Clare of Assisi

Clare of Assisi
and the Poor Sisters

in the Thirteenth Century
MARIA PIA ALBERZONI
Clare of Assisi
and the Poor Sisters
in the Thirteenth
Century
Franciscan Institute Publications

The Franciscan Institute
Saint Bonaventure University
Saint Bonaventure, NY 14778
2004
Copyright © 2004
The Franciscan Institute
St. Bonaventure University
St. Bonaventure, New York
All rights reserved.

No part of the book may be reproduced or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
without permission in writing from the publisher.
Library of Congress Card Catalogue Number: 2004113195

ISBN: 1-57659-195-6
Printed in the United States of America

Phoenix Color
Hagerstown, MD
USA
Contents
Preface ......................................................................................7
Abbreviations ...........................................................................9
Introduction ..........................................................................11
Chapter 1: Clare and the Papacy ........................................... 29
Chapter 2: San Damiano in 1228:
A Contribution to the “Clarian Question” ....... 89
Chapter 3: Sorores minores and Ecclesiastical Authority
to the Pontificate of Urban IV ......................... 113
Chapter 4: The Papacy
and New Women’s Religious Orders ............... 155
Appendices
1. The Life of Gregor y IX .................................................. 209
2. A Letter of Hugolino to Clare (1220) ........................... 210
3. Formular y for the Foundation
of Hugolinian Monasteries ......................................... 212
4. Gregor y IX to Agnes of Prague (1234-1238) ................ 213
Bibliography ........................................................................ 217
Preface
This is Maria Pia Alberzoni’s first book published in English.

It will give English-speaking audiences access to the research
this outstanding Italian scholar has done in the past years on
Clare and the Poor Sisters in the thirteenth century.
The four chapters composing this volume were originally pub-
lished separately in Italian. The chapter “Clare and the Papacy”
and the appendices were published in 1995 by the Edizioni
Biblioteca Francescana in Milan. The chapter “San Damiano in
1228: A Contribution to the ‘Clarian Question’” appeared in
1997 in Collectanea Franciscana (Vol. 67, 459-476). The chapter
“Sorores minores and Ecclesiastical Authority to the Pontificate
of Urban IV” was part of the acts of a conference on Clare and
the evolution of the Poor Clare in the thirteenth century (Chiara
e la diffusione delle Clarisse nel secolo XIII) published by the Uni-
versity of Lecce in 1998. And, finally, the chapter “The Papacy
and New Women’s Religious Orders” was presented in 1998 at
a conference on the papacy and the mendicant orders in the
thirteenth century (Il Papato duecentesco e gli Ordini Mendicanti).
This publication is the product of a joint effort. Thanks go to
William Short, OFM and Nancy Celaschi, OSF for working on
the translation from the Italian; to Roberta McKelvie, OSF and
Daria Mitchell, OSF for editing the text; and to Trevor Thomp-
son for adapting the notes to the scholarly publications in En-
glish as well as for compiling the bibliography.
May this book contribute to a better knowledge, understand-
ing and appreciation of Clare of Assisi and her sisters.
Jean François Godet-Calogeras, Ph.D.

Editor
Abbreviations
AFH Archivum franciscanum historicum.

BF I-II J. H. Sbaralea, Bullarium Franciscanum, I-II. Rome,
1759-1761.
CAED Clare of Assisi: Early Documents. R. Armstrong, ed.,
trans. St. Bonaventure, NY, 1993.
CF Collectanea franciscana.
DIP Dizionario degli Istituti di Perfezione. G. Pelliccia and
G. Rocca, eds., 9 vols. Rome, 1974-1997.
Ecrits Claire d’Assise: Ecrits. M. F. Becker, J. F. Godet, T.
Matura, eds. Paris, 1997.
Escritos I. Omaechevarria, Escritos de sancta Clara y
documentos complementários. Madrid, 1970, 1982,
1993.
FAED Francis of Assisi: Early Documents. R. Armstrong,
J.A.W. Hellmann, W. Short, eds., 3 vols. New York,
1999-2001.
Fontes Fontes franciscani (Assisi: 1995)
FF Fonti francescane. Editio minor. Scritti e biografie di san
Francesco d’Assisi. Cronache e altre testimonianze del
primo secolo francescano. Scritti e biografie di santa
Chiara d’Assisi. Assisi,1986.
Legenda Legenda sanctae Clarae virginis. G. Boccali, ed. Assisi,
2001.
MGH:SS Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores.
.
RIS Rerum italicarum Scriptores

Scritti Chiara d’Assisi: Scritti. Edizione critica, Traduzione
italiana. M. F. Becker, J. F. Godet, T. Matura, G. G.
Zoppetti, eds. Vicenza, 1986.
Introduction
Clare and San Damiano

between Charism and Institution
The so-called “women’s religious movement” has been care-

fully examined in many studies published especially in the early
decades of the twentieth century. An important point of depar-
ture for these studies in historiography is the famous work of
Herbert Grundmann, which was published in 1935 and then
published in a revised edition in 1961.1 In fact, all later publi-
cations on this topic make reference to that work. On the other
hand, Grundmann himself reaped the plentiful harvest sown
by many experts from the ranks of the mendicant orders, re-
search whose results flowed into the major reviews of the re-
spective institutes, such as the Archivum franciscanum historicum,
the Archivum fratrum Praedicatorum and the Collectanea
franciscana.
As for what concerns the origins of the Order that only in
1263 came to be called the “Order of Saint Clare,” I should
make special mention of the crucial contributions of Father
Livarius Oliger2 and Lilly Zarncke.3 Without repeating observa-
tions made in the chapter on “Clare and the Papacy,” we would
do well to insist on the importance of these two works for sev-
eral reasons. First of all, both authors were familiar with the
stimulating, intense historical research in Germany in those
years (Lemp, Lemmens, Wauer); although each of them had
different starting points, the study they give us is rational, un-
tainted by prejudice. I need only mention that the heated de-
bate over the authenticity of the privilegium paupertatis attrib-
12 CLARE OF ASSISI AND THE POOR SISTERS
uted to Innocent III and Clare’s Testament would have been

avoided to a great degree if due attention had been given to
Father Oliger’s observations; in fact, he did not use these two
sources because he felt they were unreliable.4 Father Gratien of
Paris, author of the work that became the reference point for
all later studies on the Order of Friars Minor, basically repeated
what Oliger had so carefully established in his work on
“Franciscan” women’s monasticism.
So, too, the works of Fathers Vicaire and Scheeben, Koudelka
and Mandonnet – to name but a few of the Dominican authors
of important works published in the Archivum fratrum
Praedicatorum – shed light on the salient aspects of the early
history of the feminine component of the Order of Preachers.
Except for Zarncke, the dominant tendency of the authors
mentioned here is to reconstruct the beginnings of these insti-
tutions through the filter of later developments, as if from their
very first steps the founders had a clear plan for organizing
women’s monasteries, or as if from the very beginning religious
life had been lived in the same way it was in the post-Tridentine
era.
These risks were pointed out by Grundmann, whose work
proposed a new style of research. He showed how a compara-
tive analysis of the phenomena with that of their contempo-
raries, situating them in the broader context of the life of the
Church, could lead to a greater understanding of the real sig-
nificance of the events.
I would like to point out that, besides citing these important
contributions without adding anything new, later studies delved
deeper into particular aspects of the complex twelfth century
“religious movement,” aspects that were in varying degrees re-
lated to national or regional interests in Italy. For example, there
were many articles and study congresses on Francis and the
Order he founded, especially in the years marking the 750th
anniversary of his death (1976) and the eighth centenary of his
birth (1981–82). Some degree of interest is also due to the Order’s
expansion throughout the various provinces of Italy. Although
there have been fewer study congresses, similar observations
could be made about Clare of Assisi and the Poor Clares, a field
INTRODUCTION 13
of research that has developed in the last decade with some

surprising aspects.5
In various regions of Italy, particular attention has been paid
to diverse aspects of the “women’s religious movement.” I need
only mention the work of Anna Benvenuti and Mario Sensi on
the recluses, the bizzoche, and the various unofficial expressions
of women’s religious life in central Italy, or the recent publica-
tions on the Humiliati or other spontaneous forms of religious
life, primarily in northern Italy.6 Special attention has been given
to phenomena peculiar to other European regions, such as the
Beguines in Flanders.7
Thus we are faced with a diverse and rich context, but one
that frequently focuses on local situations or tends to focus on
the life-style of the “founding” community, a study based on
relatively idealized texts that tend to follow one of two trends.
On the one hand, they tend to see local developments as radi-
ating directly from the “center” (in the case of the women’s
monasteries, for example, tradition usually traces their found-
ing back to one of the first companions of Clare since she, un-
like Francis, never went far from Assisi). On the other hand,
they always envision the early structures as similar to what is
familiar to us, or we base our ideas of them on an image spread
by the Order itself in the second half of the thirteenth century.
The studies contained in this volume reflect the various stages
of a research process that is basically alike. They are motivated
by a general reconsideration of relations between Clare and
the community at San Damiano and ecclesiastical authority,
particularly the papacy. It is an aspect of institutional history
that has often been neglected in favor of attempts to clarify the
spirituality and personality of the saint herself. Clare’s choices
must be examined within the complex context of religious life
in her day, a time when the papacy was increasingly involved
in initiatives aimed at giving religious life well-defined juridi-
cal norms, to the point that it claimed the right of ultimate
appeal in defining any of its practical aspects. Furthermore, the
first decades of the thirteenth century are dominated by the
figures of popes who were great legal experts, especially Gre-
gory IX, who while he was still a cardinal played a great role in
the history of Francis, his Order, and Clare’s community. For

example, we still have a hand-written copy of a letter he per-
sonally sent to Clare and her sisters; depositions during the
process of canonization and the Legenda also tell us of a con-
flict between the abbess of San Damiano and the pope. These
are important clues which, taken into consideration with an
eye to the complex relationships between Rome and the Order
of Friars Minor (as well as the relations between the Friars Mi-
nor and the Order of San Damiano), give us a rough sketch of a
complex picture, a picture that has not yet been studied in great
detail by Franciscan scholars. Yet this event is part of Clare’s
personal drama and emphasizes her ability to resist as she strives
to remain faithful to the charism that had drawn her and led
her to undertake a new form of religious life.
I would now like to point out some ideas that I feel are espe-
cially important and thus try to offer a new interpretation of
the studies published here. My goal is to shed some light on
the topics that are discussed, or at least partially clarified, in
these studies.
The Role of the Papacy
Within the context of these studies, all the papal interven-

tions were considered, especially those of Cardinal Hugolino
of Ostia, later Pope Gregory IX. Consequently, traditional con-
victions about the obvious natural sympathy shown from the
outset by the pontiffs – from Innocent III onward – towards
the little community of San Damiano were revised. In the tra-
ditional view, Clare and her sisters enjoyed the total support of
the ecclesiastical authority and Francis’s fratres, and from the
beginning they worked to spread their form of life, to the point
of creating a network of monasteries joined to the Friars Minor.
Such an interpretation of the facts would first of all have to
take into consideration some mysterious instances of obstinacy
shown by Francis and Clare, instances which scholars have
tended to explain by offering a spiritual interpretation. On the
one hand, if, in fact, Francis had shown what nearly amounts
INTRODUCTION 15
to intolerance for the women’s religious communities, so much

so that he stopped visiting San Damiano, on the other hand,
Clare first had a conflict with the pontiff and then a few years
later actually evicted the friars who served San Damiano. This
reaction seems to be a bit strange for a woman who from the
very beginning, according to the traditional view, had been
shown such great favor by the Roman Curia and the Friars Mi-
nor.
The outlook changes if one considers the diverse roles played
by the various parties. Rather than being interested in Clare’s
community and fostering the spread of their lifestyle, the pa-
pacy began a process of “institutionalization” in 1217, with
the goal of giving a cohesive structure to religious life for
women. The person most instrumental in this process was the
powerful Cardinal Hugolino, who at that time served as papal
legate in northern and central Italy. It is in the context of his
legal work that Clare met the Cardinal of Ostia, since he found
that the (modest) spread of the practices followed at San
Damiano was an impediment to his work. The monastery of
Monticelli, which followed the ordo (i.e. the practices) of San
Damiano, received legal recognition before it came to the car-
dinal legate’s legislative attention. This made Hugolino take an
interest in the monastery in Assisi and to go there and meet
Clare, an event that took place, we should note, at a time when
Francis was absent from Italy.
On this occasion Hugolino outlined his plan to join San
Damiano to the network of women’s monasteries that he was
organizing, thus giving it a juridically polished forma vitae, such
as he had composed for the other monasteries that had received
their forma vitae from him. Already in the 1220s we can see a
latent conflict between the future Gregory IX and Francis, who
was firmly opposed to the idea of creating a bond between his
fraternitas and a certain number of women’s communities. These
communities adopted practices based primarily on the life of
Cistercian nuns, and they certainly did not draw their inspira-
tion from the Franciscan charism. Francis’s resistance went so
far as to oppose the pope’s attempts to establish bonds between
the friars and the new religious orders; we need only recall the
insistence on austere living contained in the documents writ-

ten for the first monasteries founded and organized by
Hugolino. However, even in the early 1220s some friars pre-
ferred to support the papacy’s attempts to institutionalize
women’s monastic life rather than to encourage the spread of a
lifestyle patterned after the life of Clare at San Damiano. This
comes to light when we examine the questions addressed to
the pope by the friars’ general chapter and the responses he
gave in Quo elongati, dated September 28, 1230.
At a very early date, then, San Damiano was in a unique situ-
ation vis-à-vis the type of women’s monasticism being promoted
by Hugolino. On the one hand, it was seen as a case needing
“normalization” within the stream of a more structured expe-
rience, namely Hugolino’s structure, which took its inspiration
from the Cistercian way of life. On the other hand, however,
the community in Assisi could prove to offer an interesting
way of joining the “papal” monasteries to the Order of Friars
Minor, marking the beginning of the friars’ broader involve-
ment in the burdensome duties of the cura monialium.
Francis’s death and Hugolino’s election to the papacy several
months later can be seen as a watershed event. The difficult
balance which had been maintained because of Francis and
Clare’s firm opposition to the papal project broke down in the
face of the papacy’s increasing pressure on the Order. (By way
of parenthesis, we should note that this is the proper context
for interpreting the passages in the exempla in which Francis
takes on the qualities of a misogynist.) In a relatively short pe-
riod of time the Minister General was given charge of the cura
monialium of the papal monasteries as a whole (December,
1227), and Clare was asked to change her lifestyle and adopt
the papal norms for her community (July, 1228). Gregory IX’s
Quo elongati, which enjoyed the unquestioning support of a
good part of the Friars Minor, sanctioned the fact that San
Damiano was henceforth equal to all the monasteries founded
by Hugolino (September, 1230). The pontiff, in accord with
the new cardinal protector, Raynaldus of Jenne, began to use
one name to designate all the women’s monasteries entrusted
to the care of the Friars Minor: the “Order of San Damiano.”
INTRODUCTION 17
Now the merger, which Francis and Clare had always opposed,
had taken place. This is the reason for Clare’s lengthy resis-
tance and her tenacious attachment to the Franciscan origins
of her community, a resistance that found its only support in
the so-called “privilegium paupertatis” that she obtained from
Gregory IX in September of 1228. Therefore, it is incorrect to
speak of the “Damianites” or the “Order of San Damiano” when
referring to Clare’s community. The Order founded by the pa-
pacy, which bore the name of the little community in Assisi,
was in some way a betrayal of that community which never-
theless became incorporated in it.
This conglomeration, known from 1230 onwards as the “Or-
der of San Damiano,” contained a wide variety of women’s
groups, a fact that explains its complexity. The creation of the
“Order of Saint Clare” marks its demise. In fact, Urban IV suc-
ceeded in putting into effect the plans pursued by the papacy
for decades, namely, to give juridical unity to the type of mo-
nasticism for women promoted by the papacy, which had nei-
ther a common name nor a common set of laws. Even after her
death Clare proved useful to the ecclesiastical authorities who
wanted to give a single name and a single set of laws to this
heterogeneous group, from which the abbess of San Damiano
had always sought to remain autonomous. It is in the context
of her lengthy resistance to such an imposing power that we
should see the drama of Clare’s life: although she was eventu-
ally incorporated into the broad institutional complex, her
desire to be faithful to Francis’s teaching explains her attempts
to gain recognition, at least for her community, of a forma vitae
that in some way would remain faithful to the inspiration of
Francis.
Therefore, prior to 1263 the name “Poor Clares” can be used
to designate neither Clare and her sisters nor the monasteries
of the Order of San Damiano. This expression is totally differ-
ent, and it would be anachronistic to apply it to anything ear-
lier than that date.
Relations with the Order of Friars Minor
Another topic touched upon in various ways in each of these

studies is that of the relations between Clare (and San Damiano)
and the Order of Friars Minor. We can summarize this topic as
follows.
From the outset, a period beginning around the year 1212
when Clare and her sister Catherine (whose religious name was
Agnes) transferred to San Damiano, we can speak of a true sym-
biosis between the two components of the religious life that
rose up from the example of Francis. San Damiano was in fact
a locus where the friars would stay when traveling and where
Francis too would frequently abide. It seems that until 1230 no
one considered it necessary to have some kind of juridical norms
regulating the relations between the fratres and sorores minores.
Francis’s death and the gradual rise within the Order of friars
from other regions of Italy or other parts of Europe – especially
those coming from the universities – caused a weakening of
the natural bond between the communities. This was especially
true in matters concerning their joint ministry to the poor in
the hospitals, where both groups had traditionally lived so as
to care for the sick of both sexes. In addition to this, the friar
who remained faithful to Clare even after Francis’s death, when
she first experienced problems with the papacy, was Brother
Elias. He probably came from Assisi, but in any case he was
living there while overseeing the construction of the basilica
destined to house Francis’s mortal remains. It was he who some-
how managed to keep alive the bond between Clare and her
sisters and the Order of Friars Minor. We need only recall Elias’s
major role in championing Clare’s community and those con-
nected to it, to the point that he became the main support and
counselor of the Poor Sisters. This can be seen in the letter to
Clare from her sister Agnes – now abbess of the monastery in
Perugia (presumably written in 1229) – and the exchange of
letters between Clare and Agnes of Bohemia, especially the sec-
ond letter, traditionally dated in 1238.
However, this “golden age” was soon to draw to an abrupt
and final end. Elias, who had been Minister General of the Or-
INTRODUCTION 19
der since 1232, was obliged to resign in May, 1239. He was

forced to take refuge with the excommunicated Frederick II in
order to escape the threat of imprisonment by Gregory IX and
the authorities of the Order, who were increasingly hostile to a
person whom they thought to be an unrefined layman, a trai-
tor to Francis’s will. This, despite the fact that he really should
be seen as one of the most faithful interpreters of Francis’s
charism and one of the most illustrious and educated person-
ages of his day. Faced with Elias’s deposition and subsequent
condemnation, Clare must have felt terribly isolated and prob-
ably saw a real threat that the uniqueness of her experience
might be brought to naught. Those in charge of the Order would
not do anything to guarantee her juridical protection, and she
was faced with absolute isolation after the failure of her at-
tempt, undertaken in concert with Elias, to create an impor-
tant connection with the monastery of Agnes in Prague. This
attempt aroused the clear displeasure of Gregory IX, who was
increasingly convinced of the merits of his initiatives on be-
half of women’s religious life, and was also increasingly deter-
mined to extend his Order, gathering together in it the various
expressions already in existence and giving them a unified ju-
ridical shape.
Thus we can understand the difficulties in Clare’s later years,
years which saw her suffering from a prolonged illness precisely
because she could not give in on what she saw as essential. The
Order’s authorities were no longer concerned about her; they
were more interested in supporting Gregory IX in his conflict
with Frederick II and with stemming the papacy’s continuous
requests to assume the care of the new monasteries. They tried
to resolve the problem on increasingly legal bases, something
that ever since Quo elongati (September, 1230) Clare had shown
she would not tolerate. Clare’s only solace and support came
from the remaining companions of Francis, with the long-lived
Leo in the front lines. They obviously enjoyed a close relation-
ship with Clare and her community, and their influence must
have been considerable. For example, it would be interesting
to speculate about Leo’s influence on Clare in the years after
Elias’s deposition. This would make it easier to understand
Clare’s lengthy tribulation and her constant mention of Francis’s

guidance and desire, in ways that are reminiscent of the writ-
ings attributed to Leo. Such a premise would also make it easier
to understand what might have led Leo to pass on a privilegium
paupertatis attributed to Innocent III and, with it, the Testa-
ment of Clare. The latter document insists on poverty as it was
lived at the beginning and is sensitive to the situation that de-
veloped after Clare’s death, taking special pains to forbid the
community’s transfer to the city of Assisi. Leo’s role is part of
the hypothesis recently formulated in two different contexts
by Emore Paoli and Attilio Bartoli Langeli, but their ideas are in
need of further study.8
San Damiano and the Sorores Minores
There has been a great deal of discussion about the term Sorores
Minores, ultimately identifying this particular style of religious
life with that of the sisters of San Damiano or, still worse, with
the nuns of the Order of San Damiano.9 A definitive answer
begins to emerge from the explanation of the problem when it
is examined within the context of the Order of Friars Minor
after Elias’s deposition.
It is Elias, as has been noted, who assumes a central role in
the history of Clare, a role that earlier historiography, influ-
enced by the “spiritual” version of the history of the Order,
had essentially ignored. Elias is a key player!10 In addition to
his enjoying Francis’s total trust, Clare considered him an es-
sential reference point for supporting and diffusing the formula
vitae Francis had given her. That formula vitae was probably not
a true text in the normative sense, but rather a collection of
counsels, suggestions and practical norms that Clare and Elias
had learned directly from their father and intended to spread,
although they did so against the will of Gregory IX.11 In my
opinion this shows the greatness of Elias who, as Minister Gen-
eral of the Order, in addition to trying to maintain the pro-
foundly lay nature of the Order (while the Roman Church
sought to promote the clericalization of the religious), chose to
INTRODUCTION 21
foster and spread the experience of San Damiano, supporting

the women in their choice of lifestyle – as he did with Clare’s
sister, Agnes, when she was sent to Perugia in order to give the
way of life lived in San Damiano to the members of a monas-
tery founded a few years earlier under the auspices of Cardinal
Hugolino.
It was Elias and the first generation of friars, those who had
known Francis and lived with him, who rose to defend the
existence of a women’s component of the Order, as was Clare’s
firm conviction, and to guarantee her the spiritual cura and the
juridical cover required by the ecclesiastical authority.
With Elias’s removal from the office of Minister General,
which occurred in the chapter of the Order in May, 1239, with
Gregory IX presiding, Clare – along with the other women reli-
gious called by names such as Minorissae, Discalceatae,
Cordulariae, or more simply Sorores Minores – saw that it was
futile to hope for any recognition from the ecclesiastical au-
thorities through the efforts of the Friars Minor. The papacy
sent letters urging the bishops to fight this phenomenon, which
was now considered quasi-heretical. But Gregory IX, and Inno-
cent IV after him, were not alone in their struggle against this
form of religious life that had now been condemned by ecclesi-
astical authorities. Siding with them, and perhaps even more
stalwart foes of the Sorores Minores, were those in charge of the
Order of Friars Minor and the monasteries of the Order of San
Damiano, who accused these women of unfair competition and
appealed to the ecclesiastical authority to denounce their ques-
tionable status.
Thus in the 1240s we find an end of the phenomenon of the
Sorores Minores, that is, of those women religious who were “ir-
regular” – according to the fine points of canon law – who ex-
plicitly recalled the Franciscan ideal of their origins. In order to
be recognized as nuns of the Order of San Damiano, they had
to submit to the rigid dictates of reclusion as it had been re-
cently “invented” by Gregory IX and renounce their itinerant
lifestyle and their dedication to the works of mercy. If they
wanted to lead a different lifestyle, they could find some insti-
tutional point of reference among the men’s monastic groups
or ask for diocesan recognition. These were certainly dramatic

circumstances, especially because these women’s presence must
have been rather widespread. Otherwise, they certainly would
not have been cause of such great concern for the Order of
Friars Minor, the Damianite nuns and the papacy.
Women’s Monasticism and the Mendicant Orders
At this point, having come to the end of our journey, we can

ask another question: Is the case of the Order of San Damiano
unique in the history of women’s religious life or does its insti-
tutional path have significant points in common with other
experiences of that day? I believe we can claim that to a great
degree the experience is absolutely unique.
The Order of San Damiano, in fact, was the first case of a
religious institution directly organized by the papacy through
the involvement of ranking prelates: we need only think of
Cardinal Hugolino. Before that time, Rome had never under-
taken such a vast project within the area of religious life, but
limited itself to granting approval (of uncertain value, as we
can see from the case of Waldesius of Lyons) to those who might
choose to come to them to receive official solace. Now, how-
ever, thanks to the progressive codification of canon law, it was
possible to redefine the very structure of religious life accord-
ing to well-defined juridical plans and models which, at the
beginning of the thirteenth century, were essentially based on
the structures of the Cistercian Order.12 With Honorius III’s
authorization, Hugolino was the first cardinal to undertake the
founding of an Order. At the same time the cardinal, later Pope
Gregory IX, insistently sought to give a charismatic founda-
tion to the institution he had created and, in order to achieve
his goal, in the 1230s sought to join the women religious of his
Order to a male Order or, in any case, to a charism that would
guarantee their physiognomy and, at the same time, make cer-
tain that they would receive the necessary cura monialium.
Herein lies the uniqueness of the Order of San Damiano and
it is here that we should look for the reasons for the papacy’s
INTRODUCTION 23
constant concern to give it definitive structure. Otherwise, Gre-

gory IX’s position would be a contradiction. He knew that he
was the founder of the Order of San Damiano and indeed the
nuns followed the forma vitae he had composed. He even stated
that Clare and her community had also assumed these norms,
something that the abbess of San Damiano could not deny, at
least from the formal point of view, although with Elias’s sup-
port she was trying to rid herself of them, causing the “re-emer-
gence” of a set of norms attributed to Francis, as we can see
from her correspondence with Agnes of Bohemia. Was Gregory
IX then deliberately lying? In a certain sense we could say yes;
yet the pontiff was used to this kind of maneuvering. We need
only think of the passage in Quo elongati in which he pronounces
on the legal validity of Francis’s Testament. On that occasion
he stated that he could certainly interpret the intentio of Fran-
cis, since he had known him very well when he was alive, and
then proceeded to nullify the normative value of the writing
that even Francis had said should always be read along with
the rule.13
On the other hand, Gregory IX’s position is quite easy to
understand if one considers his effort to give a specific and
appropriate structure to women’s monasticism, which up until
that time had always developed in subordination to male reli-
gious life. Without the authoritative reference to a saint, namely
Francis, whom the pope declared to be the founder of the Or-
der of San Damiano, it would have been difficult to obtain the
help of the Minors in the cura of the women religious and espe-
cially to guarantee the latter a valid institutional point of refer-
ence. Thus it is a question of distorting the facts in order to
give solidity to the new institution, attributing to it the merit
of a saint, safely but quickly canonized in order to allow such
an action (among other reasons), and decisively subordinating
the legislative activity and founding role that the pope could
certainly have claimed for himself and which, in fact, is recog-
nized in the pontiff’s official Vita.
This unique papal initiative also emphasizes the reasons that
make Franciscan women’s monasticism different from that of
the Friars Preachers. In fact, Dominic understood Prouille and
the women’s monasteries of Madrid and Saint Sixtus of Rome

as an integral part of his fraternity and, although the interven-
tion of the papacy and of Cardinal Hugolino can be seen in the
composition of norms for the Roman nuns, this fact did noth-
ing to change the structure of the relations between the Preach-
ers and the women religious joined to them. We could say, by
way of simplification, that Dominic and his friars re-proposed
in practice the structures of the double monastery or of the
double Order, composed of religious of both sexes, while with
the monastic network that he created Hugolino was introduc-
ing an absolutely novel element within the context of the reli-
gious life.
The Order of San Damiano seems to be offered as a model for
centralized Orders directly dependent on Rome, a fact that be-
comes more obvious when we recall that the ultimate respon-
sibility for the Order was firmly entrusted to a cardinal, an ex-
periment that Hugolino basically suggested to the Friars Minor
when he became their “Cardinal Protector.”
Clare fought throughout her whole life so that the model of
the double Order might prevail, that is, that San Damiano might
be considered a convent of the Order of Friars Minor, as was
true for the women’s monasteries united to the Friars Preach-
ers. However, her position was out of date, an idea that was
passé. The history of religious life in the Middle Ages and the
fate of the orginal structure of the mendicant orders, central-
ized and subjected to the particular care of the papacy, would
have supported the model introduced by Hugolino/Gregory IX.
Thus we have another reason why the history of Clare, of the
monastery of San Damiano and ultimately of the Order of San
Damiano, deserve our attention.
NOTES
1
H. Grundmann, Religiöse Bewegungen im Mittelalter. Untersuchungen über die
geschichtlichen Zusammenhänge zwischen der Ketzerei, den Bettelorden und der
religiösen Deutschen Mystik (Darmstadt, 1961); 1st German edition (Berlin, 1935).
English translation: Religious Movements in the Middle Ages: The Historical Links
between Heresy, the Mendicant Orders, and the Women’s Religious Movement in the
twelfth and thirteenth Century, with the Historical Foundations of German Mysticism,
trans. by Steven Rowan (Notre Dame, IN, 1995).
INTRODUCTION 25
2
L. Oliger, “De origine regularum Ordinis s. Clarae,” AFH 5 (1912): 181-209
and 413-47.
3
L. Zarncke, Der Anteil des Kardinals Ugolino an der Ausbildung der drei Orden
des heiligen Franz, Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte des Mittel-alters und der
Renaissance (Leipzig-Berlin, 1930), 42.
4
Oliger, “De origine,” 187-88: after citing the passage from Chapter VI of
Clare’s forma vitae containing the so-called formula vitae given by Francis to
Clare, Oliger added: “Eadem fere verba leguntur in Testamento S. Clarae. Sed
quoniam hoc esse genuinum non ab omnibus agnoscitur, eius testimonio non
nimis inhaerere intendimus, nec etiam necessarium est, cum ea quae historica
refert facta aliunde etiam innotenscant.” Concerning the privilegium paupertatis
see ibid., 191: “Cum vero nec Testamento S. Clarae inhaerere possumus ob
saepe dictam rationem, restat unus auctor Legendae S. Clarae testis concessionis
Privilegii paupertatis ab Innocentio III S. Clarae factae. Sed huic testimonio
non paucae obstant graves difficultates, quae plures induxerunt auctores ut
negarent Innocentium III S. Clarae Privilegium paupertatis dedisse”; this is then
followed by his clear explan-ation of why even Fr. Sbaraglia, the editor of the
Bullarium franciscanum, did not include this document in his collection: 1)
Gregory IX’s privilegium of September 1228 (still extant) makes no mention of
a previous document; 2) the fact that the Legenda speaks of Pope Innocent, but
not specifically of Innocent III; 3) the apocryphal nature of the “Et si qua mulier”
clause. The debate over these texts has recently been reopened by W. Maleczek,
“Das ‘Privilegium paupertatis’ Innocenz’ III und das Testament der Klara von
Assisi: Überlegungen zur Frage ihrer Echtheit,” Collectanea franciscana, 65 (1995):
5-82. The work was printed separately under that same title, as part of the
series “Bibliotheca seraphico-capuccina,” 47. An English translation by Cyprian
Rosen and Dawn Nothwehr was published as “Questions About the Authenticity
of the Privilege of Poverty of Innocent III and of the Testament of Clare of
Assisi” in Greyfriars Review, 12 (1998): Supplement, 1-80.
5
An important reference point is the acts of the 1979 Assisi congress:
Movimento religioso femminile e francescanesimo nel secolo XIII, Atti dei Convegni
della Società internazionale di studi francescani (Assisi, 1980), 7; also deserving
of special mention is Marco Bartoli’s biography, Chiara d’Assisi, Bibliotheca
seraphico-capuccina, 37 (Rome, 1989); see also idem., Chiara (Cinisello B.-Milan,
2001) (Tempi e figure). [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, trans. by Sr. Frances Theresa,
(Quincy, IL: 1993), and the acts of the congress held in Assisi in 1992 (Chiara di
Assisi, Spoleto 1993), and the biography by C. Gennaro, Chiara d’Assisi, (Vercelli,
1995). Besides the work of M. Carney, Clare of Assisi: The First Franciscan Woman
(Quincy IL, 1993), we should note a series of contributions published during
the recent centenary. I would like to make particular mention of only Chiara:
Francescanesimo al femminile, D. Covi and D. Dozzi, eds., (Rome, 1992); A.
Rotzetter, Klara von Assisi: Die erste franziskanische Frau (Freiburg i.B., 1993);
Chiara d’Assisi: Con Francesco sulla via di Cristo (Assisi, 1993); Chiara d’Assisi e la
memoria di Francesco, Atti del Convegno per l’VIII Centenario della nascita di s.
Chiara, A. Marini and M.B. Mistretta, eds., Centro Francescano Santa Maria in
Castello, Fara Sabina-Rieti, Monografie Francescane, 2 (Città di Castello, 1995);
and the congresses organized by the Department of Historical Studies of the
University of Lecce: Chiara e il secondo Ordine. Il fenomeno francescano femminile
nel Salento (Nardò, 1993), G. Andenna and B. Vetere, eds., (Galatina, 1997) and
Chiara e la diffusione delle Clarisse nel secolo XIII (Manduria, 1994), G. Andenna
and B. Vetere, eds. (Galatina 1998). Interest was great even after the centenary
celebrations; among the many works published I would like to mention M.P.
Alberzoni, “Chiara di Assisi e il francescanesimo femminile,” in Francesco d’Assisi
e il primo secolo di storia francescana, Biblioteca Einaudi, 1 (Turin, 1997), 203-35.
6
A. Benvenuti Papi, In castro poenitentiae. Santità e società femminile nell’Italia
medievale, Italia sacra. Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica, 45 (Rome, 1990);
M. Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in Umbria nei secoli XIII and XIV: un bizzocaggio
centro-italiano,” in Il movimento religioso femminile in Umbria dei secoli XIII-XIV.
Atti del Convegno internazionale di studio nell’ambito delle celebrazioni per
l’VIII centenario della nascita di S. Francesco d’Assisi (Città di Castello, 1982),
ed. by R. Rusconi (Florence, 1984), 87-121; Id., Storie di bizzoche tra Umbria e
Marche (Roma, 1995); Uomini e donne in comunità, Quaderni di storia religiosa,
1 (Verona, 1994); Sulle tracce degli Umiliati, M.P. Alberzoni, A. Ambrosioni, A.
Lucioni, eds. Bibliotheca erudita, Studi e documenti di storia e filologia, 13
(Milan, 1997).
7
A. Mens, “L’Ombrie italienne et l’Ombrie brabançonne Deux courants
religieux parallèles d’inspiration commune,” Études Franciscaines, 17 (1967):
Supplement. The same author studied the spontaneous forms of life of the
twelfth and thirteenth century in present-day Holland in Oorsprong en betekenis
van de nederlandse begijnen en begardenbewing: verkelijkende studie, XIIe-XIII 1e
eeuw. Université de Louvain, Recueil de travaux d’histoire et de philologie, III/
30 (Louvain, 1947).
8
E. Paoli, Introduzione a Clarae Assisiensis Opuscula, in Fontes franciscani, E.
Menestò and S. Brufani, eds., Medioevo francescano Testi 2 (Assisi, 1995), 2237-
54. The question is still at the center of a debate, especially after the important
research of A. Bartoli Langeli, Gli autografi di frate Francesco e frate Leone,
Autographa Medii Aevi, 5 (Turnhout, 2000), 13-75.
9
In addition to C. Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile nel XIII secolo,”
Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa, 25 (1989): 259-80, the reader should see
the useful contributions of Optatus van Asseldonk, “Sorores Minores. Una nuova
impostazione del problema,” Collectanea franciscana, 62 (1992): 595-633; Id.,
“Sorores Minores e Chiara d’Assisi a San Damiano: Una scelta tra clausura e
lebbrosi?” Collectanea franciscana, 63 (1993): 399-420.
10
Besides the rather extensive entry by O. Odoardi, “Elia di Assisi,” in DIP, III
(Rome, 1976), coll. 1094-1110, see also S. Vecchio, “Elia d’Assisi,” in Dizionario
biografico degli Italiani, XLII (Rome, 1993), 450-58 and, G. Barone, Da frate Elia
agli Spirituali, Fonti e ricerche, 12 (Milan, 1999), 29-86.
INTRODUCTION 27
11
On this topic see the work of A. Marini, “La ‘forma vitae’ di san Francesco per
San Damiano tra Chiara d’Assisi, Agnese di Boemia ed interventi papali,”
Hagiographica, 4 (1997): 179-95 and Id., “‘Pauperem Christum, virgo pauper,
amplectere’: Il punto su Chiara e s Agnese di Boemia,” in Chiara e la diffusione
delle Clarisse, 121-32.
12
This particularly refers to the work of G. Melville, “Diversa sunt monasteria
et diversa habent institutiones”: Aspetti delle molteplici forme organizzative
dei religiosi nel Medioevo,” in Chiesa e società in Sicilia. I secoli XII-XVI, G. Zito,
ed. (Turin, 1995), 323-45; Id., “Ordensstatuten und allgemeines Kirchenrecht.
Eine Skizze zum 12/13 Jahrhundert,” in Proceedings of the Ninth International
Congress of Medieval Canon Law, P. Landau and J. Mueller, eds. Monumenta
iuris canonici, s. C: Subsidia, 10 (Vatican City, 1997), 691-712.
13
H. Grundmann, “Die Bulle «Quo elongati» Papst Gregors IX,” AFH 54 (1961):
3-25, also published in Id., Ausgewählte Aufsätze, I: Religiöse Bewegungen,
Monumenta Germaniae Historica Schriften, 25/1 (Stuttgart, 1976), 222-42.
Chapter 1
Clare and the Papacy
Clare’s Story Seen

Through Her Relations with the Papacy
Clare, the unworthy servant of Christ and the

little plant of the most blessed Francis, prom-
ises obedience and reverence to the Lord Pope
Innocent and his canonically elected successors,
and to the Roman Church.
Let the sisters be strictly bound to always have
that Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church who
has been delegated by the Lord Pope for the
Friars Minor as Governor, Protector, and Cor-
rector, that, always submissive and subject at
the feet of that holy Church and steadfast in
the Catholic faith, we may always observe the
poverty and humility of our Lord Jesus Christ
and of His most holy Mother and the Holy
Gospel we have firmly promised. Amen.1
When, in the final years of her life, Clare of Assisi dedicated

herself to drafting the rule for her own community and for
those who might wish to follow its example,2 various reasons
prompted her to place strong emphasis on the monastery of
San Damiano’s vital dependence on the Apostolic See.
Certainly the desire to follow closely the norms composed

by Francis for the Lesser Brothers, solemnly approved by
Honorius III in 1223,3 had considerable weight in her formula-
tion of such expressions. However, at the same time we must
not underestimate Clare’s desire to see her rule approved by
the highest authorities of the Roman Church, first of all by
Innocent IV – in his turn author of a rule for the monasteries of
the Order of San Damiano – and, therefore, by the cardinal
protector. Furthermore, in composing her own forma vitae, Clare
certainly included directions and norms suggested by canoni-
cal experts of her day at the highest levels of the ecclesiastical
hierarchy.
Her relationship to the papacy is thus a theme of primary
importance in Clare’s life and offers a privileged viewpoint for
reconstructing the most significant phases of her history and
that of the community of San Damiano. The author of the
Legenda sanctae Clarae emphatically insists on the important
roles of popes and high-ranking prelates of the Curia as coun-
selors of the saint.4 We should not underestimate the reasons
that may have caused her biographer to reinterpret the rela-
tionships between Clare and ecclesiastical authority, which were
undoubtedly important not only for the history of the Assisi
community, but also for the fate of what has been called
“women’s Franciscanism.” Francis had been dead for about
thirty years, during which time the papacy was actively involved
in the situation of San Damiano and in developments in
women’s religious life. Beginning from a careful examination
of these circumstances, it is actually possible for us to retrace
the long legal battle that especially marked the final years of
Clare’s life, but which can already be noted in the early 1220s,
at the very beginning of her disagreements and misunderstand-
ings with Gregory IX.
The scarce and sporadic documentation that has come down
to us does not give us a detailed reconstruction of the relation-
ships between Clare and the Roman Church’s highest authori-
ties. However, in order to shed some new light on a problem
that in many ways is still open, we can focus on some impor-
tant moments signaled as such by both the acts of the process
of canonization and documents of papal origin.5
CLARE AND THE PAPACY 31
San Damiano and the Ordo Sancti Damiani
Proceeding with our investigation, we must first establish what

has been achieved by historiography, and on this basis orient
our reinterpretation of the sources. We must also point out some
distinctions that are essential for a proper understanding of
the history of the community of San Damiano, on the one hand
– with which Clare’s story is intimately involved – and, on the
other hand, that of the Order of San Damiano. The latter was
the special creation of Cardinal Hugolino of Ostia, and only
later did it come to include the monastery of Assisi. Just as the
last years of Francis’s life were marked by the difficulties related
to his drafting legislation to be submitted to the Roman See for
approval, a task in which the influence of the cardinal of Ostia
must have been felt, so too Clare encountered a number of
difficulties before receiving papal approval, the day before she
died, of her untiring efforts to remain faithful to the memory
of Francis, whom she always called her father and founder. I
would only mention that this is a complex story which did not
end even with the deaths of Francis and Clare. If indeed Clare
was a witness to the disagreements arising within the Franciscan
Order before and after the papal interpretations of the rule, in
particular that of Gregory IX’s Quo elongati,6 the abbess of San
Damiano also experienced obstacles facing her own commu-
nity, obstacles that arose from the need to give the simple forma
vitae that Francis gave her increasing canonical tidiness. We
should note that after her death, just as happened after Francis’s
death, juridical elaboration continued at the hand of Gregory’s
successors, as we can see by the fact that the rule composed by
Clare and approved by Innocent IV in 1253 was followed only
at San Damiano and in a few other monasteries, while the Ordo
Sancti Damiani received a definitive status, becoming the Ordo
sanctae Clarae through legislation promulgated by Pope Urban
IV in 1263.7
It is therefore totally incorrect to speak of an “Order of Saint
Clare” or of “Poor Clares” before 1263, when that terminology
was first officially used to designate the composite Order which
still contained diverse elements which the Apostolic See had
made so many efforts to unify from the time of the pontificate
of Gregory IX onwards.8 The sometimes indiscriminate use of

such terminology has given rise to considerable misunderstand-
ings causing people to see as “Franciscan” from its very begin-
ning something that, at least initially, was not so.9
To find an explanation for so much ambiguity, we should
note that scholarly historiography, especially within the
Franciscan Order, has for the most part interpreted the delicate
“founding period” in the light of later developments.10 It has
uncritically accepted evidence tending to exalt the origins of
individual monasteries throughout Italy by pushing the dates
of their foundation as early as possible or by claiming they were
founded by Clare’s companions, given the impossibility of
claiming that Clare, who had lived at San Damiano for forty
years, was the founder.11 Historiography within the various
Orders, furthermore, has always tended to observe events in its
own religious family without adequately situating them in the
context of a broader historical and historiographical perspec-
tive, which would be necessary for a proper understanding of
the significance of events concerning their own group.12 We
have no interest in detracting from the praiseworthy work of
the recovery and interpretation of data carried out by so many
Franciscan historians, who were often compelled by apologetic
reasons to undertake their work.13 Their labors have given lus-
ter to the Archivum franciscanum historicum and other Franciscan
journals. However, we must now reconsider the story of Clare
and the community of San Damiano within the context of the
results already achieved by historiography, taking into account
the history of the Church of her period. And, in this context, it
is helpful to look at the problem of the relations between Clare
and the papacy.
The traditional approach of Franciscan historiography holds
that Clare was the foundress of the Second Order of St. Francis,
or – even worse – of the Order of Poor Clares, a term which, as
was said, cannot be correctly applied to monasteries of
Damianites until after Urban’s Rule of 1263.14 This approach
was still held in the work of Fr. Gratien of Paris, who dedicated
part of Appendix II to The Order of Saint Clare.15 In it the Capu-
chin scholar, who took the same path he had already followed
with regard to the Order of Friars Minor, paid particular atten-

tion to the five rules followed in women’s “Franciscan” monas-
teries in the course of the thirteenth century.16 Several times Fr.
Gratien praised the “indissoluble amitié” that bound Francis to
Hugolino from 1217 on, and which led the saint to ask the
Cardinal of Ostia to take an interest in the monastery of San
Damiano. Therefore Hugolino would have become cardinal
protector of San Damiano, as he was of the Franciscan Order.17
Furthermore, Francis supposedly asked for the powerful prelate’s
involvement in regularizing the many women’s monasteries
which were springing up and whose founding, according to Fr.
Gratien, was to be attributed directly to the apostolate of the
Minors as well as the efforts of Clare’s companions.18 Later schol-
ars, with few exceptions, took this viewpoint in facing the prob-
lem of the origins of women’s Franciscanism, as we can see
from the well-known essay of Micheline de Fontette. Although
published in 1967, the section entitled Les Clarisses adds noth-
ing to the historical development as it was interpreted by Fr.
Gratien.19
In the course of the 1930s some studies proposed examining
the history of the “Second Order” within a broader context,
namely, one not limited to events within the Franciscan fam-
ily, but which allowed the groupings that began with Francis
and Clare to be situated within the context of a broader frame-
work, including that of the various “religious movements.” This
is true of the valuable but little-known work of Lilly Zarncke,20
and to another work that gathered some of the first fruits and
required all subsequent historiography to deal with it, namely,
the work of Herbert Grundmann.21 Although its effects were
long in coming due to the events of the war that impeded its
spread, Grundmann’s work allowed scholars to overcome some
of the difficulties in which scholarship had become mired. Par-
ticularly its two central chapters, “The Origins of the Women’s
Religious Movement,” and “The Incorporation of the Women’s
Religious Movement into the Mendicant Orders,” offered a con-
vincing overall picture of the difficulties encountered by the
new women’s groups, and the Roman Curia with them, in align-
ing themselves with the Mendicant Orders.22
Through a careful study of the original sources and of studies

that helped to reconstruct Hugolino’s contribution to the rise
of the “Second Order,” Zarncke convincingly showed that
Francis did not request Hugolino’s intervention in assuming
the care of the women’s monasteries, but it was the Cardinal of
Ostia who organized the “Weltfluchtbewegung unter den Frauen,”23
thus giving birth to a new Order. It was only later, when he
wanted to confer on these women’s communities and on the
rule he had given them “a spiritual authority which only the
figure of Francis allowed,”24 that he would ascribe its paternity
to Francis himself.25 In this way Gregory IX put the Franciscan
Order in the position of being unable to refuse the cura
monialium of the Ordo Sancti Damiani, thus achieving one of
his major goals.26
Zarncke’s study achieved innovative results which, as we have
noted, had not been adequately evaluated by Grundmann him-
self, much less so by historians among the Friars Minor, since
the acceptance of such conclusions seemed to deprive the his-
tory of the origins of Franciscan life of one of its important
elements. In fact, Zarncke’s work was mentioned only in pass-
ing, at times to raise a few objections to it.27 The fact that it was
written in German took care of the rest, at least as far as Italian
historians were concerned.28 However, this author maintains
that Zarncke’s work has shed new light on Clare’s originality
and her strenuous fidelity to the ideal shown to her by Francis,
and made it possible for us to interpret more precisely the rela-
tionships between the abbess of San Damiano and the Roman
Curia up to the time of Hugolino’s election to the papacy in
1227.
Another interesting element emerging from the work of
Zarncke and more recent authors,29 is the element of caution
to be used in choosing the sources for reconstructing the rela-
tionships between Francis and Hugolino and between the lat-
ter and Clare. If, as certain passages from the Legenda sanctae
Clarae and papal documents would have us believe,30 the friend-
ship and collaboration between the two saints and the cardinal
of Ostia can be taken for granted, on the other hand, writings
from authors we may define as Spirituals show that greater
emphasis can be given to the differences between the Franciscan

Order and the Roman Curia over the cura monialium. These
differences can be situated in the second half of the century,
attributing to Francis himself attitudes of intolerance in the
face of the burden represented by the cura of women’s monas-
teries, and in regard to certain friars who proved to be exces-
sively zealous in the service of the religiosae mulieres.31
Grundmann’s approach was not adopted until the 1970s, as
can be seen by the fact that only at that time did the expres-
sion “women’s religious movement” enter into its own in his-
torical terminology. It was first used in Italian by Manselli, who
had also written the preface to the Italian edition of the Religiöse
Bewegungen.32 The Seventh Meeting of the International Soci-
ety of Franciscan Studies had as its title “Movimento religioso
femminile e francescanesimo nel secolo XIII” [“The Women’s
Religious Movement and Franciscanism in the Thirteenth Cen-
tury,”]33 and this expression was then repeated in various pub-
lications, aided by the circumstance of the eighth centenary of
the birth of Saint Francis.34 This new approach affected some
other important contributions, not only about the story of Clare
and her community, but also regarding the whole Order of San
Damiano. The most convincing one, which treated the period
of the pontificates of Gregory IX and Innocent IV, is that of
Roberto Rusconi;35 we should also mention the biography by
Marco Bartoli and the articles published in the proceedings of
the 1992 congress in Assisi dedicated to Chiara di Assisi.36
The relations between Clare and the highest ecclesiastical
authorities constitute a problem that has not yet been studied
with the attention reserved for the relations between Francis,
the papacy and some notable exponents of the Roman Curia.37
To understand these correctly we must consider the life of the
abbess of San Damiano, the history of her community, and
that of the monasteries were inspired by it – namely, Monticelli,
Monteluce, Foligno, Spello, Arezzo, San Salvatore di Colpersito
(which we will refer to as “Clarian”)38 – apart from develop-
ments in the Hugolinian monasteries which, during the pon-
tificate of Gregory IX, became the Order of San Damiano.39 One
can see that these are rather subtle distinctions, but they are
necessary if we wish to avoid those ambiguities that Gregory

IX counted on in order to ensure for all the Hugolinian monas-
teries – which from their beginnings were immediately subject
to the authority of the Roman Church – the cura monialium of
the Franciscans. If there were indeed points in common be-
tween the Clarian monasteries – with San Damiano foremost
among them – and the Order of San Damiano created by the
Cardinal of Ostia, there were also rather significant differences.40
In this regard, for example, Zarncke considers it interesting to
note that the cura monialium of the monasteries we may define
as “Hugolinian” was entrusted to the Cistercian, Ambrose, while
at the same period Clare’s community and others more closely
linked to the Franciscan experience continued to have visitators
chosen from among the Friars Minor.41
We should also note that serious attention has not yet been
given to other sources. The Vita of Gregory IX,42 for example,
gives us many reasons for crediting the origins of the Order of
San Damiano to the work of Hugolino, a fact that can also be
evinced from the Vita prima of Thomas of Celano.43 In addition
to his giving it shape by compiling a rule for it, the Cardinal of
Ostia bound it securely to the Roman See, exempting the mon-
asteries founded by him from the authority of the local bishop
from the time of their founding.44 This was a significant inno-
vation, showing Hugolino’s desire to give the new Order he
founded a somewhat centralized structure, granting a “cardi-
nal protector” appointed directly by the pontiff the broadest
possibilities for intervening in order to organize the “women’s
religious movement” along the lines of tried and true monastic
experience.45 Such motives have led some people to believe that
the Cardinal of Ostia wanted to promote a reform within the
Benedictine Order, but a reform no longer connected with the
Cistercian men’s monasteries which, at the beginning of the
thirteenth century, had decided to no longer accept responsi-
bility for the cura monialium.46
The Evidence up to 1220
On the basis on these findings we may now proceed to rein-

terpret the significant events in the relations between Clare
and the highest authorities in the Roman Church. Besides con-

sidering the occasions when Clare might have had contact with
Gregory IX and Innocent IV (the popes who issued documents
in favor of the Clarian community), we will also take into ac-
count the interventions by the cardinal protectors of the mon-
astery of San Damiano and of the Franciscan Order, Hugolino
of Ostia and Raynaldus of Jenne.47 Both ascended to the papal
throne and Raynaldus, who in 1254 became Pope Alexander
IV – the pontiff who canonized Clare – retained the title of
protector of the Franciscan Order throughout his pontificate.48
Since Clare’s contacts with the Roman See were not always di-
rect, we will have to formulate some hypotheses about who
may have served as her intermediaries, that is, those who chan-
nelled the requests from the community of San Damiano to
the Apostolic See and who obtained for the community the
concession of papal documents or the suspension of unwel-
come measures.
Since the so-called privilegium paupertatis attributed to Inno-
cent III is to be considered a forgery, as Werner Maleczek has
convincingly and definitively shown,49 it seems rather improb-
able that there were any contacts between Clare and this pon-
tiff. The community resident at San Damiano, in fact, was a
small one, organized according to a penitential life-style, which
was quite common at the beginning of the thirteenth century
throughout the regions of Umbria and Tuscany.50 This small
community certainly had not yet developed a significant net-
work of relations, and therefore at that early date did not serve
as a reference point for other women’s religious groups. Fur-
thermore, as Roberto Rusconi has illustrated, much of the tra-
ditional data concerning the founding of Clarian monasteries,
especially those attributed to Clare’s companions, should be
reconsidered in light of a thorough examination of the surviv-
ing documents, although it is probable that there was a “wide
circulation” of the first “damianite” religious women.51
It is also difficult to maintain that Innocent’s presumed
privilegium had any connection with the norms issued during
the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 in regard to the birth of
the novae religiones.52 Such groups had frequently been existing
for some time without sensing any need to adopt a true and
proper rule – such as the one Hugolino composed around 1219
– in order to regularize the status of communities that, for the
most part, were already established, and which for this reason
was introduced at San Damiano too.53 In any case, the Assisi
monastery was under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Assisi
until it received from the Cardinal of Ostia the forma vitae he
had composed and had been adopted in other foundations of
north-central Italy, which granted the monasteries exemption
from the authority of the diocesan ordinary.54
At that time the Bishop of Assisi was Guido II, who played
such an important role in the history of Francis and of his early
fraternitas. It was he who put Francis in touch with John of St.
Paul, one of the most influential cardinals in Innocent’s cu-
ria,55 who facilitated the friars’ stay in Assisi and other places in
the diocese, and actually hosted Francis in the episcopal palace
during his final illness. Despite this, historians have not yet
given him due attention.56 The same prelate also showed favor
toward Clare and her first sisters. San Damiano, in fact, was a
church within the jurisdiction of the bishop of Assisi and, even
if Guido did not promulgate official documents recognizing
the San Damiano community,57 it is still reasonable to think
that he did take some interest in this regard. He, in fact, knew
the life-style practiced at San Damiano well enough to suggest
to Clare that she relax some ascetical practice regarding fasting
that he, together with Francis, considered unduly harsh.58
There is no evidence of any contacts between Clare and
Honorius III, but various reasons suggest that we should con-
sider this pontificate very carefully, since it was so important
for the development and definitive organization of the new
forms of religious life. We need only recall that it was Honorius
who approved the rule of the Dominicans and the Franciscans,
yet historians have neglected this pontiff also, devoting more
attention to Hugolino, the most influential cardinal of
Honorius’s curia.59 The latter dedicated himself to carrying out
the work outlined by Innocent III: reorganizing women’s reli-
gious communities, giving them a precise juridical shape and
placing them under the direct protection of the Roman Church
at a time when the men’s religious Orders were giving increas-

ingly clear indications that they wanted to scale back their com-
mitment to the cura monialium.60 From the time of his lega-
tions in Tuscany and Lombardy,61 Hugolino had occasion to
observe at close range the varied expressions of women’s reli-
gious life, which for the most part had sprung up spontane-
ously62 on ascetical models based on poverty.63 From that time
on he did everything possible to regularize the communities
that already existed or were yet to be founded.64
On August 27, 1218, before setting out for northern Italy on
his second legation, Hugolino had Honorius III issue Litterae
tuae nobis. Even though it stands as the first document in the
Bullarium franciscanum, the letter has no connection with the
Franciscan Order or Orders.65 Rather this papal document al-
lowed Hugolino to take under the protection of the Apostolic
See the donations made for the founding of new women’s reli-
gious houses that were characterized by a strong desire for pov-
erty.66 The legate therefore was acting in full agreement with
the pope, as can also be seen from the solemn confirmations
that Honorius issued for the earliest Hugolinian monasteries,
beginning in December of 1219, and to which the Cardinal of
Ostia had already given decrees of approbation as early as July
of that year:67 Monticelli, near Florence;68 Santa Maria di
Gattaiola, in the diocese of Lucca;69 Santa Maria outside Porta
Camollia in Siena;70 and Monteluce in Perugia.71 It is precisely
after the foundation of Monticelli, whose documents explic-
itly refer to the observantiae regulares of San Damiano,72 that
Hugolino meets with Clare, perhaps in order to have a fuller
understanding of the Assisi community’s life-style, but certainly
in order to introduce them to the forma vitae he had composed.
Thus the Cardinal of Ostia thought he would include the group
at San Damiano among the foundations he had fostered or, at
least, had regularized.73
According to the commonly accepted chronology of events,
Hugolino spent Holy Week of 1220 at San Damiano, as is evi-
denced by the letter he addressed to Clare shortly after his de-
parture from the monastery.74 If that letter reveals Hugolino’s
undeniable esteem for Clare (beyond the usual formulas of epis-
tolary style), it cannot be denied that it also contains ideas that

the Cardinal of Ostia saw as characteristic of women’s monas-
tic life, ideas with which Clare must not have been in total
agreement. This is especially true in regard to the strict, perma-
nent enclosure that Hugolino increasingly saw as the indispens-
able condition for constant prayer.75
Clare and Hugolino
It was not until 1220, when Francis was in the East, that
Hugolino made contact with Clare’s community, which must
have had many aspects in common with those communities
he had solemnly established a few months earlier, and for which
he had obtained pontifical protection. However, Clare’s com-
munity, unlike the others, wanted to remain in the most abso-
lute poverty and, particularly, in close relationship with the
community of Francis, which at that time did not have a rule
solemnly approved by the Apostolic See. We cannot know for
certain if at that time Hugolino was even thinking of making
San Damiano the “exemplar” for the monasteries he was gradu-
ally organizing. One document in particular allows us to see
the type of intervention used by the Cardinal of Ostia in regard
to the “women’s religious movement.” This is a formula that
he prepared precisely for founding women’s monasteries orga-
nized according to the forma vitae he had composed and di-
rectly subject to the authority of the Church of Rome. This
formula was inserted in the register of the legation undertaken
in March, 1221, and from it we can see his plan to begin a
religio pauperum dominarum de Valle Spoleti sive Tuscia, stating
that the models for it were the monasteries of Perugia, Siena
and Lucca, founded less than two years earlier.76 Thus a new
monastic institution was becoming ever more defined, one
linked to the initiative of Hugolino and independent of San
Damiano, undoubtedly characterized by a strong emphasis on
poverty.77 At this stage there was not yet a clear and definite
plan to subject the religious to strict enclosure, as we can see
from the name used to indicate the nascent Order (religio
pauperum dominarum) or from the formula as a whole, though
this element had already been hinted at in the diplomas of

July, 1219.
Difficulties must have arisen quite quickly regarding the ob-
servance of strict poverty, as is also mentioned in the letter
addressed to Hugolino by Honorius III in August 1218.78 In or-
der to obtain life’s basic necessities without any income from
rents on property, the women had to have some relations with
the outside world. For San Damiano this involved the role played
by the Friars Minor, who begged to support themselves and
Clare’s sorores, as well as by the sister servitiales. However, it was
the friars who maintained contact with the external world, and
the servitiales frequently left the monastery to carry out the
tasks for which they were responsible.79 Experience, therefore,
led Hugolino to favor enclosure over poverty, and in this re-
gard one must think that the advice of the Cistercians, much
sought and valued by the Cardinal of Ostia,80 had some influ-
ence. This new direction is eloquently shown by the change in
the name of the nascent religio in documents beginning in the
1220s, that is in direct relationship to the legation undertaken
by Hugolino in 1221.81 In these documents the strong empha-
sis on poverty begins to be associated with strict enclosure. Al-
though the episcopal documents for the foundation of the
monasteries of Faenza and Milan, modeled on Hugolino’s for-
mula, still speak of sorores pauperes,82 in the very next years the
ecclesiastical documents begin to speak more and more of the
sorores pauperes inclusae, and Hugolino’s rule is called the “forma
vitae pauperum dominarum clausarum in valle Spoleti manentium.”83
The Hugolinian monasteries were soon given increasingly
generous gifts of real estate, an aspect that appears to be clearly
associated to the intention to have them observe strict enclo-
sure. These motives were certainly not in harmony with the
guidelines Francis had given to the community of San Damiano,
but until Hugolino became pope and Assisi’s monastery was
included, at least in name, among the Hugolinian foundations,
they had no effect on the life of Clare and her sisters.84 Thus we
see that, although even during Innocent III’s pontificate a cer-
tain number of papal privileges were issued for the Hugolinian
monasteries – some of which granted approval for the posses-
sion of goods received by way of donation – San Damiano did

not receive any papal letters. This is further proof that Clare’s
community was considered a special case.85
While Hugolino was making his first contacts with San
Damiano around 1220, he continued acting energetically on
behalf of the new Order he had conceived, and whose care he
had assumed by papal assignment. A Milanese document, in
fact, of November 2, 1224, allows us to attribute to Hugolino
the responsibility for the guidance of the Ordo de Valle Spoleti,
clearing the field of a number of confusions regarding hypo-
thetical assignments in this regard entrusted to a certain Brunetto
de lo Carmaniago. The document, emanating from the
archdiocesan chancery and signed by the archbishop, Henry of
Settala, refers to Hugolino as “qui de mandato domini pape est
provisor et rector omnium monialium ipsius Ordinis” [“who by
mandate of the Lord Pope is supervisor and governor of all the
nuns of this Order.”]86 This term recalls the language used to
define the cardinal protector, and this must have been sub-
stantially the function Hugolino carried out for the monaster-
ies he founded. However, this does not necessarily mean that
he exercised similar authority by papal proxy on San Damiano’s
behalf. Clare probably felt no need for it, at least while Francis
was alive, since she considered San Damiano to be included
naturaliter in the Franciscan Order.87
If, therefore, there is evidence of relations between Clare and
Hugolino as early as 1220, when he stayed for a certain period
of time at San Damiano, it does not seem that the Cardinal of
Ostia’s interest in the Assisi monastery was all that keen. Rather,
he dedicated himself to the organization of the new women’s
Order he had founded, for which the pope had made him re-
sponsible, and for which he appointed as visitator the Cistercian,
Ambrose. The story of Clare and her community instead was
progressing in direct contact with the Friars Minor, who guar-
anteed them material and spiritual assistance. We are dealing,
therefore, with two separate histories, basically running paral-
lel to one another. However, things would change after the death
of Francis and Hugolino’s election to the papacy in March of
1227.
Gregory IX
Pope Gregory of happy memory . . . loved this

holy woman intensely with fatherly affection.
When he was [attempting to] persuade her that,
because of the events of the times and the dan-
gers of the world, she should consent to have
some possessions which he himself willingly
offered, she resisted with a very strong spirit and
would in no way acquiesce. To this the pope
replied: “If you fear for your vow, We absolve
you from it.” “Holy Father,” she said, “I will
never in any way wish to be absolved from the
following of Christ.”88
This dialogue, which is even mentioned in the letter of Clare’s

canonization, offers a glimpse of the relations between Clare
and the pope, one that is unique because of its significance and
its rather lively tone.89 The encounter, which can be placed in
July of 1228 when Gregory was in Assisi to preside at the can-
onization of Francis, marks a significant turning point in rela-
tions between the abbess of San Damiano and the pontiff. There
is nothing to lead us to believe that until then the contacts
with ecclesiastical authority had presented any difficulties, per-
haps because the strong link with the Franciscan Order (to
which, as we said, Clare felt that she and her community be-
longed) gave Clare sufficient autonomy from papacy’s activity
in regard to women’s religious life. A little more light on what
may have caused the disagreement between Clare and the pon-
tiff comes from a study of the circumstances preceding the en-
counter in July 1228, and, thus, of the reasons that led the
pope to visit the Assisi community once again.
In July, 1227, a few months after his election to the papacy,
Gregory IX addressed to some communities of pauperes moniales
his Magna sicut dicitur, a letter with a highly spiritual tone, which
in many ways is reminiscent of Ab illa hora.90 In it he com-
mends himself to the prayers of the religious, describing in
touching imagery drawn from the passion of Christ his new
position as pontiff and the weighty responsibilities connected

with it, which prevented him from continuing to take care of
the Order he had created.91 In that same letter Gregory an-
nounced that he had passed the baton of the cura monialium to
Brother Pacificus, with no indication of the friar’s Order of prov-
enance.92 But if, as is probable, this Pacificus is to be identified
as the Friar Minor of the same name who had already been
mentioned in a document drawn up in April, 1226, in Gubbio,
entrusting him with the care of the monasteries of the pauperes
inclusae, this fact is certainly worthy of note. That would make
this Pacificus “the first Friar Minor really known as visitator of
the nuns,”93 and the Magna sicut dicitur would provide the first
evidence of Gregory’s attempt to place the cura monialium of
the Hugolinian monasteries on the shoulders of the Minors.
The papacy’s position will become even more evident in De-
cember of 1227, when, with Quoties cordis, the pontiff directly
delegated to the minister general of the Minors the care of the
pauperes moniales reclusae, without, however, making any men-
tion of the two Orders having a common Franciscan origin.94
Gregory thus sought to assure the Franciscans’ cura of the
monasteries he had established. In order to be more systematic
in his undertaking, however, he had to have San Damiano –
the first and only community to which Francis had guaranteed
his own assistance and that of his friars – included among the
foundations of the Ordo de Spoleto sive Tuscia which, as a result
of the strong emphasis placed on strict enclosure, was already
being called the Ordo pauperum monialium reclusarum. On the
basis of these considerations we can formulate some hypoth-
eses about Gregory’s visit to San Damiano, the occasion for the
spirited discussion with Clare recalled by one of the witnesses
in the process of canonization and then recounted in the
Legenda.95 On that occasion the pope quite probably had two
objectives in mind. First of all, since Francis was dead, he wanted
to convince the abbess of San Damiano to establish closer ties
to the Roman Church, which, as we have seen, beginning with
Hugolino’s work, was striving to reorganize the “women’s reli-
gious movement.” This meant that the Assisi monastery should
be numbered among the foundations of pauperes moniales
reclusae. As a result, Clare would have to accept the forma vitae

that Gregory was implementing and spreading even beyond
Italy, as can be seen by the text contained in a letter sent to the
monastery of Pamplona in April of 1228.96 This would also mean
that Clare and her sisters would have to accept both the strict
enclosure required by it, and the possibility of receiving gifts of
real estate.97
The evidence given by one who was present at that discus-
sion leaves no doubt about Clare’s firm response. She probably
agreed to the pope’s requests to annex San Damiano to the
Hugolinian monasteries and be directly subject to the Roman
See, but she wanted the pope himself to guarantee, with a cor-
responding document, the unique character of the Assisi mon-
astery.98 In fact, on September 17 of that same year Gregory IX
addressed to Clare the letter Sicut manifestum est, stating that
no one would force San Damiano to possess property.99
After this open disagreement there was quite probably a cer-
tain chill in the relations between Clare and Gregory. In fact,
the privilegium paupertatis is the last document addressed to Clare
by the pope,100 although from the first years of his pontificate,
he issued an increasing number of privileges to the Hugolinian
monasteries. On the other hand, to all effects the pontiff had
succeeded in having the community of San Damiano numbered
among “his” monasteries which, perhaps as a result of his talks
with Clare, the pope began to call the Ordo Sancti Damiani.101
This was an important victory for Gregory who, as we have
seen, sought to establish a solid link between the Order of Mi-
nors and the monasteries that had sprung up by his initiative.
If indeed the new Order took its name and its example from
the community of Clare, for whom the assistance of the friars
was fundamental, the same situation could easily be extended
to the entire Order of San Damiano. Thus the papacy would
have a valid precedent for overcoming the inevitable opposi-
tion that began to appear among the Franciscans in relation to
the constantly increasing number of Damianite monasteries
entrusted to them.
The fact that from then on San Damiano was included among
the monasteries which we might describe as being of “pontifi-
cal right” is confirmed by the August 18, 1228, letter of Cardi-

nal Raynaldus, Hugolino-Gregory’s successor in the care of the
pauperes moniales reclusae. This letter is addressed to twenty-
four monasteries in the north-central part of Italy, and the name
of the monastery of San Damiano heads the list.102 With this
letter Raynaldus, one of Hugolino’s closest collaborators dur-
ing his legations in Tuscany and Lombardy, that is, from the
time of the first Hugolinian foundations,103 announces that he
has succeeded the Cardinal of Ostia in the cura of the monas-
teries. The new cardinal protector also informed the nuns that
Brother Pacificus had resigned from the weighty responsibility
of visitator of the monasteries and that the office had now been
accepted by Brother Philip Longo.104
Thus we are led to believe that Clare’s increased rigidity dur-
ing her conversation with Gregory IX was caused by the pontiff’s
request to have San Damiano incorporated into the nucleus of
monasteries placed directly under the papacy’s jurisdiction.
Besides stricter enclosure and its consequent need to accept
rents, their insertion within Hugolinian monasticism would
mean a weakening of the bonds with the Franciscan Order; we
need only consider, for example, that the Apostolic See would
decide which friars would be responsible for the cura monialium.
The new arrangement threatened to compromise the charac-
teristic elements of the San Damiano experience, which Clare
had no intention of renouncing.105 Within this perspective per-
haps we can offer a convincing explanation for the harsh reac-
tion of the abbess of San Damiano to the news of the decisions
contained in the interpretation of the Franciscan rule promul-
gated by Gregory IX in Quo elongati of September 28, 1230.106
In the 1230 Pentecost chapter in Assisi the friars were unable
to come to an agreement on the interpretation of some points
of the rule involving important problems, such as how much
juridical weight did Francis’s Testament have.107 It seems that
less than four years after Francis’s death, there were irreconcil-
able differences between the two groups of friars. On the one
hand we find the clerics, many of whom entered the brother-
hood from the universities quite far from Umbria and who, for
the most part, had not known the founder personally. On the
other hand we have those religious who, because of their his-

tory and formation, were more in line with Francis’s original
vision.108 The delegation that submitted the unresolved ques-
tions to the pope in the name of the chapter was actually made
up of six clerics from the Po region, in addition to the minister
general, John Parenti.109 One of the disputed points was a con-
cern about friars residing in or visiting the convents of the
pauperes moniales reclusae entrusted to them by the Holy See by
Quoties cordis of December, 1227; this responsibility, as we have
seen, had been reaffirmed by Raynaldus in August, 1228.110 The
rule, in fact, forbade the friars from entering the monasteries of
nuns, “excepting those brothers to whom special permission
has been granted by the Apostolic See.” Until that time the
friars had interpreted that prohibition as meaning the pauperes
moniales reclusae “because the Apostolic See has particular care
for them”; now, however, there was some question of whether
this norm might apply to all women’s monasteries, obviously
including San Damiano. In Quo elongati Gregory IX, addressing
the questions put to him by the general chapter and clearly
adhering to his plan to organize women’s religious life, replied
essentially in the affirmative to this question, stating that pa-
pal permission was necessary for the friars to enter any monas-
teries, not only those of the pauperes moniales reclusae.111
The crisis that this papal letter touched off precisely touched
upon the originality of San Damiano in comparison with the
Hugolinian monasteries, this time weighing more directly on
the position of the Assisi monastery with respect to the Order
of Minors.112 As we have seen, Clare was not too quick to agree
that her community should become part of the Ordo Sancti
Damiani and, in any case, although she gave her formal agree-
ment to follow Hugolina’s forma vitae,113 her request for the
privilegium paupertatis reveals that she chose to defend the origi-
nality of the Assisi monastery, an originality that combined
the choice of poverty with close ties to the Franciscan Order.
Thus we see that if, during her conversation with the pope in
1228, Clare was vigorously defending the option for poverty as
it was practiced at San Damiano, when faced with Quo elongati
she reacted harshly in order to safeguard the vital union be-
tween the Franciscan Order and her community. Some Friars

Minor actually lived at San Damiano in order to perform their
ministry there, and they were not dependent on the decisions
of the Apostolic See.114
Thus we can grasp the truly dramatic nature of Clare’s state-
ment: “Let him now take away from us all the brothers since
he has taken away those who provide us with the food that is
vital”;115 for Clare the possibility of close contact with the Mi-
nors was strictly linked to the life of San Damiano, even to the
point of considering it almost a special form of apostolate.116
This episode is familiar to all, and we mention it here only
because it was clearly a significant event in the relations be-
tween Clare and Gregory IX. However, it must still be noted
that Clare’s angry outburst could not have been expressed di-
rectly to the pope since he was not in Assisi at the time. Clearly,
the pontiff came to hear of it and suspended the provisions for
San Damiano, entrusting the care of the monastery to the gen-
eral of the Order, John Parenti, as Clare wanted.117 One hy-
pothesis is that it was Parenti himself who informed the Ro-
man Curia of Clare’s reaction, but we cannot entirely exclude
the possibility that this initiative had been taken by another
high-level exponent of the Order, one who enjoyed Clare’s com-
plete confidence, and who in 1232 would succeed John Parenti
in the leadership of the Order: Brother Elias.118
Clare and Brother Elias
The close collaboration between Clare and Brother Elias seems

to be confirmed in the letter addressed to Clare by Agnes, who
tradition claims was abbess of Santa Maria di Monticelli in Flo-
rence at that time.119 The letter is generally considered to have
been written in 1230. Clare’s sister, who had left San Damiano
to reform the Florentine monastery according to the customs
of San Damiano, turned to her old community to ask for prayers
for herself and her new sisters. However, she adds an interest-
ing remark that makes it possible for us to establish that Gre-
gory IX, upon the request of both Clare and Agnes, had re-
cently granted the privilegium paupertatis to the latter commu-
nity, which wanted to be like the Assisi monastery in every

way.120 Therefore, even if relations between Gregory and Clare
were no longer marked by the deep affection that Hugolino
demonstrated in his letter of 1220, they were not, however,
broken down to the point that Clare was unable to send the
pope requests in her own name or that of other communities.
Nor was Gregory incapable of responding positively to such
requests. Certainly it would have been a great loss for Gregory
to suffer a definitive break with Clare, first of all because of the
fame the abbess of San Damiano had achieved due to the dis-
tribution of the Vita prima of Thomas of Celano, which dedi-
cated a good deal of space to the origins of Clare’s commu-
nity.121 Furthermore, Gregory was increasingly calling the com-
munities he founded the Ordo Sancti Damiani, setting Clare’s
community up as the model of the monasteries directly sub-
ject to the Apostolic See, which he was also doing, as we men-
tioned, to guarantee that the Minors would maintain the cura
of the religious women.
The delicate balance of relations between Clare and the pa-
pacy must have included a further source of conflict, namely
the important role played by Brother Elias. He probably came
from Assisi and was a long-time companion of Francis and had
a profound understanding of Clare’s community. Unlike the
six friars who accompanied John Parenti in the delegation to
Gregory IX in the late spring of 1230 to request the pope’s in-
terpretations of disputed points in the rule, Elias had a pro-
found understanding of Clare’s community.122 The famous epi-
sode of Francis’s preaching to the sisters of San Damiano, turn-
ing the sermon into a penitential gesture, shows Elias and
Francis together in relation to Clare’s community.123 On this
occasion Francis’s vicar appears to be particularly solicitous of
the religious women, since it is he who begs Francis in their
name to grant the desire of Clare and her sisters, and to address
to them some words of faith. This is one of the rare instances
in which the Vita secunda of Thomas of Celano does not put
Elias in a bad light, but rather testifies to the close bond linking
him to Clare and Francis.124 Prescinding from the misleading
interpretations of Elias advanced by the chronicles of the Or-
der, we can see that in addition to being one of the best-known

and esteemed persons at both the papal and imperial courts,
Elias must have been one of the most faithful interpreters of
the message of Francis, whose vicar he was from 1221 to 1227
when the general chapter elected John Parenti and Elias was
given the task of dedicating himself totally to the construction
of the basilica in Assisi.125 Our hypothesis that he served as
mediator between Clare and the papacy after the promulga-
tion of Quo elongati would be supported by the fact that, al-
though he usually resided in Assisi, Elias must have had easy
access to the Roman curia.
This is confirmed by the fact that, in the letter mentioned
above, Agnes first informs Clare that Gregory IX had granted
her community the privilegium paupertatis, and then immedi-
ately adds a reference to Elias, asking Clare to beg him to visit
the community of Monticelli more frequently – presuming that
Agnes was at its head – to bring the Lord’s consolation to Agnes
and her new sisters.126 If that request implicitly confirms a fa-
miliarity between Clare and Elias, it also suggests that he per-
formed the task of linking what we may define as the Clarian
foundations, in opposition to the monasteries of Hugolinian
origin, which were now designated as the Ordo Sancti Damiani.
This perspective alone gives clear significance to the relations
between Elias and the communities closest to Clare: the abbess
of San Damiano certainly considered Elias to be one of Francis’s
most faithful followers, and she had the greatest trust in his
advice, as she also suggested Agnes of Bohemia should do.127
This mission to the Clarian monasteries was one that Elias
clearly exercised with Clare’s full consent. Furthermore, at least
until the promulgation of Quo elongati, he was able to exercise
this responsibility with total autonomy from ecclesiastical au-
thority.128 The papal interpretation of the rule probably com-
plicated things, since Gregory IX had now extended the de-
mand for authorization for the friars to enter any women’s
monasteries, not only those of the pauperes moniales reclusae. If
indeed Clare’s decisive had managed to extract an exception to
Quo elongati for San Damiano, we have no information about
similar provisions for other communities linked to that of Clare,
such as Monticelli.129 We would add only that there is no evi-

dence of the role played in these events by the cardinal protec-
tor, Raynaldus. The sources, in fact, do not allow us to have an
overall view of his activity in regard to San Damiano, while he
did act in favor of other communities which we may call
damianite, that is, belonging to the Order of San Damiano.130
The reasons behind their deep spiritual friendship and Clare’s
unconditional esteem for Elias should be sought in their com-
mon work of coordinating and spreading the model offered by
the Assisi monastery. Thus Francis’s most faithful companions
were determined to remain faithful to the founder’s intentio
and sought to overcome the obstacles placed in their way by
the decisive regularization pursued by Gregory IX.131
A significant piece of evidence supporting Clare and Elias’s
agreement to spread a form of religious life for women based
on the model proposed by Francis is offered by the Clare’s sec-
ond letter to Agnes of Bohemia, written between 1234 and
1238.132 Clare’s letters offer an interesting perspective allowing
us to grasp the reasons motivating the noblewoman of Assisi to
write her own rule.133 In fact, from the letters Clare wrote to
Agnes we see the women’s joint effort to make the Prague mon-
astery increasingly conform to the model proposed by Francis
and faithfully followed at San Damiano. They wanted to trans-
form Saint Francis of Prague, where Agnes was abbess, from a
monastery following the Hugolinian forma vitae into a Clarian
monastery.134 This letter addressed by Clare to Agnes of Bohemia
contains two motifs that can be clearly grasped. On the one
hand we see Clare’s esteem for Elias, whose advice she also rec-
ommends to the Bohemian abbess:
In all of this, follow the counsel of our venerable

father, Brother Elias, the Minister General, that
you may walk more securely in the way of the
commands of the Lord. Prize it beyond the advice
of the others and cherish it as dearer to you than
any gift.135
On the other hand, we can clearly note Clare distancing her-

self from the positions of Gregory IX, which she considered a
compromise:
If anyone would tell you something else or sug-

gest something that would hinder your perfec-
tion or seem contrary to your divine vocation,
even though you must respect him, do not follow
his counsel. But as a poor virgin, embrace the
poor Christ.136
In his letter of May 11, 1238, Gregory IX seems to give an

unfavorable echo to these heartfelt and courageous suggestions
of Clare to Agnes. Despite the intervention of Wenceslaus,
Agnes’s brother Wenceslaus, King of Bohemia, had written to
Gregory IX on his sister’s behalf, asking that the pope graciously
grant her requests. Despite the king’s intervention, the pope
denied Agnes and the religious of the Prague monastery per-
mission to follow the forma vitae Francis had given the com-
munity of San Damiano. He also firmly ordered them to ad-
here to the text of the rule (that is, the Rule of Benedict with
the addition of the Hugolinian-Gregorian legislation) which
he was including with the letter.137 On that occasion in particu-
lar Gregory expressed a negative judgment on the forma vitae
of Francis, defining it as simple milk for a newborn, in contrast
to the solid food for an adult, represented instead by the rule
he had composed.138 Most of all, however, we can note a veiled
reference to someone who, suggesting the adoption of the forma
vitae which Francis had composed for San Damiano, had given
Agnes and her companions bad advice:
We ask therefore for your devotion and your

obedience in the Lord Jesus Christ, enjoining
you, in remission of your sins, that you, put-
ting aside every pretext, observe diligently the
aforesaid rule [that is, the rule of Gregory IX]
and see that it be observed by your sisters, so
that, considering with careful meditation and
observing prudently what is said above [the rea-

sons for which the Gregorian forma vitae is to
be preferred to that of Francis] – prescinding
from anything that may be suggested to you by
someone who perhaps has zeal, but not according
to knowledge – what must be taken into consid-
eration especially in your affections is the fact
that what pleases God and is acceptable to us
has the power to save, for you and for those
near to you, as the mercy of the Redeemer may
wish.139
It seems plausible that the expression “someone” (ab aliquo)

referred to Elias or to Clare. However, if we are to base our think-
ing on the gender of the Latin word, it would seem to indicate
Elias, although the reference is deliberately indeterminate. The
next phrase (“who perhaps has zeal, but not according to knowl-
edge”) might rather lend support to the idea that the person in
question is precisely Elias, especially in light of two reasons.
First of all, we should note Gregory’s definite tendency
throughout his pontificate to marginalize the lay element from
positions of responsibility in ecclesiastical life. The classic ex-
ample is that of preaching, which has been studied by Rolf
Zerfass, which seems rather eloquent: After the careful, condi-
tional concessions granted to the laity by Innocent III, from
the very first years of his pontificate Gregory repeatedly acted
to exclude from such an important activity anyone not belong-
ing to the ordo doctorum, that is, all non-clerics. Given the strong
link increasingly created between preaching and confession,
he preferred to limit this office to priests.140 The reference to a
person “who has zeal, but not according to knowledge” could
therefore well mean Elias, who was not a cleric, and who for
this very reason was countering opposition within his own
Order.141
The second reason that leads us to believe that Gregory’s not-
so-veiled criticism refers to the general of the Minors is Elias’s
difficult position in regard to the Order, but also undoubtedly
in regard to the papacy, which had such close relations with
the Order.142 Thus, although we can see reasons favoring

Gregory’s circumspection towards Elias, the pontiff still used
him for important missions, such as when he sent Elias to
Frederick II in the spring of 1238.143 One of the factors at this
time of difficulty for the Minister General of the Minors was
the pope’s disapproval of the work he was carrying out in sup-
port of the ideal of life proposed by Clare, which the pope evi-
dently saw as an alternative to the Order he had been organiz-
ing with increasingly greater determination since the early
1210s. Here we are faced with two opposing camps, yet Clare
had the valuable support of Elias who, we must not forget, from
1232 to 1239 held the office of minister general of the Franciscan
Order, the Order to which Clare felt that she belonged.144
Elias, furthermore, acted not only out of solidarity with Clare
and the communities aspiring to follow the Clarian model, but
also in order to vindicate the originality of Francis’s contribu-
tion to women’s religious life, a contribution which Gregory
was trying to overcome and wipe out, substituting extreme as-
ceticism for the practice of absolute poverty.145
What is more, Clare and Elias could have been seen in some
way as Gregory’s antagonists in the development of so-called
women’s Franciscanism. If, indeed, on the one hand the pon-
tiff, and the cardinal protector with him, was trying to give a
certain uniformity to the expressions of the “women’s religious
movement,” Clare, her sisters, and Elias on the other hand,
became the spokespersons and proponents of the model of
women’s religious life proposed by Francis, giving occasions
for disorder, at least in the Curia’s eyes.146 For Clare, however,
such an initiative, conducted in agreement with the minister
general of the Franciscan Order, could have had only one mean-
ing, namely being a faithful witness of Francis in the sphere of
action which he had pointed out to her, offering her advice
and help in bringing San Damiano to life and placing that com-
munity under the care of the Order of Minors.147 And in the
name of just such unconditional fidelity, Clare placed at the
opening of the rule approved in 1253 this phrase: “Forma vitae
Ordinis sororum pauperum, quam beatus Franciscus instituit haec
est.”148 These words did not refer to the Ordo Sancti Damiani,
but to that group of monasteries that we have defined as

“Clarian.”149 Clare was working very hard to enable Agnes of
Prague’s monastery to join the latter group, certainly aware that
the addition of a prestigious community would have prompted
a large number of communities to ask to be allowed to observe
the forma vitae of Francis, which Clare had also defended for
San Damiano on several occasions. Thus it is no accident that
the exchange of letters with Agnes is interrupted temporarily
in December, 1238, after Gregory’s clear refusal to grant Prague’s
request for permission to follow the forma vitae of Francis in-
stead of that of Gregory, despite the fact that the former was
the only one they knew of when they made their religious pro-
fession.150 These elements also allow us to understand the rea-
son the two women do not resume their correspondence until
1253, when Clare was already near death, and after her rule
had been approved by Cardinal Raynaldus. Clare still hoped
(or she had been informed) that Agnes had always kept alive
her desire to conform her community’s life to that of San
Damiano. The new rule she composed, which was approved by
the ecclesiastical authority, had as its nucleus the forma vitae of
Francis. This might suggest to Agnes that she should ask to
have such legislation extended to Saint Francis of Prague, as in
fact happened, but only after Clare’s death, by the decree of
Innocent IV and, again, of Alexander IV.151
After the Deposition of Elias
The situation must have become particularly difficult for Clare

after Elias’s deposition, which took place in May, 1239, during
the chapter held in Rome, with Gregory IX presiding in per-
son.152 With Elias’s removal, besides losing the advice of one of
the friars whom she considered closest to Francis, Clare saw
the erosion of the last support for her efforts on the part of the
highest authority of the Order. The new administration, which
played such a big part in deposing Elias, was in fact heavily
weighted with friars who certainly did not show any great sen-
sitivity for the experience of Clare and her sisters of the monas-
teries linked to San Damiano.153 Among the ministers the pre-
vailing desire at the time was to strictly limit the interventions

requested of the Friars Minor on behalf of women’s monaster-
ies, pursuing the approach we might define as juridical or ca-
nonical, an approach set into motion by Quo elongati in 1230.154
This author believes that, taking these developments into
consideration, we can establish a certain link between Elias’s
deposition and the growth of the phenomenon of the
Minorissae. This name is given to those religiosae mulieres who,
while inspired by the ideal of Francis spread by the Minors and
requesting their spiritual assistance, were harshly condemned
first by Gregory IX and then by Innocent IV for their failure to
observe the strict enclosure required by Hugolino’s forma vi-
tae.155 Significantly, this phenomenon does not appear until
the early 1240s. This may be due to the fact that, until then,
due to Elias’s mediation, the Franciscan Order (or a part of it)
somehow recognized those experiences and channeled them
in the direction of what we have called “Clarian” foundations.156
In those same years the highest reaches of the Order were try-
ing to set limits to the cura monialium and the lack of submis-
sion of these dissident religiosae mulieres provided more than
sufficient reason for the Order’s refusal to recognize them.157
What is more, however, these elements allow us to conjecture
about the leadership of the Order’s intent to foster, in agree-
ment with the Apostolic See, the Order of San Damiano, to the
detriment of the Clarian foundations. Only those nuns who
lived according to the rule composed by the pope and who
therefore observed strict enclosure would henceforth enjoy the
cura monialium of the Minors.158
Furthermore, according to Thomas of Eccleston, after Elias’s
deposition, “without permission and against the general pro-
hibition of the minister general to visit the house of the Poor
Ladies; for this reason he seems to have incurred the sentence
of excommunication decreed by the pope.”159 This interesting
tidbit could support our observations about the activity Elias
was conducting with Clare’s approval, but without any papal
authority. It would also help us to understand why Gregory IX
was upset with the initiative of the ex-minister general of the
Minors, who, according to the chronicler, fell into total dis-
grace with the pope for this very reason.
Many elements suggest that we need to re-evaluate the role

played by Elias on behalf of the women’s communities of
Franciscan and Clarian inspiration. In all likelihood the close
relationship between Clare and the Order of Minors drew its
force from the bond between the community of San Damiano
and the first companions of Francis, and we should once again
consider Elias as a member of that band in good standing. The
unjust demonization he has suffered, especially in the works
by Spiritual authors, may also explain for the most part these
authors’ almost total silence about Clare and her community.
Peter of John Olivi and Angelo Clareno make only passing
mention of Clare, referring only to the courage and fierce resis-
tance she showed in the well known episode of her clash with
Gregory IX who, according to Angelo Clareno’s account, actu-
ally excommunicated her yet still failed to bend her to his de-
mands.160 Olivi, on the other hand, places Clare alongside
Francis to show how the choice of absolute poverty (which in
this case is also illustrated by her well known opposition to
Gregory IX), despite some accusations of heterodoxy, received
the full approval of the Church’s highest authority, which ac-
tually raised the two pauperes to the glory of the altar.161 Ubertino
da Casale merely mentions some rotuli that Brother Leo en-
trusted to the monastery of Saint Clare so that their contents
would be safeguarded.162 As a whole, we have the impression
that the Spirituals do not speak of Clare or her experience at
San Damiano because such a memory would have necessarily
involved a kind of “rehabilitation” of Elias.
Toward the Approval of the Rule
Shortly before his death [Francis] once more wrote his last
will for us that we or those, as well, who would come after us
would never turn aside from the holy poverty we had embraced.
He said:
I, little brother Francis, wish to follow the life

and poverty of our most high Lord Jesus Christ
and of His holy mother and to persevere in this
until the end; and I ask and counsel you, my
ladies, to live always in this most holy life and

poverty. And keep most careful watch that you
never depart from this by reason of the teach-
ing or advice of anyone.163
It seems that when Clare was deprived of Elias’s support164

and therefore the support of the highest levels of the Franciscan
Order, she grew increasingly ill and retired from an active com-
mitment to spreading the novitas of Francis. Instead she dedi-
cated herself entirely to making San Damiano the ideal model
of a Franciscan women’s community. In this, too, she followed
the example of Francis who, in his turn, had pointed to the
Portiuncula as a model for the whole Franciscan Order.165 In
order for this to happen, she had first and foremost to be con-
formed to and incarnate the form of life established by Francis.
Within the context of these considerations the relations be-
tween Clare and the highest Church authorities at that time
take on a particular significance. Francis was dead and canon-
ized for more than twenty years, but Clare remained the zeal-
ous guardian of the memory of the father and founder. As we
have said, this required an active remembering, one that de-
manded that she keep the ideal of the beginnings alive every
day.
For its part, under Innocent IV the Apostolic See continued
in the direction begun by Gregory IX and pursued his plan to
give greater uniformity to the vast Order of San Damiano, whose
members were of at least two different stamps. One group had
its reference in the experience of Clare while the other had its
origin and legislation from the Apostolic See. These divergent
trends could be seen, for example, in the different names used
to designate the religious women: pauperes sorores, pauperes
moniales inclusae, or even, pauperes moniales reclusae Ordinis Sancti
Damiani.166 In addition to this variety of names, the various
monasteries also observed different customs which thus char-
acterized individual monasteries or several monasteries linked
together.167
Thus we can see the motives that led Innocent IV to promul-
gate a new rule in 1247.168 Its most significant element was
probably the lack of any reference to the rule of Saint Benedict,

which had been replaced by that of Saint Francis. There were
certainly some points of contention remaining, especially the
fact that this norm explicitly provided for the monasteries’
possession of property.169 Clare managed to escape being forced
to follow it since it was clearly contrary to the privilegium
paupertatis.170 Although the community of San Damiano had
given its name to a large monastic Order of women, along with
the monasteries formed according to its life style, it appeared
ever more unique within that context. It was at this point that
Clare, who had already lost her direct link to the leadership of
the Franciscan Order and fearing new interventions that would
tend to make San Damiano lose its original charism, decided to
begin drafting a new rule. She probably profited from the ad-
vice of the cardinal protector and hoped to obtain his approval
and his support with the pope.
The work was finished in November of 1251 when Raynaldus,
passing through Assisi with the Roman Curia on their return
from Lyons to Rome, stopped to pay a visit to Clare, who had
been ill for many years and was thought to be on the verge of
death.171 She received him with great devotion and saw this as
a God-sent opportunity to ask him to approve her rule: “She
asked him to petition to have the Privilege of Poverty confirmed
by the Lord Pope and the cardinals.”172
In such a context, the term privilegium paupertatis is probably
a reference to the rule written by Clare, which focused particu-
larly on this point (which contained the text of the exhorta-
tion addressed to her by Francis) as opposed to Hugolino’s forma
vitae and the successive legislation prepared by the Apostolic
See for the pauperes moniales inclusae.173 Despite Clare’s impas-
sioned plea, it was not until almost a year later – with his Quia
vos of September 16, 1252 – that the cardinal allowed the rule
of Clare to be followed at San Damiano. During this lapse of
time – which was certainly a long one since Clare was seriously
ill and often thought to be close to death – there were probably
ongoing negotiations between the abbess of San Damiano and
Raynaldus of Ostia in order to give the text a proper canonical
structure.174 Even the papal privilege, which literally repeated
Raynaldus’s letter of approval, was addressed only to the mon-

astery of Clare, and it would be a whole year before the docu-
ment was published. The fact that it was the pope’s visit to the
dying woman that eventually caused him to decide to send
Solet annuere with the confirmation of the rule bestows even
greater importance on the relations, direct or mediated, between
Clare and the Roman See.175
On this point the Legenda gives us an eloquent witness:
Lord Innocent IV of happy memory together

with the cardinals hurried to visit the servant
of Christ. . . .Entering the monastery, he went
to her bed and extended his hand so that she
might kiss it. The most grateful woman accepted
it and asked that she might [also] kiss the foot
of the pope with the greatest reverence.176
We are at the last moments of the life of Clare, a famous

woman with a reputation for sanctity, as Innocent IV himself
would show when he proposed praying the office of virgins
instead of the office for the dead when he celebrated her fu-
neral. However, this flight of papal enthusiasm was dampened
by the intervention of Cardinal Raynaldus of Ostia himself.177
The attitude of extreme devotion Clare showed the Roman
pontiff, underscored with certain emphasis in the Legenda, sug-
gests some further considerations. Clare was never in open re-
bellion against Gregory IX and she certainly intended to honor
him, although she never placed such obedience before her jeal-
ous defence of Francis’s directives.178 But when Clare met with
Innocent IV (it is of no concern to us whether she met him
once or twice),179 she was in precarious health and had little
hope of ever seeing her rule solemnly confirmed by the Apos-
tolic See. Her humble and insistent request for papal approval
seemed to be the safest way to obtain the favor she had so long
desired. We no longer find in her the proud attitude she dis-
played when Gregory IX came to visit her at San Damiano and
proposed that they diminish the severity of poverty practiced
in the monastery and conform instead to the details of his forma

vitae.
Although Clare had known Gregory before he was elected
pope, it seems unlikely that Innocent IV, who came from an
area far from Umbria, had any contact with Clare before he
was elected to the chair of Peter. The pope’s visit to the abbess
of San Damiano in August, 1253, must have been the first meet-
ing between the two. Any earlier exchanges between Clare and
the pontiff would have probably been conducted through in-
termediaries, and the most likely person to have done that
would have been Cardinal Raynaldus.
On one occasion there was obviously some conflict between
Clare and Innocent IV, when she refused to accept the rule
drawn up for the Order of San Damiano which, as we have
seen, sought to meet the needs of the Damianite monasteries
by eliminating any mention of the Rule of Benedict and rather
introduced that of Francis. However, it explicitly provided for
the community’s possession of property, thus once again pro-
posing the classic monastic model for the Order of San
Damiano.180 The pope was certainly aware of the opposition
Clare had already shown when faced with such a norm, and
perhaps we can interpret his delay in approving Clare’s rule as
implying a hesitancy toward the abbess of San Damiano who,
in turn, had a few years earlier failed to promptly obey a sol-
emn papal directive.
In any case, it seems that the dying Clare’s personal encoun-
ter with the pope and her clear demonstration of devotion to
him obtained the death-bed approval of her rule. On the very
day before her death Clare was able to hold in her own hands
the document certifying that San Damiano could continue fol-
lowing faithfully the way shown to it by Francis.181 Clare’s last
effort to keep Francis’s memory alive had succeeded.
Changing Memories over Time
As I, together with my sisters, have ever been

solicitous to safeguard the holy poverty which
we have promised the Lord God and blessed
Francis, so, too, the Abbesses who shall succeed

me in office and all the sisters are bound to
observe it inviolably to the end.182
As we have seen, both approvals of Clare’s rule – by Cardinal

Raynaldus and by Innocent IV – were limited to the Assisi mon-
astery. Perhaps Clare had thought it advisable to limit this re-
quest to her community, in the hope that the other monaster-
ies following the Assisi model might later request and obtain
from the Roman Curia the permission to follow a rule that had
been solemnly approved. We have already seen, for example,
that this is the route taken by Agnes of Bohemia.183
It is interesting to note in this regard that the opening for-
mula itself reinforces our conviction about the particular role
the monastery of San Damiano was gradually taking on in rela-
tion to the Order of San Damiano, even in the eyes of the Cu-
ria. While all the other letters sent by ecclesiastical authorities
to the monasteries of Damianites in those years make specific
mention of the Ordo Sancti Damiani, both Quia vos and Solet
annuere are addressed to Clare, abbess, and the other sorores of
San Damiano of Assisi, with no mention of the Ordo to which
they belong.184 This author believes that by doing so the Ro-
man Curia was emphasizing the fact that by receiving a set of
norms different from the other monasteries of Damianites,
underscoring Clare’s profound attachment to the forma vitae
shown her by Francis, San Damiano was somehow on a level
different from (if not alternative to) the monasteries of the Order
of San Damiano and was proving to be something of a hin-
drance to the papacy’s plan to structure religious life for
women.185 This would explain the hesitancy of Raynaldus and
then of Innocent IV to approve Clare’s rule. Such resistance
was eventually overcome only by the great determination
shown by the abbess of San Damiano to the ecclesiastical au-
thority, who ultimately required Clare to include in the text
she composed – the first rule written by a woman – many ele-
ments of the forma vitae of Gregory IX and Innocent IV, first
and foremost that of strict enclosure.186
Following Elias’s deposition, furthermore, the situation within

the Franciscan Order had changed greatly, and this had an im-
portant influence on relations between the Minors and Clare.
Lacking the full support of the highest levels of the Order, the
close bond between it and the experience of San Damiano be-
came increasingly tenuous. Last of all, the Order was certainly
not interested in increasing the difficult burden of the cura
monialium which the Apostolic See kept placing on its shoul-
ders. All these reasons, combined with the papacy’s inevitable
resistance, did not favor the spread of Clare’s rule, which would
explain why only a few monasteries besides San Damiano asked
to observe the rule composed by Clare.187
For the papacy, therefore, it was important to solidify – even
by using Clare’s example – the direction that it had been pur-
suing for several decades. It was deemed necessary to give a
definitive shape to religious life for women following the lines
of strict enclosure and a close bond with the mendicant Orders
(in San Damiano’s case, with the Franciscans).188 It was thus
the Apostolic See that favored Clare’s canonization and not the
Franciscan Order, which waited a good five years before in-
cluding the abbess of San Damiano among the saints of the
Order and thus celebrating her feast with solemnity.189 Inno-
cent IV and Alexander IV understood that the canonization
was an important step for giving greater cohesiveness to
“women’s Franciscanism” and, above all, for ensuring the Mi-
nors’ cura monialium for it. Because of her tenacious attach-
ment to the guidance she received from Francis, during her
lifetime Clare presented a bit of a problem for the papacy.190
After her death, however, she offered the Roman See the op-
portunity finally to give a uniform shape to one part of the
troubled “women’s religious movement.”191
It was ultimately up to Urban IV to draw the inevitable con-
sequences and prepare a new rule that would ultimately be ex-
tended to the whole Order, which would henceforth be known
as the “Order of Saint Clare.” This Rule proposed Clare as an
example for all religious women, but certainly not because of
her attachment to the ideal of absolute poverty. With his Beata
Clara the pontiff totally conformed women’s Franciscanism to
earlier monastic experience, and no further mention is made

of the primitive ideal of poverty.192 Not even the monastery of
San Damiano was exempted from the direction set by ecclesi-
astical authorities with the full agreement of the Franciscan
Order. In order to move to Assisi, where Clare’s body had been
buried, the religious women accepted many donations that were
the most tangible sign of veneration for the saint among the
well-to-do. Therefore, in order to honor the memory of Clare,
her sisters – those to whom she had given the task of maintain-
ing an inheritance earned by dint of such hard work – acted
contrary to the direction Clare had most jealously guarded, the
privilegium paupertatis.193
It was eventually Nicholas IV, the first Franciscan pope – with
his Devotionis vestrae precibus of May 26, 1288 – who would
approve Assisi’s Poor Clares’ definitive abandonment of the
observance of the privilegium paupertatis.194 With the interven-
tion of this pontiff, evidently at the request of the religious
women, the Assisi monastery was placed within the ambit of
the Ordo Sanctae Clarae promoted by Urban IV. However, the
difficult inheritance left by Clare was nonetheless the patri-
mony of Christian spirituality and of the lived experience of
the Church. “Francis’s intuition has survived institution,”195 due
also to the fundamental contribution of Clare and her sisters.
NOTES
1
RCl 1:3 and 12:12-13. The critical edition is in M.-F. Becker, J.-F. Godet, T.
Matura, eds., Claire d’Assise, Écrits. Introduction, texte latin, traduction, notes et
index, Sources Chrétiennes 325 (Paris, 1985). The same Latin text can now be
found in Fontes, 2292-2319. [Engl. trans., CAED, 64 and 80.]
2
A concise overview of Clare’s writings with the elements necessary for their
chronological ordering can be found in E. Grau, “Die Schriften der heiligen
Klara und die Werke ihrer Biographen,” in Movimento religioso femminile e
francescanesimo nel secolo XII, Convegni della Società internazionale di studi
francescani 7 (Assisi, 1980), 193-228. The problem should now be reconsidered
in the light of the extensive research of W. Maleczek, “Das Privilegium
paupertatis Innocenz’ III und das Testament der Klara von Assisi. Überlegungen
zur Frage ihrer Echtheit,” published in CF 65 (1995): 5-82. [Engl. trans.,
“Questions About the Authenticity of the Privilege of Poverty of Innocent III
and of the Testament of Clare of Assisi,” trans. by Cyprian Rosen and Dawn
Nothwehr, Greyfriars Review 12 (1998): Supplement, 1-80.] In the view of this

author, Maleczek’s work undoubtedly marks a shift of considerable importance
in studies on Clare of Assisi and demonstrates the correct methodology for
approaching the philological problems involved in the so-called “Franciscan
Sources.”
3
E. Grau, “Die Regel der hl. Klara (1253) in ihrer Abhängigkeit von der Regel
der Minderbrüder (1223),” in Franziskanische Studien 35 (1953): 216, 245-49.
4
S. Brufani, “Le legende agiografiche di Chiara d’Assisi del secolo XIII,” in
Chiara di Assisi, Atti dei Convegni della Società internazionale di studi
francescani e del Centro interuniversitario di studi francescani, Nuova serie 3
(Spoleto, 1993), 351-52.
5
Among these I would like to mention Clara claris praeclara (August-October,
1225), by which Alexander IV canonized Clare: it explicitly recalls episodes of
the saint’s life taken directly from the Legenda. See the careful study by G. La
Grasta, “La canonizzazione di Chiara,” in Chiara di Assisi, 317-24.
6
Further attention will be given to this important papal document below.
The edition, with a useful historical introduction, are found in H. Grundmann,
“Die Bulle Quo elongati Papst Gregors IX,” AFH 54 (1961): 3-25. [Engl. trans,
FAED I, 570-75.] For an overall view see E. Pásztor, “Francesco e papato,” in
Francesco, il francescanesimo e la cultura della nuova Europa, I. Baldelli, A. M.
Romanini, eds. (Rome, 1986), 103-18.
7
BF II, pp. 509-521 (Beata Clara of October 18, 1263); see the Italian translation
in FF editio minor, 1283-1312.
8
BF II, p. 509: “In hoc autem Ordine, vos et alias ipsum profitentes sub
nominationum varietate, interdum Sorores, quandoque Dominas, plerum-que
Moniales, nonnumquam Pauperes Inclusas Ordinis Sancti Damiani, contigit
hactenus nominari; vobisque, sub horum et aliorum diversitate nominum,
diversa privilegia, indulgentiae ac litterae a sede apostolica sunt concessa, et
tam a felicis recordationis Gregorio papa praedecessore nostro, tunc Ostiensi
episcopo et vestri Ordinis curam gerente, quam ab aliis variae datae sunt regulae
et formae vivendi, quarum observantiis se vestrum aliquae sollemniter
obligavere. Propter quod, dilectae in Domino filiae, fuit nobis humiliter
supplicatum, ut eundem vestrum Ordinem vestrum curaremus certi nominis
titulo insignire (. . .) certam vobis vivendi formam, ad tollendum omnem de
vestris conscientiis scrupulum, largiremur.” An edition can be found in Escritos,
334-35; the Italian trans-lation of this passage is found in FF editio minor, 1283-
84.
9
In this regard see R. Rusconi, “L’espansione del francescanesimo femminile
nel secolo XIII,” in Movimento religioso femminile, 267-68; and A. Benvenuti
Papi, “La fortuna del movimento damianita in Italia (sec. XIII): propositi per
un censimento da fare,” in Chiara di Assisi, 72-73.
10
An interesting observation in this regard may be found in R. Lambertini,
A. Tabarroni, Dopo Francesco: l’Eredità difficile (Turin: 1989), 25: Vale anche per le
esperienze colettive, di dimensione storica, ciò che ognuno è in grado di sperimentare

in se stesso cercando con la memoria nella propria esistenza passata: il ricordo degli
inizi è sempre in qualche misura condizionato dalla consapevolezza di ciò che è
avvenuto dopo, di ciò rispetto a cui l’inizio è appunto un inizio. [“The same thing
holds true for collective experiences as is true for the individual in reflecting
upon personal experience: one’s recollection of the beginning is always
influenced in some way by the awareness of what came afterward, in relation
to which the beginning is precisely that, the beginning.”]
11
See similar observations, formulated in regard to the spread of the Order of
Friars Minor, by L. Pellegrini, Insediamenti francescani nell’Italia del Duecento
(Rome: 1984), 190-96; for a chronology of the women’s foundations, see the
studies of Rusconi and Benvenuti Papi above, note 9.
12
The need to broaden the scope of investigation to include, as far as possible,
the whole sweep of Church history in a given period, is discussed in
Grundmann, Religious Movements, 1-3.
13
I would recall here only the significant contribution of L. Oliger, “De origine
regularum Ordinis S. Clarae,”AFH 5 (1912): 181-209; 413-47, who states that
he undertook the work to refute the conviction expressed by some eminent
scholars, who had advanced hypotheses about the Benedictine, rather than
Franciscan, origin of the Order of the Poor Clares.
14
See above, notes 7-8 and corresponding text.
15
Gratien de Paris, Histoire de la fondation et de l’évolution de l’Ordre des Frères
Mineurs au XIIIe siècle (Paris: 1928); the work has been reprinted with an updated
bibliography by Mariano d’Alatri, S. Gieben, Bibliotheca seraphico-capuccina 29
(Rome: 1982); the part dedicated to the history of the Order of Saint Clare may
be found on 593-617. [Engl. trans., History, Stephen Paul Laliberté, trans., 3
vols. See vol. 3, appendix two, 720-51.]
16
These are, respectively, the forma vitae by Hugolino, the rule of Innocent
IV, the rule of Clare, that of Blessed Isabelle of Longchamp and of Urban IV.
17
Hugolino did not actually become protector of the Order until the second
part of 1220, after Francis’s return from the East: see R. Manselli, San Francesco,
Biblioteca di cultura 182 (Rome: 1980), 229-30. [Engl. trans., Saint Francis of
Assisi, Paul Duggan, trans. (Chicago, IL: 1988), 225]; see new edition, (San
Paolo: 2002).
18
Gratien de Paris, History, vol. 3, 724-38.
19
M. de Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique du droit canon. Recherches sur
les structures juridiques des branches féminines des Ordres (Paris: 1967), 129-136;
de Fontette also follows Fr. Gratien’s approach in the structure of her essay,
marked by the examination of the successive rules; it should be noted that this
work lacks any reference to historiography in German.
20
L. Zarncke, Der Anteil des Kardinals Ugolino an der Ausbildung der drei Orden
des heiligen Franz, Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte des Mittelalters und der
Renaissance 42 (Leipzig/Berlin: 1930).
21
See above, note 12 and corresponding text.
22
Grundmann, Religious Movements, 75-137.
23
Zarncke, Der Anteil, 27-34: the expression may be rendered as “the women’s
movement of flight from the world [fuga mundi.]”
24
M. Bartoli, “Gregorio IX e il movimento penitenziale,” in La “Supra montem”
di Niccolò IV (1289): genesi e diffusione di una regola (Ed. Analecta TOR, 1988),
59.
25
Zarncke, Der Anteil, 77 (“Die Grundung des zweiten Ordens des hl. Franz
durch Ugolino”); see also Benvenuti Papi, La fortuna, 64.
26
In this regard see the careful analysis developed by Grundmann, noted
above in note 22 and corresponding text; Rusconi, L’espansione, 285-86.
27
By way of example we might mention K. Esser, Die Briefe Gregors IX. an die
hl. Klara von Assisi, Franziskanische Studien 35 (1953): 292, note 79. Some recent
contributions by Franciscan scholars suggest the adoption without prejudice
of the new historiographical perspectives: see, for example, Optatus von
Asseldonk, “Sorores minores: Una nuova impostazione del problema,” CF 62
(1992): 595-634; “Sorores minores e Chiara d’Assisi a S. Damiano: Una scelta tra
clausura e lebbrosi,” CF 63 (1993): 399-421; see also A. Rotzetter, Chiara d’Assisi,
La prima francescana (Ital. trans., Milan: 1993).
28
I would note just one more work that has not yet been given sufficient
attention in historiography, but which would undoubtedly prove most useful
for reconstructing Hugolino’s career: E. Brem, Papst Gregor IX. bis zum Beginn
seines Pontifikats (Heidelberg: 1911).
29
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 279-81 (on Brother Philip Longo, “Philip the Tall”);
G. Barone, “Frate Elia,” in Bollettino dell’Istituto storico italiano per il Medio Evo e
Archivio Muratoriano 85 (1974-75), 89-91, and “Frate Elia: suggestioni da una
rilettura,” in I compagni di Francesco e la prima generazione minoritica, Atti e
Convegni della Società internazionale di studi francescani e del Centro interuniversitario
di studi francescani: Nuova serie 2 (Spoleto: 1992), 61; Benvenuto Papi, “La
fortuna,” 59-62; an important con-tribution in view of a correct positioning
and understanding of these sources is now offered by J. Dalarun, Francesco: un
passaggio. Donna e donne negli scritti e nelle leggende di Francesco d’Assisi, I libri di
Viella 2 (Rome: 1994), 49-54. [Engl. trans., forthcoming from Franciscan Institute
Publications.]
30
See above, notes 17-18, and corresponding text.
31
Zarncke, Der Anteil, 75, in this regard analyzes the tradition regarding Philip
Longo.
32
R. Manselli, “Introduzione all’edizione italiana;” in Grundmann, Movimenti
religiosi, 11-20; useful remarks also in M. Bartoli, “La povertà e il movimento
francescano femminile,” in Dalla “sequela Christi” di Francesco d’Assisi all’apologia
della povertà, Atti dei Convegni della Società internazionale di studi francescani e del
Centro interuniversitario di studi francescani. Nuova serie 1 (Spoleto: 1992), 225.
Kaspar Elm recently raised reasonable questions about the diffusion and use of
the term “religious movement:” K. Elm, “Francescanesimo e movimenti religiosi
del Duecento e Trecento. Osservazioni sulla continuità e il cambiamento di un
problema storiografico,” in F. Santi, ed., Gli studi francescani dal dopoguerra ad
oggi, Atti del Convegno di studio (Spoleto: 1993), 73-89.
33
The meeting was held from October 11-13, 1979. The texts were published
in 1990.
34
See, among others, R. Rusconi, ed., Il movimento religioso femminile in Umbria
nei secoli XIII-XIV, Atti del Convegno internazionale nell’ambito delle celebrazioni
per l’VIII centenario della nascita di S. Francesco d’Assisi (Florence, 1984).
35
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 269-90; for the problem of the relationships
between the “women’s religious movement” and the papacy in the thirteenth
century, I would mention only the contributions of M. Bartoli, “Gregorio IX,
Chiara d’Assisi e le prime dispute all’interno del movimento francescano,”
Rendiconti della Accademia nazionale dei Lincei. Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e
filologiche 35 (1980), 97-108; and that of C. Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo
femminile nel XIII secolo,” Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa 25 (1989): 270-
80.
36
M. Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, Bibliotheca seraphico-capuccina 37 (Rome: 1989);
Chiara di Assisi (see above, note 4).
37
K.-V. Selge, “Franz von Assisi und die römische Kurie,” Zeitschrift für Theologie
und Kirche 67 (1970): 129-161; and “Franz von Assisi und Hugolino von Ostia,”
in San Francesco nella ricerca storica degli ultimi ottanta anni, Atti del Convegno di
studio, Convegni del Centro di studi sulla spiritualità medievale 9 (Todi, 1971), 159-
222; P. Zerbi, “San Francesco d’Assisi e la Chiesa romana,” in Francesco d’Assisi
nell’Ottavo centenario della nascita (Milan: 1982), 75-103; G. G. Merlo, Tensioni
religiose agli inizi del Duecento (Torre Pellice: 1984), 57-65 (now in his Tra eremo
e città, Studi su Francesco d’Assisi e sul francescanesimo medievale, Medioevo
francescano. Saggi 1, (Assisi: 1991), 76-84.
38
C. Gennaro, “Chiara, Agnese e le prime consorelle: dalle Pauperes dominae
di S. Damiano alle Clarisse,” in Movimento religioso femminile, 174; Benvenuti
Papi, “La fortuna,” 72-74 (though much of the traditional data is still in need
of careful verification); on the monastery of San Salvatore, see below, note 41.
39
It is possible to move back to the final years of the third decade of the
century the first references to the Ordo Sancti Damiani (see the case of Piacenza
mentioned below, at note 100), which Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 285, places in
the 1230s.
40
Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 113-114. [Engl. trans, CAED, 83-84.]
41
Zarncke, Der Anteil, 71-75; Grundmann, Religious Movements, 330, [Italian
277-78], disagrees with the Zarncke’s cautions against the interpretation
furnished by authors among the Spirituals concerning the relationship between
Francis and Brother Philip Longo. Of particular interest is the episcopal
document by which the bishop of Camerino, in June, 1223, and thus prior to
the approval of the rule of the Minors, granted to the mulieres Deo dicate who
lived in the monastery of San Salvatore in San Severino Marche, evidently
placed under Episcopal jurisdiction, the right to have visitators chosen from
the Friars Minor, in order that the women might remain in the strictest poverty
(Oliger, “De origine,” 200). We may note that this monastery stands outside
the typology indicated earlier, since in this document there is no mention
either of the community of San Damiano or of the Hugolinian Ordo de Valle
Spoleti sive Tuscia: it seems rather to accept the direct intervention of the
Franciscans and, with them of some Penitent friars, if such indeed were the
friars present at the act of concession.
42
Vita Gregoriii papae IX, in RIS III (Milan: 1723), 575. [Engl. trans., FAED I,
603: “At the time of his office [as bishop of Ostia], he [Hugolino] established
and brought to completion the new orders of the Brothers [and Sisters] of
Penance and of the Cloistered Ladies. . . .For the above-mentioned [Cloistered]
Ladies he had constructed through the resources of his office and at incalculable
expense a monastery in Rome, that of Saint Cosmas, and [others] in Lombardy
and in Tuscany, afterwards providing for the necessities of each one.”]
43
1Cel 20: “For the moment let this suffice concerning these virgins dedicated
to God and most devout servants of Christ. Their wondrous life and their
renowned practices received fron the Lord Pope Gregory, at that time Bishop
of Ostia, would require anoher book and the leisure in which to write it.”
[Engl. trans., FAED I, 199.]
44
Vita Gregorii, 1121-22. [Engl. trans., FAED I, 603: “These women, receiving
divine inspiration by means of his efforts in preaching, abandoned family and
home and he, once raised to the pontifical throne, gathered them as daughters,
revered them as mothers, and met their needs with generous aid.”] Concerning
the characteristics of the origins of the monasteries of the pauperes moniales
reclusae in the region of the Po River, I take the liberty of referring to M. P.
Alberzoni, “Il francescanesimo femminile in Lombardia fino all’introduzione
della regola urbaniana,” in Chiara e il secondo Ordine (Convegno di Studi organizzato
in occasione dell’VIII Centenario della nascita di Santa Chiara, (Galatina: 1997).
45
In fact, before departing for Lombardy and Tuscany for his second legation,
in August of 1218 Hugolino had Honorius III confer on him the most extensive
powers in this sense: see BF I, pp. 1-2.
46
Grundmann, Religious Movements, 91-92; Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 287-89.
In that period the Cistercians exercised great influence at the highest levels of
the ecclesiastical hierarchy: many cardinals came from the Cistercian Order;
both Innocent III and Hugolino, later Gregory IX, had Cistercian confessors.
The result was that, with the dispositions of the Fourth Lateran Council, the
Order’s model of monastic organization, were extended in practice to all the
other forms of religious life. See M. Maccarone, Studi su Innocenzo III, Italia
sacra. Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 17 (Padua: 1972), 246-62; and his
“Lateranense IV, concilio,” in DIP V (Rome: 1978), cols. 485-90.
47
A. Paravicini Bagliani, Cardinali di curia e “familiae” cardinalizie dal 1227 al
1254, I, Italia sacra. Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 18 (Padua: 1972), 41-
53, has shown that Raynaldus belonged to the family of the counts of Jenne,
contrary to what is said by Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 226 (Rainaldo di Segni). In
English translation Clare of Assisi, “Segni” is not used, 179; and by Benvenuti
Papi, “La fortuna,” 61 (Raynaldus Orsini). Raynaldus must have been quite
familiar with Hugolino’s activities on behalf of the women’s monasteries since
he was a member of the entourage during the legation of 1221: G. Levi,
“Documenti ad illustrazione del Registro del Card. Ugolino d’Ostia legato
apostolico in Toscana e Lombardia,” Archivio della R. Società di Storia Patria 12
(1889): 273; Paravicini Bagliani, Cardinali di curia, 46.
48
Gratien de Paris, History, vol. 1, 263. The announcement is in Philippi de
Perusia, Epistola de cardinalibus protectoribus ordinis fratrum minorum, ed. O.
Holder-Egger, in MGH, SS XXXII (Hanover-Leipzig, 1905-1913), 681; the
providential character of such papal elections in light of the fortunes of the
Franciscan Order is underscored by Salimbene de Adam, Chronica, critical ed.,
by G. Scalia, Scrittori d’Italia 233 (Bari: 1966), 727-28. [Engl. trans. The Chronicle
of Salimbene de Adam, Joseph L. Baird, Giuseppe Baglivi and John Robert Kane,
eds. (Binghamton, 1986), 509.] Concerning Salimbene’s attitude toward the
papacy, see M. P. Alberzoni, “Un mendicante di fronte alla vita della Chiesa
nella seconda metà del Duecento: Motivi religiosi nella Cronaca di Salimbene,”
in Salimbeniana, Atti del Convegno pe il VII Centenario di fra Salimbene (Bologna:
1991), 24-30.
49
Maleczek, Das Privilegium paupertatis (see above, note 2); Maleczek’s detailed
analysis also leads him to examine the statements about the granting of the
privilegium by Innocent III, as contained in the Legenda and in Clare’s Testament,
with the important conclusion that the latter text also should be seen as having
been composed in the 1400s.
50
A lively overall picture is sketched by M. Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in
Umbria nei secoli XIII e XIV: un bizzocaggio centro-italiano,” in Il movimento
religioso femminile in Umbria, 87-121.
51
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 247-77; see G. Casagrande, “Le compagne di
Chiara,” in Chiara di Assisi, 383-425.
52
The text of the constitution Ne nimia religionum is in Conciliorum
Oecumenicorum Decreta, ed., G. Alberigo, G. L. Dossetti, P. P. Joannou, C. Leonardi,
P. Prodi, bilingual edition (Bologna: 1991), 242. [Engl. trans. in Decrees of the
Ecumenical Councils, Norman P. Tanner, ed. (Washington, DC: 1990), 242.]
53
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 277-79.
54
Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse,” 94-98.
55
A careful outline of the activity carried out by Cardinal Giovanni di San
Paolo, who was also apostolic penitentiary, in favor of the new religious groups
is sketched by Selge, “Franz von Assisi und Hugolino,” 173-79.
56
A first contribution is given by L. Canonici, “Guido II d’Assisi. Il vescovo di
san Francesco,” Studi francescani 77 (1980): 187-206.
57
R. Manselli, “La Chiesa e il francescanesimo femminile,” in Movimento
religioso femminile, 246, underlines the scarce information about the activity of
Guido in regard to the monastery of San Damiano.
58
Legenda, no. 18 (FF, 2410). “Prohibuere tandem beatus Franciscus et
episcopus Assisii sanctae Clarae illud trium dierum exitiale ieiunium,
praecipientes ut nullum transeat diem, quin saltem unciam et dimidiam panis
sumat in pastum.” [Engl. trans., CAED, 272: “Finally, blessed Francis and the
Bishop of Assisi prohibited the holy Clare to continue that deadly fast of three
days, directing her to let no day pass without taking at least an ounce and a
half of bread”.] In this regard, Oliger, “De origine,” 190, notes: “Verba prohibere
et praecipere auctoritatem denotant, et non solum paternum consilium in
Episcopo Assisiensis, cui caeterum monasterium S. Damiani erat subiectum,
donec Cardinalis Hugolinus eidem exemptionis privilegium a Sancta Sede
procuravit.” In agreement with that hypothesis is also Benvenuti Papi, “La
fortuna,” 67.
59
A careful analysis of Hugolino’s position within the Roman Curia, beginning
at the end of the papacy of Innocent III, with abundant bibliographical
indications, is in Selge, “Franz von Assisi und Hugolino,” 179-90; on the
interpretation given by the Franciscan sources to the relations between Hugolino
and Francis, see E. Pásztor, “San Francesco e il cardinale Ugolino nella ‘Questione
francescana,’” CF 46 (1976): 209-39.
60
The plan formulated by Innocent III, to begin a single monastery to include
the religious women of Rome, and directly subject to the Holy See, could not
be carried out because the pope did not find the religious men who would
agree to undertake the cura monialium; the enterprise succeeded however with
Honorius III, who received the agreement of the Friars Preacher; see Maccarone,
Studi su Innocenzo III, 272-78.
61
The legations of Hugolino in north-central Italy were three, and took place,
respectively, at the beginning of 1217, in 1218-1219, and in 1221. The most
recent and up-to-date overview of Hugolino’s activity during his cardinalate is
given by W. Maleczek, Papst und Kardinalskolleg von 1191 bis 1216: Die kardinäle
unter Coelestin III und Innocenz III Publikationen des Historischen Instituts beim
Österreichischen Kulturinstitut in Rom. Abhandlungen 6 (Vienna: 1984), 126-33.
62
A rich collection of cases is offered in the studies of A. Benvenuti Papi, “In
castro penitentiae”: Santità e società femminile nell’Italia medievale, Italia sacra,
Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica (Rome: 1990), 45.
63
Bartoli, “La povertà,” 226-29; see also the overview by E. Pásztor, “Esperienze
di povertà al femminile,” in La conversione alla povertà nell’Italia dei secoli XII-
XIV Atti dei Convegni dell’Accademia Tudertina e del Centro di studi sulla spiritualità
medievale, Nuova serie 4 (Spoleto: 1991), 369-89.
64
Hugolino himself indicates the beginning of his interest in the women’s
communities in the course of the legations in the opening of Cum a nobis of
March 31, 1228, by which he invited the nuns of Pamplona to observance of
his forma vitae: “vestris iustis postulationibus grato animi concurrentes assensu,
Formam et modum vivendi, quam adhuc in minori officio constituti, dum in
Tusciae et Lombardiae partibus legationis officium fungeremur, universis
Pauperibus monialibus reclusis tradidimus, praesenti pagina duximus
inserendum.” (Cf. Escritos, 214).
65
BF I, pp. 1-2.
66
BF I, p. 1: “Litterae tuae nobis exhibitae continebant quod quamplures
virgines et aliae mulieres . . . desiderant fugere pompas et divitias huius mundi
et fabricari sibi aliqua domicilia in quibus vivant nihil possidentes sub caelo,
exceptis domiciliis ipsis, et construendis oratoriis in eisdem.”
67
Hugolino’s diplomas, all with the incipit Prudentis virginibus, are reproduced
entirely in the papal letters, in their turn modeled on the formulary of
Sacrosancta Romana Ecclesia, “that is, in the form of litterae gratiosae, more generic
therefore than a privilege, and thus less obliging for the Curia,” (Sensi,
“Incarcerate e recluse,” 97-98); an analogous development seems also to have
been followed for the foundation of Santa Maria de charitate between July 29,
1219 and September 19, 1223; see M. Sensi, “Le Clarisse a Foligno nel secolo
XIII,” CF 47 (1977), 353.
68
BF I, pp. 3-5 (December 9, 1219; Hugolino’s diploma was dated July 27,
1219).
69
BF I, pp. 10-11 (September 19, 1222); Hugolino’s diploma, July 30, 1219.
70
BF I, pp. 1-13 (September 19, 1222; Hugolino’s diploma, July 29, 1219).
71
BF I, pp. 13-15 (September 24, 1222; Hugolino’s diploma, July 29, 1219). A
careful examination of the first documentation of ecclesiastical prov-enance
in favor of the Perugian monastery has been carried out by P. Höhler,
“Frauenklöster in einer italienischen Stadt. Zur Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte
der Klarissen von Monteluce und der Zisterzienserinnen von S. Guiliana in
Perugia (13 - Mitte 15 Jh.)” Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven
und Bibliotheken 67 (1987), 22-29; Höhler had already given a preview of some
results of his research in “Il monastero delle Clarisse di Monteluce in Perugia
(1218-1400),” in Il movimento religioso femminile in Umbria, 161-67.
72
BF I, p. 4: “Ordo monasticus, qui secundum Dominum et beati Benedicti
regulam quam profitemini in eodem loco institutus esse dignoscitur, perpetuis
ibidem temporibus inviolabiliter observetur. Observantias nihilominus
regulares, quas iuxta Ordinem dominarum Sanctae Mariae de Sancto Damiano
de Assisio praeter generalem beati Benedicti regulam vobis voluntarie indixistis,
ratas habemus.” In the diplomas addressed to the other three foundations in
the days immediately following, mention is rather made of “formulam
nihilominus vitae vestrae, quam a nobis humiliter recepistis cum beati Benedicti
regula, perpetuis temporibus manere decernimus illibatam.” In this regard, see

73
It is possible to hypothesize a change of mind by Hugolino who, after
granting that Monticelli could adopt the forma vivendi of Francis (see Höhler,
“Frauenklöster,” 27), changed his approach decidedly with the successive
foundations, or else that it was the strong personality of the foundress that
permitted the adoption of the observantiae of San Damiano. (In fact, this was
the only one of these four cases in which Hugolino’s interlocutor is not a rich
lay benefactor, but the very foundress and abbess of the nascent community.)
On Hugolino’s attempts to extend his own forma vitae to the women’s
communities, see Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 265-67.
74
Esser, “Die Briefe,” 277-83; Escritos, 358-59. The Latin text is reproduced in
Appendix 2 at the end of the book; on this, see Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 112-13,
[Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 83-85.]
75
Esser, “Die Briefe,” 292: “Die geistliche Aufgabe, die Hugolin an den
Gemeinschaften des neuen Frauenordens wahrgenommen, behält er auch als
Papst bei, wie der Brief Deus Pater cui vos sehr deutlich zeigt. Er ist eine Theologie
des kontemplativen Ordenslebens in wenigen Sätzen.” To explain the strong
emphasis Hugolino puts on the importance of the contemplative life for the
whole Church, Esser mentions the influence of Cistercian spirituality: on this
aspect Bartoli dwells also, Chiara d’Assisi, 103-12. [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi,
76-82.] We would note that strict enclosure was also considered by Innocent
III in his program of reform the characteristic motif of the new women’s
monasticism: Maccarone, Studi su Innocenzo III, 276.
76
G. Levi, Registri dei cardinali ugolino d’Ostia e Ottaviano degli Ubaldini, Fonti
per la storia d’Italia 8 (Rome: 1890), 153-54. The text of Hugolino’s formulary,
inserted at the end of the register of the legation is found in Appendix 3 at the
end of the book; see the important observations in Rusconi, “L’espansione,”
279.
77
Hugolino’s formulary says explicitly that in the new monasteries, all
dedicated to the Virgin Mary, according to the tradition inaugurated by the
Cistercians (Gratien de Paris, History, 730-31), “virgines Deo dicate et alie ancille
Christi in paupertate Domino famulentur.” Interesting observations on the
meaning of this form of poverty, which nonetheless presumed some property,
and its eventual connections with exemption are found in Zarncke, Der Anteil,
62-64.
78
BF I, pp. 1-2 (Litterae tuae nobis); see above, note 66.
79
Clare had great reverence for the servitiales, as emerges from the acts of the
process of canonization: Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 143-47. [Engl. trans., Clare of
Assisi, 109-12.] In this context the organization of the life at San Damiano
appears very close to that delineated by Francis in the Regula pro heremitoriis;
see the review by C. Gennaro of the volume by Marco Bartoli, in Rivista di
storia e letteratura religiosa 29 (1993), 257-62.
80
Maleczek, Papst und Kardinalskolleg, 128.
81
On this legation, besides Levi, Documenti (see above, note 47) somewhat
useful also is the study by C. Thouzellier, “La légation du cardinal Hugolin en
Lombardie (1221). Un épisode de la cinquième croisade,” Revue d’histoire
ecclésiastique 45 (1959): 508-42.
82
F. Lanzoni, “Le antiche carte del convento di S. Chiara in Faenza,” AFH 5
(1912), 273: “virgines Deo dicate et alie ancille Christi absque possessionibus
(. . .) in paupertate Domino famulentur;” M. P. Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a
Milano nel Duecento Fonti e ricerche 1, (Milan: 1991), 208: “pauperes sorores
Mediolani commorantes.”
83
Both expressions are found in a diploma issued by the archbishop of Milan,
Enrico da Settala, on February 4, 1225: Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano,
179.
84
Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 85-88.
85
For the Hugolinian foundation at Milano, for example, Honorius III issued
at least two privileges, in May and August of 1225 (Alberzoni, Francescanesimo
a Milano, 179); for Monteluce, see the observations by Höhler, Frauenklöster,
27-29.
86
The document is published in Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano, 208,
where there are indications about previous editions; scholars, basing their work
on the edition by Sassi, in fact had attributed the title of “provisor et rector
omnium monialium ipsius Ordinis,” to Brunetto de lo Carmaniago, who was,
in reality, one of the witnesses to the document: see Oliger, “De origine,” 420;
Gratien de Paris, History, vol. 3, 728; Grundmann, Movimenti, 279; Sensi,
“Incarcerate e recluse,” 95. Interesting indications on the role played by
Hugolino in regard to the recent Order can also be gleaned from Beata Clara of
October 18, 1263; see the passage reproduced above, in note 8.
87
Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 121. [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 91: “Clare considered
as ‘her’ Order the whole of the minorite movement as a unit, the men’s branch
and the women’s branch.”
88
“Nequaquam a Christi sequela in perpetuum absolvi desidero,” (Legenda, 14; FF,
2407. [Engl. trans., CAED, 269]). The episode is effectively reconstructed by
Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 172-73. [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 132-35.]
89
P. II, 83; Escritos, 123 (the Italian translation can be found in FF, 2462.
[Engl. trans., CAED, 238-45.]); see Bartoli, “La povertà,” 234-41.
90
See above, notes 74-75 and corresponding text.
91
Worthy of note are some expressions Gregory uses to indicate the
characteristics of the “Hugolinian” nuns: “Dum itaque ad amena soli-tudinis
beate vite preludia heremitarum cetum ad donativa cur-rentium celestium
thesaurorum dum ad beati Benedicti vestigia, preruptis silicibus et rupibus
inaccessis, impressa fratrumque nostrorum pauperum collegia Agnum Dei beata
emulatione sequentium,” in Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano, 209, from
the original sent on July 27, 1227 to the monastery of Sant’ Apollinare in Milan;
in pp. I, 33-34 can be found the edition of the original sent to the monastery of
Siena on August 12 of the same year; G. B. Mittarelli, A. Costadoni, Annales
Camaldulenses IV (Venice: 1759), 296, in addition published an original
addressed on August 1 to the nuns of Spello. I would add that the letter Deus
Pater cui vos, dated in the early months of 1228 (Esser, Die Briefe, 283-90) should
also be considered a circular letter sent to the Hugolinian monasteries, as Esser
rightly hypothesized at the end of his analysis. Therefore I would hold, contrary
to Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 27 [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 10] that this document
can no longer be considered among the Clarian sources.
92
“Positus igitur in patibulo cruces . . . ad vos venire nequeo…et vos, iuxta
matrem Domini lamentantes a longe videre compellor, quas filio meo fratri
Pacifico commendatas, in cruce relinquo.”
93
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 284.
94
BF I, p. 36. See Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 285-286. We might note, as an
example of the confusion created by the incorrect use of terminology that
Sbaraglia, in an editorial note, clarifies in this way the term moniales reclusae:
“Nempe Damianite, seu Clarissae.”
95
96
The edition is in Escritos, 217-232, where there are also indications about
later redactions. [Engl. trans., CAED, 90-100.]
97
Even though, in the opening of the letter sent to Pamplona, Gregory
expressly exalted the poor life led by the nuns (“quia divina vobis gratia
inspirante, per arduam viam et arctam, quae ad vitam ducit, incedere, et vitam
pauperem ducere pro aeternis lucrandis divitiis elegistis:” Escritos, 218), with
this letter he imposed the observance of the rule of Saint Benedict, “in qua
virtutum perfectio et summa discretio noscitur instituta” (219), in all that which
was not in conflict with the forma vitae which he recalls against on this occasion,
and in the forma vitae there is no mention of specific limitations regarding the
ownership of property. We would also note briefly that clarification is needed
for the notion of poverty used in reference to the religious life in this period:
the monastery of San Salvatore in San Severino Marche furnishes an interesting
example of a community that was not a Hugolinian foundation, but linked to
the Friars Minor right from its beginnings, and which, in consideration of the
poverty of the religious women there, obtained from the bishop the right not
to pay tribute to the diocese but, at the same time and for the same reason,
obtained permission to have a mill and a vineyard sufficient for the production
of a certain quantity of wine (Oliger, “De origine,” 200). See above, note 41:
“Item donec in hodierna religione et paupertate dicte mulieres permanserint
concedo eis licentiam habendi molendinum, quod habent nunc, et acquirendi
tantam vineam, quod ex ea percipiant et habeant quiquaginta sarcinas vini.”
See also Zarncke, Der Anteil, 63-64.
98
Gennaro, Chiara d’Assisi, 182-83; Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 172-74. [Engl.
trans., Clare of Assisi, 132-34.] The studies cited here consider the privilegium
paupertatis of Gregory IX as a confirmation of that attributed to Innocent III,
and traditionally dated 1215-1216; now, thanks to Maleczek’s research, Das
privilegium paupertatis (see above, note 2), it has been clarified that that document
was never promulgated by Innocent.”
99
“Ut recipere possessiones a nullo compelli possitis.” [“No one can compel
you to receive possessions”], the Latin text and translation are in Scritti, 204-07
[Engl. trans., CAED, 85-86]; there is also an Italian translation in FF, 2451.
Zarncke (Der Anteil, 62-63) rightly notes that ownership of real estate donated
to Hugolinian monasteries, thanks to exemption, passed directly to the Roman
Church. The same author (66-67) comes to the conclusion that the privilegium
paupertatis had been requested by Clare precisely to protect against the donations
of Gregory IX; an interesting confirmation of the pontiff’s generosity in regard
to women’s communities can be found in the Vita of Gregory IX (see above,
note 44, and Appendix 1 at the end of the book).
100
Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 174. [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 134.] It is worth
noting, to confirm the crisis in relations between Clare and Gregory, that there
is no evidence of other meetings between the two, even though the pope stayed
in Assisi from September 16 to October 5, 1235; the circumstances that
encouraged the long stay of the curia in Assisi are examined by W. Schenkluhn,
San Francesco in Assisi: Ecclesia Specialis, Ital. trans., Fonti e ricerche 5 (Milan:
1994), 199-202.
101
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 285, identifies, in the course of the 1230s, the
growing affirmation of the title Ordo Sancti Damiani; a systematic examination
of the documentation regarding the Hugolinian monasteries, still lacking, will
allow more exactitude in this chronology. For the moment I would just point
out the composite terminology present in the document of May 6, 1229, with
which the bishop of Piacenza, Visdomino, conceded exemption to five women,
defined as sorores Ordinis Sancti Damiani, who intended “in paupertate Domino
famulemini iuxta formam vitae pauperrimarum dominarum in Valle Spoleti,
sive Mediolani manentium.” See P. M. Campi, Dell’historia ecclesiastica di Piacenza
II (Piacenza: 1651), 390.
102
The edition of the letter is in Oliger, “De origine,” 445-46, and in Escritos,
364-367; on it, see Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 286.
103
See above, note 47.
104
Brother Pacificus was charged with the cura monialium only one year earlier
(see above, XXXX). On Brother Philip Longo I would refer to the important
observations by Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 279-81.
105
Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 177. [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 137-38.]
106
The critical edition of the document is in Grundmann, Die Bulle, 25-27;
an Italian translation is in FF, 2196-2202. Particular attention to Clare’s reaction
to the papal declaration can be found in Gennaro, “Chiara, Agnese,” 184-85,

and Bartoli, “Gregorio IX, Chiara d’Assisi,” (see above, note 29), 104-08.
107
Gratien de Paris, History, vol. 1, 152-55.
108
The multiple difficulties present in the Order even during the last years of
Francis’s life are intelligently reexamined in the light of the Testament by G.
Miccoli, Francesco d’Assisi: Realtà e memoria di un’esperienza cristiana, Einaudi
Paperbacks 217 (Turin: 1991), 72-84; see also the interpretation of G. G. Merlo,
Intorno a frate Francesco. Quottro studi (Milan: 1993), 131-156 (“Le stimmate e la
‘grande tentazione’”).
109
The Chronicle of Thomas of Eccleston, A. G. Little, ed., Tractatus de adventu
fratrum minorum in Angliam (Paris: 1909), 81 tells us the names of the friars
who made up the delegation: Anthony of Padua, Haymo of Faversham, Gerard
Rossignol, Leo of Perego, Gerardo of Modena, and Pietro of Brescia. See the
recent important observations by A. Rigon, “Antonio di Padova e il minoritismo
padano,” in I compagni di Francesco, 187-90.
110
111
The translation of the letter is taken from FAED I, 575; see also the recent
provocative observations of G. Miccoli, “Postfazione,” in Dalarun, Francesco,
192-94.
112
Bartoli, “Gregorio IX, Chiara d’Assisi,” 106: “For Clare was above all
concerned with defending the originality of her own community. She refused
the identification of the Damianites with the Pauperes moniales Inclusae;” we
would note that the term “Damianites” is used by Bartoli in reference to the
sorores of the monastery of San Damiano, while in our opinion, it should rather
be used to designate the nuns of Hugolinian monasteries.
113
Gregory IX testifies to the San Damiano community’s acceptance of the
rule he composed in writing the letter of May 11, 1238 to Agnes of Bohemia
(BF I, pp. 242-44: the Latin text is in Appendix 4 in this chapter). The chronology
and the content of the letter are examined by A. Marini, Agnese di Boemia,
Bibliotheca seraphico-cappuccina 38 (Rome: 1991), 76-79.
114
Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 138: “Just as in 1228 (Clare) had to defend her
choice of poverty, so in 1230 she had to fight for the free and fruitful spiritual
union which bound San Damiano to the whole minorite movement;” but, as
we said, the two points were interconnected. Clare’s unconditional fidelity to
Francis’s dispositions in regard to poverty and the link between San Damiano
and the Franciscan Order is illustrated by E. Menestò, “Vite dei santi e processi
di canonizzazione come proposta di un modello di santità,” in Dalla “sequela
Christi,” 194-95.
115
Legenda 37. See FF, 2426: “Omnes nobis auferat de cetero fratres, postquam
vitalis nutrimenti nobis abstulit praebitores.”) [Engl. trans., CAED, 290]: [“Let
him now take away from us all the brothers since he has taken away those who
provide us with the food that is vital”.]
116
Gennaro, “Chiara, Agnese,” 184-85. We would note that the function of
“spiritual assistance” to the Franciscan Order carried out by the religious women
through their prayer was what Hugolino requested for himself from Clare’s
community in Ab illa hora, the letter he wrote after staying in Assisi in the
Spring of 1220.
117
Legenda 37. “Et statim omnes fratres ad ministrum remisit, nolens habere
eleemosynarios qui panem corporalem acquirerent, postquam panis spiritualis
eleemosynarios non haberent. Quod cum audiret papa Gregorius statim
prohibitum illud in generalis ministri relaxavit.” The Italian translation is in
FF, 2426. [Engl. trans., CAED, 290: “At once she sent back to the minister all
the brothers, not wanting to have the questors who acquired corporal bread
when they could not have the questors for spiritual bread. When Pope Gregory
heard this, he immediately mitigated that prohibition into the hands of the
general minister.”] See also Bartoli, “Gregorio IX, Chiara d’Assisi,” 104.
118
In 1230, in fact, Elias was staying for the most part in Assisi, where he was
involved in the work of construction on the basilica dedicated to Francis. The
figure and the work of Brother Elias have recently been studied in depth,
especially thanks to the studies of Giulia Barone (see above, note 30). This has
allowed us to free his image from age-old prejudices due to the misleading
interpretations of Salimbene and the Spirituals. See in particular Barone, “Frate
Elia,” 132-42; see also S. Vecchio, “Elia d’Assisi,” in Dizionario biografico degli
Italiani XLII (Rome: 1993), 450-58.
119
Gennaro, “Chiara, Agnese,” 174, where, however, a certain amount of
caution is necessary in regard to news of Agnes’s stays in Verona, Venice, Padua
and Mantua: see Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 274-76. Quite rightly, Rusconi (ibid.,
276) notes that in the letter in question it is impossible to identify evidence
concerning Agnes’s stay at Monticelli. Thus we would have the case of the
reading of a document strongly conditioned by data offered by tradition. The
edition of the letter is in Analecta franciscana III (Ad Claras Aquas: 1897), 175-
77, and in Escritos, 369-71 (dated to 1232).
120
Such a grant would be revealed by the phrase: “Sciatis quod dominus Papa
satisfecit mihi ut dixi et volui, in omnibus et per omnia, secundum intentionem
vestram et meam, de causa quam scitis, de facto videlicet proprii.” We may
note that if Agnes were at Monteluce, instead of Monticelli, the chronology
would accord well with the privilegium addressed by Gregory IX on June 16,
1229 to the Perugia monastery (BF I, p. 50), whose superior (who is not called
abbatissa) is named Agnes.
121
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 285; M. Bartoli, “Novitas clariana: Chiara,
testimone di Francesco,” in Chiara di Assisi, 164-65.
122
See above, note 109 and corresponding text: Anthony of Padua, Leo of
Perego, Gerardo Boccabadati of Modena, and Peter of Brescia were clerics and
came from the Po region; Gerardo Rossignol was papal penitentiary and Haymo
of Faversham, priest and professor at Tours, Bologna and Padua, was English.
These were “friars belonging to international circles, to papal circles, to the

northern area of Italy; men of the law, learned theologians, famous preachers;
not one Umbrian friar.” See Rigon, Antonio di Padova e il minoritismo padano,
189.
123
2Cel 207 (FF, 717-18). [Engl. trans., FAED II, 379.] The episode has been
studied by R. Manselli, “Il gesto come predicazione per san Francesco d’Assisi,”
CF 51 (1981): 7-14; a different interpretation may be found in F. Cardini, “Aspetti
ludici, scenici e spettacolari della predicazione francescana,” Storia della città
26-27 (1983), 62. Now see also Dalarun, Francesco, 77-78.
124
Engl. trans., FAED II: 379: “While the holy father was staying at San
Damiano, he was pestered by his vicar with repeated requests that he should
present the word of God to his daughters, and he finally gave in to his
insistence,” (FF, 717). See M. Bartoli, “S. Damiano e la memoria di Francesco,”
in Chiara d’Assisi e la memoria di Francesco. Convegno di studi per l’VIII Centenario
della nascita di S. Chiara d’Assisi (Rieti: Petruzzi, 1995).
125
Barone, “Frate Elia: suggestioni,” 63-65.
126
“Precor ut rogetis fratrem Heliam, quod debeat me visitare saepe saepius
et in Domino consolari” (Escritos, 371).
127
The advice is contained in the second letter, dated between 1234 and 1238
(Scritti, 104-111; the translation given here is that of FF, 2288; [Engl. trans.,
CAED, 40-43]): “Regarding this . . .;” we will return to this letter shortly.
128
The prescription contained in the rule, according to which authorization
from the Apostolic See was necessary in order to have access to women’s
monasteries, was not in fact applied to San Damiano, since this community
was considered part of the Franciscan Order.
129
See above, note 119, and corresponding text.
130
Two witnesses in the process of canonization (II:22 and III:14) mention
the joint efforts of Gregory IX and the cardinal to convince Clare to accept
properties for San Damiano: Z. Lazzeri, “Il processo di canonizzazione di S.
Chiara d’Assisi,” AFH 13 (1920): 452, 454. A notable example of the generosity
of Raynaldus in regard to religious women is that of Mantua, studied by C.
Cenci, “Le Clarisse a Mantova (sec. XIII-XV) e il primo secolo dei Frati Minori,”
Le venezie francescane 31 (1964): 3-92. Here he is active in the founding of the
monastery as early as 1237 (ibid., 7-9) and once pope, in an unpublished letter
of May, 1257, addressed to the civic authorities of Mantua, wrote: “sorores
monasterii de Tegeto Mantuano, Ordinis Sancti Damiani ad Romanam Ecclesiam
nullo medio pertinentis, ex eo specialius in Domino diligamus quod nos (. . .)
primarium lapidem in ecclesia ipsarum posuimus, tunc in minori officio
constituti.” (Archivio di Stato di Milano, Archivio diplomatico, Bolle e brevi,
cart. 13).
131
Indicative of this tendency are the opening words of the forma vitae of
Hugolino in 1228, (Escritos, 218): “Cum omnis vera religio et vitae institutio
approbata certis constet regulis et mensuris, certis constet legibus disciplinae.”

[Engl. trans, CAED, 90: “Every true Religion and approved institute of life
endures by certain rules and requirements, and by certain disciplinary laws.”]
See also Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 276.
132
This is the hypothesis for dating formulated by Grau, Die Schriften, 198-
202; the edition and Italian translation are in Scritti, 104-11; the English
translation is found in CAED, 40-43.
133
Marini, Agnese di Boemia, 71-73; and “’Ancilla Christi plantula sancti
Francisci.’ Gli scritti di Santa Chiara e la Regola,” in Chiara di Assisi, 119-20.
134
The Prague monastery seems to have followed the process, at least in
terminology, that characterizes the Hugolinian foundations directly subject to
the Apostolic See: in 1234 the nuns were still defined as pauperes moniales incluse,
while in 1237 there appears the denomination of “Order of San Damiano.” See
Marini, Agnese di Boemia, 66-67).
135
We may note that these expressions of Clare recall closely Francis’s last
will, as reported by Clare in Chapter VI of the rule: “Et rogo vos dominas meas
et consilium do vobis ut in ista sanctissima vita et paupertate semper vivatis. Et
custodite vos multum ne doctrina vel consilio alicuius ab ipsa in perpetuum
ullatenus recedatis” (Scritti, 152, emphasis added). [Engl. trans, CAED, 72: “And
I ask and counsel you, my ladies, to live always in this most holy life and
poverty. And keep most careful watch that you never depart from this by reason
of the teaching or advice of anyone.”]
136
Marini, “Ancilla Christi,” 135-140; the Latin text and [Italian] translation
are in Scritti, 108-109; we have preferred the translation from FF, 2288 (emphasis
added). [Engl. trans., CAED, 41.]
137
BF I, pp. 242-44, [Engl. trans., CAED, 371-74.] (Angelis gaudium: the Latin
text is in Appendix 4 in the back of the book.) Marini, Agnese di Boemia, 76-79.
Marini further notes (“Ancilla Christi,” 136): [“In all probability Agnes’s requests,
which she had her brother Wenceslaus warmly support at the Curia, fell within
a much broader effort of which Clare was at least aware, but which only in
1253 was able to result in a rule.”] See also Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo
femminile,” 275-77.
138
BF I, p. 243 (see Appendix 4 at the end of the book): “Sane (. . .) cum nobis
adhuc in minori constitutis officio, dilecta in Christo filia Clara, abbatissa
monasterii Sancti Damiani de Assisio et quaedam aliae devotae in Domino
mulieres, postposita vanitate saeculi, elegissent eidem sub religionis observanda
famulari, ipsis beatus Franciscus quibus tamquam modo genitis non cibum
solidum, sed qui videbat competere, potum lactis formulam vitae tradidit.”
[Engl. trans., CAED, 372: “Surely . . . when we were yet established in a lesser
office, and that beloved daughter in Christ, Clare, the Abbess of the Monastery
of San Damiano in Assisi, and certain other devout women in the Lord cast
aside worldly vanity and cose to serve Him under the yoke of religious
observance, Blessed Francis gave them, as new-born children, not solid food
but rather a milk drink, a formula of life, which seemed to be suited for them.”]
139
The Latin text of this passage is in Appendix 4 at the end of the book.
140
R. Zerfass, Der Streit um die Laienpredigt. Eine pastoralgeschichtliche Unter-
suchung zum Verständnis des Predigtamtes und zu seiner Entwicklung im 12 und 13
Jahrhundert (Freiburg i. B., 1974), 253-301 (“Die Zurück-weisung der Laien durch
Gregor IX.”); see also the significant contribution of R. Rusconi, “Predicatori e
predicazione (secoli IX-XVIII),” in C. Vivanti, ed., Intellettuali e potere, Storia
d’Italia: Annali 4 (Turin, 1981), especially 960-77; and his “I francescani e la
confessione nel secolo XIII,” in Francescanesimo e vita religiosa dei laici nel ‘200,
Convegni della Società internazionale di studi francescani 8 (Assisi, 1981), 251-
309.
141
The internal situation of the Order at the end of the 1230s is sketched by
T. Desbonnets, From Intuition to Institution: The Franciscans, Paul Duggan and
Jerry Du Charme, trans. (Chicago, IL: 1983), 105-13. See also R. Manselli, “La
clericalizzazione dei Minori e san bonaventura,” in Bonaventura francescano,
Convegni del Centro di studi sulla spiritualità medievale 14 (Todi: 1974), 181-208.
142
Barone, “Frate Elia: suggestioni,” 69-70, notes how the discontent in the
Order showed itself forcefully precisely in 1238, when even Robert Grosse-
teste, who used Friars Minor for the administration of his diocese (Lincoln),
had recourse to the Roman Curia, displaying his concerns about the status of
the Order and to have some clarifications in regard to Elias’s position.
143
Salimbene, Chronica, 136, [Engl. trans., The Chronicle of Salimbene de Adam,
74], on such activity by Elias. See also comments by G. Barone, “Federico II di
Svevia e gli Ordini Mendicanti,” Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome 90 (1978):
613-14; A. M. Voci, “Federico II imperatore e i Mendicanti: privilegi papali e
propaganda anti-imperiale,” Critica storica 22 (1985): 24-25.
144
Indicative of this conviction, it seems to me, are the words of Clare in
Chapter 1 of the rule: “Et sicut [Clara] in principio conversionis suae una cum
sororibus suis promisit oboedientiam beato Francisco, ita eamdem promittit
inviolabiliter servare successoribus suis” (Scritti, 136). [Engl. trans., CAED, 64:
“And as, at the beginning of her conversion she, together with her sisters,
promised obedience to Blessed Francis, so now she promises his successors to
observe the same obedience inviolably.”]
145
This appears to be the tendency constantly pursued by the papacy in regard
to the new women’s monasticism; see the observations of La Grasta, “La
canonizzazione di Chiara,” 319-20.
146
I would place in this context the new “edition” of the forma vitae of Gregory,
contained in Cum omnis vera, addressed to the monastery of Ascoli Piceno in
May, 1239 (BF I, pp. 263-67). In the opening of the letter it is obvious that the
objective of the papacy is to confer a uniform, juridically well-defined
physiognomy on the Order of San Damiano (see the observations of Gennaro,
“Il francescanesimo femminile,” 276): this was an effort that can be traced
based on the legislative efforts, not only of Gregory IX, but also of Innocent IV
and Urban IV.
147
Clare herself affirms the same in Chapter VI of the rule: “The blessed father
. . . should be fulfilled by the friars,” (FF, 2256; Scritti, 150-53). [Engl. trans.,
CAED, 71-72.]
148
Rule I:1 (Scritti, 134). [Engl. trans., CAED, 64.]
149
It is significant that to designate her Ordo Clare does not use Hugolino’s
terminology, according to which the religious women were defined as pauperes
moniales reclusae; see, as one example among many, the text of the forma vitae
of 1228 (Escritos, 217). [Engl. trans., CAED, 90.] Marini (“Ancilla Christi, 116-
17) is of the opposite opinion, and uses for proof of his position the reference
to a cardinal protector as noster; but that expression however, more than referring
to other monasteries of the Ordo Sancti Damiani should be referred to the fact
that the cardinal protector of the Franciscan Order was to be the same one
charged with the protection of Clare’s community. In fact, the approbation of
Clare’s rule was addressed only to the monastery of Assisi, and made no mention
of an Ordo: “Innocentius episcopus, servus servorum Dei, dilectis in Christo
filiabus Clarae abbatissae, aliisque sororibus monasterii Sancti Damiani
“Assisinatis, salutem et apostolicam benedictionem,” (BF I, p. 671; Escritos, 271).
[Engl. trans., CAED, 63.]
150
Marini, Agnese di Boemia, 78-79: “But Agnes had also reminded the pope
that at the moment of their religious profession she and the other sisters knew
only the “form of life” of Francis and not the Hugolinian rule.” Gregory
responded to this objection, assuring her that Clare also had adopted this rule:
“What is more, it does not seem that one breaks a vow who changes it for the
better?” This example reveals the composite origins of the Prague monastery, a
fact that can be verified also for many other monasteries.
151
Marini, Agnese di Boemia, 90-94.
152
Gratien de Paris, History, vol. 1, 185-187; G. Odoardi, “Elia di Assisi,” in
DIP III (Rome: 1976), coll. 1098-1100; Barone, “Frate Elia: suggestioni,” 70-71.
153
Concerning the background of the friars who were most representative of
the Order at the beginning of the 1240s, see the observations of Rigon, “Antonio
di Padova e il minoritismo padano,” 189.
154
The difficulties arising within the Franciscan Order after the death of
Gregory IX because of the burden of an increasing number of monasteries for
which to provide care, are sketched by Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 304-07.
155
Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 283: “Probably the refusal of
the Minors to accept new monasteries to care for, as the pope would have
wished, creates an uneasy situation, in which the demand of many women for
a religious life of the Franciscan type, not accepted within established channels,
translates into the discovery of freer forms, closer to the Minorite movement.”
156
In this regard I would only remark that it would be interesting to reconsider
the manifestations of “Po Minoritism;” for example, the case of Verona, carefully
studied by G. M. Varanini, “Per la storia dei Minori a Verona nel Duecento,” in
G. Cracco, ed., Minoritismo e centri veneti nel Duecento (=Civis. Studi e testi 7
[1983]), 93-101, could provide interesting evidence of the movement of a Clarian
community, that is, one directly inspired by the ideal of Francis spread by his
friars, to a Hugolinian community, subject to a strict enclosure a exempt from
episcopal authority right from 1225. The organizer of that institutional
movement would then be identified with Leo of Perego, one of the friars who,
as we have seen, was sent on the delegation to Gregory IX to request the
interpretation of disputed points in the rule at the end of the chapter of 1230;
see also Alberzoni, “Francescanesimo a Milano,” 26.
157
Grundmann, Movimenti religiosi, 228-30. [Engl. trans., Religious Movements,
115-17.]
158
Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 282: the cloister is, in fact, the
element on which the pope most insists to characterize the Order of San
Damiano. See also above, note 75, and corresponding text.
159
Thomas of Eccleston, Tractatus, 85: “Post hoc frater Helias, electo ad
morandum loco de Cortona, contra generalem prohibitionem generalis ministri
sine licentia accessit ad loca pauperum dominarum; unde sententiam latam a
papa videbatur incurrisse.” The Italian translation is in FF, 2061. [Engl. trans.
by Placid Hermann, O.F.M. in XIIIth Century Chronicles (Chicago, IL, 1961), 91-
191. Citation on 156.] I thank Giulia Barone for having pointed out this passage
to me.
160
Only Angelo Clareno speaks of an excommunication hurled at Clare by
Gregory IX because of her refusal to accept property; she would finally succeed
in bending the pope ‘ad sua vota per inobedientiam,” and thus making him
grant her the privilegium paupertatis. The context is studied by G. L. Potestà,
“ideali di santità secondo Ubertino da Casale ed Angelo Clareno,” in Santi e
santità nel secolo XIV, Convegni della Società internazionale di studi francescani 15
(Assisi, 1989), 136-37; and in his Angelo Clareno. Dai poveri eremiti ai Fraticelli,
Nuovi studi storici 8 (Rome: 1990), 267-68, noting with due balance the absence
of sources that might support the veracity of that account. Dalarun, Francesco,
85, emphasizes that Clareno, furthermore is the first to attribute an important
place to Clare in the life of Francis.
161
Quaestio VIII de perfectione evangelica: “Secundum hoc peccasset beata Clara
quae hanc [poverty] cum multis sanctis sororibus ita viriliter observavit, ut nec
ad preces et suasiones Gregorii super possessionum receptione acquiescere
voluerit. Pecasset et Franciscus de cuius consilio et doctrina ipsa cum multis
aliis talem paupertatem assumpsit.” The text is in J. Schlageter, Das Heil der
Armen und das Verderben der Reichen. Petrus Johannis Olivi OFM. Die Frage nach
der höchsten Armut, Franziskanische Forschungen 34 (Werl/Westfalen: 1989), 184.
I am indebted to Maria Paola Rimoldi for pointing out the text to me.
162
Bartoli, “Novitas clariana,” 164; the Italian translation is in FF, 1720; see
also E. Pásztor, “Frate Leone testimone di san Francesco,” CF 50 (1980): 35-84.
163
Rule VI:6-9, (FF, 2256-57). [Engl. trans., CAED, 72]; there is another
translation in Scritti, 153.
164
Elias died a few months before Clare, in April of 1253. Even after his
deposition, his distancing from the Order, and the double excommunication
he incurred, he continued his activity in memory of Francis, as evidenced by
his promoting the construction of the basilica dedicated to the Saint at Cortona:
Vecchio, “Elia,” 453-54.
165
Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, 117. [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 87.] Marini, “Ancilla
Christi,” 146.
166
Perhaps the most significant evidence in this regard is Beata Clara of Urban
IV (October 18, 1263): the Latin text of the passage in question is reported
above, in note 18; the Italian translation is in FF editio minor, 1283-1284.
167
One interesting example in this regard is offered by the document by which
the bishop of Asti granted, between 1236 and 1244, exempting the religious
women who were about to launch a new monastery, which was defined in this
way: “domus clausa ad habitandum et manendum in servitio domini nostri
Jesu Christi, in habitu sororum Minorum; et ut teneant et observent vitam et
regulam quam observant sorores et dominae de Santa Garaffa de Sardona
(Tortona), salvo eo quod istae sorores et dominae possint et debeant habere
possessiones.” (BF I, p. 330)
168
Cum olim vera religio of August 6, 1247 (BF I, pp. 476-83; Escritos, 242-64.
[Engl. trans., CAED, 114-28]); on this document, see Rusconi, “L’espansione,”
289-90.
169
BF I, p. 482; Escritos, 260: “Ad haec, liceat vobis in communi redditus et
possessiones recipere et habere ac ea libere retinere.” [Engl. trans., CAED, 125:
“As far as this is concerned, you may be permitted to receive, to have in common,
and to freely retain produce and possessions.”]
170
Gennaro, “Chiara, Agnese,” 186-87.
171
172
Legenda, no. 40 (the Italian translation is in FF, 2428: “Et, ecce, post
modicum tempus pervenit Curia Romana Perusium. Audito vero eius infirmitatis
augmento, properat de Perusio dominus Ostiensis invisere sponsam Christi,
cuius ferat officio pater, cura nutritius, affectu purissimo semper devotus amicus.
Pascit infirmam dominici corporis sacramento, pascit et reliquas salutaris
exhortatione sermonis. Supplicat illa tantum patrem cum lacrymis, ut suam et
aliarum dominarum animas pro Christo nomine habeat commendatas. Verum
illud super omnia rogat, ut privilegium paupertatis a Domino Papa et
cardinalibus sibi impetret confirmari; quod fidelis ille religionis adiutor, sicut
verbo promisit, sic opere adimplevit.” [Engl. trans., CAED, 292: “And, behold,
in a little while the Roman Curia arrived in Perugia. The Lord of Ostia, after
hearing about the increase of her sickness, hurried from Perugia to visit the
spouse of Christ. (He had become) a father (to her) by his office, a provider by
his care, always a dedicated friend by his very pure affection. He nourished the
sick (woman) with the Sacrament of the Body of the Lord, and fed (those)
remaining with the encouragement of his salutary word.”]
173
Chap. VI of Clare’s Rule could have been considered a guarantee against
the possibility that the community might be forced to accept possessions; in
this direction are the hypotheses of E. Grau, “Das Privilegium paupertatis
Innozenz’ III.,” Franziskanische Studien 31 (1949): 338-40. In any case, as carefully
demonstrated by Maleczek, “Das Privilegium,” (see above, note 2), the references
to papal documents in the Legenda should always be evaluated critically.
174
A different chronology is proposed by L. Hardick, “Zur Chronologie im
Leben der hl. Klara,” Franziskanische Studien 35 (1953): 208-09, who places
Raynaldus’s visit to Clare on September 8, 1252, and thus only eight days before
the approval granted by the cardinal. Raynaldus’s letter is repeated in its entirety
in the Solet annuere of Innocent IV on August 9, 1253 (BF I, pp. 671-78; Escritos,
271-94. [Engl. trans., CAED, 114-28]). See also Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 179-80.
175
I believe we should reconsider the question of the presumed autograph
written by Innocent IV on the original of Solet annuere, which would attest to
the pontiff’s concern that the chancery draw up the document as quickly as
possible. The problem was already raised by P. Sabatier, “Le privilège de la
pauvreté,” Revue d’histoire franciscaine 1 (1924): 50-53, but both Bartoli, Chiara
d’Assisi, 236, and Marini, “Ancilla Christi,” 152, accept without discussion the
hypothesis of the papal autograph.
176
Legenda 41 (FF, 2429). [Engl. trans., CAED, 293.]
177
Legenda 47 (FF, 2433-34); [Engl. trans., CAED, 297.]
178
We have already mentioned the long-standing tradition within the
Franciscan Order, at least on the Spiritual wing, of the harsh clash between
Clare and Gregory IX, as a consequence of which the pope would even have
hurled an excommunication against the abbess of San Damiano; see above,
note 160 and corresponding text.
179
Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 179-80.
180
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 290: “the assimilation of this order to the
traditional monastic world is certainly not so much a problem of the rule as it
is of property;” Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 278.
181
Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 188. The most eloquent testimony in this regard is
in the acts of the process of canonization, published by Lazzeri, “Il processo di
canonizzazione,” 459: “Et desiderando epsa grandemente de havere la Regola
de l’Ordine bollata, pure che uno dì se potesse ponere epsa Bolla alla boccha
sua, et poi de l’altro dì morire; et como epsa desiderava, così le adivenne, imperò
che venne uno Frate con le lectere bollate, le quale epsa reverentemente
pigliando, ben che fusse presso alla morte, epsa medesima se puse quella Bolla
alla boccha per basciarla.”
182
FF, 2257, from the Rule VI: 10-11: “Et sicut ego semper sollicita fui, una
cum sororibus meis, sanctam paupertatem, quam Domino Deo et beato
Francisco promisimus, custodire, sic teneantur abbatissae, quae in officio mihi
succedent, et omnes sorores usque in finem inviolabiliter observare” (Scritti,
152-153). [Engl. trans., CAED, 72: “As I, together with my sisters, have ever
been solicitous to safeguard the holy poverty which we have promised the
Lord God and blessed Francis, so, too, the Abbesses who shall succeed me in
office and all the sisters are bound to observe it inviolably to the end,”.]
183
184
BF I, p. 671; Escritos, 271-72.
185
We have already seen above the two points on which Clare never wished
to deviate, even when faced with the insistence of Gregory IX: see above, note
114 and corresponding text.
186
This was, as we have said, the element that becomes most emphatic,
beginning with the work of Hugolino and which will finally be extended to all
women’s monasteries by Boniface VIII with his Periculoso of 1298 (Rusconi,
“L’espansione,” 269-20; La Grasta, “La canonizzazione,” 313-14). The different
characteristics of the enclosure foreseen in the rule of Clare as compared with
papal norms, are explained by Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 91-97.
187
See the case of Agnes of Bohemia, mentioned above in note 151 and
corresponding text.
188
189
Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 200.
190
R. Rusconi, “Chiara d’Assisi e la negazione del potere,” in E. Menestò and
R. Rusconi, Umbria. La strada delle sante medievali (Turin: 1989), 51, explains in
this way the silence of Thomas of Celano’s Vitae secunda on Clare and San
Damiano: “Perhaps the root of this attitude is to be found in a certain perplexity
wihin the Roman Curia in regard to this nun who, more than two decades
after the death of Francis, stubbornly insisted on being the most insistent and
inconvenient “witness” of the saint’s original vocation to poverty.”
191
La Grasta, “La canonizzazione,” 314-17.
192
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 303: “with time the Ordo S. Damiani, and then
the Ordo s. Clarae, in its process of institutionalization gradually became
assimilated to preexisting women’s monasticism, whose characteristics and
limitations it basically repeats.”
193
Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 200.
194
On this pope, see E. Menestò, ed., Niccolò IV: un pontificato tra Oriente ed
Occidente, Atti del convegno internazionale di studi in occasione del VII centenario
del pontificato di Niccolò IV (Spoleto: 1991).
195
Desbonnets, From Intuition to Institution¸ 141. See also the suggestions made
by C. Violante, “Le istituzioni ecclesiastiche,” in Il Centro italiano di studi sull’Alto
Medioevo, Venticinque anni di attività (Spoleto: 1977), 81: “For this common,
close rapport between spirituality and institutional system with ecclesiology,
every spiritual movement bonds to an institution: it presupposes an institutional
system, or tends to alter it, to a new one; and even when it rejects that effort
for institutions, it still objectively promotes the formation of a new system. In
fact a spiritual movement works even when it has been defeated.”
Chapter 2
San Damiano in 1228:

A Contribution to
the “Clarian Question”
If we are to consider Clare’s Testament authentic, its men-

tion of the privilegium paupertatis obtained from Innocent III
becomes decisive; however, we fail to realize that the argumen-
tation is flawed by the very fact that Innocent’s Privilege must
be proven to have been granted by that pope. One cannot base
one hypothesis upon another one.1
These words which Ovidio Capitani presented on the occa-
sion of the study day held in Bologna in May 1994 take us
straight to the heart of the problem that Maleczek has so cou-
rageously faced.2
Since this author has prepared the Italian translation of
Maleczek’s work, I would like to present a brief outline of his
research and the conclusions that he reached. I shall try to be
as brief as possible.
The author begins with what he considers to be flaws in the
“form” of the so-called privilegium paupertatis of Innocent; he
then conducts a careful analysis of the document in relation to
the formulary used by the chancery at the time of Innocent III.
The fact that Maleczek has interests and skills that are prima-
rily dedicated to the study of diplomatic documents3 certainly
allows him to face the problem without the prejudices that have
so greatly influenced – and continue to do so – the study of
issues related to the beginnings of the experience of Francis

and the early fraternitas.4
An examination of the text of the presumed document of
Innocent leads Maleczek to note incongruities with the for-
mula for solemn privileges used in Innocent’s chancery. His
comparison of the privilegium attributed to Innocent III with
the text of the doubtlessly authentic Sicut manifestum est (the
privilegium Gregory IX granted to San Damiano in September
of 1228 and to Monteluce of Perugia in June, 1229) allows us to
see “the only substantive difference” (that is, the phrase that
begins, “Et si qua mulier,” which foresees the possibility that
those who did not wish to conform to the community’s way of
life could transfer to another community)5 as an interpolation
that is actually contrary to the canonical teaching on the tran-
situs of religious, a teaching that had undergone particular de-
velopment in the twelfth century and which had also been
incorporated into papal documents from the time of Alexander
III onwards. Then, still trying to verify the compatibility of such
a privilegium with the events at the monastery of San Damiano
in 1215-16 (the period in which historians have tried to situate
the so-called privilegium of Innocent) Maleczek reviewed the
history of Clare and her community within the context of pa-
pal initiatives related to the so-called “women’s religious move-
ment” up to 1230. Such an examination also supports the
scholar in his conviction that there would have been no rea-
son to request such a papal document in the period prior to the
pontificate of Gregory IX.
Since Innocent’s privilegium is named in sources of a certain
importance for the history of Clare, Maleczek first examines
chapters 14 and 40 of the Legenda sanctae Clarae. In the first
instance, in order to illustrate Clare’s tenacity in pursuing the
virtue of poverty, the hagiographer (Thomas of Celano?) re-
ports that the saint asked Innocent III for a special privilege,
the first draft of which the pope enthusiastically personally
composed. In the second episode, speaking of Clare’s long ill-
ness, the biographer presents her in an attitude of supplica-
tion, begging the cardinal of Ostia, who had come to visit her,
to supply a solemn confirmation of the privilegium paupertatis.
SAN DAMIANO IN 1228 91
After an attentive examination of the passages in question and

of the historiography that had already examined them,
Maleczek concludes that Thomas of Celano was expressing him-
self in a generic way when discussing papal documents.
Maleczek concludes that it is not plausible to use the evidence
offered by the Legenda to validate the existence of a privilegium
paupertatis.
At this point all that is left for the author to do is to examine
the other important source, the Testament of Clare, which con-
tains an explicit statement that the saint had obtained from
Innocent III a privilegium guaranteeing the observance of abso-
lute poverty. She then had taken pains to request the confir-
mation of that act by successive pontiffs.6 In the early years of
the twentieth century the Testament (not cited in any thirteenth
century source, and known only through Luke Wadding’s 1628
edition in which he states that he took it “ex memoriali anti-
quo”) was at the center of a debate among historians. If Leonhard
Lemmens was able to contradict the violent refutation of its
authenticity advanced by Eduard Lempp, at the beginning of
the twentieth century Walter Goetz and Edmund Wauer were
still inclined to consider the text as “suspect” at least. The situ-
ation turned decidedly in favor of the Testament’s authenticity
in the 1920s because of the studies of Paul Sabatier, which were
supported in the 1950s by the re-emergence of other manu-
scripts containing the disputed text so that later historians were
on the whole inclined to accept its authenticity. Maleczek con-
siders the problem in its entirety, starting from an attentive
analysis of the manuscript tradition of the Testament with the
privilegium attached (three mss.), as well as the tradition con-
taining only the Testament (two mss.); and, finally, that with
only the privilegium (two other mss.). He does so without ne-
glecting the vernacular versions of the two texts. He holds that
the the manuscripts do not date back any earlier than the mid-
fifteenth century, and claims that they were redacted in the
monasteries of Santa Lucia in Foligno (reformed in 1424) and
Monteluce in Perugia, where the Observance was introduced
in 1448 by nuns coming precisely from Foligno. By comparing
the content and style of the Testament to the other writings of
Clare, the author identifies reasons for grave doubts, prompt-

ing him to date the composition of Clare’s presumed last wishes
to the mid-fifteenth century, particularly in light of the fre-
quent pleas for the observance of poverty, which seem to re-
flect the basic concerns of the Observant reform.
The author then sets out to identify the reasons that would
have necessitated the forgery, the place and the period in which
this document might have been produced. Thanks to studies
on the Observance and, in particular, to research examining
the production of books in the convents of Perugia (Monteripido
and Monteluce), it is possible to demonstrate not only the sig-
nificant educational level of many nuns but also their decided
interest in the writings of Clare. In particular they showed that
they wanted to return to the observance of Clare’s rule, which
even in the thirteenth century had not been wide-spread, and
which from 1263 onwards had actually fallen into disuse in
favor of the rule composed by Urban IV for the nascent “Order
of Saint Clare.” However, the nuns who transferred to the di-
rection of the Observant Friars Minor, who themselves also
wanted to “return to the origins,” intended to re-orient them-
selves according to Clare’s text and therefore sought to recover
the rule, whose original was no longer available. It would not
be rediscovered until 1893. Hence their interest in the history
of the Order, an interest that was expressed also in the compo-
sition of Chronicles whose purpose was to recount new begin-
nings, that is, the story of the reformed houses. In addition to
this, Monteluce held the original of the privilegium paupertatis
addressed to the nuns of Perugia in June of 1229.
In such a context Maleczek was able to identify the probable
motive for the interpolation “Et si qua mulier” found in the
privilegium attributed to Innocent III: making use of a docu-
ment dating back to Innocent’s papacy, the Observant religious
women would have had the use of an important tool to justify
their action, giving a more convincing basis for authorizing
the transitus to other monasteries of nuns who did not intend
to submit to the reform.7
So much for the main lines of Werner Maleczek’s research.
At this point, I would like to dwell on a few moments in the
history of the institution that was made to date back in some
way to Clare, and from her directly to Francis, proposing some

observations that focus particularly on what I consider a year
that is critical for the story of Clare and of San Damiano: 1228.
In the course of that year, in fact, and not in 1215-1216 as
most historians have claimed, we may locate a precise break, a
turning point in the history of the religious community lodged
at the little church in Assisi belonging at that time to the bishop.
This is a conclusion already pointed to by Capitani, 8 one which
Werner Maleczek’s research served to corroborate. This change
can be observed from different points of view.
The Viewpoint of the Ecclesiastical Authority
First of all, let us consider this from the viewpoint of the atti-
tude of ecclesiastical authority, notably of the Roman Curia.
On March 19, 1227, when Francis had been dead for only a
few months, Cardinal Hugolino was elected pope, taking the
name of Gregory IX. This event was decisive for the develop-
ment of women’s monasticism. Innocent III had already set
out to enact a reform in this area, beginning with the religious
women living in Rome. He intended to establish a universale
coenobium at San Sisto; the main characteristics of this new foun-
dation would be strict enclosure and direct dependence on the
pope. As we know, Innocent III was not able to carry through
on this project, while Honorius III did succeed, in entrusting
the cura of the Roman coenobium to Dominic of Caleruega and
his friars.9
Just one year after Innocent’s death, during Hugolino’s lega-
tion in north-central Italy, he had a personal experience of the
precarious situation (from the juridical point of view) of many
communities, which we might identify as “semi-religious” (es-
pecially in the areas of Umbria and Tuscany, since other re-
gions offered women new experiments in the forms of “re-
newed” religious life recognized by the papacy: Humiliati, Can-
ons of San Marco, Albi). Therefore, before departing for a new
legation in the same regions in 1218, Hugolino had Honorius
III issue to him Litterae tuae nobis, authorizing him to found,
even beyond the diocese of Rome, monasteries directly subject
to the Roman Church. On his return trip in July, 1219, the

cardinal addressed documents (all with the incipit of Prudentis
virginibus) to the monasteries that formed the nucleus of the
later Order (Lucca, Siena, Perugia and Florence).10 In giving life
to these new communities Hugolino composed his own forma
vitae, which is explicitly mentioned in the documents along
with the rule of Benedict (an element that was essential for
defining the Ordo to which they belonged, as Lateran IV re-
quired).11 We may note that this forma vitae is not known to us,
even though it certainly must have formed the basis of the one
Hugolino sent – in 1228 – to a monastery located on the Ibe-
rian peninsula: Pamplona.12 As Roberto Rusconi has already
pointed out, however, in one case – that of Monticelli – the
mention of the Hugolinian forma vitae was replaced by that of
the “Ordo dominarum Sancte Marie de Sancto Damiano de
Assisio,” in such a way that this reference appears to be an al-
ternative to Hugolino’s newly drafted plan.13 Although the car-
dinal had consented to the monastery of Monticelli’s adoption
of San Damiano’s observantiae regulares, he must have looked
with disfavor on that exception; we need only think of the
reasons he will still offer in May of 1238 – in the Angelis gaudium
addressed to Agnes of Bohemia – to justify his refusal to allow
the Prague monastery to follow the forma vitae that Clare tena-
ciously attributed to Francis.14 The presence of different formu-
lae vitae within what was supposed to constitute a single religio
could only have been considered a cause of the gravis confusio
that Constitution 13 of Lateran IV had sought to prevent.15 A
significant indication of the intentions of Hugolino – and of
Honorius III as well – is provided by the formulary composed
by the cardinal’s chancery to facilitate the founding of new
monasteries directly subject to the Roman Church and preserved
in the surviving part of the register of Hugolino’s 1221 lega-
tion. It specifies that the newly-founded communities were to
follow the “forma vite vel religionis pauperum dominarum de
Valle Spoleti sive Tuscia per dominum Hugonem venerabilem
episcopum Hostiensem auctoritate domini pape eiusdem
sororibus tradita;”16 as models for the new foundations the
monasteries of Siena, Lucca and Perugia were mentioned, with
the deliberate exclusion of Florence, which was originally ori-

ented toward San Damiano.
The Involvement of the Friars Minor
Since we are dealing here with events that were closely inter-
connected, as a second step let us examine the involvement of
the Order of Friars Minor in a process that, for the religious
women of San Damiano, came to maturity in 1228. The papal
plan started to assume definitive shape at a time when the
Minorite Order was in great crisis, and in which Hugolino him-
self became its “lord, protector, and corrector,” as Francis calls
him in his Testament.17
Only after Hugolino’s document for Monticelli (July 27, 1219)
does the cardinal seem to show a certain interest in San
Damiano. At that date Clare and her small community were
still living in a close symbiosis with the fraternitas of Francis,
and the settling of Clare and her sister Agnes at San Damiano is
a sign of this institutional reality that must not be underesti-
mated, since even after 1212 this continued to be considered a
Franciscan locus. In this regard we can conjecture that the fa-
mous sorores minores mentioned by Jacques de Vitry were noth-
ing else than women’s communities residing alongside men’s
communities, and one of these was San Damiano itself. And
such communities had a more enduring success and life than
historians have believed, if we think of the extreme efforts of
the popes to induce them to abandon a “suspect” relationship
with the Minors, efforts concentrated in the years 1241-1255,
significantly only after the deposition of Brother Elias. More
importantly, however, such communities continued to exist
until the middle of the thirteenth century, independent of ei-
ther the Ordo sororum pauperum – as Clare in her rule defines
San Damiano and the (few) other monasteries linked to hers –
or of the Ordo Sancti Damiani – as the Hugolinian monasteries
under the Apostolic See were called from the 1230s onwards.18
If until 1219 Clare and her companions at San Damiano led a
“minoritic” life – undoubtedly marked by a greater stability
than that of the friars – but considering themselves part of the
same fraternitas, we have reason to believe that Clare had no

need to have recourse independently to the Roman Curia to
obtain a privilege, since the same statutes applied to her as ap-
plied to the Friars Minor (and we know how Francis looked
with suspicion upon any request on the part of the friars for
papal documents!).19 Only when Clare’s community appeared
as a disturbing element within the context of the reorganiza-
tion of women’s monasticism, probably as its renown spread
beyond the Assisi-Perugia area through the friars themselves.
We should remember that Francis himself was in Florence in
1217 – and Monticelli is just outside Florence – where he would
meet with Hugolino);20 it was then Hugolino decided to take a
personal interest and stayed for a certain period at San Damiano
around Easter of 1220, while Francis was in the East.21
It is precisely during Francis’s absence that we begin to find
significant evidence of Hugolino’s attempt to link the Friars
Minor to the monasteries founded by his initiative in his at-
tempt to assure the cura monialium of these monasteries. It is
also in this context that we seem to find the explanation for
the much amplified dispute between Francis and Philip Longo.22
In his treatment of the difficulties that led Francis to return to
Italy from the East, Jordan of Giano was the first to mention
the grave cause for disturbance for the whole Order: the one to
whom Francis had entrusted the care of the Poor Ladies before
his departure, Brother Philip, “contrary to the will of Blessed
Francis who wanted to conquer all things through humility
rather than by the force of legal judgments, sought lettters from
the Apostolic See. By these letters he wished to defend the La-
dies and excommunicate their disturbers.”23 Careful reading of
the episode reveals a first attempt by Hugolino to entrust the
cura of his monasteries to Brother Philip, to whom Francis had
entrusted Clare’s community during his stay in the East. In that
context, Hugolino’s visit to San Damiano (which took place, as
we mentioned, around Easter of 1220) seems to take on even
greater significance. According to Jordan’s account, on his re-
turn from the East – due to the alarm raised by news of the turn
of events in the guidance of what could still have been consid-
ered the women’s branch of the Order24 – Francis immediately

removed Philip from his responsibilities.
At this point, however, it is legitimate to wonder if Philip’s
removal may have concerned responsibilities he had assumed
(or was forced to take on) in regard to the Hugolinian nuns
rather than those linked to the Minorite community. In that
case there would have been no disagreement between Philip
and Francis, but rather one between Hugolino and Francis.25
Let us continue to follow Jordan’s narrative: Francis, having
returned from the East, goes to Honorius III and asks him for a
“pope” just for his Order. On receiving Hugolino as cardinal
protector, Francis explains to him the cause of his disturbance
and the cardinal revoked the letter to Brother Philip. So it was
Hugolino who charged Philip with the cura of the monasteries
directly subject to the Holy See, and it was certainly not un-
usual to provide documents of apostolic protection for these–
the very documents that had provoked Francis’s reaction.
Therefore, if Francis removed Philip, he removed him from
the cura of the Hugolinian monasteries (that is, those linked to
Hugolino), and this gesture could be interpreted more as de-
fending Francis’s faithful socius, who perhaps was unable to
withstand the cardinal’s requests. In fact, Francis’s opposition
to Hugolino’s plan forced the latter to entrust the responsibil-
ity for the cura of “his” monasteries to a chaplain of his own,
the Cistercian Ambrose, who, however, would have had no
authority over San Damiano nor the other communities that
continued to see themselves as part of the Minorite fraternitas.26
With the passing of time the multiplication of monasteries di-
rectly subject to the Roman Church demonstrated the neces-
sity of involving the Minors more directly in the undertaking,
since the responsibility had become too much for Ambrose to
handle alone.
The testimony of Thomas of Pavia also takes on new signifi-
cance when considered in this institutional context.27 Thomas
says that Francis never authorized “the establishment of other
[women’s] monasteries, although some were opened during his
lifetime;” furthermore, the saint became quite upset when he
learned that the religious women were being called sorores,28 to
the point that he exclaimed, in the well known phrase, “The

Lord has taken away our wives, but now the devil is providing
us with sisters.” “Cardinal Hugolino, Bishop of Ostia” – the
narrative continues – “who was then the protector of the Order
of Minors, looked after these sisters with great affection. One
time, when he was taking leave of blessed Francis, he said to
him: ‘I am entrusting these ladies to you.’ Francis replied with
a smile: ‘Well, Holy Father, from now on let them not be called
“Lesser Sisters,” [Sorores Minores] but as you have just said, “La-
dies” [Dominae.]’”29 Although a late one, this source makes it
possible to conjecture that Hugolino’s attempt – the reader
should note that he enters the scene unexpectedly, almost as if
in logical connection with the word “monasteries”30 – was to
put directly on the shoulders of Francis or on the Order during
his lifetime the cura monialium or, in any case to give a single
institutional structure to the sorores and the dominae. The event
is clarified still more, however, by the next part of the narra-
tive: “Not long afterwards, Brother Ambrose of the Cistercian
Order died.” (Ambrose, however, is still referred to in 1228).
“He was a [papal] penitentiary to whom Cardinal Hugolino had
entrusted the care of the above-mentioned monasteries, with
the exception of the monastery of Saint Clare. Then Brother
Philip the Tall [Philip Longo] saw to it that these monasteries
were entrusted to him and that he was granted authorization
by the supreme pontiff to appoint Lesser Brothers for their ser-
vice as he saw fit.”31 We might therefore hypothesize that dur-
ing Francis’s lifetime conflicts with the Roman Curia had arisen
following its attempts to entrust the cura of the Hugolinian
monasteries to the Minors; later authors chose to present these
as disagreements within the Order and identify Philip as the
guilty party in order to avoid bringing to light a strong point of
disagreement between Francis and Cardinal Hugolino himself.
As long as Francis was alive, Honorius III did not think it
necessary to intervene in regard to the Minorite Order; rather
he turned toward the Preachers to obtain their assistance for
the nuns of San Sisto.32 Following the death of Francis and
Hugolino’s ascent to the papal throne as Gregory IX (which
took place within the space of about five months’ time) the
situation changed radically. In his new position Gregory IX

would have no great difficulty in imposing the cura of his mon-
asteries on the Minors, as is clearly shown by the Quoties cordis
of December 14, 1227.33 In order to do this the pope had to
obtain the consent of the Order’s leadership; and first of all,
that of the minister general, John Parenti, to whom, in fact,
Quoties cordis was addressed.
Clare and Gregory IX
At this point the action of the papacy also took in Clare and
her community. Gregory IX intended to join the sorores minores
to the nuns of the Order he had founded, both to give a more
than juridical foundation to his request to the whole Order of
Friars Minor and to finally give a regular form to the commu-
nity of sorores minores. In this plan it was particularly impor-
tant to obtain the consent of Clare, who at that time already
was seen as the legitimate heir of women’s Minoritism.34 Tak-
ing advantage of his stay in Assisi, where in July, 1228, he sol-
emnly proclaimed the sainthood of Francis, the pope, accom-
panied by Cardinal Raynaldus, went to San Damiano to dis-
cuss the question directly with Clare. The central point of the
papal request was an invitation to Clare and her sisters to move
under the direct jurisdiction of the Roman Church, thus gain-
ing exemption from the authority of the bishop of Assisi. This
implied a choice that would lead to a substantive change in the
physiognomy of San Damiano, first in regard to the strict en-
closure that characterized the Hugolinian nuns – now defined
in official documents as Pauperes incluse or recluse – and the
indispensable prerequisite for putting such reclusion into ef-
fect was the acquisition of properties that would guarantee suf-
ficient revenues. Clare, however, realized that this would cre-
ate a threat to the uniqueness of San Damiano, that is, to its
direct and vital link with the Order of Friars Minor. To the de-
gree that her community would move under the jurisdiction
of the Roman Church and become part of the religio it was pro-
moting, they would no longer be able to consider themselves
the women’s branch of a single Order – that of the Friars Minor
– and the friars’ cura of the monastery would be regulated by

pontifical legislation, as Gregory IX in fact would explicitly af-
firm in Quo elongati.
If, therefore, Clare’s resistance when confronted with Gre-
gory IX’s requests allowed her to obtain the privilegium of Sep-
tember, 1228 – which now, I repeat, makes sense, as it guaran-
teed maintaining a uniqueness at the very time that the divi-
sion between San Damiano and the Minorite Order was offi-
cially established – Clare also could not avoid the fact that
henceforth her monastery and the few others connected to it
would be numbered among what we can call the Hugolinian
monasteries. The proof for this is offered by the circular letter
that Cardinal Raynaldus addressed on August 18, 1228, to
twenty-four monasteries, with San Damiano listed as first among
them. In this letter the cardinal announced that he was replac-
ing Gregory IX in the role of “delegate” of the Curia in the
provisio of the religious women and replacing Philip Longo with
Brother Pacificus in the role of their visitator.35 In the course of
only a few years all those monasteries founded by papal initia-
tive became known by the name of the “Order of San Damiano,”
yet San Damiano only belonged to it from what we might call
a juridical point of view, since Clare never wanted to use that
terminology for her community, preferring the name that she
would later consecrate in the rule, “Ordo sororum pauperum.”36
Thus we are confronted with the paradox of an Order that takes
the name of a monastery which, however, does not consider
itself part of the Order.
From 1228 on, therefore, Gregory IX could finally affirm that
Clare’s community also had accepted the forma vitae he had
composed at the time of his legation in Lombardy, and thus to
point to this model community as an example to those who
would have still asked to conform their life to the “minorite”
model. We may grasp the importance of this crucial year for
the story of Clare if we consider the letters that Gregory IX
wrote in May, 1238 – both the previously mentioned Angelis
gaudium,37 and the earlier De Conditoris omnium (May 5) – to
Agnes of Prague.38 In the latter for the first time the pope ex-
plicitly refers to Francis as the father of a threefold militia, com-
posed of the “fratrum Ordinis Minorum, Sororum inclusarum,39 et

Penitentium collegia,” a militia that mirrors on earth the order
of the divine Trinity. In this regard Marco Bartoli has pointed
out how the pope also proposes “the image of Francis, founder
of three Orders,” to confer on these congregations “a spiritual
authority, which only the figure of Francis allowed. Gregory IX
essentially wished to attribute to Francis the paternity of a
women’s congregation which he himself had founded.”40 We
should ask if perhaps what Gregory IX wrote to Agnes of
Bohemia was really prompted by the desire to give luster to the
congregation, or if it was rather from the wish to offer a con-
vincing justification for his actions.
The Testimony of Thomas of Celano
To what has already been noted about the centrality of the

1228 events for the life of Clare and of San Damiano, I wish to
add the interesting testimony of Thomas of Celano.41 The offi-
cial Legenda of Francis was written just after his canonization,
which occurred in July 1228, and the one commissioning the
work was Gregory IX himself. Many indications converge to
suggest that this text reflects the concerns and motives that
guided the pontiff’s action in regard to Clare’s community in
that period.
As Jacques Dalarun has observed, at the beginning of Chap-
ter VIII of the first part of the Vita prima, which speaks about
Francis’s dedication in restoring the church of San Damiano,
there is an unexpected “break in the chronological order of
events. This pause at San Damiano is a bit surprising, allowing
an anticipation evoking the birth of the women’s Order and
singing its merits. But it is still possible to understand the move-
ment: Thomas, mentioning the restoration of the little church,
automatically thinks of the nuns who were living there at the
time he was writing, that is, in 1228; it is a free association of
ideas.”42 In regard to this same hypothesis Miccoli has observed:
“I wonder however if the mere association of ideas is enough
to explain Celano’s introducing at that point of the story the
lengthy digression on Clare and the pauperes dominae. . . .As a
rule, Celano assembles the various parts of his narrative wisely

and consciously, taking account of the many needs to which
his text must respond. . . .So it does not seem to me . . . that his
anticipations and digressions are generally the product of ca-
sual composition. I believe that we can also conclude that there
were some very specific reasons and problems behind this
roundabout introduction outside his time frame of a discourse
on Clare and the pauperes dominae that do not fit into his time
frame.”43 Miccoli’s insight is confirmed if we look at it in rela-
tion to the events outlined above. The hagiographer’s words,
which were aimed at exalting, through Clare, San Damiano
and the institutional role it had assumed shortly beforehand,
give us a surprising but convincing glimpse of the fact that
their author is writing on commission:
This is the blessed and holy place where the

glorious religion and most excellent Order of
Poor Ladies and holy virgins had its happy be-
ginning, about six years after the conversion of
the blessed Francis and through the same
blessed man. The Lady Clare, a native of the
city of Assisi, the most precious and strongest
stone of the whole structure, stands as the foun-
dation for all the other stones. For after the be-
ginning of the Order of Brothers, when this lady
was converted to God through the counsel of
the holy man, she lived for the good of many
and as an example to countless others. Noble
by lineage, but more noble by grace, chaste in
body, most chaste in mind, young in age, ma-
ture in spirit, steadfast in purpose and most ea-
ger in her desire for divine love, endowed with
wisdom and excelling in humility, bright in
name, more brilliant in life, most brilliant in
character.44
As a whole, what we have here is praise that is both lofty

and conventional, but in a hagiographical tone, describing a
model of women’s perfection.45 A few details allow us to grasp

the simultaneous presence of two tendencies. On the one hand
there is Celano, who sincerely admires the life and experi-
ence of Clare; on the other hand we have Gregory IX, who is
definitely more concerned with praising San Damiano than
Clare.46 The narrative that follows in fact takes a turn, an-
nounced in some way by the reference to Clare as the lapis
pretiosissimus placed at the base of other stones arranged upon
it: “A noble structure of precious pearls arose above this
woman, whose praise comes not from mortals but from God,
since our limited understanding is not sufficient to imagine
it, nor our scanty vocabulary to utter it.”47 Thomas continues
by proposing a list of seven virtues that characterize the life
of the community, at the center of which – precisely in fourth
place – is poverty (“altissima paupertas”).48 But what is of greater
interest to us is the chapter’s conclusion, in which the biogra-
pher declares: “For the moment let this suffice concerning
these virgins dedicated to God and most devout servants of
Christ. Their wondrous life and their renowned practices re-
ceived from the Lord Pope Gregory, at the time Bishop of Os-
tia, would require another book and the leisure in which to
write it,” that is, they require special study and a separate
work.49 Thus we discover the origin of such an evident and
prolonged panegyric: in this second part of the passage Celano
is no longer reporting on the life and experience of Clare and
of San Damiano, but on the formative causes of the commu-
nities of “virgins dedicated to God and most devoted
handmaids of the Lord” who had received their formula vitae,
not from Francis certainly (as Thomas had said earlier had
happened for Clare), but from Cardinal Hugolino. The very
formal exaltation is therefore directed to the life, and espe-
cially the rule that was followed, not so much at San Damiano,
which here functions only as the primus lapis and as an evi-
dent link with the experience of Francis, but that of the
Hugolinian monasteries, which precisely at the beginning of
the 1230s, were beginning to be called the Ordo Sancti
Damiani.50 Through the legenda that Celano was writing, and
which presumably would have had a certain distribution es-
pecially among the men and women devoted to Francis as

well as among the various women’s communities, Gregory IX
wanted to communicate a specific message: if Francis had been
the one to start – nothing more! – the community of San
Damiano, Gregory himself, the legislator, was the one who
had established the institutio gloriosa. This was therefore an
invitation to all the sorores minores to channel themselves in
the direction of the Hugolinian monasteries, following the
model that is indicated here by San Damiano, but which in
reality overshadows the Hugolinian institution. On the other
hand, we can also understand why Celano ends his descrip-
tion so brusquely; as he himself states, that would be “an-
other story.”
Confronted with this “other story” the voice of Clare rings
out, solitary but firm, and there seems to grow ever stronger in
her that “syndrome of heredity,” as Emore Paoli rightly describes
it.51 It is in these crises that Clare, San Damiano and the com-
munities that referred to San Damiano seem to find in Brother
Elias alone the support they need and the bond uniting them
to their origins. This would be amply confirmed by later events
during the generalate of Elias that allow us to glimpse some
sort of alliance between Clare and the minister general, to the
detriment of the papal plan of “Damianizing” the women’s
component of the Order of Minors.52 It was precisely in 1228,
less than two years after the death of Francis, that the plan
enjoyed its first important success.
NOTES
1
Reproduced here is the text of the presentation given during the round-
table held on February 19, 1997 at the Istituto Austriaco di Cultura in Rome. O.
Capitani, “Chiara per Francesco,” in Chiara d’Assisi: un messaggio antico (1194)
per un’eredità moderna (1994). Studi in occasione delle “Giornate dell’Osservanza”
(=Zenit. Quaderni, 1994), 47-52 (the citation is on 49). See also the observations
of F. Accrocca, “Nodi problematici delle fonti francescane. A proposito di due
recenti edizioni,” in CF 66 (1996): 593-94, in particular: A mio avviso, la
discussione sul Testamento dovrà concentrarsi non tanto su argumenti di critica esterna
(ciò che finora ha principalmente polarizzato l’interesse), ma dovrà privilegiare criteri
di analisi interna [“in my opinion the discussion about the Testament should
not focus so much on arguments from external criticism (that which has up to
now principally polarized interest) but should privilege the criteria of internal
analysis”].
2
Maleczek, “The Privilege.”
3
I would mention only the important edition of the registers of Innocent III,
which the Akademie der Wissenschafter of Vienna, together with the Instituto
storico austriaco of Rome, has been pursuing for over thirty years and on which
Maleczek also is working.
4
On the origins of the “Franciscan Question” tied to the work of Paul Sabatier,
through its later complications, and up to the “magic circle” of Mansellian
memory, or the “vicious circle” as Jacques Dalarun defines it, see J. Dalarun, La
malavventura di Francesco d’Assisi (Milan: 1996), 15-39. [Engl. trans.: The
Misadventure of Francis of Assisi, trans. by Edward Hagman, O.F.M. Cap.,
Franciscan Institute Publications, 2002, 21-57.]
5
An interesting point of comparison is found in the formulary used for
resolving similar cases, as reported in Innocent IV’s Rule for the Order of San
Damiano: “Si vero noluerit (the sister exhorted and warned by the visitator)
vel contempserit emendare, a monasterio per eundem [visitatorem] removeatur
omnino” (Escritos, 256). [Engl. trans. CAED, 122: “If he does not wish to amend
(his ways) or spurns (the warning), let him be removed altogether from the
monastery by the same (visitator)”.]
6
TestCl, nn. 42-43 (Fontes, 2315): “Immo etiam ad maiorem cautelam sollicita
fui a domino papa Innocentio, sub cuius tempore cepimus, et ab aliis
successoribus suis nostram professionem sanctissime paupertatis, quam Domino
et beato patri nostro promisimus, eorum privilegiis facere roborari, ne aliquo
tempore ab ipsa declinaremus ullatenus.” [Eng. trans., CAED, 59: “Morever, for
greater security, I took care to have our profession of the most holy poverty
that we promised our father strengthened with privileges by the Lord Pope
Innocent, during whose pontificate we had our beginning, and by his other
successors, that we would never nor in any way turn away from her.”] See now
the edition of the text in Maleczek, Chiara d’Assisi, 162-63.
7
Maleczek, Chiara d’Assisi, 156.
8
Capitani, Chiara per Francesco, 50: L’irrinunciabilità del privilegium paupertatis
ha quindi un significato storico ben preciso nel 1228, quando Francesco è morto da
due anni e non può costituire più un ostacolo insormontabile anche per un papa,
quando Francesco è stato canonizzato dalla bolla “Mira circa nos” del 19 luglio
1228, cioè esattamente sessanta giorni prima del Privilegium paupertatis [“The
necessity of the Privilegium paupertatis thus had a very specific historical
significance in 1228, when Francis has been dead for two years, and can no
longer present an insurmountable obstacle even for a pope, when Francis has
been canonized with the bull Mira circa nos of July 19, 1228, that is, exactly
sixty days before the Privilegium paupertatis”].
9
M. Maccarrone, Studi su Innocenzo III, Italia sacra, Studi e documenti di storia
ecclesiastica 17 (Padua: 1972), 272-78.
10
For the events related to the origins of what will usually be called, beginning
in the 1230s, the Order of San Damiano, I take the liberty of referring to M. P.
Alberzoni, Chiara e il Papato, Aleph 3 (Milan: 1995) and my “Chiara di Assisi e
il francescanesimo femminile,” in Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo di storia
francescana, Biblioteca Einaudi 1 (Turin: 1997), 208-13.
11
BF I: pp. 10-11; 12, 14: Formulam nihilominus vitae vestrae, quam a nobis
humiliter recepistis, cum beati Benedicti Regula perpetuis temporibus manere
decernimus illibatam [“However, the form of your life that you have humbly
received from us with the Rule of Saint Benedict, we decree that they remain
inviolate for all time”].
12
Escritos, 217-232. [Engl. trans.: CAED, 90-100.]
13
R. Rusconi, «L’espansione,» 278-279; now also see L Pellegrini, “Le pauperes
dominae nel contesto dei movimenti italiani del secolo XIII,” in B. Vetere, G.
Andenna, eds., Chiara e il Secondo Ordine Il fenomeno francescano nel Salento
(Galatina: 1997), 75-80.
14
BF I: pp. 242-244. An Italian translation of this text is now available in G.
G. Zoppetti, M. Bartoli, eds., S. Chiara d’Assisi, Scritti e documenti (Assisi, Padua,
Vicenza: 1994), 414-416. See also the analysis by A. Marini, “Chiara e Agnese
di Boemia,” in Chiara e la diffusione delle Clarisse (Galatina: 1997).
15
See Maccarrone, Studi su Innocenzo III, 307-27.
16
G. Levi, Registri dei cardinali ugolino d’Ostia e Ottaviano degli Ubaldini, Fonti
per la storia d’Italia 8 (Rome: 1890), 153-54.
17
Fontes, 231: “Qui est dominus, protector et corrector totius fraternitatis.”
[Engl. trans.: FAED I, 127: “Who is the Lord, the Protector and the Corrector of
this fraternity.]
18
The problem is now oulined in Alberzoni, Chiara di Assisi, 222-25.
19
Fontes, 230, the Italian translation is in FF 123: “Praecipio firmiter per
obedientiam fratribus universis, quod ubicumque sunt, non audeant petere
aliquam litteram in curia Romana, per se neque per interpositam personam,
neque pro ecc[l]esia neque pro alio loco.” [Engl. trans.: FAED I, 126: “I strictly
command all the brothers through obedience, wherever they may be, not to
dare to ask any letter from the Roman Curia, either personally or through an
intermediary, whether for church or another place.”]
20
E. Pásztor, “S. Francesco e il cardinale Ugolino nella ‘questione francescana,’”
in CF 46 (1976), especially 210-17.
21
K. Esser, “Die Briefe Gregors IX. an die hl. Klara von Assisi,” in Franziskanische
Studien 35 (1953): 277-83.
22
R. Rusconi has shed light on this problem in “L’espansione,” 280-81. See
also the observations of A. Benvenuti Papi, “La fortuna del movimento
damianita in Italia (sec. XIII): propositi per un censimento da fare,” in Chiara
di Assisi, Atti dei Convegni della Società internazionale di studi francescani e
del Centro interuniversitario di studi francescani, Nuova serie 3 (Spoleto: 1993),

60-63.
23
Fratris Iordani a Jano Chronica, in Analecta franciscana I (Ad Claras Aquas
[Quaracchi]: 1885), 15. The Italian translation is in FF 2335. [Engl. trans. by
Placid Hermann, OFM in XIIIth Century Chronicles (Chicago 1961), 28.]
24
In this regard the indications highlighted by Giovanni Miccoli in relation
to the Epistola ad fideles become rather intriguing: the author proposed dating
the first redaction of this text to the first years of the life of Francis’s fraternitas,
based on a valid internal criterion: “the fact that the proposal regards ‘masculi
et feminae,’ who, by all the evidence, share a religious option that is the same
as that of Francis, would make us think of a situation of the fraternitas that was
still quite fluid and indistinct, a situation of which there remain some few
traces in other sources.” G. Miccoli, “Gli scritti di Francesco,” in Francesco d’Assisi
e il primo secolo di storia francescana, 53); see also Alberzoni, Chiara di Assisi,
210-11.
25
This would not be the first episode of the kind that can be found: Pásztor’s
observation, commenting on Hugolino’s forbidding of Francis’s journey to
France, during the meeting of the two in Florence, is indicative: “Here is the
explanation of the journey Francis did not take, which interests the compiler
[of the Legend of Perugia]: it is a defeat of Francis (. . .). This conclusion to the
episode in reality not only demonstrates a certain authority of the cardinal
over Francis’s movements, but also specifies that Hugolino prevented Francis
from carrying out a plan that the latter considered the will of God.” (Pásztor,
San Francesco e il cardinale Ugolino, 214).
26
The problem is confronted by L. Oliger, “De origine regularum Ordinis S.
Clarae,” in AFH 5 (1912): 417-21. The attentive examination conducted by L.
Zarncke, Der Anteil des Kardinals Ugolino an der Ausbildung der drei Orden des
heiligen Franz, Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte des Mittelalters und der Renaissance 42
(Leipzig/Berlin, 1930), 71-75, throws light on the simultaneous presence of
Ambrose and Philip as visitators, but with differing areas of competence and,
rightly, attributes to the Spirituals, followed by later historiography, the attempt
to put the two charges in chronological succession: such an explanation of the
facts would pre-suppose condemnation of Philip’s treachery.
27
On this see Benvenuti, “La fortuna del movimento,” 59-60.
28
This name is first attested in the well known letter of Jacques de Vitry in
1216; Lettres de Jacques de Vitry (1160/1170-1240) éveque de Saint-Jean-d’Acre:
Édition critique par R. B. C. Huygens (Leyden: 1960), 75. [Engl. trans.: CAED,
313-14.]
29
The Latin text is reported in Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 418-19; the
Italian translation is in FF 2683. [Engl. trans. in FAED III, 794.]
30
“Et cum intellexisset [Francis] quod mulieres congregate in dictis monasteriis
dicebantur sorores, vehementer turbatus, fertur dixisse: ‘Dominus a nobis uxores
abstulit, dyabolus autem nobis procurat sorores.’ Dominus Ugolinus episcopus
Hostiensis, qui erat protector Ordinis Minorum, ipsas sorores magna affectione
fovebat.” (Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 419). [Engl. trans.: FAED III, 794],
[“Also, he [Francis] never authorized the establishment of other women’s
monasteries, although some were opened during his lifetime through the
involvement of others. When it came to his attention that the women who
lived together in these monasteries were called sisters, he was greatly disturbed
and it is said that he exclaimed: ‘The Lord has taken away our wives, but now
the devil is providing us with sisters. Cardinal Hugolino, Bishop of Ostia, who
was then protector of the Order of Minors, looked after these sisters with great
affection”.]
31
Oliger, “De origine regularum,” “Non multum post hoc mortuus est fr.
Ambrosius de Ordine Cistersiensium penitentiarius, cui dictus dominus Ugo-
linus curam predictorum monasteriorum commiserat, preter quam mon-asterii
sancte Clare. Tunc fr. Philippus Longus procuravit sibi commicti monasteria
supradicta, auctoritatem habere a summo Pontifice, ut in eorum obsequia
secundum arbitrium summ fratres deputaret Minores.” [Engl. trans.: FAED III,
795: “Not long afterwards, Brother Ambrose of the Cistercian Order died. He
was a papal penitentiary to whom Cardinal Ugolino had entrusted the above-
mentioned monasteries, with the exception of the monastery of Saint Clare.
The Brother Philip the Tall saw to it that these monasteries were entrusted to
him and that he was granted authorization by the Supreme Pontiff to appoint
Lesser Brothers for their service as he saw fit.”]
32
See above, note 9 and corresponding text: the universale coenobium thought
up by Innocent III, took the name of San Sisto from the church next to which
it was built.
33
BF I, p. 36; see Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 285-86, where there is also indicated
the necessary correction of the date given in BF.
34
For the events sketched here I would refer to Alberzoni, Chiara e il Papato,
56-59 (see above).
35
Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 446: “Unde et nos, filiabus nostris paterna
sollicitudine providentes, admissis precibus devotissimi Deo et vobis fratris
Pacifici, cui onus iam importabile videbatur, carrissimum nostrum, in intimis
radicatum nostrorum viscerum, fratrem Philippum, religiosum ac Deum
timentem, visitatorem vobis duximus de speciali mandato Summi Pontificis
deputandum.”
36
Fontes, 2292. [Engl. trans.: CAED, 64: “Order of the Poor Sisters.”]
37
BF I, p. 243: “quae praedictam Regulam [the rule of the Order of San
Damiano] studio compositam vigilanti et acceptam a praedictor Sancto [Francis],
nec no per felicis recordationis Honorium papam praedecessorem nostrum
postmodum confirmatam dictae Clarae et sorores, concesso ipsis ab eodem
intercedentibus nobis exemptionis privilegio, solemniter sunt professae.” [Engl.
trans.: CAED, 372-73: “And they solemnly professed that Rule which was
composed with careful zeal and accepted by St. Francis, and afterwards
confirmed by the same Pope Honorius, Our predecessor of happy memory;

secondly, because Clare and her Sisters put aside the formula and have been
observing the same Rule in a laudable manner from the time of the profession
until the present.”] Gregory IX does not specify how much earlier Clare had
embraced his rule; the reference to the privilege of exemption seems to me,
however, an important piece of evidence for placing the episode in the context
of the events of 1228.
38
BF I, p. 242: “sicut in moderno speculo beato Francisco gloriantes in domino
contemplamur, qui (. . .) Patris aeterni Filio grande lucrum attulit animarum,
institutis per ipsum specie stigmatum Redemptoris, sicut pluri-bus dignis fide
patuit insignitum, per orbis latitudinem tribus Ordinibus, in quibus per dies
singulos cunctipotens redditur multipliciter gloriosus. Intus enim quasi tribus
propaginibus invite contentis, quas coram se per somnium pincerna Pharaonis
inspexit, fratrum Ordinis Minorum, Sororum inclusarum et Poenitentium
collegia designantur, que Sancte ac individue Trinitatis dedicata cultui.” [Engl.
trans.: CAED, 370]: “Just as We, glorying in the Lord, contemplate Blessed Francis
as the mirror for our contemporaries, who . . . brought a grand increase of souls
to the Son of the eternal Father when he which during every single day the All
powerful is rendered glorious in many ways. For within, as if unwilling satisfied
with the three branches, which the cup bearer of Pharaoh saw before himself
in a dream, associations of the Order of Friars Minor, of the cloistered Sisters,
and of Penitents were designed and dedicated to the worship of the Holy and
Undivided Trinity In this letter the elements proper to the hagiography of
Saint Francis appear in synthesis. Worthy of attention are the ways Gregory
uses to refer to the person and work of Francis. To the degree that he attempts
to impede a real following of Francis’s directions, he puts himself forward as
the champion of the holiness of the saint of Assisi; one might even say that he
wishes to gain credit in the eyes of Agnes of Bohemia and her entourage,
distinguishing himself for his sincere devotion to Francis.
39
It is necessary to note that at this point the papal chancery, voluntarily or
not, committed the error of designating the women’s communities that Francis
founded with the name used normally for the Hugolinian nuns, or of the Order
of san Damiano; if it was Gregory’s intention to retrace the steps of a history,
he should have designated the religious women rather as sorores minores, but
probably already at this date the discomfort in regard to the sorores minores was
growing, both on the part of the minorite Order and of the Roman Curia.
40
M. Bartoli, “Gregorio IX e il movimento penitenziale,” in R. Pazzelli, L.
Temperini, eds., La ‘Supra montem’ di Niccolò IV (1289): genesi e diffusione di una
regola, Ed. Analecta TOR (Rome: 1988), 57-59.
41
Fontes, 293-295: “Quomodo construxit ecclesiam Sancti Damiani et de
conversatione Dominarum in eodem loco degentium.” [Engl. trans.: FAED I,
196] “How he built the church of San Damiano, and the way of life of the
ladies living in that place.”] On this passage, see Dalarun, La malavventura, 52-
61, where the author quotes a long, pertinent section from G. Miccoli,
“Postfazione,” in J. Dalarun, Francesco: un passaggio (Rome: 1995), 195-97; [Engl.

trans. forthcoming from Franciscan Institute Publications.]
42
Dalarun, La malavventura, 53. [Engl. trans.: The Misadventure, 77.]
43
Miccoli, “Postfazione,” 195-96.
44
Fontes, 294 : “Hic est locus ille beatus et sanctus, in quo gloriosa religio et
excellentissimus ordo pauperum Dominarum et sanctarum vir-ginum, a
conversione beati Francisci fere sex annorum spatio iam elapso, per eumdem
beatum virum felix exordium sumpsit; in quo domina Clara, civitate Assisii
oriunda, lapis pretiosissimus atque fortissimus caeterorum superpositorum
lapidum exstit fundamentum. Nam, cum post initiationem ordinis Fratrum,
dicta domina sancti viri monitis Deum conversa fuisset, multis exstitit ad
profectum et innumeris ad exemplum. Nobilis parentela, sed nobilior gratia;
virgo carne, mente castissima; aetate iuvencula, sed animo cana; constans
proposito et in divino amore ardentissima desiderio; sapientia praedicta et
humilitate praecipua: Clara nomine, vita clarior, clarissima moribus.” [Engl.
trans., FAED I, 197]: We should note that Thomas of Celano is rather precise in
reporting the proper name of Clare and her sisters: “Ordo pauperum dominarum.”
45
This character of the description is noted also by M. Bartoli, “Novitas clariana:
Chiara testimone di Francesco,” in Chiara di Assisi, 166: Una descrizione tanto
più stupefacente (. . .) anche se dai toni alquanto convenzionali. Tommaso appare
pieno più di ammirazione che di concrete informazioni sul tenore di vita a San
Damiano, tanto che finisce con il descrivere una comunità di tipo monastico
tradizionale [“A description that is all the more amazing (. . .) even if in rather
conventional tones. Thomas seems to be more full of admiration than of
concrete information on the tenor of life at San Damiano, so much so that he
ends by describing a community of a traditional monastic type”].
46
This episode might provide more evidence about the difficulties that Thomas
encountered in composing his work, difficulties that he shows he is able to
overcome masterfully and ably, as Dalarun shows in La malavventura, 119. [Engl.
trans.: The Misadventure, 173-74.]
47
Fontes, 294: “Super hanc quoque pretiosissimarum margaritarum nobilis
structura surrexit, quarum laus non ex hominibus sed ex Deo est, cum nec
angusta meditatio eam cogitare sufficiat, nec brevis locutio explicare.” [Engl.
trans.: FAED I, 197.] So far I have not addressed the long and sometimes tortuous
argumentation used by Niklaus Kuster for the declared purpose of overturning
the conclusions reached by W. Maleczek (N. Kuster, “Das Armutsprivileg
Innozenz’ III. und das Klaras Testament: Echt oder raffinierte Fälschungen?” in
CF 66 (1996): 5-94). Since historical reconstructions are to be based on the
examination of documentation, not on sometimes arbitrary hypotheses, though
recognizing in Kuster’s work points of some interest, I do not think it advisable
to spend time on many passages that should be corrected (naturally, those
within the limited field of my knowledge). The reference to the Vita prima of
Thomas of Celano, in part suggested by my reading of Kuster’s essay, is meant
to exemplify the basic differences in method. Kuster, in fact, proceeds to analyze

the text presuming that it refers to the religious women of San Damiano =
Damianites = Clares, without being aware of the basic difference between Clare’s
community and those founded by Hugolino and, consequently, without
grasping the nuances of that kind in Thomas’s text. If the whole panegyric is
directed, not to Clare, but to the religious women of Hugolino-Gregory IX, to
whom the pontiff was trying forcefully to aggregate San Damiano, the central
post occupied by poverty can no longer be referred to Clare and to San Damiano,
but rather to the Hugolinian pauperes moniales inclusae, who – by chance – had
poverty as an identifying characteristic, over which reclusion did not prevail
until the 1230s.
48
Kuster, “Das Armustprivileg,” 47-51; for the analysis of the text, the author
also refers to one of his later works, “Thomas von Celano und Klaras Armut in
San Damiano. Beitrag zu einer neuinterpretation der beiden Franziskusviten
und zur Diskussion über den Verfasser der Klaralegende,” in Wissenschaft und
Weisheit 59 (1996): 45-79.
49
Fontes, 295: “Et haec ad praesens de virginibus Deo dicatis et devotissimis
ancillis Christi dicta sufficiant, cum ipsarum vita mirifica et institutio gloriosa,
quam a domino papa Gregorio, tunc temporis Ostiensi episcopo, susceperunt,
proprium opus requirat et otium.” The Italian translation is in FF 353. [Engl.
trans.: FAED I, 199.]
50
A kind of watershed in the evolution of Hugolino’s program, which over
time would include also the assuming of a new name, is found in the letter
mentioned above, in note 35, addressed on August 18, 1228 by Cardinal
Raynaldus to 24 monasteries to announce the passing to himself of the task of
protecting and building earlier carried out by Hugolino (now Gregory IX), as
well as the naming of Brother Philip Longo to replace Brother Pacifico as visitator
of the monasteries themselves. In this letter – which a recent editor entitles, in
a way that is curious to say the least, “Carta circular del cardenal rainaldo a
veinticuatro monasterios de Clarisas” (Escritos, 362) – San Damiano is mentioned
in first place. On that occasion, furthermore, the monasteries were called simply
paupera monasteria, “poor monasteries,” (the Spanish translation in Escritos is
wrong!), a sign of the fact that at that time there was no other common name
for the diverse experiences. Perhaps it is here that we should look for the origin
of that insistent adjective altissima paupertas, which Ovidio Capitani has
emphasized in the course of the panel discussion.
51
E. Paoli, “Introduzione,” to Clarae Assisiensis Opuscula in Fontes, 2247.
52
Concerning the varied evidence indicating a deep and multifaceted bond
among Elias, San Damiano and the communities linked to Clare, I have collected
some indications in Chiara e il Papato, 69-89 [see above, 48-55.]
Chapter 3
Sorores minores and

Ecclesiastical Authority
as far as the Pontificate
of Urban IV
When it came to his attention that the women

who lived together in these monasteries were
called sisters, he was greatly disturbed and it is
said that he exclaimed: “The Lord has taken
away our wives, but now the devil is providing
us with sisters.” Cardinal Hugolino, Bishop of
Ostia, who was then the protector of the Order
of Minors, looked after these sisters with great
affection. One time, when he was taking leave
of blessed Francis, he said to him: “I am en-
trusting these ladies to you.” Francis replied with
a smile: “Well, Holy Father, from now let them
not be called ‘Lesser Sisters,’ [Sorores Minores]
but as you have just said, ‘Ladies [Domine].’”
And from then on they were called Ladies and
not Sisters.”1
This famous passage from Thomas of Pavia who, in turn, is

relating the memoirs of Brother Stephen,2 seems to indicate
that underlying Francis’s concern in regard to the use of the
term Sorores Minores was more than a problem of terminology:
it was institutional in nature. However, the position of the Saint

of Assisi is not in fact what is recorded here, but rather what
the Order of Friars Minor had assumed in the early 1260s, at a
time that was particularly sensitive for the relationships be-
tween the minorite Order and the women’s religious commu-
nities who wanted to take their point of reference from the
example of Francis and his fraternitas – or which had in a later
period been led to follow that example3 – although their own
starting point had been the choice of a life characterized by
poverty and penance, then widespread.4 It is therefore impos-
sible to speak of “women’s Franciscanism” as a well-defined
reality at its origins; rather it appears as the result of a complex
process that developed in the course of slightly less than fifty
years and saw the involvement of the papacy and the mendi-
cant Orders.
In attempting to reconstruct the history of these groupings,
which were ultimately to result in a unified entity only through
the decisive intervention of ecclesiastical authority culminat-
ing in the Beata Clara of Urban IV, the importance of the use of
correct terminology has been generally underestimated, a prob-
lem otherwise well evidenced by Urban’s aforementioned let-
ter.5 That important papal document contains a reference to
the problems arising from the multiplicity of names used to
identify a single reality: sorores, dominae, moniales, pauperes
inclusae Ordinis S. Damiani;6 and to this diversity was explicitly
linked the plurality of rules and customs present within what
the Apostolic See wanted to see as constituting a united Order,
leaning toward centralization and under the direct control of
the Roman Church, according to methods that had experienced
significant implementation in the mendicant Orders.7
This study will therefore try to clarify the history of the term
sorores minores, as well as the underlying reality, in the attempt
to identify the reasons that, after an initial period of favor,
strengthened the gradual and progressive growth of an essen-
tially negative connotation to the term, as can be deduced from
some papal documents from the middle years of the century.8
SORORES MINORES AND ECCLESIASTICAL AUTHORITY 115
Jacques de Vitry in 1216
“I found one consolation in those parts, nevertheless: many

men and women, rich and wordly, after renouncing everything
for Christ, fled the world. They are called Lesser Brothers and
Lesser Sisters.”
The first attested use of the term is offered by the well-known
letter which Jacques de Vitry wrote in October 1216.9 Already
in 1930 Lilly Zarncke, in her important work that was pub-
lished in Leipzig in that year, had advanced well-founded doubts
about assuming that text as a documentary source tout-court
for the origins of the men’s and women’s Franciscan experi-
ence, and had proposed some lenses for reading it, suggesting
that we should not necessarily identify the Sorores Minores men-
tioned by Jacques de Vitry with Clare and her sisters.10 In fact,
subsequent historiography, perhaps influenced by the exces-
sive value attributed to this source by many scholars, accepted
with few reservations the identification of the Sorores Minores
with the Clares;11 only recently has this been reconsidered more
critically.12
Undoubtedly, to the eye of an attentive observer from a dis-
tant land, the link between the two expressions of minoritas
was evident. But the description offered by the famous letter
indicates a very fluid reality whose outlines, especially for the
women’s component, appear quite indistinct, particularly when
compared with the precise descriptions offered in the same
context in regard to the life of itinerant preaching of the Fratres
Minores and their custom of gathering together annually in
chapter, both to discuss legislation for their life to be submit-
ted for papal approval as well as to establish a minimum of
missionary strategy.13 The early spread of the name Sorores
Minores is thus to be linked to the growth of a community com-
posed of women, resolved to follow the example indicated by
the itinerant preaching of the friars in the various regions of
the Italian peninsula, as well as by the commitment of these
religious men to the sick and the needy.
The Sorores Minores mentioned by Jacques de Vitry in 1216
should not in any way be traced back univocally to the experi-
ence of Clare and her first sisters, at that time only four years at
San Damiano, and still living what we might call a penitential
phase; this fact makes them similar to, and therefore difficult
to distinguish from, many groups of the same time, widespread
particularly in the Tuscan-Umbrian region.14
Finally, it is possible to note that while, precisely because it
corresponded to a defined reality, the name Fratres Minores re-
mained essentially unchanged and finally came to be conse-
crated definitively by the papal approval of the rule, such was
not the case with the correlative term used by Jacques de Vitry,
Sorores Minores.15 Perhaps this was due to the lack of a precise
institutional reference in the person of a founder or foundress.
The ambiguity in terms is thus to be put in relation with the
minimal cohesiveness of the group, a fact that is in turn due to
the absence of a single person at the origin of the experience
itself.16 From this comes the history of the different names over
time and, especially, the difficulty of identifying the character-
istic features of women’s Franciscanism, obstinately considered,
until recently, as a unified phenomenon from its very begin-
nings.17 To place at the center of attention the variations and
changes in terminology used to designate these religious group-
ings in the course of the thirteenth century therefore coincides
with the retracing of some of the most important steps in the
legislative travail that so marked the history of “women’s
Franciscanism” and, in a particular way, that of the Sorores
Minores.
The 1220s
The words of Jacques de Vitry concerning the Sorores Minores

remain an isolated bit of evidence; until the 1220s, in fact, there
are no other attested examples of the use of such terminology.
Yet certainly groups of Sorores Minores did exist, and must have
assumed such proportions as to induce the ecclesiastical au-
thority to confer on them a sort of legislation tending toward
uniformity. It is within this perspective that we should place
the Litterae tuae nobis of August 1218 by Honorius III to cardi-
nal Hugolino of Ostia, about to depart for the second legation
he was to conduct in the north-central regions of the Italian

peninsula.18 As recent research has rightly affirmed,19 Honorius
and Hugolino took this action, with its strong legislative char-
acter, with the intention of giving birth to a new women’s reli-
gious Order, a kind of reform of the Cistercian Order, which
had become necessary in order to respond to the notable re-
quest for access to religious life on the part of women without
adding a further burden to the men’s Orders who had borne
most of the responsibility, especially the Premonstratensians
and Cistercians.20
I will not dwell here on the modalities and characteristics of
what we may define as the earliest Hugolinian monasteries:
Monticelli near Florence, and Monteluce in Perugia, Siena, and
Lucca, which were founded by the direct intervention of
Hugolino in July, 1219, and which, between December of that
year and September, 1222, received from Honorius the solemn
protection by which he confirmed the activity of the cardinal
of Ostia and subjected the new foundations directly to the
Church of Rome from the very time of their founding.21 I in-
tend only to note that the religious women of the new Order
were defined as moniales by Honorius III, and their superior
abbatissa, elements that give us grounds to believe that there
was an influence here of Benedictine monasticism.22
A poverty-centered characterization is, however, present in
the formulary prepared for the use of bishops who intended to
grant exemption to monasteria that were to follow the “forma
vite vel religionis pauperum dominarum de Valle Spoleti sive
Tuscia per dominum Hugonem venerabilem episcopum
hostiensem auctoritate domini pape eisdem sororibus tradita,”
a formulary inserted in the register of the legation of Hugolino
in 1221, the third one that the cardinal of Ostia undertook in
the north-central area.23 As Roberto Rusconi has pointed out,
Hugolino’s formulary indicates that the model for the founda-
tions of the new Order are those of Perugia, Siena and Lucca,24
all certainly without influences from Clare’s community,25 one
reason that gives greater force to the initiative of the ecclesias-
tical authority itself. On the other hand, in the documentation
of this period there emerges a certain contradiction in terms:
if, in fact, those which were founded were monasteries, the

religious women were not defined as moniales, but as sorores,
and the name of the new religio, as mentioned, was marked by
a strong accent on poverty (religio pauperum dominarum de Valle
Spoleti sive Tuscia),26 without any reference to Franciscan
minoritas.
Yet another official document of the early 1220s merits our
attention: the document issued by the bishop of Camerino,
Attone, in June, 1223, in favor of some women who are de-
fined only as mulieres Deo dicate, living at the church of San
Salvatore in the parish of San Severino.27 This community, which
maintained ties of friendship with Francis and his friars, as we
learn from the Vitae of Thomas of Celano,28 received recogni-
tion from the local bishop, under whose jurisdiction it remained;
at the same time, however, it could receive as visitators Friars
Minor named for that purpose by Francis, a fact worth noting,
if we remember that at that date the Order had not yet received
solemn papal approval.29
If, therefore, there were Sorores Minores undoubtedly linked
to the experience of Francis and his fratres, that reality was not
limited to the community of Clare, who must however have
exercised a certain influence, limited at first to nearby areas.30
The San Damiano group was one of many inspired by the peni-
tential spirit, which Jacques de Vitry indicated with the name
that seemed to him to correspond best to a reality that was so
close to that of the Fratres Minores, but which a local observer
might not have lumped together under the single designation
of Minores. As the documented case of San Severino Marche
shows, other communities could have been organized under
the leadership of Franciscans without necessarily referring to
Clare’s model.
We are thus faced with at least three possibile outcomes for
women’s religious life among those Jacques de Vitry called
Sorores Minores, which can be indicated generally in this way:
1) Clare’s community and those influenced by it, scattered
particularly throughout the Tuscan-Umbrian area;31 2) groups
of religiosae mulieres, like the one in San Severino Marche, that
were placed under the jurisdiction of the bishop and assisted
by the Friars Minor, with characteristics closer to the commu-

nities of penitents than to the cloistered model of the San
Damiano community; and, 3) beginning in 1219, monasteries
that we may define as Hugolinian, which in 1221 began to be
called the religio pauperum dominarum de Valle Spoleti sive Tuscia.32
Leo of Perego
Until the early 1220s these three diverse components coex-

isted, maintaining important bonds: the Sorores Minores with
the episcopacy and the Friars Minor, the religious women of
the Hugolinian Order with the Church of Rome, by means of
the visitators it designated. But a certain competition must have
begun gradually as Hugolino’s project became clearer and be-
gan to receive the support of some Franciscans, and as their
position gradually grew stronger within the Order.
Within this perspective the case of Leo of Perego takes on
particular importance. He was undoubtedly a person of some
eminence among the Minors, as can be seen from the fact that
in May, 1230, he was among the delegation of six friars sent by
the general chapter of the Order to Gregory IX to obtain some
clarifications on the interpretations of Francis’s rule, clarifica-
tions which the pope ultimately provided in the letter Quo
elongati.33 Hugolino probably knew Leo from the time of his
legations and it seems probable that it was the Milanese friar
who around 1224 intervened, on orders of the cardinal of Os-
tia, to direct toward more consolidated forms of religious life34
the Sorores Minores who lived in the leprosarium of Sant’Agata
sub Aquario in Verona.35
If the facts are to be interpreted in this way, we can dismiss
the hypotheses formulated by Giorgio Cracco in regard to a so-
called “indigenous Minorite movement.”36 This would not be
a contemporaneous appearance in different areas of a spiritual
tendency that would later find its definitive location by flow-
ing into the Umbrian Minorite movement. Rather it would be
a manifestation on the local level of that vast phenomenon of
penitential inspiration, enlivened by the preaching of Francis
and his friars even in areas relatively far from Umbria, that,
through the intervention of the ecclesiastical authority and

aided in this by members of the Franciscan Order, came to be
channeled toward forms that were institutionally better defined
and controllable: in the case of Verona’s Sorores Minores, toward
Hugolinian monasticism.37
Similar ideas can also be gathered from an examination of
the situation in Milan, still in connection with the work of Leo
of Perego. A notary’s act of February, 1223, by which the clerics
of the Milanese church of Sant’Apollinare sold the land on
which the monastery of Santa Maria would be built, explicitly
noted that in that monastery the religious women intended to
follow the “Ordo et regula Beati Damiani de Valle Spolitti iuxta
civitatem de Sixi.”38 The example of San Damiano – either di-
rectly or, as tradition would have it, coming through Florence39
– was thus quite present. But at the time of the religious women’s
solemn entrance and later, when they were granted episcopal
exemption, between November, 1224, and February, 1225, ei-
ther by Leo’s direct intervention or by the close bond existing
between the archbishop Henry of Settala and Hugolino, at Milan
too, it was Hugolino’s forma vitae that was to prevail.40
Gregory IX
An important shift in the fate of “women’s Franciscanism”

took place with Hugolino’s ascent to the papal throne (March
19, 1227): from his new position he could be even more force-
ful in his attempts to give a basic unity to the Order he founded
and, particularly, to link it solidly to a men’s Order that would
assume its cura.41 Gregory IX thought he would find the neces-
sary availability among the Friars Minor, of whom he was car-
dinal protector by Francis’s express will, and for whom he con-
tinued to be a privileged interlocutor, as can be seen in regard
to Quo elongati, the interpretation of the rule requested of the
pope by the Order.42
If already at the beginning of 1226 the Minorite Brother
Pacificus had received from Hugolino the charge of visiting the
monasteries of the dominae pauperes inclusae – as shown by a
document regarding the monastery of Gubbio of April, 122643
– in July, 1227, and thus only a few months after his election,
Gregory IX confirmed by papal authority the responsibilities
for the cura monialium entrusted to that friar.44 With his Quoties
cordis of December 14, 1227, the pope then entrusted in virtute
obedientiae the cura of the monasteries of the pauperes moniales
reclusae to the minister general of the Franciscan Order, John
Parenti, without the mention of any intervention by Francis in
starting this women’s monastic Order.45 In order to forge ahead
more quickly along these lines Clare’s agreement was needed,
as she presented herself as the jealous guardian of the guidance
Francis had given to her and her sisters, since San Damiano is
the only monastery for which we have evidence of Francis’s
personal involvement in the foundation and for which he had
guaranteed the assistance of his friars.46
In the summer of 1228, in fact, Gregory succeeded in getting
Clare, her community and those connected to it to become
part of the Order of the pauperes moniales reclusae, thus remov-
ing them from episcopal jurisdiction, placing them in direct
dependence on the Roman Church, and granting them in ex-
change the so-called privilegium paupertatis of September 17,
1228,47 by which San Damiano was guaranteed that it could
continue along the way indicated by Francis, at least in regard
to the choice of absolute poverty.48 From that time the pontiff
and the new cardinal protector of the women’s monasteries,
Raynaldus di Jenne, could begin to call the new Order created
by Hugolino the Ordo S. Damiani, precisely in order to empha-
size the importance within it of the Assisi monastery and, thus,
the strong link with the experience of Francis and the Friars
Minor.
Some indication of these institutional developments of
Hugolinian monasticism is to be found in the letter sent by
Cardinal Raynaldus on August 18, 1228, to twenty-four mon-
asteries, all located in the Italian peninsula, with San Damiano
of Assisi heading the list.49 With this letter Raynaldus, besides
announcing his appointment to succeed Hugolino-Gregory,
now unable to follow closely the development of his Order,
also announced the appointment of the new visitator in the
person of Brother Philip Longo. Philip, according to rather bi-
ased tradition, had earlier held that office in the period when
Francis was in the East, and because he had demonstrated ex-
cessive interest for the Poor Ladies at the papal curia, seeking
privileges for them against Francis’s wishes, had aroused the
violent opposition of the saint, who immediately dismissed him
from the office.50
In reality the first references to the role of visitator of the
pauperes moniales reclusae carried out by Philip Longo come af-
ter, 1228; all of this gives a basis for holding that his was not a
“return” to a post from which Francis himself had violently
removed him, but rather the acceptance on the part of this
faithful socius of Francis – and one very close to Clare from the
very beginning51 – of a task that was quite burdensome, since
the Order of Friars Minor, in the person of its general, since
December, 1227 – as we noted – had been charged with the
cura monialium of all the Hugolinian monasteries.52 Probably at
a later time the choice of Philip was considered a dangerous
concession in the face of the ever more pressing requests of
Gregory IX. The fact that a faithful socius of Francis had ac-
cepted such a position had made the historical memory of this
friar come to be marked by a severe condemnation, as this was
considered a dangerous precedent for a situation that only in
the course of the pontificate of Urban IV would find a solid
compromise in the Beata Clara of October, 1262.53
Thus we have come to identify an important step in the his-
tory of the Order of San Damiano – this is the name that would
gradually assert itself – marked by the link established between
the pauperes moniales reclusae and the Minors. We should note,
however, that Clare’s agreement must not have been without
reservations,54 and that San Damiano continued to consider
itself a community sui generis, characterized by a strong bond
with the Minorite Order.55 Thus I would avoid applying the
term “Damianite” to the community of San Damiano, which I
would rather call “Clarian” or “Damian,” since the term
“Damianite” should rather be understood as referring to the
paupere moniales reclusae, that is, the Order created by Hugolino.
The 1230s
Having mentioned what in my opinion are the most impor-

tant stages in the beginnings of the “women’s Franciscan move-
ment” and having considered the attempts made by the Apos-
tolic See to give it a uniform physiognomy, it is still necessary
to note that until the third decade of the 1200s the Sorores
Minores were not within the horizon of the papacy’s activities,
since they evidently did not present cause for concern.56 Yet we
should not think that there were no “alternative” forms of
women’s religious life inspired by the Franciscan-penitential
model, but rather that ecclesiastical authority had not yet had
any need to intervene in a systematic way. It is probable that
the Sorores Minores enjoyed a link, though not an institutional
one, with the Order of Friars Minor, who offered their cura to
the mulieres religiosae who aspired to a type of life like their
own.
Perhaps the Franciscan Order, with the papacy’s support, had
already sought to put an end to this situation in 1230. The
problems presented to Gregory IX by the delegation from the
general chapter – led by the minister John Parenti – to obtain
from the pope some clarifications on the interpretation of the
rule about which the chapter members were unable to reach
agreement, included a question regarding the cura monialium.57
The question concerned whether or not there was need for pa-
pal authorization for the friars charged with the cura of the
monasteries, with the exclusion of those of the pauperes moniales
reclusae, for which the Apostolic See had already granted the
Franciscans special permission with Quoties cordis. In the reply
to the question Gregory IX extended the prohibition of access
without papal authorization to all women’s monasteries.58
Clare’s harsh reaction to this provision – sending back to the
minister general the friars who were at San Damiano to pro-
vide food and the administration of the sacraments59 – is a clear
indication that the Assisi community had no intention of al-
lowing itself to be closed within the rigid confines of Gregorian-
Damianite monasticism, since it considered itself in a different
position than the Order of San Damiano, as was also guaran-

teed by the privilegium paupertatis granted by Gregory IX to Clare
and her sisters, and extended only with reluctance to other
monasteries that had requested it.60
Like that of Clare, other communities also probably lived in
close symbiosis with the Order of Friars Minor and, perhaps
because they considered themselves part of it to all effects, shar-
ing even its name – that of Sorores Minores – they did not feel it
necessary to obtain exemption from episcopal jurisdiction or
privileges of protection from the Apostolic See. Since these privi-
leges in particular are the documents that give us information
about the founding of a certain monastery, their complete ab-
sence in regard to these women’s “Minorite” groupings helps
to explain the impossibility of evaluating the numbers or loca-
tions of groups of sorores Minores, compared with the modest
collection of sources that allow us to see the beginnings of the
Order of San Damiano.61 It is rather the notarial sources that
are essential for giving us this information, although they are
not always reliable in the precision of the terms they use.62
Since the Sorores Minores did not have their own autonomous
statutes, their history seems to be confused with that of the
Friars Minor. What is more, we often learn of their existence
“by negation,” that is, when the ecclesiastical authority decreed
the closure or transfer of a community.63 A telling example of
this is offered by the letter of May 26, 1223, by which Gregory
IX charged the bishop of Coria to visit personally and verify
whether the information that had been communicated to the
pontiff was true: namely, that a house of the Friars Minor was
much too close to an otherwise unidentified women’s monas-
tery that the bishop of Plasencia had recently transferred to
that place. If indeed the two buildings were so close as to pro-
voke scandal, the bishop of Coria was to order the bishop of
Plasencia, in the pope’s name, to locate the religious women
elsewhere.64
Brother Elias
That situation, which we can define as one of symbiosis be-

tween Fratres and Sorores Minores, continued until the end of
the generalate of Brother Elias.65
I have already hypothesized elsewhere that Elias played an
important role, before and after his generalate, in promoting
the spread within the Italian peninsula and beyond the Alps of
the “Damian” forma vitae, which Clare had received from
Francis, and thus found himself in conflict with the approach
of Gregory IX and the cardinal protector Raynaldus.66 Further-
more, as Thomas of Eccleston reports, even after he was re-
moved from the office of minister general, Elias continued to
visit the monasteries of the pauperes dominae without the au-
thorization of the Apostolic See, as had been established by
Quo elongati in 1230.67 This would have increased the pontiff’s
level of mistrust, and he eventually excommunicated Elias.68
There are not many clues that allow us to discern Elias’s in-
volvement in regard to Clarian or Damian monasticism between
1232 and 1239, especially in view of the fact that at least after
1239 the official sources maintained absolute silence. With the
passing of time there came into its own a completely negative
image of the ex-general and, together with him, of the friar
who had taken on the heavy responsibility of visitator of the
religious women, Brother Philip Longo.69
Enrico Menestò has recently advanced the hypothesis that
the damnatio memoriae of Elias by Franciscan “zealots,” and later
by the Spirituals, should be attributed to the “evil memory” of
the conciliatory ex-general of the Minors spread, in the course
of a long life, by the intransigent Brother Leo, companion of
Francis.70 Essentially, then, Brother Elias, and with him other
friars, including some of the most faithful followers of Francis,
encouraged the spread of Clarian monasticism, thus placing
themselves in ever more open contrast with what we may call
the “Damianite” plan promoted by Gregory IX and the power-
ful cardinal protector, Raynaldus of Ostia, with the agreement
of the leadership of the Minorite Order. This is what led to the
condemnation of the ex-minister general by both the pope and
his confreres.
Beginning in the years immediately following the deposition

of Elias the Sorores Minores, also called Minoretae or Minorissae,
would thus have found themselves without support of the whole
Franciscan Order, or at least of its highest leaders. Furthermore,
the situation among the Friars Minor must also have been rather
troubled due to the conflicts over the interpretation of the rule
and the massive involvement of the friars in the conflict be-
tween Gregory IX and Frederick II, a conflict that, as Giancarlo
Andenna has shown, also had repercussions in the internal life
of the Order.71
After Brother Elias
The first official position assumed by Gregory IX in regard to

what he considered a kind of women’s religious life not recog-
nized by the Church was contained in the letter Ad audientiam
nostram of February 21, 1241.72 The missive, addressed to the
archbishops and bishops, expressed Gregory’s disappointment
on receiving complaints regarding nonnullae mulieres who, in
various dioceses, falsely claimed to belong to the Ordo S. Damiani
and who, to prove their membership in it, were going around
without shoes, with the habit and cord proper to the
Damianites, and were calling themselves Discalceatae,
Chordulariae, or Minoretae. These, however, were distinguished
from the true Damianites by the fact that the latter lived in
perpetual reclusion.73 Since such a religio simulata was creating
confusion in the Order of San Damiano and discredit for the
Minorite Order, Gregory IX ordered all the prelates to compel
those women to abandon the habit, which in the eyes of the
faithful identified them as Damianites.74
Commenting on this text, Clara Gennaro merely notes a
“growing concern on the part of the papacy in regard to a con-
fused world of women’s Franciscanism.”75 In reality, the im-
pression is that the pontiff’s intervention must have been re-
quested by the leadership of the Friars Minor, who were con-
cerned about the dimensions of the phenomenon, and prob-
ably no longer willing to provide it with a juridical cover be-
fore the ecclesiastical authority, which had also never looked
kindly upon women’s religious life outside traditional monas-

tic institutions.
This papal letter, already distributed toward the end of the
pontificate of Gregory IX, certainly did not suffice to stem the
phenomenon. Rather, the long vacancy preceding the election
of Innocent IV probably weakened the effect of the measures
laid out in regard to such irregular communities. Later pontifi-
cal documents actually indicate the persistence of nuclei of
Sorores Minores, especially in certain regions in which heresy
was most widespread and where women had experienced the
possibility of their own autonomous initiatives in religious life:
northern Italy and southern France.76
Innocent IV
Gregory’s successor, Innocent IV, thus had to confront the

problem once again; of particular interest to our topic is his
letter Cum harum rector, repeated on several occasions.
The first copy known to us dates to October 2, 1246, and is
addressed to the archbishops and bishops whose dioceses in-
cluded the Minorite provinces of Lombardy, the March of
Treviso and Romagna.77 But a few days later, on October 10,
the same letter was sent to the archbishops and bishops of south-
ern France.78 In April, 1250, the same missive was sent to arch-
bishops and bishops of Lombardy, the March of Treviso and
Romagna.79 Two copies dated August 17, 1251, were addressed
respectively to the prelates of France80 and England,81 and again,
about six years later, on January 8, 1257, it is addressed anew to
the prelates of the Midi.82
Let us pause a moment to consider the tone of Cum harum
rector. The tone of the opening is very harsh, even describing
these mulierculae as “interius onerate peccatis, foris tamen
sanctitatis,”83 women who pretend to follow the rigid discipline
of the Order of San Damiano but in reality, without placing
themselves under any iugum disciplinae, as if they were directly
under the yoke of Satan, they travel about various regions.84 In
the narratio, the pontiff says that he has learned from trustwor-
thy people of the existence of these false religious women, who
say they belong to the Order of San Damiano, whose first

founder was the confessor of Christ, Francis.85 And what is more,
by hiding their true nature, these women have even managed
to obtain from the pope letters authorizing the foundation of
new monasteries, so that they usurp fallaciter the name of Sorores
Minores, a name that is not even used for the sisters of the Or-
der of San Damiano, with the risk that the image of the Order
of Friars Minor may become tainted.86 The pope then ordered
an end to the construction of such monasteries in the dioceses
of the prelates receiving the letter and even the interruption of
such construction if the consent of the provincial ministers
were lacking, using as his principal motive the desire to pro-
mote the good of the Minorite Order.87
I have dwelt on the narratio because it gives us, for the first
time, an explanation of the discomfort (particularly, it seems)
on the part of the Order of Friars Minor, caused by the fact that
there were religious women who presumed to use the same
name of Minores and, thus, to enjoy the cura of the friars. Evi-
dently the term Sorores Minores was considered ambiguous and
dangerous for the good name of the Minorite Order, so that it
was to be avoided even for the Damianites.
In this context, furthermore, there is particular significance
to the strong reminder of Innocent IV that the founding of the
Order of San Damiano was the work of Francis himself. It was
expedient to reaffirm the strong bond between Francis and the
Ordo S. Damiani – not, please note, the monastery of San
Damiano – in order to discredit the Sorores Minores, striking
them in their use of the name itself and thus in their pretence
of having a privileged bond with the Order of Friars Minor while
not belonging to the monasticism promoted as “Franciscan”
by the Apostolic See. It is clear that, once the foundation of the
Order of San Damiano was attributed to Francis, the Minors
had also achieved their goal of circumscribing their commit-
ment to the Damianites, thus obtaining an important limita-
tion to the burdensome commitment to the cura monialium.
We should note further that, if seen in this light, the context
allows us to explain the reasons that led Innocent IV in August
1247 to promulgate a new rule for the Order of San Damiano.88
In fact, its mention of the rule of Benedict was now replaced by

the rule of Francis, an inevitable change if the desire was to
make the foundation of this Order date back to Francis.89
In this regard it is interesting to recall that Innocent’s state-
ment that Francis founded the Order of San Damiano is the
second instance of this position assumed by a pontiff. Gregory
IX had already expressed himself in these terms in a letter ad-
dressed to Agnes of Prague in May, 1238.90 And, we might note,
the circumstances were in some way similar. In that case, too,
the pope had to confront the request by a group of religious
women – and a high-profile group since the sister of the king
of Bohemia belonged to it – who sought to obtain official rec-
ognition for their adoption of the forma vitae followed at San
Damiano, even though the Assisi community officially belonged
to the Order founded earlier by Hugolino.91 It seems, therefore,
that the papacy appealed to the memory of Francis to safe-
guard and reinforce the position of the Order, which had actu-
ally been started on Hugolino’s initiative, and which certainly
owed its success and its connection with the Friars Minor to
the action of ecclesiastical authority.92 Clare also will use a simi-
lar tactic to safeguard absolute poverty and strict dependence
on the Minorite Order – the two points on which she in no
way intended to give way, even in the face of the insistence of
the pope and the cardinal protector – in Chapter Six of her rule
when she makes a specific appeal to the will of Francis.93 Only
the authority of a saint could validly oppose the firm will of
the hierarchy.94
It may not be out of place to conjecture that Clare’s commu-
nity also turned in a similar way to what we may define as
“dissident Franciscanism,” especially if we consider the corre-
spondence between Clare and Agnes of Prague, together with
the letters that Gregory IX addressed to the sister of the king of
Bohemia, in particular the Angelis gaudium of May 11, 1238.95
From it we seem to be able to gather that there are two oppos-
ing positions and that – as we could easily predict – the posi-
tion maintained by Gregory IX and the cardinal protector,
Raynaldus of Ostia, would prevail. On that occasion too the
pope found in recourse to the authority of Francis the stron-
gest reason for his own position in regard to both a part of the
Minorite Order and, especially, to the dissident mulieres
religiosae.96
Thus it seems we can conclude that although for some of the
clergy and for the faithful the term Sorores Minores indicated a
type of women’s religious life particularly close to the experi-
ence of evangelical life practiced by the Friars Minor, for the
ecclesiastical authority it constituted an element of disturbance
in the framework of a firm commitment to a plan for imposing
norms pursued by the papacy in the course of the thirteenth
century.97
Sorores Minores and Damianites
The pontificate of Innocent IV seems to have witnessed a

radicalization of the conflict between the Sorores Minores and
ecclesiastical authority, with the leadership of the Order of Fri-
ars Minor in agreement, as well as the Order of San Damiano.
An interesting confirmation of the irreconciliable differences
between the two positions is provided by the letter Ex parte
dilectarum, addressed in September, 1250, to the bishop of
Salamanca, Spain.98 The papal intervention had been requested
by the Damianite women of that city to force the bishop to
constrain quaedam mulieres (who lived in the diocese and
claimed to belong to the Order of San Damiano, but who were
not in reality, since they did not observe permanent enclosure)
to abandon the habit and cord characteristic of the Damianite
women.99 The presence of these religiosae mulieres therefore cre-
ated a confusio that evidently harmed the official establishment
of “Franciscan” religious women. This offers indirect proof of
the success that the Sorores Minores must have had among the
faithful, as well as within some sectors of the Minorite Order
itself, since the complaint about the Minorissae came only from
the abbess and sorores of the “official” monastery, and, the pon-
tiff, unlike in similar letters, made no mention of the harm
deriving from this situation to the image of the Order of Friars
Minor.100
On the other hand, there is significant evidence to allow us

to conclude that the presence of communities of Sorores Minores
was rather considerable, and that in many cases they enjoyed
the full support of the ecclesiastical authority, as is suggested
by the documentation for Novara so carefully examined by
Giancarlo Andenna.101 It seems to show that the bishop,
Sigebaldo Cavallazzi, was in sympathy with the community of
Sorores Minores who had come from Piacenza, led by a relative
of Innocent IV, Cecilia of Rocca Sarzana. To aid their establish-
ment, the prelate, with the full support of Innocent IV and
Alexander IV, had in fact decreed the end of a pre-existing
Cluniac foundation, citing as his reason the fact that it was
impossible to implement a radical reform of that monastery.102
However, the introduction of the Sorores Minores from Piacenza
was not without difficulty. Precisely in order to avoid being
forced into a system of norms, first that of the Damianites and
later that of Urban, they made the unpopular decision to pass
to Cluniac monasticism, and only after a series of interven-
tions by the Friars Minor, who were in turn supported by the
ecclesiastical authority, were forced between 1262 and 1263 to
abandon their original site and move to the “official” monas-
tery of the Poor Clares within the city. There, around 1270, the
group of dissidents who from 1264 to 1267 had chosen to pass
to dependency on Cluny, headed by the abbess Cecelia, finally
moved as well.103
If we then consider the position of the highest authorities of
the Order of Friars Minor and that of the minister general, John
of Parma, in particular, we can see that there was a tendency
strongly opposed to the phenomenon of the Sorores Minores.104
During Parma’s generalate Innocent IV received many petitiones
to block the phenomenon of the religiosae mulieres who, be-
sides generating confusion about Damianite monasticiscm,
posed a threat to the Order of Friars Minor of a potentially large
increase in the responsibility for the cura monialium.105
The Struggle for Survival
Within this framework, decidedly unfavorable for the Sorores

Minores, we can understand the phenomenon that had previ-
ously been largely ignored by scholars, the phenomenon of
communitites that at first seemed to be within the “Franciscan”
area transferring to or moving toward other men’s monastic
institutions, especially the Cistercians.106 Related to this ten-
dency during the pontificate of Innocent IV is the ever increas-
ing imposition of a “fixed number” on already existing com-
munities of Damianites. The Sorores Minores were faced, with-
out the possibility of appeal, with the alternative of transfer-
ring to the Order of San Damiano in order to continue enjoy-
ing the spiritual assistance of the Minors, or else of abandon-
ing the Damianite habit and joining other previously approved
ecclesiastical institutions if they wished to avoid the sentence
of the Fourth Lateran Council’s constitution Ne nimia
religionum.107 Thus more than one community of Sorores Minores
sought to regularize their status by joining the monasteries of
the Order of San Damiano, a fact that certainly created difficul-
ties, not only because of the impossibility of receiving all those
who wanted to transfer, but also because the earlier rivalries
and mutual distrust were probably not entirely overcome. In
this regard I will limit my remarks to two examples.
In Milan documentation from the 1240s reveals the exist-
ence of a community of Sorores Minores at San Vittore all’Olmo,
located outside the city, the place where the Fratres Minores had
their first settlement in the Lombard capital at the beginning
of the 1220s. The religious women seem to have had close per-
sonal ties with some Friars Minor; the concerns appear for the
most part to be economic in nature, but obviously our knowl-
edge of them is conditioned by the type of documentation that
has survived, and in this case, as is usual for these “irregular”
communities, it does not include documents from the ecclesi-
astical authority. We should note that San Vittore all’Olmo,
and not Sant’Apollinare (the Milanese monastery of the Order
of San Damiano) had provided the model for the Piacenza
monastery of San Francesco, from which, as we said, came the
Sorores Minores who came to Novara under the leadership of

Cecilia of Rocca Sarzana, a hypothesis that seems to be sup-
ported by the fact that the procurator of the nuns of Piacenza
was none other than Federico of Oreno, the father of four or
three of the religious present at San Vittore all’Olmo.108 Since
after 1251 three of Federico’s daughters are listed among the
nuns of Sant’Apollinare, we must conclude that after severe
papal warnings, the sorores of San Vittore all’Olmo – or at least
some of them – had entered the “official” community of the
Order of San Damiano.109 A part of the community, however,
remained at San Vittore all’Olmo and, having lost the assis-
tance of the Minors, turned to the Cistercians of Morimondo,
to whose cura they were entrusted by the general chapter of
Cîteaux.110
In the same way at Lodi we have important evidence of a
women’s mansio, that of Santa Maria di Riolo, which in 1249
was still designated “ultra Abduam, prope civitatem Laude, ibi
ubi stare consueverant fratres Minores.”111 However, already in
June, 1245, this community was aggregated to the Cistercian
Order, as demonstrated by a letter with which Innocent IV ad-
dressed the abbot of the monastery of Cerreto, stating that the
latter, in accordance with the request of Gregorio of
Montelongo, should accept responsibility for the cura monialium
of Santa Maria di Riolo.112 Here we have another case of religiosae
mulieres abandoning Minorite orientation after 1241, evidently
forced to rely on the white monks, perhaps to protect some of
the characteristics that had inspired their beginnings which
incorporation into the Order of San Damiano would not allow
them to preserve. At Lodi, in fact, at least until the pontificate
of Urban IV, there was no monastery of Damianites.
Only with Beata Clara, as mentioned earlier, can we see
the signs of a definitive organization of “women’s
Franciscanism.” With the creation of the Ordo s. Clarae the
earlier legislation was abolished and the cura monialium by the
Minors was assured, but only to those monasteries which had
adopted the new rule and, consequently, the name; further-
more, it definitively cleared up any ambiguity about presumed
links between communities not included in the Order of St.

Clare and the Order of Friars Minor.113
Urban IV
However, even during the pontificate of Urban IV there seems

to be a strong re-emergence of the Sorores Minores. The story of
the rule, which Isabelle, sister of King Louis IX of France, had
drawn up for the monastery of Longchamp that she founded
around 1255, suggests some interesting reasons in this con-
text.114 Isabelle – or whoever acted for her – entrusted the com-
position of the new text to five Franciscan theologians, includ-
ing Bonaventure, as her biographer testifies.115 This rule, which
is certainly inspired more by the legislation of Innocent IV than
by that of Clare, was first approved, though only for the mon-
astery of Longchamp, by Alexander IV on February 10, 1259,116
and, later, definitively approved with some important revisions,
by Urban IV on July 27, 1263,117 that is, only a few months
before the same pope promulgated the rule intended for that
whole group which, from then on, would have the name Ordo
s. Clarae.
The important changes introduced by Urban IV concern, first
of all, the name that was to be given to the religious women of
the Paris monastery, since the approval was addressed exclu-
sively to them.118 In the rule composed by the five theologians,
and approved by Alexander IV, it was in fact determined that
the nuns were to be called Sorores Ordinis Humilium Ancillarum
beatissime Mariae virginis gloriosae, a fact that cannot fail to make
us think that the legislators were attempting to distinguish the
new religious institute from the Order of Friars Minor.119 At the
beginning of the text of the rule later granted to Isabelle by
Urban IV, however, there is mention of the previous approval
by Alexander IV, promulgated in response to the pleas of the
king of France, according to which, Urban IV says, the nuns
had taken the name of sorores inclusae, that is, Damianites.120
Later, however, the monarch himself, perhaps faced with his
sister’s firm refusal to submit to the legislation which, even
though it was prepared specifically for her, was so far from what
could even remotely be called “Franciscan,” became the spokes-

man before the pope of the women’s desire to change their
name to that of Sorores Minores. The pope stated that at that
time he had received kindly the king’s request,121 had asked
Cardinal Simone of Santa Cecilia to revise the rule, and had
determined that from then on the rule would be called that of
the Sorores Minores inclusae.122 Urban, who was French by na-
tionality, certainly could not ignore the request of the king of
France, and agreed to make a significant exception, an imporant
one, if we recall the way the term Sorores Minores was being
used at that time, and the condemnations issued against them.
On the other hand, with the addition of the term inclusae, the
pope tended to repeat the necessity of strict enclosure for all
nuns who wished to be associated with the Friars Minor or re-
ceive the cura from them.
Urban IV also introduced new elements into the formula of
profession for the religious. The formula contained in the rule
composed by the five theologians and approved in 1259 in fact
made no mention of Francis123 – contrary to the legislation of
Innocent in 1247124 – and much less to Clare, although she had
been raised to the glory of the altars four years earlier.125 In the
revision undertaken at the desire of Urban IV, however, the
formula contained an explicit reference to Francis,126 although
Clare was still ignored, confirming the fact that the “Franciscan”
inspiration of these nuns had no connection with the Clarian
experience but traced its roots directly to the example of the
Friars Minor.
Thus we are faced with a complex and lively religious world,

one on which varied forces were exercising strong influences:
we can cerainly see that there was a basic trend of religiosae
mulieres who desired a life conformed to the example of the
apostolic community, which allowed women to witness to the
Christian faith outside the confines of the enclosure, which
the mendicant Orders, at least in their male component, had
broken through. It would clearly be wrong to consider the strong
tendency toward the “monasticization”127 of women’s religious
life in the 1200s as the result only of a strongly legislative project
conducted by the pontiffs. That tendency should rather be in-

serted within the decisive move toward clericalization that can
be seen in the Order of Friars Minor, which resulted in the reaf-
firmation of an essentially monastic model for both the friars
and the religious women.
NOTES
1
“Et cum [Franciscus] intellexisset quod mulieres congregate in dictis
monasteriis dicebantur sorores, vehementer turbatus, fertur dixisse: ‘Dominus
a nobis uxores abstulit, dyabolus autem nobis procurat sorores.” Dominus
Ugolinus episcopus Hostiensis, qui erat protector Ordinis Minorum, ipsas sorores
magna affectione fovebat. Et cum quadam die beato Francisco, volenti ab eo
recedere eas recommendaret: ‘Frater, inquit, recommendo tibi dominas illas;’
tunc beatus Franciscus yllari vultu respondit: ‘Sancte pater, de cetero non sorores
nominentur minores, sed domine sicut nunc recommendando eas dixistis.’ Et
ex tunc dicte sunt domine, non sorores.” The passage is cited in L. Oliger, “De
origine regularum,” 419 (from a 14th cent. ms. in the Archive of Sant’Antonio in
Rome). [Engl trans. in FAED III, 794.] The author himself observes in a note
that the two terms continued to be used indifferently until the clarification
introduced by Beata Clara of Urban IV (see below, notes 5-6, and corresponding
text), in which he coined the official name of Ordo sanctae Clarae.
2
“De origine regularum,” 418: “Frater Thomas de Papia, provincialis minister
in Thuscia, dixit quod quidam fr. Stephanus nomine, simplex et tanta puritate
preditus, ut vix eum crederes posse mentiri, narravit sibi que infrascriptis
continentur.” [Engl. trans., FAED III, 793: “Brother Thomas of Pavia, provincial
minister of Tuscany, said that a certain brother, Stephen by name, a man of
such simplicity and purity of heart that one could hardly imagine his saying
anything untrue, told him several things which I have written down here.”]
3
On the characteristics of this source, see the observations of A. Benvenuti,
“La fortuna,” 59-68. A recent rereading of the passage is offered in Optatus van
Asseldonk, “Sorores Minores: Una nuova impostazione,” 618-21. On the
relationships between the mendicant Orders and women’s communities
founded with close bonds to the papacy it is useful to refer to H. Grundmann,
Movimenti religiosi, 193-293. [Engl. trans., Religious Movements, 89-137.]
4
A general view of the problem is offered by G. Miccoli, “Chiesa, riforma,
vangelo e povertà: un nodo nella storia religiosa del XII secolio,” in his Francesco
d’Assisi. Realtà e memoria di un’esperienza cristiana, Einaudi Paperbacks 217 (Turin:
1991), 3-32. Specific cases are outlined in La conversione alla povertà nell’Italia
dei secolli XII-XIV, Atti dei convegni dell’Accademia tudertina e del Centro di
studi sulla spiritualità medievale, n.s. 2 (Spoleto: 1991), in particular the studies
by F. Dal Pino, “Scelte di povertà all’origine dei nuovi ordini religiosi dei secoli
XII-XIV,” 53-125; E. Pásztor, “Esperience di povertà al femminile,” 369-89; and
G. P. Pacini, “Comunità di poveri nel Veneto: esperienze ‘religiose’ del laicato

vicentino dal secoli XII al XIV,” 325-53.
5
A first sketch of the problem may be found in Gratien de Paris, Histoire, 593-
617, [Engl. trans., History, 720-51.] See R. Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 303-04 and,
especially, the careful analysis done by G. Andenna, “Urbano IV e l’Ordine
delle Clarisse,” in the proceedings of this conference, Chiara e la Diffusione
delle Clarisse nel secolo XIII, Manduria, 14-15 December 1994, ed. by G. Andenna
and B. Vetere (Galatina 1998), 195-218.
6
BF II, p. 509: “In hoc autem Ordine, vos et alias ipsum profitentes sub
nominationum varietate, interdum Sorores, quandoque Dominas, plerumque
Moniales, nonnumquam Pauperes Inclusas Ordinis Sancti Damiani, contigit
hactenus nominari; vobisque, sub horum et aliorum diversitate nominum,
diversa privilegia, indulgentiae ac litterae a sede apostolica sunt concessa, et
tam a felicis recordationis Gregorio papa praedecessore nostro, tunc Ostiensi
episcopo et vestri Ordinis curam gerente, quam ab aliis variae datae sunt regulae
et formae vivendi, quarum observantiis se vestrum aliquae sollemniter
obligavere. Propter quod, dilectae in Domino filiae, fuit nobis humiliter
supplicatum, ut eundem vestrum Ordinem curaremus certi nominis titulo
insignire (. . .) certam vobis vivendi formam, ad tollendum omnem de vestris
conscientiis scrupulum, largiremur.” An edition can be found in Escritos, 334-
35; the Italian translation of this passage is found in FF editio minor, 1283-1284.
7
Concerning the approach of Gregory IX in regard to Clare’s community
and the Order of San Damiano, see M. P. Alberzoni, Chiara e il papato, 52-69;
[see above, 43-48.]
8
A first framing of the question is offered by C. Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo
femminile nel XII secolo,” Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa 25 (1989),
especially the Appendice dedicated to “Le mulieres vagantes e il francescanesimo
femminile,” 281-284. Now see also the study by Optatus van Asseldonk, “Sorores
Minores e Chiara d’Assisi a S. Damiano: Una scelta tra clausura e lebbrosi,” CF
63 (1993): 399-420. Though limited to the problem of Francis’s relationship to
women, there are useful indications in Dalarun, Francesco, 26-31.
9
Huyghens, Lettres, 75-76; partial trans. in FF, pp, 1906-1908: “Multi enim
utriusque sexus, divites et saeculares, omnibus pro Christo relictis, saeculum
fugiebant, qui fratres minores et sorores minores vocantur.” [Engl. trans., CAED,
313.] On this text, see the observations of L. Pellegrini, “Introduzione alle
Cronache e altre testimonianze,” in FF, 1812-13; and his “Espressioni di
minoritismo nella realtà urbana del secolo XIII,” in Esperience minoritiche nel
Veneto del Due-Trecento, Atti del Convegno nazionale di studi francescani
(Padova, 1984); (=Le Venezie francescane, nuova serie 2 [1985]), 72-74; and finally,
Optatus van Asseldonk, “Sorores minores: una nuova impostazione,” 600-13. K.
Elm, “Die Entwicklung des Franziskanerordens zwischen dem ersten und letzten
Zeugnis des Jakob von Vitry,” in Francesco d’Assisi e francescanesimo dal 1216 al
1226, Convegni della Società internazionale di studi francescani 4 (Assisi: 1997),
193-233, considers this letter in reference to the developments in the Franciscan

Order.
10
L. Zarncke, Der Anteil, 25-30.
11
As one example among many, see the note to the text in FF, 1907-08: “this
may refer to the Poor Ladies (Clares).”
12
13
Huyghens, Lettres, 76: “Homines autem illius religionis semel in anno cum
multiplici lucro ad locum determinatum conveniunt, ut simul in domino
gaudeant et epulentur, et consilio bonorum virorum suas faciunt et promulgant
institutiones sanctas et a domino papa confirmatas, post hoc vero per totum
annum disperguntur per Lumbardiam et Thusciam et Apuliam et Siciliam.”
[Engl. trans., CAED, 314: “The men of this Order, with much profit, come
together once a year in a determined place to rejoice together in the Lord and
to eat together. They draw up and promulage their holy statutes with the advice
of good men and have them confirmed by the Lord Pope. After this they disperse
for an entire year throughout Lombardy, Tuscany, Apulia, and Sicily.”]
14
W. Maleczek, Klara von Assisi, 29-33; Maleczek’s essay had also appeared in
CF 65 (1995): 5-82, and is now available in Italian translation: Chiara d’Assisi
La questione dell’autenticità del Privilegium paupertatis e del Testamento, Aleph 4
(Milan: 1996). [Engl. trans., Greyfriars Review 12 (1998): Supplement: “Questions
About. . .” 1-80.] There are good examples in M. Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in
Umbria,” 87-121, and in A. Benvenuti Papi, In castro poenitentiae.
15
With the brief parenthesis of indecision between pauperes minores and fratres
minores, if we credit the evidence of Burchard of Ursberg: O. Holder-Egger, B.
von Simon, eds., Burchardi Praepositi Urspergensi Chronicon (MGH: Scriptores
rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum 16), 107-08. In this regard, see Optatus
van Asseldonk, “Sorores Minores,” 614-16. Worth noting is the fact that Jacques
de Vitry, in the Historia Occidentalis, dating to 1220-1221, dedicates a chapter
to the religio of the Friars Minors, who had not yet received papal approval of
their rule of life, while he makes no mention of the corresponding women’s
experience; see J. F. Hinnebusch, The Historia Occidentalis of Jacques de Vitry: A
Critical Edition, Spicilegium Friburgense 17 (Fribourg: 1972), 158-63.
16
See the observations of A. Bartoli Langeli, “I Penitenti a Spoleto nel
Duecento,” CF 43 (1973): 303-12; the essay has also been reprinted in G. G.
Merlo, ed., Esperience religiose e opere assistenziali nei secolli XII e XIII [Turin:
1987], 165-92. See especially 303: “In the second half of the 1200s central Italy
swarmed with communities of pious women (. . .) who could not be assimilated
into any religious Order. The lack of a center of expansion, of a common origin,
of a defined monastic configuration make it difficult to position them within
the frameworks of thirteenth century religious life.” See also J. Dalarun, “La
mort des saints fondateurs, de Martin à François,” in Les fonctions des saints
dans le monde occidental, IIIème-XIIIème siècle, Collection de l’École Française de
Rome 149 (Rome: 1991), 193-94; and L. Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 43-53.
17
See as one example Gratien de Paris, History, vol. 3, 720-23; and M. De
Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique, 129-36.
18
BF I, pp. 1-2. An Italian translation of this letter may now be found in G. G.
Zopetti, M. Bartoli, eds., S. Chiara d’Assisi: Scritti e documenti (Assisi, Padua,
Vicenza: 1994), 387-88. The most recent updated overview Hugolino’s activity
during his cardinalate is offered by W. Maleczek, Papst und Kardinalskolleg, 126-
33. On the importance of this letter for a correct understanding of the initiatives
of Honorius III and Hugolino in regard to women’s religious life in north-
central Italy, see M. P. Alberzoni, “L’Ordine di San Damiano in Lombardia,”
126-27. (The essay earlier appeared in Rivista di storia della Chiesa in Italia 49
[1995], 1-42); and “Chiara d’Assisi e il francescanesimo femminile,” 211-13.
The problem is studied within the broad context of various experiences of
women’s religious life by L. Pellegrini, Le “pauperes dominae,” 71-84.
19
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 277-78. His observation on 278 is important: In
questo contesto, tenuto conto della grande familiarità di Ugolino d’Ostia con l’ordine
cistercense e del dettato delle disposizioni conciliari, cadono taluni falsi problemi,
come quello del ruolo della regola benedettina nei primordi del francescanesimo
femminile [“In this context, keeping in mind the great familiarity of Hugolino
of Ostia with the Cistercian Order and of the decree of the Council’s decisions,
some false problems are eliminated, such as that of the role of the Benedictine
Rule in the beginnings of the women’s Franciscan movement”]. See also the
presentations by R. Rusconi and A. Bartoli Langeli at the Tavola rotonda in
Movimento religioso femminile e francescanesimo, at 349-51 and 353-55,
respectively. I would recall that some interesting notions in this regard were
already noted by Zarncke, Der Anteil, 36-44.
20
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 271. The problem as a whole had been examined
by Grundmann, Movimenti religiosi, 193-230. [Engl. trans., Religious Movements,
89-119.] See now the study by K. Elm, “Le donne negli ordini religiosi,” 10-14.
21
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 277-79: Nella sua genesi, ispirazione e svolgimento
l’azione di Ugolino, volta a istituzionalizzare il movimento religioso femminile
dell’Italia centrale, prescinde dal francescanesimo delle origini [“In its genesis,
inspiration and implementation, the action of Hugolino, tending to
institutionalize the women’s religious movement of central Italy, prescinds from
the original Franciscan movement”]. See also Chapter 1, 39.
22
Indicative in this regard are the inscriptiones of the documents of founding
for the four monasteries mentioned above, granted by Hugolino from July 29
to 30, 1219, all using the incipit, Prudentis virginibus, and these are repeated in
the letter of privileges addressed by Honorius III to these communities between
December 1219 and September 1222. The texts are in BF I, pp. 3-5 and 10-15;
useful observations can be found in Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in Umbria,”
97-98.
23
G. Levi, Registri dei cardinali Ugolino d’Ostia e Ottaviano degli Ubaldini (Rome:
1890) (Fonti per la storia d’Italia 8), 153-154. On the earlier legations of
Hugolino, see above, note 18 with its corresponding text.
24
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 279. In Hugolino’s register (Levi, Registri dei
cardinali, 153-154) this is in fact specified: “et loco ipsi et sororibus tam
presentibus quam futuris plenam concedimus libertatem, quam habere
noscuntur monasteria eiusdem religionis de Perusio, de Senis et de Luca eius
apostolice sedis privilegiis confirmatam.”
25
An influence of San Damiano on the monastery of Monteluce in Perugia
must have occurred in the period immediately afterward, when perhaps some
socia of Clare went there to reform it. I would refer on this point to the valid
observations in Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 274-76, which, besides offering a
complete outline of the traditions, also suggests important clarifications meant
to correct some traditional dates. I believe that, besides reasons of geographical
proximity, one definite sign that Monteluce was in close contact with San
Damiano is the concession also to the Perugian monastery of the privilegium
paupertatis, a little over a year after the similar document was addressed to
Clare. The edition of both documents can be found in BF I, pp. 50 and 771.
There is now a new edition in Maleczek, Chiara d’Assisi, 20-23. We should note
that the abbess mentioned in the privilegium sent to Monteluce was called Agnes,
like Clare’s sister, who in a letter addressed to the community of San Damiano,
and traditionally dated around 1230, announced to the sisters of her former
community that she had received from Gregory the privilegium paupertatis. The
tradition has always identified Agnes as abbess of Monticelli and, therefore, it
was believed that this monastery had received the papal document (which has
not come down to us). If instead Agnes had been called to take on the office of
abbess at Perugia, and not in Florence, the traditional information could well
accord with the granting of the privilegium to Monteluce, and not to Monticelli.
26
Levi, Registri dei cardinali, 153.
27
The edition is in Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 200.
28
The episodes reported in 1Cel 78 and 2Cel 106 are well known, from which
emerges Francis’s deep affection for this religious community.
29
30
G. Casagrande, “Le compagne di Chiara,” in Chiara d’Assisi, 388-400.
31
The places touched by this influence are recorded in Rusconi,
“L’espansione,” 274-276; while the data furnished by Benvenuti, “La fortuna,”
74-76 require detailed confirmation.
32
This is the terminology used in Hugolino’s register: Levi, Registri dei cardinali,
153; I would mention only that such terminology will be taken up in the
documents of foundation for Hugolinian monasteries, at least until the turn of
the third decade of the thirteenth century; there are examples for the Po region
in Alberzoni, “L’Ordine di S. Damiano,” 129-30.
33
Besides H. Grundmann, “Die Bulle,” 3-25, see the important study of A.
Rigon, “Antonio di Padova e il minoritismo padano,” in I compagni di Francesco,
187-90.
34
That is, within the field of Hugolinian monasticism, distinguished by rigid
enclosure, that in fact came to be imposed on the religious women who
transferred to Santa Maria di Campomarzo. There is some mention of the events
concerning this monastery, with the translation of some interesting documents,
already noted by Varanini (see the following note) and published in A. Rossi
Saccomanni, ed., Le carte dei lebbrosi di Verona tra XII e XIII secolo, Fonti per la
storia della Terraferma veneta 4 (Padua: 1989) in F. Ferrari, Il francescanesimo
nel Veneto dalle origini ai reperti di S. Francesco del Deserto Appunti per una storia
della provincia veneta dei fratogna (1990), 127-29; 133-34; 137-43.
35
The episode is convincingly reconstructed by G. M. Varanini, “Per la storia
dei Minori a Verona nel Duecento,” in G. Cracco, ed., Minoritismo e centri veneti
nel Duecento (=Civis. Studi e testi 7) (1983), 93-101. But we must remember
that the term Sorores Minores by which the Veronese religious women were
identified is found in a testimonial composed some fifteen years after the events
it reconstructs. Thus it is possible that such terminology was suggested by later
experiences or by a usage established over time: in the course of the 1230s (the
testimonial is from 1235) the term was rather widely used. There is also some
mention of the incident in Optatus van Asseldonk, “Sorores Minores e Chiara
d’Assisi,” 416. See also my remarks in “L’Ordine di S. Damiano,” 139-42.
36
G. Cracco, “Premessa,” in Minoritismo e centri veneti, 3-7.
37
Frater Leo, in fact, as visitator of these sorores, had not agreed to regularize
their position, but had invited them to place themselves under the rules of
Benedictine monasticism; the Sorores Minores until then had shared the
conditions of the sick in the leprosarium of Sant’Agata. See now G. De Sandre
Gasparini, “Introduzione,” in Le carte dei lebrrosi di Verona, xix-xxiv.
38
Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano, 178.
39
P. Sevesi, “Il monastero delle Clarisse in S. Apollinare di Milano (documenti
secc. XIII-XVIII),” AFH 17 (1924): 339-40, but the fact cannot be verified.
40
The difficulties Enrico of Settale had with the authorities of the commune
of Milan are mentioned in M. P. Alberzoni, “Nel conflitto tra papato e impero:
da Galdino della Sala a Guglielmo da Rizolio (1166-1241),” in Diocesi di Milano,
Storia religiosa della Lombardia 9 (Brescia: 1990), 238-244. See also my remarks
under “Henri de Settala,” in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques
XXIII (Paris: 1990) cols. 1227-30. On the repeated requests on behalf of the
nuns made by Hugolino to Enrico there are also remarks in R. Manselli, “La
Chiesa e il francescanesimo femminile,” in Movimento religioso femminile e
francescanesimo, 257-58.
41
Grundmann, Movimenti religiosi, 193-293, [Engl. trans., Religious Movements,
87-137], focuses his analysis on this problem.
42
See above, note 33, and its corresponding text.
43
The document was published in L. Oliger, “Documenta originis Clarissarum
Civitatis Castelli, Eugubii (a. 1223-1263) necnon statuta monasteriorum Perusiae
Civitatisque Castelli (saec. XV) et S. Silvestri Romae (saec. XIII),” AFH 15 (1922):
98-99; in this regard, see Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 284.
44
With Magna sicut dicitur, addressed to several Hugolinian monasteries from
the end of July through the first half of August 1227, Pacificus was to extend
the visitatio to the Hugolinian monasteries in various regions of the peninsula
(Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano, 180 and 209; there is also an edition in
BF I, 33-34).
45
BF I, pp. 36-37, with the date of November 14, 1227, which should however
be dated a month later, as Rusconi has pointed out, “L’espansione,” 285-286,
following W. R. Thomson, “Checklist,” n. 58.
46
This is one of two fragments of writings from Francis addressed to Clare
and her community, which Clare personally inserted in Chapter VI of her rule:
M.-F. Becker, J.-F. Godet, T. Matura, G. G. Zoppetti, eds., Chiara d’Assisi. Scritti
Edizione critica Traduzione italiana (Vicenza: 1986), 152-53: “Quia divina
inspiratione fecistis vos filias et ancillas summi Regis Patris caelestis . . . volo et
promitto per me et fratres meos semper habere de vobis tanquam de ipsis curam
diligentem et sollicitudinem specialem.” [Engl. trans., CAED, 71-72: “Because
by divine inspiration you have made yourselves daughters and servants of the
Most High King . . . I resolve and promise for myself and for my brothers to
always have that same loving care and solicitude for you as (I have) for them.”]
47
There is a reconstruction of the facts in Chapter 1, 43-45; see also Maleczek,
Chiara di Assisi, 60-64.
48
Clare’s resistance to Gregory and Raynaldus, the cardinal protector, who
had insisted that the monastery of San Damiano also accept properties, must
have been absolutely determined, as witnessed by two depositions at the process
of canonization (II:22 and III:14): F. Lazzeri, “Il processo di canonizzazione,”
452 and 454. [Engl. trans., CAED, 146 and 149.]
49
The edition of the letter is in Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 445-46.
50
See Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 280-81; Optatus van Asseldonk, Sorores Minores
e Chiara d’Assisi, 408-10.
51
1Cel 25 (FF, 362). [Engl. trans., FAED I, 204.] Interesting evidence for the
collaboration between Philip and Francis in regard to Clare and the first
community at San Damiano emerges from the depositions given in the course
of the process of canonization of Clare (witnesses VI:1; X:8; XII:5; XVII:3). It
was in fact Philip who exhorted Clare to convert after the example of Francis;
together with Francis and Bernard of Quintavalle, Philip accompanied Clare to
the monastery of San Paolo delle Abbadesse and then to Sant’Angelo in Panzo.
He is yet again recalled together with Francis in the secret conversations with
Clare before her flight from her father’s house.
52
On this responsibility given by Gregory IX to the minister general of the
Friars Minor, see above, note 45. The tradition that pictures Francis himself as
removing Philip from the responsibility of being visitator is completely without
foundation: the reasons are effectively summarized in Rusconi, “L’espansione,”
279-81. In this case too we are dealing with a “reconstruction” carried out in
the second half of the century, when the Minorite Order wished to avoid
assuming en masse “Franciscan” women’s monasteries; particularly negative is
the image of Philip given also in this case by Thomas of Pavia, who, obviously,
makes this hostility go back directly to Francis, in order to discredit those friars
who show themselves open to taking on the quite burdensome cura of the
monasteries of “Franciscan” inspiration (see notes 1 and 2, above, and their
corresponding text).
53
On the importance of Beata Clara in view of the regularizing, in a juridical
sense, of the relationships between the Minors and the Order of San Damiano,
see Andenna, “Urbano IV e l’Ordine delle Clarisse,” 195-218 in Chiara e la
Diffusione Della Clarisse nel Secolo XIII, 195-218.
54
In regard to the enclosure see Bartoli, Chiara d’Assisi, (Rome: 1989)
(Bibliotheca seraphico-capuccina 37), 115-28. [Engl. trans., Clare of Assisi, 85-
97.]
55
Indicative of the unique position of the Assisi monastery is the revoking of
measures presented in Quo elongati, granted by Gregory IX to San Damiano: a
reconstruction of the circumstances can be found in C. Gennaro, “Chiara,
Agnese,” 97-108; and in Alberzoni, Chiara e il papato, 63-69.
56
Gennaro, “Il francescanisimo femminile,” 273-77, rightly emphasizes “a
plan for implementing enclosure completely external to the Damianites,” which
Gregory IX attempts to put in place beginning in the 1230s.
57
Grundmann, “Die Bulle,” 24-25: “Denique quia continetur in regula
supradicta, quod fratres non ingrediantur monasteria monialium . . . .”
58
Besides the studies mentioned above, at note 33, see G. Miccoli,
“Postfazione,” in Dalarun, Francesco: un passaggio, 192-94.
59
F. Pennacchi, ed., Legenda sanctae Clarae virginis (Assisi: 1910), n. 37: “Omnes
nobis auferat de cetero fratres, postquam vitalis nutrimenti nobis abstulit
praebitores.” Engl. trans., CAED, 290: “Let him now take away from us all the
brothers since he has taken away those who provide us with the food that is
vital.”]
60
The documentation that has come down to us allows us to determine that
the privilege was granted to Monteluce in June 1229 (see note 25, above). Agnes
of Prague, after repeated attempts, received the concession on April 15, 1238
(BF I, p. 236): A. Marini, Agnese di Boemia, (Rome, 1991), p. 75: Gregorio aveva
per cosi dire perfezionato le sue decisioni dell’aprile 1237, concedendo ad Agnese ed
alle sue consorelle del monastero di S. Francesco una specie di “privilegio di povertà”,
che si pone sulla stessa linea di quello concesso a suo tempo a santa Chiara [“Gregory
had refined, so to say, his decisions of April 1237, granting to Agnes and her
sisters of the monastery of Saint Francis a type of ‘privilege of poverty’ that
runs along the same lines as that granted earlier to Saint Clare.”] The problem
has not been examined carefully in Maleczek, Chiara d’Assisi, who reaches this
important conclusion: [“That the pope granted the Privilegium paupertatis to

other monasteries has been frequently hypothesized, but not proven”], (62).
61
An attempt at reconstructing the network of foundations of the Order of
San Damiano on the basis of documentation from episcopal and pontifical
sources can be found in Alberzoni, L’Ordine di S. Damiano. The most classic
example in this regard seems to be that of l’Arcella in Padua. There are no
documents from ecclesiastical authority for the early period of the life of this
convent; yet Anthony too resided there, so we can hypothesize that at the
beginning it was a “double monastery.” The studies by C. M. Romeri, “Le Clarisse
nel territorio della minoritica provincia veneta. Collana di notizie,” in Il secondo
Ordine francescano nelle Venezie (Le Venezie francescane 20 [1953]), 15-18; and
of Ferrari, “Il francescanesimo nel Veneto,” 199-200, use largely traditional
data.
62
On the importance of notarial sources for the reconstruction of religious
history, useful indications can be found in G. G. Merlo, “Spiritualità e religiosità,”
in La spiritualità medievale: metodi, bilanci, prospettive, Estratti dagli Studi medievali
11 (Spoleto: 1987), 52-54; and his “Discorso inaugurale,” in La conversione alla
povertà, 6-7.
63
Worthy of note is the case of the Sorores Minores of Verona, mentioned in
notes 35-37 above, with corresponding text. It seems possible to see a similar
situation for the house at Longare/Vicenza, for which I would refer to B.
Brogliato, “Il primo monastero delle Clarisse di Vicenza. Santa Maria all’Araceli,”
AFH 74 (1981): 77-102; and by the same author, 750 anni di presenza francescana
nel Vicentino (Vicenza: 1982), 357-73. In both studies Brogliato publishes the
document of the bishop Manfredo of July 19, 1241, which established and
provided exemption to the monastery of Santa Maria Matris Domini of Longare
(the nucleus of the religious women came from the house of the Humiliati in
that locality). The monastery of the Damianites of Longare was transferred to
Vicenza, again by the will of the bishop Manfredo, who also endowed it with
property in October of 1244. On this episode see also Pacini, “Comunità di
poveri nel Veneto,” 345-346.
64
These are two dioceses located on the Iberian peninsula (both suffragans of
the archbishop of Compostela): the letter is in BF I, 106: (“si inveneris dictum
monasterium quod episcopo memorato de novo, ut dicitur, construit tanta
domum praedictorum fratrum vicinitate respiecere quod contumeliam possit
eis vel gravamen aut scandalum generare, dictum episcopum, ut monasterium
ipse removeat, monitione praemissa auctoritate nostra appellatione cessante
compellas.) Recently the problem of forms of common living among religious
of both sexes has been studied extensively in two volumes of miscellanea: K.
Elm, M. Parisse, eds., Doppelklöster und andere Formen; and Uomini e donne in
comunità; now see also Elm, Le donne negli Ordini religiosi.
65
A careful reconstruction of the figure and activity of Elias is offered by
Giulia Barone, “Frate Elia,” 89-144; and in “Frate Elia: suggestioni,” 60-80; now
see also S. Vecchio, “Elia d’Assisi,” 450-58.
66
See Chapter 1, 48-57.]
67
Gregory IX’s response to the question posed by the friars sent from the
general chapter in fact tended to be restrictive; see notes 33 and 56-59, above,
with corresponding text.
68
Tractatus de adventu, 85: “Post hoc frater Helias, electo ad morandum loco
de Cortona, contra generalem prohibitionem generalis ministri sine licentia
accessit ad loca pauperum dominarum: unde sententiam latam a papa videbatur
incurrisse.”The Italian translation is in FF, 2061. [Engl. trans. in XIIIth Century
Chronicles, trans. by Placid Hermann, OFM. (Chicago, 1961), 156: “After this,
Brother Elias, having chosen the place of Cortona for his dwelling place, went
without permission and against the general prohibition of the minister gernal
to visit the houses of the Poor Ladies; for this reason he seems to have incurred
the sentence of excommunication decreed by the pope.”]
69
See notes 49-53, above, and corresponding text.
70
E. Menestò, “Leone e i compagni di Assisi,” in I compagni di Francesco, 56-
58.
71
G. Andenna, “Federico II e i Mendicanti di Lombardia: dalla collaboazione
allo scontro,” in Federico II e la civiltà comunale nell’Italia del nord, Convegno
internazionale di studio [Pavia, 13-15 ottobre 1994], (Roma: 1999, printed 2001);
see also C. D. Fonseca, “Federico II e gli Ordini Mendicanti,” in Friedrich II.
Tagung des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom im Gedenkjahr 1994,
Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom 85 (Tübingen 1996,)
163-81. A tendency to reduce the importance of the involvement of the
Mendicants in the campaign against Frederick is shown by G. Barone, “La
propaganda antiimperiale nell’Italia federiciana: l’azione degli Ordini
Mendicanti,” in P. Toubert, A. Paravicini Bagliani, eds., Federico II e le città italiane
(Palermo: 1994), 278-89.
72
The edition is in BF I, p. 290; on this text see Grundmann, Movimenti religiosi,
230. [Engl. trans., Religious Movements, 116-17]; Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 204-
06; Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 281-84; and Optatus van
Asseldonk, “Sorores Minores e Chiara d’Assisi,” 416-18.
73
BF I, p. 290: “Ad audientiam nostram noveritis pervenisse quod nonnullae
mulieres per vestras civitates et dioeceses discurrentes se fore de S. Damiani
Ordine mentiuntur, ut et alii suae assertioni mendaci fide crudelitatis accedant,
discalceatae vadunt, habitum et cingulum monialium eiusdem Ordinis et
cordulas deferentes, quas quidem Discalceatas seu Chordularias, alii vero
Minoretas appellant, cum tamen moniales ipsae, ut gratum praestent Deo
famulatum, perpetua sint inclusae.”
74
BF I, p. 290: “Unde quia in eiusdem Ordinis confusionem ac derogationem
Ordinis fratrum Minorum et ipsorum fratrum scandalum ac monialium
earumdem praedictarum mulierum religio simulata redundat, universitati
vestrae per apostolica scripta praecipiendo mandamus quatenus mulieres ipsas
ad abiiecendum cum eiusdem cingulis et chordulis huiusmodi habitum,
monitione praemissa per censuram ecclesiasticam, cum super hoc requisiti

fueritis, appellatione postposita, compellatis.”
75
Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 283.
76
G. Gonnet, “La donna presso i movimenti pauperistico-evangelici,” in
Movimento religioso femminile, 103-129; a general framework for the spread of
heresy is offered by G. G. Merlo, Eretici ed eresie medievali.
77
The edition is in Alberzoni, Francescanesimo, 219-20; Thomson, “Checklist,”
n. 883 indicates the earlier edition of Sevesi, which however contains some
lacunae.
78
The reference to these documents can be found in Agathange de Paris,
“L’origine et la fondation des monastères de Clarisses en Aquitaine au XIIIe
siècle,” CF 25 (1955): 7, note 7 (Thomson, “Checklist”).
79
This copy was published in BF I, 541 (Thomson, “Checklist,” n. 1252); see
also Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 282.
80
The document, unpublished, is noted by Agathange de Paris, “L’origine et
la fondation,” 7, note 7 (Thomson, “Checklist”).
81
Thomson, “Checklist,” n. 1400.
82
BF II, 183-84 (Thomson, “Checklist,” n. 2300); a useful framework can be
found in Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 304-06.
83
BF II, 1p. 84: “Sane, sicut nuper a viris accepimus fide dignis quaedam
mulierculae interius oneratae peccatis, foris tamen sanctitatis, cuius virtutem
prorsus abnegant, speciem pretendentes.”
84
BF II, p.184: “Cum harum rector Sathanas tenebrarum se frequenter in
lucis angelum transfigurans, sequaces innumeros per erroris devia post se
trahat . . .;” see Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 282.
85
BF II, p. 184: “Nec hiis contentae, ad dampnationis suae cumulum quo
liberius suam valeant malitiam in oculis hominum palliare, Ordinis Sancti
Damiani, cuius dignae memoriae sanctus confessor Christi Franciscus primus
cultor extitit et plantator, se velle monasteria eiusdem Ordinis construere.”
86
BF II, 184: “Se velle monasteria eiusdem Ordinis construere profitentes,
super ipsorum fundatione litteras a nobis impetrant, tacita veritate, unde
frequenter accidit ut per tales nomen sororum minorum, quod nec ipsis etiam
sororibus Ordinis Sancti Damiani ex regula seu vite formula competit, sibi fallaciter
usurpantes, infamiae nubilo dilectorum filiorum fratrum Minorum Ordinis
puritas obfuscetor” (emphasis added).
87
BF II, 184: “Ne memoratum Ordinem, quem sincere diligimus et gaudemus
utiliter promoveri famae suae, contingat de cetero pro talibus incurrere
detrimentum.”
88
The edition is in BF I, pp. 476-83; and, more recently, in Omaechevarría,
Escritos, 242-64. [Engl. trans., CAED, 114-28.] See also Rusconi, “L’espansione,”
289-90.
89
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 242-43: “. . . quia divina vobis gratia inspirante,
per arduam viam et arctam, quae ad vitam ducit, incedere elegistis, vestris piis
precibus inclinati, beati Francisci regulam quantum ad tria tantum, videlicet
oboedientiam, abdicationem proprii in speciali et perpetuam castitatem, necnon
formam vivendi praesentibus annotatam, secundum quam specialiter vivere
decrevistis, vobis et iis, quae successerint, concedimus observandam.” [Engl.
trans., CAED, 114: Because you have chosen under the inspiration of divine
grace to travel the hard and narrow path that leads to life, we, acceding to your
pious prayers, grant to you and those who come after you the observance of
the Rule of Saint Francis with respect to the three (counsels), namely obedience,
the renunciation of property in particular, and perpetual chastity, as well as
the Form of Life written in the present document, according to which you
have particularly decided to live. By doing so we establish by our apostolic
authority that it be observed for all times in every monastery of your Order.”]
90
BF I, pp. 241-42 (De conditore omnium, May 9, 1238): “. . . sicut in
modernorum speculo beato Francisco gloriantes in Domino contemplamur,
qui (. . .) commissae sibi desuper gerendo fideliter legationis officium, Patris
aeterni Filio grande lucrum attulit animarum, institutis per ipsum specie
stigmatum redemptoris, sicut pluribus dignis fide patuit insignitum, per orbis
latitudinem tribus Ordinibus, in quibus per dies singulos conctipotens redditur
multipliciter gloriosus. Intus enim quasi tribus propaginibus invite contentis,
quas coram se per somnium pincerna Pharaonis inspexit, fratrum Ordinis
minorum, Sororum inclusarum et Poenitentium collegia designantur. . . .” [Engl.
trans., CAED, 370: “Just as We, glorying in the Lord, contemplate Blessed Francis
as the mirror for our contemporaries, who . . . brought a grand increase of souls
to the Son of the eternal Father when he instituted Three Orders throughout
the breath of the world, in which during every single day the All powerful is
rendered glorious in many ways. For within, as if unwilling satisfied with the
three branches, which the cup bearer of Pharaoh saw before himself in a dream,
associations of the Order of Friars Minor, of the cloistered Sisters, and of Penitents
were designed. . . .”]. It is noteworthy that in the anonymous Vita Gregorii
papae IX, 575, the fatherhood of the three Orders is expressly attributed to
Hugolino-Gregory IX: “Cujus officii tempore Poenitentium fratrum et
Dominarum inclusarum novos instituit Ordines, et ad summum usque provexit.
Minorum etiam Ordinem intra initia sub limite incerto vagantem novae regulae
traditione direxit, et informavit informem.” [Engl. trans., FAED I, 603: “At the
time of his office he established and brought to completion the new orders of
the Brothers of Penance and of the Cloistered Ladies. He also gave form to the
yet unorganized Order of Minors, which in its early stages was wandering about
without definite bounds, by providing them with a new Rule.”]
91
San Damiano’s being included among the Hugolinian monasteries is attested
by the letter of Cardinal Raynaldus of August 18, 1228 (see note 49, above, and
corresponding text). The reasons that led Clare to accept the requests of Gregory
IX, who for his part guaranteed by the privilegium paupertatis a kind of autonomy
to the Assisi monastery are sketched by Alberzoni, Chiara e il papato, 52-62. For
the contacts between Clare and Agnes of Bohemia, especially in regard to the
problem of the rule, see A. Marini, “Ancilla Christi,” 115-20, and, by the same
author, “Chiara e Agnese,” Chiara e la Diffusione Della Clarisse nel secolo XIII,
121-32.
92
M. Bartoli, “Gregorio IX e il movimento penitenziale,” 59.
93
Chiara d’Assisi. Scritti, 152-53; see also J.-F. Godet, “Claire et la vie au féminin.
Symbole de femme dans ses écrits,” Laurentianum 32 (1990): 173-74. [Engl.
trans., Clare of Assisi, a Woman’s Life: Symbols of the Feminine in her Writings
(Chicago: Haversack, 1991), 63-65.]
94
On this firm attitude on the part of Clare, I would refer to the interesting
observations of R. Rusconi, “Chiara d’Assisi e la negazione del potere,” 51.
95
See Chapter 1, 51-53. See also the study by Marini, in Chiara e la Diffusione
Della Clarisse nel secolo XIII, 121-32. [Engl. trans., CAED, 371-74.]
96
BF I, p. 243: “Nos quidem ad rationis consilium recurrentes ex diversis
causis expedire non vidimus quod id ad complementi gratiam [that is, to follow
the forma vitae composed by Francis for San Damiano] duceremus. Primo quia
praedictam regulam [the forma vitae of Hugolino], studio compositam vigilanti
et acceptatam a praedicto Sancto nec non per felicis recordationis Honorium
Papam praedecessorem nostrum postmodum confirmatam, dictae Clara et
sorores, concesso ipsis ab eodem intercedentibus nobis exemptionis privilegio,
solemniter sunt professae.” [Engl. trans, CAED, 372-73: “We did not for various
reasons deem it expedient to give it the full stamp of approval: first, because
Clare and her Sisters had the privilege of exemption which was given to them
by Pope Honorius at our request, and they solemnly professed that Rule which
was composed with careful zeal and accepted by St. Francis, and afterwards
confirmed by the same Pope Honorius, Our predecessor of happy memory;
secondly, because Clare and her Sisters put aside the formua and have been
observing the same Rule in a laudable manner from the time of their profession
until present.]
97
Even more significant are some expressions of the Hugolinian forma vitae,
repeated verbatim in the opening of the document containing the rule of
Innocent of August 6, 1247: “Cum omnis vera religio et vitae institutio approbata
certis constet regulis et mensuris, certis constet legibus disciplinae; quisquis
religiosam ducere vitam cupit, nisi certam atque rectam conversationis suae
regulam disciplinamque vivendi observare studuerit diligenter, eo ipso a
rectitudine deviat, quo rectitudinis lineas non observat; et ibi deficiendi incurrit
periculum, ubi per discretionis virtutem certum ac stabile proficiendi collocare
neglexit fundamentum.” (Omaechevarría, Escritos, 218 and 242). [Engl. trans.,
CAED, 114: “Every true Religion and approved institute of life endures by certain
rules and requirements, and by certain disciplinary laws. Unless each sister has
diligently striven to observe a certain correct rule and discipline for living, she
will deviate from righteousness to the degree that she does not observe the
guidelines of righteousness. She runs the risk of falling at the point where, in
virtue of her free choice, she neglected to set for herself a sure and stable
foundation for making progress.”] See the comment of Gennaro, “Il
francescanesimo femminile,” 276.
98
BF I, p. 56: Ex parte dilectarum (September 30, 1250); there is a mention in
99
BF I, p. 556: “ . . . quod quaedam mulieres per tuam civitatem et dioecesim
discurrentes se fore ipsius ordinis mentiuntur et, ut alii suae assertioni majori
fide credulitatis accedant, discalceatae vadunt, habitum et cingulum monialium
ejusdem Ordinis, vel chordulas deferentes.”
100
BF I, p. 556: “Cum autem praedictae abbatissa et moniales, ut gratum
praestent Domino famulatum, perpetuo sint inclusae, et in ejusdem Ordinis
confusionem ac dictarum abbatissae et sororum praedictarum mulierum religio
simulata redundet, praefatae abbatissa et sorores nobis humiliter supplicarunt,
ut providere ipsis super hoc de benignitate sedis apostolicae curaremus.”
101
Andenna, “Le Clarisse nel Novarese,” 185-267.
102
Andenna, “Le Clarisse nel Novarese,” 206-07.
103
Andenna, “Le Clarisse nel Novarese,” 208-16; there is some mention of
the episode also in Alberzoni, “L’Ordine di S. Damiano in Lombardia,” 147-50.
104
John was originally from the Po region, where, as we have seen, there
were strong forces within the Order toward its “monasticizing” or “cleri-
calizing,” as well as a firm position regarding forms of women’s religious life
that were not regulated by the papal see, as would seem to be confirmed by the
cases mentioned above, at note 63, with corresponding text, and by the fact
that the most numerous papal interventions in regard to the sorores minores
were aimed precisely at this region. See note 76, above, and corresponding
text.
105
See the letters with the telling incipit, Petitio vestra: July 8, 1252: BF I, p
619; August 18, 1255: BF II, p. 67; December 29, 1256: Alberzoni,
“Francescanesimo a Milano,” 226-27.
106
G. Penco, “Alcuni aspetti di rapport tra le prime comunità di Clarisse e le
monache Benedettine,” Benedictina 34 (1987): 15-23. The case of Novara,
mentioned above, is notable: there, as we saw, the jurisdiction of the monastery
returned temporarily to the abbot of Cluny.
107
The importance of that constitution for the religious life, at least until the
Second Council of Lyons in 1274, has been analyzed by M. Maccarrone, Studi
su Innocenzo III, 307-27; and, by the same author, “Lateranense IV, concilio,” in
DIP V (Rome: 1978), cols. 477-80 and 490-95; now in his “Le costituzioni del
IV Concilio lateranense sui religiosi,” in R. Lambertini, ed., Nuovi studi su
Innocenzo III, Nuovi studi storici 25 (Rome: 1995).
108
Confirmation of the bonds among San Vittore all’Olmo, San Francesco of
Piacenza and the monastery of Novarra can be found in interesting details of a
case submitted in June 1255 to the judgment of Friar Bresciano, master of the
hospital of Brolo in Milan, and to Domenico Burro, master of the hospital of

San Celso, also of Milan (Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Carte pagensi, n. 1845).
The decision put an end to the demands of the heir or a donor, who in 1246
precisely had made a considerable donation to three of his daughters, dedicated
in the monastery of Sant’Apollinare; but the rent had been exchanged by the
abbess of Sant’Apolllinare and was finally donated anew to the syndic of
Sant’Apollinare, who received it in the name of Cecilia of Rocca Sarzana, abbess
of the monastery of San Pietro in Novara. It seems that the rent originally
donated was to have been administered according to the will of Friar Matteo di
Canzo, of the Order of Friars Minor, since one Caracosa de Canzo was among
the religious women of San Vittore all’Olmo in 1246, it is not improbable that
the rights enjoyed by the abbess of Novara, until 1252 the head of the Piacenza
monastery, were related to a common administration of the two communities
(San Vittore all’Olmo and Piacenza) carried out by Federico della Torre. See
Alberzoni, “Francescanesimo a Milano,” 68-69 and 161-62; and my “L’Ordine
di S. Damiano in Lombardia,” 142-45.
109
In fact, in August of 1251 Innocent IV set at 70 the maximum number of
nuns who could reside in the monastery of Sant’Apollinare (Alberzoni,
“Francescanesimo a Milano,” 70 and 202).
110
J. M. Canivez, Statuta II, 366, n. 32: this concerns a disposition of 1251.
111
Archivio di Stato di Milano, pergamene per fondi, cart. 195, doc. 1249
ottobre 17; in another parchment of December 19, 1250, the religious women
are identified as “de ultra Abdua que stant in domo fratrum Minorum.” I thank
Dr. Guido Cariboni who with the greatest courtesy has communicated this
interesting information.
112
Archivio di Stato di Milano, Archivio diplomatico, Pergamene per fondi,
cart. 345 (1245 giugno 18); the matters concerning a grange given to monastery
of Cerreto at the beginning of the thirteenth century are carefully examined
by G. Cariboni, “Documenti ignoti o poco noti intorn a Barbata, curtis del
monastero bresciano di S. Giulia,” Rendiconti dell’Istituto lombardo Accademia di
Scienze e lettere Classe di Lettere e Scienze Morali e Storiche 129 (1995): 27-49.
113
See notes 5-7, above, and corresponding text; Rusconi, “L’espansione,”
308-09.
114
On the genesis of that rule, there are useful indications in Oliger, “De
origine regularum,” 436-39, basically repeated in Gratien de Paris, History, vol.
3, 740-42. There is also a mention in Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 292. There are
no additional new elements in the basic notices by A. Blasucci, “Clarisse
isabelliane o Minoresse,” in DIP II (Rome: 1975), col. 1146 and, by the same
author, “Isabella di Francia, beata,” in DIP V (Rome: 1978), cols. 17-18. A rapid
overview, with analysis of some important passages of the rule of Isabelle
compared with that of Clare (with whom it is otherwise difficult to discern a
“family resemblance”) is found in Omaechevarría, Escritos, 294-97.
115
Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 437: these were “viri (. . .) probi et probati
ac theologiae magistri, quales erant frater Bonaventura, frater Guilielmus de
Milletonne, frater Odo de Roni, frater Godefridus de Vierson et frater Guilielmus
de Harcombour.”
116
The rule approved by Alexander IV has been published, based on an original
found by Father Sbaraglia in the archive of the friary of Santa Croce in Florence,
in BF III, pp. 64-68 (contrary to the assertion of Oliger, “De origine regularum,”
437: “cuius tamen diploma non superest.”) This text is the basis of the edition
in Omaechevarría, Escritos, 294-329.
117
BF II, pp. 477-86: see the comparison of the two texts outlined in
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 296-97.
118
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 300: “Urbanus episcopus servus servorum Dei
dilectis in Christo filiabus . . . abbatissae et conventui sororum Minorum
monasterii Humilitatis beatae Mariae Parisiensis dioecesis salutem et apostolicam
benedictionem.”
119
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 299-300: “Quam utique regulam a praedicto loco
volumus sortiri vocabulum, ut quae ipsam professae fuerint nuncupentur
Sorores Ordinis humilium Ancillarum beatissimae Virginis gloriosae.”
120
In reality the terminology used by Hugolino and then repeated in the
course of his pontificate is that of pauperes moniales inclusae, as may be easily
grasped from the copy of the forma vitae addressed on April 12, 1228 to the
monastery of Pamplona: “ . . . formam et modum vivendi, quem adhuc in
minori officio constituti, dum in Tusciae et Lombardiae partibus legationis
officio fungeremur, universis Pauperibus monialibus reclusis tradidimus . . .”
(Omaechevarría, Escritos, 217). [Engl. trans., CAED, 90: “. . . form and manner
of living which we delivered to all the Poor Cloistered Nuns when in a lesser
rank we were performing the duties of Legate in parts of Tuscany and Lombardy.
. .”.] Innocent IV also used the terms moniales inclusae, as in the inscriptio of the
letter with which he sent the rule of 1247: “Innocentius episcopus servus
servorum Dei dilectis in Christo filiabus universis abbatissis et monialibus
inclusis Ordinis Sancti Damiani,” (Omaechevarría, Escritos, 242). [Engl. trans.,
CAED, 114: “Innocent, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his beloved
daughters in Christ, all the abbesses and enclosed nuns of the Order of Saint
Damian, health and apostolic blessing”] while Clare, in the rule of 1253 seems
rather to prefer Ordo sororum pauperum: “Forma vitae Ordinis sororum pauperum,
quam beatus Franciscus instituit, haec est. . . ”. (Omaechevarría, Escritos, 273).
[Engl. trans., CAED, 64: “The form of life of the Order of the Poor Sisters that
Blessed Francis established is this . . .”]. But we should note that in the letters
written by Cardinal Raynaldus and by Innocent IV for the approval of that
same rule, the terminology is different again: “Innocentius episcopus servus
servorum Dei dilectis in Christo filiabus Clarae abbatissae, aliisque sororibus
monasterii Sancti Damiano Assisinatis” (Omaechevarría, Escritos, 271). [Engl.
trans., CAED, 63: “Innocent, Bishop, Servant of the servants of God, to his
beloved daughters in Christ, Clare, Abbess, and the other sisters of the monastery
of San Damiano in Assisi.”] and “Raynaldus, miseratione divine Ostiensis et

Velletrensis episcopus charissimae sibi in Christo matri et filiae dominae Clarae,
abbatissae Sancti Damiani Assisinatis eiusque sororibus tam praesentibus quam
futuris” (Omaechevarría, Escritos, 272). [Engl. trans., CAED, 63: “Raynaldus by
divine mercy Bishop of Ostia and Velletri, to his most dear mother and daughter
in Christ, the Lady Clare, Abbless of San Damiano in Assisi, and to her sisters,
both present and to come.”]
121
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 300: “Sane felicis recordationis Alexander papa
praedecessor noster carissimi in Christo filii nostri . . . regis Franciae
supplicationibus condescendens omnibus Christi ancillis a saeculo fugientibus
et in vestro monasterio Humilitatis beatae Mariae vocabulo insignito in quo,
tunc de novo constructo, nemo adhuc, ut dicitur, morabatur, professionem
facientibus, regulam infrascriptam in eodem monasterio perpetuis temporibus
observandam, cum Sororum inclusarum vocabulo nuncupandam, concessit.
Porro ex parte dicti regis nobis fuit humiliter supplicatum ut dictam regulam,
in aliquibus capitulis corrigi facientes, nominationi eius Minorum vocabulum
adicere de benignitate apostolica dignaremur.”
122
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 300-01: “Nos igitur, eiusdem regis precibus
inclinati, regulam ipsam per dilectum filium nostrum Simonem tituli Sanctae
Ceciliae cardinalem corrigi facientes et, ut sicut re ita et nomine, praesertim
cum idem monasterium, sicut praemittitur, titulum Humilitatis beatae Mariae
sibi adscripsit, eiusdem humilitatis possit profectibus insigniri, nuncupationi
eiusdem regulae dictum Minorum adicientes vocabulum, duximus statuendum
ut regula ipsa Sororum minorum inclusarum de cetero nominetur, et servetur
perpetuo in praetacto [praefacto?] monasterio et in aliis monasteriis de cetero
fundandis seu plantandis, in quibus sorores eandem regulam profiteri contigerit,
sic correcta.” Simon of Brion was also French, and had been created cardinal of
the title of Santa Cecilia by Urban IV in 1262. See A. Paravicini Bagliani,
“Cardinali di curia,” 537.
123
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 304: “Ego tali soror promitto Deo et Beatae Mariae
semper virgini et omnibus sanctis in manibus vestris, Mater, vivere sub regula
a domino Alexandro papa IV Ordini nostro concessa, toto tempore vitae meae,
in oboedentia, castitate ac sine proprio, et etiam sub clausura, secundum quod
per eandem regulam ordinatur.”
124
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 244: “Ego talis soror promitto Deo et beatae Mariae
semper virgini, beato Francisco et omnibus sanctis, servare perpetuam
oboedientiam secundum regulam et formam vivendi a sede apostolica Ordini
nostro traditam, vivendo toto tempore vitae meae sine proprio et in castitate.”
[Engl. trans., CAED, 115: “I, sister N., promise to God, to the ever blessed Virgin
Mary, to Saint Francis, and to all the saints, to observe perpetual obedience
according to the Rule and Form of Life given to your Order by the Apostolic
See, by living all the days of my life without anything of my own, and in
chastity.”]
125
The solemn letter of canonization, Clara claris praeclara, is from September-
October 1255. The edition is in Lazzeri, “Il processo di canonizzazione,” 172-
82, the basis also for that in Omaechevarría, Escritos, 115-27. The Minorite
Order, however, only during the chapter of Genoa (1260) introduced the
celebration of the feast in the sanctorale of the Order: see Bartoli, Clare of Assisi,
199; G. La Grasta, “La canonizzazione,” 317-24.
126
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 304: “Ego talis soror promitto Deo et beatae Mariae
semper Virgini et beato Francisco et omnibus sanctis, in manibus vestris, mater,
vivere secundum regulam a domino Alexandro papa IV Ordini nostro
concessam, prout a domino Urbano papa IV est correcta et approbata, toto
tempore vitae meae, in oboedientia et castitate ac sine proprio, et etiam sub
clausura secundum quod per eandem regulam ordinatur” [“I, Sister N., promise
God and the Most Blessed Mary ever Virgin, and Blessed Francis and all the
Saints, in your hands, Mother, to live during the whole time of my life according
to the Rule given to our Order by the Lord Pope Alexander IV, as it has been
corrected and approved by the Lord Pope Urban IV, in obedience, in chastity
and without property, and also in enclosure as the same Rule enjoins”].
127
Bartoli Langeli, “Tavola Rotonda,” in Movimento religioso femminile e
francescanesimo, 353.
Chapter 4
The Papacy and

New Women’s Religious Orders
The first decades of the thirteenth century mark a decisive

moment in the evolution of forms of religious life and even for
the very definition and consolidation of the concept of “reli-
gious Order” in the sense that we still give the term.1
This idea was already noted by Grundmann, who for this
reason, in his well-known volume on the religious movements
of the Middle Ages, gave special emphasis to the pontificate of
Innocent and those immediately after it. In this he was the first
to give a thorough consideration of the attitude of the pontiffs
of the first half of the 1200s to what he called “the women’s
religious movement.”2 Grundmann’s methodological choice3
helped to overcome the historiographical approach followed
by quite credible specialists and scholars such as Oliger,4 Lazzeri,5
Father Gratien,6 Scheeben,7 Koudelka,8 and Vicaire,9 to name
but a few. They examined many valuable sources with compe-
tence and, more importantly, published them. However, they
remained in some sense prisoners of the conviction that the
saintly founders of the mendicant Orders, specifically Dominic
and Francis, played a very great role in the origins of those
groups that in the course of the 1200s would become new ex-
pressions of religious life for women.10
There are also essays available that study the history of
women’s monasticism in the middle centuries of the Middle
Ages. Among these we should note: the work of Jean Leclercq,
fruit of a presentation given at the Assisi Meeting in 1979;11

Edith Pàsztor in the prestigious volume, Dall’eremo al cenobio,12
as well as in the proceedings of the meeting held at Città di
Castello on the occasion of the eighth centenary of the birth of
Francis;13 Kaspar Elm;14 or again, with particular attention to
juridical aspects this time, the volume of de Fontette.15
Within the framework of historiography focused on forms of
religious life developed by women, we should also note that
the so-called “women’s Franciscanism” has received greater at-
tention, thanks especially to the presentations made at the
meetings organized by the Società internazionale di studi
francescani, notably the one held in 1979, in which, among
others, those of Raoul Manselli16 and Roberto Rusconi17 stand
out. The latter study in particular – later taken up and ampli-
fied for Italian regions by Anna Benvenuti18 – offered an inno-
vative approach. By using careful periodization, marked by pre-
cise institutional changes, it broke through the narrow limits
of a “women’s Franciscanism” seen as the exclusive result of
the activities of exponents of the Order of Friars Minor or by
sociae of Clare indefatigably committed to the reform or foun-
dation of monasteries, and cautioned against a reconstruction
of the origins modelled on institutional outcomes. The inter-
pretative approach proposed by Rusconi has encouraged a broad
rethinking, not only of matters concerning the institutional
placement of the monasticism linked to Clare of Assisi, but also
of the relations among Clare, her community, and the Roman
Church.19
With no pretext of thoroughly addressing such a vast prob-
lem, the following exposition will give particular study to pon-
tifical documentation. This, in fact, represents a privileged ob-
servation point, since it was precisely the popes, in tandem
with the college of cardinals or some of its members,20 who
promoted the most important initiatives aimed at giving birth
to new experiments in religious life for women.
THE PAPACY AND THE NEW WOMEN RELIGIOUS ORDERS 157
Until the End of the 12th Century
First of all we should recall that until the end of the twelfth
century there really is no such thing as women’s religious Or-
ders: that means that the religious life for women was orga-
nized in strict dependence on individual men’s monasteries or
congregations (as in the case of the Cluniacs21 and the monas-
teries that depended on communities that were reformed start-
ing in the eleventh century) or was under the responsibility of
the bishop, something that signalled the adoption of locally
approved norms.22 In the course of the twelfth century there
were attempts to respond in a novel way to the need for a frame-
work for women’s religious life. We need only think of the
founding of double monasteries at Fontevraud and Prémontré,23
or those based on the initiative of Gilbert of Sempringham.
Their institutional organization however must have soon proved
to be rather fragile, if we consider that as early as 1147 Gilbert
had tried to aggregate his monasteries to the Cistercian Order,24
and that from the 1140s on the Premonstratensians were try-
ing to limit the entrance of sorores and conversae into their
houses.25 In fact, in May of 1198 they obtained papal confir-
mation of the decision in this regard made by the chapter of
Premonstratensian abbots.26 This led Grundmann to think that
the canons of St. Norbert had tried to “exclude [women] from
the Order altogether.”27 In reality it seems more plausible that
the aim of the Premonstratensians’ decision was to end the
custom of double monasteries and, to this end, in 1198 they
forbade the incorporation of new women’s communities into
the Order, limiting themselves to maintaining the cura of those
who were already part of it. This information is confirmed in
the chapter “De non recipiendis sororibus” of the Premon-
stratensian statutes of the 1230s, in which they specify that
religious women should not be received except in the loca “ab
antiquo recipiendis cantantibus sororibus deputata.”28
In the opinion of Jacques de Vitry, that decision was one of
the causes that made the number of Cistercian women’s foun-
dations grow disproportionately, especially in countries beyond
the Alps.29 In reality, it was not until 1213 that the general chap-
ter of the Cistercians made any decisions regarding the moniales

incorporated into the Order. Until then, the presence of
women’s monasteries must not have presented a significant
problem for the Cistercians’ more consolidated structure.30
At that time the Cistercians were the only Order in the juridi-
cal sense of the term,31 and the papal see sought to extend their
model to all religious groups, in particular concerning the prac-
tice of canonical visitation and the annual general chapter. Af-
ter the basically unsuccessful results of regional chapters con-
voked for exempt monasteries in 1202-1203, the initiative was
refined and reproposed in Constitution 12 of the Fourth Lateran
Council (In singulis regnis).32
Until the dawn of the 1200s, therefore, there were no ordines
composed entirely of women. Confirmation of this fact can be
seen in the Historia occidentalis, composed at the beginning of
the thirteenth century, in which Jacques de Vitry dedicates a
good twenty-one of the thirty-eight chapters of the work to
describing the forms of religious life existing at that time, yet
he mentions moniales on only two occasions, and then pre-
cisely in regard to Cistercian and Premonstratensian nuns and,
it is worth noting, only after speaking of the men’s branch of
the two Orders.33 He also mentions other possibilities of
women’s religious life recognized by ecclesiastical authority
when he speaks of the Humiliati and the hospitaller communi-
ties, but it is significant that, even in the 1220s, he makes abso-
lutely no mention of a women’s component linked to the Fri-
ars Minor, or to the Canons of Bologna (as he calls the Preach-
ers).34 Yet in his work, even though it is quite sensitive to re-
newal in the western Church, there is not even a specific treat-
ment of the mulieres religiosae living in community, including
the Beguines, who were surely familiar to Jacques de Vitry, and
for whom he had great esteem. This indicates, therefore, an
interesting fact about the ways of understanding and classify-
ing forms of religious life (the religiones),35 among which, evi-
dently, those groups of women that were in some sense “au-
tonomous” could not be included.
Novelties of the 13th Century
The fact is that at the beginning of the thirteenth century

not only did Orders not exist – except for the Cistercians, as
has already been noted – but also the term ordo was still being
used in a rather uncertain sense.36 In the papal documents of
the twelfth century the term ordo can be found, but it is usually
accompanied by the adjective canonicus or monasticus; the beati
Augustini regula was always connected with the ordo canonicus
and the beati Benedicti regula (rarely that of Basil) with the ordo
monasticus.37 Thus we can observe its very broad usage, still quite
far from the later more precise definitions introduced by canon
law.38 The refining of the terminology began with the famous
Constitution 13 of Lateran IV (Ne nimia religionum).39 This Con-
stitution does not use the term ordo, but it does speak of regula
and institutio, the latter a term that, although it can be found
in papal documents of the twelfth century, still did not have a
univocal meaning.40 Previously consuetudines were understood
as the free interpretation of the elements that characterized
the ordo, while at this point institutio began to be used to mean
forms of religious life that were juridically well defined by means
of the compilation of statutes.41 Maccarrone has further em-
phasized that “the legislation of Lateran IV made a great con-
tribution to making the law of religious become pontifical law,”42
limiting the powers of bishops in promoting new forms of reli-
gious life. Perhaps a significant proof of this change is to be
found in the fact that, from the beginning of Innocent III’s
pontificate, the term ordo would be used increasingly to indi-
cate the new forms of religious life approved by the pontiff.
After the eleventh-century reform the papacy became the
center of the Church, and to it were referred appeals that had
previously been resolved at the local level. Thus the pontiffs
found themselves playing an increasingly decisive role in giv-
ing form to various religious experiences. An eloquent example
is offered by the itinerant preachers of Robert of Arbrissel and
Norbert of Xanten. They had already demonstrated a tendency
to turn to the papal see for recognition of their apostolate, which
evidently went beyond the confines of a single diocese.43 Waldo
and his companions took a similar initiative, as did some rep-

resentatives of the Humiliati, who went to the Roman Curia
on the occasion of the Third Lateran Council.44
Especially with Innocent III, furthermore, there seems to be a
growing emphasis in the Roman Curia on a kind of “spiritual-
ity of reform” of religious life, which, as Christoph Egger45 and
Fiona Robb46 have recently hypothesized, drew on the theory
and the practice of Joachim of Fiore, and was spread and sup-
ported by personages held in great esteem by the pontiff, such
as Ranerius of Ponza.
It is not possible here to examine the new approvals granted
by Innocent III, for which the enduring point of reference re-
main the studies of Michele Maccarrone and Franco Dal Pino.47
However, we may pause to reflect on the use of the term ordo.
In the documents of Innocent III it is used only to designate
the Trinitarians, in 1198,48 and the Humiliati, in 1201,49 while
that term is not found, for example, in the approval of the
canons regular of St. Mark of Mantua in July, 1207.50 And it is
precisely the Humiliati, for whose approval Innocent III ex-
pressly mentions the intervention of Ranerius of Ponza together
with that of two other cardinals,51 who represent the first ex-
ample of an Order that is also a women’s Order, inasmuch as
within the Order from the very beginnings the presence of
sorores was taken for granted, as can be gathered not only from
dispositions in the rule, but also from the norms regulating the
election of superiors of individual houses, an election in which
the women religious also took part.52
Innocent III
If, therefore, until the beginning of the thirteenth century

there were no religious Orders in the modern understanding of
the term, with the exception of the Cistercians, much less were
there any made up exclusively of women. Therefore, it may be
useful to consider some of the more significant steps that marked
their birth and development.
An important step along the road leading from an apprecia-
tion of the diversity of expressions of religious life within the
Church – as Innocent III was still writing in the Licet multitudini

addressed to the Humiliati in December 120053 – to their juridi-
cal regulation is represented by the papal attempt to create a
unifying reorganization of the life of the women religious liv-
ing in the city of Rome.54 Innocent III, in regard to the monas-
tery being built next to the church of San Sisto, acts like a bishop
within his diocese, even if the radical nature of the project
undertaken cannot make us exclude the possibility that the
pope was planning to provide a model for similar reforms to be
promoted in other dioceses.55 The unique element in Innocent’s
plan was the strict enclosure,56 along with the possibility of
organizing the new foundation according to canonically ap-
proved norms and limiting the problem of divergent customs
that were difficult to oversee.57 The papal plan contains the
basic directions of the concept of reform of women’s monasti-
cism, which will remain constant throughout the whole thir-
teenth century.58
Particularly in what concerns the adoption of strict enclo-
sure, we should note that already in the “double” congrega-
tions – Gilbertines and Premonstratensians – in the course of
the twelfth century dispositions were introduced to guarantee
the absolute separation of the religious of the two sexes, norms
that basically translated into the reclusion of the nuns.59 In the
years prior to Lateran IV the Cistercian Order also moved in
that direction, imposing on the women’s monasteries linked
to it, from 1213 on, the observance of a rigid enclosure, which,
significantly, was defined as inclusio.60 This requirement actu-
ally became the conditio sine qua non for a community of nuns
to be admitted to the Order or to remain incorporated in it.61
Perhaps in consideration of the regime of strict enclosure to
which religious women were subject, Innocent III had entrusted
to the Gilbertines the church of San Sisto, next to which the
new foundation was to be born and, in January of 1202, he
proceeded to canonize Gilbert of Sempringham.62 Death pre-
vented Innocent III from bringing to a conclusion the work he
had begun, but the project was taken up again and implemented
by Honorius III.
Honorius III
Beginning with the pontificate of Honorius III, the Roman

Curia began to play a role of primary importance in the elabo-
ration of new institutional models for women’s religious life.
In this regard we should note that historiography has been in
some way conditioned by hagiographical reconstructions of the
saintly “founders,” in particular Francis and Dominic. Follow-
ing the direction indicated by Grundmann, it is now possible
to attempt some clarification that would recognize the influ-
ence of papal interventions: it is precisely through these that it
is possible to identify the phases of an important and intelli-
gent process of construction. Its principal actors (without de-
tracting from the greatness and uniqueness of the saints in
question) were the pontiff and, with him, some representatives
of the college of cardinals.
Let us consider first of all the events of the years 1217 and
1218.
Honorius III had ascended the papal throne only a few months
earlier when, in January, 1217, he entrusted to Cardinal
Hugolino of Ostia his first legation in the territories of today’s
north-central Italy, with the goal of ending the wars among
cities in the region and channeling the considerable economic
and military resources of the communes toward the undertak-
ing overseas.63 It was in Florence, in the course of this legation,
that the famous meeting between Francis and the cardinal, to
which Thomas of Celano alludes in the Vita prima, would have
taken place.64 In the presence of the cardinal, moreover, a meet-
ing between Francis and Dominic would have taken place.65
These are interesting pieces of evidence about the primary role
played by Hugolino – certainly with the pope’s consent – in
establishing, and then in maintaining, contacts with the two
future “founders.” Beginning in 1217, in fact, such occasions
for meeting become more frequent.66
At the beginning of 1218 Dominic was in Rome as procura-
tor of the friars who lived in the monastery of Prouille, for whom
he obtained from Honorius III, on March 30, 1218, a solemn
privilege, undersigned by Hugolino, among others.67 By means
of it the men’s community was structured according to the ordo

canonicus and the rule of St. Augustine, as had already hap-
pened at Saint Romain in Toulouse.68
According to the hagiographical account, which Koudelka
essentially repeats, Dominic was lodging at San Sisto during
his time in Rome and, taking note of the state of abandonment
of the religious life practiced there, decided to act, as he had
already done at Prouille.69 It seems more plausible to hypoth-
esize that both Honorius and Hugolino had begun negotiations
with Dominic during his stay in Rome in view of obtaining his
collaboration and that of his friars in solving the problem of
the cura monialium of the universale coenobium. And Dominic
probably saw his offer to assume responsibility for the papal
project as a counterpart to obtaining the privilege.
Still, in March, 1218, Hugolino, in the name of the apostolic
see and by means of a delegate, accepted the donation of a
piece of land on the hill of Monticelli near Florence, to which
Avvegnente di Albizzo and other sorores were to move.70 From
May, 1218, until the end of August, 1219, the cardinal of Ostia
carried out a new legation in the north-central areas of the Ital-
ian peninsula. During this time, on July 18, 1218, he accepted
from Glotto di Monaldo the donation of a piece of land at
Monteluce “in pertinentiis Perusine civitatis.”71 Then, on the
following July 31, while Hugolino was at Perugia, and in his
presence, the bishop of that city, Giovanni, granted exemption
to the religious women, reserving the payment of one pound
of wax annually on the Feast of the Assumption of the Virgin.72
At this point the cardinal turned to the pontiff to obtain au-
thorization to start monasteries directly subject to the Apos-
tolic See from the time of their foundation. This marks a new
practice, in some way anticipated by the granting of the lands
of Monticelli and Monteluce directly to Hugolino. With the
Litterae tuae nobis of August 27, 1218, in fact, Honorius III
charged his legate with receiving “in jus et proprietatem” of the
Roman Church donations of lands on which were to be founded
women’s monasteries directly subject to the pope – or, as we
might say today, monasteries “of pontifical right.”73 The de-
clared intent of this procedure was to prevent the intervention
of those who might have been able in some way to prevent the
execution of the women’s poverty-based plan,74 so that
Hugolino and Honorius III emerge as the only ones involved
in any discussion of requests from these new women’s commu-
nities desirous of embracing a poor lifestyle.75 In this regard,
however, it is definitely necessary to reframe the communis opinio
which sees the purpose of these donations to the Roman Church
as guaranteeing the communal poverty of the individual mon-
asteries.76 The donations should rather be considered as the
indispensable premise for guaranteeing their direct subjection
to the Church of Rome, which at this time was particularly
intent on furnishing a radical solution to the problem of
women’s religious life.77
The Roman Curia and Cardinal Hugolino
If the basis for papal intervention in the organization of reli-

gious life for women was established by Litterae tuae nobis, other
events of considerable importance also took place during Au-
gust of 1218 that would influence later developments at the
monastery of San Sisto in Rome.
In order to be able to entrust Dominic and his friars with
the cura of the nuns who were to arrive in the universale
coenobium the Gilbertines had to renounce their care of the
basilica of San Sisto. Precisely in August, 1218, taking advan-
tage of the visit to the Roman Curia of the two procurators of
Sempringham, Honorius III presented to the prior of the Or-
der the problem of serving the church of San Sisto, defined at
that time as being “servitoribus debitis viduata.” By the follow-
ing feast of Christmas the prior was to send four friars to it,
who would dedicate themselves to introducing there the
“instituta vestri Ordinis.” Otherwise – the pope could now say
– he would entrust it to persons of another Order.78 The reply
of the representatives of Sempringham’s prior did not arrive
until the beginning of November, 1219, and it was negative;
the Order stated that it was in no condition to send to San
Sisto religious with the requisite qualities as the pope had
asked. As a consequence, in December, 1219, Honorius III ab-
solved the aforementioned friars of their pastoral duties at

that church, made it independent of Sempringham79 and,
within a few days, turned it over to the friars and sisters of
Prouille, Fanjeaux and Limoux, announcing to them his in-
tention to grant to Dominic and the friars of his Order the
church of San Sisto. Together with the announcement came
an invitation to the religious of those houses to make them-
selves available to respond to requests Dominic would make
to provide suitable religious for the Roman foundation.80 In
the course of negotiations, Dominic was at the Curia, from
which, as Koudelka also notes, in a brief period he received an
impressive number of letters for himself and his friars.81 Ac-
cepting the cura of the monastery of San Sisto was therefore
adequately rewarded by the granting of papal privileges.
The activity carried out by the pontiff and the Curia in those
months can be connected with Cardinal Hugolino’s initiative.
In July, 1219, at the end of his legation and on the way back to
the papal curia, he formally founded four new women’s com-
munities.82 I will not dwell here on the events surrounding the
foundations of Monticelli, Lucca, Siena and Perugia. In July,
1219, each of them received a document of exemption with
the incipit “Prudentis virginibus,” by which the cardinal, in addi-
tion to making them exempt from the authority of the bishop,
assigned to them a juridical organization, that is, an approved
rule (that of Benedict), to which he added the institutiones
regulares, that is, the forma vitae composed by Hugolino him-
self, and which has come down to us in a version from 1228.83
It was based on the principles of traditional monastic life, to
which was added the obligation of reclusion.
In December, 1219, Honorius III on one front ratified the
transfer of San Sisto to Dominic and his friars, while on an-
other he acted to consolidate the initiative of his legate in re-
gard to the recently founded monasteries. In fact, replying to a
request from Avvegnente, whom the papal document refers to
as the abbatissa, he confirmed Hugolino’s document for
Monticelli by a letter with the incipit of “Sacrosancta Romana
Ecclesia,” while Hugolino’s other three contemporary founda-
tions did not receive papal confirmation until three years later.84
The particular character of this Florentine foundation has al-
ready been pointed out. Along with the beati Benedicti regula it
was also to follow not only the forma vitae of Hugolino, but
also the religious observances “juxta Ordinem dominarum Sanctae
Mariae de Sancto Damiano de Assisio,” which, the cardinal stated,
he had approved (“quas . . . ratas habemus”).85 The difference in
the timing of the papal approval is probably due to the fact
that the community of Monticelli, headed by Avvegnente di
Albizzo, a representative of the city’s aristocracy, had already
been organized along the model of San Damiano before the
cardinal of Ostia had prepared his own forma vitae.86
In the context of this presentation, the use of the term ordo
in reference to San Damiano takes on particular significance,
all the more so since such terminology was contained in
Hugolino’s document of July, 1219. This is an interesting con-
firmation of the fact that as late as this date, ordo must have
signified merely a set of customs followed in a certain house.87
However, we should emphasize an important difference be-
tween the initiative entrusted to Dominic and his friars by the
papal curia and that which Hugolino had undertaken, hoping
perhaps to obtain the collaboration of the Cistercians. If, in
fact, the case of San Sisto concerned the reform of a single
monastery according to models tested by monasticism up to
that time, the first Hugolinian monasteries rather represented
founding something “from scratch,” although they were in
many respects modelled on Cistercian monasticism.88 And that
is not all. For the “refounding” of San Sisto, Honorius III began
by solving the thorniest problem, that is, identifying who would
guarantee the cura of the women religious. That, in substance,
amounted to their incorporation into the Order of Friars
Preacher, that is, creating a situation not much different from
that of the double monasteries of Prémontré or Sempringham,
one that, furthermore, had already been tried in Prouille and
Madrid.
The new Hugolinian monasteries, however, had no precise
institutional point of reference in a men’s congregation. If it is
probable that the visitatio was entrusted to frater Ambrose, one
of Hugolino’s chaplains generally held to be a Cistercian, it is,
however, unlikely that he alone could really provide for the
cura of the nuns, since this was quite a task, especially because
of the total reclusion to which they were subject.89 It is very
probable that already in 1219 Hugolino sought to resolve this
problem by involving the Friars Minor, and here we may find
the explanation of the controversy about Brother Philip Longo.90
If the cardinal indeed states in the document for Monticelli of
July, 1219, that he had approved the observances of San
Damiano, that implied some previous contact, a contact that
could have been assured by Brother Philip, to whom Francis
had entrusted the care of Clare and her sisters before departing
for the East. Hugolino, therefore, could have guaranteed ap-
proval for the style of life (ordo) of San Damiano in exchange
for the help of Philip and the other fratres in the cura of the
monasteries that had been recently established, for which he,
in any case, maintained ultimate responsibility.91 Furthermore,
it is certainly worth noting that as long as Francis was alive
Hugolino, and Honorius III with him, did not make any bind-
ing decisions for the Order of Friars Minor in regard to the cura
monialium, an aspect that cannot fail to reflect the profound
significance of Francis’s well-attested opposition to requesting
privileges from the Roman Curia.92
Perhaps it was in relation to the involvement of Brother
Ambrose in the cura of the new monasteries that the General
Chapter of the Cistercian Order determined that no additional
women’s abbeys were to be incorporated into the Order. On
the same occasion the obligation of the strictest enclosure for
Cistercian nuns is further reaffirmed; those who had not ob-
served that disposition were to be deprived of the custodia of
the Order.93 This did not prevent a good number of women’s
monasteries from still being incorporated into the Order in the
following years, either by means of what we might call excep-
tion or by other methods.94
In February, 1221, women’s religious life began at the mon-
astery of San Sisto with the arrival of some religious women
from other foundations in Rome – an event that did not occur
without some strong resistance95 – and a community of friars
was established in the monastery. In April, probably in the com-
pany of Foulques of Toulouse, the women religious of Prouille
arrived in Rome. Tthey were to “shape” the monastery, intro-

ducing there their own institutiones.96 We may note that
Honorius III named a commission of cardinals to assist Dominic
in carrying out the delicate task of beginning the new founda-
tion and giving it a solid legal structure.
Besides Hugolino of Ostia, this commission included two
Cistercian cardinals, Stefano of Fossanova, cardinal priest of
the Twelve Apostles, and Niccolò of Tuscolo.97 The role of the
representatives of the college of cardinals was not merely for-
mal, as was once believed. We should not forget that Dominic,
like Francis, became a saint post mortem. When cardinals were
placed alongside them in various roles, these men were clearly
subordinates in relation to prelates of such high state, even
though later hagiography presents them as great friends and
admirers of the future saints.98 Without the work of Dominic
religious life at San Sisto would probably not have become a
reality, but this does not mean we should underestimate the
cardinals’ contribution in giving institutional shape to the new
religious foundation, a shape that was probably not lacking in
elements typical of Cistercian monasticism.
In 1221 Hugolino, grappling with the last of his important
legations in the north-central regions, had his chancery pre-
pare in advance a formulary that was to serve as a model for
bishops who had authorized in their dioceses the founding of
monasteries exempt from the time of their foundation, and for
this reason not just under the protection of the Roman Church
but directly subject to it. I will not dwell here on this well-
known document except to note that in it, for the first time,
Hugolino’s project took on a name: “religio pauperum dominarum
de Valle Spoleti sive Tuscia.” The religious women lived accord-
ing to the forma vitae given to them by Hugolino himself, and
the monasteries of this religio were those of Perugia, Siena and
Lucca.99
Furthermore, in August of 1221, at Bologna, where Hugolino
was also staying, Dominic died,100 and difficulties immediately
arose about accepting new women’s communities into the Or-
der. First among them was the community gathered around
Diana of Andalò, who in August, 1219, had made her religious

profession in the church of the Preachers in Bologna.101
At this point, perhaps due as well to the resistance of the
Friars Preacher, who evidently did not intend to develop as a
double Order, the papacy intensified its initiative, which it had
undertaken independently. Between 1221 and 1228 at least fif-
teen women’s monasteries belonging to the new religio founded
by Hugolino sprang up.102 During the pontificate of Honorius
III these were not linked to any men’s religious Order, but their
care was maintained by the cardinal of Ostia himself, who in a
document of 1224 is specifically mentioned as provisor et rector
of the monasteries of the Ordo de Spolito by papal mandate.103
This aspect merits some attention, since it reveals a telling trait
of the new concept of “religious Order” which the Roman Cu-
ria, and Hugolino in particular, were constructing. The cardi-
nal of Ostia in fact maintained ultimate responsibility for all
the new women’s monasteries founded by initiative of the Ap-
ostolic See and directly subject to it.104 This was necessary for it
to exercise effective control over all the foundations, following
as well as perfecting the model offered by the Order of Cîteaux,
since during the pontificate of Innocent that Order showed
signs of crisis.105 In women’s monastic tradition there was noth-
ing similar to the Cistercian chapter or, much less, a general
superior. The solution implemented by Hugolino, then, was
that of maintaining for himself, both as cardinal and founder,
the leadership of the whole “religio pauperum dominarum de Valle
Spoleti sive Tuscia,” since this still lacked a precise institutional
point of reference and, consequently, its own leadership.
This role carried out by Hugolino in regard to the new religio
was to confer on him even greater authority within the Curia,
so that in the summer of 1220, when Francis returned from the
East, he approached Honorius III to ask that the cardinal of
Ostia carry out a similar responsibility in regard to the Friars
Minor, at that time experiencing a profound crisis. The impres-
sion we get is that the so-called cardinal protector of the Friars
Minor – Hugolino himself – in reality functioned as a point of
institutional reference in a moment of severe difficulty for the
young Order, which still did not have legislation approved by
the Apostolic See.106 In such a context it is perhaps possible to

evaluate more fully the reasons behind Francis’s decision to
quit the leadership of the Friars Minor, a decision he put into
action in the course of the chapter held in the autumn of 1220,
when the presence of Hugolino in fact replaced, from a juridi-
cal point of view, the charismatic one of the founder.107
Once he assumed a precise function in regard to Francis and
his religio, the cardinal of Ostia could rely on the collaboration
of some Minorites in carrying out responsibilities for the cura
of his nuns. The friars were entrusted by the cardinal – prob-
ably individually – to assist him in the work he had under-
taken. This could help to explain the work of Philip Longo,
mentioned earlier, in regard to the Hugolinian monasteries, or
that of Leo of Perego, who in 1224 intervened at Verona and
Milan to support the plan for normalization, in a Hugolinian
sense, of the two women’s communities that began there un-
der the influence of the Minors, who evidently had publicized
the San Damiano experience.108 This must have been the case
also with Brother Pacifico, who from July, 1227, to August, 1228,
filled the role of visitator of the pauperes dominae,109 for whom,
in most cases, the only point of institutional reference contin-
ued to be the Rule of Benedict and the forma vitae of Hugolino.
Gregory IX and the Order of San Damiano
The basic turning-point for the history of new women’s Or-

ders came with Hugolino’s ascent to the papal throne in March,
1227.110 From this moment on the effort to structure new reli-
gious communities in a rigidly juridical form became ever more
evident in the action of the papacy. Indications of this approach
are found in the repeated interventions of the new pontiff in
regard to the Humiliati between April and June of 1227. Per-
haps as a consequence of that undertaking’s lack of success,
beginning in that same year Gregory IX’s efforts turned espe-
cially toward the mendicant Orders. We have already outlined
the process by which the papacy managed to give substantially
unified juridical shape to the Friars Preacher and Friars Minor.111
Here we may note that the new women’s monasticism was in-
volved in this process of evolution and this, in turn, influenced

the decisions of the men’s Orders.
In December of 1227, in fact, Gregory IX could finally give
an institutional form to the cura monialium carried out by Fri-
ars Minor for monasteries he had founded. With Quoties cordis
the pope entrusted to the minister general of the Order, simply
by virtue of obedience, the task of assisting the Pauperes moniales
inclusae, thus establishing a precise juridical bond between the
two Orders.112
For its part the General Chapter of the Order of Preachers,
celebrated in Paris in May, 1228, rigorously forbade any initia-
tive of individual friars in regard to nuns or, more generally, in
regard to any mulier who wished to dedicate herself to the reli-
gious life.113 This measure was probably taken to prevent the
establishment of precedents that could become the basis for
later incorporation of entire communities into the Order.
The General Chapter of the Cistercians in 1228 also reaffirmed
and specified the prohibition against future incorporation of
women’s monasteries into the Order, adding a significant clause,
according to which the monks would not be held responsible
even for those religious communities that had been allowed to
follow the Cistercian customs.114 On the same occasion, fur-
thermore, the obligation of strict enclosure for the religious
women was reaffirmed, specifying that those who did not wish
to accept the norms on reclusion were to consider themselves
separated from the Order.115
If up to this point it has been possible to follow as if on “par-
allel tracks” the events concerning the women’s component in
various ways linked to the two mendicant Orders, from 1228
onwards their stories follow diverging paths. The monasteries
we may define as “papal” will continue to be an Order unto
themselves, under varying circumstances attached to the Mi-
nors. The Preachers, for their part, precisely in consequence of
the “traditional” origin of the reform of San Sisto – that is, the
process was that of the reform of pre-existing foundations and
their incorporation into a men’s community – would have to
deal with a women’s component organized by the papacy, but
within the men’s Order. Given these profound differences in
origins, our observations will now move predominantly to the

Hugolinian monasteries in order to show how they were struc-
tured into an Ordo.
In this process the negotations carried out between July and
August, 1228, between the papacy, Cardinal Raynaldus of Jenne
and Clare assume special importance, aimed as they were to
moving the San Damiano community toward incorporation
into Hugolinian monasticism.116 If on the one hand that at-
tempt was inspired by the desire to give greater uniformity to
the diverse expressions of women’s religious life, on the other
hand we should not forget that the canonization of Francis
offered the opportunity to establish a more specific bond be-
tween the new saint and Clare’s community, and, through it,
with all the monasteries directly subject to the Church of Rome.
These certainly could boast of an appropriate juridical struc-
ture, but they lacked a charismatic consecration. That bonding
was effected, despite Clare’s resistance, and with the privilegium
paupertatis of September, 1228, San Damiano gained recogni-
tion of its unique status.117 But this happened only after Cardi-
nal Raynaldus, succeeding Gregory IX as the cardinal charged
in the preceding August with the cura of papal monasteries,
had announced to twenty-four paupera monasteria (with San
Damiano heading the list) his appointment to that position,
and the assumption of the office of visitator by Brother Philip
Longo.118
At that date, and following those dispositions, the institu-
tional leap, if we may use the term, was accomplished; and the
pope had all reason to believe that one phase of his program
was concluded. One sign of this is that Gregory IX began to
export the new religious Order beyond the Italian peninsula.119
We may note that in the letter of Cardinal Raynaldus of
Sant’Eustachio of August, 1228, the terminology of Ordo Sancti
Damiani was not yet used, a denomination that would not nor-
mally be used for the Hugolinian monasteries until 1235.120
Thus, a new concept of Order was being delineated, one that
no longer meant just the collection of liturgical customs or the
form of life proper to one or more religious houses. The use of
the term by the Roman Curia rather implies the meaning of a
confederation of monasteries following a single set of legisla-

tion, on the basis of which they could be defined as a unified
entity. Observance was now connected seamlessly to consis-
tency in the corporate-juridical sense.121 This is a line of devel-
opment that the pontiff pursued first and foremost with mon-
asteries he had established, but one which the old monastic
congregations – here we may mention Cluny122 and Fruttuaria123
– were also induced to accept, in light of new legislation that
gave them a centralized physiognomy, appropriate to new le-
gal criteria, tending to a uniform character of religious life.124
In the same years the “double” monasteries belonging to the
Order of Preachers officially remained only Prouille, Madrid
and Rome. Within what must be considered a great effort at
organization and clarification from a juridical point of view, it
is also quite interesting to note that the institutiones of San Sisto,
precisely those drafted for the Roman monastery incorporated
into the Order of Preachers since 1221,125 from the 1230s on
came to be called at times the “Order of San Sisto.”126 In this
case the use of the term ordo diverges from definitions like that
of the “Order of San Damiano,” used for the women’s monas-
teries that the papacy sought to connect to the Friars Minor,
since the “Order of San Sisto” did not so much signify a spe-
cific institutional reality as a form of life approved by the Church
of Rome and, for this reason itself, one that could be extended
to a network of monasteries, for which it became a source of
recognition and unification.127
For this reason in 1232 the customs or the ordo of San Sisto
were adopted, by papal directive, by the German monasteries
of the Order of Penance of Saint Mary Magdalene.128 This was,
in fact, a form of life approved by the Papal See, one which
could be adapted and revised as needed, without the monas-
teries in question being able to pose objections, so that now,
on the basis on this form of life, it was possible to define a style
of religious life.
The Second Order of Saint Francis
Having examined the steps leading to the formation of the

Order of San Damiano – that is, of the first exclusively women’s
Order in the modern sense of the word – we will now briefly
consider what we may define as the “construction” of the sec-
ond Order of St. Francis. We must immediately point out that
the definition “women’s Franciscanism” does not necessarily
refer only to the Order of San Damiano, since even beyond the
middle of the thirteenth century we can note a significant pres-
ence of Sorores Minores, that is, of communities of women who
already in the 1220s were living religious life after the example
of the fraternitas of Francis, and in strict dependence on it.
Among these groups, which cannot be defined except in rela-
tion to the experience of the Friars Minor, we must place the
monastery of San Damiano.129
In 1228 Gregory IX and cardinal Raynaldus had certainly
succeeded in getting Clare’s community to become part of
Hugolinian monasticism, but these women had significant res-
ervations about completely identifying with the juridical struc-
ture of the new ordo depending on the Church of Rome. These
reservations find expression in the privilegium paupertatis. Clare
and her sisters, like Diana of Andalò and her community on
another front, simply considered themselves, respectively, as
part of the Order of Friars Minor or the Friars Preacher. As a
consequence, for them a juridical solution that did not some-
how guarantee their complete integration within the new men’s
Orders was unacceptable.130 They were still linked to the image
of what we may define as a “symbiotic unity” with the men’s
component, while the papacy was trying to pave the way to-
wards a “juridical unity,” that is, one regulated by the norms of
canon law, between the women’s communities and the reli-
gious men who had assumed their cura.131
When Brother Elias was named minister general of the Order
of Friars Minor in 1232, Clare found a strong support for enact-
ing the “symbiotic” program she had been pursuing, and es-
sentially she was guaranteed effective membership in the Or-
der of Minors at least until 1239.132
However, that is not all. Probably with Elias’s support, or by

his initiative, a plan was conceived to extend the model of
women’s religious life practiced at San Damiano, encouraging
its connection to the prestigious monastery of Prague, formed
in 1233 by nuns coming from Trent,133 and which Agnes of
Bohemia entered in 1234, immediately being named abbess.
In that same year Agnes, evidently knowing about the particu-
lar life-style observed at San Damiano, contacted Clare, express-
ing her desire to introduce in her community the forma vitae
established by Francis for the religious women of Assisi.134 In
this plight the point of reference for Clare and Elias was the
memory of Francis and the instructions he left to the sisters of
San Damiano. In fact, the clarifications Agnes requested from
Clare focus on those instructions, evidently in view of their
adoption by the Prague monastery.135 Gregory IX was explicitly
asked to authorize the change of Agnes’s community into the
“Clarian” direction, a question of no little importance if we
remember that this request was backed by the king of Bohemia,
Agnes’s brother. The pope therefore had to take a position on
the matter, especially because the spread of such desires would
gravely compromise the unity of his “Order” that continued to
be an objective of prime importance for the pontiff.136 Gregory
IX thus set out on a bold defense of the forma vitae he had
composed, and of the Order of San Damiano, which in this
period, at least implicitly, was actually being set up in opposi-
tion to what Francis had chosen to establish. This was in con-
trast with the papal plan, which had identified precisely in
Francis’s sainthood a unifying and formative center for his
monasticism.
In this context two papal letters, dated May 9 and 11, 1238,
respectively, allow us to observe the unfolding of the pontiff’s
plan to organize the Order of San Damiano. The second of these
letters, Angelis gaudium, has been the object of the careful study
of Alfonso Marini, who rightly has pointed out the signs of
disagreement existing between Agnes and Gregory IX, specifi-
cally in relation to the forma vitae that the religious women of
Prague intended to follow. In it the pope actually stated that he
was against the adoption of the formula attributed to Francis,
defined as milk for newborns, in contrast with the solid food

offered by the Hugolinian rule, which was essentially being
imposed on Agnes and her community.137 The pontiff did not
stop at this difficult refusal, but offered a threefold justification
for it: first, he asserted that his regula had been composed “stu-
dio vigilanti,” then accepted by Francis himself, and confirmed
by Honorius III. Secondly, from the time of their profession
Clare and her community had also observed the regula of
Hugolino. Finally, since it was determined that all the nuns of
the Order of San Damiano would follow that same rule, any
exception in that area would be a cause of scandal and prompt
doubt among the religious.138 Gregory IX, therefore, sought to
clear the field of further interventions by an anonymous zealot,
though one lacking the necessary competence, presumably
identified as Elias, who might have been able to convince Agnes
to persist in her request, something that Gregory IX consid-
ered absolutely unacceptable, since – as he rather curtly noted
– the formula of Francis had not been approved by the Apos-
tolic See, and even Clare and the other sisters did not observe
it.139 Here we have an interesting confirmation that, after the
Fourth Lateran Council, it was only papal approval that sup-
plied the juridical grounds for the assumption of a specific set
of legislation.
Considering the dogmatic tone of this letter, perhaps we can
explain the high praise of the choice of life made by Agnes, as
can be found in the missive of just two days earlier, De conditoris
omnium.140 In that letter the pontiff invited the abbess of Prague
to follow the example of saintly monks and, in particular, among
those closer in time, Francis, to whom was entrusted an impor-
tant task, defined here as legationis officium. Marked by the gift
of the stigmata – the pontiff continues – Francis brought great
advantage to souls by establishing three Orders, thanks to which
every day praises are raised to God. Gregory IX at this point
specifies the names of the three Orders established by Francis:
“Fratrum Ordo Minorum, Sororum inclusarum et Poenitentium
collegia,” showing that this fact was a significant corollary with
the persons of the Blessed Trinity.141 As Marco Bartoli has al-
ready noted, this is the first official mention of Francis as founder
of the three Orders, information that, while full of profound

theological significance, is completely opposite of what is pre-
sented in the life of Gregory IX, which states that he juridically
organized and consolidated that of the Friars Minor.142
Gregory IX’s firm stance against the requests of the powerful
abbess of Prague – requests probably enjoying the support also
of a part of the Order of Friars Minor and Clare herself – may
perhaps be explained by the pontiff’s choice to see what we
might call the “alternative” position as contrasting with the
plan he was pursuing for the new Order, entering into the merit
of the arguments put forward by Agnes and by those who were
supporting her in this course of action. If, in fact, Francis was
the founder of the sorores inclusae, why seek to choose a way of
life different from that approved by the saint himself, not to
mention by the Apostolic See? This presupposition, then, was
important for giving greater cohesiveness and strength to the
young Order: if the women religious did not have a saint as
their foundress there was still the example of Francis, and from
the time of Quo elongati, Gregory IX did not hesitate to define
himself as Francis’s friend and the interpreter of his true
intentio.143 If, on the one hand, the decision to attribute the
founding of the Order of San Damiano to Francis himself al-
lowed Gregory IX to lend greater authority to the recent reli-
gious foundation,144 while, on the other hand, besides reveal-
ing the pontiff’s disappointment over the internal disagreements
within the Order of Friars Minor and Clare’s opposition, the
aim of such arguments was to discourage the enemy, effectively
counterattacking on their own territory.
Attributing to Francis the founding of three distinct Orders
also had an important institutional aspect. If Clare and her sis-
ters were convinced that they belonged to the Order of Friars
Minor and, as such, were to receive the assistance of the fri-
ars,145 in this way they were rather placed in the “second” Or-
der – in a subordinate position – while united to the Friars Mi-
nor by a precise spiritual and structural bond.
A similar process did not occur in the case of the religious
women linked to the Order of Preachers. If in 1226 Diana of
Andalò and her sisters of Sant’Agnese in Bologna could still
claim that they had made profession “secundum ordinem Fratrum

Predicatorum” into the hands of Brother Dominic – and Honorius
III used this argument to remind the Preachers about the re-
sponsibilities they had assumed for the nuns146 – in the 1230s
the papacy’s tendency was to spread, especially among the reli-
gious women of the Germanic region (but from 1245 also in
the kingdom of France), the rule of the Order of San Sisto. Of
itself this would not mean the Friars Preacher were necessarily
involved, but it certainly gives enough reason for believing they
were.147
The birth of the Order of San Damiano and the contempo-
rary spread of the constitutions of San Sisto are further to be
linked to the process of clericalization, which Gregory IX him-
self fostered in the two larger mendicant Orders,148 tending to
make them exclusively men’s Orders. If asked by the papal see,
they would have had to undertake the care of women’s monas-
teries, to which however they were no longer joined in a “sym-
biotic” way, but by responsibilities defined on the basis of canon
law.
Innocent IV
If, therefore, on the one hand Gregory IX sought to give a

charismatic configuration to his Order – now become (though
not yet in terminology) the second Order of St. Francis – by
saying that the saint desired its founding, on the other hand,
beginning in 1238 – the year of the letters to Agnes of Bohemia
mentioned earlier – the pope had the text of his forma vitae
preceded by a significant preamble which contains the essence
of his idea of religious life as he had learned over the course of
twenty years.149 Clara Gennaro has highlighted the difference
between Agnes of Prague’s request to the papal curia and the
ideal of religio espoused by the pontiff in this document.150 In it
he affirms that the basis for every “vera religio et vitae institutio
approbata” consists in well-defined rules, in a specific discipline,
and that whoever decides to embrace religious life, if not faith-
fully following an established and sure rule of life, for this very
reason falls into error.151 To remove any doubt in this regard
and thus to assure the “correct” interpretation of religious life,

Gregory IX, besides recalling the observance of his forma vitae,
ordered the religious women to follow the rule of Benedict,
inasmuch as this was a set of norms adopted from the very
beginning by the holy Fathers and approved by the Church of
Rome. They were obliged to observe it in all that was not op-
posed to the forma vitae he had composed, which they had
received from him, and which was then repeated in full below.
Innocent IV follows the same path so firmly mapped out by
Gregory IX, adding however some necessary clarifications of a
juridical nature.152
A first significant example of this direction is provided by a
letter addressed to Agnes of Bohemia by Innocent IV in No-
vember, 1243. Evidently, even after the deposition of Elias and
the interruption of contacts with Clare, Agnes was still express-
ing her inability to tolerate the forma vitae imposed on her by
Gregory IX.153 The abbess of Prague had expressed her perplex-
ity over the obligation of professing the rule of Benedict and,
perhaps not without a bit of resourcefulness, stated objections
of a strictly juridical character, thus giving a clear sign that she
was well aware of where the papacy was now moving. Specifi-
cally, Agnes told the pontiff that she was afraid of committing
grave sin if she did not observe all the norms included in the
rule of Benedict.154 It actually seemed impossible to her to fol-
low two rules – that of Benedict and the forma vitae of Hugolino
– in one Order. Therefore, Agnes was asking for some modifica-
tions of the text or the elimination of any reference to the rule
of Benedict. Innocent IV, like his predecessor, responded nega-
tively to the requests of the abbess of Prague. What is more, he
made use of the very same reasons already advanced by Gre-
gory IX in Angelis gaudium, and exhorted Agnes, by virtue of
obedience, to hold to the text of the legislation in use. How-
ever, the pope offered an explanation on at least one point,
specifically on the significance of obedience to the rule of
Benedict. This had in fact been proposed for the Order of San
Damiano inasmuch as it was considered quasi praecipua among
the approved rules, so that, through it “vestra religio authentica
redderetur.”155 On the other hand – the pope continued – the
fact that this was mentioned specifically as a juridical guaran-

tee did not mean that it had to be observed in all its parts, since
Cardinal Raynaldus, who was the cardinal charged with the
cura of the Order of San Damiano, had heard Gregory IX state
that the rule of Benedict did not oblige the sisters of his Order
to anything more than obedience, poverty and perpetual chas-
tity.156
Since this papal declaration did not seem to settle the per-
plexities of Agnes of Bohemia or of other monasteries of the
Order, in the new rule for the Order of San Damiano promul-
gated in 1247 – which, as has already been noted, essentially
repeated and updated the Hugolinian forma vitae – the pontiff
removed any reference to the rule of Benedict. Drawing the
necessary conclusions from the statement made by Gregory IX
less than ten years earlier, namely, that Francis was the founder
of the Order of the sorores inclusae, he decreed that henceforth
the rule to follow was the Beati Francisci regula, although this
did not amount to any great change, since even in this case the
observance concerned only the three vows of obedience, pov-
erty and chastity.157
In the same years the Order of Friars Preacher was experienc-
ing a lack of the institutional clarity that had allowed the de-
velopment of the Order of San Damiano. Earlier, numerous
women’s monasteries, especially in Germanic areas, had fol-
lowed the ordo of San Sisto, but this had presupposed their draw-
ing closer to the Dominican Order, a closeness that in juridical
terms came to be defined as commissio, being entrusted to the
Order and not incorporation in it, as it was for the three coenobia
going back to Dominic himself.158 Because from 1245 on a good
number of monasteries came to be incorporated into the Order
of Preachers, it no longer made sense to have the norms fol-
lowed in these still being called the Order of San Sisto. The
work of the master general Humbert of Romans was decisive in
obtaining permission for them to follow the same norms as the
Friars Preacher, with necessary adjustments.159
It is therefore clear that the differing origins of the two most
important monastic reforms based on papal initiative in the
course of the thirteenth century conditioned the institutional
development of the same. Thanks to the presence of even a

recalcitrant Clare and the canonization of Francis, from the
1230s on Gregory IX was able to give form to a new women’s
Order. The Preachers, however, until well beyond the middle
of the century, had to deal with a women’s component “inter-
nal” to the Order, and the solution envisaged was that of com-
plete incorporation, which of itself meant the impossibility of
developing an autonomous women’s Order.
Conclusion
In this regard at least some mention should be made of the

hypothesis of rethinking the solid historiographical image of a
papacy wholly sensitive to the requests of religious women,
actually battling on their side against the mendicant Orders,
which were attempting to rid themselves of a burden that was
becoming increasingly demanding over time.160 Instead of em-
phasizing the conflicts between communities of nuns desiring
spiritual assistance from the Mendicants and the Mendicants
themselves refusing their care, it might be necessary to look at
the problem from a different perspective. The papacy had en-
couraged or increased the founding of new women’s religious
groups in order to give them a set of norms that took into ac-
count requests for reform as well as the new codes of canon
law. When the time came for the pontiffs to find a solution for
assuring the cura of these monasteries, they could not turn to
the already solidly-established monastic or canonical experi-
ences, which already tended towards severing a bond that was
too onerous – what we have called “symbiotic” – linking them
to the women’s component. Then there arose an opportunity
to involve the new Orders, particularly the Minors. The expe-
dient of a cardinal curam gerens of the Order of San Damiano
was to have guaranteed the institutional link between the
women’s monasteries and the Apostolic See. In reality, one of
his most important tasks was that of assuring their cura, plac-
ing it on the Friars Minor. So the nuns were not the principal
agents of the pressing requests in this area addressed to the
Mendicants, but rather the papacy, which naturally used the
religious women’s requests for cura to obtain the decisive inter-

vention of the friars.
So, too, the characteristics marking thirteenth-century
women’s monasticism (the Order of San Damiano first and fore-
most), such as reclusion and the strong emphasis placed on the
contemplative dimension are to be sought in the directives im-
posed by the papacy rather than in a “spirituality” linked to
the mendicant Orders. But these were tendencies which, as early
as the 1230s, were also being affirmed in the more “clericalized”
sectors of the Friars Minor and the Preachers.161
Without pretending to go into later developments in women’s
religious life in the thirteenth century in great detail, let it suf-
fice to say that the generalates of Humbert of Romans and
Bonaventure were fundamentally important for clarifying the
relationships between the religious women and the mendicant
Orders, as Grundmann already pointed out. They managed to
have the papacy recognize their eminently juridical duties in
regard to the moniales, essentially managing to overcome cus-
tomary law in this matter in favor of the new orientations of
canon law, and thus guaranteeing for themselves a greater free-
dom of action.162
In this process the rule of Urban IV (October, 1263) should
be considered because, in addition to finally clarifying the name
of the religious women linked in various ways to the Friars Minor
– made possible by the recent canonization of Clare – it settled
the relationships between the two distinct Orders – the Order
of Friars Minor and the Order of Saint Clare – in terms that
were peremptorily juridical. While still recognizing a common
origin in Francis, they now had two different models of sanc-
tity to follow.163
It was the first pope from the Order of Friars Minor, Nicholas
IV, who made a significant contribution to the legislative ex-
perimentation that the papacy had repeatedly conducted dur-
ing the thirteenth century. To him, in fact, with Supra montem
of 1289, is due the creation of the Third Order Regular.164 The
new set of norms would be the obligatory point of reference
for many women’s communities that were either excluded from
or had not wished to take on the structure of the second Order.
With the creation of the Third Order the great process of or-
ganizing women’s religious life was completed, a process pro-
moted and enacted in the thirteenth century by pontiffs who –
we must not forget – had received a solid juridical formation.
NOTES
1
A careful examination of this process can be found in J. Dubois, “Les ordres
religieux au XIIeme siècle selon la Curie romaine,” in Revue Benedictine 78 (1968):
283-309.
2
H. Grundmann, Religious Movements, 31-32, 89-92. The existence of a Frauen-
bewegung not necessarily related to the apostolate of Francis and the first friars
was highlighted by L. Zarncke, Der Anteil, 27-34.
3
Grundmann, Religious Movements, 5: “In most cases this women’s religious
movement did not create its own autonomous orders, but rather was absorbed
into the women’s houses of the mendicant orders. Research on the history of
Orders has been content to see the initiative of individual founders of orders as
the determining factor in the rise of these female orders, resulting in complete
neglect of the existence of an autonomous, spontaneous religious movement
among women.” Grundmann also emphasized the lack of consideration paid
to the action of the papacy up to that time.
4
L. Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 181-209; 413-47.
5
Z. Lazzeri, “Il processo di canonizzazione di S. Chiara d’Assisi,” in AFH 13
(1920): 403-507.
6
Gratien de Paris, Histoire. This has been reprinted with an updated
bibliography by Mariano d’Alatri, S. Gieben, Bibliotheca seraphico-cappuccina
29 (Rome: 1982). [Engl. trans., History, by Stephen Paul Laliberté, 3 vols.]
7
H. C. Scheeben, “Die Anfänge des zweiten Ordens des hl. Dominikus,” in
Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 2 (1932): 284-315.
8
V. J. Koudelka, “Le ‘Monasterium Tempuli’ et la fondation dominicaine de
San Sisto,” in Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 31 (1961): 5-81.
9
M.-H. Vicaire, Histoire de Saint Dominique (Paris: 1957). The importance and
the limits of Dominican scholarship for the historical reconstruction of the
beginning of the Order are carefully considered by L. Canetti, “Le ultime volontà
di san Domenico. Per la storia dell’Ordo Praedicatorum dal 1221 al 1236,” in
Rivista di storia della Chiesa in Italia 48 (1994):43-44. The essay is now almost
entirely included in the chapter “’Cura mulierum’ Per la storia dell’Ordo
Praedicatorum dal 1221 al 1236,” in his L’invenzione della memoria: Il culto e
l’immagine di Domenico nella storia dei primi frati Predicatori, Società internationale
per lo studio del medioevo latino 19 (Spoleto: 1997), 267-320. The succeeding
citations are taken from the article appearing in Rivista di storia della Chiesa in
Italia, and by G. G. Merlo, “Gli inizi dell’ordine dei Frati Predicatori,” in Rivista
di storia e letteratura religiosa 31 (1995): 415-22.
10
K. Elm, “Franziskus und Dominikus. Wirkungen und Antriebskräfte zweier
Ordensstifter,” in Saeculum 23 (1972): 127-47. On the significance of the role
of foundress attributed to Clare post mortem see G. La Grasta, “La canonizzazione
di Chiara,” in Chiara d’Assisi, Atti dei Convegni della Società internazionale di
studi francescani e del Centro interuniversitario di studi francescani. Nuova
serie, 3 (Spoleto: 1993), 299-324. See also the observations of G. Andenna,
“Urbano IV e l’Ordine delle Clarisse,” in G. Andenna, B. Vetere, eds., Chiara e
la diffusione dell’Ordine delle Clarisse nel secolo XIII (Galatina: 1998), 195-218.
11
J. Leclercq, “Il monachesimo femminile nei secoli XII e XIII,” in Movimento
religioso femminile e francescanesimo nel secolo XIII, Atti dei Convegni della Società
internazionale di studi francescani, 7 (Assisi: 1980), 63-99.
12
E. Pásztor, “Il monachesimo femminile,” in Dall’eremo al cenobio La civiltà
monastica in Italia dalle origini all’età di Dante (Milan: 1987), 155-80.
13
E. Pásztor, “I papi del Duecento e Trecento di fronte alla vita religiosa
femminile,” in R. Rusconi, ed., Il movimento religioso femminile in Umbria nei
secoli XIII-XIV Quaderni del “Centro per il collegamento degli studi medievali
e umanistici nell’Università di Perugia” 12 (Florence: 1984), 31-65.
14
K. Elm, “Die Stellung der Frau in Ordenswesen, Semireligiosentum und
Häresie zur Zeit der heiligen Elisabeth,” in Sankt Elisabeth. Fürstin, Dienerin,
Heilige. Aufsätze, Dokumentation, Katalog (Sigmaringen: 1981), 7-28; and “Le
donne negli Ordini religiosi dei secoli XII e XIII,” in G. Andenna, B. Vetere,
eds., Chiara e il secondo Ordine. Il fenomeno francescano femminile nel Salento,
Saggi e ricerche, 29 (Galatina: 1997), 9-22.
15
M. de Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique du droit canon. Recherches sur
les structures juridiques des branches féminines des Ordres (Paris: 1967).
16
R. Manselli, “La Chiesa e il francescanesimo femminile,” in Movimento reli-
gioso femminile e francescanesimo, 239-61. See also M. Bartoli, “Francescanesi-
mo e il mondo femminile nel XIII secolo,” in Francesco, il francescanesimo e la
cultura della nuova europa (Rome: 1986), 167-80.
17
R. Rusconi, “L’espansione,” in Movimento religioso femminile e francescanesimo,
263-313.
18
A. Benvenuti, “La fortuna del movimento damianita in italia (sec. XIII):
propositi per un censimento da fare,” in Chiara di Assisi, 59-106. A study
dedicated entirely to the northern regions of the Italian peninsula, to which I
refer the reader for further bibliographical indications, is in M. Alberzoni,
“L’Ordine di S. Damiano in Lombardia,” in Rivista di storia della Chiesa in Italia
49 (1995), 1-42 (now, with the same title, in Chiara e il Secondo Ordine, 117-57).
See also L. Pellegrini, “Female Religious Experience and Society in Thirteenth-
Century Italy.” In Monks and Nuns, Saints and Outcasts: Religion in Medieval Society;
Essays in Honor of Lester K. Little. S. Farmer and B. H. Rosenwein, eds. (Cornell
University Press: 2000), 97-122.
19
See the studies by O. van Asseldonk, “Sorores minores Una nuova
impostazione del problema,” in Collectanea franciscana 62 (1992): 595-633 and
“Sorores minores e Chiara d’Assisi a San Damiano Una scelta tra clausura e
lebbrosi?” in CF 63 (1993): 399-420; but particularly W. Maleczek, Klara von
Assisi. Das Privilegium paupertatis Innocenz’ III. und das Testament der Klara von
Assisi. Überlegungen zur Frage ihrer Echtheit (Rome: 1995) (Bibliotheca seraphica-
capuccina 47), 29-39; (Ital. trans. Chiara d’Assisi La questione dell’autenticità del
Privilegium paupertatis e del Testamento, Aleph 4 (Milan: 1996), 45-64. [Engl.
trans., “Questions about the Authenticity of the Privilege of Poverty,” 11-23]
where he has carefully reconsidered the tradition of two of the best-known
texts relative to the history of Clare; see also M. Alberzoni, “Clare of Assisi and
Women’s Franciscanism,” in Greyfriars Review 17.1 (2003): 5-38.
20
On the need to consider the initiatives of the pontiffs without distinguishing
them from those of his closest collaborators – the cardinals, in first place – has
been brought to our attention by W. Maleczek, Petrus Capuanus Kardinal, Legat
am vierten Kreuzzug, Theologe (+1214), Publikationen des historischen Instituts
beim Österreichischen Kulturinstitut in Rom I:8 (Vienna: 1988), 51-53; see also
the contribution by Maleczek, Il Papato Duecentesco e Gli Ordini Mendicanti, Atti
del XXV Convegno internazionale Assisi (Spoleto:1998), 23-80.
21
J. Wollasch, ‘Frauen in der Cluniacensis ecclesia,” in K. Elm, M. Parisse,
eds., Doppelklöster und andere Formem der Symbiose männlicher und weiblicher
Religiosen im Mittelalter, Berliner historische Studien 18. Ordensstudien 8 (Berlin:
1992), 97-113; G. Andenna, “Il monachesimo cluniancense femminile nella
‘Provincia Lumbardie’ dei secoli XI-XIII. Origini, evoluzione dei rapporti politici
con le strutture organizzative dei territori e problematiche economiche e sociali,”
in Cluny in Lombardia, Italia benedettina 1 (Cesena: 1979), 331-61; and “Il
monachesimo cluniacense in Lombardia dalla metà del XIII alla fine del XV
secolo,” in Italia nel quadro dell’espansione europea del monachesimo cluniacense,
Italia benedettina 8 (Cesena: 1985), 221-45.
22
A rich collection of relevant case-law is outlined by A. Benvenuti Papi, ‘In
castro poenitentiae’ Santità e società femminile nell’Italia medievale, Italia sacra,
Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 45 (Rome: 1990); a detailed set of
examples may be found in M. Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in Umbria nei secoli
XIII e XIV: un bizzoccaggio centro-italiano,” in Il movimento religioso femminile
in Umbria, 87-121; a partial version is in D. Bornstein, R. Rusconi, eds., Mistiche
e devote nell’italia tardomedievale, Nuovo Medioevo 40 (Naples: 1992), 57-84.
23
An overview on the foundation of these two monasteries and their first
phase of growth is in Grundmann, Religious Movements, 17-21. See the agile
synthesis with the necessary bibliographical indications by M. Parisse,
“Fontevraud, monastère double,” in Doppelklöster und andere Formen, 135-47,
and De Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique, 13-25; 65-80.
24
G. Jenal, “Doppelklöster und monastische Gesetzgebung im Italien des
frühen und hohen Mittelalters,” in Doppelklöster und andere Formen, 50-51. For
the Gilbertines, besides R. Foreville, G. Keir, eds., The Book of St. Gilbert (Oxford:
1987), xx-xxi and xl-xlii. See R. Foreville, “Naissance d’un ordre double. L’ordre
de Sempringham,” in -R. Gaussin, ed., Naissance et fonctionnement des réseaux
monastiques et canoniaux, Actes du 1er Colloque International du C.E.R.C.O.M.
(Saint-Etienne: 1991), 163-74.
25
A. Erens, “Les soeurs dans l’ordre de Prémontré,” in Analecta Praemonstrat-
ensia 5 (1929): 1-26; F. Lefèvre, Les Statuts de Prémontré réformés sur les ordres de
Grégoire IX et d’Innocent IV au XIIIe siècle, Bibliothèque de la Revue d’histoire
ecclésiastique 23 (Louvain: 1946), x-xviii.
26
O. Hageneder, A. Haidacherer, eds., Die Register Innocenz’ III, I:1,
Pontifikaatsjahr, 1198/99. Texte, Publikationen der Abteilung für historische
Studien des Österreichischen Kulturinstituts in Rom II/1,1, n. 198 (Graz-
Cologne: 1964), 286-87: “olim in communi capitulo statuistis et postmodum
sub interminatione gravis pene sepius innovastis, ut nullam de cetero in sororem
recipere teneamini vel conversam, presertim cum ex hoc aliquando incommoda
fueritis multa perpessi. Nos igitur institutionem ipsam . . . auctoritate apostolica
confirmamus et presenti scripti pagina communimus.”
27
Grundmann, Religious Movements, 78. See in this regard J. F. Hinnebusch,
The Historia occidentalis of Jacques de Vitry A Critical Edition (Fribourg: 1972)
(Spicilegium Friburgense 17), 134-35: “Moniales siquidem adeo incluse infra
septa monasterii tenebantur, quod ad eas nullum hominum patebat ingressus.
. . .Postquam uero fenestras in hostia conuerterunt, et, primo feruore tepescente,
improuida securitas torporem et negligentiam inducere cepit . . . multi utriusque
sexus in limo profundi submersi perierunt. . . .Prudenter igitur, licet sero, in
generali capitulo premonstratenses unanimiter firmauerunt, quod feminas de
cetero in ordine suo non essent recepturi.”
28
Lefèvre, Les Statuts, xi, 112-115 (De receptis sororibus and De non recipiendis
sororibus).
29
On this problem, besides E. G. Krenig, “Mittelalterische Frauenklöster nach
den Konstitutionen von Cîteaux,” in Analecta sacri Ordinis Cisterciensis 10 (1954):
10-15, see Grundmann, Religious Movements, 91-92 and S. Thompson, ‘The
Problem of the Cistercian Nuns in the Twelfth and Early Thirteenth Centuries,”
in D. Baker, ed., Medieval Women (Oxford: 1978), 227-52 (especially 233-42).
Such an interpretation of the facts is based particularly on the evidence of
Jacques de Vitry in the Historia Occidentalis, 117: “Postquam autem
premonstratensis ordinis uiri timorati et religiosi, sapienter attendentes et
familiari exemplo experti quam graue sit et periculosum ipsos custodes custodire,
in domibus ordinis sui feminas iam de cetero non recipere decreuerunt,
multiplicata est sicut stelle celi et excreuit in immensum cysterciensis ordinis
religio sanctimonialium . . . Fundabantur cenobia (. . .) Ex aliis monasteriis
moniales, mutato habitu, ad fructum melioris uite et artioris uie aduolabant.”
30
J. M. Canivez, Statuta capitulorum generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis ab anno
1116 ad annum 1786 I (Louvain: 1933): 405:3. It is thus possible to revise the
communis opinio, according to which at the beginning of the thirteenth century
the Cistericians had been completely closed in regard to nuns, [as Grundmann
also repeated, in Religious Movements, 91-92]. The organization of the Cistercian
women’s monasteries is also discussed by De Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge
classique, 27-63.
31
G. Melville, “’Diversa sunt monasteria et diversa habent institutiones’ Aspetti
delle molteplici forme organizzative dei religiosi nel Medioevo,” in G. Zito,
ed., Chiesa e società in Sicilia I secoli XII-XVI (Turin: 1995), 329: [“With the
Cistercians, at the beginning of the twelfth century, there began a completely
new form of vita religiosa. A broader conception of Ordo came to substitute that
which had previously been common, which was limited to indicating a common
style of life. Observance now came to be connected indivisibly with consistency
in the corporate-juridical sense.”] See also K. Elm, “Orden. I. Begriff und
Geschichte des Ordenswesens,” in Theologische Realenzyclopädie XXV (Berlin/
New York: 1995), 315-30.
32
G. Melville, “Ordensstatuten und allgemeines Kirchenrecht. Eine Skizze
zum 12./13. Jahrhundert,” in Landau, J. Mueller, eds., Proceedings of the Ninth
International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Monumenta iuris canonici, s. C:
Subsidia, 10 (Vatican City: 1997), 691-712. In regard to experimentation
concerning the general chapter for exempt monasteries and subsequent
codification at the Council, see M. Maccarrone, Studi su Innocenzo III, Italia
sacra. Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 17 (Padua: 1972), 226-62; and
his “Le costituzioni del IV concilio lateranense sui religiosi,” in R. Lambertini,
ed., Nuovi studi su Innocenzo III, Nuovi studi storici 25 (Rome: 1995), 19-36. The
text of the constitution is in A. García y García, ed., Constitutiones Concilii quarti
Lateranensis una cum Commentariis Glossatorum, Monumenta iuris canonici, s.
A: Corpus Glossatorum 2 (Vatican City: 1981), 60.
33
Hinnebusch, The Historia Occidentalis, 116-18; 134-35: only the Cisterican
nuns have a chapter about them, while those of Premontré – perhaps because
of a basically negative opinion, sufficient for Jacques to explain the Order’s
attitude, which had managed to separate the houses and now sought to limit
the entrance of religious women – do not receive a separate treatment. Further,
Jacques has words of praise only for the Cistercian women; there is finally a
mention of the “sanctimoniales nigre de Fontevraut” (130).
34
Regarding Jacques de Vitry and his direct knowledge of the first Friars
Preacher, and on the date of composition of the Historia, see Merlo, “Gli inizi
dell’ordine dei Frati Predicatori,” 430-31; and L. Canetti, “Intorno all’’idolo
delle origini:’ la storia dei primi frati Predicatori,” in I frati Predicatori nel
Duecento (Quaderni di storia religiosa 3, 1996), 31-33.
35
Maccarone, “Le costituzioni,” 3: “Oggeto della legislazione del IV concilio
lateranense sono i religiosi, chiamati quasi sempre regulares, con una passaggio
de terminologia sanctito dalla cost. 13, che impone una regola a tutti coloro
che vogliono enterare in ‘religione’.” [“The object of the Fourth Lateran
Council’s legislation is the religious, almost always called regulares, with a change
in terminology sanctioned by Const. 13, which imposes a rule on all those
who want to enter into ‘religion’.”] Examples of the new form that sprang up
in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries are in the essays collected in Religiones
novae, Quaderni di storia religiosa 2 (1995).
36
Dubois, “Les Ordres religieux,” 309; Maccarone, “Le costituzioni,” 41-43;
L. Prosdocimi, “A proposito della terminologia e della natura giuridica delle
norme monastiche e canonicali nei secoli XI e XII,” in La vita comune del clero
nei secoli XI e XII II, Miscellanea del Centro di studi medioevali 3 (Milan: 1962),
1-8. There are some relevant remarks also in A. Boni, “La legislazione clariana
nel contesto giuridico delle sue origini e della sua evoluzione,” in Antonianum
70 (1995): 68-72.
37
Dubois, “Les Ordres religieux,” 285-287: [“After the word Ordo one finds
either canonicus or monasticus (. . .) Three Rules are cited: beati Augustini regula
. . . ordo canonicus; Ordo monasticus is followed most often by beati Benedicti
regulam, but sometimes but beati Basilii regulam”]. The evidence of Jacques de
Vitry is significant (Hinnebusch, The Historia Occidentalis. 111: “Cum igitur a
priscis temporibus in partibus occidentis due tantum fuissent regularium
diuersitates, monachi scilicet nigri sancti Benedicti regulam profitentes, et
canonici albi secundum regulam beati Augustini uiuentes.”)
38
An important confirmation of the semantic polyvalency of the term is
offered also in a passage from Jacques de Vitry (Hinnebusch, The Historia
Occidentalis, 165-166): “Ca XXXIIII: De diuersis secularium personarum
ordinibus. In primo de regula presbyterorum. Non solum hos qui seculo
renunciant et transeunt ad religionem regulares iudicamus, sed et omnes Christi
fideles, sub euangelica regula domino famulantes et ordinate sub uno summo
et supremo abbate uiuentes, possumus dicere regulares . . . .Pari modo proprius
est ordo coniugatoru, alius autem uiduarum et alius uirginum.”
39
Constitutiones, 62; Maccarrone, “Le costituzioni,” 36-45; F. A. Dal Pino, I
frati Servi di s. Maria dalle origini all’approvazione (1233 ca. –1304) I:2: Storiografia-
Fonti-Storia, Recueil de travaux d’histoire et de philologie, 4e série, 49 (Louvain:
1972), 576-77.
40
Maccarrone, “Le costituzioni,” 41.
41
G. Picasso, “’Usus’ e ‘consuetudines’ cluniacensi in Italia,” in L’Italia nel
quadro dell’espansione europea del monachesimo cluniacense, 297-311, besides
noting that the “cosiddette Consuetudines antiquiores in realtà riguardano
soltanto la celebrazione della liturgia” [“so-called Consuetudines antiquiores in
reality concerned only the celebration of the liturgy”] ( 301), notes the absence
of “un testo ufficiale delle medisine, al quale tutti avrebbo potuto far riferimento,
cospiandole, senza dover mandare curiosi indagatori a Cluny per esserne
informati” [“an official text of these, to which all could have made reference,
copying them, without needing to send curious investigators to Cluny to be
informed about them”] ( 303). See also Melville, “Diversa sunt monasteria,”
332-33, and R. Creytens, “Les constitutions primitives des soeurs dominicaines
de Montargis (1250),” in Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 17 (1947), 48-60.
42
Maccarrone, “Le costituzioni,” 45: with Lateran IV we can see “[an extension
of papal jurisdiction over the religious themselves, who in more ancient canon
law, until Gratian, were essentially subject to their diocesan bishop. This is a
process that had already been begun, and Lateran IV marked its decisive turn,
in virtue of which religious, their goods, their activities, are to be ever more in
the hands of the papacy. . . .The legislation of Lateran IV contributed strongly
to making the law of religious pontifical law.”
43
Grundmann, Movimenti religiosi, 48-51; [Engl. trans., Religious Movements,
17-20]. R. Zerfass, Der Streit um die Laienpredigt Eine pastoralgeschichtliche Unter-
suchung zum Verständnis des Predigtamtes und zu seiner Entwicklung im 12. und
13. Jahrhundert (Freiburg i. B.: 1974), 134-35.
44
Grundmann, Movimenti religiosi, 59-65; [Engl. trans., Religious Movements,
25-30]. G. G. Merlo, Eretici ed eresis medievali, Universale paperbacks Il Mulino
230 (Torino: 1989), 49-61.
45
C. Egger, “Papst Innocenz III. als theologe. Beiträge seines Kenkens im
Rahmen der Frühscholastick,” in Archivum historiae pontificiae 30 (1992): 55-
123.
46
F. Robb, “Who hath Chosen the Better Part?” Pope Innocent III and Joachim
of Fiore on the Diverse Forms of Religious Life,” in J. Loades, ed., Monastic
Studies II (Bangor: 1991), 151-70. The ideal of monastic reform proposed by
Joachim is sketched by E. Pásztor, “Gioacchino da fiore, s. Bernardo ed il
monachesimo cisterciense,” in Clio 20 (1984), 547-61. See also E. Wessley,
Joachim of Fiore and Monastic Reform, American University Studies, s. VIII:
Theology and Religion 72 (New York: 1990), together with the useful indications
of G. L. Potestà, “Gioacchino riformatore monastico nel Tractatus de vita sancti
Benedicti e nella coscienza dei primi florensi,” in Florensia 6 (1992), 73-93.
47
Maccarrone, Studi su Innocenzo III, 278-306; Dal Pino, I Frati servi, 551-80.
48
Die Register I, 703-08; it should also be noted that here the use of the term
Ordo is rather ambiguous, as it seems to be synonymous with modus vivendi, or
else it speaks of the churches “istius ordinis,” as it foresees that a year of novitiate
is obligatory before being admitted “in ordine.” We may note that in the last
two cases the expressions are found in the document of approval of the rule of
the Trinitarians, issued conjointly by the bishop of Paris and the abbot of Saint
Victor of that city; the document was inserted whole into the papal letter.
49
The papal documents of approval of the Humiliati, according to their
characteristic three-part division, are in G. Tiraboschi, Vetera humiliatorum
monumenta II (Milan: 1767), 128-48. It is worthy of attention that in these
letters, from the very inscriptio, the term Ordo appears, used to indicate the
entirety of the communities that were to follow the same rule; such terminology
was even applied to the ministers of the lay communities, to whom was
addressed, not a rule, but a propositum.
50
G. B. Mittarelli, A. Costadoni, Annales Camaldulenses IV (Venice: 1759),
cols. 635-638: the letter of approval was addressed to the “dilectis filiis presbytero
Alberto magistro & fratribus sancti Marci.” A significant example of the

ambiguity still borne by the term Ordo is offered by the chancery of Honorius
III, which, in 1218 addressed two letters to the prior and to the canons of San
Marco of Mantua, once calling them “ordinis sancti Augustini,” then “ordinis
ejusdem Sancti,” in reference this time to the title of the church of Mantua,
from which the religious took their name.
51
Robb, “Who hath Chosen the Better Part?” 164-70; the two cardinals were
Pietro Capuano and Graziano Pisano, for whom see W. Maleczek, Papst und
Kardinalskolleg, 117 and 71-73; and his Petrus Capuanus, 115.
52
For the events surrounding the approval of the Humiliati, besides Alberzoni,
“Gli inizi degli Umiliati: una riconsiderazione,” in La conversione alla povertà
nell’Italia dei secoli XII-XIV, Atti dei Convegni dell’Accademia Tudertina e del
Centro di studi sulla spiritualità medievale Nuova serie 4 (Spoleto: 1991), 200-
08, see A. Ambrosioni, Umiliate/i, in DIP VI (Rome: 1997), cols 1489-1507. On
the problem of the participation of the women’s component in the life of the
first Humiliati communities, see M. Alberzoni, “Sub eadem clausura sequestrati”
Uomini e donne nelle prime comunità umiliate lombarde,” in Uomini e donne
in comunità (Quaderni di storia religiosa I, 1994), 69-110. If the norms addressed
to the Humiliati were the first in order of time to foresee a women’s component
within an Order, the letter of approval addressed in January 1207 to the priest
Alberto of Mantua and to the fratres of San Marco of Mantua also contains an
explicit and quite interesting mention of the sorores: “Hanc regulam observare
studebunt sorores Deo devote in suo claustro & oratorio manentes recluse”
(Mittarelli, Costadoni, Annales Camaldulenses, col. 638).
53
PL 214, cols. 921-22; on this letter see Maccarrone, Studi su Innocenzo III,
285-86; Dal Pino, I Frati servi, 559-60; and Alberzoni, Gli inizi degli umiliati,
200-08. The edition of the text is now in Alberzoni, “Die Humiliaten zwischen
Legende und Wirklichkeit,” in Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische
Geschichtsforschung 107 (1999), 324-53. “Sane quia huiusmodi varietas non parit
discordiam mentium, sed concordiam magis generat animorum, non
deformitatem sed decorem inducit, nec reprehenditur sed potius commendatur,
iuxta quod habetur in psalmo: ‘Astitit regina a destris tuis in vestitu deaurato,
circumamicta varietate.’”
54
This process is mentioned by Maccarrone, “Le costituzioni,” 38-39: “La
ragione che muove il papa e il concilio ad introdurre questa rigida disciplina,
che fissa la vita religiosa entro le vecchie istituzioni monastiche e canonicali
rifutando ogni novità, viene enunciata al principi della cost. 13, con l’asserzione
che una eccessiva diversità di ‘religioni’ sarebbe causa di grave confusione nella
Chiesa. Quest’affemazione rappresenta un mutamento rispetto all’idea,
dominante nel sec. XII, che la varietà della vita religiosa era un bene, espressione
della varietà della mistica nuziale della Chiesa sposa di Cristo.”[“The reason
that the pope and the council introduced this rigid discipline, which fixes the
religious life within the old monastic and canonical institutions, rejecting any
innovation, is enunciated at the beginning of Const. 13, with the assertation
that excessive diversity of “religions” would cause grave confusion in the

Church. This affirmation represents a change in regard to the idea that
dominated the twelfth century, that the variety of religious life was something
good, an expression of the mystical bridal gown of the Church, the bride of
Christ”].
55
Maccarrone, Studi su Innocenzo III, 274: “. . . a Roma tutti I monasteri,
sia, maschili, sia femminili erano sotto la giurisdizione immediata del papa,
che poteva disporre di essi nel campo spirituale e materiale, non essendo
protetti de esenzioni e privilegi, neppure rispetto ai cardinali delle chiese
titolari.” [“. . . in Rome all the monasteries, both of men and of women,
were under the immediate jurisdiction of the pope, who could make use of
them in the field of spiritual or material matters, as they were not protected
by exemptions and privileges, even with respect to the cardinals of the titular
churches.”] On Innocent’s initiative, see also B. Bolton, “Daughters of Rome:
All One in Christ Jesus!” in W. J. Sheils, D. Wood, eds., Women in the Church
(Oxford: 1990), 101-15.
56
This characteristic is shown also by the Dominican Benedetto of
Montefiascone in his historical note concerning the foundation and early days
of the monastery of San Sisto, though written at the beginning of the 14th
century: “Nota quod dominus Innocentius papa III monasterium Sancti Sixti
cum devotione animi de bonis Ecclesiae aedificare cepit, ut mulieres Urbis et
moniales aliorum monasteriorum Urbis per diversa vagantes possent ibi sub
arcta clausura et diligenti custodia Domino famulari.” Koudelka, “Le
‘Monasterium Tempuli,’” 69; the passage is cited in Maccarrone, Studi su
Innocenzo III, 276-77.
57
Koudelka, “Le ‘Monasterium Tempuli,’” 44. There is an important constitutio
formulated by Innocent III in December, 1204, designed to guarantee control
over alienation of real estate by women’s monasteries of Rome: “Quia nonnulle
abbatisse cenobiorum Vrbis reverentia divina postposita, utpote proprie saluti
oblite . . . nos eorum indempnitatis, quorum nobis cura specialis imminere,
consulere cupientes, de communi fratrum nostrorum consilio presenti
constitutione decernimus. . . .” Die Register Innocenz’ III., VII:7. Pontifikatsjahr
1204/1205, Texte und Indices, unter der Leitung von O. Hageneder, bearbeitet
von A Sommerlechner, H. Weigl, C. Egger, r. Murauer (Vienna: 1997), n. 167,
294-95.
58
Maccarrone, Studi su Innocenzo III, 275-278; Alberzoni, “Clare of Assisi,” 6-
7.
59
Besides Bolton, Daughters of Rome, 111-12, see the studies cited above at
note 24 (in particular, The Book of St. Gilbert, xliv-lx and Chap. 9, 30-34: De
exordio ordinis de Sempringham et inclusione monialium) and at note 29. See
also the example of the “double” congregation of San Marco, mentioned above
at note 52.
60
Canivez, “Statuta,” I, 405:3: “Item constituitur auctoritate Capituli generalis
ut moniales quae iam etiam incorporatae sunt Ordini, non habeant liberum
egressum, nisi de licentia abbatis sub cuius cura consistunt, quia omnino non
expedit animarum earum. Si quae vero fuerint incorporandae de cetero non
aliter admittantur ad Ordinis unitatem, nisi penitus includendae.”
61
Canivez, “Statuta,” I, 517:4: “Inhibetur auctoritate capituli generalis ne
aliqua abbatia monialium de cetero Ordini incorporetur. Moniales Ordinis nostri
includantur, et, quae includi noluerint, a custodia Ordinis se noverint
eliminatas.”
62
Koudelka, “Le Monasterium Tempuli,” 43-44. The procedure followed in
carrying out the process of canonization of Gilbert is examined by A. Vauchez,
La sainteté en occident aux derniers siècles du Moyen Age d’après les procès de
canonisation et les documents hagiographiques, Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises
d’Athènes et de Rome 241 (Rome: 1981), 44-47. The text of the letter with
which Innocent III guided the process according to new norms is in The Book
of St. Gilbert, 234-36. On criteria for evaluating sanctity as introduced by this
pontiff in the processes of canonization, see R. Paciocco, “’Virtus morum’ e
‘virtus signorum’: La teoria della santità nelle lettere di canonizzazione di
Innocenzo III,” in Nuova rivista storica 70 (1986) : 597-609. It is of some interest
to note that Raniero of Ponza also took part in the papal decision to canonize
Gilbert: see M. Alberzoni, “Raniero da Ponza e la curia romana,” in Florensia 11
(1997): 83-113. De Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique, 97, underlines also
the influence of the rule of Sempringham on the constitutions of San Sisto.
Now see Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 68-69 (notes 93-94).
63
Maleczek, Papst und Kardinalskolleg, 130; the regions concerned in the course
of this legation were Tuscany and Liguria, since one of the principal purposes
was making peace between Pisa and Genoa; concerning the claims of the two
seafaring cities on Sardinia, see W. Maleczek, “Das Frieden stiftende Papsttum
im 12. und 13. Jahrhundert,” in Träger und Instrumentarien des Friedens im hohen
und späten Mittelalter, hrsg. von J. Fried, Vorträge und Forschungen 43
(Sigmaringen: 1996), 306-07; at the turn of 1217 Hugolino was on his return to
Rome.
64
The episode is in 1Cel 74:10-75:6. [Engl. trans., FAED I, 246-247]. This is
also found with significant variations in AC 108, 2 Spe 65 and 1 Spe 36. [Engl.
trans. FAED II, 214; FAED III, 309-10; FAED III, 246]. On this meeting, see E.
Pásztor, “San Francesco e il cardinale Ugolino nella ‘Questione francescana,’”
in CF 46 (1976): 209-17, and the contribution by W. Maleczek, see note 20.
65
2Cel 148-50; the episode is also present in AC 49; Pásztor, San Francesco e il
cardinale, 229-34.
66
Perhaps it is possible to make a precise connection between the contacts
between cardinal Hugolino and Dominic and that which has been defined
“the great turn of 1217” (Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 20-23), characterized
also by the first missions of the Friars Preacher: G. G. Merlo, “Gli inizi dell’ordine
dei Frati Predicatori,” 425-26.
67
At the turn of 1217 Hugolino had returned to the curia, where he stayed
until the following May, when he undertook a new legation; see Maleczek,
Papst und Kardinalskolleg, 130-31.
68
In the October 8, 1215 document by which Innocent III took under apostolic
protection the fratres and the moniales of S. Maria of Prouille, there was no
mention of the rule followed in that monastery: M.-H. Laurent, “Monumenta
historica S. N. Dominici I: Historia diplomatica S. Dominici,” Monumenta Ordinis
F. Praedicatorum historica XV (Paris: 1933), n. LXII, we find: (1215 October 8:
Iustis petentium desideriis) 70-71: “dilectis filiis . . . priori, fratribus et monialibus
domus sanctae Mariae de Pruliano;” the clause about the rule however is present
in n. LXXXVI (1218 March 30: Religiosam vitam eligentibus); 100-03: “dilectis
filiis . . . priori monasterii sanctae Mariae de Proillano, eiusque fratribus tam
presentibus quam futuris, regularem vitam professis. . . . In primis siquidem
statuentes ut Ordo canonicus, qui secundum Deum et beati Augustini regulam
in eodem monasterio institutus esse dinoscitur.” On the significance of these
documents, besides De Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique, 92-93, see Canetti,
“Intorno all’idolo delle origini,” 17-21, which appropriately insists on an
“institutional hiatus” in the history of the Ordo Praedicatorum, which can be
placed in 1216.
69
Koudelka, “Le Monasterium Tempuli,” 48-53.
70
A. Benvenuti Papi, “L’insediamento francescano a Firenze: le origini,” in
La presenza francescana nella Toscana del ‘200 Quaderni di vita e cultura francescana
(Florence: 1990), 89-90; Pellegrini, “Esperienze religiose femminili,” has
appropriately placed the episode within the framework of the actions
undertaken by Hugolino as legate.
71
Francesco d’Assisi Documenti e Archivi Codici e Biblioteche Miniature (Milan:
1982), n. 22, 47-48; later in the document it was specified that the donation
was made to Hugolino, who accepted it for the religious women: “tibi predicto
domino episcopo, pro ipsis mulieribus recipienti.”
72
Francesco d’Assisi, Documenti e Archivi, n. 14, 31. A reconstruction of the
beginnings of the community of Monteluce is in Höhler, “Frauenklöster in
einer italienischen Stadt. Zur Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte der Klarissen
von Monteluce und der Zisterzienserinnen von S. Giuliana in Perugia (13.-
Mitte 15. Jh.),” in Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und
Bibliotheken 67 (1987): 22-27; and his “Il monastero delle Clarisse di Monteluce
in Perugia (1218-1400),” in Il movimento religioso femminile in Umbria, 162-65
(on the monastery’s origins).
73
See in regard to the process that progressively extended the authority of
the Roman See over the religious life, the observations of Maccarrone, “Le
costituzioni,” at note 42 above.
74
J. H. Sbaralea, BF I, 1 “quidam volentes sibi reservari correctionem,
institutionem et destitutionem in illis, non verentur salubre illarum propositum
impedire, quare tua Fraternitas postulavit, ut super iis paterna providere
sollicitudine curaremus.”
75
BF I, pp. 1-2: “Volentes igitur piis dictarum mulierum desideriis sic favorem
Apostolicum impertiri, ut et ipsae assequantur suae petitionis effectum, et
Diocesani locorum et alli in quorum parocchiis loca ipsa consistunt, justam
non habeant materiam murmurandi.”
76
M. Maccarrone, “Primato romano e monasteri dal principio del secolo XII
ad Innocenzo III,” in Istituzioni monastiche e istituzioni canonicali in Occidente
(1123-1215), Miscellanea del Centro di studi medioevali 9 (Milan: 1980), 131-
32; reprinted in Zerbi, R. Volpini, A. Galuzzi, eds., Romana Ecclesia cathedra
Petri, Italia sacra. Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 48 (Rome: 1991),
926-27. A similar interpretation is offered by L. Pellegrini, Le “pauperes
dominae,” in Chiara e il secondo Ordine, 75.
77
In the same vein is the interpretation by Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in
Umbria,” 94-95.
78
Laurent, “Monumenta historica,” n. 88, 105: “Alioquin ex tunc in ea
personas alterium Ordinis statuemus, que debitum ibidem impendant Domino
famulatum.”
79
Laurent, Monumenta historica, n. 100, 120; the overall reconstruction of
the facts is in Koudelka, “Le Monasterium Tempuli,” 48-53.
80
Laurent, “Monumenta historica,” n. 104, 124-25: “mandantes, quatinus,
cum ab eodem fratre .D. fueritis requisiti, ad predictam ecclesiam, prout ipse
mandaverit accedatis, Domino ibidem in ordine vestro devotum obsequium
impensuri.”
81
Laurent, “Monumenta historica,” nn. 99: the Preachers of Paris can celebrate
the divine offices in the church that the University masters have donated to
them; nn. 101: the Chapter of Notre Dame must not prevent the Preachers
from celebrating divine offices in the church of Saint-Jacques; nn. 102: the
burdens borne in the apostolate constitute satisfaction for the punishment for
sins committed by the friars; nn. 103: the pope recommends the Preachers to
all the archbishops and bishops. See also Koudelka, “Le Monasterium Tempuli,”
52: [“From November 11, 1219 to May 12, 1220 the pontifical chancery issued
an impressive series of bulls in favor of Dominic and his friars”]. We may note
that Hugolino had returned from the legation in August of 1219 and he
remained at the curia until the last months of 1221; see Maleczek, Papst und
Kardinalskolleg, 131.
82
83
Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in Umbria,” 277-79; the text of the forma vitae
of Hugolino, in its 1228 version, is in I. Omaechevarría, Escritos de Santa Clara
y documentos complementarios, Biblioteca de autores cristianos 314 (Madrid:

1993), 217-32. [Engl. trans, CAED, 90-100].
84
BF I, pp. 3-5; pp. 10-15: the papal letters repeat in full the texts of the
Hugolinian documents of July 1219.
85
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 279.
86
Zarncke, Der Anteil, 45-47; Pellegrini, “Le ‘pauperes dominae’,” 76. See now
the careful reconstruction he has proposed in “Female Religious Experience,”
in the text corresponding to notes 34-47.
87
Dubois, “Les Ordres religieux,” 306. Melville, “Diversa sunt monasteria,”
329, notes that until the model elaborated by the Cistercians was accepted the
term Ordo [“was limited to indicating a common style of life”]. Also of interest
is the analogous use of the term noticeable for the monastery of Sant’Agnese of
Bologna, in which the religious women asserted that they followed the same
customs “sicut cetera loca eiusdem Ordinis” (even though here the reference is
probably to the Order of Friars Preacher). See the papal letter Ad audientiam
nostram of December 17, 1226, cited in Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 78.
88
Gratien de Paris, Histoire, 602. [Engl. trans., History, 731], as evidence of
such an intention on Hugolino’s part, underlines the fact that all the new
foundations were given the title of the Blessed Virgin, as was the custom of the
Cistercians. Further, we should not underestimate the fact that in the first
decades of the thirteenth century Cistercian women’s monasticism enjoyed
considerable favor, as demonstrated convincingly in G. Cariboni, Comunità
religiose femminili legate ai Cistercensi a Piacenza e in Lombardia tra i pontificati di
Innocenzo III and Alessandro IV (Tesi di Dottorato, Università Cattolica del Sacro
Cuore, Milan [10o ciclo: 1994-1997]).
89
The incorporation of a monastery into the Dominican Order entailed, for
example, the creation of a men’s community at its site, with at least six friars,
with the responsibilities of chaplains and confessors, and with a prior at the
head of the men’s community as well as that of the women’s community, and
with other conversi and lay friars dedicated to the management of the property:
De Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique, 104-08.
90
On this problem see the important observations of Zarncke, Der Anteil, 70-
75; Grundmann, Religious Movements, 109-17; Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 279-
81; finally, see Chapter 2.
91
Oliger, “De origine regularum,” 417-21; Zarncke, Der Anteil, 45-47.
92
Test 25.
93
Canivez, “Statuta,” I, 517:4: “Inhibetur auctoritate capituli generalis ne
aliqua abbatia monialium decetero Ordini incorporetur. Moniales Ordinis nostri
includantur, et quae include noluerint, a custodia Ordinis se noverint
eliminatas.”
94
A good example of the possible avenues used for reaching incorporation to
the Cistercian Order is traced by G. G. Merlo, “Fondazioni monastiche femminili
della stirpe marchionale di Saluzzo,” in Forme di religiosità nell’Italia occidentale

dei secoli XII e XIII, Storia e storiografia 11 (Vercelli: 1997), 147-75. The essay
has also appeared in Bollettino della Società per gli studi storici, archeologici e artistici
della provincia di Cuneo 113 (1995): 69-88. Sensi, “Incarcerate e recluse in
Umbria,” 98-99, notes that still in the first half of the thirteenth century the
Cistercian Order [“had continued to be for some time one of the institutional
outlets for the women’s religious movement”].
95
Indicative of the difficulties encountered in carrying out the reform of Santa
Maria Tempuli is the episode in which the ancient icon of the Virgin Mary
miraculously returned to its original home, quickly followed by the religious
women, who had interpreted the event as a sign of God’s will; only the later
solemn translation of the image by Dominic’s own efforts assured a permanent
placement of the icon and, with it, of the monastic community in its new
home. The episode, framed within the events of the foundation of San Sisto, is
narrated in A. Walz, “Die Miracula beati Dominici der Schwester Cäcilia,” in
Archivum fratrum Praedicatorum 37 (1967): 42-43.
96
Koudelka, “Le Monasterium Tempuli,” 57-58.
97
Maleczek, Papst und Kardinalskolleg, 179-83 (Stefano of Fossanova); A.
Paravicini Bagliani, Cardinali di curia e ‘familiae’ cardinalizie dal 1227 al 1254 I,
Italia sacra Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 18 (Padua: 1972), 11 (Niccolò
of Chiaramonte, bishop of Tuscolo). According to the Miracula beati Dominici
the cardinalatial commission had been requested by Dominic himself, to assist
him in the undertaking of reforming San Sisto (Walz, “Die Miracula beati
Dominici,” 23: “Beatus vero Dominicus rogavit eum [Honorium III], ut ad tam
grande negotium perficiendum socios sibi ydoneos concedere dignaretur”); but
more likely is the hypothesis that their duties were those of supervising
Dominic’s activity: these were in fact cardinals with a sensitivity to reform of
religious life.
98
Illustrative of this tendency is the essay of V. J. Koudelka, “Notes pour
servir à l’histoire de S. Dominique,” in Archivum fratrum Praedicatorum 35 (1965):
5-15 (“Le cardinal Étienne de Fossanova, ami de S. Dominique”), where
Koudelka’s conclusions should also be reexamined, since according to him
Stefano was not a monk of the famous monastery of Lazio, but had taken his
name from his membership in a family active in the service of that abbey.
99
G. Levi, Registri dei cardinali Ugolino d’Ostia e Ottaviano degli Ubaldini (Rome:
1890) (Fonti per la storia d’Italia 8), 153-54; Alberzoni, Chiara d’Assisi, 214.
100
E. Brem, Papst Gregor IX. bis zum Beginn seines Pontifikats (Heidelberg: 1911),
105-06; worthy of note is the fact that Hugolino personally celebrated Dominic’s
funeral, as emerges from the testimony of Brother Ventura of Verona at the
process of canonization: A. Walz, ed., Acta canonizationis S. Dominici,
Monumenta Ordinis F. Praedicatorum Historica XVI (Rome: 1935), 130. See
also M.-H. Vicaire, Histoire de Saint Dominique II: “Au coeur de l’Église,” (Paris:
1982), 313-21.
101
94-95.] Also, De Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique, 116. Now see the
careful reconstruction by Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 60-86.
102
Benvenuti, “La fortuna,” 74-76.
103
M. Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano nel Duecento, Fonti e ricerche 1
(Milan: 1991), 208. This concerns the donation of the church of Sant’Apollinare,
where the sisters were to take up residence (November 2, 1224): “Ad honorem
Dei et sancte Romane Ecclesie dominus Henricus, Dei gratia sancte
Mediolanensis Ecclesie venerabilis archiepiscopus, attendens honestatem et
religionem Iacobe habbatisse et pauperum sororum mediolani commorantium
Ordinis de Spolito, et ad preces domini Ugonis, Dei gratia Hostiensis episcopi,
qui de mandato domini pape est provisor et rector omnium monialium ipsius
Ordinis, dedit et titulo donationis concessit ecclesiam Sancti Apolinaris.”
104
This is an aspect that was quite clear in the understanding of those in the
environment of the curia, as attested by the Vita Gregorii papae IX, in RIS III
(Milan: 1723), 575: “non multo post in Ostiensem episcopum ordinatus. Cujus
officii tempore Poenitentium fratrum et Dominarum inclusarum novos instituit
Ordines, et ad summum usque provexit. Minorum etiam Ordinem intra initia
sub limite incerto vagantem novae regulae traditione direxit, et informavit
informem.”
105
B. Griesser, “Rainer von Fossanova und sein Brief an Abt Arnald von Citeaux
(1203),” in Cistercienserchronik 60 (1953): 151-67; B. Bolton, “Non Ordo sed Horror:
Innocent III’s Burgundian Dilemma,” in M.Th. Lorcin, Guichard, J. M. Poisson,
M. Rubellin, eds., Papauté, monachisme et théories politiques: études d’histoire
médiévale oferts à Marcel Pacaut (Lyon: 1994), 645-52 [now in her Innocent III:
Studies on Papal Authority and Pastoral Care, Collected Studies, 490 (Norfolk:
1995)]; G. Cariboni, “Huiusmodi verba gladium portant Raniero da Ponza e
l’Ordine cistercense,” in Florensia 11 (1997): 115-35.
106
Maleczek, Papst und Kardinalskolleg, 132, notes that with the Regula bullata
of 1223, in the redaction of which Hugolino had such a role, there is also the
institutionalization of the office of cardinal protector, first assumed by Hugolino
himself.
107
G. G. Merlo, “The Story of Brother Francis and the Order of Friars Minor,”
Greyfriars Review (especially 5-8); R. Rusconi, “Francesco d’Assisi, santo (Francesco
di Pietro di Bernardone),” in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani XLIX (Rome:
1997), 664-78. In the Testament, as Francis establishes a significant hierarchy
for procedure in the correction of friars who do not submit to the rule, there
emerges clearly the role of the cardinal of Ostia, “qui est dominus, protector et
corrector totius fraternitatis” (Test 33). [Engl. trans., FAED I, 127: “who is the
Lord, the Protector and the Corrector of this fraternity.”] Quite rightly W.
Maleczek has defined such prerogatives “die letzte Instanz der Jurisdiktion” for
the friars who had deviated from the right observance of the rule, or who were
considered not to be orthodox.
108
On Philip Longo, see above, note 91 with its corresponding text; the role
of Leo of Perego in regularizing some women’s communities is traced by
Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano, 26-28, and Chiara d’Assisi, 213-15.
109
Alberzoni, Francescanesimo a Milano, 209 (Magna sicut dicitur of July 28,
1227): “Positus igitur in patibulo crucis . . . ad vos venire nequeo . . . et vos . . .
a longe videre compellor, quas filio meo fratri Pacifico commendatas, in cruce
relinquo.”
110
G. Tiraboschi, Vetera Humiliatorum monumenta II (Milan: 1767), 158-70.
On this documentation now see the observations of D. Castagnetti, “La regola
del primo e del secondo Ordine dall’approvazione alla Regula Benedicti,” in M.
Alberzoni, A. Ambrosioni, A. Lucioni, eds., Sulle tracce degli Umiliati, Bibliotheca
erudita. Studi e documenti di storia e filologia 13 (Milan: 1997), 186-90.
111
P.-M. Gy, “Le statut ecclésiologique de l’apostolat des Prêcheurs et des
Mineur[s] avant la querelle des Mendiants,” in Revue des sciences philosophiques
et théologiques 59 (1975) : 79-88; useful indications in this regard can be found
also in R. Rusconi, “I Francescani e la confessione nel secolo XIII,” in
Francescanesimo e vita religiosa dei laici nel ‘200, Atti dei Convegni della Società
internazionale di studi francescani 8 (Assisi: 1981), especially 268-90.
112
BF I, 36-37 (for the correction of the date, see W. R. Thomson, “Checklist
of Papal Letters relating to the Three Orders of St. Francis, Innocent III-Alexander
IV,” in AFH 64 (1971): num. 58; Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 285-86.
113
Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 78-79; the text promulgated in that chapter
can be reconstructed based on the first constitutions: A. H. Thomas, De oudste
Constituties van de Dominicanen, Bibliothèque de la Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique
42 (Louvain: 1965), 360: “Prohibemus etiam ne aliquis de cetero aliquam tondeat
vel induat vel ad professionem recipiat.”
114
J. M. Canivez, Statuta capitulorum generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis ab anno
1116 ad annum 1786 II (Louvain: 1934), 68:16: “Nulla monassteria monialium
de cetero sub nomine aut sub iurisdictione Ordinis nostri construantur vel
Ordini socientur. Si quod vero monasterium monialium nondum Ordini
sociatum vel etian construendum, nostras institutiones voluerit aemulari, non
prohibemus; sed curam animarum earum non recipiemus, nec visitationis
officium eis impendemus.”
115
Canivez, Statuta II, 68-69:17, which says “quae includi noluerint,
ubicumque fuerint, a custodia Ordinis se noverint separatas.”
116
On these circumstances see M. Bartoli, “Gregorio IX, Chiara d’Assisi e le
prime dispute all’interno del movimento francescano,” in Rendiconti della
Accademia nazionale dei Lincei Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche 35
(1980): 97-108; M. Alberzoni, Chiara e il papato, Aleph 3 (Milan: 1995), 52-63,
and “Chiara d’Assisi,” 215-18; E. Prinzivalli, “Le fonti agiografiche come
documenti per la vita di Chiara,” in Hagiographica 4 (1997): 215-19.
117
Maleczek, “Chiara d’Assisi,” 9-64; and Chapter 2.
118
Oliger, De origine regularum, 445; Pellegrini, “Le ‘pauperes dominae’,” 80-
81, where, however, it should be clarified that the terminology used is not yet
Ordo Sancti Damiani but precisely that of paupera monasteria, followed by the
names of the monasteries, with that of San Damiano heading the list.
119
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 215-16; the limited diffusion of Hugolinian
monasteries outside the Italian peninsula even after 1228 is also attested by
Julian of Speyer, for whom the religio of the pauperes dominae is primarily spread
“per diversas Italiae partes:” E. Prinzivalli, “Alcune riflessioni sulla Vita s.
Francisci di Giuliano da Spira,” in Hagiographica 3 (1996): 142-44.
120
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 285-89; based on papal documentation it is thus
possible to trace the evolution of the terminology; BF I, 101 (April 10, 1233):
“Abbatissis et monialibus monasteriorum pauperum in locis Sedi Apostolicae
immediate subiectis;” BF I, pp. 118-19 (November 24, 1233): “Abbatissae ac
sororibus inclusis;” BF I, pp. 149 (March 22, 1235): “Abbatissae et conventui
pauperum monialium reclusarum monasterii S. Mariae de Virginibus Ordinis
S. Damiani Faventinae diocesis.” Yet another papal letter for the Milanese
monastery of Sant’Apollinare of March 8, 1235 (Alberzoni, “Francescanesimo
a Milano,” 210) was addressed to “abbatisse ac monialibus inclusis,” while in
the next one of March 28, 1235 (BF I, p. 150) we find: “Abbatissae et mon[i]alibus
reclusis Ordinis Sancti Damiani.”
121
Melville, “Diversa sunt monasteria,” 329-30: “Allo stesso tempo is
presupposti essenziali e le regole di questo nuovo sistema vennero fissale per
iscritto in forma di documenti costitutzionali, che vennero approvati dal Papato
quale organo superiore di controllo. A differenza delle norme delle congregazioni
di vecchio stile, che giudicavano la fissazione per iscritto come una registrazione
di consuetudines già vissute, si trattava ora di un diritto collegiale, statuario e
innovative, che praeter regulam era adattato alle esigenza della nuova struttura
associativa.” [“At the same time the essential presuppositions and the rules of
this new system were being set down in writing in the form of constitutional
documents, which were approved by the papacy as the higher controlling agent.
Differing from the norms of congregations of the old style, which considered
the act of setting down in writing a recording of consuetudines already practiced,
these were now statutory, innovative collegial law, which praeter regulam was
adapted to the demands of the new associative structure.”
122
F. Neiske, “Reform oder Kodifizierung? Päpstliche Statuten für Cluny im
13. Jahrhundert,” in Archivum historiae pontificiae 26 (1988): 71-118; G. Melville,
“Cluny après ‘Cluny.’ Le treizième siècle: un champ de recherches,” in Francia
17 (1990): 91-124.
123
A. Lucioni, “L’evoluzione del monachesimo fruttuariense tra la fine dell’XI
e la metà del XIII secolo: dalla ecclesia all’Ordo,” in Il monachesimo italiano nell’età
comunale (1088-1250), Atti del Congresso storico internazionale per il IX
centenario della morte di sant’Alberto da Prezzate (1095-1995), (Cesena: 1998,
printed 1999): the terminology regarding Fruttuaria also shows a change around
the middle of the 1200s.
124
Melville, “Diversa sunt monasteria,” 332: “Il mondo dell’antica
molteplicità, che era segnata da un reciproco scambio di consuetudines, intese
come interpretazioni libere delle norme spirituali – questo mondo si era
trasformato in una nuova molteplicità, segnata dalle rispettive identità chiuse,
fondata su istitutiones particolari della struttura organizzativa e su paritcolari
creazioni giuridiche in forma di statuti. Si trattava ora piuttosto dell’unità interna
ad una congregazione, attaverso la quale era possibile tracciare una linea di
demarcazione netta rispetto all altre congregazioni.” [“The world of ancient
multiplicity, marked by a reciprocal exchange of consuetudines, understood as
free interpretations of spiritual norms – this world had been transformed into
a new multiplicity, marked by closed respective identities, one founded on
particular institutiones of the organizational structure and specific juridical
creations in the form of statutes. Now the point was rather the internal unity
of a congregation, by which it was possible to draw a clear line of demarcation
in regard to the other congregations.”]
125
Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 80-81; here the author puts the accent – as
Grundmann had done – on the converging viewpoints between “the women’s
religious movement” and the papacy, actually against the men’s Orders; at this
point it would be useful to ask if such agreement should not be interpreted
simply as the women’s following of papal directives, to which the Mendicants
rather offered some resistance.
126
The development of legislation for the nuns linked to the Order of Preachers
is considered by Creytens, “Les constitutions primitives,” 48-55.
127
Creytens, “Les constitutions primitives,” 52: “La règle de Saint-Sixte,
dominicaine dans ses origines, devient forme de vie religieuse officiellement
reconnue par l’Église, une régle-type pour moniales, à cotè de celle des
Cisterciens et de Grégoire IX, (elaborée pour les moniales de l’Italie quand le
pape était incore cardinal. . . .A l’instar des religieux de ‘l’ordre de s. Augustin’
les seurs de ‘l’ordre de Saint-Sixte’ complétaient ensuite leur règle commune
par des statuts ou constitutions spéciales qui les distinguaient les unes des
autres.” [“The rule of San Sisto, Dominican in its origins, became a form of
religious life officially recognized by the Church, a model rule for nuns, alongside
that of the Cistercians and that of Gregory IX (drafted for the nuns of Italy
when the pope was still a cardinal. . . .) Like the religious of the “Order of St.
Augustine” the sisters of the “Order of San Sisto” later filled out their common
rule with statutes or special constitutions which distinguished them one from
another.”]
128
Creytens, “Les constitutions primitives,” 53: “Conçue a ses origines comme
livre de constitutions [la règle de Saint-Sixte] elle divint par volonté de Grégoire
IX un texte canonisé auquel il n’était plus permis d’apporter le moindre
changement, pas plus qu’à la règle de. S. Augustin.” [“Conceived at its origins
as a book of constitutions (the rule of San Sisto) became, by the will of Gregory
IX, a canonized text to which it was no longer permitted to introduce the least
change, any more than to the rule of St. Augustine”]. On the adoption of this
rule by the religious women of the Order of Penitents of St. Mary Magdalene:
Creytens, “Les constitututions. . . .” 53-55, 60. The legislation of the Dominican
nuns is examined as a whole by De Fontette, Les religieuses à l’âge classique, 93-
101.
129
Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 304-06; and Chapter 3.
130
C. Gennaro, “Clare, Agnes and the First Sisters: From the ‘Pauperes
Dominae’ of San Damiano to the Poor Clares,” Greyfriqrs Review 9.3 (1995):
259-276. Just as firm was the conviction of Diana: since she had made religious
profession “secundum ordinem Fratrum Praedicatorum in manus bone memorie
fratris Dominicis,” she should have had the right “sub eodem Ordine perpetuo
permanere.” See A. Brémond, T, Rippol, Bullarium Ordinis Fratrum Praedicatorum
VII [Rome: 1737], 7: Ad audientiam nostram, December 17, 1226; the passage is
cited by Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 78, note 132.
131
I borrow the term from the meaningful title of the volume cited earlier,
Doppelklöster und andere Formen der Symbiose männlicher und weiblicher Religiosen
im Mittelalter (see note 21, above).
132
Alberzoni, Chiara e il papato, 69-77.
133
Alberzoni, “L’Ordine di San Damiano in Lombardia,” 17-18.
134
A. Marini, Agnese di Boemia, 61-66; and “La forma vitae di san Francesco
per San Damiano tra Chiara d’Assisi, Agnese di Boemia ed interventi papali,”
in Hagiographica 4 (1997): 179-95.
135
The dramatic circumstances in which the correspondence between Clare
and Agnes can be situated are carefully considered in A. Rotzetter, Chiara d’Assisi
La prima francescana (Milan: 1993) 249-78. [Ital. trans. of Klara von Assisi Die
erste franziskanische Frau (Freiburg i. B.: 1993)].
136
Gregory IX’s own words are significant, in the forma vitae of 1228
(Omaechevarría, Escritos, 231: “Hanc igitur vivendi formulam breviter
suprascriptam uniformiter ubique ab omnibus volumus et mandamus
diligentium observari; quatenus per locorum distantiam separatas vitae identitas
et morum conformitas caritatis vinculo uniat et coniungat.” [Engl. trans., CAED,
99: “This formula of life, briefly described above, be diligently and everywhere
observed in a uniform way by every sisiter, to the extent that unity of life and
conformity of ways may unite and join in a bond of love those sisters who are
separated by the distance between places.”])
137
Marini, Agnese di Boemia, 71-73; and “Ancilla Christi plantula sancti Francisci.
Gli scritti di Santa Chiara e la Regola,” in Chiara d’Assisi, 119-20; the problem
has also been considered by C. Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile nel
XIII secolo,” in Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa 25 (1989): 275-77.
138
BF I, pp. 243; an Italian translation may be found in G. G. Zopetti, M.
Bartoli, S. Chiara d’Assisi, Scritti e documenti (Assisi, Padua, Vicenza: 1994), 414-
16. [Engl. trans., CAED, 371-374.] See also Marini, “La forma vitae,” 184-87.
139
BF I, pp. 243: “nam nullo modo teneris ad illam, cum per Sedem
Apostolicam approbata non fuerit & a saepedicta Clara ejusque sororibus ac
aliis non servetur.” [Engl. trans., CAED, 373: “You are in no way held to that
Rule since it has not been approved by the Apostolic See. It is not observed by
the oft-mentioned Clare, her Sisters, or by others.”]
140
BF I, pp. 241-42 (De conditoris omnium, May 9, 1238). [Engl. trans., CAED,
369-71.]
141
BF I, p. 242: “sicut in modernorum speculo beato Francisco gloriantes in
Domino contemplamur, qui . . . commissae sibi desuper gerendo fideliter
legationis officium, Patris aeterni Filio grande lucrum attulit animarum, institutis
per ipsum specie Stigmatum Redemptoris, sicut plurib[u]s dignis fide patuit
insignitum, per orbis latitudinem tribus Ordinibus, in quibus per dies singulos
cunctipotens redditur multipliciter gloriosus. . . . Fratrum Ord. Min., Sororum
inclusarum, & Poenitentium Collegia designantur, quae Sanctae ac individuae
Trinitatis dedicata cultui.” [Engl. trans, CAED, 370: “Just as We, glorying in the
Lord, contemplate Blessed Francis as the mirror for our contemporaries, who .
. . passed over to the cultivation of continual purity which had been given to
him from above for faithfully managing the office of ambassador. Through the
sign of the Stigmata which clearly appeared to many trustworthy people He
brought a grand increase of souls to the Son of the eternal Father when he
instituted Three Orders throughout the breath of the world, in which during
every single day the All Powerful is rendered glorious in many ways . . .
associations of the Orders of Friars Minor, of the cloistered Sisters, and of
Penitents were designed and dedicated to the worship of the Holy and Undivided
Trinity.”] On this text, see the analysis, though more interested in the events
concerning the Penitents, of M. Bartoli, “Gregorio IX e il movimento
penitenziale,” in Pazzelli/Temperini, eds., La “Supra Montem,” 57-59. It is worth
noting that in this letter there is such an explicit mention of Francis as
stigmatized, a motif that Gregory IX made his own beginning in 1237: C.
Frugoni, Francesco e l’invenzione delle stimmate. Una storia per parole e immagini
fino a Bonaventura e Giotto (Turin: 1993), 54-55.
142
See the text cited above, note 104: the name that the pontiff uses to indicate
the second Order founded by Francis in reality contains a clear reference to
reclusion, characteristic precisely of the Hugolinian nuns, and, in general, of
the new women’s monasticism promoted by the papacy. Thomas of Celano
had already spoken of a trina militia founded by Francis: “egregius nempe artifex
ad cuius formam, regulam et doctrinam, efferendo praeconio, in utroque sexu
Christi renovatur Ecclesia et trina triumphat militia salvandorum. Omnibus
quoque tribuebat normam vitae ac salutis viam in omni gradu veraciter
demonstrabat” (1Cel 37). [Engl. trans., FAED I, 216: “He is without question an
outstanding craftsman, for through his spreading message, the Church of Christ
is being renewed in both sexes according to his form, rule and teaching, and
there is victory for the triple army of those being saved. Furthermore, to all he
gave a norm of life and to those of every rank he sincerely pointed out the way
of salvation.”] And here perhaps we should not exclude the possibility of a
suggestion from the pope commissioning the work. The position of Thomas in
regard to Gregory IX is well outlined in J. Dalarun, The Misadventure, 88-131.
Julian of Speyer, who wrote his Vita sancti Francisci between 1232 and 1235,
while referring to Thomas, introduces significant variations, which move
decidedly in the direction pursued by the Roman Curia: ISpi 23:6-10: “Omni
namque ordini, conditioni, aetati et sexui congruenter documenta salutis
impendit; omnibus vivendi regulam tribuit, cuius hodie felicem ducatum in
utroque sexu sequentium triumphare se gaudet Ecclesia triplici militia
salvandorum. – Tres enim, ut supra tetigimus, Ordines ordinavit; quorum
primum ipse professione simul et habitu super omnes excellentissime tenuit,
quem et Ordinem Fratrum Minorum, sicut in Regular scripserat, appellavit.
Secundum etiam, qui supra memoratus est, pauperum Dominarum et virginum
felix ab eo sumpsit exordium. Tertius quoque non mediocris perfectionis Ordo
Poenitentium dicitur.” [Engl. trans., FAED I, 385: “In fact, he provided a plan
of salvation to persons of every state and condition, age and sex, giving them
all a rule of life. Today, the church rejoices that his felicitous leadership of both
sexes has brought about a threefold army of those who are saved. As we
mentioned above, he founded three Orders, the first of which he prized above
all others by profession and habit, and which, as he had written in its Rule, he
called the Order of Lesser Brothers. The Second Order, the Order of the Poor
Ladies and virgins of the Lord, also mentioned above, likewise took its fruitful
origin from him. The Third, also an Order of Penitents.”] On the work of Julian
of Speyer, besides the introduction of G. Cremascoli, in Fontes franciscani (S.
Maria degli Angeli-Assisi: 1995), 1017-23, see E. Prinzivalli, “A Saint to be Read:
Francis of Assisi in the Hagiographic Sources,” Greyfriars Review 15.2 (2001):
253-298, and, especially, 264-266, where she appropriately underlines how
Julian was an outsider to the circles close to the socii of Francis.
143
H. Grundmann, “Die Bulle Quo elongati Papst Gregors IX.,” in AFH 54
(1961):3-25; now in Ausgewählte Aufsätze I: Religiöse Bewegungen, Schriften der
Monumenta Germaniae Historica 25:1 (Stuttgart: 1976), 222-42: “et cum ex
longa familiaritate, quam idem Confessor nobiscum habuit, plenius noverimus
intentionem ipsius et in condendo predictam Regulam et obtinendo
confirmationem ipsius per sedem apostolicam sibi astiterimus. . . .” (The citation
is on 237).
144
We should note that with the explicit mention of Francis as the founder
of the three Orders this goes far beyond what Thomas of Celano had written in
the Vita prima regarding Clare and San Damiano, where only the role of
initiating the work was attributed to Francis: “Hic [San Damiano] est locus ille
beatus et sanctus, in quo gloriosa religio et excellentissimus ordo pauperum
Dominarum et sanctarum virginum, a conversione beati Francisci fere sex
annorum spatio iam elapso, per eundem beatum virum felix exordium sumpsit”
(1Cel 18). [Engl. trans., FAED I, 197: “This is the blessed and holy place where
the glorious religion and most excellent Order of Poor Ladies and holy virgins
had its happy beginning, about six years after the conversion of the blessed
Francis and through the same blessed man.”] See Alberzoni, “San Damiano nel
1228,” 472-75.
145
In light of this conviction of Clare it is possible to grasp the significance of
her harsh reaction to the papal provisions contained in Quo elongati, regarding
the problem of the cura monialium on the part of the Friars Minor: Gennaro,
“Chiara, Agnese,” 184-85; Bartoli, “Gregorio IX, Chiara d’Assisi e le prime
dispute,” 106; M. Bartoli, Clare of Assisi, 135-38; Alberzoni, Chiara e il papato,
63-68. Interesting evidence regarding the fact that not only Clare’s community
but also others considered themselves part of the Order of Friars Minor is offered
by a Milanese notarial document of April 1254, in which the domine de Cosourezio
were defined “de Ordine fratrum Minorum:” M. Alberzoni, “Gli Atti del Comune
di Milano. Contributo alla storia delle istituzioni ecclesiastiche milanesi,” in
Libri e documenti 23, n. 1:3 (1997): 7.
146
The expression was contained in Ad audientiam nostram of December 17,
1226 (see note 130, above); see also the observations of Krenig, “Mittelalterische
Frauenklöster,” 12-15.
147
101-06]. Creytens, “Les constitutions primitives,” 48-54; De Fontette, Les
religieuses à l’âge classique, 99-101.
148
T. Desbonnets, De l’Intuition à l’Institution: Les Franciscains [Engl. trans.,
From Intuition to Institution: The Franciscans, 115-26].
149
I refer to the exemplar sent to the Damianites of Zaragoza, pointed out
and used by Omaechevarría, Escritos, 217-32.
150
Gennaro, “Il francescanesimo femminile,” 276; see also Grundmann,
Movimenti religiosi, 193-94. [Engl. trans., Religious Movements, 89-90.]
151
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 218: “Cum omnis vera religio et vitae institutio
approbata certis constet regulis et mensuris, certis constet legibus disciplinae;
quisquis religiosam ducere vitam cupit, nisi certam atque rectam conversationis
suae regulam disciplinamque vivendi observare studuerit diligenter, eo ipso a
rectitudine deviat, quo rectitudinis lineas non observat; et ibi deficiendi incurrit
periculum, ubi per discretionis virtutem certum ac stabile proficiendi collocare
neglexit fundamentum . . . Quocirca vobis omnibus et singulis in virtute
oboedientiae districte praecipiendo mandamus, quatenus formam ipsam, quam
vobis dirigimusk, plene in sequentibus annotatam, humiliter et devote recipere,
et inviolabiliter de cetero studeatis vos, et post vos omnes futurae, perpetuis
temporibus observare.” [Engl. trans., CAED, 90-91: “Every true Religion and
approved institute of life endures by certain rules and requirements, and by
certain disciplinary laws. Unless each sister has diligently striven to observe a
certain correct rule and discipline for living, she will deviate from righteousness
to the degree that she does not observe the guidelines of righteousness. She
runs the risk of falling at the point where, in virtue of her free choice, she
neglected to set for herself a sure and stable foundation for making progress. .
. .Therefore, in virtue of obedience we strictly enjoin each and every one of
you, and we command that you humbly and devotedly accept this form of life,
fully explained below, which we are sending you, and that you and those who
follow you strive to observe it inviolably for all time.”]
152
It is certainly no accident that the “new” rule promulgated by Innocent
IV on August 16, 1247 has the same incipit, Cum omnis vera religio; see
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 242-43. [Engl. trans., CAED, 114.] The order of topics
is also essentially the same, with the addition of new dispositions evidently
suggested by experience in the intervening period; Oliger, “De origine
regularum,” 413-427; Gratien de Paris, Histoire, 605-08; De Fontette, Les religieuses
à l’âge classique, 134-36; Rusconi, “L’espansione,” 289-90.
153
BF I, pp. 315-17.
154
BF I, pp. 316: “. . . tu, super eo, quod in proaemio ipsius formulae Apostolicis
litteris insertae dicitur: Regulam Beati Benedicti vobis tradimus observandam,
una cum sororibus tuis in timore poneris & anxietate gravaris, praesertim cum
mortale credis committi peccatum, si contra praeceptum hujusmodi aliquando
veniatur, & impertinens ac impossibile reputetur quod in Ordine tuo duae
Regulae debeant observari.”
155
BF I, p. 316: “Nec te ac sorores easdem illud exterreat, quod de virtute
obedientiae ac observanti Beati Benedicti Regula in eadem formula continetur,
cum pro eo quod sororum universitas suos ab illicitis restringant affectus &
religiosae vitae studio fortius astringatur praeceptum obedientiae in illa positum
fuerit & adjectum de Beati Benedicti Regula, ut per ipsam quasi praecipuam de
Regulis approbatis vestra religio authentica redderetur.” [Engl. trans., CAED,
90-91: “Neither you nor your sisters should be disturbed by the words ‘by virtue
of obedience’ and ‘the Rule of Saint Benedict’ as found in this rule. The precept
of obedience has as its purpose to preserve the sisters from unlawful attachments
and to strengthen their zeal for religious life. And the phrase life may be
authentic, since this is the greatest of all those approved for religious.”]
156
BF I, p. 316: “Nulla tamen propter hoc necessitate inducta, ut ipsam
teneamini observare, sicut ex eo clare probatur, quod memoratus Praedecessor
noster, praesente & audiente venerabili fratre nostro [Rainaldo] Ostienti episcopo
declaravit, quod regula ipsa sorores sui Ordinis non ligat ad aliud nisi ad
obedientiam, abdicationem proprii ac perpetuam castitatem, quae sub alia
cujuslibet religionis existent.” [Engl. trans., CAED, 379: This is clear from the
fact that our aforementioned predecessor, in the presence and in the hearing
of our venerable brother, the bishop of Ostia, declared that the rule does not
oblige the sisters to anything else but to obedience, the renunciation of property
and perpetual chastity, which form part of all religious rules.”]
157
Omaechevarría, Escritos, 242-43: “Quapropter, dilectae in Domino filiae, .
. . vestris piis precibus inclinati, beati Francisci Regulam quantum ad tria tantum,
videlicet oboedientiam, abdicationem proprii in speciali et perpetuam
castitatem, necnon Formam Vivendi presentibus annotatam, secundum quam
specialiter vivere decrevistis, vobis et iis, quae successerint, concedimus
observandam.” [Engl. trans, CAED, 114: “Therefore, beloved daughters in Christ,

. . . we, acceding to your pious prayers, grant to you and those who come after
you the observance of the Rule of Saint Francis with respect to the three
(counsels), namely obedience, the renunciation of property in particular, and
perpetual chastity, as well as the Form of Life written in the present document,
according to which you have particularly decided to live. By doing so we
establish by our apostolic authority that it be observed for all times in every
monastery of your Order.”]
158
120-21.] The difficulties that arose in the Order of Preachers regarding the cura
monialium are also considered in Canetti, “Le ultime volontà,” 77-86.
159
Creytens, “Les constitutions primitives,” 56-64; see also E. T. Brett,
“Humbert of Romans and the Dominican Second Order,” in Cultura e istituzioni
nell’Ordine domenicano tra Medioevo e Umanesimo. Studi e testi (Pistoia: 1981)
(Memorie domenicane, n.s. 12[1981]), 1-25.
160
It is sufficient here to recall the incisive conclusions of Grundmann,
Movimenti religiosi, 252. [Engl. trans., Religious Movements, 133: “In both the
mendicant Orders therefore, during the thirteenth century, the attempts to
withdraw from responsibilities for the women’s convents failed. The demands
of the women’s religious movement to be organized and assisted by the
mendicant Orders were shown to be more forceful than the policies to the
contrary promoted by the latter.”
161
One example among many is that of Cardinal Hugolino’s recommendation
to Clare and the San Damiano community in 1220: “Committo igitur tibi
animam meam et spiritum recommendo, ut, sicut Jesu in cruce Patri suo spiritum
commendavit, et in die judicii mihi respondeas, si de salute mea non fueris
sollicita et attenta.” K. Esser, “Die Briefe Gregors IX. an di hl. Klara von Assisi,”
in Franziskanische Studien 35 [1953]: 359, and what Jordan of Saxony asked of
Diana d’Andalò: A. Tilatti, “La direzione spirituale: Un percorso di ricerca
attraverso il secolo XIII nell’ordine dei Predicatori,” in Dalla penitenza all’ascolto
delle confessioni, Atti dei Convegni della Società internazionale di studi
francescani e del Centro interuniversitario di studi francescani 23 (Spoleto:
1996), 127-73. These offer evidence that leads us back to a conception of
women’s religious life modelled on the example of Mary, while the role of
Martha now seemed to be reserved to ecclesiastics; interesting indications about
the way of understanding the relationship between the active life and
contemplative life are in G. Constable, “The Interpretation of Mary and Martha,”
in his Three Studies in Medieval Religious and Social Thought (Cambridge: 1995),
especially 92-113.
162
62-67.]
163
La Grasta, “La canonizzazione di Chiara,” 314-17. On the significance of
Beata Clara for the institutional evolution of women’s “Franciscan” monasticism,
see Andenna, “Urbano IV e l’Ordine delle Clarisse.” See note 10, above.
164
Some examples are offered by G. Casagrande, “Terziarie Francescane
Regolari in Perugia nei secoli XIV e XV,” in R. Pazzelli, M. Sensi, eds., La beata
Angelina da Montegiove e il movimento del Terz’Ordine regolare francescano femminile,
Ed. Analecta TOR, 1984), 437-91; and in the same volume, M. Bigaroni, “Prime
fondazioni di monasteri di Terziarie Francescane in Assisi,” 505-528. See also
in La “Supra montem,” the contributions of Mariano d’Alatri, “Genesi della
regola di Niccolò IV: aspetti storici,” 93-107; A. García y García, “Genesis de la
Regla de nicolao IV: aspectos juridicos,” 109-31; M. Sensi, “La Regola di Niccolò
IV dopo la costituzione Periculoso,” 147-98; and R. Pazzelli, “Movimenti,
congregazioni e ordini con la Regola di Niccolò IV nei secoli XIII-XV,” 249-88.
E. Menestò, “Problemi di identità cristiana di ieri e di oggi nella Supra montem
di Niccolò IV,” in Niccolò IV: un pontificato tra Oriente ed Occidente, Biblioteca del
“Centro per il collegamento degli studi medievali e umanistici nell’Università
di Perugia” 4 (Spoleto: 1991), 157-70, rightly defines this papal document [“one
of the most important moments in the process of institutionalization”] of the
penitential movement which, in varying ways, referred back to Francis of Assisi
(161).
Appendices
Appendix 1
Vita Gregorii papae IX, in RIS, III (Mediolani 1723), 575.
Cujus officii tempore Poenitentium fratrum et Dominarum

inclusarum novos instituit Ordines, et ad summum usque
provexit. Minorum etiam Ordinem intra initia sub limite incerto
vagantem novae regulae traditione direxit, et informavit
informem, beatum Franciscum, eis ministrum praeficiens, et
rectorem, quorum eodem rigante ad eos limites incrementa
venerunt, ut praebente divina potentia per singulos orbis
terminos eorum venerando consortio vix viculus reperiatur
immunis.
Praeter illa quidem mira existimatione notanda, quae frat-
rum necessitatibus pia liberalitate concessit. Domnabus eisdem
in urbe Monasterium unum, scilicet monasterium Sancti Cos-
mae; in Lombardia . . . in Tuscia . . . expensis innumeris, et
ministerii sui subventione construxit, providendo postmodum
necessitatibus singulorum. Eas etiam, quae suae praedicationis
studio divinitus inspirante, parentibus dimissis, et patria, nec
lacrymis emollitae natorum, mundi superbiam, et temporales
divitias commutaverant in paupertatis extrema, et in asperae
lanae mordentes aculeos vestis pretiosae contextum, post sum-
mi pontificii solium colligebat ut filias, venerabatur ut matres,
ipsarum indigentiam uberioribus auxiliis prosecutus.
At the time of his office [as bishop of Ostia] he [Cardinal

Hugolino] established and brought to completion the new or-
ders of the Brothers of Penance and of the Cloistered Ladies.

He also gave form to the yet unorganized Order of Minors, which
in its beginnings was wandering about without definite bounds,
by providing them with a new rule and by designating Francis
as their minister and rector. Under his leadership those limits
were increased, so that by God’s power there is hardly a hamlet
throughout the whole world that now may be found without
their venerable association.
Besides the many things, to be noted with great admiration,
which he with dutiful liberality contributed for the necessities
of these brothers, for those Ladies he had constructed through
the subvention of his office and at incalculable expense a mon-
astery in Rome, that of Saint Cosmas, in Lombardy and in
Tuscany, afterwards providing for the necessities of each one.
Those [Ladies] who, divinely inspired by the zeal of his preach-
ing to leave parents and homeland and not dissuaded by the
tears of their own children, had exchanged the pride of the
world and temporal wealth for the extremes of poverty, and
the fabric of their precious clothes for the smarting prickle of
rough wool, after he ascended the throne of the Supreme Pon-
tiff he gathered them together as daughters, venerated them as
mothers, and provided to their indigence with more abundant
help.
Appendix 2
Letter of Hugolino to Clare, 1220.
(K. Esser, “Die Briefe Gregors IX an die hl. Klara von Assisi,”
Franziskanische Studien 35 (1953): 277).
1. Carissimae sorori in Christo et matri salutis suae, dominae

Clarae, ancillae Christi, Hugolinus miser et peccator episcopus,
se ipsum totum quod est, quod esse potest. 2. Carissima soror
in Christo! Ab illa hora, qua a sanctis colloquiis vestris me
redeundi necessitas separavit et ab illo gaudio coelestium
thesaurorum avulsit, tanta me amaritudo cordis, abundantia
lacrymarum et immanitas doloris invasit, quod nisi ad pedes
Jesu consolationem solitae pietatis inveniam, timeo, ne
angustias illas semper tales incurram, quibus spiritus meus forte
APPENDICES 211
deficiet et penitus anima liquefiet. 3. Merito quia, dum Pascha

tecum et cum ancillis Christi ceteris celebratam, deficiente illa
laetitia gloriosa, qua vobiscum de corpore Christi tractaveram,
sicut, cum Dominus a discipulis raptus et patibulo crucis affixus,
immensa fuit tristitia subsecuta, ita remansi e vestra absentia
desolatus. 4. Et licet me usque modo sciverim et reputaveri
peccatorem, intellecta meritorum praerogativa tuorum et rigore
Religionis inspecto, modo pro certo didici, quod tot peccatorum
sarcina praegravatus et in tantum universae terrae Dominatorem
offendi, quod non sum dignus electorum ejus consortio
aggregari et ab occupationibus terrenis avelli, nisi lacrymae et
orationes tuae mihi veniam impetrent pro peccatis. 5. Committo
igitur tibi animam meam et spiritum recommendo, ut, sicut
Jesu in cruce Patri suo spiritum commendavit, et in die judicii
mihi respondeas, si de salute mea non fueris sollicita et attenta;
quia pro certo credo, quod apud summum judicem impetrabis,
quidquid instantia tantae devotionis et copia lacrymarum
exposcit. 6. Dominus Papa modo non venit Assisium, sed
opportunitate captata te et sorores tuas videre desidero. 7. Saluta
Agnetem virginem et sororem meam et universas sorores tuas
in Christo. Amen.
Hugolino, a wretched and sinful man, the Bishop of Ostia,

commends himself all that he is and all he is capable of being
to his very dear sister in Christ and mother of his salvation, the
servant of Christ, Lady Clare.
My very dear sister in Christ! From that very hour when the
necessity of returning here separated me from your holy con-
versation and tore me away from that joy of heavenly treasure,
such a bitterness of heart, such an abundance of tears and such
an immensity of sorrow have overcome me that, unless I find
at the feet of Jesus the consolation of His usual kindness, I fear
that I will always encounter such trials which will cause my
spirit to melt away. And this is reasonable because, just as an
overwhelming sorrow ensued when the Lord was taken away
from the disciples and nailed to the gallows of the cross, so I
remain desolate by your absence from me. For that glorious
joy, with which I discussed the Body of Christ with you while
celebrating Easter with you and the other servants of Christ,

has forsaken me. And although I have always known and have
considered myself to be a sinner, yet after having recognized a
sure sign of your merits and having observed the rigor of your
way of life, I have learned with certainty that I have been
weighed down with such a burden of sin and have so offended
the Lord of the whole universe, that I am not worthy to be
freed from earthly concerns and be associated with the com-
pany of the elect, unless your prayers and tears obtain for me
pardon for my sins.
Therefore, I entrust my soul and commend my spirit to you,
just as Jesus on the cross commended His spirit to the Father,
so that on the day of judgment you may answer for me, if you
have not been concerned for and intent on my salvation. For I
have a certain belief that you will obtain from the most high
Judge whatever the insistence of so great a devotion and abun-
dance of tears implores. The Lord Pope is not coming to Assisi
now, but I will seize the first opportunity in my desire to see
you and your sisters. Greetings to the virgin Agnes, my sister,
and to all your sisters in Christ. amen.
[Engl. trans., CAED, 101-02.]
Appendix 3
Prepared Formulary for the foundation
of Hugolinian monasteries.
(Levi, Registri dei cardinali, 153-54).
Nos . . . Dei gratia . . . episcopus, de consensu capituli nostri,

videlicet * * de mera helemosina nostra divine pietatis intuitu
donamus et concedimus tibi * * in tali loco plenam facultatem
monasterium constituendi, vel talem locum cum omnibus perti-
nentiis suis ad construendum ibidem monasterium in honore
gloriose virginis Marie, in quo virgines Deo dicate et alie ancille
Christi in paupertate Domino famulentur iuxta formam vite
vel religionis pauperum dominarum de Valle Spoleti sive Tuscia
per dominum Hugonem venerabilem episcopum Hostiensem
auctoritate domini pape eisdem sororibus traditam; et loco ipsi
APPENDICES 213
et sororibus tam presentibus quam futuris plenam concedimus

libertatem, quam habere noscuntur monasteria eiusdem
religionis de Perusio, de Senis et de Luca eius Apostolice Sedis
privilegiis confirmatam, nichil nobis aliud reservantes in eo,
preter dedicationem ecclesie, consecrationes altarium,
benedictiones monialium, cum ab abbatissa et sororibus propter
hec fuerimus requisiti, si tamen nos et successores nostri gratis
ea et sine pravitate aliqua voluerimus exhibere; reservamus
etiam nobis nomine annui census unam libram cere, in festo *
* nobis et successoribus nostris annis singulis persolvendam;
sorores vero ipse, si aliquando formam dicte religionis abiecerint
vel contempserint observare et frequenter ammonite se
noluerint emendare, ex tunc in nostram seu successorum
nostrorum iurisdictionem locus ipse libere revertatur. et hanc
con-cessionem et donationem pro nobis et successoribus nostris
firmam habere promittimus et nullo tempore contravenire,
dantes notario * * liberam potestatem conficiendi exinde pub-
licum instrumentum.
Appendix 4
Letter, Angelis gaudium, addressed to Agnes of Prague
by Gregory IX on May 11, 1228.
(BF I, pp. 242-44).
Gregorius episcopus servus servorum Dei dilectae filiae Agneti

ancillae Christi et gloriosae Virgini in mulieribus benedictae
salutem et apostolicam bendictionem.
Angelis gaudium et conversis ad Dominum super eo
devotionis augmentum advenisse credimus quod regularem
apparatum abjiciens assumpsisti paupertatis habitum, ut vesti-
gia regis aeterni sequentibus promissa percipere valeas praemia
supernorum. Verum ut in hac parte, auctore Domino, dirigi
tua possit intentio et compleri est tibi sollicite vigilandum, ut
quantumcumque cor tuum, inspirante Domino, ad virtutum
observantiam inflammetur, ad cultum obedientiae prompta
semper et facilis pro illius gloria, qui usque ad mortem crucis
est Patri factus obediens, habearis.
Cum igitur nos, licet immeriti, universitatis fidelium Patres

simus a Domino constituti hoc gerentes corde praecipuum quod,
propitiante Deo, per nostrae servitutis officium salus provenire
valeat animarum, monita nostra debes et devota mente suscipere
et efficacis diligentiae studiis adimplere praesertim super iis in
quibus hoc solum agitur, quod gratum conditori omnium
habeatur. Sane, filia benedictionis et gratiae, cum nobis adhuc
in minori constitutis officio, dilecta in Christo filia Clara
abbatissa monasterii Sancti Damiani de Assisio et quaedam aliae
devotae in Domino mulieres, postposita vanitate seculi,
elegissent eidem sub religionis observantia famulari, ipsis beatus
Franciscus, quibus tamquam modo genitis non cibum solidum
sed qui videbat competere potum lactis formulam vitae tradidit,
quam pridem nobis in quadam schedula per dilectum filium
priorem hospitalis Sancti Francisci Pragensis, virum ubique
discretum et providum, destinati humili supplicatione
deposcens, ut praesentatam nobis per eumdem sub sigillo tuo
formam et quibusdam capitulis quae in Ordinis Beati Damiani
regula continentur confirmari auctoritate apostolica curaremus.
Nos quidem ad rationis consilium recurrentes ex diversis
causis expedire non vidimus quod id ad complementi gratiam
duceremus. Primo quia praedictam regulam, studio compositam
vigilanti et acceptatam a praedicto Sancto nec non per felicis
recordationis Honorium papam praedecessorem nostrum,
postmodum confirmatam dictae Clara et sorores, concesso ipsis
ab eodem intercedentibus nobis exemptionis privilegio,
solemniter sunt professae. Secundo quia ipsae, formula praedicta
postposita, eamdem regulam a professionis tempore usque nunc
laudabiliter observarunt. Tertio quia, cum sit ita statutum ut
ubique ab omnibus eamdem profitentibus uniformiter
observetur, ex praesumptione contrarii grave posset ac
importabile scandalum exoriri, praesertim quia ceterae sorores
praefati Ordinis, dum integritatem regulae sic violatam
attendent, turbatis mentibus in ipsius observantia, quod avertat
Dominus, titubarent.
Rogamus itaque devotionem tuam et obedientiam in Domino
Jesu Christo in remissionem tuorum peccatorum iniungentes,
APPENDICES 215
quatenus praemissa solerti meditatione considerans et prudenter

advertens – quod quidquid tibi suggeratur ab aliquo forte zelum,
sed secundum scientiam non habente – id in tuis affectibus
debeat haberi potissimum quod Deo placitum et acceptum nobis
salutare tibi et proximis esse valeat, annuente clementia
redemptoris, praedictam regulam omni occasione postposita
diligenter observes et a tuis sororibus observari procures
ineffabili spe tibi proposita, quod per hoc animae tuae de mise-
ricordia divina proveniat, ut mereatur gemmis adornari, quibus
coelestis aulae solium noscitur insigniri.
Nec super hoc tibi obsistat trepidatio ex eo consurgens, quod
tamquam eorum ignara quae de concessione regualae
memoratae praedicimus, te ad supradictae regulae observantia
obligasti, nam nullo modo teneris ad illam, cum per sedem
apostolicam approbata non fuerit et a sepedicta Clara eiusque
sororibus ac aliis non servetur. Quid ulterius? Quia non videtur
votum infringere qui commutat ipsum in melius, te ac sorores
tuas ab observantia praedictae formulae de indultae nobis a
Domino potestatis plenitudine absolventes volumus et man-
damus, quatenus eamdem regulam tibi sub bulla nostra
transmissam reverentia filiali suscipias in monasterio tuo
perpetuis futuris temporibus cum illis articulis observandam,
super quibus ea charitate devicti, quae coeli regem ad
compatiendum languoribus humanae fragilitatis induxit,
duximus dispensandum, prout in litteris apostolicis directis tibi
per memoratum priorem super petitionibus ex parte tuae
sinceritatis oblatis quantum in Domino fieri cum salute animae
tuae potuit favorabiliter expeditum perspicies contineri; firmam
de nobis habitura fiduciam quod, si a te aliquando vel sororibus
iamdicti monasterii de ipsius regulae in aliquibus temperando
rigore aut super aliis requisiti fuerimus, super hoc tuis et ipsarum
votis secundum Deum paternis affectibus annuemus.
Datum Laterani V idus maii pontificatus nostri anno
duodecimo.
Gregory, servant of the servants of God, sends greetings and

Apostolic blessings to his beloved daughter Agnes, handmaid
of Christ and of his glorious Virgin who is blessed forever.
We believe that joy came to the angels and that there was an
increase of devotion among those converted to the Lord, when
you cast aside your royal trappings and assumed the habit of
poverty in order to obtain those rewards of heaven which were
promised to those who follow the footsteps of the eternal King.
Truly, you have to maintain careful vigilance in order that your
intention, with God’s help, may be directed to this end and
come to realization. That your heart, however great it is, may
be inflamed to the observance of virtue under the inspiration
of the Lord, you have to be prompt in the practice of the obedi-
ence to the Father of all the faithful, and since We are mindful
that Our principal concern is the salvation of souls which, with
the help of God, is able to be accomplished through the ad-
ministrations of Our office, you ought to accept Our advice
with a devout heart and follow it with efficient and diligent
zeal, especially on those matters where the only consideration
is to please the Creator of all things.
Surely, O daughter of benediction and grace,
Having recourse to prudent deliberation
Therefore, We ask you devout obedience
We wish and command that you accept
You will note that
Given at the Lateran on the 11th of May in the 12th year of
Our pontificate.
[Engl. trans., CAED, 371-74.]
BIBLIOGRAPHY 217
Bibliography
Accrocca, F. “Nodi problematici delle fonti francescane. A

Proposito di due recenti edizioni.” Collectanea
Franciscana 66 (1996): 563-598; English trans., “Some
Knotty Problems in the Franciscan Sources.” Greyfriars
Review 11.2 (1997): 113-141.
Acta canonizationis S. Dominici. A. Walz ed. Monumenta Ordi-
nis F. Praedicatorum Historica XVI. Rome, 1935.
Alberzoni, M. P. “Chiara d’Assisi e il francescanesimo
femminile.” In Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo di storia
francescana, 203-235. Turin: Biblioteca Einaudi, 1997;
English trans., “Clare of Assisi and Women’s Francis-
canism.” Greyfriars Review 17.1 (2003): 5-38.
_____. Chiara e il Papato. Milano, 1995.
_____. “Die Humiliaten zwischen Legende und Wirklichkeit.”
In Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische
Geschichtsforschung 107 (1999): 324-353.
_____. Francescanesimo a Milano nel Duecento. Fonti e richerche
1. Milan, 1991.
_____. “Gli Atti del Comune di Milano. Contributo alla storia
delle istituzioni ecclesiastiche milanesi.” In Libri e
documenti 23, n. 1:3 (1997): 1-17.
_____. “Gli inizi degli Umiliati: una riconsiderazione.” In La
conversione alla povertà, 187-237. Atti dei convegni
dell’Accademia tudertina e del Centro di studi sulla
spiritualità medievale, n.s. 2. Spoleto, 1991.
_____. “Henri de Settala.” In Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie
ecclésiastiques. Vol. 13 (Paris, 1990), cols. 1227-1230.
_____. “Il francescanesimo femminile in Lombardia fino

all’introduzione della regola urbaniana.” In Chiara e il
secondo Ordine. Galatina, 1997.
_____. “L’Ordine di San Damiano in Lombardia.” In La Nascita
di un’Istituzione: L’Ordine di S. Damiano nel XIII secolo.
Milan, 1996. Also in Rivista di storia della Chiesa in Italia
49 (1995): 1-42. Also in Chiara e il Secondo Ordine, 117-
157. Galatina, 1997.
_____. “Nel conflitto tra papato e impero: da Galdino della Sala
a Guglielmo da Rizolio (1166-1241).” Storia religiosa
della Lombardia 9. In Diocesi di Milano. Brescia, 1990.
_____. “Raniero da Ponza e la curia romana.” In Florensia 11
(1997): 83-113.
_____. “San Damiano nel 1228: Contributo alla ‘Questione
clariana.’” Collectanea Francescana 67 (1997): 459-476;
English trans., “San Damiano in 1228: A Contribution
to the Clare Question.” Greyfriars Review 13.1 (1999):
105-123.
_____. “Sorores Minores e autorità ecclesiastica fino al pontificato
di Urbano IV.” In Chiara e la diffusione delle Clarisse,
165-194. Galatina, 1998.
_____. “‘Sub eadem clausura sequestrati’: Uomini e donne nelle
prime comunità umiliate lombarde.” In Uomini e donne
in comunità, 69-110. Verona, 1994.
_____. “Un mendicante di fronte alla vita della Chiesa nella
seconda metà del Duecento: Motivi religiosi nella
‘Cronica’ di Salimbene.” In Salimbeniana, 7-34. Atti del
convegno pe il VII centenario di fra Salimbene, Bolo-
gna, 1991.
Ambrosioni, A. “Umiliate/i.” In Dizionario degli Istituti di
perfezione VI. Rome, 1997.
Andenna, G. “Federico II e i Mendicanti di Lombardia: dalla
collaborazione allo scontro.” In Federico II e la civiltà
comunale nell’Italia del nord. Rome, 2001.
_____. “Il monachesimo cluniacense femminile nella ‘Provincia
Lombardie’ dei secoli XI-XIII: Origini, evoluzione dei
rapporti politici con le strutture organizzative dei
territori e problematiche economiche e sociali,” 331-
BIBLIOGRAPHY 219
361. In Cluny in Lombardia. Italia benedettina 1. Cesena,

1979.
_____. “Il monachesimo cluniacense in Lombardia dalla metà
del XIII alla fine del XV secolo.” In Italia nel quadro
dell’espansione europea del monachesimo cluniacense, 221-
245. Italia benedettina 8. Cesena, 1985.
_____. “Urbano IV e l’Ordine delle Clarisse.” In Chiara e la
diffusione della Clarisse nel secolo XIII, 195-218. Galatina,
1998.
Barone, G. Da frate Elia agli Spirituali. Fonti e ricerche 12. Padua,
1972.
_____. “Federico II di Svevia e gli Ordini Mendicanti.” Mélanges
de l’Ecole Française de Rome 90 (1978): 607-626. Milan,
1999.
_____. “Frate Elia.” In Bollettino dell’Istituto storico italiano per il
Medio Evo e Archivio Muratoriano 85 (1974-1975): 89-91.
_____. “Frate Elia: suggestioni da una rilettura.” In I compagni di
Francesco e la prima generazione minoritica, 61. Centro
interuniversitario di studi francescani: Nuova serie 2.
Spoleto, 1992.
_____. “La propaganda antiimperiale nell’Italia federiciana:
l’azione degli Ordini Mendicanti.” In Federico II e le città
italiane, 278-289. P. Toubert and A. Paravicini Bagliani,
eds. Palermo, 1994.
Bartoli, M. Chiara d’Assisi. Bibliotheca seraphico-capuccina 37.
Rome, 1989; English trans., Clare of Assisi. Quincy, IL,
1993.
_____. Chiara: Una donna tra silenzio e memoria. Tempi e figure,
37. Milan, 2001.
_____. “Francescanesimo e il mondo femminile nel XIII secolo.”
In Francesco, il francescanesimo e la cultura della nuova
Europa, 167-180. Rome, 1986.
_____. “Gregorio IX, Chiara d’Assisi e le prime dispute all’interno
del movimento francescano.” In Rendiconti della
Accademia nazionale dei Lincei. Classe di Scienze morali,
storiche e filologiche 35 (1980): 97-108.
_____. “Gregorio IX e il movimento penitenziale.” In La “Supra
montem” di Niccolò IV (1289): genesi e diffusione di una
regola. R. Pazzelli and L. Temperini, eds., 47-60. Rome,

1988.
_____. “La povertà e il movimento francescano femminile.” In
Dalla “sequela Christi” di Francesco d’Assisi all’apologia
della povertà, 223-248. Spoleto, 1992.
_____. “S. Damiano e la memoria di Francesco.” In Chiara d’Assisi
e la memoria di Francesco, 15-23. Fara Sabina-Rieti, 1995.
Bartoli Langeli, A. Gli autografi di frate Francesco e di frate Leone.
Corpus Christianorum Autographa Medii Aevi 5.
Turnhout, 2000.
_____. “I Penitenti a Spoleto nel Duecento.” Collectanea
Franciscana 43 (1973): 303-330.
_____. “Tavola Rotonda.” In Movimento religioso femminile e
francescanesimo, 339-357. Assisi, 1980.
Benvenuti Papi, A. “In castro penitentiae”: Santità e società
femminile nell’Italia medievale. Italia sacra. Studi e
documenti di storia ecclesiastica 45. Rome, 1990.
_____. “La fortuna del movimento damianita in Italia (sec. XIII):
propositi per un censimento da fare.” In Chiara di Assisi,
59-106. Spoleto, 1993.
_____. “L’insediamento francescano a Firenze: le origini.” In La
presenza francescana nella Toscana del ’200. Quaderni di
vita e cultura francescana, 81-100. Florence, 1990.
Bigaroni, M. “Prime fondazioni di monasteri di Terziarie
Francescane in Assisi.” In La Beata Angelina da Montegiove
e il movimento del Terz’Ordine regolare francescano
femminile. R. Pazzelli and M. Sensi, eds., 505-528. Rome:
Ed. Analecta TOR, 1984.
Bolton, B. “Daughters of Rome: All One in Christ Jesus!” In
Women in the Church. W. J. Sheils and D. Wood, eds.,
101-115. Oxford, 1990.
_____. “‘Non ordo sed Horror’: Innocent III’s Burgundian Di-
lemma.” In Papauté, monachisme et théories politiques:
études d’histoire médiévale offerts à Marcel Pacaut, 645-
652. M. Pacaut and P. Guichard, eds. Lyon, 1994. Also
in Innocent III: Studies on Papal Authority and Pastoral
Care. Collected Studies, 490. Norfolk, 1995.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 221
Boni, A. “La legislazione clariana nel contesto giuridico delle

sue origini e della sua evoluzione.” Antonianum 70
(1995): 47-98.
The Book of St. Gilbert. R. Foreville and G. Keir, eds. Oxford,
1987.
Bullarium Franciscanum. Rome, 1759–.
Brem, E. Papst Gregor IX. bis zum Beginn seines Pontifikats. Heidel-
berg, 1911.
Brett, E. T. “Humbert of Romans and the Dominican Second
Order.” In Cultura e istituzioni nell’Ordine domenicano
tra Medioevo e Umanesimo. Studi e testi. Memorie
domenicane, n.s. 12, 1-25. Pistoia, 1981.
Brogliato, B. “Il primo monastero delle Clarisse di Vicenza. Santa
Maria all’Araceli.” Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 74
(1981): 77-102.
_____. 750 anni di presenza francescana nel Vicentino. Vicenza,
1982.
Brufani, S. “Le legende agiografiche di Chiara d’Assisi del secolo
XIII.” In Chiara di Assisi, 325-355. Spoleto, 1993.
Bullarium Ordinis Fratrum Praedicatorum VII. A. Brémond and T.
Rippol, eds. Rome, 1737.
Burchardi Praepositi Urspergensi Chronicon. O. Holder-Egger and
B. von Simon, eds. Hanover-Leipzig, 1905-1913. MGH:
Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum 16.
Campi, P. M. Dell’historia ecclesiastica di Piacenza II. Piacenza,
1651.
Canetti, L. “Intorno all’idolo delle origini: La storia dei primi
frati Predicatori.” In I frati Predicatori nel Duecento.
Quaderni di storia religiosa 3. G. G. Merlo, ed., 9-51.
Verona/Cierre, 1996.
_____. “Le ultime volontà di san Domenico. Per la storia
dell’Ordo Praedicatorum dal 1221 al 1236.” Rivista di
storia della Chiesa in Italia 48 (1994): 43-97.
_____. L’invenzione della memoria: il culto e l’immagine di Domenico
nella storia di primi frati Predicatori. Società internazionale
per lo studio del medioevo latino 19. Spoleto, 1996.
Canivez, J. M. Statuta capitulorum generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis
ab anno 1116 ad annum 1786, I. Louvain, 1933.
Canonici, L. “Guido II d’Assisi: Il vescovo di san Francesco.”

Studi francescani 77 (1980): 187-206.
Capitani, O. “Chiara per Francesco.” In Chiara d’Assisi: un
messaggio antico (1194) per un’eredità moderna (1994).
Studi in occasione delle “Giornate dell’Osservanza,” 47-
52. In Zenit Quaderni, 1994.
Cardini, F. “Aspetti ludici, scenici e spettacolari della
predicazione francescana.” Storia della città 26-27 (1983):
53-64.
Cariboni, G. Communità religiose femminili legate ai Cistercensi a
Piacenza e in Lombardia tra I pontificati di Innocenzo III
and Alessandro IV. Milan, 1994-1997.
_____. “Documenti ignoti o poco noti intorno a Barbata, curtis
del monastero bresciano di S. Giulia.” In Rendiconti
dell’Istituto lombardo Accademia di Scienze e lettere, 27-
49. Classe di Lettere e Scienze Morali e Storiche 129,
1995.
_____. “‘Huiusmodi verba gladium portant’ Raniero da Ponza e
l’Ordine cistercense.” Florensia 11 (1997): 115-135.
Carney, Margaret. Clare of Assisi: The First Franciscan Woman.
Quincy, IL: Franciscan Press, 1993.
Casagrande, G. “Le compagne di Chiara.” In Chiara di Assisi,
383-425. Spoleto, 1993.
_____. “Terziarie Francescane Regolari in Perugia nei secoli XIV
e XV.” In La Beata Angelina da Montegiove e il movimento
del Terz’Ordine regolare francescano femminile. R. Pazzelli
and M. Sensi, eds., 437-491. Rome: Ed. Analecta TOR,
1984.
Cenci, C. “Le Clarisse a Mantova (sec. XIII-XV) e il primo secolo
dei Frati Minori.” Le venezie francescane 31 (1964): 3-92.
Chiara d’Assisi: Con Francesco sulla via di Cristo. Assisi, 1993.
Chiara d’Assisi e la diffusione delle Clarisse nel secolo XIII. Atti del
Convegno di Studi in occasione dell’VIII centenario
della nascita di s. Chiara. G. Andenna and B. Vetere,
eds. Galatina, 1998.
Chiara d’Assisi e la memoria di Francesco. Atti del Convegno per
l’VIII Centenario della nascita di s. Clare. Monografie
BIBLIOGRAPHY 223
Francescane 2. A. Marini and M. B. Mistretta, eds. Fara

Sabina-Rieti, 1995.
Chiara d’Assisi: Scritti e documenti. G. G. Zopetti and M. Bartoli.
Assisi, Padua, Vicenza, 1994.
Chiara di Assisi. Atti del XX Convegno internazionale. Società
Internazionale di Studi Francescani. Spoleto, 1993.
Chiara e il secondo Ordine. Il fenomeno francescano femminile nel
Salento (Nardò, 12-13 November 1993). G. Andenna and
B. Vetere. Galatina, 1997.
Chiara: Francescanesimo al femminile. D. Covi and D. Dozzi.
Rome, 1992.
Claire d’Assise, Écrits. Introduction, texte latin, traduction, notes et
index. M.-F. Becker, J.-F. Godet, and T. Matura. Sources
chrétiennes, 325. Paris, 1985.
Clare of Assisi: Early Documents. Regis Armstrong, ed. St.
Bonaventure, NY: The Franciscan Institute, 1993.
Constable, G. Three Studies in Medieval Religious and Social
Thought. Cambridge, 1995.
Constitutiones Concilii quarti Lateranensis una cum Commentariis
Glossatorum. Monumenta iuris canonici, s. A: Corpus
Glossatorum 2. Vatican City, 1981.
Cremascoli, G. “Introduzione – Julian of Speyer.” In Fontes
franciscani, 1017-1123. Assisi, 1995.
Creytens, R. “Les constitutions primitives des soeurs
dominicaines de Montargis (1250).” Archivum Fratrum
Praedicatorum 17 (1947): 41-84.
D’Alatri, M. “Genesi della regola di Niccolò IV: aspetti storici.”
In La “Supra montem” di Niccolò IV (1289): genesi e
diffusione di una regola, 93-107. Rome: Ed. Analecta TOR,
1998.
Dalarun, J. Francesco: un passaggio : Donna e donne negli scritti e
nelle leggende di Francesco d’Assisi. I libri di Viella 2. Rome,
1994.
_____. La malavventura di Francesco d’Assisi. Milan, 1996. En-
glish trans., The Misadventure of Francis of Assisi. E.
Hagman, trans. St. Bonaventure, NY : Franciscan Insti-
tute Publications, 2002.
_____. “La Mort des saints fondateurs, de Martin à François.” In

Les fonctions des saints dans le monde occidental, IIIème-
XIIIème siècle. Collection de l’École Française de Rome
149, 193-215. Rome, 1991. English trans., “The Death
of Holy Founders from Martin to Francis.” Greyfriars
Review 14.1 (2000): 1-19.
Dalla penitenza all’ascolto delle confessioni: il ruolo dei frati
mendicanti. Atti del XXIII Convegno internazionale della
Società internazionale di studi francescani. Spoleto,
1996.
Dalla “sequela Christi” di Francesco d’Assisi all’apologia della
povertà. Atti dei Convegni della Società internazionale
di studi francescani e del Centro interuniversitario di
studi francescani. Nuova serie 1. Spoleto, 1992.
Dal Pino, F. A. I frati Servi di s. Maria dalle origini all’approvazione
(1233 ca. – 1304) I.2: Storiografia-Fonti-Storia. Recueil
de travaux d’histoire et de philologie, 4e série, 49.
Louvain, 1972.
_____. “Scelte di povertà all’origine dei nuovi ordini religiosi
dei secoli XII-XIV.” In La conversione alla povertà nell’Italia
dei secolli XII-XIV, 53-125. Spoleto, 1991.
De Fontette, M. Les religieuses à l’âge classique du droit canon:
Recherches sur les structures juridiques des branches
féminines des Ordres. Paris, 1967.
De Paris, A. “L’Origine et la fondation des monastères de
Clarisses en Aquitaine au XIIIe siècle.” Collectanea
Franciscana 25 (1955): 5-52.
Desbonnets, T. From Intuition to Institution: The Franciscans. P.
Duggan and J. Du Charme, trans. Chicago, 1983.
Die Register Innocenz’ III., 1. Band, 1. Pontifikatsjahr, 1198/99:
Texte. Publikationen der Abteilung für historische
Studien des Österreichischen Kulturinstituts in Rom II/
I/1. O. Hageneder and A. Haidacher, eds. Graz/Cologne,
1964.
Die Register Innocenz’ III., VII:7. Pontifikatsjahr 1204/1205, Texte
und Indices. Publikationen des Historischen Instituts
beim Österreichischen Kulturinstitut in Rom II.
Abteilung, 1. Reihe, 7: Texte und Indices. O. Hageneder,
BIBLIOGRAPHY 225
A. Sommerlechner, H. Weigl, C. Egger, and R. Murauer,

eds. Vienna, 1997.
Doppelklöster und andere Formen der Symbiose männlicher und
weiblicher Religiosen im Mittelalter. Berliner historische
Studien 18. Ordensstudien 8. K. Elm and M. Parisse,
eds. Berlin, 1992.
Dubois, J. “Les ordres religieux au XIIème siècle selon la Curie
romaine.” Revue Bénédictine 78 (1968): 283-309.
Egger, C. “Papst Innocenz III. als Theologe. Beiträge seines
Kenkens im Rahmen der Frühscholastik.” Archivum
historiae pontificiae 30 (1992): 55-123.
Elm, K. “Die Entwicklung des Franziskanerordens zwischen dem
ersten und letzten Zeugnis des Jakob von Vitry.” In
Francesco d’Assisi e francescanesimo dal 1216 al 1226, 193-
233. Convegni della Società internazionale di studi
francescani 4. Assisi, 1997.
_____. “Francescanesimo e movimenti religiosi del Duecento e
Trecento: Osservazioni sulla continuità e il cambiamento
di un problema storiografico.” In Gli studi francescani dal
dopoguerra ad oggi. Atti del Convegno di studi. F. Santi,
ed., 73-89. Spoleto, 1993.
_____. “Franziskus und Dominikus: Wirkungen und Antriebskräfte
zweier Ordensstifter.” Saeculum 23 (1972): 127-147.
_____. “Le donne negli Ordini religiosi dei secoli XII e XIII.” In
Chiara e il secondo Ordine, 9-22. Galatina, 1997.
_____. “Orden. I. Begriff und Geschichte des Ordenswesens.”
In Theologische Realenzyclopädie XXV, 315-330. Berlin/
New York, 1995.
_____. “Die Stellung der Frau in Ordenswesen, Semireli-
giosentum und Häresie zur Zeit der heiligen Elisabeth.”
In Sankt Elisabeth. Fürstin, Dienerin, Heilige, Aufsätze,
Dokumentation, Katalog, 7-28. Sigmaringen, 1981.
Erens, A. “Les soeurs dans l’ordre de Prémontré.” Analecta
Praemonstratensia 5 (1929): 1-26.
Escritos de Santa Clara. Ig. Omaechevarria, ed. Madrid, 1970,
1982.
Esperienze religiose e opere assistenziali nei secoli XII e XIII. Turin,
1987.
Esperienze minoritiche nel Veneto del Due-Trecento. Atti del

Convegno nazionale di studi francescani. Padova, 1984.
Le Venezie francescane, nuova serie 2 (1985).
Esser, K. “Die Briefe Gregors IX. an die hl. Klara von Assisi.”
Franziskanische Studien 35 (1953): 277-283.
Federico II e la civiltà comunale nell’Italia del nord. Atti del
convegno internazionale promosso in occasione
dell’VIII centenario della nascita di Federico II di Svevia.
Pavia, Aula Foscoliana dell’Università, Rivellino,
Castello Visconteo. Rome, 2001.
Fonseca, C. D. “Federico II e gli Ordini Mendicanti.” In Friedrich
II, 163-181. Tagung des Deutschen Historischen Instituts
in Rom im Gedenkjahr 1994. Bibliothek des Deutschen
Historischen Instituts in Rom 85. Tübingen, 1996.
Fontes franciscani. Assisi, 1995.
Foreville, R. “Naissance d’un ordre double. L’ordre de
Sempringham.” In Naissance et fonctionnement des
réseaux monastiques et canoniaux. Actes du 1er Colloque
International du C.E.R.C.O.M. R. Gaussin, ed., 163-174.
Saint-Etienne, 1991.
Francis of Assisi: Early Documents. I. The Saint; II. The Founder;
III. The Prophet. R. Armstrong, J. A. W. Hellmann and
W. Short, eds. New York: New City Press, 1999, 2000,
and 2001.
Francescanesimo e vita religiosa dei laici nel ’200. Atti dell’VIII
Convegno internazionale. Società internazionale di
studi francescani 8. Assisi, 1981.
Francesco d’Assisi: Documenti e Archivi, Codici e Biblioteche, Min-
iature. Milan, 1982.
Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo di storia francescana. Turin:
Biblioteca Einaudi 1, 1997.
Frugoni, C. Francesco e l’invenzione delle stimmate: Una storia per
parole e immagini fino a Bonaventura e Giotto. Turin, 1993.
García y García, A. “Genesis de la Regla de Nicolao IV: aspectos
juridicios.” In La “Supra montem” di Niccolò IV (1289):
genesi e diffusione di una regola, 109-131. Rome: Ed.
Analecta TOR, 1988.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 227
Gasparini, Sandre. “Introduzione.” In Le carte dei lebbrosi di

Verona, xix-xxiv. Padua, 1989.
Gennaro, Clara. Chiara d’Assisi. Magnano, 1995.
_____. “Chiara, Agnese e le prime consorella: dalle Pauperes domi-
nae di S. Damiano alle Clarisse.” In Movimento religioso
femminile, 169-191. Assisi, 1980. English trans., “Clare,
Agnes and the First Sisters: From the ‘Pauperes Domi-
nae’ of San Damiano to the Poor Clares.” Greyfriars Re-
view 9.3 (1995): 259-276.
_____. “Il francescanesimo femminile nel XIII secolo.” Rivista
di storia e letteratura religiosa 25 (1989): 259-280.
Godet, J.-F. “Claire et la vie au féminin: Symbole de femme
dans ses écrits.” Laurentianum 31 (1990): 148-175.
_____. Clare of Assisi: A Woman’s Life: Symbols of the Feminine in
Her Writings. Chicago, 1991.
Gonnet, G. “La donna presso I movimenti pauperistico-
evangelici.” In Movimento religioso femminile, 101-129.
Assisi, 1980. English trans., “The Place of Women in
the Pauperist-Evangelical Movements.” Greyfriars Review
13.2 (1999): 203-224.
Gratien de Paris. Histoire de la fondation et de l’évolution de l’Ordre
des Frères Mineurs au XIIIe siècle. Paris, 1928. Reprinted
by Mariano d’Alatri and S. Gieben. Bibliotheca seraphico-
capuccina 29. Rome, 1982.
Grau, E. “Das Privilegium paupertatis Innozenz’ III.”
_____. “Die Regel der hl. Klara (1253) in ihrer Abhängigkeit von
der Regel der Minderbrüder (1223).” Franziskanische
Studien 35 (1953): 216, 245-249.
_____. “Die Schriften der heiligen Klara and die Werke ihrer
Biographen.” In Movimento religioso femminile, 193-228.
Assisi, 1980.
Griesser, B. “Rainer von Fossanova und sein Brief an Abt Arnald
von Cîteaux (1203).” Cistercienserchronik 60 (1953): 151-
167.
Grundmann, H. “Die Bulle ‘Quo elongati’ Papst Gregors IX.”
Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 54 (1961): 3-25; also
published in Ausgewählte Aufsätze, I: Religiöse
Bewegungen. MGH Schriften 25/1, 222-242. Stuttgart,

1976. English trans., FA:ED I, 570-575.
_____. Religiöse Bewegungen im Mittelalter: Untersuchungen über
die geschichtlichen Zusammenhänge zwischen der Ketzerei,
den Bettelorden und der religiösen Deutschen Mystik.
Darmstadt, 1961. 1st German edition Berlin, 1935. En-
glish trans., Religious Movements in the Middle Ages: The
Historical Links between Heresy, the Mendicant Orders, and
the Women’s Religious Movement in the Twelfth and Thir-
teenth Century, with the Historical Foundations of German
Mysticism. Notre Dame, IN, 1995.
Gy, P.-M. “Le statut ecclésiologique de l’apostolat des Prêcheurs
et des Mineur[s] avant la querelle des Mendiants.” Re-
vue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 59 (1975):
79-88.
Hardick, L. “Zur Chronologie im Leben der hl. Klara.”
The Historia Occidentalis of Jacques de Vitry: A Critical Edition.
Spicilegium Friburgense 17. J. F. Hinnebusch, ed.
Fribourg, 1972.
Höhler, P. “Frauenklöster in einer italienischen Stadt. Zur
Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte der Klarissen van
Monteluce und der Zisterzienserinnen von S. Guiliana
in Perugia. 13 – Mitte 15 Jh.” Quellen und Forschungen
aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 67 (1987): 22-
29.
_____. “Il monastero delle Clarisse di Monteluce in Perugia
(1218-1400).” In Il movimento religioso femminile in
Umbria. R. Rusconi, ed., 161-167. Florence, 1984.
I compagni di Francesco e la prima generazione minoritica. Atti del
XIX Convegno internzaionale. Assisi. Spoleto, 1992.
Il monachesimo italiano nell’età comunale (1088-1250). Atti del
IV Convegno di studi storici sull’Italia benedettina,
Abbazia di S. Giacomo Maggiore Pontida. Francesco G.
B. Trolese, ed. Cesena, 1998.
Il movimento religioso femminile in Umbria nei secoli XIII-XIV. Atti
del Convegno internazionale nell’ambito delle
celebrazioni per l’VIII centenario della nascita di S.
Francesco d’Assisi. R. Rusconi, ed. Florence, 1984.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 229
Il Papato duecentesco e gli ordini mendicanti. Atti del XXV

Convegno internazionale di Studi Francescani. Spoleto,
1998.
Jacques de Vitry. Lettres. R.B.C. Huygens, ed. Leyden, 1960.
Jenal, G. “Doppelklöster und monastische Gesetzgebung im
Italien des frühen und hohen Mittelalters,” 25-55. In
Doppelklöster und andere Formen. Berlin, 1992.
Jordan of Giano. “Chronica.” In Analecta franciscana I.
Quaracchi, 1885.
Koudelka, V.J. “Le ‘Monasterium Tempuli’ et la fondation domi-
nicaine de San Sisto.” Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum
31 (1961): 5-81.
_____. “Notes pour servir à l’histoire de S. Dominique.” Archivum
Fratrum Praedicatorum 35 (1965): 5-15.
Krenig, E. G. “Mittelalterische Frauenklöster nach den
Konstitutionen von Cîteaux.” Analecta sacri Ordinis
Cisterciensis 10 (1954): 1-105.
Kuster, N. “Das Armutsprivileg Innozenz’ III Und das Klaras
Testament: Echt oder raffinierte Fälschungen?”
Collectanea Franciscana 66 (1996): 5-94. English trans.,
“Clare’s Testament and Innocent III’s Privilege of Poverty:
Genuine or Clever Forgeries?” Greyfriars Review 15.3
(2001): 171-252.
_____. “Thomas von Celano und Klaras Armut in San Damiano:
Beitrag zu einer neuinterpretation der beiden
Franziskusviten und zur Diskussion über den Verfasser
der Klara-legende.” Wissenschaft und Weisheit 59
(1996): 45-79.
La conversione alla povertà nell’Italia dei secolli XII-XIV. Atti dei
convegni dell’Accademia tudertina e del Centro di studi
sulla spiritualità medievale, n.s. 2. Spoleto, 1991.
La Grasta, G. “La canonizzazione di Chiara.” In Chiara di Assisi,
317-324. Spoleto, 1993.
La “Supra montem” di Niccolò IV (1289): genesi e diffusione di una
regola. Atti del 5° Convegno di studi francescani. R.
Pazzelli and L. Temperini, eds. Rome: Ed. Analecta TOR,
1988.
Lambertini, R. and A. Tabarroni. Dopo Francesco: l’Eredità difficile.
Turin, 1989.
Lanzoni, F. “Le antiche carte del convento di S. Chiara in

Faenza.” Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 5 (1912):
261-276.
Laurent, M.-H. “Monumenta historica S. N. Dominici I: Historia
diplomatica S. Dominici.” In Monumenta Ordinis F.
Praedicatorum historica XV. Paris, 1933.
Lazzeri, Z. “Il processo di canonizzazione di S. Chiara d’Assisi.”
Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 13 (1920): 403-507.
Le carte dei lebbrosi di Verona tra XII e XIII secolo. Fonti per la
storia della Terraferma veneta 4. A. Rossi Saccomanni,
ed. Padua, 1989.
Leclercq, J. “Il monachesimo femminile nei secoli XII e XIII.”
In Movimento religioso femminile, 63-99. Assisi, 1980.
English trans., “Women’s Monasticism in the 12th and
13th Centuries.” Greyfriars Review 7.2 (1993): 167-192.
Lefèvre, F. Les Statuts de Prémontré réformés sur les ordres de Grégoire
IX et d’Innocent IV au XIIIe siècle. Bibliothèque de la Re-
vue d’histoire ecclésiastique 23. Louvain, 1946.
Legenda sanctae Clarae virginis. F. Pennacchi, ed. Assisi, 1910.
Legenda sanctae Clarae virginis Assisiensis. G. Boccali, ed. Assisi,
2001.
L’Italia nel quadro dell’espansione europea del monachisimo
cluniacense. Atti del Convegno internazionale di storia
medioevale. Italia Benedettina 8. C. Violante, A.
Spicciani, and G. Spinelli, eds. Cesena, 1985.
Levi, G. “Documenti ad illustrazione del Registro del Card.
Ugolino d’Ostia legato apostolico in Toscana e
Lombardia.” Archivio della R. Società di Storia Patria 12
(1889): 273.
_____. Registri dei cardinali Ugolino d’Ostia e Ottaviano degli
Ubaldini. Fonti per la storia d’Italia 8. Rome, 1890.
Lucioni, A. “L’evoluzione del monachesimo fruttuariense tra la
fine dell’XI e la metà del XIII secolo: dalla ‘ecclesia’
all’‘Ordo.’” In Il monachesimo italiano nell’età comunale
(1088-1250), 97-138. Cesena, 1999.
Maccarone, M. “Lateranense IV, concilio.” In Dizionario degli
Istituti di Perfezione V, cols. 485-490. Rome, 1978.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 231
_____. “Le costituzioni del IV Concilio lateranense sui religiosi.”

In Nuovi studi su Innocenzo III. Nuovi studi storici 25. R.
Lambertini, ed., 1-45. Rome, 1995.
_____. Studi su Innocenzo III. Italia sacra. Studi e documenti di
storia ecclesiastica 17. Padua, 1972.
_____. “Primato romano e monasteri dal principio del secolo
XII ad Innocenzo III.” In Istituzioni monastiche e
istituzioni canonicali in Occidente (1123-1215). Miscella-
nea del Centro di studi medioevali 9. Milan, 1980. Re-
printed in Romana Ecclesia Cathedra Petri. Italia Sacra.
Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 47-48. P. Zerbi,
R. Volpini, and A. Galuzzi, eds. Rome, 1991.
Maleczek, W. “Das Frieden stiftende Papsttum im 12. und 13.
Jahrhundert.” In Träger und Instrumentarien des Friedens
im hohen und späten Mittelalter. Vorträge und Forschungen
43. J. Fried, ed., 249-332. Sigmaringen, 1996.
_____. “Das ‘Privilegium paupertatis’ Innocenz’ III. und das Testa-
ment der Klara von Assisi: Überlegungen zur Frage ihrer
Echtheit,” Collectanea Franciscana 65 (1995): 5-82. Pub-
lished separately, Bibliotheca seraphico-capuccina 46.
Rome, 1995. English trans., “Questions About the Au-
thenticity of the Privilege of Poverty of Innocent III and
of the Testament of Clare of Assisi.” Greyfriars Review
12, Supplement (1998): 1-80.
_____. Papst und Kardinalskolleg von 1191 bis 1216: Die kardinale
unter Coelestine III und Innocenz III. Publikationen des
Historischen Instituts beim Österreichischen Kultur-
institut in Rom. Abhandlungen 6. Vienna, 1984.
_____. Petrus Capuanus Kardinal, Legat am vierten Kreuzzug,
Theologe (†1214). Publikationen des historischen
Instituts beim Österreichischen Kulturinstitut in Rom
I:8. Vienna, 1988.
_____. “Franziskus, Innocenz III, Honorius III und die Anfänge
des Minoritenordens: Ein neuer Versuch zu einem alten
Problem.” In Il Papato duecentesco e gli ordini mendicanti,
23-80. Spoleto, 1998.
Manselli, R. “Il gesto come predicazione per San Francesco
d’Assisi.” Collectanea Franciscana 51 (1981): 5-16.
_____. “La clericalizzazione dei Minori e San Bonaventura.” In

San Bonaventura francescano. Convegni del Centro di
studi sulla spiritualità medievale 14, 183-208. Todi,
1974. English trans., “St. Bonaventure and the
Clericalization of the Friars Minor.” Greyfriars Review 4.2
(1990): 83-98.
_____. San Francesco. Biblioteca di cultura 182. Rome, 1980. En-
glish trans., Saint Francis of Assisi. Chicago, 1988. New
edition, San Francesco. Milan, 2002.
_____. “La Chiesa e il francescanesimo femminile.” In Movimento
religioso femminile, 239-261. Assisi, 1980.
Marini, A. “Ancilla Christi, plantula sancti Francisci: Gli scritti di
santa Chiara e la Regola.” In Chiara di Assisi, 107-156.
Spoleto, 1993.
_____. “La ‘forma vitae’ di San Francesco per San Damiano tra
Chiara d’Assisi, Agnese di Boemia ed interventi papali.”
Hagiographica 4 (1997): 179-195.
_____. “Pauperem Christum, virgo pauper, amplectere: Il punto su
Chiara ed Agnese di Boemia.” In Chiara e la diffusione
delle Clarisse nel secolo XIII. G. Andenna and B. Vetere,
eds., 121-132. Galatina, 1998.
_____. Agnese di Boemia. Bibliotheca seraphico-cappuccina 38.
Rome, 1991.
Melville, G. “Cluny après ‘Cluny’: Le treizième siècle: un champ
de recherches.” Francia 17 (1990): 91-124.
_____. “‘Diversa sunt monasteria et diversas habent institutiones’:
Aspetti delle molteplici forme organizzative dei religiosi
nel Medioevo.” In Chiesa e società in Sicilia. I secoli XII-
XVI. G. Zito, ed., 323-345. Turin, 1995.
_____. “Ordensstatuten und allgemeines Kirchenrecht: Eine
Skizze zum 12/13 Jahrhundert.” In Proceedings of the
Ninth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law.
Monumenta iuris canonici, series C, Vol. 10. P. Landau
and J. Mueller, eds., 691-712. Vatican City, 1997.
Menestò, E. “Leone e I compagni di Assisi.” In I compagni di
Francesco, 31-58. Spoleto, 1992.
_____. “Problemi di identità cristiana di ieri e di oggi nella ‘Su-
pra montem’ di Niccolò IV.” In Niccolò IV: un pontificato
BIBLIOGRAPHY 233
tra Oriente ed Occidente. Biblioteca del Centro per il

collegamento degli studi medievali e umanistici
nell’Università di Perugia 4, 157-170. Spoleto, 1991.
Menestò, E. and R. Rusconi. Umbria: La strada delle sante
medievali. Turin, 1989.
Mens, A. “L’Ombrie italienne et l’Ombrie brabançonne: Deux
courants religieux parallèles d’inspiration commune.”
Études Franciscaines 17 Supplement (1967).
_____. Oorsprong en betekenis van de nederlandse begijnen en
begardenbewing: verkelijkende studie (XIIe-XIIIe eeuw).
Recueil de travaux d’histoire et de philologie, III/30.
Université de Louvain. Louvain, 1947.
Merlo, G. G. “Discorso inaugurale.” In La conversione alla povertà,
3-32. Spoleto, 1991.
_____. Eretici ed eresie medievali. Il Mulino 230. Universale pa-
perbacks. Bologna, 1989.
_____. “Fondazioni monastiche femminili della stirpe
marchionale di Saluzzo.” In Forme di religiosità nell’Italia
occidentale dei secoli XII e XIII. Storia e storiografia 11,
147-175. Vercelli, 1997. Also in Chiara e la diffusione
delle Clarisse nel secolo XIII, 53-78. Galatina, 1998.
_____. “Gli inizi dell’ordine dei Frati Predicatori.” Rivista di storia
e letteratura religiosa 31 (1995): 415-422.
_____. Intorno a frate Francesco: Quattro studi. Milan, 1993.
_____. “Spiritualità e religiosità.” In La spiritualità medievale:
metodi, bilanci, prospettive. Studi medievali 11, 49-56.
Spoleto, 1987.
_____. “Storia di frate Francesco e dell’Ordine dei Minori.” In
Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo di storia francescana, 3-
32. Turin: Biblioteca Einaudi 1, 1997. English trans.,
“The Story of Brother Francis and the Order of Friars
Minor.” Greyfriars Review 15.1 (2001): 1-33.
_____. Tensioni religiose agli inizi del Duecento. Torre Pellice, 1984.
_____. Tra eremo e città: Studi su Francesco d’Assisi e sul
francescanesimo medievale. Medioevo francescano. Saggi
2. Assisi, 1991.
Miccoli, G. Francesco d’Assisi: Realtà e memoria di un’esperienza
cristiana. Einaudi Paperbacks 217. Turin, 1991.
_____. “Gli scritti di Francesco.” In Francesco d’Assisi e il primo

secolo di storia francescana. Biblioteca Einaudi 1, 35-69.
Turin, 1997.
Minoritismo e centri veneti nel Duecento. Civis. Studi e testi 7
(1983). G. Cracco, ed. Trent, 1983.
Mistiche e devote nell’Italia tardomedievale. Nuovo Medioevo 40.
D. Bornstein and R. Rusconi, eds. Naples, 1992.
Mitarelli, G. B. and A. Costadoni. Annales Camaldulenses IV.
Venice, 1759.
Movimento religioso femminile e francescanesimo nel secolo XIII.
Atti del Convegno internazionale della Società
internazionale di studi francescani. Assisi, 1980.
Neiske, F. “Reform oder Kodifizierung? Päpstliche Statuten für
Cluny im 13. Jahrhundert.” Archivum historiae pontificiae
26 (1998): 71-118.
Ne nimia religionum. In Consiliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta. G.
Alberigo, G. L. Dossetti, P. P. Joannou, C. Leonardi, and
P. Prodi, eds., 242. Bologna, 1991. English trans., In
Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils. Norman P. Tanner,
ed., 242. Washington D.C., 1990.
Niccolò IV: un pontificato tra Oriente ed Occidente. Atti del
convegno internazionale di studi in occasione del VII
centenario del pontificato di Niccolò IV. E. Menestò,
ed. Spoleto, 1991.
Odoardi, O. “Elia di Assisi.” In Dizionario degli Istituti di Perfezione
III (Rome, 1976), coll. 1094-1110.
Oliger, L. “De origine regularum Ordinis s. Clarae.” Archivum
Franciscanum Historicum 5 (1912): 181-209 and 413-447.
_____. “Documenta originis Clarissarum Civitatis Castelli,
Eugubii (a. 1223-1263) necnon statuta monasteriorum
Perusiae Civitatisque Castelli (saec. XV) et S. Silvestri
Romae (saec. XIII).” Archivum Franciscanum Historicum
15 (1922): 71-102.
Pacini, G. P. “Comunità di poveri nel Veneto: esperienze ‘religi-
ose’ del laicato ‘vicentino dal secoli XII al XIV.” In La
conversione alla povertà nell’Italia dei secolli XII-XIV, 325-
353. Spoleto, 1991.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 235
Paciocco, R. “‘Virtus morum’ e ‘virtus signorum’: La teoria della

santità nelle lettere di canonizzazione di Innocenzo III.”
In Nuova rivista storica 70 (1986): 597-610.
Paoli, E. “Introduzione a Clarae Assisiensis Opuscula.” In Fontes
franciscani. E. Menestò and S. Brufani, eds., 13-75. Assisi,
1995.
Paravicini Bagliani, A. Cardinali di curia e “familiae” cardinalizie
dal 1227 al 1254. Vol. I. Italia sacra. Studi e documenti
di storia ecclesiastica 18. Padua, 1972.
Pásztor, E. “Esperience di povertà al femminile.” In La conversione
alla povertà nell’Italia dei secolli XII-XIV, 369-389. Spoleto,
1991.
_____. “Francesco e papato.” In Francesco, il francescanesimo e la
cultura della nuova Europa. I. Baldelli and A. M. Romanini,
eds., 103–118. Rome, 1986.
_____. “Frate Leone testimone di San Francesco.” Collectanea
Francescana 50 (1980): 35-84.
_____. “Gioacchino da fiore, s. Bernardo ed il monachesimo
cisterciense.” Clio 20 (1984): 547-561.
_____. “Il monachesimo femminile.” In Dall’eremo al cenobio:
La civiltà monastica in Italia dalle origini all’età di Dante,
155-180. Milan, 1987.
_____. “I papi del Duecento e Trecento di fronte alla vita religiosa
femminile.” In Il movimento religioso femminile, 31-65.
Florence, 1984. English trans., “The Popes of the Thir-
teenth Century and Women Religious.” Greyfriars Re-
view 7.3 (1993): 381-405.
_____. “San Francesco e il cardinale Ugolino nella ‘Questione
francescana.’” Collectanea Franciscana 46 (1976): 209-
239. English trans., “St. Francis, Cardinal Hugolino, and
‘The Franciscan Question.’” Greyfriars Review 1.1 (1987):
1-29.
Pazzelli, R. “Movimenti, congregazioni e ordini con la Regola
di Niccolò IV nei secoli XIII-XV.” In La “Supra montem”
di Niccolò IV (1289): genesi e diffusione di una regola, 249-
288. Rome: Ed. Analecta TOR,1988.
Pellegrini, L. “Espressioni di minoritismo nella realtà urbana
del secolo XIII.” In Esperienze minoritiche nel Veneto del
Due-Trecento. Le Venezie francescane, nuova serie 2

(1985). Padua, 1984.
_____. Le esperienze religiose femminili. In “Che sono queste novità?”
Le religiones novae in Italia meridionale (secoli XIII e XIV),
267-298 Napoli, 2000.
_____. Insediamenti francescani nell’Italia del Duecento. Rome,
1984.
_____. “Le ‘pauperes dominae’ nel contesto dei movimenti
italiani del secolo XIII.” In Chiara e il Secondo Ordine: Il
fenomeno francescano nel Salento. B. Vetere and G.
Andenna, eds., 71-84. Galatina, 1997.
_____. “Female Religious Experience and Society in Thirteenth-
Century Italy.” In Monks and Nuns, Saints and Outcasts:
Religion in Medieval Society Essays in Honor of Lester K.
Little. S. Farmer and B. H. Rosenwein, eds., 97-122.
Cornell University Press, 2000.
Penco, G. “Alcuni aspetti di rapport tra le prime comunità di
Clarisse e le monache Benedettine.” Benedictina 34
(1987): 15-23.
Philippi de Perusia. Epistola de cardinalibus protectoribus ordinis
fratrum minorum. In MGH Scriptores XXXII. O. Holder-
Egger ed. Hanover-Leipzig, 1905-1913.
Picasso, G. “‘Usus’ e ‘consuetudines’ cluniacensi in Italia.” In
L’Italia nel quadro, 297-311. Cesena, 1985.
Potestà, G. L. “Gioacchino riformatore monastico nel Tractatus
de vita sancti Benedicti e nella coscienza dei primi
florensi.” Florensia 6 (1992): 73-93.
Potestà, L. “Ideali di santità secondo Ubertino da Casale ed
Angelo Clareno.” In Santi e santità nel secolo XIV, 103-
137. Perugia, 1989.
_____. Angelo Clareno: Dai poveri eremiti ai Fraticelli. Nuovi studi
storici 8. Rome, 1990.
Prinzivalli, E. “Alcune riflessioni sulla ‘Vita s. Francisci’ di
Giuliano da Spira.” Hagiographica 3 (1996): 137-161.
_____. “Le fonti agiografiche come documenti per la vita di
Chiara.” Hagiographica 4 (1997): 197-219.
_____. “Un santo da leggere: Francesco d’Assisi nel percorso delle
fonti agiografiche.” In Francesco d’Assisi e il primo secolo
BIBLIOGRAPHY 237
di storia francescana, 71-116. Turin, 1997. English trans.,

“A Saint to be Read: Francis of Assisi in the Hagiographic
Sources.” Greyfriars Review 15.3 (2001): 253-298.
Prosdocimi, L. “A propostio della terminologia e della natura
giuridica delle norme monastiche e canonicali nei secoli
XI e XII.” In La vita comune del clero nei secoli XI e XII II.
Miscellanea del Centro di studi medioevali 3. Milan,
1962.
Rigon, A. “Antonio di Padova e il minoritismo padano.” In I
compagni di Francesco e la prima generazione minoritica,
169-199. Spoleto, 1992.
Robb, F. “Who Hath Chosen the Better Part? Pope Innocent III
and Joachim of Fiore on the Diverse Forms of Religious
Life.” In Monastic Studies II. J. Loades, ed., 151-170.
Bangor, 1991.
Romeri, C. M. “Le Clarisse nel territorio della minoritica
provincia veneta. Collana di notizie.” In Il secondo Ordine
francescano nelle Venezie. Le Venezie francescane 20.
Venice, 1953.
Rotzetter, A. Klara von Assisi. Die erste franziskanische Frau.
Freiburg im B., 1993.
Rusconi, R. “Chiara d’Assisi e la negazione del potere.” In
Umbria: La strada delle sante medievali. E. Menestò and
R. Rusconi, eds. Turin, 1989.
_____. “Francesco d’Assisi, santo (Francesco di Pietro di
Bernardone).” In Dizionario biografico degli Italiani XLIX,
664-678. Rome, 1997.
_____. “L’espansione del francescanesimo femminile nel secolo
XIII.” In Movimento religiose femminile, 263-313. Assisi,
1980. English trans., “The Spread of Women’s
Franciscanism in the Thirteenth Century.” Greyfriars
Review 12.1 (1998): 35-75.
_____. “Predicatori e predicazione (secoli IX-XVIII).“ In
Intellettuali e potere. Storia d’Italia: Annali 4, 951-1035.
C. Vivanti ed. Turin, 1981.
_____. “I francescani e la confessione nel secolo XIII.” In
Francescanesimo e vita religiosa dei laici nel ‘200, 251-309.
Assisi, 1981.
S. Chiara d’Assisi: Scritti e documenti. G. G. Zopetti and M. Bartoli,

eds. Assisi, Padua, Vicenza, 1994.
Sabatier, P. “Le privilège de la pauvreté.” Revue d’histoire
franciscaine 1 (1924): 1-54.
Salimbene de Adam. Chronica. Scrittori d’Italia 233. G. Scalia
ed. Bari, 1966; English trans., The Chronicle of Salimbene
de Adam. J. L. Baird, G. Baglivi, and J. R. Kane, eds.
Binghamton, 1986.
San Francesco nella ricerca storica degli ultimi ottanta anni. Atti
del Convegno di studio. Convegni del Centro di studi
sulla spiritualità medievale 9. Todi, 1971.
Santi e santità nel secolo XIV. Atti del XV Convegno della Società
internazionale di studi francescani. Perugia, 1989.
Scheeben, H. C. “Die Anfänge des zweiten Ordens des hl.
Dominikus.” Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum 2 (1932):
284-315.
Schenkluhn, W. San Francesco in Assisi: Ecclesia Specialis. Fonti e
ricerche 5. Milan, 1994.
Schlageter, J. Das Heil der Armen und das Verderben der Reichen:
Petrus Johannis Olivi OFM Die Frage nach der höchsten
Armut. Franziskanische Forschungen 34. Werl/
Westfalen, 1989.
Selge, K.-V. “Franz von Assisi und die Römische Kurie.” Zeitschrift
für Theologie und Kirche 67 (1970): 129-161.
_____. “Franz von Assisi und Hugolino von Ostia.” In San
Francesco nella ricerca storica degli ultimi ottanta anni, 159-
222. Todi, 1971.
Sensi, M. “Incarcerate e recluse in Umbria nei secoli XIII and
XIV: un bizzocaggio centro-italiano.” In Il movimento
religioso femminile in Umbria dei secoli XIII-XIV. R.
Rusconi, ed., 87-121. Firenze, 1984. English trans., “The
Women’s Recluse Movement in Umbria during the 13th
and 14th Centuries.” Greyfriars Review 8.3 (1994): 319-
345.
_____. “La Regola di Niccolò IV dopo la constituzione
‘Periculoso.’” In La “Supra montem” di Niccolò IV (1289):
genesi e diffusione di una regola, 147-198. Rome: Ed.
Analecta TOR, 1988.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 239
_____. “Le Clarisse a Foligno nel secolo XIII.” Collectanea

Franciscana 47 (1977): 349-363.
_____. Storie di bizzoche tra Umbria e Marche. Rome, 1995.
Sevesi, P. “Il monastero della Clarisse in S. Apollinare di Milano
(documenti secc. XIII-XVIII).” Archivum Franciscanum
Historicum 17 (1924): 338-364.
Sulle tracce degli Umiliati. Bibliotheca erudita. Studi e documenti
di storia e filologia, 13. M. P. Alberzoni, A. Ambrosioni,
A. Lucioni, eds. Milano, 1997.
Thirteenth Century Chronicles. P. Hermann, trans. Chicago, 1961.
Thomas, A. De oudste Constituties van de Dominicanen.
Bibliothèque de la Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 42.
Louvain, 1965.
Thomas of Eccleston. De adventu fratrum minorum in Angliam.
A. G. Little ed. Collection d’études et de documents sur
l’histoire religieuse et littéaire du Moyen Âge, 7. Paris,
1909.
Thompson, S. “The Problem of the Cistercian Nuns in the
Twelfth and Early Thirteenth Centuries.” In Medieval
Women. D. Baker, ed., 227-252. Oxford, 1978.
Thomson, W. R. “Checklist of Papal Letters relating to the Three
Orders of St. Francis: Innocent III–Alexander IV.”
Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 64 (1971): 367-580.
Thouzellier, C. “La légation du cardinal Hugolin en Lombardie
(1221). Un épisode de la cinquième croisade.” Revue
d’histoire ecclésiastique 45 (1959): 508-542.
Tilatti, A. “La direzione spirituale: Un percorso di ricerca
attraverso il secolo XIII nell’ordine dei Predicatori.” In
Dalla penitenza all’ascolto delle confessioni: il ruolo dei frati
mendicanti, 125-173. Spoleto, 1995.
Tiraboschi, G. Vetera humiliatorum monumenta II. Milan, 1767.
Uomini e donne in comunità. Quaderni di storia religiosa, 1.
Verona, 1994.
Van Asseldonk, Optatus. “Sorores Minores: Una nuova
impostazione del problema.” Collectanea Franciscana 62
(1992): 595-634.
_____. “Sorores Minores e Chiara d’Assisi a San Damiano: Una
scelta tra clausura e lebbrosi?” Collectanea Franciscana
63 (1993): 399-420.
Varanini, G. M. “Per la storia dei Minori a Verona nel Duecento.”

In Minoritismo e centri veneti nel Duecento. Civis. Studi e
testi 7, 1983. G. Cracco, ed., 93-101. Trent, 1983.
Vauchez, A. La Sainteté en occident aux derniers siècles du Moyen
Age d’après les procès de canonisation et les documents
hagiographiques. Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises
d’Athènes et de Rome 241. Rome, 1981. English trans.,
Sainthood in the Later Middle Ages. Cambridge, 1997.
Vecchio, S. “Elia d’Assisi.” In Dizionario biografico degli Italiani
XLII, 450-458. Rome, 1993.
Vicaire, M.-H. Histoire de Saint Dominique. Paris, 1957; new edi-
tion, 1982.
Violante, C. “Le istituzioni ecclesiastiche.” In Il Centro italiano
di studi sull’alto Medioevo: Venticinque anni di attività.
Spoleto, 1977.
Vita Gregorii papae IX. In Rerum Italicarum Scriptores III. Milan,
1723.
Voci, A. M. “Federico II imperatore e i Mendicanti: privilegi
papali e propaganda anti-imperiale.” Critica storica 22
(1985): 24-25.
Walz, A. “Die ‘Miracula beati Dominici’ der Schwester Cäcilia.”
Archivum fratrum Praedicatorum 37 (1967): 5-45.
Wessley, E. Joachim of Fiore and Monastic Reform. American Uni-
versity Studies, s. VII: Theology and Religion 72. New
York, 1990.
Wollasch, J. “Frauen in der Cluniacensis ecclesia.” In
Doppelklöster und andere Formen, 97-113. Berlin, 1992.
Zarncke, L. Der Anteil des Kardinals Ugolino an der Ausbildung der
drei Orden des heiligen Franz. Beiträge zur Kultur-
geschichte des Mittelalters und der Renaissance, 42.
Leipzig/Berlin, 1930.
Zerbi, P. “San Francesco d’Assisi e la Chiesa romana.” In Francesco
d’Assisi nell’ottavo centenario della nascita, 75-103. Milan,
1982.
Zerfass, R. Der Streit um die Laienpredigt. Eine pastoralgeschichtliche
Untersuchung zum Verständnis des Predigtamtes und zu
seiner Entwicklung im 12 und 13 Jahrhundert. Freiburg im
B., 1974.

Clare of Assisi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Clare of Assisi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Clare of Assisi

and the Poor Sisters

Franciscan Institute Publications

All rights reserved.

Library of Congress Card Catalogue Number: 2004113195

Printed in the United States of America

This is Maria Pia Alberzoni’s first book published in English.

Jean François Godet-Calogeras, Ph.D.

AFH Archivum franciscanum historicum.

RIS Rerum italicarum Scriptores

Clare and San Damiano

The so-called “women’s religious movement” has been care-

uted to Innocent III and Clare’s Testament would have been

of research that has developed in the last decade with some

the history of Francis, his Order, and Clare’s community. For

The Role of the Papacy

Within the context of these studies, all the papal interven-

to intolerance for the women’s religious communities, so much

insistence on austere living contained in the documents writ-

Relations with the Order of Friars Minor

Another topic touched upon in various ways in each of these

der since 1232, was obliged to resign in May, 1239. He was

Clare’s lengthy tribulation and her constant mention of Francis’s

San Damiano and the Sorores Minores

foster and spread the experience of San Damiano, supporting

or ask for diocesan recognition. These were certainly dramatic

Women’s Monasticism and the Mendicant Orders

At this point, having come to the end of our journey, we can

constant concern to give it definitive structure. Otherwise, Gre-

the women’s monasteries of Madrid and Saint Sixtus of Rome

Clare and the Papacy

Clare’s Story Seen

Clare, the unworthy servant of Christ and the

When, in the final years of her life, Clare of Assisi dedicated

Certainly the desire to follow closely the norms composed

San Damiano and the Ordo Sancti Damiani

Proceeding with our investigation, we must first establish what

of Gregory IX onwards.8 The sometimes indiscriminate use of

with regard to the Order of Friars Minor, paid particular atten-

Through a careful study of the original sources and of studies

emphasis can be given to the differences between the Franciscan

necessary if we wish to avoid those ambiguities that Gregory

The Evidence up to 1220

On the basis on these findings we may now proceed to rein-

and the highest authorities in the Roman Church. Besides con-

at a time when the men’s religious Orders were giving increas-

tolary style), it cannot be denied that it also contains ideas that

Clare and Hugolino

this element had already been hinted at in the diplomas of

sion of goods received by way of donation – San Damiano did

Pope Gregory of happy memory . . . loved this

This dialogue, which is even mentioned in the letter of Clare’s

position as pontiff and the weighty responsibilities connected

reclusae. As a result, Clare would have to accept the forma vitae

cal right” is confirmed by the August 18, 1228, letter of Cardi-

other hand we have those religious who, because of their his-

tween the Franciscan Order and her community. Some Friars

Clare and Brother Elias

The close collaboration between Clare and Brother Elias seems

nity, which wanted to be like the Assisi monastery in every

der, we can see that in addition to being one of the best-known

such as Monticelli.129 We would add only that there is no evi-

In all of this, follow the counsel of our venerable