Building an Aristocratic Identity in Medieval Italy

1 Introduction

The sources from central Italy in the early Middle Ages make it challenging to conduct thorough studies of individual families. While certain areas of Tuscany and Latium have a remarkable documentary tradition that reaches back to the Lombard period,^[1] these records are sometimes too sporadic to trace family histories in detail.^[2] Even for the upper social classes, the case studies are limited. Rome provides the notable examples of the Crescenzi and Tuscolani families, dominant in the city’s politics in the 10th and 11th centuries,^[3] while Tuscany had the Guidi and Walcherii family, emerging around the same time.^[4] Although a few other cities and regions offer interesting cases, the issue persists:^[5] the documentation of the families from this period remains scarce.^[6]

This is the first reason why the Counts of the Marsi represent a highly interesting case. Also known as the Berardi, after their ancestor, they were a landowning family that first appears in sources in the 10th century.^[7] Originally from Burgundy, they settled in the Marsica region, in the Apennines, on the border between Latium and Abruzzo.^[8] Through a clever politics of land investments and personal alliances, they became the most powerful force in the area. Over several generations, they acquired a strategic network of castles and established strong relationships with the influential monasteries of Farfa and Subiaco. Thanks to this careful strategy by the end of the 11th century most of Marsica was under their control.^[9]

Two main types of sources mention the Counts of the Marsi: chronicles and documents.^[10] The latter, especially those from Farfa and Subiaco, are the most useful for understanding their power consolidation.^[11] While the sources do not allow for the creation of a complete genealogical tree, they provide enough details to trace the key stages of their development. Moreover, they reveal that the Counts underwent a process of identity building, transforming from a family of wealthy landowners into an established aristocratic group.^[12] The acquisition of land and power, crucial for understanding the rise of the family, was accompanied by a deeper transformation. The Counts of the Marsi, likely seeking to distinguish themselves from the rest of the local elites, adopted a set of attributes to identify their family members in documents. The first and most notable was their claim to Frankish ancestry, tracing their lineage back to their founder, Berardus.^[13] The second was the use of a limited set of given names, often of Frankish origin: Berardus, Oderisius, Rainaldus, and Teuduinus.^[14] The third was the title comes, which was used by most male family members.^[15] From a modern perspective, these three elements are pivotal, as they allow us to identify the Counts of the Marsi in the sources with a high degree of certainty. In a society that had not yet adopted family names, this aspect is particularly significant.^[16]

If we compare the case of the Crescenzi and the Tuscolani with that of the Counts of the Marsi, we can highlight another reason why the latter are an important case study. Both the Crescenzi and the Tuscolani were deeply involved in the power struggles for the control of the city of Rome. They made and deposed popes and engaged with emperors.^[17] In other words, they operated on an international stage, and this prominence plays a key role in the attention they receive in the sources. The Counts of the Marsi, while influential, acted more on a regional level.^[18] From the perspective of political history this might be seen as a limitation, but for social historians it can be the opposite. In fact, it allows for the study of a family that was less influenced by exogenous factors and more representative of local dynamics. This perspective opens the issue of representativity. While the attributes of the Counts of the Marsi set them apart from other landowners, in other ways their family appears typical of its time.^[19] The contracts they signed, the donations they made, and the trials in which they participated are similar to most examples preserved in the archives of Farfa and Subiaco.^[20] However, even if from an economic and legal standpoint they often acted like the rest of the local elites, the Counts are distinctive due to their visibility in the sources. When we look beyond their titles and examine their relationship with monasteries and other social groups, they emerge as a representative case study. A final aspect must be discussed. When examining their achievements in the high and late Middle Ages, the Counts of the Marsi exhibit remarkable continuity. After their initial power consolidation, they remained the leading family in the area for generations. In the first half of the 12th century, the arrival of the Normans led to a series of conflicts and the loss of many properties. However, several side branches of the family retained power. Petrus of Celano, a descendant of one of these branches, successfully reunited Marsica and other territories under his rule. By the time of his death in 1212, he had become one of the most powerful figures in central Italy.^[21] In the following years, his sons opposed Frederick II and his politics, which weakened their position. Nevertheless, the last descendants of the Counts of the Marsi were not extinguished until the 15th century.^[22]

This paper investigates the development of the Counts of the Marsi from their first mention in the 10th century to the end of the 11th, when their process of identity building was largely completed. It analyses the testimonies from the chartularies of Farfa and Subiaco, aiming to reconstruct the composition of the family and its power strategies as thoroughly as possible. In doing so, it identifies key steps in the development of their shared identity. On a broader level, the paper also discusses the concept of aristocracy in early medieval Italy and argues why the Berardi can be defined as an aristocratic group. The objective of this study is not only to explore regional history, but also to assert that the Counts were part of a new form of aristocracy emerging in central Italy.^[23] In Chapter 2, this paper analyses the terms aristocracy, nobility, and elite from the viewpoint of early medieval and social history. In Chapters 3 and 4, it addresses the current state of research on the Counts, provides an overview of the sources, and outlines the goals and methodology of this study. Finally, Chapter 5 contains the main discussion and focuses on the history of the family, from its beginnings in the 10th century to the height of their power consolidation in the late 11th century.

2 The Concept of Aristocracy in Early Medieval Italy

Defining the upper classes is a problematic topic for social historians. Philippe Contamine, dealing with the idea of nobility in late medieval France, made an important distinction. There are terms that are mostly used by modern researchers, like aristocracy and elite, and some that were already widespread in the Middle Ages, like noblesse in middle French.^[24] Even when it comes to this second category, the original meanings were often multiple and different from the modern ones. Janet Nelson studied the use of nobilis and nobilitas in a selection of sources from the 9th century, and the resulting picture is all but uniform. In the Carolingian bodies of laws, they do not play a major role, because the main difference was between free and unfree rather than between noble and unnoble. Among literary authors, nobilis was more common, but it could have different meanings even within the same work. For example, in Einhard’s biography of Charlemagne the word is used both as a generic adjective (good or gentle) and to define a social group (the Saxon aristocracy).^[25] Up to this point, at least, Medieval scholars did not have a consensus about what nobility meant. Studying the concept of chivalry, Jean Flori came to a similar conclusion. In the chapter called „Qu’est-ce que la noblesse?“ he wrote that in the 10th century nobility did not possess a clear legal status.^[26] He defined nobility „une qualité modulable“ that could have different meanings. Ecclesiastical sources often gave a moral connotation to the word noble, linking it to personal respectability and not to a social group. Flori claimed that this started changing in the 13th century, when a legal framework for nobility started to be defined.^[27]

Nevertheless, social hierarchies were crucial in early Medieval Europe. Giuseppe Albertoni stressed this aspect in his analysis of Carolingian Italy, writing that the difference between the upper classes and the rest of the landowners was clearly perceived. Elaborating on the ideas of Gerd Tellenbach and Karl Schmid, he argued that the concept of family changed during the 11th century. Previously, the aristocratic groups were based on the personal bonds of single members and often lacked a common name. The Latin word familia defined a person’s entourage and not his biological family. After the change, the word shifted to a more modern idea, namely a group of people related to each other.^[28] The unsystematic organisation of early Medieval families may be one of the reasons why identifying them in the sources can be difficult. Jean-Pierre Delumeau noted how some of the most influential families in Carolingian Italy, like the Supponidi, the Unruochingi, and the Guidonidi, seem to vanish after the 10th century.^[29] This is surprising for groups that played a major role in the previous centuries, but it acquires a different meaning if we consider what a family was in this time. These groups did not necessarily extinguish, but they lost their importance as a network of personal bonds, which was the factor that made them visible in the sources.^[30]

Trying to identify early Medieval nobility as a well-defined social rank is therefore problematic. Although forms of hierarchy, as well as of leading classes and aristocracies, existed, the variety and mobility of these groups were too dynamic to be enclosed in a single definition. Gerd Tellenbach was clear about it in a paper dedicated to the relationship between law and nobility in the high Middle Ages. He underlined how an aristocratic man in a region could hold no power in the neighbouring one, or how a count could be influential on a local level, but almost irrelevant on a higher one.^[31] In the end, Chris Wickham was convincing when he wrote that delimiting the concept of aristocracy in this period is mostly a decision made by modern historians.^[32] In fact, Wickham underlined the ambivalence of the term nobilis, which was never a synonym of aristocratic.^[33] In summary, it seems that contemporary researchers must accept the structural ambiguity of early Medieval Italian aristocracies.^[34] The most important aspect is not to seek a universal definition of nobility in a certain geographical or chronological frame, which could easily turn into a ghost chase, but rather to use the related terminology in a clear and coherent way.

For this reason, it is necessary to explain how the terms aristocracy, nobility and elite will be used in this article. The first one comes from the Greek ἀριστοκρατία (literally „power of the best“) and defines the ruling class of a society.^[35] The second one originates from the Latin nobilitas (from nosco, which means „to know“) and has a related meaning, but with a notable difference.^[36] Aristocracy is a broad word that comprehends the leading classes in general; nobility is a narrower term and indicates a more definable social group, marked by specific attributes or rights.^[37] If we follow this definition, virtually all societies from the past had forms of aristocracy, but only some had actual nobilities. The third term, elite, comes from the Latin eligere („to choose“). It will be used to define not only the leading classes, but all social groups that could rely on a substantial economic power, political authority, or cultural influence. Elites include people that are not usually ascribed to aristocracies, like merchants, artisans, lower clergymen, and minor landowners.^[38]

Central Italy in the 10th and 11th century had both elites and aristocracies, but it seems reasonable to say that it did not have a nobility that matches this definition. There were no clear laws to define such a closed group, marked by specific rights.^[39] As both a proof and a natural consequence of this, the documentary sources do not have a clear terminology regarding these social concepts. The Latin word nobilis was used often, especially in the honorary title nobilis vir, but the meaning was far from the modern term noble. In fact, the title was carried by men with very different backgrounds, including merchants and artisans.^[40] Tommaso Di Carpegna Falconieri identified a distinction between more prestigious titles, like nobilis vir and vir magnificus, and more ordinary ones, like vir honestus or the name of a profession.^[41] On a general level, this differentiation is correct, but it does not always work, because the notaries from this time could be very inconsistent in the use of this terminology. Pierre Toubert, one of the most important historians of Latium in this period, was therefore sceptical about the possibility of understanding honorary titles as clear social status markers.^[42] Nevertheless, titulature is important to study upper classes. Even Toubert used the titles of Alberic of Rome to analyse his political role.^[43] Étienne Hubert also considered honorary titles while following the urban development in Rome.^[44] More recently, Edward Schoolman researched the titles from Ravenna to offer an interesting analysis of the local elites.^[45] Instead of seeing it as a problem, we should interpretate the inconsistency of the honorary titles as a revealing piece of information. The titulature was incoherent because the upper classes were undergoing a process of transformation. The elites were shifting to a new concept of family, less dependent on individual figures and more anchored to a network of parental ties.^[46]

The Counts of the Marsi were one of the families that underwent this process. Even at the end of the 11th century, calling them noble would be misleading, because a real nobility had yet to emerge. However, they can be called aristocratic because they had managed to differentiate themselves from the rest of the local elites and they belonged to an established form of upper class. Studying the Counts means, in fact, observing an example of upper class transformation. The three pillars of their identity construction – the Frankish origin, the limited number of given names, and the title comes – can be read as instruments to underline this shift in the sources. This does not mean that all aspects of this process were fully conscious. We will see how the Counts probably took some of these steps because of the social environment they were living in, but this does not make them less important in our analysis.

3 The Historiography on the Counts of the Marsi

In 1615, the priest and historian Francesco Zazzera published a book on the history of Italian nobility. He dedicated a chapter to the „Casa dei conti dei Marsi“, thus initiating modern historiography on the Berardi family. Zazzera’s work shows the limitations of an early 17th-century effort, but it is remarkable for its adherence to sources. He consulted many of the documents and chronicles discussed here, although he lacked a modern understanding of the historical context. In particular, he interpreted the honorary titles from the 10th and 11th centuries as feudal titles, leading to a misleading depiction of the family’s history. Moreover, he sought to construct an unbroken genealogical tree, sometimes making unsupported assumptions.^[47] Nonetheless, Zazzera’s interest in the topic exceeded the attention it has received in more recent times.

In fact, more recently, the Counts of the Marsi have been the subject of surprisingly few publications. In the early 20th century, Federico Terra-Abrami and Cesare Rivera researched them, focusing on promoting local history.^[48] In 1930, Hermann Müller dedicated a chapter to them as part of his research on the topographic and genealogical history of Sabina and the Duchy of Spoleto.^[49] Between 1994 and 2002, Antonio Sennis studied the family from a regional perspective, reconstructing the social and political development of the Marsica region.^[50] Pierre Toubert and Étienne Hubert, who were interested in the neighbouring Sabina region, approached the subject from a peripheral point of view.^[51] Laurent Feller did the same in 1998, concentrating on medieval Abruzzo.^[52] In 2016, Maria Carla Somma published a paper focusing on the archaeological and topographic aspects of their expansion around the monastery of Subiaco.^[53] Finally, the Lumen Historical Society has made significant efforts to research local history.^[54]

The studies by Terra-Abrami and Rivera are important as they opened contemporary research on the Counts of the Marsi, although they mostly offer an overview of the main events aimed at a local audience. Pierre Toubert did not mince words when he wrote: „Il n’y a rien d’utile à tirer de Rivera … et peu de Terra-Abrami.“^[55] However, both authors made a valuable effort to collect documents and information about the Counts. While it is legitimate to focus on more recent publications, their contributions deserve appreciation. This analysis opens with Pierre Toubert’s observations. In 1973, he published his well-known monography on medieval Latium, in which he referred to two members of the Berardi family, Count Berardus and Count Rainaldus, as „grands incastellatores“.^[56] However, he acknowledges the limitations of the sources, noting that we do know little about the genealogy of the Counts before the 10th century.^[57] This is an important remark, since Zazzera had attempted to link them to the Carolingian dynasty.^[58] Toubert’s main interest lay in the family’s expansion into the diocese of Rieti during the early 11th century, an endeavour that ultimately failed after 1030.^[59] He also supported the idea that Carsoli was the Counts’ main residence during this period.^[60] Still, his overall interest in the subject was rather limited.

Antonio Sennis, who dedicated his dissertation to the history of Marsica, studied the Counts in greater depth. His work, summarised in articles from 1994 and 2002, begins with a comprehensive analysis of the region’s history in the early Middle Ages, when sources are extremely scarce.^[61] Regarding the Berardi family, he distinguished between the title comes – which he called „dignità comitale“ – and the County of Marsica as a territorial entity, which emerged only in the 10th century.^[62] He linked the Berardi’s settlement in the area to Hugh of Provence’s political problems, as he needed to consolidate his control over his kingdom’s southern borders.^[63] Sennis noted that the Berardi stopped being involved in the higher Italian politics after Hugh’s death and started focusing on more regional problems. Since Marsica did not possess a comital administration yet, the family soon splintered into several branches that pursued different goals.^[64] Sennis argued that this process stabilised during the Ottonian age, as Marsica developed into a more cohesive entity. Through their control of the diocese, the Berardi consolidated their power and became the leading force in the region.^[65] Sennis also noted that their role in the judiciary system was limited, as major monasteries preferred to turn to the emperor rather than to local counts. He highlighted how the Counts of the Marsi oscillated between acting as private landowners and public officials.^[66] The arrival of the Normans in southern Italy further diminished their power, forcing them to seek alliances and ultimately accept a reduction in influence.^[67]

In 1998, Laurent Feller made a parallel analysis dealing with Abruzzo’s history. In his comprehensive monography, which follows Toubert’s methodological approach, Feller situated the Berardi’s within the larger context of Frankish migration to Italy in the 10th century. He noted how the phenomenon concerned the upper classes, with new families joining the already existent Lombard aristocracy, and connected this displacement with the emersion of new forms of ethnic identities.^[68] In the later chapters, he focused mainly on the familiar relationships between the Counts of the Marsi and the Attonides, the leading family around Teate, the modern city of Chieti. He did, however, use these links to understand more the history of the Attonides than that of the Berardi.^[69] In fact, he defined the latter as agents of the Attonides in the western part of the region.^[70] However, Feller identified the Counts’ religious politics as an exceptional element of their activities in this period, and especially their ability to occupy the bishop seats in their region. As a possible explanation he mentioned their origin from Burgundy, where this kind of strategy was more common.^[71]

Étienne Hubert dedicated two parts of his monography from 2002 on the Turano valley to the Counts of the Marsi. In the chapter on the genesis of the incastellamento he studied the role of large landowners. The Counts were one of the about dozen families that controlled sizable portions of the valley around the year 1000. Hubert noted how most of these groups did not possess a common name and appeared in the sources only as „sons of“.^[72] This confirms the idea that the process of construction of new familiar identities was just at its beginnings in the area. Hubert then came back to the topic in the chapter focussed on the first main phase of the incastellamento in the 11th century. He estimated that the Counts had arrived in the Turano valley around 1030, since their member Berardus was mentioned as owner of the castle of Offiano in 1037.^[73] Notably, Hubert used the terms „projet territorial“ and „implantation comtale“ to define the arrival and expansion of the Counts of the Marsi in the Turano valley. Confronting the different sources, he saw an organised long-term effort in their strategy to take control of the area.^[74] In a first phase the project was successful, but in the central part of the 11th century it came to a stop. One of the reasons was the division of properties among the family members, which weakened the range and power of their sphere of influence. A second cause was the predominance of Benedictine monasteries such as Farfa and Subiaco, which obtained sizable donations from the Counts. Hubert did not question the legitimacy of these acts, but he detected how the Berardi emerged weakened from this transfer of properties.^[75]

In 2016, Maria Carla Somma examined the activities of the Counts of the Marsi around the monastery of Subiaco. She summarised some of the conclusions of the previous authors, noting that the Berardi were able to take control of a large area in the Apennines but failed at creating a stable and cohesive territorial entity.^[76] By calling the relationships between the family and Subiaco as a system of „condivisione/acquisizione“, she claimed that the Counts actively wanted to place their properties under the sphere of influence of the monks.^[77] As a reason she identifies the high degree of legal and administrative autonomy that Subiaco was achieving. In other words, the Counts would have tried to exploit the monastery’s privileges. This reconstruction does not necessarily clash with Hubert’s theory. We could assume that the family tried to gain an advantage through its donations, but ultimately was weakened by them.

The overview of over fifty years of research shows how the history of the Counts of the Marsi has been studied from different perspectives. While Toubert and Hubert focused on their role as castle builder, Feller explored their place in Abruzzo’s aristocratic history, and Sennis emphasised their regional dominance in Marsica. Somma, in contrast, centred on their activities in the Aniene valley. This paper will build on the ideas of these scholars but will return to the original sources from Farfa and Subiaco. The goal is to use the tools of social history to go beyond the Berardi’s role as promoters of the incastellamento and influential family in medieval Abruzzo. These aspects are significant but must be viewed within the broader context of medieval aristocracy.

4 Overview of the Sources and Methodology

Due to their importance at the border between Latium and Abruzzo, the Counts of the Marsi appear relatively often in the sources from the monasteries of Farfa and Subiaco. In fact, the relationship between the family and the two abbeys was a central element in shaping the identity of the Counts. Estimating the number of the documents concerning them is challenging, because some family members possibly acted as witnesses and judges without carrying distinctive titles. An approximation is however possible. From the first attestation in 981 to the end of the 11th century there are 12 documents from Farfa and 5 from Subiaco that mention the Counts.^[78] The number may seem small, but it becomes remarkable when compared to the general situation. The landowning families are mentioned only rarely in many documents and different chartularies. The 17 documents concerning the Berardi therefore emerge as a significant body of sources.

Before presenting the individual documents, it is important to make a further clarification. The sources of the cartularies of Farfa and Subiaco are copies compiled between the late 11th and 12th centuries.^[79] Therefore, the texts have undergone a process of selection and transcription that must be taken into account. Inevitably – though this is certainly not a problem unique to this region – historians must work with a selection that is not only shaped by the passage of time but also influenced by the monks’ decision to prioritise certain documents over others. The table below summarizes the key elements of these documents and is also useful for outlining the main methodology of this article. The analysis is based on archival research, specifically on monastic cartularies, and document analysis. In a preliminary phase, the main factors considered are the chronology of the sources, their place of production and preservation, and the types of contracts they contain. In a second phase, the analysis continues with a socio-historical and prosopographical approach, identifying the members of the Berardi family who appear in the texts. As outlined in the introduction, the aspects given the most consideration are personal names, honorific titles, public offices, and geographical attributes.

Several researchers have tried to reconstruct the Berardi’s family tree. The most accurate proposals are those of Antonio Sennis and Étienne Hubert.^[80] Nevertheless, piecing together all familiar ties with the surviving sources is an almost impossible task. To offer a clear overview of the situation, I decided to focus on the different generations instead of proposing another genealogical tree. The analysed period begins with the first mention of a family member in Farfa in 981 and ends in 1074, year of the last notice from the 11th century. To mitigate the confusion that may arise from the repetitions of the same names, the different generations are briefly introduced. The first generation of the Berardi coincides with the family founder Berardus franciscus, also known as Berardus I. The date of his death is unknown, but it was before 986.^[81] Several of his sons reached adulthood, and four are recorded in Farfa and Subiaco. Teuduinus, Berardus, and Rainaldus carried the title comes and were active as landowners and judges between Rieti and the Marsica region. A fourth son, Gualterius, was a bishop, although his seat is unknown.^[82] These four men represent the second generation of the Berardi in central Italy. A third generation is first recorded in 995. Count Oderisius, son of Rainaldus, appears in several documents from Farfa. His brother Berardus is also mentioned in a donation made in 1038. In comparison to the previous generation, their role seems to be less prominent. The situation changes with the fourth generation, the last one discussed in this paper. The most important member was Rainaldus, who was active between 1060 and 1068. He was the son of Berardus, who might have been either the Berardus from 1038 or one of his cousins.^[83] At this point, distinguishing between brothers and cousins becomes virtually impossible, but we know the names of several other members of this generation. Two were called Oderisius and one Berardus. The last document, a donation from 1074, is the only one recording some female names: Litelda, Sikelgaita, and Gilla.

For the aim of this paper, the most important generations are the second and the fourth, as they were those who played a major role in building the family identity. The sons of Berardus franciscus were confronted with the uneasy task of consolidating their fortune and prestige in central Italy. Their grandchildren in the second half of the 11th century, coming after what looks like a transitional phase in the family history, revoked their Frankish ancestry to stabilize their common identity and strengthen their position towards the monasteries of Farfa and Subiaco. If we compare the chronology of these two phases – respectively from 981 to 1000 and from 1060 to 1074 – to the general situation of the Italian peninsula, we can trace a connection between the latter and the history of the family. The first one encompassed the central part of the Ottonian rule in Italy, a moment of conflict and reorganisation.^[84] The second one coincided with the peak of the Norman conquest of southern Italy, which ultimately extended to include the Marsica region and most of modern-day Abruzzo.^[85]

5 The Counts of the Marsi in the Sources from Farfa and Subiaco

The history of the Counts of the Marsi begins in the first decades of the 10th century, when Berardus, a man from southern France, settled in central Italy. Despite Francesco Zazzera’s effort to portray him as a descendant of Charlemagne, Berardus’ origin remains unclear.^[86] The only source about these early years is the chronicle of Leo Marsicanus, monk in Montecassino and bishop of Ostia. Leo, who wrote between the end of the 11th century and the beginnings of the 12th, was himself a member of the Berardi family.^[87] Describing the reign of Hugh of Arles in Italy (926–947) he recorded: „Cum hoc Hugone venit Italiam Azzo comes Burgundiae avunculus Berardi illius qui cognominatus est Franciscus a quo videlicet Marsorum comites procreati sunt.“^[88]

Since Hugh was crowned in Pavia in the summer of 926, we can situate Berardus’ arrival in Italy in the second quarter of the 10th century.^[89] Leo did not mention any relationship with Charlemagne and wrote only that Berardus’ uncle was a Burgundian count. In fact, it seems that Leo was more interested in Berardus’ descendants rather than in his ancestors. The two pieces of information we are given are his Frankish origin and his role as family founder, which confirm the formula „ex natione Francorum“ found in several documents.^[90] Estimating that Berardus franciscus arrived in Italy towards 930, over 50 years passed until his family was first mentioned in Farfa in 981.^[91] This fact undermines the idea that Berardus was a leading political figure when he settled in Italy. If he had been, his role would have probably been recorded in one of the documents from this time. Instead, the comparison between Berardus’ absence in the sources and the prominence of his sons points toward a slow growth of the family’s fortune. We do not know the size of Berardus’ properties when he first moved to Marsica, but the main growth apparently took place during the following generation.

A foundation of wealth was a fundamental step to allow the establishment of the family. Concretely, Berardus franciscus and his sons gathered enough estates and resources to sustain the donations they made to the monasteries of Farfa and Subiaco.^[92] These acts, which had an important religious motivation, strengthened the authority and the reputation of the Berardi. They were accompanied by the gain of important clergy positions, as shown by the case of Gualterius, one of Berardus’ sons, who was a bishop by 993.^[93] Another important role acquired by the family concerned the judiciary system. Central Italy in this time did not have a professional body of judges large enough to deal with trials without the help of the local elites.^[94] Therefore, court cases were decided by judicial assemblies made up by a core of professional judges, known as iudices ordinarii, and a variable number of prominent men from the area, usually called iudices dativi.^[95] We do not know exactly how these non-professional judges were selected, but to perform this role they had to count on the respect of their local community. Members of the Berardi family started to act as judges as early as 982.^[96] By this year they were integrated enough in the local society to absolve this delicate task.

The first mention of a family member in either Farfa or Subiaco is from the year 981.^[97] The document is a judgment and sees the participation of Teuduinus comes, one of Berardus’ sons. In this case he did not act as judge, but as one of the lawsuit’s parties. Teuduinus and other landowners contested the ownership of a watermill and other estates in the hands of Farfa’s monks. Since Iohannes, the abbot, was able to present a document to prove his rightfulness, the landowners had to renounce their claims. I consider the identification of Teuduinus as one of Berardus’ sons as almost certain, because he carries the title comes, he appears in three other documents in the same decade, and the name was rare in central Italy. However, based on the source it appears that in this period the fact of being a count was not a very distinctive element. In this document alone there are four other men who are identified as comites. By this time the Counts of the Marsi can be hardly distinguished from the rest of the region’s elite.

In 982, Teuduinus served a more prestigious role when he presided the judicial assembly of two trials involving another group of landowners and the monastery of Farfa.^[98] The first case saw three men, Gaiderisius, Rainerius, and Adalbertus, contending the monks several estates in the diocese of Rieti. The properties had to be profitable, because the monastery used its connections to the imperial court and obtained the intervention of the bishop of Pavia Petrus, who presided the assembly together with Teuduinus.^[99] Petrus, acting as missus domni imperatoris, came to Rieti with three collaborators, the iudices de Papia Herizo, Aldo, and Liuzo.^[100] The rest of the assembly was composed by local officials and members of the elite. Five carried the title iudex, five are only mentioned by name, and the rest are recorded collectively as reliqui plurimi circum sedentes et astantes. After the interested parties were heard, the monks won the lawsuit and obtained the properties back. The second instance, which was judged by the same assembly together with the previous one, regarded the property of two fishing ponds (piscarie) in Sabina.^[101] In this case nobody stepped in front of the judges to defend their claims, and the assembly simply confirmed the abbey’s rights over the lakes. If in the document from 981 Teuduinus was virtually indistinguishable from other local landowners, in this case his role is better defined. Presiding a judicial assembly together with Pavia’s bishop was an influential task, especially since the trial involved a powerful institution such as the monastery of Farfa.

The following attestation comes from a waiver made in April 983 and preserved in the chartulary of Subiaco.^[102] Leo, abbot of the monastery of Cosma and Damiano in Cave, renounced his claim over a land called massa iuventiana and other properties in favour of the monastery of Subiaco. The judicial assembly was held in Rome and was presided by Pope Benedict VII together with the bishops Geribertus of Tours, Petrus of Pavia, Gregorius of Albano, and Leo of Ostia. The abbots Iohannes of Farfa and other clergymen were also present. Among the laymen there were three palatine judges, who were the most important public officials in Rome in this time and absolved both administrative and judicial functions. They were seven and their titles were: primicerius, secundicerius, protoscriniarius, arcarius, sacellarius, primus defensor, and nomenculator.^[103] The three judges present at this waiver were the primicerius Iohannes, the arcarius Leo, and the protoscriniarius Azzo. The list was completed by the dativi iudices Rigizo and Benedictus, the consul Iohannes, the comes palatii Sergius, and Berardus, comes civium Tiburtine.^[104]

In this case, identifying Berardus as a member of the Counts of the Marsi is not easy. However, it seems that the attribution is likely, as the combination of the given name Berardus, the title comes, and the city of Tivoli is quite distinctive. The existence of a count Berardus, son of Berardus franciscus, is confirmed by another document written in 993.^[105] As for Tivoli, the town lays very close to Marsica’s western border. Finally, the previous charters involving count Teuduinus show that the use of the title comes in the Berardi family had already begun. Therefore, Berardus’ identification cannot be described as certain, but it is supported by several elements. If this interpretation is correct, it means that two sons of Berardus franciscus were active as judges in judicial assemblies of great importance. They worked next to influential officials and clergymen such as bishops, abbots, and palatine judges.

The four documents discussed so far are very important to assess the influence and social prestige of the Berardi family in the late 10th century, but they reveal no direct information about their concrete wealth. The first source to do so is an exchange from 986 preserved in the chartulary of Farfa.^[106] Count Teuduinus, appearing for the third time, exchanged several properties with the monastery of Farfa. Differently from his other attestations, in this case Teuduinus is described as „filius cuiusdam Berardi comitis ex natione Francorum and as habitator ducatu spoletano“. This is both the oldest document in which Berardus franciscus is mentioned and the first reporting the expression „ex natione Francorum“. An analysis of the exchanged properties can help us estimate the proportions of the family’s wealth in this decade. Teuduinus gave the monastery 16 plots of farmland and vineyards located in the regions of Marsica and Sabina. In exchange, the monks gave him a castle (rocca) in the diocese of Rieti. The following table summarises the location and size of the different properties. The unit of measurement was the modius, which was primarily a unit of volume but could also be used to measure an area. According to the estimate reported by Pierre Toubert, in medieval Sabina a modius was equivalent to about 0,23 hectares.^[107]

Overall, the 16 properties given by Teuduinus measured just over 100 modii, which equal to about 23 hectares. This result is only an approximation, but it gives us an estimate of the size of the exchanged land. As for the property given by the monks, it consisted of a single castle and its adjacent lots, which altogether measured 100 modii too. Therefore, the exchange was apparently balanced, even though we can hardly estimate other important factors like fertility, altimetry, and slope. 23 hectares may not be an immense estate, but they were a sizable amount of land. However, the high degree of fragmentation of the properties suggests that these were acquired through a process of purchases and inheritance rather than through military conquest or a royal donation at the time of Berardus franciscus. As for the socio-political implications of the contract, the choice to exchange many plots of land with a single, larger castle looks like an attempt to concentrate and valorise the family’s properties. Controlling one stronghold surrounded by sizable farmland implicated that the Berardi could project more power than by owning 16 small plots spread out between Rieti and the Marsica region. Moreover, the fact that the abbey of Farfa was willing to allow this operation may indicate that the Counts enjoyed a certain support among the monks.

The most important source to understand the Berardi’s family structure in this generation is a donation from 993.^[108] This document, copied in the chartulary of Subiaco, was originally made in Carsoli at the very heart of the Marsica region. The donation was made by three members of the family. Two, Count Rainaldus and the bishop Gualterius, were almost certainly sons of Berardus franciscus. The third, also named Berardus, is recorded as Rainaldus’ son. The beneficiary of the donation was Petrus, abbot of Santa Scolastica in Subiaco. The identification of Rainaldus and Gualterius as sons of Berardus franciscus is not fully certain, as the text does not mention the family founder. However, several clues support this interpretation. The count Rainaldus is mentioned again in a document from 1000, which will be discussed later, and is described there as son of Berardus franciscus.^[109] In addition to this, we know that Carsoli was one of the most important seats of the family.^[110] Therefore, the reconstruction of the familiar ties is in this case highly probable.

The second problem that must be addressed is the location of Gualterius’ episcopal see. The text records him as epyscopus, but no places are mentioned. This sparked a brief but interesting debate among specialists. In his chronology of the bishops of Tivoli, published in two parts in 1922 and 1923, Giuseppe Cascioli argued that Gualterius may have been bishop in Tivoli.^[111] Although there is no direct evidence of this, no other bishop is recorded in the city around 993. The hypothesis is therefore plausible but quite circumstantial, as Cascioli himself wrote at the end of his brief analysis. Antonio Sennis shared this scepticism and identified Gualterius as bishop of Forcona in modern day Abruzzo.^[112] In fact, the text mentions that some of the men present at the donation were from a place called Forcone, even though this does not refer specifically to Gualterius. To further sustain this theory, in his work dedicated to Italian bishops under the Saxonian and Salian emperors Gerhard Schwartz had recorded a bishop named Gualdericus in Forcona between the 10th and the 11th centuries, even if the exact chronology is all but certain.^[113] Finally, we must consider the possibility that Gualterius was bishop in the local diocese of Marsica, whose bishops are not always recorded.^[114] The debate is interesting, but from a socio-historical perspective it is not decisive. The crucial fact is that one of the sons of Berardus franciscus had managed to become bishop by the end of the 10th century. The occupation of an episcopal see is another piece of evidence which reveals the importance of the family among local elites.

Unfortunately, the document is vague when it comes to the extent of the donated properties. These included all Rainaldus and Gualterius’ possessions in the places called Monte de Spina, Colle Longu, and Campu Siccu not far away from Carsoli. The number and titles of the witnesses, however, might indicate that the donation was of a certain importance. Apart from the already mentioned abbot Petrus, the people present included three priests and monks from Subiaco, the judge Adenolfus, the viscount Ildebrandus, and several other men from Marsica and from the town of Forcona.

Two years later, in 995, a new member of the family, Count Oderisius, appears for the first time in the sources. As attested in a later document,^[115] he was Rainaldus’ son, which would identify him as the brother of the Berardus who was mentioned in 993. The document is from the chartulary of Farfa and concerns a trial held in Marsica. The dispute involved the monastery of Farfa and two brothers, Rachisius and Remedius, who had occupied several properties of the monks. Once again, the source is vague about the size of the estates, which were located in Marsica. The judicial assembly was presided by the count Oderisius and the bishop Helmpertus, who represented Hugh, duke and marquis of Spoleto.^[116] The rest of the assembly consisted of four judges and several prominent men from the region. The fact that Oderisius could preside a trial involving the monastery of Farfa next to a bishop confirms the socio-political relevance of his family in this period. This is further sustained by the following document, written in 999 and also preserved in Farfa’s chartulary.^[117] Oderisius acted again as leader of a judicial assembly, this time to settle a dispute between the monks and his own father Rainaldus. This concerned the property of a church in Marsica. Even in the late 10th century, it seems surprising that a son was called as a judge in a trial concerning his father. However, the document shows that no actual dispute was held. Rainaldus freely renounced his rights over the church and the trial ended on peaceful terms. This reveals that Oderisius’ role was that of a mediator rather than of a real judge. The background of this case remains unclear, but the presence of a full judiciary assembly suggests that the agreement was not a simple donation, but a settlement that came after a form of dispute. Rainaldus’ decision to renounce his rights can be put into the context of the Berardi’s will to maintain good relationships with the monastery of Farfa and more in general to acquire a role of influence as mediators and protectors of religious institution in the region.

The following year, in February 1000, the count Rainaldus made a sizable donation to the monastery of Subiaco.^[118] The formula „ex natione Francorum“ appears for a second time, referred to Rainaldus’ father, Berardus franciscus. The donated properties encompassed the three castles of Arsoli, Roviano, and Anticoli.^[119] Although they are referred to as castella in the source, the text suggests that they were fortified villages with significant agricultural and artisanal activities. The writer mentioned churches, houses inside and outside the walls, fields, vineyards, watermills, rivers, and pastures, as well as some additional uncultivated land. The dimension of Rainaldus’ donation is striking, especially if compared to the documents analysed in the previous pages. This document is a clear proof that the Berardi disposed of a considerable number of properties by the very beginning of the 11th century. As for the reasons behind the donation, several elements can be suggested. First, the religious aspect should not be underestimated. The tight relationships between Farfa, Subiaco, and the Berardi underline not only a political strategy, but also a devout attitude toward monastic institutions. However, strengthening Subiaco’s position in southern Marsica could have two positive effects for the Berardi. On one hand, it meant guaranteeing the support of an ancient and influential monastery such as Santa Scolastica. On the other, it ensured that the area between Subiaco and the Berardi’s power base in central Marsica remained out of the reach of potential rivals.

After this, the counts of the Marsi are not recorded in either monastery for several years and they reappear in Farfa in 1014.^[120] Count Oderisius, previously active in 995 and 999, is mentioned again, this time as a monastery founder. The document is an imperial diploma issued by Henry II and confirming several properties to the monks of Farfa. Among these, the text mentions the churches of Saint Peregrine and Saint Mary in the territory of Balba in the Marsica region, stating that Oderisius had repopulated them with monks. Once again, a source confirms how the Berardi invested in the preservation of religious institutions. Despite this important document, the first half of the 11th century provides scarce information about the activities of the Counts in Farfa and Subiaco. In 1038 a donation to the abbey of Farfa mentions the count Berardus, Rainaldus’ son and Oderisius’ brother, who had already appeared forty-five years earlier in 993, when he was probably very young.^[121] However, he does not play any significant role in the contract and is cited only as a neighbour in relationship to a property located in the diocese of Rieti. The donor, Transaricus of Rieti, was not a member of the Berardi family. Although this source is useful to reconstruct the genealogy of the Counts, it reveals little about their political and economic activities in this period.

The same holds true for the following source, an imperial diploma from 1050 issued by Henry III in favour of the monastery of Farfa.^[122] The document confirms a long list of properties, among which the church of Saint Peregrine that had already been cited in 1038. In relation to it, the writer recorded: „aecclesiam sancti Peregrini in qua comes Oderisius monasterium construxit“. Since Oderisius was active as a judge and thus an adult man in 995, we can suspect that he was probably dead by 1050, but the text does not specify it. However, this source is important because it implies that the memory of Oderisius’ foundation was not only alive at the middle of the 11th century but also considered important enough to be recorded in an imperial diploma.

The following document, written in 1060 and copied into the chartulary of Subiaco, is the oldest one concerning the fourth generation of the Counts in Italy.^[123] It is a donation made by Rainaldus, son of Berardus, to the monks of Santa Scolastica. In the text Rainaldus is described with several titles and attributes: „illustrissimus comes, gloriosus comes, natione Francorum, and habitator in Carsoli“. The use of adjectives in their superlative form was not uncommon in Latium, as shown by other documents preserved in the chartulary.^[124] However, the combination of these four attributes is very peculiar and stands out from the rest of the source. The choice to combine the title comes, which had been common in the family for eighty years, with pompous attributes such as illustrissimus and gloriosus, is innovative. Moreover, the claim of a Frankish origin after three generations spent in Italy shows that this element had become an important feature for the Berardi. Finally, the mention of Carsoli as Rainaldus’ home supports the idea that the counts had established a residence in this town of Marsica.

As for the document itself, the donated properties were conspicuous. The monks, represented by their abbot Umbertus, received the castle of Camorata – nowadays Camerata Nuova in the province of Rome –^[125] and the nearby church of Saint Peter. Camerata lays very close to Arsoli, Roviano, and Anticoli Corrado, the three castles that had been donated to Subiaco by Rainaldus’ ancestors in 993. With this addition, the monks gained control over much of the area between the core of Marsica, where Carsoli is located, and the valley of the Aniene river that leads to Tivoli and to the city of Rome.^[126] Although, as already mentioned, the religious aspect of these donations should not be underestimated, a strategic thinking also may have played a role behind this transfer of fortified villages. It is possible that the Counts of the Marsi wanted the monastery of Subiaco to have a secure control over the communication lines between Marsica and central Latium. However, this transfer of power was mitigated by a second contract, stipulated at the same time, and also copied into the chartulary of Subiaco.^[127] In this second document Count Rainaldus leased both the church of Saint Peter and the castle of Camorata in exchange for a yearly payment of three solidi of Pavia.^[128] In this case, a strategic thinking appears more clearly. Rainaldus was willing to strengthen Subiaco’s patrimony, but, at least for the moment, he made sure to retain control of his stronghold in the Apennine mountains. A few years later, in a document dated in 1066 or 1067, Rainaldus appeared again, this time to make a sizable donation to the monastery of Farfa.^[129] The monks received two properties in Marsica: the church of Saint Silvester and the church of Saint Salvatore and Saint Mary. The donation was conspicuous, as the churches came with land and properties. In this case Rainaldus carried the title comes de provincia Marsorum. Although the Frankish ancestry was not mentioned, it is interesting to see that the connection to the Marsica region had acquired an important role for the Counts. However, it should not be missed that there is no reference to a county of Marsica. The attribute should probably be interpreted as an ancestry and not as a claim to the ownership of the whole region.

Rainaldus was not the only member of the Berardi family who entertained strong relationships with the monastery of Farfa. In 1068 or 1069 another branch of the family exchanged the castle of Repasto and the church of Saint Andrew in Marsica for the castle of Acqua Mezza, all located in the territory of Rieti.^[130] The donors were three family members: Oderisius, Berardus, and Herbeus. Oderisius was son of Count Berardus, which would make him Rainaldus’ brother. Berardus and Herbeus were sons of Count Teuduinus. They were probably Oderisius’ cousins, although the exact degree of kinship is difficult to reconstruct. Every single member of the Berardi family mentioned in the document – Oderisius, Berardus, the other Berardus, Herbeus, and Teuduinus – carries the title comes. The brothers Berardus and Herbeus do not have it in their first mention, but they are called comites in the signature list. Although the problem will need to be addressed further, this is a hint that the Counts of the Marsi used the title as an honorific attribute and not as a form of office. In fact, the document does not mention any specific region, town, or castle of residence, but only a generic reference to other castles and properties owned by the family around Rieti.

The last source mentioning the Counts in either chartulary is a document from 1074 preserved in Farfa.^[131] It is a peculiar contract, partly a donation and partly a purchase, stipulated in the city of Rieti by a larger group of family members. Since the familiar network is quite complicated and the names tended to repeat themselves, a visual representation might be clearer to understand. The following table summarises the situation:

Moreover, the text mentions two deceased children, Rainaldus and Berardus, saying only they were the children of the previously mentioned count. However, since the document mentions several counts, it is impossible to understand if Rainaldus and Berardus were children of Berardus or of one of the two men called Oderisius. Moreover, it is also possible that they were instead sons of one of the two deceased fathers, Berardus and Rainaldus. Like the previous donation from 1068 or 1069, this contract was stipulated by two brothers and a third man who was probably their cousin. Once again, most male family members carry the title comes. The most interesting attribute concerns the family’s ancestry. After the list of donors, the notary wrote this sentence: „quoniam omnes nos insimul ex natione Francorum“. It must not be forgotten that 148 years had passed since Hugo of Arles’ coronation as king of Italy. The Counts of the Marsi had been living in Italy for almost a century and a half, and yet their claim to a Frankish ancestry still retained a prominent role in their self-representation. Another peculiarity of this source is the presence of several women, a unique example in the documents analysed for this research. Three women are mentioned, all wives of family members: Litelda, Sikelgaita, and Gilla.^[132] Litelda, wife of Oderisius, was the only one alive at the time of the donation. Sikelgaita, remembered only as mother of two of the donors, had already passed, as had her husband Rainaldus. Gilla was also deceased, but her death had been probably a premature one, as his husband wanted to remember her in the donation.

The properties acquired by Farfa consisted of the castle of Offiano, also called Montaliano, and half of the monastery of Saint John.^[133] Both were located in the territory of Rieti. In exchange, the monks paid 100 pounds, which were not equivalent to the full prices of the two holdings. The rest of the value was in fact donated to the monastery in exchange for the salvation of the souls of the deceased relatives mentioned in the text. This kind of solution was very unusual at the time, as I could find no other example of it in the chartularies of Farfa and Subiaco. This contract concludes the list of the seventeen documents concerning the Counts of the Marsi in the 10th and 11th century. The comparison of the sources has highlighted the elements already discussed in the introduction: the limited set of given names, the use of the title comes, and the claim of a Frankish ancestry. Moreover, the analysis of the sentences has been useful to understand the level of social prestige reached by the Berardi in central Italy, while that of purchases, donations, and exchanges has revealed some information about their economic influence. The following conclusion will address these aspects as a whole and tie them into a general reflection on the topic.

6 Conclusions

This paper’s documentary analysis has examined a specific case study. The broader premise, however, is to investigate whether a new form of aristocratic identity was emerging in Italy in the transitional phase between the early and the high Middle Ages. From this viewpoint, the Berardi family has revealed a promising example to understand at least some possible aspects of this social shift toward a new form of leading classes. A single case study is not enough to describe such a large phenomenon, but it aims to build the ground for further research. The first element to be discussed is the use of honorific titles. Ever since their first contracts made between 981 and 986, stipulated by single family members and not by larger groups, the Berardi were characterised by the virtually omnipresent use of the title comes. In fact, one or several counts appear in every one of the seventeen texts. Although the title was widespread in Latium,^[134] such an imposing presence suggests that the Berardi had a particular attachment to it, using it in the fashion of a personal attribute. To support this interpretation, there is no evidence that the titles of count corresponded to specific administrative units or autonomous local powers. Marsica had a certain form of administrative cohesiveness within the Duchy of Spoleto, but as far as we can understand it was not a mosaic of semi-independent counties.^[135]

For these reasons, I believe that the Counts of the Marsi operated a form of title appropriation, adopting comes as an attribute to distinguish themselves in the sources in opposition to the other local landowners.^[136] While these occasionally used the title too, they generally appeared only with their names or with other generic titles such as nobilis vir or vir magnificus.^[137] The operation was successful and the Berardi managed to be associated with the title comes, as proven by the judicial assemblies in which they were involved. Since these assemblies included influential figures such as bishops and palatine judges, the fact that the Berardi were called comites supports the idea that this title use had been accepted by the rest of the local elites. A further aspect concerns the family names. If we focus on the names that appear at least twice, the list consists of only four names: Berardus, Oderisius, Rainaldus, and Teuduinus. Two more names, Gualterius and Herbeus, are found only once. In the last contract from 1074 the female names Gilla, Litelda, and Sikelgaita are also recorded. Including the family founder there were at least four men named Berardus, three named Oderisius, two named Rainaldus, and two named Teuduinus. The actual list, however, was much longer, as not all family members appear in the chartularies.^[138] While honorific titles point to a social strategy, the use of a determined set of first names should not be interpreted only as a deliberate tactic. However, the repetition of the same four names over four generations can be used an indirect source to see the identity cohesion of the Counts of the Marsi. The names Oderisius and Teuduinus are particularly interesting because they were uncommon in central Italy.^[139] Rainaldus and Berardus were more widespread, but they did not belong to the most common names in the region.^[140]

The third and last pillar of the Berardi’s identity was their claim of a Frankish ancestry. This is the most distinctive feature of the family. While other landowners use the title comes and other familiar groups could use the same names over different generations, a Frankish origin was a rare characteristic in this time and place. The expression „ex natione Francorum“ is used four times: in 986, in 1000, in 1060, and in 1074.^[141] The chronological distribution is interesting because it covers almost the whole investigated period. The first two mentions, those from 986 and 1000, are not surprising, as they referred to Berardus franciscus, who came from Southern France, and his children, whose birthplace is unknown, but whose Frankish ancestry was still very near. The other two mentions are more interesting, as they show a remarkable continuity of the claim. While we cannot know how ‚Frankish‘ the Counts of the Marsi were after over a century in Italy, we know that they believed in it. And more importantly, they probably wanted the rest of the local elites to know they had this distinctive feature that made them unique and different from their neighbours and rivals.

As stated before, a single case study does not suffice to prove a whole historical process, but the example of the Counts of the Marsi supports the theory that a new form of aristocratic identity was emerging in Italy at the turn into the second millennium. This aristocracy was not necessarily wealthier or more powerful than before, but it was more cohesive and self-aware from a social standpoint, and consequently more visible in the sources. This paper has focused on a specific family, but other cases could be considered to further elaborate the understanding of this new type of elite. Two examples that could be most promising to conduct this research are the Counts Guidi in Tuscany and the Aleramici in Northern Italy. Although both families have been object of several publications, a new analysis of the attributes discussed in this paper will be useful to compare the self-awareness and social complexity of Italian aristocratic groups in this timeframe.^[142] The hope is therefore that this study may serve as a building block for constructing a new interpretation of this phenomenon.