summoned contrary to his orders. But he soon took a higher tone. Being, after long delay, made aware of the facts and of the treachery of the legates, he sent out an urgent summons to a council to meet at Rome, pronounced sentence of deposition on Zachary, Bishop of Anagni, one of the legates, and on Gregory Asbestas, Archbishop of Syracuse, who had consecrated Photius, anathematised the latter, declared Ignatius sole legitimate Patriarch, restored to their offices all the Bishops and clergy deposed for their support of his cause, and declared the deposition of all who had been ordained by Photius (beginning of 863).
This meant war. The Emperor Michael III, surnamed, not without reason, the Drunkard, as soon as he was informed of the measures which had been taken, replied from Constantinople by an abusive letter. Nicholas retorted by insisting before everything else on the immediate restoration of Ignatius whether guilty or innocent, claiming for himself the sole right to judge him afterwards in the name of the authority belonging to the See of Rome, "which confers upon the Pope judiciary power over the whole Church," without his being himself capable of "being judged by anyone." He prohibited the Emperor from interfering with a matter which did not come within the province of the civil authority, "for," he added, "the day of 'king-priests' and 'Emperor-Pontiffs' is past, Christianity has separated the two functions, and Christian Emperors have need of the Pope in view of the life eternal, whereas Popes have no need of Emperors except as regards temporal things" (865). Finally, after a few months, in November 866, as the Emperor Michael refused to give way, Nicholas demanded of him the official retractation and the destruction of the insulting letter of 865, failing which he declared that he would convoke a General Council of the Bishops of the West, when anathema would be pronounced against the Emperor and his abettors.
Stimulated by the conflict, the Pope had thus reached the point, through the logical development of the theories which we have already seen put forward by the Bishops from their standpoint, of so conceiving of his power that he no longer saw in kings and emperors anything more than ordinary Christians, accountable to him for their actions, and as such amenable to his sovereign authority. With all alike he takes the tone of a master. To Charles the Bald he writes in 865 that it is for him to see that one of his (the Pope's) decisions is put in execution, adding that "were the king to offer him thousands of precious stones and the richest of jewels, nothing, in his eyes, could take the place of obedience." He does not fail to remind Charles, as well as Louis the German and Lothar, that the duty of kings is to work for the exaltation of the Church of Rome, "for how think you," he writes to one of them, "that we can, on occasion, support your government, your efforts, and the Churches of your kingdom, or offer you the protection of our
