This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]

On: 08 November 2014, At: 07:41

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Medieval History

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmed20

Terror and territorium in Alexander of

Telese's Ystoria Rogerii regis: political
cultures in the Norman kingdom of
Sicily
a
Eleni Tounta
a
History and Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki,
Thessaloniki 541 24, Greece
Published online: 07 Apr 2014.

To cite this article: Eleni Tounta (2014) Terror and territorium in Alexander of Telese's Ystoria
Rogerii regis: political cultures in the Norman kingdom of Sicily, Journal of Medieval History, 40:2,
142-158, DOI: 10.1080/03044181.2014.903200

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03044181.2014.903200

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Journal of Medieval History, 2014
Vol. 40, No. 2, 142–158, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03044181.2014.903200

Terror and territorium in Alexander of Telese’s Ystoria Rogerii regis: political

cultures in the Norman kingdom of Sicily
Eleni Tounta*

History and Archaeology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki 541 24, Greece
(Received 26 June 2013; final version received 10 September 2013)

Alexander of Telese’s account of Roger II of Sicily, the Ystoria Rogerii regis, is imbued with
the notion of terror regius that scholars have treated in a practical sense, understanding it to
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

mean the use of physical violence. This article inquires into the meaning of terror to reveal
the author’s intellectual horizons and the social function of his narrative. Firstly, this
concept seems to define the hegemonic ethos, the performative role of the coronation
ceremony, the establishment of judicial institutions and consequently the power relations
between the ruler and his subjects, in such a manner as to assert the king’s primacy over
centrifugal powers inherent in the feudal system. Secondly, the concept is always associated
with the physical territory of the king’s dominions. It is maintained that Alexander of Telese
is influenced by Romano-Byzantine concepts of territoriality that are equally to be discerned
in Roger II’s administrative and judicial institutions. It is therefore argued that the narrative
aims at shaping political attitudes both for rulers and subjects.
Keywords: Alexander of Telese; Norman kingdom of Sicily; Roger II of Sicily; terror; Roman
law

The Norman conquest of Southern Italy and Sicily in the eleventh century led to the formation of
two distinct areas of power: the duchy of Apulia and the county of Sicily, which, under the
overlordship of the Roman Church, were ruled by members of the Norman Hauteville family,
Robert Guiscard (1059–85) and his brother Roger I (1085–1101) respectively. The county of
Sicily, as well as its lands in the southern half of Calabria, was formally under the lordship of
the duke of Apulia. Power relations in these areas differed significantly. In the duchy of Sicily,
Robert Guiscard created a large number of feudal dominions that undermined de facto the
central authority. Because of this fragmentation of power and the duke’s expansionist policy
against the Byzantine Empire, southern Italian magnates strengthened both their ambitions and
their political role by rebelling often against the first duke and his successors. The county of
Sicily did not experience the same degree of political turbulence, since Roger I tried to
mitigate the centrifugal forces of feudalism by granting small fiefs mostly to members of his
family. Chance events, like the deaths of significant warrior-kinsmen of the Hauteville brothers
during the conquest of Sicily, contributed significantly to the consolidation of central power.
This process was equally assisted by the indirect recognition of Roger I’s hereditary succession

*Email: tounta@hist.auth.gr

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

 Journal of Medieval History 143

by the Roman Church. The complex situation that had developed in the duchy of Apulia gave the
count of Sicily the opportunity to intervene by aiding the dukes against their rival magnates. In
return, he succeeded in gaining complete control over parts of Calabria and Sicily. His policy
was followed by that of his son and successor, Roger II (1105–54), who in 1122 succeeded in
taking over the whole of Calabria and Sicily by lending military support to Duke William I
(1111–27), Robert Guiscard’s grandson, in his efforts to assert control over his magnates.1
The death of William I in 1127 marked the beginning of a new era in political relations in
southern Italy and Sicily. Roger II claimed the ducal office on the grounds of hereditary right,
since he was the last offspring of the Norman Hauteville family. His claims, albeit legitimate,
were strongly contested both by southern Italian magnates, who saw their feudal rights
curtailed, and the Roman Church, which was concerned about the increase of its vassal’s
power. The count did not hesitate to resort to military means and in the following year he was
invested with the duchy of Apulia, Calabria and Sicily. Notwithstanding the recognition of the
Holy See, southern Italian magnates continued to fight against their new lord and did not lay
down their arms even after his coronation in 1130.2
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

Royal perception of this turbulent period, particularly of the years 1127–35, has come down to
us through the Ystoria Rogerii regis,3 a historical narrative written by Alexander, abbot of Telese,
at the behest of Roger II’s sister Matilda, who was married to one of the king’s main opponents,
Rainulf, count of Caiazzo.4 Alexander’s monastery was situated in a region that was under
Rainulf’s rule.5 It is very likely that both Matilda and her brother, who had visited the
monastery at Telese twice and displayed his royal generosity on both occasions, were the
abbot’s main sources of information.6 It would not be too bold to argue that the abbot’s
intimacy with the Hauteville family had a decisive effect on the peculiar way in which he
structured his narrative. The prologue and the main part of the text, which is divided into four
books, record Roger’s conflicts with the southern Italian magnates and autonomous cities;
these are followed by an Alloquium, in which the abbot counsels the king, exhorting him to
rule his kingdom wisely and maintain a pious attitude towards God. The peculiarity lies in the
fact that the advice given by the abbot here has already served as a pattern for the narration of
the king’s deeds in the main part of the work. It is for this reason that some scholars have

1
Hubert Houben, Roger II of Sicily. A Ruler Between East and West, transl. Graham A. Loud and Diane
Milburn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 8–24, 37; József Deér, Papsttum und
Normannen. Untersuchungen zu ihren lehnsrechtlichen und kirchenpolitischen Beziehungen (Cologne:
Böhlau. 1972), 164–8; Julia Becker, Graf Roger I. von Sizilien. Wegbereiter des normannischen
Königreichs (Tübingen: Niemeyer, 2008), 77–86. For the power relations that developed in southern Italy
between the dukes and the magnates, see Graham A. Loud, The Age of Robert Guiscard. Southern Italy
and the Norman Conquest (Harlow: Longman, 2000), 234–60.
2
See, among others, Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 41–75; Pierre Aubé, Un normand en méditerranée (Paris:
Payot, 2001), 145–274; Donald Matthew, The Norman Kingdom of Sicily (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1992), 33–48. For Roger II’s hereditary rights, see Deér, Papsttum und Normannen,
184–5.
3
Alexandri Telesini abbatis, Ystoria Rogerii regis Sicilie Calabrie atque Apulie, ed. Ludovica de Nava. Fonti
per la storia d’Italia 112 (Rome: Istituto storico italiano per il medio evo, 1991) [hereafter Ystoria Rogerii].
The only fact known about the author is that he was abbot of the monastery of the Holy Saviour in Telese
from 1127 until 1143.
4
Ystoria Rogerii, Prologus, 2.
5
Graham A. Loud, ‘History Writing in the Twelfth-Century Kingdom of Sicily’, in Chronicling History.
Chroniclers and Historians in Medieval and Renaissance Italy, eds. Sharon Dale, Alison Williams Lewis
and Duane J. Osheim (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2007), 29–54 (34).
6
Dione Clementi, ‘Historical Commentary on the “Libellus” of Alessandro di Telese’, in Ystoria Rogerii,
177–336 (213–14).
 144 E. Tounta

reasonably likened Alexander of Telese’s work to a mirror for princes (speculum principis),
attributing to it both a didactic aim and a legitimating one.7
The most striking feature of the narrative is the overwhelming role the author attributes to the
terror regius. The word terror itself, as well as analogues like metus or timor, are very frequently
used to describe the king’s deeds, especially his reactions against the rebels and the manner in
which he rules, as well as his subjects’ feelings towards royal power. Permeating the whole of
the narrative, the concept of terror seems to have occupied a dominant position in the abbot’s
intellectual outlook, defining his understanding of royal political culture.8 Given that both the
concept and vocabulary of terror are absent from any of Roger II’s official records, it is
necessary to inquire into the meaning and function of terror regius, which will shed light on
Alexander of Telese’s perceptions of power. Such an investigation illuminates the work’s
intended meaning and reveals its social function.9
Both the prologue and the Alloquium are structured around two pairs of concepts that
determine the content of the main narrative. The first pair consists of the concepts of peace
(pax) and tranquillity (quietas) that are perceived as the preconditions for the proper
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

functioning of the kingdom. The second pair consists of those concepts that make the
establishment of peace and tranquillity possible, namely terror and justice (iustitia). It is
within the framework of the intertwined relations of these four concepts that Roger’s deeds are
recorded. Pax is first connected with terror in the prologue, in which Alexander of Telese
expresses his intention to show his readers by what means the bond of peace is consolidated.
It is for this reason that he undertook to narrate Roger’s deeds, namely to show how he
subjected all provinces from Sicily to Rome through might (potentia) and terror, although, as
the abbot claims, warlike deeds (bellica acta) are not considered good.10 In the Alloquium, the
abbot, seeking to point out to the king how the kingdom should be governed in a good and

7
Mario Oldoni, ‘Realismo e dissidenza nella storiografia su Ruggero II: Falcone di Benevento e Alessandro
di Telese’, in Società, potere e popolo nell’età di Ruggero II. Atti delle terze giornate normanno-sveve (Bari:
Università degli Studi di Bari, 1979), 259–83 (276–7), argues that the abbot was seeking to impress upon
Roger II the importance of justice and to instil in his subjects the belief in their right to rise up against
unjust rulers. Paolo Delogu, ‘Idee sulla regalità: l’eredità normanna’, in Potere, società e popolo tra età
normanna ed età sveva (1189–1210). Atti delle quinte giornate normanno-sveve (Bari: Università degli
Studi di Bari, 1983), 185–214 (186–92), underlined Alexander of Telese’s aim to exalt and legitimise the
power of Roger II. From a similar perspective Clementi, ‘Historical commentary’, 177–92, argues that
the abbot was seeking to achieve two things: on the one hand, to persuade Roger’s subjects to accept his
power and, on the other, to point out to the king the necessity of governing by peaceful and just means in
order to secure for himself the divine grace to which he owed his power. Caterina Lavarra, ‘Spazio,
tempi e gesti nell’ Ystoria Rogerii di Alessandro di Telese’, Quaderni Medievali 35 (1993): 79–100 (87–
92), basing her arguments mainly on those of Oldoni, ‘Realismo e dissidenza’, also maintains that the
narration functions as a speculum principis. Loud, ‘History Writing’, 30–6, stresses the function of the
text as propaganda to legitimise Roger II’s policy, presenting the king’s actions as ‘divinely inspired’.
8
The medieval concept of terror implied the legitimate use of violence for the protection of the kingdom and
the Church; it must not be confused with the modern notion of terrorism that defines extreme violent
activities of non-state agencies against innocent people. For a historical approach to the term ‘terror’, see
Rudolf Walther, ‘Terror, Terrorismus’, in Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur
politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland, vol. 6, eds. Otto Bruner, Werner Conze and Reinhart
Koselleck (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1990), 323–444.
9
For the social function of medieval chronicles, see, among others, the studies by Gabrielle M. Spiegel, The
Past as Text. Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,
1997).
10
Ystoria Rogerii, Prologus, 1–2: ‘Siquidem ipsa bellica acta, cum bona non esse cernantur, ideo tamen
conscribuntur, quia ut non fiant quodam modo innuunt, immo iubent; ut et pacis vinculum desiderabilius
deinceps perseveranter in nobis vigeat faciliusque non queat dissolui. [...] Nunc igitur eiusdem regis gesta
 Journal of Medieval History 145

proper manner (‘bene et recte administrari debeat regnum’), argues that such government is
possible when the kingdom is ruled properly both in times of war and peace; to be precise,
when injustice is removed by law and when enemies are vanquished by arms.11 In the same
vein, Alexander of Telese stresses to the king the importance of ruling over his subjects both
by the severity of justice (iustitie censura) and the bond of peace (pacis vinculo).12
The main narrative unfolds within this conceptual framework. The abbot focuses on
Roger II’s military campaigns against the southern Italian magnates, highlighting the ruler’s
violent reaction and the cruel punishment he inflicted on his terrified opponents for the sake of
peace and justice. Further, the establishment of peace and justice is presented as the ultimate
goal of Roger’s elevation to kingship. On the occasion of his coronation, Alexander asserts
that Roger II was endowed with such great virtue that he clearly exceeded his ancestors in the
extent of his territorial dominance (‘terrarum atquisitione iam superexcedere’) in order to
avenge evil (‘ad exercendum malorum vindictam’) and preserve justice (‘ad conservationem
iustitie’).13 As soon as Roger is crowned king, he is shown to give serious thought to how he
can establish peace in the kingdom, something which he greatly desires, and how he can
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

prevent any resistance to his power.14 The abbot concludes his narrative by presenting the
king’s character and administrative abilities. Roger II is, among other things, depicted as a
lover and defender of justice and as the most severe avenger of wrongdoings.15 His
governance is evaluated in a similar way:

The fear he provoked (metus ipsius) helped to such an extent that, with God’s assistance, he stamped
out every existing injustice in the kingdom; peace and justice prevailed and it is clear that in his person
are fulfilled the words of the Psalms ‘Righteousness and peace have kissed each other’. [Ps. 85:11]16

At first sight Alexander of Telese’s political ideas do not differ from the thinking of his
contemporaries. That laws and arms might be used against internal and external enemies to
govern a kingdom effectively was a widespread notion in medieval political culture. Equally
familiar was the idea of composing a historical narrative in order to advise a king about the
importance of these means.17 Besides, since medieval rulers were perceived as imitatores

ad perpetuam conscribendam memoriam assumantur: [ … ] quanta [ … ] potentia, quantove etiam terrore

provincias omnes a Sicilia Romam usque conterens, in brevi sibi subdiderit.’
11
Ystoria Rogerii, Alloquium, 90: ‘Quod si forsitan queretur, que sint ea, quibus bene et recte administrari
debeat regnum, Domino concedente breviter aperiemus. Regnum igitur bene recteque administrare est, cum
utrumque tempus et belli et pacis recte gubernatur, dum et per legum tramites rerum iniquitates expellas,
atque armis, victis hostibus, sis triumphator.’
12
Ystoria Rogerii, Alloquium, 90: ‘Memento itaque te idcirco regis nomine censeri, ut omnes sub ditione tua
positi, et iustitie censura, et pacis vinculo regantur.’
13
Ystoria Rogerii, ΙΙ, 3, 25: ‘Cui etiam adeo tanta concessa est virtutis potentia, ut ad exercendum malorum
vindictam et ad conservationem iustitie ipsum genus suum ampliori terrarum atquisitione iam superexcedere
videatur.’
14
Ystoria Rogerii, ΙΙ, 7, 26: ‘Cumque, peractis regie coronationis celebritatibus [ … ] cepit rex sollicitus intra
mentis sue volvere archanum, qualiter deinde regnum suum, quod multum desiderabat, perpetua solidaretur
pace nullusque adversum se resistendi facultatem posset habere.’
15
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 3, 82: ‘Erat quippe amator iustitie atque defensor, ultorque malorum severissimus.’
16
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 4, 83: ‘In tantum enim profuit metus ipsius, ut de cunctis, Deo cooperante, regni sui
finibus, omni penitus eliminata iniquitate, non nisi que iustitie et pacis erant, sectarentur. Ita ut illud Psalmiste
in eo videretur compleri: “Iustitia et pax osculate sunt.”’
17
See, for instance, Ottonis episcopi Frisingensis, Chronica sive historia de duabus civitatibus, ed. Walter
Lammers. Ausgewählte Quellen zur deutschen Geschichte des Mittelalters, 16 (Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1980), [hereafter Chronica,] 3: ‘Parui ergo libens et lubens vestro
imperio tanto devotius, quanto regiae excellentiae convenientius esse considero ob rei publicae non
 146 E. Tounta

Christi, the consolidation of peace and justice were seen as royal duties par excellence.18 Neither
was the concept of terror unknown to medieval politics. Terror was considered an instrument of
power. The ruler ought to provoke terror by arms (terror armorum) in times of war to defend his
territory against external enemies. Provoking terror by laws (terror legum) was also
acceptable, mainly for the establishment of justice and for the protection of the Church from
heretics, its internal enemies.19 Terror thus constituted a means to achieve specific aims, an
alternative way of action. In no way was it an inherent part of the nature of royal
power. Since the king undertook the functions of ‘vicarius Dei’ and ‘mediator Dei et
hominum’ in ruling over his subjects he should display divine virtues. His justice should be
conditioned by mercy (misericordia) and, above all, by clemency (clementia). The proper
instrument of power by which the king governed, settled conflicts and administered justice
was grace (gratia), the use of which confirmed and strengthened the charismatic character of
royal might.20
The instrumental use of terror for the establishment of peace and justice can be clearly seen in
Alexander’s narrative, which abounds in descriptions of cruel punishments inflicted on rebel
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

magnates by the king. The most eloquent example is found in the Prologue, when the abbot
recounts how the Lombards, cowed by the terror provoked by Roger II (‘eius conterritti
terrore’), were led back to the path of justice (‘ad viam iustitiae revocarentur’):

Just as the great depravity of the Lombards was once repressed by the Normans’ power with God’s
wish and consent, it is now certain that an heavenly order was given to Roger to chastise with his
sword the wickedness in their regions. Is there any malice not committed by them? They fearlessly
perpetrated homicides, thefts, rapes, sacrileges, adulteries, violating of oaths, violent occupation
both of churches and monasteries, treating people of God with disdain and so on. They preyed on
pilgrims or they killed them in secret places in order to steal their belongings. Offended by these
crimes God drew Roger out of the scabbard of Sicily to repress those who had committed these
injuries, holding him as a sharp sword and striking them with him. Consequently, these people, for
so long tolerated and unpunished by God, returned to the path of justice cowed by the terror
provoked by him [Roger II].21

solum armis tutandae, sed et legibus et iudiciis informandae incrementum antiqua regum seu imperatorum
gesta vos velle cognoscere.’
18
Walter Ullmann, Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages (London: Methuen, 1961),
117–26. Hans Hubert Anton, Fürstenspiegel und Herrscherethos in der Karolingerzeit (Bonn:
L. Röhrscheid, 1969), 48–79.
19
Ernst-Dieter Hehl, ‘Terror als Herrschaftsmittel des früh- und hochmittelalterlichen Königs’, in Angst und
Schrecken im Mittelalter. Ursachen, Funktionen, Bewältigungsstrategien, eds. Annette Gerok-Reiter and
Sabine Obermaier. Das Mittelalter. Perspektiven mediävistischer Forschung 12.1 (Berlin: Akademie
Verlag, 2007), 14–22.
20
Stefan Weinfurter, ‘Investitur und Gnade. Überlegungen zur gratialen Herrschaftsordnung im Mittelalter’,
in Investitur- und Krönungsrituale. Herrschaftseinsetzungen im kulturellen Vergleich, eds. Stefan Weinfurter
and Marion Steinicke (Cologne: Böhlau, 2005), 105–23 (107–12).
21
Ystoria Rogerii, Prologus, 3: ‘Nam sicut ipso Deo disponente, vel permittente, vigens Longobardorum
nequitia supervenientium Normannorum violentia olim comprimenda fuit, ita et nunc certum est Rogerio
celitus datum vel permissum fuisse harum scilicet regionum immensam gladio suo coerceri malitiam.
Quid enim tunc mali non in ipsis exercebatur? Quippe omni timore abiecto, cedes hominum, furta,
rapine, sacrilegia, adulteria, periuria, necnon ecclesiarum monasteriorum oppressiones, virorum Dei
contemptus, pluraque hiis similia fieri non desinebant. Peregrinorum quoque pro Deo itinerantium, alii
predabantur, alii vero, pro rebus eorum diripiendis, in abditis locis perimebantur. Quibus facinoribus
plurimum Deus offensus, idcirco Rogerium de vagina provincie Sicilie extraxit, ut eundem quasi gladium
acutum in manu tenens, harum perpetratores iniquitatum per eum percutiendo comprimeret, atque ad
viam iustitie, quos incorrigibiles valde diu sustinuerat, eiusdem conterriti terrore revocarentur.’
 Journal of Medieval History 147

Roger did not wait for God to lead him against the Lombards. When he assumed the office of count,
he ruled over his subjects in the best way, strenuously repressing them by all kinds of terror. As a
result, Alexander of Telese asserts, they were not able to perpetrate any criminal action.22
This instrumental aspect of the concept of terror, as used by the abbot, has been pointed out by
scholars. P. Delogu claimed that terror functioned as an instrument of combat that could have raised
questions both of political legitimacy and morality if Alexander of Telese had not justified its use in
the king’s desire to punish wrongdoers and establish peace, thereby emphasising the divine origin
of the royal office.23 H. Taviani-Carozzi suggested that Alexander had been influenced by Amato of
Montecassino, who had recorded the deeds of the first duke of Apulia, Robert Guiscard, casting him
as engendering terror in his opponents. However, admitting the intensity of the terror portrayed in
the abbot’s narrative, she maintained that Alexander was trying to refute the accusation of
tyrannical behaviour that had been levelled against Roger II. It was for this reason that the abbot
insisted on the use of the word terror, presenting the king’s violent reactions as a divine
instrument in the service of earthly peace and justice.24
It is, however, doubtful whether the word terror would have been understood by the abbot’s
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

southern Italian contemporaries as a counterbalance to that of tyrannus, intended to reverse the

accusation of tyrannical behaviour. In its medieval use the term tyrannus signified either the
usurper of political power or – and this was a legacy of antiquity – the cruelty and
oppressiveness of the ruler against his subjects, whose liberties were curtailed.25 Even in its
second sense, which in our case involves the feudal rights of the southern Italian magnates, the
term tyrannus is not connected, either in a lexical or conceptual way, with the term terror.
This fact becomes obvious in the narrative of Falco of Benevento, a near contemporary of
Alexander of Telese and active in the same region, who recounts Roger II’s conflicts with the
southern Italian magnates in 1127–40 from an anti-royalist perspective. The king is
characterised as a tyrannus and his tyrannical behaviour is conveyed by the term crudelitas.26
The term terror is always used by the author generally to denote horrors provoked by the
war.27 Even Roger II, once defeated by his adversaries, is presented as suffering ‘terror of
battles’ (terrores praeliorum).28

22
Ystoria Rogerii, Ι, 4, 8: ‘[ … ] tanta utebatur industria, tantaque virtutis fulciebatur gratia, ut totam Sicilie
provinciam optime strenueque regens sub omni terrore constringeret; adeo ut non fur, non latro aut raptor,
sive quislibet malefactorum ex latebris suis prodiens, apparere auderet.’
23
Delogu, ‘Idee sulla regalità’, 188–90.
24
Huguette Taviani-Carozzi, ‘De Robert Guiscard au roi Roger de Sicile: la mémoire de l’historien
Alexandre de Telese’, in eadem, Faire mémoire. Souvenir et commémoration au moyen âge (Aix-en-
Provence: Université de Provence, 1999), 317–45 (333–5).
25
It was within this conceptual framework that Roger II was regarded as tyrannus by both of the medieval
empires that were laying claim to southern Italy and Sicily and his southern Italian adversaries. See Helene
Wieruszowski, ‘Roger II of Sicily, Rex-Tyrannus, in Twelfth-Century Political Thought’, Speculum 38
(1963): 46–78 (53–70).
26
Falconis Beneventani, Chronicon, ed. Giuseppe Del Re. Cronisti e scrittori napoletani editi e inediti. Storia
della monarchia 1 (Naples: n.p., 1845). See, for instance, 218, ‘Regem testamur aeternum, tanta crudelitate in
Christianos illos exarsit, quod vix aut nunquam a saeculo est auditum’; 219, ‘Mirabatur omnis exercitus, et
facta regis horrebat, coelorum regem deposcens, ut tanto tyranno, et crudeli viro resistere dignaretur.’
27
Falconis Beneventani, Chronicon, 219, ‘Rusticorum itaque manus Montis Pilosi, ferocitatem regis, et
praeliorum terrores persentiens, pugnare contra eum nolebant’; 221, ‘Milites itaque castellum illud
servantes terrorem machinarum, et domos rusticorum a lapidibus dirutas aspicientes … castrum illud
reddiderunt ad praefati comitis potestatem.’
28
Falconis Beneventani, Chronicon, 214, ‘Quibus omnibus ita peractis, fragor victoriae, et regis fugientis
calamitas Apuliae partes, et Siciliae, et totius Italiae intonuit, et super auditis occisionibus, et regis
terroribus calde mirabatur.’ Even Otto of Freising, who supports the Western Empire’s claims on southern
 148 E. Tounta

Without denying the intended justification, and therefore legitimation, of terror regius
through its connection with the divine origins of royal power, the next step is to understand
the meaning and function of this concept, the use of which is apparently more than just
instrumental. Based on the premise that the history of violence is the history of the values and
institutions that conditioned it – to be more precise, ideas about the state, the individual and
the community29 – it may be fruitful to seek elements in the narrative that could shed light on
both the abbot’s understanding of terror and his own perception of political reality. Viewed
from this perspective, the Ystoria Rogerii facilitates this process, since Alexander of Telese
focuses on three basic elements of medieval politics, namely the hegemonic ethos – that is to
say, the political virtues of the ruler that condition his exercise of power and relationship with
his subjects – the coronation ceremony and the establishment of judicial institutions.
Roger II’s hegemonic ethos, as described by Alexander of Telese, contrasts with that regarded
as the norm in medieval political culture. According to the abbot, the king was aware of the fact
that familiarity usually bred contempt; he was therefore frugal in the amount of familiarity,
affability and pleasantness he displayed both in his public and private life and he never ceased
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

to arouse fear. The fear he provoked (metus ipsius) helped to such a degree that, with God’s
help, he eliminated every injustice in his whole kingdom so that peace and justice prevailed.30
Alexander’s notion that the ideal king should arouse fear and avoid familiarity in order to
secure peace and justice does not correspond to the standard medieval conception of kingship.
Emperor Otto I (962–73), for instance, was ‘always pleasant, despite the terror of royal
punishment’.31 Emperor Frederick I (1152–90), ‘although he did not tolerate injustice, was
affable and generous’.32 A principal virtue of the medieval rex was the affability that,
according to the abbot of Telese, Roger II not only refused but also considered to be a fault,
thus shaping for himself a new royal behaviour conditioned by engendering fear.
The new ‘climate of terror’ that Roger II sought to instil in his rule was expressed
symbolically during one of the most important moments of a monarch’s life, the coronation
ceremony. The narrative representation of Roger II’s coronation ceremony proves to be
astonishingly selective. Apart from a brief mention of the unction that conferred upon Roger II
the regia dignitas, Alexander of Telese directs his whole attention to the king’s rich ornaments,
which gave the onlookers the impression that all the riches and honours of this world were in
the church.33 The description of the festivities unfolds within the same framework. The abbot

Italy and Sicily and thus perceives and depicts Roger II as a tyrant, connects this term with crudelitas and not
with terror. See Chronica, ed. Lammers, II, 19, 140; VII, 23, 540.
29
Lauro Martines, ‘The Historical Approach to Violence’, in Violence and Civil Disorder in Italian Cities
1250–1500, ed. L. Martines (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972), 3–18 (13–14).
30
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 4, 83: ‘Sed quia familiaritas solet parere contemptum, ita ipse publice, et privatim in
familiaritate vel affabilitate seu iocunditate habebatur modestus, ut numquam etiam desisteret timeri. In
tantum enim profuit metus ipsius, ut de cunctis, Deo cohoperante, regni sui finibus, omni penitus
eliminata iniquitate, non nisi quae iustitie et pacis erant, sectarentur.’
31
Widukindi monachi Corbeiensis, Rerum gestarum Saxonicarum Libri tres, ed. Paul Hirsch. Monumenta
Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum, 60 (Hanover: Monumenta
Germaniae Historica, 1935), II, 36, 96: ‘preter regiae disciplinae terrorem semper iocundus’.
32
Philippus Jaffé, ed., Monumenta Corbeiensia. Bibliotheca Rerum Germanicarum 1 (Berlin: apud
Weidmannos, 1864), 505: ‘iniuriae omnino impatiens, affabilis ac liberales’.
33
Ystoria Rogerii, II, 4, 25: ‘Cum ergo dux ad ecclesiam archiepiscopalem more regio ductus, ibique
unctione sacra linitus, regiam sumpsisset dignitatem, non potest litteris exprimi, immo mente extimari
que et qualis quantave eius tunc esset gloria, quam magnus in regni decore, quamque etiam in divitiarum
affluentiis admirabilis. Nempe aspicientibus tunc universis ita videbatur ac si omnes huius mundi opes
honoresque adessent.’ For a commentary on Alexander’s of Telese description of the coronation
ceremony, especially as far as the participants are concerned, see Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 50–9.
 Journal of Medieval History 149

focuses on the splendid decoration of the palace, the precious ornaments of the horses that carried
Roger II and his dignitaries to the church, the gold and silver dishes used at the banquet, even on
the silk clothes of the servants.34 The grandeur of the ceremony, the ensuing festivities in the
palace and even the palace decoration revealed Roger’s possession of limitless wealth, which
itself engendered fear in the participants:35

The glory and wealth of the royal house was so great and of such a kind that it caused such great
marvel and surprise that anyone coming from afar was perturbed by great fear (‘timor non
modicus’) seeing much more than anyone had heard of by rumour.36

The abbot does not describe the ceremonial rituals in detail. Instead, he stresses Roger’s material
wealth and the fear it aroused. After Philippe Buc’s The Dangers of Ritual we are aware of the
way in which medieval authors manipulated rituals to achieve their political goals.37 In this
case what is manipulated by Alexander of Telese is the performative function of the coronation
ceremony. Instead of dwelling on the sacredness with which the king was invested through the
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

rites, as both a medieval and a modern reader would expect, the abbot lays emphasis on the
economic power of the king and presents the fear as the dominant feeling of the participants.
Therefore, he stages the ceremony as a performance of terror.38
The performative function of ceremonies should not be underestimated. Ritual acts shape
identities both for the ritual agents and the audience, since the ‘statements’ made by the ritual
agents both through words and gestures declare the assumption of a specific social role that
henceforth will condition their relations with the audience. Moreover, these statements are
binding for both parties, thus ensuring that the performed identities will be maintained in the
course of time. It is in this way that ceremonies build a normative framework for
the interaction between agents and their audience.39 Since coronation ceremonies constitute the
opening acts of governance, their role in defining socio-political systems of interaction
between the ruler and his subjects is crucial, as Gerd Althoff has demonstrated, as far as
medieval political culture is concerned.40
In this light the flaunting of wealth at Roger’s coronation should not be seen merely as a
display of power intended to engender fear and thus avert any possible resistance to the new

34
Ystoria Rogerii, II, 5–6, 26.
35
Ystoria Rogerii, ΙΙ, 4, 25–6.
36
Ystoria Rogerii, ΙΙ, 6, 26: ‘Gloria et divitie in domo regis tot et tales tanteque tunc vise sunt, ut omnibus et
miraculum ingens et stupor vehementissimus fieret; in tantum, ut timor etiam non modicus universis, qui de
longe venerant, incuteretur. Et enim multo plura in eo conspiciebantur, quam rumor non fuit quem audierant.’
37
Philippe Buc, The Dangers of Ritual. Between Early Medieval Texts and Social Scientific Theory
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001).
38
See Buc, Dangers of Ritual, 15–50, on how Liutprand of Cremona manipulated Ottonian and Lombard
ritual presentation by investing only the former with a sacred aura in order to legitimise the claims of
Otto I on north Italian territories.
39
Gerd Althoff, ‘Zur Bedeutung symbolischer Kommunikation für das Verständnis des Mittelalters’,
Frühmittelalterliche Studien 31 (1997): 370–89; Barbara Stollberg-Rilinger, ‘Symbolische
Kommunikation in der Vormoderne. Begriffe-Thesen-Forschungsgeschichte’, Zeitschrift für Historische
Forschung 31 (2004): 489–527; Pierre Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power (Cambridge: Polity
Press, 1991), 117–26 (rites of institution). For the importance of symbolic representations in the shaping
of institutions, see, among others, Gerhard Göhler, ‘Der Zusammenhang von Institution, Macht und
Repräsentation’, in Institution – Macht – Repräsentation. Wofür politische Institutionen stehen und wie
sie wirken, ed. G. Göhler (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1997), 11–62 (48–52).
40
Gerd Althoff, Die Macht der Rituale. Symbolik und Herrschaft im Mittelalter (Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2003), 85–90.
 150 E. Tounta

king. Alexander of Telese constructs for the king a specific identity that determines the political
systems of the newly founded kingdom. Not only did the coronation and the consecration rituals
fail to divest Roger II of the spirit of terror with which he had until then invested his actions,41
but, on the contrary, they presented terror as a fundamental element of politics, especially as far as
the king’s relations with the magnates, participants and spectators of the ceremony were
concerned.
The function of terror in the system of governance is made plain by the establishment of
judicial institutions. When, in 1129, Roger II was elevated to the dukedom, he gathered
together the southern Italian magnates and delivered a speech at Melfi promulgating a peace
edict and strengthening the role of the ducal judicial courts.42 Not only did he order the
magnates to stay in peace with each other, but he also made them swear (among other things)
not to allow crimes within their lands, to bring the criminals to courts organised by the duke
himself and to protect all the people and their property in the regions under his dominion
(‘cuncto populo terre sue dominationis cum rebus eorum’). He concluded his speech by saying
that since, with God’s help, he had been able to subject all the regions (‘terras omnes’) and to
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

impose the rigour of justice in every territory under his dominion, the eternal peace had to be
seen to be preserved (‘in omni dominationis loco huiusmodi iustitiae assiduo rigore
promulgato, pax continua perseverare videbatur’) in the territory he had created for it. ‘How
could the blessing of peace be absent in the regions, where nobody would dare to commit
crime in public as a result of being restrained by his terror’, the abbot asks rhetorically in
concluding the narration.43
Roger II imposed a kind of pax Dei on southern Italy, demanding that the magnates co-operate
with him in the establishment of peace and justice.44 This process, as recorded by Alexander of
Telese, is directly related to the king’s successful effort to secure the peace by means of rigor
iustitiae and terror. The notions of clementia and gratia that formed an intrinsic part of the
medieval royal judicial function are totally absent. The use of the word terror itself defines the
concept of power, thus forming an analogous political culture. The king is perceived as
offering and imposing a specific image of justice, reacting against prevalent understandings of
the term and consequently against the socio-political context of power. This reaction becomes
plausible since it is based on the ruler’s ability to shape the dominant discourse, which, in

41
As is argued by Giancarlo Andenna, ‘Dalla legitimazione alla sacralizzazione della conquista (1042–
1140)’, in I caratteri originari della conquista normanna. Diversità e identità nel Mezzogiorno (1030–
1130). Atti delle sedicesime giornate normanno-sveve, eds. Raffaele Licinio and Francesco Violante
(Bari: Dedalo, 2006), 371–405 (400). For the same reason I cannot accept the argument of Lavarra,
‘Spazio, tempi e gesti’, 85–6, that Alexander of Telese’s description of the luxurious dresses and
banquets during the ceremony and the festivities presents Roger II as a modello spirituale.
42
Clementi, ‘Historical commentary’, 280–2.
43
Ystoria Rogerii, Ι, 21, 18–19: ‘quibus etiam inter cetera edictum dedit, ut in pace permanentes, alterutrum
non adversarentur. Simulque eos iurare compulit ut ab ipsa hora, et in antea, iustitiam et pacem tenerent, et
adiuvarent tenere; nec manu tenerent homines qui latrocinium aut rapinam facerent in terris suis, nec esse
consentirent. Et si aliquis ibi huiusmodi malefactor reperiretur, sine fraude, curie sue, in loco a se
constituto, ut iustitia ex eo fieret, presentarent; et quod ecclesiasticis personis et rebus earum, videlicet
archiepiscopis, episcopis, abbatibus, monachis, omnibusque clericis, laboratoribus, villanis et cuncto
populo terre sue dominationis cum rebus eorum, nec non peregrinis, viatoribus, mercatoribus, pacem
tenerent et observarent; nec eos inquietarent, nec inquietare ad suum posse permitterent. Unde non mirum
si terras sibi omnes, Deo cooperante, subicere poterat, quoniam quidem in omni dominationis loco
huiusmodi iustitie assiduo rigore promulgato, pax continua, in qua secundum Psalmistam factus est locus
eius perseverare videbatur. Quomodo enim pacis bonum deesse poterat, ubi nullus quidem malefactor,
terrore ipsius cohercitus, prodire auderet?’
44
Clementi, ‘Historical commentary’, 281.
 Journal of Medieval History 151

turn, provides him with authority every time he uses it.45 In this process of establishing judicial
institutions the use of terror is in no way instrumental. Within any political community
institutions have a normative function, determining specific principles of action both for the
agents, namely the persons who create the institutions, and the receivers. In the long run, both
agents and receivers assimilate these principles and adjust their political behaviour accordingly.
It is in this way that institutions lend politics meaning, values and orientation.46 Since terror
constitutes the substratum of the institutional framework of action, it is consequently presented
as a political value that, by analogy, seeks to shape the political ‘ethos’ of the kingdom.
A further contextual analysis of these passages shows that this new political value and its
function in the establishment of peace and justice are always related to the concrete territories
under the king’s dominion: on the occasion of the coronation ceremony, Alexander of Telese
legitimises Roger’s decision to assume the kingship over his extensive territorial dominions,
which he had acquired by God’s grace in order to avenge the wrongdoers and to preserve
justice.47 It is in the same vein that the abbot recounts the promulgation of the peace edict of
1129 and the function of the ducal courts of justice. Roger is presented as associating the
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

establishment of judicial institutions with the imposition of rigor iustitiae in every territory
under his dominion, while Alexander argues that peace could not be absent in the regions
where, from fear of the king’s terror, people were restrained from committing crimes.48
Moreover, evaluating the royal ethos of his king, the abbot stresses once again that Roger II
succeeded in establishing peace and justice regni sui finibus by engendering fear and avoiding
affability.49
It seems therefore that a concept of territoriality conditions Alexander of Telese’s political
thought. This can be equally deduced from the foundation legend, of the restoration of the
kingdom (restitutio regni), that the abbot puts forward to legitimise the establishment of
the Norman kingdom of Sicily. Roger II suggested to the Sicilian magnates that he should be
crowned king owing to the fact that his dominions extended from Sicily to Rome. The
magnates agreed and added that the seat of the new kingdom should be Palermo, since in this
region there had been kings in ancient times whose rule had been abolished as a result of
God’s unfathomable designs.50 More interesting than the invention of Sicily’s royal past is the
staged reception that this discourse received amongst the southern Italian magnates. According
to Alexander, the duke gathered the magnates and ecclesiastical authorities in Salerno and
informed them of his wish to establish a kingdom. Not only did they agree unanimously, but
they insisted (‘magnopere precibus insistunt’) on Roger’s elevation to the kingship since the
duke not only ruled over Sicily by paternal inheritance, but over Calabria, Apulia and other
regions as well, which had been conquered through his military prowess and which were
legally his thanks to his blood relations with the former dukes.51 Michele Fuiano argued that

45
Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, 105–6, 127–37.
46
Göhler, ‘Der Zusammenhang von Institution’, 16, 25–8.
47
Ystoria Rogerii, II, 3, 25.
48
Ystoria Rogerii, I, 21, 18–19.
49
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 4, 83.
50
Ystoria Rogerii, II, 1, 23. ‘Videlicet ut ipse, qui tot provinciis, Sicilie, Calabrie, Apulie, ceterisque
regionibus que pene Romam usque habentur, Domino cooperante dominabatur, nequaquam utique ducalis
sed regii illustrari culminis honore deberet. Qui etiam adebant, quod regni ipsius principium et caput,
Panhormus Sicilie metropolis fieri deceret; que olim sub priscis temporibus super hanc ipsam provinciam
Reges nonnullos habuisse traditur, qui postea, pluribus evolutis annis, occulto Dei disponente iudicio
nunc usque sine regibus mansit.’
51
Ystoria Rogerii, I, 2, 23–5: ‘[ … ] convocatis ad se aliquibus ecclesiasticis peritissimis, atque
competentioribus personis, nec non quibusdam principibus [ … ]. Ac illi, rem ipsam sollicite
 152 E. Tounta

the restitutio regni legend reveals the perception of a state entity that consists of the sovereign on
the one hand and the subjected people, regardless of their ethnicity, on the other. In the abbot’s
narrative the concept of territoriality is dominant, eclipsing all ethnic differences.52 The
primacy of the concept of territoriality was not irrelevant to Roger’s efforts to impose his
authority on the magnates. Their gathering in Salerno was not a curia, that is to say, an
assembly in which decisions are taken through processes of consensus. It was rather a
gathering of loyal men ( fideles), to whom Roger II announced his irreversible decision; no
designatio of the future king took place, but merely an acclamatio.53 In this regard, it should
be stressed that the principle of hereditary succession that had been instituted in the Sicilian
county by the first count, Roger I, was taken to include southern Italy after the assumption of
the ducal office by Roger II. It was also recognised by the Roman Church and thus constituted
a major source of conflict between the new sovereign and the southern Italian magnates. The
ius haereditarium strengthened the central power, since the magnates no longer had the right
to elect the new ruler and subsequently witnessed a diminution in their power to take political
decisions.54
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

Taking into consideration the contextual framework in which the notion of terror is used and
its close relation to the concept of territoriality, it seems reasonable to conclude that Alexander of
Telese was seeking to legitimise a new political culture shaped by Roger II’s efforts to create in his
newly founded kingdom a strong central authority by claiming for himself the monopoly on the
use of legal violence and annihilating the forces operating against it, as represented by the
southern Italian magnates. A concept of territoriality connected with a monopoly on the use of
legal violence had been conceived in Roman law, in which additionally the notion of terror
was linked in etymological terms to the concept of territoriality:

Territory (territorium) is the entirety of the fields between the boundaries of a civitas. It is argued that
it is so called because the rulers of this territory within its boundaries have the right to terrify
(terrendi), that is to say, to repress.55

perscrutantes, unanimiter tandem uno ore laudant, concedunt, decernunt; ymmo, magnopere precibus
insistunt ut Rogerius dux in regiam dignitatem apud Panhormum, Sicilie metropolim, promoveri debeat,
qui non tantum Sicilie paterna hereditate, verum etiam Calabrie, Apulie, ceterarumque terrarum, que non
solum ab eo bellica obtinentur virtute, sed et propinquitate generis antecedentium ducum iure sibi
succedere debent. Nam si regni solium in eadem quondam civitate ad regendum tantum Siciliam certum
est extitisse, et nunc ad ipsum per longum tempus defecisse videtur, valde dignum et iustum est ut in
capite Rogerii diademate posito, regnum ipsum non solum ibi modo restituatur, sed in ceteras etiam
regiones, quibus iam dominari cernitur, dilatari debeat.’
52
Michele Fuiano, ‘La fondazione del Regnum Siciliae nella versione di Alessandro di Telese’, Papers of the
British School at Rome 24 (1956): 65–77 (73–5). It should be noted that the kingdom of Sicily was
sanctioned by a bull issued by Pope Anacletus II in 27 September 1130. See Houben, Roger II of Sicily,
50–6; Matthew, Norman Kingdom, 33–7. Alexander of Telese makes no mention either of this bull or of
the relations between Roger II and Anacletus II that were conducted under the shadow of the papal
schism (February 1130). His position could be interpreted as a denial of the Roman Church’s rights in the
kingdom. Cf. Fuiano, ‘La fondazione del Regnum Siciliae’, 66–9. On the contrary, Loud, ‘History
Writing’, 33–4, argues that the omission of the papal role should be explained by the fact that the
legitimacy of Anacletus II was strongly disputed at the time that the abbot was completing his work;
therefore, a mention of the papal sanction could have a negative effect on the image of the new king.
53
Nicola Cilento, ‘La “coscienza del Regno” nei cronisti meridionali’, in Potere, società e popolo tra età
normanna ed età sveva (1189–1210). Atti delle quinte giornate normanno-sveve, 165–84 (168–9).
54
Deér, Papsttum und Normannen, 165–211.
55
Theodor Mommsen, in Corpus Iuris Civilis, vol. 1, Digesta Iustiniani (Berlin: Apud Weidmannos, 1973),
D. l.16.239.8: ‘Territorium est universitas agrorum intra fines cuiusque civitatis: quod ab eo dictum quidam
aiunt, quod magistratus eius loci intra eos fines terrendi, id est summovendi ius habent.’
 Journal of Medieval History 153

It is therefore reasonable to argue that terror constitutes the conceptual construct through which
Alexander of Telese perceived Roger’s efforts to control his dominions by overcoming the power
of the magnates. Apart from examples of violent acts of war, terror should not always be
considered as denoting the use of physical violence; rather it should be understood as implying
the primacy of royal power against that of the magnates. Besides, it was not only by violence
that Roger II addressed rebellion; many conflicts were, on the contrary, settled through
peaceful agreement.56
Theo Broekmann, without taking into consideration either the new political culture or the
figurative sense of the vocabulary, argues that it was Roger II’s Legitimationsdefizit that led
him to curtail the magnates’ privileges and to adopt a violent stance, thereby abandoning a
policy of conciliation which had undermined in many cases the traditional, ritual settlement
of conflicts.57 In my opinion, it was rather Roger’s political ambitions and strategies that
clashed with the southern Italian magnates’ political self-definition, since this latter was
incompatible with the new political culture the king was seeking to establish. In this
context, even cruel punishments constitute on a symbolic level a way of settling conflicts,
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

since in such cases, apart from the individuals concerned, violence has no destructive
effect; rather it leads to a stabilisation of the socio-political order, as desired by the royal
power.58
Although Justinian’s Codex had been rediscovered in part by this time in southern Italy, and in
the monastery of Montecassino at that,59 it is impossible to gauge how much knowledge of
Roman law Alexander of Telese possessed. Nevertheless, the Romano-Byzantine legacy of
territoriality was undoubtedly strong in twelfth-century southern Italy and Sicily.60 Living in
such an intellectual environment, the abbot was certainly aware of centralised Byzantine
political structures. It is in this respect that the exemplum of the Byzantine emperor that the
abbot proposed to Roger II can be understood: according to Alexander, the king should follow
the example of the prudent emperor of Constantinople and subjugate the best fortified cities
and the strongest castles. Only by fulfilling that condition could he preserve peace and justice;
moreover, he could become strong like the lion, which is not afraid of facing any animal, and
he could therefore safely sleep during the night and rest during the day.61 Given that all

56
Ystoria Rogerii, II, 62–4, 52–4; III, 10, 64–5; III, 16, 68.
57
Theo Broekmann, Rigor Iustitiae. Herrschaft, Recht und Terror im normannisch-staufischen Süden
(Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2005), 194–208.
58
For this function of the use of violence, see Marian Füssel and Stefanie Rüther, ‘Einleitung’, in Raum und
Konflikt. Zur symbolischen Konstituierung gesellschaftlicher Ordnung im Mittelalter und frühe Neuzeit, eds.
Christoff Dartmann, M. Füssel and Stefanie Rüther (Münster: Rhema, 2004), 9–18 (15–16).
59
Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 141–2.
60
Herbert Zielinski, ‘Zum Königstitel Rogers II. von Sizilien (1130–1154)’, in Politik, Gesellschaft,
Geschichtsschreibung: Giessener Festgabe für František Graus zum 60. Geburtstag, eds. Herbert Ludat
and Rainer Christoph Schwinges (Cologne: Böhlau, 1982), 165–82 (166–7), detects the concept of
territoriality in Roger II’s royal title. Apart from the Romano-Byzantine legacy, he mentions the changes
in Lombard political thought during the creation of the Lombard principalities in southern Italy at the end
of the eighth century, since the princeps gentis became princeps terrae.
61
Ystoria Rogerii, Alloquium, 90–1: ‘Ut ergo huiusmodi pacis atque iustitie bonum in regno tuo perpetuari
valeat, multum prodest, si tu solus munitiores et inexpugnabiles urbes, ac fortiora, et inexpugnabilia oppida
proprio subdideris dominio. Revocetur itaque ad mentem tuam laudabilis Constantinopolitani imperatoris
prudentia, qui pro conservatione eiusdem pacis atque iustitie, validioribus terris sibi retentis, ceteris vero,
que sub eo sunt planiores, immo debiliores terras ad sibi subdentum et obsequendum dimittit. Dum itaque
ad ipsum simili cautione providentum studueris, eris, sicut dicit Salomon, tamquam leo fortissimus
bestiarum qui ad nullius pavebit occursum; siquidem innocentium dormieris securus, quiesces in die
antevigilans.’
 154 E. Tounta

Byzantine cities and castles were de facto under imperial control, Alexander filtered reality
through his own understanding of Western feudal systems. It is, however, plain that the abbot
had realised how powerful the Byzantine emperor was thanks to the centralised structure of
power; in comparison, royal power in the West was weak – and that made the emperor a
model to follow.62 By controlling the strongest cities and castles Roger could establish
effective royal power, consequently undermining the libertas both of magnates and
autonomous cities. It was exactly by this policy that the first king of Sicily secured his
power.63 Even the way in which the abbot depicts Roger’s tight control on the administration
of finances and on the military operations is conditioned by an elaborate perception of power
that probably stems from his experience of Byzantine administration.64 As Houben reasonably
argues, the king’s tight administrative and financial control is revealing of an effort to
rationalise and territorialise the administration in order to eliminate the centrifugal powers
inherent in the feudal system.65
The term terror itself is very likely to have been drawn from the Old Testament, in which
‘Deus magnus et terribilis’66 connotes not only the kindness and justice of God, but merciless
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

violence as well. The abbot’s political imagery, which casts Roger II as a sword in God’s
hand, is in no way to be underestimated.67 The influence that the Old Testament exercised on
Alexander of Telese’s mindset is made plain by an Old Testament narrative the abbot uses as
an exemplum to teach his prudent readers about the gravity and impiety of
committing perjury.68 Roger’s violent suppression of a revolt by southern Italian magnates in
1133 is compared to the merciless revenge King Nebuchadnezzar exacted on King Zedekiah
and his sons for having committed perjury against him.69 By this comparison, Alexander of
Telese implies that those who revolted against the Sicilian ruler were deservedly punished for
their crimes by divine justice (‘merito ulciscente divina iustitia digna pro hoc
malorum retributione feriuntur’). The abbot does not fail to stress the message of the
exemplum: one should avoid committing perjury because when one disdains someone that one
ought not to, one will in turn be disdained by God and, like Zedekiah, receive just
punishment.70 This comparison could only have aroused surprise in medieval men, since
Nebuchadnezzar was considered as the biblical example par excellence of a king punished by
God for his arrogance. By no means, therefore, could he have served as a model for medieval

62
Albeit in respect of the early Middle Ages, it is useful to consider how the Byzantine emperor’s example
functions in Gregory of Tours’ Libri historiarum decem. When the author compares a ruler with the
Byzantine emperor, he merely tries to defame the ruler’s governance, which seems to him autocratic and
interventionist in ecclesiastical matters. See Buc, Dangers of Ritual, 96–7.
63
Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 155–6.
64
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 3–4, 82–3. Clementi, ‘Historical commentary’, 184–5.
65
Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 158.
66
Deut. 7:21. Among others, see Ps. 46:3, ‘Quoniam Dominus excelsus terribilis rex magnus super omnem
terram’; Ps. 75:8, ‘Tu terribilis es et quis resistet tibi ex tunc ira tua.’
67
Ystoria Rogerii, Prologus, 3.
68
Ystoria Rogerii, ΙΙ, 46, 45: ‘Nunc itaque in hoc prudens lector diligenter consideret quantum sceleris sit
periurii crimen committere, maximeque illud, cum quis vitam et membra seu honorem domini sui vel ei
captionem non inserendam iuramento assecurat, et non custoditur ut iurat.’
69
Ystoria Rogerii, II, 46, 45–6.
70
Ystoria Rogerii, ΙΙ, 46, 45–6: ‘Unde Grimoaldus, et Gofridus, Tancredus atque Alexander comes nec non
et alii eoque, Rogerii dominatum super se suscipientes, erga eundem fidelitatis sacramentum non
servaverunt, merito ulciscente divina iustitia digna pro hoc malorum retributione feriuntur. Et enim ipsis
ita accidit sicut et Sedethie regi demurato constat accidisse. [ … ] quandoquidem, qui illud contempnit
vitandum, contempnetur a Deo, ita ut dignam proinde, sicut et istis contigit, sine dubio quandoque
excepturus sit penam.’
 Journal of Medieval History 155

rulers.71 If, however, the exemplum’s functional relationship to the narrative is taken
into consideration, it is apparent that the point of the comparison is not merciless justice
itself,72 but the perjury committed against the earthly ruler that constitutes an offence against
God.73
The aims of Alexander of Telese’s narrative can be better evaluated by examining the socio-
political context of the Ystoria Rogerii regis, especially as far as Roger’s legislative work is
concerned, given the text’s insistence on the relationship between terror and justice. In 1140,
nearly at the same time that Alexander of Telese was completing his text, Roger II
promulgated a legal code, the so-called ‘Assizes of Ariano’, which was to be applied to the
whole kingdom. Although incomplete, the Assizes of Ariano, which touched upon issues
mainly concerning ecclesiastical matters, public and penal law, constituted a considerable
innovation. Roger II did not confine himself to codifying existing laws. Rather, he had new
laws drafted which superseded customary laws whenever contradictions arose. These new laws
were promulgated by the king’s power and authority alone, without the consent of the
magnates. In this way, under the influence of the centralised political structures of Byzantium,
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

Roger II established the legal framework for his interaction with the magnates. It is no
accident that the Assizes of Ariano drew extensively on Justinian’s Codex.74
The primacy of royal power is clearly expressed in the enactments of penal law that played an
important role in the formation of a new community.75 A prominent place in Roger’s legal code is
reserved for the crimen laesae maiestatis that had been instituted in late Roman antiquity76 and
was incorporated in Justinian’s Codex to define the inviolability of the emperor.77 Although
Western medieval judicial thought was well acquainted with this crime, the Assizes of Ariano,
drawing directly on the Codex,78 have an important as well as innovative implication for the

71
Broekmann, Rigor iustitiae, 138. In the Alloquium the abbot, exhorting the king to be humble like King
David and Emperor Constantine the Great, presents Nebuchadnezzar as a model to avoid because of his
arrogance: Ystoria Rogerii, Alloquium, 91–2.
72
Broekmann, Rigor iustitiae, 138–9.
73
The use of this example corresponds to the theocratic perception of royal power that undoubtedly
conditions Alexander of Telese’s political thought. See Delogu, ‘Idee sulla regalità’, 186–7 and 190–1;
Cilento, ‘La coscienza del Regno’, 166–74; Salvatore Tramontana, ‘Il senso della storia e del quotidiano
nelle parole e nelle imagini dei cronisti normanni e svevi’, in Il senso della storia nella cultura medievale
italiana (1100–1350). Atti del quattordicesimo convegno di studi (Pistoia: Centro Italiano di Studi di
Storia e d’Arte, 1995), 189–203 (192–3).
74
For the Assizes of Ariano, see, among others, Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 135–47; Mario Caravale, Il regno
normanno di Sicilia (Milan: Giuffrè, 1966), 49–50.
75
Walter Ullmann, ‘Roman Public Law and Medieval Monarchy: Norman Rulership in Sicily’, in idem,
Jurisprudence in the Middle Ages (London: Variorum Reprints, 1980), V, 166.
76
Cristoph Ulrich Schminck, Crimen laesae maiestatis. Das politische Strafrecht Siziliens nach den Assisen
von Ariano (1140) und den Konstitutionen von Melfi (1231) (Aalen: Scientia Verlag, 1970), 21–4.
77
Paul Krüger, ed., Codex Iustiniani, in Corpus iuris civilis, vol. 2, ed. T. Mommsen (Berlin: apud
Weidmannos, 1970), C. 9,8,5, pr.1: ‘Quisquis cum militibus vel privates, barbaris etiam scelestam inierit
factionem aut factionis ipsius susceperit sacramenta vel dederit, de nece etiam virorum illustrium qui
consiliis et consistorio nostro intersunt, senatorum etiam (nam et ipsi pars corporis nostri sunt), cuiuslibet
postremo qui nobis militat cogitarit (eadem enim severitate voluntatem sceleris qua affectum puniri iura
voluerunt) ipse quidem utpote maiestatis reus gladio feriatur, bonis eius omnibus fisco nostro addictis.’
78
Ortensio Zecchino, ed., Le Assise di Ariano (Cava dei Tirreni: Di Mauro, 1984), Ass. 18: ‘Quisquis cum
milite uno vel cum pluribus, seu privato scelestem inierit factionem, aut factionis dederit, vel susceperit
sacramentum, de nece etiam virorum illustrium, qui consiliis et consistorio nostro intersunt, cogitaverint
et tractaverint, eadem severitate voluntatem sceleris qua effectum puniri iura voluerunt, ipse quidem ut
pote reus majestatis gladio feriatur, bonis eius omnibus fisco addictis.’ For the influence of Justinian’s
Codex, see Schminck, Crimen laesae maiestatis, 33–9.
 156 E. Tounta

relations between a ruler and his subjects, since the Justinian enactment prosecuted not only the
act itself but the intention as well.79
Equally innovative for Western medieval judicial thought was the protection afforded by the
same enactment to anyone acting under the king’s commands.80 The very fact that this provision
concerned court officials81 proves the extent to which Roger II was trying to institute the royal
maiestas.82 In this respect one should bear in mind the formula ‘gratia Dei omnipotentis et
serenissimi Rogerii regis’ used by officials to show that their legitimating sources of power
were both God and the king.83 In this way the king organised a bureaucratic system that was
uniquely dependent on and directly controlled by him.84 At the heart of this system lay the
administration of justice, in which Roger II directly intervened by installing judicial officials
even in regions of the kingdom that enjoyed a certain amount of autonomy, such as certain
southern Italian and Sicilian cities. In an attempt to reduce their autonomy the first Sicilian
king and his successors designated the urban judges elected by their communities as royal
officers and limited their competence to minor cases of justice.85
Roger’s II determination to overcome the competing pull of any other power, such as that of
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

the magnates, is clearly manifest in the adoption in the Assizes of Ariano of the Justinian
enactment De sacrilegiis86 on the special relationship between God and the earthly sovereign:

Nobody should oppose himself to the king’s judgement, his decisions, his institutions and actions. For
it is tantamount to sacrilege when anyone objects to the king’s judgements, decisions and actions or
when anyone questions the worth of a person elected by the king and offered a distinction.87

The term sacrilegium contains the notion of sacredness, or, to be more exact, of a religious crime
against the king. In medieval Latin the term signified either the crime or the penance one had to
pay in order to be given absolution. Its use in the Assizes of Ariano introduces an innovation into
both the legal language and ideas of medieval Europe.88 By acting within the framework of
theocratic political kingship,89 Roger II was the first Western medieval king to sanction by law
the idea of royal sacrality.
It was against this backdrop that Alexander of Telese used the concept of terror to narrate
Roger II’s deeds and, more specifically, his attempt to create in his kingdom a new political

79
Schminck, Crimen laesae maiestatis, 36.
80
Schminck, Crimen laesae maiestatis, 34–5.
81
Zecchino, ed., Le Assise di Ariano, Ass. 35: ‘Observent diligentissime iudices, ut in actione iuriariarum
curialium dignitatem personarum considerent, et iuxta personarum qualitatem sententiam ferant, eorum
scilicet quibus fiunt, et eorum qui faciunt, et quando ubi temeritas presumiter, et iusta qualitatem
personarum sententiam ferant; ipsis autem facta iniuria, non ad ipsos dumtaxat, set etiam ad regie
dignitatis spectat offensam.’
82
Schminck, Crimen laesae maiestatis, 35–6.
83
Ullmann, ‘Roman Public Law’, 168–70.
84
For the centralised bureaucratic system, see, among others, Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 147–59. Cf.
Antonio Marongiu, ‘A Model State in the Middle Ages: the Norman and the Swabian Kingdom of
Sicily’, Comparative Studies in Society and History 6 (1964): 307–20 (307–13).
85
Houben, Roger II of Sicily, 149.
86
Krüger, ed., Codex Iustiniani, in Corpus iuris civilis, vol. 2, ed. Mommsen, C. 9,29,2: ‘Disputari de
principali iudicio non oportet: sacrilegii enim instar est dubitare, an is dignus sit, quem elegerit imperator.’
87
Zecchino, ed., Le Assise di Ariano, Ass. 17: ‘Disputari de regis iudicio, consiliis, institutionibus, factis non
oportet. Est enim par sacrilegio disputare de eius iudiciis, institutionibus, factis atque consiliis et an is dignus
sit quem rex elegerit, aut decernit.’
88
Schminck, Crimen laesae maiestatis, 52–3.
89
Delogu, ‘Idee sulla regalità’, 190–3.
 Journal of Medieval History 157

culture that impinged on traditional political mentalities. The abbot, familiar with both the
Romano-Byzantine political legacy and Roger’s ambitions and strategies, passed political
realities through his theological prism and represented them using the vocabulary of terror.
Given that this word referred to the terribilis power of the Old Testament God, it was part and
parcel of wider medieval political and theological imagery, and thus it could be readily
recognised and understood by the readers or audience of the text and it might therefore be an
important influence on their perceptions of political power. Alexander of Telese’s narrative did
not intend solely to legitimise royal power in its new, centralised form, but also to formulate a
discourse that would shape new political attitudes both for rulers and subjects. For this reason
he did not address himself only to the king, offering him advice on the proper administration
of the kingdom. At crucial points of the narrative he ‘converses’ with his audience, apparently
members of the local ruling elite and the royal court, to acquaint them with the new political
culture and to define their role and their behaviour within the framework of the new political
structures. Moreover, that Alexander’s monastery was situated amid the territory of Rainulf of
Caiazzo, suggests that a part of the audience was unfavourably disposed towards the king. In
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

this regard, two arguments may elucidate the ability of the Ystoria Rogerii to convey a direct
message. Oldoni, commenting on the structure of the text and the oral style of the abbot’s
writing, suggested that the narrative was intended for public reading in front of the king and
the members of his court.90 In addition, Clementi, focusing on the difficulties presented by the
Latin language that Alexander of Telese used, argued that this difficulty can be explained by
the fact that the abbot, seeking rather to persuade than to inform, had in mind an audience that
already had a precise knowledge of contemporary events and their agents.91
One of the most direct discussions takes place around the exemplum of King Nebuchadnezzar.
The abbot invites his prudens lector to meditate on the crime of perjury in order to appreciate its
impiety and the punishment attaching to it.92 Prophetic dreams by people from the area of Telese
about the growth of Roger’s power, related by the abbot at the end of his narrative, set the
framework of another direct discussion with his readers.93 The dominant motif of these dreams
is the crushing of the rebels under Roger’s sword in accordance with the divine will.
Alexander of Telese maintains that these dreams indicate that the king received his crown from
God himself and consequently would never lose it.94 Moreover, he stresses that if it is a sin
(peccatum) to resist the divine order, it is also a sin to fight against Roger, who received his
power from God. Finally, the abbot advises any aspiring rebel to beware of Roger’s sword and
not to fight against it; rather he should submit if he fears setting himself against the divine order.95

90
Oldoni, ‘Realismo e dissidenza’, 278–9.
91
Clementi, ‘Historical commentary’, 194.
92
Ystoria Rogerii, II, 46, 46.
93
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 6, 84–7, 88. Clementi, ‘Historical commentary’, 180–90, notes that these dreams are
revealing of Alexander of Telese’s political ideas. Lavarra, ‘Spazio, tempi e gesti’, 98–100, maintains that the
dreams, apart from the sacred character of Roger’s power, promote the legitimacy and necessity of the
kingdom. Loud, ‘History Writing’, 32–3, argues that the prophetic dreams are ‘an important and integral
part of the whole, for they foretell the inevitability of Roger’s triumph and the divine sanction accorded
to his rule’.
94
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 9, 87: ‘His igitur duabus visionibus, constat dubium non esse Rogerium divina vere
triumphasse dispositione, regnique coronam ita divinitus percepisse, ut numquam ea sit cariturus.’
95
Ystoria Rogerii, IV, 9, 87: ‘Si ergo peccatum est Dei ordinationi resistere, peccatum est utique ipsius
repugnare, quippe Rogerius nisi potestatem de super accepisset, non potuisset facere quidquam. Caveat
ergo ab eius gladio, non contendat cum eo, ymmo subdatur illi quisquis divine dispositioni contraire
pertimescit.’
 158 E. Tounta

The term peccatum used by Alexander of Telese to describe resistance to the king should be
viewed in conjunction with the use of De sacrilegiis in the Assizes of Ariano and the innovative
character of its legal thought. In this context, the Ystoria Rogerii transforms traditional medieval
political ideas, as far as the principles of the royal exercise of power are concerned. Influenced by
his theological-political background, Alexander of Telese introduces the value of terror into the
ruler’s political virtues, legitimising it by reference to the terribilis divine nature that the earthly
king (‘rex’), as vicar of God (‘vicarius Dei’) and the mediator between God and men (‘mediator
Dei et hominum’), should imitate. To his mind, this terror regius is closely connected with the
notion of iustitia, which should not be understood as an abstract idea, but rather viewed within
the context of legislation and the administration of justice, since the interplay of these two
concepts is presented as the foundations on which judicial institutions are established. By
broadening the scope of political morality in this way, the abbot of Telese equally transforms
the criteria by which the hegemonic ethos should be judged. The king is no longer bound only
to the virtues of gratia, misericordia and clementia, but also to the laws that he has
promulgated by his own authority. This new intellectual perception of the power relations
Downloaded by [UQ Library] at 07:41 08 November 2014

between ruler and subjects, which can also be discerned, albeit through different processes, in
other contemporary medieval kingdoms,96 should not be considered as an isolated
phenomenon; rather, it should be seen as part of the wider legal developments of the twelfth
century that gradually transformed the traditional nature of political interaction.97

Eleni Tounta is Assistant Professor of Medieval History at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. She
came to Thessaloniki in 2007 after having studied for her PhD at the Universities of Athens and
Heidelberg and having held the position of research assistant at the University of Heidelberg. She has
published on different aspects of the political culture of the Western Empire and the Norman Kingdom of
Sicily.

96
For example, in the German kingdom. Weinfurter, ‘Investitur und Gnade’, 114–22, demonstrates that after
the Investiture Controversy and the subsequent loss of the sacred nature of kingship, the legal character of
feudal relations was strengthened. As a result the royal gratia was no longer the main instrument for the
settlement of conflicts.
97
See, for instance, Janet Coleman, A History of Political Thought from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance
(Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 29–38.