At the time of Boniface's death in 1303, there were twobasic constellations of ideas regarding the locus,nature, and character of supreme authority incirculation throughout Latin Christendom. On the onehand, polemicists and scholars had revived thetraditional hierocratic perspective, adaptingarguments 􀀀rst made in connection with thepapal–imperial con􀀀icts of the early thirteenthcentury to the quite di􀀀erent conditions ofroyal–papal con􀀀ict at the turn of the fourteenthcentury. For them, supreme authority wasunambiguously vested in the pope or the papal o􀀀ce—the supreme pontiff possessed a plenitudo potestatis overall members of the church militant—secular princesno less than clerical ones. Temporal rulers derivedtheir royal power from the pope and possessed thispower only in diminished and derivative form fromhim. The pope had the right to intervene in anytemporal matter, on account of sin (ratione peccati). Popesultimately possessed two forms of power: “regulated”or rule-governed power, and “absolute” power,de􀀀ned as the pope's extraordinary power totranscend human law and jurisdiction. Inincreasingly strident terms, hierocratic polemicistsand scholars made the case that the pope was truly“a creature without a halter or bridle.”

On the other hand, pro-royal thinkers had adapted theolder imperial–dualist arguments of the earlythirteenth century to the ongoing dispute betweenPhillip and Boniface. In this case, though, it wasnot merely a matter of dusting o􀀀 old arguments andexpressing them more forcefully and uncompromisinglythan in the past. Rather, in translating the dualistargument from the context of imperial–papal con􀀀ictto one of regnal–papal con􀀀ict, pro-royalpolemicists and scholars developed a radically newparadigm of supreme temporal power. In this newregnalist paradigm, kings (rather than emperors)ruled territorially limited kingdoms (rather than auniversal empire); the authority to rule in thetemporal sphere came directly from God, withoutpapal mediation or sancti􀀀cation; and the Churchwas understood to be less a distinct society subjectto its own laws and exercising unquali􀀀ed dominionover its own property, than a subordinate spiritual“department” contained within—and subject to thepolitical jurisdiction of—the regnum.