It is commonly asserted that in the early years of the twelfth century the medieval papacy was suddenly afflicted with a bad _JUL attack of apostolic poverty. The consensus of historical opinion accepts that a pope, Paschal II, who had already distinguished himself by launching crusades against both eastern and western Roman emperors, acted so much out of character that, when forced to deal directly with Henry V over the question of episcopal investiture, he abruptly and to the astonishment of contemporaries ‘decreed the poverty of the whole Church’. It was as if St Peter had hiccoughed, and for a brief instant the Roman church was assailed by self-doubt, tacitly admitting that centuries of criticism of ecclesiastical secularity were justified. The attempt by Paschal to renounce the regalian rights of bishops in February 1111 has become regarded by many as the turning point in a process described as weaning the papacy away from strict Gregorian principles, permitting the introduction of a spirit of moderation and compromise which would eventually lead to the Concordat of Worms and ‘the end of the Investiture Contest’. Not only are we asked to believe that a pope ‘went spiritual’ in a moment of papal ascendancy, and yet was able to re-establish ecclesiastical power when to all intents and purposes a royal prisoner—which even the recent ingenious suggestion that Paschal was a concealed pro-imperial sympathizer can hardly explain—but the whole argument exhibits a profound misunderstanding of papal attitudes towards the regalian rights during the Investiture Contest, and fails to discern the essential continuity of papal policy during the crucial period of negotiations between the Councils of Guastalla and Lateran I.