(Vol. iii., p. 265.)
In reply to your correspondent NEMO'S Query, whether any such personage as
Pope Joan ever held the keys of St. Peter, and wore the tiara? and if so,
at what period, and for what time, and what is known of her personal
history? I would remark that the story runs thus: that between the
pontificates of Leo IV., who died in the year 855, and of Benedict III.,
who died in 858, a female of the name of Joan found means to cause herself
to be elected Pope, which post she held for a term of upwards of two years,
under the title of Joannes VII., according to Sabellicus, or, according to
Platina, of Joannes VIII. She is generally said to have been an
Englishwoman, the daughter of a priest, who in her youth became acquainted
with an English monk belonging to the Abbey of Fulda, with whom she
travelled, habited as a man, to many universities, but finally settled at
Athens, where she remained until the death of her companion, and attained
to a great proficiency in the learning common to the time. After this she
proceeded to Rome, and having by the talent she displayed in several
disputes obtained the reputation of a learned divine, was, on the death of
Leo IV., elected to fill the pontifical chair. This position she held for
upwards of two years, but soon after the expiration of that time was
delivered of a child (but died during parturition), while proceeding in a
procession between the Coliseum and the Church of St. Clemente.
The first mention of this story appears to have been made by Marianus
Scotus, who compiled a chronicle at Mayence, about two hundred years after
the event is said to have occurred, viz. about 1083. He was followed by
Sigebert de Gemblours, who wrote about 1112; and also by Martino di
Cistello, or Polonus, who wrote about 1277; since when the story has been
repeated by numberless authors, all of whom have, more or less, made some
absurd additions.
After the satisfactory proofs of the fictitious character of the story,
which have been produced by the most eminent writers, both Catholic and
Protestant, it may appear a work of supererogation to add anything on the
point; yet it may perhaps be permitted to observe, that in the most ancient
and esteemed manuscripts of the works of the authors above quoted, no
mention whatever is made of the Papissa Giovanna, and its introduction must
therefore have been the work of some later copyist.
The contemporary writers, moreover, some of whom were ocular witnesses of
the elections both of Leo IV. and Benedict III., make no mention whatever
of the circumstance; and it is well known that at Athens, where she is
stated to have studied, no such school as the one alluded to existed in the
ninth century.
The fact will not, I think, be denied that it was the practice of the
chroniclers of the early ages to note down the greater portion of what they
heard, without examining critically as to the credibility of the report;
and the mention of a fact once made, was amply sufficient for all
succeeding authors to copy the statement, and make such additions thereto
as best suited their respective fancies, without making any examination as
to the truth or probability of the original statement. And this appears to
have been the case with the point in question: Marianus Scotus first
stated, or rather some later copyist stated for him, the fact of a female
Pope; and subsequent writers added, at a later period, the additional facts
which now render the tale so evidently an invention.