in 1870
Stephen VI, the successor of Boniface VI, influenced by Lambert and Agiltrude, sat in judgment of Formosus. In 897, nine months after Formosus's death, in what is known as the
Cadaver Synod, where the pope’s body was exhumed and forced to stand trial. The Synod was an attempt for the church to distance itself from the memory of Formosus, and was an example of violence being used to destroy the symbolism behind the former pope. The corpse was disinterred, clad in papal vestments, and seated on a throne to face all the charges from John VIII. The verdict stated that the deceased pope had been unworthy of the pontificate, and the was applied to Formosus. All of Formosus's measures and acts were annulled, and the orders conferred by him were declared invalid. The papal vestments were torn from his body, the three fingers from his right hand he had used in blessings were cut off, and the corpse was thrown into the
Tiber, later to be retrieved by fishermen. In certain historiographical essays, such as Dyan Elliott's "Violence Against the Dead: The Negative Translation and ‘Damnatio Memoriae’ in the Middle Ages," scholars depict the body of Pope Formosus as a victim of ecclesial politics and personal grudges, while others prefer to present Pope Stephen VI as a more benevolent figure attempting to correct the mistakes made by his predecessor. Following the death of Stephen VI, Formosus's body was reinterred in
St Peter's Basilica. Further trials of this nature against deceased persons were banned, but
Sergius III (904–911) reapproved the decisions against Formosus. Sergius demanded the re-ordination of the bishops consecrated by Formosus, who in turn had conferred orders on many other clerics, causing great confusion. Later, the validity of Formosus's pontificate was re-reinstated. The decision of Sergius with respect to Formosus has subsequently been universally disregarded by the
Catholic Church, since Formosus's condemnation had little to do with piety and more to do with politics. In the history of the papacy, there has only been one pope Formosus, and he was a politically charged figure. Formosus lived through the fall of the Carolingian empire from within the church as a bishop, which left him uniquely suited to advance himself following the turmoil caused by the death of Charles the Fat. In order to amass power, Formosus was violently political as shown by his dealings with the Saracens and his attempted bishopric of in Bulgaria as he attempted to gain power for himself. Formosus tried to force the church to bend to his will through his promise to crown Arnulf of Carinthia emperor, and made political moves to keep to the legacy of the fallen Carolingians. These actions went against the Church and eventually led to Formosus's own downfall. Given the political nature of his actions, future popes would refuse to adopt the name Formosus as they wanted to distance themselves from the controversial nature of his actions.
Primary Source Account - Liudprand of Cremona Few primary sources document the Cadaver Synod. The most well-known account comes from
Liudprand of Cremona (c. 920-972), a historian, diplomat, and later Bishop of Cremona. His book,
Antapodosis (
Retribution) offers a secondhand account of the events, written roughly 60 years after the synod took place. Composed for the records of
Bishop Recemundus of Elvira, Liudprand included Formosus and his posthumous trial as part of a wider analysis on late-Carolingian era Italy. Liudprand wrote
Antapodosis during a period of exile from the court of
King Berengar II of Italy. As Berengar held very loose familial connection to the Carolingian dynasty, his legitimacy relied on a perception of longstanding social stability. Liudprand sought to ruin this perception and discredit his rival. His work connected the desecration of Formosus’ body to a corrupt and chaotic church protected by Berengar’s predecessors. As a result, historians recognize that the coverage of the Cadaver Synod in
Antapodosis likely contains added details that exaggerate the savagery of the event; however, the account remains a leading piece of scholarship for interpreting the trial due to the rarity of viable alternatives. ==References==