Pope Gregory X, formerly Tedaldo Visconti, was born near the beginning of the thirteenth century, though, as is often the case, the precise date of birth is not known. As his anonymous biographer related, Tedaldo was born to a noble family of Piacenza, but more importantly, his nobility of birth was surpassed by his nobility of character. This particular form of nobility would come to mark the life and career of Tedaldo, and help propel the unordained archdeacon to the height of ecclesiastical power in the West. Indeed, even the Greek historian George Pachymeres remarked upon the renown of his virtuous character when he wrote of Tedaldo’s election to the papacy.

Before his papal election, Tedaldo was party to some of the most formative events of the thirteenth century, and knew some of the most important figures of his time in both Western Europe and the Holy Land. This gave him the diplomatic experience, organisational ability, high contacts, and experience in the Holy Land that he would need to be a suitable candidate not just for the papacy in general, but more importantly for the papal role as head of the struggling crusading movement. These elements have formed the general consensus among historians to explain Tedaldo’s election, and an investigation into his early life supports this. The best evidence for such skills comes from Bartholomew of Lucca, Tedaldo’s contemporary, who wrote that ‘[Pope Gregory X] was uncommonly experienced in secular affairs, although modest in learning, and he did not exert himself for the gain of money, except for alms for the poor.’ Roberg has also highlighted the differences between Tedaldo and his predecessors as pope. He wrote that with his election, there was ‘neither a scholar nor a lawyer-pope, like some of his predecessors and successors in the thirteenth century.’ His election was a marked difference in the type of person elected to the papacy in the thirteenth century, but one that must have been deemed necessary by the cardinals. Daniel Waley wrote that Tedaldo’s election ‘brought to the papal throne a man who had no experience of the problems of the Papal State and whose dearest projects were concerned with the Holy Land.’ Waley himself was more interested in the Papal State, so can be excused for his criticism of Tedaldo’s priorities.