pendent Roman government, we may add the following words of Dr. John Jacob Mascou: "As the title of Patricius is so eminent in the histories of Pipin and Charlemaign, it may be worthy our

lemagne, had delivered Pope Stephen from Aistulphus king of the Lombards, the Pope constituted not only him, but also his sons Charles and Caroloman, patricians in the year of Christ 754, by which dignity the right of defending the Roman See was at that time conceded to them. For when Pope Adrian had, by his legate Peter, intreated Charles to afford him assistance against Desiderius, he availed himself of this plea, that he was the lawful guardian and protector of the church, as Pope Stephen had ordained him patrician of the Romans. Hence the right of defending and advocating the cause of the Romans was again conceded to Charles. But when Charles had been detained some months in the siege of Pavia, he hastened to Rome about the feast of the Passover, where he was received with great solemnity by the Pope and the Roman noblemen, and himself not only appointed patrician of the Romans; but also under this dignity and power Pope Adrian, having called a synod for the purpose, by a pragmatic sanction yielded up to him the whole right of electing the pontiff, and of regulating the Papal See. It is hence evident that under the title and dignity of the patriciate the whole power over the city and the Pope of Rome was committed to Charles. Upon the death of Adrian, Leo acceded to the pontificate; and shortly after sent to the king, by his legates, his keys of the shrine of St. Peter, and the ensign of the Roman city, with other gifts; and intreated him that he would send some one of his grandees to Rome, who would establish by oath the Romans under his protection and subjection. Hence he had supreme authority as patrician over the City and the Pope of Rome, whilst in the controversy of the Romans with Pope Leo he acted as judge, caused money to be coined at Rome, used this title of patrician among others; and made them equal with the regal,

A

enquiry, what was the real signification of it. The Patriciat, in itself, was not so much an office, or kind of public employ, as the exarchatus, ducatus, and other offices of the empire were, as rather a peculiar dignity in the empire, which had likewise its proper insignia. Constantine the Great, in particular, placed it in high esteem: And, after this, persons of the greatest distinction, when they had enjoyed the offices of consuls and præfecti prætorii, or other the principal posts of the empire, were honoured with it. Even several kings of foreign nations have accepted of it. Odoacer sued for this title from the emperor Zeno, that he might rule, with the better face, in Rome and Italy. When this emperor afterwards encouraged Theoderic, king of the Ostro-Goths, to march into Italy, he nominated him Patricius. Even Clovis accepted of this dignity from Anastasius. But after the Popes conferred the title of Patricius on king Pipin and his sons, it may have received a new and particular signification. From this time we might agree with Peter de Marca and Pagius, that the Patricii were the protectors of the Roman church, and, at the same time, had the temporal jurisdiction in Rome."*

Selden says that "the title of patri

(when in that age only the titles of kingdoms had been used ;) and the years of his reign were computed from the same. Where. fore writers even scruple not to assert, that Charlemagne, be fore he was made emperor, had annexed Rome to his sceptre.” *See his History of the Ancient Germans, translated by Tho

cius was of such honour, that Charlemagne, before he was crowned emperor, had it as an additament of greatness."* Finally," that Charlemagne was Patrician of the Romans, and ruled over them under this name, is attested by numberless state-instruments and historians."+ This form of government continued till the imperial coronation of Charlemage in 800, when the title of Roman patrician was absorbed in that of Roman emperor; for Du Cange informs us that "the patriciate of the Romans is properly to be understood of the præfecture of the City of Rome, or even of Italy, which used to be governed by patricians.-Therefore, (he adds,) it is no wonder that Charles, when made emperor, should abandon the title of patrician, as the patrician dignity was in subjection to the imperial." The point of time when the Patriciate

mas Lediard, Esq. Vol. IV. pp. 637, 638. Edit. Lond. and Westm. 1738.

*See his Titles of Honour, Col. 1012.

+ Carolum M. Patricium fuisse Romanorum, iisque hoc nomine imperasse infinita diplomata et historici testantur. See Capitularia Rerum Francorum à Stephano Baluzio, Tom. II. p. 920, Paris. 1677.

mæ,

Patriciatus Romanorum intelligendus propriè de urbis Rovel etiam Italiæ præfecturâ, quæ à Patriciis-regi solebat. Non mirum igitur, si Carolus imperator factus à patricii titulo abstinuit, cùm Patriciatus dignitas fuerit imperatoriæ subdita. See his Glossary on the word Patriciatus. See also Jo, annis Meursi Glossarium Græco-Barbarum on the word IIa

τρίκιος.

of Rome commenced cannot be readily ascertained. Alberic (in his Chron. ad A. D. 750) will have it that Charles Martel was the first patrician; for he says "Gregory HI. not only suspended the tribute, (scilicet to the Greek emperor,) but also having sent relics and precious gifts to Charles Martel, prince of the Franks, saluted him in his Apostolic writings, in which he signified that the Roman clergy and people had elected him patrician of the Roman city, and defender of the church. Therefore Charles Martel was Roman patrician, his son Pipin was Roman patrician, Charlemagne his son was Roman patrician till he was made emperor, a title of greater eminence." But Mascou and others think it extremely doubtful whether Charles Martel was ever invested with the insignia of the Patriciate, or was even proclaimed Patricius. † Yet notwithstanding the uncertainty of this point, all agree that his son Pepin was made patrician; and Hugo Flaviniacensis (Chron. Verdunensi apud

*Tertius autem Gregorius non solum vectigalia interdixit, sed etiam Karolo Martello Francorum principi missis reliquiis et muneribus pretiosis, salutavit eum Apostolicis scriptis, quibus et significauit, quod Romanus eum clerus et populus elegissent Romanæ patricium vrbis et ecclesiæ defensorem. Itaque Karolus Martellus fuit patritius Romanus, Pippinus filius eius fuit patritius Romanus, Karolus Magnus filius eius fuit patritius Romanus, donec factus fuit Imperator, quod maius est. See Struvius's Corpus Hist. Germanicæ, Tom. I. p. 137, n. 46.

+ See Mascou's History of the Ancient Germans translated by Thomas Lediard, Esq. Vol. II. pp. 638, 639.

Labbeum, Tom. I. p. 104,) says, that " that "Stephen, who had succeeded Zacharias, left Rome on account of the oppression of Aistulphus, king of the Longobards, on the fourteenth day of the month October, being the seventh Indiction, the second year of his Pontificate, and the 754th from the Incarnation, and came to Pipin in France, and constituted him both Defender of the Roman church, and prince; confirmed him as king by his unction, and anointed his two sons Caroloman and Charles. And then was Rome withdrawn from her allegiance to the empire of the Greeks." If we follow the first of these opinions, the patriciate, as an independent form of government existed about 60 years; but if the latter, which is by far the most certain, then its duration was about 46 years. The seven heads of the Beast are, therefore, the following: The Regal power, The Dictatorship, The power of the Prætors, † The Consulate, The Triumvirate, The

*

Stephanus, qui Zachariæ successerat propter infestationem Aistulphi Regis Longobardorum decimo quarto die mensis Octobris Roma egressus Indictioné septima Papatus sui anno secundo ab Incarn. Dom. DCCLIV. ad Pipinum venit in Francia, et constituit eum Romanæ ecclesiæ defensorem, et Principem, et confirmauit vnctione sua in Regem, et vnxit duos filios eius Carolomannum et Carolum. Et tunc ablata est Roma a subiectione Imperii Græcorum. See Struvius's Corpus Hist. Germanicæ,

Tom. I. p. 137, n. 46.

+ I call this the government of prætors, because this is the name by which it is called by almost all writers. But Licinius, whom Dionysius Halicarnassensis quotes, appears to dissent from all others in this particular; for speaking of the origin of the

Q