THE PAPACY
VOL. II.
LONDON : 'HINTED Br
SPOTTI8WOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET
A HISTORY
OF
THE PAPACY
DURING
THE PERIOD OF THE REFORMATION
BY
M. CKEIGHTON, M.A.
LATE FELLOW OF MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD
VOL. II.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL-THE PAPAL RESTORATION
1418 — 1464
LONDON
LONGMANS, GKEEN, AND CO.
1882
All rights reserved
c 1
V.
CONTENTS
OF
THE SECOND VOLUME.
BOOK III.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
1419-1447.
CHAPTER I.
MARTIN V. AND ITALIAN AFFAIRS.
1419-1425.
A.D.
1418. Martin V. journeys to Italy
Feb. 1419. Martin V. at Florence . . . . • ... 3
1414-16. Fortunes of Naples
Rise of Braccio . * . . • 5
1417. Braccio in Rome
1419. .Alliance of Martin V. with Giovanna II
June 1. Submission of Baldassare Cossa 7
Martin V. suspicious of Giovanna II 9
Feb. 1420. Braccio in Florence .
June. Sforza declares for Louis III. of Anjou
Alliance of Giovanna II. with Alfonso V. of Aragon
Discontent of Martin V. with the Florentines . . . . 11
Sept. Martin V. goes to Rome 13
1422. Peace in Naples 14
1423. Giovanna II. adopts Louis of Anjou 14
October. Alfonso leaves Naples 15
April. Martin V. summons a Council at Pavia 15
July. Council transferred to Siena 16
Aug.-Nov. Contest about safe conduct 17
Intrigues of the Curial party 17
Feb. 1424. The Reformers abandoned by the French . . . .18
March. Dissolution of the Council of Siena . . . . . 19
1425. Reform Constitution of Martin V 19
Jan. 1424. Death of Sforza . • • • . . 20
VI
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
A.D.
June Death of Braccio . t .
1424-30. Martin V. recovers the States of the Church
Nov. 1424. Death of Benedict XIII
1429. End of the Antipopes .....
PAGE
. 21
. 21
, 22
, 23
CHAPTER II.
MARTIN V. AND THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BEGINNINGS OP ETJGENIUS IV.
1425-1432.
1420-25k/Martin V. and France 24
1423. Martin V. reproves Archbishop Chichele 25
1426-27. Martin V. makes Henry Beaufort Cardinal and legate . . 25
1427-28. Martin V. humbles Archbishop Chichele 26
1429. Beaufort's Crusade against the Hussites . * . . . .27
v Results of Martin V.'s policy in England . . . . . 28
Architectural works of Martin V 28
Martin V. and his Cardinals . . . . . . . 28
Court of Martin V 29
Feb. 1431. Death of Martin V 29
Character of Martin V £0
March 3. Election of Gabriel Condulmier, Eugenius IV 31
Previous life of Condulmier 32
Eugenius IV. shows desire for Reform . . . . . 34
Quarrel of Eugenius IV. with the Colonna . - . . .34
April. The Colonna take up arms . . . . . . . . 35
Sept. Peace with the Colonna ........ 35
CHAPTER III.
BOHEMIA AND THE HUSSITE WARS.
1418-1431.
Failure of the Council of Constance to pacify Bohemia
1418. Wenzel declares against the Hussites ....
July 1419. Beginning of religious warfare in Prag .
August. Death of Wenzel .......
Temporising policy of Sigismund ....
Nicolas of Hus and John Zizka .....
December. Diet of Briinn . . . . . .
1420. Prag revolts against Sigismund . *• .
Zizka fortifies Tabor
July. Sigismund repulsed from Witkow ....
. Mar. 1421. Sigismund driven from Bohemia ....
June. Bohemia accepts the Four Articles of Prag
October. Flight of the German army from Saaz .
Military system of Zizka ......
37
37
38
39
39
40
41
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME. vii
A.D. PAGE
Jan. 1422. Sigismund routed at Kuttenberg 48
May. Sigismund Korybut of Poland in Prag . . . . . 48
December. Martin V. defeats the Polish alliance 49
1423-24. Uncompromising temper of Zizka . , . . . . 50
Oct. 1424. Death of Zizka 50
1425. Desire of the Moderates for peace . . . . . . 51
June 1426. Procopius the Great defeats the Saxons at Aussig . . .51
1427. Failure of Korybut's peace policy . . . . . . 52
July. Failure of the Crusade against Bohemia, . i . . .53
1429. Proposals for the pacification of Bohemia . '. . . . 54
Diversion of Cardinal Beaufort's Crusade . . . .55
1430. Bohemian raids into Germany . . . . . . . 55
The Bohemian question renders a Council inevitable . . 55
Startling document in favour of a Council . . . . 56
Jan. 1431. Cardinal Cesarini appointed legate in Germany . . .57
Feb.-July. Beginnings of the Council of Basel . . . . . . 57
July 5. Cesarini's appeal to the Bohemians . . . . .58
Aug. 14. Eout of the Crusaders at Tauss 58
Sept. 9. Cesarini arrives in Basel ....... 60
CHAPTER IV.
FIKST ATTEMPT OF EUGENIUS IV. TO DISSOLVE THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
1431-1434.
1431 iXf)escription of Basel 61
July 23. Formal opening of the Council . . . . . . . 61
Sept. Cesarini's first steps 62
Oct. 10. '''Invitation sent to the Bohemians . . . . . . 62
Nov. 12. Eugenius IV, orders the dissolution of the Council . . 63
Jan. 1432. His Bull not accepted by the Council 64
Cesarini's letter protesting against the dissolution . . .65
Open hostility between Pope and Council . £ • • . . 68
Sigismund makes an expedition into Italy . . . .68
Relations of Sigismund to Eugenius IV. and the Council . . 69
Resolute bearing of the Council ...... 70
Feb. 15. The Council of Basel reasserts the principles of Constance . 71
Organisation of the Council of Basel . . . . .71
The Council recognised by France and Bohemia . . . 73
Sigismund and Eugenius IV. . . . . . . .73
April. Sigismund warmly declares for the Council . . . . 74
Domenico Capranica comes to Basel . . . . .75
June. The Bohemians agree to send envoys to Basel . . . . 76
Sept. The Council accuses Eugenius IV. of contumacy . . .77
November. ' Sigismund uses the Council to subdue Eugenius IV. . . . 77
Jan. 1433. • The Council takes Sigismund under its protection . . .78
February. Eugenius IV. revokes his dissolui ion . . . . . . 78
April:. JFKe Council asserts its authority 79
, Stjaits of Eugenius IV 80
viii CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
A.D. PAGE
May 31. Coronation of Sigismund . . . . . . .81
June-Aug. Mediation of Sigismund between Pope and Council . . . 83
August. Sigismund draws to the side of Eugenius IV. . . .85
Oct. 11. Sigismund comes to Basel . . . . . . . . 85
Sigismund pleads for Eugenius IV. ...... 86
Nov. 7. Prolongation of the term granted to Eugenius IV. . . . 87
Nov. 26s. Decree establishing synodal action ...... 88
Struggles about precedence . 88
Ja^334°' | Eugenius IV. recognises the Council 89
May 29. Kising in Rome against Eugenius IV 89
June. Flight of Eugenius IV. to Florence 90
CHAPTER V.
THE COUNCIL OP BASEL AND THE HUSSITES.
1432-1434.
1432. Desire of Bohemia for peace 92
November. Preparations at Basel for the Conference . . . . . 92
Arrival of tlie Bohemians in Basel 93
Preliminaries of the Conference 94
Jan. 16-20. Rokycana's defence of the First Article of Prag ... 95
Jan. 20-23. Nicolas of Pilgram's defence of the Second Article . . . 96
Jan. 23-25. Ulrich of Zynaim's defence of the Third Article . . .96
Jan. 26-29. Peter Payne's defence of the Fourth Article . . . . 97
Answer of John of Ragmsa , 98
J^'chiO } Further disputations . . .: 99
^p;^0 1 Private conferences . . .: '.: . ' . . . .100
April 14. Departure of the Bohemians 102
General results of the Conference 102
May 8. The Council's .envoys at Prag . . x 104
June- July. >. Negotiations with the Diet at Prag . . . . .105
August. John of Palomar's report to the Council 105
Deliberations at Basel ........ 106
June. Renewed war in Bohemia . . . . . . . . 107
Sept. Mutiny in the Bohemian army . . . . . .108
October. Second embassy of the Council to Prag . . . . 108
November. Diet of Prag 109
The Council's basis of agreement . . . . . . 110
Nov. 30. Acceptance of the Council's basis by the Diet . . .111
Causes of the Council's success Ill
^434 / DeParture of the Council's envoys 112
February. Further negotiations at Basel 113
Progress of affairs in Bohemia 114
May 30. Death of Procopius the Great in battle of Lipan . . .114
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME. ix
CHAPTER VI.
ETJGENITJS IV. AND THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE GREEKS AND THE BOHEMIANS.
1434-1436.
A.D, PAGE
1434. .Position of the Council ..... .116
Desire to reform the Papacy . . . . . . . 117
April. Admission of the Papal presidents 117
Grievances of Sigismund against the Council . . . . 118
Proposal to allow the marriage of the clergy . . . .118
May 19. Departure of Sigismund . . . . . . . . 119
1433-34. First negotiations of the Council with the Greeks . . 119
^Negotiations of Eugenius IV. with the Greeks . . . . 120
g decrees of the Council . ,. .121
April. \^Atiger at the Pope's dealings with the Greeks . . . . 121
June 9. Decree abolishing annates 122
Aug.-Nov. Envoys of Eugenius IV. at Basel . . . . . . 122
Jan. 1436. Steps towards Council's independence of the Pope . .123
March 22. Decree for Reform of the Pope and Cardinals . . . . 125
April 14. The Council decrees sale of indulgences . . 125
Apology of Eugenius IV. ........ 126
u^ffate of parties in the Council . . . . . .126
Results of the democratic organisation of the Council . . 127
Reaction in favour of Eugenius IV. ..... 128
(JCbe Council's success in Bohemia 129
Aug. 1434. Negotiations at Regensburg 129
Sept. Unsatisfactory results ........ 130
Nov. 1434 1
to L Proposals of Council and Bohemians to Sigismund . .131
Mar. 1435 J
July 1435. Conference at Briinn 132
Difficulties about interpreting the Compacts . . . .133
July 6. Agreement of the Bohemians with Sigismund . . . . 134
Dissatisfaction of both with the Council's envoys . . . 135
The Bohemian question passes from the Council to Sigismund 1 35
Sept. Bohemia decides to recognise Sigismund .... 136
December. Difficulties with the Council's envoys . .... 137
' | Signing of the Compacts at Iglau 138
July 6. Dispute between Rokycana and the legates . . . . 139
Hollo wness of the reconciliation of Bohemia. . . .140
Aug. 23. Sigismund enters Prag . . ..... 140
Merits of the Council's policy towards Bohemia . . . 140
X CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
CHAPTER VII.
WAR BETWEEN THE POPE AND THE COUNCIL.
1436-1438.
A.D. PAGE
1435. Congress of Arras 142
^Neutrality of Europe between Pope and Council . > . . 143
1436. Financial difficulties of the Council . . . x . . . 143
May. Negotiations for the place of Conference with the Greeks . 144
November. Cesarini joins the Papal party . . . . . . . 144
Dec. 5. Choice of Avignon by the Council 145
,. 07 ' > Compromise about Avignon ....... 146
April. The Archbishop of Taranto organises the Papal party . . 146
April 17. Schism in the Council . . . . . . . . 147
Futile attempts at reconciliation 148
May 7. Publication of conflicting decrees . . . . . . 149
June. Dispute about sealing the decrees . . . . . .149
May 10. Eugenius IV. fixes the Council in Italy 150
July 31. The Council summons Eugenius IV. to Basel . . . .151
Oct. 1. The Council pronounces Eugenius IV. contumacious . .152
Sept. 18. Eugenius IV. dissolves the Council of Basel .... 152
November. The Greeks accept the Pope's terms . . . . . . 153
Neutrality of Sigismund 155
1436. Position of Sigismund in Prag ....... 155
Position of Rokycana 155
Sigismund and the Council's envoys . . . . . . 156
1437. Progress of the Catholic reaction in Bohemia .... 156
June. Eokycana driven from Prag . . . . . . . 158
August. Bohemian envoys in Basel . . . . . . .159
October. Demands of the Bohemians . . . . . . . 159
Refusal of their demands . . . . . . .160
Dec. 9. Death of Sigismund 161
Character of Sigismund 162
1488 ' fC'esarini leaves Basel ......... 164
Jan. 24. Suspension of Eugenius IV. by the Council .... 165
CHAPTER VIII.
EUGENIUS IV. IN FLORENCE.
THE UNION OF THE GREEK CHURCH.
1434-1439.
1434. Eugenius IV. and Florentine affairs 167
Oct. 28. Rome submits to Eugenius IV. . . . . . . . 168
1432-5. Affairs of Naples . . .169
1435. Alfonso of Aragon and Filippo Maria Visconti . . . . 171
1436. Position of Italian affairs . 172
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME. xi
A.D.
1436-37.. Eugenius IV. in Bologna ........ 172
Attitude of the Greeks ... .... 173
, Points of dispute between Eastern and Western Churches . 174
Feb. 1438. Arrival of the Greeks in Venice . . . . . .174
March 7. Arrival of the Greeks in Ferrara ...... 176
^Beginning of the Council of Ferrara ..... 176
Arrangements for the Council ....... 177
June. Conference about the doctrine of Purgatory .... 179
The question of the Procession of the Holy Ghost . . .181
Jan. 1439. Transference of the Council to Florence . . 183
Position of the Greek Emperor ....... 183
Feb. 29. Discussion resumed at Florence ...... 184
June 10. Death of the Patriarch Joseph ....... 187
Discussions on minor points . . . . . . .187
, Question of the Papal Supremacy . . . . • • 188
July 5. Acceptance of Union by the Greeks ..... 189
July 6. Publication of the decrees ........ 190
Departure of the Greeks ........ 191
Eeception of the Union in Greece . . . . . . 191
General results of the Council of Florence . . . .192
CHAPTER IX.
THE GERMAN DECLARATION OF NEUTRALITY.
ELECTION OP FELIX V.
1438-1439.
1438. Attitude of the Council of Basel 195
March 17. Declaration of German neutrality . . . . . . 196
March 18. Election of Albert II. King of the Romans .... 197
July 7. Pragmatic Sanction of Charles VII. of France . . . . 197
July-Oct. The Electors attempt to mediate 199
Mar. 1439. Diet of Mainz accepts some of the Basel decrees . . . 200
Hopes of Pope and Council 200
April/,. Discussion by Council of the heresy of Eugenius IV. . . 201
May. Neutrality of the German ambassadors at Basel . . . 205
May 16. J^ree condemning the heresies of Eugenius IV. . . . 206
June 25. ^^cree of the deposition of Eugenius IV. .... 207
Plague at Basel 208
Triumvirs appointed to choose Papal Electors . . . 209
October. Nomination of Papal Electors 209
Amadeus VIII., Duke of Savoy, candidate for the Papacy . 210
Nov. 6. Election of Amadeus of Savoy, Pope Felix V. ... 212
Jan. 1440. Beginnings of Felix V 212
Views of Eugenius IV. and his Court 213
July 24. Coronation of Felix V 214
Oct. 1439. Death of Albert II. . . 214
Xll
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
CHAPTER X.
ETJGENIUS IV. AND FELIX V.
1440-1444.
A.D.
Feb. 1,1440, Election of Frederick III. in Germany .
'' Adherents of Felix V
Felix V. and the Council
Mar. 1441, Diet of Mainz
The Diet proposes a new Council
Frederick III. proclaims another Diet
Quarrels of Felix V. with the Council .
v Policy of .Frederick III
May 1442. Diet of Frankfort
German envoys sent to the two Popes
Answer of the Council .....
November. Frederick III. in Basel ....
December. Answer of Eugenius IV
1443. Electoral League in favour of Felix V.
Frederick III. and the Swiss ....
1444. Failure of Frederick III.'s projects .
August. Diet of Niirnberg
Felix V. leaves the Council of Basel .
1440. Death of Cardinal Vitelleschi ....
1441. Peace in North Italy
1442. Alfonso enters Naples
Mar. 1443. Eugenius IV. leaves Florence
Sept. Eugenius IV. enters Kome ....
1444. Death of Nicolo Piccinino
1444 - 6. Fortunes of Francesco Sforza ....
Theological reaction in favour of Eugenius IV.
PAGE
, 215
. 215
. 216
. 217
. 218
. 219
. 219
. 220
. 220
. 221
. 221
. 222
. 222
. 223
. 223
. 224
. 225
. 226
. 226
. 228
. 228
. 228
. 229
. 230
. 231
. 231
BOOK IV.
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
1444-1464.
CHAPTER I.
AENEAS SYLVIUS PICCOLOMJNI AND THE RESTORATION OP THE OBEDIENCE
OF GERMANY.
1444-1447.
1405 31. Early life of ^Eneas Sylvius Piccolomini
1432-35. JSneas as secretary . . . " .
1435. .ZEneas in England and Scotland
vEneas's description of Scotland
1435-39. ./Eneas a partisan of the Council of Basel
235
236
236
237
239
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
Xlll
A.D.
1439. jEneas made Secretary to Felix V. . . -• •
1442. ^Eneas crowned Poet by Frederick III. .
JEneas made Secretary to Frederick III.
uEneas and Kaspar Schlick . . .
1443-44. ^Eneas drifts to the side of Eugenius IV. .
Dissolute life and character of JEneas
Dissatisfaction of JSneas with Germany
1444. Policy of the German Electors ....
November. Battle of Varna
Frederick III. draws to the side of Eugenius IV. .
1445. Embassy of JSneas Sylvius to Eugenius IV.
Keconciliation of ^Eneas with Eugenius IV. .
Jan. 16. Eugenius IV. attacks the Electors ....
Negotiations between Eugenius IV. and Frederick III.
1446. Treaty between Eugenius IV. and Frederick III.
February. Eugenius IV. deposes Electors of Trier and Koln .
League of the Electors against the Pope .
Their proposals laid before Frederick III.
July. Envoys of the Electors in Kome .....
Double dealing of uiEneas Sylvius ....
Partisans of Frederick III. . . . .
Sept. 1. Diet of Frankfort
Division amongst the Electors .....
October. Overthrow of the Electoral League
Overthrow of the Council of Basel ....
November. Proposals of the Diet laid before Eugenius IV.
Negotiations with the Curia .....
Illness of Eugenius IV. .
Feb. 7, 1447. Restoration of the German obedience.
Feb. 23. Death of Eugenius IV
Character of Eugenius IV. ......
His architectural works .
PAGE
. 240
. 240
. 241
. 242
. 243
. 245
. 247
. 248
. 249
. 250
. 250
. 251
. 252
. 253
. 253
. 255
. 255
. 256
. 257
. 258
. 260
. 260
. 261
. 263
. 263
. 264
. 265
. 266
. 267
. 268
. 269
. 271
CHAPTER II.
NICOLAS V. AND THE AFFAIRS OF GERMANY.
1447-1453.
1447. .Republican feeling in Rome ....
Peace kept in Rome by Alfonso of Naples
Preparations for the Conclave ....
March 6. Election of Tommaso Parentucelli, Nicolas V.
Early life of Pareutucelli
Conciliatory measures of Nicolas V.
Embassies of congratulation to Nicolas V. .
JEneas Sylvius made Bishop of Trieste .
June. Congress at Bourges .....
July. Congress at Aschaffenburg
2Eneas Sylvius justifies his conduct
. 273
. 274
. 274
. 275
. 276
. 277
. 278
. 279
. 280
. 28J
. 281
xiv CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
A.D. PAGE
1448. The German Electors recognise Nicolas V. .... 282
February. Concordat of Vienna ......... 282
Provisions of the Concordat 283
Motives for its acceptance in Germany . . . , . 285
April. Abdication of Felix V 285
Dissolution of the Council of Basel ...... 286
Aug. 1447. Death of Filippo Maria Visconti 287
His character 287
Claimants for the Milanese ....... 289
Feb. 1450. Francesco Sforza becomes Lord of Milan ..... 289
Jubilee of 1450 290
Negotiations for the marriage of Frederick III. . . . . 291
The Council in France deferred 291
Canonisation of Bernardino of Siena . . . . . . 292
Fra Capistrano in Germany ....... 293
Attitude of Bohemia 293
1451. ^Eneas Sylvius in Bohemia ....... 294
December. Frederick III. sets out for Italy 295
Feb. 1452. Frederick III. at Siena 297
Nicolas V. and Frederick III 298
March 19. Coronation of Frederick III 298
Frederick III. at Naples 300
Frederick III. leaves Italy 301
Kesults of Frederick III.'s journey 301
Kebellion of Austria against Frederick III 302
Sept. Submission of Frederick III 303
Dec. 1452. Diet of Vienna 303
1453. Speech of vEneas Sylvius against the Austrians . . . . 304
Failure of the league between Pope and Emperor . . . 306
CHAPTER III.
NICOLAS V. AND THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
1453-1455.
1452. Nicolas V. and the Romans 308
January. Plot of Stefano Porcaro . . . . . . . .308
Different judgments of Porcaro ....... 310
May 1453. Capture of Constantinople by the Turks . . . . .311
Help given by Nicolas V. to the Greeks 312
Effects of the news on European sentiment . . . .312
Effects on Nicolas V. . . . 313
Sept. Nicolas V. proclaims a Crusade ...... 313
Political condition of Europe ....... 314
April 1454. Peace of Lodi 314
Preparations of Germany for a Crusade 315
April. Congress at Regensburg . . . . . . " . 316
Crusading zeal of the Duke of Burgundy . . . . 317
May 9. Arrival of the Duke at Regensburg . ... .319
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
x,V
Proceedings of the Congress .
Resolutions of the Congress
Opinion of ^Eneas Sylvius . .
October. Diet of Frankfort
Coldness of the Diet
Schemes of the German Electors .
Feb. 1465. Diet of Neustadt
Fruitless proceedings of the Diet
Proposals for reform of the Empire
March 24. Death of Nicolas V. . . .
of his Pontificate
Character of Nicolas V.
PAGE
. 319
320
. 321
. 321
. 322
. 323
324
324
. 325
325
327
. 327
CHAPTER IV.
NICOLAS V. AND THE REVIVAL OF LEARNING.
Architectural plans of Nicolas V
The adornment of Rome .....
Artists and architects employed by Nicolas V. .
Buildings of Nicolas V
Decay of literature in the Middle Ages
Revival of the classical spirit in Italy . .
Dante
Revival of learning ....
Teutonic and Italian spirit .....
The Papacy and the revival of learning ..
Literature under Nicolas V
Vespasiano da Bisticci and Gianozzo Manetti
Poggio Bracciolini ....
George of Trapezus and Bessarion
Lorenzo Valla
Quarrel of Poggio and Valla ....
Francesco Filelfo
Flavio Biondo
ue of the Humanists .
329
. 329
. 330
.330
331
.331
332
332
. 333
. 333
334
. 335
336
337
338
. 340
341
342
. 343
CHAPTER V.
CALIXTTJS III.
1455-1458.
A p. 8, 1455. Election of Alfonso Borgia, Calixtus III
Early life of Alfonso Borgia ...
April 20. Riot at his coronation
Crusading zeal of Calixtus III. . . .
Recognition of Calixtus III. by Frederick III.
August. German Embassy in Rome ....
345
346
346
346
347
347
XVI
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
NCI
GPAGE
potism of Calixtus III. ....... 349
, Calixtus III. proclaims war against the Turks . . . . 349
Apathy of Europe ......... 349
1456. The Papal fleet sails against the Turks 350
April. Siege of Belgrad by the Turks . . . . . .351
Kepulse of the Turks 352
Death of Hunyadi and Capistrano ...... 352
Nov. 1457. Death of Ladislas of Hungary 353
1456. Electoral opposition to Frederick III 353
• Anti-Papal policy of the opposition . . . . . . 354
December. ^Eneas Sylvius made Cardinal ....... 354
' Martin Mayr attacks the Papal policy 355
Answer of Cardinal Piccolomini ...... 356
1457. P>pal measures against the German opposition . ... 357
November. Change of policy in Germany ....... 359
1458. Calixtus III. and Naples 359
Power of the Papal nephews ....... 360
June. Calixtus III. opposes the succession of Ferrante in Naples . 361
August 6. Death of Calixtus III 362
Eesults of the Pontificate of Calixtus III 362
Character of Calixtus III. .364
1458.
Aug.11-18.
Aug. 19.
Sept. 3.
October.
Jan. 1459.
February.
March.
April, May
May 27.
June,
July.
CHAPTER VI.
PITTS II. AND THE CONGKESS OF MANTUA.
1458-1460.
The Conclave .......
Election of J^neas Sylvius Piccolomini, Pius II.
Coronation of Pius II. .
Feelings of Pius on his election
Crusading policy of Pius II. .
Affairs in Naples
Pius II. recognises Ferrante
Departure of Pius II. for Mantua .
Pius II. at Corsignano .
Pius II. at Siena
Policy of King George of Bohemia
Attitude of Pius II. towards Bohemia
Pius II. at Florence and Bologna
Arrival of Pius II. at Mantua .
Pius II. awaits assembling of Congress
Arrival of envoys of the Despot of Morea
August. Arrival of Imperial and Burgundian envoys
' Negotiations with the Burgundians
Sept. Coming of the Duke of Milan
Arrival of Italian envoys ....
Sept. 26. Speech of Pius II.
365
367
368
369
370
371
372
372
373
374
375
376
378
378
379
380
381
382
383
383
384
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
XVli
Proceedings of the Congress ....
Proposals of Pius II. .
His disappointment ....
Nov. 21. Reception of the French envoys
Their protest against the Pope's Neapolitan policy
Answer of Pius II. ......
>: England and the Congress ....
Negotiations with Germany ....
Arrival of Sigismund of Austria
1451-57. His quarrel with Cardinal Cusa ....
Cusa as Bishop of Brixen ....
1457. Open breach of Cusa and Sigismund .
Nov. 1459. Pius II. mediates between Cusa and Sigismund
The Bull ' Execrabilis '
Jan. 19. Dissolution of the Congress .
Results of the Congress of Mantua
PAGE
. 386
. 386
, 387
, 388
. 389
, 389
391
392
, 392
, 393
394
, 395
. 395
. 396
. 397
. 398
CHAPTER VII.
PIUS II. AND THE AFFAIRS OF NAPLES AND GERMANY.
1460-1461.
1459. Civil war in Naples
October. Jean of Anjou in Naples ......
1460. Pius II. and Cosimo de' Medici ....
March. Creation of Cardinals .......
Troubles in Naples .......
Country life of Pius II
Dissolute life of Cardinal Borgia ....
July. Angevin victory at Sarno ......
Troubles in Rome .......
Oct. 7. Return of Pius II. to Rome
Oct. 31. Suppression of the Roman revolt ....
Pius II. and Jacopo Piccinino .....
Mar. 1461. Rising of Genoa against the French
June. Pius II. at Tivoli
1460-61. Fruitless Diets in Germany
1460. Progress of the quarrel between Cusa and Sigismund
August. Pius II. threatens Sigismund with excommunication
Protest of Sigismund
Writings of Gregory Heimburg ....
Jan. 1461. Citation of Sigismund
Further appeal of Sigismund
1459-61. Strife about the Archbishopric of Mainz .
1460-61. Scheme for the deposition of Frederick III. .
1461. Alarm of Pope and Emperor
August. Deposition of Diether of Mainz ....
Dissensions in Germany
VOL. II. SL
400
400
401
402
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
409
410
411
412
413
413
414
418
419
419
420
421
421
422
XV111
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
CHAPTER VIII.
PIUS II. 'S RELATIONS TO PRANCE AND BOHEMIA.
1461-1464.
A.D. PAGE
July 1461. Accession of Louis XI. of France 423
The Papacy and the Pragmatic Sanction .... 423
Working of the Pragmatic Sanction ..... 425
Views of Pius II. about the Pragmatic 426
Negotiations of Pius II. with Louis XI. ..... 427
Country life of Pius II 427
Visit of the Queen of Cyprus to Eome 428
November. Louis XI. abolishes the Pragmatic 428
December. Creation of Cardinals 429
1462. Neapolitan affairs 430
March. French envoys in Rome ........ 430
Complaints of Louis XI. . . 431
Pius II. and George of Bohemia 432
March. " Bohemian envoys in Eome 433
March 31. Pius II. annuls the Compacts 434
April 11. Reception of the head of St. Andrew in Rome . . . . 436
Ecclesiastical ceremonies in Viterbo ..... 438
Oct. 1463. Humiliation of Gismondo Malatesta 440
1461-62. Troubles in Germany 441
Aug. 1462. Diet at Prag 441
George of Bohemia breaks with the Pope .... 443
Dealings of George with the Bohemian clergy . . . . 445
Position of George towards Germany 446
Dissensions within the Franciscan Order ... . . 447
Dispute about the Blood of Christ . . . ; . .448
May 1463. Visit of Pius II. to Ostia 449
August. Piccinino deserts the Angevin cause in Naples . . . 450
- Anger of Louis XI. at the Pope's Neapolitan policy . , . 452
t Anti-papal measures of Louis XI. ...... 452
t Provisions of the Pragmatic restored as ordinances . . . 453
1464. Gradual pacification of Germany ...... 454
1459-63.
1461.
1462,
CHAPTER IX.
CRUSADE AND DEATH OF PIUS II.
1464.
Attitude of Pius II. towards the Crusade
Opinion of Europe .....
Pius II. and Hungary ....
Impostorous embassy from the East .
Letter of Pius II. to the Sultan
Papal plan of a Crusade ....
456
456
457
458
459
460
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME. xix
A.D. PACK
Answer of Louis XI 461
Zeal of the Duke of Burgundy 461
Discovery of alum at Tolfa ....... 462
1463. Pacification of Hungary 463
Sept. Speech of Pius II. to the Cardinals 463
October. Congress at Rome ......... 465
Alliance of Pius, Hungary, and Venice 467
1464.; Political alarms in Italy 468
Troubles in Burgundy . . . . . . . .469
The Pope's dread of George of Bohemia ... . . 470
George's plan for a European Parliament . . . .471
Preparations for the Crusade . . . . . . . 47 1
June 6. Citation of George of Bohemia 472
June 18. Departure of Pius II. for the Crusade 472
July 18. Pius II. arrives at Ancona 473
Pius II. and the Crusaders 473
Aug. 14. Death of Pius II 474
Contemporary opinions of the Crusade ... . . 476
Different views of Pius II. 's character ..... 477
April 1463. Pius II. 's Bull of Retractation 478
Character of Pius II 480
Character given by Platina and Campano . . . . . 481
Apophthegms of Pius II 483
Pius II. as a man of letters ........ 48.J
Historical works of Pius II. ....... 485
Dialogues of Pius II 486
Multifarious activity of Pius IF 487
Apology for his devotion to literature ... . . 488
The Commentaries of Pius II 489
Scientific spirit of Pius II. 490
Pius II. as a patron 491
His unpopularity with the Humanists ..... 492
"' Simple life of Pius II 495
Cardinal Ammannati ......... 495
Campano 496
Pius II. and art 497
His buildings in Rome and Siena ...... 498
His buildings in Pienza 498
Res-ults of his Pontificate . 500
APPENDIX.
1. Lives of Martin V. . -• . . 503
2. Florentine authorities .......... 503
3. Braccio and Sforza . V 504
4. Naples . . . . v 505
5. The Council of Siena 505
XX CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
PAOE
6. France and England 506
7. Rome 506
8. Death of Benedict XIII . . . . . 507
9. The Hussite Wars .... 507
10. Eugenius IV 509
11. The Council of Basel 513
12. The Council of Basel and the Hussites . . . . . . 516
13. The Councils of Ferrara and Florence 518
14. The Ecclesiastical policy of France and Germany ... . . 520
15. Nicolas V. . 521
16. Calixtus III 523
17. Pius II. . . 523
Errata in Vol. II.
Page 9, line 14 from top, for ' Montefiasone ' read ' Montefiascone '
„ 64, line 9 from bottom, for ' purification ' read 'pacification
„ 107, line 10 from top, for ' Ton ' read ' Tok '
„ 112, margin, for ' 1484 ' read ' 1434 '
„ 122, margin, for ' January ' read ' June '
„ 170, lines 15 and 12 from bottom, for ' Sicily ' read ' Naples '
„ 174, margin, for ' Vienna ' read ' Venice '
„ 196, line 9 f ; om bottom, for ( Boniface XIII.' read ' Benedict XIII.'
BOOK III.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL,
1419-1444.
VOL. II.
''1
CHAPTEK I.
MARTIN V. AND ITALIAN AFFAIRS.
1418-1425.
ON leaving Constance Martin V. felt himself for the first time CHAP
free. He had been taught by the events of the last four years *•
that freedom was only possible for a Pope in Italy, in spite Martin V.
of all the temporary inconveniences which might arise from
Italian politics. But much as he might desire to find himself 1418-
in his native city, and revive the glories of the Papacy in
its old historic seat, he could not immediately proceed to
Kome. John XXIII. had abandoned Eome, and had been driven
even to flee from Bologna, owing to his political helplessness
and the power of his opponent Ladislas. The death of Ladislas
and the abeyance of the Papacy had only plunged Italian affairs
into deeper confusion, and Martin V. had to pause a while and
consider how he could best return to Italy.
Through the Swiss cantons Martin made a triumphal pro- Martin v.
gress, and had no reason to complain of want of respect or lack ^resiP
of generosity. On June 11 he reached Geneva, and in the dencein
city of the prince-bishop he stayed for three months ; there he February
had the satisfaction of receiving the allegiance of the citizens 1419>
of Avignon. He seems to have wished to display himself as
much as possible, and exert the prestige of the restored Papacy
to secure his position. At the end of September he moved
slowly from Geneva through Savoy to Turin, and thence through
Pavia to Milan, where he was received with great honour by
Filippo Maria Visconti on October 12. So great was the popu
lar curiosity to see the Pope that when he went to consecrate a
new altar in the cathedral, several people were trampled to
B 2
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK death in the throng.1 At Milan Martin V. showed his desire
HTL - for the pacification of Italy by making terms between Filippo
Maria and Pandolfo Malatesta, who had seized on Brescia.2
There, too, he received ambassadors from the Florentines, who,
in their capacity of peacemakers, were anxious to arrange
matters so as to enable the Pope to return quietly to Kome.
They offered him a refuge in their city and also their services
as mediators.3 On October 19 Martin V. left Milan for Brescia,
and on October 25 he entered Mantua. There he stayed
till the end of the year seeking for some means to make
the Papal influence a real power in Italian affairs. At length
he resolved to accept the services of the Florentines, and set
out for their city, avoiding on his way the rebellious Bologna,
which had cast off the Papal rule. On February 26, 1419, he
entered Florence, where he was honourably received, and took
up his abode in the monastery of Santa Maria Novella.
Fortunes of The condition of Italy was indeed sufficiently disturbed to
need all the efforts of the Pope and of Florence to reduce it to
order and peace. In Lombardy, Filippo Maria, Duke of Milan,
was bent on winning back the lands of his father Giangaleazzo,
which had fallen into the hands of petty tyrants. Southern
Italy was thrown into confusion by the death of Ladislas, who
was succeeded in the kingdom of Naples by his sister Grio-
vanna II., a woman with none of the qualities of a ruler, who used
her position solely as a means of personal gratification. The
death of Louis of Anjou gave every hope of a peaceful reign to
the distracted Neapolitan kingdom ; but Griovanna's ungovern
able passions soon made it a sphere of personal intrigue. At
first the Queen, a widow of forty-seven years old, was under the
control of a lover, Pandolfello Alapo, whom she made Chamber
lain and covered with her favours. To maintain his position
against the discontented barons, Alapo formed an alliance with
Sforza, who was made Grand Constable of Naples. But the
barons insisted that the Queen should marry, and in 1415 she
chose for her husband Jacques de Bourbon, Count of La Marche.
1 See for a description of the ceremonies, Corio, Stnria di Milano, part iv.
ch. 2.
2 Platina, Hist. Mantuana, in Muratori, xx. 800.
3 Commissioni di Rinaldo deyli Albizzi (i. 296, &c.) gives a full account of
these negotiations.
BftAOCTO IN EOME. t
The barons sided with the Count of La Marche, who, by their CHAP.
help, imprisoned Sforza, put Alapo to death, and exercised the *• _
power of King. The favour, however, which he showed to his
own countrymen the French disgusted the Neapolitan nobles,
and in 1416 Griovanna was able again to assert her own power.
By this time she had a new favourite to direct her, Giovanni
Caraccioli, who drove the King to leave Naples, and thought it
wise also to find an occupation for Sforza which would keep him
at a distance. For this purpose he sent him on an expedition
against Braccio, who had attacked the States of the Church and
had advanced against Rome.
Andrea Braccio, of the family of the Counts of Montone, Rise of
was a noble £erugian who, in his youth, had been driven by 1
party struggles to leave his native city, and had embraced the
calling of a condottiere under Alberigo de Barbiano. He served
on many sides in the Italian wars, and finally was in the pay
of Ladislas, who played him false in an attack upon Perugia ;
whereon Braccio joined the side of John XXII., who left him
governor of Bologna when he set out for Constance. Braccio
was possessed with a desire to make himself master of his native
city of Perugia, and in 1416 sold the Bolognese their liberty
and hired soldiers on every side. He defeated Carlo Malatesta,1
whom the Perugians called to their aid, and in July 1416
made himself master of the city. Soon, desirous of enlarging
his territory, he advanced into the States of the Church. Todi,
Eieti, and Narni soon fell before him, and he pressed on to the
neighbourhood of Eome. But Braccio, to win Perugia, had
drawn to his side the condottiere-general Tartaglia, who stipu
lated, in return for his services, that Braccio should not oppose
him in attacking the dominions of Sforza. From that time
Sforza conceived a deadly hatred against Braccio, and for the
next few years the history of Italy is an account of the desperate
rivalry of these two rival condottieri.
Rome during the abeyance of the Papacy was left in an Braccio in
anomalous condition. The Castle of S. Angelo, which had been
taken by Ladislas, was still held by a Neapolitan governor.
1 A picture by Paolo Uccelli in the National Gallery commemorates this
celebrated battle, fought near Assisi on the Tiber, close to Sant' Egidio. Carlo
Malatesta and his nephew were made prisoners.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
John XXIII. on departing for Constance had appointed Car-
dinal Isolani his legate in Eome ; and he was assisted, or
hindered, by the presence of the Cardinal of S. Angelo, Pietro
degli Stefanacci, who found Kome preferable to Constance.1
The legate Isolani managed to retain considerable influence
over the Komans, and induced them to carry on the govern
ment of the city according to the constitution established before
the interference of Ladislas. But Eome was in no condition
to offer resistance to Braccio when he advanced against it,
and on June 9, 1417, took up his position by S. Agnese. In
vain the legate tried to negotiate for his departure. Braccio
harried the adjacent country, and reduced the Romans to
capitulate through hunger. He had an ally in the Cardinal
Stefanacci, who welcomed him on his triumphal entry on June
16 and helped him to form a new magistracy. The legate
fled into the Castle of S. Angelo, and begged for help from
Naples. His entreaties were heard, as Sforza was burning for
revenge against Braccio, and Griovanna's new favourite, Carac-
cioli, was looking about for some means of getting rid of Sforza,
whose manly frame might soon prove too attractive to the
susceptible Queen. Braccio was engaged in besieging the
Castle of S. Angelo when the arrival of Sforza on August 10
warned him of his danger. Sforza seeing how matters stood,
went to Ostia, and crossed the Tiber without hindrance. When
Braccio heard that he was advancing against him, he judged it
unwise to risk the loss of his newly-won possessions, and on
August 26 withdrew to Perugia. Sforza entered Eome in
triumph with the banners of Naples and of the Church. He
restored the legate Isolani to power, appointed new magistrates,
and imprisoned the traitorous Cardinal of S. Angelo, who died
soon afterwards.
^ Such was the condition of affairs which Martin V. had to
. face on his election. It was natural that his first movement
with Gio-
vanna ii. should be towards alliance with Giovanna II. of Naples, seeing
1 That his presence in Rome was for no good we gather from many men
tions in the Diarium Antonii Petri (Mur. xxiv.) The following, p. 1061, may
suffice : ' Statim quod supradictus Dominus Stephanus Barbarini descendit de
Sanula fuit interfectus absque ulla mora, et hoc fecerunt familiares Domini
Cardinalis de Sancto Angelo de mandate suo quia supradictus Stephanus ibat
ad supponendum concubinam dicti Cardinalis de Sancto Angelo.' Stefano was
a canon of St. Peter's.
Alliance of
of Naples.
END OF BALDASSAKE COSSA. 7
that the Neapolitan influence seemed most powerful in Rome. CHAP.
He welcomed Giovanna's ambassadors and sent a cardinal to «_ — ,: — -
arrange matters with the Queen as early as May 1418.
Giovanna agreed to restore all the possessions of the Church
and make a perpetual alliance with the Pope, who was to crown
her Queen of Naples. She gave a pledge of her sincerity by the
usual means of enriching the Pope's relations. Martin's brother,
Giordano Colonna, was made Duke of Amain and Venosa, his
nephew Antonio was made Grand Chamberlain of Naples ; and
on August 21, appeared with a Bull announcing the Pope's
alliance with Giovanna.1 Antonio at first attached himself to
the favourite Caraccioli ; but before the end of the year Sforza
was strong enough to organise a popular rising against the
favourite, who was forced to leave Naples and was sent as am
bassador to Martin V. at Mantua. There the surrender of the
fortresses which the Neapolitans occupied in the States of the
Church and the coronation of Giovanna were finally arranged.
Early in 1419 a Papal Legate was sent to Naples to perform
the coronation.
Thus matters stood when Martin V. took refuge in Florence. Submission
He could do nothing better than await the course of events in gare Cosaa
Naples and the results of the Florentine mediation. Eeturn to
Rome with Braccio hostile was impossible. If Braccio were to 1419.
be overthrown, it could only be by the arms of Sforza ; but the
Pope's first steps had been to ally with Giovanna and Caraccioli,
with whom Sforza was now at enmity. At Florence Martin
V.'s prestige was increased by the arrival of four of Benedict
XIII.'s cardinals, who were solemnly received on March 17. So
far as Italy was concerned, Martin V. had nothing to fear from
Peter de Luna. But the deposed Baldassare Cossa was still an
object of his dread, for^ Braccio had threatened to espouse Cossa's
cause, and might again raise him to the position of a dangerous
rival. Accordingly, Martin V. was very anxious to get Cossa
into his hands, and the Florentines in the interests of peace
were desirous that this matter should be arranged. John
XXIII., when legate of Bologna, had always been on good terms
with the Florentines, and had stood in friendly relations with
several of the richest citizens, amongst whom were Giovanni
dei Medici and Niccolo da Uzzano, who were now ready to
1 Cwrnali Napolitani (Mur. xxi.), p. 1080.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK interfere on his behalf. They procured from Martin V. a
. ' _ * promise that he would deal gently with his deposed predecessor,
and advanced the sum of 38,500 Ehenish ducats to buy the
release of Cossafrom Lewis of Bavaria, in whose custody he was.1
On his way to Florence Cossa was escorted by the Bishop of
Liibeck, who was charged by Martin V. to keep a sharp eye upon
him. At Parma he lodged with an old friend, who alarmed
him with rumours that Martin V. meant to have him im
prisoned for life at Mantua. He fled by night to Grenoa, where
he found protection from the Doge, Tommaso di Campo Fregoso.
Friends quickly gathered round him, urging him once more to
try his fortunes and assert his claims to the Papacy.2 For a
brief space there was a thrill of horror lest the miseries of the
Schism should again begin. But the wise counsels of GHovanni
dei Medici and his Florentine friends seem to have prevailed
with Cossa ; they assured him of his safety and urged him to
fulfil his promise. John XXIII. no longer possessed his former
vigour or felt his old confidence in himself and his fortunes.
The helplessness which had overtaken him at Constance still
haunted him, and though the old spirit might rekindle for a
moment, it was soon chilled by doubt and hesitation. He
judged it wisest to trust his friends, proceed to Florence, and
submit to the mercy of Martin V. On June 14 he entered
Florence, and was received with respectful pity by the entire
body of the citizens. The sight of one who had fallen from a
high degree kindled their sympathy, and Cossa's poor apparel
and miserable look impressed more vividly the sense of his
changed fortunes. On June 27, he appeared before Martin
V. in full consistory, and kneeling before him made his submis
sion. ' I alone,' he said, ' assembled the Council ; I always
laboured for the good of the Church ; you know the truth. I
come to your Holiness and rejoice as much as I can at your
elevation and my own freedom.' Here his voice was broken
with passion ; his haughty nature could ill brook his humilia
tion. Martin V. received him graciously, and placed on his
1 ' Document! relativi alia liberazione della prigionia di Giovanni XXIII.,'
in Archwio Storico Italiano, vol. iv. part i. (first series) p. 429.
2 These details are to be found in Platina, Vita Martini V. ; Leon.-Aretin.
Commentarii (Mur. xix. 930) ; Vita Martini V. (Mur. III. part ii. 863), and the
note of Mansi to Raynaldus, Annales, No. 6 sub anno.
MARTIN V. AND GIOVANNA II. 9
head the cardinal's hat. But Cossa did not long live under the
shadow of his successor. He died in the same year on Decem
ber 23, and his Florentine friends were faithful to his memory.
In the stately Baptistery of Florence the Medici erected to
him a splendid tomb. The recumbent figure cast in bronze
was the work of Donatello, and the marble pedestal which sup
ports it was wrought by Michelozzo. It bears the simple in
scription ' Johannes quondam Papa XXIII. obiit Florentiae.'
Martin V.'s attention was meanwhile directed to the king- Martin v.
dom of Naples, and he urged on Griovanna II. the duty of suspicious*
restoring to his obedience the States of the Church. Griovanna ofGi°-
V 9*1111 ft 11*
was not sorry to rid herself of Sforza, for she longed to recall
her favourite Caraccioli. Sforza was despatched to war against
Braccio, but on June 20 was defeated at Montefiasone near
Viterbo. But Martin V. was enabled to detached Tartaglia
from Braccio's side, and Sforza could again set an army in the
field in the name of Naples and the Pope. He was not, how
ever, supported from Naples ; for Griovanna had recalled Carac
cioli, and the favourite thought it better to leave Sforza to his
fate. Martin V. saw that nothing was to be gained from a
further alliance with Griovanna II. and Caraccioli. Moreover,
the question of the Neapolitan succession was again imminent,
for Giovanna was over fifty years of age, and was childless.
Louis III. of Anjou had already begged Martin V. to procure
from Griovanna II. a formal recognition of his claim, and Mar
tin V. judged that the opportunity was favourable for action.
Sforza was weary of the selfish policy of Caraccioli, and the
Neapolitan barons resented the rule of the insolent favourite.
The Florentines offered Martin V. their aid to mediate between
him and Braccio. The Pope saw an opportunity of making
himself the central figure in the politics of Southern Italy. At
peace with Braccio and allied with Sforza, he might settle the
succession to Naples in favour of Louis of Anjou, and end
the Neapolitan difficulty which had so long harassed his pre
decessors.
In January 1420 Sforza paid Martin V. a visit in Florence, Braccio in
and the Pope broached his views, to which with some reluctance
Sforza gave his adhesion. Scarcely had Sforza departed before 1420<
Braccio at the end of February made a triumphal entry into
Florence, there to Celebrate his reconciliation with the Pope.
10 THE COi/VCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK With a splendid escort of four hundred horsemen and forty
^ IITL ^ foot, with deputies from the various cities under his rule,
Braccio entered the city in grandeur that awoke the enthu
siastic acclamations of the Florentines. In the middle of the
bands of horsemen, gleaming in gold and silver armour, mounted
on splendid steeds richly caparisoned, rode Braccio, clad in
purple and gold, on a steed whose trappings were of gold. He
was a man rather above the middle height, with an oval face
that seemed too full of blood, yet with a look of dignity and
power that, in spite of his limbs maimed with wounds, marked
him as a ruler of men.1 Amid the shouts of the thronging
citizens Braccio visited the Pope, and paid him haughty rever
ence. After a few days spent in negotiations, an alliance was
made between Martin V. and Braccio, by which Braccio was
left in possession of Perugia, Assisi, and other towns which he
had won, on condition of reducing Bologna to obedience to the
Pope.
Martin V.'s pride was sorely hurt by the avowed preference
which the Florentines showed to the condottiere over the Pope.
The Florentine boys expressed the common feeling by a doggrel
rhyme which they sang in the streets, and which soon reached
the ears of the sensitive Pope :—
Braccio valente
Vince ogni gente ;
II Papa Martino
Non vale un quattrino.
Braccio the Great
Conquers every state :
Poor Pope Martin
Is not worth a farthing.
He was glad to see Braccio leave Florence, and hoped that the
task of reducing Bologna would occupy him long enough to
enable Sforza to make his attack on Griovanna unimpeded by
Braccio's hostility.2 Braccio, however, rapidly gathered his forces
and conducted matters with such skill that on July 22 the Pope's
legate took possession of Bologna.3
1 A full account of Braccio's entering into Florence, which abounds in
interesting details, is given in Campanus, Vita BracMi, Mur. xix. 562.
2 Campanus, Vita Brachii, Mur. xix. 566.
3 Chronica Novella di Bologna, Mur. xviii. 611.
GIOVANNA II. AND ALFONSO V. OF ARAGON. 11
Meanwhile Sforza hastened the preparations against Gio- CHAP.
vanna II. On June 18 he suddenly raised the standard of the ^ / ^
Duke of Anjou, and began to make war against Naples: on flares for
August 19 ten Angevin galleys made their appearance off the Louis ill.
Neapolitan coast. Louis of Anjou eagerly caught at Martin June, 14-io.
V.'s offer of protection ; he did not scruple to leave France in
the hands of the English, and abandon his land of Provence to
the hostile attacks of the Duke of Savoy, that he might pursue
the phantom kingdom of Naples, which had proved disastrous to
his father and his grandfather alike.
Giovanna II., seeing herself thus threatened, cast about on Alliance of
her part also for allies. She sent an ambassador to the Pope, f/0^^
whose hostility was not yet declared ; but the subtle Neapolitan Alfonso v.
easily saw through the Pope's equivocal answers to his demands. 1420.*
There was in Florence at the Papal Court an ambassador of
Alfonso V. of Aragon. To him in his strait the Neapolitan
turned. He reminded him that the House of Aragon had as
good a claim to Naples as the House of Anjou. Giovanna II.
was childless, and could dispose of her kingdom as she chose ;
if Alfonso succoured her in her strait, he might count upon
her gratitude. This proposal was very acceptable to Alfonso
V., a young and ambitious king. By the death of Martin of
Sicily without children in 1409 the kingdom of Sicily had
been attached to that of Aragon, and Alfonso was keenly alive
to the advantage of annexing Naples also. At the time that
Giovanna's offer reached him he was engaged in prosecuting
against the Genoese his claims on the island of Corsica, where,
after a long siege, the desperate efforts of the Genoese threat
ened to render his undertaking hopeless. His ambassador at
Florence was endeavouring to obtain from Martin V. a recog
nition of Alfonso's claim to Corsica ; but Alfonso V. at once saw the
policy of abandoning a doubtful attempt upon a barren island
for the more alluring prize of the Neapolitan kingdom. He
despatched from Corsica to the relief of Giovanna II. fifteen
galleys, which arrived off Naples on September 6, and Giovanna
II. showed her gratitude by adopting him as her son.
War was now let loose upon Naples. Alfonso and Giovanna Discontent
sought to strengthen themselves by an alliance with Braccio. v.wfthThe
Martin V.'s policy had succeeded in providing occupation for FJoren-
all whom he had most to dread. He was now in a position
12 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK to take advantage of the general confusion, and amid the
> ,___, weakness of all parties raise once more the prestige of the Papal
name. He had gained all that was to be gained from a stay in
Florence, and might now with safety venture to Eome. More
over, Martin V. was not over-satisfied with the impression which
he had produced on the Florentines. The common sense of
the quick-witted commercial city was not taken in by high-
sounding claims or magnificent ecclesiastical processions. The
Florentines had shown for Braccio an admiration which they
refused to Martin V. However much Martin might wrap him
self in his dignity, and affect to despise popular opinion, he
yet felt that in Florence nothing succeeded like success, and
that a fortunate freebooter ranked above a landless Pope. The
bustling, pushing spirit of a prosperous commercial city was alien
to the Papacy, which could only flourish amongst the traditions
and aspirations of the past. A few days before his departure from
Eome Martin V. could not refrain from showing his wounded
pride to Leonardo Bruni who was present in the library of
S. Maria Novella. For some time Martin V. walked gloomily
up and down the room, gazing out of the window upon the
garden below. At last he stopped before Leonardo, and
in a voice quivering with scorn repeated the doggrel of the
Florentine mob, * Poor Pope Martin isn't worth a farthing.'
Leonardo tried to appease him by saying that such trifles were
not worthy of notice ; but the Pope again repeated the lines in
the same tone. Anxious for the fair fame of Florence, Leonardo
at once undertook its defence, and pointed out to the Pope the
practical advantages which he had derived from his stay — the
recovery of some of the States of the Church, and especially of
Bologna, the submission of John XXIII., the reconciliation
with Braccio. Where else, he asked, could such advantages
have been so easily obtained ? The Pope's gloomy brow grew
clearer before the words of the Florentine secretary.1 Martin
V. departed with goodwill from Florence ; thanked its magis
trates for their kind offices, and marked his gratitude to the
city by erecting the bishopric of Florence to the dignity of an
archbishopric.
On September 9 Martin V. departed from Florence with due
1 Leonardo, in his Comm., Mur. xix. 931, gives a vivid account of this curious
and characteristic scene.
RETURN OF MARTIN V. TO ROME. 13
respect from the citizens. On September 20 he was honourably CHAP.
received in Siena, and used his opportunity to borrow 15,000 , *; ,
florins, for which he gave Spoleto as a pledge.1 From Siena Martin V.
he proceeded through Viterbo to Kome, which he entered on MS abode
September 28, and took up his abode by S. Maria del Popolo.
Next day he was escorted to the Vatican by the city magis- 142°-
trates and the people, bearing lighted torches and clamorous
with joy. The Eomans had indeed occasion to hail any change
that might restore their shattered fortunes. Everything that
had happened in late years had tended to plunge them deeper
and deeper in misery and ruin. The havoc wrought by the
invasions of Ladislas, of Sforza, and of Braccio, the absence of
the Pope, and consequent loss of traffic, the want of all autho
rity in the Papal States, the pillage that wasted up to the walls
of Rome — all these combined to reduce the city to wretchedness
and desolation. Martin V. found Rome so devastated that it
hardly looked like a city. Houses were in decay, churches in
ruins, the streets were empty, filth and dirt were everywhere,
food was so scarce and dear that men could barely keep them
selves alive. Civilisation seemed almost extinct. The Romans
looked like the scum of the earth.2 Martin V. had a hard task
before him to bring back order and decency into the ruined city.
It was his great merit that he set himself diligently to put mat
ters straight, and that he succeeded in reclaiming its capital
for the restored Papacy. His first care was to provide for the
administration of justice, and put down the robbers who in
fested Rome and its neighbourhood, for the purpose of pillaging
the pious pilgrims who visited the tombs of the Apostles.3 But
much had to be done to repair the ravages of preceding years,
and new disasters rendered the task more difficult. In November
1422 the town was overwhelmed by a flood in the Tiber, occa
sioned by Braccio's destruction of the wall of the Lago di Pie di
Luco, the old Veline Lake. The water rose to the height of the
high altar in the Pantheon, and as it subsided carried away the
flocks from the fields and caused great destruction of property.
In Naples little was done worthy of the great efforts which
1 Annali Senesi, Mur. xix. 428.
2 This description, which may perhaps be rhetorical, is taken from Platina,
Vita Martini.
3 Infessura, Dia^um, Mur. ill. part ii. p. 1122.
H
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
• » —
Peace in
Naples.
1422.
Giovanna
II. adopts
Louis of
Anjou.
1423.
were made. Alfonso's reinforcements checked the victorious
career of Louis of Anjou and Sforza, till in June, 1421,
Braccio brought his forces to Griovanna's aid, Alfonso himself
arrived in Naples, and the Pope despatched Tartaglia to the
aid of Louis. Alfonso and Braccio engaged in a fruitless siege
of Acerra. Nothing serious was done, as the condottieri gen
erals were engaged in a series of intrigues against one another.
Sforza accused Tartaglia of treachery, seized him, and put him
to death. Tartaglia's soldiers, indignant at the treatment of
their leader, joined Braccio, who was anxious only to secure his
own principality of Capua. Martin V. was weary of rinding
supplies, and was embarrassed by Alfonso's threats that he
would again recognise Benedict XIII. Caraccioli was afraid
of Alfonso's resolute character, and sowed discord between him
and Griovanna : Alfonso on his part was perplexed by the Queen's
doubtful attitude towards him. As everyone had his own
reasons for desiring peace, the Pope's mediation was accepted
for that purpose in March, 1422. Aversa and Castellamare,
the only two places which Louis held, were surrendered to the
Papal Legate, who soon afterwards gave them over to the Queen.
Braccio and Sforza were outwardly reconciled, and Sforza joined
the side of Griovanna, only with the purpose of favouring more
surely the party of Louis. Louis himself withdrew to Kome,
where he lived for two years at the Pope's expense, awaiting the
results of Sforza's machinations. But this peace and its recon
ciliations were alike hollow. The mutual suspicions of Alfonso
and Griovanna II. went on increasing till in May, 1423, Alfonso
determined on a decisive blow. He suddenly imprisoned
Caraccioli, and made a dash to obtain the person of the Queen,
who was in the Castel Capuano at Naples. The attempt to
surprise the Queen failed, and Alfonso besieged the Castle. But
Sforza hastened to the Queen's aid, and, though his army was
smaller than Alfonso's, he gave his men fresh courage by point
ing to the splendid equipments of the Aragonese ; raising the
battle-cry, ' Fine clothes and good horses,' l he led his men to
the charge. His inducement proved to be sufficiently strong ; he
won the day, and Alfonso in his turn was besieged in the Castel
Nuovo. After this failure the fortunes of Louis of Anjou began
to revive. Caraccioli was ransomed from prison, and he and
1 « A li ben vestiti, a li ben a cavalli.'— Gior. Naj)., Mur. xix. 1088.
SUMMONS OF A COUNCIL TO PA VIA. 15
Sforza urged Giovanna to cancel the adoption of the ungrateful CHAP.
Alfonso and accept Louis as her successor. At the end of June J: „
Louis arrived in Naples, and his adoption as Giovanna's heir
was formally accomplished with the Pope's sanction.
Alfonso's hopes now rested on the prompt aid of Braccio ; Alfonso
but Braccio entered the Neapolitan kingdom through the ^pies
Abruzzi, and set himself to besiege the wealthy city of Aquila 142S-
that he might obtain booty for his soldiers. The defence
was obstinate, and the siege slowly dragged on. In vain
Alfonso besought Braccio to quit it; the stubborn condot-
tiere refused. Meanwhile Filippo Maria Visconti, who had by
this time secured his possessions in Lombardy, and had more
over made himself master of Genoa, offered help to Giovanna.
He did not wish that an active king like Alfonso should estab
lish himself in Naples and urge troublesome claims to the
Genoese possessions. Alfonso was afraid lest he might lose his
command of the sea before the attack of the Genoese galleys ;
he also received disquieting news from Aragon. Weary with
waiting for Braccio, who never came, he sailed away on October
15, and revenged himself on Louis by sacking Marseilles on his
homeward voyage.
y-Trie^3eparture of Alfonso relieved Martin V. of a trouble- Martin V.
some enemy ; but his attention in this year, 1423, had to be cSS^t*
directed to an equally troublesome matter. It was now five Pavia.
years since the dissolution of the Council of Constance, and the pn
period for holding the next Council had arrived. Already in
1422 the University of Paris sent ambassadors to urge Martin
V. to fulfil his promise. Among the envoys of the University
was a learned Dominican, John Stoikovic, a native of Eagusa
in Dalmatia, who stayed at Eome to watch Martin's proceedings
and be ready for the Council as soon as it was summoned.1
Pavia had been fixed at Constance for its place of meeting ; but
in his letters of summons Martin V. was careful to express his
fervour in behalf of the Council by saying that if Pavia was
found unsuitable, he was resolved to call it to a more con
venient place rather than it should dissolve.2 The transalpine
prelates were not inspirited by this kindly assurance ; they felt
that a Council in an Italian city was as good as useless. Martin V.
1 Mon. Concilium, i. 10.
2 Lefters in Raynaldi Annales, 1423, 1.
16 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK had taken no steps in the way of reforming the abuses of
^ . ' _. the Church. The state of Christendom was not favourable
for a Council. In England Henry V. was dead, and the
minority of Henry VI. had already begun to open up intrigues
and jealousies. France was exhausted by its war with England.
In Germany Sigismund was engaged in war with the Hussites
in Bohemia, and had no time to spend in talk. There was
nothing to encourage men to undertake the costly journey to
Italy, where Martin V. was likely to employ them on the barren
subject of a proposed union between the Eastern and Western
Churches.
Council When the Council was opened, on April 24, by the four
to^Siona™ prelates whom the Pope had nominated as presidents, it was
July, 1423. not largely attended.1 Few came from beyond the Alps, and
the absence of Italians showed that the Pope's influence was
used against the Council from the beginning. Scarcely were
the opening formalities at an end when the outbreak of the
plague gave a reason for removing elsewhere, and the Council
decided to go to Siena, where, on July 2, it resumed its labours.
The first step of the Council was to organise itself according
to nations, and to determine who should have the right of
voting. All prelates, abbots, graduates of universities who
were in orders, rectors, ambassadors of kings, barons, and
universities were to be admitted freely : other ecclesiastics
were to be judged of by the nation to which they belonged. Each
nation was to have a president elected every month, who, to
gether with chosen deputies, was to prepare the business to be
discussed by the nation according to the wishes of the majority.
While making these arrangements the Council repeatedly sent
to the Pope urging him to come to Siena, and their request
was confirmed by the city magistrates, who showed themselves
amenable to the Pope's will by granting a safe-conduct in the
terms which he demanded.
But when the safe-conduct was known at Siena, the Fathers
1 John of Ragusa (Mon. Condi, i. 10) says : ' Prassentibus quam plurimis
episcopis, abbatibus, prgelatis, doctoribus et ambassiatoribus diversarum na-
tionum.' The author of the life of Martin in Mur. iii. 2, 865, says that there
were only two Burgundian abbots, and the country had to be scoured to raise
a decent number of ecclesiastics. Perhaps both writers are exaggerating on
their own side.
THE COUNCIL OF SIENA. 17
saw their liberty directly menaced by it. All magistrates and
officials in the Sienese territory were to take oath of allegiance
to the Pope, a proceeding which left the Council entirely at
the Pope's mercy. Moreover, the members of the Council conduct.
were to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Pope's officers. November,
The whole tenor of the articles of agreement was insulting I423-
to the Council, and gave manifest signs of the Pope's ill-will.
In its formal language the officials of the Curia were named
before the members of the Council.1 The energy of the Council
was forthwith turned to negotiate with the Sienese for a safe-
conduct which would give them greater security from the Pope.
Meanwhile Martin V. showed himself more decidedly hostile,
and his presidents used all efforts to weaken the Conciliar party.
Letters from Rome poured in to Siena ; tempting promises of pro
motion were held out to those who showed signs of wavering.
The reforming party felt that something must be done. intr5gues
They settled the matter of the safe-conduct, and agreed to pass of ^e
some decrees on which there could be no difference of opinion, party.
On November 6 a session of the Council was held, which declared
that the work of reform must begin from the foundation of the
faith, and consequently condemned the errors of Wyclif and
Hus, denounced the partisans of Peter de Luna, approved of
negotiations for union with the Greek Church, and exhorted all
Christian men to root out heresy wherever they found it. After
this, the reforming party urged that the work left unachieved
at Constance should be resumed, and the French nation put
forward a memorandum sketching a plan of reform according
to the lines laid down at Constance. The Curial party
resolved on resistance, and the small numbers present at Siena
rendered personal pressure tolerably easy. John of Ragusa,
though wishing to make the Council seem as numerous as pos
sible, can only count two cardinals and twenty-five mitred
prelates, as representatives of the higher clergy,2 at the session
in November 6. The Curial party thought it best to throw
the machinery of the nations into confusion. They managed to
1 ' In omnibus officiates cameras et sequentes eamdem, in quorum numcro
simt etiam lenones et mwetrlces, patribus ad concilium venientibus prasponuntur,'
says John of Ragusa (Mon. Con. i. 20).
2 Mon. Condi, i. 27 : he adds : ' Cum multitudine doctorum et magistrorum
et ceterorum copiosa ; ' but this is in a letter written to urge the Bishop of
Arras to attend the Council.
VOL. II. C
18
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
Hi.
The re
formers
abandoned
by the
French.
February,
1124.
cause disputed elections to the office of president both in the
French and in the Italian nation in the month of January 1424.
The Papal legates offered their services to the French to judge
in this dispute. The French answered that, on matters con
cerning a nation in the Council, no one, not even the Pope,
could judge, but the Council itself : they asked the presidents
to summon a congregation for the purpose. The presidents
refused, whereupon the French called the other nations to
gether on January 10, and afterwards drew up their grievances
in the shape of a protest, which they lodged with the legates.
Meanwhile the legates were busily engaged in strengthening
their party within each nation, so as to prevent any possibility
of unanimity. While thus the nations were divided, the
legates steadily pursued the dissolution of the Council, and,
as a first step towards this, urged the appointment of de
puties to fix the meeting place of the next Council. This
question in itself aroused antagonism. The French wished the
future Council to be held in France. This excited the national
jealousy of the Germans and English. The Curial party openly
avowed that they never wished to see another Council at all,
and opposed the decrees of Constance.
There were hopes, however, of renewed concord when, on
February 12, the Archbishop of Eouen and the ambassadors of
the University of Paris arrived at Siena. They interposed to
heal the dissension among the French, and the Archbishop of
Eouen was by a compromise elected to the office of president
of the French nation. The compromise was, however, fatal.
The Archbishop of Kouen had been already won over by the
legates, and the ambassadors of the University had a greater
desire to go to Rome and seek favours for themselves than stay
at Siena and watch over the reformation of the Church. On
February 19 deputies from all the nations agreed in choosing
Basel as the meeting plac* for the next Council to be held in
seven years.
The dissolution of the Council was now felt to be imminent.
Only a few zealous reformers had hopes of further business, and
they were aided by the citizens of Siena, who did not see why
they should not enjoy the same luck as Constance and reap a
golden harvest for some years to come. But Martin V. knew
how to address rebellious citizens. He sternly bade them ( not
DISSOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF SIENA. 19
to put their sickle into another's sheaves, nor think that General CHAP.
Councils were held or dissolved to please them or fill their L ,
pockets.' J Still the Sienese were resolved to make a last at
tempt, and on February 20 laid the Pope's letters before the
nations, and shut their gates to prevent the desertions which
were thinning the Council's ranks. But the reformers were not
strong enough to accept the citizens' help ; the Council sent to
request the gates to be opened.
Meanwhile the legates were ready to dissolve the Council, Dissolution
the reformers were anxious to continue their work. At last, on Council of
March 7, the legates, taking advantage of the solitude produced Siena-
by the festivities of the Carnival, posted on the door of the 1421.
Cathedral a decree of the dissolution of the Council, which had
been secretly drawn up on February 26, and prohibited all from
attempting to continue it. On the same day they hastily left
Siena for Florence. Those who remained were too few to hope
to accomplish anything. Thomas, Abbot of Paisley, who was a
member of the French nation, published an energetic protest
against the dissolution, which was joined by a few other zealous
reformers. Then on March 8 they held a meeting in which
they decided that, to avoid scandal to the Church, and danger to
themselves on account of the nearness of the Papal power, it
was better to depart quietly. The Council of Siena came
rapidly to an end, and Martin V. could plead the smallness of
its numbers, its seditious conduct with the Sienese burghers,
and its own internal disorders, as reasons for its dissolution.
Keally the Council of Siena followed too soon upon that of
Constance. The position of affairs had not materially changed.
The Pope had not yet recovered his normal position in Italy,
and those who had been at Constance were not prepared to
undertake the labours of a second Council, when they had
nothing to give them any hopes of success. What was impos
sible with the help of Sigismund was not likely to be more
possible in the face of Martin V.'s determined resistance.
Martin V. judged it wise, however, to make some promises Reform
of reform. As the Council had been too full of disturbance to ^>ns"*?1'
admit of any progress in the matter, he promised to under- Martin V.
take a reform of the Curia, and nominated two cardinals as
commissioners to gather evidence. The results of Martin V.'s
1 Letter in Raynaiuus, 1423, § 11 ; also in Mon. Condi, i. 60.
c 2
20
BOOK
III.
Death of
Sforza.
January,
1424.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
deliberations were embodied in a constitution, published on
May 16, 1424. It reads as though it were the Pope's retaliation
on the attempt made at Constance to constitute the Cardinals
as an official aristocracy which was to direct the Pope's actions.
Martin V. provided for decorous and good living on the part
of the Cardinals, forbade them to exercise the position of pro
tectors of the interests of kings or princes at the Papal Court,
or to receive money as protectors for monastic orders ; they
were not to appear in the streets with a larger retinue than
twenty attendants ; they were, if possible, to live near the
churches whence they took their titles, and were to restore
the dilapidated buildings and see to the proper performance
of divine service. Similarly the duties of the protonotaries
and abbreviators of the Papal chancery were defined and regu
lated. Archbishops, bishops, and abbots were ordered to keep
strict residence, and hold provincial synods three times each
year for the redress of abuses ; all oppressive exactions on the
part of ordinaries were forbidden, and propriety of life was
enjoined. Finally the Pope withdrew many of 'Ms rights of
reservation as a favour to the ordinaries as patrons.1
Martin V. considered that he had now amply fulfilled all
that reformers could require at his hands, and could look around
him with greater assurance. He was free for seven years from
the troubles of a Council, and could turn his attention to the
object which he had most at heart, the recovery of the States
of the Church, which Alfonso's withdrawal from Naples had
rendered a practicable measure. Fortune favoured him in this
respect beyond his hopes. The desperate resistance which
Aquila continued to offer to Braccio, encouraged Sforza to
march to its relief. On his way there, in January 1424, find
ing some difficulty in crossing the river Pescara, which wa>
swollen by the wind and tide, he rode into the water to en
courage his men. Seeing one of his squires swept off his horse,
Sforza hastened to his assistance ; but, losing his balance in
attempting to save the drowning man, he was weighed down
by his heavy armour : twice his hands were seen to wave above
the flood, then he disappeared. His body was swept out to
sea and was never found. Thus died Sforza at the age of
P> This important document is printed by Dollinger, Beitrage zur politisolum,
kirchlichen und Culturyescliiclite (1863), vol. ii. p. 335.
DEATH OF SFORZA AND OF BRACCIO. 21
fifty-four, one of the most notable men in Italian history. His CHAP.
death tells us the secret of his power. He died in the perform- ._ *' _^
ance of an act of chivalrous generosity to a comrade. However
tortuous he might be in political relations, to his soldiers he
was frank and genial ; they loved him and knew that their lives
and fortunes were as dear to Sforza as his own.
Nor did the more accomplished Braecio long survive his sturdy Death of
rival. In spite of the withdrawal of Sforza's troops after their JjJJJ'Jiga.
leader's death, Aquila still held out. As its possession was re
garded as the key to the possession of Naples, Martin V. was
eager to raise troops for its relief. He found it as easy to
arouse the jealousy of the Duke of Milan against Braecio as
against Alfonso ; and in May a joint army of Naples, Milan, and i
Pope advanced to the relief of Aquila. Braecio scorned to take J
advantage of his enemies as they crossed the mountain ridge *
that led to the town ; though their forces were superior to his
own, he preferred to meet them in the open field. An unexpected
sortie of the Aquilans threw Braccio's army into confusion.
As he rode around exhorting his men to form afresh and renew
the fight, a Perugian exile forced his way through the throng
and, with the cry, ' Down with the oppressor of his country ! '
wounded Braecio in the throat. On the fall of their leader the
soldiers of Braecio gave way, and the siege of Aquila was raised,
June 2. Braccio's haughty spirit would not survive defeat;
for three days he lay without eating or speaking till he died.
Unlike Sforza, he had no grown-up son to inherit his glory.
His shattered army rapidly dispersed upon his death. His
body was carried to Rome, and was buried as that of an ex
communicated man in unconsecrated ground before the Church
of S. Lorenzo.
Martin V. reaped the full benefit of Braccio's death. On Martin v.
July 29 Perugia opened its gates to the Pope, and the other
cities in Braccio's dominions soon folio wed its example. Martin
V. found himself in undisputed possession of the Papal States. 1424-30.
This was a great point to have gained, and Martin V. had won
his triumph by his astute and cautious, if unscrupulous, policy.
He had not hesitated to plunge Naples into war, and had
trusted to his own acuteness to fish in troubled waters. For
tune had favoured him beyond what he could expect, and the
only further difficulty that beset him was a rising of Bologna
22
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
111.
Death of
Benedict
XIII.
1424.
in 1429, which was put down, though not without a stubborn
struggle, by Carlo Malatesta. From that time he set himself
with renewed zeal and statesmanlike care to organise the resto
ration of law and order in the Roman territory and the rest of
the Papal possessions. When we look back upon the wild con
fusion that he found at his accession, we must recognise in
Martin V.'s pontificate traces of energy and administrative ca
pacity which have been left unrecorded by the annals of the time.1
The slow and steady enforcement of order and justice is passed
by unnoticed, while discord and anarchy are rarely without a
chronicler. It is the great merit of Martin V. that he won
back from confusion, and reduced to obedience and order, the
disorganised States of the Church.2
The policy of Martin V. was to bring under one jurisdiction
separate communities, with their existing rights and privileges,
and so to establish a central monarchy on which they all
peaceably depended. It was the misfortune of Martin V. that his
work was thrown away by the wrongheadedness of his successor,
and so left no lasting results. Still, Martin V. deserves high
praise as a successful statesman, though even here he displayed
the spirit of a Roman noble rather than of the Head of the
Church. The elevation of the Colonna family was his constant
aim, and he left to his successors a conspicuous example of
nepotism. His brothers and sisters were enriched at the ex
pense of the Church, and their aggrandisement had the dis
astrous result that it intensified the long-standing feud between
the Colonna and the Orsini, and led to a reaction upon Mar
tin's death. So far did Martin V. identify himself with his
family that, in defiance of the traditions of his office, he took
up his abode in the Colonna Palace by the Church of SS.
Apostoli, regarding himself as more secure amongst the re
tainers of his house.
The same year that saw the , deaths of Sforza and Braccio
freed Martin V. from another enemy. In November 1424 died
Benedict XIII., worn out by extreme old age. In his retire
ment at Peniscola he had been powerless either for good or ill.
Yet the existence cf an anti-Pope was hurtful to the Papal
1 Infessura: fiiarivm, Mur. in. part ii. 1112: ' Morti che furono questi
rirnase lo Papa senza altri impacci e mantenne nel suo tempo pace e dovizia.'
END OF THE ANTI-POPES. 23
dignity, and Alfonso's hostility to Martin V., threatened to CHAP.
give him troublesome importance. Benedict's death might .,_ ^ ,
seem to end the Schism, but one of the last acts of the obsti
nate old man was the creation of four new cardinals. For a
time his death was kept secret till Alfonso's desires were
known ; at length in June 1425 three of Benedict's cardinals
elected a new Pope, Gil de Munion, canon of Barcelona, who
took the title of Clement VIII. But schism when once it
begins is contagious. Another of Benedict's cardinals,1 a
Frenchman, Jean Carrer, who was absent at the time and
received no notice, elected for himself another Pope, who took
the title of Benedict XIV. Martin V. was desirous of getting
rid of these pretenders, and sent one of his cardinals, brother of
the Count de Foix, to negotiate with Alfonso. But Alfonso End of the
refused him entrance into his kingdom, and ordered Clement i429~.P°peS'
VIII. to be crowned in Peniscola. Martin V. summoned
Alfonso to Kome to answer for his conduct. Alfonso saw that
nothing was to be gained by isolation from the rest of Europe.
Time mollified his wrath at the loss of Naples, and in his hopes
for the future it was better to have the Pope for his friend
than for his foe. The Cardinal de Foix carried on his nego
tiation with wise moderation, and was helped by one of the
King's counsellors, Alfonso Borgia. In the autumn of 1427
Alfonso V. received the Pope's legate, agreed to recognise
Martin V., and accept his good offices to settle disputes be
tween himself and Griovanna II. In July 1429 Munion laid
aside his papal trappings, submitted to Martin V., and re
ceived the melancholy post of Bishop of Majorca. The good
offices of Alfonso Borgia were warmly recognised both by
Alfonso V. and Martin V., and this ending of the Schism had for
its abiding consequence in the future the introduction of the
Borgia family to the Papal Court, where they were destined to
play an important part. The Pope of Jean Carrer was of course a
ridiculous phantom, and in 1432 the Count of Armagnac ordered
Carrer, who was still obstinate, to be made prisoner and
iianded over to Martin V.2
1 See Carrer's letter to the Count of Armagnac announcing his election of
Benedict XIV., in Martene, Thesaurus, ii. 1714. The letter is written with all
possible seriousness in the most approved style.
* Letter in Martene, Thesaurus, ii. 1748.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Martin V.
and
France.
1420-1420.
ft
CHAPTEE IT.
MARTIN V. AND THE PAPAL RESTORATION. BEGINNINGS OF
EUGENIUS IV.
1425-1432.
As Martin V. felt more sure of his position in Italy, and saw
the traces of the Schism disappear in the outward organisation
of the Church, he was anxious also to wipe away the anti-papal
legislation which in France and England had followed on the
confusion caused by the schism of the Papacy.
In France Martin V. easily succeeded in overthrowing the
attempt to establish the liberties of the national Church on the
basis of royal edicts. Charles VI. had issued in 1 418 ordinances
forbidding money to be exported from the kingdom for the
payment of annates or other demands of the Court of Rome,
and had confirmed the ancient liberties of the Grallican Church
as regarded freedom of election to ecclesiastical offices. In
February 1422 he had further forbidden appeals to Rome in
contempt of the ordinances. But before the end of the year
Charles VI. was dead, and the confusion in France was still
further increased by the English claims to the succession.
The youthful Charles VII. was hard pressed, and wished to gain
the Pope's support. In February 1425 he issued a decree re
establishing the Papal power, as regarded the collation to bene
fices and all exercise of jurisdiction, on the same footing as it
had been in the days of Clement VII. and Benedict XIII.1 The
Parlement, it is true, protested and refused to register the
decree. The Pope, on his part, granted an indemnity for what
had been done in the past. All the reforming efforts of the
University of Paris and its followers were for the time un
done.
i prntres des
VEglise Gallicanc, ch. xxii. § 19.
MARTIN V. AND ARCHBISHOP CHICHELE. 25
In England Martin V. was not so successful. In 1421 he wrote
to Henry V. and exhorted him to lose no time in abolishing the
prohibitions of his predecessors (the Statutes of Provisors and Martin V.
Prsemunire) on the due exercise of the Papal rights. Next Archbishop
year, on the accession of King Henry VI., he wrote still
more pressingly to the Council of Regency.1 When nothing
was done, he directed his anger against Henry Chichele, the
Archbishop of Canterbury. Chichele in 1423 proclaimed in
dulgences to all who in that year made pilgrimage to Canter
bury. Martin indignantly forbade this assumption of Papal
rights by a subordinate ; 6 as the fallen angels wished to set
up in the earth their seat against the Creator, so have these
presumptuous men endeavoured to raise a false tabernacle of
salvation against the apostolic seat and the authority of the
Roman Pontiff, to whom only has God granted this power.' 2
It was long since an English archbishop had heard such lan
guage from a pope ; but Chichele was not a man of sufficient
courage to remonstrate. He withdrew his proclamation, and
Martin V. had struck a decided blow against the independence
of the English episcopate.
The restored Papacy owed a debt of gratitude to Henry of Martin V.
Winchester for his good offices as mediator at Constance, and Henry
immediately after his election, Martin V. nominated him Car- ^^^
dinal. Chichele protested against this step as likely to lead to and legate.
inconveniences ; and Henry V., declaring that he would rather
see his uncle invested with the crown than with a cardinal's
hat, forbade his acceptance of the proffered dignity. When the
strong hand of Henry V. was gone, Beaufort was again nomi
nated Cardinal on May 24, 1426, no longer from motives of
gratitude, but because the Pope needed his help. In February
1427, he was further appointed Papal legate for the purpose of
carrying on war against the Hussites. But the Pope still
pursued his main object, and in a letter to the Bishop of
Winchester denounced still more strongly the execrable statute
of Prgemunire by which the King of England disposed of the
affairs of the Church as though himself, and not the Pope, were
the divinely appointed Vicar of Christ. He bade him remember
the glorious example of S. Thomas of Canterbury, who did not
hesitate to offer himself as a sacrifice on behalf of the liberties
1 Letters in Raynaldus, gut anni*. 2 Raynaldus, 1423, § 21.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
Martin V.
of the Church.1 He bade him urge the abolition of this statute
on the Council, on Parliament, and on the clergy, that they may
preach about it to the people ; and he asked to be informed what
steps were taken in compliance with his commands. He wrote
also in the same strain to the University of Oxford. Indeed, so
deeply did Martin V. resent the ecclesiastical attitude of Eng
land that he said in a consistory, 'Amongst Christians no states
have made ordinances contrary to the liberties of the Church
save England and Venice.' 2 Martin's instincts taught him truly,
and he did his utmost to blunt the edge of the weapon that a
century later was to sever the connexion between the English
Church and the Papacy.
Again Martin V. wrote haughtily to Chichele, bidding him
and the Archbishop of York set aside the Statutes of Provisors
ancl rec°gmse tne Papal right to dispose of benefices in Eng
land. Chichele humbly replied that he was the only person in
England who was willing to broach the subject ; and it was hard
that he should be specially visited by the Pope's displeasure for
what he could not help. Martin V. retorted by issuing letters
to suspend Chichele from his office as legate — a blow against
the privileges and independence of the Archbishops of Canter
bury, who since the days of Stephen Langton had been recog
nised as the Pope's ordinary legate (legatus natus) in England.
Chichele so far roused himself as to appeal to a future Council
against this encroachment. The Pope's letters were seized by
royal authority, and the suspension did not take effect. But
Chichele was a timid man, and the condition of affairs in Eng
land made him shrink from a breach with the Pope. The
Lollards were suppressed but not subdued, and a strong anti-
hierarchical feeling simmered amongst the people. In the dis
tracted state of the kingdom, little help was to be gained from
the royal power, and Chichele feared the consequences of an
interdict. He called to his help the bishops, the Univer
sity of Oxford, and several temporal lords, who addressed
letters to the Pope, bearing testimony to Chichele's zeal for the
1 Tlaynaldus, 1426, § 19 : ' Illius gloriosissimi martyris B. Thomas olim
Cantuariensis archiepiscopi successor effectus es, qui adversus similia decer-
tans statuta holocaustum se offerens Deo, pro libertate ecclesiastica occubuit."
The Pope stretches a point in making Thomas a martyr for his resistance to
the Constitutions of Clarendon.
2 Commissioni di Ilinaldo degli Albizzi, ii. 413.
MARTIN V. AND ENGLAND. £7
Church, and begging the Pope to be reconciled to him. To CHAP
Chichele's letters pleading his excuses, the Pope still answered v_ *L_.
that the only excuse that he could make was active resistance
to the obnoxious statutes. At length Chichele, in 1428, ap
peared before the Commons, accompanied by the Archbishop of
York and other bishops, and with tears in his eyes pointed out the
dangers in which the Church and kingdom were placed by their
opposition to the Pope's demands. Parliament was unmoved
either by Martin's letters or by Chichele's half-hearted plead
ings. They only petitioned the Pope to restore the Archbishop
to his favour. The King wrote in the same sense, and the
matter was allowed to drop. Martin V. might console himself
with the reflection that, if he had failed to carry his point and
abolish the hateful statutes, he had at least succeeded in hu
miliating the English episcopate by treating them as creatures
of his own.1
In September 1428, Beaufort made his first appearance in Beaufort's
England since his elevation to the Cardinalate, and a protest in gainst the
the King's name was issued against his exercise of any legatine **™sites-
authority within the realm. Next year the question wa .j raised
whether Beaufort, being a cardinal, was justified in officiating
as Bishop of Winchester and prelate of the Order of the
Garter : the King's council advised Beaufort to waive his right.
Meanwhile Beaufort was allowed to gather troops for a crusade
against the Hussites. But the English statesman -and the
Papal councillor came into collision; and the troops which
Beaufort had gathered for a crusade in Bohemia were turned
against France. Beaufort pleaded to the Pope the lame excuse
that he had not ventured to disobey the King's commands in
this matter ; nor would the soldiers have obeyed him if he had
done so.2 Though treacherous, the action of Beaufort was
popular. He was allowed, though a cardinal, to take his seat
at the King's council, except only when matters were under
discussion which concerned the Church of Eome. Eeally,
Beaufort was too much absorbed in deadly personal rivalry with
Gloucester to be of any service to the Pope in furthering
his attempt to overthrow the liberties of the English Church.
1 The correspondence between Martin V. and Chichele is given partly in
Raynaldus, partly in Wilkins' Concilia, iii. 471-486.
2 Raynaldus, 142u, 17.
BOOK
III.
Architec
tural
works of
Martin V.
Martin V.
find his
Cardinals.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
But the Papacy has never in its history gained so much by
definite victories as it has by steady persistency. It was always
prepared to take advantage of the internal weakness of any
kingdom, and to advance pretensions at times when they
were not likely to be resolutely disavowed. In time they
might be heard of again, and when reasserted could at least
claim the prestige of some antiquity. By his treatment of
Archbishop Chichele, and by his grant of legatine powers to
Beaufort, Martin V. exercised a more direct authority over the
machinery of the English Church than had been permitted to
any pope since the days of Innocent III. The Church was
weak in its hold on the affections of the people, and when the
kingly office was in abeyance, the Church, robbed of its protector,
was too feeble to offer any serious resistance to the Papacy.
Martin V. used his opportunity dexterously, and his successors
had no reason to complain of the independent spirit of English
bishops.
But besides being an ecclesiastic Martin V. had the senti
ments of a Roman noble. He wished to restore his native city
to some part of her old glory, and laboured so assiduously at
the work of restoration that a grateful people hailed him as
6 Father of his country.' He rebuilt the tottering portico of S.
Peter's, and proceeded to adorn and repair the ruined basilicas
of the city. In the church of S. John Lateran, which had
been destroyed by fire in 1308, and was slowly rising from its
ruins, he laid down the mosaic pavement which still exists,
and built up the roof. He restored the Basilica of the SS.
Apostoli. His example told upon the Cardinals, and he urged
on them to undertake the care of the churches from which they
took their titles.1 His pontificate marks the beginning of an
era of architectural adornment of the City of Rome.
The only part of the work of the reformation of the Church
which Martin V. showed any wish to carry into effect was that
concerning the Cardinals. The Papal absolutism over all
bishops, which Martin V. desired to establish, aimed at the
reduction of the power of the ecclesiastical aristocracy which
surrounded the Pope's person, and the rules for the conduct of
the Cardinals issued in 1424 were not meant to be mere waste
paper. Martin V. succeeded in reducing the power of the Car-
1 Dollinger, Bcitrage, ii. 386.
DEATH OF MART1X V. 29
dinals ; he paid little heed to their advice, and they were so CHAP.
afraid of him that they stammered like awkward children in ^ Ii1' _^
his presence.1 Sometimes he even excluded them altogether.
In 1429 he retired from Eome to Ferentino before a pestilence,
and forbade any of the Cardinals to follow him.
Yet all Martin V.'s injunctions could not purge the Curia Court of
from the charge of corruption. Money was necessary for the
Pope, and Martin V., if he laid aside the grosser forms of ex
tortion, still demanded money on all fair pretexts. The am
bassadors at the Papal Court found it necessary for the conduct
of the business to propitiate the Pope by handsome presents
on the great festivals of the Church. If any business was to be
done, the attention of the Pope and his officials had to be
arrested by some valuable gift. Yet Martin V. showed a care
in making ecclesiastical appointments which had not been seen
in the Popes for the last half-century. He did not make his *
appointments rashly, but enquired about the capacities of the \/f
different candidates and the special needs of the districts which
they aspired to serve. Even so, Martin V. was not always to be
trusted. He seemed to delight in humbling bishops before
him. He deposed Bishop Anselm of Augsburg simply because
the civic authorities quarrelled with him. In England he con
ferred on a nephew of his own, aged fourteen, the rich arch
deaconry of Canterbury. Yet Martin V. was never weary of
uttering noble sentiments to the cardinals and those around
him : no word was so often on his lips as 'justice.' He would
often exclaim to his cardinals, < Love justice, ye who judge the
earth.' 2
In these peaceful works of internal reform and organisation Death of
Martin V. passed his last years, disturbed only by the thought pI{?rtin V*
that the time was drawing near for summoning the promised M31.
Council at Basel. Moreover, there was little hope of avoiding
it, for the religious conflict in Bohemia had waxed so fierce
1 Keport of the Ambassador of the Teutonic knights in Voigt's Stimmen
arxs Rom. Raumer : Historisches Tasckenbuch, vol. iv. 74 : ' Sie diirfen wider
den Papst nicht reden ausser was er gerne hort ; denn der Papst hat die Cardi-
niile alle so unterdriickt, dass sie vor ihm nicht anders sprechen, als wie er es
gerne will, und werden vor ihm redend roth und bleich.'
2 Platina : « Ejus sermo plenus sententiis erat. Excidebat nullum nomen
tarn crebro quam justitiae nomen. Ad suos persaepe conversus his verbis
utebatur, Diligite justitiam qui judicatis terrain.'
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
that it had long been the subject of greatest interest in the
politics of Europe. Army after army of the orthodox had been
routed by the Bohemian heretics. Papal legates had in vain
raised troops and conducted them to battle. Germany was
hopelessly exhausted, and when force had failed, men looked
anxiously to see if deliberation could again avail. Martin V.
ordered the legate in Bohemia, Griuliano Cesarini, to convoke
a Council at Basel in 1431. But he was not to see its begin
ning : he was suddenly struck by apoplexy, and died on
February 20, 1431. He was buried in the Church of S. John
Lateran, where his recumbent effigy in brass still adorns his
tomb.
Martin V. was a wise, cautious, and prudent Pope. He
received the Papacy discredited and homeless : he succeeded in
establishing it firmly in its old capital, recovering its lost
possessions, and restoring some of its old prestige in Europe.
This he did by moderation and common sense, combined with
a genuine administrative capacity. He was not a brilliant man,
but the times did not require brilliancy. He was not person
ally popular, for he did not much care for the regard or sym
pathy of those around him, but kept his own counsel and went
his own way. He was reserved, and had great self-command.
When the news of a brother's unexpected death wras brought to
him early one morning, he composed himself and said mass as
usual. He did not care for men's good opinion, but devoted
himself energetically to the details of business. He did not
care to do anything splendid, so much as to do all things
securely. Yet he rescued the Papacy from its fallen condition
and laid the foundations for its future power. ** His strong-willed
and arbitrary dealings with other bishops did much to break
down the strength of national feeling in ecclesiastical matters
which had been displayed at Constance. He was resolved to
make the bishops feel their impotence before the Pope ; and the
political weakness of European States enabled him to go far in
breaking down the machinery of the national Churches, and
asserting for the Papacy a supreme control in all ecclesiastical
matters. In this way he may be regarded as the founder of the
theory of Papal omnipotence which is embodied in modern Ultra-
montanism. Yet Martin V. succeeded rather through the weak
ness of Europe than through his own strength. He did not awaken
CHARACTER OF MARTIN V. 31
suspicion by large schemes, but pursued a quiet policy which CHAP.
was dictated by the existing needs of the Papacy, and ._ IiL ^
was capable of great extension in the future. Without being
a great man, he was an extremely sagacious statesman. He
had none of the noble and heroic qualities which would have
enabled him to set up the Papacy once more as the exponent of
the religious aspirations of Europe ; but he brought it into
accordance with the politics of his time and made it again
powerful and respected. There were two opinions in his own
days respecting the character of Martin V. Those who had
waited anxiously for a thorough reformation of the Church
looked sadly on Martin's shortcomings and accused him of
avarice and self-seeking. Those who regarded his career as a
temporal ruler, extolled him for his practical virtues, and the
epitaph on his tomb called him with some truth, ' Temporum
suorum felicitas,' the happiness of his times.1 At the present
day we may be permitted to combine these two opposite judg
ments, and may praise him for what he did while regretting
that he lacked the elevation of mind necessary to enable him
to seize the splendid opportunity offered him of doing more.
After the funeral of Martin V., the fourteen Cardinals who Election of
were in Rome lost no time in entering into conclave in the
Church of S. Maria sopra Minerva. They were still smarting
at the recollection of the hard yoke of Martin V., and their one ivf March
desire was to give themselves an easy master and escape the s> 143L
1 These two views are expressed in the two lives in Muratori, m., part ii.,
859. One says : ' Martinus vero avarissimus f uit ; miserabiliter in palatio apud
sanctos Apostolos vixit.' The other says : ' Cujus quidem mors non modo
populum Romanum sed universes Christi fideles magno dolore confecit.' The
following stanzas from a Sapphic ode written by Gregorio Correr, great-
nephew of Gregory XII., and cousin once removed of Eugenius IV., show how
Martin's qualities were regarded by his friends. The ode is published from a
MS. in the Museo Correr in Venice by Von Reumont, Beitr'dge zur ItaliemscJien
GescHckte, iv. 302 :—
Prodiit notis latebris latronum
Turba, securum patet iter, arces
Jam licet sacras simul et beatura
Visere Tibrim.
Salve o sacratge pater urbis, atque
Gentium terror, decus et Latini
Nominis, spesqu3 ; ut maneas precamur
Summe sacerdos.
32 THE COUNCIL OF BASKL.
BOOK indignities which they had so long endured. To secure this
^_III1' _- end they had recourse to the method, which the Schism had
introduced, of drawing up rules for the conduct of the future
Pope, which every Cardinal signed before proceeding to the
election. Each promised, if he were elected Pope, to issue a
Bull within three days of his coronation, declaring that he would
reform the Eoman Curia, would further the work of the ap
proaching Council, would appoint cardinals according to the
decrees of Constance, would allow his cardinals freedom of
speech and would respect their advice, give them their accus
tomed revenues, abstain from seizing their goods at death, and
consult them about the disposal of the government of the Papal
States. We see from these provisions how the Cardinals
resented the insignificance to which Martin V. had consigned
them. To reverse his treatment of themselves they were willing
to reverse his entire policy and bind the future Pope to accept
in some form the Council and the cause of ecclesiastical reform.
They entered the Conclave on March 1 , and spent the next day
in drawing up this instrument for their own protection. On
March 3 they proceeded to vote, and on the first scrutiny
Gabriel Condulmier, a Venetian, was unanimously elected.
Others had been mentioned, such as Giuliano Cesarini, the
energetic legate in Bohemia, and Antonio Casino, Bishop of
Siena. But in their prevailing temper, the Cardinals deter
mined that it was best to have a harmless nonentity, and all
were unanimous that Condulmier answered best to that de
scription.
Previous Gabriel Condulmier, who took the name of Eugenius IV.,
SSmi«°n" was a Venetian, sprung from a wealthy but not noble family.
His father died when he was young ; and Gabriel, seized with
religious enthusiasm, distributed his wealth, 20,000 ducats,
among the poor, and resolved to seek his riches in another
world. So great was his ardour that he infected with it his
cousin, Antonio Correr, and both entered the monastery of
S. Giorgio d' Alga in Venice. There the two friends remained
simple brothers of the order, till Antonio's uncle was unex
pectedly elected Pope Gregory XII. As usual, the Papal uncle
wished to promote his nephew ; but Antonio refused to leave
his monastery unless he were accompanied by his friend Con
dulmier. Gregory XII. made his nephew Bishop of Bologna,
EARLY LIFE OF GABIUEL CONDULMIER. 33
and Condulmier Bishop of Siena. He afterwards prepared the CHAP.
way for his own downfall by insisting on elevating both to the - _ . ' ^
dignity of cardinals. But the diminution of Gregory's obedience
gave them small scope for their activity ; they both went to Con
stance and were ranked among the Cardinals of the united Church.
Their long friendship was at last interrupted by jealousy. Cor-
rer could not endure his friend's elevation to the Papacy ; he
left him, and at the Council at Basel was one of his bitterest
opponents. Martin V. appointed Condulmier to be legate in
Bologna, where he showed his capacity by putting down a
rebellion of the city. When elected to the Papacy at the early
age of forty-seven he was regarded as a man of high religious
character, without much knowledge of the world or political
capacity. The Cardinals considered him to be an excellent
appointment for their purpose. Tall and of a commanding
figure and pleasant face, he would be admirably suited for
public appearances. His reputation for piety would satisfy the
reforming party ; his known liberality to the poor would make
him popular in Kome ; his assumed lack of strong character and
of personal ambition would assure to the Cardinals the freedom
and consideration after which they pined. He was in no way
a distinguished man, and in an age when learning was becom
ing more and more respected, he was singularly uncultivated.
His early years were spent in the performance of formal acts of
piety, and his one literary achievement was that he wrote with
his own hand a breviary, which he always continued to use
when he became Pope. The absence of any decided qualities
in Eugenius IV. seems to have been so marked that miraculous
agency was called in to explain his unexpected elevation. A
story, which he himself was fond of telling in later years,1 found
ready credence. When he was a simple monk at Venice, he
took his turn to act as porter at the monastery gate. One day
a hermit came and was kindly welcomed by Condulmier, who
accompanied him into the church and joined in his devotions.
As they returned, the hermit said, £ You will be made Cardinal,
and then Pope ; in your pontificate you will suffer much adver
sity.' Then he departed, and was seen no more.
1 Vespasiano says : ' Questo diceva spesso papa Eugenio a cJd lo voleva udire?
His words seem to suggest that those around him had a horror of the story, with
which they were regaled too often.
VOL. II. D
34
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Eugenius
IV. gives
earnest of
a desire to
reform.
,
Quarrel cf
Eugrnius
IV. with
the Co-
loLna.
Eugenius IV. was faithful to his promise before election,
and on the day of his coronation, March 11, confirmed the
document which he had signed in conclave. He also showed
signs of a desire to reform the abuses of the Papal Court. His
first act was to cut off a source of exaction. The customary
letters announcing his election were given for transmission
to the ambassadors of the various states, instead of being sent
by Papal nuncios, who expected large donations for their
service.1
But the first steps of Eugenius IV. in the conduct of affairs
showed an absence of wisdom and an unreasoning ferocity.
Martin V. had been careful to secure the interests of his own
relatives. His brother Lorenzo had been made Count of Alba
and Celano in the Abruzzi, and his brother Giordano Duke of
Amalfi and Venosa, Prince of Salerno. Both of them died
before the Pope, but their places were taken by the sons of
Lorenzo — Antonio, who became Prince of Salerno, Odoardo, who
inherited Celano and Marsi, and Prospero, who was Cardinal
at the early age of twenty-two. Martin V. had lived by the
Church of SS. Apostoli in a house of moderate preten
sions, as the Vatican was too ruinous for occupation ; his
nephews had a palace hard by. It was natural for a new Pope
to look with some suspicion on the favourites of his predecessor.
But at first all went well between the Colonna and Eugenius IV.
The Castle of S. Angelo was given up to the Pope and a con
siderable amount of treasure which Martin V. had left behind
him. But Eugenius IV. soon became suspicious. The towns in
the Papal States grew rebellious when they felt that Martin
V.'s strong hand was relaxed, and Eugenius needed money
and soldiers to reduce them to obedience. He suspected that
the Papal nephews had vast stores of treasure secreted, and
resolved by a bold stroke to seize it for himself. Stefano
Colonna, head of the Palestrina branch of the family and at
variance with the elder branch, was sent to seize the Bishop of
Tivoli, Martin's Vice-Chamberlain, whom he dragged ignomin-
iously through the streets. Eugenius IV. angrily rebuked him
for his unnecessary violence, and so alienated his wavering
loyalty. At the same time Eugenius demanded of Antonio
1 The King of Castile did not understand this, and complained of omission
as a slight. Eugenius wrote to explain ; see Raynaldus, 1431, No. i).
EUGENIUS IV. AND THE COLONNA. 35
Colonna that he should give up all the possessions in the Papal CHAP.
States with which his uncle had endowed him, Grenazano, Soriano, ^ *}'.—-
S. Marino, and other fortresses where Eugenius imagined that
the Papal treasures lay hid. Antonio loudly declared that this
was a plot of the Orsini in their hereditary hatred of the
Colonna ; he denounced the Pope as lending himself to their
schemes, and left Rome hastily to raise forces. He was soon
followed by Stefano Colonna, by the Cardinal Prospero, and the
other adherents of the family. Gathering their troops, the
Colonna attacked the possessions of the Orsini and laid waste
the country up to the walls of Rome.
Eugenius IV., like Urban VI., had been unexpectedly raised The Co-
to a position for which his narrowness and inexperience rendered ™* take
him unfit. Trusting to the general excellence of his intentions against the
and exulting in the plenitude of his new authority, he acted on April 1431.
the first impulse, and only grew more determined when he met
with opposition.1 He tortured the luckless Bishop of Tivoli
almost to death in his prison. He ordered the partisans of the
Colonna in Rome to be arrested, and over two hundred Roman
citizens were put to death on various charges. Stefano Colonna
advanced against Rome, seized the Porta Appia on April 23,
and fought his way through the streets as far as the Piazza
of S. Marco. But the people did not rise on his side as he had
expected ; the Pope's troops were still strong enough to drive
back their assailants. Stefano Colonna could not succeed in
getting hold of the city ; but he kept the Appian gate, laid waste
the Campagna, and threatened the city with famine. Eugenius
IV. retaliated by ordering the destruction of the Colonna
palaces, even that of Martin V., and the houses of their ad
herents, and on May 18 issued a decree depriving them of all
their possessions. The old times of savage warfare between the
Roman nobles were again brought back.
The contest might long have raged, to the destruction of Peace
the new-born prosperity of the Roman city, had not Florence, Colonna6
Venice, and Naples sent troops to aid the Pope. But the September
Neapolitan forces under Caldora proved a feeble help, for they
took money from Antonio Colonna, and assumed an ambiguous
attitude. In Rome the confession of a conspiracy to seize the
1 Billius (Mur. xix. 143) calls him : ' Sui ipsius fidentissimus quodcunque
proposition cepisset,'
n 2
36 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK Castle of S. Angelo and expel the Pope was extorted from a
._IIi1- . luckless friar, and gave rise to fresh prosecutions and imprison
ments. Amid these agitations Eugenius IV. was stricken by
paralysis, which was put down to the results of poison adminis
tered in the interests of theColonna. Sickness brought reflection ;
and the Colonnesi on their side saw that the chances of war
were going against them, since Venice and Florence were deter
mined to support Kugeriius, whose help they needed against
the growing power of the Duke of Milan. Accordingly, on
September 22 peace was made between the Pope and Antonio
(Jolonna, who paid 75,000 ducats and resigned the castles
which he held in the Papal States. Giovanna of Naples de
prived him also of his principality of Salerno. The relatives
of Martin V. fell back to their former position. But Eugenius
ha/1 gained by violence, disorder, bloodshed, and persecution
an end which might have been reached equally well by a
little patience and tact.
The disturbances in the States of the Church gradually
settled down, and Eugenius in September was anxiously await
ing the coming of Sigismund to Italy for the purpose of
assuming the Imperial crown. On his dealings with Sigisrnund
depended his chance of freeing himself from the Council,
which had begun to assemble at Basel, and whose proceedings
were such as to cause him some anxiety.
37
CHAPTER III.
BOHEMIA AND THE HUSSITE WAKS.
1418-1431.
THE fortunes of Sigismund had not been prosperous since his CHAP
departure from Constance. The glories of the revived empire m>
which had floated before his eyes soon began to fade away. Failure
Troubles in his ancestral states occupied all his attention, and ^^n of
prevented him from aspiring to be the arbiter of the affairs of Constance
Europe. His dignified position at Constance, as Protector of Bohemia,
the Council that was to regulate the future of the Church, en
tailed on him nothing but disappointment. It was easy for the
Council to burn Hus and to condemn his doctrines ^ but the
Bohemian people were not convinced by either of these pro
ceedings, and cherished a bitter feeling of Sigismund's perfidy.
He had invited Hus to the Council, and then had abandoned
him ; he had inflicted a disgrace on their national honour which
the Bohemians could never forgive. The decrees of the Council
found little respect in Bohemia, and a league w^as formed among
the Bohemian nobles to maintain freedom of preaching. The
teaching of Jakubek of Mies, concerning the necessity of receiv
ing the communion under both kinds, gave an outward symbol
to the new beliefs, and the chalice became the distinctive badge
of the Bohemian reformers. The Council in vain summoned
Wenzel to answer for his neglect of its monitions ; in vain it
called on Sigismund to give effect to its decrees by force of
arms. Sigismund knew the difficulties of such an attempt,
and as heir to the Bohemian kingdom did not choose to draw
upon himself any further hatred from the Bohemian people.
Before the election of a new Pope, the Bohemians could still Wenzei
denounce the arbitrary proceedings of the Council, and hope declares
for fairer hearing in the future. But the election of Oddo Hussites.
Colonna, who as Papal commissioner had condemned Hus in l
38
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
nr'
Beginning
1411, dashed all further hopes to the ground. Martin V. ac-
cepted all that the Council had done towards the Bohemian
heretics, and urged Sigismund to interpose. He threatened to
proclaim a crusade against Bohemia, which would then be
conquered by some faithful prince, who might not be willing to
hand it over to Sigismund. The threat alarmed Sigismund,
who wrote urgently to his brother Wenzel ; and the indolent
Wenzel, who had allowed dim notions of impossible toleration
to float before his eyes, at last roused himself to see the hope
lessness of his attempt neither to favour nor discourage the
new movement. At the end of 1418 he ordered that all the
churches in Prag should be given up to the Catholics, who
hastened to return and wreak their wrath on the heretics.
Two churches only were left to the Utraquists, as the reformed
party was now called, from its administration of the communion
under both kinds. But the multitudes began to meet in the
open air, on hill-tops, which they loved to call by Biblical
names, Tabor and Horeb and the like. Peacefully these as
semblies met and separated ; but this condition of suppressed
revolt could not long continue. On July 22, 1419, Wenzel's
wrath was kindled by hearing of a vast meeting of 40,000 wor
shippers, who had received the communion under both kinds,
and had given it even to the children of their company.
These meetings at once awakened the enthusiasm of the
Utraquists, and gave them confidence in their strength. On
Sunday, July 30, a procession, headed by a former monk, John
of Sulau, who had preached a fiery sermon to a large congrega
tion, marched through the streets of Prag, and took possession
of the church of S. Stephen, where they celebrated their own
rites. Thence they proceeded to the Town Hall of the Neustadt,
and clamoured that the magistrates should release some who
had been made prisoners on religious grounds. The magis
trates were the nominees of Wenzel to carry out his new policy ;
they barred the doors, and looked from the windows upon the
crowd. Foremost in it stood the priest, John of Sulau, holding
aloft the chalice. Some one from the windows threw a stone,
and knocked it from his hands. The fury of the crowd blazed
out in a moment. Headed by John Zizka, of Trocnow, a
nobleman of Wenzel's court, they burst open the doors, slew
the burgomaster, and flung out of the windows all who did
DEATH OF WENZEL. 39
not succeed in making their escape. It was the beginning of CHAP.
a religious war more savage and more bloody than Europe had », ^ — ,
yet seen.
Wenzel's rage was great when he heard of these proceedings. Death of
He threatened death to all the Hussites, and particularly the August^
priests. But his helplessness obliged him to listen to proposals J
for reconciliation. The rebels humbled themselves, the King
appointed new magistrates. Wenzel's perplexities, however, were
soon to end ; on August 16 he was struck with apoplexy, and
died with a great shout and roar as of a lion.1 He was buried
secretly by night, for Prag wTas in an uproar at the news of his
death. Wenzel's faults as a ruler are obvious enough. He
was devoid of wisdom and energy ; he was arbitrary and capri
cious ; he was alternately sunk in sloth, and a prey to fits of
wild fury. He had none of the qualities of a statesman ; yet
with all his faults he was felt by the Bohemians to have a love
for his people, to whom he was always kindly and familiar,
and to whom in his way he strove to do justice. His own am
biguous position towards his brother Sigismund and European
politics corresponded in some measure with the ambiguous
attitude of Bohemia towards the Church, and for a time he was
no unfitting representative of the land which he ruled. Just
as events had reached the point when decision was rendered
inevitable, Wenzel's death handed over to Sigismund the respon
sibility of dealing with the future of Bohemia.
Sigismund did not judge it expedient to turn his attention
immediately to Bohemia. His Hungarian subjects clamoured
for his aid against the Turks, who were pressing up the Danube
valley. He was bound to help them first, and obtain their
help against Bohemia. He trusted that conciliatory measures
would disarm the Bohemian rebels, whom he would afterwards
be able to deal with at leisure. Accordingly he appointed
the widowed Queen, Sophia, as regent in Bohemia, and round
her gathered the nobles in the interests of public order. At
the head of the Government stood Cenek of Wartenberg,
who was leader of the Hussite league, and wTho strove to check
excesses by a policy of toleration. But men needed guarantees
1 ' Cum magno clamore et rugitu quasi leonis.' Laur. de Brezina (in
Hofler, GeschichtscJireiber cler Husitischen Bemegung, i. 341), who is the autho"
rity for the above account.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
for the future. The Diet which met in September 1419, and
in which the Hussites had a majority, demanded of Sigismund
that he should grant full liberty for the Utraquist preaching and
ceremonies, and should confer office in the State on the Tchecks
only. Sigismund returned the ambiguous answer that he
hoped soon to come in person, and would govern according to
the old customs of his father, Charles IV. No doubt the
answer was pleasant to the patriotic aspirations which their
request contained ; but men significantly observed that there
were no Hussites in Charles IV.'s days.
Queen Sophia was obliged to write repeatedly to Sigismund,
begging him to be more explicit ; but only drew from him a
proclamation recommending order and quiet, and promising to
examine into the Utraquist question when he arrived. Sigis
mund hoped to gain time till he had an army ready ; he
hoped to win over the Hussite nobles by a display of confidence
meanwhile, and slowly gather round himself all the moderate
party.
But Sigismund did not know the strength nor the political
sagacity of the leaders of the extreme party, which had been
slowly but surely forming itself since the death of Hus. The
moderate party were men of the same views as Hus, who were
faithful to an ideal of the Church, repelled the charge of heresy,
and still hoped for tolerance, at least in time, for their own
opinions. With men such as these Sigismund could easily
deal. But the extreme party, who were called Taborites from
their open-air meetings, recognised that the breach with Eome
was irreparable, and were prepared to carry their opinions into
all questions, religious, political, and social alike. Their posi
tion was one of open revolt against authority both in Church
and State ; they rested on the assertion of the rights of the in
dividual, and appealed to the national sentiment of the masses
of the people. At the head of this party stood two men of re
markable ability, Nicolas of Hus and John Zizka, both sprung
from the smaller nobility, and both trained in affairs at Wenzel's
court. Of these, Nicolas had the eye of a statesman ; Zizka the
eloquence, the enthusiasm, and the generalship needed for a
leader of men. Nicolas of Hus saw from the first the real
bearing of the situation ; he saw that if the extreme party of
the reformers did not prepare for the inevitable conflict they
DIET OF BRUNN, 1419. 4
would gradually be isolated, and would be crushed by main CHAP.
force. Zizka set himself to the task of organising the enthu- , , ' _
siasm of the Bohemian peasants into the stuff which would
form a disciplined army. Like Cromwell in a later day, he
used the seriousness that comes of deep religious convictions
as the basis of a strong military organisation, against which the
chivalry of Germany should break itself in vain. While Sigis-
mund was delaying, Zizka was drilling. On October 25 he seized
the Wyssehrad, a fortress on the hill commanding the Neustadt
of Prag, and began a struggle to obtain entire possession of the
city. But the excesses of the Taborites, and the fair promises
of the Queen-regent, confirmed the party of order. Prag was
not yet ready for the Taborites, and on November 1 1 , Zizka and
his troops fell back from the city.
In this state of things Sigismund advanced from Hungary Diet of
into Moravia, and in December held a Diet at Briinn. Thither December
went Queen Sophia and the chief of the Bohemian nobles ; 1419t
thither, too, went the ambassadors of the city of Prag, to seek
confirmation for their promised freedom of religion. Sigis-
mund's attitude was still ambiguous ; he received them
graciously, did not forbid them to celebrate the communion
in their own fashion in their own houses, but ordered them to
keep peace in their city, submit to the royal authority, lay aside
their arms, and he would treat them gently. The burghers of
Prag submitted, and destroyed the fortifications which menaced
the royal castle. Sigismund could view the results of his
policy with satisfaction. The submission of Prag spread terror
on all sides; l the power of Sigismund impressed men's imagina
tion ; the Catholics began to rejoice in anticipation of a speedy
triumph.
From Briinn Sigismund advanced into Silesia, where he was Prag re-
received with loyal enthusiasm, and many of the German against
nobles met him at Breslau. Sigismund became convinced
of his own power and importance and let drop the mask
too soon. At Breslau he put down the Utraquists, enquired
severely into a municipal revolt, which was insignificant com
pared to what had happened in Prag, caused twenty-three
citizens to be executed for rebellion, and on March 17 allowed
1 ' Timor magnus ac pavor veritati adhagrentes invasit/ says Brezina,
Hofler, i. 348.
:2 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK the Papal legate to proclaim a crusade against the Hussites.
_11iL..^ The result of this false step was to lose at once the support of
the moderate party, and to alienate the national feeling of the
Bohemians. The people of Prag issued a manifesto calling all
who loved the law of Christ and their country's liberties to join
in resisting Sigismund's crusade. The nobles, headed by
Cenek of Wartenberg, denounced Sigismund as their enemy,
and not their king. The country was at once in arms, and the
pent-up fanaticism was let loose. Churches and monasteries
were destroyed on every side. No country was so rich in
splendid buildings and treasures of ecclesiastical ornament as
was Bohemia ; l but a wave of ruthless devastation now swept
across it which has left only faint traces of the former splendour.
Again excesses awoke alarm among the moderate nobles.
Cenek of Wartenberg went back to Sigismund's side ; and the
burghers of Prag saw themselves consequently in a dangerous
plight, as the two castles between which their city lay, the
Wyssehrad and the Hradschin, again declared for Sigismund.
As they could not defend their city, they again turned to
thoughts of submission, in return for an amnesty and permission
to celebrate the communion under both kinds. But Sigismund
had now advanced into Bohemia and proudly looked for a speedy
triumph. He demanded that they should lay aside their arms
aud submit. This harshness was a fatal error on Sigismund's
part, as it drove the burghers of Prag into alliance with the
extreme party of Zizka.
Zizka for- As yet this alliance had not been made ; as yet Prag wished
Tabor. to proceed on the old constitutional lines. It wished to recog
nise the legitimate king, and obtain from him tolerance for the
new religious beliefs. If this were impossible, there was nothing
left save to throw in their lot with those who wished to create
a new constitution and a new society. Zizka had been prepar
ing for the contest. He remorselessly pursued a policy which
would deprive the Catholics of their resources, and would
compel Bohemia to follow the course in which it had engaged.
Monasteries were everywhere pillaged and destroyed ; Church
property was seized ; the lands of the orthodox party were ruth-
1 ' Nullum ego regnum aetate nostra in tota Europa tarn frequentibus, tarn
augustis, tarn ornatis templis ditatum fuisse quam Bohemicum reor,' says
Sylvius, Hist. Boh. ch. xxxvi.
REPULSE OF SIGISMUND.
lessly devastated. Sigismund, if he entered Bohemia, would
find no resources to help him. Zizka so acted as to make the
breach at once irreparable ; he wished to leave no chance of
conciliation, except on condition of recognising all that he had
done. Moreover, he established a centre for his authority.
When he failed to seize Prag as a stronghold, he sought out a
spot which would form a capital for the revolution. A chance
movement made him master of the town of Austi, near which
were the remains of an old fortified place. Zizka's eye at once
recognised its splendid military situation, lying on the top of a
hill, which was formed into a peninsula by two rivers which
flow round its rocky base. Zizka set to work to build up the
old walls, and strengthen by art the strong natural position.
The approach to the peninsula, which was only thirty feet wide,
was rendered secure by a triple wall and a deep ditch. Towers
and defences crowned the whole line of the wall.1 It was not a
city, but a permanent camp, which Zizka succeeded in making,
and to which was given the characteristic name of Tabor.
Henceforth the name of Taboriteswas confined to Zizka's followers.
Before the danger which threatened them with entire
destruction, as Sigismund's army numbered at least 80,000 men kow. July
from almost every nation in Europe, all parties in Bohemia
drew together. The troops of Zizka entered Prag, and the
burghers destroyed such parts of their city as were most open
to attack from the Wyssehrad and the Hradschin, which were
held by the Royalists. The hill of Witkow, on the north-east
of the city, was still held by the Hussites, and against that
Sigismund directed an attack on July 14. The attention of the
enemy was distracted by assaults in different quarters, and
Sigismund's soldiers pressed up the hill. Butatower, defended
by twenty-six Taborites, with two women and a girl who fought
like heroes, kept the troops at bay till a band of Zizka's soldiers
came to their aid, and charged with such fury that the Germans
fled in dismay. Sigismund learned with shame and anger the
powerlessness of his great host to contend against a people
actuated by national and religious zeal. Their repulse kindled
in the Germans a desire for vengeance, and they massacred
the Bohemian inhabitants of the neighbouring towns and
1 JEn. Sylvius, Hist, Boll. ch. xl., gives a graphic description of Tabor,
which he visited himself. ' Nos qualem vidimus descripsimns.'
44
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Sigismund
driven
from
Bohemia.
Marc a
1421.
villages. When the Bohemian nobles of the King's party
resented this display of hatred against the entire Bohemian
race, Sigismund's unwieldy army began to break up. There
was again a talk of negotiation, and the people of Prag sent to
Sigismund their demands, which are known as the Four Articles
of Prag, and formed the charter of the Hussite creed. They asked
for freedom of preaching, the communion under both kinds, the
reduction of the clergy to apostolic poverty, and the severe repres
sion of all open sins. These articles were a worthy exposition
of the principles of the Keformation: the first asserted the
freedom of man to search the Scriptures for himself ; the second
attacked one of the great outposts of sacerdotalism, the denial
of the cup to the laity ; the third cut at the root of the abuses
of the ecclesiastical system, and the fourth claimed for Chris
tianity the power to regenerate and regulate society. There
was some semblance of discussion on these points ; but there
could be no agreement between those who rested on the
authority of the Church and those who entirely disregarded it.
These negotiations, however, gave still further pretext for
many of Sigismund's troops to leave his army. Resolving to
do something, Sigismund on July 28 had himself crowned King
of Bohemia, a step which gave greater appearance of legitimacy
to his position. He strove to bind to his interests the
Bohemian nobles by gifts of the royal domains and of the
treasures of the churches. Meanwhile the Hussites besieged
the Wyssehrad and succeeded in cutting off its supplies. It
was reduced to extremities when Sigismund made an effort to
relieve it. The chivalry of Moravia, Hungary, and Bohemia
were checked in their fiery charge by the steady organisation
of the Taborites, and more than four hundred of the bravest
nobles were slaughtered by the flails of the peasants as they
struggled in the vineyards and marsh at the bottom of the hill.
Sigismund fled, and the Wyssehrad surrendered on November 1.
After this, Sigismund's cause was lost, and he was regarded as
the murderer of the nobles who fell in the disastrous battle of
the Wyssehrad, The troops of Zizka overran Bohemia, and the
Catholic inhabitants fled before them. Town after town sub
mitted, and in March 1421 Sigismund left Bohemia in despair.
He had hopelessly mismanaged affairs. He had alternated
between .a policy of conciliation and one of repression. He had
RELIGIOUS PARTIES IN BOHEMIA. 45
alienated the Bohemians through the cruelty of his German CHAP.
followers, and had lost the support of the Germans through his .. , * ' _,
anxiety to win the Bohemian nobles. Finally, his hope of over
coming the people by the help of the native nobles had igno-
miniously failed and had covered Sigismund with disgrace.
The Utraquists were now masters of Bohemia, and the Bohemia
whole land was banded together in resistance to Catholicism
and Sigismund. The nobles joined with the people, and Prag
was triumphant : even the Archbishop Conrad accepted the June 1421.
Four Articles of Prag on April 21, 1421. The movement spread
into Moravia, which joined with Bohemia in its revolution.
The next step was the organisation of the newly-won freedom. A
Diet held at Caslau in June accepted the Four Articles of Prag,
declared Sigismund an enemy of Bohemia and unworthy of the
crown, appointed a committee of twenty representatives of the
different estates and parties to undertake the government of
the land until it had a king, and left the organisation of
religious matters to a synod of clergy which was soon to be
convoked. Sigismund's ambassadors offering toleration, scarcely
obtained a hearing : the offer came a year too late.
Although Bohemia was united in opposition to Sigismund Religious
and Catholicism, it was but natural that the divergencies of
opinion within itself should grow wider as it felt itself more
free from danger. The division between the Conservative and
Kadical party became more pronounced. The Conservatives,
who were called Calixtins or Utraquists from their ceremonial,
or Pragers from their chief seat, held by the position of Hus, —
a position of orthodoxy in belief, with a reformation of ecclesi
astical practice carried out according to Scripture. They
altered as little as possible in the old ecclesiastical arrange
ments, retained the mass service with the communion under
both kinds, and observed the festivals of the Church.1 Against
them were set the Eadicals, the Taborites, amongst whom there
were several parties. The most moderate, at the head of which
stood Zizka, differed from the Pragers not so much in belief as
in the determined spirit with which they were prepared to
1 The Papal legate reported to the Council of Basel : (Mon. Condi, i.
141.) ' Quod in veteri Praga in omni loco ecclesiastico non alia vidit in Bohe-
morum ceremoniis, nisi sicut in nostris ecclesiis, excepta practica communi-
candi sub utraque speoie.'
46
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Flight of
the Ger
man army
from Saaz.
1421.
defend their opinions and carry them out in practice. The
thorough Taborites cast aside all ecclesiastical authority and
asserted the sufficiency of Scripture, for the right understand
ing of which the individual believer was directly illuminated
by the Holy Ghost. They rejected Transubstantiation, and
asserted that Christ was present in the elements only in a
figurative way. Besides these were various extreme sects, who
held that the Millennium had begun, that God existed only in
the hearts of the believers, and the devil in the hearts of the
wicked. Most notorious amongst these was the small sect of
the Adamites, who took possession of a small island on the
river Nezarka and gave themselves up to a life of communism
which degenerated into shameless excesses. Against these ex
treme sectaries the Pragers and Zizka set up a standard of
orthodoxy, and proceeded to measures of repression. Fifty of
both sexes were burned by Zizka on the same day : they
entered the flames with a smile, saying, ' To-day will we reign
with Christ.' The island of the Adamites was stormed, and the
entire body exterminated. Martinek Hauska, the chief teacher
who opposed Transubstantiation, was burned as a heretic in Prag.
It was indeed needful that Bohemia should retain the ap
pearance of unity if she were to succeed in maintaining her
new religious freedom. Sigismund was disheartened by the
failure of his first attempt, and was ready to wait and try the
results of moderation. But the German electors and the Pope
were by no means willing to give up Bohemia as lost. The
four Khenish Electors formed a league against the heretics :
the Papal legate, Cardinal Branda, journeyed through Germany
to kindle the zeal of the faithful. Sigismund was openly
denounced as a favourer of heresy, and was compelled to bestir
himself. It was agreed that the Electors should lead an army
from Germany, and Sigismund should advance from Hungary
through Moravia and unite with them. In September Ger
many poured an army of 200,000 men into Bohemia ; but
Sigismund tarried and deferred his coming. Loud accusations
of treachery were brought against him by the angry princes,
and disputes sprang up among them. The vast army wasted
its energies in the siege of Saaz, and began gradually to dis
perse ; the news of Zizka's advance turned it to shameful flight.
It was said ironically that such was the horror which the Ger-
ZIZKA'S MILITARY SYSTEM. 47
man princes felt against the heretics, that they could not even CHAP.
endure to see them.1 >_ , ' _,
When Sigismund had finished his preparations, he also in Military
December entered Bohemia with a formidable army of 90,000
men, well armed, trained in warfare, led by Pipo of Florence,
one of the most renowned generals of the age. Zizka put forth
all his powers of generalship to save Bohemia from the im
pending danger. Zizka, who had been one-eyed for years, had
lost his remaining eye at the siege of the little castle of Eabi
in August. He was now entirely blind, but his blindness only
gave greater clearness to his mental vision, and he could direct
the movements of a campaign with greater precision than be
fore. The very fact that he had to be dependent on others for
information led him to impress more forcibly his own spirit on
those around him, and so train up a school of great generals
to succeed him. Under Zizka's guidance the democratic feel
ing of the Bohemians had been made the basis of a new mili
tary organisation which was now to try its strength against the
chivalry of the Middle Ages. Strict discipline prevailed amongst
Zizka's troops, and he was able to meet the dash of the feudal forces
with the coolness of a trained army which could perform com
plicated manoeuvres with unerring precision. He paid especial
attention to artillery, and was the first great general to realise
its importance. Moreover, he adapted the old war chariots to
the purposes of defence. His line of march was protected on
the flanks by waggons fastened to one another by iron chains.
These waggons readily formed the fortifications of a camp or
served as protection against an attack. In battle the soldiers,
when repulsed, could retire behind their cover, and form again
their scattered lines. The waggons were manned by the bravest
troops, and their drivers were trained to form them according
to letters of the alphabet ; so that the Hussites, having the key,
easily knew their way amongst the lines, while the enemy, if
they forced their way, were lost in an inextricable labyrinth. At
times the waggons, filled with heavy stones, were rolled down hill
on the enemy's ranks ; when once those ranks were broken, the
1 Thomas Ebendorfer of Haselbach, quoted by Palacky, Geschichte von
jBohnwn, iii. 2, 254, from the MS. Liber Augustalis : ' Adeo enim eis Bohenii
erant abominabiles ut non solum eos ferire sed ne quidem potuerunt eos
contueri.'
48 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK waggons were rapidly driven in, and cut in two the enemy's
. IIL . line. It was a new kind of warfare, which spread terror and
helplessness among the crusading hosts.
Sigismund This new organisation was sorely tried when, on December
Kutten^ 21? Sigismund's army advanced against Kuttenberg, and met
berg. Janu- Zizka's forces hard by its walls. The waggons of the Bohemians
proved an impregnable defence, and their artillery did great
execution against the Hungarians. But treachery was at work
in Kuttenberg, and opened the gates to Sigismund. Next day
the Bohemians found themselves shut in on all sides, and their
foes prepared to reduce them by hunger. But in the darkness
of the night Zizka drew his troops together, and with a charge
of his waggons broke through the enemy's line and made good
his retreat. Eapidly gathering reinforcements, Zizka returned
to Kuttenberg on January 6, 1422, and fell suddenly upon the
centre of the unsuspecting army. A panic seized the Germans ;
Sigismund fled ignominiously, and his example was followed by
all. Zizka followed, and, aided by the wintry weather, inflicted
severe losses on the invaders. More than 12,000 men are said
to have perished. The second crusade against the Hussites
failed even more signally than the first.
Sigismund Bohemia had now beaten back both Sigismund, who came
Korybut ^o asser^ njs hereditary rights to the crown, and the German
goes to princes, who viewed with alarm the dismemberment of the
1422.* ay empire. There remained the more difficult task of organising
its political position. The great statesman, Nicolas of Hus, was
dead, and Zizka had the talents of a general rather than a
politician. His own democratic ideas were too strong for him
to put himself at the head of the State, and bring about the
necessary union between the Pragers and the Taborites. The
Bohemian nobles and the Conservative party generally desired
to take the management of affairs out of the hands of the Ta
borites, and re-establish a monarchy. Already they had offered
the kingdom to Ladislas, King of Poland, who shrank from in
curring the charge of heresy, which would hinder him in his
constant warfare against the Teutonic knights in Prussia. But
Witold, Grand Duke of Lithuania, a man of high political
sagacity, had before his eyes the possibility of a great Slavic
confederacy which would beat back all German aggression. He
saw in the Hussite movement a means of bridging over the
FAILURE OF THE POLISH ALLIANCE. 49
religious differences between the Latin and Greek Churches, CHAP.
which was an obstacle to the union of Prussia and Poland. . IIL _ .
These plans of Witold created great alarm in Germany, and many
efforts were made to thwart them ; but Witold took advantage
of events, announced to the Pope that he wished to restore
order in Bohemia, and in May 1422 sent the nephew of Ladis-
las of Poland, Sigismund Korybut, with an army to Prag.
Prag, torn with internal dissensions, accepted Korybut as a
deliverer. Zizka recognised him as ruler of the land, and
Korybut showed zeal and moderation in winning over all parties
to his side.
This union of Bohemia and Poland was a standing menace Martin V.
to Germany, and a diet held at Niirnberg in July appointed p0ffs^ t
Frederick of Brandenburg to lead a new expedition into ?Ilianc?'
Bohemia. Frederick was keenly alive to the gravity of the 1422.
situation, which indeed threatened himself in Brandenburg.
He endeavoured to gather together both an army for a crusade
and a permanent army of occupation, which was to be left in
Bohemia. But Germany's internal weakness and constant dis
sensions prevented Frederick from accomplishing anything.
He led a few soldiers into Bohemia, spent some time in nego
tiations, and then returned. Nor was Korybut's position in
Bohemia a strong one. He failed in his military undertakings ;
his attempts at conciliation alienated the extreme Taborites ;
Zizka maintained an attitude of neutrality towards him. Mean
while Martin V. was untiring in his endeavours to break down
the alliance between Poland and Bohemia. He exhorted the
Polish bishops to labour for that purpose. He wrote to Ladislas
and Witold, pointing out the political dangers which beset them
if they strayed from Catholicism.1 Sigismund, on his part, was
willing to purchase an alliance with Poland by abandoning
the cause of the Teutonic Knights. The combined efforts of
Martin V. and Sigismund were successful. Witold wrote to the
Bohemians that his desire had been to reconcile them with the
Roman Church ; as they were obstinate, he was driven to aban
don them to their fate. Korybut was recalled, and left Prag
on December 24. The great idea of a Slavonic Empire and
Church was at an end, and the future of Poland was decided
1 See his letter dated May 13, U22, in Palacky, Urkundliche
i. 199.
VOL. II. E
50
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Uncom
promising
temp3r of
Zizka
and the
Taborites.
1423-4.
Death of
Zizka.
October
1424.
by its cowardice at this great crisis. Henceforth it was con
demned to the isolation which it had chosen through want of
foresight.
The departure of Korybut and freedom from invasion
awakened amongst the Bohemians the differences which danger
made them forget. The Pragers and the Taborites stood in
stronger opposition to one another. The Pragers were more
disposed to negotiation, and hoped that they might still find
room for their opinions under the shadow of the authority of
the Church. Zizka had grown more convinced of the futility of
compromise, and a stern spirit of resistance took possession of
him and his followers. The year 1423 is full of the records of
civil war and devastation in Bohemia, and Zizka spread fire and
slaughter even in the neighbouring lands of Moravia and Hungary.
The year 1424 is known in Bohemian annals as ' Zizka's bloody
year.' He swept like a storm over towns and villages of those
who wished for compromise, and inflicted a sore defeat on
the forces of the Pragers who were following on his track.
The Pragers in dismay looked for a leader, and found him in
Korybut, who in June 1424 returned to Prag, no longer as
the deputy of Witold and the Governor of Bohemia, but as
a personal adventurer at the head of the moderate party. Zizka
advanced against Prag ; and the capital of Bohemia, the seat of
Hus and his teaching, was in danger of a terrible siege. But
moderate counsels prevailed at the last moment to avert this
crowning calamity. Zizka withdrew and soon after died of the
plague on October 11. His followers bewailed the loss of one
who was to them both leader and father ; they took the name of
Orphans in sign of their bereavement.
Zizka was a man of profound, even fanatical, piety, with
great decision and energy, who clearly saw the issue that lay
before the Bohemians if they wished to maintain their religious
freedom. But he was a man of action rather than reflection.
He had the qualities necessary to head a party, but not those
necessary to lead a people. He could solve the problem for
himself by a rigorous determination to be watchful and to per
sist ; but his range of ideas was not large enough to enable
him to form any policy which would organise the nation to
keep what it had won. Amid Bohemian parties he maintained
a strong position, opposed to extremes but convinced of the
DEATH OF ZIZKA. 51
hopelessness of conciliation. As a general he is almost un- CHAP.
rivalled, for he knew how to train out of raw materials an in- s ill-
vincible army, and he never lost a battle. He could drive back
hosts of invaders and could maintain order within the limits of
Bohemia ; but he lacked the political sense that could bind
a people together. His position became more and more a
purely personal one ; his resolute character degenerated into
savagery ; and his last energies were spent in trying to im
press upon all his own personal convictions without any con
sideration of the exact issue to which they would lead. With
out Zizka Bohemia would never have made good her resistance
to the Church and to Sigismund. It was his misfortune rather
than his fault that he had not also the political genius to
organise that resistance on a secure basis for the future.
By Zizka's death the party opposed to reconciliation with Desire of
Eome lost its chief strength. The Taborites divided into two — rate party
the Orphans, who held by the opinions of Zizka, and were divided
from the Pragers rather on social and political than on religious
grounds — and the extreme Taborites, who denied Transubstan-
tiation and were entirely opposed to the Church system. But
both these parties were feeble, and spent their energies in con
flicts with one another. The field was open for Korybut and
the Pragers to continue negotiations for peace and reconcilia
tion. Bohemia was growing weary of anarchy. The first fervour
of religious zeal had worn away, the first enthusiasm had been
disillusioned. Men were beginning to count the cost of their
political isolation, of the devastation of their land by foes with
out and quarrels within, of the ruin of their commerce.
Against this they had little to set as a counterpoise. The
exactions of feudal lords were as easy to bear as the exactions
of a plundering army ; the equality which they had hoped to
find through religion was not yet attained. Though victorious
in the field, the great mass of the Bohemian people longed for
peace almost on any terms.
During the year 1425 Korybut pursued his negotiations, Procopius
and was engaged in paving the way for reconciliation with
Rome. The people were not unwilling, but the army still
remained true to its faith. As they felt that danger was June 142«.
menacing them, the Taborites again drew together, reasserted
52
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Failure of
Korybut's
plans for
reconcilia
tion. 1427.
their principles and prepared to wage war. Besides the danger
from half-heartedness at home, two active enemies harassed the
Bohemian border. Albert of Austria attacked Moravia, and
Frederick of Meissen, whom Sigismund had made Elector of
Saxony, was winning back Silesia. A new leader arose to guide
the renewed vigour of the Taborites, Procopius, called the Great
to distinguish him from others of the same name. Procopius,
like Zizka, was sprung from the lower nobility, and was a priest
at the time when he first attached himself to the party of Hus.
Without possessing the military genius of Zizka, he knew how
to manage the army which Zizka had created ; and he had a
larger mind and was capable of greater plans than his prede
cessor. Procopius was averse from war, and as a priest never
bore arms nor took part in the battles which he directed. He
wished for peace, but an honourable and enduring peace, which
would guarantee to Bohemia her religious freedom. Peace, he
saw, could only be won by arms ; it was not enough to repel
the invaders, Bohemia must secure its borders by acting on the
offensive. He led his troops up the Elbe to the siege of
Aussig. Frederick of Saxony was absent at a Diet at Niirnberg,
but his wife Catharine called for succours and gathered an army
of 70,000 men. The Bohemian troops, reinforced by Korybut,
amounted only to 25,000. On June 16, 1426, was fought the
battle under the walls of Aussig. The Bohemians entrenched
themselves behind their waggons, and the furious onslaught of
the German knights forced the first line. But the artillery
opened on their flank; the Bohemians from their waggons
dragged the knights from their horses with long lances, and
dashed them to the ground. The German lines were broken,
and the Bohemians rushed in and turned them to flight. The
slaughter that ensued was terrible : 10,000 Germans were left
dead upon the field. Procopius wished to lead his victorious
army farther, so as to teach the Germans a lesson ; but the
Moderates refused to follow, and the campaign came to an end
without any other results.
As usual, a victory united Germany and disunited Bohemia.
Korybut pursued his schemes for union with Kome, and wrote
to Martin V. asking him to receive Bohemian envoys for this
purpose. Martin V. expressed his willingness, provided they
would abide by the decision of the Holy See, which was, how-
HENKY OF WINCHESTER IN BOHEMIA. 53
ever, ready to receive information of their desires.1 Korybut CHAP.
hoped that the Pope would abandon Sigismund and recognise ^J^l...
himself as King of Bohemia in return for his services to the
Church. But Korybut was not yet firm enough in his position
to carry out his plan. The dissension between the Taborites
and the Pragers was not yet so profound that the Moderates as
a body were willing to submit unreservedly to Eome. Kory
but's plans were known in Prag, and a party formed itself which, •
while in favour of reconciliation, stood firm by che Four Articles.
On Maundy Thursday, April 17, 1427, an eloquent and
popular priest, John Rokycana, denounced in a sermon the
treachery of Korybut. The people flew to arms, drove out the
Poles, and made Korybut a prisoner. His plans had entirely
failed, and the victory of the moderate party over him neces
sarily turned to the profit of Procopius and the Taborites.
Procopius was now ruler of Bohemia, and carried out his Failur
policy of terrifying his opponents by destructive raids into ousa(je Of
Austria, Lusatia, Moravia, and Silesia. Germany in alarm 1427-
again began to raise forces ; and Martin V. hoped to gain greater
importance for the expedition by appointing as Papal legate
Henry Beaufort, Bishop of Winchester, whom he made Cardinal
for the purpose. Beaufort's experience of affairs and high
political position made him a fit man to interest England and
France in the cause of the Church. In July 1427 a strong
army entered Bohemia and laid siege to Mies ; but the soldiers
were undisciplined and the leaders were disunited. On the
approach of Procopius a panic seized the army, and it fled in
wild confusion to Tachau. There Henry of Winchester, who
had stayed behind in Germany, met the fugitives. He was
the only man of courage and resolution in the army. He im
plored them to stand and meet the foe ; he unfolded the Papal
banner and even set up a crucifix to shame the fugitives.1
They stayed and formed in battle order, but the appearance of
the Bohemian troops again filled them with dread, and a second
time they fled in panic terror. In vain Henry of Winchester
tried to rally them. He seized the flag of the Empire, tore it
1 See letter of Martin V. to Sigismund, in Raynaldus, 1427, § 10: ' Ipsos
volebamus audire, ita scilicet, si venirent parati stare nostras determinationi,
nobis et ecclesise de csetero parituri.'
2 Andrew of Ratisbou, in Hofler, ii. 454 ; i. 578.
54
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL
BOOK
III.
Proposals
for pacifi
cation.
1429.
in pieces and flung them before the princes ; but at last was
himself driven to flee, lest he should fall into the hands of the
heretics.
This disgraceful retreat did not bring men's minds nearer
to peace. Martin V. urged a new expedition, and Sigismund
was not sorry to see the Electors in difficulties. In Bohemia
the party of peace made a vain effort to raise Prag in the name
of Korybut ; but the rising was put down without the help of
Procopius, and Korybut was sent back to Poland in September
1427. Procopius rallied round him the entire Hussite party,
and, true to his policy of extorting an honourable peace, signal
ised the year 1428 by destructive raids into Austria, Bavaria,
Silesia, and Saxony. After each expedition he returned home
and waited to see if proposals for peace were likely to be made.
In April 1429 a conference was arranged between Sigismund
and some of the Hussite leaders, headed by Procopius, at
Pressburg, in Hungary. Sigismund proposed a truce for two
years till the assembling of the Council at Basel, before which
the religious differences might be laid.1 The Hussites answered
that their differences arose because the Church had departed
from the example of Christ and the Apostles : the Council of
Constance had shown them what they had to expect from
Councils; they demanded an impartial judge between the
Council and themselves, and this judge was the Holy Scripture
and writings founded thereon. The proposals of Sigismund
were referred to a Diet at Prag, and answer was made that the
Bohemians were ready to submit their case to a Council, pro
vided it contained representatives of the Greek and Armenian
Churches, which received the Communion under both kinds,
and provided it undertook to judge according to the Word of
Grod, not the will of the Pope. Their request was equitable
but impracticable. It was clearly impossible for them to sub
mit to the decision of a Council composed entirely of their
opponents ; yet they could have little hope that their proposal
to construct an impartial tribunal would be accepted.2
The negotiations came to nothing. Indeed, Sigismund was
busy at the same time in summoning the forces of the Empire to
1 Palacky, Urkundliche Beitrage, ii. 22.
2 See ibid. ii. 50, and Andrew of Ratisbon, Dialoqus, in Hofler, i. 582.
MOVEMENT IN FAVOUK OF A COUNCIL. 55
advance again against Bohemia. Henry of Winchester had
gathered a force of 5,000 English horsemen, and in July 1429
landed in Flanders on his way to Germany. But religious con- DiY,ersi?n
siderations were driven to give way to political. The unex- Beaufort's
pected successes of Jeanne Dare, the raising of the siege of ^jfc e
Orleans, the coronation of Charles VII. at Rheims, gave a
sudden check to the English power in France. Winchester's
soldiers were ordered to the relief of their countrymen ; the
Cardinal's influence could not persuade his men to prefer reli
gious zeal to patriotic sentiment. The Catholics in Germany
broke into a wail of lamentation when they saw the forces of
the Papal legate diverted to a war with France.1
Grermany was feeble, and Bohemia was again agitated by Bohemian
a struggle. The peace party in Prag had for its quarters the Germany.
Old Town, and the more pronounced Hussites the New Town. 1430t
The two quarters of the city were on the point of open hostility
when Procopius again united Bohemia for a war of invasion.
The year 1430 was terrible in the annals of Germany, for the
Hussite army carried devastation into the most flourishing pro
vinces of the Empire. They advanced along the Elbe into
Saxony, and penetrated as far as Meissen ; they invaded Fran-
conia and threatened with siege the stately town of Niirnberg.
Wherever they went the land was laid waste, and fire and
slaughter were spread on every side.
The policy of Procopius was beginning to have its effect. The
The Hussite movement was the great question which attracted
the attention of Europe. Hussite manifestoes were circulated renders a
i -i .1 11 Council
m every land ; the new opinions were discussed openly and inevitable.
in many places met with considerable sympathy.2 The Hussites
complained that their opponents attacked them without really
knowing their beliefs, which were founded only on Holy Scrip
ture ; they invited all men to acquaint themselves with their
opinions ; they appealed to the success of their arms as a proof
that God was on their side. The opinion began to prevail that,
1 See the letters of Martin V. to Charles VII. of France, in Kaynaldus,
1429, §§ 16, 17.
2 John of Segovia (Hon. Condi, ii. 5) gives an account of these Hussite
letters in Spain : ' Premittebant se desiderare, ut illis aperiret intellectum
Deus illuminans corda eorum, narrantes quomodo jam a pluribus annis inter
se et illos magna fuisset discordia, et utrinque nobiles et ignobiles multi fatui
sua corpora perdidissc.-t, &c.'
56
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Startling
document
in favour
of the
Council.
143J.
after all, argument and not arms was the proper mode of meeting
heresy, particularly when arms had proved a failure. Martin V.,
who hated the very name of a Council,1 was again haunted at
the end of 1 430 by the face of John of Kagusa, who had been
negotiating with Sigismund that he should combine with the
University of Paris to urge on the Pope a speedy summons of
the Council to Basel. Soon after John's arrival in Kome, on
the morning of November 8, the day on which Martin V. was
to create three new cardinals, a document was found affixed to
the door of the Papal palace which caused a great sensation in
Rome.
' Whereas it is notorious to all Christendom that since the
Council of Constance, an untold number of Christians have
wandered from the faith by means of the Hussites, and mem
bers are daily being lopped off from the body of the Church
militant, nor is there any one of all the sons whom she begat to
help or console her ; now, therefore, two most serene princes
direct to all Christian princes the following conclusions, ap
proved by learned doctors both of canon and of civil law, which
they have undertaken to defend in the Council to be cele
brated according to the decree of Constance in March next.'
Then followed the conclusions, which set forth that the Catholic
faith must be preferred before man, whoever he be ; that princes
secular as well as ecclesiastical are bound to defend the faith ;
that as former heresies, the Novatian, Arian, Nestorian, and
others, were extirpated by Councils, so must that of the Hus
sites ; that every Christian under pain of mortal sin must strive
for the celebration of a Council for this purpose ; if popes or
cardinals put hindrances in the way they must be reckoned as
favourers of heresy ; if the Pope does not summon the Council
at the appointed time those present at it ought to withdraw
from his obedience, and proceed against those who try to hin
der it as against favourers of heresy. This startling document
was currently supposed to be authorised by Frederick of Bran
denburg, Albert of Austria, and Lewis of Brieg.2
Several of the Cardinals, chief of whom was Condulmier, the
1 ' In immensum nomen concilii abhorrebat.'— John of Ragusa, Man. Con.
i. 66.
2 It is given in Martene, Ampl. Collectio, viii. 48, in a letter from a
Burgundian envoy ; also by John of Ragusa, Hon. Condi, i. 65.
BEGINNING OF THE COUNCIL OF BASEL. 57
future pope, urged on Martin Y. to comply with the prevailing CHAP.
wish. But Martin V. wished again to try the chance of war, , _ L1^ _ ,
and awaited the results of a diet which Sigismund had sum- Cardinal
moned to Niirnberg. On January 11, 1431, he appointed a appointed
new legate for Germany, Ofiuliano Cesarini, whom he had just Ge?manv.
created Cardinal. Cesarini was sprung from a poor but noble January
family in Rome, and his talents attracted Martin Y.'s notice. He
was a man of large mind, great personal holiness, and deep learn
ing. His appearance and manner were singularly attractive,
and all who came in contact with him were impressed by the
genuineness and nobility of his character. If any man could
succeed in awakening enthusiasm in Germany it was Cesarini.1
Before Cesarini's departure to Germany, Martin V. had been Beginnings
brought with difficulty to recognise the necessity of the assembly
of the Council at Basel, and commissioned Cesarini to pre- Basel.
side at its opening. The Bull authorising this was dated Feb- juiy HJi.
ruary 1, and conferred full powers on Cesarini to change the
place of the Council at his will, to confirm its decrees and do all
things necessary for the honour and peace of the Church. This
Bull reached Cesarini at Niirnberg, shortly after the news of
Martin V.'s death. The Diet of Xiirnberg voted an expedition
into Bohemia, and Cesarini eagerly travelled through Germany
preaching the crusade. At the same time steps were taken
to open the Council at Basel. On the last day of February a
Burgundian abbot read before the assembled clergy of Basel the
Bulls constituting the Council, and then solemnly pronounced
that he was ready for conciliar business. In April, representa
tives of the University of Paris and a few other prelates began
to arrive ; but Cesarini sent to them John of Ragusa on April 30,
to explain that the Bohemian expedition was the object for
which he had been primarily commissioned by the Pope, and
was the great means of extirpating heresy. He besought them
to send envoys to help him in his dealings with the Bohemians,
and meanwhile to use their best endeavours to assemble others
to the Council. The envoys of the Council, at the head of whom
was John of Ragusa, followed Sigismund to Eger, where he
held a conference with the Hussites. The conference was
only meant to divert the attention of the Bohemians, and it was
1 See his character as described by Yespasiano, and Paulus Jovius in the
Elorjia Virornm
58
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Cesariui's
appeal to
the Bohe
mians.
Juh- 5,
1431.
Rout of the
Crusaders
at Tauss.
August 14,
1431.
speedily ended by a demand on the part of the envoys that the
Bohemians should submit their case unconditionally to the Coun
cil's decision. Sigismund returned to Niirnberg on May 22, and
the German forces rapidly assembled. There were complaints at
the legate's absence ; Cesarini's zeal had led him as far as
Koln, whence he hastened to Niirnberg on June 27. There he
found a messenger from Eugenius IV., urging the prosecution
of the Council, and bidding him, if it could be done without
hindrance to the cause at heart, to leave the Bohemian expedi
tion and proceed at once to Basel. But Cesarini's heart and
soul were now in the crusade. He determined to pursue his
course, and on July 3 appointed John of Palomar, an auditor of
the Papal court, and John of Eagusa, to preside over the Council
as his deputies in his absence.
On July 5, Cesarini addressed an appeal to the Bohe
mians, protesting his wish to bring peace rather than a
sword. Were they not all Christians ? Why should they
stray from their holy mother the Church? Could a hand
ful of men pretend to know better than all the doctors of
Christendom ? Let them look upon their wasted land and the
miseries they had endured ; he earnestly and affectionately be
sought them to return while it was time to the bosom of the
Church. The Bohemians were not slow to answer. They
asserted the truth of the Four Articles of Prag, which they were
prepared to prove by Scripture. They recounted the results of
the conferences at Pressburg and Eger, where they had pro
fessed themselves willing to appear before any Council which
would judge according to Scripture, and would work with them
in bringing about the reformation of the Church according to the
Word of God. They had been told that such limitations were
contrary to the dignity of a General Council, which was above all
law. This they could not admit, and trusting in God's truth
were prepared to resist to the utmost those who attacked them.1
On July 7 Cesarini left Niirnberg with Frederick of Branden
burg, who had been appointed commander of the Crusade.
Cesarini had done his utmost to pacify the German princes and
unite them for this expedition. He was full of hope when he
set out from Niirnberg. But when he reach Weiden, where the
different contingents were to meet, his hopes were rudely dis-
1 In Martene, Amp. Coll. viii. 15; also Man. Condi, i. 148.
FLIGHT OF THE GEBMAN ARMY AT TAUSS. 59
pelled. Instead of soldiers he found excuses ; he heard tales CHAP.
of nobles needing their troops to war against one another rather »—,',,
than combine in defence of the Church. ' We are many
fewer,' he wrote to Basel on July 16, 'than was said in Niirn-
berg, so that the leaders hesitate. Not only our victory but
even our entry into Bohemia is doubtful. We are not so few
that, if there were any courage amongst us, we need shrink
from entering Bohemia. I am very anxious and above measure
sad. For if the army retreats without doing anything, the
Christian religion in these parts is undone ; such terror would
be felt by our side and their boldness would increase.' } How
ever, on August 1, an army of 40,000 horse and 90,000 foot
crossed the Bohemian border, and advanced against Tachau.
Cesarini seeing it unprepared for attack urged an immediate
onslaught : he was told that the soldiers were tired with their
march, and must wait till to-morrow. In the night the in
habitants strengthened their wralls and put their artillery into
position, so that a storm was hopeless. The crusading host
passed on, devastating and slaughtering with a ruthless cruelty
that was a strange contrast to the charitable utterances of
Cesarini's manifesto. But their triumph was short-lived. On
August 14 the Bohemian army advanced against them at Tauss.
Its approach was known, when it was yet some way off, by
the noise of the rolling waggons. Cesarini, with the Duke of
Saxony, ascended a hill to see the disposition of the army ;
there he saw with surprise the German waggons retreating.
He sent to ask Frederick of Brandenburg the meaning of this
movement, and was told that he had ordered the waggons to
take up a secure position in the rear. But the movement was
misunderstood by the Germans. A cry was raised that some
were retreating. Panic seized the host, and in a few moments
Cesarini saw the crusaders in wild confusion making for the
Bohemian Forest in their rear. He was driven to join the fugi
tives, and all his efforts to rally them were vain. Procopius,
seeing the flight, charged the fugitives, seized all their waggons
and artillery, and inflicted upon them terrible slaughter. Cesa
rini escaped with difficulty in disguise, and had to endure the
threats and reproaches of the Germans, who accused him as the
author of all their calamities.
1 Mon. Cuncil. i. 99.
60
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Cesarini
arrives in
Basel. Sep
tember 9,
1431.
Cesarini was humbled by his experience. He reproached
himself for his confidence in German arms; he had now seen
enough of the cowardice and feebleness of Germany. He had
seen, too, the growing importance of the Hussite movement,
and the force which their success was giving to the spread
of their convictions throughout Grermany. When he returned
to Niirnberg Sigismund met him with due honour ; the German
princes gathered round him and protested their readiness for
another campaign next year. But Cesarini answered that no
other remedy remained for the check of the Hussite heresy
than the Council of Basel. He besought them to do their ut
most to strengthen the feeble and cheer the desponding in
Germany, to exhort those whose faith was wavering to hold out
in hope of succour from the Council.1 With this advice he has
tened to Basel, where he arrived on September 9. To the
Council were now transferred all men's expectations of a peace
able settlement of the formidable difficulty which threatened
Western Christendom.
John of Segovia, in Man. Condi, ii. 29.
61
CHAPTER IV.
FIRST ATTEMPT OF EUGENIUS IV. TO DISSOLVE THE
COUNCIL OF BASEL.
1431-1434.
THE ancient city of Basel was well fitted to be the seat of a
great assemblage. High above the rushing Rhine rose its
stately minster on a rocky hill which seemed to brave the Description
river's force. Round the river and the minster clusters the
city. It was surrounded by a fertile plain, was easily accessible
from Germany, France, and Italy, and as a free Imperial city
was a place of security and dignity for the Council. To the eye
of an Italian, accustomed to marbles and frescoes, the interior
of the cathedral looked bald and colourless ; but its painted
windows and the emblazoned shields of nobles hung round
the walls gave it a staid richness of its own. The Italians
owned that it was a comfortable place, and that the houses of
the merchants of Basel equalled those of Florence. It was well
ordered by its magistrates, who administered strict justice and
organised admirably the supplies of food. The citizens of
Basel were devout, but little given to literature; they were
luxurious and fond of wine, but were steadfast, truthful, sin
cere, and honest in their dealings.1
The Council was long in assembling. It was natural that, Formal
while the President was absent in Bohemia, few should care to of the^
undertake the journey. If the Crusade ended in a victory, it ^"Jo'
was doubtful how long the Council would sit. Cesarini's depu- 1431.
ties, John of Palomar and John of Ragusa, opened the Council
with due ceremonial on July 23. It was only sparsely at-
1 This is the picture of ^neas Sylvius in a letter addressed to the Cardinal
of S. Angelo, printed by Urstisius, Epitome Histories Ba&iliensis (1577). It
was written by ^Eneas is an introduction to a history of the Council.
62
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Cesarini's
first steps.
September
1431.
Invitation
sent to the
Bohe
mians.
October 10,
1431.
tended, and its first business was to increase its numbers, and
obtain some guarantees for its safety and freedom from the city
magistrates and from Sigismund. On August 29 came the news
of the flight of the Crusaders from Tauss. It produced a deep
impression on the assembled fathers, and convinced them of
the seriousness and importance of the work which they had
before them. They felt that the chastisement which had be
fallen the Church was due to her shortcomings, and that peni
tence and reformation alone could avert further disaster. l
To this feeling the arrival of Cesarini on September 9 gave
further force. Deeply impressed with the importance of the
crisis, he sent forth letters urging on prelates that they should
lose no time in coming to the Council. Only three bishops,
seven abbots, and a few doctors were assembled, as the roads
were unsafe, owing to a war between the Dukes of Austria and
Burgundy. He wrote also to the Pope to express his own con
victions and the common opinion of the work which the Coun
cil might do : it might extirpate heresy, promote peace through
out Christendom, restore the Church to its pristine glory,
humble its enemies, treat of union with the Greeks, and finally
set on foot a crusade for the recovery of the Holy Land.2 An
envoy was sent to the Pope to explain to him how matters
stood, and to urge the need of his presence at Basel. Mean
while there were many discussions relative to the constitution
of the Council, who were to take part in it, and what was to be
the method of voting. There was a general agreement that, as
the great object of the Council was to arrange a union with the
Bohemians and the Greeks, it was desirable to admit men of
learning, that is, doctors of canon or civil law, as well as pre
lates. The question of the method of voting was left until the
Council became more numerous.
The Council, moreover, lost no time in trying to bring
about its chief object. On October 10 a letter was sent to the
Bohemians, begging them to join with the Council for the pro
motion of unity. Perhaps God has allowed discord so long that
1 John of Ragusa (Man. Condi, i. 101) : ' Fortius accensi ad reformatio-
nem ecclesise, negotia concilii multo acrius et cum majore sollicitudine et
laborecoeperuntperagere et procurare, expressam Dei hanc ultionem et flagel-
lum percipientes evenire propter peccata et deformationem ecclesiaa.'
2 The letter is given by John of Ragusa, Man. Condi, i. 108.
THE COUNCIL'S INVITATION TO THE BOHEMIANS. 63
experience might teach the evils of dissension. Christ's disciples CHAP.
are bound to labour for unity and peace. The desolation of . ^ ^
Bohemia must naturally incline it to wish for peace, and where
can that be obtained more surely than in a Council assembled
in the Holy Grhost ? At Basel everything will be done with
diligence and with freedom ; every one may speak, and the
Holy Grhost will lead men's hearts to the truth, if only they
will have faith. The Bohemians have often complained that
they could not get a free hearing : at Basel they may both
speak and hear freely, and the prayers of the faithful will help
both sides. The most ample safe-conduct was offered to their re
presentatives, and the fullest appreciation given to their motives.
4 Send, we beseech you, men in whom you trust that the Spirit
of the Lord rests, gentle, Grod-fearing, humble, desirous of peace,
seeking not their own, but the things of Christ, whom we pray to
give to us and you and all Christian people peace on earth, and
in the world to come life everlasting.' 1 This letter, which
breathes profound sincerity and true Christian charity, was,
no doubt, an expression of the views of Cesarini, and was most
probably written by him. The greatest care was taken to make
no allusion to the past, and to approach the matter entirely
afresh. But it was impossible for the Bohemians to forget all
that had gone before. The difficulty experienced in sending
the letter to the Bohemians showed the existence of a state
of things very different from what the Council wished to recog
nise. There was no intercourse between Bohemia and the rest
of Christendom ; the Bohemians were under the ban of the
Council of Siena as heretics. It was finally agreed to send three
copies by different ways, in hopes that one at least might arrive.
One was sent to Sigismund for transmission, another to the
magistrates of Niirnberg, and a third to the magistrates of
Eger. All three copies arrived safely in Bohemia in the begin
ning of December.
This activity on the part of the Council necessarily aroused Eugsnius
the suspicion of Eugenius IV. The zeal of Cesarini, which had fhl' dL^o.3
been kindled by his Bohemian experiences, went far beyond lution of
the limits of Papal prudence. The Bohemian question did of Basel,
not seem so important at Kome as it did at Basel. A Council 12^1431?*
1 John of Ragusa, 3fon, Condi. \. 135 ; also in John of Segovia, and in Mansi,
xxix. 233
64 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK which under the pressure of necessity opened negotiations with
IIL ^ heretics, might greatly imperil the faith of the Church, and
might certainly be expected to do many things contrary to the
Papal headship. A democratic spirit prevailed in Basel, which
had shown itself in the admission of all doctors ; and the dis
cussion about the organisation of the Council showed that it
would be very slightly amenable to the influence of the Pope
and the Curia. Eugenius IV. resolved, therefore, at once to
rid himself of the Council. He thought it wisest .to overturn it
• at once, before it had time to strike its roots deeper. Accord
ingly, on November 12, he wrote to Cesarini, empowering him
to dissolve the Council at Basel and proclaim another to be
held at Bologna in a year and a half. The reasons given were
the small attendance of prelates at Basel, the difficulties of
access owing to the war between Austria and Burgundy, the
distracted state of men's minds in that quarter owing to the
spread of Hussite opinions ; but especially the fact that nego
tiations were now pending with the Greek Emperor, who had
promised to come to a Council which was to unite the Greek
and Latin Churches on condition that the Pope paid the ex
penses of his journey and held the Council in some Italian city.
As it would be useless to hold two Councils at the same time,
the Pope thought it better that the Fathers of Basel should
reassemble at Bologna when their business was ready.
The Pope's A Bull dissolving the Council on these grounds was also
solution is8" secretly prepared, and was signed by ten cardinals. The Corni
ce Ved" cil, in entire ignorance of the blow that was being aimed at it,
by the was engaged in preparations for its first public session, which
January took place under the presidency of Cesarini on December 14.
The Council declared itself to be duly constituted, and laid
down three objects for its activity : the extirpation of heresy,
the purification of Christendom, and the reformation of morals.
It appointed its officials and guarded by decrees its safety and
freedom. On December 23, arrived the Bishop of Parenzo,
treasurer of Eugenius IV., and was honourably received ; but
the coldness of his manner showed the object of his mission.
The Council was at once in a ferment of excitement. In a
congregation on December 29, the citizens of Basel appeared
in force, and protested against the dissolution. Various
speakers of the Council laid before the Bishop of Parenzo four
CESABINI'S LETTER TO EUGENIUS iv. 65
propositions : that the urgent needs of Christendom did not
allow of the dissolution of the Council ; that such a step would
cause great scandal and offence to the Church ; that if this
Council were dissolved or prorogued, it was idle to talk of
summoning another ; that a General Council ought to proceed
against all who tried to hinder it, and ought to call all Chris
tian princes to its aid. The Bishop of Parenzo was not pre
pared for this firm attitude ; he found things at Basel different
from his expectations. He thought it wise to temporise, and
declared that if he had any Papal Bulls he would not publish
them. Meanwhile he tried to induce Cesarini to dissolve the
Council. Cesarini was sorely divided between his allegiance to
the Pope and his sense of what was due to the welfare of
Christendom. It was agreed that two envoys should be sent
to the Pope, one from Cesarini and one from the Council. The
Bishop of Parenzo thought it wise to flee away on January 8,
1432, leaving his Bulls with John of Prato, who attempted to
publish them on January 13, but was interrupted, and his Bulls
and himself were taken in custody by the Council's orders.1
Cesarini was deeply moved by this attitude of the Pope.
To his fervent mind it was inconceivable that the head of
Christendom should behave with such levity at so grave a crisis, iv. pro-
He wrote at once to Eugenius IV. a letter, in wilich he expressed a^ainft the
with the utmost frankness his bitter disappointment at the dissolution,
Pope's conduct, his firm conviction of the need of straightfor- 1432.
ward measures on the part of the ecclesiastical authorities to
restore the shattered confidence of Christian people. He began
his letter by saying that he was driven to speak freely and fear
lessly by the manifest peril of the faith, the danger of the loss
of obedience to the Papacy, the obloquy with which Eugenius
was everywhere assailed. He recapitulated the facts concerning
his own mission to Bohemia and his presidency of the Council ;
detailed the hopes which he and everyone in Germany entertained
of the Council's mediation. ' I was driven also to come here by
observing the dissoluteness and disorder of the German clergy, VQ
by which the laity are sorely irritated against the Church — so
much so, that there is reason to fear that, if the clergy do not
amend their ways, the laity will attack them, as the Hussites
do. If there had been no General Council, I should have
1 John of Segovia, Mon. Con. ii. 64.
VOL. II. F
66 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK thought it my duty as legate to summon a provincial synod for
, IIL f the reform of the clergy ; for unless the clergy be reformed I
fear that, even if the Bohemian heresy were extinguished,
another would rise up in its place.' Having these opinions, he
came to the Council and tried to conduct its business with
diligence, thinking that such was the Pope's desire. ' I did
not suppose that your holiness wished me to dissemble or act
negligently ; if you had bid me do so, I would have answered
that you must lay that duty on another, for I have determined
never to occupy the post of a dissembler.'
He then passed on to the question of the prorogation of the
Council, and laid before the Pope the considerations which he
would have urged if he had been in the Curia when the ques
tion was discussed. (1) The Bohemians have been summoned to
the Council ; its prorogation will be a flight before them on
the part of the Church as disgraceful as the flight of the Ger
man army. ' By this flight we shall approve their errors and
condemn the truth and justice of our own cause. Men will see
in this the finger of God, and will see that the Bohemians can
neither be vanquished by arms nor by argument. 0 luckless
Christendom ! 0 Catholic faith, abandoned by all ; soldiers and
priests alike desert thee ; no one dares stand on thy side.'
(2) This flight will lose the allegiance of wavering Catholics,
amongst whom are already rife opinions contrary to the Holy
See, (3) The ignominy of the flight will fall on the clergy,
who will be universally attacked. (4) ' What will the world
say when it hears of this ? Will it not judge that the clergy is
incorrigible and wishes to moulder in its abuses ? So many
Councils have been held in our time, but no reform has fol
lowed. Men were expecting some results from this Council ;
if it be dissolved they will say that we' mock both Grod and men.
The whole reproach, the whole shame and ignominy, will fall
upon the Roman Curia as the cause and author of all these ills.
Holy Father, may you never be the cause of such evils ! At
your hands will be required the blood of those that perish ;
about all things you will have to render a strict account at
the judgment seat of God.' (5 & 6) To promote the pacifica
tion of Christendom ambassadors have been sent to make peace
between England and France, between Poland and the Teutonic
Knights ; the dissolution of the Council will stop their valuable
LETTER OF CESABINI TO EUGENIUS IV. 67
labours. (7) There are disturbances in Magdeburg and Passau, CHAP.
where the people have risen against their bishops and show signs . l^' ' *
of following the Hussites. The Council may arrange these
matters ; if it be dissolved discord will spread. (8) The Duke
of Burgundy has been asked by the Council to undertake the
part of leader against the Hussites. If the Council be dissolved,
he will be irritated against the Church, and his services will be
lost. (9) Many German nobles are preparing for another ex
pedition into Bohemia if need be. If they are deluded by the
Pope, they will turn against the Church. < I myself will rather
die than live ignominiously. I will go perhaps to Niirnberg and
place myself in the hands of these nobles that they may do with
me what they will, even sell me to the heretics. All men shall
know that I am innocent.' (10) The Council sent envoys to
confirm the wavering on the Bohemian borders : if the Council
be dissolved, their work will be undone and there will be a large
addition to the Hussites.
He then proceeded to answer the Pope's objections. If he
cannot conveniently come to Basel in person on account of his
health, let him send a deputation of cardinals and eminent
persons. As to the safety of the place, it is as secure as
Constance. It is said that the Pope fears lest the Council
meddle with the temporalities of the Church. It is not reason
ably to be expected that an ecclesiastical assembly will act
to its own detriment. There have been many previous Councils
with no such result. ' I fear lest it happen to us as it did to
the Jews, who said, " If we let him alone, the Romans will come
and take away our place and nation." So we say, "If we
let this Council alone, the laity will come and take away our
temporalities." But by the just judgment of God the Jews lost
their place because they would not let Christ alone ; and by the just
judgment of God, if we do not let this Council alone we shall lose
our temporalities, and (God forbid) our lives and souls as well.'
Let the Pope, on the other hand, be friendly with the Council,
reform his Curia, and be ready to act for the good of the Church.
The Council is likely, if pressed to extremities, to refuse to
dissolve, and there would be the danger of a schism. He begged
to be relieved of his commission and complained of the want of
straightforwardness. If he attempted to dissolve the Council, he
would be stoned to ueath by the fathers ; if he were to go away,
F 2
68
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Open hos
tility be
tween the
Pope and
the Coun
cil.
Sigismund
makes an
expedition
into Italy.
November
1481.
the Council would be certain to appoint for itself another
president.1
This letter is remarkable for its clear exhibition of the
state of affairs in Europe at this time, and as we read it now,
it is still more remarkable for the political instinct which
enabled its writer to make so true a forecast of the future. It
would have been well for Eugenius IV. if he had had the wis
dom to appreciate its importance. It would have been well for
the future of the Papacy if Cesarini's words had awakened an
echo in the Court of Rome. As it was, the politicians of the
Curia only smiled at the exalted enthusiasm of Cesarini, and
Eugenius IV. was too narrow-minded and obstinate to reconsider
the wisdom of a course of conduct which he had once adopted.
He did not understand, nor did he care to understand, the sen
timents of the Council. He had forgotten the current of feel
ing against the Papacy which had been so strong at Constance.
The decrees of Constance were not among the Papal Archives ;
and one of the Cardinals who possessed the manuscript of
Filastre was heard with astonishment by the Curia when he
called attention to the decree which declared a General Council
to be superior to the Pope.2 At Basel, on the other hand, there
were many copies of the acts of the Council of Constance, and
it was held that the Pope could not dissolve a General Council
without its own consent. The rash step of Eugenius forced
the Council into an attitude of open hostility towards the Pa
pacy, and a desperate struggle between the two powers was
inevitable.
The first question for both parties was the attitude of
Sigismund. His personal interest in the settlement of the
Hussite rebellion naturally inclined him to favour in every way
the assembling of the Council. In July 1431 he took the
Council under his Imperial protection, and in August wrote in
its interest to make peace between the Dukes of Austria and
Burgundy. But Sigismund felt that the years which had
elapsed since the Council of Constance had not been glorious to
his reputation. He had failed ignominiously in Bohemia and
had exercised little influence in Germany, where he had
1 The letter is given in
in Mansi.
2 John of Segovia, p. 77,
. Syl. Opera, p. 64, in John of Segovia, 95, &c.
SIGISMUND AT MILAN. 69
quarrelled with Frederick of Brandenburg, who was the most
distinguished amongst the electors. His early enthusiasm for
acting with dignity the part of secular head of Christendom had
been damped at Constance, and he did not care' to appear at
Basel without some accession to his dignity. With character
istic desire for outward show, he determined on an expedition to
Italy, to assume the Imperial crown. He hoped to establish
once more the Imperial claims, to check the power of Venice,
who was the enemy of Hungary, and to induce the Pope to
come to Basel. Yet to attain all these objects he had only a
following of some 2,000 Hungarian and German knights.1 His
hopes were entirely built on the help of Filippo Maria Visconti,
who was at war with Venice and Florence, and with whom
Sigismund made a treaty in July. Before setting out for Italy
he appointed William of Bavaria his vicegerent as Protector of
the Council : then early in November he crossed the Alps, and
on November 21 arrived in Milan. But the jealous and sus
picious character of Filippo Maria Visconti could not bear the
presence of a superior ; he was afraid that Sigismund's presence
might be the occasion of a rising against himself. Accordingly
he gave orders that Sigismund should be honourably received
in Milan ; but he himself withdrew from the city and remained
secluded in one of his castles. He refused to visit Sigismund,
and gave the ridiculous excuse that his emotions were too
strong ; if he saw Sigismund he would die of joy.2 Disappointed
of his host, Sigismund could only hasten his coronation with
the iron crown of Lombardy, which took place in the church
of S. Ambrogio on November 25. He did not stay long in
Milan, where he was treated with such suspicion, but in De
cember passed on to Piacenza, where, on January 10, 1432, he
received news of the Papal Bull dissolving the Council of Basel.
Sigismund had left Germany as the avowed Protector of the Relations
Council ; but it was felt that his desire to obtain the Imperial ^j^ft"
crown gave the Pope considerable power of affixing stipula- Eugenius
tions to the coronation. In fact, Sigismund's relations with Council.
1 Poggio, Hut. Flor. Mur. xx. 379.
2 Windeck, in Mencken, i. 1241 : ' Er hatte sorge dass die stat Meylon sich
an dem konig fluge und er kam nye zu dem konige ; er sprach und nam sich
an, " Sehe er den konige, er musste von frewden sterben." Es war aber ein
getewsche.'
70 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL,
BOOK Eugenius IV. were not fortunate for the object which he had in
._ IIi1' „ view. Not only was the question of the Council an obstacle to their
good understanding, but Sigismund's alliance with the Duke of
Milan was displeasing to Eugenius IV., who as a Venetian was
on the side of his native city. When Sigismund discovered how
little he could depend on Filippo Maria Visconti, his political
position in Italy was sufficiently helpless. There were grave
fears in Basel that he might abandon the cause of the Council
as a means of reconciling himself with the Pope.
At first, however, Sigismund's attitude seemed firm enough.
Immediately on hearing of the proposed dissolution of the
Council he wrote to Basel, exhorting the fathers to stand firm,
and saying that he had written to beg the Pope to recon
sider his decision. The Council, on its side, wrote to Sigis
mund, affecting to disbelieve the genuineness of the Bull
brought by the Bishop of Parenzo,1 and begging Sigismund to
send William of Bavaria at once to Basel. On receipt of
this letter Sigismund wrote again, thanking them for their
zeal, saying that he was going at once to Kome to arrange mat
ters with the Pope, and exhorting them to persevere in their
course.
Resolute Before it received the news of Sigismund's constancy
of theDS the Council on January 21 issued a summons to all Chris-
usz™1' tendom, begging those who were coming to the Council not to
be discouraged at the rumours of its dissolution, as it was im
probable that the Vicar of Christ, if well informed, would set
aside the decrees of Constance, and bring ruin on the Church
by dissolving the Council which was to extirpate heresy and
reform abuses. Congregations were continued as usual to
arrange preliminaries, and on February 3 William of Bavaria
arrived in Basel, and was solemnly received as Sigismund's vice
gerent. Prelates poured in to the Council, which daily became
more numerous. The Dukes of Milan, Burgundy, and Savoy
all wrote to express their co-operation with the Council. Car
dinal Cesarini could not reconcile it with his allegiance to
the Pope to continue as President of the Council in spite of
the Pope's wishes, and the breach with the Papacy was made
1 < Quidam episcopus Parentinus SS. domini nostri Summi Pontificis assertus
thesaurarius quasdam prcetensas litteras apostolicas dissolutionis dictas sacrae
synodi, ut accepimus, attulit.' — Martene, Amp. Coll. viii. 53.
OKGANISATION OF THE COUNCIL. 7 1
more notorious by the election of a new President, Philibert, CHAP.
Bishop of Coutances. As a farther sign of its determination ... , ' ..,
the Council ordered a seal to be made for its documents. Its
impress was God the Father sending down the Holy Spirit on
the Pope and Emperor sitting in Council surrounded by car
dinals, prelates, and doctors.1
On February 15 was held the second general session, in TheCouo-
which was rehearsed the famous decree of Constance, that ' a j reasserts*61
General Council has its power immediately from Christ, and
that all of every rank, even the Papal, are bound to obey it in
matters pertaining to the faith, the extirpation of heresy, and
Constance.
February
15,1432. J
the reformation of the Church in head and members.' It was
decreed that the Council could not be dissolved against its
will, and that all proceedings of the Pope against any of its
members, or any who were coming to incorporate themselves with
it, were null and void. This was the Council's answer to the
Pope's Bull of dissolution. The two powers now stood in open
antagonism, and each claimed the allegiance of Christendom.
The__moy^m^nt_against the Papal monarchy which _had^ been
startedjby, th^_Schisrn__found its full expression at BaseL The
Council of Pisa had merely aided the Cardinals in their efforts
to restore peace to the disturbed Church ; the Council of Con
stance had been a more resolute endeavour for the same
purpose of the temporal and spiritual authorities of Christen
dom. But the Council of Basel asserted against a legitimate
Pope, who was universally recognised, the superiority of a Gen
eral Council over the Papacy. It was a revolt of the ecclesias
tical aristocracy against the Papal absolutism, and the fate of
the revolt was a question of momentous consequences for the
future of the Church.
After this declaration the Council busily sent envoys through- o-rgamsa-
out Christendom, and set to work to organise itself for the
transaction of business. The means for this purpose had been Basel
under discussion since September 1431, and in the plan
adopted we recognise the statesmanlike capacity of Cesarini.2
1 It bore the legend : ' Sigillum sacri generalis Concilii Basileensis univer-
salem ecclesiam representantis.'— John of Segovia, p. 122.
2 John of Segovia, 126, says that the suggestion of the deputations came
from John of Ragusa, ' velut subitanea inspiratione ; ' considering the rela
tions in which he stoo^ towards Cesarini the source of the inspiration seems
pretty obvious.
72 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK The fortunes of the Council of Constance showed the danger
-_IIT1' _^ of national jealousies and political complications in an eccle-
.. siastical synod. It was resolved at Basel to avoid the division
i by nations, and to work by means of four committees, which
1 were to prepare business for the general sessions of the Council.
As the objects of the Council were the suppression of heresy,
the reform of the Church, and the pacification of Christendom,
these objects were confided to the care of deputations of Faith,
of Eeformation, and of Peace, while a fourth was added for
common and necessary business. The deputations were formed
equally out of every nation and every rank of the hierarchy.
They elected their own officers, and chose a new president
every month. Every four months the deputations were dis
solved and reconstituted, care being taken that a few of the old
members remained. As a link between the four deputations
was appointed monthly a committee of twelve, chosen equally
from the four nations, who decided about the incorporation of
\jf> new members with the Council, and their distribution among
the deputations. They decided also the allotment of business
to the several deputations, received their reports, and submitted
them to a general congregation. At each election four of the
old members were left to maintain the continuity of tradition ;
but the same men might not be reappointed twice. For the
formal supervision of the Council's business was a small com
mittee of four, one appointed by each deputation, through
whom passed all the letters of the Council, which it was their
duty to seal. If they were dissatisfied with the form of the
contents, they remitted the letter, with a statement of their
reasons, to the deputation from which it originated.
This system, which was conceived in the spirit of a liberal
oligarchy, was calculated to promote freedom of discussion and
to eliminate as much as possible political and national feeling.
Secrecy in the conduct of business was forbidden, and members
of one deputation were encouraged to discuss their affairs
with members of the other deputations. The deputations met
three times a week, and could only undertake the business laid
before them by the president. When they were agreed about
a matter, it was laid before a general congregation ; if three
of the deputations at least were then in favour of it, it was
brought before the Council in general session in the cathedral,
SIGISMUND AND EUGENIUS IV. 73
and was finally adopted. Every precaution was taken to ensure c^p-
full discussion and practical unanimity before the final settlement <— ,- — -
of any question. The organisation of the Council was as demo
cratic as anything at that time could be.1
The first deputations were appointed on the last day of Council re-
February. It was not long before cheering news reached the by France
Council. The French clergy, in a synod held at Bourges on mil^eb-
February 26, declared their adhesion to the objects set forth by ™ary
the Council, and besought the King to send envoys to the Pope
to beg him to recall his dissolution ; and at the same time to send
envoys to Sigismund to urge that nothing should be done by
the Council against the ecclesiastical authority, lest thereby a
plausible pretext for transferring the Council elsewhere be
afforded to the Pope. The letters of Sigismund to the Council
assured it of his fidelity ; and his ambassadors to the Pope on
March 1 7 affirmed that Sigismund's coming to Italy aimed only
at a peaceful solution of the religious and political difficulties
of Europe, and was prompted by no motives of personal am
bition. He wished the Pope to understand that he was not
prepared to win his coronation by a desertion of the Council's
cause. From Bohemia also came the news that the Pragers
had consented to negotiate with the Council on the basis of the
Four Articles, and had desired a preliminary conference at Eger
with the envoys of the Council, to which the Fathers at Basel
readily assented.
Yet the success of the Council and the entreaties of Sigis- Sigismund
mund were alike unavailing to move the stubborn mind of the nius IV.
Pope. Envoys and letters passed between Sigismund and
Eugenius IV., with the sole result of ultimately bringing the
two into a position of avowed hostility. Sigismund said that
no one could dissolve the Council, which had been duly sum
moned. Eugenius IV. answered with savage sarcasm, ' In what
you write touching the celebration and continuation of the
Council you have said several things contrary to the Gospel of
Christ, the Holy Scripture, the sacred canons and the civil laws ;
although we know these assertions do not proceed from you,
because you are unskilled in such matters and know better how
1 For the organisation of the Council see John of Segovia, 122 and 271 ;
and Aug. Patricius in Hu. tzsheim, v. 788 ; Mansi, xxix. 377.
74 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK to fight, as you do manfully, against the Turks and elsewhere,
v_ IIIL . in which pursuit, I trust, you may prosper.' l Sigismund must
have felt keenly the sneer at his failures in the field. He
fancied himself mighty with the pen and with the tongue, but
even his vanity could not claim the glory of a successful
general.
Sigismund Sigismund had gone to Italy with the light-heartedness which
declares characterised his doings. He hoped to indulge his love of display
for the and at the same time fill his empty pockets. His coronation
April 1432, would give him the right of granting new privileges and would
bring presents from the Jews. He was not sorry to send Wil
liam of Bavaria to Basel in his stead, for he did not at first wish
to commit himself too definitely to the Council's side ; if the
Council could restore peace in Bohemia, he was ready to support
it ; otherwise its action might come into collision with the Im
perial pretensions. So long as Sigismund was doubtful about
the Bohemian acceptance of the Council's invitation, and about
the Pope's pliancy, he wished not to commit himself too far.
Hence William of Bavaria had a delicate part to play at Basel,
where he distinguished himself at first by care for the Council's
decorum, and forbade dancing on fast days, to the indignation
of the ladies of Basel.2 But soon William had more important
work to do, as Sigismund found that he needed the Council's
help for his Italian projects. He had hoped, with the help of
Milan, Savoy, and Ferrara, to overcome Florence and Venice,
and so force the Pope to crown him. But when the Duke of
Milan openly mocked him, Sigismund was driven to make a
desperate effort to retrieve his ignominious position. He could
not leave Italy without the Imperial crown ; if he set himself
to win it by submission to the Pope, Bohemia would be lost for
ever. He had tried to reconcile the Pope and the Council ;
but Eugenius IV. scornfully refused his mediation. The
only remaining course was to cast in his lot with the Council,
and use it as a means to force the Pope to satisfy his demands.
1 John of Segovia, 179; also Martene, Amp. Coll. viii. 129.
2 They complained : ' Ware unser Herr der Konig selbst hier und sein lieber
Caspar (i.e. Schlich, the royal chancellor), sie hatten uns unsere Freude nicht
verdorben ; aber well der Herzog selbst keine Freude hat und nicht zu uns
gehen will, so will er sie uns auch nicht gonnen,' from a letter to Schlich in
Kluckhohn, Herzog Wilhelm von Bayern in Forschmigen zur Deutschen
GeschicJite, ii. 521, &c.
CARDINAL CAPRANICA IN BASEL. 75
On April 1, 1432, he wrote to William begging him to keep the
Council together, and not allow it to dissolve before the threats
of the Papal dissolution. He advised the Council to invite the
Pope and Cardinals to appear at Basel ; he even suggested that
if the Council called him to its aid, its summons would afford
him an honourable pretext for leaving Italy. Acting on these
instructions, William prompted the Fathers at Basel to take
steps to prevent Eugenius IV. from holding his Council in
Bologna as he proposed to do. Accordingly, on April 29, the
Council in a general session called on Eugenius IV. to revoke
his Bull of dissolution, and summoned him and the Cardinals to
appear at Basel within three months ; in case Eugenius could
not come personally he was to send representatives.
The support of Sigismund and the obvious necessity of Domenico
endeavouring to find some peaceable settlement for the Bohe-
mian question made Europe in general acquiesce in the pro- Bai*ei to
ceedings of the Council. No nation openly espoused the Papal fh-mation
side or refused to recognise the Council, which gradually cardin-
increased in numbers. In the beginning of April the deputa- alate- 1482-
tions contained in all eighty-one members j1 and as the hostility
between the Pope and the Council became more decidedly pro
nounced all who were on personal grounds opposed to
Eugenius IV. began to flock to Basel. Foremost amongst these
was Domenico Capranica, Bishop of Fermo, who had been a
favourite official of Martin V., and had been by him created
Cardinal, though the creation had not been published at the
time of his death. This secresy on the part of Martin V. arose
from a desire to abide as closely as possible by the decrees of
Constance forbidding the excessive increase of the Cardinalate.
He endeavoured, however, to secure himself at the expense of
his successor by binding the Cardinals to an undertaking that in
case he died before the publication of such creations, they
would, nevertheless, admit those so created to the Conclave.
On Martin Y.'s death Capranica hastened to Eome and pre
sented himself as a member of the Conclave ; but the Cardinals
were in violent reaction against Martin V. and the Colonna, and
refused to admit one of their adherents. The new Pope involved
Capranica in his general hatred of the Colonna party, denied him
the Cardinal's hat. and showed the greatest animosity against
1 John of Segovia, 151.
76
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
The Bohe
mians
aeree to
send en
voys to
him. Capranica for a time was driven to hide himself, and at
last set off to Basel to obtain from the Council the justice
which was refused him by the Pope.1 On his way through Siena
I he engaged as secretary a young man, aged twenty-six, .ZEneas
Sylvius Piccolomini, sprung from an old but impoverished
family. ^Eneas found the need of making his way in the
world, and eagerly embraced this opportunity of finding a
wider field for the talents which he had already begun to
display in the University of Siena. No one suspected that
this young Sienese secretary was destined to play a more im
portant part in the history of the Council and of the Church
than any of those already at Basel, when in May Capranica
entered Basel, where he was received with distinction, and in
time received full recognition of his rank, which Eugenius IV.
afterwards confirmed.
In Italy Eugenius IV. found that things were going against
him. In Eome the Cardinals were by no means satisfied with
the aspect of affairs and many of them secretly left the city.2
T^e e^orts °f Eugenius IV. to stop Sigismund's progress and
raise up enemies to him in Italy were not successful. From
Piacenza Sigismund passed to Parma and thence in May to
Lucca, where he was threatened with siege by the Florentines.
In July he advanced safely to Siena, where he fixed his abode
till he could go to Rome. In Basel the Council pursued its
course with firmness and discretion. The conference with the
Bohemians at Eger resulted in the Settlement of preliminaries
about the appearance of Bohemian representatives at Basel. The
Bohemians claimed that they should be received honourably,
allowed a fair hearing, be regarded in the discussion as free from
all ecclesiastical censures, be allowed to use their own worship,
and be permitted to argue on the grounds of * Grod's law, the
practice of Christ, the Apostles, and the primitive Church, as
well as Councils and doctors founded on the same true and
impartial judge.' 3 Their proposals were willingly received by
* See the life of Capranica by Baptist a Poggio, in Baluze, Miscellanea
(Paris, 1680), iii. 266, &c.
2 The Ambassador of the Teutonic Knights says (Voigt, Stimmen aus Rom.;
Hist. Taschenbuch, iv. 75) : ' Ich furchte dass ein Schisma ausbrechen und
der Hof in Rom iibel stehen wird. Die Cardinale ziehen von Rom heimlich
ohne Urlaub weg, weil man diesen einem Jeden versagt.'
8 Articles in Martene, Amp. Coll. viii. 131.
The Coun
cil accuses
the Pope of
contu-
THE COUNCIL ACCUSES THE POPE OF CONTUMACY. 77
the majority at Basel, and in the fourth session, on June 20, a CHAP.
safe-conduct to their representatives was issued. At the same *y* ^
time a blow was aimed against the Pope by a decree that, if a
vacancy occurred in the Papacy, the new election should be
made at Basel and not elsewhere. Another and still bolder
proceeding was the appointment by the Council of the Cardinal
of S. Eustachio as legate for Avignon and the Venaisin, on the
ground that the city was dissatisfied with the Papal governor
and the Council thought it right to interfere in the interests of
peace.
Eugenius IV. saw that unless he took some steps to prevent
it another schism was imminent. He attempted to renew
negotiations with Sigismund and sent four envoys, headed by mac
the Archbishops of Tarento and Colocza, to Basel, where they September
arrived on August 14. They proposed a future Council at I
Avignon, Mantua, or Ferrara. It was evident that the sole
object of the Papal envoys was to shake the allegiance of
waverers and spread discord in the Council. To repel this in
sidious attempt the promoters of the Council, in its sixth ses
sion, on September 6, accused the Pope and Cardinals of con- •
turnacy, for not appearing in answer to the summons, and
demanded that sentence should be passed against them. The
Papal envoys were driven to demand a prolongation of the
term allowed, which was granted. After this, on September 9,
Cesarini again resumed the presidency of the Council, judging,
it would seem, that moderation was more than ever necessary.
Eugenius IV. now turned his attention to Sigismund, whose Sigismund
position in Siena was sufficiently pitiable. Deserted by the Conncifto
Duke of Milan and his Italian allies, he was cut off by the subdue the
Florentine forces from advancing to Rome, and was, as he him- November
self said, caged like a wild beast within the walls of Siena.1 *
It was natural that Sigismund should be anxious to catch at
the Pope's help to release him from such an ignominious posi
tion. When Eugenius IV. promised to send two cardinals to
confer with him, Sigismund wrote to the Council urging it to
suspend its process against the Pope, until he tried the result
1 Bonincontrii Annales, Mur. xxi. 140 : ' Audivi ego saepius ilium dicentem
quum Senis essem, " Ego ulciscar de illo perfidissimo tyranno (Filippo Maria
Visconti) qui me Sen's tanquam belluam collocavit.'" William of Bavaria
calls him * ein betriibter verlassener armer Herr,' Kluckhohn, 562.
78
BOOK
111.
The Coun
cil takes
Sigismund
under its
Jrotection.
anuaiy
1433.
Eugenius
IV. re
vokes his
dissolution
of the
Council.
February
1433.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
of negotiations, or of a personal interview. The Council was
uneasy at this, and begged Sigismund to have no dealings with
the Pope until he recognised its authority. Sigismund an
swered, on October 31, that such was his intention, but that
he judged it wise to see the Pope personally, and so arrange
things peaceably. The Council grew increasingly suspicious,
and Sigismund did not find that his negotiations with the Pope
were leading to any satisfactory conclusion. Again he swung
round to the Council's side,1 which, strengthened by his support,
in its eighth session, on December 12, granted Eugenius IV.
and the Cardinals a further term of sixty days, within which
they were to give in their adhesion to the Council, or the charge
of contumacy against them would be proceeded with.
So far Sigismund and the Council were agreed ; but their
ends were not the same. Sigismund wished only for a pacifi
cation of Bohemia and his own coronation ; so far as the Coun
cil promoted these ends it was useful to him, and he was re
solved to use it to the uttermost. Accordingly, on January 22,
1433, William of Bavaria prevailed on the Council to pass a
decree taking the King under its protection. By this means
Sigismund was helped both against the Pope and the Council ;
for if the Council made good its claim to elect a new Pope, it
might proceed to elect a new King of the Komans as well.
The reason of this decree was a rumour that Eugenius IV. in
tended to excommunicate Sigismund. The Council pronounced
all Papal proceedings against him to be null and void.
/ Eugenius IV. at last felt himself beaten. The Council had
taken precautions against every means of attack which the Papal
authority possessed. The Pope had succeeded in driving Sigis
mund to espouse warmly the Council's cause, and was alarmed
to hear that he was engaged in negotiating peace with the
Florentines.2 The arrival of the Bohemian envoys at Basel, on
January 4, gave the Council a real importance in the eyes of
Europe. The Council was conscious of its strength, and on
February 19 appointed judges to examine the process against
Eugenius IV. But Eugenius had been preparing to retreat
step by step from a position which he felt to be untenable,
1 See his letter of November 22, in John of Segovia, 292.
2 See Sigismund's letter to the Council, dated January 7, 1433, in Martene,
Amp. Coll. viii, 533,
THE COUNCIL ASSERTS ITSELF AGAINST THE POPE. 79
and strove to discover the smallest amount of concession which CHAP,
would free him from his embarrassment. He sent envoys to IV' _.
Basel, who proposed that the Council should transfer itself to
Bologna; when this was refused, they asked that it should
select some place in Italy for a future Council. Next they
offered that the question whether the Council should be held in
Germany or Italy should be referred to a committee of twelve ;
finally they proposed that any city in Germany except Basel
should be the seat of a new Council.1 When the Fathers at
Basel would have none of these things, Eugenius IV. at last issued
a Bull announcing his willingness that the Council should
be held at Basel, whither he proposed to send his legates ; on
March 1 he nominated four cardinals to that office.
Sigismund rejoiced at this removal of the obstacles which The Coun
stood in the way of his coronation ; he was anxious that the its
Council should accept the Pope's Bull and so do away with all
hostility between himself and Eugenius IV. But the Fathers
at Basel looked somewhat suspiciously on the concessions which
had been wrung with such difficulty from the Pope. They ob
served that the Bull did not recognise the existing Council,
but declared that a Council should be held by his legates.
Moreover, he limited the scope of the Council to the two points
of the reduction of heretics and the pacification of Christendom,
omitting the reformation of the Church. It was argued that
Eugenius IV. had not complied with their demand that he
should withdraw his dissolution ; he refused to recognise any
thing done at Basel before the coming of his legates.2 Deter
mined to affirm its authority before the arrival of the Papal
legates, the Council passed a decree on April 27, renewing the
decree of Constance about the celebration of General Councils at
least every tenth year ; asserting that the members of a Council
might assemble of their own accord at the fixed period ; and that
a Pope who tried to impede or prorogue a Council should after
four months' warning be suspended, and then after two months
be deprived of office. It was decreed that the present Council
could not be dissolved nor transferred without the consent of
two-thirds of each deputation and the subsequent approbation
1 These wearisome negotiations are told by John of Segovia, 338, &c., and
are recapitulated in the Council's letter of June 16, 374.
2 See letter of the Council, June 13, in John of Segovia, 375.
80
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Straits of
Eugenius
of two-thirds of a general congregation. The Cardinals were
henceforth to make oath before entering the Conclave that
whoever was elected Pope would obey the Constance decrees.
To give all possible notoriety to these decrees, all prelates
were ordered to publish them in their synods or chapters.
So far as a new constitution can be secured on paper, the Coun
cil of Basel made sure for the future the new principles of
Church Government on which it claimed to act. It was a trans
ference to ecclesiastical matters of the parliamentary oppo
sition to monarchy which was making itself felt in European
politics.
When the Papal legates arrived and claimed to share with
Cesarini the office of president, Cesarini answered that he was
the officer of the Council and must obey their will in the matter.
The Council, in a congregation on June 13, answered that they
could not admit the claim of the Pope to influence their deliber
ations by means of his legates : not only the President, but the
Pope himself, was bound to obey the Council's decrees. They
were bent upon asserting most fully the supremacy of a General
Council, and aimed at converting the Pope into its chief
official. The concessions made by Eugenius IV. had not ended the
conflict between him and the Fathers at Basel. They had rather
brought more clearly to light the full opposition that had arisen
between the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the Papal monarchy.
But Eugenius IV. had not so much aimed at a reconciliation
with the Council as a reconciliation with Sigismund. He
saw that for this purpose concessions must be made to the
Council ; but he hoped with Sigismund's help to reduce the
Council in course of time. Sigismund's position in Italy made
him eager to catch at any concession on the part of Eugenius IV.
which would allow him to proceed to his coronation with
out abandoning the Council, from which he hoped for a settle
ment of his Bohemian difficulties. He received with joy the
Pope's advances, and Eugenius IV. on his side felt the need of
Sigismund's protection even in Eome. Five cardinals be
sides Capranica had already left him and joined the Council.
The officials of the Curia grew doubtful in their allegiance, and
began to think that their interests would be better served in
Basel than in Eome. On March 11, the anniversary of the
Pope's coronation, as he went from the commemoration service
RECONCILIATION OF SIGISMUND AND EUGENIUS IV. 81
he was beset by members of the Curia, who craved with tears CHAP.
leave to depart,1 and followed him with their cries to the door ._ IV> _.
of the Consistory. A few had leave given them, and all were
bent on departure.
In this state of affairs Eugenius IV. saw the wisdom of
gratifying Sigismund in the two matters which he had at heart, t:
Reconcilia-
Sigismund
and
Eugenius
IV. April
7, 1433.
the pacification of Italy and his coronation as Emperor. There
were not many difficulties in the way of peace. Florence,
Venice, and the Duke of Milan were all equally weary of war ;
and the Pope had little difficulty in inducing them to submit
their grievances to Niccolo of Este, Lord of Ferrara, who at that
time played the honourable part of mediator in Italian affairs.
By his help the preliminaries of peace were arranged at Ferrara
on April 7 ; and on the same day Sigismund's envoys arranged
with the Pope the preliminaries of the Imperial coronation.
Sigismund acknowledged that ' he had always held and holds
Eugenius as the true and undoubted Pope, canonically elected ;
and with all reverence, diligence, care, and labour, among all
kings and princes, all persons in the world ecclesiastical as well
as secular, venerates, protests, and acts in defence of his holiness,
and the Church of Grod, so long as he shall live, faithfully and
with a true heart, according to his knowledge and power, with
out fraud or guile, so far as with God's help he may.' 2 He
agreed also to stay at Rome for a time after his coronation, and
labour for the peace of Christendom and especially of Italy.
This alliance of the Pope and Sigismund was naturally j Sigis-
regarded with growing suspicion at Basel. Sigismund's letters to coronation
the Council changed in tone, and dwelt upon the evils of scandal jM?y 31»
in the Church and the disastrous effects of a schism. On May 9 *-
he urged the Council to treat the Papal legates with kindness,
and to abstain from anything that might lead to an open
1 Eeport from Eome, in Konigsberg Archives, printed by Voigt, ^ftnea Syl-
vio de' Piccolomini, i. 443 : ' Et quia propter decreta Concilii multi Curtesani re-
cesserunt et fere omnes se preparant ad reoedendum . . . Omnes Curtesani
de omni nacione concorditer in die Coronacionis moderni pontificis comme-
morati, dummodo papa exivit de capella majori, flexis genibus volebant petere
licenciam, sed non exauditi. Omnes pariter clamabant voce lacrimabili licen-
ciam, licenciam, sequendo dominum nostrum usque ad locum consistorialem.
. . . Omnes habent animum recedendi, sed non audent et nee habent lucrum,
stant in tribulacionibus.'
2 Pacta, in Martene, ^mj). Coll. viii. 580.
VOL. II. G
g2 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK rupture. The Council loudly exclaimed that the Pope had
ill. beguiled the King under the pretence of a coronation, and
meant to keep him in Kome as a protection to himself. Sigis-
mund, however, hastened his coronation, and on May 2 1 entered
Kome with an escort of 600 knights and 800 foot. Kiding
beneath a golden canopy he was met by the city magistrates
and a crowd of people. The bystanders thought that his
deportment showed a just mixture of affability and dignity ; his
smiling face wore an expression of refinement and geniality,
while his long grizzly beard lent majesty to his appearance.1
On the steps of S. Peter's, Eugenius in pontifical robes greeted
Sigismund, who kissed his foot, his hand, his face. After mass
was said Sigismund took up his abode in the palace of the
Cardinal of Aries, close to S. Peter's. On Whit Sunday, May 31,
the coronation took place. Before the silver door of S. Peter's,
Sigismund swore to observe all the constitutions made by his
predecessors, as far back as Constantine, in favour of the Church.
Then the Pope proceeded to the high altar and Sigismund was
conducted by three Cardinals to the Church of S. John Lateran,
where before the altar of S. Maurice he was consecrated canon
of the Church. He returned to S. Peter's, and took his place
by the side of the Pope, each seated under a tabernacle erected
for the purpose. The mass was begun, and after the epistle the
Pope and Sigismund advanced to the altar. The Pope set on
Sigismund's head first the white mitre of a bishop, and then the
golden crown ; he took from the altar, and gave into his hands,
the sword, the sceptre, and the golden apple of the Empire.
When the mass was ended the Pope and Emperor gave one
another the kiss of peace. Then Sigismund took the sword in
his hand, and Eugenius, holding the crucifix, gave him his solemn
benediction. When this was over they walked side by side to
the church door ; the Pope mounted his mule, which Sigismund
led by the bridle for a few paces and then mounted his horse.
Eugenius accompanied him to the bridge of S. Angelo, where
Sigismund kissed his hand and he returned to the Vatican. On
1 Poggio, in a letter toNiccolo Niccoli, in Baluze, Miscell. iii. 184, describes
Sigismund's entrance and coronation ; of himself he says : ' Aspectu perlmmanus,
ridenti similis, facie hilari atque liberali, barba subcana ac prolixa, ea inest in
vultu comitas et majestas, ut qui ilium ignorarent ipso conspectu et oris
egregia specie creterorum regem opinarentur.'
SIGISMUND MEDIATES BETWEEN THE POPE AND THE COUNCIL. 83
the bridge Sigismund, according to custom, exercised his new
authority by dubbing a number of knights, Eomans and
Germans, amongst others his chancellor Caspar Schlick. The
Imperial procession went through the streets to the Lateran,
where Sigismund dismounted.
The days that followed were spent in formal business such
as Sigismund delighted in. Letters had to be written, and all
grants and diplomas given by the King of the Eomans needed
the Imperial confirmation, which was a source of no small profit
to the Imperial chancery. It is worth noticing that after his
coronation Sigismund engraved on his seal a double eagle, to
mark the union of his dignities of Emperor and Roman King.
From this time dates the use of the double-headed eagle as the „
Imperial ensign.
It soon, however, became obvious that Sigismund's corona-
tion had affected his relations towards the Council. He was between
still anxious for its success in the important points of the recon- j^d t^Q
ciliation of the Bohemians ; but he had no longer any interest Council.
in the constitutional question of the relations which ought to August,
exist between Popes and General Councils. No doubt this ques
tion had been a useful means of bringing EugeniusIV.to acknow^
ledge the Council ; now that he had done so, and Sigismund had
obtained from the Pope what he wanted, his instincts as a prac
tical statesman taught him that in the midst of the agitation of
European politics it was hopeless for a Council to continue on
abstract grounds a struggle against the Pope, which could
only lead to another schism. On June 4 he wrote to the
Council announcing his coronation, and saying that he found in
the Pope the best intentions towards furthering all the ob-»
jects which the Council had at heart.1 His envoys on their
arrival at Basel found the Council preparing accusations against
Eugenius, and the seven Cardinals present engaged in dis
cussing the canonicity of his election. They had some diffi
culty in persuading the Council to moderation, but at last
obtained on July 13 a decree which, while denouncing in no
measured terms the contumacy of Eugenius IV., extended again
for sixty days the period for an unreserved withdrawal of his Bull
of dissolution, and for a declaration of his entire adhesion to
the Council. If he did not comply within that time, the
1 Letter in Martene, Am}). Coll. viii. 607.
o 2
84 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK Council would at once proceed to his suspension. Eugenius,
. IIiL ^ trusting to the help of Sigismund, showed a less conciliatory
spirit ; for he issued a Bull withdrawing from the Council
all private questions, and limiting its activity to the three
points of the extirpation of heresy, the pacification of Chris
tendom, and the reform of manners. In the same sense
Sigismund's envoys on August 18 brought a message to the
Council, exhorting to greater diligence in the matters of paci
fication and reform, for so far no fruits of its energies were
apparent. He warned it against creating a schism, for after
extinguishing one at Constance he would rather die than see
another.1 He begged the Fathers to suspend all proceedings
against the Pope till his arrival at Basel, when he hoped to
remove all difficulties between them and the Pope. The
Council answered that it was the Pope and not the Council
that was causing a schism ; the relations of the Pope to a General
Council was a matter concerning the faith and the reformation
of the Church, and nothing could be done on these points till
the present scandal was removed. Sigismund, in fact, was
asking the Council to desist from measures which he had for
merly urged. The Council naturally demanded securities for
the future. Its position was undoubtedly logical, though
practically unwise. Eugenius IV., to strengthen Sigismuud's
hands, issued a Bull on August 1 expressing, at Sigismund's
request, his ' willingness and acquiescence ' (volumus et con-
tentamur) that the Council should be recognised as valid from
its commencement. He declared that he entirely accepted the
Council, and demanded that his legates should be admitted as
presidents, and that all proceedings against his person and
authority should be rescinded. The Fathers at Basel naturally
looked closely into the language of the Bull. They were not
satisfied that the validity of the Council from the beginning
should merely be tolerated by the Pope. They wished for the
Papal < decree and declaration ' (decernimus et declaramus) that
it had been valid all along. Every step towards concilia
tion only brought into greater prominence the fact that the
1 John of Segovia, 409 : ' Porro quia nephandum scisma extinctum fuerat
in Constanciensi Concilio, pro qua re tot tantosque labores sustinuisset, avisabat
taliter fieri ne suscitaretur, quia preeligeret mori quam suis diebus scisma
videre.' See also letter of August 3 in Martene, Amp. Coll. viii. 626.
SIGISMUND AND EUGENIUS IV. 85
Council claimed to be superior to the Pope, and that Eugenius CHAP.
was determined not to suffer any derogation from the Papal . Iy* .
autocracy.1
In this view of Eugenius IV. Sigismund acquiesced. He
wished the Council to engage in more practical business, and he the Pope's
dreaded as a statesman the consequences of another schism. gust' 1433.
In this he was joined by the Kings of England and France,
the German Electors, and the Duke of Burgundy. All of them
urged upon the Council the inexpediency of provoking a schism.
Eugenius IV. 's repeated attempts at compromise at length
created a feeling of sympathy in his favour. He had given
way, it was urged, on the practical points at issue. The Council
did not meet with much attention when it answered that he
had not conceded the principle which was at stake in the con
flict. The great majority were in favour of proceeding to the
suspension of Eugenius IV. when the term expired ; but the
remonstrances of the Imperial ambassadors, and the considera
tion that an open breach with Sigismund would render Basel
an insecure place for the Council, so far prevailed that in the
session of September 11 a further term of thirty days was
granted to Eugenius IV., on the understanding that within that
time Sigismund would appear in Basel.
Sigismund meanwhile at Eome had been employing his Sigismund
versatile mind in studying the antiquities of the city, and Basel.
drinking in the enthusiasm of the Renaissance under the
guidance of the famous antiquary Ciriaco of Ancona. He lived
in familiar intercourse with Eugenius IV., and a story is told
which illustrates the mixture of penetration and levity which
marked Sigismund's character. One day he said to the Pope,
' Holy Father, there are three things in which we are alike,
and three in which we are different. You sleep in the morning,
I rise before daybreak; you drink water, I wine; you shun
women, I pursue them. But in some things we agree : you
distribute the treasures of the Church, I keep nothing for my-
1 See an interesting letter of Eugenius IV. to the Doge of Venice, in Ray-
naldus, 1433, 19 : « Potius enim hanc Apostolicam dignitatem et vitam insuper
possuissemus quam voluissemus esse causa et initium ut Pontificalis dignitas
et Apostolicae sedis auctoritas submitteretur Concilio, contra omnes canonicas
sanctiones ; quod nunquam antea neque aliquis nostrorum predecessorum
fecit, neque ab ullo extuit requisitum, atque in hoc ipse postmodum imperator
acquievit.'
86 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK self; you have gouty hands, I gouty feet ; you are bringing the
._ m" - Church and I the Empire to the ground.' But these days of
peaceful enjoyment were disturbed by the news from Basel,
where it was clear that Sigismund's presence was needed. On
August 21 he left Rome, and journeyed through Perugia, Rimini,
and Ferrara to Mantua. He would not go through the territories
of the Duke of Milan, against whom he nourished the deepest
anger. Venice took occasion of his wrath to make an alliance
with him for five years, in return for which they gave the
needy Emperor ten thousand ducats to pay the expenses of his
journey from Rome to Germany. From Mantua Sigismund
hastened to Basel, so as to reach it at the end of the term
granted to the Pope. He arrived unexpectedly on October 1 1 ,
having come through the Tyrol to the Lake of Constance, and
thence by boat to Basel. So hasty had been his journey that
he brought little baggage with him, and before entering Basel
the Imperial beggar had to send to the magistrates for a pair
of shoes.
The Fathers of the Council hastily assembled to show Sigis-
such honour as they could. He was escorted to the
IV. Oct. Cathedral, where he took his place on the raised seat generally
occupied by the cardinals, who now sat on lower benches.
There he addressed the congregation, setting forth his zeal
for the Council's cause, as his hasty journey testified ; he asked
for further delay in the proceedings against the Pope, that he
might carry out successfully the work of pacification on which
he was engaged. To this the Council did not at once assent,
but urged that the Pope's suspension might help on Sigis
mund's endeavours. Murmurs were heard on all sides, and it
was clear that Sigismund's authority was not omnipotent at
Basel. The Council was filled with the enemies of Eugenius
IV., and was convinced of its own power and importance.
Sigismund reminded the Fathers that the Emperor was guar
dian of the temporalities of the Church. He was answered that
it was also his duty to execute the decrees of the Church. He
angrily asserted that neither he nor any of the kings and
princes of Christendom would permit the horrors of another
schism. In his vehemence he forgot his Latin, and gave
schisma the feminine gender. It was maliciously said that he
wished to show the Council how dear the matter was to his
SIGISMUND AT BASEL. 87
heart.1 At last the Council, which was not really in a position
to resist, reluctantly granted a prolongation of the term to
Eugenius IV. for eight days.
Sigismund found it necessary to change his tactics and Proionga-
listen to the Council's side of the quarrel, as at Rome he had term°
listened to the Pope. He conferred with the ambassadors and £rante.d to
r .bugemus
with the chiefs of the Council, and was present at a public dis- iv. No-
putation on October 16 between the president, Cesarini, and 1433.
the Papal envoys. Cesarini spoke for three hours in behalf of a
Council's superiority over a Pope. He argued that the Bulls of
Eugenius IV. refused to admit this proposition, and that without
securing the means of a reformation of the head of the Church it '
was useless to reform the members ; as to the Pope's demand
that all proceedings against himself should be revoked, there
were no proceedings if only he did his duty. On behalf of
Eugenius IV. the Archbishop of Spoleto urged the sufficiency
and reasonableness of his proposal, to revoke his decrees against
the Council if the Council would revoke its proceedings against
himself. There were replies and counter-repbes, but both
parties were equally far from an agreement. A second pro
longation of eight days to Eugenius IV. was obtained by Sigis
mund by a repetition of his former assertion, that he could not
endure a schism. This was succeeded by a third, on which
Sigismund repeated an old doggerel about the three Emperors
Otto, which afforded him a pun on the eight days (octo dies) of
the prolongation :
Otto post Otto regnabit tertius Otto.
Sigismund and the ambassadors of France united in urging the
Council to give Eugenius IV. a security that no proceedings
would be taken affecting his title to the Papacy. Words ran
high on this proposal, and at length, on November 7, Sigismund's
persistency succeeded in extorting from the Council a further
term of ninety days, within which the Pope was to explain the
1 John of Segovia, p. 465, from whom this account is taken, is clearly
trying to elevate a current witticism to the dignity of history when he says :
' Cum vero de scismate loquebatur, ut communiter usus est genere feminino,
judicio autem presencium non generis neutri ignarus aut immemor, sed ut
attenciores redderet audientes percipere, que de scismate loquebatur, cordi
ejus radicitus inesse.'
88
BOOK
III.
Decree es
tablishing
synodal
action
through
out the
Church.
November
26, 1433.
Struggles
about pre
cedence.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
ambiguities in his decrees by revoking anything which could
be construed to the ' derogation or prejudice ' of the Council.
In the interval Sigismund urged the Council to proceed with
the question of reform, a matter which had been making little
progress during the excitement of this conflict with the Pope.
The only point in which the Council had taken up reform was to
use it as a weapon against the Pope. On July 13 a decree had
been passed abolishing reservations and provisions except in the
domain of the Holy See, and enacting that elections should be
made only by those to whom the right belonged, and that no
dues be paid for Papal confirmation. This was merely an on
slaught on the Pope's revenues, and was scarcely meant seriously.
In answer to Sigismund's exhortations the Council embodied,
in a decree on November 26, the only point on which there was
agreement, the revival of the synodal system of the Church.
The Council's scheme of reform was to extend the conciliar sys
tem to all parts of the ecclesiastical organisation. By means of
diocesan synods the bishops were to put down heresies and
remedy scandals in their respective dioceses, and were to be
themselves restrained by provincial synods, whose activity was
to be in turn ensured by the recurrence of General Councils.
It was on all grounds easier to agree on machinery which was to
deal with questions in the future than to amend abuses in the
present.
Even this measure of reform was secondary to a violent dis
pute which convulsed the Council concerning precedence in
seats at the sessions between the ambassadors of the Imperial
Electors and those of the Duke of Burgundy. So keen was the
contention that it almost prevented the solemn celebration of the
Christmas services, and was only ended in July, 1434, by assign
ing a separate bench to the representatives of the Electors
immediately below the cardinals, and arranging that the Bur-
gundian envoys should sit next to those of kings. This burning
question was further complicated by the claims of the envoys
of the Duke of Brittany to be as good as those of the Duke of
Burgundy ; at last it was arranged that the Burgundians should
sit on the right, the Bretons on the left.
In the middle of the controversy came envoys from Euge-
nius IV., on January 30, 1434, announcing that he had at last
given way. They brought a Bull revoking all previous Bulls
EUGENIUS IV. KECOGNISES THE COUNCIL. 89
against the Council, acknowledging its legitimacy from its CHAP.
beginning, and declaring fully the Pope's adhesion to it.
Great was Sigismund's joy at this triumph of his mediatorial
policy. Grreat was the relief of all parties at Basel when, in the _
sixteenth session on February 3, the Council decreed that cii. Janu-
Eugenius IV. had fully satisfied their admonition and summons.
It was under the pressure of necessity that Eugenius IV. had
given way. His impetuous rashness had raised up enemies
against him on every side. He had begun his pontificate by
attacking the powerful family of the Colonna. He had plunged
into Italian politics as a strong friend of Venice, and thereby
had drawn upon himself the animosity of the wily Duke of
Milan. With these elements of disturbance at his doors he
had not hesitated to bid defiance to a Council which had the
support of the whole of Christendom. Basel had become in
consequence the resort of the personal and political enemies of
the Pope, and on Sigismund's departure from Kome Eugenius was
threatened in his own city. The Duke of Milan sent against
him the condottiere Niccolo de Fortebracchio, nephew of
Braccio da Montone, who on August 25, 1433, captured Ponte
Molle. The Pope fled for safety to the Church of S. Lorenzo
in Damaso, and in vain called for help. Fortebracchio, aided
by the Colonna party, took possession of Tivoli and styled him
self < the General of the Holy Council.' Francesco Sforza, won
over to the side of the Duke of Milan by the promise of the
hand of his natural daughter Bianca, invaded the March of
Ancona, and scornfully dated his letters ' invito Petro et
Paulo,' 'against the will of Peter and Paul.' The Duke of Milan
was supported by the Council,1 which Sigismund in vain tried to
interest in the pacification of Italy. The name of the Council
lent a colourable pretext to all acts of aggression. Euge
nius IV. found himself destitute of allies. Never had the
Papacy been in a more helpless condition. No course was pos
sible except submission.
Accordingly Eugenius IV. made his peace with the Coun- Rising in
cil, and then proceeded to face his enemies at home. He de- against
tached Francesco Sforza from the side of the Duke of Milan by T^e"ius
* IV. May
29, 1434^
1 John of Segovia, 532: 'Plures littere ex Ytalia particulariter destinate
affirmabant, quod eciam absque ulla vi, audito quod nomine concilii habere
yellet, terre et civitates marchie Anconitane reddebant se comiti Francisco.'
90
THE COUNCIL OF BASKL.
BOOK
III.
Flight of
Eugenius
IV. to
Florence.
June 1434.
appointing him, on March 25, Vicar of the March of Ancona
which he had overrun. Sforza willingly exchanged the dubious
promises of Filippo Maria Visconti for an assured position.
But the Duke of Milan sent to the aid of Fortebracchio
the condottiere Niccolo Piccinino ; before their superior
forces Sforza was driven to retire, and the blockade of Kome
was continued. The sufferings of a siege were more than the
Romans cared to endure for the sake of an unpopular Pope.
It was easy for the foes of Eugenius IV. to raise the people in
rebellion. A crowd flocked to S. Maria in Trastevere, whither
Eugenius had retired for safety, to lay their grievances before
the Pope, They were referred to his nephew, the Cardinal Fran
cesco Correr, who listened to them with haughty indifference.
When they complained of the loss of their cattle, he answered
that they busied themselves too much about cattle ; the Venetians
who had none led a much more refined and civilised life.1 The
remark might be true, but it was not consoling. The people
resolved to take matters into their own hands, and on the even
ing of May 29 raised the old cry of * The people and freedom ! '
stormed the Capitol, and set up once more their old republic
under seven governors. Next day they demanded of the Pope
that he should hand over to them the castles of S. Angelo and
Ostia, give them his nephew as a hostage, and come himself to
take up his abode in the palace of his predecessor by the
Church of SS, Apostoli. When Eugenius refused, his nephew
was dragged away by force in spite of his entreaties, and he was
threatened with imprisonment. Eugenius heard that the
palace by SS. Apostoli was being prepared for his custody, and
he knew that there he would be the prisoner of the Council
and the Duke of Milan.
There was no escape except by flight, which was difficult, as
his abode was closely guarded. At last a pirate of Ischia,
Vitellio, who had a ship at Ostia, was prevailed upon to help
the Pope in his need. His aid was secured just in time, as on
the evening of June 4 the Pope was to be removed to the
palace by SS. Apostoli. At midday, when everyone was taking
his siesta, Eugenius and one of his attendants, disguised as
Benedictine monks, escaped the vigilance of the sleepy guards,
mounted a couple of mules and rode to the Tiber bank, where a
1 Platina, Vita Etigenii IV.
FLIGHT OF EUGENIUS IV. FEOM EOME. 91
small dirty boat was prepared for them. A few bishops professed
to be waiting for an audience with the Pope, so as to lull the
suspicions of his guards. But the two mules left riderless on the
bank, and the unwonted energy of the rowers, made the spec
tators give the alarm. The people of Trastevere gave chase
along the bank, hurling stones and shooting arrows at the boat.
The wind was contrary, the bark was crazy, the crowd of pur
suers increased along both banks ; Eugenius lay at the bottom of
the boat covered by a shield. When the Church of S. Paolo was
passed, and the river became broader, the fugitives hoped that
their danger was over ; but the Eomans ran on before, and seized
a fishing boat, which, filled with armed men, they laid across
the stream. Luckily for Eugenius his boat was commanded by
one of the pirate's crew whose courage was equal to the occa
sion. In vain the Romans hurled their darts, and promised him
large sums of money if he would deliver up the Pope. He
ordered his boat to charge the enemy. Their boat was old
and rotten, and they feared the encounter. The prow turned
aside and the Pope's boat shot safely past. Eugenius could
now rise from his covering of shields, and sit upright with a
sigh of thankfulness. He reached Ostia in safety and went on
board the pirate's ship. There he was joined by a few mem
bers of the Curia who had succeeded in fleeing. He sailed to
Pisa, and thence made his way to Florence, where he was
honourably received on June 23, and like his predecessor,
Martin V., took up his abode in the cloister of S. Maria Novella.1
There he could reflect that his inconsiderate obstinacy had en
dangered at Basel his spiritual supremacy, and had handed over
his temporal possessions to the condottieri of the Duke of
Milan.
1 The flight of Eugenius is graphically described by Flavins Blondus,
Decades, iii. 6. See also the account of the Roman ambassadors to the Council
in John of Segovia, 717.
92 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
CHAPTER V.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL AND THE HUSSITES.
1432-1434.
B?RK ^F ^ne downfall of Eugenius IV. was due to his obstinacy, the
Desire of"' Pres^ge °f the Council, which enabled it to reap the advantage
Bohemia of his weakness, was due to the hopes which were conceived of
a peaceable ending of the Bohemian revolt. It was much easier
for a Council than for a Pope to open negotiations with vic
torious heretics, and the Bohemians on their side were not
averse from an honourable peace. Bohemia, with a population
of four or five millions, had suffered much during its ten years'
struggle against the rest of Europe. Its victories were ruinous to
the conquerors ; its plundering raids brought no real wealth.
The commerce of Bohemia was annihilated ; its lands were
uncultivated ; the nation was at the mercy of the Taborite
army, which no longer consisted solely of the God-fearing pea
sants, but was recruited by adventurers from the neighbouring
lands. The policy of Procopius the Great was, by striking terror,
to prepare the way for peace, that so Bohemia, with its religious
liberty assured, might again enter the confederacy of European
States. When the Council of Basel held out hopes of peace he
was ready to try what could be won ; and Bohemia consented to
send representatives to Basel for the purpose of discussion.
*ionPaof th Accordingly the Council proceeded to prepare for its great
Council for undertaking. In November 1432 it appointed four doctors,
enoe with John of Ragusa, a Slav ; Giles Carlier, a Frenchman ; Hein-
in?aM°he" ric^ Kalteisen, a German ; and John of Palomar, a Spaniard, to
November undertake the defence of the Church doctrine against the four
articles of Prag. These doctors zealously studied their case with
the aid of all the theologians present at Basel. As the time of
the advent of the Bohemians drew near, strict orders were
THE BOHEMIANS IN BASEL. 93
given to the citizens to abstain from everything that might CHAP.
shock the Puritanism of their expected guests.1 Prostitutes > ,1 ,
were not to walk the streets ; gambling and dancing were for
bidden ; the members of the Council were enjoined to maintain
strict sobriety, and beware of following the example of the
Pharisees of old, who taught well and lived ill. At the same
time guards were set to see that the Bohemians did not spread
their errors in the seat of the Council. On the part of the
Bohemians seven nobles and eight priests, headed by Procopius
the Great, were chosen by a Diet as their representatives at Arrival of
Basel. They rode with their attendants through Germany, a
stately cavalcade of fifty horsemen, with a banner bearing their
device of a chalice, under which was the inscription, ' Veritas
omnia vincit ' (Truth conquers all). In alarm lest their entry
into Basel might seem like a demonstration and cause scandal,
Cesarini sent to beg them to lay aside their banner. Before
his messenger reached them they had taken boat at Schaff-
hausen, and entered Basel, quietly and unexpectedly, on the
evening of January 4, 1433. The citizens flocked to gaze on
them, wondering at the strange dress, the resolute faces, and
fierce eyes of the men who had wrought such terrible deeds
of valour.2 They were conducted to their hotels, where several
members of the Council visited them, and Cesarini sent them
presents of food. On January 6, the festival of the Epiphany,
they celebrated the Communion in their lodgings, and curiosity
drew many to attend their services. They noticed that the
Pragers used vestments and observed the customary ritual, with
the sole exception that they communicated under both kinds.
Procopius and the Taborites, on the other hand, used no
vestments nor altar, and discarded the mass-service. After
consecration of the elements they said the Lord's Prayer
and communicated round a table. A sermon was preached in
German, at which many Catholics were present. This scan
dalised Cesarini, who sent for the Bohemians, and requested
them to discontinue preaching in German. They answered
that many of their followers were Germans, and the sermons
were for their benefit ; they had the right of performing their
1 John of Ragusa, Tractatus de Pednctione Bokemorvm, in Mon. Con.
i. 258 ; John of Segovia, ii. 298.
2 ^En. Sylvius, Hist. Bokcm. ch. xlix.
94 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK services as they thought fit, and meant to use it ; they invited
, ll*- ^ no one to come, but they were not bound to prevent them from
doing so. Cesarini sent to the magistrates of the city a request
that they would prevent the people from attending their preach
ings. The magistrates took no measures for this end ; but after
a few days the crowd grew weary of the novelty, and ceased of
its own accord to attend. John of Eagusa makes a sage re
mark, which the advocates of religious protection would do well
to remember : ' Freedom and neglect succeeded where restraint
and prohibition would have failed, for human frailty is always
eager after what is forbidden.' l The Bohemians, on their side,
asked to be present at the sermons preached before the Coun
cil ; permission was given on condition that they entered the
cathedral after the reading of the Grospel, and left when the
sermon was ended, so as not to be present at any part of the
mass service.
hmries'of Next day, January 7, Procopius invited John of Eagusa and
the con- others to dine; they had a general theological discussion, in
January which the predestinarian views of the Hussites came promi
nently forward. Most skilful among their controversialists was
an Englishman, Peter Payne, an Oxford Lollard, who had fled to
Bohemia, whom John of Eagusa found to be as slippery as a
snake.2
On January 9 the Council ordained that Wednesdays and
Fridays should be strictly kept as fast days, and prayers for
union be said during the period of the negotiations with the
Bohemians. A solemn procession was made for success in this
arduous matter; forty-nine mitred prelates and about eight
hundred other members of the Council took part in it. The
Bohemians asked when and where they were to have an audi
ence. Cesarini fixed the next day in the ordinary meeting
place of congregations, the Dominican monastery. The Bohe
mians objected to the place as being too small and out of the
way ; but Cesarini was firm in refusing to depart from the
usage of the Council.
1 « Unde factum est per neglectam licentiam, quod nullo modo factum
fuisset per exactam prohibitionem, quia humana fragilitas semper nititur in
vetitum.' — Hon. Condi, i. 259.
2 ' Ipse Anglicus tanquam anguis lubricus quanto strictius teneri videbatur
et concludi tanto citius ad impertinentes dilabebatur materias.'— Ibid. 260.
Some information about Payne and his aliases is given in Rogers' Loci e Libra
Veritatis of Gascoign, p. 186, &c.
CONFERENCE WITH THE BOHEMIANS. 95
On January 10 the congregation assembled, and seats were
assigned to the Bohemians on two rows of benches opposite the
cardinals. Cesarini opened the proceedings with a long and
eloquent oration, in which, speaking in the person of the
Church, he exhorted all to unity and peace, and addressed the
Bohemians as sons whom their mother yearned to welcome
back to her bosom. On the part of the Bohemians, John of
Rokycana arose and took for his text, * Where is He that is
born King of the Jews ? We have seen his star in the east,
and are come to worship Him.' He said that the Bohemians
were seeking after Christ, and, like their Master, had been evil
spoken of; he asked the Council not to be astonished if they
said strange things, for truth was often found in strange ways ;
he praised the primitive Church and denounced the vices of the
clergy of the present day. Finally, he thanked the Council for
its courtesy, and asked for a day to be fixed for a full hearing.
Cesarini answered that the Council was ready at any time ;
after a private conference, the Bohemians fixed the next Friday,
January 16.
The Bohemians brought with them to the Council the same
spirit of reckless daring which had characterised them on the
field of battle. Only on January 13 did they arrange finally
their spokesmen, whereas the theologians of the Council had
been for two months preparing their separate points. Each
day the Bohemians paid visits to the cardinals and prelates ;
they were received as a rule with great friendliness. At first
some of the Cardinals tended to be cold, if not discourteous ; but
Cesarini's anxious efforts to promote conciliatory conduct were
in the end successful, and free social intercourse was established
between the two parties. In a few days' time a cardinal dis
covered at least one bond of union between himself and the
Bohemians ; he laughingly said to Procopius, ' If the Pope had
us in his power, he would hang us both.'
On January 16 the proceedings began with a ratification of Rokycana's
the safe-conduct, and a formal verification of the powers of the theFirs?
Bohemian representatives. Then John of Rokycana began the Article of
controversy by a defence of the First Article of Prag, concerning ; January
the Communion under both kinds. He argued from the nature 1433^
of the rite, from the words of the Gospel, the custom of the ^
primitive Church, the decrees of the General Councils and the
UN rot'NOll« OK lU
I.....K
Ul
f
N<, .Ml. I
VkMvof
TMixl
AnWta,
•• ••
tostiwonios of (ho Kathors, (hut it \va« not onl^v pormissihlo hut
uooossarvi Hirt sp\wh oxtoudod ovoi1 thwo da^'s* wud was li«-
tondod to with git^^t «tt^utli»uJ NVI^u ho muUnl I^H»OJ>I»»M
DjU'uu^ to hU (Wt — w nmu of inultllo ht^ight» of ittUwwt tVnino,
\\\(\\ u H\vuv(hv ftu'o, Iwgo tluHhiu^^YoHj uud n tlo»voo,\|n^«>iiou of
wmuttmttuw. \\v vu^Hiouut^Iy exhort ^1 (\\v\\\ to opou thoir
to i'i- i..- [-. i truth} (luM\uuhunuou \\ \ u lu^tu'tMtlv ban-
, to \vhioh till woiv invlt^lt lot \\\v\\\ I^NVWIV lont tht*%y In-
owwl pnnijihinont by tloMpUiug it» fov(hni oouhl vimlioutt) IIU
own, Tht* li%!itl\»M.-i lunu'il \vith unu^tMnont ilu--.,- oxptvHHionn of
H forvont oouviotion tlmt vight t^onhl bo on tl\o **i<lo oppotuMl to
tho Oh\uvh»* (V«nrl\\i with hi>* \vonttMl tnot intorju^rni to p^«
vont M\ \\\\\\\\\v\y ontlnv^k of w\\ on tho j^o't ivf (ho (\mnoil,
llo »*\i^o»ttMl that tho l».«li, ni\ in l\,MiKI th'fit npoak and thon
anbn\it thoir argnwonta in \vriti\^, HO that tht\y
fnllv anxwovod on tho Mv of tho (\muoil. Thi* TOM*
tO, iu,l l !». i . in!-U ,!i pOlfitnl,
On Ja\\narv i)0» Nioola»* of Pilgvmu boy^an tho dofonoo of tho
Soooud AHiolo of Prwjf tho sn|»pvoH>*io\v of pnblio **i\v». Ho
«poko for twt^ dw^v*, h\»t \\\\ tho »*ooond day did uot in\itato tho
wodoration of l\okvoa\u\. Ho uttaokoil tho vioo* »>f tho
thoir aiwotvv, thoiv hiudra\»oo of tho Word of Uod; ho
IM.M. lu-.i ilu-ni with tho doathn of iin-. nud .i.-i.-m,
waintlv livon ho vlofondod, A nmmmr avoao in ti^o
»on\o langl\od mwnfnllv% \>thora gnashotl thoir tooth t
>vith t\v|do\l hands lookod up i(\ hoavon, Tho spotvkor a?*kv\l it
ho wan to havo a fair hoaving a\n<oi\ling to jmxnuxo, (V^nun
imntoaUy a\\j*wo^d» * Yo»»% bnt jwuao »ion\otin\o»* to lot u« oloar
onv thiH^ts,* Nioolas \vo\\t ou \\\i\\ his spoooh, Aftoi\\;>ui.
Kokvoana blan\ovl him for tho bittornoHa of his iuvootivo» :uul
oxjwssod a \vish to spoak himsolf o« tlvo Thinl Artiolo, Ho
was ovorvnlod bv tho othor ftlttbftftfttdwf) <n»»l v>ul\ at tho last
uuvtnont was it dot\\uto^y sottlod that IMrioh of /vnaim was to
to thoiv spokesman,*
On %law\arv 5iH IMvioK bov^an his av^nwonts for tho tWodom
of pwaohtagi aivd also spoko for txw^ilays, urging (ho snpivnmov
H U
\\\
vtU,
(U)NJWHKN(M WITH Till1: UniiKMIANH, :>V
of th* Word of God over the won! of roan, the danger of tht
Hiihrtiiiulii.il i,r Hie one for I In* oihw, thfl dignity of the true ,
prieHt, und hiw duly to preach <«•"! Word in ipltft of ftll §n«
deHVourw to prevent him.1 At MM- end of MH Brit dny'tf speech
Uokyeitnu roue mid wtid I lint ho hud hiMi.nl (Iwt UIH HohemijiUM
were nflousod of throwing HUOW »tt u crucifix on ih<- hn'dge j they
witthfd l.o deny it, itud if it could he |.,.. . -i u, ,i uuy of their
iii- i. -I. ni hud done HO h«'' nhoidd l» piiiiirtlii'd, ( '('Hiii'ini
..i. . .. -i Hint luituy tiilnN wnrn (old nhout their doingn, which,
i... • . • . i . 1 1,. Council had i. ..i . -i to . ..-I..,. UH well HH their
Hjieechew. He wished, however, that tiiey would rentmiu (Jieir
. i M,I hum goiiifj iuto the ueighhoiiring villa^eH to Hpreiid
fl>< u .1... i,,,,. Hd wiiti .i. -.i. -I i I.. i the . . ,i.i ..uly
went to get fodder (or (Jie i.-.i . nnd if 1 1.- .., ,,.... (jenuiiUM
nnked (hem (pieHliouH, Much iiH, whelJier they held I he Virgin
Mury i" he a virgin, no grciit Inmii WHH done if they iiUHWered,
* Yen.1 They proirUied, however, to wee to (he nuttter.
On Jimuiiry 14(1 1'nl-er I'nyne hegiui it (hree dnyn1 wpeech on
Ihe. lenipnnd | >MMHeHHJ(»iiH of Mm clergy, lie ..In, .if.. I Mini
worldly good* were not to he entirely denied (hern, but, in thti jf"11.1"1,11
word* of H, l*»iul, luiving food nnd ruinienl, therewith (hey J»w»»ry
i, ..ni. i he content ; till Hii|ierl1ui(ieH tihould i.. • ui o(f from (hem,
iiiid they should in no eitHe exercJHe (c.in|»onil lordHhip.* When
he hud lininlied In itrgumenl, he mdd I hat thin doctrine WUH
(Miininoiily HUppoHed lo originuie from Wyclif j he referred (h«
Council, however, (o tht writings of Richard i'ii-.in»p of Armftghf
and w« nt mi to give M\ ruutount of Wyclif*H l-eiiching ni Oxford,
IIJH own ntniggleH in defence of W^diMte opinioiiH, und hiti
ni -i.i mi., r... i, .mi i When he hitd ended, Hokyoftnft thanked
i In Oounoll for th«tr pulient und kindly hearing ; if imylhing
I hat they hud Hiud conld I" proved (.o he erroneouH, (hey wero
willing (o .UN. nd it. I If. Asked (hut those who answered in the
Council'* hehiilf i....ii-i follow Iheir exiunple u,nd reduce tha
hrud of (heir urgUfnents to writing. ()ne of 11,. Hnln mi .m
iHihlcH, Hjieuking in (iermiin, thunlo'd VN'illiani of Mavariii. for hiti
prehcnce u.(, HP .1 1 . u i.. n Williiun uHHiired (hem of hin pro-
(eel ion, und promined toprooure for them U.H free, und c>omple(e
1 Tliu Hjioiush \a jjlvBM in Mm'tone, .I///// /'.•// viH, HOfi,
V Tlio b^h<i|..:i.i I., .11.!., i in lo Hi.-, d, unc.il IB t;iv.-.ii l.y John ,,| Ki.i.' ut.i,
It, 870,
V0|<. II. II
98
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Answer of
John of
Kagusa.
January
31-Febru-
ary 7.
a hearing as they wished. Cesarini then proceeded to settle the
preliminaries of the Council's reply. First he asked if all the
Bohemians were unanimous in their adhesion to the arguments
set forth by their speakers : he was answered * Yes.' Cesarini
then commented on the various points in the Bohemian speeches
which gave him hopes of reconciliation. He said that the
Council was resolved not to be offended at anything which was
said contrary to the orthodox belief: but if any concord was
to be obtained they must have everything under discussion.
Besides the Four Articles, which had been put forward, he believed
there were other points in which the Bohemians differed from
the Church. One of their speakers had called Wyclif 'the
evangelical doctor ' ; with a view to discover how far they held
with Wyclif he handed to them twenty-eight propositions taken
from Wyclif s writings and six other questions, opposite to each
of which he asked that they would write whether they held it or
no. The Bohemians asked to deliberate before answering. It
was the first attempt of the Council to break the ranks of the
Bohemians by bringing to light the differences which existed
amongst them.
On January 31 the reply on the part of the Council was
begun. First came a sermon from a Cistercian abbot, which
gave offence to the Bohemians by exhorting them to submit to
the Council. Then John of Eagusa began his proof that the
reception of the Communion under both kinds was not neces
sary and, when forbidden by the Church, was unlawful. His
speech, which was a tissue of scholastic explanations of texts and
types and passages from the Fathers, lasted till February 12. He
angered the Bohemians by his tediousness and by the assump
tions, which underlaid his speech, that they were heretics.
Some stormy interruptions took place in consequence. On Feb
ruary 4 Procopius rose and protested against the tone adopted
by the Cistercian abbot and John of Kagusa. ' We are not
heretics,' he exclaimed ; ' if you say that we ought to return to
the Church, I answer that we have not departed from it, but
hope to bring others to it, you amongst the rest.' There was a
shout of laughter. < Is the speaker going to continue rambling
over impertinent matter ? Does he speak in his own name or in
that of the Council ? If in his own, let him be stopped : we
did not take the trouble to come here to listen to three or four
CONFERENCE WITH THE BOHEMIANS.
doctors.' The Cistercian abbot and John of Eagusa both excused
themselves from any intention of violating the compact under
which the Bohemians had come to Basel. Eokycana asked : ' You
talk of the Church : what is the Church ? We know what Pope
Eugenius says about you ; your head does not recognise you as
the Universal Church. But we care little for that and hope
only for peace and concord.' Cesarini exhorted both sides
to patience : he reminded the Bohemians that if they had
answered the twenty-eight articles proposed to them there
would be less doubt about their opinions, and it would be easier
to decide what was pertinent and what was not.
On February 10 there was another outburst of feeling. John
of Eagusa, in pursuing his argument respecting the authority of
the Church,' was examining objections that might be raised to his
positions. He introduced them by such phrases as ; a heretic
might object.' This enraged the Bohemians ; Eokycana rose
and exclaimed, c I abhor heresy, and if anyone suspects me of
heresy let him prove it.' Procopius, his eyes flashing with
rage, cried out, < We are not heretics nor has anyone proved us
to be such ; yet that monk has stood and called us so repeatedly.
If I had known this in Bohemia I would never have come here.'
John of Eagusa excused himself, saying, 4 May Grod show no
mercy to me if I had any intention of casting a slur on you.'
Peter Payne ironically exclaimed, ' We are not afraid of you ;
even if you had been speaking for the Council your words would
have had no weight.' Again Cesarini cast oil on the waters, be
seeching them to take all things in good part, ' There must be
altercations,' he truly said, * before we come to an agreement ;
a woman when she is in travail has sorrow.' Next day the
Archbishop of Lyons came to ask pardon for John of Eagusa.
The Bohemians demanded that the other three speakers should
be more brief and should speak in the name of the Council.
During the remainder of John's address Procopius and another
of the Bohemians refused to attend the conference.
It was agreed by the Council that the other three orators Further
should speak in the Council's name, reserving, however, the Jon"1*"
right of amending or adding to what they said. Matters now February
went more peaceably. The speeches of Carlier, Kalteisen, and 10.
John of Palomar, which were studiously moderate, extended till
February 28. Meanwhile the Bohemians, on being pressed to
H 3
100
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Private
confer
ences.
March 11-
April 13.
answer the twenty-eight articles submitted to them, showed
signs of their dissensions by standing on the treaty of Eger.
They said that they had only been commissioned to discuss the
Four Articles of Prag, and they did not think it right to com
plicate the business by introducing other topics.
The disputation had now come to an end ; but Kokycana
claimed to be allowed to answer some of the statements of John
of Kagusa, who demanded that, in that case, he should also have
the right of further reply. It was obvious that this procedure
might go on endlessly ; and Cesarini suggested that a committee
of four on each side should be nominated for private conference.
However, on March 2 Kokycana began his reply, which lasted
till March 10. When he had ended, John of Eagusa rose and
urged that the Bohemians were bound to hear him in reply.
The Bohemians announced that they would hear him if they
thought fit, but they were not bound to do so. * We will put
you to shame throughout the world,' said John angrily, ' if you
go away without hearing our answers.' Rokycana sarcastically
said that John of Ragusa scarcely maintained the dignity of a
doctor. ' And yet,' he added, ' before we came here, we had
never heard that there was such a person in the world. Still,
I have proved that his sayings are erroneous ; for is it not erro
neous,' and he raised his voice with passionate earnestness, ' to
say that either man or council can change the precepts of
Christ, who said, " Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my
words shall not pass away " ? '
It was clear that such war of orators was preventing rather
than furthering the union which both parties professed to seek.
William of Bavaria interposed his mediation ; and the Council
deputed fifteen members, chief of whom was Cesarini, to arrange
matters in private with the fifteen Bohemian representatives.
Their meetings, which began on March 11, were opened with
prayer by Cesarini, who exerted all his persuasive eloquence
and tact to induce the Bohemians to incorporate themselves
with the Council, which would then proceed to settle the dif
ferences existing between them. The discussions on this point
were at last summed up by Peter Payne : ' You say, " Be incor
porated, return, be united : " we answer, " Eeturn with us to the
primitive Church ; be united with us in the Grospel." We know
what power our voice has, so long as we are one party and you
CONFERENCE WITH THE BOHEMIANS. 101
another ; what power it would have after our incorporation ex- CHAP.
perience has abundantly shown.' The Bohemians began to speak ._ / .
of departing ; but a learned German theologian, Nicolas of Cusa,
raised the question — if the Council allowed the Bohemians the
Communion under both kinds, which they regarded as a matt'er
of faith, would they agree to incorporation ? if so, the other
questions, which only concerned morals, might be subjected to
discussion. At first the Bohemians suspected a snare ; but
William of Bavaria assured them of his sincerity. After de
liberating, the Bohemians refused incorporation, as being beyond
the powers given them as representatives ; moreover, if they
were incorporated and the Council decided against them, they
could not accept its decision. An attempt was made to advance
further by means of a smaller committee of four on each side ;
but it only became obvious that nothing more could be done
in Basel, that the Bohemian representatives were not disposed
to take any decided step, and that, if the Council intended
to proceed with the negotiations, they must send envoys to
Bohemia to treat with the Diet and the people.
Meanwhile disputations continued before the Council, in
which Eokycana, Peter Payne, and Procopius showed themselves
formidable controversialists. They had been formed in a ruder
and more outspoken school than that of the theological pro
fessors who were pitted against them. John of Eagusa espe
cially met with no mercy. One day he was so pedantic as to
say that he did not wish to derogate from the dignity of his
university. ' How so ? ' asked Rokycana. ' According to the
statutes,' said John of Ragusa, * a doctor is not bound to answer
a master ; nevertheless, as it concerns the faith, I will answer
you.' ' Certainly,' was the retort ; ' John of Ragusa is not better
than Christ ; nor John of Rokycana worse than the devil ;
yet Christ answered the devil/ Another time, when John of
Ragusa had been speaking at great length, Rokycana remarked,
' He is one of the preaching friars, and is bound to say a great
deal.' Kalteisen, in his reply to Ulrich of Zynaim, reproved him
for having said that monks were introduced by the devil. 6 I
never said so,' interrupted Ulrich. Procopius rose : ' I said one
day to the President, " If bishops have succeeded to the place
of the Apostles, and priests to the place of the seventy-two
disciples, to whom except the devil have the rest succeeded ? " '
102
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Departure
of the
Bohe
mians.
April H.
General
results of
the Confer
ence.
There was loud laughter, amid which Eokycana called out,
' Doctor, you should make Procopius Provincial of your Order.' 1
It was at length arranged that on April 14 the Bohemians
should return to their own land, whither the Council undertook
to send ten ambassadors who should treat with the Diet in
Prag. Procopius wrote to inform the Bohemians of this, and
urged them to assemble in numbers at the Diet on June 7, for
great things might be done. On April 13 the Bohemians took
farewell of the Council. Kokycana in the name of all expressed
their thanks for the kindness they had received. Then Pro
copius rose and said that he had often wished to speak, but
had never had an opportunity. He spoke earnestly about the
great work before the Council, the reformation of the Church,
which all men longed for with sighs and groans. He spoke of
the worldliness of the clergy, the vices of the people, the intru
sion into the Church of the traditions of men, the general
neglect of preaching. Cesarini, on the part of the Council, re
capitulated all that had been done, and begged them to continue
in Bohemia the work that he trusted had been begun in Basel.
He thanked Eokycana for his kindly words : turning to Pro
copius, he called him his personal friend and thanked him for
what he had said about the reformation of the Church, which
the Council would have been engaged in, if they had not been
employed in conference with the Bohemians. Finally he gave
them his benediction and shook them each by the hand. Eoky
cana also raised his hand, and in a loud voice said, ' May the
Lord bless and preserve this place in peace and quiet.' Then
they took their leave ; as they were going, a fat Italian arch
bishop ran after them and with tears in his eyes shook them by
the hand. On April 14 they left Basel, accompanied by the
ambassadors of the Council.
The Conference at Basel was most honourable to all who
jwere concerned in it ; it showed a spirit of straightforwardness,
Icharity, and mutual forbearance. It ^as no slight matter in
those days for a Council of theologians to endure to listen to
the arguments of heretics already condemned by the Church.
It was no small thing for the Bohemians, who were already
masters in the field, to curb their high spirit to a war of words.
1 These particulars are taken from the Liber Diurtius of Peter of Saaz, in
Mon. Condi, i., 348.
RESULTS OF THE CONFERENCE. 103
Yet, in spite of occasional outbursts, the general result of the CHAP.
conference at Basel wa,s to promote a good feeling between the - _ /
two parties. Free and friendly intercourse existed between the
Bohemians and the leading members of the Council, chiefly ,
owing to the exertions of Cesarini, whose nobility and generosity
of character produced a deep impression on all around him.
But in spite of the friendliness with which they were received,
and the personal affection which in some cases they inspired,
the Bohemians could not help being a little disappointed at
the general results of their visit to Basel. They had been
somewhat disillusioned. They came with the same moral
earnestness and childlike simplicity which had marked Hus at
Constance. They hoped that their words would prevail, that
their arguments would convince the Council that they were
not heretics, but rested on the Grospel of Christ. They were
chilled by the attitude of superiority which showed itself in all
the Council's proceedings, and which was the more irritating
because they could not formulate it in any definitely offensive
words or acts. The assumption of an infallible Church, to
which all the faithful were bound to be united, was one which
the Bohemians could neither deny nor accept. In Bohemia
the preachers had been wont to denounce those who departed
from the Gospel ; in Basel they found themselves the objects
of kindly reprobation because they had departed from the
Church.1 It gradually became clear that they were not likely
to induce the Council to reform the Church in accordance with
their principles : the utmost that would be granted wras a Con
cordat with Bohemia which would allow it to retain some of
its peculiar usages and opinions without separation from the
Catholic Church. The Bohemian representatives had failed to
convince the Council ; it remained to be seen if the good feel
ing which had grown up between the two contending parties
would enable the Council to extend, and the Bohemian people
to accept, a sufficient measure of toleration to prevent the
breach of the outward unity of the Church.
1 Peter of Saaz gives this picture in the account of a conversai ion between
the disputants at dinner with Cesarini : ' Dixit auditor : Augustinus dicta sua
ecclesiae judicanda commisit ; similiter Hieronymus Damaso Papas : quare vos
non? forte aestimatis vos ita sapientes esse, quasi errare non possetis in fide ?
Et sic omnem divisionem et bellorum causam retorquebant in nostros, no^tri
autem e con verso in eos, quia evangelio conlradicerent.' — Man. Condi, i. 320.
104 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK The ten ambassadors of the Council, chief amongst whom
. m' .... were the Bishops of Coutances and Augsburg, Giles Carlier,
In's envoys John of Paloinar5 Thomas Ebendorfer of Haselbach, Canon of
go to Prag. Vienna, John of Greilhausen, and Alexander, an Englishman,
1433. ' Archdeacon of Salisbury, travelled peaceably to Prag, where
they were received with every show of respect and rejoicing on
May 8. They spent the time till the assembling of the Diet
in interchanging courtesies with the Bohemian leaders. On
May 24 a Bohemian preacher, Jacob Ulk, inveighed in a sermon
against the Council's envoys, and bade the people beware of
Basel as of a basilisk which endeavoured to shed its venom on
every side. He attempted to raise a riot, but it was put down
by Procopius,1 and the magistrates issued an edict that no one
under pain of death was to offend the Council's ambassadors.
On June 13 the Diet assembled, and after preliminary addresses
John of Palomar submitted the Council's proposal for the incor
poration of the Bohemians and the common settlement of their
differences in the Council. He was answered that the Council
of Constance was the origin of all the wars and troubles that
had beset Bohemia ; the Bohemians had always wished for peace,
but they were firm in their adhesion to the Four Articles of
Prag, and they wished to hear the Council's decision respecting
them. John of Palomar at once answered that the Four Articles
seemed to be held in different senses by different parties among
the Bohemians ; before he could give the Council's opinion, he
wished them to be defined in writing in the sense in which
they were universally believed. It was the first step towards
bringing to light the dissensions of the Bohemian_parties. A
definition drawn up by the University of I*rag was repudiated
by the Taborites as containing treacherous concessions. Eoky-
cana gave a verbal answer, and a committee of eight deputies
of the Diet was appointed to confer on this point with the
ambassadors of the Council. A definition was then drawn up
in which the Council's side gained nothing. They saw that
by this procedure they would merely drift back to the disputa
tion which they had in Basel.
Accordingly on June 25 the Council's ambassadors took the
decided step of negotiating secretly with some of the Calixtin
1 Palacky, Geschiclite ron Bohinen, Bk. VIII. ch. iii., from Haselbach's MS.,
Liber PontificaMs,
THE COUNCIL'S FIEST EMBASSY TO PEAG. 105
nobles, to whom they said that the Council would most pro- CHAP.
bably allow to the Bohemians the Communion under both kinds, , ; — ,
if they would incorporate themselves for the discussion of the ^^with
other points. This was received with joy by some of the nobles, the Diet
amongst whom a party in favour of this course was gradually June-July,
organised. The Diet enquired under what form such privilege 14a3>
would be granted, and a proposed form was presented by the
ambassadors. The Diet in answer drew up on January 29 a
form of their own, which, if the Council accepted, they were
willing to unite with it. As the form contained the full accept
ance of the Four Articles of Prag, the ambassadors refused to
entertain it. On July 1 they again had a meeting in Eokycana's
house with some of the Calixtin nobles, who agreed to moderate
the form into such a shape that another Bohemian deputation
might take it to Basel. In the discussion that ensued in the
Diet some sharp things were said. When the Council's ambas
sadors begged the Bohemians to forget the past and be as
they had been twenty years ago, Procopius scornfully exclaimed,
* In the same way you might argue that we ought to be as we
were a thousand years ago when we were pagans.' A statement,
however, was drawn up that the Bohemians agreed to unite
with the Council and obey * according to God?s Word.' Three
ambassadors, Mathias Landa, Procopius of Pilsen, and Martin
Lupak, were appointed to take this, together with an exposition
of the Four Articles, to the Council. They, with the Council's
envoys, left Prag on July 1 1 and reached Basel on August 2,
where they were received with joy.
The object of this first embassy of the Council was to survey j0im of
the ground and report the position of affairs in Bohemia. On ^portS*8
July 31 one of the envoys who was sent on before, announced the Coun-
to the Council that everywhere in Bohemia they had found a j^t 1433.
great desire for peace, and had been listened to by the Diet
with a courtesy and decorum which the Council would do well
to imitate. He urged that conciliation be tried to the utmost.
The other envoys on their arrival gave a full report of their pro
ceedings to the Council, which appointed a committee of six to
be elected from each deputation who, together with the Cardinals,
were to confer on future proceedings. Before this committee
John of Palomar 0,1 August 13 made a secret report of the
general aspect of affairs in Bohemia. He said that neither the
106 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK nobles nor the people were free, but were tyrannised over by a
^_11,1' _^ small but vigorous party, which feared to lose its power if any
reconciliation with the Church took place ; the strength of this
party lay in the hatred of the Bohemians to German domina
tion, and their willingness to carry on war to escape it. He
sketched the position of the three chief sects, the Calixtins,
Orphans, and Taborites ; the only point on which they all
agreed was the reception of the Communion under both kinds.
The first party wished to obtain the use of their rite by peaceable
means and desired union with the Church ; the second party
desired to be in the bosom of the Church, but would take up
arms and fight desperately to defend what they believed to be
necessary ; the third party was entirely opposed to the Church,
and was not to be won over by any concessions, for the confisca
tion of the goods of the clergy was their chief desire.1
Deiibera- The commission then proceeded to deliberate whether the
Basel about Communion under both kinds could be conceded to the
ques- Bohemians, and what answer the Council should return to the
1433" °^er three articles, of which the Bohemian envoys brought a
definition to the Council. The discussions lasted for a fortnight,
and on August 26 an extraordinary congregation was held,
which was attended by the prelates at Basel and 160 doctors,
who were all bound by oath of secresy. John of Palomar put
before them, on behalf of the commission, the pressing need of
settling the Bohemian question, and the desirability of making
some concession for that purpose. He argued that the Church
might lawfully do so, and follow the example of Paul in his
dealings with the Corinthians; for he 'caught them by guile.'
The Bohemian people was intractable and would not enter the
fold of the Church like other Christians ; they must treat it
gently as one treats a mule or horse to induce it to submit to
the halter. When once the Bohemians had returned to union
with the Church, their experience of the miseries of a separa
tion from it would lead them to submit to the common rites of
Christendom rather than run new risks in the future. Cesarini
followed in the same strain ; and next day William of Bavaria,
on behalf of Sigismund, urged the interest of the Emperor in
securing his recognition, by means of the Council, as King of
1 John of Segovia, Mon. Condi, ii. 431, and Declaratio Gcstorum in
Bohemia, in Mem. Concil. i. 388.
THE SIEGE OF PILSEN. 107
Bohemia. After three days' deliberation it was agreed to con- CHAP.
cede the reception of the Communion under both kinds, and an ._ ^' „
answer to the other three articles was framed. But the secret-
was still kept from the Bohemian envoys, as the Council did not
wish their decision to be known too soon in Bohemia, and they
were also afraid lest Eugenius IV. might interpose. On Sep
tember 2 the Bohemians were dismissed with kindly words and
the assurance of the despatch of four envoys from the Council to
Prag. Four of the previous embassy — the Bishop of Coutances,
John of Palomar, Henry Toh, and Martin Verruer — set out on
September 11.
The second embassy from Basel did not meet with such a Renewed
peaceable entrance into Bohemia as had the first. War had Bohemia,
again broken out, a war in which were involved the contending June 1433*
interests of the Council and the Hussites. In the very middle
of Bohemia there still remained a city which held fast by the
cause of Catholicism and Sigismund. In the reaction which
ensued after the first successes of the commencement of the
Hussite movement, the strong city of Pilsen in the south-west
of Bohemia had swung back to Catholicism, and from its numerous
outlying fortresses had defied all efforts to reduce it. Year by
year their sufferings from Hussite attacks made the inhabitants
grow firmer in their resistance ; and when the Council's envoys
first came as spies into the land the Bohemians keenly felt the
disadvantage under which they lay in their negotiations when
they could not offer a decided front to their foe. Messengers
from Pilsen visited the Basel ambassadors and prayed for help
from the Council. As the Bohemians began to see that all that
the Council would grant them was a recognition of their excep
tional position, they felt the need of absolute internal unity if
they were to secure or maintain it. The Diet decreed a vigor
ous siege of Pilsen ; the Council's ambassadors protracted their
negotiations to allow the men of Pilsen to gather in their
harvest j1 and later the Fathers of Basel sent a contribution of
money to the aid of Pilsen and used their influence to prevail
on Niirnberg to do the same. On July 14 the Bohemian army
began the siege of Pilsen, and in the beginning of September
1 John of Segovi,^ p. 32 : ' Quia Pilyenses, qui erant obsessi, tempore
tractatuum pacis collegerant messes aliquas, qui jam prae inopia subsistere non
poterant.'
108
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Mutiny in
the Bohe
mian army.
September
1433.
Second em
bassy of the
Council to
Frag.
October
1433.
the besieging host had grown to 36,000 men. The might of
the Hussites was directed to secure religious unity within their
land.
Pilsen was strongly defended, and the besiegers began to
suffer from hunger. Foraging parties were sent to greater
distances, and on September 16 a detachment of 1,400 foot and
500 horse was sent by Procopius under the command of John
Pardus to harry Bavaria. As Pardus was returning laden with
spoil, he was suddenly attacked by the Bavarians ; his troops
were almost entirely cut to pieces, and he himself with a few
followers made his escape with difficulty to the camp at Pilsen.
Great was the wrath of the Bohemian warriors at this disgrace
to their arms. They rushed upon Pardus as a traitor, and even
hurled a stool at Procopius, who tried to protect him ; the stool
hit Procopius on the head with such violence that the blood
streamed down his face. The wrath of the chiefs was turned
against him ; he was imprisoned, and the man who had thrown
the stool was made general in his stead. This excitement lasted
only a few days. Procopius was released and restored to his
former position, but his proud spirit had been deeply wounded
by the sense of his powerlessness in an emergency. He refused
the command and left the camp never to return.
This was the news which greeted the Council's envoys
when they reached Eger on September 27. They feared to
advance farther in the present excited condition of men's minds.
The Bohemians in vain tried to discover what message they
brought from the Council. The leaders of the army before
Pilsen at length sent two of their number to conduct them
safely to Prag, where they said that the Diet could not assemble
before St. Martin's Day, November 11. The fears of the
envoys were entirely dispelled by the cordial welcome which
they received in Prag on their arrival, October 22. A plague
was ravaging the city and the physicians vied with one another
in precautions for ensuring the safety of their city's guests.
The preacher Ulk still raised his voice against them ; they
had honey on their lips but venom in their heart, they wished
to bring back Sigismund, who would cut off the people's heads
for their rebellion.
The proceedings of the Diet, which opened on November 17,
resolved themselves into a diplomatic contest between the
THE COUNCIL'S SECOND 'EMBASSY TO FRAG. 109
Council's envoys and the Bohemians. The Council was trying
to make the smallest concessions possible, the Bohemians were
anxious to get all they could. But the four envoys of Basel piet of
had the advantage in contending with an assembly like the j November
Diet. They could gauge the effect produced by each conces
sion ; they could see when they had gone far enough to have
hopes of success. Moreover, they knew definitely the limits of
concession which the Council would grant, while the Bohemians
were too much at variance amongst themselves to know defi
nitely what they were prepared to accept. Accordingly, after
the preliminary formalities were over, the Council's envoys be
gan to practise economy in their concessions. John of Palomar,
after a speech in which he lauded General Councils and recapi
tulated all that the Fathers at Basel had done to promote unity,
proceeded to give the limitations under which the Council was
prepared to admit three of the Articles ; about the fourth, the
Communion under both kinds, he said that the envoys had
powers to treat if the declaration which he had made about the
other three was satisfactory to the Bohemians. The Diet de
manded to have the Council's decision on this also put before
them. The envoys pressed to have an answer on the three
Articles first. For two days the struggle on this point con
tinued ; then the envoys asked, before speaking about the Com
munion, for an answer to the question whether, if an agreement
could be come to on the Four Articles, the Bohemians would
consent to union. John of Eokycana answered on behalf of all,
' We would consent ; ' and all the Diet cried ' Yes, yes.' Only
Peter Payne rose and said : ' We understand by a good end one
in which we are all agreed ; ' but those around him admonished
him to hold his tongue, and he was not allowed to continue.
Then John of Palomar read a declaration setting forth that the
Communion under one kind had been introduced into the
Church, partly to correct the Nestorian error that in the bread
was contained only the body of Christ, and in the wine only
His blood, partly to guard against irreverence and mishap in
the reception of the elements : nevertheless, as the Bohemian
use was to administer under both kinds, the Council was willing
that they should continue to do so till the matter had been
fully discussed. If they still continued in their belief, per
mission would be given to their priests so to administer it to
110 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK those who, having reached years of discretion, asked for it.
, ll*- „ The Bohemians were dissatisfied with this. They complained
that the Council said nothing which could satisfy the honour
of Bohemia. They demanded that their words, that the reception
under both kinds was 4 useful and wholesome,' should be adopted,
and that the permission be extended to children.
The Coun- On November 26 an amended form was submitted to the
of agree-3 Diet, which became the basis of an agreement. Bohemia and
meat. Moravia were to make peace with all men. The Council would
accept this declaration and release them from all ecclesiastical
censures. As regarded the Four Articles : —
(1) If in all other points the Bohemians and Moravians
received the faith and ritual of the Universal Church, those
who had the use of communicating under both kinds should
continue to do so, * with the authority of Jesus Christ and the
Church his true spouse.' The question as a whole should be
further discussed in the Council ; but the priests of Bohemia
and Moravia should have permission to administer under both
kinds to those who, being of the age of discretion, reverently
demanded it, at the same time telling them that under each
kind was the whole body of Christ.
(2) As regarded the correction and punishment of open
sins, the Council agreed that, as far as could reasonably be done,
they should be repressed according to the law of (rod and the
institutes of the Fathers. The phrase used by the Bohemians ,
* by those whose duty it was,' was too vague ; the duty did not
devolve on private persons, but on those who had jurisdiction
in such matters.
(3) About freedom of preaching, the Word of God ought to
be freely preached by priests who were commissioned by their
superiors : ' freely ' did not mean indiscriminately, for order was
necessary.
(4) As regarded the temporalities of the clergy, individual
priests, who were not bound by a vow of poverty, might inherit
or receive gifts ; and similarly the Church might possess tem
poralities and exercise over them civil lordship. But the clergy
ought to administer faithfully the goods of the Church accord
ing to the institutes of the Fathers ; and the goods of the
Church cannot be occupied by others.
As abuses may have gathered round these last three points,
BASIS OF AGREEMENT WITH THE BOHEMIANS. Ill
the Diet could send deputies to the Council, which intended to
proceed with the question of reform, and the envoys promised
to aid them in all possible ways.
The basis of an agreement was now prepared, and a large Acceptance
party in Prag was willing to accept it. Procopius, however, Council's
rose in the Diet and read proposals of his own, which John of ^Diet
Palomar dismissed, observing that their object was concord, and November
it was better to clear away difficulties than to raise them. On
November 28 the legates judged it prudent to lay before the
Diet an explanation of some points in the previous document.
The rites of the Church, which the Bohemians were to accept,
they explained to mean those rites which were commonly observed
throughout Christendom. If all the Bohemians did not at
once follow them, that would not be a hindrance to the peace ;
those who dissented on any points should have a full and fair
hearing in the Council. The law of Grod and the practice of
Christ and the Apostles would be recognised by the Council,
according to the treaty of Eger, as the judge in all such matters.
Finally, on November 30, after a long discussion and many
verbal explanations given by the envoys, the moderate party
among the Bohemians succeeded in extorting from the Diet a
reluctant acceptance of the proposed agreement.
The success of the Council was due chiefly to the fact that Causes of
the negotiations, once begun, awakened hopes among the
moderate party in Bohemia and so widened the differences
between them and the extreme party. There was both plague
and famine in the land. More than 100,000 are said to have
died in Bohemia during the year, and men had good grounds
for feeling sadly the desolate condition of their country and
counting the cost of their prolonged resistance. Moreover, the
appearance of the Council's envoys had emboldened those who
wished for a restoration of the old state of things to lift up
their heads. There were still some adherents of Sigismund,
chief of whom was Meinhard of Neuhaus ; there were still
formidable adherents of Catholicism, as the continued ill-success
of the siege of Pilsen showed. As soon as doubt and wavering
was apparent among the Hussites the party of the restoration
declared itself more openly. Further, the events of the siege
of Pilsen brought ^o light the disorganisation that had spread
among the army. The old religious zeal had waxed dim ;
112
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
in.
Departure
of the
Council's
envoys.
January
14, 1484.
3
adventurers abounded in the ranks of the Lord's soldiers ; the
sternness of Zizka's discipline had been relaxed, and the mu
tiny against Procopius bowed the spirit of the great leader and
made him doubtful of the future. The Bohemian nobles were
weary of the ascendency of the Taborites, whose democratic
ideas they had always borne with difficulty. The country was
weary of military rule ; and the party which was aiming at
Sigismund's restoration determined to use the conciliatory
spirit of the Diet for their own purposes. On December 1 a
Bohemian noble, Ales of Riesenberg, was elected governor of
the land, with a council of twelve to assist him ; he took oath
to promote the welfare of the people and defend the Four
Articles. The moderate party, which had sought to find a
constitutional king in Korybut in 1427, now succeeded in set
ting up a president over the Bohemian republic.1 The peace
negotiations with the Council had already led to a political
reaction.
The Compact had been agreed to, but the difficulties in the
way of its full acceptance were by no means removed. The
envoys demanded that, as Bohemia had agreed to a general peace,
the siege of Pilsen should cease. The Bohemians demanded
that the men of Pilsen should first unite with the Bohemian
government, and that all Bohemians should be required by the
Council to accept the Communion under both kinds. Other
questions also arose. The Bohemians complained that, in treat
ing of the temporalities of the clergy, the Council used language
which seemed to accuse them of sacrilege. They demanded also
that the Communion under both kinds shouldbe declared ' use
ful and wholesome ' for the whole of Christendom, and that
their custom of administering the Communion to infants should
be recognised. The discussion on these points only led to
further disagreement. The envoys had convinced themselves
that a large party in Bohemia was prepared to accept peace on
the terms which they had already offered. As nothing more
was to be done, they asked to be told definitely whether
the Compact was accepted or not ; otherwise they wished to
depart on January 15, 1434. The Diet answered that it would
be more convenient if they went on January 14; a Bohemian
envoy would be sent to Basel to announce their intentions.
1 Palacky, Gescldclite von Bokmen, Bk. VII I. ch. iii.
NEGOTIATIONS AT BASEL. 113
Accordingly the Council's ambassadors left Prag on January 14, CHAP.
and arrived in Basel on February 15. -_ / -
The result of this second embassy had been to rally Further
the moderate party in Bohemia, and break the bond that had Jj^JJ"
hitherto held the Bohemians together. The envoys had laid Basel,
the foundations of a league in favour of the Church. Ten of 143™
the masters of the University of Prag subscribed a statement
that they were willing to stand by the Compacts and had been
reconciled to the Church ; even when the envoys were at Eger
two nobles followed them seeking reconciliation.1 When the
ambassador of the Diet, Martin Lupak, joined them at Eger, it
is not wonderful that they warned him that it was useless for
him to journey to Basel if he went with fresh demands. The
Council, after hearing the report of their envoys, gave Martin
audience at once on February 16. He asked that the Coun
cil should order all the inhabitants of Bohemia to receive the
Communion under both kinds ; if all did not conform, there
would be different churches and different rites, and no real
peace in the land, for each party would claim to be better than
the other, the terms ' catholic ' and ' heretic ' would again be
bandied about, and there would be perpetual dissension. This
was no doubt true ; but the Council listened to Martin with
murmurs of dissent. It was clearly impossible for them to
abandon the Bohemian Catholics, and to turn the concession
which they had granted to the Hussites into an order to those
who had remained faithful to the Church. Still Sigismund
besought them to take time over their answer and to avoid any
threats. The answer was drawn up in concert with Sigismund,
and on February 26 Cesarini addressed Martin Lupak, saying
that the Council wondered the Bohemians did not keep their
promises, as even Jews and heathens respected good faith. He
besought him to urge his countrymen to fulfil the Compacts ;
then the Council would consider their new demands, and
would do all they could consistently with the glory of God and
the dignity of the Church. Martin defended his demands, and
there was some altercation. At last he taunted Cesarini with
1 ' Plures eorum conversi f ue rant ad fidem eciam postquam exierint regnum :
etenim se in Egra conf^'tutis nobiles duo, qui multa dampna intulerunt in
exercitu, advenerant humiliter reconciliationem petentes.' — From relation of
ambassadors, in John of Segovia, p. 595.
VOL. II. I
114
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Progress of
affairs in
Bohemia.
Death of
Procopius
in the
battle of
Lipan.
May 30,
1434.
the remark that the Church had not always wished for peace,
but had preached a crusade against Bohemia. ' Peace is now
in your hands, if you will stand by the agreement,' said
Cesarini. < Eather it is in the hands of the Council, if they
will grant what is asked,' retorted Martin. He refused to
receive a letter from the Council unless he were informed of
its contents, and after briefly thanking the Fathers for hearing
him, he left the congregation and departed.
A breach seemed again imminent; but the Council knew
that it would not be with Bohemia, but only with a party in it,
which they trusted to overcome by the help of their fellow-
countrymen. The first envoys had reported that there was a
number of irreconcilables who must be subdued by force ; the
second negotiations had brought to light internal dissensions
and had founded a strong party in Bohemia in favour of union
with the Council. Everything was done to strengthen that
party and gain the means of putting down the radicals. On
February 8 the Council ordered a tax of 5 per cent, on eccle
siastical revenues to be levied throughout Christendom for their
needs in the matter of Bohemia. John of Palomar was sent
to carry supplies from the Council and from Sigismund to aid
the besieged in Pilsen, where the besieging army was suffer
ing from plague, hunger and despondency. In Bohemia Mein-
hard of Neuhaus was indefatigable in carrying on the work
of the restoration. In April a league was formed by the
barons of Bohemia and Moravia and the Old Town of Prag
for the purpose of securing peace and order in the land ; all armed
bands were ordered to disperse and an amnesty was promised if
they obeyed.
Procopius was roused from his retirement in the New Town
of Prag by these machinations, and once more put himself at
the head of the Taborites and the Orphans. But the barons
had already gathered their forces. The New Town of Prag was
summoned to enter the league, and on its refusal was stormed ;
on May 6 Procopius and a few others succeeded with difficulty
in escaping. At this news the army before Pilsen raised the
siege and retired. Bohemia merged its minor religious differ
ences, and prepared to settle by the sword a political question
that was bound to press some day for solution. On one side
were the nobles ready to fight for their ancient privileges ; on
THE BATTLE OF LIPAN. 115
the other side stood the towns as champions of democracy. On CHAP.
May 30 was fought the decisive battle at Lipan. The nobles, „ t' _^
under the command of Borek of Militinek, a companion in arms
of Zizka, had an army of 25,000 men ; against them stood
Procopius with 18,000. Both armies were entrenched behind
their waggons, and for some time fired at one another. The
Taborites had the better artillery, but their adversaries turned
this superiority to their rain. One wing feigned to be greatly
distressed by their fire ; then as if goaded to exasperation rushed
from behind its entrenchment and charged. When they thought
that the foe had exhausted their fire, they feigned to flee, and
the Taborites, thinking their ranks were broken, rushed from
their waggons in pursuit. But the seeming broken ranks
skilfully reformed and faced their pursuers, who had mean
while been cut off from their waggons by the other wiDg of
the nobles' army. Shut in on every side, Procopius and his
men prepared to die like heroes. All day and night the
battle raged, till in the morning 13,000 of the warriors who
had been so long the terror of Europe lay dead on the ground.
Procopius and all the chief men of the extreme party were
among the slain. The military power of Bohemia, which had
so long defied the invader, fell because it was divided against
itself.
The fight of Lipan was a decided victory for the Council.
It is true that among the conquerors the large majority was
Hussite, and would require some management before it could
be safely penned within the fold of the Church. But the
Taborites had lost the control of affairs. The irreconcilable s
were swept away, and the Council would henceforth have to
deal with men of more moderate opinions.
i 2
116
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Position
of the
Council in
1434.
CHAPTEE VI.
EUGENIUS IV. AND THE COUNCIL OF BASEL — NEGOTIATIONS WITH
THE GREEKS AND THE BOHEMIANS.
1434-1436.
AT the beginning of the year 1434 the Council of Basel had
reached its highest point of importance in the affairs of Chris
tendom and of the Church. It had compelled the Pope to
accept without reserve the conciliar principle for which it
strove ; it had gone so far in pacifying Bohemia that its final
triumph seemed secure. It looked to further employment for
its energies in negotiating a union between the Greek and
Latin Churches. Yet the Council's success had been largely
due to accidental circumstances. Eugenius IV. had been sub
dued, not by the Council's strength, but by his own weakness ;
he fell because he had so acted as to raise up a number of de
termined enemies, without gaining any friends in return. The
Council's policy towards him was tolerated rather than approved
by the European Powers ; if no one helped Eugenius IV., it was
because no one had anything to gain by so doing. Sigismund,
whose interest was greatest in the matter, was kept on the
Council's side by his personal interest in the Bohemian ques
tion ; but he, with the German electors and the King of France,
was resolute in resisting any steps which might lead to a schism
of the Church. If the Council were to keep what it had won,
it must gain new hold upon the sympathies of Christendom,
which were not touched by the struggle against the Pope.
Sigismund gave the fathers at Basel the advice of a statesman
when he exhorted them to leave their quarrel with the Pope
and busy themselves with the reform of the Church.
But to contend for abstract principles is always easy, to re
form abuses is difficult. The Council found it more interesting
THE COUNCIL IN 1434. 117
to war with the Pope than to labour through the obstacles CHAP.
which lay in the way of a reformation of abuses by those who ^ VL
benefited by them. Each rank of the hierarchy was willing to Desire to
. , , TII . reform the
reform its neighbours, but had a great deal to urge in its own Papacy.
defence. In this collision of interests there was a general agree
ment that it was good to begin with a reform in the Papacy,
as the Pope was not at Basel to speak for himself.1 Moreover,
the Council had grown inveterate in its hostility to the Pope.
The personal enemies of Eugenius IV. nocked to Basel, and
were not to be satisfied with anything short of his entire
humiliation. In this they were aided by the pride of
authority which among the less responsible members of the
assembly grew in strength every day, and made them desirous
to assert in every way the superiority of the Council over the
Pope.
The first question that arose was concerning the presidency. Admission
Eugenius IV., after his recognition by the Council, issued a Bull Papal pre-
nominating four Papal deputies to share that office with Cesarini.
The first decision of the Council was that they could not admit
this claim of the Pope, since it was derogatory to the dignity of
the Council, but they were willing themselves to appoint two of
the Cardinals. Again Sigismund had to interpose, and with some
difficulty prevailed on the Council to receive the Papal presi
dents. They were not, however, admitted till they had bound
themselves by an oath to labour for the Council, to maintain the
decrees of Constance, to declare that even the Pope, if he refused
to obey the Council, might be punished, and to observe strict
secresy about all its proceedings. On these terms the Papal
presidents, Cardinal Albergata, the Archbishop of Tarento, the
Bishop of Padua, and the Abbot of S. Justin of Padua, were
admitted to their office on April 26, 1434, at a solemn session
at which Sigismund in his Imperial robes was present.
The pretensions of the Council went on increasing. On
1 See the interesting chapter of John of Segovia, p. 358 : — « Experimento
quidem palparunt concilio tune et postea interessentes circa reformationem
ecclesie quam sit velut infinita distancia inter dicere et facere, fiat reformacio j\fk
et facta est. Suave profecto est de aliorum reformacione statuum cogitare, . ,
liberum avisare, speciosum predicare, sanctimonieque reputatur, quod facta
non sit redargucio. Sed cum venitur ad opus reformacionis, in quovis statu
sentitur, quod de justicia dicitur proverbio communi, illam desiderari ut quo-
cunque alio, nee tamen in propria fiat domo.'
118 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK May 2 Cardinal Lusignan, who was sent on an embassy to
._ IIiL - pacify France, received from the Council the title of legatus a
S'sMs069 ^erey *n spite of the protest of the five presidents against con-
mund ferring a dignity which only the Pope could grant. Sigismund
Council. e also felt aggrieved by the small heed which the Council paid to
his monitions. Few German prelates were present ; the large
Jifc majority were French, Italians, and Spaniards. The democratic
constitution of the Council prevented Sigismund from receiving
the deference which was his due ; he was not even consulted
about the appointment of ambassadors. He felt that a slight
had been offered to himself by the dealings of the Council with
his enemy, the Duke of Milan. He complained bitterly of the
irregular conduct of the Council in granting a commission to
the Duke of Milan as its vicar, and so abetting him in his de
signs on the States of the Church. The Council at first denied,
then defended, and finally refused to withdraw from, its con
nexion with the Duke of Milan. Sigismund saw with indig
nation that the Council adopted a policy of its own, and refused
to identify its interests with his. He sadly contrasted the
purely ecclesiastical organisation at Basel with the strong na
tional spirit that had prevailed at Constance. He determined
to leave a place where he had so little weight that, as he himself
said, he was like a fifth wheel to a carriage, which did no good,
I but only impeded its progress.1
ttTKV* Before departing he seems to have resolved to give a stimulus
of Liibeck to the Council. He sent the Bishop of Liibeck to the several
theam°£- deputations to lay before them a suggestion that the marriage
riageofthe of the clergy should be permitted. 'It was in vain,' he
pleaded, ' that priests were deprived of wives ; scarcely among a
thousand could one continent priest be found/ By clerical celi
bacy the bond of friendship between the clergy and laity was
broken, and the freedom of confession was rendered suspicious.
There was no fear that a married clergy would appropriate the
goods of the Church for their wives and families ; the permission
to marry would rather bring those of the highest ranks into the
clergy, and the nobles would be less desirous of secularising
ecclesiastical property if it was in the hands of their relations
1 John of Segovia, 663: ' Dicebat qnod intendebat recedere, quia sibi
videretur quod erat in concilic sicut quinta rota in curru, que de nichilo juvat
sed impedit currum.'
DEPAKTUKE OF SIGISMUND FROM BASEL. 119
and friends.' The fathers listened ; but * the old,' says
^Eneas Sylvius, 'condemned what had no charms for them.
The monks, bound by a vow of chastity, grudged that secular
priests should have a privilege denied to themselves.' The ma
jority ruled that the time was not ripe for such a change ; they
feared that it would be too great a shock to popular prejudice. l
Before his departure Sigismund addressed the Council, and Departure
urged that it would be better to follow the example set at mund!8"
Constance, and organise themselves by nations. He wisely re- JJ*J 19>
marked that the reformation of the Church would be better
carried out if each nation dealt with its own customs and
rites.2 Moreover, decisions arrived at by a national organi
sation would have greater chance of being accepted by the States
so represented. He was answered that the deputations would
take his suggestion under consideration. Finally, on May 19
he departed in no amiable mood from Basel, saying that he
left behind him a sink of iniquity.
After Sigismund's departure Cesarini besought the Council First nego-
to turn its attention to the question of reformation ; he said tiTeCoundi
that already they were evil spoken of throughout Christendom ^'lth ,the
for their delay. The basis of the questions raised at Constance 1433-34.
was adopted, and the extirpation of simony first attracted the
attention of the fathers. But there was great difficulty in
keeping to the point, and little progress was made. In- A/4
significant quarrels between prelates were referred to the
Council as a court of appeal, and the Council took greater in
terest in such personal matters than in abstract questions of
reform. The question of union between the Eastern and
Western Churches was hailed with delight as a relief. This
question, which had been mooted at Constance, slumbered
under Martin V., but had been renewed by Eugenius IV. The
Council in its struggle with the Pope thought it well to de
prive him of the opportunity of increasing his importance, and
at the same time to add to its own. In January 1433 it
sent ambassadors to Greece to inaugurate steps for the pro-
1 This account is given by ^neas Sylvius, in Feai ; Pius II., a Calumniis
Vindicatus, p. 58. The matter is not mentioned by John of Segovia, who
perhaps thought it beneath the dignity of his serious history.
2 ' Prasterea cum reformacio esset ex diversis consuetudinibus, existentibus
variis juxta nacionum varietatem, id mclius deliberari posset ab illis de
nacione ' — John of Segovia, 6G2.
120 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK posed union. In consequence of these negotiations the Greek
-_n.L - ambassadors arrived at Basel on July 12, 1434. They were
graciously received by the Council ; and Cesarini expressed the
general wish for a conference on their differences, which he
said that discussion would probably show to be verbal rather
than real. The Greeks demanded that they should have their
expenses paid in coming to the conference, and named as the
place Ancona, or some port on the Calabrian coast, then Bo
logna, Milan, or some other town in Italy, next Pesth or Vienna,
and finally some place in Savoy. The Council was anxious
that the Greeks should come to Basel ; but when the Greeks
declared that they had no power to assent to this, their other
conditions were accepted. Ambassadors were to go to Con
stantinople to urge the choice of Basel as a place for the
conference. The Greeks also demanded that Eugenius IV.
should give his assent to the Council's proposals, and envoys
were accordingly sent to lay them before him.
tions^f " "^u^ Eugenius IV. on his side had made proposals to the
Greeks for the same purpose ; and the Greeks, with their usual
the Greeks, shiftiness, were carrying on a double negotiation, in hopes of
1433-34. making a better bargain for themselves by playing off against
one another the rival competitors for their goodwill. Euge
nius IV. sent to Constantinople in July 1433 his secretary,
Cristoforo Garatoni, who proposed that a Council should be
held at Constantinople, to which the Pope should send a legate
and a number of prelates and doctors. When the Council's pro
posals were laid before him, Eugenius wrote on November 15,
1434, and gently warned it of the dangers that might arise from
too great precipitancy in this important matter. He mildly com
plained that he had not been consulted earlier. He added, how
ever, that he was willing to assent to the simplest and speediest
plan for accomplishing the object in view. The question of the
place of conference with the Greeks was sure to open up the
dispute between the Pope and Council. The chief reason
which Eugenius IV. had given for dissolving the Council was
his belief that the Greeks would never go so far as Basel.
He was now content to wait and see how far the Council would
succeed. He already began to see in their probable failure a
means of reasserting his authority, and either transferring the
Council to Italy, as he had wished at first, or setting up against
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE GKEEKS. 121
it another Council, which from its object would have in the eyes CHAP.
of Europe an equal, if not a greater, prestige. ^ m' ..
On the departure of the Greek ambassadors the Council Reforming
again turned to its wearisome task of reformation, and on January *
January 22, 1435, succeeded in issuing four decrees, limiting 22> 1435<
the penalties of interdict and excommunication to the persons
or places which had incurred them by their own fault, forbid
ding frivolous appeals to the Church, and enforcing stricter »
measures to prevent the concubinage of the clergy. Offenders
whose guilt was notorious were to be mulcted of the revenues
for three months, and admonished under pain of deprivation to
put away their concubines ; fines paid to bishops for connivance
at this irregularity were forbidden. The Council felt that it
was at least safe in denouncing an open breach of ecclesiastical
discipline, one which in those days was constantly condemned
and constantly permitted.
From this peaceful work of reform the Council was soon An^er
drawn away by a letter from Eugenius IV., announcing the pope for
hopes he entertained of effecting a union with the Greeks by
means of a Council at Constantinople. The letter was brought with the
by Garatoni, who on April 5 gave the Council an account of his April *
embassy to the Greeks, and urged in favour of the Pope's plan, l
that it involved little expense, and was preferable to the Greeks,
who did not wish to impose on their Emperor and the aged
Patriarch a journey across the sea. The Council, however, by
no means took this view of the matter ; it was resolved not to
lose the glory of a reunion of the two churches. On May 3 an /
angry letter was written to the Pope, saying that a synod at
Constantinople could have no claims to be a General Council,
and would only raise fresh discord ; such a proposal could not
be entertained. Eugenius IV. gave way in outward appear
ance, and sent Garatoni again to Constantinople to express his
readiness to accept the proposals of the Council. He was con
tented to bide his time. But the Council was in a feverish
haste to arrange preliminaries, and in June sent envoys,
amongst whom was John of Kagusa, to Constantinople for this
purpose. It also began to consider means for raising money,
and the sale of indulgences was suggested. This suggestion
raised a storm of dissatisfaction amongst the adherents of the
122
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
-— — , —
Decree
abolishing
annates.
January
1435.
Knvoys of
Eugenius
IV. at
Basel.
August-
November
Pope, and seemed to all moderate men to be a serious encroach
ment on the Papal prerogative.
It was not long, however, before a still more deadly blow
was aimed at the Pope's authority. The reforming spirit of
the Basel fathers was stirred to deal vigorously with Papal
exactions. The subject of annates, which had been raised in
vain at Constance, was peremptorily decided at Basel. On
June 9 a decree was passed abolishing annates, and all dues on
presentations, -on receiving the pallium, and on all such occa
sions. It was declared to be simoniacal to demand or to pay
them, and a pope who attempted to exact them was to be
judged by a General Council. Two of the Papal presidents, the
Archbishop of Tarento and the Bishop of Padua, protested
against this decree, and their protest was warmly backed by the
English and by many other members of the Council. There were
only present at its publication four cardinals and forty-eight
prelates. Cesarini only assented to it on condition that the
Council should undertake no other business till it had made, by
other means, a suitable provision for the Pope and Cardinals.
The abolition of annates was, indeed, a startling measure of re
form. It deprived the Pope at once of all means of maintaining
his Curia, and to Eugenius IV., a refugee in Florence, left no
source of supplies. No doubt the question of annates was one
that needed reform ; but the reform ought to have been well
considered and moderately introduced. As it was, the Council
showed itself to be moved chiefly by a desire to deprive the
Pope of means to continue his negotiations with the Greeks.
The decree abolishing annates was a renewed declaration of
war against the Pope. It marked the rise into power of the
extreme party in the Council — the party whose object was the
entire reduction of the Papacy under a conciliar oligarchy.
At the time, Eugenius was too helpless to accept the challenge.
Two of his legates at Basel protested against the annates decree,
and absented themselves from the business of the Council. The
Council answered by instituting proceedings against them for
contumacy. But the matter was stayed for the time by the
arrival, on August 20, of two Papal envoys who had been sent
expressly to deal with the Council on this vexed question —
Antonio de San Vito, one of the auditors of the Curia, and the
learned Florentine, Ambrogio Traversari, abbot of Camaldoli.
AMBROGIO TEAVERSAEI IN BASEL. 123
The feeling of the Italian churchmen was turning strongly in
favour of Eugenius IV. ; they saw in the proceedings of the
Council a menace to the glory of the Papacy, which Italy was /
proud to call its own. Keformation, as carried out by the |
Council, seemed to them to be merely an attempt to overthrow
the Pope, and carry off beyond the Alps the management of ^
ecclesiastical affairs which had so long centred in Italy.1
Traversari, who had been zealous for a reform, and had sent to
Eugenius on his election a copy of St. Bernard, * De Considera-
tione,' now placed himself on the Pope's side, and went to
Basel to defeat the machinations of what he considered a law
less mob.2
The answers which Traversari brought from the Pope were
ambiguous : he was willing that the union with the Greek
Church should be conducted in the best way ; when the pre
liminaries- had advanced further he would be willing to consider
whether the expenses had better be met by indulgences or in
some other way ; as to the abolition of annates .he thought that
the Council had acted precipitately, and wished to know how they
proposed to provide for the Pope and Cardinals. There was, in
this, no basis for negotiation ; and Traversari in vain endeavoured
to get farther instructions from Eugenius IV. He stayed three
months in Basel, and was convinced that Cesarini's influence
was waning, and that it was a matter of vital importance to
the Pope to win him over to his side ; he urged Eugenius IV.
to leave no means untried for this end. Traversari was shrewd
enough in surveying the situation for the future, but for the
present could obtain nothing save an empty promise that the
question of a provision for the Pope should be taken into
immediate consideration.
Pending this consideration the Council showed its deter- steps of the
mination to carry its decrees into effect. When the customary ^tabi/sh0
dues for the reception of the pallium were demanded by the its inde-
Papal Curia from the newly elected Archbishop of Eouen, the of the Pope.
January
1 See Flavius Blondus, Decades, III., ch. viii. p. 527: — « Diximus all- 1436'
quando Basiliense concilium, per Italici nominis invidiam, inf estissimis aniinis
nihil accuratius qiiresivisse, ac pro viribus intentasse, quam eo pontifice per
nefas omne deposito, pontificatum vel mnltas in partes lacerum trans Alpes
traducere.'
2 See his letters from Basel. Ambrogii Traversari Epistolcp^ ed. Memis, p.
27, Jkc.
124 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK Council interposed and itself bestowed the pallium on Decem-
,IIi1' ^ ber 11. In January 1436 it resolved to admonish the Pope to
withdraw all that he had done or said against the authority of
the Council, and accept fully its decrees. An embassy was
nominated to carry to Eugenius IV. a form of decree which he
was to issue for this purpose. The reason for this peremptory
proceeding was a desire to cut away from the Pope the means
of frustrating the Council's projects as regards the Greeks. Its
envoys at Constantinople could not report very brilliant success
in their negotiations. They could not at first even establish
the basis wThich had been laid down at Basel in the previous
year. The Greeks took exception to the wording of the de
cree which was submitted to them ; they complained that the
Council spoke of itself as the mother of all Christendom, and
coupled them with the Bohemians as schismatics.1 When the
ambassadors attempted to defend the Council's wording they
were met by cries, ' Either amend your decree or get you gone.' 2
They undertook that it should be changed, and one of them,
Henry Menger, was sent back to Basel, where, on February 3,
1436, he reported that all other matters had been arranged
with the Greeks, on condition that the decree were altered,
and that a guarantee were given for the payment of their ex
penses to and from the conference, whether they agreed to
union or no. He brought letters from the Emperor and the
Patriarch, urging that the place of conference should be on the
sea-coast, and that the Pope as the head of Western Christen
dom should be present. The envoys attributed these demands
to the machinations of the Papal ambassador Garatoni.3
More and more irritated by this news, the Council pro
ceeded with its plan of crushing the Pope, and on March 22
issued a decree for the full reformation of the head of the
1 ' Quamobrem hujus sanctse synodi ab initio suge congregationis prsecipua
cura fuit recens illud Bohemorum antiquumque Graecorum dissidium
prorsus extinguere, et eos nobiscum in eodem fidei et caritatis vinculo copu-
lare' was the preamble of the decree of September 7, 1434. John of Segovia,
752.
2 Letter of John of Kagusa, in Cecconi, No. LXXVII.
3 John of Segovia, 841. ' Eeferebat insuper de Cristoforo Garatono Con-
stantinopoli fecisse et dixisse quge pro honore papee Henricus ipse volebat pree-
terire.' More explicitly John of Ragusa, in his relation to the Council, says
(Cecconi, No. CLXXV1II.), « Ad nihil aliud venerat nisi nt impediret directe vel
indirecte hie concordata et conclusa.'
SALE OF INDULGENCES BY THE COUNCIL. 125
Church. It began with a reorganisation of the method of CHAP.
Papal election ; the Cardinals on entering the Conclave were to . _ v*' .
swear that they would not recognise him whom they elected Decree for
till he had sworn to summon General Councils and observe of the Pope
the decrees of Basel. The form of the Papal oath was specified, dinais.
and it was enacted that on each anniversary of the Papal elec-! ^g'6ch 22>
tion the oath, and an exhortation to observe it, should be read;
to the Pope in the midst of the mass service. The number of
cardinals was not to exceed twenty- six, of whom twenty-four
were to be at least thirty years old, graduates in civil or canon
law, or in theology, none of them related to the Pope or any living J/J
cardinal ; the other two might be elected for some great need
or usefulness to the Church, although they were not graduates.
It was further enacted that all elections were to be freely made
by the chapters, and that all reservations were to be abolished.
At the end of the month appeared the Pope's ambassadors, The Coun-
the Cardinals of S. Peter's and S. Croce. They brought as be-
fore evasive answers from the Pope, who urged the Council to indui-
choose a place for conference with the Greeks which would be Aprii {4,
convenient both for them and for himself; he did not approve 1436/
of the plan of raising money by granting indulgences, but was
willing to issue them with the approval of the Council. This
was not what the Council wanted. It demanded that Eugenius
IV. should recognise its right to grant indulgences. Onj
April 14 it issued a decree granting to all who contributed to the
expenses of the conference with the Greeks the plenary indul
gence given to crusaders and to those who made a pilgrimage
to Rome in the year of Jubilee. On May 1 1 an answer was given
to the Pope's legates, complaining that Eugenius IV. did not
act up to the Council's decrees, but raised continual difficulties ;
he did not join with them in their endeavours to promote
union with the Greeks, but spoke of transferring the Council
elsewhere ; he did not accept the decree abolishing annates,
except on the condition that provision was made for the Pope,
although he ought to welcome gladly all efforts at reformation,
and ought to consider that the question of provision in the
future required great discussion in each nation; he did not
recognise, as he ought to do, the supremacy of the Council
which, with the presidents who represented the Pope, had full
power to grant indulgences. On receiving this answer, the
126 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK Archbishop of Tarerito and the Bishop of Padua resigned their
>_ l]L _ office of presidents on behalf of the Pope and left the Council.
It was a declaration of open war.
Apology of Eugenius IV. on his side prepared for the contest. He
lv.g6E drew up a long defence of his own conduct, and a statement of
the wrongs which he had received from the Council since his
recognition of its authority. He set forth the Council's refusal
to accept the Papal presidents as the representatives of the
Pope, its decrees diminishing the Papal revenues and the Papal
power, interfering with the old customs of election, granting in
dulgences, exercising Papal prerogatives, and doing everything
most likely to lead to an open schism. He commented on the
turbulent procedure of the Council, its democratic organisation,
its mode of voting by deputations which gave the preponder
ance to a numerical minority, its avowed partisanship which
gave its proceedings the appearance of a conspiracy rather than
of a deliberate judgment. For six years it had laboured with
scanty results, and had only destroyed the prestige and respect
which a General Council ought to command. He recapitulated
his own proposals to the Council about the place of a conference
with the Greeks, and the repulse which his ambassadors had
met with. Restated his /resolve to call upon all the princes
of Christendom to withdraw their support from the Council,
which, he significantly added, not only spoke evil of the
Pope but of all princes, when once it had free course to its
insolence. He promised reformation of abuses in the Curia,
with the help of a Council to be summoned in some city of
Italy, where the condition of his health would allow his personal
presence. He called upon the princes to withdraw their am
bassadors and prelates from Basel.1
state of This document of Eugenius IV. contained nothing which
Si th? was likely to induce the princes of Europe to put more confi-
Councii. dence in him, alleged no arguments which could lead them to
alter their previous position so far as the Papacy was concerned.
But there was much in his accusations against the Council,
where the extreme party had been gradually gaining power.
Cesarini was no longer listened to, and his position in Basel
became daily more unsatisfactory to himself. He had earnestly
striven for a settlement of the Bohemian difficulty and for the
1 In Raynaldi Annales, 1436, 2, &c.
PAETIES IN THE COUNCIL. 127
pacification of France, which had been begun at the Congress CHAP.
of Arras. He was desirous for reformation of the Church and __Z^." *
so had agreed to the decree abolishing annates. But he could
not forget that he was a cardinal and a Papal legate, and was
opposed to the recent proceedings of the Council against the
Pope.1 Round him gathered the great body of Italian pre
lates, except the Milanese and the chief theologians. But the
majority of the Council consisted of Frenchmen, who were led
by Cardinal Louis d'Allemand, generally known as the Cardinal
of Aries, a man of great learning and high character, but a
violent partisan, who belonged to the Colonna faction and
intrigued with the Duke of Milan. He had no hesitation
in taking up an attitude of strong political hostility against
Eugenius IV. The French followed him, as did the Spaniards,
so long as Alfonso of Arragon was the political enemy of
Eugenius IV. The Milanese and South Italians were also on
his side. The English and Germans who came to the Council
were animated by a desire to extend its influence, and so were
opposed to the Pope.
The organisation of the Council gave the Pope a just ground Results of
for complaint. It had been decided at the beginning that the JJat^or-'
lower ranks of the clergy should have seats and votes. The ganisatiou
Council was to be fully representative of the Church, and so Council,
was entirely democratic. All who satisfied the scrutineers, and
were incorporated as members, took equal part in the proceed
ings. At first the dangers of this course had not shown them
selves ; but as the proceedings of the Council were protracted,
the prelates who took a leading part in its business became
fewer.2 The constitution of the Council was shifting from week
to week. Only those were permanent who had some personal
interest to gain, or who were strong partisans. The enemies of
Eugenius IV. clung to the Council as the justification of their
1 From the time of the adhesion of Eugenius IV. John of Segovia tells us
that Cesarini's attitude began to change : ' Ex hac die multi ex patribus
manifestius animadverterunt legatum ipsum jam non fore tarn ardentem pro
auctoritate generalium conciliorum quo modo primum,' 606. The change was
as much on the part of the opposition as of the legate : he accepted the adhesion
of Eugenius and was ready to forget the past, while the enemies of Eugenius
IV. had no such intention.
3 Eugenius, in his Apology, Raynaldus, 1436, § 8, 9, says that there were
never more than 150 prelates at Basel, and at the time he wrote scarcely 25.
128 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK, past conduct as well as their hope in the future. Adventurers
, IJi . who had everything to gain and little to lose flocked to Basel,
and cast in their lot with the Council as affording them a
better chance of promotion than did the Curia. Thus the
Council became more and more democratic and revolutionary
in its tendencies. The prelates drew to the side of Cesarini,
and found themselves more and more in a minority, opposed to
a majority which was bent on the entire humiliation of the
Papacy.1
Reaction in It was natural that the violence of the French radical party
Eugenius should cause a reaction in favour of the Pope. Many had been
IV- in favour of the Council against the Pope, when the Council
wished for reform, which the Pope tried to check. They were
shaken in their allegiance when the Council, under the name of
reform, was pursuing mainly the depression of the Papal power,
and the transference of its old authority into the hands of a
self-elected and non-representative oligarchy. The cry was
raised that the Council was in the French interest ; that it
simply continued the old struggle of Avignon against Rome.
The friends of Eugenius IV. began to raise their heads, and
attacked the Council on political grounds, so as to detach from
it the princes of Christendon. Their arguments may be
gathered from a letter of Ambrogio Traversari to Sigismund, in
January 1436: — 'The Council of Basel has found time for
nothing but the subversion of Catholic peace and the depression
of the Pope. They have now been assembled for five years ; and
see on how wrongful a basis their business proceeds. In old
days bishops, full of the fear of Grod, the zeal of religion, and
the fervour of faith, used to settle the affairs of the Church.
Now the matter is in the hands of the common herd ; for
scarcely out of five hundred members, as I saw with my own
eyes, were there twenty bishops ; the rest were either the lower
orders of the clergy, or were laymen ; and all consult their private
feelings rather than the good of the Church. No wonder that
the Council drags on for years, and produces nothing but scandal
1 This complaint is universal among the writers on the Papal side, and was
raised by Eugenius IV. in his Apology. J^neas Sylvius, himself an adventurer
in Basel, says rhetorically, 'Inter episcopos, cseterosque patres conscriptos,
vidimus in Basilea coquos et stabularios orbis negotia judicantes; quishorum
dicta vel facta judicaverit legis habere vigorem ? ' Oratio adversus Australes,
in Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, i. 231.
PAET1ES IN BOHEMIA. 129
and danger of schism. The good men are lost in the ignorant CHAP.
and turbulent multitude. The French, led by the Cardinal of ... \J'_.
Aries and the Archbishop of Lyons, want to transfer the Papacy
into France. Where everyone seeks his own interest, and the
vote of a cook is as good as that of a legate or an archbishop,
it is shameless blasphemy to claim for their resolutions the
authority of the Holy Ghost. They aim only at a disruption
of the Church. They have set up a tribunal on the model of
the Papal court; they exercise jurisdiction, and draw causes
before them. They confer the pallium on archbishops, and
claim to grant indulgences. They aim at nothing less than the
perpetuation of the Council, in opposition to the Pope.' l
There was enough truth in this view of the situation to The Coun-
incline the statesmen of Europe to take a more languid interest
in the proceedings of the Council. Moreover, the Council had
lost its political importance by the gradual subsidence of the
Bohemian question. The Council had done its work when it
succeeded in bringing to a head the divergence of opinion
which had always existed between Bohemian parties. The
negotiations with the Council had given strength to the party
which wished to recognise authority, and was not prepared to
break entirely with the traditions of the past. Eound it
gathered the various elements of political discontent arising
from the long domination of the democratic and revolutionary
party. At the battle of Lipan the Taborites met with such a
defeat that they could no longer offer a determined resistance
to the plan for a reconciliation with Sigisrnund.
But the hopes of immediate success which the fight of Lipan xegotia-
awakened in Basel were by no means realised at once. The ^s^
spirit of the Bohemian Reformation was still strong ; and though burg.
the Calixtins were, on the whole, in favour of reconciliation 1434!^
with the Church, they had no intention of abandoning their
original position. The Bohemian Diet in June, 1434, pro
claimed a general peace with all Utraquists, and a truce for a
year with all Catholics. It took measures for the pacification
of the land and the restoration of order. To Sigismund's
envoys, who had come to procure his recognition as King of
Bohemia, the Diet answered by appointing deputies to confer
with Sigisrnund at Regensburg. Thither the Council was
1 Travcrsarii Epistolte, ed. Mehus. ii. 238.
VOL. II. K
130
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Unsatis
factory
results of
the nego
tiations.
September
1434.
requested by Sigismund to send its former envoys. On
August 16 its embassy, headed by Philibert, bishop of Cou-
tances, but of which John of Palomar was the most active
member, entered Eegensburg an hour after the Bohemians,
chief amongst whom were John of Eokycana, Martin Lupak,
and Meinhard of Neuhaus. As usual, Sigismund kept them
waiting, and did not arrive till August 21. Meanwhile the
Council's envoys and the Bohemians had several conferences,
which did not show that their differences were disappearing.
The Bohemians were requested to do as they had done at
previous conferences, and not attend mass in the churches.
They consented ; but John of Kokycana remarked that it would
be better if the Council were to drive out of the churches evil
priests rather than faithful laymen, who only washed to receive
the Communion under both kinds. John of .Palomar had to
apologise for the Council's delay in its work of reform ; the
English and Spanish representatives, he said, had not yet
arrived, and everything could not be done at once.
When negotiations began on August 22 Sigismund and the
Council's envoys found that the Bohemians were firm in their
old position. They were willing to recognise Sigismund on
condition that he restored peace in Bohemia, which could only
be done by upholding the Four Articles of Prag, and binding
all the people of Bohemia and Moravia to receive the Commu
nion under both ' kinds. Sigismund appealed to the national
feelings of the Bohemians by a speech in their own tongue, in
which he recalled the connexion of his house with Bohemia.
About the questions in dispute John of Eokycana and John of
Palomar again indulged in the old arguments, till the Bohe
mians declared that they were sent to the Emperor, not to the
Council's envoys. They submitted their request to Sigismund
in writing, and Sigismund in writing gave answer, begging
them to stand by the Compacts of Prag. The Bohemians de
clared their intention of doing so, but said that the Compacts
must be understood to apply to the whole of Bohemia and Mo
ravia. John of Palomar declared that the Council could not
compel faithful Catholics to adopt a new rite, though they were
prepared to allow it to those who desired it. The conclusion
of the conference was that the Bohemian envoys should report
to the Diet, soon to be held at Prag, the difficulties which had
CONFEKENCE WITH SIGISMUND AT REGENSBUKG. 131
arisen, and should send its answer to the Emperor and to the CHAP.
Council. Matters had advanced no further than they were at , ,J .
the time of accepting the Compacts. In some ways the tone of
the conference at Kegensburg was less conciliatory than that of
the previous ones. One of the Bohemian envoys fell from a
window and was killed. The Council's ambassadors objected
to his burial with the rites of the Church, on the ground that
he was not received into the Church's communion. This caused
great indignation among the Bohemians, who resented this
attempt to terrorise over them. Still they submitted to the
Council's envoys a series of questions about the election of an
archbishop of Prag, and the views of the Council about the
regulation of ecclesiastical discipline in accordance with the
Compacts. Sigismund besought the Council for money to act
against Bohemia, and some of the Bohemian nobles asserted
that with money enough Bohemia could soon be reduced to
obedience. Yet Sigismund did not hesitate to express to the
Council's envoys his many grounds for grievance at the Council's
procedure. The parties in the conference at Eegensburg were
at cross purposes. Sigismund, dissatisfied with the Council,
wished to make it useful for himself. The Council wished to
show Sigismund that its help was indispensable for the settle
ment of the Bohemian question. Bohemia wished for peace,
but on condition of retaining in matters ecclesiastical a basis
of national unity, without which it felt that peace would be
illusory. On September 3 the Conference came to an end
without arriving at any conclusion. All parties separated
mutually dissatisfied.1
Still these repeated negotiations strengthened the peace proposals
party in Bohemia. Of the proceedings of the Diet held at Prag °f jh^.
on October 23 we know little ; but they ended in an abandon- to the
ment by the Bohemians of the position which they had taken amUo*
up at Regensburg. There they had maintained that, as the November*
people of Bohemia and Moravia were of one language and 1434-
under one rule, so ought they to be of one ritual in the most 1435.
solemn act of Christian worship. They now decided to seek a
basis of religious unity which would respect the rights of the
1 John of Segovia, 675 : ' Itaque expedita dieta secuta minime f uerunt
queexipsis eventuraprimo autumabantur, adepcio regni Bohemie, pro qua im-
perator, et acceptacio firmaarticulorum fidei, pro qua instabat sancta synodus.'
K 2
132 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK minority, and on November 8 wrote, not to the Council, but to
[n- ^ the Council's envoys, proposing that in those places where the
Communion under both kinds had been accepted it should be
recognised ; in those places where the Communion under one
kind had been retained it should remain. Mutual toleration
was to be enjoined, and an archbishop and bishops were to be
elected by the clergy, with the consent of the Diet, who were
to be subject to the Council and to the Pope in matters agree
able to the law of Grod, but no further, and who were to regu
late the discipline of the Church in Bohemia and Moravia.1
It was a proposal for the organisation of the Bohemian Church
on a national basis, so as to obtain security against the danger
of a Catholic reaction.
The Council's answer to the Bohemians was, that they would
again send their former envoys to confer with them and with
the Emperor. The Bohemians, seeing that little was to be
hoped for from the Council, resolved to see if they could obtain
from Sigismund the securities which they wished. A Diet held
in Prag in March 1435 sent Sigismund its demands : the
Four Articles were to be accepted ; the Emperor, his court,
his chaplain and all State officers were to communicate under
both kinds ; complete amnesty was to be given for the past,
and a genuinely national Government was to exist for the future.2
v The envoys who brought these demands to Sigismund enquired
if the Council's ambassadors, who were already with Sigismund
in Posen, were prepared to accept the offer made by the Diet
in the previous November ; otherwise it was useless for the
Bohemians to trouble themselves further or incur more expense.
But the Council's ambassadors had come armed with secret
instructions, and refused to have their hand forced. They
answered that their mission was to the Emperor in Council of
the Bohemians assembled, and then only could they speak.
Confer- Many preliminaries had to be arranged before the Con-
Brttnn! ference finally took place at Briinn. There the Council's envoys
July 1435. arrived on May 20, and were received with ringing of bells and
all manifestations of joy by the people. On June 1 8 came the
Bohemian representatives ; but Sigismund did not appear till
July 1. Meanwhile the Bohemians and the Council's envoys
1 The letter, ascribed to Rokycana, is in Mon. Condi, i. 631.
2 In Mon. Condi, i. 537.
CONFERENCE AT BRUNN. 133
had several sharp discussions. Those of the Bohemians who CHAP.
had been reconciled to the Church were allowed to attend the ^ ^___
mass ; but the others were forbidden to enter the churches,
and were refused a chapel where they might celebrate mass
after their own fashion. On June 28 some of the Bohemians,
on being requested to withdraw from a church where they had
come with their comrades, were so indignant that they were
on the point of leaving Briinn, and were only appeased by the
intervention of Albert of Austria, who had luckily arrived a few
days before.
The day after Sigismund's arrival, on July 2, John of Roky- Difficulties
cana brought forward three demands on the part of the Bohe-
mians, that the Four Articles be accepted throughout the
whole of Bohemia and Moravia ; that those countries be freed pacts
from all charge of heresy, and that the Council of Basel proceed
with the reformation of the Church in life, morals, and faith.
He asked also for an answer to the demands sent to Eger by
the Bohemian Diet in the previous November. The Council's
envoys answered by justifying the procedure of the Council and
blaming the Bohemians for not keeping to the Compacts but
raising new difficulties. There was much disputation. The
Bohemians professed their willingness to abide by the Compacts
as interpreted by their demands sent to Eger; the legates
answered that these demands were contrary to the Compacts
themselves. Sigismund urged the legates to give way, but they
refused. On July 8 the legates demanded that the Bohemians
should declare their adhesion to the Compacts, as they had
promised ; no promise had been made by the Council about the
Eger articles, otherwise it would have been fulfilled. It was
clear to the Bohemians that the Council regarded the Compacts
as the ultimate point of their concessions, whereas the Bohe
mians looked on them only as a starting point for further
arrangements. John of Rokycana angrily answered the legates,
4 We are willing to stand by the Compacts ; but they cannot be
fulfilled till they are completed. Much must be added to
them ; for instance, as regards obedience to bishops, we will not
obey them if they order what is contrary to God's word. How
do you ask us to fulfil our promises when you will not fulfil
yours? It seems to us that you aim at nothing save to sow
division amongst us, for since your coming we are worse off
134
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Agree
ment of
the Bo
hemians
with
Sigismund.
July 6,
1435.
than before, and will take heed that it be so no longer. We
ask no difficult things. We ask for an archbishop to be elected
by the clergy and people or appointed by the king. We ask
that causes be not transferred out of the realm. WTe ask that
the Communion be celebrated under both kinds in those places
where the use exists. These are not difficult matters ; grant
them and we will fulfil the Compacts. We do not ask these
things through fear, or through doubt of their lawfulness ; we
ask them for the sake of peace and unity. If you do not grant
them, the Lord be with you, for I trust He is with us.' While
John of Palomar was preparing a reply, the Bohemians left
the room and thenceforth conferred only with the legates
through Sigismund.
The Bohemian envoys had in fact begun to negotiate
directly with Sigismund, who showed himself much more ready
to give way than did the legates of the Council. On July 6 a
proposal was made to Sigismund that he should grant in his
own name what the Council refused. Under the pretext of re
moving difficulties and providing for some things omitted in
the Compacts, Sigismund promised that benefices should not be
conferred by strangers outside Bohemia and Moravia, but only
by the king ; that no Bohemian or Moravian should be cited or
be judged outside the kingdom ; that those who preferred to
communicate under one kind only should, to avoid confusion,
be tolerated only in those places which had always maintained
the old ritual; that the archbishops and bishops should be
elected by the Bohemian clergy and people. These articles
Sigismund promised to uphold before the Council, the Pope,
and all men.1 The legates of the Council strongly deprecated
any secret negotiations on the part of Sigismund ; the Bohe
mians, relying on the promises they had received, showed
themselves more conciliatory. On July 14 they offered to
sign the Compacts with the addition of a clause, c Saving the
liberties and privileges of the kingdom and of the margraviate
of Moravia.' This the legates would not accept, as it clearly
carried the election of the archbishop by the people and clergy.
Sigismund answered the legates privately, and besought them
to consent, lest they should be the cause of a rupture, and woe
to them through whom that came. When the legates again
1 They are given in J/iw. Condi, i. GG2.
SIGISMUND TAKES BOHEMIAN AFFAIRS INTO HIS OWN HANDS. 135
refused, he angrily said, ' You of the Council have granted CHAP.
articles to the Bohemians, and have held conferences without , ^ ,
my knowledge, but I acquiesced. Why then will you not
acquiesce for my sake in this small matter ? If you wish me to
lose my kingdom, I do not.' He exclaimed in German to those
around him, ' Those of Basel wish to do nothing except diminish
the power of the Pope and Emperor.' He showed his indigna
tion by abruptly dismissing the legates,
Sigismund's anger cooled down and the clause was with- The Coun-
drawn. The Bohemians demanded the acceptance of various dissatisfy3 S
explanations of the Compacts which the legates steadily refused. fid' the nd
At last the signing of the Compacts was again deferred because Bohe-
the legates would not substitute, in the article which declared
6 that the goods of the Church cannot be possessed without
guilt of sacrilege,' the words ' unjustly detained ' (wijusfa
deteneri) for < possessed' (usurpari}. On August 3 the Bohe
mians departed, and the legates undertook to lay their demands
before the Council and meet them again at Prag in the end of
September.
The Council's envoys had acted faithfully by the letter of The Bohe-
their instructions ; ' they had stood upon the Compacts, and had
refused to make any further concessions or even admit any ina-
terial explanations. The negotiations had therefore passed out cil to Si
of their hands into those of Sigismund. The Compacts had laid
the foundations of an agreement. The Council had opened the
door to concessions ; and Sigismund was justified in declaring
that the Council could not claim to have the sole right of inter
preting the concessions so made or regulating the exact method
of their application. The proceedings at Briinn led the Bohe
mians to think that the Council had dealt with them un
fairly, and after begging them to accept the Compacts as a
means to further agreement, was now bent on doing its
utmost to make the Compacts illusory. The Bohemians there
fore turned to Sigismund and resolved to seek first for political
unity, and then to maintain their own interpretation of the
Compacts by securing the organisation of a national Church
according to their wishes. In this state of things the interests
of the Council and of Sigismund were no longer identical. The
Council wished to minimise the effect of the concessions which
1 These instructions are given in Non, Condi, i. 619.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
ill.
it had made — concessions which were indeed necessary, yet
might form a dangerous precedent in the Church. Sigismund
wished to obtain peaceable possession of Bohemia, and trusted
to his own cleverness afterwards to restore orthodoxy.1 The one
thing that was rendered tolerably certain by the conference at
Briinn was the recognition of Sigismund as King of Bohemia,
and he was determined that the Council should not be an
obstacle in the way. At the same time Sigismund was rigidly
attached to the orthodox cause ; but he was convinced that the
reduction of Bohemia was a matter for himself rather than the
Council.
The proceedings with Sigismund at Briinn satisfied the
peace party in Bohemia, and the Diet which met in Prag on
September 21 ratified all that had been done. The submission
of Bohemia to the Church and to Sigismund was finally agreed
to on the strength of Sigismund's promises. A committee of
two barons, two knights, three citizens, and nine priests was
appointed to elect an archbishop and two suffragans. Their
choice fell on John of Rokycana as archbishop, Martin Lupak
and Wenzel of Hohenmaut as bishops. On December 21 the
Bohemian envoys again met Sigismund and the legates of
the Council at Stuhlweissenburg. The legates had heard of
Rokycana's election, though it was kept a secret pending Sigis
mund's confirmation. They were perturbed by the understand
ing which seemed to exist between Sigismund and the Bohe
mians. They had come from Basel empowered to change the
words in the Compacts as the Bohemians wished, and substitute
' unjustly detained ' for ' possessed ' ; but before doing so they
demanded that Sigismund should give them a written agree
ment for the strict observance of the Compacts on his part.
This was really a demand that Sigismund should declare that
he intended the promises which he had made to the Bohemians
at Briinn to be illusory. Meinhard of Neuhaus, the chief of
1 See the relation of the envoys to the Council, Mon. Condi, i. 669: ' Im-
perator nobis dixit, quod nemo putaret ipsum habere affect um ad habendum
illud regnum propter se . . . sed propter Deum et fidem: et quod libenter de illo
faceret offertorium ad altare ut ad fidem debitam reduceretur debitumque
statum.' The position of the envoys is given in p. 672: 'Cum enim ille
declaraciones illorum articulorum essent non solum pro Bohemia, sed essent
doctrina generalis ecclesie, et dicte declarationes essent jam pnblicate per
mundum, nos nuncii sacri concilii in illis verbum aliquod minime mutaremus.'
DIFFICULTIES WITH THE COUNCIL'S ENVOYS. 137
Sigismund's partisans amongst the Bohemians, was consulted CHAP.
on this point. He answered, 6 If the Emperor publicly revoke , ^ -
his promises, all dealings with the Bohemians are at an end ;
if he revoke them secretly, it will some day be known, and
then the Emperor, if he were in Bohemia, would be in great
clanger from the people.' l
Accordingly Sigismund refused to sign the document which Difficulties
the legates laid before him, and submitted another, which de- Council's
clared generally his intention of abiding by the Compacts, but
which did not satisfy the legates. Sigismund referred the 1435-
legates to the Bohemians, and they accordingly demanded that
the Bohemians should renounce all requests which they had
made contrary to the Compacts. This the Bohemians refused,
and Sigismund endeavoured to lead the legates to a more con
ciliatory frame of mind by telling them that * dissimulation on
many points was needful with the Bohemians, that he might
obtain the kingdom ; when that was done, he would bring things
back to their former condition.' The legates answered that
their instructions from the Council were to see that the Com
pacts were duly executed ; when this was done, the king's
power would remain as it had always been ; if the Bohemians
wanted more than the king could grant, they could seek further
favours from the Council. The question of the Emperor's
agreement with the Council again raised much discussion. The
Bohemians refused any responsibility in the matter. ' If there
is ought between you and the legates,' they said to Sigismund,
6 it is nothing to us, we neither give assent nor dissent.' 2 The
agreement was at last drawn up in general terms. The
legates contented themselves with Sigismund's verbal promise as
to his general intentions, and a written statement that he
accepted the Compacts sincerely according to their plain mean
ing, and would not permit that any one be compelled to com
municate under both kinds nor anything else to be done in
contradiction to the Compacts. Iglau was fixed by the Bohe
mians as a frontier town in which the final signing of the
Compacts might be quietly accomplished, and the ambassadors
departed on January 31, 1436, to reassemble at Iglau in the
end of May.
1 Carlier, De Legationibvs, in Mu-n. Condi, i. 681.
2 Ibid., Mon. Condi, i. 689.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
In all these negotiations the result had been to put difficul
ties out of sight rather than to make any agreement. Since
the conference at Prag in 1433, no nearer approach had been
made by the Bohemians to the orthodoxy of the Council. They
had rather strengthened themselves in a policy by which they
might obtain the advantages of peace and union with the
Church, and yet might retain the greatest possible measure of
ecclesiastical independence. This they hoped to secure by a
strong national organisation, while Sigismund trusted that once
in power he would be able to direct the Catholic reaction ;
and the Council, after taking all possible steps to save its
dignity, was reluctantly compelled to trust to Sigismund's
assurance.
Sigismund appeared at Iglau on June 6 ; but the Bo
hemians were on the point of departing in anger when they
found that the legates had come only with powers to sign the
Compacts, not to confirm the election of the Bohemian bishops.
With some difficulty the Bohemians wrere prevailed upon to
accept Sigismund's promise that he would do his utmost to
obtain from the Council and the Pope a ratification of the
election of the bishops whom they had chosen. At last, on
July 5, the Emperor, in his robes of state, took his place on a
throne in the market-place of Iglau. The Duke of Austria bore
the golden apple, the Count of Cilly the sceptre, and another
count the sword. Before Sigismund went the legates of the
Council, and by them took their places the Bohemian envoys.
The signing of the Compacts was solemnly ratified by both par
ties. John Walwar, a citizen of Prag, gave to the legates a copy
of the Compacts duly signed and sealed, together with a pro
mise that the Bohemians would accept peace and unity with
the Church. Four Bohemian priests, previously chosen for the
purpose, took oath of obedience, shaking hands with the legates
and afterwards with Rokycana, to show that they held him
as their archbishop. Then the legates on their part handed a
copy of the Compacts to the Bohemians, admitting them to
peace and unity with the Church, relieving them from all eccle
siastical censures, and ordering all men to be at peace with them
and hold them clear of all reproach. Proclamation was made
in Sigismund's name that next day the Bohemians should enter
the Church and the Compacts be read in the Bohemian tongue.
SIGNING OF THE COMPACTS AT IGLAU. 139
Then the Bishop of Coutances, in a loud clear voice, began to CHAP.
sing the « Te Deum,' in which all joined with fervour. When _^__^
it was done, Sigismund and the legates entered the church for
mass ; the Bohemians, raising a hymn, marched to their inn,
where they held their service. Both parties wept for joy at the
ending of their long strife.
The next day showed that difficulties were not at an end, Dispute
that the peace was hollow, and that the main points of dis-
agreement still remained unsettled. In the parish church, the
Bishop of Coutances celebrated mass at the high altar, and July 6,
John of Eokycana at a side altar. The Compacts were read by
Rokycana from the pulpit in the Bohemian tongue, then he
added : ' Let those of the Bohemians who have the grace of
communicating under both kinds come to this altar.' The
legates protested to the Emperor. John of Palomar cried out :
' Master John, observe the canons ; do not administer the sacra
ments in a church of which you are not priest." l Rokycana
paid no heed, but administered to seven persons. The legates
were indignant at this violation of ecclesiastical regulations,
and said : ' Yesterday you vowed canonical obedience ; to-day
you break it. What is this ? ' Rokycana answered that he was
acting in accordance with the Compacts, and paid little heed to
the technical objection raised by the legates. Sigismund urged
the legates to grant a church, or at least an altar, where the
Bohemians might practise their own ritual. The legates, who
were irritated still more by hearing that Martin Lupak had
carried through the streets the sacrament under both kinds to
a dying man, refused their consent. The Bohemians bitterly
exclaimed that they had been deceived, and that the Compacts
were illusory. They threatened to depart at once, and it re
quired all Sigismund's skill in the management of men to
prevail on the Bohemians to stay till they had arranged
the preliminaries about his reception as King of Bohemia.
The utmost concession that he could obtain from the legates
was, that one priest might celebrate mass after the Bohemian
ritual. They refused to commission for this purpose either
Rokycana or Martin Lupak, and accepted Wenzel of Drachow,
on condition that they should first examine him to be sure of
1 ' Non rninistretis sacramenta in aliena parochia:' Thomas Eberndorf's
Diarium Mon. Concil. \. 779. See also John of Tours' Regitfrum, ibid. 821.
HO
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Ilollowness
of the
reconcilia
tion of the
Bohemians.
Sigismund
enters
I* rag as
King of
Bohemia.
August 23,
1436.
Merits of
the Coun
cil in its
policy
towards
Bohemia.
his orthodoxy. This Wenzel refused, and the Bohemians con
tinued to celebrate their own rites in their houses, as they
had done previously.
Thus the long negotiations with the Council had led to no
real agreement. The signing of the Compacts was rather an
expression on both sides of the desire for peace, and for the out
ward unity of the Church, than any settlement of the points at
issue. The conception of a united Christendom had not yet
been destroyed, and both parties were willing to make conces
sions to maintain it. But neither side abandoned their convic
tions, and the peace which had been proclaimed affected only
the outward aspect of affairs. The Bohemians remained the
victors. They had re-entered the Church on condition that they
were allowed an exceptional position. It remained for them to
make good the position which they had won, and use wisely
and soberly the means which they had at their disposal for this
purpose.
In political matters also they saw the necessity of aban
doning their attitude of revolt, and entering again the State
system of Europe. They were willing to recognise Sigismund,
but on condition that he ensured the Bohemian nationality
against German influences. On July 20 Sigismund agreed to
ratify the rights and privileges of the Bohemians, to be guided
by the advice of a Bohemian Council, to uphold the University
of Prag, to admit none but Bohemians to office in the land,
and to grant a full amnesty for all that had happened during
the revolt. On August 20 the Governor of Bohemia, Ales of
Riesenburg, laid down his office in Sigismund's presence,
and the Bohemian nobles swore fidelity to their king. On Au
gust 23 Sigismund entered Prag in state, and was received
with joyous acclamations by the people. The pacification of
Bohemia was completed. The great work which Europe had
demanded of the Council was actually accomplished.
If we consider the deserts of the Council in this matter, we
see that its real importance lay in the fact that it could admit
the Bohemians to a conference without injuring the prestige
of the Church. A Pope could adopt no other attitude towards
heretics than one of resolute resistance. A Council could in
vite discussion, in which each party might engage with a firm
belief that it would succeed in convincing the other. The
KESULTS OF THE COUNCIL'S POLICY IN BOHEMIA. 141
decree for reunion with the Church arose from the exhaustion CHAP.
of Bohemia and its internal dissensions ; it found that it could s ,,' _,
no longer endure to pay the heavy price which isolation from the
rest of Europe involved on a small state. The temper of the
Bohemians was met with admirable tact and moderation by the
Council under the influence of Cesarini. Moral sympathy and v
not intellectual agreement tended to bring the parties together.
The impulse given at first was strong enough to resist the
reaction, when both parties found that they were not likely to
convince each other. But the religious motives tended to be
come secondary to political considerations. The basis of con
ciliation afforded by the negotiations with Basel was used by
the peace party in Bohemia and by Sigismund to establish an
agreement between themselves. When this had been done, the
position of the Council was limited to one of resistance to the
extension of concessions to the Bohemians. The Council was
thenceforth a hindrance rather than a help to the unscrupulous
policy of illusory promises, which Sigismund had determined to
adopt towards Bohemia till his power was fully established.
From this time the Council lost all political significance for
the Emperor, who was no longer interested in maintaining it
against the Pope, and felt aggrieved by its treatment of him
self, as well as by its democratic tendencies, which threatened
the whole State system of Europe.
142 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
CHAPTER VII.
WAR BETWEEN THE POPE AND THE COUNCIL.
1436-1438.
BOOK ip Sigismund's interest in the Council had faded away, the
interest of France had equally begun to wane. At the opening
of the Council, France, in her misery and distress, the legacy
of the long war with England, felt a keen sympathy with one
of the Council's objects, the general pacification of Christen
dom. The Council's zeal in this matter stirred up the Pope to
emulation, and Eugenius IV. busied himself to prevent the
Council from gaining any additional prestige. In 1431 Cardinal
Albergata was sent by the Pope to arrange peace between
England, Burgundy, and France. His negotiations were fruit
less for a time ; but the ill-success of the English induced them
in 1435 to consent to a congress to be held at Arras. Thither
went Albergata as Papal legate, and on the side of the Council
was sent Cardinal Lusignan. Eepresentatives of the chief
States of Europe were present ; and 9,000 strangers, amongst
whom were 500 knights, thronged the streets of Arras. In the
conference which began in August the rival legates vied with
one another in splendour and in loftiness of pretension. But
though Lusignan was of higher lineage, Albergata was the more
skilful diplomat, and exercised greater influence over the nego
tiations. England, foreseeing the desertion of Burgundy, re
fused the proposed terms, and withdrew from the congress on
September 6. Philip of Burgundy's scruples were skilfully
combated by Albergata. Philip wished for peace, but wished
also to save his honour. The legate's absolution from his oath, not
to make a separate peace from England, afforded him the means
of retreating from an obligation which had begun to be burden
some. On the interposition of the Church Philip laid aside his
THE CONGKESS OF AKRAS. 143
vengeance for his father's murder, and was reconciled to Charles CHAP.
VII. of France on September 21. The treaty was made under , _ Y_^L_,
the joint auspices of the Pope and the Council. Both claimed
the credit of this pacification. Cesarini, when the news reached
Basel, said that if the Council had sat for twenty years, and had
done nothing more than this, it would have done enough to
satisfy all gainsayers.1 But in spite of the Council's claims it
had won less prestige in France than had Eugenius IV., and
France had no further hopes of political aid from its activity.
Thus the chief States of Europe had little to gain either Neutrality
from Pope or Council, and had no reason to take either side, when ^ ^Q
the struggle again broke out about the union with the Eastern
Financial
difficulties
of the
Council.
Church. The letter of Eugenius IV., asking the princes of the Pope
Europe to withdraw their countenance from the Council, met Council.
with no answer ; but the Council had no zealous protector on
whose help it could rely. The conflict that ensued was petty
and ignoble.
The policy of Eugenius IV. was to allure the Council to some
Italian city where he could more easily manage to bring about
its dissolution. In this he was helped by the desire of the
Greeks to avoid a long journey overland, and his envoy Grara-
toni had continued to confirm them in their objection to go to
Basel or to cross the Alps. The Council was fully alive to the
Pope's project, and hoped to prevail upon the Greeks, when
once their journey was begun, to give way to their wishes. But
the great practical difficulty which the Council had to face was ,
one of finance. The cost of bringing the Greeks to Basel was \i
computed at 71,000 ducats and their maintenance, which could
not be reckoned at less than 200,000 ducats.2 Moreover it
would be needful that the Western Church should not be
outdone by the Eastern in the number of prelates present at the
Council. At least a hundred bishops must be summoned to
Basel, and it might not be an easy matter to induce them to
come. The sale of indulgences had not been productive of so
rich a harvest as the Council had hoped. In Constantinople the
Bull was not allowed to be published, and the Greeks were by
no means favourably impressed by this proof of the Council's
1 Martene and Durand, Amp. Coll. viii. 882.
2 See Avisamenta pro facto Grcccorum, Martene, Amp. Coll. viii. 895, and
Instrucioncs pro Oratoribus in John of Segovia, 902.
144
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Negotia
tions fur
the place
of the
conference
with the
Greeks.
May 1436.
Cesarini
joins the
Papal
party. No
vember
1436.
zeal. In Europe generally it had awakened dissatisfaction ; it
was a sign that the reforming Council was ready to use for its
own purposes the abuses which it condemned in the Pope.
Altogether the Council had before it a difficult task to raise the
necessary supplies and celebrate its conference with due magni
ficence in the face of the Pope's opposition.
As a preliminary step towards raising money and settling
the place of the conference, envoys were sent in May 1436 to
negotiate for loans in the various cities which had been men
tioned. They were required to promise 70,000 ducats at once,
and to undertake to make further advances if necessary. The
envoys visited Milan, Venice, Florence, Siena, Buda, Vienna,
Avignon, as well as France and Savoy. In August Venice
offered any town in the patriarchate of Aquileia, the Duke
of Milan any town in his dominions ; both guaranteed the
loan. Florence also offered herself. Siena was willing to
receive the Council, but could not lend more than 30,000
ducats. The Duke of Austria was so impoverished by the
Bohemian wars that he could not offer any money, but would
welcome the Council in Vienna. The citizens of Avignon were
ready to promise all that the Council wished. During the
month of November the representatives of Venice, Florence,
Pavia, and Avignon, harangued the Council in favour of their
respective cities.1 Venice and Florence were clearly in favour
of the Pope, and so were not acceptable to the Council. In
Pavia the Council would be sure enough of the Duke of Milan's
hostility to the Pope, but could not feel so confident of its own
freedom from his interference. If the Greeks would not come
to Basel, Avignon was, in the eyes of the majority, the most
eligible place.
But though the majority might be of this opinion, there had
been growing up in the Council a strong opposition. The un
disguised hostility of the extreme party to the Pope had driven
moderate men to acquiesce in the pretensions of Eugenius
IV., and this question of the place of conference with the
Greeks was fiercely contested on both sides. Cesarini had for
1 The amusingly rhetorical speech of ./Eneas Sylvius, acting for the Duke
of Milan in behalf of Pavia, is given in Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, p. 5. It
reads, from its careful attention to style, like a new language when compared
with the other records of the Council.
CHOICE OF AVIGNON FOE COUNCIL WITH THE GREEKS. 145
some time felt that he was losing his influence over the CHAP.
Council, which followed the more democratic Cardinal d'Allemand. , Y^-
He now began to speak decidedly on the Pope's side. He argued
with justice that Avignon was not specified in the agreement
made with the Greeks ; that the Pope's presence at the confer
ence was necessary, if for no other reason, at least as a means of
providing money; that if any help was to be given to the
Greeks against the Turks, the Pope alone could summon Europe
to the work ; finally, he urged that if the Pope and Council were
in antagonism, union with the Greeks was rendered ridiculous.
On these grounds he besought the Council to choose a place
which was convenient for the Pope.1 There were angry replies,
till on November 10 Cesarini took the step of openly ranging
himself on the Pope's side. He warned the Council that
henceforth they were to regard him as a Papal legate, and
sent a paper to all the deputations demanding that in future
no conclusions be arrived at respecting the Roman See until
he had first been heard at length on the matter.2
But the dominant party was determined to have its own Choice of
way and took measures to out-vote its opponents. It sum- by'tbe"1
moned the priests from the neighbourhood and flooded the £ouncil-
. , . December
Council with its own creatures. On December 5 the votes 5, i486,
were taken, and it was found that more than two-thirds of the
Council, 242 out of 355, voted at the bidding of the Cardinal
d'Allemand for Basel in the first instance ; failing that, Avignon,
and, failing that, some place in Savoy. Basel had been already
refused by the Greeks. The Duke of Savoy had not offered to
provide money for the Council. The vote was really given for
Avignon alone. Cesarini, in the Pope's name and in his own,
protested against Avignon as not contained in the treaty made
with the Greeks ; if the Council refused to go to Italy, there
1 John of Segovia, i. 913.
2 The gradual change of opinion on the part of Cesarini may be traced in
the letters of Ambrogio Traversari, 143-175. Traversari takes credit to his own
arguments for producing the result.
3 John of Paloniar, in Mansi, Supplementum, vi. 576, says : ' Illi qui iverant
per plateas in brevibus vestibus et ad rnensas donainorum ministraverant, tune
sumptis longis vestibus Deputationes intrarunt ut sic numerus vaccilium
augeretur.' Eugenius, in a letter to the Duke of Savoy (Cecconi, No. cxcv.)
says : * Multitudine vocum, quas diversis artibus cotidie propter hoc negotium
ad concilium venire fecerant, conati sunt eligere civitatem Aveniouenseni.'
VOL. II. L
146
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Compro
mise of
Februar
23, 143
ary
37.
The Arch
bishop of
Taranto
organises
the Papal
party.
April 1437.
remained only Buda, Vienna, and Savoy as eligible ; if the
Council decided on Savoy, he would accept it as according to
the agreement ; beyond this he could not go. In spite of his
written protest, the majority confirmed their vote by a decree in
favour of Avignon.
At the beginning of February 1437, the Greek ambassador,
John Dissipatus, arrived in Basel, and was surprised to find that
the Council had fixed on Avignon. He vainly pleaded that
Avignon was not included in the decree which the Greeks had
accepted, and when the Council paid no heed, he handed in
a protest on February 15. The Council requested him to
accompany their envoys to Constantinople. He refused, declaring
his intention of visiting the Pope and renewing his protest be
fore him : if no remedy could be found, he would publish to
the world that the Council would not keep its promises. The
majority at Basel was little moved by these complaints, save sc
far as they tended to strengthen the position of the minority
which was working in favour of the Pope. Through fear ol
playing into their hands, a compromise was made on February
23. The Council decreed that the citizens of Avignon were
to be required to pay, within thirty days, the 70,000 ducats
which they had promised ; a further term of twelve days was
allowed them to bring proof of their payment to Basel ; if this
were not done in the appointed time, the Council ' could, and was
bound,' to proceed to the election of another place.1
During the period of this truce arrived, on April 1, the Arch
bishop of Taranto, as a new Papal legate, accompanied by the
Greeks who had visited the Pope at Bologna. His arrival
gave a, new turn to affairs. Cesarini was opposed, on grounds
of practical wisdom, to the proceedings of the Council rather
than decidedly in favour of the Pope ; the Archbishop of
Taranto entered the lists as a violent partisan, as energetic and
as unscrupulous as was the Cardinal d'Allemand. He set to
work to organise the Papal party and to devise a policy of
resistance. Opportunity soon befriended him. As the term
allowed to Avignon to pay its money drew near its close, there was
no news of any payment. Parties in favour of the Pope and the
1 ' Alioquin ex tune ipsum sacrum concilium pcssit et teneatur ad
electionem alterius loci pro ycumenico concilio celebrando procedere.' The
' cedula consensus patrum ' is given by John of Segovia, 936.
SCHISM IN THE COUNCIL. 147
Council were formed amongst the burghers, and the disunion
awakened the fears of the cautious merchants, who doubted
whether the Council's presence within their walls would prove
a profitable investment ; they proposed to defer the full pay
ment of the money till the actual arrival of the Greeks. On
this the Papal party insisted that the agreement with Avignon
was forfeited, and on April 12, the day on which the term
expired, Cesarini exhorted the Council to proceed to the choice
of another place. In his speech he used the words ' the
authority of the Apostolic See ; ' there was at once a shout of
indignation, as it was thought that he hinted at the dissolution
of the Council. The discussion was warm, and the sitting broke
up in confusion.
The position assumed by the Archbishop of Taranto was i Schism in
that the decree of February 23 was rigidly binding ; the con- 1 £11?
tingency contemplated in it had actually occurred, and the \17» 1437>
Council was bound to make a new election. Nay, if some
members of the Council refused to do so, he argued, from the
analogy of a capitular election, that the power of the Council
devolved on those who were ready to act — a numerical minority,
if acting according to the law, could override a majority which
acted illegally.1 The Papal party numbered about seventy votes,
their opponents about two hundred ; but the Archbishop of
Taranto's policy was to create a schism in the Council and
destroy the power of the majority by the prestige of the ' saner
part.' Accordingly on April 17, when the deputations voted on-,
the question of adhering to Avignon or choosing another place,
the presidents in three of the deputations, being on the Papal
side, refused the votes in favour of Avignon as technically in
correct, and returned the result of the voting as in favour of
a new election. When the majority protested with shouts and
execrations, the minority withdrew and allowed them to declare
their vote in favour of Avignon. There was now a hopeless
deadlock ; the two parties sat separately, and the efforts of the
German ambassadors and of the citizens of Basel were alike
unavailing to restore concord.
1 John of Segovia, 956 : ' Continuo autem Cardinalis sancti Petri dicebat
de jure fore quod in actibus communitatis, quando universitas deficit, quemli-
bet universitatis illius posse supplere ; unde cum papa consensisset in decreto
Grtecorurn, ad eum, quia summus pontif ex, caput ecclesias et principale mem-
brum, spectabat laborare ne ecclcsia Latina deficeret in promissis.'
L2
148 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK When agreement proved to be impossible, both sides pre-
v_IIT1' ^ pared to fight out their contention to the end. On April 26
Futilf ts at ^ie maJority published its decree abiding by Avignon ; the
reconcilia- minority published its choice of Florence or Udine, and asserted
1437. that henceforth the power of the Council, as regarded this
question, vested in those who were willing to keep their
promise.1 In the wild excitement that prevailed suspicions
were rife, and violence was easily provoked. On the following
Sunday, when the Cardinal of Aries proceeded to the Minster
to celebrate mass, he found the altar already occupied by the
Archbishop of Taranto, who suspected that the opportunity
might be used of publishing the decree of the majority in the
name of the Council, and who had resolved, in that case, to be
beforehand. Loud cries and altercations were heard on all sides ;
only the crowded state of the cathedral, which prevented men
from raising their arms, saved the scandal of open violence.
The civic guards had to keep the peace between the combatants.
Evening brought reflection, and both parties dreaded a new
schism, and were appalled at the result which seemed likely
to follow from a Council assembled to promote the peace of
Christendom. Congregations were suspended, and for six days
the best men of both parties conferred together to see if an
agreement were possible ; but all was in vain, because men
were swayed by personal passion and motives of self-interest,
and the violence of party-spirit entirely obscured the actual
subject under discussion. Everyone acted regretfully and
remorsefully, but with the feeling that he had now gone too far
to go back. The die had already been cast ; the defeat of the
Council involved the ruin of everyone who had till now upheld
it; to retreat a hair's breadth meant failure. Conferences
brought to light no common grounds ; matters must take their
course, and the two divisions of the Council must find by
experience which was the stronger.2
1 The document is given in Cecconi, No. cxviii. : ' Cum jus et potestas
hujus sacri concilii (quoad actum istum et dependentia ab eo) apud illos
remaneat qui dicte cedule concordate et conclusioni ac determinationi hujus
sacri concilii inniti volant, et providere ne sacrum Concilium in suis pro-
missis deficiat,' &c.
2 The state of feeling is vividly described in a letter of JSneas Sylvius to
Piero da Noceto, dated May 20, 1437, in Mansi, xxxi. 220, &c. A few of his
phrases are worth noting: 'Tanta inter majores vociferatio erat ut modestiores
CONFLICTING DECREES PUBLISHED. 149
On May 7, a day which many wished never to dawn, the CHAP.
rival parties strove in a solemn session to decree in the name
of the Council their contradictory resolutions. In the early
morning the Cardinal of Aries, clad in full pontificals, took pos- conflicting
session of the altar, and the cathedral was filled with armed May i',
men. The legates arrived later, and even at the last moment ]
both sides spoke of concord. It was proposed that, in case the
Greeks would not come to Basel, the Council be held at Bologna,
and the fortresses be put in the hands of two representatives of
each side. Three times the Cardinals of Aries and of S. Peter's
stood at the altar on the point of making peace ; but they
could not agree on the choice of the two who w^ere to hold the
fortresses. At twelve o'clock there were cries that it was use
less to waste more time. Mass was said and the Bishop of
Albienza mounted the pulpit to read the decree of the majority.
The hymn < Veni Creator,' which was the formal opening of the
session, had begun ; but it was silenced that again there might
be negotiations for peace. All was in vain. The session
opened, and the Bishop of Albienza began to read the decree.
On the part of the minority the Bishop of Porto seized a secre
tary's table and began to read their decree surrounded by
a serried band of stalwart youths. One bishop shouted against
the other, and the Cardinal of Aries stormed vainly, calling for
order. The decree of the minority was shorter and took less
time in reading ; as soon as it was finished, the Papal party
commenced the ' Te Deum.' When their decree was finished,
the opposite party sang the 4 Te Deum.' It was a scene of wild
confusion in which violent partisans might triumph, but which
filled with dismay and terror all who had any care for the
future of the Church. Both parties felt the gravity of the
crisis ; both felt powerless to avert it. With faces pale from
excitement they saw a new schism declared in the Church.
Next day there was a contention about the seal of the Coun- Dispute
cil, which Cesarini was found to have in his possession and at ing the '*
first declined to give up. But the citizens of Basel insisted
that it was their duty to see that the seal was kept in its
proper place. On May 14 a compromise was made. The seal
in taberna vinaria cernas bibulos.' < Si rueam petis sententiam paucissimos ex
utraque parte numerarem qnos credam sola moveri conscientia.' « Apud quein
sit veritas Deus noverit ; ego nan video neque si video scribere ausim.'
150 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK was put in custody of a commission of three, on condition that
._ IIiL „ both decrees be sealed in secret ; the Bull of the conciliar
party was to be sent to Avignon, but not to be delivered till the
money was paid by the citizens ; if this was not done within
thirty days the Bull was to be brought back ; meanwhile the Bull
of the Papal party was to remain in secret custody. Again there
was peace for a while, which was broken on June 16 by the dis
covery that the box containing the conciliar seal had been
tampered with, and the seal used by some unauthorised person.
The discovery was kept secret, and the roads were watched to
intercept any messengers to Italy. A man was taken bearing
letters from the Archbishop of Taranto, which were produced
before a general congregation. There was an outcry on both sides,
one protesting against the seizure of the letters, the other
against the false use of the Council's seal. Twelve judges were
appointed to examine into the matter. The letters, which were
partly in cipher, were read and the case against the Archbishop
of Taranto was made good. He was put under arrest, and
when the matter was laid before the Council on June 2 1 , there
was an unseemly brawl which ended in the use of violent
means to prevent an appeal to the Pope being lodged by the
Archbishop's proctor. On July 19 the Archbishop, surrounded
by an armed troop, made his escape from Basel and fled to the
Pope.
ivgfixesS ^e majority in the Council of Basel might pass what de-
the Coun- crees they would, but they had reckoned too much on their
II 87*80, -^ power over the Greeks. The Papal legates won over the
Greek ambassadors and sent them to Eugenius IV. at Bologna.
The Pope at once ratified the decree of the minority, fixed
Florence or Udine as the seat of a future Council, and on .May
oO issued a Bull to tins effect. He wrote to all the princes of
Christendom announcing his action. But Sigismund raised
a protest against a Council being held in Italy, and the Duke
of Milan strongly opposed the choice of Florence. Appa
rently wishing to avoid discussion for the present, Eugenius
IV. prevailed on the Greeks to defer till their arrival on the
Italian coast the exact choice of the place. The Greek am
bassador, John Dissipatus, solemnly declared in the Emperor's
name, that he recognised as the Council of Basel, to which he
had formed obligations, only the party of the legates, and that
THE COUNCIL SUMMONS EUGENIUS IV. 151
he accepted the decree of the minority as being the true decree CHAP.
of the Council.1 Eugenius IV. hired at his own expense four — y]}' —
Venetian galleys to convey the Greeks to Italy. Preparations
were made with all possible speed, and on September 3 the
Bishops of Digne and Porto, representing the minority of the
Council, and Garatoni, now Bishop of Coron, on the part of
the Pope, arrived in Constantinople. Claiming to speak in the
name of the Pope and of the Council, they at once began to
make preparations for the journey of the Greeks to Italy.
The assembly at Basel could not make its arrangements The
with Avignon quickly enough to compete on equal terms with su°mnions
the Pope. It had to face the usual disadvantages of a demo- J^gte0nius
cracy when contending against a centralised power. Its hope Basel,
of success with the Greeks lay in persuading them that the 1437. '
Council, and not the Pope, represented the Western Church,
and was strong in the support of the princes of Western
Europe. It determined again to proceed to the personal
humiliation of Eugenius IV., and so by assailing his power to
render useless his dealings with the Greeks. On July 31 the
Council issued a monition to Eugenius IV., setting forth that
he did not loyally accept its decrees, that he endeavoured to
set at nought its labours for the reformation of the Church, that
he wasted the patrimony of the Holy See, and would not work
with the Council in the matter of union with the Greeks ; it
summoned him to appear at Basel within sixty days, personally
or by proctor, to answer to these charges. This admonition
was the first overt act towards a fresh schism. Sigismund and
the German ambassadors strongly opposed it on that ground,
and besought the Council to recall it. It was clear that the
Council would meet with little support if it proceeded to ex
tremities against the Pope. But in its existing temper it lis
tened to the ambassadors of the King of Aragon and the Duke
of Milan, the political adversaries of Eugenius IV., and paid
little heed to moderate counsels. On September 26 it annulled
the nomination to the cardinalate by Eugenius of the Patriarch
of Alexandria, as being opposed to the decree that during the
Council no cardinal should be nominated elsewhere than at
Basel. It also annulled the decree of the minority on May 7,
1 Raynaldus, 1437, No. 13.
152 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK by whatever authority it might be upheld, and took under its
v_ — <i — .> own protection the Papal city of Avignon.
The Coun- jn Vain the Council tried to win over Sigismund to its side,
nounces Sigismund had gained by the submission of Bohemia all that
ivf con™ ne was likely to get from the Council, In Italian politics he
StoblT* /had allied nimself witn Venice against his foe the Duke of
1437. I Milan, and so was inclined to the Papal side. He wrote angrily
Vto the Council on September 17, bidding them hold their hand
in their process against the Pope, He reminded them that
they had found the Church united by his long labour, and were
acting in a way to cause a new schism. They had met to re
form and pacify Christendom, and were on the way to do the
very reverse ; while wishing to unite the Greeks, they were en
gaged in dividing the Latins, If they did not cease from their
seditious courses, he would be driven to undertake the defence
of the Pope.1 The Council was somewhat dismayed at this
letter ; but the bolder spirits took advantage of current suspi
cions, and declared it to be a forgery, written in Basel, by the.
same hands as had forged the Council's Bulls-.2 Passion out
weighed prudence, and men felt that they had gone too far to
withdraw ; on October 1 the Council declared Eugenius IV.
guilty of contumacy for not appearing to plead in answer to
the charges brought against him.
genius Qn m's side a]so Eugenius IV. was not idle. He accepted
solves the the challenge of the Council, and on September 18 issued a Bull
September ^/decreeing its dissolution. In the Bull he set forth his desire to
is, 1437. work with the Council for union with the Greeks ; in spite of
all he could do they chose Avignon, though such a choice was
null and void as not being included in the agreement pre
viously made with the Greeks. Still, in spite of the default
of Avignon to fulfil the conditions it had promised, the Council
persevered in its choice. The legates, the great majority of
prelates, royal ambassadors, and theologians, who made up the
saner part of the Council, protested against the legality of this
choice, and chose Florence or Udine, and at the request of the
Greeks he had accepted their choice. The turbulent spirits in
1 The summary of this letter is given by Patricius, in Hartzheim, v. 819.
2 John of Segovia, 1027 : ' Non defuere qui dicerent earn f uisse nedum
imrrmtatam sed scriptam Basilee, cognitamque fuisse manum scriptoris,
proptereaque ilium ex Basilea fugisse.'
THE GREEKS ACCEPT THE POPE'S OFFERS. 153
the Council, consisting of a few prelates who were animated CHAP
partly by personal ambition and partly were the political tools _ _ ^ _ ,
of the King of Aragon and the Duke of Milan, gathered a
crowd of the lower clergy, and under the specious name of
reformation resisted the Pope, in spite of the Emperor's remon
strances. To prevent scandals and to avoid further dissension,
the Pope transferred the Council from Basel to Ferrara, which
he fixed as the seat of an Ecumenical Council for the purpose
of union with the Greeks. He allowed the fathers to remain
at Basel for thirty days to end their dealings with the Bohe
mians ; but if the Bohemians preferred to come to Ferrara,
they should there have a friendly reception and full hearing.1
The Council on October 12 annulled the Bull of Eugenius,
on the ground of the superiority of a General Council over a
Pope, and prohibited all under pain of excommunication from
attending the pretended Council at Ferrara. It warned
Eugenius IV. that if he did not make amends within four
months he would be suspended from his office, and that the
Council would proceed to his deprivation.
Both Pope and Council had now done all they could to The Greeks
assert their superiority over each other. The first question was
which of the two contending parties should gain the adhesion
of the Greeks. The Papal envoys had arrived first at Con- 1437.
stantinople, and their offers were best adapted to the conve
nience of the Greeks. When on October 4 the Avignonese
galleys arrived off Constantinople with the envoys of the
Council, the captain of the Papal galleys was with difficulty
prevented from putting out to sea to oppose their landing.
The Greek Emperor was perplexed by two embassies, each
brandishing contradictory decrees, and each declaring that
it alone represented the Council. Each party had come
with excommunications ready prepared to launch against the
other. This scandalous exhibition of discord, in the face of
those whom both parties wished to unite to the Church, was
only prevented by the pacific counsels of John of Eagusa, who
had been for three years resident envoy of the Council in Con
stantinople, and had not been swallowed up by the violent wave
of party-feeling which had passed over Basel.2 The Council's
1 The Bull is given in full in John of Segovia, p. 1033.
2 See his relation to the Council of Basel in Cecconi, No. clxxyiii., and also
Mansi, Condi., xxxi. 248.
154
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL,
BOOK
III.
Neutrality
of Sigis- "
mund.
ambassadors proceeded at once to attack the claims of their
opponents to be considered as the Council. They succeeded
in reducing to great perplexity the luckless Emperor, who
wanted union with the Latin Church as the price of military
help from Western Europe, and only wished to find out to
whom or what he was to be united. The Greeks were puzzled
to decide whether the Pope would succeed in dissolving the
Council, or the Council in deposing the Pope : they could not
clearly see which side would have the political preponderance
in the West. The two parties plied the Emperor in turn with
their pleadings for a space of fifteen days. The Council had
the advantage that the Greeks were already committed to an
agreement with them. But the Papal party had diplomats
who were adroit in clearing away difficulties. l The Greeks
ultimately decided to go with them to Italy, and the Emperor
exhorted the Council's envoys to peace and concord, and invited
them to accompany him to Venice. They refused with cries
of rage and loud protestations, and on November 2 departed
for Basel.
Now that the breach between Pope and Council was ir
reparable, and the Pope had won a diplomatic victory in his
negotiations, both parties looked to Sigismund, who, however,
refused to identify himself decidedly with either. He disap
proved of the Pope's dissolution of the Council, from which he
still expected some measures of ecclesiastical reform ; on the
other hand, he disapproved of the Council's proceedings against
the Pope, which threatened a renewal of the schism.2 Eugenius
IV. had showed his willingness to conciliate Sigismund by
allowing the Council in his Bull of dissolution to sit for thirty
days to conclude its business with Bohemia ; or, if the Bohe
mians wished, he was willing to receive their representatives
at Ferrara. This was important to Sigismund and to the Ba*
hemians, as it showed that the Pope accepted all that had bee£
done in reference to the Bohemian question, and was ready. '»
adopt the Council's policy in this matter.
Sigismund had indeed reason to be content with the results
1 See the relation of the Bishop of Digne to Eugenius IV. and the Council
of Ferrara, in Cecconi, No. clxxxviii.
2 John of Segovia, 1060, gives the contents of a letter of Sigismund to
the Council, dated October 20.
THE CATHOLIC KEACTION IN BOHEMIA. 155
which he had won. His restoration to Bohemia had been ac- CHAP.
complished, and he had organised a policy of reaction which '
seemed likely to be successful. On August 23, 1436, his
entry into Prag had been like a triumphal procession. He lost i486,
no time in appointing new magistrates, all of them chosen from
the extremely moderate party. The legates of the Council
were always by his side to maintain the claims of the Church.
Bishop Philibert of Coutances began a series of aggressions on
the episcopal authority in Bohemia. He asserted his right to
officiate in Rokycana's church without asking his permission :
he held confirmations and consecrated altars and churches in
virtue of his superior office as legate of the Council. The Bo
hemians on their part waited for the fulfilment of Sigismund's
promises, and the knights refused to surrender the lands of
the Church until they were satisfied. Sigismund was bound
to write to the Council, urging the recognition of Kokycana as
Archbishop of Prag ; but he told the legates that he trusted
the Council would find some good pretext for delay. ' I have
promised,' he said, e that till he dies I will hold no other than
Rokycana as archbishop ; but I believe that some of the Bo
hemians will kill him, and then I can have another archbishop.' l
It is clear that Sigismund knew how to manage a reaction,
knew the inevitable loss of popularity which a party leader
suffers if he make concessions and does not immediately gain
success. Eokycana was looked upon as a traitor by the ex
treme party, and as a dangerous man by the moderate party.
We are nob surprised to find that in October rumours were rife
of a conspiracy organised in Eokycana's house against the
Emperor and the legates. Inquiries were made, and without
being directly accused Kokycana was driven to defend himself,
and then his defence was declared to be in itself suspicious.2
Rokycana seems to have felt his position becoming daily Position of
more insecure. On October 24 he paid his first visit to the Rok>vcana>
legates to try and find out their views about the confirma
tion of his title of archbishop. The legates received him
haughtily and talked about the restoration of various points of
1 John of Tours: Hegistrum-, Mon. Conoil., i. 835.
2 John of Tours, p. 836 : ' Rokssana vero longa oratione, cum non accusare-
tur, se excusavit et sub gravissimo anathemate de illis conventiculis ; unde
mirabantur multi, scientes non esse vera quce dicebat.'
156
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Bigismund
and the
Council's
envoys.
November
1436.
Progress
of the
Catholic
reaction
in Bohe
mia. No
vember
1436-June
1437.
ritual which the Bohemians had cast aside. ' You talk only
about trifles,' saidEokycana impatiently; 'more serious matters
need your care.' ' You say truly,' exclaimed John of Palomar
with passion ; 6 there are more serious matters : for you deceive
the people and can no more give them absolution than this
stick, for you have not the power of the keys seeing you
have no apostolic mission.' This bold onslaught staggered
Rokycana, who repeated the words of Palomar in amazement,
and said that the people would be indignant at hearing them ;
he would consult his fellow-priests. One of his followers
warned the legates that they and the Emperor were becoming
unpopular through their refusal to confirm Rokycana's election
as archbishop. Rokycana withdrew with a bitter feeling of
helplessness.
The legates on November 8 pressed the Emperor to take
further measures for the Catholic restoration. They had now
been two months in Bohemia, they urged, and little had been
done. The Communion was given to children, the Epistle and
Gospel were read in Bohemian and not in Latin, the use of holy
water and the kiss of peace was not restored, and toleration was
not given to those who communicated under one kind. All this
was contrary to the observance of the Compacts, and the king
dom of Bohemia was still infected with the heresy of Wyclif.
Sigisnnind angrily answered, ' I was once a prisoner in Hungary,
and save then I never was so wearied as I am now ; indeed my
present captivity seems likely to be longer.' He begged the
legates to be patient till the meeting of the Diet. He was en
gaged in treating with Tabor and Koniggratz, which were still
opposed to him, and he needed time to overcome their resistance.
Tabor agreed to submit its differences to arbitration ; Konig
gratz was reduced by arms.
On November 27 the legates and Rokycana came to a confer
ence on the disputed points in the Emperor's presence. Roky
cana demanded the. clear and undoubted confirmation of the
Compacts ; the legates the re-establishment of the Catholic
ritual. There were many difficulties raised and much discus
sion ; but Rokycana found himself abandoned by the masters of
the University, and opposed by the city magistrates and the
nobles. He gave way unwillingly on all the points raised by
the legates except the Communion of children and the reading
THE CATHOLIC KEACTION IN BOHEMIA. 157
of the Epistle and Grospel in Bohemian. On December 23 the CHAP.
Catholic ritual was restored in all the churches in Prag ; the - I^i ,
use of holy water and the kiss of peace was resumed, and
images which had been cast downi were again set up in their
former places. Still Bishop Philibert abode in Prag and exer
cised the office of bishop. On February 11, 1437, the Empress
Barbara was crowned Queen of Bohemia by Philibert, and
Rokycana was not even bidden to the ceremony.
On February 13 the legates at last received from the
Council the Bull of ratification of the Compacts of Iglau.
Together with it came an admonition to the Emperor not to
tolerate the communion of children. He was urged also to
restore the Catholic ritual throughout Bohemia and to hand
over to the Council Peter Payne, who maintained the Wyclifite
doctrine that the substance of bread remained in the Eucharist.
When the ratification was shown to Rokycana, he demanded
that there should also be issued a letter to the princes of
Christendom freeing Bohemia from all charge of heresy. He
brought forward also the old complaint that many priests re
fused to give the sacrament under both kinds ; he demanded
that the legates should order them to do so, should enjoin
the bishops to see that the clergy obeyed their command, and
should request the Bishop of Olmiitz himself to administer
under both kinds. The legates answered that the letter clear
ing the Bohemians had already been issued at Iglau ; for the future
the Bohemians by observing the Compacts would purge them
selves in the eyes of all men better than any letter could do it
for them. To the other part of his request they answered that
they would admonish any priest who was proved to have refused
the Communion under both kinds to anyone who desired it ;
they could not ask the Bishop of Olmiitz to administer the
Communion himself, but only to appoint priests who were ready
to do so. This was the utmost that Rokycana could procure,
in spite of repeated renewal of his complaints.
The reaction went on with increasing strength. The rest of
Bohemia followed the example of Prag and restored the Catholic
ritual. Sigismund set up again in the Cathedral of Prag the
old capitular foundation with all its splendour. The monks
began to return to Prag ; relics of the saints were again ex
posed for popular adoration'? In this state of affairs represen-
158
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Rokycana
driven
from Prag.
June 1437.
tatives of Bohemia were summoned to Basel to discuss further
the question of the necessity or expediency of receiving the
Communion under both kinds. Sigismund, wishing to rid him
self of Rokycana, urged him to go. Rokycana steadily re
fused, knowing that at Basel he would only meet with coldness,
and that during his absence from Prag the triumph of the re
action would be assured. On April 7, Procopius of Pilsen, in
the Emperor's presence, bade Rokycana remember that- he had
been the leader in former negotiations with the Council. ' You
are experienced in the matter,' he said ; ' you have no right to
refuse.' ' Procopius,' said Rokycana, forgetting where he was,
6 remember how our party fared at Constance ; we might fare in
like manner, for I know that I am accused and hated at Basel.'
6 Think you,' said Sigismund angrily, ' that for you or for this
city I would do anything against mine honour ? ' l It was so
long since Sigismund had broken his plighted word to Hus that
he had forgotten that it was even possible for others to
remember it.
Though Rokycana stayed in Prag, he was systematically set
aside in ecclesiastical matters. On April 12 Bishop Philibert
appointed rural deans throughout Bohemia and charged them
how to carry out their duties ; Rokycana was not even consulted.
The church in which Rokycana preached was given to the
Rector of the University, who was inducted by the legate.
Peter Payne was banished by Sigismund from Bohemia as a
heretic, and an opportunity against Rokycana was eagerly
looked for. This was given by a sermon preached on May 5,
about the Communion of children, in which he said that to give
up this practice would be a confession of previous error and of
present instability of purpose. ' Too many now condemn what
once they praised. But you, poor children, lament. What
have you done amiss that you should be deprived of the Com
munion ? Who will answer for you ? Who will defend you ?
Now no one heeds.' Mothers lifted their voices and wept over
the wrongs of their children, and that was judged sufficient to
establish against Rokycana a charge of inciting the people to
sedition. The Diet demanded that some steps should be taker,
to administer the archbishopric of Prag ; and Sigismund's in
fluence with the moderate party was strong enough to obtain oji
1 John of Tours, SCO.
LAST EMBASSY OF THE BOHEMIANS TO BASEL. 159
June 11 the election of Christiann of Prachatic to the office of CHAP.
Vicar of the Archbishopric. Rokycana on being asked to sur- .. ^ ^ _M
render the seal and submit to Christiann as his spiritual
superior, judged it wise to flee from Prag on June 16.
The exile of Eokycana was the triumph of the moderate Bohemian
party, the Utraquists pure and simple, who wished for entire
union with the Church, but who were still staunch in uphold-
ing the principles of a reformed Church for Bohemia. Envoys
were sent off to Basel to end the work of reconciliation and
settle the points which still were disputed. On August 18 the
envoys, chief amongst whom were the priests John Pribram
and Procopius of Pilsen, entered Basel with great magnificence.
Pribram in his first speech to the Council demanded that the
Communion under both kinds should be fully granted, not only
in Bohemia and Moravia, but universally, seeing that it was
the truth of Grod's law. Pribram and John of Palomar argued
learnedly for many days on the subject ; but Pribram felt that
he met with little attention from the Council. One day
he angrily met the suspicious coolness which surrounded him
by declaring that the Bohemians had never been heretical, but
had always remained in the unity of the faith ; if anyone said
otherwise, they were ready to answer with their steel as they
had done in past days.1 When Pribram had ended his dis
putation, Procopius of Pilsen advocated the Communion of
children with no better success.
At last, on October 20, the Bohemians submitted nine de-
mands to the Council, which deserve mention as showing the Bohemians,
ultimate point arrived at by these long negotiations. (1) That °cstober *»
the Communion under both kinds be granted to Bohemia and
Moravia ; (2) that the Council declare this concession to be more
than a mere permission given for the purpose of avoiding further
mischief; (3) that the Church of Prag be provided with an arch
bishop and two suffragans, who should be approved by the realm ;
(4) that the Council issue letters clearing the good name of Bo
hemia; (5) that in deciding whether the Communion under
both kinds be of necessary precept or not, the Council adhere
to the authorities mentioned in the Compact of Eger, the law
1 Si quis vellet dicere contra, ipsi darent ferrea response, glorianter men-
cionando quas sibi dicebant contra eos impugnantes de celo concessas
victorias.' — John of Segovia, 1066.
160
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Refus.il of
their de
mands
by the
Council.
of God, the practice of Christ and the Apostles, general councils
_ and doctors founded on the law of God ; (6) that the Com
munion of children be allowed ; (7) that at least the Epistle,
Gospel, and Creed in the mass service be said in the vulgar
tongue ; (8) that the University of Prag be reformed and have
some prebends and benefices attached to it; (9) that the
.-, Council proceed to the effectual reformation of the Church in
head and members. Pribram besought that these be granted,
especially the Gospel truth concerning the Sacrament. ' The
kingdom of Bohemia is ready,' he added, ' as experience has
shown, to defend and assert this even by thousands of deaths.'
Great was the indignation of the Bohemians when, on Novem
ber 6, Cesarini exhorted them to conform to the ritual of the
universal Church as regarded the Communion of the laity under
one kind only ; still, he added, the Council was willing to stand
by the Compacts.
Cesarini had gone too far in thus openly showing the policy
of the Council to reduce the Bohemians to accept again the
Catholic ritual. It required some management on the part of
other members of the Council to allay their indignation. On
November 24 the Council gave a formal answer to the Bohe
mian requests. As regarded the necessity of the Communion
under both kinds the point had now been argued fully ; it only
remained for them to join with the Council and accept its de
claration on the subject as inspired by the Holy Ghost. Their
other points had either been already settled by the Compacts or
were favours which might afterwards be discussed by the Coun
cil. This was of course equivalent to a refusal to grant any
thing beyond the bare letter of the Compacts. The Bohemian
moderates saw themselves entirely deceived in their hopes of
obtaining universal tolerance for their beliefs. The Council
would grant nothing more than a special favour to Bohemia
and Moravia to continue to use the ritual which they had
adopted, until such time as it could safely be prohibited. In
vain the Bohemians asked that at least they should not be sent
away entirely empty-handed, lest it be a cause of fresh dis
turbances. They could get no better answer, and left Basel on
November 29. In spite of Cesarini's remonstrance against the
imprudence of such a step, the Council on December 23 issued
a decree that the Communion under both kinds was not a pre-
DEATH OF rflGLSMUND. 1G1
cept of Christ, but the Church could order the method of its CHAP.
reception as reverence and the salvation of the faithful seemed . V*L ^
to require. The custom of communicating under one kind
only had been reasonably introduced by the Church and was to
be regarded as the law, nor might it be changed without the
Church's authority.
In Bohemia the disappointment of the expectations which I Death of
the great mass of the people still retained caused growing irri- 1 December'
tation, and seemed likely to lead to a fresh outbreak. More- » 9> 1437>
over, Sigismund's declining health gave an occasion to the am
bitious schemes of those of his own household. Sigismund had
no son, but his only daughter was married to Albert of Austria ;
and the fondest wish of Sigismund's declining years was that
Albert should succeed to all his dignities and possessions. But
the Empress Barbara had already tasted the sweets of power
and was unwilling to retire into obscurity. She and her rela
tives, the Counts of Cilly, raised up a party among the Bohemian
barons with the object of elevating Ladislas of Poland to the
thrones of Bohemia and Hungary, and marrying him, though
still a youth, to Barbara, in her fifty-fourth year.1 Sigismund
discovered this plot and felt the danger of his position. He
was seized with erysipelas, and had to submit to the amputation
of his big toe. His one desire was to quit Bohemia and secure
Albert's accession in Hungary. Concealing his knowledge of
what was passing around him, he left Prag on November 1 1 ,
borne in an open litter and dressed in the imperial robes. He
was accompanied by the Empress and the Count of Cilly, and
on November 21 reached Znaym, where Albert and his wife
Elizabeth awaited him. There he ordered Barbara to be im
prisoned, but the Count of Cilly had timely warning and
escaped. At Znaym Sigismund summoned to his presence
several of the chief barons of Bohemia and Hungary, and urged
on them the advantages to be gained by uniting both lands
1 Palacky, GescMchte von Boliincn. Hi. pt. 3, 282, throws doubt upon this
assertion of ^Eneas Sylvius {Hist. Boliem. ch. Hi.), and there can be no ques
tion that^Eneas has drawn a picture of Barbara which is exaggerated through
his dislike to the family of Cilly. Still Windeck's account of Sigismund's
last commands to his nobles makes the same assertion : ' das sie denne die
kaiserynne sein frauen behilten bis das Herzog Albrechte in das konigreich
kerne, oder sie warden den konig von Polande nemen und in das konigreich
zihen,' in Mencken. I., 1278.
VOL. II. M
62 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK under one rule ; he warmly recommended to their support the
_IITL _^ claims of Albert. This was his last effort. Feeling his malady
grow worse, he was true to the last to that love of dramatic
effect which was so strong a feature of his character. He wished
to die like an emperor. Attired in the imperial robes, with
his crown on his head, he heard mass on the morning of Decem
ber 9. When mass was over he ordered grave clothes to be
put on over the imperial vesture, and sitting on his throne
awaited death, which overtook him in the evening. He was left
seated for three days according to his command, c that men
might see that the lord of all the world was dead and gone.' l
Then his corpse was carried to Grrosswardein and buried in the
resting-place of the Hungarian kings.
The facile pen of ^Eneas Sylvius gives us the following
vigorous description of Sigismund : — ' He was tall with bright
eyes, broad forehead, pleasantly rosy cheeks, and a long thick
beard. He had a large mind and formed many plans, but was
changeable. He was witty in conversation, given to wine and
women, and thousands of love intrigues are laid to his charge.
He was prone to anger, but ready to forgive. He could not
keep his money, but spent it lavishly. He made more promises
than he kept, and often deceived.' 2 These words are a fair re
presentation of the impression produced on his contemporaries
by this mighty ' lord of all the world.' With all his faults, and
they were many, on the whole men loved and esteemed him.
No doubt vanity was the leading feature of Sigismund's
character; but it was the dignified vanity of always seeming to
act worthily of his high position. He would have been ludicrous
with his dramatic strut had not his geniality and keenness of
wit imposed on those who came in his way, and so saved him
from hopeless absurdity. It is easy to mock at Sigismund's
1 "Windeck, as above, ' so sollte man in stelien lassen zwen tag oder drei tage,
dass alle mon in sehen mochte, dass aller der welde herre tot und gestorben
were.'
2 From a Vatican MS. published in Palacky's Italienische Reise (Prag, 1838),
p. 113: 'Fuit autem Sigismundus egregiae staturas, illustribus oculis, fronte
spaciosa, genis ad gratiam rubescentibus, barba prolixa et copiosa, vasto
animo,multivolus, inconstans tamen, sermone facetus, vini cupidus, in Venerem
ardens, mille adulteriis criminosus, pronus ad iram, facilis ad veniam, nullius
thesauri custos, prodigus dispensator ; plura promisit quam servavit, fmxit
multa.' A portrait of Sigismund by Albert Diirer exists at Niiremburg.
CHARACTER OF SIGISMUND. 163
undertakings, at his pretensions as compared with the results CHAP.
which he achieved; but it is impossible not to feel some sym- . vn'
pathy even for the weaknesses of an Emperor who strove to
realise the waning idea of the empire, and whose labours were
honestly directed to the promotion of the peace and union of
Christendom. Sigismund possessed in perfection all the lesser
arts of sovereignty ; kindly, affable, and ready in speech, he could
hold his own amidst any surroundings. His schemes, however
chimerical they might seem, were founded on a large sympathy
with the desires and needs of Europe as a whole. He laboured
for the unity of Christendom, the restoration of European peace,
and the reformation of the Church. Even when he spoke of
combining Europe in a crusade against the Turks, his aim,
however chimerical, was proved by the result to be right. But
Sigismund had not the patience nor the wisdom to begin his
work from the beginning. He had not the self-restraint to
husband his resources ; to undertake first the small questions
which concerned the kingdoms under his immediate sway, to aim
only at one object at a time, and secure each step before ad
vancing to the next. Relying on his position, he caught at
every occasion of displaying his own importance, and his vanity
led him to trust that he would succeed by means of empty
display. Hence his plans hampered one another. He de
stroyed his position at the Council of Constance by a change of
political attitude resulting from a futile attempt to bring
about peace between England and France. He induced Bohe
mia to think that its religious interests were safe in his keeping,
and then trusted to repress its religious movement by the help
of the Council of Constance. When he had driven Bohemia
to revolt, he oscillated between a policy of conciliation and one
of repression till matters had passed beyond his control. He
lost his command of the Council of Basel because he entered v
into relations with the Pope, who was bent upon its overthrow.
His schemes of ecclesiastical reform slipped from his grasp, and
after spending his early years in extinguishing one schism, he
lived to see the beginning of another. Few men with such
wise plans and such good intentions have so conspicuously
failed.
The death of Sigismund removed the only man who might j $
have averted an open outbreak between Eugenius IV. and the
M 2
164
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Cesariui
leaves
Basel.
January 9,
1438.
Council of Basel. Both sides now proceeded to extremities.
On December 30 Eugenius IV. published a Bull declaring the
Council to be transferred from Basel to Ferrara. At Basel
Cesarini made one last attempt to bring back peace to the dis
tracted Church. On December 20, in an eloquent speech
breathing the true spirit of Christian statesmanship, he pointed
out the evils that would follow from a schism. Farewell to all
hopes of a real union with the Greeks, of real missionary enter
prise against the Mohammedans, who were the serious danger
to Christendom. He besought the Council, ere it was too late,
to recall its admonition to the Pope, provided he would recall
his translation of the Council : then let them send envoys to
meet the Greeks on their arrival in Italy and propose to them
to come to Basel, Avignon, or Savoy, — failing that, let them
frankly join with the Pope and the Greeks in the choice of a
place which would suit all parties. He offered himself as ready
to do his utmost to mediate for such a result.1 But Cesarini
spoke to deaf ears. The control of the Council had passed
entirely into the hands of Cardinal d'Allemand, who was com
mitted to a policy of war to the bitter end. A ponderous reply
to Cesarini was prepared by the Archbishop of Palermo, a mass
of juristic subtilties which dealt with everything except the
great point at issue.
Cesarini saw the entire disappointment of the hopes which
six years before had been so strong in his breast at the opening
of the Council. He had longed for peace and reform ; he saw
instead, discord and self-seeking. The Council, which ought
to have promoted the welfare of Christendom, had become an
engine of political attack upon the Papacy. The noble,
generous, and large-minded aims of Cesarini had long been
forgotten at Basel. The reformation which he projected had
passed into revolution, which he could no longer control nor
moderate. He shared the fate of many other reformers at
many times of the world's history. The movement which he
had awakened passed into violent hands, and the end of his
labours for peace and order was anarchy and discord. With a
sad heart he confessed his failure, and on January 9, 1438,
he left Basel amid demonstrations of respect from his oppo
nents. At the request of the Pope and all the Cardinals, he
1 The speech is given in full by John of Segovia, 1114.
SUSPENSION OF EUGENIUS IV. BY THE COUNCIL. 165
went to Florence, where he was received with honour and lived CHAP
VII
for a time in quietness and study. >— — ,J — -
At Basel Cardinal d'Allemand was appointed president in
Cesarini's stead. The Council on January 24 took the next genius IV,
step in its process against Eugenius IV. It decreed that, as hej council.
had not appeared to plead within the appointed time, he was|
thenceforth suspended from his office ; meanwhile the adminis
tration of the Papacy belonged to the Council, and all acts done
by Eugenius were null and void. Sixteen bishops were present
at this session, of whom nine were Savoyards, six Aragonese,
and one Frenchman. Of the eighteen abbots who were there,
eleven were Aragonese and six were Savoyards. The Council
was in fact supported only by the King of Aragon and the
Dukes of Milan and Savoy. The Duke of Savoy hoped to use
it for his personal aggrandisement. The King of Aragon and
the Duke of Milan saw in it a means of forcing Eugenius IV.
into subserviency to their political schemes in Italy. Neither
of them was prepared to support the deposition of the Pope,
but they wished the process against him to be a perpetual
threat hanging over his head.1 The rest of the European powers
looked with disapproval, more or less strongly expressed, on the
proceedings of the Council. Henry VI., of England, wrote a
letter addressed to the Congregation (mot the Council) of Basel,
in which he reproved them for presuming to judge the Pope,
denounced them for bringing back the times of Antichrist, and
bade them desist from the process against Eugenius.2 Charles
VII., of France, wrote to the Council to stay its measures
against the Pope, and wrote to the Pope to withdraw his decrees
against the Council ; he forbade his bishops to attend the
Council of Ferrara, but allowed individuals to act as they
pleased at Basel. His purpose was to regulate ecclesiastical
matters in France at his own pleasure. In Germany, Sigis-
mund's policy of mediation survived after his death ; men
wished to avoid a schism, but to obtain through the Council
some measures of reform. The Kings of Castille and Portugal
1 Patricius, in Hartzheim, v. 824 : ' Tandem post multos tractatus Philippus
dux, qui suspensionem Eugenii postulaverat, nunc aperte Basileensibus
ostendit, non sibi placere ulterius contra Eugenium procedi.'
2 Patricius, in Hartzheim, v. 827.
166 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK and the Duke of Burgundy all admonished the Council to
>_ — ^ — ' withdraw from their proceedings against Eugenius.
The quarrel of the Pope and the Council now ceased to
attract the attention of Europe ; it had degenerated into a
squabble in which both parties wrere regarded with something
approaching contempt. But this condition of affairs was full of
danger to the future of the organisation of the Church.
167
CHAPTER VIII.
EUGENIUS IV. IN FLORENCE, AND THE UNION OF THE GREEK
CHURCH.
1434—1439.
SINCE his flight from Rome in 1434, Eugenius IV. has merely CHAP.
appeared as offering such resistance as he could to the growing - VIII'_-
pretensions of the Council. During the four years that had fy^j18
passed from that time he had been quietly gaining strength and Florentine
importance in Italy. True to her old traditions, Florence 1434! S'
graciously received the exiled Pope ; and under the shadow of
her protection, Eugenius IV., like his predecessor Martin V., had
been able to recruit his shattered forces and again re-establish
his political position.
At first his evil genius seemed still to pursue Eugenius IV.,
and he played a somewhat ignominious part in Florentine
affairs. The time when he arrived in Florence was a great
crisis in Florentine history. The prudent conduct of Giovanni
de' Medici Lad preserved the internal peace of Florence by care
fully maintaining a balance between the aristocratic and popu
lar parties in the city. But between his son Cosimo and his
political rival Rinaldo degli Albizzi, a bitter hostility gradually
grew up which could only end in the supremacy of the one or
the other party. The first step was taken by Rinaldo, who, in
September 1433, filled the city with his adherents ; Cosimo was
taken unawares, was accused of treason, cast into prison, and
only by a skilful use of his money succeeded in escaping death.
He went as an exile to Venice ; but his partisans were strong in
Florence, the city was divided, and" a reaction in his favour set
in. It was clear that the new magistrates who came into office
on September 1, 1434, would recall him from banishment, and
Rinaldo and his party were prepared to offer forcible resistance.
On September 26, Florence was in a ferment, and Rinaldo degli
68 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK Albizzi, with 800 armed men, held the Palace of the Podesta
_ I1T1' _^ and the streets which led to the Piazza. Eugenius IV. in this
condition of affairs offered his services as mediator. He
sent Giovanni Vitelleschi, Bishop of Eecanati, to Einaldo,
who, to the surprise of everyone, was persuaded to leave his
position and confer with the Pope at S. Maria Novella. It
was one o'clock in the morning when he did so. What argu
ments the Pope may have used we do not know ; but at five
o'clock Einaldo dismissed his armed men and remained peace
ably with the Pope. Perhaps he was not sure of the fidelity of
his adherents, and trusted that, by a show of submission, he
might, with the Pope's help, obtain better terms than the
doubtful chances of a conflict seemed to promise.
His enemies at once pursued the advantage thus offered to
them. The Signori sent some of their number to thank the
Pope for his good offices, and whatever may have been the first
intention of Eugenius IV., he was soon won over to abandon
Einaldo. On October 2, the party of the Medici filled the
Piazza and decreed the recall of Cosimo. Next day Einaldo
and his son were banished. The Pope attempted to console
Einaldo, and protested the uprightness of his own intentions
and the pain which he felt at the failure of his mediation.
' Holy Father,' answered Einaldo, ' I do not wonder at my
ruin ; I blame myself for believing that you, who have been
driven out of your own country, could keep me in mine. He
who trusts a priest's word is like a blind man without a guide.'
Sadly Einaldo left Florence for ever, and on October 6 Cosimo
de' Medici returned in triumph amid shouts that hailed him
father of his country. From that day forward for three hundred
years the fortunes of Florence were identified with those of the
house of Medici.
In his abode at Florence things gradually began to take a
better turn for Eugenius IV. The rebellious Eomans, who had
proudly sent their envoys to Basel announcing that they had
recovered their liberties and that the days of Brutus had re
turned, began to find themselves in straits. The Papal troops
still held the castle of S. Angelo and bombarded the town ;
their commander also by a stratagem took prisoners several of
the Eoman leaders. The people soon turned to thoughts of
peace and submission, and on October 28 Giovanni Vitelleschi,
EUGENIUS IV. IN FLORENCE. 161
at the head of the Pope's condottieri, took possession of CHAP.
the city in the Pope's name and put to death the chief ^_ '** •_
leaders of the rebellion. Moreover, Venice and the Pope re
newed their league against the Duke of Milan, appointed
Francesco Sforza as their general, and sent him against the
Duke's condottiere general, Fortebracchio, who had occupied the
neighbourhood of Eome. Fortebracchio was routed and slain,
whereon the Duke of Milan found it advisable to come to terms.
On August 10, 1435, peace was made, leaving Eugenius IV.
master of the Patrimony of S. Peter and the Eomagna, while
Francesco Sforza obtained the lordship of the March of Ancona.
The Duke of Milan also withdrew his aid from the rebellious
Bologna, which on September 27 submitted to the Pope.1
Even in Florence Eugenius IV. was not safe from the machina
tions of the Duke of Milan. A Koman adventurer, named
Riccio, obtained the connivance of the Milanese ambassador
at Florence, the Bishop of Novara, to a plot for seizing the per
son of Eugenius when he retired into the country before the
summer heat. The city magistrates discovered the plot and
Riccio was tortured and put to death. The Bishop of Novara
abjectly prayed for pardon from Eugenius ; and the Pope granted
his life to the entreaty of Cardinal Albergata, who was just set
ting out as Papal legate to the Congress of Arras. Albergata
took the Bishop of Novara to Basel, where he remained as
one of the bitterest opponents of Eugenius IV.2
In another quarter the affairs of the kingdom of Naples Affairs of
afforded a scope for the activity of Eugenius IV. The feeble S-S.
queen Giovanna II. continued to the end of her reign to be the
puppet of those around her. Even her chief favourite, Carac-
cioli, could not retain his hold upon her changeful mind. He
saw his influence fail before the intrigues of the Queen's cousin,
the Duchess of Suessa, who at length succeeded in obtaining
the Queen's permission to proceed against her over-ween
ing favourite. On August 17, 1432, Caraccioli celebrated
magnificently his son's marriage ; in the night a message
was brought to him that the Queen was dying and wished to
see him. Hurriedly he rose and opened' his door to a band of
1 Cronica di Bologna, Mnr. xviii. 655. Blondus, Dec. iii. 6,
2 Blondus, Decades, 493.
170 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK conspirators who rushed upon him and slew him on his bed.1
^_IIiIi^1 Giovanna wept over his death and pardoned those who wrought
it. His mighty tomb in the Church of San Giovanni Carbo-
nara is worthy of a more heroic character. Three knightly
figures of Strength, Skill, and Justice bear the sarcophagus on
which stands Caraccioli as a warrior. The tomb is in the vast
style of the old Neapolitan work ; but in its execution we see
the delicacy of Tuscan feeling and the hand of Florentine artists.
The way is already prepared for the later flow of the Kenais-
sance motives into the rude regions of Naples.
On Caraccioli' s death Louis of Anjou prepared to return
to Naples ; but the imperious Duchess of Suessa preferred to
exercise undivided sway over her feeble mistress. The death
of Louis in November 1434 awakened the activity of Alfonso
of Aragon ; but Giovanna II. would not recognise him as her
heir, and made a will in favour of Eene, Count of Provence,
the younger brother of Louis of Anjou. On February 2, 1435,
Giovanna II. died, at the age of 65, worn out before her time ;
one of the worst and most incapable of rulers that ever disgraced
a throne. On her death the inevitable strife of the parties of
Anjou and Aragon again broke out. Eene claimed the throne
by Giovanna's will, Alfonso of Aragon put forward Giovanna's
previous adoption of himself, and the claims of the house of
Aragon. But Eugenius IV. put forth also the claims of the
Papacy. The Angevin line had originally come to Sicily at the
Papal summons, and had received the kingdom as a papal fief.
Eugenius IV. asserted that on the failure of the direct line in
Giovanna II. the kingdom of Sicily devolved to the Pope.
He appointed as his legate to administer the affairs of the king
dom Giovanni Vitelleschi, who had been created Patriarch
of Alexandria. Little heed was paid to the Pope's claims.
Alfonso's fleet vigorously besieged Gaeta, which was garrisoned
by Genoese soldiers to protect their trade during the time of
warfare. Genoa, at that time under the signory of the Duke of
Milan, equipped a fleet to raise the siege of Gaeta, and on
August 5 a battle was fought off the isle of Ponza, in which
the Genoese were completely victorious. Alfonso and his two
brothers, together with the chief barons of Aragon and Sicily,
were taken prisoners.
1 Giornali JVajwhtani, Miir., xxi. 1695; Tristan Caraccioli, Mur., xxii. 35.
POLITICS OF MILAN AND NAPLES, 171
Italy was shaken to its very foundations by the news of CHAP.
this victory, of which the Duke of Milan would reap the fruit, s / •_,
It seemed to give him the means of making himself supreme ^agon °*
in Italian politics. But the jealous temper of Filippo Maria ajdFmppo
Visconti looked with distrust on this signal victory which coafcL 1435,
Grenoa had won. His first proceeding was to humble the
pride of the city by depriving it of the glory of bringing home
in triumph its illustrious captives, He ordered Alfonso and
the rest to be sent from Savona to Milan, and on their arrival
treated them with courtesy and respect. Alfonso's adven
turous and varied life had given him large views of politics
and great experience of men. He recognised the gloomy and
cautious spirit of Filippo Maria, who loved to form plans in
secret, who trusted no one, but used his agents as checks one
upon another. In the familiarity of friendly intercourse,
Alfonso put before the Duke political considerations founded
upon a foresight which was beyond the current conceptions of
the day. ' If Rene of Anjou,' he argued, 6 were to become
King of Naples, he would do all he could to open communica
tions with France, and for this purpose to establish the French
power in Milan. If I were to become king of Naples, I should
have no enemies to dread save the French ; and it would be my
interest to live on good terms with Milan, which could at any
moment open the way to my foes. The title of king would be
mine, but the authority would be yours. With me at Naples
you will remain a free prince ; otherwise you will be between
two strong powers, an object of suspicion and jealousy to
both.' *
The state system of Italy was already so highly organised
that arguments such as these weighed with the Duke of
Milan, and he determined to forego all thoughts of present
glory for future safety. Instead of treating Alfonso as a cap
tive, he entered into an alliance with him, gave him his
liberty and ordered Gfenoa to restore his captured ships.
Alfonso was sufficiently keen-sighted to perceive, and Filippo
Maria was sufficiently prudent to recognise, the danger that
would arise to Italian independence from the centralisation of
the French monarchy and the power of the house of Austria.
They devised a scheme for neutralising this danger. The idea
1 Macliiavelli, Storia Fior., ch. v.
72 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK of a balance of power in Italy, founded on identity of interest
TTL , between Milan and Naples, which was to keep Italy in peace
and exclude all interference from beyond the Alps, began from
this time forward to be a central point in Italian politics.
The immediate result of this policy was that Genoa, indig
nant at the slight thus cast upon her, revolted from Milan and
joined the league of Florence, Venice, and the Pope. Eugenius
IV., alarmed at the alliance between Alfonso and the Duke of
Milan, withdrew his own claims on Naples and espoused the
cause of Rene, who was a prisoner of the Duke of Burgundy,
but was represented in Naples by his wife, Elizabeth of Lor
raine. Neither she nor Alfonso had any resources at their
command, and the war was carried on between the rival fac
tions in the realm. We have seen that Alfonso was anxious to
minimise the help which the Pope could give his rival, by
supplying him with sufficient occupation in the affairs pro
ceeding at Basel.
When Eugenius IV. had recruited his shattered fortunes by
an abode of nearly two years in Florence, he left it for his own
city of Bologna, on April 18, 1436. Before his departure he
consecrated the stately Duomo of Florence, which had just re
ceived its crowning ornament of Brunelleschi's mighty dome,
and was again ready for divine service. The city wished
that the ceremonial should be befitting of its splendour. A
scaffolding adorned with carpets was erected from S. Maria
Novella to the Duomo, on which Eugenius IV. walked in state,
the gonfaloniere of the city bearing his train.1
On April 22, Eugenius IV. entered Bologna with nine
cardinals, and was soon followed by two others from Basel.
The Papal government of Bologna had not been such as to win
the affections of the people. The legate, the Bishop of Con-
cordia, had proclaimed a general pacification, on the strength of
which Antonio de' Bentivogli, after fifteen years' exile, returned
to the city which he had once ruled. He had not been there
three weeks when he was seized, as he left the chapel where the
legate had been saying mass. He was gagged and immediately
beheaded by order of the Pope's Podesta, as was also Tommaso
de' Zambeccari. The only reason assigned for this treacherous
1 Ammirato, bk. xxi. Machiavelli, v.
CONDITION OF THE GREEK EMPIBE. 173
act was dread of the number of their followers.1 The cruelty CHAP.
V T T T
and tyranny of the Podesta made the Papal rule hateful in the - L^_I_.
city. Nor did Eugenius IV. do anything to mend this state
of things. He was busied with his negotiations with the Coun
cil and with the Greeks. The only attention which he paid
to the citizens of Bologna was to extort from them 30,000
ducats by holding out hopes of summoning his Council thither.
When the citizens found themselves disappointed, they looked
with scarce concealed discontent on the Pope's departure for
Ferrara on January 23, 1438. Scarcely had he gone, when
Niccolo Piccinino, the Dqke of Milan's general, appeared before
Bologna. On the night of May 20 the gates were opened
to him by the citizens. Faenza, Imola, and Forli joined in
the revolt, and the greater part of Komagna was again lost to
the Pope.
This was, however, of small moment to Eugenius IV. His Attitude of
attention was entirely fixed on the Council of Ferrara, through
which he hoped to win back all that he had lost. The union
of the Greek Church was to reinstate the Papacy in its position
in the eyes of Europe ; the Pope was again to appear as the
leader of Christendom in a great crusade for the protection of
Constantinople. It is a melancholy spectacle that is offered to our
view. The Eastern Empire, with its splendid traditions of past
glories, has sunk to be a catspaw in the ecclesiastical squabbles of
the West. The trembling Greeks are ready to disavow their [,
religious convictions to obtain help from their Western bre~ j
thren. The States of Europe are so rent by intestine strug- I
gles, or are so bent upon purely selfish ends, that they are
incapable of understanding the menace to European civilisa
tion contained in the establishment of the Turks on this side of
the Bosporus. The Greeks cannot appeal to any feeling of
European patriotism, or to any considerations of political wisdom.
Only through the semblance of an ecclesiastical reconciliation
can they hope to awaken any interest for their cause in Western
Europe. At the last moment they see the Western Church
itself distracted by contending parties ; they engage desperately
in a sacrifice of their convictions, which they half feel will
avail them nothing.
The causes of the separation between the Eastern and
1 Cronica, di liologna, Mur., xviii. G5G.
174 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK ! Western Churches were national rather than religions. The
. nrL _^ \ beliefs and rites of the two Churches did not materially differ.
diif ut^be -^u^ ^e P^^ica! development of the East and West had been
tweenthe ; different. In the East, the Imperial autocracy had main-
aod €I ) tained and strengthened its power over the Church ; in the
West, where the Teutons had weakened the fabric of the Imperial
system, the Pope, as supreme head of the Western Church, had
won an independent position for his authority. It is true that the
Greek view of Purgatory differed somewhat from that of the
Latins, that they used leavened and not unleavened bread for
the Host, that they did not adopt the addition of the words
* and from the Son ' (Filioque) to the clause of the Nicene Creed
which defines the procession of the Holy Ghost. But no vital
point was concerned in any of these differences. The real
disagreement was that the Papacy strove to assert over the
Eastern Church a supremacy which that Church was unwill
ing to admit. The ill-feeling created by the claim of Pope
Nicolas I. in 863, to interfere as supreme judge in the question
of the election of the Patriarch of Constantinople, simmered on
till it produced a formal rupture in 1053, when Leo IX. at
Hildebrand's suggestion excommunicated the Greek Patriarch.
Round its ecclesiastical establishment the narrow spirit of
Greek nationality centred, and the Greeks were ready in every
sphere to assert their superiority to the barbarous Latins. In
the time of their distress their pride was humbled if their
minds were not convinced. They were ready to sacrifice the
traditions of the past, which they still held firmly in their hearts,
to the pressing need for present aid. It is sad to see the feeble
representatives of an ancient civilisation lowering themselves
before the Papacy in its abasement.
Arrival of On November 24, 1437, the Greek Emperor, John Palgeo-
in Vienna, logus, his brother, the Patriarch, and twenty-two bishops,
went on board the PaPal galleys and set sail for ItalJ-1 Though
the Greeks journeyed at the Pope's expense, yet the Emperor,
in his anxiety to display fitting magnificence, converted into
money the treasures of the Church. An earthquake, which oc-
1 The account of the voyage given by Syropulus, sect. iv. ch. i.-x., is a
varied and amusing description of a journey in the Mediterranean at that
time. His impressions of Venice are also most valuable as a contribution to
an idea of the splendour of the city.
THE GREEKS IN VENICE. 175
curred at the time of his departure, was looked upon as an evil CHAP.
omen by the people who with heavy hearts saw the ships quit ._ t ' ^
the harbour. After many perils and discomforts on the way,
the Greeks reached Venice on February 8, 1438, and were mag
nificently received by the Doge, who went out to meet them in
the ' Bucentaur,' which was decked with red carpets, and awn
ings wrought with gold embroidery, while gold lions were
standing on the prow. The rowers were clad in uniforms richly
wrought with gold, and on their caps was embroidered the image
of S. Mark. With the Doge came the Senate in twelve other
splendid ships, and there was such a multitude of boats that
the sea could scarce be seen. Amid the clang of trumpets the
Emperor was escorted to the palace of the Marquis of Ferrara,
near the Eialto, where he abode. The amazement of the
Greeks at the splendour of Venice is the most striking testimony
to the decay of their own noble city. ' Venice splendid and
great,' says Phranza, < truly wonderful, yea most wonderful, rich,
variegated and golden, trimly built and adorned, worthy of a
thousand praises, wise, yea most wise, so that one would not be
wrong in calling it the second land of promise.' ]
For twenty days the Greeks remained in Venice. The Doge
offered them hospitality as long as they chose, and advised them
to see whether they could get better terms from the Pope or
from the Council. There was not much difference of opinion
on this point. Three only of the Greek prelates thought it
desirable to wait ; the Emperor's doubts, if he had any, were
decided by the arrival of Cardinal Cesarini, who was the repre
sentative of that ' saner part ' of the Council to which the
Greeks professed to adhere. The stay of the Greeks in Venice
was not without melancholy reflections. Wherever they turned
they were reminded that the glory of Venice was in a .
measure due to the spoils of Constantinople. In the rich
jewels which bedecked the colossal statue on the high altar of
S. Mark's they saw the plunder of S. Sophia's.2
On February 28 the Emperor set sail for Ferrara. The
Patriarch was sorely displeased at being left behind to follow in
1 Phranza, CJironicon Ufajifs, ii. § 185, ed. Migne.
- Syropulus, IV. xvi. : roTs /J.ev /ceKTTj/teVois Kav^p-a. KCU repots eyyiyj/trai, rots
5e a.fpaipeQe'ia'Lif, e'/Trore Kal irapaTii^oifv, a.0v/.da KCU \inrrj /ecu Karytye ta, ws na.1 ri^y
Tore crvvf&T).
176
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Arrival of
the Greeks
in Ferrara.
March 7,
1438.
Begin niug
of the
Council of
Ferrara.
January
1-138.
a few days. The Emperor disembarked at Francolino, where
he was received by the Marquis of Ferrara and Cardinal
Albergata as the Pope's legate. He entered the city on
March 4, riding on a magnificent black charger beneath a
canopy held by his attendants. He advanced into the court
yard of the papal palace, where Eugenius IV. was seated with
all his clergy. The Pope rose to greet the Emperor, who dis
mounted and advanced ; Eugenius prevented him from kneel
ing and embraced him. Then he gave him his hand, which the
Emperor kissed and took his seat on the Pope's left ; they con
tinued some time in friendly conference. The Patriarch, who
was particular to keep close to his luggage, followed grumbling,
and reached Ferrara on March 7. His good humour was not
increased by a message from the Emperor, telling him that the
Pope expected him to kiss his foot on his reception. This the
Patriarch stoutly refused to do. ' I determined,' he said, ' if
the Pope were older than me to treat him as a father, if of the
same age as a brother, if younger as a son.' He added that he
had hoped by the Pope's aid to free his Church from the
tyranny of the Emperor, and could not subject it to the Pope.
The negotiations respecting this knotty question occupied the
entire day. At last the Pope, for the sake of peace, consented
to waive his rights, provided the reception was in private and
only six of the Greek prelates were admitted at one time. On
the evening of March 8, the Patriarch Joseph, an old man of
venerable aspect, with white hair and a long white beard, of
dignified bearing, and considerable experience of affairs, greeted
the Pope in his palace.1 The Pope rose and the Patriarch
kissed his cheek, the inferior prelates his right hand. When
the ceremony was over they were conducted to their lodgings.
The Council had been opened at Ferrara on January 5 by
the Cardinal Albergata as Papal legate. Its first decree on
January 10 was to confirm the translation of the Council from
Basel to Ferrara, and to annul all that had been done at Basel
since the Pope's Bull of translation. On January 27, the Pope
entered Ferrara escorted by the Marquis Nicolas III., of Este.
1 Letter of John of Ragusa to Cesarini from Constantinople (Cecconi,
Docum. Ixxviii.) : ' Pater antiquus est, et sicut etas, canities, barba prolixa et
effigies reddunt ipsum cunctis spectantibus venerabilena ; ita sensus naturalis,
experientia rerum et niorurn compositio reddunt ipsum cunctis secum famili-
ariter conversantibus mirabilem.'
ARRIVAL OF THE GREEKS AT FERRARA. 177
He took up his abode in the palace of the Marquis ; and as he CHAP.
suffered grievously from gout, the citizens of Ferrara consulted ^ I1J-
his infirmity by erecting a wooden scaffold, communicating
between the palace and the cathedral, so as to spare him the in
convenience of mounting steps.1 On February 8 he presided over
a congregation, and commended to its deliberation the work of
union with the Greeks, and the repression of the excesses of those
still remaining at Basel. The result of this deliberation was the
issue of a Bull on February 15, annulling the proceedings of
the Council of Basel and declaring excommunicate all who did
not quit it within thirty days. Eugenius IV. had thus done all
he could to affirm his dignity before the arrival of the Greeks.
In like manner the first point of importance with the Arrange-
Greeks was to affirm their own dignity at Ferrara. The ques- J^f^
tion that first called for solution was the arrangement of seats Council.
in the Council. Cesarini suggested that the Greeks should sit
on one side of the cathedral, the Latins on the other, and the
Pope in the middle as a link between the two parties. The
Greeks bluntly answered that they needed no such link;
but if a link were thought necessary, it should be strengthened
by the addition of the Greek Emperor and Patriarch to the
Pope. Both sides fought to win prestige ; but the Greeks were
not fighting on equal terms. They were the Pope's stipendiaries
in Ferrara, and the arrangement for supplying them with the
stipulated allowances went on side by side with the negotiations
about the knotty question of seats. The Pope at first proposed
to supply the Greeks with food ; this they resisted, and
demanded an allowance in money. Ultimately the Pope gave
way; it was agreed that the Marquis of Ferrara should fur
nish them with lodgings, and the Pope give the Emperor thirty
florins a month, the Patriarch twenty-five, the prelates four, and
the other attendants three. The Greeks accepted a compromise
about seats. The Latins were to sit on one side, the Greeks on
the other. The Pope's seat was highest and was nearest the
altar ; next him was a vacant seat for the Western Emperor,
opposite to which sat the Greek Emperor, and behind him the
Patriarch. When the Patriarch wished to adorn his seat with
curtains like the Papal throne he was not allowed to do so.
The Greeks murmured at this arrangement, but were obliged
1 Frizzi, Jfcmorie t)er la Storia di Fcrrara^ ILL 430.
VOL. II. N
178 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK to submit. The Emperor exclaimed that the Latins were not
JITL , aiming at order, but were gratifying their own pride.
Before appearing at the Council the Greek Emperor insisted
that it should not be merely an assembly of the prelates, but
also of the kings and princes of the West. The Pope was
driven to admit that some time was necessary before the princes
could arrive. It was agreed that a delay of four months should
take place to allow them to be duly summoned. Meanwhile
a general session should be held to proclaim that the Council
was to be held at Ferrara, and nowhere else.
Some time was spent in settling these matters. At last on
April 9 a solemn session was held in the cathedral, ' a won
derful and awful sight,' says a Greek ; ' so that the church
looked like heaven.' l The Pope and papal retinue chaunted
the psalm, ' Blessed be the Lord God of Israel.' The Patriarch
was too ill to be present ; but a declaration of his consent to the
Council was read in his absence. Then the decree convoking
all to Ferrara within four months was read in Latin and Greek,
and received the formal approval of both parties. After a few
thanksgivings, the synod was dismissed.
The festivities of Easter occupied some time, and the
Greeks were annoyed that they could not get a church in Ferrara
for the celebration of their own services. The Pope referred
them to the Bishop of Ferrara, who answered that all his
churches were so crowded that he could not find one large
enough for their purposes. One of the Greeks said that he
could not worship in the Latin churches, as they were full of
saints whom he did not recognise ; even the Christ bore an in
scription which he did not understand ; he could only make the
sign of the cross and adore that.2 The tone of mind exhibited
in these remarks did not augur well for any real agreement,
nor did the Emperor wish the discussions to go too far. His
plan was to defer matters as long as possible, to insist upon the
Council being representative of the powers of Eurgpe, to obtain
from them substantial help against the Turks, and to go back
1 Aota Grceca, in Labbe, p. 21.
2 Syropulus, 109 : orav els vabv 6tVeA0a> \ariva)v ov irpoffKvvca TIVCL rcov
ayiwv, €7ret oflSe yvwptfa rivd. r}>v Xpurrbv 1<r<as pbvov yvupifa, a\\' ou5'
Sum OVK oT5o TTWS firLypdcperai, aAAa iroiS) T~bv ffravp'bv /JLOV KCU
(rravp})v ofiv t>v avrbs TTOIW irpoffKvvu Kal ovx erepov rl r<av e/ceta-e Qewpou-
v pot.
THE QUESTION OF PUEGATOEY. 179
to Constantinople having made as few concessions as were CHAP.
possible.
The Latins, however, were anxious to make their triumph
complete. They urged that it was a useless waste of time
to do nothing while they waited for the appearance of the
European princes. Cesarini displayed his wonted tact in
inviting the Greeks to dinner, and overcoming the reserve
which the Emperor wished them to maintain. He succeeded
in inducing one of the most stubborn of the Greek prelates,
Mark of Ephesus, to publish his views in writing, to the great
wrath of the Emperor. The Papal officers were remiss in the
payment of allowances, and hinted that the Pope could not
continue to pay men who would do nothing. By such means
the Greeks were at last driven to agree to the appointment of
ten commissioners on either side, who should engage in pre
liminary discussions upon the points of variance. Chief among
the Greeks were Mark, Bishop of Ephesus, and Bessarion,
Bishop of Nicaea ; the Emperor ordered that they only should
conduct the discussions. On the side of the Latins Cesarini
took the leading part.
The conferences began on June 4. The first question dis- conference
cussed was that of Purgatory, on which the real difference of
opinion was not important. The Latins held that sins, not re- Purgatory.
pented of during life, are purged away by purgatorial fire, which
at the Day of Judgment is succeeded by everlasting fire for the
reprobate. The Greeks admitted a Purgatory, but of pain and
grief, not of fire, which they reserved as the means only of
eternal punishment. Also the Greeks maintained that neither
the punishment of the wicked nor the joy of the blessed was
complete till the general resurrection, seeing that before that
time neither could receive their bodies. The Latins admitted
that the punishment_of the wicked could not be perfect till
they had received their bodies, but held that the blessed, as
souls, enjoy at present perfect happiness in heaven, though on
receiving their bodies their happiness would become eternal.
Even the most staunch upholder of the Greek doctrines, Mark
of Ephesus, was driven to admit that there was not much dif
ference between the Greek and the Latin opinions on this ques
tion. When the discussion was ended, the Latins handed in
their opinion in writing. The Greeks were timid in committing
N 2
180 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK themselves. Each wrote his opinion and submitted it to the
. _IIiI> Emperor, who combined those of Bessarion and Mark, to the
effect that the souls of the happy departed, as souls, enjoy
perfect felicity, but when in the resurrection they receive
their bodies they will be capable of more perfect happiness
and will shine like the sun. On July 17 this statement was
submitted to the Latins. The only result of these con
ferences was to bring into prominence the differences existing
amongst the Greeks themselves. The narrow and bigoted spirit
of old Byzantine conservatism, expressed by the rough out
spoken Mark of Ephesus, did not harmonise with the cosmo
politan feeling of the polished Platonist Bessarion, who saw the
decadence of the Greeks, and wished to bring his own ability
into a larger sphere of literary and theological activity. The
Latins learned that there were some amongst the Greeks who
would bow, and some who must be driven, to consent to union.
Then came a pause till the four months' interval had elapsed
for the fuller assembling of the Council. None of the European
princes appeared, and the delay continued. Ferrara was at
tacked by the plague ; some of the Greeks grew terrified or
weary, and fled home. The Emperor requested the magistrates
to keep guard over the gates, and forbade any of the Greeks to
leave the city without his permission. The Emperor meanwhile
spent his time in hunting in the woods round Ferrara, and
paid no heed to the requests of the Marquis that he would spare
his preserves, which had been stocked with great difficulty.
The plague drove the Latins out of the city. Of a hundred
and fifty prelates who were present at the first session, only
five cardinals and fifty bishops remained. The Greeks escaped
the ravages of the plague, except only the household of the
Russian archbishop.
It was some time before the Pope could obtain the Em
peror's consent to a second session of the Council. The Greeks
were suspicious ; they were indignant at a rumour which had
been spread that they were guilty of fifty-four heresies ; they
were afraid that, if they allowed the Council to proceed, they
might be outvoted. Their fears on this last point were set at
rest by an agreement that each party should vote separately.
After that they could no longer resist the Pope's entreaties
that the business of the Council should proceed.
THE PROCESSION OP THE HOLY GHOST. 181
On October 8 the second session was held in the Pope's CHAP
chapel, as Eugenius was unable to move through an attack of ._vni'_.
the gout. The Greeks had previously decided among them- T> Jj?the
selves the question to be discussed. The more moderate party, Procession
headed by Bessarion, who was in favour of a real union if it were Ghost,
possible, wished to proceed at once to the important point
which divided the two Churches, the double procession of the
Holy Ghost. The Nicene Creed, which had been framed to de
fine the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, dealt chiefly with the
relation between the Father and the Son, and contented itself
with the statement that ' the Holy Grhost proceeded from the
Father.' The continuance of controversy in the West led to
the addition of the words ; and from the Son ' (Filioque), an
addition which the Greeks never made. The Western Church
argued that the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father
alone derogated from the dignity of the Son, who was equal
with the Father in all points save only in his generation by
the Father. The explanatory addition gradually became in
corporated in the Creed. The greater metaphysical instinct of
the Greeks led them to reject such an addition, which seemed to
them dangerous, as tending to give a double origin to the Holy
Ghost, and thereby to imperil the Unity in Trinity. There
was no fundamental difference of opinion between the Greek
and Latin fathers at first ; but the genius of the Greek language-
admitted of finer distinctions than a Latin could comprehend.
The Greeks were ready to allow that the Holy Ghost proceeded
from the Father through the Son, not that He proceeded from
the Father and the Son. The difference was of little moment
till the resentment of the Greek Patriarch against the Papal
claims to supremacy led in the ninth century to an open rup
ture between the two Churches, and every shadow of difference
was at once brought into prominence. Tomes of learning had
been amassed on either side in support of their opinions on
this point, and a molehill had been piled to the height of a
mountain. It was felt that this question presented the greatest
difficulty in settlement. Bessarion and his followers wished to
discuss it at once. Mark of Ephesus, and those who were op
posed to the union, succeeded in overruling them, and pro
posed the more dangerous preliminary question, £ Is it permis
sible to make any addition to a Creed ? ' Six disputants were
182 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK chosen on either side : Bessarion, Mark, and Isidore of Russia
,_IU> . were chief among the Greeks, Cardinals Cesarini and Albergata,
and Andrea, Bishop of Rhodes, among the Latins.
The arguments were long and the speeches were many on
hoth sides. The Fathers of Ferrara found, like the Fathers of
Basel when dealing with the Bohemians, that a disputation led
to little result. Speech was directed against speech ; orator re
futed orator. But amid the flow of words the central positions
of the two parties remained the same. The Latins urged
that the c Filioque ' was an explanation of the Nicene Creed in
accordance with the belief of most of the Latin and Greek
Fathers, notably S. Basil ; the Greeks urged that it was not
derived from the text of the Creed itself, but was an unauthor
ised addition, which gave a careless explanation of a doctrine
needing careful definition. Through October and November
the discussion rolled on. The monotony was only broken by
the arrival of ambassadors from the Duke of Burgundy, who
aroused the deepest indignation in the Greek Emperor by pay
ing reverence to the Pope and not to himself. When they
urged that they were commissioned only to the Pope and had
letters to him alone, the Emperor was still more enraged and
threatened to leave the Council where he was subject to such
slights. He could only be appeased by the solemn and public
presentation of a letter forged by the ambassadors.1
The discussions were leading to no result. As a way of
escaping from a mere strife of words, Cesarini besought that
the real point of issue, the truth of the double procession of
the Holy Ghost, be taken into consideration. If they were
agreed that it was true, the addition of it to the Creed was of
small moment. The majority of the Greek prelates were loth
to enter upon a doctrinal discussion ; but the rumours of a new
Turkish attack on Constantinople made the Emperor more
desirous for succours. He assembled his prelates and said that
it was unworthy of them, after so many labours and so much
trouble, to refuse to come to the point ; their refusal in the
present state of affairs would only give cause of triumph to the
Latins. In vain the. Patriarch urged that it was unwise to quit
1 These ludicrous proceedings are told by Syroptilus, 176. The Emperor's
attendants urged him at least to receive the forged letter in his own palace,
but he insist ed upon a public ceremony.
THE COUNCIL TRANSFERRED TO FLORENCE. 183
the safe position of the unlawfulness of an addition to the Creed. CHAP.
VTTI
The Emperor succeeded in extorting from the discordant pre- > , '_.
lates a reluctant consent to the discussion of the doctrine.
The Pope meanwhile had been pressing on the Emperor the 'Transfer-
necessity of transferring the Council from Ferrara to Florence, jcouncii to
He pleaded that at Ferrara he could get no money to fulfil his
agreement with the Greeks. Niccolo Piccinino was ravaging
the neighbourhood so that no revenues could reach the Papal
coffers ; the plague had made Ferrara an unsafe place of resi
dence ; Florence had promised a large loan to the Pope if he
would again take refuge within its walls. Engenius IV. was
anxious to remove the Greeks farther from their own land, to a
place where they would be more entirely dependent on himself.
The Greeks murmured, but their necessities gave them little
option ; as the Pope's stipendiaries they were bound to go where
he could best find them rations. On January 10, 1439, the
last session was held at Ferrara and decreed the transference of
the Council to Florence on the ground of the pestilence.
On January 16 Eugenius IV. left Ferrara for Florence; his
journey was more like a flight before the troops of Piccinino
than a papal progress. The sedentary Greeks were greatly
wearied by the discomforts of a long journey across the Apen
nines in winter. The aged Patriarch especially suffered from
the journey ; but his vanity was gratified by the splendour of
his reception in Florence, where he was met by two cardinals,
and amidst a blare of trumpets and the shouts of a vast multi
tude he was escorted to his lodgings. Three days after, on
February 16, arrived the Emperor; but a storm of rain spoiled
the magnificence of his reception, and scattered the crowd
which came to give him the welcome that the Florentines,
better than any others, could give to a distinguished guest.
In Florence the Pope was determined to proceed more Position
speedily with business than had been done at Ferrara. The Greek
Greek Emperor had by this time seen the actual position of EmPeror
affairs. He was obliged to submit to the failure of the expec
tations with which he had come to Italy. He had hoped to play ,
off the Council of Basel against the Pope, and so secure good j
terms for himself ; he found the Latins united and undisturbed
by the proceedings of the fathers still remaining at Basel. He
hoped that the Western princes would have assembled at the
184
TEE COUNCIL OF EASEL.
BOOK
111.
Discussion
resumed at
Florence.
February
29, 1439.
Council, and that he could have made the question of union
secondary to a project for a crusade against the Turk ; he
found a purely ecclesiastical assembly which he could not divert
from purely theological considerations. As he could not with
dignity go back to Constantinople empty-handed, and as he
sorely needed succours, he saw no other course open than to
accept such terms of union as could be obtained and trust
afterwards to the generosity of Western Christendom. At
Florence he used his influence to expedite matters, and fell in
with the Pope's suggestions for this purpose.
On February 26 a meeting took place at Florence in the
Pope's palace, confined to forty members on each side. It was
agreed to hold public disputations three times a week for three
hours at least, and also to appoint committees on each side, who
might confer privately about the union. The public sessions,
which began on March 2, were really a long theological duel
between John of Montenegro, a famous Dominician theologian,
and Mark of Ephesus. Day after day their strife went wearily
on, diversified only by disputes about the authenticity of manu
scripts of S. Basil against Eunomius, whose words Mark of
Ephesus was convicted of quoting from a garbled manuscript.1
The argument turned on points verbal rather than real ; each
side could support its own opinion more easily than prove the
error of its opponent. Even Mark of Ephesus was wearied of
talking, and in a long speech on March 17 fired his last shot.
John of Montenegro on his part made a statement which the
partisans of union among the Greeks seized as a possible basis
for future negotiation. He said explicitly that the Latins
1 The question here raised is of great interest as throwing light rapon the
condition of ancient MSS. at the time. See the accounts given in Acta
Grcec.a, Labbe, xiii. 311, &c., by Andrea of Sante Croce (ib. 1063, &c.) ; by S.
Antoninus, Ckronicon, tit. xxii. ch. 13 ; by Bessarion in his letter to Alexius
Lascaris Phi'anthropicns (Ojjera, ed. Migne, p. 325). Bessarion's account is
very copious on the point. The text of S. Basil was ' dlta^aTi juei/ yap §et/re-
pfveiv TOV Tlov, irap avTOv r& elvcu %XOV> Ka' '*a-9 avTov XafjL^avov nal avayysXXov
r]/juv, KCU oA.a>s e/ceu/Tjs TTJS curias e£7]/x./iej>0j/ TrapaSlSuffW o TT\S eucre/3eias \6yos.'
There were six MSS. of S. Basil contra Eunoinium at the Council, four on
parchment, of which three belonged to the Archbishop of Mitylene, one to the
Latins, and two on silk belonging to the Emperor and the Patriarch. All
agreed save that of the Patriarch, which Mark quoted, and in which the
words KCU o\ws eKefvrjs rr)s alrias f£r)/j./j.fvov were omitted. ' rJ5e ei> /j.6vov, ' says
Bessarion, *rb TOV Trarpid.p\ov SyjAaSrj, elx*v erepcos, rivbs TrepiKo^dvros TO
KCU TO. /zev Trpoa'OfVTOS TO. 8' a,
DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PKOCESSION OF THE HOLY GHOST. 185
recognised the Father as the one cause of the Son and of the CHAP.
VITI
Holy Ghost. This was the only theological point involved in . _.
the two positions. The Emperor requested John to put his
statement in writing, and laid it before his assembled prelates.
He spoke of all his labours to bring about union, and he urged
them to accept this basis. The Greeks in truth were weary of
the controversy ; they longed to return home. The Patriarch
grew feebler day by day ; the Emperor grew more determined
to see some fruits of all his trouble. A passage of a letter of
S. Maximus, a Greek writer of the seventh century, was dis
covered by the Greeks, which agreed with the language of John
of Montenegro. ' If the Latins will accept this,' exclaimed the
partisans of the Union, ' what hinders us from agreement ? ' In
an assembly of the Greek prelates the Emperor's will overbore
all opposition except that of Mark and the Bishop of Heraclea.
The letter of Maximus was submitted to the Latins as the
basis for an agreement ; meanwhile the public sessions were
suspended.
John of Montenegro, however, was anxious to .have his
reply to the last onslaught of Mark of Ephesus. Another
session was held on March 21 to gratify the vanity of the Latins ;
but the Emperor took the precaution of ordering Mark to absent
himself. When thus bereft of an adversary and listened to in
solemn silence, John of Montenegro talked himself out in two
days. An understanding had now been established between the
Pope and the Emperor ; but the susceptibilities of the Greeks
were still hard to manage. Public sessions, which only awakened
vanity, were stopped. Committees composed of ardent par
tisans of the Union were nominated on both sides for the pur
pose of minimising the difficulties that still remained. Bes-
sarion and Isidore of Russia among the Greeks strove their
utmost to overcome the rigid conservatism of their fellow-
countrymen. The Cardinals Cesarini and Capranica among the
Latins laboured assiduously to secure the Papal triumph.
Perpetual messages passed between the Pope and the Emperor.
Documents were drawn up on both sides ; proposals towards
greater exactness of expression were put forward. Bessarion
argued in a learned treatise that there was no real difference
of meaning, when the Latins said that the Holy Ghost proceeded
from (If) the Son, and the Greek fathers wrote that he pro-
186 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK ceeded through (Sta) the Son, if both agreed that there were
, IIL , not two causes, but one, of the procession, and that the Father
and the Son formed one substance.
The Patriarch was lying on his death-bed. Bessarion and
his party were resolute for the Union on large grounds of
ecclesiastical statesmanship. Others of the Greeks, following
the Emperor, were convinced of its practical necessity. They
had gone so far that they could not draw back. They were
willing to seek out expressions of double meaning, which might
serve for a compromise.1 Yet many of the Greeks held by the
stubborn Mark of Ephesus, and would not give way. The
discussion passed from being one between Greeks and Latins
to one between two parties among the Greeks. Many were
the fierce controversies, many the intrigues, great the anger of
the Emperor, before an end was visible to these troublesome
disputations. At last, on June 3, the Greeks agreed that, with
out departing from their ancient belief, they were ready to
admit that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the
Son, as one cause and one substance, proceeds through the Son
as the same nature and the same substance. Next day a
schedule was drawn up, of which a copy was handed to the
Emperor, the Pope, and the Patriarch : it ran : ' We agree
with you, and assent that your addition to the Creed comes
from the Fathers ; we agree with it and unite with you, and say
that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son as
from one origin and cause.'
Matters had proceeded so far that the Emperor turned to
business, and asked the Pope what succours he would grant.
Eugenius IV. premised to supply 300 soldiers and two galleys
for the constant defence of Constantinople ; in time of need,
twenty galleys for six months, or ten for a year. He also
undertook to preach a crusade and rouse the West for the de
fence of the Greeks. Satisfied with this promise, the Emperor
hastened to bring matters to a conclusion. Mark of Ephesus
was peremptorily ordered to hold his tongue, and he himself
1 So sajs Mark of Ephesus (Migne, clix.p. 1076) : irepl Tovrp6irovrris evw
TWO. pTjra TrepiepydfeffBai 5t' &v kv<aQ
/car' a/j.<f)OTfpas TO.S 56£as Aa/xj8a;/e<r0ou.
/ Death of
the Patri
arch June
10, 1439.
CONTINUANCE OF THE DISCUSSIONS. 187
admits that he was not unwilling to be relieved from further CHAP.
responsibility in the matter.1 v_ t __
But the sudden death of the Patriarch Joseph on the even
ing of June 10 seemed at first likely to put a stop to all further
negotiations. The Greeks, bereft of their ecclesiastical head,
might well urge that without his sanction all proceedings
would be useless. Happily for Eugenius IV., there was found
a paper subscribed by Joseph a few hours before his death,
approving what seemed good to his spiritual sons, and acknow
ledging the supremacy of the Eoman Church. The Patriarch
was buried with due honours in the Church of S. Maria Novella,
where the inscription on his tomb is the only memorial remain
ing to this day of the labours spent in uniting the Eastern and
Western Churches.2
Fortified by the Patriarch's declaration, the Emperor urged Discus-
on the completion of the work of union. The Pope submitted minor0
to the Greeks for their consideration the differences between
the Churches concerning the use of unleavened bread in the
Eucharist, Purgatory, the Papal Primacy, the words used in
consecration. The Pope had already laid before them a state
ment of the views which the Latins would be ready to accept.
The only question was that those who were in favour of the
Union should win over the rest to accept the proffered terms.
The subject of Purgatory had already been threshed out at
Ferrara, and the difference was seen to be slight. A satis
factory form of agreement was soon found. It was laid down
that those who died in sin went to eternal punishment, those
who had been purged by penitence went to heaven and beheld
the face of God, those who died in penitence before they had
1 Migne, clix. p. 1088 : Hirecrxuv Kal avrbs rr/i/ ypa^v 'iva pi] irpbs bpyyv avrovs
fpe9tffas fls TTpovTTTov ijSr) rbv KivSvvov eyuaurij/ e/j.fia\w.
2 It runs —
Ecclesiae Antistes fueram qui magnus Bore
Hie jaceo magnus religione Joseph,
Hoc unum optaram, miro inflammatus amore,
Unus ut Europse cultus et una fides.
Italiam petii, foedus percussimus unum ;
Junctaque Romanse est me duce Graia fides.
Nee mora, decubui ; nunc me Florentia servat,
Qua tune concilium floruit urbe sacrum.
Felix qui tanto donarer munere vivens,
Qui morerer voti compos et ipse mei.
188 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK produced worthy fruits of penitence for their omissions and
^ . t ' _ . commissions went to Purgatory for purification by pains, and for
them the prayers and alms of the faithful availed, as the Church
ordained. The use of leavened or unleavened bread was a small
point of ritual, on which the Latins could urge that their own
custom of using unleavened bread was more in accordance
with the facts of the institution of the Sacrament, as it was
clear that at the time of the Passover Christ could only have
unleavened bread. The Pope declared that, though the Latin
Church used unleavened bread, the Sacrament might also be
celebrated with leavened bread. The question was left open.
As to the consecration of the elements, the Greeks were in
the habit of using after the words of consecration a short
prayer of S. Basil that the Spirit might make the bread
and wine the Body and Blood of Christ. The Latins demanded
that the Greeks should declare that the Sacrament was conse
crated only by the words of Christ, The Greeks did not doubt
the fact, but objected to the declaration as unnecessary. It
was agreed that it should be made verbally, and not inserted
in the Articles of Union.
Question So far all went smoothly enough ; but the greatest difficulty
Papal Su- arose about the Papal Supremacy. Up to this point the Greeks
premacy. might flatter themselves that they had been making immaterial
compromises or engaging in verbal explanations. Now they
had to face the surrender of the independence of their Church.
However true it might be that they must make some sacrifices
to gain political consideration, the recognition of the Papal
headship galled their pride to the quick. The Pope demanded
that the Greeks should recognise him as the chief pontiff, suc
cessor of Peter, and vicar of Christ, and admit that he judged
and ruled the Church as its teacher and shepherd. The Greeks
requested that their own privileges should be reserved. There
was a stormy discussion. At length the Greeks, on June 22,
proposed to admit the Pope's Supremacy with two provisoes :
(1) That the Pope should not convoke a Council without the
Emperor and Patriarch, though if they were summoned and
did not come, the Council might still be held ; (2) That in case
an appeal were made to the Pope against a Patriarch, the
Pope should send commissioners to investigate and decide on
the spot without summoning the Patriarch to the Council.
UNION OF THE GREEK CHUKCH. 189
Next day the Pope answered roundly that he intended to keep CHAP.
all his prerogatives, that he had the power of summoning a '_
Council when it was necessary, and that all Patriarchs were
subject to his will. On receiving this answer the Emperor
angrily said, ' See to our departure.' It seemed that the nego
tiations wrere to be broken off, and that the Greeks would
not give way. But next day, June 24, being the festival of
S. John Baptist, was given to religious ceremonies. The
Greeks who had committed themselves to the Union, Bessarion,
Isidore of Kussia, and Dorotheus of Mitylene, spent the time in
trying to arrange a compromise. Keflection brought greater
calmness to the Emperor, and on June 26 Bessarion and his
friends submitted a proposal couched in vaguer terms : * We
recognise the Pope as sovereign pontiff, vicegerent and vicar of
Christ, shepherd and teacher of all Christians, ruler of the
Church of God, saving the privileges and rights of the
Patriarchs of the East.' This was accepted by the Pope.
Nothing now remained save to draw up in a general decree the
various conclusions which had been reached. For this purpose
a committee of twelve was appointed, which laboured for eight
days at the task.
On July 4 the decree was finished. When it was taken to »Acceptance
the Emperor he objected to the fact that it ran in the Pope's
name, in the usual style of an ecclesiastical decree, and he
insisted on the addition of the words — ' with the consent of the
most serene Emperor and Patriarch of Constantinople.' On
July 5 it was signed separately by the Latins and the Greeks.
It bears the signature of one hundred and fifteen Latin prelates
and abbots, and of thirty-three Greek ecclesiastics, of whom
eighteen were metropolitans. A great majority of the Greeks
signed it unwillingly. Syropulus tells us of many machinations
which were used to win their assent. On the one hand, the
declared will of the Emperor drove the compliant to sub
mission ; on the other hand, Papal largess was doled out to the
needy, and social cajoleries were heaped upon the vain. Mark of
Ephesus, alone of those who were at Florence, had the courage
of his opinions and refused to sign. He was too considerable a
person to be intimidated by the Emperor, and too stubborn a
conservative to be won over by the Pope. In spite, however,
of the pathetic account of Syropulus, it is difficult to feel much
190
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Publica
tion of the
Decrees.
July 6,
1439.
sympathy with the reluctant Greeks. They knew, or they might
have known, when they left their home what they had to
expect. It was a question of political expediency whether or no
it was desirable in their imminent peril to abandon their
attitude of isolation, and seek a place amid the nations of
Western Christendom. If so, they must expect to make some
sacrifice of their ancient independence, to overthrow some of
the walls of partition which their conservatism had erected
between themselves and the Latin Church. An acknowledgment
of the Papal Supremacy was the necessary price for Papal aid.
It was useless to appear as beggars and demand to retain all
the privileges of independence. It was useless to advance so
far on rational calculations of expediency, and to raise objections
the moment that the actual pinch was felt by national vanity. The
wisest heads among the Greeks confessed that since the Greek
Church was no longer the centre of a vigorous national life, it
must conform in some degree to the Latin Church if the
Greeks looked for aid to the Latin nations. Moreover, the
circumstances of the time were such that the Pope was as
anxious for the Union as were the Greeks themselves. The
Latins were willing to accept vague conditions and to agree
readily to compromises. The Greeks could not complain that
they were hardly pressed in matters of detail.
On July 6 the publication of the Decrees took place in the
stately cathedral of Florence. The Greeks had at least the
satisfaction of outdoing the Latins in the splendour of their
vestments.1 The Pope sang the mass. The Latin quire sang
hymns of praise ; but the Greeks thought their Gregorian music
barbarous and inharmonious.'2 When they had ended the Greeks
sang their hymns in turn. Cesarini read the Union Decree in
Latin and Bessarion in Greek ; then the two prelates embraced
one another as a symbol of the act in which they had engaged.
JSext day the Greeks who had been spectators of the Latin
mass asked that the Pope should in like manner be present at
the celebration of their mass. They were told that the Pope
was not certain what their mass was, and would like to see it
1 Vespasiano Florentine in his Life of Eugenius says, ' I Greci con abiti
di seta al modo Greco molto ricchi ; e la maniera degli abiti Greci pareva
assai piu grave et piu degna che quella de' prelati Latini.'
2 j)fAiv Se us &a"r}fjt.oL e'SoKoOj/ <pa)va.l e'yu^ueAeiS, says Syropulus, p. 295.
DEPARTURE OF THE GREEKS. 191
performed privately before he committed himself to be present CHAP.
at a public ceremony. The Greeks refused to subject them- VIIL ^
selves to this supervision. The Emperor said indignantly that
they had hoped to reform the Latins, but it seemed that the
Latins only intended to reform them.
The Greeks were now anxious to depart, but waited to Departure
receive from the Pope five months' arrears of their allowance. Qr^8
The Pope tried to raise some other questions for discussion, July 1439.
chief of which was divorce, which the Greek Church allowed,
while the Latin Church did not. He suggested that they
should at once proceed to the election of a Patriarch. The
Emperor refused any further discussion, and said that they
would proceed to elect a Patriarch on their return, according
to their own customs. The Pope requested that Mark of
Ephesus should be punished for his contumacy, but this also
the Emperor wisely refused. To make assurance doubly sure,
the Pope demanded that five copies of the Union Decree should
be signed by the original signataries, one for the Greeks,
the rest to be sent to the princes of Europe. The Greeks
objected that this was unnecessary ; at last, however, they
agreed to sign four duplicates, on the understanding that no
farther difficulties were to be put in the way of their departure.
On July 20 the Greek prelates began to quit Florence. The
Emperor remained till August 26, when he made his way to
Venice, and returned to Constantinople after an absence of two
years.
4 Have you won a triumph over the Latins ? ' was the ques
tion eagerly asked of the returning prelates. 4 We have made
a satisfactory compromise,' was the general answer. 4 We have
become Azymites ' (so the Latins were called by the Greeks
because they used unleavened bread in the mass), ' we have
become Azymites, and have betrayed our Creed,' said Mark of
Ephesus, and the Greek people took his view of the matter.
They were profoundly conservative, and though their leaders
might see the necessity of departing from their national isola
tion, the people could not be induced to follow the new policy.
The Greek prelates who at Florence had unwillingly accepted
the Union could not stand against the popular prejudice, and
by their excuses for what they had done only tended to inflame
the popular wrath. Mark of Ephesus became a hero; the
Reception
of the
Union in
Greece.
192 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
'prelates who had wished for the Union were treated with con-
j tumely. The Emperor was powerless. The Bishop of Cyzicum,
whom he made Patriarch, was looked upon with aversion as a
traitor. When he gave the people his blessing many of them
turned away that they might not be denied by one tainted
with the leprosy of Latinism. The Emperor, finding that he
could do nothing to abate the force of this popular feeling,
adopted an attitude of indifference. The Pope supplied for the
defence of Constantinople two galleys and 300 soldiers, as
he had promised ; but no great expedition was equipped by
Europe against the Turks. The Emperor's brother, Demetrius,
despot of Epirus, who had been with him in Italy, and had
been a spectator of all that had there been done, actually ven
tured to raise a rebellion. He combined Turkish aid with the
fanatical feeling of the extreme Greek party against the Latins,
and for some time troubled his brother. The three Patriarchs
of Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria issued in 1443 an
encyclical letter, in which they condemned the Council of
Florence as a council of robbers, and declared the Patriarch of
Constantinople a matricide and heretic.
General Thus the Council of Florence was productive of no direct
ofTh? fruits. The Popes did not succeed in establishing their supremacy
Council of over the Greek Church ; the Greeks got no substantial aid
from Western Christendom to enable them to drive away their
Turkish assailants. Yet the Council of Florence was not
utterly useless. The meeting of two different civilisations and
schools of thought gave a decided impulse to the literary world
v/of Italy, and attracted thither some of the leaders of Greek
letters. It was not long before Gremistus Pletho took up his
abode at Florence, and Bessarion became a cardinal of the
Roman Church. Greek letters found a home in the West ; and
when the impending destruction at last fell upon Constan
tinople, the Greek exiles found a refuge prepared for them by
their fellow-countrymen.
To Eugenius IV. and to the Papacy the Council of Florence
rendered a signal service. However slight its ultimate results
might be, it was the first event since the outbreak of the
Schism which restored the ruined prestige of the Papacy.
Public opinion is naturally influenced chiefly by accomplished
facts. No one could judge of the permanence of the work, but
RESULTS OF THE COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 19'3
all were in some measure impressed by a new sense of the CHAP.
Papal dignity when they heard that, downcast as he was, VI11-
Eugenius IV. had still succeeded in healing the schism which
had so long rent asunder the Christian Church. The Pope
whose name was loaded with obloquy at Basel had been accepted ^
as supreme at Constantinople. The power which was hard
pressed at Home still had sufficient vigour to win new conquests
abroad. With lofty exultation Eugenius IV. wrote to the
princes of Christendom, and announced the success of his
efforts. He recapitulated his labours in this holy cause,
carried on in spite of many discouragements, because he knew
that only in Italy, and only in the presence of the Pope, could
this great result be obtained.1 It was a home thrust which the
fathers of Basel would find it hard to parry.
The Council of Florence was felt to be a triumph of Papal
diplomacy. The prospect of it had drawn from Basel all men
possessed of any moderation. The Italians saw in it the means
of reasserting their hold on the headship of the Church, which
the transalpine nations had begun to threaten. In union with
the Greeks, they saw the beginning of a new epoch of crusades,
in which the Papacy might again stand forth as the leader of
the Latin race. The acute statesman and learned scholar,
Francisco Barbaro, who was at that time Capitano of Brescia,
wrote to the Archbishop of Florence at the beginning of the
Council, pointing out the means to be employed. Learning
and argument, he said, were useless ; for the Greeks were too
acute and too proud of their knowledge to be overcome by dis
putation. They must be treated with tact and with kindness ;
they must be led to see that in union lies their safety and
glory. He urged the necessity of the greatest care. The
union must be made to succeed ; otherwise there was no chance
for the Papacy, and Italian affairs would be plunged into hopeless
confusion.2 The policy recommended by Barbaro was that
pursued by the Pope's advisers. Cesarini's experience at Basel
1 Raynaldi, sub anno, § 9 : ' Inter afflictiones et angustias multas invictam
semper tenuimus patientiam, ne tantum bonum deseri pateremur : sciebamus
enim rem istam peralium explicari non posse '
2 See the letters of Barbaro in Fez, TJwsaurus, vi. pt. 3, 172, &c. On
March 1, 1438, he writes (p. 185) : ' Nisi sapienter resistatur et cum Greeds rite
et ordine res componantur, in magna perturbatione futura sunt omnia nisi
prteter expectationem hominum saluti divinitus remedium affcratur.'
VOL. II. O
194 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK had fitted him admirably for the work to be done at Florence.
UL , The Papal diplomacy won a signal triumph, and followed up its
first victory by others, less conspicuous indeed, but which added
strength to the Papal cause. In December 1439 the recon
ciliation of the Armenians to the Eoman Church was announced
to Europe, and Jacobites, Syrians, Chaldseans, and Maronites
in succeeding years made illusory submission, which served to
present a dazzling display of Papal power.
195
CHAPTER IX.
THE GERMAN DECLARATION OF NEUTRALITY AND THE ELECTION
OF FELIX V.
1438-1439.
CHAP.
IX.
lAttitude of
theCoun-
EUGENIUS IV. might triumph at Florence ; but the fathers of
Basel, weakened yet not dismayed, pursued their course with
an appearance of lofty indifference. In January 1438 they
suspended Eugenius IV. from his office for venturing to sum- fai of Basel,
mon a Council to Ferrara without their assent. The logical /
consequence of such a step was the deposition of Eugenius,
and to this Cardinal d'Allemand and his followers were ready
to proceed. But, although all who had any leaning towards
Eugenius, or who had any scruples about the omnipotence of
the Council, had already left Basel, there still remained many
who did not wish to proceed at once to extremities. Motives
of statesmanship and considerations of expediency landed them
in a somewhat illogical position. Through their desire to sup
port the Council without attacking the Pope they were nicknamed
at Basel fi the Greys,' as being neither black nor white.1 This
party, though it had the weakness which in ecclesiastical mat
ters always attaches to a party that is trimming through po
litical pressure, was still strong enough to put off for some
time the deposition of Eugenius. It raised technical points,
disputed each step, and gave weight to the remonstrances
against a new schism which came from the princes of Europe.
Accordingly, says ^neas Sylvius, the question of procedure
against Eugenius was discussed according to the Socratic
method. Every possible suggestion was made, and every pos
sible objection was raised against it. Was Eugenius to be dealt
1 Mn. Syl., De Con. Basil, (ed. 1700), p. 9. « Quorum postea sectam Wilhel-
muSj Constantiensis Juris consultus, Griseam appellavit.'
o 2
196 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK with simply as a heretic, or as a relapsed heretic, or was he a
, IU'_. heretic at all ? On such points the fathers differed ; but they
agreed on March 24 in fulminating against the Council of
Ferrara, declaring all its procedure null and void, and summon
ing all, under pain of excommunication, to quit it and appear
at Basel within thirty days.
Deciara- It was, however, impossible that this war between the Pope
neutrality6 an(^ ^ne Council could continue without exciting serious atten-
of Ger- Hon., on political grounds, amongst the European nations most
March 17, nearly interested in the Papacy. Grermany and France, about
the same time, took measures to protect themselves against the
dangers with which they were threatened by the impending
outbreak of a schism. What Grermany desired was a measure
' of ecclesiastical reform without the disruption of the unity of
W& ; the Church. It felt no interest in the struggle of the Council
against the Pope ; rather the Grerman princes looked with sus
picion upon the avowed object of the Council, of exalting the
ecclesiastical oligarchy at the expense of the Papacy. It bore
too near a resemblance to their own policy towards the Em
pire, and they did not wish to be embarrassed in their own
schemes by an access of independence to the bishops. Ac
cordingly the Electors entered into correspondence with Cesarini
in 1437, and lent their support to his efforts for a compro
mise between the Pope and the Council. When this failed,
the Electors, under the guidance of Archbishop Kaban of Trier,
devised a plan of declaring the neutrality of Grermany in the
struggle between the Pope and the Council ; by so doing they
would neither abandon the reformation of the Church nor assist
in creating a schism, but would be in a position to take advan
tage of any opportunity that offered. This scheme was, no
doubt, suggested by the example of the withdrawal of the
French allegiance from Boniface XIII., and had much to be
said in its favour. The Electors had sent to obtain the assent
of Sigismund when the news of his death reached them.
In March 1438 the Electors met for the purpose of choosing
a new king at Frankfort, where they were beset by partisans
of Eugenius IV. and of the Council. They resolved that be
fore proceeding to a new election they would secure a basis for
their new policy. In a formal document they publicly declared
on March 17 that they took no part in the differences between
THE GERMAN DECLARATION OF NEUTRALITY. » 197
the Pope and the Council, nor would they recognise the punish
ments, processes, or excommunications of either, as of any va
lidity within the Empire. They would maintain the rights of
the Church till the new king found means to restore unity; if
he had not done so within six months, they would take counsel
of the prelates and jurists of their land what course to adopt.1
Next day Albert, Duke of Austria and King of Hungary, Sigis-
mund's son-in-law, was elected king, as Sigismund had wished
and planned.
This declaration of neutrality was a new step in ecclesias- Election of
tical politics, and was equally offensive to Pope and Council, March is,
both of whom were loud in asserting that in such a matter 1438*
neutrality was impossible. Both hastened to do all they could
to win over Albert ; but Albert was not easy to win over,
nor indeed was he in a position to oppose the Electors.
His hold on Hungary, threatened by the Turks, was but weak,
and Bohemia was insecure. His personal character was not
such as to afford much opportunity for intrigue. He was up
right and honest, reserved in speech, a man who thought more
of action than of diplomacy. Tall, with sunburnt face and
flashing eyes, he took his pleasure in hunting when he could
not take it in warfare, and was content to follow the advice
of those whom he thought wiser than himself.2 Ambassadors
could do nothing with him, and in July he joined the band of
the Electors, and declared himself personally in favour of
neutrality.
The example of Grermany was followed by France. Grer- Pragmatic
many had taken up the attitude most in accordance with its Charles0 C
views ; France proceeded to do likewise. For the large ques- vu. May
tions of Church government involved in the struggle between
Council and Pope, France had little care. Since their failure at
Constance the theologians of the University of Paris had sunk
into lethargy. France, suffering from the miseries of its long
war with England, took an entirely practical view of affairs.
Its object was to retain for its own uses the wealth of the
1 Miiller, PeicJistagstJieatrum, i. 22, &c.
2 vEneas Sylvius, in Palacky, ItaliemscTie lieise, 116: ' Fuit vir magnse
statures, venationis cupidus, in armis promptus, facere quam dicere malebat ;
non ipse per se cernens sed acquiescens consiliis eorum quos bonos existimavit ;
nigra facie, oculis terribilibns, malorum omniiim hostis.'
198 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK Church, and prevent Papal interference with matters of finance.
. IIIj , Charles VII. determined to adopt in his own kingdom such
of the decrees of the Council as were for his advantage, seeing
that no opposition could be made by the Pope. Accordingly a
Synod was summoned at Bourges on May 1, 1438. The am
bassadors of Pope and Council urged their respective causes.
It was agreed that the King should write to Pope and Council
to stay their hands in proceeding against one another ; mean
while, that the reformation be not lost, some of the Basel decrees
should be maintained in France by royal authority. The results
of the synod's deliberation were laid before the King, and on
July 7 were made binding as a pragmatic sanction * on the
French Church. The Pragmatic Sanction enacted that Greneral
Councils were to be held every ten years, and recognised the
\k authority of the Council of Basel. The Pope was no longer
to reserve any of the greater ecclesiastical appointments, but
elections were to be duly made by the rightful patrons. Grants to
benefices in expectancy, * whence all agree that many evils arise/
were to cease, as well as reservations. In all cathedral churches
one prebend was to be given to a theologian who had studied for
ten years in a university, and who was to lecture or preach at
least once a week. Benefices were to be conferred in future,
one-third on graduates, two-thirds on deserving clergy. Appeals
to Eome, except for important causes, were forbidden. The
number of Cardinals was to be twenty-four, each of the age of
thirty at least. Annates and first-fruits were no longer to be
paid to the Pope, but only the necessary legal fees on insti
tution. Regulations were made for greater reverence in the con
duct of Divine service; prayers were to be said by the priest in an
audible voice ; mummeries in churches were forbidden, and clerical
concubinage was to be punished by suspension for three months.' 2
Such were the chief reforms of its own special grievances, which
1 The term Pragmatic Sanction is explained by S. Augustine, Coll. III.
cum Dotiatittis : f Pragmaticum rescrijrtitm quod supra prcvccptum Imperial*
dicitur.' Similarly ^JEneas Sylvius in his Commentaries says : ' Pragmaticam
sanctionem quidam rescriptum principis esse dixerunt, nos melius sanctionem
de causis possumus appellarc Pragma enim Greece, Latine causam significat ;
apud Gallos outem pragmatica sanctio lex est qusedatn de negotiis ecclesias-
ticis.'
2 It is given in full in Ordo finances des Rois de France de la troulcme race,
xiii. 267; briefly in Martene, Amp. Coll. viii. 945, and in Monch.
THE PRAGMATIC SANCTION OF CHARLES VII. 399
France wished to establish. It was the first step in the CHAP.
T"V
assertion of the rights of national Churches to arrange for .
themselves the details of their own ecclesiastical organisation.
It went no further, however, than the amendment of existing
grievances as far as the opportunity allowed. It rested upon no
principles applicable to the well-being of Christendom. While
Germany, true to its imperial traditions, was content to hold its
hand till it discovered some means of bringing about a reforma
tion without a schism, France entered upon a separatist policy
to secure its own interests.
The issue of both these plans depended upon the struggle The
between the Pope and the Council. Charles VII. besought the
Council to suspend their proceedings against the Pope, and
received an answer that it was doing so. On July 12, at a Diet Pope and
held at Niirnberg, the Electors offered to mediate between the jS^to'
Pope and Council, but were answered by the Council's envoys °4c3fcgber
that secular persons might not judge ecclesiastical matters, and
that it would be a bad precedent if Popes and Councils were
interfered with.1 The Electors, with Albert's assent, extended
the neutrality for four months. On October 16, at a second
Diet at Niirnberg, appeared Cardinal Albergata, as the head
of a Papal embassy ; but the envoys of the Council, headed by
the Patriarch of Aquileia, were received with greater marks of
distinction. Eugenius IV. never again subjected any of his
cardinals to such a slight, but chose less important and more
skilful diplomatists. The Electors again offered to mediate, on
the basis that the Councils of Ferrara and Basel should alike
be dissolved, and a new one summoned at another place. The
Basel envoys replied that they had no instructions on this matter ;
they asked if the Electors accepted the decrees of the Council,
and were answered in turn that envoys should be sent to Basel
to answer this question. At Basel accordingly there was much
negotiation with the German envoys, who were joined by those
of the other princes, but the fathers resolutely opposed a transla
tion of the Council, and rejected all proposals tending to that end.
When the third Diet met at Mainz on March 5, 1439, matters
had advanced no farther than they were at first.
1 Patricius, ch. 80 : ' Quoniam non liceret seculares principes de rebus
ecclesiasticis jndicare, neque esset utile reipublicas ut principes videantur legera
pragscribere Concilio generali et Romano pontifici.'
200
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL,
BOOK
III.
The Diet of
Main/ pub
lishes its
acceptance
of some of
the decrees
of Basel.
March
1439.
Hoi:es of
Pope and
Council.
To Mainz Eugenius sent no envoys ; but many of his ad
herents were there to plead his cause, chief amongst whom was
Nicolas of Cusa, a learned theologian who had been an admiring
follower of Cesarini, « the Hercules of Eugenius' party,' as JEneas
Sylvius calls him.1 But the Electors now wavered in their
policy of mediation, and began to turn their eyes to the
example of France. They tended towards using the oppor
tunity for establishing the privileges of the German Church.
The Council sent again the Patriarch of Aquileia. But the
German princes had by this time seen that a reconciliation
between Pope and Council was impossible. They had an ad
viser of keen sagacity in the legist John of Lysura, sprung, like
Nicolas of Cusa, from a little village in the neighbourhood of
Trier.2 He was the firm upholder, if not the originator, of the
policy of neutrality. He now advised the Electors, if nothing
were to be gained by mediation, to follow the example of
France, and secure such of the work of the Council of Basel as
satisfied them. On March 26 the Diet took the unwelcome
step of publishing its acceptance of the Basel decrees concern
ing the superiority of general councils, the organisation of
provincial and diocesan synods, the abolition of reservations
and expectancies, freedom of election to ecclesiastical benefices,
and the abolition of annates and other oppressive exactions of
the Curia. The Pope was not to refuse confirmation to the
election of a bishop, except for some grave reason approved by
the cardinals. Appeals to Eome until the cases had been heard
in the Bishops' courts, were, with few exceptions, forbidden.
Excommunications were not to be inflicted on a town for the
fault of a few individuals. Such were the chief provisions of
this pragmatic sanction of Germany.
The state of things which now existed in France and Ger
many was really a reversion to the system of concordats with
1 De Condi. Basil, p. 9 : ' Hercules tamen omnium Eugenianorum Nico-
laus Cusanus existimatus est, homo et priscarum literarum eruditissimus
et multarum rerum usu perdoctus, cujusque dolendum sit tarn nobile ingenium
ad ilia schismatis studia divertisse, ut legatione ad Grascos vigore falsi Decreti
fungeretur.' The last sentence refers to the fact that Nicolas was one of the
ambassadors sent to Constantinople in the name of the minority, who claimed
to pass their decree of May 7, H37.
2 About Lysura see ^En. Sylv., De Ratisbonensi Dieta, in Mansi, Orci'twnes
Pii IT., iii. 66. At Basel he and Cusa were looktd upon with equal dislike,
and there was a saying current : ' Cusa et Lysura pervertunt omnia jura.'
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST EUGEN1US IV. 201
which the Council of Constance had ended. The rights that CHAP,
had then been granted by the Papacy for five years, and ^_^ >
had afterwards proved mere illusory concessions, were now
extended and secured. The strife between the Pope and the
Council enabled the State in both countries to assert, under the
sanction of a General Council, liberties and privileges which
needed no Papal approval. Such a policy of selection was
opposed equally to the ideas of the Council and of the Pope.
The Council wished for adhesion to its suspension of Eugenius
IV. ; the Pope was not likely to acquiesce quietly in the loss of
his prerogatives and of his revenues. Meanwhile, however, each
was bent on using its opportunities. Eugenius IV. hoped by
the brilliancy of his success at Florence to establish himself
again in a position to interfere in European affairs. The
Council trusted that, if it carried to extremities its proceed
ings against the Pope, Germany and France, after establishing
reforms by virtue of its authority, would be driven to approve
of a decisive step when it was once taken.
Accordingly at Basel the process against Eugenius IV. was Discussion
prepared. The proctors of the Council gathered together JJe^SJjJw"
a hundred and fifty articles against the Pope, swelling the of Eu-
number of charges to make the matter look more terrible,1 April
though all converged to the one point, that Eugenius by dissolv
ing the Council had made himself a schismatic and the author
of a schism. It was clear that such a process might be pro
tracted endlessly by a few determined opponents at every stage
in the pleadings. The more resolute spirits, led by a Burgun-
dian abbot Nicolas, carried the adoption of a more summary
method of procedure. The Council was summoned to discuss
the heresy of Eugenius and set forth the great points of
Catholic doctrine which he had impugned. This discussion
took place in the middle of April, and for six whole days,
morning and afternoon, the dispute went on. First the theo
logians laid down eight conclusions ;
(1) It is a truth of the Catholic faith that a General Council
has power over a Pope or any other Christian man.
(2) It is likewise a truth that the Pope cannot by his
authority dissolve, transfer, or prorogue a General Council
lawfully constituted.
1 Patricius, ch. 72: ' Causidicorum mo re, capitibus centum et quinquaginta,
ut res atrocior videretui, patribus proponunt,'
202 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK (3) Anyone who pertinaciously opposes these truths is to be
^ t ' _^ accounted a heretic.
(4) Eugenius IV. opposed these truths when first he
attempted by the plenitude of the Apostolic power to dissolve
or transfer the Council of Basel.
(5) When admonished by the Council he withdrew his errors
opposed to these truths.
(6) His second attempt at dissolution contains an inex
cusable error concerning the faith.
(7) In attempting to repeat his dissolution he lapses into
the errors which he revoked.
(8) By persisting in his contumacy, after admonition by the
Council to recall his dissolution, and by calling a Council to
Ferrara, he declares himself pertinacious.
The Archbishop of Palermo, who had formerly distinguished
himself as an opponent of Eugenius IV., now at his King's bid
ding, counselled moderation. He argued with much acuteness
that Eugenius had not contravened any article of the Creeds,
nor the greater truths of Christianity, and could not be called
heretical or relapsed. John of Segovia answered that the
decrees of Constance were articles of faith, which it was heresy
to impugn. The Bishop of Argos followed on the same side in
a speech of much passion, which the Archbishop of Palermo in
dignantly interrupted. The Bishop of Argos called the Pope
6 the minister of the Church.' * No,' cried the Archbishop of
Palermo, ' he is its master.' ' Yet,' said John of Segovia, ' his
title is " servant of the servants of God." ' The Archbishop of
Palermo was reduced to silence.
The discussion went on ; but really narrowed itself to two
questions, ( Has a General Council authority over a Pope ? Is
this an article of faith ? ' 1 The disputation at last ended and
the voting began. Three deputations at once voted for the con
clusions of the theologians. The fourth deputation accepted
the first three conclusions, but doubted about the last five ;
it hoped by delay to keep the whole question open. When the
day came for a general congregation to be held, the Archbishops
of Milan and Palermo prepared for resistance with the aid of the
ambassadors of the princes. They pressed for delay, on the
1 A summary of these arguments on the two points is given by ^Eneas
Sylvius, De Condi. Basil., p. 16 -42.
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST EUGENIUS IV. 203
ground that the princes of Europe were not sufficiently repre
sented. When they had finished their arguments, Cardinal
d'Allernand made a splendid speech for a party leader. The
princes of Europe, he said, were well enough represented
by their prelates; the Archbishops of Milan, Palermo, and
Lyons had said all that could be said. They had complained
that the voice of the bishops was disregarded in the Council,
and that the lower clergy carried everything against them.
What Council had done so much to raise the condition of
bishops, who till now had been mere shadows with staff and mitre,
different only in dress and revenues from their clergy ? The
Archbishop of Palermo had said that his opinion ought to pre
vail because more bishops were on his side. The order of the
Council could not be changed to suit his convenience ; it had
pleased him well enough so long as he was in the majority.
Everybody knew that the prelates were only anxious to please
their princes ; they confessed to God in private, to their political
superiors in public. He himself maintained that it was not the
position, but the worth, of a man that was of importance. ' I
could not set the lie of the wealthiest prelate above the truth
spoken by a simple priest. Do not, you bishops, despise your
inferiors ; the first martyr was not a bishop but a deacon.' The
example of the early Church showed that Councils were not
restricted to bishops. If it were so now, they would be at the
mercy of the Italians, and there would be an end to all further
reforms. The Archbishop of Palermo pressed for delay only as a
means of wasting a favourable opportunity. He threatened
them with the anger of princes, as if the Council was to
obey princes, and not princes the Council. They must cleave to
the truth at all hazards. He ended by urging them to affirm
the first three conclusions, as a means of stopping the intrigues
of Eugenius IV., and defer for the present the remainder in
deference to the Archbishop of Palermo's request.
All listened with admiration to the dashing onslaught of
d'Allernand. But on the attempt to read the decree affirming the
three conclusions a scene of wild clamour and confusion arose,
as had happened two years before. The Patriarch of Aquileia
turned to the Archbishop of Palermo and cried out ; You don't
know the Germans ; if you go on thus, you will not leave this
land with your head on your shoulders.' There was a loud cry
204 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK that the liberty of the Council was being attacked. Again the
— <1 — / citizens of Basel had to interfere to keep the peace. The fathers
were free to conduct their debates at pleasure, but a citizen
guard was always present to see that arguments were not en
forced by stronger than verbal means.1
When silence was restored, the debate was resumed for a
while, till Cardinal d'Allemand again rose to put the question.
The Archbishop of Palermo interposed, saying, ' You despise
our entreaties, you despise the kings and princes of Europe, you
despise the prelates ; but beware lest, while you despise all, your
selves be despised by all. We have the majority of prelates on
our side, we form the Council. In the name of the prelates I
declare that the motion must not be carried.* There was a
hubbub as of a battle-field, and all was again confusion. John
of Segovia was sufficiently respected by both parties to obtain a
hearing while he denounced the scandal of the day's proceed
ings, urged the observance of the ordinary procedure of the
Council, and defended the authority of the president. His speech
made no impression on the Archbishop of Palermo, who declared
that he and the prelates of his party constituted the Council
and would not allow any decree to be published in the teeth of
the protest he had just made. No one kept his seat ; the
rival partisans gathered round their leaders, the Cardinal of
Aries and the Archbishop of Palermo, and looked like two armies
drawn up for contest. It seemed that the Archbishop's policy
would prevail, that the congregation would be ended by the
evening darkness without passing any vote, and thus a substan
tial triumph be gained for Eugenius IV. The followers of the
Cardinal of Aries loudly upbraided him with his incompetency :
4 Why do you sleep ? Where is now your courage and your
skill ? '
But the Cardinal was only waiting his time. When a slight
lull prevailed he called out suddenly in a loud voice, * I have a
letter just come from France which contains wonderful, almost
incredible news, which I would like to lay before you.' There
was at once silence, and D'Allemand began to read some triviali-
1 ^n. Syl., De Condi. Basil., 60 : ' Servaverunt semper hunc morem cives, nt
in omni negotio adesse curarent, quod pariturum dissensiones arbitrarentur,
illud prascipue adcayentes ne qui tumultus fierent, neve alias quam verbales
rixae.
DISSENSIONS AT BASEL. 205
ties ; then the pretended letter went on to say that messengers CHAP.
of Eugenius IV. filled France and preached that the Pope was . _ l*' ^
above the Council ; they were gaining credit, and the Council
ought to take measures to check them. < Fathers,' said the
Cardinal, ' the necessary measures are found in the eight propo
sitions which you have examined, all of which, however, you do
not intend at present to pass ; but I declare the three first to be
passed, in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy
Ghost.' Thus saying, he hastily left his seat and was followed
by his triumphant partisans. He had snatched a formal victory
at a time when defeat seemed imminent. He had shown that
French craft was a match for Italian subtilty.
A few days afterwards arrived from Mainz the ambassadors Neutrality
of the Electors, from whom the opponents of the decree ex-
pected help in their resistance. But the Electors at Mainz had
practically forsaken their position of mediators. They had seen May u«h).
the hopelessness of mediation unless supported by a general
agreement of European powers. Private interests prevailed too
strongly for this to be possible. Portugal and Castile were at
variance. Milan and Aragon had their own ends in view in any
settlement that might be made with the Pope. The attitude
of France, was dubious ; and the Germans suspected that
France aimed at getting the Council into its own hands, and
reviving the French hold upon the Papacy. The Electors had
no settled policy, and were content with a watchful neutrality.
The German ambassadors did nothing at Basel, though an at
tempt was made to revive the national divisions, and procure
joint action on the part of the German nation. On May 9 the
German ambassadors were present, though by an accident, at a
general congregation which accepted the form of decree embody
ing the conclusions previously passed. Again there was a stormy
scene. The Archbishop of Milan denounced the Cardinal of Aries
as another Catiline, surrounded by a band of ruffians. When
the Cardinal of Aries began to read the decree the Archbishop of
Palermo thundered forth his protest. Each side shouted down
the other, to prevent their proceedings from claiming conciliar
validity. The Cardinal of Aries rose to leave the room. His
opponents prepared to stay and enact their protest; but a
sudden cry of one who declared that he would not be untrue
to his oath, and allow the Council to degenerate into a conven-
206
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
The decree
condemn
ing the
heresies of
Eugenius
ivfis
passed.
May 16,
1439.
tide,1 recalled all to a sense of the gravity of the situation. All
felt that they were on the verge of disruption of the Council.
The Cardinal resumed his seat ; those who were departing were
recalled. The Bishop of Albi read a protest to himself, for no
one could hear him for the hubbub. The Lombards, Castilians,
and Aragonese declared their adhesion to the protest, and left
the congregation. The Cardinal of Aries then went on with
the ordinary business, late though it was, and the form of de
cree was at last adopted. As the Archbishop of Palermo
left the Council he turned to his followers and said with in
dignation, ' Twice, twice.' It was the second time that the
policy of the Cardinal of Aries had been too acute for him, and
had baffled his attempts at obstruction.
For a few days the followers of the Archbishop of Palermo
absented themselves from the meetings of the deputations ; and
on May 15 the ambassadors of the Electors feebly protested that
they did not assent to any proceedings which were contrary to
the conclusions of the Diet of Mainz. Next day they tried to
make a compromise, but failed, as the opponents of the decree
could not make up their minds what terms they were prepared
to accept. A session was held on the same day, May 16, for
the publication of the decree. The greater number of prelates
refused to be present. None of the Aragonese bishops, none from
any of the Spanish kingdoms, would attend. From Italy there
was only one, and from the other kingdoms only twenty. But
the Cardinal of Aries was not deterred by their absence. He
had a large following of the inferior clergy, and had recourse to
a strange expedient to cast greater ecclesiastical prestige
over the assembly. He gathered from the churches of Basel
the relics of the saints, which, borne by priests, were set in the
vacant places of the bishops. When the proceedings began,
the sense of the gravity of the situation moved all to tears.
In the absence of opposition the decree was read peaceably,
and was formally passed.
On May 22 the ambassadors of the princes appeared in
a general congregation, and took part in the business, excusing
themselves for their previous absence on the ground that it
1 ^En. Syl., De Condi. Basil., 74. '"Absit a me," inquit Pater, « ut in
vestro conventiculo maneam aut aliquid again quod jurejurando a me prrestito
sit adversum." '
DEPOSITION OF EUGENIUS IV. 207
was not their duty as ambassadors to mix with such matters. It
was clear from such vacillating conduct on the part of their
representatives that the princes of Europe had little real in
terest in the struggle between Pope and Council. They had
ceased to act as moderators, and had no large views about the
need of ecclesiastical reforms. They were content to gain what
they could for their separate interests, as they understood them
at the moment, and to let the whole matter drift. They were
incapable of interposing to free the question of reform from the
meshes of personal jealousy in which it had become entangled.
So long as every power which could interfere with their own
projects was enfeebled, they were content that things should
take their own course. The only man at Basel with a settled
policy was the Cardinal of Aries ; and he was no more than a
party leader, bent on using the democracy of the Council as a
means of asserting the power of the ecclesiastical oligarchy
against the Papal monarchy.
Emboldened by his first triumph, the Cardinal of Aries Deposition
pursued his course. The German ambassadors still urged a genius IV.
suspension of the process against the Pope. On June 13 a BeacSeieclat
solemn answer was made by the Council that the process June 25,
had now been suspended for two j^ears in deference to the
wishes of princes. They must not take it amiss if the Council,
whose business it wTas to regulate the affairs of the Church,
declined to delay any longer. Faith, religion, and discipline
would be alike destroyed if one man had the power to set
himself against a General Council, and bear a tyrant's sway
over the Church ; they would rather die than desert the
cause of liberty.1 The ambassadors were silent when, on
June 23, the remaining five of the eight conclusions were
decreed by the Council, and Eugenius IV. was cited to appear
in two days and hear his sentence. The plague was at this
time raging in Basel, and very little pressure would have suf
ficed to induce the fathers to transfer the Council elsewhere ; but
there was no real agreement amongst the powers of Europe.
The session on June 25 was attended by thirty-nine bishops and
abbots, and some 300 of the lower clergy. Eugenius IV. was
summoned by the bishops, and when he did not appear was
declared contumacious. He was declared to be a notorious
1 Cf. Patricias, ch. 91.
208 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK cause of scandal to the Church, a despiser of the decrees of the
; IIi1- , Holy Synods, a persistent heretic, and destroyer of the rights
of the Church. As such he was deposed from his office ; all
were freed from his allegiance, and were forbidden to call him
Pope any longer. The dominant party in the Council had
everything to win and nothing to lose by pursuing to its end
the quarrel with the Pope. In the divided state of political
interests there was a chance that some of the European powers
might be drawn to its side if once a decided step were taken.
But it forgot, in the excitement of the conflict, that the
Council's hold upon men's obedience was a moral hold, and
rested upon hopes of ecclesiastical reform. When this had
been sacrificed to the necessities of a party conflict, when a
schism and not a reformation was the issue of the Council's
activity, its authority was practically gone. It required only
a little time to make this clearly manifest.
Plague at The Council, however, did not hesitate in its course. On
14%.' the day of the deposition of Eugenius IV. a consultation was held
about future procedure ; and the opinion of John of Segovia was
adopted, to defer for sixty days the election to the vacant office
of Pope. The position of the Council was discouraging. The
plague, which since the spring had been raging in Basel, had
grown fiercer in the summer heat. Five thousand of the in
habitants are said to have fallen before its ravages. Terror
prevailed on every side, and it was hard to keep the Council
together. The learned jurist Pontano and the Patriarch of
Aquileia, two pillars of the Council, were amongst those who
fell victims to the mortality. The streets were thronged with
funerals and priests bearing the sacrament to the dying. The
dead were buried in pits to save the trouble of digging single
graves. ^Eneas Sylvius was stricken by the plague, but re
covered. Eight of his friends amongst the clerks of the Council
died.1
In spite of all danger and the repeated advice of his friends
1 See his account of the plague, De Condi. Basil., 85, and Commentarii, 7.
His own cure is thus described : ' Quoniam sinistrum inguen lassum erat
sinistri pedis vena aperta est ; turn die to to et in partem noctis prohibitus
somnus ; exin puivis quidam ebibitus est, cujus materiam uiedicus revelare
iioluit ; ulceri et loco lasso nunc rafani viridis succi pleni incistB portiones,
mine madidae cretee frusta supponebantur. Inter hasc aucta febris ingentem
capitis dolorem et salutis desperationem adduxit.'
PREPARATIONS FOR A NEW ELECTION. 209
that he should flee before the pestilence, the Cardinal of Aries CHAP.
stood to his post, and so kept the Council together. At the IX' .
beginning of October the business of the Council was resumed. J^^d*
and the method of the new election was discussed. The Col- to nominate
lege of Cardinals was represented in Basel only by Louis the Papacy.
d'Allemand. It was clear that electors must be appointed.
After some discussion their number was fixed at thirty-two,
but there were many opinions about the means of choosing
them. At last William, Archdeacon of Metz, proposed the
names of three men who should be trusted to co-opt the re
maining twenty-nine. The three whose high character and
impartiality were supposed to place them above suspicion were
Thomas, Abbot of Dundrennan, in Scotland,1 John of Segovia,
a Castilian, and Thomas of Corcelles, Canon of Amiens. At
first this plan met with great objections ; but they gradually
disappeared on discussion. The Germans urged that they
were not represented, and it was agreed that the three should
associate with themselves a German, Christian, Provost of
S. Peter's in Bruma, in the diocese of Olmiitz. They took an
oath that they would choose fitting men who had the fear of
God before their eyes, and would not reveal the names of
those they chose till the time of their publication in a general
Congregation.
The triumvirs at once set about their business. They con- Nomina-
ferred with representative men of every nation ; they did their Electors/6
best to acquaint themselves with the characters of those whom
they had in view. Yet they displayed singular discretion
in their inquiries ; and when, on October 28, they met to make
their election, no one knew their intentions. Next day the
congregation was crowded to hear their decision. Every
where speculation was rife. The more vain and more simple
among the fathers displayed their own estimate of their
deserts by appearing in fine clothes, with many attendants,
ready to enter the conclave at once.2 Suspense was prolonged
because the Cardinal of Aries was late. He appeared at last
with a gloomy face, and took his seat saying, ' If the trium
virs have done well, I confess that I am rather late ; if
1 ' Abbatem de Dunduno, Ordinis Cisterciensis, Diocoesis Candidas Casas '
(Whithern in Galloway), ^En. Syl,,, De Condi, Basil., p. 89.
2 ^En. Syl., De Condi. Basil, 1)1.
VOL. II. P
210 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK they have done ill, I am too soon.' He was afraid that their
^_™^__, democratic sympathies might have outrun his own. His words
were an evil omen ; everyone prepared for a dissension, which
in the matter of a new election would work irreparable ruin to
the Council.
The triumvirs behaved with singular prudence. First
Thomas of Dundrennan, then John of Segovia, explained the
principles on which they had acted. They had regarded national
divisions, and had considered the representative character
of those whom they chose ; goodness, nobility, and learning
had been the tests which they had used. The general result of
their choice was that the electors would consist of twelve
bishops, including the Cardinal of Aries, which was the number
of the twelve apostles, seven abbots, five theologians, nine
doctors and men of learning, all in priests' orders. This an
nouncement in some degree appeased the general dread. When
the names were read, the position of the men chosen and
their distribution amongst nations met with general approval.
The Cardinal's brow cleared ; he praised the triumvirs for their
wisdom and prudence, and the Congregation separated in con
tentment. On October 30, after the usual ceremonies, the
electors entered the conclave in the house Zur Brucke.
Amadeus The Cardinal of Aries was, of course, ready with a nominee
Duke'of for the Papal office ; naturally, he had not proceeded to ex-
candfd'ate tremities without making preparations for the result. If the
for the cause of the Council was to succeed, it must again strike its
roots into European politics, and must secure an influential
protector. As other princes had grown cold towards the
Council, the Duke of Savoy had declared himself its adherent.
The greater part of the fathers now remaining at Basel were
Savoyards. Amadeus VIII. had ruled over Savoy since 1391.
He was a prudent man, who knew how to take advantage of
his neighbours' straits, and had greatly increased the dominions
and importance of Savoy, till it embraced the lands that ex
tended from the Upper Saone to the Mediterranean, and was
bounded by Provence, Dauphine, the Swiss Confederacy, and
the Duchy of Milan. Like many others, Amadeus VIII. had
drawn his profits from the necessities of Sigismund, who, in
1416, elevated Savoy to the dignity of a duchy. The Duke of
Savoy refused to take any side in the internal struggles of
ELECTION OF FELIX V. 211
France or in the war between France arid England, but grew CHAP.
rich on his neighbours' misfortunes. He married a daughter _1X' „
of Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy ; his eldest daughter
was married to Filippo Maria, Duke of Milan, his second
was the widow of Louis of Anjou. From his wealth, his
position, and his connexions, the Duke of Savoy was a man
of great political influence. But the death of his eldest
son caused him deep grief and unhappiness. In 1431 he
retired from active life, and built himself a luxurious retreat
at Kipaille, whither he withdrew with seven companions to
lead a life of religious seclusion. His abode was called the
Temple of S. Maurice ; he and his followers wore grey cloaks,
like hermits, with gold crosses round their necks, and long
staffs in their hands.1 Yet Amadeus in his seclusion took a
keen interest in affairs, and, when the suspension of Eugenius
IV. was decreed by the Council, sent an embassy to the Pope
excusing the Council, and offering to mediate. As matters
went on, his support was more openly declared, and he offered to
send to Basel the prelates of his land. During the year 1439
Savoyards had largely reinforced the Council, and the scheme
of electing Amadeus as the future Pope had taken definite
form. Amadeus had consulted other princes on the subject,
and from the Duke of Milan had received the warmest
promises of support. The electors to the Papacy had been
chosen equally from the nations represented at the Council —
France, Italy, Germany, and Spain. But, from its geographical
position, Savoy was reckoned both in France and Italy. Of the
twelve bishops amongst the electors seven were Savoyards ; the
others were the Cardinal of Aries, two French and one Spanish
bishop, and the Bishop of Basel. Without any accusation of
false play in the choice of the electors, it fell out that quite half
of them were either subjects of Amadeus or were bound to him
by ties of gratitude.
The proceedings of the conclave were conducted with the
utmost decorum.2 At its commencement the Cardinal of Aries
1 See his life by ^En. Sylvius, De Viris Claris ; in Mansi, Orationes, iii.
178. .(Eneas saw him at Bipaille, and says : ' Vitam magis voluptuosam quam
penitentialem degebat' (Comment. 3).
2 vEn. Sylvius, who was clerk of the Conclave, says, ' Nihil nisi honest um
vidi ' (De Vims Claris, 180). His account of the proceedings of the Conclave,
De Condi. Basil., p. 100, °;c. is given in great detail.
p 2
212 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK reminded the electors that the situation of affairs needed a rich
and powerful Pope, who could defend the Council against its
adversaries. On the first scrutiny of votes it was found that
seventeen candidates had been nominated, of whom Amadeus
had the greatest number of votes — sixteen. On the next
scrutiny he had nineteen votes, and on the third twenty-one.
His merits and the objections that could be raised against him
were keenly but temperately discussed, and in the final scrutiny
on November 5 it was found that he had received twenty-six
votes, and his election to the Papacy was solemnly announced
by the Cardinal of Aries.
The Council published the election throughout Christen
dom, and named an embassy headed by the Cardinal of Aries, with
seven bishops, three abbots, and fourteen doctors, to carry to
Amadeus the news of his election. Probably from want of
money, the embassy did not leave Basel till December 3, when it
was accompanied by envoys of the citizens and several nobles.
On reaching Ripaille they were met by the nobles of Savoy.
Amadeus, with his hermit comrades, advanced to meet them
with the cross borne before him. Amadeus entered into nego
tiations in a business-like spirit, and rather surprised the
ambassadors of the Council by stipulating that a change should
be made in the form of the oath administered to the Pope,
that he should keep his hermit's beard and his former name of
Amadeus, The envoys replied that the oath must be left to
the Council ; they could not alter the custom of assuming a
religious name ; the beard might be left for the present.
Amadeus also disappointed the Council's envoys by showing an
unexpected care about his future financial position. ' You
have abolished annates,' he said ; ' what do you expect the
Pope to live on ? I cannot consume my patrimony and dis-
. inherit my sons.' They were driven to promise the cautious
old man a grant of firstfruits of vacant benefices.
Begin- At last matters were arranged. Amadeus accepted his
" election, assumed the name of Felix V., and took the oath
January as prescribed by the Council. Then he left his solitude in
Kipaille, and went in pontifical pomp to Tonon, where, amid
the ecclesiastical solemnities of Christmastide, his friends were
so struck by the incongruity of his bearded face that they per
suaded him to shave. On the festival of the Epiphany he took
FIRST STEPS OF FELIX V. 213
the final step of separating himself from his worldly life by CHAP.
declaring his eldest son Louis Duke of Savoy, and his second ^ ]f'^-
son Philip Count of Geneva. By the Council's advice he
agreed not to nil up the offices of the Curia, lest by so doing
he should hinder the reconciliation of those who held them
under Eugenius IV. ; as a provisional measure they were put
into commission. Felix V. also submitted to the Council's
demand that, in the letters announcing his election, the Pope's
name should come after that of the Council. On the other
hand, the Council allowed him to create new cardinals, even
in contradiction to their decrees on this point. Felix named
four, but only one of those, the Bishop of Lausanne, as a
dutiful subject, accepted the doubtful dignity, to which small
hope of revenue was attached.
On February 26 the Council of Basel issued a decree com- views of
manding all to obey Felix V., and excommunicating those who jv^amThis
refused. This was naturally followed by a similar decree of Curia.
Eugenius IV. from Florence on March 23. Neither of these
decrees was very efficacious. Eugenius IV. had strengthened
himself in December by creating seventeen cardinals, Bessarion
and Isidore of Russia among the Greeks, two Spaniards, four
Frenchmen, one Englishman (John Kemp, Archbishop of
York), one Pole, one German, one Hungarian, and five Italians.
Unlike the nominees of Felix, all accepted the office except the
Bishop of Krakau, who refused the offers of both Popes alike.
The news of the election of Amadeus at first caused some con
sternation in the court of Eugenius IV. ; but the sagacity of
Cesarini restored their confidence. ' Be not afraid,' he said,
' for now you have conquered, since one has been elected by the
Council whom flesh and blood has revealed to them, not their
Heavenly Father. I was afraid lest they might elect some poor,
learned and good man, whose virtues might be dangerous ; as
it is, they have chosen a worldling, unfit by his previous life for
the office, one who has shed blood in war, has been married and
has children, one who is unfit to stand by the altar of God.' 1
Felix V. did not find matters easy to arrange with the
Council. He stayed at Lausanne for some time, and did not
comply with the repeated requests of the fathers that he would
hasten to Basel. No steps were taken to provide for the support
1 JEn. Syl., Comment, ed. Fea. p. 79.
214
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Coronation
of Felix V.
July 24,
1440.
Death of
Albert IL
October
1489.
of the Papal dignity. The letter of Felix V. nominating the
Cardinal of Aries as president of the Council, was ruled to be
so informal that it was not inserted in the Council's records.
Questions concerning the Council's dignity in the presence of
the Pope gave rise to many discussions ; it was agreed that the
Pope and his officials should take an oath not to impede the
jurisdiction of the Council over its own members. Not till June
24, 1440, did Felix enter Basel accompanied by his two sons, an
unusual escort for a Pope, and all the nobility of Savoy. On July
24 he was crowned Pope by the Cardinal of Aries, the only
cardinal present. The ceremony was imposing, and more than
50,000 spectators are said to have been present. Felix V.
looked venerable and dignified, and excited universal admira
tion by the quickness with which he had mastered the minutiae
of the mass service. No expense was spared to give grandeur
to the proceedings ; the tiara placed on Felix's head cost
thirty thousand crowns. After this, Felix abode in Basel await
ing the adhesion of the princes of Europe.
The two Popes were now pitted one against the other ; but
their rivalry was unlike any that had existed in former times.
Each had his pretensions, each represented a distinctive policy ;
but neither had any enthusiastic adherents. The politics of
Europe were but little concerned with ecclesiastical matters ;
the different States pursued their course without much heed to
the contending Popes. Germany was the least united State and
had the least determined policy. To Germany both Eugenius
IV. and Felix V. turned their attention ; each strove to end
its neutrality favourably to himself. The hopes of both
parties were awakened by the death of Albert II., on October
27, 1439. He died in Hungary of dysentery, brought on by
eating too much fruit when fatigued in hot weather. Albert
in his short reign had not succeeded in restoring order in the
Empire, in giving peace to the Church, or in protecting his
ancestral kingdoms ; but his noble and disinterested character,
his firmness and constancy, had roused hopes in men's minds,
which were suddenly extinguished by his untimely death. It
became at once a question what would be the policy of the
Electors during the vacancy in the Empire.
215
CHAPTEE X.
EUGENIUS IV. AND FELIX V.
1440-1444.
THE German Electors heard at the same time the news of the CHAP.
death of Albert II., and of the elevation of Amadeus to the Papal > - ^ —
dignity. They refused to receive either the envoys of Eugenius Frederick0
IV. or of Felix V., and renewed their declaration of neutrality. J^*'
Everything urged them to hasten their election to the Empire, 1440.
and on February 1, 1440, they unanimously chose Frederick,
Duke of Styria, second cousin of the deceased king and head
of the house of Austria. Frederick was a young man, twenty-
five years of age, whose position was embarrassing and whose
responsibilities in Germany were already heavy. He was guar
dian of the county of the Tyrol during the minority of Sigismund,
son of that Frederick who had played so luckless a part at Con
stance. Moreover, Albert II. died without male heir, but left his
wife pregnant ; when she gave birth to a son, Ladislas, Frederick
became guardian also of Bohemia and Hungary. At his election
Frederick was held to be sagacious and upright ; but he was not
likely to interfere with the plans of the electoral oligarchy.
Kepresentatives of the two Popes at once beset both Electors
and King. Frederick III., unlike his predecessor, was not com
mitted definitely to the policy of neutrality, and only said that
he proposed at the first Diet to confer with the Electors about
the means of amending the disorders in the Church. He took
no steps to hasten the summoning of a Diet, which met at
Mainz a year after his election on February 2, 1441. Even
then Frederick III. did not appear in person.
Meanwhile Felix V. had received the adhesion of a few of Adherent
the German princes. In June, 1440, Albert of Munich recog- jJSf"
nised him, and in August Stephen of Zimmern and Zweibriicke
216 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK came to Basel with his two sons, and did him reverence.
.. IIL . Albert of Austria, brother of Frederick III., followed, as did
also Elizabeth of Hungary, widow of the late king, On the
other hand Felix V. met with a decided rebuff in France,
where a synod was held at Bourges to hear ambassadors of both
Popes. On September 2 answer was made in the King's name
that he recognised Eugenius IV., and besought his relative, i the
lord of Savoy ' (as he called Felix V.), to display his wonted
wisdom in aiming at peace. France had no reason to deviate
from her old policy, especially as Eugenius IV. maintained the
cause of Rene of Anjou in Naples. The Universities, especially
those of Vienna, Koln, Erfurt, and Krakau, declared them
selves in favour of Felix V. It was but natural that the
academic ideas, from which the conciliar movement sprang,
should accept the issue which followed from the application
^ of their original principle. The Council was especially anxious
to gain the adhesion of the Duke of Milan, and Felix con
sented to pay a large subsidy in return for his protection.
But Filippo Maria Visconti merely played with the offers of
Felix. He promised to send envoys, but nothing came of it.
In like manner Alfonso of Aragon adopted an ambiguous attitude.
Both these princes wished to play off Felix V. against Eugenius
IV. in Italian affairs, but saw nothing to be gained by com
mitting themselves too definitely.
Felix V. Thus Felix V. was supported by no great power, and the
Council. schism had little influence on the mind of Europe. Felix
V. represented only the new-fangled ideas of the Council — ideas
which had long deserted the sphere of practical utility, and so
had lost their interest. Felix V. and the Council were indis-
solubly bound together. The Council, in electing a Pope, had
taken its last step. Felix V. could not dissolve the Council
against its will, and was helpless without it. Yet, in spite of
their close connexion, it was difficult to regulate the relations
between the two. There was at the outset a difficulty about
money. The Council had elected the Duke of Savoy as a man
who would spend his money in its behalf. Felix V. demanded
that the Council should make due provision for its Pope and
4 his cardinals. This could only be done by granting to Felix
i V. what had been taken away from Eugenius IV. The reform
ing Council must admit that it could not afford to carry out its
FELIX V. AND THE COUNCIL. 217
own reforms ; there was no escape from this admission. On CHAP.
August 4 a decree was passed giving the Pope for five years a ._
fifth, and for the succeeding five years a tenth, of the first year's
revenues of all vacant benefices. It is true that the reason
assigned for this special grant was to enable him to rescue from
tyrants the patrimony of S. Peter. None the less it awakened
opposition from the Germans in the Council, and was defended
only by the fact that it was practically inoperative except in the
dominions of Savoy. It brought little money ; and when, on
October 12, Felix V., at the instance of the Council, nominated
eight cardinals, amongst \vhoin were the Patriarch of Aquileia
and John of Segovia, the question of their revenues again
became pressing. On November 12 six cardinals were created
to conciliate France. It was necessary to have recourse to the
old system of provisions of benefices to supply them with
revenues. Felix V. chafed under the restraints which the
Council laid upon him, and took advantage of the absence of
the Cardinal of Aries in November to preside over the Council,
and pass some decrees which awoke much comment. When
he asked to have the same rights granted to him over eccle
siastical benefices in Savoy as the Pope exercised in the States
of the Church, the Council refused the demand.
Meanwhile Frederick III. gave no signs of his intention. Diet of
This indecision, which was the result of indolence and infirmity March
of purpose, passed at first for statesmanlike reserve. Both 1
parties looked to the Diet at Mainz for an opportunity of
achieving a signal victory. They were disappointed to hear
that the King found himself too much engaged with difficult
matters in his own States to undertake in person the affairs of
Germany. He sent four commissioners to Mainz, who were to
hear the arguments of the rival claimants. Eugenius IV. had
learned wisdom by former experience, and sent as his repre
sentatives two men skilled in affairs, but not of high dignity,
Nicolas of Cusa, a deserter from the Council, who well knew the
temper of Germany, and John of Carvajal, a Spaniard of great
personal piety and worth, a trained official of the Papal court.
The Council, on the other hand, sent its highest dignitaries,
Cardinal d'Allemand and three of the new cardinals, chief of
whom was John of Segovia. John claimed to appear as Papal
Legate ; but when he was entering with pomp the Cathedral of
218 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK Mainz the Chapter met him, and declined to admit his legatine
. i • „ authority, so that he was obliged to retire. The Diet decided to
hear him as an ambassador of the Council, but not to recognise
on either side the claims of any dignity which had been con
ferred since the declaration of neutrality. When the Council's
representatives tried to resist this decision, they were told by the
citizens of Mainz that their safe-conduct would be revoked
within eight days if they did not submit to the demands of the
Diet. They were driven sullenly to give way, and only the
Cardinal of Aries received the honour due to his office.
The Diet Qn March 24 D'Allemand appeared before the Diet, and
a new " pleaded the cause of the Council, while his colleagues remained
sulkily at home. Next day Carvajal and Cusa answered him,
and seemed to produce considerable effect upon those present,
the Electors of Trier and Mainz, the king's commissioners, the
ambassadors of France, and a few German nobles. Stung by
the success of Cusa, John of Segovia laid aside his pride, as
sumed a doctor's robes, and with great clearness and cogency
restated the Council's position. He produced a vast treatise,
divided into twelve books, in which he had argued out at
length the various points raised by his speech. Carvajal and
Cusa replied. When John of Segovia wished to return to
the charge the Diet ruled that it had heard enough. It is
no wonder that it quailed before John of Segovia's treatise,1
especially as the matter in dispute was one in which Germany
took a political, not an ecclesiastical, interest. A paper was
circulated amongst the members of the Diet, most probably
the work of Jacob, Archbishop of Trier, urging the accept
ance of whichever Pope would summon a new Council, to be
organised by nations, and would guarantee to the German
Church the reforms which it had claimed for itself. In accord
ance with this plan the Diet laid before the rival parties the
old proposal that a new Council should be summoned in some
neutral place with the concurrence of the kings of Europe. Six
places in Germany and six in France were submitted for choice,
and Frederick III. was to negotiate with the two Popes further
arrangements for this new Council, which was to meet on
August 1, 1442.
Both parties retired from Mainz disappointed, and beset
1 A summary of this discussion is given by Patricius, ch. 117, 118.
FELIX V. AND THE COUNCIL. 219
Frederick with embassies. Frederick, who was rapidly showing
himself to be a master of the art of doing nothing, said that
he proposed to hold another Diet at Frankfort next year, when
the question might be again discussed. He was not altogether
satisfied with the policy adopted by the Diet. The Diet
was ready to recognise the Pope who would grant to the Grer-
man Church such reforms as suited the Electors ; Frederick III.
was desirous to recognise the Pope who was generally held to
be legitimate, especially if in so doing he could further his
own interests.
Pending the next Diet, the fathers at Basel composed and Quarrels of
disseminated statements of their cause. Their proceedings
otherwise were not very harmonious. There was the old diffi-
culty about money. Felix V. complained that he incurred great
expenses in sending out embassies and the like, while he received
little or nothing. The Cardinals clamoured for revenues, and
the officials of the Curia claimed their share of such money as
came in. The Council granted to Felix a bishopric, a monas
tery, and one benefice in Savoy till he should recover the
States of the Church. An outcry was raised against the ex
cessive fees of the Papal Chancery ; the officers answered that
they only exacted the dues recognised by John XXII. Want of
money led to a strict inquiry into the conduct of the financial
officers of the Council ; and this caused great bitterness. Felix
sent the captain of his guard to imprison some who were
accused of malversation. The Council loudly complained that
their liberty was infringed, and called on the citizens of Basel
to maintain their safe-conduct. The magistrates interfered,
restored peace, and fined the Pope's captain. The Council
urged on Felix V. to send embassies on all sides to set forth
his cause. Felix V. answered that embassies were costly
things, and as yet he had got little for his money spent on
them. The Council, believing in the power of plausibility,
commissioned the Archbishop of Palermo to draw up a letter to
be presented to Frederick III. When he had done his work it
did not satisfy them, and the facile pen of ^Eneas Sylvius was
employed to put it into a more seductive form. The time
for the Diet of Frankfort was drawing near, and Felix was
prevailed to send another embassy. Plis cardinals at first
pleaded their outraged dignity, and refused to go. Felix bade
220
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Policy of
Frederick
III.
Diet of
Frankfort.
May 1442.
them disregard their clothes in the interests of truth and jus
tice. The Cardinal of Aries, the Archbishop of Palermo, and
John of Segovia accepted the office and set out in May 1442.
Eugenius IV. meanwhile had asserted his authority by de
creeing, on April 26, 1441,1 the transference of his Council from
Florence to Eome, on the ground that Kome was a fitter place
to receive the ambassadors of the Ethiopian Church, who were
conducting an illusory reconciliation with the Papacy. It was
a proud assertion of Papal superiority over Councils. An at
tempt .was made by the more decided of the Electors to obtain
the assent of Eugenius IV. to the policy which they had put
forward at Mainz. A learned jurist, Gregory Heimburg, was
sent to Florence with the proposals of the Electors, drawn out
in the form of two bulls, one dealing with the new Council, the
other with the liberties of the German Church. Eugenius gave
no definite answer, as Heimburg brought with him no creden
tials. He deferred his answer to the Diet at Frankfort. But this
negotiation showed a disposition on the part of the German
princes at this time to take the matter into their own hands,
without waiting for Frederick, whose dubious attitude was pro
bably due to a hope of winning back from the Swiss cantons
some of the Habsburg possessions, with which view he did not
choose to quarrel with Basel or with Savoy.2
On May 27 Frederick arrived in Frankfort with the three
ecclesiastical Electors, the Count Palatine, and the Duke of
Saxony. The Council was represented by its three Cardinals ;
Eugenius IV. by Carvajal and Cusa, as before. But they were
not permitted to air their eloquence before the King. He
decided, before entering the troubled sea of ecclesiastical dis
putes, to secure his position by the prestige of a coronation,
and announced his intention of going to Aachen for that pur
pose. In his absence commissioners would hear the arguments
of the rival envoys, that on his return he might not find them
contending. The Cardinal of Aries, as a prince of the Empire,
accompanied the King ; but at Aachen he was shut out of the
1 Patricius. ch. 129, gives 1442 as the date of this translation. Mansi
in his note on Raynaldus, gub anno 1441, proves that the first embassy of the
Ethiopians was in 1441, and corrects the error of Patricius. The decree of
translation was signed in 1441, though Eugenius stayed in Florence till the
beginning of 1443.
2 For these negotiations see Piickert, Die KurfiirstlicJie Neutralit at, 170, &c.
FEEDEEICK III. AND THE EIVAL POPES. 221
cathedral by the Bishop as being excommunicated. At Frank
fort the Archbishop of Palermo harangued the royal commis
sioners for three days, and Cusa, not to be outdone, did the
same. The weary commissioners asked that the arguments
might be reduced to writing, which was done. On Frederick's
return, July 8, they were laid before him, and the business of
the Diet commenced. The plan of the five Electors for recog
nising Eugenius was, under Frederick's influence, laid aside.
At Aachen he had signed a treaty with Zurich to help him to
recover his ancestral domains. The Electors agreed to stand
by their King, and leave in his hands the decision of the eccle
siastical question.
The policy adopted at Frankfort did not in its contents German
differ from that previously followed. Envoys were to be sent to tolhe^w
Eugenius and to Basel, urging the summons of an undoubted p°Pes-
Council. But the object of this new embassy was the glorifica
tion of the new King of the Romans. Six places wTere proposed
for the Council, all in Germany, because in Germany was
greater liberty and security than in other kingdoms, where
war prevailed and scarcity was felt. Punctilious orders were
given to the ambassadors as to the manner in which they were
to observe the neutrality. Eugenius IV. was to be treated with
the ordinary respect due to the rank which he had held before
the declaration of neutrality. Felix V. was not to be treated as
Pope. Everything was done to convince both parties that they
must submit their cause to the decision of the German King.
From Frankfort Frederick III. made a kingly progress Answer
through Elsass and the Swiss Cantons, which received him council
with due respect. He was accompanied by the Cardinal of
Aries, and proposals were made to him for a marriage with Mar
garet, the daughter of Felix V., and widow of Louis of Anjou.
Frederick III. does not seem to have rejected the proposal.
It suited him to take no decisive steps. He promised to visit
Basel, but demanded that first his ambassadors should be
heard, and an answer be returned by the Council, which, sorely
against its will, was driven to consider the proposal of the Diet.
After many discussions and many complaints, the Council
answered that, though they were lawfully assembled and en
joyed full security at Basel, and would run many dangers in
changing their place, still, in their desire for peace, they were
222
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Frederick
III. in
Basel.
November
1442.
Answer of
Eugenius
IV.
December
1442.
willing to agree to the King's proposal, provided the King and
princes would promise obedience to all the decrees of the new
Council, and also would agree to choose the place of its meeting
from a list which the fathers in Basel would submit. It was clear
that such reservations made their concession entirely futile.
On receiving this answer Frederick III. entered Basel on
November 11, and was honourably received by the Council. He
maintained, however, an attitude of strict neutrality, and visited
Felix V. on the understanding that he was not to be expected
to pay him reverence as Pope. The interview took place in
the evening ; Felix V. appeared in Papal dress, with his nine
cardinals, and the cross carried before him. The Bishop of
Chiemsee on Frederick's behalf explained his master's attitude,
and was careful to address Felix as c your benignity,' not
' your holiness.' Nothing was gained by the interview. Fre
derick was respectful, but nothing more. The marriage project
did not progress, though Felix is said to have offered a dowry
of 200,000 gold ducats provided he was recognised as Pope.
Frederick left Basel on November 17, saying, < Other Popes
have sold the rights of the Church ; Felix would buy them,
could he find a seller.' l
The German envoys to Eugenius IV. were referred to a
commission, chief amongst whom was the canonist, John of
Torquemada, who raised many technical objections to their
proposals. But Eugenius IV. refused to take advantage of the
technicalities of the Commission. On December 8 he gave a
decided answer. He wondered at the demand for an undoubted
Council, seeing that he was then holding a Council which had
done great things for Christendom, and to call it doubtful was
nothing less than to oppose the Catholic faith. He did not call
Frederick by his title of King, but spoke only of ' the Electors
and him whom they had elected.' He was willing to summon
more prelates to his Council at the Lateran, and leave them to
decide whether any further steps were necessary. The answers
of the Pope and the Council were formally reported to the
envoys of the King and some of the princes at Niirnberg on
February 1, 1443. They deferred their consideration to a Diet
to be held in six months ; but they fixed no place for its meet
ing. In fact, the German Electors were rapidly falling away
1 Mu. Sylvius, De Dictis Alfonsi, lib. II. 46.
LEAGUE OF THE ELECTORS FOR FELIX V. 223
from their mediatorial attitude, which had never been very
genuine. No sooner had Frederick III. succeeded in checking
their league in favour of Eugenius IV. than a new league was League of
formed in behalf of Felix V. The personal and family rela- in favour of
tionships of the House of Savoy naturally began to tell upon 3* v*
the German princes. A man who had a dowry of 200,000
ducats at his disposal was not likely to be without friends. In
December 1442 negotiations were set on foot for a marriage
between the son of the Elector of Saxony and a niece of Felix V.
The Archbishop of Trier was busy in the matter, and stipulated
for his reward at the expense of the Church. The Archbishop
of Koln was a declared adherent of the Council. These Electors
were indifferent which Pope was recognised ; they only bar
gained that the victory should be won by their help, and that
they should be rewarded by an increase of their power and im
portance. It was hopeless to attempt to secure for Felix V.
universal recognition ; but it would answer their purpose if he
obtained by their means a really important position.1 A league
in favour of Felix V. was definitely formed, and its success de
pended upon obtaining the support of Frederick III. or of the
French King.
The plan dearest to Frederick III. was the recovery of the Frederick
old possessions of the House of Habsburg from the Swiss '
Confederates. His alliance with Zurich and his march through Confedi J^
the lands of the Cantons was regarded by Frederick III. as
an important step. But the jealousy of the Confederates was
easily aroused, and the quarrels which had urged Ziirich to seek
alliance with Frederick soon revived. Zurich was called upon to
renounce her alliance with Austria, and on her refusal was at
tacked. The war was waged with savage determination. Zurich
was overmatched in numbers but trusted to Austrian help. Fre
derick III. could raise no forces in his own dominions, where he
had troubles on every side. The German princes refused to send
troops to prosecute a private quarrel of their King. A crushing
defeat on July 22, 1143, threatened Zurich with destruction,
and Frederick III., in his desire for aid, turned to the French
King, and begged to have the loan of some of the disbanded
soldiers, who were the miserable legacy to France of the long
English war. These Armagnacs, as they were called after their
former leader, were a formidable element in the French king-
1 Cf. for these negotiations, Piickcrt, Die KurfiinstU-che Nnttralitat, p. 195, &c.
224
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Plans of
Frederick
III. meet
with no
success.
dom, and Charles VII. was willing enough to lend them to his
neighbours. But he also was ready to fish in troubled waters ;
and the embarrassments of the Empire suggested to him that
he might extend his frontier towards the Rhine. Instead of
5,000 troops, as Frederick III. demanded, he sent 30,000 ;
instead of lending them to the Austrian general, he sent them
under the command of the Dauphin. Eugenius IV. tried to use
this opportunity for his own purposes. He conferred on the
Dauphin the title of gonfalonier of the Church, with a salary of
15,000 florins, in hopes that he would attack Basel and disperse
the Council.1 In August 1444 the French marched through
Elsass, took Miimpelgard, and, spreading devastation in their
way, advanced towards Basel. In a bloody battle on the little
river Birs by the cemetery of S. Jacob, not far from the
walls of Basel, a body of 1,500 Confederates fought for ten
hours against the overwhelming forces of the French. They
were cut to pieces almost to a man ; but the victory was so
dearly bought that the Dauphin made no further attempts to
conquer Basel, or to fight another battle against the troops of
the Cantons. He made peace with the Confederates through
the mediation of the fathers of the Council, and retired into
Elsass, where his troops pillaged at will.2
This was the. state of things when, at the beginning of
August 1444, Frederick III. at last arrived at Niirnberg, to be
present, as he had so often promised, at a Diet which was to
settle the affairs of the Church. He had during the past year
sent letters to the princes of Europe, begging them to consent
to a General Council, which he, following the example of the
Emperors Constantine and Theodosius, proposed to summon.
He received dubious answers ; it was clear that such a Council
was impossible. The French King,c in his answer, said that
it would be better to drop the name of a Council, and bring
about an assembly of secular princes ; where were the princes,
there was also the Church.3 ^Eneas Sylvius expresses the same
1 Raynaldus, sab anno 1444, No. 13.
2 For this interesting episode in Swiss history see Miiller, Geschickte der
Schweizerisclien Mdgenossensckaft, Bk. III. pt. ii. ch. x. ; or more in detail,
Barthold, in Historisches Taschenbuck, 1844 ; Tuetey, Les Ecorcheurs, Mont-
beliard, 1874.
1 ^En. Syl., Com. in Fea., 84: « Kelinquendum esse concilii nomen; con-
venire principes bonuna esse et in rebus ecclesiae sese aperire atque com-
DIET OF NUKNBERG, 1444. 225
opinion still more forcibly : ' I do not see any clergy who would
suffer martyrdom for one side or the other. We all have the
same faith as our rulers, and if they were to turn idolaters, we
would do so too. We would abjure not only a Pope, but Christ
Himself at their bidding. For love has waxed cold, and faith
is dead.' 1 Fortified by the proposition of the French King,
Frederick III. put off his presence at a Diet till the need had
grown urgent. He went to Niirnberg more interested about
Swiss affairs than about the position of the Church.
On August 1 Frederick III. arrived in Niirnberg, where the Dj.et of
Electors of Trier, Saxony and Brandenburg, awaited him, and August^'
were soon joined by the Archbishop of Mainz. Many of the l
chief German princes were also there, Frederick's first desire
was to get help from the Diet against the Swiss Confederates ;
but in this he was coldly listened to, and when the news of the
battle on the Birs reached Niirnberg the King was placed in a
sorry predicament.2 The hungry bands of France had ravaged
the possessions of the Empire, and the Dauphin was already
negotiating peace with the enemies of Austria, whom he had
been summoned to overthrow. Frederick, crimson with shame,
had to listen to reproaches which he could not answer. The
only lesson which he learned from them was not to face another
Diet, a lesson which for the next twenty-seven years he stead
fastly practised. The Diet appointed the Pfalzgraf Lewis general
of the army of the Empire against < the strangers from France.'
Frederick III., by his supineness, had lost his control over the
German princes. A proposition which he put forward about
ecclesiastical matters — to extend the neutrality for a year, and
proclaim a Council to meet on October 1, 1445, at Constance,
or, failing that, at Augsburg — was not accepted. The Diet
separated without coming to any joint decision. The discord
between the King and the Electors had at length become
manifest.
Moreover, at Niirnberg the Pfalzgraf Lewis had been won
over to the side of Felix V. by a marriage contract with Mar-
ponere; nihil se dubitare ubi essent principes quin illic ecclesia esset,
conventumque illorum nullum probibere posse.'
1 Mn. Syl., Epistolce, No. 54, ed. Basel.
2 Mn. Sylvius, who was at Niirnberg, gives an account of the news that
reached him, Ep. 87.
VOL. II. Q
226
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
s , — -
Felix V.
deserts the
Council of
Basel.
1443.
Death of
Cardinal
Vitelleschi.
1440.
garet, the daughter of Felix, whom Frederick III. had refused.
Four of the six Electors were now leagued together in favour of
Felix. It was a question how far they would succeed. The
dispute between the two Popes had passed into the region of
mere political expediency and personal intrigue. The whole
matter was felt to centre in Germany, and in the midst of
these political intrigues the Council of Basel sunk to insig
nificance. Felix V. had found that the Council was useless
to him, as well as irksome. Towards the end of 1443 he
quitted Basel on the ground of health, and took up his abode
at Lausanne. There he might live in peace, and be rid of the
expense which the Council perpetually caused him.1 Forsaken
by the Pope of its own choice, the Council became a mere
shadow. Its zeal and energy had been expended to little
abiding purpose. After a glorious beginning, it had gone hope
lessly astray, and had lost itself in a quagmire from which
there was no escape.
The hopes of Felix V. entirely rested on Grermany. Euge-
nius IV. relied upon the revival of his prestige, as sure to tell
upon Italian politics, in which the Papacy was a necessary
element to maintain the balance of power. In Italy Eugenius
IV. had been slowly gaining ground. In 1434 the condottiere
bishop, Giovanni Vitelleschi, had taken possession of Rome in the
Pope's name, and ruled it with severity. Francesco Sforza had,
however, gained a firm hold of the March of Ancona. The
Duke of Milan encouraged Bologna in 1438 to throw off the
Papal yoke, and declare itself independent ; its example was
followed by Faenza, Imola, and Forli. The condottiere general,
Mccolo Piccinino, in league with the Duke of Milan, beguiled
Eugenius IV. into a belief that he was going against Sforza
in the March. Suddenly he showed himself in his true colours,
and prepared to enrich himself at the Pope's expense. More
over, he planned an invasion of the Florentine territory, and
was supposed to have drawn to his side the Papal general,
1 One of the few remaining memorials of the connexion of Felix V. with
Basel is a bell in the Cathedral, which bears the following quaint inscrip-
.tion: —
' Te, pia Virgo, colo ; tibi me dat Papa, Maria ;
Hie Felix quintus, qui germinat ut terebinthus,
Me fieri fecit ; Felix vocor : is sine v<& sit :
M, cum C quater X post tot, I jungito duplex,
DEATH OF CARDINAL VITELLESCHI. 227
Vitelleschi. Vitelleschi with a strong hand introduced order CHAP.
into Rome and the neighbourhood ; he even waged war against ^_J^___^
Alfonso in Naples. He enjoyed to the full the confidence
of Eugenius IV., over whom he had greater influence than
anyone else, and by whom he was created cardinal in 1437.
Vitelleschi was a condottiere influenced by the same ambitions
as Sforza and Piccinino, and in Kome he held an independent
position which tempted him to act on his own account. He
was known to be bitterly hostile to Sforza, and was nego
tiating with Piccinino for the overthrow of their rival. When
Eugenius IV. summoned to the aid of the Florentines the
Pontifical forces under the leadership of Vitelleschi, the cautious
Florentine magistrates were alarmed lest the understanding
between the two condottieri might prove stronger than Vitel-
leschi's obedience to the Pope. They laid before Eugenius IV.
intercepted letters of Vitelleschi to Piccinino. The favourite
had many foes among the Cardinals, who succeeded in per
suading the Pope that Vitelleschi was a traitor. But Euge
nius IV. dared not proceed openly against a powerful general.
Secret orders were sent to Antonio Redo, captain of the Castle
of S. Angelo, to take him prisoner. On the morning of
his departure for Tuscany Vitelleschi came to give his last
orders to the commander of the Castle ; suddenly the draw
bridge was raised, and Vitelleschi was wounded in three places.
He was made prisoner, and resigned himself to his fate.
When he was told that his captivity would be brief, as the
Pope would soon be convinced of his innocence, he answered,
' One who has done such deeds as mine ought either never
to have been imprisoned, or can never be released.' He died
on April 2, 1440, and the rumour spread that his death was
due to poison, and not to his wounds.1 At all events, the
Florentines were glad to be rid of Vitelleschi, and managed to
persuade the Pope to appoint as his successor a man whom they
could trust, Ludovico Scarampo, who had formerly been Arch
bishop of Florence. In June 1440 Eugenius IV. conferred on
Scarampo and his own nephew, Pietro Barbo, the dignity of
cardinal.
The fall of Vitelleschi freed Florence from the fear of
1 Poggio, Hist. Flor., bk. vii. Platina, in Vita Euyenii. Bonincontrii,
Annales, Mur. xxi. HI). Potronius, Mur. xxiv. 1123.
Q 2
228
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
Peace in
North
Italy. 1441,
Alfonso
enters
Naples.
June 1442.
Departure
of Eu
genius IV.
from Flor
ence.
March
1443.
Piccinino, for it restored the balance between him and his
rival Sforza. But the Duke of Milan was growing weary of the
indecisive war which he had been waging against the League of
Venice, Florence, and the Pope. Sforza and Piccinino had won
all that for a time they were likely to hold. All parties wished
for peace, which was concluded at Cremona in November 1441,
on the usual terms that each should keep what they had won.
Sforza also received in marriage the illegitimate daughter of
the Duke of Milan, Bianca, whose hand had often been pro
mised him, and often refused. Eugenius IV. alone was dis
contented ; for Sforza was left in possession of the March of
Ancona and other conquests in the States of the Church.
In Naples also the Angevin party, which Eugenius IV. sup
ported, was gradually giving way before the energy of Alfonso.
In 1442 Rene was driven into Naples and there was be
sieged. His only hope was to gain assistance from Sforza ; but
the Duke of Milan, jealous of his powerful son-in-law, set
Piccinino to keep him in check, and Eugenius IV., who now
saw in Sforza his chief enemy, was only too glad to do his part
of fulminating against him.1 Alfonso pressed the siege of
Naples, which he entered on June 2, 1442. Rene was driven
to flee from the Castel Nuovo, where the superb triumphal arch
in the inner doorway still stands to commemorate the entrance
of Alfonso.2 Rene fled on board a Genoese galley to Florence,
where he received the Pope's condolences, and afterwards betook
himself to his county of Provence.
The fall of the Angevin party in Naples greatly affected the
policy and position of Eugenius IV. He had little to expect
from France, whose position towards the Papacy was now de
clared. On the other hand, he had much to gain from Alfonso,
and Alfonso had shown by his dealings with the Council of
Basel that his chief object was to bring the Pope to terms. By
an alliance with Alfonso, Eugenius could obtain help against
Sforza, and could also pave the way for a peaceful return to
1 Eaynaldus, 1442, 11. In this Bull of deprivation Eugenius recapitulates
all his wrongs at the hands of Sforza.
2 This splendid example of Kenaissance architecture is assigned by Vasari
to Giuliano da Majano, but the inscription in S. Maria Nuova on the grave of
the Milanese sculptor, Pietro cli Martino, claims it for him. The frieze
represents Alfonso in his triumphal car followed by his Court, the city
magistrates arid clergy.
RETURN OF EUGENIUS IV. TO ROME. 229
Eome. He had begun to feel that in a contest against a
pretender the establishment of his Curia in Rome would add to
his prestige. He had already decreed the adjournment of his
Council from Florence to the Lateran, and it was worth while
to make his hold on Eome secure. Moreover, he had gained
little by his alliance with Florence and Venice ; in the peace of
1441 they had regarded only their own interests and had paid
no heed to his desires. Accordingly Eugenius IV. negotiated
with Alfonso to recognise him in Naples, and legitimatize his son
Ferrante, on condition that Alfonso helped him against Sforza.
As this was a step alienating himself from the League and from
Florence, Eugenius IV. found it desirable to leave Florence on
March 7, 1443. The Venetians urged the Florentines to keep
him prisoner, and only on the morning of his departure did the
Florentines determine to let him go.1 Yet the final departure
was courteous on both sides, and Eugenius IV. thanked the
magistracy for their hospitality. He betook himself to Siena,
a city hostile to Florence, and, by so doing, gave a clear indi
cation of his change of policy.
In Siena Eugenius IV. was honourably received, and con-
eluded his negotiations with Alfonso. He also had an interview
with Piccinino, and doubtless devised with him schemes against September
their common enemy Sforza. On September 13 he set out for
Rome, where he arrived on September 28, after an absence of
eight years. The Romans received their Pope with acquies
cence, but without enthusiasm. Eugenius IV. settled down
quietly into his capital, and proceeded at once to open his
Council in the Lateran. But the Council of the Lateran was
an empty form maintained against the Council of Basel, which
was now weakened by the defection of Scotland, and Castile, as
well as Aragon. Eugenius IV. trusted to diplomacy to destroy
the last hope of Felix V., by driving Frederick III. to abandon /\[2
the Grerman neutrality. Meanwhile in Italy he had important
work to do in using his new allies as a means of recovering from
Sforza his possessions in the States of the Church.
In Italy circumstances favoured the Pope's policy. The
1 Vespasiano da Bisticci, Vita di Agnolo Acciaiiwli. < La mattina che si
parti papa Eugenio da Firenze, era stata grandissima disputazione di lasciarlo
o non lasciarlo partire ; perchk i Vineziani facevano quello che poterono che i
Fiorentini lo ritenessino per forza.' See also Vespasiano's Vita di Lionardo
irArezzo.
230
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK
III.
s. , —
Death of
Piccinino.
October
1444.
suspicious Duke of Milan was always jealous of his powerful
son-in-law, and wished to keep him in check. Alfonso of Naples
was true to his agreement with the Pope, and in August 1443
marched against Sforza. He was joined by Piccinino, and their
combined army is said to have numbered 24,000 men, against
which Sforza could only command 8,000. Sforza resolved to
act on the defensive and secure his chief cities by garrisons ; but
many of the leaders in whom he trusted betrayed his cause.
His ruin seemed imminent, when suddenly the Duke of Milan
interposed on his behalf. He wished to see his son-in-law
humbled, but not destroyed, and so prevailed on Alfonso to with
draw his troops. Sforza was now a match for Piccinino, and
succeeded in defeating him in battle on November 8. But Pic
cinino was rich in the resources of Eugenius IV., while Sforza
s uffered from want of money . Both sides retired into winter
quarters, and as spring approached Piccinino had a superior
force at his command. Again the Duke of Milan interposed,
and invited Piccinino to a conference on important affairs. No
sooner was Piccinino absent than Sforza hastened to seize the
opportunity. He gathered together his starving troops, and
told them that now was their last chance of wealth and victory.
His skilful generalship outmatched Piccinino's son, who, with
the Papal legate, Cardinal Capranica, was left in charge of the
troops of the Church. Piccinino, already an old man, had gone
to Milan with sad forebodings ; he was so overwhelmed with the
news of this defeat, that he died of a broken heart on October
25, 1444. He was a marvellous instance of the power of genius
over adverse circumstances. Small in stature, crippled through
paralysis so that he could scarcely walk, he could direct
campaigns with unerring skill ; though devoid of eloquence or
personal gifts, he could inspire his soldiers with confidence and
enthusiasm. He was impetuous and daring, and showed to the
greatest advantage in adversity. But he lacked the consistent
policy of Sforza, and saw, in his last days, that he had founded
no lasting power. With his death his army fell in pieces, and
no captain was left in Italy to match the might of Sforza.1
When the fortunes of war had begun to turn against the
Pope, Venice and Florence joined with the Duke of Milan in
urging peace, which was accepted on condition that each party
1 See Decembrio Candido's Vita Niccolai Piccinini, in Muratori, vol. xx.
EUGENIUS IV. AND FRANCESCO SFORZA. 231
should retain what it held on October 18. Sforza employed CHAP.
the eight days that intervened between the conclusion of the > _^ ,
peace and the date for its operation in recovering most of the p°^secs0of
cities which had been won for the Pope. Eugenius IV. only Sforza.
retained Ancona, Kecanati, Osimo, and Fabriano, and they were
to remain tributary to Sforza.1 His first attempt against the
powerful condottiere had not met with much success. Next
year, however, he was again prepared to take advantage of
another quarrel which had arisen between Sforza and the Duke
of Milan, and war again broke out. Bologna, which had been
in the hands of Piccinino, proclaimed its independence under
the leadership of Annibale Bentivoglio; but the Pope and
the Duke of Milan both looked with suspicion on the in
dependence of a city which each wished to bring under his
own sway. In June, 1445, a band of conspirators, supported
by the Duke of Milan, assassinated Annibale Bentivoglio after
a baptism where he had been invited to act as godfather to the
son of their ringleader. But their plan of seizing the city
failed. The people were true to the house of Bentivoglio, and
slew the assassins of Annibale. Florence and Venice came
to their help. There was again war in Italy with Sforza,
Florence, and Venice on one side, the Pope, Naples, and Milan
on the other. Again Sforza was hard pressed, and the Papal
troops overran the March of Ancona. In June, 1446, Sforza
made a raid in the direction of Eome, and penetrated as far as
Viterbo. But the cities shut their gates against him, and he had
no means of besieging them.2 Sforza's ruin seemed certain ;
Jesi was the only town in the March which he held. But
luckily for him the Venetians took this opportunity to attack
the Duke of Milan, who, being ill provided with generals,
needed the help of Sforza, whose ambition was henceforward
turned to a nobler prize than the March of Ancona, which fell
back peaceably into the hands of the Pope.
Thus Eugenius IV., by stubborn persistency, succeeded in Theoio-
repairing the mischief of his first political indiscretion, and fctiontn
obtained again a secure position in Italy, while the mistakes of favour of
the Council had done much to restore his ecclesiastical power, iv.
which had been so dangerously threatened. The leading theo
logians of the Council had been driven to quit it and range
1 Simoneta, Vita Sforzcr, Muratori, xxi. 361. 2 Ibid. Mur. xxi. 377.
232 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
BOOK themselves on the side of the Pope ; only John of Segovia and
r^ — • John of Palomar remained true to the principles with which the
Council opened. It is noticeable that the great advocate of the
Council's power, Nicolas of Cusa, was now the chief emissary of
Eugenius IV. Cusa had been taught in the school of Deventer,
and came to Basel deeply imbued with the mystic theology of
the Brethren of the Common Life. His work, 6 De Concordantia
Catholica,'1 written in 1433, represented the ideal of the re
forming party, a united Church reformed in soul and body, in
priesthood and laity, by the action of a Council which should
represent on earth the eternal unity of Heaven. Cusa's work
was the text-book of the Council ; yet its author was disillu
sioned, and found his theories fade away. He quitted Basel
with Cesarini, and in common with others who felt that they
had been led away by their enthusiasm, laboured to restore the
Papal power which once he had striven to upset. The Council
of Florence gathered round the Pope an extraordinary number
of learned theologians, whose efforts were now devoted to the
restoration of the Papacy. Again, after the interval of a cen
tury and a half, the pens of canonists were engaged in extolling
the Papal supremacy. John of Torquemada, a Spanish Domin
ican, whom Eugenius IV. raised to the Cardinalate, revived the
doctrine of the plenitude of the Papal power, and combated the
claims of a General Council to rank as superior to the Pope.2
Now, as in other times, the immediate results of an attack upon
the Papal supremacy was to gather round the Papacy a serried
band of ardent supporters ; if the outward sphere of the exercise
of the Papal authority was limited, the theoretic basis of the
authority itself was made stronger for those who still upheld it.
These labours of theologians were to bear their fruits in
after times. The immediate question for Felix V. and Euge
nius IV. was the attitude of Germany towards their conflicting
claims. Grermany was to be their battlefield, and diplomacy
their arms.
1 See Cusani, Opera, Basil, 1565, vol. ii., and Diix, Nicolas von Cusa, ii.
252, &c.
2 Summa de ecclesia et ejus auctoritate (Venice, 1561); also De summa
potentate pontiji cis et generalis concilii, in Labbe, xiii., and Mansi, xxx.
BOOK IV.
THE PAPAL EESTOBATION.
1444_1464,
CHAPTER I.
.ENEAS SYLVIUS PICCOLOMINI AND THE RESTORATION OF THE
OBEDIENCE OF GERMANY.
1444-1447.
THE man who played the chief part in settling the ecclesiastical
affairs of Germany was JEneas Sylvius Piccolomini, whose life
was closely connected with the fortunes of the Papacy in this Early life
crisis, and whose character reflects almost every tendency of Sylvius
the age in which he lived. ^lo"
jEneas Sylvius was born at Corsignano, a village near Monte- 1405-1451.
pulciano, in the year 1405, of the noble but decayed family of
the Piccolomini. He was one of a family of eighteen, of whom
only two daughters besides himself reached the age of maturity.
As a youth .ZEneas helped his father to work in the fields, and
picked up such education as his native village afforded. At the
age of eighteen he left home, and with scanty provision of money
betook himself to the University of Siena. There he applied
himself diligently to study. Mariano Sozzini taught him civil
law ; the preaching of S. Bernardino kindled in him for a brief
space the fervour of monastic devotion. The fame of Francesco
Filelfo as a lecturer in Greek literature drew him for two years
to Florence.1 At last he settled in Siena as a teacher. But
Siena was soon involved in war with Florence, and the pros
pects of literature seemed dark, when, in 1431, Domenico Ca-
pranica, on his way to Basel, needed a secretary, and offered the
post to JEneas. The journey to Basel was difficult , as North Italy
was involved in war. ./Eneas took ship at Piombino, and was
nearly shipwrecked in a storm which suddenly arose. At last
he reached Genoa in safety, and travelled through Milan and
1 From a letter of Filelfo, quoted by Voigt, p. 17.
236
THE PAPAL BESTOKATION.
BOOR over the S. Grothard to Basel, where he arrived in the spring
of 1432.
Capranica received from the Council the dignity of Car-
1432-1435. dinal ; but Eugenius IV. refused him its revenues, and he could
not long afford to keep a secretary. ^Eneas found a new
master in Nicodemo della Scala, Bishop of Freisingen, and when
he left Basel, transferred himself to the service of the Bishop
of Novara, with whom he went to Milan, and gained an
insight into the policy of the crafty Visconti. The Bishop of
Novara was one of the Duke's confidential agents, and sent
JEneas to the camp of Mccolo Piccinino, while he himself at
Florence plotted against the life of Eugenius IV., in 1435.
When the plot was discovered, and the Bishop of Novara's life
was in danger, JEneas took refuge with Cardinal Albergata, a
man of strict monastic piety, whom Eugenius IV. sent as one
of his legates to preside over the Council of Basel. On his
journey thither Albergata visited Amadeus of Savoy in Eipaille,
and ^Eneas was more impressed with the luxury than with the
piety of Amadeus' retreat. From Basel JEneas accompanied
Albergata to the Congress of Arras, where he had ample oppor
tunities of learning the political condition of France and
England. From Arras he was sent on a secret mission to the
Scottish King,1 most probably for the purpose of instigating him
to act as a check upon England, in case the resentment of the
English King were aroused by the pacification of Arras, which
was detrimental to English interests.
The remarks on England and Scotland made by the keen-
sighted Italian are interesting, not only in, themselves, but
as showing the quickening power which the new learning had
given to the faculty of observation. Men's interests were rapidly
enlarging, their curiosity was awakened, they looked on the
world as their dwelling-place, and all things human had an
attraction for their own sake. ./Eneas writes in the spirit of a
modern traveller, and his picture is vivid and precise. He went
to Calais, but was suspected by the English, who would neither
allow him to go on nor return. At length the interference of
1 In Pii II. Commentarii, the reason ^Eneas gives is ' qui pnelatum quern-
dam in regis gratiam reduceret.' In De Viris Claris, xxxii. he says, 'pro li-
beratione cujusdam captivi.' Campanus, Vita Pii, says, 'ad Eegem adversns
citeriores Britannos qni paci adversabantur sollicitandum.'
n
England
and Scot
land. 1435.
JENEAS SYLVIUS IN SCOTLAND. 237
the Cardinal of Winchester enabled him to set sail for London. CHAP.
London struck him as the wealthiest and most populous city he *•
had seen. He admired the grandeur of St. Paul's Cathedral,
and in the sacristy was shown a Latin translation of Thucydides,
which, he says, dated from the ninth century.1 He was struck by
the noble river Thames and the old London Bridge, covered with
houses, like a city in itself. He heard and recorded the legend
that the men of Strood were born with tails. But, above all
else, he was amazed by the shrine of S. Thomas at Canterbury,
covered with diamants, pearls, and carbuncles, to which nothing
less precious than silver was offered. He failed, however, in the
object of his visit, as the English Court was too suspicious of
the secretary of Cardinal Albergata to give him a safe-conduct
to Scotland. ^Eneas was obliged to return to Bruges ; but,
determined not to be baffled, he again took ship at Sluys and
set sail for Scotland. A terrible storm drove the ship to Nor
way, and only after a voyage of twelve days did ^Eiieas land at
Dun bar. He had made a vow in his peril to walk barefoot to
the nearest shrine of Our Lady. A pilgrimage of ten miles to
the shrine of Whitekirk, through the snow and ice, was the be
ginning of an attack of gout in the feet, from which he suffered
for the rest of his life.
/Eneas describes Scotland as a cold, barren, treeless country. ^Eneas's
Its towns were un walled ; the houses were built without mortar, ^j,^.1
were roofed with turf, and had doors of ox-hide. The people land-
were poor and rough ; the men small but courageous, the women
fair and amorously disposed. The Italian was surprised at the
freedom of manners in the intercourse of the sexes. The Scots
exported hides, wool, and salt fish to Flanders ; they had better
oysters than England. The Highland and the Lowland Scots
spoke a different language ; and the Highlanders lived on bark
of trees. They dug a sulphurous stone out of the ground which
they used for fuel. In winter their daylight lasted scarcely
more than four hours. There was nothing the Scots heard
with greater pleasure than abuse of the English.
was well received by the Scottish King, who gave him
, cxxvi. ed. Basil. 'Apud Angliam in sacrario nobilis sedis S.
Pauli Londiniensis vetus historia in manus venit, ante annos sexcentos, ut
signatnm erat, conscripta. . . . Auctor historic Thucydides Grtecus annotai us
erat, quern fama celebrem clarum novimus, Iranslatoris nulluru. noineu
inveni.'
238 THE PAPAL KESTORATION.
BOOK fifty nobles and two horses.1 When he had done his business, the
^ *y- , captain of the ship, in which he had come, offered him a passage
back. But ^Eneas had had enough experience of the North Sea,
and determined to return through England. The ship set sail
and was wrecked before his eyes in sight of land. The captain,
who was going home to be married, and all the crew, save four,
were drowned. Thankful for his providential escape, ^Eneas,
disguised as a merchant, crossed the Tweed, and entered
the wild border country. He spent a troubled night amid a
throng of barbarous people who encamped, rather than lived,
in the desolate plain of Northumberland. When night came on,
the men departed to a tower of defence, fearing a possible raid
of the Scots. They left the women, saying that the Scots would
not injure them, and refused to take .ZEneas with them. He and
his three attendants stayed amid some hundred women who
huddled round the watch fire. In the night an alarm was
raised that the Scots were coming. The women fled ; but ^Eneas,
fearing he might lose his way, took refuge in a stable. It was,
however, a false alarm, as the approaching band turned out to
be friends not foes. At dawn he set out for Newcastle, and saw
the mighty tower which Caesar had built. Here once more he
was in a civilised country. At Durham he admired the tomb of
the Venerable Bede. He found York a large and populous city,
with a cathedral memorable throughout the world, with glass
walls between slender pillars.2 He travelled to London with
one of the Justices in Eyre, who, little suspecting the real
character of his companion, denounced to ^Eneas the wicked
machinations of Cardinal Albergata at Arras. In London
yEneas found that a royal order forbade any foreigner to sail
1 It is curious how ^Eneas picked up odd scraps of information. He says :
* Cornicem novam esse, atque idcirco arborem in qua nidificaverit, regio fisco
cedere.' This seems unintelligible ; yet a law was passed in the first Parlia
ment of James I., 1424, Acts and Constitutions of Scotland, folio v. 1556, B. 1 :
' Of bigging of Kuikis in Treis, Ca., xxi. Item, forthy that me considderis
that Ruikis biggand in Kirkis, Zairdis, Orchardis, or Treis, dois greit skaith
apone Cornis, It is ordanit, that thay, that sie Treis pertenis to, lat thame to
big, and suffer on na wyse that thair Birdis fle away. And quhair it be tain-
tit that thay big, and the Birdis be nowin, and the nest be f undin in the Treis
at Beltane,the Treis sal be forfaltit to the King and hewin down, and v. s. to the
kingis unlaw.' ' Beltane ' seems to be the name of an old pagan festival which
was transferred to Whitsunday.
2 ' Sacellum lucidissimum, cujus parietes vitrei inter columnas ad medium
tenerissimas colligati tenentur.' — Com. 5.
AENEAS SYLVIUS AT BASEL. 239
without the King's permission. A judicious bribe overcame CHAP.
the guards of the harbour. JEneas set sail from Dover, and ._ ^.__^
made his way safely to Basel.
For a time ^Eneas remained at Basel, where he led a jovial ^Eneas a
and careless life, making himself agreeable to men of all parties, the Council
and gaining a reputation for his elegant Latinity. When the
combat between Pope and Council broke out, he was driven to
take a side ; but he did so dispassionately, with a clear perception
of the selfish motives of the various parties.1 He first came
prominently forward in an eloquent speech in favour of Pavia
as a meeting place with the Greeks ; by this step he hoped to
win the favour of the Duke of Milan, whose character he well
knew. He was thanked by the Duke, and won the favour of the
Archbishop of Milan, who presented him, though a layman, to
a provostship in the Church of S. Lorenzo in Milan. To hold
this as a layman, and without capitular election, he needed a
dispensation from the Council, which had just prohibited the
Pope from similar abuses in conferring patronage. There were
many who grudged the young favourite his success, and the
application met with some opposition in a general congregation.
But the honeyed tongue of JEneas won the day : * You will act,
fathers, as you think fit ; but, if you decide in my favour, I would
prefer this token of your good will without possession of the pro
vostship to its possession by any capitular election.' After this
the objectors were silenced by a shout of applause, and ^Eneas
obtained his dispensation. When he reached Milan, he found
another in possession, by the nomination of the Duke and the
election of the Chapter ; but ^Eneas won over the Duke, as he had
won over the Council, and his rival was forced to give way. On
his return to Basel he was nominated by the Archbishop of
Milan to preach before the Council on the feast of S. Ambrose.
The theologians were scandalised at this preference of a layman,
but the Council enjoyed the polished rhetoric of ^Eneas more
than the ponderous and shapeless erudition of men like John
of Segovia.
^Eneas was now bound to the Council by his provostship,
and showed himself a keen partisan. His pen was busily
employed in attacking Eugenius IV. In the Council he was a
1 ' Apud quern sit veritas Dens viderit : ego non video neque, si video,
scribere ausim,' be writes in May, 1437. Mansi, xxxi., 227.
240
THE PAPAL KESTOEATION.
BOOK
IV.
./Eneas
crowned
poet by
Frederick
III. June
1442.
person of importance, and held high positions. He was often
one of the Committee of Twelve which regulated its affairs.
He often presided over the Deputation of Faith. He went on
several embassies into Germany, and accompanied the Bishop
of Novara to Vienna in 1438, to congratulate Albert on his
accession to the throne. On his return to Basel he narrowly
escaped death from the plague ; in fact, the rumour of his death
was spread, and the Duke of Milan took advantage of it to
confer his provostship of S. Lorenzo on a nominee of Eugenius
IV. The policy of the Duke had changed ; he was no longer
on the side of the Council, and did not need the services of
^Eneas. The Council was bound to recompense its adherent,
and conferred on ^Eneas a canonry in the Church of Trent.
Again ^Eneas found another in possession, and again he suc
ceeded in ousting him.
Soon after this came the Papal election at Basel. So great
was the reputation of ^Eneas that he was urged to qualify for
the post of an elector by taking orders ; the Council offered
him a dispensation to allow him to proceed on one day to the
sub-diaconate and diaconate. But ^Eneas had no taste for the
restrictions of clerical life, or, at least, did not consider the
inducement to be sufficient to lead him .to undertake them.
He acted, however, as master of ceremonies to the Conclave,
and on the election of Amadeus was one of those deputed by
the Council to escort the new Pope to Basel. Felix V. made
^Eneas one of his secretaries, and it would now seem as though
JEne&s had cast in his lot for life.
^Eneas, however, soon began to see that with the election of
Felix V. the Council had practically abdicated its position.
He did not hope for much from the wisdom or generosity of the
Council's Pope. On all sides he saw that men who had any
future before them were leaving the Council, and joining the
side of Eugenius IV. For himself such a course of conduct
was impossible. He was still a young man, and his reputation
had been entirely made in the democratic surroundings of the
Council. He had made himself remarkable in the eyes of
Eugenius IV. only by the keenness of his attacks upon the
Curia. He had no previous services to plead, no weight to
bring to Eugenius' side, no position which he could use in
Eugenius' favour. It was useless for him to desert to Eugenius,
JENEAS SYLVIUS, SECEETAEY OF FKEDEE1CK III. 241
and equally useless to stay with Felix. In this dilemma he
resolved to identify himself with the neutral policy of Germany J
He took advantage of the negotiations of Felix V. to ingratiate
himself with the Bishop of Chiemsee, one of Frederick's chief
counsellors. The bishop was struck by the cleverness of the
young Italian and his capacity for writing letters. He recom
mended him to his master, and persuaded Frederick. III. to
confer on ./Eneas the ridiculous honour of crowning him with
the laurel wreath as Imperial poet. We cannot guess how
Frederick was induced to revive this distinction, which had
been bestowed on Petrarch ; but ^Eneas was proud of the title
of ' poet,' with which he afterwards adorned his name.2
./Eneas was offered the post of secretary at Frederick's: court;
but he did not deem it judicious to desert abruptly the service
of Felix V. He went back to Basel, and endeavoured to Frederick
persuade Felix that he could serve his interests better at
Vienna than at Basel. He so far prevailed that, when Frederick
visited Basel in 1442, Felix reluctantly gave his consent to this
arrangement, and .Eneas left Basel in Frederick's train never to
return. No sooner had ^Eneas changed his masters than he
changed his opinions also. Felix V. was disappointed if he
thought that the shrewd Italian would have any feeling of
loyalty towards a losing cause. ./Eneas tried to renew his con
nexion with the Duke of Milan, and win back his Milanese
provostship : he loudly proclaimed that under Frederick III,
he identified himself with the policy of neutrality,3
At Vienna ^Eneas found that he had to begin his career
afresh. He was only one amongst a crowd of hungry secretaries,
all aspirants for higher office, and all united in, disliking the
Italian intruder. In the small matters of their common life
JEneas was given the lowest place at table and the worst bed ; he
1 He says so himself in his life of the Bishop of Novara, De Viris Claris, v.
in Mansi, Orationcsiii. 149 : « Cum Felicem omnes relinquerent, nee ejus papa-
turn amplecti vellent, ego ad Fredericum Cassarem me recepi, nee enim volui
statim de parte ad partem transire.'
2 The diploma, dated Frankfort, July 27, 1442, is given in Chmel's
Regesta Frederici III., Anhang, xxix. : ' Nos cxipientes antecessorum nostrorum
imitari vestigia, qui poetas egregios in morem triumphantium, ut accepimus,
solebant in Capitolio coronare . . . convertimus aciem mentis nostne in
poetam eximium et praeclarum ./Eneam Silvium,' &c.
3 See his letter to Bishop of Milan ( Ojj£ra, Basel ed. No, 29), dated Decem.-
ber, 1442 ; also Nos, SO, 53.
VOL. II. K
242 THE PAPAL RESTOKATION.
BOOK was the object of the sarcasms of his companions. But ^Eneas
._ l^' _* bore all things with equanimity, and was content to bide his
time.1 He attached himself to the Chancellor, Kaspar Schlick,
a man whose career had many points in common with his own.
^Eneas and Kaspar Schlick was sprung from a good citizen family in
Schlick. Franconia, and in 1416 entered Sigismund's chancery as a
secretary. He had little learning ; but his native shrewdness
was developed by the teaching of experience, and his industry
recommended him for employment. He went on many
diplomatic missions, and followed Sigismund in his eventful
journeys through Europe. He became Sigismund's trusted
adviser and friend, not only in matters of state, but in the
many amorous intrigues in which Sigismund delighted to en
gage. Sigismund conferred on him riches and distinctions, and
Sigismund's successors found that Schlick's intimate knowledge
of affairs, especially of finance, rendered his services indis
pensable. He continued to be Chancellor under Albert II. and
Frederick III. To him ^Eneas first turned as to a patron,2
and approached him with an elaborate eulogy in Latin verse.
Schlick knew something of JEneas, for during his stay in Siena
with Sigismund he had been entertained by an aunt of ^Eneas,
and had acted as godfather for one of her children. He took
^Eneas under his care, secured him a regular salary, gave him
a place at his own table, and counted on his assistance in
personal matters. Schlick was an ignoble politician; with
much acuteness and great capacity for affairs, he had a narrow
and sordid mind. He was greedy of small gains, and this greed
grew upon him with increasing age ; in all that he did he had
some personal interest to serve. At first ^Eneas wished to play
the part of Horace to a second Maecenas ; but he soon learned
to change his strain, and adapt himself to the requirements of
his patron's practical nature.3 Verses disappeared, and political
jobbery took their place. It was not long before JEneas was re
quired to exercise his ingenuity in the Chancellors behalf. The
1 Com. 9 : ' Cum statuisset malum in bono vincere auriculas declinavit, ut
iniquse mentis asellus, cum gravius dorso subit onus.'
2 See his letter of December 23, 1442, given by Voigt in Arcliiv fur Kunde
OesterreicUsoher Geschickts- Quellen, vol. xvi. p. 338.
3 See his letter No. 102, written in the character of a contented man of
letters seeking only for ease and free from ambition. It ends : ' Et potissime
si tu mihi Gaspar favebis, vitas presidium et dulce decus meum.'
SYLVIUS AT VIENNA. 243
Bishop of Freising died in August 1443, and the Chancellor
wished to obtain the rich bishopric for his brother, Heinrich
Schlick, a man who had nothing but his powerful relationship
to recommend him. The chapter elected Johann Grunwalder,
one of the cardinals of Felix V., a natural son of the Duke of
Baiern-Miinchen, and called on the Council of Basel to con
firm the nomination. -ZEiieas wrote to Cardinal d'Alleinand,
urging the impolicy of alienating so powerful a man as the
Chancellor.1 The Council, however, confirmed the election of
Grunwalder, and Schlick applied to Eugenius IV., who, after
some skilful negotiations, confirmed his brother. The struggle
between the rival claimants lasted for some years ; but its im-
mediate effect was to draw Kaspar Schlick towards the side
of Eugenius IV., and JEneas readily followed his master. After
all his services to the Council, he had neither obtained any
promotion for himself, nor could he help a friend by his
arguments.2
Moreover, at Vienna ^Eneas met Cardinal Cesarini, who had
been appointed by Eugenius IV. legate in Hungary for the
purpose of warring against the Turks. Hungarian affairs
needed rather delicate management at the Court of Vienna.
After the death of Albert II. his wife bore a son, Ladislas, of
whom Frederick III. was guardian. But the Hungarian nobles
did not think it wise to run the risks of a long minority
in such perilous times. They chose as their king Wladislaf
of Poland, and Eugenius IV. approved their choice. Frede
rick III. could not venture on war, and Kaspar Schlick, who
owned lands in Hungary, used his influence on the side of
peace. But it required all Cesarini's tact to reconcile the
positions of the Pope and the King. He was ready to renew
his acquaintance with ^Eneas, treated him as a friend, and
urged him to take the side of Eugenius IV. ^Eneas was
keen-sighted enough to use the opportunity. He saw at
1 Epistola, No. 183.
2 In a letter to a friend at Basel, dated October, 1443, printed by Voigt,
Kundefur Oest. GescMchts- Quellen, xvi. 345, he says : ' Fuerant in hanc sen-
tentiam verba vestra, quaa ultimo ad me pronuntiastis. Basileae, cum diceretis
S. D. nostrum F. (Felicem) mini absenti quarn prassenti de aliquo beneficio
provisurum esse, vestrasque operas ad id spopondistis, cujus rei nullus secutus
est effectus, tametsi multis ego in rebus apud, Ca3sarea,rn. majestatem S. D.
nostro profuerim et dietim prosim.'
244 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK Frederick's Court the immense superiority of the diplomacy
^_iy* _^ of the Papal Curia over that of the Council. The strong cha
racter of Carvajal, the Papal envoy, produced a deep impression
on him.1 ^Eneas let it be understood that he was not indisposed
to help the side of Eugenius IV. when opportunity offered.
He wrote to Carvajal, October 1440, that he assumed an atti
tude of judicious expectancy. ' Here stands ^Eneas in arms,
and he shall be my Anchises whom the consent of the universal
Church shall choose. So long as Grermany, the greater part of
the Christian world, still hesitates, I am in doubt ; but I am
ready to listen to the common judgment, nor in a matter of
faith do I trust myself alone.' 2 In December of the same year
he had so far advanced in his opinions as to advocate the
ending of the schism by any means ; he favoured the proposal
of the King of 'France to summon an assembly of princes. It
matters not whether it be called a Council; so long as the
schism be done away with, the means used may be called by
any name. * Let it be called a conventicle or a meeting ; I
care not, provided it leads to peace.'3 He wrote a clever dia
logue, the ' Pentalogus,' in which he commended this plan to
Frederick III.4 In May 1444 he had already begun to consider
how the neutrality of Grermany could be brought to an end.
He wrote to Cesarini : < The neutrality will be hard to get rid
of, because it is useful to many. There are few who seek the
truth ; almost all seek their own gain. The neutrality is a
pleasing snare, because no one can be driven from a benefice,
whether he holds it justly or not, and the ordinaries confer
benefices as they please. It is a hard matter to rescue the
prey from the wolf's mouth. But, as far as I see, all Christen
dom follows Eugenius ; only Grermany is divided, and I would
gladly see it united, because I attach great weight to this
nation, for it is not led by fear, but by its own judgment and
goodwill. I shall follow the lead of the King and the Electors.' 5
1 In his Sulla Retrafftatiomi/ni (ed. Helrastadt, p. 155), he gives an account of
his arguments with Cesarini. In a letter to D'Allemand in Oest. GescMchts-
Quellen, xvi. 344, he says : ' Cardinalis Aquilegiensis (the envoy of Felix V.)
graviter segrotat, nee illi tantum vires sunt quantaa Juliano Cardinal! ; nee
tarn robustus est Aquilegiensis quam Carvajal.'
2 Ep. 25. s Letter to Bishop of Chiemsee, ED. 55.
« In Fez. Thesaurus, vol. iv. part 3, p. 736, &c. 5 Ejnst. 65.
PRIVATE LIFE OF JENEAS SYLVIUS. 245
Soon after this ^Eneas went to the Diet at Niirnberg, and there
saw the feebleness of Frederick III., the divisions among the
Electors, and the chance of success which lay open to enter
prise. He was appointed by Frederick III. a commissioner, to
sit with others nominated by the Electors for the consideration
of ecclesiastical affairs. ' We parted in discord and division '
is the only result which the letters of ^Eneas chronicle.
On his way to Niirnberg ^Eneas passed through Passau,
where Schlick was courteously entertained by the bishop.
^Eneas made himself agreeable to his host, and wrote to a
friend in Eome a pleasant sketch of Passau and its bishop.
Before sending it he requested the bishop to look it over and
correct any inaccuracies which it might contain. This delight
ful means of letting the bishop know that the pen of ^Eneas was
employed to sing his praises secured its due reward. J2neas
was presented before the end of a year to a benefice in Aspach,
in Bavaria. The bishop sent him his presentation free from
all ecclesiastical or other dues.
The character of ^Eneas at this time was not that of a Dissolute
churchman. He had led a careless, adventurous, self-seeking character
life. He had lived amongst dissolute companions and had been of^Eneas-
as dissolute as the worst amongst them. He cannot be said to
have had any principles ; he trusted to nothing but his own
cleverness, and his sole object was to make himself comfortable
wherever he was. He flattered those who were in authority ; he
was willing to do anything required of him in hopes of obtaining
a suitable reward. He never lost an opportunity of ingratiating
himself with anyone, and would use any means for that pur
pose. His store of knowledge, his fluent pen, his subtle mind
were at the command of any promising patron. One day he
wrote to young Sigismund, Count of the Tyrol, a long and ele
gant letter in praise of learning, inviting him by numerous
examples to fit himself by study for his high position. A little
while after, he wrote him a love-letter to help him to overcome
the resistance of a girl who shrank from his dishonourable pro
posals. With characteristic levity and plausibility he even
provided the youth with excuses for his conduct. ' I know
human nature,' he says ; ' he who does not love in youth loves
in old age, and makes himself ridiculous. I know too how
love kindles in youth dormant virtues ; a man strives to da
246 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK what will please his mistress. Moveover, youths must not be
^ _ t ' ,. x held too tight, but must learn the ways of the world so as to
distinguish between good and evil. I send you a letter on con
dition that you do not neglect literature for love ; but as bees
gather honey from flowers, so do you from the blandishments of
love gather the virtues of Venus.' *
The private life of ^Eneas, as we learn plainly from his
letters, was profligate enough ; but it does not seem to have
shocked men of his time, nor to have fallen below the common
standard. His irregularities were never made a reproach to
him later, nor did he take any pains to hide them from posterity.
Such as he was he would have himself known — induced perhaps
by literary vanity, more probably by a feeling that his character
would not lose in the eyes of his contemporaries by sincerity on
his part. In those days chastity was a mark of a saintly cha
racter,2 and^Eneas never professed to be a saint. His tempera
ment was ardent, easily moved and soon satisfied. The pleasures
of the flesh had strong dominion over him. His love affairs were
many, and he did not regard constancy as a virtue. A son wras
born to him in Scotland after his visit there ; but the child
soon died. We know of another son, the offspring of an English
woman whom JEneas met at Strasburg when on an embassy
from Basel. In a letter to his own father he shamelessly
describes the pains that he took to overcome her virtue, and
asks his father to bring up the child. His excuses for himself
show an entire frivolity and absence of principle. ' You will
perhaps call me sinful ; but I do not know what opinion you
formed of me. Certainly you did not beget a son of stone or
iron, seeing you yourself are flesh. I am not a hypocrite wTho
wish to seem good rather than be so. I frankly confess my
fault, that I am neither holier than David nor wiser than Solo
mon. It is an old and ingrained vice, and I do not know who is
free from it. But you will say that there are certain limits,
which lawful wedlock provides. There are limits to eating and
drinking ; but who observes them ? Who is so upright as not
to fall seven times a day ? Let the hypocrite profess that he is
1 Ep. 122.
2 Vespasiano da Bisticci says of Cesarini with wonder : ' In prima era firma
opinione in corte di Roma, e dov? egli era stato, lui essere vergine.'
PKIVATE LIFE OF JENEAS SYLVIUS. 247
conscious of no fault. I know no merit in myself and only CHAP.
divine pity gives me any hope of mercy.' ._ *•
In truth ^Eneas took no other view of life than that of a sel
fish voluptuary, for whom the nobler side of things did not exist.
He gave his experiences to his friend Piero da Noceto, who was
in the chancery of Eugenius IV., and wrote to him that he
had thoughts of marrying his concubine, who had already borne
him several children, -ZEneas advises the step : he will know all
about his wife beforehand and will not have to endure the dis
illusionment that often follows a honeymoon. ' I have loved
many women,' he says, 6 and after winning them have grown
weary of them ; if I were to marry, 1 would not unite myself to
anyone whose habits I did not know beforehand.' ] ^Eneas was
the confidant of the amours of Kaspar Schlick, and took an
adventure of Schlick's with a Sienese lady as the subject for a
novel in the style of Boccaccio. This story, ' Lucretia and
Euryalus,' had great popularity and was translated into almost
every European tongue.2
Thus the life of ^Eneas at Vienna was by no means edify- pissatis-
ing, nor was it satisfactory to himself. His associates in the JiJneaawfth
Imperial Chancery were mostly younger than himself. Their Germany,
manners were rude, their enjoyments coarse, and their vices
wanting in that refinement which to a cultivated Italian gave
them half their pleasure. ^Eneas was never at home in Ger
many : he could not speak the language fluently : the country,
the climate, the people, and the manners were all distasteful
to him. He pined at times to return to Italy, and urged his
friends to deliver him from his exile in a foreign land. He
began to feel that his life was somewhat wasted ; he began to
think that he ought to turn over a new leaf and enter upon a
new career. He thought of taking holy orders ; but if his
cultivation did not keep him from vice, it at least prevented
him from assuming a position the duties of which he could
not with decency fulfil. ' I do not intend to spend all my
life outside Italy,' he writes in February 1444. * As yet I
have taken care not to involve myself in holy orders. I fear
about my continency, which, though a laudable virtue, is more
1 Ep. 45, of January 1444.
2 It is in the letters of ^Eneas, No. 114, and was written in July 1444,
248 THE PAPAL BESTOKATION.
BOOK easily practised in word than in deed, and befits philosophers
^_ n ' ^ better than poets.' l
Policy of While this was the frame of ^Eneas' mind, the proceedings
the German
Electors. of the Diet of rsiirnberg gave a new direction to his energies.
The Diet did nothing except confirm the current witticism that
6 diets were indeed pregnant, for each carried another in its
womb.' It revealed, however, to ^Eneas the existence of the
strong party among the Electors, which had formed a league in
favour of Felix V. He saw that the contest between the two
Popes was becoming important in German politics. It gave
the Electors an opportunity of acting without the King, and if
their league in favour of Felix succeeded, the royal power would
have received a serious, if not a deadly, blow. The weakness of
the Electors lay in the fact that their ecclesiastical policy was
not sincere. They did not venture to identify themselves with
the national desire for reform, and, supported by the authority
of the Council of Basel, set in order the affairs of the German
Church. Their policy was oligarchical, not popular ; they
wished to strengthen their own hands against the King, not to
work for what the nation desired. They looked for help, not to
the national sentiment of Germany, but to the French King,
and negotiated with him to support them in the old plan of
demanding a new Council in a new place. But the French
had just shown themselves to be the national enemies of Ger
many ; and Charles VII., now freed from the pressure of the
English war, was no longer willing to help the Electors, but
reverted to the old desire of France to have a Pope at Avig
non. The negotiations between him and the Electors led to no
results.2
Battle of This policy of the Electors naturally tended to bring the
November King and the Pope together. Frederick III. on his part had
from the beginning inclined in favour of Eugenius IV., and
events had made the friendship of Eugenius more desirable.
Eugenius had so far wished to fulfil his promises to the
Greeks that he proclaimed a crusade against the Turks, and
sent Cesarini as his legate into Hungary. Cesarini, whose lofty
character was never displayed to better advantage than when
acting as the leader of a forlorn hope, stirred the courage
1 Ep. 50.
9 Piickert, Die Kurfiirstliclic NeittraUtat, 212, &c.
THE BATTLE OF VARNA. 249
of the Hungarians, filled them with enthusiasm for the CHAP.
cause of Christendom against the infidel, and awakened a , *• ^
strong feeling of devotion towards Eugenius IV. In 1443
Wladislaf, the Hungarian King, compelled the Turks to sue
for peace on condition of restoring Servia and quitting the
Hungarian frontier. But next year the expectations of a com
bined attack upon the Turks by Venice and the Greeks led
Cesarini to urge Hungary again to war. The peace had not
been approved by the Pope, and he absolved them from all
obligations to observe it. His exhortations were obeyed, and
Wladislaf again led forth his army to join his allies on the
Hellespont. But at Varna he was startled by the news that the
Turkish Sultan Murad was advancing with 60,000 men against
his army of 20,000. Cesarini counselled a prudent policy of
defence ; but Wladislaf was resolved to try the issue of a battle.
On the fatal field of Varna, November 10, 1444, the Christian
army suffered a severe defeat, and Wladislaf fell fighting.1 The
eventful life of Cesarini found on the battle-field a noble end.2
Chivalrous and high-minded, he had always devoted himself
unsparingly to the loftiest and most difficult cause that was
before him. He failed in war against the Bohemians ; he failed
to regulate the ecclesiastical violence of the Council of Basel ;
he failed to drive the Turks from Europe. Yet his efforts were
always directed to a noble end, and the very singleness of his
own purpose made him neglect the prudence which would have
been familiar to a smaller man. Amid the self-seeking of the
age Cesarini rises almost to the proportions of a hero ; he is
the only man whose character claims our entire respect and
admiration.
The news of the defeat of Varna filled Europe with conster
nation ; but it was not without its advantages to Frederick III.
The death of Wladislaf opened the way for the settlement of
1 See Bonfinius, Decades, III. ch. iv. v. ; von Hammer, XI. ; Dlugloss, XII. ;
the letter of ^Eneas to Duke of Milan giving the news, dated Dec 13, 1444,
JZpigt., No. 52.
2 About the mode of Cesarini's death there were various accounts which
are epitomised by JSneas Sylvius, ffist. Fred, in Kollar, II. 119 : ' Julianus
quoque Cardinalis in eo bello periit, de quo variam famam referunt, alii inter
proeliandum occisum, alii bello vulneratum effugisse, atque ex vulnere periisse ;
constantior tamen fama est ipsum, dum fugeret, equumque potaret, ab Hun-
garis, qui et ipsi fugiebant, percussum, illustrem spiritum qui multis annis
Basiliensem conventurr rexerat, emisisse.'
50 THE PAPAL KESTOKATION,
BOOK Hungarian affairs, and the recognition of Frederick's ward,
_ IY' _^ Ladislas. To gain this end more securely, Frederick needed
the help of Eugenius IV. Negotiations began to take a more
intimate and personal turn in relation to the affairs of Hungary.
Yet still the affairs of the Church were the subject of formal
embassies, in which the old plan of a new Council was osten
sibly being pursued. In November 1444 the Fathers of Basel
answered this proposal by an entire refusal. They had already
agreed to it in 1442, and the obstinacy of Eugenius IV. had
prevented it ; on him rested the blame of its failure. An envoy
had next to be sent to bear a similar proposition to Eugenius IV.
This was not done till the beginning of 1445, and then the
person chosen was ^Eneas Sylvius.
^Eneas at once saw that in dealings between Frederick III.
and Eugenius IV. there was scope for his cleverness and his
to the Pope, powers of intrigue. He readily started on his journey, and
rejoiced to see his native land once more. At Siena his kins
folk were alarmed at his audacity in venturing into the pre
sence of the Pope, whom he had so often attacked and so
grievously offended. They represented to him that ' Eugenius
was cruel, mindful of wrongs, restrained by no conscience, no
feeling of pity ; he was surrounded by ministers of crime ;
JEneas, if he went to Eome, would never return.'1 ^Eneas,
no doubt, enjoyed the simplicity of these good people, and
acted with dignity the part of a possible martyr to duty.
He tore himself from their weeping embrace, declaring that
he must either fulfil his embassy or die in the attempt,2 and
proceeded to Eome. Carvajal had already given Eugenius in
formation of the usefulness of ^Eneas. He was well received
by several of the cardinals for his literary or for his political
merits. Amongst the officials of the Papal Curia he met several
of his old friends at Basel. Before he could have an audience
with the Pope it was necessary that he should be absolved from
the ecclesiastical censure pronounced against the adherents of
the Council. This duty was assigned to the Cardinals Lan-
driano and Le Jeune, who afterwards introduced ^Eneas to the
Pope's presence, Eugenius graciously allowed him to kiss not
only his foot but his hand and his cheek. ^Eneas presented
1 Comm., ed. Fea., p. 87. 2 Pii II. Comm. p. 9.
AENEAS SYLVIUS RECONCILED WITH EUGENIUS IV. 251
his credentials, and then began to speak as a penitent on his CHAP.
own behalf. . L ^
* Holy Father, before I discharge my errand for the King, Reconciiia-
I will say a little about myself. I know that you have heard
much against me ; and those who have told you have spoken truly.
At Basel I spoke, wrote, and did many things, I do not deny it,
not with the intent of injuring you, but of benefiting the Church.
I erred, but in the company of many others, men of high repute.
I followed Cardinal Cesarini, the Archbishop of Palermo, the
apostolic notary Pontano, men who were esteemed the eyes of
the law and teachers of the truth. I will not mention the
universities which gave their opinions against you. In such
company who would not have erred ? But when I discovered
the error of the Basilians, I confess that I did not at once flee
to you. I was afraid lest I should fall from one error into
another. I went to the neutral camp that after mature de
liberation I might shape my course. I remained three years
with the German king, and there my study of the disputes be
tween your legates and those of the Council left me no doubt
that the right was on your side. Hence, when this embassy
was offered me, I willingly accepted it, thinking that so I might
regain your favour. Now I am in your presence, and ask your
pardon because I erred in ignorance.'
Eugenius answered graciously. ' We know that you erred
with many; but to one who owns his fault we cannot refuse
pardon, for the Church is a loving mother. Now that you hold
the truth, see that you never let it go, and by good works seek
the divine grace. You live in a place where you may defend
the truth and benefit the Church. We, forgetting your former
injuries, will love you well if you walk well.' 1
Thus ^Eneas made his peace, and entered into a tacit
agreement with the Pope that if he proved himself useful his
services should be rewarded. Eugenius had gained an agent
in Germany on whose devotion he might rely, because it
was closely bound up with self-interest. The diplomacy of the
Curia had again shown its astuteness.
After this reconciliation ^Eneas was regarded as a person
of some importance at Eome, and was well received by several
of the cardinals. But there was one person who was too blunt
1 Pii II, Commentarii, p. 10.
252
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
A,
BOOK
IV.
Sylvius in
Rome.
1445.
Eugenius
IV. attacks
theElectors.
January
1445. '
to disguise his contempt for this self-interested conversion.
One day JEneas met Tommaso Parentucelli, who had been a
companion in the service of Cardinal Albergata, but who had
followed his master and had been an uncompromising opponent
of the Council. He was now Bishop of Bologna, and was re
spected for his character and his learning. JEneas advanced to
greet him with outstretched hand, but Parentucelli coldly turned
away. ^Eneas was piqued, and afterwards adopted a similar
attitude of disdain towards Parentucelli. ' How ignorant are
we of the future ! ' he remarks afterwards, when relating this
incident ; ' if ^Eneas had known that Parentucelli would be
Pope, he would have condoned all things.' l A reconciliation
between the two was brought about by friends before ^Eneas
left Eome ; but Parentucelli was never cordial to one whose
sincerity he doubted.
On the particular matter of his embassy ^Eneas does not
seem to have done much. The party of Eugenius in Germany,
headed by Schlick, saw no way of ending the neutrality except
by summoning another Council. To this Eugenius was re
solved not to consent, and ^Eneas gave him the benefit of his
advice. In April he left Eome with an announcement that
Eugenius would send an embassy to bring his answer to the
King. His envoys, Carvajal and Parentucelli, followed close
upon JEneas.
Eugenius IV. had already entered upon a policy of attacking
his enemies in Grermany. On January 16, 1445, he issued a Bull
cutting off the lands of the Duke of Cleves from the dioceses of
Koln and Minister. In this matter he acted at the request of the
Dukes of Burgundy and Cleves ; but in the Bull he spoke of the
Archbishop of Koln as disobedient to the Roman See, and
called the Bishop of Miinster, ' Henry, the son of wickedness,
who styles himself Bishop of Miinster.' The Electors had not
fared so well as they hoped in their negotiations with France.
They were afraid lest the King might get the better of them by
his secret dealings with Eugenius IV., and were taken aback at
this hostile display on the part of Eugenius. They judged it
prudent to retire from their separate position, and once more
make common cause with the King. At the Diet on June 24,
1445, the neutrality of Grermany was renewed for eight months,
1 Comment., ed. Fea., p. 88.
NEGOTIATIONS OF EUGENIUS IV. AND FKEDEKICK III. 253
at the end of which time the King was to summon an < assembly
of the German Church or a national Council,' which was to be
proclaimed to the various lands depending on the Empire, in
cluding England, Scotland, and Denmark.1 Once more the
ecclesiastical question was to be also a national question for
Grermany. The Electors were willing to abandon their separate
negotiations with Felix V. on the understanding that Frederick
III. abandoned his agreement with Eugenius IV.
But Frederick III., indolent and careless as he was, saw in Negotia-
an alliance with Eugenius IV. the sole means of maintaining between
himself against the formidable alliance, which threatened him, Fyge™dus
of France with the House of Savoy and the Grerman Princes. Frederick
If he was heedless himself, the envoys of Eugenius IV. spared ]
no pains to enlighten him. Schlick and ^Eneas Sylvius were
ever at his side, and Carvajal was busy at Vienna arranging an
alliance between the King and the Pope. ' The King hates
the neutrality,' writes yEneas Sylvius at the end of August,
' and would willingly abandon it if the princes would only con
cur, to which end perhaps some means may be found.' 2 In
Rome Eugenius IV. went on with his proceedings against the
Archbishop of Koln. It was known in Vienna that the Arch
bishop had been summoned to appear in Rome,3 and it was
clear that further steps must follow ; yet the King raised no
word of protest. He was engaged in a secret treaty with the
Pope; he was selling his neutrality, and was being bought
cheap. On September 13 Carvajal left Vienna to carry to Rome
Frederick III.'s conditions. The terms which Carvajal had
negotiated were accepted by Eugenius IV. A treaty between
Pope and King was once more firmly established, and the end
of the reform movement in Grermany was rapidly approaching.
The terms on which Frederick III. sold his aid to Eugenius Terms of
IV. are expressed in three Bulls issued in February 1446.4 The between7
Pope granted to the King the right during his lifetime to j^P6 and
nominate to the six great bishoprics of Trent, Brixen, Chur, February
Grurk, Trieste, and Piben ; he granted the King and his suc-
1 See Ranke, Deutsche GescMchte, Anhang, vol. vi. p. 8, and Piickert, Kur-
fwrstliclw Nentralitat, 238.
2 Voigt, in Archiv fur Oesterr. GescMchts-Quelle.n, xvi. 373.
8 See letter of ^Bn. Sylvius, dated September 13, carried by Carvajal to
Eome, in Voigt, ArcMv. xvi. 386.
4 The Bulls are given in Chmel, Mat&rialien, I., No. 72-74.
254 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK cessors the right to nominate for the Papal approval those who
^_ y* _. should have visitorial powers over the monasteries of Austria ;
the King should have the right of presentation to a hundred
small benefices in Austria. Besides this, the Papacy was also
to pay the King the sum of 221,000 ducats, of which 121,000
were to be paid by Eugenius, and the rest by his successors.1
The indolent and short-sighted Frederick, no doubt, thought
that he had made a good bargain. He obtained a supply of
money, of which he was always in need. . He got into his own
hands the chief bishoprics in his ancestral domains, and thereby
greatly strengthened his power over Austria. By the nomina
tion of visitors of the monasteries he lessened the influence
of his enemy, the Archbishop of Salzburg, by exempting the
monasteries from his jurisdiction. By the right of presentation
to a hundred benefices he secured the means of rewarding the
hungry officials of his court. He thought only of his own per
sonal interests ; he cared only to secure his own position in his
ancestral domains. For the rights of the Church, for his posi
tion in the Empire, he had no thought. All that can be urged
in Frederick's behalf is, that the Grerman princes were equally
ready to abandon the Grerman Church and make terms with
either Pope who would help them to secure their own political
power. On the other hand, Eugenius IV., though making
great concessions, was careful not to impair the rights of the
Papacy or take any irretrievable step. The Papal treasury was
exhausted; but money was well spent in regaining the adhesion of
Germany, and Eugenius IV. felt amply justified in mortgaging
for this purpose the revenues of his successors. The Pope
granted the nomination to six bishoprics, but only for Frede
rick's lifetime, after which the mischief, if any, might be re
paired. The absolute appointment of visitors of monasteries
was not granted to Frederick and his successors in Austria,
but only the nomination of several from whom the Pope was
to select. The benefices granted to the King were not impor
tant ones ; they were to be between the annual value of sixty
and forty marks, and did not include appointments to cathedral
and collegiate churches. There was nothing in all this that
materially affected the Papal position in Grermany.
1 This rests on the authority of Heimburg in a letter of 1446, given by
Dux, Nicolas von Cum, I., Beilage IV.
DEPOSITION OF THE ELECTORS OF TRIER AND KOLN. 255
Moreover, Eugenius IV. was anxious that the treaty between
himself and Frederick III. should be as soon as possible openly
acknowledged. He promised Frederick 100,000 guilders for
the expenses of his coronation. He invited him to Eome to
receive the Imperial crown ; in case Frederick could not come
to Kome, Eugenius, old and gouty as he was, undertook to meet
him at Bologna, Padua, or Treviso. In the reunion of the
Papacy and the Empire Eugenius IV. saw the final overthrow
of the Council of Basel, and the restoration of the Papal
monarchy.
Eugenius IV., however, did not trust only to his allurements Eugenius
to induce the indolent Frederick to declare himself. Know-
the feeble character of the King, he resolved to plav a of Trier
, . , . ,., TT 1 * andKoln.
bold game, so as to attain his end more speedily. He had February
already succeeded in weakening, by his threat of ecclesias- 1
tical censures, the electoral league in favour of Felix V. As
his negotiations with Frederick III. advanced, he resolved to
strike a decided blow against his enemies in Germany. On
February 9 he issued a Bull deposing from their sees the
Archbishops of Koln and Trier, and appointing in their places
Adolf of Cleves and John, Bishop of Cambray, the nephew and
the natural brother of his powerful ally, the Duke of Burgundy.
The German rebels were openly defied, and the allies of Euge
nius IV. must range themselves decidedly on his side.
If Eugenius IV. acted boldly, the Electors answered the League of
challenge with no less promptitude. On March 21 they met to
at Frankfort and formed a league for mutual defence. The
attack upon the electoral privileges combined the whole body
in opposition to the high-handed procedure of the Pope. Un
deterred by the alliance of Pope and King, the Electors united
to assert the principles on which the neutrality of Germany
had been founded. If the time had come when neutrality
could no longer be maintained, it should at least be laid aside on
the same grounds as those on which it had been asserted. The
Electors again assumed the position of mediators between the
rival Popes, but set forward a plan of mediation which should
lead to decided results, and which should have for its object
the security of the liberty of the German Church. They aban
doned their scheme for the recognition of Felix V., and were
willing to join with the King in recognising Eugenius IV., but
256 THE PAPAL EESTOEATION.
BOOK on conditipn that lie confirmed the decrees of Constance about
. Iy* _^ the authority of General Councils, accepted the reforming de
crees of Basel as they were expressed in the declaration of
neutrality, recalled all censures pronounced against neutrals,
and agreed to assemble a Council on May 1, 1447, at Con
stance, Worms, Mainz, or Trier. They prepared Bulls for the
Papal signature embodying these conditions : on the issue
of these Bulls they were ready to restore their obedience and
submit the formal settlement of Christendom to the future
Council.
The attitude of the Electors was at once dignified and
statesmanlike. It showed that the Bishops of Trier and Koln
possessed political capacity hitherto unsuspected. No special
mention was made of individual grievances, no direct answer
was given to the attack made by Eugenius IV. on the electoral
privileges. By accepting their terms the Pope would tacitly
recall his Bulls of deposition ; if he refused to accept them, the
Electors would be free to turn to Felix V. and the Fathers of
Basel. They might summon in name a new Council ; but it
would consist of the members of the Council of Basel reinforced
by Germans bound to the policy of the Electors. They re
solved that envoys be sent to Frederick III. and Eugenius IV.,
and unless a satisfactory answer were obtained by September,
they would proceed further. These resolutions were the work,
in the first instance, of the four Rhenish Electors ; but within
a month the Markgraf of Brandenburg and the Duke of Saxony
had also given in their adhesion. The League of the Electoral
Oligarchy, to act in despite of its nominal head, was now
fully formed.
The pro- Strong as was the position of the Electors, they showed
the Electors their weakness by not asserting it publicly. Their agreement
was kept secret ; and the embassy sent to demand the adhesion
III. 1446. Of Frederick III. was instructed to lay the plan only before
him and six counsellors, who were to be bound by an oath of
secresy. Decided as was the policy of the Electors in appear
ance, it was founded upon no large sentiment of earnest
ness or patriotism. It was merely a diplomatic semblance,
and, as such, must be cloaked in diplomatic secresy, that it
might be exchanged, should expediency require, for a more
conciliatory attitude. The envoys of the Electors were headed
LEAGUE OF THE ELECTORS AGAINST EUGENIUS IV. 257
by Gregory Heimburg, who hop.ed against hope that he might CHAP.
use the opportunity of giving effect to his own reforming ideas, , *; ..
and trusted that he might work through the selfishness of the
Electors towards a really national end. Frederick III. received
through him the proposals of the Electors, by which he was
sorely embarrassed. At his Court were Carvajal and the Bishop
of Bologna, who had just brought him the Bulls which ratified
his treaty with the Pope ; but his oath of secresy to the Elec
tors forbade him to take counsel with them. The separate
articles of the proposals of the Electors were discussed in the
presence of the six counsellors sworn to secresy. The King
was ready to accept them in principle, but made reservations on
points of detail. The envoys were instructed not to lay before
the King the Bulls which they were to present to the Pope,
unless he fully accepted the provisions of the Electors. Frede
rick, on his side, complained of this reserve as offensive to his
dignity. ' It is a new thing,' he said, < that an agreement
should be made behind my back, and that I should be required
to accept it without a full discussion of every article.' The am
bassadors of the Electors declared that they had submitted
everything to the King. But Frederick III. was justified in
refusing to join the Electors till they had shown him the written
proposals which they were to submit to the Pope ; and they
refused to do this because they wished to keep in the back
ground their final threat of making common cause with the
Council of Basel.1 The sole result of these negotiations was,
that the King proclaimed a Diet at Frankfort on September 1,
and let it be understood that he was then prepared to consider
the termination of the neutrality.
In the beginning of July Heimburg and two companions Envoys of
reached Koine. Frederick III., anxious to give some hint to ^j^*018
Eugenius IV., told the Pope's envoys at Vienna that it would Juiy 1446.
be well if one of them returned to Rome. Carvajal was ill of a
fever ; so the Bishop of Bologna set out, and with him went
yEneas Sylvius, to whom the King confided the secret of the
Electors. JEneas pleads, as a technical excuse for this double
dealing, that the King himself had taken no oath of secresy,2
1 For these negotiations m see Piickert, Die Kurfurstliche Neutralitat,
p. 261, &c.
2 Comm. ed. Fea. p, 91.
VOL. II. S
258
THE PAPAL EESTOEATION.
BOOK
IV.
Double
dealin of
Sylvius.
but only his six counsellors. It is, however, probable that ^Eneas
needed no special enlightenment, but as secretary was privy
to the whole matter, and was himself bound to secresy,1 if
not specially on that occasion, yet by the nature of his office.
However that may be, he went with Thomas of Bologna, and
on the way let drop enough to indicate to Thomas the advice
which he ought to give to the Pope. They made such haste
on their journey that the ambassadors of the Electors only
entered Eome the day before them, and Thomas of Bologna
was the first to have an audience of the Pope. ^Eneas ex
pressly says, 'The Bishop of Bologna, though he could not
know all that the ambassadors of the Electors brought with
them, still guessed and opined much.' 2 ' Instructed by
^Eneas, he warned the Pope about the matter, and advised him
to give the ambassadors a mild answer.'3 The duplicity of
aEneas was invaluable to the cause of Eugenius IV. : it averted
the most pressing danger, that the Pope, by his contemptuous
behaviour, should give the Electors an immediate pretext for
turning to the Council of Basel.
The presence of ^Eneas was also useful in another way.
Frederick III. had not been asked by the Electors to send an
embassy to Kome ; but ^Eneas was there to speak in the King's
name, and was called in to assist at the audience. By this
means Eugenius IV. had a pretext for overlooking the fact that
what was submitted to him were the demands of the Electors : he
could treat them as the joint representations of the King and the
Electors, and so return a vague answer. Every precaution had
been taken by the Electors to put their cause clearly before
the Pope. "When Eugenius raised an objection to receiving an
embassy from the men whom he had deposed, he was informed
that the credentials of the ambassadors were signed simply with
the subscription of the whole College — * The Electoral Princes
of the Holy Roman Empire.'
However definitely the Electors put their propositions
before the Pope, he was resolved not to give them a definite
answer. When they were admitted to an audience, .Eneas
spoke first on behalf of the King. He recommended the am
bassadors to the Pope's kindly attention, and vaguely said thi.it
1 This is the conjecture of Piickert, p. 264.
3 Hist. Frederici, in Kollar, II. p. 122.
Comm. ed. Fea., 1)1.
.ENEAS SYLVIUS AND GKEGOKY HEIMBUKG. 259
the peace of the Church might be promoted by entertaining CHAP.
their proposals. Then Heimburg, in a clear, incisive, and __J^__,
dignified speech, set forward the objects of the Electors.
There could not be a greater contrast than between ^Eneas and
Heimburg : they may almost be taken as representatives of the
German and Italian character. Heimburg was tall and of com
manding presence, with flashing eyes and a genial face, honest,
straightforward, eminently national in his views and policy,
holding steadfastly by the object which he had in view.1 He
was the very opposite of the shifty Italian adventurer, who
recognised in him a natural foe. Heimburg's speech was
respectful, but uncompromising. Eugenius listened, and then,
after a pause, shrewdly returned a vague answer. The depo
sition of the archbishops, he said, had been decreed for
weighty reasons ; as to the authority of General Councils, he
had never refused to acknowledge it, but had only defended the
dignity of the Apostolic See ; as to the German Church, he did
not wish to oppress it, but to act for its welfare. The proposals
made to him were serious, and he must take time to consider
them.
^Eneas meanwhile unfolded to Eugenius the opinions of
Frederick III. He advised that the archbishops should be
restored, without, however, annulling their deprivation ; that
the Constance decree in favour of General Councils should be
accepted. If this were done, the recognition of Eugenius
might be accomplished ; if not, there was great danger of a
schism. Eugenius listened and seemed to assent. The
cardinals endeavoured to discover if the ambassadors had any
further instructions ; but Heimburg did not consider himself
justified by the Pope's attitude to lay before him the Bulls
that he had brought. The ambassadors were kept for three
weeks awaiting the Pope's answer, and ^Eneas has drawn a spite
ful picture of Heimburg sweltering in the summer heat, stalk
ing indignantly on Monte Giordano in the evening, with bare
head and breast, denouncing the wickedness of Eugenius and
the Curia. At length they were told that, as they had no
powers to treat further, the Pope would send envoys with his
answer to the Diet at Frankfort. The ambassadors left Rome
without producing their Bulls. Heimburg regarded the Papal
1 See ^Eneas' description of him, Hist. Fred., in Kollar, II. p. 123.
s 2
260
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Partisans
of Fre
derick III.
Diet of
Frankfort.
September
1, 1446.
attitude as equivalent to a refusal to entertain his proposals.
Meanwhile ambassadors had been sent also to Basel, and the
Council had similarly deferred its answer till the assembling of
the Diet.
The results of the Diet of Frankfort would clearly be of
great importance both to Grermany and to the Church at large.
The policy of the Electors had not received the adhesion of the
King ; the oligarchy had resolved to act in opposition to their
head, and, if they were resolute, the deposition of Frederick III.
was imminent. In this emergency Frederick entrusted his
interests to the care of the Markgraf Albert of Brandenburg
and Jacob of Baden, the Bishops of Augsburg and Chiemsee,
Kaspar Schlick and JEneas Sylvius. At the head of this em
bassy stood Albert of Brandenburg, who had already shown
his devotion to Frederick by taking the field against the
Armagnacs, and who was bent upon overthrowing the intrigues
of France with the Khenish Electors. The representatives of the
King were all convinced of the great importance of the crisis,
and were not a little embarrassed to find at Frankfort no ambas
sadors of the Pope. The Bishop of Bologna had left Eome with
^Eneas Sylvius, but had been delayed at Parma by sickness, and
on his recovery had gone to confer with the Duke of Burgundy
about the measures to be adopted towards the deposed Arch
bishops of Trier and Koln. John of Carvajal and Nicolas of
Cusa had come from Vienna ; but they had no special instruc
tions about the answer to be returned by the Pope to the
proposals of the Electors.
In spite of the gravity of the occasion, few of the Grerman
princes or prelates were personally present at Frankfort. The
four Khenish Electors were there ; but the Electors of Bran
denburg and Saxony only sent representatives, as did also the
majority of the bishops and nobles. From Basel came the
Cardinal of Aries, bearing a decree which approved of the transfer
ence of the Council to one of the places which might be approved
by the King and the Electors, and generally accepting the pro
posals of the Electors without making any mention of Felix V.
The Electors took up a position of friendliness to the Cardinal
of Aries. When, on September 14, the proceedings of the Diet
began with a solemn mass, the Cardinal appeared, as was his
wont, in state as a Papal legate. The royal ambassadors made
DIET OF FRANKFORT, 1446. 261
the usual protest that Germany was neutral, and could not re
cognise the officials of either Pope. The Archbishop of Trier
angrily denounced their conduct ; they could admit the legates
of Eugenius, the foes of the nation, and would exclude those of
the Council. The majority agreed with him ; but the citizens of
Frankfort were still loyal, and their tumultuous interference
compelled the Cardinal to lay aside the insignia of his office.
The proceedings l began with the reading by Heimburg of the
speech which he had made to Eugenius IV., and the written
answer of the Pope. Heimburg further gave an account of his
embassy, and the reasons which had led him to abstain from
presenting to the Pope the Bulls which the Electors had drawn
up ; the question to be discussed was, whether the Pope's
answer gave ground for further deliberation. On the Pope's
side his envoys submitted an answer to the * prayers of the
King and the Electors.' Eugenius was ready to summon a
Council within a convenient time ; he had never opposed the
decrees of the Council of Constance, which had been renewed
in Basel while a universal and recognised Council was sitting ;
he was willing to do away with the old burdens of the German
Church provided he were indemnified for the losses which he
would thereby sustain. About the revocation of the depriva
tion of the archbishops he said nothing. The answer of
Eugenius IV. was mere mockery of his opponents. He granted
nothing that they had asked ; his concessions were merely
apparent, and he reserved to himself full power to make them
illusory. His attitude towards the Electors was practically the
same as it had been towards the Council of Basel.
The regal and the Papal ambassadors would not have Division
ventured to submit such an answer if they had not seen their t™E?ec-
way to effect a breach in the ranks of their opponents. On tors-
September 22 Albert of Brandenburg succeeded in inducing
the representatives of his brother the Elector, the Archbishop
of Mainz, two bishops, and one or two nobles, to agree that
they had obtained an answer from the Pope which afforded the
basis for peace in the Church, and that they would stand by
1 For the proceedings of tKe Diet the account given by ^Eneas Sylvius,
Hist. Fred., in Kollar, II. 127, &c., must be compared with the official record in
the Dresden Archives excerpted by Puckert, Die Kvrfii?'stliclie Keutralit'dt,
p. 27S, &c.
262 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK one another to maintain this opinion. The Archbishop of
^ t ' . Mainz was won over by consideration of the assistance which
he might obtain from Frederick III. and Albert of Branden
burg in the affairs of his own dominions. ^Eneas Sylvius is not
ashamed to own that he was the instrument of bribing four of
the Archbishop's counsellors with 2,000 florins to help in
bringing him to this decision. The adhesion of Frederick of
Brandenburg was due to the influence of his brother Albert.
The others who joined in the step had all some personal in
terest to serve.
Eound the basis thus secured adherents rapidly began to
gather. But it was clear to the Papal envoys that they must
make some concessions, and afford their new adherents a
plausible pretext for withdrawing their support from the
Electoral League. ^Eneas Sylvius undertook the responsibility
of playing a dubious part. He ' squeezed the venom,' as he
puts it, out of the proposals of the Electors, and composed a
document in which the Pope undertook, if the princes of Europe
agreed, to summon a General Council within ten months of the
surrender of the neutrality, recognised the Constance decrees,
confirmed the reforming decrees of Basel till the future Council
decided otherwise, and, at the instance of the King, restored
the deposed Archbishops of Trier and Koln, on condition that
they returned to his obedience.1 The Bishop of Bologna and
Nicolas of Cusa assented to these proposals ; John of Carvajal
was dubious, and hot words passed between him and ^Eneas,
who was afraid lest his obstinacy or honesty might spoil all.
^Eneas skilfully mixed up his relations with the Pope and with
the King, and managed to produce an impression that the
Pope had commissioned him to make this offer. The sturdy
Germans, Heimburg and Lysura, were annoyed at this activity
of the renegade Italian in their national business. ' Do you
come from Siena,' said Lysura to JEneas, ' to give laws to
Germany ? ' JEneas thought it wiser to return no answer.
JEneas may have exaggerated his own share in this matter ;
but early in October the Koyal and Papal ambassadors agreed
to submit to the Diet a project of sending a new embassy to
1 The Dresden MS. has in the margin of this proposal the note : ' Nota
fallaciam, quum potius rex instare deberet ut ante omnera tractatum domini
isti restituerentur,' Piickert, 289.
OVERTHROW OF THE ELECTORAL LEAGUE. 263
Rome, to negotiate with Eugenius IV. on this basis. Their CHAP.
demands were to go in the form of articles, not, as before, of „ *; ,
Bulls ready prepared.
This seemed to the majority to be a salutary compromise. Overthrow
The Electors of Mainz and Brandenburg considered it better Electoral
than a breach with the King. The Elector of Saxony and the ^^f;
Pfalzgraf thought that the new proposals contained all that 1446.
was important in the old. The summons of a new Council
would keep matters still open ; anyhow, negotiations would
gain time. On October 5 the league that had been formed in
favour of this compromise was openly avowed, and received
many adherents. It was resolved that the articles be presented
to Eugenius at Christmas ; if he accepted them, the neutrality
should be ended ; if not, the matter should be again con
sidered. The answer was to be brought to a Diet at Niirnberg
on March 19, 1447.- The Archbishops of Trier and Koln found
themselves deserted by the other Electors ; all they could do
was to join on October 11 in a final decree that the King should
try to obtain from the Pope a confirmation of the Bulls pre
pared by the Electors ; failing that, he should obtain Bulls
framed according to the articles ; these were to be laid before
the Electors at the next Diet, and each should be free to accept
or reject them. This reservation of their individual liberty was
the utmost that the oligarchical leaders now hoped to obtain for
themselves. Next day the Cardinal of Aries appeared before
the Electors in behalf of the Council of Basel, which had been
invited to support the policy of the Electors, and had issued
Bulls accordingly. He proffered the Bulls, but no one would
receive them. With heavy hearts the envoys of Basel left
Frankfort. On their way to Basel they were attacked and
plundered ; only by the speed of his horse did the Cardinal of
Aries succeed in taking refuge in Strasburg. He afterwards
said in Basel, ' Christ was sold for thirty pieces of silver, but
Eugenius has offered sixty thousand for me.'
The league of the Electors had been overthrown at Frank- Overthrow
fort, and with it also fell the cause of the Council of Basel. Council of
Germany was the Council's last hope, and Germany had failed. Basel-
The diplomacy of the Curia had helped Frederick III. to over
come the oligarchical rising in Germany ; but the Pope had
won more than the King. The oligarchy might find new
264
THE PAPAL EESTOKATION.
BOOK
IV.
Proposal
of the Diet
laid before
Eugenius
IV. No
vember
1446.
grounds on which to assert its privileges against the royal
power ; the conciliar movement was abandoned, and the sum
moning of another Council was vaguely left to the Pope's
good pleasure. The ecclesiastical reforms, which had been
made by the Council of Basel, survived merely as a basis of
further negotiations with the Pope. If the Papal diplomacy
had withstood the full force of the conciliar movement, it was
not likely that the last ebb of the falling tide would prevail
against it.
There still remained, however, for the final settlement of
the question, the assent of Eugenius IV. to the undertaking of
his ambassadors. Even at Frankfort, Carvajal had been opposed
to all concessions ; at Kome, where the gravity of the situation
in Germany and the importance of the victory won at Frank
fort were not fully appreciated, there was still a chance that
the Pope's obstinacy might be the beginning of new difficulties.
But the health of Eugenius IV. was failing ; he was weary of
the long struggle, and desired before the end of his days to
see peace restored to the distracted Church. The theologians
in the Curia, headed by John of Torquemada, counselled no
concession ; the politicians were in favour of accepting the
proffered terms. Eugenius showed his desire to increase the
influence of those who were conversant with German affairs
by raising to the Cardinalate in December Carvajal and the
Bishop of Bologna. Frederick III., the Electors, and the
princes of Germany all sent their envoys to Eome. On behalf
of the King went ^neas Sylvius and a Bohemian knight,
Procopius of Eabstein ; chief amongst the others was John
of Lysura, Vicar of the Archbishop of Mainz. They all met
at Siena, and rode into Rome, sixty horsemen. A mile outside
the city they were welcomed by the inferior clergy, and were
honourably conducted to their lodgings. A difficulty was first
raised whether the Pope could receive the ambassadors of the
Archbishops of Bremen and Magdeburg, seeing that those pre
lates had been confirmed by the Council of Basel ; but this was
overcome by a suggestion of Carvajal that they should appear
as representatives of the sees, not of their present occupants.
On the third day after their arrival an audience was given to
the German ambassadors in a secret consistory, where Eugenius
was seated with fifteen cardinals. In a clever speech ^Eneas
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CUKIA. 2G5
*
Sylvius laid the proposals before the Pope, and such was his CHAP.
plausibility that he managed to satisfy the Germans without , ^ — ,
offending the dignity of the Pope.1 He touched upon the
evils of ecclesiastical dissension, spoke of the importance
of Germany and its desire for peace, skilfully introduced the
German proposals, and besought the Pope of his clemency to
grant them as the means of unity. Eugenius answered by
condemning the neutrality, complained of the conduct of the
deposed archbishops, and finally said that he must deliberate.
On the same day Eugenius was seized by an attack of fever, Negotia-
which confined him to his bed. The German question was the Curia,
referred to a commission of cardinals, and opinion was greatly
divided. Only nine cardinals were in favour of concession ; the
others declared that the Eoman See was being sold to the Ger
mans, and that they were being dragged by the nose like buffa
loes. The German proposals were not treated as though they
were meant for definite acceptance, but were regarded as the basis
of further negotiation. The ambassadors were entertained and
cajoled by the cardinals, while the illness of Eugenius IV. made
everyone anxious to have the matter settled speedily. Little by
little the articles agreed on at Frankfort were pared down : (1) As
regarded the summons of a new Council, the Pope agreed to it
as a favour, without issuing a Bull, which might bind his suc
cessor, but merely making a personal promise to the King and
the Electors.2 (2) Instead of the acceptance of the decrees of
Constance and Basel, Eugenius agreed to recognise { the Council
of Const; nee, and its decree Frequens and other of its decrees,
and all the other Councils representing the Catholic Church.'
All mention of the Council of Basel was studiously avoided, and,
by the express mention of the decree Frequens, the omission
of the more important decree Sacrosancta was in a measure
emphasized. (3) On the third point, the acceptance of the
Pragmatic Sanction of Germany as it had been established at
the declaration of the neutrality in 1439, Eugenius IV. was
willing to follow the example of Martin V. in granting the
concordats of Constance. He recognised the existing posses
sors of benefices, and agreed to send a legate to Germany, who
would arrange for the liberties of the German Church in the
1 In Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, i. 108.
2 Raynaldus, Annales, 1447, No. 5.
266
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Illness of
Eu genius
IV.
future, and the proper provision to be made for the Papacy in
return. Meanwhile, the condition of the German Church was
to remain as it was, ' till an agreement had been made by our
legate, or other orders given by a Council.' The Germans, who
had at first taken the Basel decrees as the foundation of an
ecclesiastical reformation, now accepted them as a limit — a
limit, moreover, which might be narrowed. (4) In like
manner the Papal diplomacy secured for the Pope a triumph in
the matter of the deposed archbishops. Eugenius IV. was
asked to annul their deposition, 'if they were willing to concur
in the declaration in his favour; he agreed, when they did so
concur, to restore them to their office.
Moreover, to aid the progress of these negotiations, ^Eneas
Sylvius undertook, in Frederick's name, that the King would
solemnly declare, and publish throughout Germany, his recog
nition of Eugenius, would receive with due honour a Papal
legate, would order the city of Basel to withdraw its safe-
conduct from the Council, and, as regarded the provision
to be made for the Pope out of the ecclesiastical revenues of
Germany, would act not only as a mediator, but as an ally of
the Pope.
Thus diplomacy was busily spinning its web round the bed
of the dying Pope. True till the last to his persistent character,
Eugenius IV. was resolved to see the restoration of the Grerman
obedience before he died. The theologians might make the
best terms that they could ; but Eugenius made them under
stand that he wished to see the end. He might well gaze
with sadness on the desolation which his unyielding spirit had
wrought in the fortunes of the Church. France was practically
independent of the Papacy ; Germany was estranged ; a rival
Pope diminished the prestige of the Holy See ; in Italy, Bologna
was lost to the domains of the Church, and the March of
Ancona was still in the hands of Sforza. He would bequeath a
disastrous legacy to his successor ; but the recovery of Ger
many would at least improve the position. Eugenius longed to
signalise his last days by a worthy achievement ; on their side
the envoys of the German King wished their mission to succeed.
Now that a goal of some sort was in view, all were eager to
reach it. If the Pope died before matters were decided, the
powers of the envoys came to an end, for they were only com-
RESTORATION OF THE GERMAN OBEDIENCE. 267
missioned to negotiate with Eugenius. The Germans did not CHAP.
wish to sacrifice the present opportunity, and see everything „ *'_.
again reduced to doubt.
The physicians gave Eugenius ten days to live when the
conclusions of the Commission of Cardinals were laid before him.
The Pope was too feeble to examine them fully, much more to
go through the labour of reducing them to the form of Bulls.
Scrupulous and persistent to the last, he dreaded even the
semblance of concession when the decisive moment came.
When he finally decided to give way he devised a subter
fuge to save his conscience. On February 5 he signed a secret
protest setting forth that the German King and Electors had
desired from him certain things 'which the necessity and
utility of the Church compel us in some way to grant, that we
may allure them to the unity of the. Church and our obedience.
We, to avoid all scandal and danger which may follow, and
being unwilling to say, confirm, or grant anything contrary to
the doctrine of the Fathers or prejudicial to the Holy See,
since through sickness we cannot examine and weigh the con
cessions with that thoroughness of judgment which their
gravity requires, protest that by our concessions we do not
intend to derogate from the doctrine of the Fathers or the
authority and privileges of the Apostolic See.' 1
By this pitiful proceeding the dying Pope prepared to enter Restoration
into engagements which his successor might repudiate. He Gernian
was ready to receive the restitution of the German obedience ;
but the German envoys, on their side, began to hesitate.
They did not, of course, know the secret protest of the Pope ;
but they doubted whether they ought to take a step which
might divide Germany, when they had no guarantee that the suc
cessor of the death-stricken Eugenius would pursue his policy.
John of Lysura, who was now as zealous for reconciliation as
before he had been anxious for reform, plausibly argued that
they were dealing with the Eoman See, which never died ; the
Bulls of Eugenius would bind his successor. If they left Rome
without declaring the obedience of Germany, the existing dis
position of the Electors might change, and everything might
again become doubtful. So long as Eugenius could stir his
finger, it was enough. If they went away without accomplish-
1 Raynalclus, 1447, No. 7.
2G8
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Death of
Eu gen ins
IV. Feb-
ruarv 23,
1447.
ing anything they would be ridiculous. Lysura and JEneas
prevailed on the other ambassadors of the King and of the
Archbishop of Mainz to resolve on a restoration of obedience to
Eugenius IV.
On February 7 the ambassadors were admitted into the
Pope's chamber. Eugenius still could greet them with dignity,
but in a feeble voice requested that the proceedings should not
be long. ^Eneas read the declaration of obedience, and
Eugenius handed him the Bulls, which he gave to the ambassa
dors of the Archbishop of Mainz as being the primate of
Germany. The envoys of the Pfalzgraf and of Saxony excused
themselves from joining in the declaration ; they were not
empowered to do so, but they had no doubt that their princes
would give their assent in the forthcoming Diet at Niirnberg.
Eugenius thanked Grod for the work that had been accom
plished, and dismissed with his benediction the ambassadors,
who were moved to tears at the sight of the dying man. A
public Consistory was held immediately afterwards before the
whole Curia ; over a thousand men were present. ^Eneas
spoke for the King, Lysura for the Archbishop of Mainz, the
other ambassadors followed. The Vice-Chancellor in the Pope's
behalf spoke words of thankfulness, and the Consistory broke up
amid the joyous peals of bells with which Rome celebrated its
triumph. The city blazed with bonfires ; the next day was
a general holiday, and was devoted to a special service of
thanksgiving.
The German envoys stayed in Eome, waiting for the neces
sary copies of the Bulls, and anxious about the new election.
Day by day Eugenius grew visibly worse, and there were signs
of disturbances to follow on his death. Alfonso of Naples
advanced with an army within fifteen miles of Eome. There
were troubles at Viterbo, and in Rome itself the people were
anxious to be rid of the severe rule of Cardinal Scarampo, the
favourite of Eugenius. Amidst this universal disquiet Eugenius
died hard. When the Archbishop of Florence wished to ad
minister supreme unction the Pope refused, saying, CI am still
strong ; I know my time ; when the hour is come I will send for
you.' Alfonso of Naples, 011 hearing this, exclaimed, ' What
wonder that the Pope, who has warred against Sforza, the
Colonna, myself, and all Italy, dares to fight against death also ? '
DEATH OF EUGENIUS IV. 269
At length Eugenius felt that his last hour was approaching. CHAP.
Summoning the Cardinals, he addressed to them his last words. — ; _ .
Many evils, he said, had befallen the Holy See during his pon
tificate, yet the ways of Providence were inscrutable, and he
rejoiced, at last before he died, to see the Church reunited. ' Now,
before I appear in the presence of the Great Judge, I wish to
leave with you my testament. I have created you all Cardinals
save one, and him I have loved as a son. I beseech you, keep
the bond of peace, and let there be no divisions among you.
You know what sort of a Pope the Holy See requires ; elect a
successor in wisdom and character superior to me. If you listen
to me, you will rather elect with unanimity a moderate man
than a distinguished one with discord. We have reunited the
Church, but the root of discord still remains ; be careful that
it does not grow up afresh. That there be no dispute about
my funeral, bury me simply, and lay me in a lowly place by the
side of Eugenius III.' All wept as they heard him.1 He re
ceived supreme unction, was placed in S. Peter's chair, and
there died on February 23, at the age of 62. According to
Vespasiano da Bisticci, he exclaimed shortly before his
death : ' 0 Gabrielle, how much better had it been for your
soul's health had you never become pope or cardinal, but died
a simple monk ! Poor creatures that we are, we know ourselves
at last.' His body was exhibited to public view, and he was
buried, according to his desire, in S. Peter's by the side of
Eugenius III.
Amid the disastrous events of his pontificate, the personal Character
character of Eugenius IV. seems to play an insignificant part, genius IV.
At his accession he had to face a difficult problem, which
would have tried the tact and patience of the largest and wisest
mind. But Eugenius was a narrow-minded monk, with no
experience of the world and a large fund of obstinacy. He
quarrelled with the Komans; he alarmed the politicians of
Italy ; he offended a strong party in the Curia, and finally
proceeded to defy a Council which was supported by the
moral approval of Europe. Such wisdom as Eugenius IV. ever
gained, he gained in the hard school of experience. After the
1 This account is given by ^5neas Sylvius in his letter from Rome to
Frederick III., Muratori, vol. iii. pt. 2, p. 889. The other account is given by
Vespasiano, Vita dc Eugenio IV.
270 THE PAPAL RESTOEATION.
BOOK mistakes of the first year of his pontificate, the rest of his life
^_ *y* ., was a desperate struggle for existence. The one quality that
helped him in his misfortune was the same obstinacy as first
led him astray.1 Where a more sensitive or a more timid man
might have been disposed for compromise Eugenius stood firm,
and in the long run won a tardy victory, not by his own skill, but
through the faults of his opponents. Time was on the side of
the representative of an old institution, and every mistake of
the Council brought strength to the Pope. Those who at first
attacked him through bitter personal animosity gradually
found that he was the symbol of a system which they did not
dare to destroy. The wisdom and skill of eminent men, which
at first enabled the Council to attack the Pope, were gradually
transferred to the Pope's service. Every mistake committed
by the Council lost it a few adherents, alarmed at the dangers
which they foresaw, or anxious for their own personal interests,
but all determined on the overthrow of that which they had
forsaken. To them Eugenius IV. was necessary ; and they paid
him greater reverence through remorse for the wrongs which they
had formerly done him.2 No man is so zealous as one who has
deliberately changed his convictions ; and the success of Euge
nius at the last was due to the zeal of those who had deserted
the Council. Hence Eugenius IV. was faithfully served in
his latter days, though he inspired no enthusiasm. He was
the Pope, the Italian Pope, and as such was the necessary
leader of those who wished to maintain the prestige of the
Papacy, and to keep it secure in its seat at Kome. But he
was outside the chief interests, intellectual and political, which
were moving Italy. Politically he pursued a course of his own,
and was not trusted by Venice, nor Florence, nor by the
Duke of Milan, nor by Alfonso of Naples, while in Eome
itself his rule was harsh and oppressive both to the barons and
the people. He was a man of little culture, and such ideas as
he had were framed upon his monastic training. Yet, though
he was untouched by the classical revival, 'tie was not opposed
to it. Among his secretaries were Poggio Bracciolini, Flavio
1 ' Fu molto capitoso e di dura testa ' is the testimony of Paolo Petrone,
Mur. xxiv. 1130.
2 The final judgment of J^neas Sylvius was ' Alti cordis fuit, sed nullum
in eo magis vitium fuit, nisi quia sine mensura erat, et non quod potuit sed quod
voluit aggressus est,' Mur. iii. pt. 2, p. 891.
CHARACTER OF EUGENIUS IV. 271
Biondo, Maffeo Vegio, Giovanni Aurispa, and Piero de Noceto.1 CHAP.
He welcomed at Home the antiquary Ciriaco of Ancona and the ._ *• .
humanist George of Trebizond, and employed in his affairs the
learned Ambrogio Traversari. He pursued the plan of Martin V.
to restore the decayed buildings of Eome ; and in his later
days summoned Fra Angelico to decorate the Vatican Chapel.
He also invited to Rome the great Florentine sculptor Donatello ;
but his plans were interrupted by the disturbances of 1434
and his flight from the city. While at Florence he so admired
Ghiberti's .magnificent gates to the Baptistery that he resolved
to decorate S. Peter's by a like work, which he entrusted to a
mediocre but eminently orthodox artist, Antonio Filarete. The
gates of Eugenius IV. still adorn the central doorway of S. Peter's,
and are a testimony of the Pope's good intentions rather than of
his artistic feelings. Large figures, stiffly and ungracefully
executed, of Christ, the Virgin, SS. Peter and Paul, fill the chief
panels ; between them are small reliefs commemorating the
glories of the pontificate of Eugenius IV., the coming of the
Greeks to Ferrara, the Council of Florence, the coronation of
Sigismund, the envoys of the Oriental Churches in Eome. On the
lower panels are representations of martyrdoms of saints. The
reliefs are destitute of expression and are architecturally ineffec
tive. The imagination of the artist has been reserved for the ara
besque work which frames them. There every possible subject
seems to be blended in wild confusion — classical legends,
medallions of Roman emperors, illustrations of ^Esop's fables,
allegories' of the seasons, representations of games and sports —
all are interwoven amongst heavy wreaths of ungraceful foliage.
Eugenius IV. showed his respect for antiquity by restoring the
Pantheon, but did not scruple to carry off for his other works
the stones of the Colosseum.2 Though personally modest and
retiring, he had all the Venetian love of public splendour;
he caused Ghiberti to design a magnificent Papal tiara, which
cost 30,000 golden ducats. Without possessing any taste of
his own, Eugenius IV. so far followed the fashion of his time
that he prepared the way for the outburst of magnificence which
Nicolas V. made part of the Papal policy.
1 See Bonamici, De Claris Pontificiarum litterarum Scriptoribus,
2 See Miintz, Les Arts a la Cour des Papes, i. 32, &c.
272 THE PAPAL EESTOBATiON.
BOOK The object, however, which lay nearest the heart of
._iy> ^ Eugenius IV. was the promotion of the Franciscan Order, to
which he himself had belonged. The friars held a chief place
at his court, and were admitted at once to the Papal presence,
where their affairs had precedence over all others, to the great
indignation of the humanists. Poggio rejoiced that under the
successor of Eugenius the reign of hypocrisy was at an end,1 and
friars would no longer swarm like rats in Borne. If the policy
of Eugenius was to erect the friars once more into a powerful
arm of the Holy See, the corrupt state of the body made such a
restoration impossible. Yet Eugenius would give more atten
tion to remodelling the rules of a religious order than to the
great questions which surrounded him on every side. His
notion of ecclesiastical reform was to turn monastic orders into
orders of friars, and he met the demands of the Fathers of
Basel by displaying great activity in this hopeless work.2
In person Eugenius IV. was tall, of a spare figure, and of
imposing aspect. Though he drank nothing but water, he was
a martyr to gout. He was attentive to all his religious duties,
lived sparingly, and was liberal of alms. He slept little, and
used to wake early and read devotional books. He was reserved
and retiring, averse from public appearances, and so modest that
in public he scarcely lifted his eyes from the ground.3 Though
stubborn and self-willed, he bore no malice, and was ready to
forgive those who had attacked him. He had few intimates ;
but when he once gave his confidence he gave it unreservedly,
and Vitelleschi and Scarampo successively directed his affairs
in Italy. A man of monastic and old-fashioned piety, he was
destitute of political capacity, and was more fitted to be an
abbot than a pope. What might in a smaller sphere have been
firmness of purpose, became narrow obstinacy in the ruler of
the Universal Church. It is a proof of the firm foundation of
Papacy in the political system of Europe, that it was too deeply
rooted for the mismanagement of Eugenius IV., at a dangerous
crisis of its history, to upset its stability.
1 Dialogus contra Uypocrisim, in Fasciculus Rerum ; Appendix, 571.
- Vespasiano, Vita di Eugenia IV., ' attendeva con ogni diligenza a
riformare la Chiesa, e fare che i religiosi stessino a' termini loro, ed i conventual!
fargli osservanti, giusto alia possa sua.'
* RafTaelle de Volterra, Commentarii (Anthrnjwlogia) xxii. : ' oculos in
publico nunquam attollebat, tit a parente meo, qui eum sequebatur, accepi.'
273
CHAPTER II.
NICOLAS V. AND THE AFFAIRS OF GERMANY.
1447-1453.
ON the death of Eugenius IV. the troubled state of Home CHAP.
made the Cardinals anxious about the future. It was of the 1L ^
utmost importance for the peace of the Church that the new Republican
election should be peaceable and orderly, that the new Pope Rom"? &t
should have an undoubted title; but the attitude of the 1447t
Romans, who had endured with murmurs the rule of Eugenius
IV., made the Cardinals dread a repetition of the tumults
which had caused the Schism. The citizens of Rome held
a meeting in the monastery of Araceli to draw up demands
which should be submitted to the Cardinals.1 The Cardinals in
dismay urged the Archbishop of Benevento, Cardinal Agnesi, to
attend the meeting and confer with the citizens. The leader
of the Romans was Stefano Porcaro, a man of considerable know
ledge of affairs, sprung from an old burgher's stock in Rome.
Porcaro recommended himself by his capacity to Martin V.,
who obtained for him the post of Capitano del Pojjolo in Florence.
There he became acquainted with many of the chief humanists,
and on leaving Florence he travelled in France and Germany.
By Eugenius IV. he was made Podesta of Bologna, where his
reputation increased, and he won the friendship of Ambrogio
Traversari,2 who advised the Pope to employ Porcaro as
mediator with the rebellious Romans in 1434. Eugenius
refused all mediation, and his obstinacy was rewarded by
1 Infessura, in Mur. iii. 2, 1181 ; ^En. Syl. id. 891.
'z Our chief information about, the early life of Poroaro comes from
scattered notices amongst the letters of Traversari.
II. T
274
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Peace kept
by Alfonso
ofN*
Prepara
tions for
the Con
clave.
success ; but it alienated Porcaro from the Papal service, and
his classical studies drifted him to the republicanism of
ancient Rome. In the assembly at Araceli Porcaro rose, and
in a fiery speech stirred the citizens to remember their ancient
liberties. They ought, at least, to have an agreement with the
Pope such as even the smallest towns in the States of the
Church had managed to obtain. Many agreed with him,1 and
the Archbishop of Benevento had some difficulty in reducing
him to silence. The assembly broke up in confusion, and
many citizens gathered round Porcaro.
But the Republican party was afraid to move through fear
of Alfonso of Naples, who lay at Tivoli with an army, with a
view of influencing the new election. He had already sent a
message to the Cardinals that he was there to secure for them
a free election, and was at their commands. The Romans felt
he would use any movement on their part as a pretext for
seizing the city ; and it was useless to escape from the rule of
the Church only to fall under that of the King of Naples. Ac
cordingly the Republican party held its hand. The keys of the
city were given to the Cardinals, who made the Grand Master
of the Teutonic Knights guardian of the Capitol, and published a
decree ordering the barons to leave Rome. The bands who were
flocking from the country into the city were excluded, the
barons unwillingly departed, and all was quiet when, on March
4, the Cardinals went into conclave in the dormitory of the
cloister of S. Maria sopra Minerva.
JEneas Sylvius gives a description of the preparations for
the conclave. The dormitory was divided into cells for the
eighteen Cardinals present ; but on this occasion the partitions
were of cloth, not of wood. Lots were drawn for the distribu
tion of the cells, which each cardinal adorned with hangings
according to his taste. Each entered the conclave with his
attendants, a chaplain and a cross-bearer ; each had his own
food sent him every day in a wooden box, on which his arms
were emblazoned. These boxes were carried through the
streets in a way that made the city seem to be full of funerals ;
they were accompanied by a procession of the Cardinal's house
hold and all his dependents, who had so contracted the habit of
1 ' Disse alcune cose utili per la nostra Repubblica,' says Infessura, Mur.
iii. pt. 2, 1131.
ELECTION OF TOMMASO PAKENTUCELLI. 275
flattery that, when their master was not there, they were fain to CHAP,
grovel to the box that contained his dinner.1 ._ **' _.
When the eighteen Cardinals entered the conclave it was Election of
the general expectation that their choice would fall on Prospero
Colonna, the nephew of Martin V. But the old Eoman proverb,
4 He who goes into the conclave a Pope comes out a Cardinal,' March 6,
was again proved true. Prospero Colonna was supported by
the powerful Cardinals Scarampo and Le Jeune ; but the party
of the Orsini were strongly opposed to an election from the
house of their rivals, and many of the Cardinals thought that it
would be bad policy to run the risk of kindling discord in the
city. The opponents of Colonna were more anxious to prevent
his election than careful who else was elected. On the first
scrutiny Colonna had ten votes and Capraniea eight. In the
hopes of agreeing on another candidate, various names were
suggested of those outside the college, such as the Archbishop
of Benevento and Nicolas of Cusa. On the second scrutiny
Colonna still had ten votes, but the votes of his opponents were
more divided, and three were given for Thomas of Bologna.
The election of Colonna now seemed secure, 'Why do we
waste time,' said Cardinal Le Jeune, < when delay is hurtful to
the Church ? The city is disturbed ; King Alfonso is at the
gates ; the Duke of Savoy is plotting against us; Sforza is our foe.
Why do we not elect a Pope ? Grod has sent us a gentle lamb,
the Cardinal Colonna : he only needs two votes ; if one be
given, the other will follow.' There was a brief silence ; then
Thomas of Bologna rose to give his vote for Colonna. The
Cardinal of Taranto eagerly stopped him. < Pause,' he said,
4 and reflect that we are not electing a ruler of a city but of
the Universal Church. Let us not be too hasty.' ' You mean
that you oppose Colonna,' exclaimed Scarampo ; < if the election
were going according to your wishes, you would not speak of
haste. You wish to object, not to deliberate. Tell us whom
you want for Pope.' To parry this home-thrust, which was
true, the Cardinal of Taranto found it necessary to mention
some one definitely. fi Thomas of Bologna,' he exclaimed. * I
accept him,' said Scarampo, who was followed by Le Jeune, and
1 ' Usque adeo miseros Curiales adulandi consuetude illexit ut quum Cardi-
nalibus nequeant Cornutis assententur,' Mur. iii. 2, 892. The boxes were
called Cornuta.
T 2
276
THE PAPAL EESTOKATION.
BOOK
IV.
Early life
of Paren-
tucelli.
soon Thomas had eleven votes in his favour. Finally, Torque-
mada said, ' I, too, vote for Thomas, and make him Pope ; to
day we celebrate the vigil of S. Thomas.' The others accepted
the election that it might be unanimous, and Cardinal Colonna
announced it to the people. The mob could not hear him, and
a cry was raised that he was Pope. The Orsini roused them
selves ; the people, according to old custom, pillaged Colonna's
house. Their mistake was lucky for themselves, as Thomas
was a poor man, and they found little booty in his house after
wards. The election was a universal surprise. The Cardinal of
Portugal, as he limped out of the Conclave, when asked if the
Cardinals had elected a Pope, answered, ' No, God has chosen a
Pope, not the Cardinals.'
Tommaso Parentucelli l sprang from an obscure family at
Sarzana, a little town not far from Spezia, in the diocese of
Lucca. His father, Bartolommeo, was a physician in Pisa or
Lucca, it is not certain which. At the age of seven he lost his
father, and his mother soon afterwards married again ; but she
was careful to give her son a good education, and at the age of
twelve sent him to school at Bologna. As he had to make his
own way in the world, he went to Florence at the age of nine
teen, and acted as private tutor to the sons, first of Rinaldo
degli Albizzi, and afterwards of Palla Strozzi. By this means
he saved in three years enough money to enable him to return
to Bologna and continue his studies at the University, where
he attracted the notice of the bishop of the city, Niccolo
Albergata, who took him into his service. For twenty years
Parentucelli continued to be at the head of Albergata's house
hold; he looked upon the Cardinal as a second father, and
served him with zeal. But he was a genuine student, and
employed his leisure in theological reading. He became
famous for his large and varied knowledge, his great powers of
memory, and his readiness and quickness as a disputant. In
Albergata's service he accompanied his master on many em
bassies, and obtained an insight into the politics of Europe,
while at the same time, by his own reputation for learning, he
1 The very name is uncertain. Manetti, Mur. iii. 2, 107, says : ' De nobili
Parentucellorum prog-enie.' Two Bulls of Felix V. (Mansi, xxxi. 188, 190)
call him Thomas de Calandrinis ; but Ciaconius, ii. 961, gives from Oldoinus
two inscriptions from a tomb at Sarzana which call his mother Andreola de
Oalderinis, and an uncle J, P. Parentucelli.
EARLY LIFE OF PARENTUCELLI. 277
made acquaintance with the chief scholars of Italy. No one
had a greater knowledge of books, and Cosimo de' Medici con
sulted him about the formation of the library of S. Marco.
The only luxury in which Parentucelli indulged was in books,
for which he had a student's love. He was careful to have fair
manuscripts made for his own use, and was himself famous for
his beautiful handwriting.1
On the death of Albergata in 1443 Parentucelli entered
the service of Cardinal Landriani, and after his death in the
same year was employed by Eugenius IV., who soon made him
Bishop of Bologna. But Bologna was in revolt against the
Pope, and Parentucelli gained such scanty revenues either from
his see or from the bounty of Eugenius IV. that he was driven
to borrow money from Cosimo de' Medici to enable him to dis
charge his legation in Grermany. Such was Cosimo's friend
ship that he gave him a general letter of credit to all his cor
respondents. The embassy in Grermany led to important
results, and Eugenius IV. recognised the merits of Parentucelli
by making him Cardinal in December 1446. He had only
enjoyed his new dignity a few months before his elevation to
the Papacy. His first act was a sign of gratitude to his early
patron and friend. He took the pontifical title of Nicolas V.
in remembrance of Niccolo Albergata.
If the election of Nicolas V. was not very gratifying to any Concilia-
political party, it was least objectionable to none. The Colonna, sures^f*"
the Orsini, Venice, the Duke of Milan, the King of France, Nicolas v-
the King of Naples, all had hoped for an election in their own
special interest. All were disappointed ; but at least they had
the satisfaction of considering that their opponents had gained
as little as themselves. No one could object to the new Pope.
He was a man of high character and tried capacity. He had
made himself friends everywhere by his learning, and had made
no enemies by his politics. Alfonso of Naples sent four am
bassadors to congratulate him and be present at his coronation,
^Eneas Sylvius waited on him to receive a confirmation of the
agreement which Eugenius IV. had made with Germany.
4 1 will not only confirm but execute it,' was the answer of
Nicolas. * In my opinion the Koman Pontiffs have too greatly
1 Vespasiano da Bisticci, himself a Florentine bookseller, speaks with ad
miration of the technical skill of Parentucelli as a scribe and a librarian.
278
THE PAPAL RESTOKATION.
BOOK
IV.
Embassies
of congra
tulation
to the new
Pope.
extended their authority, and left the other bishops no juris
diction. It is a just judgment that the Council of Basel has
in turn shortened too much the hands of the Holy See. We
intend to strengthen the bishops, and hope to maintain our
own power most surely by not usurping that of others.' 1
These words of Nicolas V. express the entire situation of
ecclesiastical affairs. If his policy could only have been carried
out, the future of the Church might still have been assured.
In the same sense he spoke about secular matters to his old
friend the Florentine bookseller, Vespasiano da Bisticci. Ves-
pasiano presented himself at a public audience, and Nicolas
bade him wait till he was done. Then he took him into a
private room, and said, with a smile, ' Would the people of
Florence have believed that a simple priest who rang the bell
would one day become Pope to the confusion of the proud ? '
Vespasiano answered that his elevation was due to his merits,
and that he now might pacify Italy. ' I pray Grod,' said
Nicolas, 'that He will give me grace to carry out my intention,
which is to pacify Italy, and to use in my pontificate no other
arms than those which Christ has given me, that is, His Cross.'
The pacific character of the new Pope made him generally
acceptable. After his coronation on March 18, embassies from
the various Italian States flowed into Borne, and the dexterity
and precision with which Nicolas answered their harangues in
creased the opinion which men already had of his capacity. He
received the embassies in open consistory, so that those who
wished to regale themselves with a banquet of eloquence might
be fully satisfied. Already in Italy a cultivated taste had
begun to attach great importance to the neat and decorous per
formance of formal duties. Cities were anxious to have in their
service men whose speeches on public occasions could win
applause by the elegance of their style ; and scholars rose to the
rank of State officials by the reputation which they gained
from these public appearances. Under Eugenius IV. the
Papacy had not given much encouragement to this display of
eloquence ; but Nicolas V., himself a scholar and the friend of
scholars, was willing to fall in with the prevalent taste. His
public audiences were crowded with critics, and reputations
were made or unmade in a morning. The complimentary
1 In Mur. iii. pt. 2, 895.
BEGINNINGS OF NICOLAS V. 279
harangue began to hold the same relation to the new culture
of the Kenaissance as had the scholastic disputation to the
erudition of the Middle Ages. In this arena of eloquence
Nicolas V. himself could hold his own with the best, not so
much by elegance of style as by the readiness with which he
could aptly reply, on the spur of the moment, to an elaborately
prepared speech. The very graces of the orator who had pre-
ceeded him lent a foil to the readiness of the Pope. Thus the
Florentine embassy was headed by the learned Gianozzo
Manetti, who spoke for an hour and a quarter. The Pope, with
his hand before his face, seemed to be asleep, and one of his
attendants touched his arm to wake him. But when Gianozzo
had finished, Nicolas took each of his points in order, and gave
a suitable answer to them all. The audience knew not which
to admire most, the grace of the orator or the aptness of the
Pope.1 The cleverness of Nicolas V. soon won for him the
respect of those who at first looked with disfavour on the insig
nificant appearance of the successor of the majestic Eugenius
IV. Nicolas V. had no outward graces to commend him. He
was little, with weak legs disproportionately small for his
body; a face of ashen complexion brought into still greater
prominence his black flashing eyes; his voice was loud and
harsh ; his mouth small, with heavily protruding lips.
Nicolas V., however, had more serious work in hand than
the reception of ambassadors. His first care, naturally, was to
secure the restoration of the German obedience. ^Eneas
Sylvius, who had acted as cross-bearer at the Pope's coronation 1447.
on March 18, set out on March 30 to carry to Frederick III. the
confirmation by Nicolas V. of the engagements of his pre
decessor. ^Eneas advised the King to renew his declaration of
obedience, and order all men to receive honourably the Pope's
legates ; so would he end the schism, conciliate the Pope, win
back Hungary, and prepare the way for his coronation as
Emperor. ^Eneas himself soon received a mark of the Pope's
favour in the shape of a nomination to the vacant bishopric of
Trieste. As JEneas found himself rising in the world, and his,
age advanced beyond the temptations of youthful passion, his
objections to take Holy Orders had died away. In 1446 he
resolved to live more cleanly, 'to abandon,' as he said,
1 Vespasiano, Vita di Nicola V.
280 THE PAPAL EESTOEATION.
BOOK ' Venus for Bacchus.' He was ordained, and 4 loved nothing so
. T ' _^ much as the priesthood.' Only through ecclesiastical prefer
ment could he hope for any recognition of his services.
While he was at Eome there came a report of the death of the
Bishop of Trieste, and Eugenius IV. was ready to appoint
^Eneas to the vacant see. The Bishop of Trieste outlived
Eugenius ; but Nicolas V. carried out his predecessor's intention,
disregarding the fact that, by the compact between Eugenius
and Frederick, Trieste was one of the bishoprics granted to the
King's nomination. No difficulty, however, arose on this head,
as Frederick III., independently of the Pope, had nominated
^Eneas. It is true that the Chapter of Trieste tried to
assert their rights, but were at once set aside by the King and
Pope, and ^Eneas won his first decided step in the way of
preferment.1
Congress at As affairs stood in Gfermany, the King, the Archbishop of
JuneSM47. Mainz, and the Elector of Brandenburg were ready to acknow
ledge Nicolas V. ; the other Electors had not yet declared
themselves. Wishing to make the best terms for themselves,
they turned to the King of France, who held a congress at
Bourges in June. Jacob of Trier went there in person ; the
other Electors sent representatives. England, Scotland, Bur
gundy, and Castile were all ready to follow the French King,
who thus asserted in the affairs of the Church the authority
which had previously belonged to the Emperor. The con
clusions signed at Bourges on June 28 were a little in advance
of those accepted by Frederick III. The King of France and
the Electors were ready to acknowledge Nicolas V. if he re
cognised the existing condition of ecclesiastical affairs, agreed to
summon a Council on September 1, 1448, in some place to be
determined by the French King, accepted the Constance
decrees, and agreed to provide for his rival, Felix V.2 There
was in this a pretence of standing upon the conciliar basis, and
maintaining the cause of reform more definitely than Frederick
III. had done ; but it was done by an alliance with the French
King, the enemy of the German nation. It was the expression
of anarchy and self-inter estjather than any care for the na-
1 Pii II., Comment. 14.
2 ' Advisata in facto pads ecclesitv,' in D'Achery, Spicilegium, iii. 770.
Labbe, xiii. 1330.
CONGRESSES OF BOURGES AND ASCHAFFENBURG. 281
tionai welfare ; it was merely a means of making better terms CHAP.
than could be obtained by joining Frederick III. The Congress ._ .'*' _„
then moved from Bourges to Lyons, that it might more easily
negotiate with Felix V. the terms of his abdication.
Meanwhile Frederick III, summoned an assembly of the Congress of
princes who had joined his party at Aschaffenburg on July 12. t>nrg> July
The Archbishop of Mainz presided, and the assembly confirmed 1447-
what had been done at Rome, Frederick III. withdrew his safe-
conduct from the Council of Basel, and ordered it to disperse ;
but no immediate heed was paid to his command. On August
21 he published in Vienna a general edict announcing his
adhesion to the conclusion of the assembly at Aschaffenburg,
and forbade, under the ban of the Empire, any adhesion to
Felix V. or the Council of Basel.1 The proclamation was
celebrated by festivities in Vienna and by a solemn procession.
But this display of joy was fictitious, and the University was
only driven to take part in the procession under threat of depri
vation of its revenues and benefices.2 The academic feeling
remained till the last true to the conciliar cause.
But the Papal diplomacy steadily pursued its course. -<Eneas
./Eneas Sylvius found himself, as Bishop of Trieste, occupied in justifies his
the same way as when he held the inferior office of royal conduct-
secretary. He was sent to Koln to win over the archbishop, and
succeeded in the object of his mission. But at Koln he found
himself regarded by the University as an apostate ; the sneers
which had elsewhere been spoken behind his back were there
expressed before his face. ^Eneas found it necessary to justify
himself in a letter addressed to the rector of the University,
and his apology is full of characteristic shrewdness.3 He went
to Basel, he said, an unfledged nestling from Siena ; there he
heard nothing but abuse of Eugenius, and was too inex
perienced to disbelieve what he heard. Dazzled by the
eminence of the Council's leaders, he followed in their track,
and his vanity led him to write against Eugenius. But God
had mercy on him, and he went to Frankfort as Saul had gone
to Damascus. If even Augustine had written confessions, why
should not he ? At Frederick's Court he first began to hear
1 See Chmel's Materialien, I. 245 ; Raynaldus, 1447, 17.
2 Mitterdorfer, Hist. Univ. Viennens, i. 161.
3 It is given in Fea, Pivs II. a calumniis rindicatus, p. 1 .
282
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
The
German
Electors
recognise
Nicolas V.
1448.
Concordat
of Vienna.
February
1448.
both sides, and gradually became neutral, till the arguments of
Cesarini convinced him that he ought to leave the Council's
party. His chief reasons for doing so were : (1) The wrongful
proceedings against the Pope, who was neither heretical,
schismatic, nor a cause of scandal, and therefore ought not
justly to be deposed ; (2) the nullity of the Council, which had
been translated by the Pope, did not represent the Universal
Church, and was not supported by any nation in Europe except
Savoy ; (3) the Council did not trust the justice of its own
cause ; was faith only to be found at Basel, as Apollo gave
oracles only at Delphi? — by refusing to go elsewhere the
Council showed disbelief in itself.
Thus ./Eneas justified himself, and the cause of Nicolas V.
progressed, as the Electors saw that they could gain something
from the Pope. Jacob of Trier began to make terms for him
self. Dietrich of Koln used Carvajal to mediate in a troublesome
dispute between himself and the Duke of Cleve. The Pfalzgraf,
though the son-in-law of Felix V., was content with exacting a
few concessions from Frederick III., and sent his ambassador to
Rome. The Elector of Saxony obtained corresponding favours
from the King. On no side was there any real care for Church
reform ; it merely served as a cry under cover of which the
Electors sought to promote their own power and their own
interests. Early in 1448 the whole of Germany had entered
the obedience of Nicolas V.
In accordance with the undertaking of Eugenius IV., a
legate was sent to Germany to arrange for the liberties of the
Grerman Church in the future, and the no less important ques
tion of the provision to be made for the Pope out of its
revenues. Cardinal Carvajal was wisely chosen for this pur
pose, and the Concordat at Vienna on February 16, 1448, was
the work of himself and the King. It was not submitted to a
Diet, though no doubt many representatives of the Electors
and the princes were at Vienna. It would seem that the
assembly of Aschaffenburg was dexterously turned into a Diet ;
and the Concordat, made in the name of the Grerman nation, was
regarded as being a necessary consequence of that assembly.1
The Concordat of Vienna and the Pragmatic Sanction of
1 The Concordat has been often printed, best by Koch, Sanctio Pragmatica
Germanorum Illustrata. Argentor. 1789, p, 210.
THE CONCORDAT OF VIENNA. 283
Bourges represent the net result of the reforming movement at CHAP.
Basel, and in their form, as well as their contents, go back to ^ IL _.
the system pursued at the end of the Council of Constance. Its relation
The strength of the reforming party was its cry for the redress cordats of
of grievances which each national Church experienced from (
Papal interference. Its weakness lay in the fact that it
had not sufficient statesmanship to devise a means of re
dressing these grievances without destroying the constitution
of the Church under the Papal monarchy. The Council of
Constance fell in pieces before the difficulties of this task, and
produced merely a temporary agreement between the Papacy
and the national Churches concerning a few matters of com
plaint. The Council of Basel, in its desire to abolish abuses,
threatened to sweep away also the basis of the Papal monarchy,
and so became engaged in an irreconcilable contest with the
Papacy, in which it was not supported by the public opinion of
Europe. In this state of things France used the opportunity
to regulate by royal authority the relations of the Gallican
Church to Eome. Germany, after a vain endeavour to arbi
trate as neutral between the rival Popes, fell back upon the
old method of a Concordat, and aimed merely at extending
the basis which had been established at Constance. The Con
cordat of Constance was made provisionally for five years only;
the Concordat of Vienna was meant, on the Papal side, to be
permanent. It was, of course, true that Eugenius IV. had
agreed in February 1447 that another Council should be
assembled within ten months. A year passed, and nothing was
done towards summoning a Council. The Concordat of Vienna
confirmed all that Eugenius IV. had granted, ' so far as they
do not go against this present agreement ; ' it made no mention
of a Council, and the promise of Eugenius IV. lapsed through
non-fulfilment.
Thus Germany was contented to accept as the settlement Provisions
of its grievances a private agreement between the King and cordat.
the Pope. The question arranged by the Concordat of Vienna
was the relations henceforth to exist between the Papacy and
the German Church. It was little more than a repetition of
the Concordat of Constance ; but such alterations as were made
were in favour of the Pope.
It dealt only with the grievances caused by Papal reserva-
284 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK tions and Papal interference with elections. It admitted the
v V' ^ right of Papal reservation to benefices whose holders died at
the Roman Court or within two days' journey from Rome, to
vacancies caused by Papal deprivation or translation, to benefices
vacated by the deaths of cardinals or other officials of the Curia,
to offices held by any promoted by the Pope to a bishopric,
monastery, or other office incompatible with residence. More
over, Papal provisions were allowed to benefices, excepting the
higher offices in cathedrals and collegiate churches, such as
might fall vacant in the months of January, March, May, July,
September, and November. The Concordat of Constance had
given to the Pope alternate benefices. The Concordat of Vienna
gave him alternate months, and it is noticeable that by this ar
rangement the Pope secured 184 out of the 365 days of the year.
The Papal right of confirmation of other elections was
retained as before. In case the elections were canonical, the
Pope was to confirm them, unless ' from some reasonable and
evident cause, and with the consent of the Cardinals, the Pope
thought that provision should be made for some more useful
and more worthy person.' If the elections were found to be
uncanonical, the Pope was to provide. The dues to the Curia,
annates, first fruits, and the rest, were to be paid in two portions
within two years. If the rates were thought excessive, the Pope
was willing to have a revaluation ; also he was ready to take into
account any special circumstances which affected at any time
the revenues of the office so taxed. Benefices below the annual
value of twenty-four florins were to be exempt.
The Papal restoration was complete. The German Church
gained nothing. The only points which showed any care for
its interests were provisions that the Papal reservation should
be exercised only in favour of Grermans, and that the Papal
months should be accepted by the Ordinaries. These advan
tages were, however, seeming rather than real. If so much
were secured by the Papacy, it would be difficult to prevent it
from overstepping these slight barriers.
No mention was made in the Concordat of the Council of
Basel or of its decrees. The reforming movement had been a
political failure, and the fruits of its labours were swept away
by the reaction. The Council had not succeeded in accom
plishing any of its objects. It had not even impressed the
END OF FELIX V. AND OF THE COUNCIL OF BASEL. 285
Curia with a sense of the gravity of the crisis from which it had
escaped. The restored Papacy was only bent on going back to
its old lines, and showed no desire to lay the foundations
of a gradual reform of the abuses which had exposed it to
so grave a peril. The Concordat was signed at Vienna on
February 18 ; it was confirmed at Eome on March 19, 'after
careful investigation by learned canonists and eminent car
dinals,' though the intervening time barely allowed it to be
carried from one place to another.
The reason why Frederick III. submitted to terms, which Motives for
were so manifestly in the Pope's favour, was the need which he anceaofCpt"
felt of maintaining his alliance with the Pope as the only means ^dat^'
of checking the electoral oligarchy, and preventing their further Germany,
connexion with France. He had no ground for opposing the
Papal power of reservation. His private agreement with
Eugenius IV. allowed the Pope to confer upon him privi
leges which were founded on the Papal right of reservation.
The assent of the Electors was gained by bribes of different
kinds ; the Archbishops were won over, like the King, by grants
of some of the Papal reservations.1 The Pope bought back the
obedience of Germany by granting to the existing representa
tives of the German Church and nation some of the privi
leges which were restored to the Papacy. As the existing
generation died out everything would again revert to the
Pope.
The conclusion of the Concordat of Vienna ended the dwin- Abdication
dling existence of the Council of Basel. On May 18 Frederick ^11449.
III. forbade the city of Basel, under threat of the ban of the
Empire, to harbour the Council within its walls. The citizens
found it necessary at last to yield, and on July 7 five hundred
of them honourably escorted the remnants of the Council on
their way to Lausanne, whither they transferred themselves
under the protection of the French King. Charles VII. under
took the task of bringing the schism to an end, and played the
same part in ecclesiastical affairs as Sigismund had done in the
previous generation. Felix V. was weary of his shadowy dig
nity. The conciliatory temper of Nicolas V. towards him and
Charles VII. made the ultimate settlement tolerably easy.2
1 See Piickert, Die Kurfurstliclie Neutralitdt, p. 321.
a The documents are in Martene, Amp. Coll. VIII. 988 &o., and Baynaldus,
H49.
86 THE PAPAL RESTORATION,
BOOK The ambassadors of England and of Rene of Anjou took part
_ Iy~ _. in the work, and Charles VII. obtained a promise from Nicolas
V. that a new Council should be held in the dominions of
France. On April 7, 1449, Felix V. laid aside his Papal office ;
but he did so in language that still asserted the principle which
he had been elected to maintain : 4 In this holy synod of Lau
sanne, representing the Universal Church, we lay aside the
dignity and possession of the Papacy, hoping that the kings,
princes, and prelates, to whom we judge that this our communi
cation will be acceptable, will aid the authority of General
Councils, will defend and support it ; and that the Universal
Church, for whose dignity and authority we have fought, will
by its prayers commend our humility to the chief and eternal
Shepherd/
Well may the Papal chronicler remark that there is not a
sentence, scarcely a word, in this which does not merit censure.1
But Nicolas V. was not obstinate, like his predecessor ; pro
vided he won the substantial point, he was not careful about
words. He had saved the Papal dignity by committing the
conduct of the negotiation to Charles VII. ; Felix V. might
have his say provided he abdicated peaceably. The Council
also was allowed to save its dignity. On April 19 it elected
Nicolas V. as Pope, and on April 25 conferred by a decree on
Amadeus the office of Cardinal, which Nicolas V. had agreed
to grant him, together with the first place next to the Pope, the
position of General Vicar within the dominions that had recog
nised him, and the outward honours of the Papal rank. The
Council then decreed its own dissolution, and its members dis
persed. True to his conciliatory policy, Nicolas V. restored
d'Allemand to his office of Cardinal, and recognised three of the
creations of Felix V. John of Segovia received from the Pope
a little bishopric in Spain, where, hidden among the hills, he
spent the rest of his days in Arabic studies, translated the
Koran into Latin, and exposed its errors.2 D'Allemand retired to
his see of Aries, where he was famous for his personal piety and
good works, and after his death, September 16, 1450, it was
said that miracles were wrought at his tomb. So great was his
fame for sanctity that Clement VII. in 1527 pronounced him
' ' llaynaldus, 1449, 2. 2 jEn. Sylv., De Euroya, ch. 42.
DEATH OF FILIPPO MARIA VISCONTI. 287
worthy of the imitation of the faithful.1 Amadeus did not long
survive him; he died on January 7, 1451, 'more useful to the
Church by his death than by his life,' says ^Eneas Sylvius,2
though most of his contemporaries are willing to forgive his
previous misdeeds in remembrance of his renunciation.
Thus Nicolas V. had the satisfaction of seeing the schism Death of
brought to an end, its last remnants swept away, and the
Papacy restored to a supremacy which it had not enjoyed
for nearly a century. In Italy also Nicolas V. had the satis-
faction of bringing back order into the Papal States. He
soothed the rebellious spirit of the Komans by ordaining that
only Komans should hold magistracies and benefices within the
city, and that the imposts should be spent only for the good of
the city.3 He soothed the barons by his mildness, and did
away with the grievances of the Colonna by allowing them to
rebuild Palestrina, on condition that it should not be fortified.
The knowledge which he had gained as Bishop of Bologna
showed him that that city could be won by a compromise. He
was content that it should recognise the sovereignty of the
Holy See and admit a Papal legate, with certain powers of
interference; otherwise it might retain the rule of the Benti-
vogli and appoint its own magistrates. The luckiest event,
however, for Nicolas V. was the death, on August 13, 1447,
of Filippo Maria Visconti, which left the affairs of Milan in
confusion, and turned elsewhere the ambition of Francesco
Sforza, who withdrew his forces from the March of Ancona, and
left the Pope in undisputed possession.
Filippo Maria Visconti is a typical character of the last mem- Character
bers of the princely families who had made themselves lords Maria Vis-
of the cities of Italy. He succeeded by caution, prudence, contl'
and treachery in gathering together the broad dominions of
his father, Grian Graleazzo ; but the strain which the effort
involved seems to have paralysed his faculties. He had studied
so carefully the mode by which a principality was won, that he
had learned with fatal accuracy the ease with which it might be
lost. His energies were entirely devoted to the security of his
own person, the suppression of possible rivals, the maintenance
of his own position. Though engaged in many wars to avert
1 Ciaconius, ii. 843. 2 Comment., ed. Fea., 114.
3 Theiner, Codex Eiplomaticus, IIT. 314.
288 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK possible danger from his own dominions, he never personally
. l^' _. took the field, and secured himself against his generals by
playing off one against another. Thus he held the balance
between Sforza and Piecinino ; when one seemed likely to be-
become too powerful his rival was pitted against him. Filippo
Maria was assiduous in his attention to public matters, and regu
lated by minute ordinances the internal affairs of his state. He
lived a lonely life in the castle of Milan and his country houses,
to which he had canals constructed to convey him more
secretly. He had no one around him whose character he had
not tried by exposing them to temptations, while they did not
suspect that he was watching. Access to him was difficult, and
was only permitted after innumerable precautions. He was
surrounded by spies, who were employed in checking one
another. So afraid was he of assassination that he changed
his bedroom two or three times in the night, and was never
without a physician, whose advice he sought respecting the
cause of every bodily sensation which he experienced. Yet he
was a man of learning, and was especially interested in the
heroes of past times and in the French romances of chivalry.
He was careful in performing all religious offices, and never
did anything without secret prayer. Even when he left his
chamber and looked upon the sun, he uncovered his head and
gave Grod thanks. Yet he was full of superstitions, consulted
astrologers, and was terrified at a thunderstorm. He had such
a horror of death that he would have no one ill within his
palace, nor would he allow the death of anyone to be mentioned
in his presence. Yet when his own death drew nigh he faced
it with fortitude, and even hastened its approach by ordering
his physician to open an old wound in his leg. His aim in life
was simply to live in quietness and security, and his tortuous
policy in Italy had no other object. He had a cynical contempt
for mankind, and pursued none but purely selfish ends ; yet he
was neither cruel nor vicious, and possessed philosophic gravity
and decorum.1
If Filippo Maria Visconti had succeeded during his lifetime
in maintaining order in his dominions, he produced confusion
1 The life of Filippo Maria Visconti written by Hero Candido Decembrio, in
Muratori, vol. xx., is one of the most characteristic works of the early
.Renaissance period in Italy.
FRANCESCO SFOBZA, DUKE OF MILAN. 289
by his death. His only child was an illegitimate daughter,
Bianca, whose hand had been the bait which kept Francesco
Sforza true to her father's service, till he at last succeeded in Claimants
extorting a fulfilment of the promise so long delayed. The Milanese.
rule of the Visconti was not a recognised monarchy ; and no
rights of succession could pass through an illegitimate daughter.
Yet Sforza aspired to the Duchy of Milan, and his claim rested
on grounds as good as those of the other claimants. Alfonso
of Naples asserted that Filippo Maria had named him as his
successor by will ; but the lordship of Milan was but the chief
magistracy of the city, and could not pass by bequest. The
Duke of Orleans, by his marriage with Valentina, sister of
Filippo Maria, claimed to represent the Visconti house ; but
this was to regard Milan as a fief which passed through the
female line. Finally, Frederick III. claimed that on the ex
tinction of the Visconti house Milan, as an Imperial fief, re
verted to the Emperor ; but this disregarded the fact that
Milan, though nominally subject to the Empire, had been a free
city for centuries before the Visconti made themselves its lords.
The Milanese on their part did not consider themselves as be
longing to any of these claimants. They had submitted to the
rule of the great Visconti family, which had been closely con
nected with the past glories of their city. When that family
came to an end they decided to go back to their position of an
independent republic, and other cities in the dominions of the
Visconti followed their example.
The new republics would clearly have enough to do to hold Francesco
their own against these numerous claimants : but Venice, fome^iord
always jealous of its neighbours, saw in the difficulties of Milan of Milan,
its own opportunity. Engaged in war with Venice, Milan was 1450. "
driven to take into its service Francesco Sforza, who, with con
summate sagacity, used the opportunity so offered. He raised
up in Milan a party favourable to himself ; he won back towns
from the Venetians, and garrisoned them with his own soldiers.
He defeated Venice so that she was driven to sue for peace ;
then he suddenly changed sides, allied himself with the Vene
tians and advanced against Milan, which was unsuspecting and
unprepared for a siege. In vain Venice, when it wras too late,
saw her mistake, made peace with Milan, and despatched an
army against Sforza, Sforza, though suffering from famine
ii. u
290
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Jubilee of
1450.
almost as much as Milan, persisted in his blockade, and kept
the Venetian troops at bay till the Milanese, in desperation,
could endure no longer. Then, gathering all the food he could,
he entered Milan February 26, 1450, as the saviour, rather
than the conqueror, of the people. He arranged that supplies
should rapidly be brought into the city, and managed to pre
sent himself to the people as their benefactor. Admiration of
his cleverness and prudence overcame all resentment of his
treachery. His first measures were wise and conciliatory, and
promised good government for the future. The Milanese soon
admitted that one who could plot so skilfully was likely to rule
with success. The condottiere general, the son of the peasant
of Cotignola, took his place amongst the princes of Europe.
Nicolas V. was glad to see peace again restored in North
Italy, and a power established which was strong enough to keep
in check the ambition of Venice. He took no part in the
operations of the war. His pursuits were those of peace. He
was busy in organising the Papal finances, and showed his grati
tude for past favours to Cosimo de' Medici by making him his
banker, a step which benefited the Papal treasury, and at the
same time increased the prestige and credit of the great banking-
house of the Medici. Otherwise Nicolas was employed in plan
ning the restoration of the buildings of Rome, and in increasing
the treasures of the Vatican Library. His object was to make
Rome once more a fit residence for the Papacy, to restore its
former splendour, and make it the literary and artistic capital
of Europe. In 1450 Nicolas V. proclaimed a year of jubilee.
The schism was at an end, and since the first jubilee of Boniface
VIII. there had not been in Rome an undisputed Pope to lend
solemnity to the pilgrimage. Italy was peaceful, and access to
Rome was free. Crowds of pilgrims from every land flocked to
Rome, to the number of 40,000 in one day.1 So great was the
crowd returning one evening from S. Peter's that more than 200
persons were killed in the crush upon the bridge of S. Angelo,
or were pushed into the water. Nicolas took care to prevent
such an accident in the future by pulling down the houses
which narrowed the approach to the bridge, and built a memo
rial chapel of marble to commemorate the calamity.
The arrangements for supplying food to this great multitude
« ^En. Syl., Hist. Fred., Kollar, II. 172.
JUBILEE OF 1450.
and for keeping order were excellent, and testified to the Pope's CHAP.
administrative skill. The offerings that flowed into the Papal . _ ' .
treasury were large, and gave Nicolas V. the means of carrying Negotia-
out still more splendidly his magnificent schemes of restoring the mar-
the City of Rome — for which a new festival was in store, in the i>fdedck
shape of an Imperial coronation. The peaceful settlement of IIL
North Italy promised Frederick III. an easy access to Rome,
which he could never have won by his own arms. He was now
thirty-five years old, and bethought himself of marriage, which
he had never contemplated since the offer which Felix V. made
him of his daughter. He sent two ambassadors to report on
the ladies of royal birth who were eligible as wife of the King
of the Romans, and finally fixed on Leonora, daughter of
the King of Portugal and niece of Alfonso of Naples. ^Eneas
Sylvius was sent to Naples to negotiate the marriage ; and
on his way thither received the news that Nicolas V. had
conferred on him the bishopric of his native city of Siena. His
business in Naples was successfully accomplished. Leonora,
only fourteen years old, had other suitors, but she preferred
Frederick III., for she rejoiced to be called Empress. ' For the
title of Emperor,' says ^Eneas, ' was held in more esteem abroad
than at home.' l It was agreed that Frederick should meet his
bride at some port in Italy, whence they should proceed to
Rome for the coronation.
When this had been arranged, ^Eneas visited Rome at the The Coun-
end of 1450, and had an opportunity of conferring another France
service on the Pope. There was one shadow which still hung l
over Nicolas V. — the shadow of a future Council, which he had
promised to the French King. French ambassadors were at
Rome urging the fulfilment of the promise, and ^Eneas sup
plied the Pope with a means of shelving the matter. Nicolas V.
had promised to hold a Council in France, if the other princes of
Europe were willing. ^Eneas, in a speech before the Pope
and Cardinals, announced the betrothal of Frederick and his
approaching coronation. He then went on to demand, in
Frederick's name, a Council in Germany, as being the fittest j
land for such a purpose. Nicolas V. could answer the French ''
ambassadors that the princes of Europe were not unanimous in
1 Hut. Fred., in Kollar, II. Ifi
v 2
292 THE PAPAL EESTOKATIOK
BOOK consenting to a Council in France.1 Again the cleverness of
, IV- . ^Eneas was found useful, and the unwelcome Council was dis
missed for the present.
Canonisa- ^Eneas also suggested to the Pope that it would be well if
nardino of" Germany felt the influence of the religious spirit of Italy. In
Sjy the manifold productiveness of the fifteenth century in Italy,
the fervour of religious feeling had found some noble exponents.
Chief of these was Bernardino, born in 1380 of a good family
in Siena. He gave to the poor his patrimony and entered
the Franciscan Order. Bernardino was filled with an enthu
siasm for moral reform, and strove to bring back the Franciscan
Order to its original purity. He followed the example of its
great founder, and, like Francis, went barefoot throughout
Italy, preaching to the crowds who in every city thronged to
hear him. Wherever he went he awakened the fervour of
devotion, which at all times can be kindled among the masses
into a transient flame. JEneas Sylvius, in his youth, was
almost stirred to become a friar by Bernardino's eloquence,
though his after-life does not show that the impression lasted
long. The Emperor Sigismund, during his stay at Siena, de
lighted to listen to Bernardino's preaching, though he made
little effort to give it any practical result. Bernardino preached
the simple gospel of ' Christ and Him crucified.' He attracted
the attention of the crowd by displaying a wooden tablet
emblazoned with the name of Jesus in letters of gold, and,
with loud cries and exhortations, set it before them for wor
ship. His success raised many enemies, who besought the
Pope to silence the unseemly fanatic. But the Papacy was
wise enough to countenance every religious movement that was
1 This proceeding is somewhat obscure. ^Eneas (Comm. p. 17) says :
' Concilium quod Galli petebant in Francia dissuasit.' Mansi, Pii II. Orationes,
pp. 140 and 152, gives two speeches of JEneas, one previously printed in Freher,
the other from a MS. at Lucca. In the first the demand is made for a
Council in Germany, in the second the matter is not mentioned. Probably
the first was what ^neas delivered ; the second was what he had prepared, and
the demand for the Council was inserted to suit the occasion. The ambas
sador of the Teutonic Order, quoted by Voigt, jffln. Syl. II. 20, mentions the
demand for the Council, and J^neas, Oratio adversus Australes, in Mansi, i.
2S4, says, ' Neque Aragonum neque Angliaa regibus neque Portagallias placet
in Gallia esse concilium. Ego quoque jussu Csesaris in consistorio publico
Romse in fine anni jubiltei hanc celebrationem concilii non sine rationalibus
causis dissuasi.'
CAPISTEANO IN VIENNA. 293
not hostile to itself. Bernardino's teaching was examined and CHAP.
approved by Martin V. and Eugenius IV. The popular devotion , [J: ,
found his sanctity attested by miracles. Even .ZEneas Sylvius
saw him dispel by his prayers a storm that threatened to
disturb his congregation. He died in 1444, and such was
his reputation for holiness that he was canonised by Nicolas V.
during the year of Jubilee.1
Bernardino is said to have established by his exertions more Fra Gio-
than five hundred Franciscan monasteries in Italy. He had many btn
followers, chief amongst whom was Giovanni of Capistrano, Germany-
a village near Aquila. On him Bernardino's mantle fell, and
at the suggestion of ^Eneas Sylvius he was sent by the Pope to
evangelise Germany, and secure its allegiance to Rome. Great
was the success of Capistrano in Vienna. From twenty to
thirty thousand thronged daily to hear the preaching of the
holy friar, though he spoke in Latin, and his words had to be
translated into German by an interpreter. They revered him as
though he were an Apostle, thronged round him to touch the
hem of his garments, and brought their sick in multitudes that
he might lay his hands upon them.
Capistrano's mission had, however, another object than Attitude of
merely to preach to the people of Vienna and reform Francis- *
can houses. It was hoped that his prestige would have some
influence on Bohemia, which had not ceased to be a trouble to
the Papacy. It is true that the Catholic reaction had made
huge strides under Sigismund, and great things were hoped
from Albert II. But Albert's death left Bohemia with an infant
king, and the national feeling against German interference
revived during the minority. Rokycana returned to Prag and
resumed his office as archbishop. The nation that had raised
heroes like Zizka and Procopius the Great found in George
Podiebrad a leader who had the wisdom to unite the nobles into
a patriotic league, and pursue a policy of moderation to all parties
in Church and State alike. The religious question in Bohemia
was left more vague than ever by the dissolution of the Council
of Basel. Nothing had been said about the Compacts in the
1 ^Eneas Sylvius gives an interesting account of him, Hist. Fred., in Kollar,
II. 173. See also his life, Acta Sanctorum, May. vol. v. There is a modern
life by Toussaint (Regensburg, 1873), more remarkable for its tendency to
edification than for its historical value.
294
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
jEneas
Sylvius in
Bohemia.
1451.
final agreement between the Pope and the Council. The
Compacts themselves had never received Papal ratification.
It suited Nicolas V. to leave the matter open, behave with
moderation, and neither accept nor repudiate the Compacts, but
wait till an opportunity offered for ending the exceptional
position which Bohemia still claimed for itself. Meanwhile,
Capistrano tried the effects of his eloquence, Cusa of his learn
ing, and ^Eneas Sylvius of his cleverness.
Besides the religious object of winning back the Hussites
from their heresy, there was also the political motive of
strengthening in Bohemia the party of Frederick III., and allow
ing him to proceed at leisure with his Italian journey. The
Bohemians murmured against Frederick's guardianship of
Ladislas, and demanded that their king should be given up
to their own care. Frederick did not dare to leave his king-
dom till he had taken some steps to secure quietness in
Bohemia. JEneas Sylvius was sent as the head of a royal
embassy to a Bohemian Diet, and we have a vivid picture drawn
by his pen. He and his companions passed through Tabor,
where they were hospitably received. As he entered the city
gate, he saw on either side of the archway a shield: one bore
the Hussite symbol of an angel holding the cup, the other
a picture of the blind general Zizka. ^Eneas found that the
old spirit still survived amid the rude dwellers in the moun
tain fastness. He was struck with holy horror at their disre
gard for ecclesiastical traditions. He had expected to find
them orthodox except in the matter of the Communion under
both kinds ; he found them an entirely heretical and rebellious
people. He left Tabor with the feelings of one who had
escaped from the companionship of the ungodly, and advanced
towards Prag. But the city was stricken by the plague, and the
Diet adjourned to Beneschau, where JEneas discharged his
mission. He besought the Diet to await peacefully the return of
Frederick III. from Eome ; Ladislas was yet too young to rule.
The Diet was not contented with this vague assurance, and
the rhetoric of ^Eneas could not convince them. But ^Eneas
had better success in arranging matters with George Podie-
brad, the governor of Bohemia, whom he judged to be ambitious
rather than misguided. He conferred with him about the
religious troubles in Bohemia ; each complained that the Com-
AENEAS SYLVIUS AND GEOEGE PODIEBRAD. 295
pacts were not observed. Podiebrad demanded the recognition
of Rokycana as archbishop ; ^Eneas asserted that it was a
breach of ecclesiastical order to compel the Pope to recognise
as archbishop anyone whom he deemed unfit.1 No result came
from the argument; but ^Eneas was satisfied that he had
gauged Podiebrad's character and found him to be a harmless
man who could be easily managed. On his return ^Eneas again
passed through Tabor, and on this occasion the Bishop Niklas
of Pilgram, with an attendant crowd of priests and scholars,
came ready for a disputation with one who had a fame for
learning. They were all well versed in Latin, and ^Eneas owns
that the one good point about this perfidious race was its
love for literature. The discussion was like most theological
discussions — each side showed much learning and readiness.
The Taborites urged the scriptural nature of their doctrine ;
JEneas pleaded the authority of the Church, and of the Pope
its earthly head. Yet ^Eneas managed to extract some humour
out of the discussion. * Why do you extol to us the Apostolic
See ? ' said one of the disputants. ' We know the Pope and
his Cardinals to be slaves of avarice and gluttony, whose god
is their belly, and whose heaven is money.' The speaker was
a round fat man. ^Eneas gently laid his hand upon his stomach.
' Is this,' said he, * the result of fasting and abstinence ? '
There was a general laugh, and jEneas withdrew from the
O O 7
dispute. Not till he reached the Catholic city of Budweis
did he breathe freely and feel as if he had emerged from the
infernal regions to the light of heaven. If ^Eneas had not
converted the Bohemian heretics, nor convinced the Bohe
mian Diet, he at least obtained so much that Frederick III.
recognised Podiebrad as Governor of Bohemia, and so procured
peace with that realm during his Roman journey.
No sooner had yEneas returned to Vienna than he was again Frederick
sent off to Italy to arrange for Frederick's coming, and receive out'fortS
his intended bride on her landing. Frederick prepared for his J^*er De~
departure, and appointed regents during his absence. But when 1451.
it was known that he intended to take with him the young
Ladislas, the discontent of the barons of Austria broke out in
1 The letter of ^Eneas to Carvajal (No. 130, ed. Basel) gives a full account
of the controversy and throws much light on the religious condition of
Bohemia.
296 THE PAPAL BESTOKATIOK.
BOOK revolt. Headed by Ulrich Eizinger, they formed a League, and
s___^J , demanded that Ladislas, their rightful king, should be given
up to them. When Frederick refused, the League renounced
allegiance to him, and took the government into its hands.
Frederick's position was ignominious : he had no forces to send
against them, and judged it better to leave Austria in revolt,
and proceed with his Italian expedition. He spent Christmas
at S. Veit in Carinthia, and on the last day of December, 1451,
he entered Italian ground.
Even in the person of the feeble Frederick III. the glamour
of the Imperial title retained some power. When it was
known that he was actually coming to Italy, a certain amount of
trepidation prevailed in the Italian cities. So evenly balanced
was their constitutional mechanism that the slightest touch
might incline it one way or another. Even Siena looked with
suspicion on its bishop, ^Eneas Sylvius, lest he might use his
influence with Frederick to seize the lordship of his native
town. Much as Nicolas V. had desired an Imperial coronation
at Rome, to give occasion for another festival, as well as to
mark the close alliance between the Empire and the Papacy, he
began to listen to the alarming hints which were poured into
his ears. Frederick might plot against the peace of the Roman
city ; allied by his marriage with Alfonso of Naples, he might
threaten the wealth of the Pope and Cardinals. If we are to
believe ^Eneas Sylvius, it needed all his cleverness to reassure
the Pope.1
Frederick advanced from Treviso through the Venetian
territory. He did not think it wise, as Milan was in the hands
of a usurper of the Imperial rights, to go to Milan to receive
the iron crown of Lombardy. He was met near the Po by
Borso, Marquis of Este, who received him on bended knees and
escorted him to Ferrara. There Lodovico Gronzaga of Mantua
came to welcome him, and Sforza's young son, Galeazzo Maria,
brought a condescending invitation to Milan. From Ferrara
Frederick journeyed to Bologna, where he was greeted by Car
dinal Bessarion, the Papal legate. Thence he passed into Florence
and saw with wonder the splendour of the city. Frederick was
accompanied by his ward Ladislas, a boy of twelve, his brother
1 Hist. Fred., in Kollar, II. 187.
FREDERICK III. IN ITALY. 297
Albert, and a few bishops and smaller princes, with about CHAP.
2,000 horsemen. His advent in Italy had no political signifi- . ^___^
cance, but was merely an antiquarian pageant.
On February 2 came the news that Leonora, with her Frederick
convoy, had arrived at Livorno. ^Eneas Sylvius was sent to s
meet her ; but the punctilious ambassador of Portugal refused
to give up his precious charge except to the Emperor himself.
^Eneas, on his side, asserted the dignity of his mission. For
fifteen days they wrangled, till the matter was submitted to
Leonora, who professed herself obedient to the commands of her
future lord. She was escorted, on February 24, to Siena, where
Frederick was anxiously awaiting her. The Sienese marked
by a stone pillar the exact spot where the Emperor first em
braced his bride. The elegant festivities of the Sienese charmed
Frederick as much as their scanty contribution of money dis
pleased him. On March 1 he passed on to Yiterbo, where
some unruly spirits showed their contempt for dignities, by
trying to catch with hooks the baldachin held over the Em
peror, that they might make booty of the rich stuff; then
growing bolder, they made a rush for the trappings of
Frederick's horse. ' We must repel force by force,' he cried,
and, seizing a lance from an attendant, he charged the mob.
This was the beginning of an unseemly brawl, in the midst of
which Frederick entered his lodging.
On March 8 the King and his attendants came in sight of
Rome. Frederick turned to ^Eneas, and said prophetically :
4 We are going to Rome — I seem to see you Cardinal and
future Pope.' The Cardinals and nobles of Rome advanced to
welcome Frederick, who, according to custom, passed the night
outside the walls. Nicolas Y. was still perturbed at the
thoughts of his coming. .ZEneas went on before to assure him
of the King's goodwill. ' I prefer the error of suspicion rather
than of over-confidence,' was the Pope's answer. Next day,
Frederick and Leonora entered Rome with pomp, and were
escorted to S. Peter's, where the Pope awaited them in the
porch seated in his chair. Frederick knelt and kissed the
Pope's foot; then Nicolas rose, offered him his hand to kiss,
and kissed his cheek. The King presented a massive piece of
gold, took the accustomed oath of fidelity, and was led by the
THE PAPAL RESTORATION,
BOOK.
IV.
Coronation
of Fre
derick III.
March 19,
1452.
Pope into the church. Never before had there been such
friendly greeting between Pope and Emperor.1
Nicolas V. proposed to defer the coronation till March 19,
as being the anniversary of his own coronation as Pope.
Frederick acceded to the Pope's wish ; but he did not care,
meanwhile, to remain indoors at the Vatican, and scandalised
the Eomans by rambling about the city before his coronation,
which was contrary to usage. He was greatly impressed by the
old buildings of Kome, as well as by the restorations on which
Nicolas V. was engaged. The Pope and the King conferred freely
within the Vatican, and their alliance was confirmed by their
mutual needs. Frederick wished the Pope to support him
against the rebellious Austrian s, and compel them to submit to
his authority as guardian of the young Ladislas. Nicholas
urged Frederick to use material weapons to bring into sub
jection a perfidious race which had favoured the conciliar
movement, and was yet far from showing a proper obedience to
the Papal commands. The league between Pope and Emperor
was strengthened by these conferences, and Frederick besought
the Pope to give an additional proof of his favour by conferring
on him in Eome the crown of Lombardy, which he had not
been able to receive at Monza. In spite of the protest of the
Milanese ambassadors, Nicolas V., on March 16, performed this
unprecedented act, and crowned Frederick King of the Romans,
with the crown of Aachen, which had been brought for the pur
pose. On the same day the marriage of Frederick and Leonora
was performed by the Pope. It was noticed that Ladislas had a
place assigned him below most of the Cardinals, and some of the
Cardinals had precedence over Frederick, who as yet only
ranked as the German King.
At length, on March 19, the Imperial coronation was per
formed with due pomp and ceremony. Frederick first took the
oath of obedience to the Pope, was made a canon of S. Peter's,
and, with Leonora, received the unction at the hands of the
Vice-Chancellor. The Pope said mass, and then placed in the
Emperor's hands the golden sword, the apple, and the sceptre,
1 See ^En. Sylv., Hist. Fred. 277, Comment. 20, the description by Gos-
winus Mandoctes, the Papal singer, in Chmel's Rcgvsta, Anhang, No. 98.
Hodcpporicon in Wiirdtwein, Svbsida, xii. 10 ; Columbanus de Pontremulo, in
Denis, Cod. lib. Jiibl. Ca>s. Tin dob. i. 517.
CORONATION OF FREDERICK III. 29!
and on his head the crown. To make the ceremony more CHAP.
imposing Frederick had fetched from Niirnberg the Imperial ._ r ' _
insignia of Charles the Great, Their venerable antiquity did
not match the magnificent clothing of Frederick, and suggested
the thought that his predecessor paid more attention to his
actions than to his ornaments. The keen eye of ^Eneas Sylvius
detected on the sword-blade the outlines of the Lion of Bohemia,
which showed him that these insignia dated only from the
times of Charles IV.1 This spurious affectation of antiquity was
an apt symbol of the Imperial claims and of the decrepitude of
the Empire. It had grown in outward display in proportion as
it had lost in real power. The Empire was but a reminiscence
of the past ; the Emperor was useful only as a figure in the
pageant.
When the coronation was over, the Pope and the Emperor
walked hand in hand to the door of S. Peter's. The Pope
mounted his horse, and the Emperor held the reins for a few
paces. Then he too mounted his steed, and Pope and Emperor
rode together as far as the Church of S. Maria in Cosmedin.
Nicolas then returned to the Vatican, and Frederick, according
to ancient custom, dubbed knights on the Bridge of S. Angelo.
More than three hundred received this distinction, many of
them men of little worth, who excited the mockery even of
./Eneas Sylvius. A splendid dinner at the Lateran brought
the day's festivities to an end.
When this important matter had been happily accom
plished the Pope issued a series of Bulls in Frederick's favour.
Some of the privileges so conferred were personal. He and a
hundred persons, whom he might choose, were empowered to
select their own confessor. He might have divine service per
formed for his benefit in a place which lay under an interdict ;
he might carry about with him an altar, at which a priest might
say mass at any time ; he and his guests might indulge in milk
and eggs during times of fasting. Other rights of more impor
tance were also conferred on Frederick, which tended to in
crease his power over the possessions of the Church in his own
dominions. In case of need he might employ the services of
unbelievers to help him in war ; a provision which no doubt was
meant to authorise him to use the troops of Bohemia against
1 Hist. Fred., in Kollar, II. 202.
300 THE PAPAL KESTOKATION!
BOOK his Austrian subjects. To dower his daughters or for other
. l^' , grave necessities he might impose < moderate taxes according
to ancient custom ' on the clergy of Austria. He was empowered
to imprison and confiscate the goods of all spiritual persons who
had joined the rebellion against his wardship of Ladislas. He
might exercise the right of visitation over all the monasteries
of Austria. He received a grant of a tenth from all the clerical
revenues in the Empire— a grant without precedent, as no
reason of an ecclesiastical character was alleged as a colourable
pretext.1 The Pope and the Emperor were bent upon pushing
to the furthest point their victory over the party of reform.
The German Church was helpless before them, and they saw no
reason for sparing it.
All these advantages were prospective ; but Frederick made
money out of his coronation by selling at once patents of
nobility. Titles of Imperial Count and Doctor were sold for
moderate prices. The open and shameless greed of Frederick
awoke the laughter of the wits of Koine.
Frederick From Kome Frederick III. went to Naples at Alfonso's re-
Na'pies. quest. He was received with much magnificence ; the roads were
strewn with fragrant flowers, and troops of boys and girls with
graceful dance and song welcomed the Emperor and his bride.
Alfonso promised to help Frederick to recover Milan; but
Frederick's character was not warlike, and the fulfilment of the
promise was little likely to be required. During Frederick's
visit to Naples ^Eneas Sylvius stayed at Kome to keep watch
over Ladislas. He was startled by a summons, in the dead of
night, to visit the Pope, wiio had received intelligence of a plot
to carry off Ladislas. Precautions were at once taken ; so
suspicious was the Pope even of the Cardinals that he forbade
them to invite Ladislas to hunting parties outside the city
walls. Frederick on his return found Ladislas still safe. He
stayed three days in Rome, and in a public consistory thanked
the Pope for his magnificent reception. ^Eneas Sylvius delivered
a speech in favour of a crusade against the Turks, and was
pleased to think that his eloquence drew tears from his audience.
On April 26 Frederick left Rome.
Frederick III. returned through Siena to Florence, where
he received a letter from the combined Austrians, Hungarians,
1 These Bulls are all quoted in Chmel's Regesta, pp. 282, &c.
FREDERICK III.'S RETURN TO GERMANY. 301
and Moravians threatening him with war unless he gave CHAP.
up Ladislas. Their deputies made a scheme for the escape of t ' ^
Ladislas, and tried to enlist the Florentines on their side ; but Departure
again the plan was discovered in good time. In Florence deri<>k in.
Frederick assumed the character of a mediator in Italian affairs.
As matters stood, Florence and Sforza were banded together
against Naples and Venice, while the Pope was neutral. Fre
derick urged on the Florentines peace and goodwill towards
Alfonso, and received an assurance of their peaceable intentions.
To Florence also came an ambassador from Sforza, asking
Frederick to invest him with the Duchy of Milan. Frederick
did not refuse, but demanded a yearly tribute or the surrender
of a part of the Milanese territory. Sforza, who had won his
dominions by his sword, was not prepared to barter any part of
them for a title, and the negotiations failed for the time.
At Ferrara Frederick hoped to appear as arbiter of Italian
affairs. Ambassadors from Florence, Venice, and Milan awaited
him ; but those of Naples tarried, and the scheme of a Congress
came to nothing. The only display of his power which Frederick
could make was the creation of Modena and Reggio into a
duchy, and the investiture therewith of Borso of Este. On
May 21 Frederick entered Venice, and a,gain tried to interpose
his good offices to mediate peace between Milan and the repub
lic. 'We know that we speak with the Emperor,' was the
answer of the doge Foscari, < and therefore we stated our inten
tions at first ; our answer, once given, cannot be changed.'
Frederick was reminded of his powerlessness in Italy. He showed
his true character to the Venetians by wandering about privately
in ordinary attire to the shops, that he might make better bar
gains for the articles of luxury which Venice temptingly dis
played to the needy German. On June 2 he left Venice. His
pleasant journey in Italy was at an end, and he had to prepare
to face his rebellious people, whom he had so lightly left to
their own devices.
The Roman journey of Frederick was indeed sufficiently Results of
ignoble. ' Other emperors,' says a Grerman chronicler, ' won Frederick
their crown by arms ; Sigismund and Frederick seemed to have journey,
begged it.' l ' He had neither sense nor wisdom,' says the
gentle Archbishop of Florence, ' but all men saw the greed with
1 Mathias During, in Mencken, III. IS.
THE PAPAL BESTORATION".
BOOK
IV.
which he looked for presents, and the joy with which he received
them.' l Poggio judged him to be only a doll of an emperor,
before whom it was useless to make a speech, as he would
neither understand it nor pay for it.2 Frederick was looked
upon as a mere figure in an antiquated ceremony, and his per
sonal qualities were not such as to win any respect from the cul
tivated Italians. The sole result of his expedition was to show
clearly the selfish nature of the alliance between Pope and
Emperor. Nicolas V. was bent only on identifying the Papacy
with the glories of Italian culture, and asserting Italian supre
macy over the ruder peoples of Germany. PYederick III. had
no higher object than to extend his power over his ancestral
dominions, and retain his influence over the kingdoms of Ladis-
las. The clear vision of real statesmanship was wanting to
both. The danger from the Turkish inroads was a real ques
tion on which Europe might have been united. Union, however,
is only possible under trustworthy leaders. The restored Papacy
had done nothing to redress the grievances of which Germany
complained ; the Emperor, who trusted to the Pope's help
to maintain his position in Germany, was no fitting exponent
of the national feeling.
^\rhen Frederick returned he found Austria under Eizinger,
Hungary under Hunnyadi, even Bohemia under Podiebrad, and
the chief nobles of Moravia banded together against him.
They demanded that their king, Ladislas, should be admitted
to reign over his ancestral kingdoms ; but this was only a demand
for their own freedom from Frederick's control. No sooner had
Frederick left Kome than an embassy from his rebellious
subjects appeared to plead their cause before the Pope. The
answer of Nicolas was that they must obey the Emperor. They
requested that the excommunication, which had been threatened
against their disobedience, should be withdrawn. ' This is a
temporal, not a spiritual matter,' said one of them ; ' it is not
in your province.' Nicolas angrily answered that all causes
were subject to the judgment of the Apostolic See ; the
Austrians must either obey, or they would be excommunicated.
The envoys hastily left Kome, and scarcely thought themselves
safe till they were out of Italy. They brought back news that
1 S. Antonini, Chronicon, III. xxii. ch. 12.
2 Poggio, letter 80 in Spic^Legium Bomcunum, x.
HUMILIATION OF FKEDEEICK III. 303
the Pope was altogether on Frederick's side, and was opposed CHAP.
to the national cause.1 On April 4 Nicolas issued a threat ^_ **• _^
of excommunication against Eizinger and his followers,2 and
wrote to Hunnyadi and Podiebrad, charging them to give the
Austrians no help.
Frederick III., at the end of June, boldly entered Neustadt,
and tried to gather around him his partisans. He trusted to
the effects of the Pope's letter, which he sent for publication
on all sides. But the Bishop of Salzburg would not allow it to
be published ; the Canons of Passau mocked at it ; the Viennese
threw the bearer of it into prison, and the theologians of the
University drew up a formal protest, in which they appealed
from an ill-instructed Pope to one better instructed, or to a
General Council. They asserted that Nicolas V. had usurped the jw
place of Felix V., and professed themselves ready to join with the
French to procure a future Council.
Frederick III. was soon besieged in Neustadt, and had no Submission
stomach for the fight. When he saw that his adversaries paid derick~JII.
no heed to the Pope, he turned to more pacific counsels. September
^Eneas Sylvius plausibly urged that, after all, Ladislas could
not be kept in wardship for ever. Frederick was driven
to hold a conference with Eizinger on September 2, and sub
mit to conditions which the Markgraf of Baden and the
bishops negotiated. He agreed to hand over Ladislas to the
Count of Cilly, on condition that the Austrian troops were
withdrawn ; the other matters in dispute were to be decided
in a Diet to be held at Vienna. On September 4 Ladislas was
given up to the Count of Cilly, who, in spite of the previous un
derstanding that nothing was to be done till the meeting of
the Diet, took the youth to Vienna, where he was received
with triumph. The Bohemians negotiated with him that, before
acknowledging him for their king, he should ratify the Com
pacts and accept the nomination of Rokycana as archbishop.
The Diet was fixed for November 12, but it was not till Diet of
after Christmas that Frederick sent his three envoys, headed December
by ./Eneas Sylvius. At Vienna were the Dukes Lewis and i4
Otto of Bavaria, William of Saxony, Albert of Austria, Charles
of Baden, and Albert of Brandenburg, with representatives of
other princes, and deputies from Hungary, Bohemia, and
1 JEn. Bvlv., Hist. Fred., in Kollar, II. 340. * Raynaldus, 1452, 7.
304
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Speech of
^Eucas
Sylvius,
* Adversus
Australes '
Moravia. Albert of Brandenburg insisted that a dispute be
tween himself and the city of Niirnberg, which had been long
pending, should first be settled. He refused to accept any
decision but the Emperor's, and drew the princes after him to
Neustadt. The Diet seemed likely to break up -at once, as the
Imperial envoys were driven to follow Albert. In vain
Frederick endeavoured to put off the decision : Albert was
violent, and would not be refused. While Frederick was
taking counsel with Cusa, the Pope's legate, ^Eneas, and the
Bishop of Eichstadt, Albert burst into the room, and rated
/Eneas and the rest, exclaiming loudly that he cared neither
for Emperor nor Pope. JEneas sadly remarks that princes,
being brought up amongst their inferiors, rarely know how to
behave towards their equals, but lose their temper and behave
with violence.1 The Emperor was driven to hear the case.
Gregory Heimburg, on behalf of the citizens of Niirnberg,
spoke with warmth and justice of the wrong that would be
done, if princes closely allied with Albert sat to judge a cause
in which he was a party. The Emperor was in a sore strait.
He did not wish to alienate the cities by assenting to a
notoriously partial judgment against Niirnberg ; but he was
powerless to withstand Albert and his confederates. He bade
one of his counsellors collect the opinions of the princes ;
Albert took him by the coat and thrust him to the door, saying,
* Are you a prince, that you mix with princes ? ' Frederick
did not even venture to raise his voice against this act of inso
lence. Still the pleading of Heimburg seems to have pro
duced some impression, and yEneas managed to have the final
decision of the case deferred to inquire into a technical point
which Heimburg had raised. Albert was left in possession of
the castles which he had seized, and the Emperor was spared
the shame which would otherwise have fallen upon him.
This preliminary scene gave the Imperial envoys no hopes
of any help from the German princes in the proceedings of the
Diet at Vienna. The Austrians, who felt that they were
masters of the situation as against the feeble Emperor, did not
much wish for any settlement of the matters in dispute. They
1 ' Hoc est principum commune vitium ; nutriti namque inter minores,
qui cuncta laudare solent qua} dicunlur ab eis, cum ad extraneos sibique
pares veniunt, furunt atque insaniunt ubi se reprehensos intelligent.' — Hist.
Fred. 417.
BIET OF VIENNA, 1453. 305
urged that the time fixed for the Diet was now past, and that
their agreement had consequently lapsed. They raised every
kind of difficulty, and negotiations proceeded slowly. In the
course of these proceedings ^Eneas Sylvius delivered his most
effective speech ' Against the Austrians,' l in which he defended
the conduct of the Emperor in his wardship of Ladislas, justified
the interference of the Pope, and defended the Papal power
against the attacks of the Viennese University. ( The Austrians,'
he said, ' exclaim with haughty mien, " What have we to
do with the Pope ? Let him say his masses, we will handle
arms; if he lays his commands on us we will appeal."
The Waldensian heretics, the Saracens themselves, could
not say more.' He proceeded to examine the grounds of an
appeal to a future Council. The decrees of Constance recog
nise, as questions to be submitted to a Council, the case as
of heresy, schism, or grievous scandal caused by the Pope to
the Universal Church ; such ' grievous scandal ' meant some
change made by a Pope in ecclesiastical usage, such as allowing
priests to marry, pronouncing judgment of death, or alteration
of ritual against the wish of the community of the faithful.
^Eneas had forgotten much that he had urged at Basel ; he had
nothing to say against simony, oppression of the Church, or
refusal to accept the conciliar principle. He scoffed at the
Councils of Constance and Basel — they were tumultuous and
disorderly. * I saw at Basel cooks and grooms sitting side by side
with bishops. Who would give their doings the force of law ? '-
6 But the Austrians appeal from an uninstructed to an instructed
Pope. What a wonderful thing is wisdom ! What a splendid
procedure they suggest ! The person of the Pope is divided
into him from whom an appeal is made and him to whom it
is made ! Such a scheme might suit Plato's ideal State, but
could be found nowhere else. They add to this an appeal
to a future Council, which, they say, is due according to the
Constance decrees within ten years of the dissolution of that
of Basel. I am afraid it will be twenty or a hundred years
before a Council is held ; since its summons depends on the
judgment of the Pope as to its opportuneness. If they expect
one from the Savoyards ' (so he calls the party of Basel), ' it is
absurd for them to talk of Councils every ten years, when the
1 In Mansi, Pii IT. Oratime*, I 184, &c.
VOL. ii. x
306
THE PAPAL KESTOKATION.
BOOK
IV.
Failure of
the league
between
Pope and
Emperor.
last sat for nearly twenty. Would that the times were favour
able to a Council, as the Pope wishes ; it would soon dispel
the folly of these dreams. But they appeal to the Universal
Church, i.e. the congregation of all faithful people, high and low,
men and women, clergy and lay. In early days, when the
believers were few, such an assembly was possible ; now it is
impossible that it should come together, or appoint a judge
to settle any cause. It were as wise to appeal to the judgment
of the Last Great Day.'
The arguments of JEneas represent the position of the
restored Papacy ; and it cannot be denied that the scorn of
JEneas was rightly exercised upon the unwieldy mechanism of
the conciliar system, whose logical claims could scarcely be put
fittingly into action. For his immediate purpose, the speech
of ^Eneas produced no result. The princes sided with the
Austrians in refusing to open for discussion the general question
of their relations to Frederick. The only points that the Diet
would consider were those referring to details. It was taken
for granted that Frederick's wardship had actually come to an
end. The question for decision was the claims that arose in
consequence. Frederick had to submit his accounts, and the
points which the princes were prepared to vsettle were, how
much he had spent, and how much was due. Austrian castles
had been pledged by the Emperor: who was to be held
responsible for redeeming them ? There was much discussion,
but at last the princes agreed on what they considered fair con
ditions. The Imperial envoys refused to accept them ; whereon
the princes again went to Frederick at Neustadt. Albert of
Brandenburg told the Emperor that he would get nothing more:
he must accept these conditions or prepare for war. The
princes then departed, and left Frederick to his fate. Frederick
was obliged to give way ; even then the conditions were not
signed by his opponents, as the Count of Cilly, who was now
master of Ladislas, preferred to keep the matter open.
Thus Frederick's league with the Pope had not been able
to save him from the direst humiliation. At the beginning of
April 1453, the Emperor, who had been received with such
pomp in Rome, was left master only of his own lands of
Carinthia and Styria. His influence over Austria, Bohemia,
Hungary, and Moravia was gone, and he was powerless in
FAILURE OF NICOLAS V. IN GERMANY. 307
Germany. The Papacy, having allied itself with the Empire,
shared its humiliation. The threat of ' excommunication had
been openly defied, and Ladislas was willing to negotiate with
the French King for the summons of a Council. At Frederick's
request the Pope recalled his admonition to the Austrians.1
Germany had not been subdued by the first exercise which
the Pope made of his newly-restored power.
1 Voigt, JEnea Sylvia de' Piccolomini, II. 88, from unpublished letters of
^Eneas at Vienna.
x 2
308
THE PAPAL RESTOKATION".
BOOK
IV.
»— — , •
Nicolas V.
and the
Romans.
Plot of
Stefano
Porcaro.
January
1453. '
CHAPTEK III.
NICOLAS V. AND THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
1453-1455.
IF Nicolas V. was humiliated at Vienna, he was about the same
time profoundly afflicted by occurrences at Borne. He was
sincere in his wish to promote peace in Italy; he was
most desirous to gain the affection of the Roman people,
whom he enriched by the jubilee and gratified by the im
posing ceremony of an Imperial coronation. Above all, he
had shown his desire to associate the city of Rome with the
glories of the revived Papacy by the magnificence of the public
works in which he was engaged. Others might have grievances
to allege : surely the Roman citizens had no reason to look
upon the Pope in any other light than a splendid benefactor.
Yet, at the beginning of 1453, Nicolas V. learned to his amaze
ment that a dangerous plot against his personal safety was formed
within the walls of Rome.
The revival of classical learning in Italy had developed a
tendency towards republicanism ; and though the movement of
the Roman citizens had been checked by the neighbourhood
of the King of Naples at the time of the election of Nicolas V.,
the spirit that had then inspired it still survived. Nicolas V.
had not thought it wise to take any severe measures to assure
the Papal Government. He trusted to his own good intentions
to overcome the opposition that had been threatened. The
republican ringleader, Stefano Porcaro, was sent into honourable
exile, as Podesta of Anagni. But when his period of office
expired, Porcaro returned to Rome to play the part of dema
gogue. Taking advantage of a tumult that arose at the carni
val, he again raised the cry of * Liberty ' amongst the excited
crowd. Nicolas V. thought it better to remove such a fire
brand from Rome, and Porcaro was exiled to Bologna, where he
PLOT OF STEFANO PO-KCAKO. 30!
enjoyed perfect freedom on condition that he showed him- CHAP.
self every day to the Legate, Cardinal Bessarion. But , IIL
Porcaro's dreams had possessed his imagination too deeply
to be dispelled by any show of clemency, and the desire to
appear as the liberator of his country become more and
more rooted in his mind. From Bologna he managed to con
trive a plot against the Pope, and to assure himself of many
confederates. His nephew, Sciarra Porcaro, gathered together
a band of three hundred armed men, who were to be the chief
agents in the rising. Their scheme was to take advantage of
the solemnity of the Festival of the Epiphany, and while the
Pope and Cardinals were at mass in S. Peter's, set fire to the
Papal stables, and, in the confusion, seize the Pope and his
brother, who was captain of the Castle of S. Angelo. While
one band seized the Castle, another, at the same time, was
to occupy the Capitol. The booty of the Pope and Cardinals,
which they estimated at 700,000 ducats, would give them
means to carry out their plan of abolishing the Papal rule and
securing a Eoman Eepublic. The aspirations of Petrarch, the
dreams of Kienzi, were at last to be realised.
When all was ready, Porcaro left Bologna on the night of
December 26, 1452, and four days after reached Eome, where
he hid himself in the house of a kinsman. The conspirators
were summoned to a banquet, in the midst of which Porcaro
appeared, clad in a dress of gold brocade, and incited them
to their great enterprise. Delay was fatal to the success
of his plan. Messengers came from Bessarion bringing the
news of Porcaro's flight from Bologna. The armed men of
his nephew caused suspicion by an encounter with the police.
Some of the conspirators gave information to the Senator and
Cardinal Capranica. Porcaro's house was watched by night,
and the presence of the conspirators was detected. On the
morning of January 4, the Senator, with fifty soldiers, sur
rounded the house. Sciarra Porcaro, with four comrades, cut his
way through the soldiers and escaped from Eome. Stefano's
courage deserted him ; he did not dare to follow his nephew,
but abandoned his confederates, and, through a back door, made
his escape to the house of a sister. Meanwhile, the Papal
Vice-Chamberlain addressed the people in the Capitol, accused
Porcaro of sedition and ingratitude, pronounced the ban
310 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK against him, and offered a reward to any who should deliver
^ Iy* _. him up, alive or dead. His sister's house was no safe place of
hiding, and by her advice he went with a friend by night to beg
a refuge from the generosity of Cardinal Orsini. His friend,
who went first to plead his cause, was made prisoner ; when
he did not return, Porcaro fled to the house of another sister,
where he was followed. His sister hid him in a box, and tried
to avoid detection by seating herself on the lid ; but it was in
vain. His hiding-place was discovered ; he was carried off to the
Castle of S. Angelo, and after a summary trial was beheaded
on the morning of January 9. He died bravely, and his last
words were : ' People, to-day dies the liberator of your country.' l
On the same day nine others followed him to the gallows.
Nicolas V. sent throughout Italy to discover those who had
escaped, and Sciarra Porcaro was put to death at Citta di Castello
before the end of the month. If Nicolas had been gentle at
first, he showed himself relentless in his fright. One culprit's
life was granted to the entreaties of the Cardinal of Metz ; but
next day Nicolas withdrew his promise, and the prisoner was
put to death.2
The Pope and the Curia were alike filled with alarm at the
discovery of this determined scheme. They did not know
how far it represented any plan concerted with the other powers
of Italy. Naples, Florence, Milan, and Venice all might have
some share in this desperate attempt to overthrow the Papacy and
seize its revenues. Nicolas was full of suspicion, and fell into
cruelty which was alien from his character. It was a bitter
blow to him that enemies should rise up against him in his
own city. The plot of Porcaro permanently disturbed his
peace of mind. He grew morose and suspicious, denied access
to his presence, and placed guards around his person. Por-
caro's plot revealed to him the incompatibility of the Papal
rule with the aspirations after freedom which the Eomans
nourished. The judgments of contemporaries differed as they
fixed their eye on the glories of the Papacy or of the Koman
city. ' Porcaro,' says the Koman Infessura, ' was a worthy man
who loved his country, and sacrificed his life because, when
banished without cause from the city, he wished to free her
1 Infessura, in Mur. iii. 2, 1135.
2 Letter to Florence of January 16, in Tommasini, Doeiimenti relativi a
Stefano Porcari, 45.
FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 311
from slavery.' On the other hand, the men of letters whom the CHAP.
Pope's liberality had gathered to Eome cannot find language . I1II'_-
strong enough to express their horror at the monstrosity of
Porcaro's plan, which seemed to them to be a rising of bar
barism against culture, of Roman ruffians against the scholars
who graced their city by their presence.1 Both judgments con
tain some truth ; but the difference which underlies them is
still irreconcilable. Rome had many advantages conferred
upon it as the seat of the Papal power, the capital of Christen
dom ; it had in the Pope a munificent lord, and shared the
benefits of his greatness. But it had to pay the price of
isolation from the political life of Italy. There were always
those who felt that they were citizens in the first place and
churchmen afterwards, and who aspired to recover for their city
the political independence of which the Papal rule deprived it.
Nicolas V. was enfeebled in health by the pains of gout as
well as by his disappointments. A still heavier blow fell on Capture of
him when the news reached Rome that on May 29 Mahomet II. tinopie by
had made himself master of Constantinople. It might seem Ma/1453*,
that no one, who had noticed the rapid advance of the*Turks,
could doubt that the fall of Constantinople was imminent ; yet
Western Europe was entirely unprepared for such an event.
Men looked round with shame and alarm when it actually took
place. They felt shame that nothing had been done to save
from the unbelievers the relics of an ancient and venerable
civilisation ; they felt alarm when the bulwark was removed
which had so long stood between Europe and the Eastern
tribes. It was natural that they should ask themselves what
had been done by the heads of Christendom, the Pope and
the Emperor, to avert this calamity. It was natural that
Nicolas V. should feel that the glories of his pontificate had
been obscured by the mishap that in his days such a disaster
had occurred. It was true that the Greeks had not main
tained the union of the Churches which had been ratified at
Florence. It was true that Nicolas had urged upon them the
necessity of so doing as a first step towards obtaining help from
Europe. It was true that the fanaticism of the Greeks refused
to seek for help on the condition of submitting to the Azymites.
1 Comp. Infessura, 1134, with Alberti, Mur. xxv. 313, and Peter de Godis,
Dialogon, ed. Perlbach.
312 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK Still the fact remained that Constantinople had fallen, and
> — ^J — the Turks had gained a foothold in Europe.
Yet Nicolas V. had not been entirely neglectful. In
Help given answer to the entreaties of Constantine Palasologos, he had
v. to the sent Cardinal Isidore of Eussia to commemorate the reconcilia
tion of the two Churches. In December 1452 a solemn ser
vice wras held in S. Sophia, and amid the muttered execrations
of the Greeks the formality of a religious agreement was again
performed. Nicolas prepared to send succours to his ally, and
twenty-nine galleys were equipped for the purpose ; but Ma-
hornet II. began the siege of the doomed city unexpectedly,
and pressed it with appalling vigour. The Papal vessels arrived
off Eubcea two days after the fall of Constantinople, and through
some mishap were captured unawares by the Turks.1 Cardinal
Isidore with difficulty escaped in disguise, and made his way
back to his own land, while the Greek Emperor Constantine
Palaeologos fell boldly fighting against the invader.
If Nicolas V. could plead that he had been willing to do
what he could to avert this catastrophe, no such plea could be
urged by the Emperor, who, says a German chronicler, ' sat
idly at home planting his garden and catching birds.'2 Yet
Frederick III. wept to hear the news, and wrote to the Pope
urging him to rouse Europe to a crusade. Everywhere a wail
of sorrow was raised. Not only was the sentiment of Europe
outraged by the fall of Constantinople and the forcible entrance
of a new religion into the domains of Christendom, but com
mercial communications with the East were checked, and there
was an uneasy feeling of dread how far the Turkish power might
push its borders in Europe. Moreover, the blow affected not
only the political, but also the literary sentiment of Europe.
Greece, which was the home of Thucydides and Aristotle — Greece,
to whose literature men were turning with growing delight and
admiration, was abandoned in her last hour by those who owed
her so deep a debt of gratitude. The literary treasures of
Constantinople were dispersed, and no man could say how great
had been the loss. 'How many names of mighty men will
perish,' exclaims ^Eneas Sylvius in a letter to the Pope, ' It
1 ^En. Syl., Epist. 155, ed. Basel.
2 Matthias Doring, in Mencken, iii. 18.
NICOLAS V. PROCLAIMS A CRUSADE. 313
is a second death to Homer and to Plato. The fount of the CHAP.
Muses is stopped.' l ._ 11iI> ^
In the same letter JEne&s goes on to depict truly enough Effects on
the change which the fall of Constantinople had wrought in
the historical position of the Papacy of Nicolas V. ' Historians
of the Roman Pontiffs, when they reach your time, will write :
" Nicolas V., a Tuscan, was Pope for so many years. He re
covered the patrimony of the Church from the hands of tyrants ;
he gave union to the divided Church ; he canonised Bernardino
of Siena; he built the Vatican and splendidly restored S.Peter's;
he celebrated the Jubilee, and crowned Frederick III." All
this will be glorious to your fame, but will be obscured by the
doleful addition : " In his time Constantinople was taken and
plundered (or, it may be, burnt and razed) by the Turks." So
your fame will suffer without any fault of yours. For, though
you laboured with all your might to aid the unhappy city, yet
you could not persuade the princes of Christendom to join in a
common enterprise in defence of the faith. They said that the
danger was not so great as was reported, that the Greeks exag
gerated and trumped up stories to help them in begging for
money. Your Holiness did what you could, and no blame can
justly attach to you. Yet the ignorance of posterity will blame
you when it hears that in your time Constantinople was lost.'
Nor was ^Eneas solitary in his utterances. Isidore of Russia, NicoiasV.
Bessarion, the Archbishop of Mitylene, and many others wrote
in the same strain. There was no lack of writing either then
or for many years later. But even without admonition from
others the course of the Pope was clear. He must make
amends for the past by putting himself at the head of Europe ;
and it was lucky for the Papacy to have a cry which might
once more gather Christendom around it. On September 29
Nicolas issued a summons to a crusade, in which, after denounc
ing Mahomet II. as the dragon of the Apocalypse, he called on
all Christian princes, in virtue of their baptismal vow, to take
up arms against the Turks. He declared remission of sins to
all who, for six months from the 1st of February next, persevered
in the work of the crusade or sent a soldier in their stead ; he
dedicated to the service of the crusade all the revenues which
came to the Apostolic See, or to the Curia, from benefices of
1 Epist. 162, ed. Basel ; the letter is dated July 12, 1453.
314
THE PAPAL KESTOEATION.
BOOK
IV.
Political
condition
of Europe.
1453.
any kind ; he exacted from all the clergy a tithe of their eccle
siastical revenues, and proclaimed universal peace, that all
might devote themselves to this holy purpose.1
The Pope's words and promises were weighty enough ; but
there were grave difficulties in giving them any practical effect.
The state of Europe was by no means peaceful, nor were men's
minds turned in the direction of a crusade. The old ideal of
Christendom had grown antiquated ; the Emperor was a poor
representative of united Europe. The Holy Koman Empire
had been the symbol of a central organisation which was to
keep in order the anarchic tendencies of feudalism. But feuda
lism, which was founded upon actual facts, had prevailed over
a system which rested only upon an idea ; and the anarchy
caused by feudalism had made national monarchies a necessity.
The fifteenth century was the period when national monarchies
were engaged in, making good their position against feudalism.
In France Charles VII. was asserting the power of the
restored monarchy against the mighty Duke of Burgundy.
England was intent on the desperate struggle of parties which
ended in the Wars of the Koses. The Spanish kingdoms,
jealous of one another, could urge their crusade against the
Mussulman at home as a reason for not going abroad. In
(jrermany each prince was engaged in consolidating his own do
minions, and the feebleness of the Emperor made him more keen
to use the opportunity offered. Poland was at enmity with
the Teutonic Knights. Hungary and Bohemia were bent on
maintaining their nationality against their Grerman king. It
was difficult to combine for united action this chaos of con
tending interests.
Peace of It was natural for the Pope to begin at home, and first to
April 1454. pacify Italy, an object which at his accession he had generally
professed, but which on reflection he deferred till a more
convenient season. He was anxious, above all things, to be at
peace himself, to maintain tranquillity in the States of the
Church, and to gratify his passion for restoring the buildings of
Rome. He saw that he would be most powerful when the rest
of Italy was weak, and that the States of the Church would be
most secure when there were other objects for the ambition of
Raynaldus, 1453, 9.
PACIFICATION OF ITALY. 315
the Italian powers.1 Even now the same motives weighed
with him, and he was only half-hearted in his attempts to heal
the breaches of Italy, where Alfonso of Naples, in alliance
with Venice, still contested the duchy of Milan with Sforza,
who was helped by Florence. He summoned ambassadors of
these States to Rome, but in the discussions that arose was so
careful to please everybody, and commit himself to nothing,
that his sincerity was suspected,2 and after some months of
conference the ambassadors left Rome without arriving at any
conclusions. To the shame of Nicolas V., the work which he
had been too half-hearted to undertake was accomplished by an
Augustinian monk, Fra Simonetto of Camerino,3 who secretly
negotiated peace between Sforza and Venice. The peace was
published at Lodion April 9, 1454, and in the following August
Florence also accepted it. When matters had gone so far, the
Pope sent Cardinal Capranica to exhort Alfonso of Naples to
join it also. After some difficulty Alfonso, on January 26,
1455, agreed to the pacification of Lodi, excepting only Genoa
from its provisions, and a solemn peace for twenty-five years
was established amongst all the Italian powers.
Meanwhile efforts were being made under the auspices of Prepara-
the feeble Frederick III. for a demonstration of unanimity on Germany
the part of the powers of Europe. At the end of December
1453, the Bishop of Pavia, as Papal legate, arrived at Neu- 1454.
stadt, and the Emperor issued invitations for a European
Congress to be held at Regensburg on April 23, 1454. He
promised to be present in person unless hindered by some
serious business. But as the time drew nigh Frederick dis
covered that there were hindrances enough to keep him at
home. He had no money ; he was afraid lest Austria or
Hungary might attack his domains if he left them unprotected ;
he did not wish to face the Electors, lest under the cover of
1 Manetti, Vita Nicolai V., in Mur. iii. pt. 2, 943 : ' Bella enim inter pre-
dictos totius psene Italic principes ecclesite suse pacern, concordiam vero
illorum versa vice bellum ecclesiae, non soluni verisimilibus conjecturis sed
certis et expressis argumentis el experientia quoque, rerum magistra, intelli-
gebat.'
2 Manetti: 'Cum tepide in hoc pacis tractatu, ne dicam frigide, sese
gereret.'
3 ' Hominem baud magnas doctrince sed fidei plenum,' saysSimoneta, Vita,
Fr.S/ortifr, Muratori, xxi. 666.
THE PAPAL RESTORATION,
BOOK
IV.
reforms in the Empire they should still more diminish the
Imperial power. ' It is hard,' he said to his counsellors, who
urged him to go, * it is hard to take care of the common good
at one's own cost. I do not see anyone who will study the
benefit of others more than his own.' l So Frederick resolved to
stay at home, and send in his stead an embassy, of which ^Eneas
Sylvius was a member. He nominated also as his represen
tatives such of the Electors and princes as he thought friendly
to himself, amongst others Lewis of Bavaria, whom ^Eneas on
his way met at Burghausen on the Inn. When ^Eneas gave
him the Emperor's commission, Lewis answered that, though
sensible of the compliment, he feared that his own youth and
inexperience rendered him unfit for the task ; he would probably
send representatives to Eegensburg. While he spoke the dogs
were barking, and a band of huntsmen were impatiently
waiting for the Duke and cursing the Imperial envoys for
causing a delay. Lewis graciously invited the envoys to fol
low the hunt, and when they declined rode off with his friends.
This was not the spirit of a crusader, and it was but a sample
of the attitude of the Grerman princes towards the great
question which they professed to consider seriously.
Congress At the period fixed for the Congress only the Imperial
burg?86 presidents and the Papal legate had arrived. Cardinal Cusa,
Apni 1454. one Qf those who had been appointed by Frederick III., ad
vanced to the neighbourhood of Eegensburg, and then wrote
to his colleagues to know if he should come any farther, and to
ask who would pay his expenses. When this was the zeal
displayed by a prince of the Church, we cannot wonder that
the secular princes did not bestir themselves more eagerly. From
Italy no one came except the Papal legate, the Bishop of Pavia.
Venice sent ambassadors, but they only entered Germany after
the Congress was over. Florence and Lucca excused them
selves as being engaged with other matters. Borso, the newly-
made Duke of Modena, was not sure enough of the peace of
Lodi to think of anything save Italian complications. Siena
did not receive the summons in time to attend to it. The
letter to Lodovico of Mantua had been by mistake addressed
to his brother Carlo. The other Italian States sent neither
excuses nor representatives. The summons addressed to
1 ^En. Syl. De Ratisponensi Dieta, in Mansi, Orationes, iii. 9.
CONGRESS AT REGENSBURG. 317
the Kings of France, England, Scotland, Hungary, Poland, CHAP.
and Denmark had been of the nature of a brotherly invitation ; ^_ IITI'_-
but none of them were inclined to show complaisance to
the feeble Emperor. Charles VII. of France did not wish to
seem to act in concert with Frederick. He wrote to the Pope,
and said that he was willing to take up arms if the German
princes on their part agreed to do so. Christian of Denmark
wrote to express his sorrow that the shortness of notice and
an expedition in which he was engaged against Norway
prevented him from sending ambassadors, but he was willing
to do what he could when the time for action arrived.1 The
Kings of England and Scotland paid no heed. Ladislas of
Hungary and Bohemia was expected, but never came. Casimir
of Poland alone sent representatives ; but they came to com
plain of the Teutonic Knights.
It was no wonder that the foreign powers showed little zeal
when Frederick himself stayed at home, and only three of the
Electors sent ambassadors. Everyone was suspicious, and
there was no real union. Frederick had urged the Pope to join
with him in issuing a summons to the German princes ; but
Nicolas V. was afraid to give any countenance to the Congress, lest
it might be turned into a Council. The remembrance of Basel
was still too vivid for the Pope to run any risk of its revival.2
As the presidents sat at Kegensburg, somewhat embarrassed Crusading
how to proceed, a rumour reached them, which at first seemed uuleV/16
like a dream, that the Duke of Burgundy was on his way and Burgundy.'
had reached Constance. When it was known that he had
actually arrived at Ulm, they wrote to Frederick begging him to
come in person and welcome one who was as powerful as a king.
In truth, Philip of Burgundy, who, besides Burgundy and
Franche Comte, ruled over the rich lands between the Somme
and the Meuse, was one of the most powerful princes in Christen
dom, and was a thorn in the side of the French King. He was
by birth connected with the crusading movement ; for his father
was taken prisoner by the Turks at the battle of Nicopolis
where Sigismund was defeated. He was now the heir of his
1 His letter is in ^Kneas Sylvius, Op. ed. Basel, p. 658.
2 JE>n. Syl. De Ratisponvnsi Dicta, 4 : ' Ea res Apostolicaa Serli non placuit ;
quia fortasse latere dolos sub ea vocatione Nicolaus timuit ; nihil est enim in
alto seclenti tutum. Magni convsntus magnos motus pariunt : inimica est
novitatum summa potestas ; spes mutationis enutrit iniseros.'
318 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK father's policy, and had just succeeded in reducing under
> l^' _^ his sway the independence of the Flemish cities. Kich and
magnificent, he put the French King to shame, and was the
ideal of European chivalry. It was a gross and fantastic
chivalry, much given to tournaments and festivals of every
sort, yet not without its culture, as the paintings of John van
Eyck still witness. Philip's proceedings in defence of Chris
tendom are characteristic of the man and of the time. When he
received the Pope's letter proclaiming a crusade, he held high
festival at Lille — a festival adorned with all the sumptuous
grandeur of Flemish pageantry. After a banquet, in which
figured a pasty containing twenty-eight men playing on musical
instruments, an elephant was led into the hall by a Saracen
giant. OD its back was a tower, in which sat a captive nun,
representing the Church, who wept and implored succour.
Two lovely maidens advanced with a live pheasant, and the
Duke, laying his hand upon it, swore on the pheasant that he
would drive out the Turk from Europe. His guests followed
his example, and a splendid ball was the appropriate exploit
which immediately followed.1
The news of Philip's approach to Regensburg caused the
utmost excitement. Everywhere he was received with honour,
and rumour was rife with the causes of his coming. Some
said that he wished to win over the Germans, and was am
bitious of the Imperial crown ; others that he hoped to prevail
on the Emperor to erect Brabant, Holland, and Zeeland into a
kingdom, that he might bear a royal title. Anyhow, his
coming brought prestige to the Congress. It impelled the
Cardinal of S. Peter's to hasten to Kegensburg without waiting
to have the question of his expenses further settled. Lewis of
Bavaria left his hunting, and went to meet Philip ; he sent
also four envoys to Regensburg, but declined to act personally
as one of the Emperor's representatives.
The presidents now thought that it was time to open the Con
gress. The Bishop of Gurk excused the Emperor's absence,
and inveighed against the Turks. Then Cardinal Cusa pointed
out that the Greeks had drawn their ruin upon their own heads
by their stubbornness in rejecting union with the Holy See.
1 This vow of the Pheasant is described by Olivier de la Marche, who him
self personated the Church in the pageant.
CONGKESS AT KEGENSBUKG. 319
The Papal legate spoke a few words. Next the ambassadors of CHAP.
the Teutonic Knights inveighed against the King of Poland, _ IIL .
and the session ended in a wrangle. The next session was spent
in a strife about precedence between the Polish envoys and those
of the Electors.
On May 9 Philip of Burgundy and Lewis of Bavaria entered Arrival of
-D v M.I. £0, T -i -j ce A i the Duke of
Kegensburg with pomp. The Imperial presidents offered to Burgundy
hold their sessions in Philip's house if that would suit his con-
venience. Philip modestly declined ; and it was agreed that 9> 1454.
the congress should sit in the Town Hall. Indeed, the pro
posal would hardly have suited the Duke's habits : for ^Eneas
tells us that he rose at noon, did a little business, dined, had a
nap, took some athletic exercise, supped till late at night, and
finished his day with music and dancing. Such a man was
not likely to sit very long over tedious deliberations. But
before the business of the crusade was undertaken, the German
princes declared their intentions. John of Lysura, the confi
dential adviser of the Archbishop of Trier, suggested that the
Germans should meet separately at the house of Lewis of
Bavaria. There he proposed that they should consider what
strength they had to lead against the Turks. The Imperial
representatives saw in this a means of exposing the poverty of
the Emperor, and refused to enter upon the subject. Then
Lysura spoke warmly of the distracted state of Germany, and
its need of internal reform before it embarked on enterprises
abroad ; he insisted that the Emperor ought to meet the
Electors, and deliberate on German affairs before he put for
ward a scheme for a crusade. The Imperial envoys admitted
the truth of Lysura's complaints, but urged the primary im
portance of the crusade : if it were to be deferred till Germany
was reorganised, it would have long to wait.
The arrival of the Markgraf of Brandenburg increased the Proceed-
number of princes, but brought an ally of the Teutonic Knights
against Poland, and threatened to divert the Congress from the
question of the crusade. At length, however, the public pro
ceedings were resumed. ^Eneas Sylvius spoke against the
Turks, and urged immediate action. Silence followed his
speech, which, being in Latin, was probably understood by
few, and was translated into German by the Bishop of Gurk.
Then Cardinal Cusa gave an account of Constantinople, and of
320 THE PAPAL EESTOEATION.
BOOK the Turks, from his personal knowledge; his speech was
._ *y* __. similarly translated into German by John of Lysura. The
Bishop of Pavia spoke also, and the assembled princes separated
to deliberate. Next day the Imperial envoys were asked to
state the Emperor's proposals. This they did in writing, and
demanded that by April 1455, an army sufficient to over
whelm the Turks should be in readiness to serve for three years.
They suggested that throughout Germany every sixty men
should furnish one horseman and two foot duly equipped for the
field ; in this way an army of 200,000 men would be raised.
Besides this, the cities were to provide all necessary ammunition
and means of transport. The Pope, Naples, Venice, and the
other maritime cities of Italy should prepare a fleet, while the
land army, joined by the Bohemians and Hungarians, was to
cross the Danube. A peace for five years was to be proclaimed
throughout Germany, beginning from next Christmas ; whoever
violated it should be under the ban of the Empire. To make
further arrangements, another Diet was to meet on September 29
at Niirnberg, if the Emperor could come there ; if he could not,
at Frankfort.
Resolutions It was a splendid scheme ; but schemes on paper are not
Congress, costly, and Frederick III. was willing to be magnificent where no
May 1454. expense was involved. The Germans listened, but urged their
own business. John of Lysura clung to his scheme of a reform
ation of the Empire. Albert of Brandenburg was busy with
his quarrel against Poland. The Congress might have sat long
had not the Duke of Burgundy grown impatient : his health
suffered at Regensburg and he was anxious to get away. Ac
cordingly it was agreed that an answer should be given to the
Emperor's proposals. Albert of Brandenburg spoke on behalf
of the Germans. He faintly praised the Emperor's zeal, but
deferred all criticism of his scheme till the forthcoming Diet,
when there would be a fuller assembly and fuller information.
Nothing, however, could be done till Germany was at peace,
and for this purpose the Emperor must meet the princes and
fully discuss with them the state of affairs. After this lukewarm
speech, which dealt rather with the affairs of Germany than the
affairs of Christendom, the Bishop of Toul, in the name of the
Duke of Burgundy, declared his master's zeal for the crusade,
and his willinness to take part in any expedition which might
DIET OF FEANKFOKT, 1454. 321
be agreed upon by the Emperor or any other Christian princes. CHAP.
Then ^Eneas Sylvius, and afterwards the Bishop of Pavia, _ IIIL _ .
thanked the Duke of Burgundy and Albert of Brandenburg for
their zeal, and the Congress separated at the end of May, with
every outward appearance of satisfaction and hope.
Yet this empty talk deceived no one. JEneas Sylvius wrote Opinion of
to a friend in Italy 1 on June 5, in the following strain : 4 My
wishes differ from my hopes : I cannot persuade myself of
any good result. You ask, Why? I answer, Why should I
hope ? Christendom has no head whom all will obey. Neither
Pope nor Emperor receives what is his due. There is no
reverence, no obedience. We look on Pope and Emperor alike
as names in a story or heads in a picture. Each state has its
own king ; there are as many princes as there are houses. How
will you persuade this multitude of rulers to take up arms ? Sup
pose they do, who is to be leader ? How is discipline to be main
tained ? How is the army to be fed ? Who can understand the
different tongues? Who will reconcile the English with the
French, Genoa with Naples, the Germans with the Bohemians
and Hungarians ? If you lead a small army against the Turks,
you will be defeated ; if you lead a large one, there will be con
fusion. Thus there are difficulties on every side.'
Having such opinions, ^Eneas was desirous to escape further Diet of
disappointment and leave the uncongenial land of Germany for October^'
his native country. He had gained all that he could from his 1454>
sojourn at the Imperial court. Frederick's position had now
sunk so low as to be desperate, and important affairs no longer
centred round him. Frederick, however, refused to part with
^Eneas just then ; he was determined not to go in person to the
Diet, but to send again ^Eneas and the Bishop of Gurk. Among
the princes he nominated as his representatives the Markgrafs
of Brandenburg and Baden. The Pope contented himself with
again nominating as his legate the Bishop of Pavia. The
Diet of Frankfort filled the month of October 1454, arid in its
outward forms resembled that of Eegensburg. ^Eneas showed
more than his wonted eloquence, and spoke for two hours ; the
Bishop of Toul asserted the zeal of the Duke of Burgundy, and
the Bishop of Pavia, in the name of the Pope, tried to inflame
the ardour of Christendom. The demand for a crusade had
1 Letter to Leonards de Benevolentibus, Epistolce 127, ed. Basel.
VOL. II. Y
322
THE PAPAL EESTORATIOlSr.
BOOK
IV.
Coldness
of the Diet
towards
the cru
sade.
already become more serious, as was seen by the presence of
ambassadors from Hungary, who loudly called for help, and
declared that if it were not given they would be driven to make
peace with the Turks to protect their own frontier. With a
view to awaken more enthusiasm Fra Capistrano came and
preached at Frankfort. The people heard him gladly ; but the
diplomats of the Congress were unmoved. Of the German
princes there were present the Markgrafs of Brandenburg and
Baden, and the Archbishops of Trier and Mainz. But they
were all bent on their own schemes. Albert of Brandenburg,
who was regarded as friendly to the Emperor, was the most
conspicuous man among the German princes, and urged the
reform of the Empire as a means of obtaining a wider sphere
for his energy. Against him was secretly formed a party, at
the head of which was the Pfalzgraf Frederick, but its moving
spirit was Jacob of Trier. This party won over Albert of
Austria, the Emperor's brother, by holding out hopes of the
deposition of Frederick and his own election in his stead. On
the deposition of the Emperor would follow the summons of a
new Council and the revival of the cry for ecclesiastical reform.
Thus in Germany the princes were agreed that internal reform
must precede any undertaking abroad ; but they were not united
in their conception of reform, and under the name of reform
were pursuing private ends and separate intrigues.1
In this state of things the Emperor's ambassadors had to
listen to nothing save complaints. When the time came for a
definite promise, they were told that the crusade was merely a
pretext used by the Pope and the Emperor to extort money ;
they would find that Germany would give them neither money
nor soldiers. The zeal of the Burgundians was turned into
ridicule ; the Hungarians were bidden to defend their own
kingdom, and not try to involve Germany in their calamities. It
required all the diplomacy of the Imperial and Papal party to
avert an absolute refusal of supplies for a crusade.2 It was only
through the influence of Albert of Brandenburg that a decent
semblance of zeal for the cause of Europe was expressed. It
was agreed that an army of 10,000 horse and 30,000 foot be
sent by Germany to the aid of the Hungarians, on condition
that the Pope equip in Italy a fleet of twenty-five galleys to
1 See Droyssen, GescJiichte Preussens Politik, ii, 116 (ed. 1868).
2 Pii II. Comm. p, 23.
SCHEMES OF THE GERMAN ELECTORS. 323
attack the Turks in Greece. This undertaking was made the CHAP.
more readily because of the belief that the conditions would never ._IIL _,
be fulfilled. ' The princes say,' writes Capistrano to the Pope,
< Why should we spend our zeal, our goods, the bread of our
children, when the Pope consumes in building towers the
revenues of S. Peter, which ought to be devoted to the defence
of the Christian faith ? '
The Diet might arrive at its own conclusions ; but Jacob of Schemes
Trier was secretly pursuing his course. As it was clear that German
the Emperor would not come to meet the princes, it was Electors-
resolved that the princes should go to him. Another Diet was
proclaimed to be held at Neustadt on February 2, 1455,
ostensibly for the purpose of arranging for the levy of the
German forces, really for the purpose of bringing pressure to
bear on the Emperor so as to strengthen the power of the
princes. Jacob of Trier had skilfully drafted a scheme for the
reform of the Empire, which was accepted by the Archbishops of
Koln and Mainz. It proposed that the Emperor should confer
with the Electors about the pacification of the Empire, for which
was needed a reorganisation of judicature and finance. More
over, the Emperor should be required to urge on the Pope the
summons of a new Council, in accordance with the provisions of
the decrees of Constance, and the Papal undertaking at the time
of the restoration of the German obedience. It was a fair-
sounding scheme ; but even while he penned it Jacob of Trier
let it be seen that it was only meant to be a pretence. He
recommended his proposal on the ground that ' when the Pope
sees us anxious to have a Council, he will be more willing to
please us, and will pay more heed to the requests made by us
to the Curia in matters which he now refuses. Likewise the
Emperor, when he sees that we wish to stir him up, will be
more willing to please us and follow our advice in all matters.' l
The plan was to bring pressure to bear both on the Emperor
and the Pope, so as to establish still more surely the inde
pendence of the German princes, and win from both sides all
the concessions which they wished. To make their plan
stronger, Albert of Austria was to be used as a rival to Frederick ;
1 This document, entitled ' Abschiedt zwischen geistlichen Churfiirsten, mit
was Mittel das Rom. Reich wieder aufzubringen ware, trad wie man im kiinff-
tigen Concilio reden soil V is printed in Ranke, Deutsche Gtschichte, vi. 10.
Y 2
324 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK and the threat of a Council was to be a means of separating the
^y- ^ interests of the Pope from those of the Emperor.
Diet of Such were the schemes of Jacob of Trier, when, in February
February 1455, he arrived at Neustadt. He was the only Elector present ;
1455. kut four others sent representatives, who were under Jacob's
orders. Ladislas of Hungary came to Vienna ; but refused to
advance to Neustadt, as he had no desire to meet his former
guardian. ^Eneas Sylvius invited Fra Capistrano to bring his
eloquence to Neustadt. He promised him good sport. ; Our
amphitheatre will be established, and there will be Circensian
games grander than those of Julius Caesar or Cnseus Pompeius.
I do not know whether there will be foreign beasts or only those
of Grermany : but Germany has wild beasts of many kinds, and
. perhaps Bohemia will send the Beast of the Apocalypse. If our
sport be only moderate, you will have a bag well filled with
every kind of game, slain by the sword that proceeds from your
mouth. If your valour comes victorious out of the amphitheatre,
we will have an army against our foes abroad, when our enemies
at home have been dispersed.'1 JEne&s could jest even on
the most serious matters, and Fra Capistrano was not so simple
a devotee that he could not understand the subtleties of the
higher politics.
Fruitless Albert of Brandenburg and Charles of Baden were the only
[ng^of the other Grerman princes who appeared. The Bishop of Toul again
Diet> came from Burgundy, and the Bishop of Pavia again represented
the Pope. The only foreign power who sent an envoy was the
King of Naples. On February 26 the proceedings began with a
wrangle about precedence of seats between Jacob of Trier and
the Neapolitan ambassadors. Then ./Eneas and the Bishop of
Pavia spoke about the crusade : but neither of them had any
assurance to offer of the Pope's activity. The Bishop of Pavia
had not visited Kome during the interval between the Diets,
and had no fresh instructions to communicate. The Nea
politan envoys declared that their King would be ready in May
to sail against the Turks, if Grermany sent its army for a
land expedition at the same time. The Bishop of Toul again
asserted the zeal of the Duke of Burgundy. Jacob of Trier
declared that the Electors were ready to do all that befitted
good Christians.
1 JEn. Sylv. Epist. 403, ed. Barel.
DEATH OF NICOLAS V. 325
After these empty words Jacob of Trier pressed upon the CHAP.
Emperor his scheme of reform. He spoke in the name of all ._ IITI> _.
the Electors ; and the representatives of the princes and Imp erial Proposals
cities were all on his side. Moreover, Jacob was in constant oTthe™
communication with Ladislas of Bohemia and Hungary, whose EmPire-
presence at Vienna was a perpetual threat to the Emperor.
The Hungarian envoys pleaded for help from Gfermany ; and
the luckless Emperor sat helpless to answer. It seemed almost
impossible for him to extricate himself with decency from the
difficulties that beset him on every side. If he gave way to
the Electors, the scanty remnants of his power were gone ; if
he refused, the Diet would not vote troops for the crusade,
and the Emperor would be rendered ludicrous in the eyes of
Christendom. From this perplexity he and his counseHors
were delivered by the news of the death of Nicolas V., which
reached Neustadt on April 12. As this news threw into un
certainty the possibility of an expedition from Italy, it was
useless to determine on a German expedition. The Pope's
death also opened up other plans to Jacob of Trier and his con
federates. It was agreed to put off till next spring the levy
of troops for the aid of Hungary, and meanwhile to proclaim
throughout the Empire peace for two years. With this lame
conclusion the Diet came to an end, to the Emperor's great
relief.
Nicolas V. had been greatly affected by the capture of Con- Death-bed
stantinople, and by the new responsibilities which were con-
sequently thrown upon his shoulders. The character of a 1455.
statesman and a warrior, summoning Europe to a mighty
enterprise, was not within the conceptions which Nicolas V. had
set before himself. He regarded it as a cruel misfortune to his
future fame that he should have to undertake a position for
which he had in no way fitted himself. He had not the energy
to reconstruct his plans ; he was half-hearted in the conduct of
the crusading movement, yet he keenly felt the ignoble position
in which he was actually placed. He had dreamed of leaving a
great reputation as the restorer of Eome, the patron of men of
letters, the inaugurator of a new era, in which the Papacy at the
head of European culture quietly reasserted its old prestige
over the minds of men. This was not yet to be ; and Nicolas,
disappointed and enfeebled by the gout, grew daily more infirm.
326 THE PAPAL EESTORATION.
BOOK When he felt that his end Avas approaching he wished to justify
his policy, and claim due recognition of his merits before he
quitted the stage of life.1 He gathered the Cardinals round his
bedside the day before his death, and addressed to them his last
testament. First he spoke of the mercies of Grod as shown in the
sacraments, and of his hope of a heavenly kingdom. Then he
proceeded to defend himself for his expenditure of money in
buildings in Rome, on which point the Cardinals listened with
the most profound interest. Only the learned, he said, could
understand the grounds of the Papal authority : the unlearned
needed the testimony of their eyes, the sight of the magnificent
memorials which embodied the history of Papal greatness. The
buildings of Rome were the means of securing the devotion of
Christendom, on which the Papal power rested. They were also
the means of procuring for the Pope safety and peace at home.
The records of the past, even the events of the pontificate of
Eugenius IV., showed how needful were precautions for the
personal safety of the Pope. ' Wherefore,' said the dying Pope,
' I have built fortresses at Grualdo, Fabriano, Assisi, Castellana,
Narni, Orvieto, Spoleto, Viterbo, and other places : I have
repaired and fortified the walls of Rome ; I have restored the
forty stations of the Cross, and the Basilicas founded by Gregory
the Great : I have made this palace of the Vatican, and the
adjacent Basilica of S. Peter, with the streets leading to it, fit
for the use and dignity of the Holy See and the Curia.' He
recalled the glories of his pontificate — the ending of the schism,
the celebration of the Jubilee, the coronation of Frederick, his
efforts for a crusade, the pacification of Italy. ' The towns in
the States of the Church,' he continued, ' that were in ruins and
in debt, I have restored to prosperity, and have adorned with
pearls and precious stones, with buildings, books, tapestries, gold
and silver vessels for the use of the churches. All this I have
done, not by simony, by avarice, nor by parsimony — for I have
been most liberal in gifts to learned men, in buying and tran
scribing manuscripts — but by G-od's blessing of peace and tran
quillity in my days. The Roman Church, thus wealthy and thus
1 This is Manetti's metaphor ; Vita Nioolai, Mur. iii. pt. 2, 915 : ' Tan •
quam absoluta quaedam totius comoedife perfectio reliquis prior ibus tarn
laudabilibus et tarn celebratis operationibus suis non injuria correspondisse
et consonasse videatur.'
CHARACTER OF NICOLAS V. 327
peaceful I leave to you, beseeching you to pray for Grod's grace CHAP.
that you may preserve and extend it.' l When he had ended „ „ , ' „ ^
his exhortation he dismissed the Cardinals with his benediction,
and next day, March 24, he died.
The last words of Nicolas V. sufficiently show the character Aims of
of his pontificate. Himself a scholar and a man of letters, he ticate of
strove to mould the Papacy into the shape of his own indivi- Nlcolas v-
dual predilections, which indeed fitted well enough with the
aspirations of Italy in his day. Thoroughly Italian, he aimed
at adapting the Papacy to the best ideal of Italy. He did not
try to become powerful by arms or statesmanship, but rather
withdrew from the current of Italian politics. In the midst of
storm and strife, which raged in North and South Italy, the
States of the Church were to be the abodes of peace, in which
was to be realised the splendour of taste and learning which
was the dream of Italian princes. Kome was to sum up all
that was best in Italian life, and was to transmit it to the rest
of Christendom. Revered in Italy as the capital of Italian
thought, Rome was to be a missionary of culture to Europe,
and so was to disarm suspicion and regain prestige. It was
not exactly a Christian ideal that Nicolas V. set before himself.
But the more religious aspirations of the time ran in the di
rection of ecclesiastical reform ; and after the proceedings at
Basel it was not judicious for a Pope to interfere with that
matter at the present. Nicolas V. saw that reform was needed ;
but reform was too dangerous. If the Papacy could not
venture on reform, the next best thing was to identify itself
with art and learning. To the demand of Germany for refor
mation Nicolas V. answered^By offering culture. His policy
was so far wise that it enabled the Papacy to exist for sixty
years before the antagonism broke out into open rebellion.
In personal character Nicolas V. was a student, with a Character
student's irritability and vanity as well as a student's high- yfN
mindedness. He loved magnificence and outward splendour,
and demanded the utmost decorum from those around him.
To his household he was a kind master, but impatient, hard to
satisfy, and of a sharp tongue. He was easily angered, but
soon repented. He was straightforward and outspoken, and
1 This speech is in Manebti's Life, p. 915.
328 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK required that everyone else should be the same ; he was re-
- _ . ' ^ morseless to anyone who equivocated or expressed himself
clumsily. He was staunch to his friends, though they all had
to bear his anger. He did not pay attention to his health,
but studied at all hours of the day and night, was irregular in
his meals, and was too much given to the use of wine as a
stimulant to his energies. JEneas Sylvius puts down as his
greatest fault, ' he trusted too much in himself, and wished
to do everything by himself ; he thought that nothing was done
well unless he were engaged in it.' l
1 Comm&ntarii, ed. Fea., 109.
329
CHAPTER IV.
NICOLAS V. AND THE REVIVAL OF LEARNING.
THE great glory of Nicolas V. was the splendour of the CHAP.
artistic revival, which he knew how to foster and direct. r- —
The restoration of the city of Rome had already occupied the Architec-
attention of Martin V. and Eugenius IV. But Martin V. had to of Nicolas
discharge the inglorious though useful work of arresting the
decay of the buildings of Rome and making necessary repairs ;
Eugenius IV. had neither opportunity nor money to proceed far
with architectural works. Still they did so much that Nicolas V.
found the way prepared for great schemes of embellishing the
city, and with unerring taste and judgment entered zealously
upon the task. His successors, Julius II. and Leo X., have left
their mark more decidedly in the form of great monumental
works ; Nicolas V. left his impress on the city as a whole. He
wished not to associate his name with some particular work, but
to transform the whole city according to a connected plan. He
represents the simplicity, the sincerity, the freshness of the
early Renaissance, when it was an impulse and not a study.
So Nicolas V. was not content with one task only. His The adorn-
keen eye glanced over the whole field, his taste penetrated
to the smallest details, and his practical sagacity kept pace
with his architectural zeal. Besides building the Vatican
palace and the basilica of S. Peter's, he restored the walls of
Rome, and erected fortresses throughout the Papal States.
Besides adapting the Borgo to be the residence of the Curia, he
proposed to make straight the crooked streets of Rome, to
widen the entrances to the piazzas, and connect them with one
another by colonnades such as made civic life more commodious
in Bologna or Padua. Nor was his care confined to the adorn
ment of Rome only ; he built at Civita Castellana, at Orvieto,
and other places in the Papal States palaces fit for the
residence of the Pope or his vicar. Whatever he did he did
330
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Artists and
architects
of Nicolas
V.
Buildings
of Nicolas
V.
thoroughly ; if he built a chapel, he provided for every kind of
ornament down to the illumination of the missal for the altar.
The schemes of Nicolas V. seem beyond the power of one
man to achieve ; but if his pontificate, instead of lasting eight
years, had lasted for sixteen, his restless energy might have
seen his plans far advanced towards completion. As it was, he
began great works to which his successors gave a final shape.
To carry out his designs he gathered round him a band of noble
artists. Chief amongst his architects were the Florentines
Bernardo Gramberelli, known as Kosellino,1 Antonio di Fran
cesco, and the famous Leo Battista Alberti. As painters he had
Fra Angelico, whose frescoes of the lives of S. Stephen and
S. Laurance still adorn the Capella di S. Lorenzo in the Vatican,
Benozzo Gozzoli and Andrea Castegno, from Florence ; and from
Perugia, Benedetto Bonfiglio, the master of Pietro Perugino.
There were decorators, jewellers, workers in painted glass, in
intarsia, and in embroidery. The city swarmed with an army of
artisans, employed by the magnificent Pope to convert Kome
into a strong and splendid city, of which the crowning glory was
to be the Papal quarter beyond the Tiber, with its mighty palace
and church, which were to be the wonder of the world. Blocks
of travertine were quarried at Tivoli, and brought by water down
the Anio, or dragged by oxen to the city. Nor did Nicolas V.
spare the antiquities of Kome to minister to his new glories.
The Colosseum was used as a quarry, and some of the smaller
temples disappeared. The Renaissance was to Nicolas V. a new
birth, sprung from his own magnificence and identified with
his glory. Eome was to be the city of the Popes, not of the
Emperors.
When Nicolas V. died he had rebuilt the walls of Rome,
strengthened, from Alberti's plans, the Castle of S. Angelo,
fortified the chief towns in the Papal States, restored the
churches of SS. Apostoli, S. Celso, S. Stefano Rotondo, and
S. Maria Maggiore, rebuilt a great part of the Capitol, reor
ganised the water supply of Rome, and begun the fountain of
Trevi. Besides all this, he had commenced from the foundation
the rebuilding of the basilica of S. Peter, and had begun the
choir. In the Vatican palace he had finished the chapel of
1 See Vasari's life of Bernardo Rosellino, and Miintz, Les Arts a la Cour
des Papes, i. 80.
AKCHITECTUEAL WOEKS OF NICOLAS V. 331
S. Lorenzo, and had built and splendidly decorated many CHAP.
chambers round the Cortile del Belvedere, where he began the ^._ IJ' .
library. He might sigh that he could not finish all that he had
undertaken ; but he succeeded in marking out a plan which his
successors carried out, the plan of erecting a mighty symbol of
the Papal power, which should to all time appeal to the imagin
ation, and kindle the enthusiastic admiration of Christendom.
This architectural revival of Nicolas V. rested upon a new Decay of
conception which had gradually been changing the thought of
Europe. Literature can only be concerned with expressing and
arranging the ideas which are actually moving the minds of
men. At the downfall of the Roman Empire the old classical
culture had to give way before the necessities of the struggle
against the barbarians, and Christianity formed the common
ground on which Roman and barbarian ideas could be assimi
lated in a new form. Christian literature was first engaged
with the expression of Christian truth and the task of ecclesias
tical organisation. The work that occupied thinking men in
the early Middle Ages was the reconstruction of society on a
Christian basis. Their labour found its expression in the con
ception of the Empire and the Papacy, a conception which
the genius of Gregory VII. impressed upon the imagination of
Europe, and the Crusades gave a practical exhibition of its
force. It was natural that during a period of reconstruction
there was little thought of style ; the builder, not the artist,
was needed for an edifice in which strength, not ornament, was
required. To this the literature of classical antiquity could
contribute nothing : it was known by some, perhaps by many,
but there was no place for it in the world's work.
As soon, however, as Christendom was organised there was Revival
a possibility for the individual to find his own place in the new classical
structure ; there was room for the organisation of individual spirit in
thought, for expression of individual feeling. While society
was struggling to assert itself against anarchy, the individual
had no place. When the lines of social organisation had
once been traced the individual, having gained a foothold,
could survey his lodging. Classical literature, which had
been hitherto of little value, became precious as a model,
both of individual feeling and of the means of giving it ex
pression. Italy was naturally the first country to lead the
332
THE PAPAL EESTOEATION.
BOOK
IV.
Dante.
Revival of
learning.
way to this new literature. She was conscious of her antiquity,
while other European nations were only awakening to the con
sciousness of their youth.. While the Teutons turned for literary
inspiration to nature and to the legendary heroes of their early
days, Italy turned to classical antiquity, to the memorials that
surrounded her on every side. Her early literature was reflec
tive and display ed the workings of the individual soul. Teutonic
literature was national, and aimed at expressing the rude aspira
tions of the present in the forms of a legendary past.
So it was that Dante summed up the first period of Ita
lian literature, and gave an artistic form to the aspirations of
Christian culture. To him classical antiquity and Christianity
went hand in hand. Virgil led him in his soul's pilgrimage
to a spiritual emancipation which was the combined result of
philosophic thought, the experience of life, and the guidance of
heavenly illumination. To the large spirit of Christian cul
ture, in which faith and reason were combined, and to which
the mediaeval ideal of a cosmopolitan Christ endom was still a
reality, Dante gave an ultimate expression . It was the ideal
of Gregory VII. transformed by all the knowledge, all the
sentiment, and all the reflection which the individual could
acquire for himself.
But this ideal of Christendom was not to be realised.
Dante, though he knew it not, lived through the period of the
fall of Empire and Papacy alike. With the Pope at Avignon
and the Empire in anarchy it was no longer possible for the
individual life to attach its aspirations to what was manifestly
powerless. The individual was more and more driven to con
sider himself and the workings of his own mind. Dante
had used his own personality as a symbol of universal man.
Petrarch did not advance beyond the expression of phases of
feeling. But the study of phases of feeling led to a larger
conception of the variety of individual life, a conception which
animates with reality the pages of Boccaccio. This distinctly
human and individual literature brought with it a quickened
sense of beauty, an appreciation of form, a desire for a more
perfect style. When once this feeling was awakened the study
of classical antiquity assumed a new importance : only through it
could men attain to clear ideas, accurate expressions, beautiful
forms. To discover these the Italian mind devoted itself with
THE REVIVAL OF LEARNING IN ITALY. 333
passionate enthusiasm to the revival of classical antiquity, the CHAP.
study of its records, the imitation of its modes of thought. , ^ —
I Instead of striving to reconstruct the decaying ideal of a united
I Christendom, Italy devoted itself to the development of the in-
\ dividual life ; instead of labouring for the reform of the Church,
Italy was busy with the acquisition of literary and artistic style.
Hence it was that Italy played so small a part in the great Teutonic
movement of the fifteenth century for the reformation of the spirit.
Church. France and Germany laboured at Constance and
Basel for the ending of the schism and the reorganisation of
Christendom in accordance with the consciences of men. Italy
had passed beyond the sphere of the scholastic formulse which
were in the mouths of conciliar theologians. She was inventing
a new method, and had little interest in questions which
concerned merely external organisation. While the Fathers of
Constance looked upon Hus as a rebel who would rend asunder
the unity of Christendom, the cultivated Italian, Poggio, ad
mired his originality and compared him with the great men of
old time. While theologians were engaged in determining by
appeals to Christian antiquity the authority of General Councils,
Poggio was ransacking the adjacent monasteries in search of
manuscripts of classical authors. The breach had begun between
the Italian and the Teutonic spirit. The Italians were bent
upon securing for the individual emancipation from outward
systems by means of culture ; the Teutons wished to adapt the
system of Christendom to the requirements of the awakening
individual. The Kenaissance and the Eeformation began to
pursue different courses.
The Papacy, as having its seat in Italy, could not remain The
unaffected by the national impulse. Though Florence was the and the
centre of the early Eenaissance, its influence quickly spread, revival of
and students of classical antiquity were rapidly attached to
every Italian court. Manuscripts were collected, academies were
formed, and public business wTas transacted with strict attention
to the best models. The Papacy could not lag behind the
prevailing fashion. Already, under Innocent VII., Leonardo
Bruni and Poggio Bracciolini were attached to the Papal Curia
as secretaries. The Greek scholar, Emmanuel Chrysoloras,
was employed by John XXIII., and followed him to Constance,
where he died. Martin V. was too busy with other matters to
334
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Literature
under
Nicolas V.
pay much heed to literature ; but under Eugenius IV. the
Italian humanists found that their own interests were closely
bound up with the Papacy. The struggle between the Pope
and the Council of Basel brought into prominence the growing
antagonism between the Italian and the Teutonic spirit, be
tween the Renaissance and the Keformation. The opposition
of the Council to the Pope was resented as an attempt to rob
Italy of part of its old prestige. The new learning was ani
mated on its side by a missionary spirit ; its mission was to
carry thoughout Europe a new culture, and the Papacy was one
of its means. Though Eugenius IV. was in no way associated
in character with the Italian spirit of culture, yet the humanists
gathered round him, and Poggio, Aurispa, Vegio, Biondo, and
Perotti were numbered amongst his secretaries.
Nicolas V. was genuinely Italian, and was himself thoroughly
penetrated with the spirit of the new learning. Before he
became Pope he had been a great collector of manuscripts,
which he delighted to transcribe with his own hand. He had
arranged the library of S. Marco for Cosimo de' Medici, and was
eager to eclipse it at Rome. If the Papacy by its magnificence
were to assert its power over Christendom, it must stand at the
head of the mission of Italian culture. So Nicolas V. declared
himself the patron of all men of learning, and they were not slow
in gathering round him. Rome had produced few scholars of
its own ; but Nicolas V. was bent on making it a home of
learning. He eagerly gathered manuscripts from every side,
and employed a whole host of transcribers and translators
within the Vatican, while his agents traversed Greece, Germany,
and even Britain in search of hidden treasures. Even the fall
of Constantinople could not be regarded as entirely a misfor
tune, for it brought to Italy the literary wealth of Greece.
6 Greece has not fallen,' said Filelfo, 6 but seems to have
migrated to Italy, which in old days bore the name of Magna
Greecia.' 1 When Nicolas V. died he left behind him a library
of five thousand volumes, an enormous collection for the days
before printing.2 When in 1450 the Jubilee brought with it
a pestilence, occasioned by the crowded state of the city, and
Nicolas fled before the plague to Fabriano, he took with him
1 Philelphi, HJpistolee ~xiii. 1.
2 Manetti, in Muratori, iii. part^, 926.
LITERATURE UNDER NICOLAS V. 335
his host of transcribers, of whom he demanded as much zeal as CHAP.
he himself displayed. ' You were the slave of Nicolas,' says ^_ IV' _.
^Eneas Sylvius to his friend Piero da Noceto, ' and had no
fixed time for eating or sleeping ; you could not converse with
your friends or go into the light of day, but were hidden in
murky air, in dust, in heat, and in unpleasant smells.' l The
Pope's passion was well known, and the world's tribute flowed
to Rome in the shape of manuscripts. For these literary
treasures Nicolas V. rebuilt the Vatican library, and appointed as
its librarian Giovanni Tortelli, of Arezzo, the author of a gram
matical work, ' De Orthographia Dictionum a Grraecis tractarum.'
Chief amongst the Pope's assistants in his formation of a Vespasiano
library was the good Florentine bookseller, Vespasiano da a
Bisticci, whose love and respect for his patron may be read in *™ .
his own simple language.2 From Florence also Nicolas V.
invited his more famous biographer, OKanozzo Manetti, whom
he made a Papal secretary, and also conferred on him a pension
of six hundred ducats. Manetti, a small man with a large
head, who enjoyed robust health, was a rigorous student, and
had generally spent five hours in reading before the greater
part of his fellow-men had risen from bed. He was of great
repute in his native city of Florence, and was a leading states
man, employed in many important embassies, where his
eloquence always gained him a ready hearing. He obtained
leave from the Florentines to transfer himself to the Pope's
service, and was engaged by Nicolas V., with characteristic
impetuosity, on the two mighty works of writing an Apology
for Christianity against Jews and Heathens, and translating
into Latin the Old and New Testaments. Manetti had so far
advanced in his task at the death of Nicolas V. that he had
written ten books against the Jews, and had translated the
Psalms, the four Gospels, the Epistles, and the Revelation.3
Manetti's life of his patron is the chief record of the greatness
1 ^En. Syl. Epistolce, 188.
2 There is no more interesting work, nor one which throws a more intimate
light on the history of Italy in the fifteenth century, than Vespasiano's Vite di
Uomini Illustri, originally published by Mai in Spicilegium Romanum, vol. i.,
afterwards by Bartoli (Florence, 1859).
3 See Naldus, Vita Manetti, Muratori, xx. 529. There is at the end a list of
all Manetti's writings.
336 THE PAPAL KESTOKATION.
BOOK of the schemes of Nicolas V., which Manetti chronicled with
, IY- _, enthusiasm, though his style is pompous and his panegyric
laboured.
Poggio Nicolas V. found in the Curia an old acquaintance, the
lini. ' literary veteran Poggio Bracciolini, who in the days of Boni
face IX. took service in the Papal Chancery, and soon associ
ated with himself his friend Leonardo Bruni. He went to
Constance with John XXIII., and on his fall betook himself
to the occupation of searching for manuscripts in the neigh
bouring monasteries, while he surveyed the proceedings of the
Council with quiet contempt. Poggio was a true explorer
and warmed with his task ; he rescued from the dust and dirt
of oblivion Quintilian, several orations of Cicero, Ammianus
Marcellinus, Lucretius, and many other works. His zeal
carried him to Langres, to Koln, and ultimately to England,
where, however, he found scanty patronage in the turbulent
times of Henry VI. Many were his endeavours to send ex
plorers to Sweden in search of the lost books of Livy. Long
were his negotiations to obtain from the monastery of Fulda
the complete manuscript of the ' Annals ' of Tacitus, which he
edited in 1429. Under Eugenius IV. he did not find himself amid
congenial surroundings; and he hailed with delight the accession
to the Papacy of his friend Tommaso of Sarzana, to whom he
had dedicated in 1449 a Dialogue on the ' Unhappiness of
Princes.' It was a species of composition then much in vogue,
consisting of moral reflections illustrated by historical examples,
founded on the model of Cicero's ' Dialogues.' Following upon
the same lines, Poggio went on to write and dedicate ' to the
same man, though not under the same name,' his most inte
resting work, a Dialogue on the < Vicissitudes of Fortune.'
Poggio represents himself as reposing with a friend on the
Capitol after an inspection of the ruins of Rome. He mo
ralises on the scanty remnants of her ancient grandeur, and in
so doing gives the completest description we possess of the
appearance of the city at that time. From this he goes on to
quote great instances of the instability of fortune, which leads
him to survey the changes of Europe from 1377 to the end of
Martin V. The pontificate of Eugenius IV. illustrates his
theme so pointedly, that a whole book is devoted to it. Then
the writer takes a sudden leap, and tells us the travels of a
GREEK LEARNING IN ROME, 337
Venetian, Niccolo Conti, who had told him the story of his CHAP.
adventures during a residence of twenty-five years in Persia . IV' „
and India. The whole work is a store of curious and interesting
information, given with much sprightliness of style and keenness
of observation.1 Poggio hailed Nicolas V. as a second Maecenas,
and expressed his joy at the downfall of the monkish favourites
of Eugenius IV. by a stinging ' Dialogue against Hypocrisy,' in
which he held up to ridicule the affected piety of self-seeking
monks, and gathered a number of scandalous stories of their
frauds and tricks practised in the name of religion.2 Poggio
himself made no pretence at the concealment of his own life
and character, but published soon after his fi Facetiae,' or jest-
book, a collection of good stories which he and his friends in
the Papal Chancery used to tell for one another's amusement in
their leisure moments. We are not surprised that men who in
dulged in such frankness as these stories betoken, found even
the restraint of the neighbourhood of a monk's frock burden
some to their overflowing and unseemly wit. Poggio's pen,
like that of many of his contemporaries, was ready not only
to copy the finer forms of classical expression, but also
the licentiousness of paganism and the fertility of vituperation
which marked the decadence of classical literature. To please
Nicolas V., Poggio composed a philippic against Amadeus of
Savoy, and called to his aid all the wealth of Ciceronian invec
tive to overwhelm the anti-Pope and the Council of Basel. He
was, however, employed on more serious works of scholarship
and translated Xenophon's < Cyropedia,' and at the request of
Nicolas V., the ; History of Diodorus Siculus.'3
These scholars of the Papal Court were by no means free George of
from literary jealousies and rivalries. Factions and disputes Jn^Bes-
were rife amongst them, as was natural when each had to sarion-
preserve a reputation for preeminence in his own subject.
Chief amongst the Greek scholars whom Nicolas V. welcomed
in Rome was George of Trapezus, who translated for him
many of the works of the Greek fathers, Eusebius of Caesarea,
Chrysostom, Gregory of Nazianzum, and Basil. But the revival
1 Poggio, De Varietate Fortunes, was not published in its completeness till
1723, by the Abate Oliva, at Paris.
2 Dialoffus contra Hypocrigim is published in the Appendix to Fascicidiis
Rerum Expetendarwm et Fugiendarum, 570, &c.
3 Printed Bononiae, 1472.
VOL. II. Z
338 THE PAPAL EESTOIIATTON.
BOOK of Greek literature led to a deep interest in Greek philosophy,
. l^' _. and Gemistos Plethon established at Florence a school of
devoted students of Plato, who was almost a new discovery to
the thought of the time. The doctrines of Aristotle and Plato
were eagerly discussed ; and Cardinal Bessarion, at the request
of Nicolas V., translated Aristotle's < Metaphysics,' while Theo
dore Gaza translated the ' History of Animals,' and Theo-
phrastus's ' History of Plants.' George of Trapezus thought
it due to his own importance to attack a work of Bessarion,
which maintained the Platonic view that nature acts with
design, which is the stamp of the Divine Intelligence. Bessa
rion answered him, and the controversy created great interest.
George of Trapezus, in an evil moment, undertook to translate
Plato's * Laws,' which he did with great rapidity. Bessarion
criticised his translation, a task of some moment, as George
professed to give a specimen of Plato's teaching; he con
victed him of 259 errors, and concluded that his translation
had almost as many mistakes as it had words.1 George cer
tainly cannot have been an accurate translator, as ^Eneas
Sylvius says, that in one of his translations from Aristotle he
found Cicero mentioned.2 Nicolas V. felt his belief shattered ;
he withdrew his patronage from George, who in 1453 retired
to Naples, where he was received by King Alfonso. He was
an irritable man and took his revenge by general railing.
Amongst other things he asserted that Poggio's translations had
been made by his assistance ; that the merits were his, and the
mistakes were Poggio's.3
Lorenzo No doubt Poggio would have answered this aspersion on
his scholarship ; but probably it never came to his ears, as in
1453 he was appointed to the honourable office of Chancellor
of his native city of Florence, where he took up his abode after
spending fifty years in the Papal service. Moreover, he was
engaged in a literary controversy with an opponent more for
midable than George of Trapezus — the learned Lorenzo Valla.
If Poggio is the most celebrated literary man of the Early
1 This controversy is to be found in Bessarion's treatises, Do Natura et
Artc, and In Calumniator &m Platonis.
* Ejnstolce, 95.
3 ' Quotidianis laboribus meis .... vel vertisse ilium vel pervertisse,' in
a letter of George, quoted by Georgius, Vita Nieolai V. 177.
LORENZO VALLA. 339
Renaissance, Valla is undoubtedly the man of the keenest
mind. Poggio might boast of a more limpid style, but Valla
was the sounder scholar. Poggio founded himself on Cicero,
Valla preferred Quintilian. Valla's 6 Elegantia3 ' is a com
prehensive attempt to deal with Latin grammar in a scientific
spirit, and it was this that gave him a pre-eminence over men
like Poggio, who were merely literary Latinists. Valla was
born in Piacenza, but was educated in Rome under the
care of Leonardo Bruni till he reached the age of twenty-four.
Then he taught at Piacenza and Pavia, till he betook himself
to Alfonso of Naples, at the time when he was bitterly opposed
to Eugenius IV. The hate of a Roman against priestly domina
tion joined with a desire to strike a blow in his patron's be
half. Valla turned his keen critical spirit, which had been
trained in the methods of scientific inquiry, to an examination
of the grounds on which rested the story of the donation of
Constantine of the patrimony of S. Peter to Pope Sylvester.
In his work, < On the Donation of Constantine,' l he set forth
vividly the historical aspect of such an event ; he imagined
Constantine wishing to make such an alienation of the territory
of the Empire ; he pictured the remonstrance of the Senate,
the humble deprecation of the Pope. He examined the nature
of the evidence for this donation, and mocked at the claims
of tradition to be credited when contemporary records were
silent. ' If anyone among the Greeks, the Hebrews, or the
Barbarians were to say that such a thing were handed down
by tradition, would you not ask for the author's name or the
production of a record ? ' He criticised the wording of the forged
decree (no difficult task), and showed its gross inconsistency
with the facts and forms of the time at which it professed
to be framed. He ended with a savage attack on the
iniquities of the Papal Government, and exhorted all Christian
princes to deprive the Pope of his usurped power, and so take
away his means of disturbing the peace of Europe by inter
ference in temporal affairs.
Nor was this Valla's only onslaught upon orthodox belief ;
he ventured to call in question the tradition that the Apostles'
Creed was the joint composition of the Twelve, who met in
solemn conference and each contributed a clause. This brought
1 It is printed in Villa's works, and in Fasciculus Iterum, i. 132.
z 2
340
THE PAPAL KESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Quarrel of
Poggio
and Valla.
him into collision with the friars, and he was threatened with
the Inquisition ; but Alfonso interposed on his behalf, and
Alfonso's reconciliation with Eugenius IV. carried Valla's
reconciliation with it. Valla had no fanatical hatred to the
Papacy, and was willing to own that his attack had been of
the nature of a literary exercise. He wrote an apology to
Eugenius IV., who did not, however, admit him to his favour ;
but Nicolas V. cared little for monastic orthodoxy, and was not
prevented by Valla's free thinking from summoning to his
court so eminent a scholar. For him Valla translated
Thucydides ; and so pleased was the Pope with his translation
that he presented him with five hundred ducats, and begged
him to translate Herodotus also, a task which Valla began
but did not finish.
The keen critical spirit of Valla made him haughty and
supercilious to his literary compeers ; and meekness was in no
sense their crowning virtue. As ill-luck would have it, one of
Valla's pupils at Rome had a copy of Poggio's ' Letters,' in the
margin of which he had written criticisms on the style, point
ing out and amending what he conceived to be barbarisms.
The book fell into the hands of Poggio, who was filled with
wrath at this attempt to improve perfection. He at once con
cluded that the criticisms proceeded from Valla, and adopted
his usual mode of chastising the offender. He wrote, in the
most approved Ciceronian style, a violent invective against
Valla, in which he defended himself against Valla's supposed
criticism, scourged his arrogance and vanity, and impeached
his orthodoxy. Valla replied by an ' Antidote to Poggio,' which
he addressed to Nicolas V. Not content with repelling
Poggio's attacks or discussing his literary character, he cast
aspersions upon his - private life. Poggio retorted by opening
the flood-gates of abuse on Valla. Every scandalous story was
raked up, every possible villany was laid to his charge ; nay,
even a picture was drawn of the final judgment of the Great
Day, and Valla was remorselessly condemned to perdition.
Replies and counter-replies followed, and the contest between
these two eminent scholars was carried on by clothing the
lowest scurrility with classical language. The actual question
in dispute disappeared : the wrath alone remained. Rhe
torical exercises in declamatory abuse were poured forth in
FKANCESCO FILELFO. 341
rapid succession. What fills us with surprise is the fact that CHAP.
Nicolas V. did not use his influence to stop this unseemly _I^_
exhibition. He received the dedication of Valla's < Antidote ; '
and, though other men of letters, who were by no means
squeamish, remonstrated with the angry combatants, Nicolas V.
did not interfere. It would seem that an interest in style
had already overpowered, even in the head of Christendom,
any feeling of decorum, not to say morality, as regarded
the subject-matter. Love for the forms of classical antiquity
was already strong enough to override the spirit of Christianity.
The criticisms of Valla on popular religion awakened no
anxiety in the heart of Nicolas V. for the stability of eccle
siastical tradition ; the low scurrility of Poggio excited no care
for Christian morality. An antagonism had begun which was
to widen hereafter and produce disastrous results on the future
of the Papacy.
The man who interposed his good offices to stop this fray Francesco
between Poggio and Valla was Francesco Filelfo, the most ad
venturous and most reprobate of the literary men of the time.
A native of Tolentino in the march of Ancona, Filelfo sought
his fortune on every side. First he taught in Venice ; then in
1420 went as secretary to an embassy to Constantinople. There
he studied Greek under John Chrysolaras, whose daughter he
married. He won the favour of the Greek Emperor, went as
envoy to Murad II., and afterwards to Hungary, and returned
to Venice in 1427 with a treasure of Greek manuscripts. As
Venice would not pay him enough, he went to Bologna, and
thence to Florence. He was a savage literary gladiator, openly
seeking his fortune and restrained by no moral principles.
His overweening vanity offended his literary contemporaries,
whom he attacked in shameless satires. He and Poggio had
a fierce war of words, and he raised up enemies on every side.
At last he attacked even Cosimo de' Medici, and found it neces
sary to flee to Siena, thence to Bologna, and afterwards to Milan.
In 1453 he passed through Rome on his way to Naples ;
Nicolas V. summoned him to his presence, presented him with
five hundred ducats, and made him one of his secretaries. He
read with pleasure Filelfo's satires, and urged him to undertake
a translation of the Iliad and Odyssey; for this task he
offered to give him a house in Rome, an estate in the country,
342 THE PAPAL EESTORATION.
BOOK and to pay him ten thousand golden ducats. The death of
y . Y ' _, Nicolas y. prevented the bargain from being completed.
Fiavio Many other scholars of less fame worked for Nicolas V.
Niccolo Perotti translated Polybius ; Gruarino of Verona the
geography of Strabo ; Piero Candido Decembrio, who had been
the chief scholar in the service of GKovanni Maria Visconti,
took refuge in Eome from the disturbances that followed his
patron's death, and translated Appian for the Pope. Nor was
it only in the sphere of Latin and Greek scholarship that
Kome became the capital of literature. The sight of the
monuments of Eome aroused an interest in an exact study
of its past topography. Poggio looked on the ruins of
Eome with the eye of a literary man who found in them food
for his imagination. His contemporary, Fiavio Biondo, a na
tive of Forli, who was made a Papal secretary by Eugenius
IV., may be regarded as the founder of serious archaeology.
His work, * Eoma Tnstaurata,' which was finished just before the
death of Eugenius IV., is a careful topographical description of
the city of Eorne and an attempt to restore its ancient monu
ments. When we consider the materials which Biondo had at
his command, we are struck with the sense of order and
accuracy which was growing up among the Italian scholars.
The work of Biondo may be formless — it cannot be said that
archaeology has yet advanced very far in style — but it is a
careful and scholarly piece of work, such as had never been
attempted before. His concluding words are an expression of
the ideal of Nicolas V. After surveying the classical monu
ments of Eome he pauses. ' Not,' he says, ' that we despise
the Eome of our own day, or think that its glories came to an
end with its legions, consuls, and senate. Eome still exercises
her sway over the world, not by arms and bloodshed, but by
the power of religion. The Pope is still a perpetual dictator,
the cardinals a senate ; the world still brings its tribute to
Eome, still flocks to see its holy relics and its sacred places.'
Though Biondo himself did not proceed to describe the Chris
tian antiquities of Eome, he warmly appreciated them ; and his
contemporary, MafFeo Vegio of Lodi, also a Papal secretary,
wrote a careful account of the antiquities of the Basilica of
S. Peter's.
Such were a few of the scholars whom Nicolas V. gathered
VALUE OF THE HUMANISTS. 343
round him. Their names are now almost forgotten, though CHAP,
in their own day they received a respect which has rarely — r: — ,
fallen to the lot of literary men. Their works repose undis- Value
turbed in libraries ; their fame, of which they were so careful, humanists.
has vanished ; they are remembered merely as literary curi
osities. Yet we owe some debt of gratitude to those who
cleared the way for European culture. They were not men
of creative genius ; their merits are scientific rather than
literary. They rescued from destruction the treasures of
antiquity, and prepared the way for a proper understanding of
them. Their method was crude ; their knowledge was imperfect ;
their attention to rhetorical forms ludicrously exaggerated.
Yet they laid the foundation of classical philology, of the
science of grammar, of intelligent criticism, of clear expression.
They stood at the opening of a new era, and their labours only
furnished the foundation for the labours of others. One genera
tion of scholars succeeds another, and the past are soon forgotten,
however great may have been their services to a better under
standing of the classical spirit, however great may have been
the impulse which that heightened knowledge gave to the
thought of Europe.
We have spoken only of a few of the most famous scholars
who gathered round Nicolas V. They are but samples of their
kind, as the court of Nicolas V. was but a brilliant sample of
the literary and artistic movement that was pervading the
whole of Italy. Of this movement Florence was its home ; and
Cosimo de' Medici had seen the wisdom of identifying his power
with all that was most eminently Florentine in the aspirations of
his native city. He set the example of a literary patronage,
which was splendidly followed by Nicolas V., and scarcely less so
by Alfonso of Naples, who made himself more Italian than the
Italians, and became the ideal of a cultivated prince. He was
never tired of reading classical authors, and had them read
to him even at his meals. He was cured of an illness by hearing
Quintus Curtius' 6 Life of Alexander the Great,' and received
from the Venetians a bone of Livy with all the reverence
due to the relic of a saint. He and Nicolas V. carried on
an honourable rivalry, which should do most for learning ;
and their example spread rapidly throughout the congenial soil
344 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK of Italy. Almost every court had its literary circle, and lite-
^ , ' ,* rary interests held a prominent place in Italian politics of the
ensuing time.
Amid these now forgotten scholars stood Nicolas V.
Though not himself a man of letters, he was for that very
reason better fitted to play the part of patron. He was
not merely a collector of books, but was also an intelligent
director of the studies of others. When we consider all that
he did, we may well be amazed at the greatness of his plans
and the energy with which he prosecuted them. The trans
formation of Rome into the undisputed capital of Europe, the
attainment for the Papacy of an overpowering prestige which
was to enthral men's minds — these apparently chimerical objects
were pursued with unerring precision and untiring labour. No
thing was overlooked in the great plan of Nicolas V. : every part
of the work was pressed on at the same time, and every part of
the work was regulated by the personal judgment of the Pope.
Fortresses and libraries, churches and palaces, were alike
rising under the Pope's supervision ; the fine arts, the literature
and science of the time, all were welcomed to Rome, and found
by the Pope's care a congenial sphere. We cannot render too
much praise to the thoroughness with which Nicolas V. con
ceived and executed the plan which he had formed. But the
plan was in itself a dream of almost superhuman magnificence,
and Nicolas V. expected too much when he hoped that the
world's commotions would stand still and respect the charming
leisure of the Papacy. The fall of Constantinople dispelled the
pacific vision of the Renaissance, and brought back the
mediaeval dream of a crusade. Before Christendom could be
rearranged under the peaceful sway of literature and theology
going hand in hand, the enemies of her faith and of her civili
sation had stormed the bulwark that had stood for twelve
centuries, and were threatening her with a new invasion.
345
CHAPTER V.
CALIXTUS III .
1455-1458.
AFTER the funeral of Nicolas V. fifteen of the twenty Cardinals CHAP.
entered the Conclave. They were greatly divided in opinion, ^_
and, in fact, had no clear policy to which they were desirous to Ejection
commit themselves. The first scrutinies led to no result, and
the Cardinals conferred privately with one another. At first
Capranica seemed to be the favourite, being commended by his
learning, his high character, and his political ability. But
Capranica was a Roman and a friend of the Colon na ; as such
he was opposed by the party of the Orsini. He was therefore
passed by in favour of Bessarion, who had no enemies and
enjoyed a high reputation for learning. His election would
have given a worthy successor to the policy of Nicolas V.,
and would also have shown the zeal of the Cardinals for
the crusade. In Bessarion they would have chosen a Pope
sprung from the Greek nation and keenly sympathising with
his conquered countrymen. For a night it seemed that Bes
sarion would be elected ; but the morning brought reflection.
He was an alien and a neophyte, a stranger to Italy and to
the traditions of the Papacy. * Shall we go to Greece,' said
Alain of Avignon, ' for a head of the Latin Church ? Bessarion
has not yet shaved his beard, and shall we set him over us ? '
There was a sudden revulsion of feeling. The Cardinals,
weary with the debate, suddenly made a compromise, and an
old Spanish cardinal, Alfonso Borgia, was elected by accession
on April 8. Borgia was seventy-seven years old, and owed his
election to his age. As the Cardinals could not agree, they
made a colourless election of one who by his speedy death
would soon create another vacancy.
Alfonso Borgia was a native of Xativa in Valencia, who had
346
THE PAPAL EESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Early life
of Cardinal
Borgia.
Riot at his
corona
tion.
Crusading
zeal of
Calixtus
111.
distinguished himself in his youth at the University of Lerida.
There he attracted the attention of his countryman, Benedict
XIII., who conferred on him a canonry, and Alfonso of Aragon
took him as his secretary. He did good service to the
Papacy in winning for Martin V. the allegiance of Spain, and
in negotiating the renunciation of the Spanish anti-Pope,
Clement VIII. In recognition of these services Martin V.
conferred on him the bishopric of Valentia, When the Council
of Basel began its sessions Alfonso chose Borgia as his repre
sentative. Borgia refused the office, but visited Eugenius IV.
at Florence, and showed great skill in negotiating peace be
tween Alfonso and the Pope. In return Eugenius IV. in
1444 raised him to the Cardinalate, and by his wisdom and
moderation Cardinal Borgia deservedly held a high place in the
Curia. When the Conclave could not agree on a successor to
Nicolas V., Borgia was an excellent person for the purposes of
a compromise. His learning was profound, his character
blameless, his political capacity stood high. His election
was gratifying to Alfonso of Naples. As a Spaniard, he bore
an hereditary hatred to the Turks, which would make him a
fitting representative of the crusading movement.1
On April 20 Alfonso Borgia was crowned Pope, and took the
title of Calixtus III. The solemnity was disturbed by a riot
arising from a quarrel between one of the followers of Count
Averse of Anguillara and one of the Orsini. Napoleone Orsini
raised his war-cry ; 3,000 men-at-arms gathered round him,
prepared to storm the Lateran and drag the Count of Anguil
lara from the Pope's presence. Only the intervention of
Cardinal Latino Orsini could appease his brother's wrath, and
persuade him not to mar the festivities with bloodshed. The
turbulent Eoman barons began at once to reckon on the feeble
ness of the aged Pope.
In spite of his years Calixtus soon showed that he was
filled with a devouring zeal for prosecuting the war against the
Turks. He solemnly committed to writing his inflexible de
termination.2 4 1, Pope Calixtus, vow to Almighty God and the
Holy Trinity that by war, maledictions, interdicts, excommuni
cations, and all other means in my power, I will pursue the Turks,
1 See Platina, Vita Cnlixti III.
2 See Infessura, Muratori, iii. pt. 2,1136.
GEKMAN RECOGNITION OF CALIXTUS lit. 347
the most cruel foes of the Christian name.' With this object
in view Calixtus IV. sent legates to every country to quicken
the zeal of Christendom. The buildings which Nicolas V. had
begun were neglected ; his swarms of workmen were dismissed ;
men of letters found themselves little regarded in the new
court where severe simplicity reigned, and the old Pope rarely
left his chamber. The revenues of the Papacy were no longer
devoted to the erection of splendid buildings and the en
couragement of letters ; they wTere used for the equipment of
the Papal fleet, and the peaceful city was full of warlike
preparation.
The hopes of a European crusade were fixed on Germany ; but Recogni-
the proceedings of the Diet of Neustadt were scarcely such as Calixtus
to inspire much confidence. The death of Nicolas V. and the p1^
election of a new Pope gave an opportunity to the Electors to in.
urge upon the Emperor their grievances against the Papacy.
Jacob of Trier exclaimed that now was the time to vindicate
the liberty of the German Church, which was treated as
the Pope's handmaid; before Calixtus III. was recog
nised, the observance of the Concordat made by Eugenius IV.
should be rigorously exacted, and the grievances of the
German Church should be reformed. ^Eneas Sylvius con
firmed the troubled Emperor, who had his own grievances,
because the private agreement made by Eugenius IV. had not
been more strictly observed than the published Concordat. It
was vain, said JEneas, for a prince to please the people, seeing
that the multitude was always inconstant, and it was dangerous
to give it the rein. On the other hand, the interests of the
Pope and Emperor were identical, and a new Pope only gave a
new opportunity for receiving favours. After a little hesitation
^Eneas prevailed, and he, with the jurist John Hagenbach,
was sent to Eome to offer to Calixtus III. the obedience of
Germany, and to lay before him the Emperor's demands.1
JEneas and his colleague did not reach Rome till August 1 0, German
when they asked for a private audience to lay Frederick's R0me.h
requests before the Pope. Calixtus III. stood in a more inde-
pendent position towards the Emperor than his two prede
cessors. Eugenius IV. had bought back the obedience of
Germany by secret concessions and a promise of money.
1 Pii II. Commentarii, 25.
348 THE PAPAL KESTORATION.
BOOK Nicolas V. had been privy to this transaction, and felt himself
^_ ry~ _, bound by it ; he had paid his share of the money promised to
Frederick, but 25,000 ducats were still due.1 Calixtus had
had no part in the negotiations with Frederick, and knew
how hopeless it was to satisfy the feeble and needy Emperor.
He refused to consider his requests until he had received the
obedience of Germany. ^Eneas Sylvius, who was anxious to
reach the Cardinalate, had no objection to use his position of
Imperial envoy as a means of showing his readiness to please
the Pope. He professed to be confounded at this demand of
the Pope ; but to avoid scandal he gave way to it. He proffered
the obedience of Germany in a public consistory, and made a
speech, in which was no mention of the Emperor's demands,
or of the stricter observance of the Concordat. This speech
was merely a string of compliments to the Pope and the Em
peror and declamation about war against the Turk.2 When,
after this, the ambassadors returned, in several private audiences,
to the matters entrusted to them by the Emperor, they could
only appear as petitioners, not as negotiators. Calixtus roundly
declared that he had no money to pay the 25,000 ducats which
Frederick claimed ; his other requests for a share in the tenths
to be raised for the crusade, and for the right of nomination
to vacant bishoprics, were deferred for further consideration.
Cardinal Carvajal should be sent to satisfy the Emperor so far
as was consistent with the rights of the Church.3 Frede
rick III. was no longer the necessary ally of the Pope : his
cause was now so far identified with that of the Pope that he
could not desert the Papacy, and he was too unimportant in
Germany to be of much service. .^Eneas Sylvius felt that he
had now done all he could for the Papacy in Germany ; his
connexion with the Emperor could be of no further profit
to him. He had brought to Rome letters from Frederick III.,
and also from Ladislas of Hungary, recommending him
for the Cardinalate. This honour had been long in coming.
Nicolas V. had almost promised it; but the outspoken and
1 Letter of Gregory Heimburg, dated 1466, in Diix, Nicolas von Cusa I.
Beilage iv.
2 In Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, i. 336.
3 These details are given in Voigt, Mneas Sylvius Piccolomini, ii. 160,
from MS. letter of ./Eneas at Vienna.
NEPOTISM OF CALIXTUS III. 349
fiery Nicolas had never liked the subtle, shifty Sienese, and CHAP.
^Eneas had been passed over. He now stayed in Kome in the ^ V' .
hopes that Calixtus, as everyone expected, would create him
Cardinal in the coming Advent.
But the expectations of ^Eneas were for a time doomed to Nepotism
of Calixtus
disappointment. A consistory was held for the creation ot in.
cardinals, and congratulations were brought to ^Eiieas, who
lay bedridden with the gout. The congratulations, however,
were premature. The sitting of the consistory was long and
stormy; when it broke up the Cardinals were pledged to
secresy. Calixtus III. went back to the policy of Martin V.,
and wished to elevate his family at the expense of the Church.
He proposed as the new cardinals two of his nephews, Rodrigo *"*'**'
Lan£ol and Juan Luis de Mila, both young men little over
twenty years of age, remarkable for nothing except their
personal strength and vigour. Together with them he nomi
nated a third youth, Don Jayme, son of the Infante Pedro of
Portugal. The Cardinals protested loudly against this creation
of two nephews ; they pointed out the scandal that was likely
to arise. For a time the Pope paused ; he did not venture to
publish the creation till September, when most of the Cardinals
had left Rome to avoid the heat. The Cardinals murmured,
but were helpless against the stubborn old man.
The desire to aggrandise his nephews was the only object Calixtus
which shared with the war against the Turks the interest of ciaims°war
Calixtus III. Legates and preaching friars swarmed through- f^^**1 the
out Europe. Calixtus had no belief in Congresses ; he issued
himself a proclamation of war, imposed a tax on all the
clergy throughout Christendom, and fixed March 1, 1456, as
the day on which a combined .fleet and army was to set forth
against the Turks. He appointed special priests to say mass
daily in behalf of the holy war ; he ordered processions to be
made for its success ; at midday each church bell was to be
rung to summon the faithful to prayer, and they who said three
Aves and Paternosters for victory against the Turk earned an
indulgence for three years. All that was possible was done to
kindle the Zealand gather the contributions of Christendom.
The princes, however, did not show the same zeal as the Apathy of
Pope. They made high-sounding promises and professions,
and were ready enough to receive the money collected in
350 THE PAPAL KESTOHATION.
BOOK their realms ; but this was all. Alfonso of Naples equipped
*— . — ^ — • a fleet, but sent it against Genoa instead of the Turks. The
Duke of Burgundy was content with the renown he had
already won as a crusader, and was busy in watching the
French King. Charles VII. of France at first refused to allow
the Pope's Bulls to be published ; he was too busily engaged
in watching England and Burgundy to have any care for
foreign enterprises. At length Cardinal Alain of Avignon pre
vailed upon him to sanction the collection of tenths from the
French clergy ; but the money was spent in building galleys at
Avignon, which were afterwards used against Naples. Ger-
many, England, and the Spanish kingdoms did nothing ; the
Italian powers were too cautious to take any decided steps.
Nowhere did the Papal summons meet with any real response.
The Papal In spite of the lukewarmness of Europe the Pope was not
against1 the disheartened. From his sick chamber he urged the building
145?8' °f his galley8 along the Eipa Grande. To obtain money he
took the treasures of art which Nicolas V. had lavished on the
Roman churches ; he even stripped the splendid bindings off
the books which Nicolas V. had stored in the Vatican library.
One day his eye fell on a salt-cellar of richly-chased gold work
upon his table : ' Take it away,' he cried, ' take it for the
Turkish war ; an earthenware salt-cellar is enough for me.' l
The result of these efforts was that in May 1456 a fleet of
some sixteen galleys was anchored at Ostia. Calixtus appointed
as his admiral Cardinal Scarampo, and bade him sail at once
against the Turks. Sorely against his will, Scarampo was
driven to undertake this hopeless task. His position was
indeed pitiable. Under Eugenius IV. he had been the general
of the Papal forces, and had ruled Rome at his will ; under
Nicolas V. his power came to an end, and he indulged himself
in ease and luxury. With a new Pope a new field was opened
for his ambition, and he had been foremost in promoting the
election of Calixtus III., believing that the old man would be
a flexible instrument in his hands. But Calixtus fell under
the power of his stalwart nephews, who looked with suspicion
on Scarampo, and so poisoned the Pope's mind against him
that he was forbidden to approach the Vatican. In this strait
Scarampo made a bid for a renewal of favour by professing the
1 Letter of Gabrielle of Verona to Capistrano, in Wadding, vi. 185.
SIEGE OF BELGKAD. 351
greatest zeal for the Turkish war. Calixtus was mollified, and CHAP.
hoped that Scarampo would devote his own wealth to this . ' ^
purpose ; the nephews were not sorry for an excuse for re
moving him from Kome, and he was appointed admiral of the
fleet. In vain Scarampo tried to evade this unpleasant duty ;
in vain he urged that thirty galleys at least were needful before
anything could be done. The obstinate and fiery Pope ordered
him to set out at once, and threatened him with a judicial
inquiry into his past conduct if he refused. Scarampo set sail
and won back a few unimportant islands in the ^Egean which
had been captured by the Turks. He carried succours to the
knights of Ehodes, and might pride himself on a few trivial
successes. But his forces were inadequate to any serious
undertaking, and Scarampo was neither a hero nor an enthu
siast who cared to risk his life in a rash attempt. His only
desire was to cruise about and make a decent show of activity.
So far as he gave the islands a notion that they were being
aided, he filled them with false security and unfounded hopes,
which only tended to make them less self-reliant.
The only country which urged war successfully against the Siege of
Turks was Hungary, which was bravely fighting for its national by the
existence. There Fra Capistrano showed the power of religious
zeal to stir a nation to a deep consciousness of the principles at
stake. There also Cardinal Carvajal, as Papal legate, brought
wisdom as well as devotion to aid the cause of patriotism.
Carvajal had gone in 1455 to aid the crusading movement,
and to reconcile the Emperor with his former ward, Ladislas.
The reconciliation Carvajal soon found to be hopeless ; he
turned his attention to the more important business of national
defence, and helped the brave Governor of Hungary, John
Hunyadi, who was resolved to withstand the Turkish onslaught.
In April 1456, came the news that the Sultan with a host
of 150,000 was advancing along the Danube valley to the
siege of Belgrad. Hunyadi gathered such troops as he could
and hastened to the relief of the threatened city. He besought
Carvajal to remain in Buda, and gather forces to send to his
support. King Ladislas, who was in Buda, went out hunting
one morning with the Count of Cilly, but thought it more pru
dent not to return to such dangerous quarters, and made off to
1 See Cribelli, DC Eypcditionc in Tureos, Muratori, xxiii. 57.
352
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Repulse of
the Turks.
Death of
Hunyadi
and Capis-
trano.
1456.
Vienna. The nobles and the King were alike afraid ; the two
churchmen, Carvajal and Capistrano, alone assisted the national
hero.
When Hunyadi arrived the siege of Belgrad had already
been carried on for some fourteen days, and the walls of the
city were terribly shaken ; but the sight of Hunyadi and Capis
trano with their forces gave the defenders new courage. On
the evening of July 21, Mahomet II. gave the signal for a
storm. All the night and all the next day the battle raged
desperately. Hunyadi and Capistrano stood on the top of a
tower and surveyed the fight. Capistrano, with uplifted hands,
bore the banner of the cross and a picture of S. Bernardino ;
from time to time shouted aloud the name of 4 Jesus.' Hu
nyadi, with a soldier's eye, saw where help was needed, and
rushed to aid the waverers till the fight was restored. More
than once the infidels forced their way into the town, and
were repelled by the valour of Hunyadi. At last an unex
pected sally was made by a troop of Capistrano's crusaders ; the
Janissaries were preparing to attack them in the flank, when
Hunyadi charged furiously to their aid, and the voice of Capis
trano succeeded in rallying them. The Janissaries amazed at
the onslaught fled to their tents ; the Sultan, who had been
slightly wounded by an arrow, gave the signal for retreat, and
Belgrad was saved.1
There was a cry of triumph throughout Europe at the
news, and Calixtus naturally expected that this success would
rouse men's minds, and fire the lagging princes of Europe
for the holy cause. But after the first glow of enthusiasm
no one was moved to any decided action. In Hungary
itself the heroes of Belgrad passed away, and it was doubtful
who wrould take their place. A month after his victory, on
August 11, John Hunyadi died of the plague. When
he felt that death was approaching and preparations were
being made to administer to him the Eucharist, he exclaimed.
' It is not fitting that the Lord should be brought to visit
the servant.' He rose from his bed and prepared to seek the
1 The account of the battle of Belgrad is rendered obscure by the desire
of many friars to elevate Capistrano into a second Joshua. Wadding, vol.
vi., has an account by Giovanni da Tagliacozzo, and another by Nicola da
Faro, both of which are full of Capistrano. See also Thurocz in Schwandtner,
Scrijytores, i. ch. 55. ^n. Sylv., Hist. Boliem. ch. 65. Hist. Fred, in Kollar, ii.
460. Comment. 327.
DEATH OF LADISLAS OF HUNGAEY. 353
nearest church ; his strength failed him, and he had to be CHAP.
carried. He confessed his sins, received the Eucharist, and „ _ ^' __ .
died in the hands of the priests.1 Capistrano was not long in
following him ; he died of fever on October 23, 1456.2
The death of Hunyadi might fill the Hungarians with woe, Death of
but it was a source of relief to King Ladislas, and more espe-
cially to his guardian the Count of Cilly. Now that the
mighty Vaivod was removed, the Count of Cilly hoped that he
would be supreme over the young King and would assert over
Hungary the royal power, freed from the trammels which
Hunyadi had imposed. Ladislas and the Count of Cilly returned
to Hungary, and even went to Belgrad to see the battle-field
whose glory they had so basely refused to share. There one
morning while the King was at mass the Hungarian nobles, led
by Ladislas Corvinus, Hunyadi's son, fell upon the Count of
Cilly and slew him. The King for some time dissembled his
wrath, and the sons of Hunyadi accompanied him unsuspi
ciously to Buda, where they were seized, and Ladislas Corvinus
was publicly beheaded as a traitor. The King himself did not
long enjoy his triumph; on November 23, 1457, he died sud
denly in Prag, whither he had gone to prepare for his marriage
with Margaret of France.
The question of the Hungarian succession added to the Schemes
confusion in Grermany, where things were already sufficiently Electoral
confounded. The electoral party was still aiming at its own opposition
objects as against the feeble Emperor, and the death of Jacob, Frederick
Archbishop of Trier, in May 1456, altered the state of parties IIL 1456<
and introduced a new subject of discord. The Pfalzgraf now
stood at the head of the opposition, and both parties struggled
to obtain the vacant archbishopric. John of Baden and Kupert
of the Pfalz were the candidates ; but the power of the Pope
was sufficiently strong to secure the victory for John of Baden,
son of the Markgraf Jacob, who was the Emperor's friend.
The opposition now consisted of the Pfalzgraf and the Arch
bishops of Mainz and Koln. The collection of the tenths
imposed by the Pope gave an occasion to raise again the old
1 JEn. Sylv., Hist. Fred., p. 465.
2 The letter of Giovanni da Tagliacozzo, in Wadding, vi. no. 85, is so
animated by a desire to procure the canonisation of Capistrano that it passes
into the fabulous.
VOL. II. A A
354
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Anti-Papal
policy of
the Elec
toral op
position.
Sylvius
made Car
dinal.
December
1456.
grievances of the German Church and to recur to the old
policy of reform. The victory of Belgrad gave an opportunity
of attacking the indolence of the Emperor, and the Electors
sent Frederick III. an invitation to be present at a Diet to be
held in Niirnberg on November 30, 1456, to consider the war
against the Turk ; if he did not come, the Electors would take
such steps as they thought best.
It was noticeable that this Diet, which was forbidden by
the Emperor, was attended by a Papal legate. It would seem
that the Electoral opposition counted on having the Pope on
their side, if only they joined in war against the Turk and laid
aside their anti-Papal measures. However that might be,
the question of the private interests of the Electors overrode
both the Turkish war and the reform of the Church. The dis
cussions were purely political, and the Diet adjourned till
March 1457, when it again met at Frankfort, and again ad
journed. Meanwhile, Albert of Brandenburg succeeded in
forming a strong party in the Emperor's favour, and the oppo
sition was driven to fall back. When baffled in its political
objects it bethought itself of the question of Church reform.
The Papacy was threatened with what it dreaded even more than
a General Council — the establishment of a Pragmatic Sanction
for Germany.
Proceedings were begun in secresy by the Electors ; but, as
usual, information early reached the Curia, and preparations
were made to resist the attempt. To JEneas Sylvius was left
the organisation of the defence. ^Eneas had at length attained
to the goal of his ambition. On December 18, 1456, the Pope
had created him Cardinal with five others. It would seem that
the College, steadfast in its opposition to the Pope and his
nephews, resisted as long as it could this new creation. ' No
cardinals,' writes ^Eneas to one of the newly-created dignitaries,1
4 ever entered the College with greater difficulty than we ; for
rust had so spread over the hinges (cardines), that the door
could not turn and open. Calixtus used battering rams and
every kind of instrument to force it.' ^Eneas wrote at once to
Frederick III. to thank him for his good offices. « All men
shall know,' he said, ' that I am a German rather than an Ita
lian cardinal.' 2 He soon proceeded to show the sense in
1 To the Cardinal of Pavia, j&>. 195. 8 E#. 189.
ANTI-PAPAL POLICY OF THE ELECTORAL OPPOSITION. 355
which he meant that promise, by using all his skill to baffle
I he aspirations of Germany for freedom from ecclesiastical
oppression.
About the grievances of Germany there was no doubt ; but
there was little earnestness in the means taken to have them attacks the
redressed. The cry for reform was raised by the Electors when policy in
they had something to gain from the Pope : it gradually died
away when a sop was thrown to the personal interests of the
leaders of the movement. The proceedings were insincere
even on the part of those who saw most forcibly the evils. The
present leader of the movement was the Archbishop of Mainz ;
and his Chancellor, Martin Mayr, sounded the note of war
in a letter to zEneas Sylvius, in which, after congratulating him
on his cardinalate, he put forth a powerful indictment of the
Papal dealings with Grermany.1 The Pope, he said, observed
neither the decrees of Constance nor Basel, nor the agreements
of his predecessors, but set at nought the German nation.
Elections to bishoprics were arbitrarily annulled, and reserv
ations of every kind were made in favour of cardinals and
Papal secretaries. * You yourself,' proceeded Mayr, ' have a
general reservation of benefices to the value of 2,000 ducats
yearly in the provinces of Mainz, Trier, and Koln, an unpre
cedented and unheard-of grant.' 2 Grants of expectancies were
habitually given, annates were rigorously exacted, nor was the
Pope content simply with the sum that was due. Bishoprics
were given not to the most worthy, but to the man who offered
most. Indulgences were granted; Turkish tenths were im
posed without the consent of the bishops, and the money went
to the Pope. Cases that ought to be decided by the bishops
were transferred to the Papal Court. In every way the German
nation, once so glorious, was treated as a handmaid by the
Pope. For years she had groaned over, her slavery ; her nobles
thought that the time was come for her to assert her freedom.
1 This letter is given in the Basel edit, of 1571 of JEnece Sylvii Opera,
p. 1035.
2 ^Eneas excuses himself for this in a letter to the Dean of Worms (Ep.
356), dated July 22, 1457 : ' Nos quidem supra xxiv. annos in Alamania ser-
vivimus et semper honorem illius nationis pro virili nostra promo vimus, et
nunc ad Cardinalatum quamvis insufficientes vocati id conamur quod illi nationi
utile decorurnque esse putamus. . . . Quibus in rebus non sumus arbitrati
Germanics nntioni futnrum odiosum si beneficia in ea pro duobus millibus
ducatorum in annuis rediubus obtineremus.'
A A 2
po
German^-
356
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Answer of
Cardinal
Picco-
lomini.
Proposal of
the Arch
bishop of
Mainz.
The letter reads as though it were genuinely meant ; but
^Eneas in his answer shows that he, at all events, had read
between the lines.1 In answering Mayr he asserted the Papal
supremacy, rejected the decrees of Basel, agreed that the Con
cordat should be observed, and suggested that if the Electors
had any grievances on this point, they should at once send
envoys to the Pope, who would be willing to grant redress.
As regarded the Papal interference with elections, it was exer
cised in the way of judicial intervention, the need for which was
caused by the ambition and greed of contending claimants, not
by Papal rapacity. If money were paid to officers of the Curia,
that was not the Pope's doing, but was caused by the ambition
of the claimants, who were willing to do anything which might
further their cause. Men were not all angels at Rome any
more than in Germany ; they took money when it was offered,
but the Pope in his chamber decided according to justice. The
Pope's officials might be extortionate, and the Pope greatly
wished to check them ; but he himself received nothing save
what was due. Everyone makes a grievance of parting with
money, and always will do so. The complaint of the Bohe
mians against the Germans was the same as that of the Ger
mans against the Papacy — that their money is taken out of the
land. Yet Germany, from its connexion with the Papacy, had
steadily grown in wealth and importance, and, in spite of its
complaints, was richer than at any previous time. ^Eneas
found it hard that Mayr complained of the provision made
in his favour ; he had lived and laboured in Germany so long
that he did not think he was regarded as a stranger. How
ever, he thanked Mayr for his personal offer to help him in
realising his provision, and would be glad to know of any
eligible benefices that might fall vacant. From the last sen
tence we see that Mayr in another letter had drawn a dis
tinction between the German grievances and his own personal
feelings ; though theoretically he might regard his friend as an
abuse, he was practically ready to help him.
y£neas showed that he interpreted this letter of Martin
Mayr to mean that the Archbishop of Mainz had some con-
1 The dates of these letters are perplexing. The letter of Mayr, in all
editions, bears the date of August 31, 1457 : the answer of ^neas is dated
August 8, 1457. There must be an error in the date of one of them.
PAPAL POLICY TOWARDS GERMANY. 357
ditions to propose to the Pope. He was not wrong in his CHAP.
conjecture, for early in September came a secretary of the >_ / „„
Archbishop, who was empowered to negotiate, through ^Eneas
Sylvius, for an alliance with Calixtus III. ; the Archbishop of
Mainz was ready to desert to the Pope's side if he received the
right of confirmation of episcopal elections throughout Ger
many. JEneas answered in a letter to Mayr with a decided
refusal, cleverly couched in courteous yet stinging language.
He was glad to hear that the Archbishop no longer joined
with the malignants against the Pope, but regretted to hear
that he had been ill advised to ask for a right inherent in the
Papacy, which none of his predecessors had enjoyed. No
understanding was necessary between Christ's vicegerent and
his subjects — all were bound to obey. He was sure that the
modesty of the Archbishop had been improperly represented
by this request, which he, for his part, could not venture to
lay before a Pope so blameless, so wise, and so upright as
was Calixtus III.1
^Eneas might answer Mayr conclusively ; yet the danger was Papal
threatening, and all the diplomatic power of ^Eneas was set at lyfaTnsrTtiie
work to avert it. He assured the Archbishop of Mainz that the Gern\a^
opposition.
Pope was ready to grant all his smaller requests ; he assured
Mayr of his strong personal friendship, and of his desire to
serve him in all ways. He wrote to Frederick III. in the name
of Calixtus III. to supply him with an answer to the murmurs
against the Papacy. He wrote to the King of Hungary, to the
Grerman Archbishops, to remind them of their duties to the
Papacy. He stirred up the Cardinals Cusa and Carvajal to
exert all their influence in Grermany. Above all he wrote
most confidentially to his former friends, the jurists and
secretaries who occupied important posts at the different
Grerman Courts ; Peter Knorr, the councillor of Albert of Bran
denburg; Heinrich Leubing, Procopius of Rabstein, Heinrich
Senftleben, and John Lysura, to whom he sent a cipher that
communications might be carried on with greater secresy.2
Moreover, a new envoy was sent into Grermany, a skilful
theologian and diplomatist, Lorenzo Rovarella, who was laden
with Bulls to the Emperor and the Electors. ^Eneas gave him
1 Letter of September 20, 1457, no. 338, ed. Basel.
2 Ep. 349, -<20, ed. Basel.
358 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK instructions1 to warn the Archbishops of Magdeburg, Trier,
Kiga and Salzburg to abstain from joining in any measures
against the Pope. He was to urge the Duke of Bavaria to use
his influence with the Pfalzgraf in the same direction ; and as
soon as possible was to proceed from the Emperor's Court to
the Ehenish provinces, which were the seat of the anti-Papal
movement. The princes were reminded that capitular elections
were rarely in favour of junior members of princely families,
and that only through the Papal intervention could these meet
with their due rewards. The bishops were asked to consider
that any blow aimed at the Papal dignity would eventually be
disastrous to all episcopal authority as well. It was frankly
admitted that there were abuses in the Papal Curia which
the Pope desired to remedy. The German princes were asked
to send their complaints to Kome, and trust to the Pope's
judgment. A judicious mixture of cajolery and fair promises
was applied to soothe the discontent of Germany.
Moreover, JEneas Sylvius took up his pen in defence of the
Papacy, and expanded his letter to Mayr into a tractate ' On
the Condition of Germany.' 2 He represented the Concordat as
depending on the goodwill of the Pope, and expressed the
Pope's desire for a reform of all abuses which could be shown to
attach to the proceedings of the Curia. He discussed the com
plaints of the Germans with sophistical skill. He condemned
generally the abuses complained of, denied their existence, and
then plausibly accounted for a few exceptional cases. Grants in
expectancy, he said, have never been made by the Pope, except
at the earnest request of princes, and solely for the purpose of
raising money for war against the Turk. Capitular elections
have never been annulled except on legal grounds, though he ad
mitted that some legal ground had been discovered to annul every
election brought before the Curia during the past two years.
As to the complaints about indulgences, he said, pertinently
enough, that the Papacy only offered indulgences to the faith
ful who showed their zeal for their religion by contributing to
the expenses of the Turkish war. It was a free gift on their
1 Ep. 341.
2 * De ritu, situ, conditione et moribus Germanise ' in the Basel ed. JEneee
Sylrii Opera, 1571, p. 1035, dated in a Viennese MS. February 1, 1458 .
VQigt,Arckivfur Kunde Oesterreich. Geschiclitsqwlloi, xvi. 420.
END OF THE MOVEMENT IN GERMANY. 359
part ; why should it be laid as an exaction to the Pope's
charge ? Germany had received from Kome more than she
had given. Her complaint that money went from her to Rome
was an old grievance, as old as human nature itself, and was
never likely to disappear.
The pleadings of ^Eneas and the diplomacy of Rovarella Change of
had the effect in Germany of staying any definite proceedings Germany,
for a time ; and in German politics to pause was to lose the f4°5v7em
day. If for a brief space a strong party of the princes was united
for a common object, it needed only a few months for some
change to occur in the position of affairs which led to a new
combination. The death of Ladislas of Hungary in November
1457 caused great excitement in Grermany. The dominions
of Austria, Hungary, and Bohemia were left in dispute, and
most of the German princes were interested in the settlement.
It is true that a Diet met at Frankfort in June 1458, and
agreed to send an embassy to the Pope ; but this was felt to
be a mere empty form. The Papacy gained its object of
putting off the enactment of a Pragmatic Sanction for Grer
many, and the death of Calixtus III. in September removed him
from further threats.
All these disturbances in Grermany promised little for the Calixtus
favourite design of Calixtus III. — a great expedition against
the Turks. Nothing was done for this object. Scarampo still
cruised about the ^Egean islands with the Papal fleet, and
Scanderbeg in Albania showed how strong national feeling
could supply courage to a handful of men contending against an
invading host ; but Europe did nothing. Calixtus III. grew
daily more indignant at the remissness of Alfonso of Naples,
his former friend, in whose service he had entered Italy. His
friendship rapidly turned to hostility when Alfonso sent his
fleet against Genoa instead of joining with Scarampo. He opposed
Alfonso's Italian policy, and strove to prevent the alliance with
Milan by which Alfonso wished to secure the succession of his
son to the Neapolitan kingdom. Alfonso had no child born in
lawful wedlock; but his illegitimate son, Ferrante, had been
legitimatised and recognised as successor to the Neapolitan
kingdom by Eugenius IV. and Nicolas V. In spite of this, on
Alfonso's death, on June 27, 1458, the impetuous Pope threat
ened to plunge Ttaly into war by refusing to acknowledge
Ferrante, and claiming Naples as a fief of the Holy See.
360
THE PAPAL RESTOKATION.
BOOK
IV.
— — t
Power of
the Papal
nephews.
It was not only anger at Alfonso's remissness to help in the
Turkish war that prompted Calixtus III. to this step. The
only object, which shared with crusading zeal the Pope's interest,
was the enrichment of his nephews ; and for this the vacancy of
the Neapolitan throne gave an opening which he hastened to
use. Besides the two nephews who had been elevated to the
cardinalate was a third, Don Pedro Luis de Lanpol, on whom
Calixtus III. was desirous to heap every worldly distinction.
He made him Gonfalonier of the Church and Prefect of Kome ;
he committed to his hands all the castles in the neigh
bourhood of the city. He conferred on him also the Duchy of
Spoleto, in spite of the protest of Capranica, who made himself
the mouthpiece of the discontent of the Cardinals. Calixtus
tried to rid himself of Capranica by sending him on distant
embassies ; when this failed he threatened to imprison him.1
There was nothing that Calixtus would not do for his nephews,
whom he identified still further with himself by bestowing on
them his own family name and arms of Borgia. These three
vigorous young men were all-powerful with the Pope, and the
cardinals who maintained an independent footing were either
sent on distant embassies or compelled to leave the city.
Carvajal and Cusa were at a safe distance in Germany ;
Scarampo, against his will, was sent to sea ; Cardinal Orsini in
vain tried to resist, and was driven to quit Eome. The other
cardinals of any importance, Estouteville, head of the French
party, Piero Barbo, the nephew of Eugenius IV., even Prospero
Colonna, thought it wise to be on good terms with the
Borgia. ^Eneas Sylvius was too much accustomed to be on
the winning side to find any difficulty in making friends with
the powerful. With his wonted amiability he was ready to
help Cardinal Borgia in his desire to enrich himself with Church
preferment. He acted as his agent and informed him of eligible
vacancies during his absence. * I keep an eye on benefices,' he
writes on April 1, 1457, 'and will take care of you and myself.
But we are deceived by false rumours. He whose death was
reported from Niirnberg was here a few days ago, and dined
with me. The Bishop of Toul, also, who was said to have died
at Neustadt, has returned safe and sound to Burgundy. I will,
Poggio's Vita Cardinalis Firmam, in Baluze, Misccll. iii. 290.
CALIXTUS III. AND NAPLES. 361
however, be watchful for any vacancy ; but you have the best CHAP.
proctor in his Holiness.' l ^ , -
Thus watchful and thus supported, the Borgia ruled Rome
and filled the city with their creatures. Dependents of their
house flocked from Spain to share the booty, and their party
was known by the name of * the Catalans.' All the offices of
the city were put in the hands of these strangers, who con
nived at robbery and murder by the members of their own
faction. One day Capranica was asked for alms on the bridge *
of S. Angelo by a beggar, who pleaded that he had escaped
from the Catalans. ' You are better off than I am,' answered
the Cardinal, 6 for you have escaped, while I am still in their
hands.' 2
The death of Alfonso offered Calixtus III. an opportunity of
exalting his nephew Pedro still higher. By claiming the king
dom of Naples he might at least get hold of some portion
which might be made into a fief for Pedro's benefit. On July 31
he conferred on him the Vicariate of Benevento and Terracina,
It was not, however, to be expected that Ferrante would
flee before the Papal threats. He summoned a meeting of
the Neapolitan nobles, who accepted him as their king ; he
appealed from the Pope to a future Council, and prepared to of Naples.
jf JT-- ir • TT i • i i .1 i • June 1458.
defend himself against an attack. He claimed only the king
dom of Naples ; on Alfonso's death without lawful issue Aragon
and Sicily passed to his brother John of Navarre. Even with
out the Pope's interference there were other claimants of the
throne of Naples. John of Anjou revived the claims of his
house ; and Charles of Biana, son of John of Navarre, was pre
pared to maintain his right of legitimate succession to Alfonso .
Calixtus III. might disturb the peace of Southern Italy ; but he
was by no means strong enough to secure his own success.
His policy could only lead to the introduction of foreign
invaders, and was in consequence strongly opposed by the far-
seeing Duke of Milan, whom Calixtus III. vainly tried to win
over to his side. Sforza answered, that the settlement made
under the auspices of Nicolas V. had met with the approval of
all the Italian Powers, and he for his part would fight in
1 E#. 257.
2 This story is told both by Vespasiano, Vita del Cardinals Ca-pranica, and
by Poggio, in Baluze, Mi^oell. iii. 290.
362
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
— — , .
Death of
Calixtus
III.
August 6,
1458.
Results
of the pon
tificate of
Calixtus
III.
defence of Fen-ante, rather than see the concord of Italy dis
turbed.1
This answer of Sforza was a bitter disappointment to the
old Pope. But the end of his plans was approaching. He was
seized with a fever, and it was clear that his end was drawing
near. The Orsini began to take up arms against the hated
Catalans. The nephew Pedro grew more fearful for himself as
he saw his uncle on his deathbed. He judged it better to beat
a prudent retreat while there was yet time. He sold the castle
of S. Angelo to the Cardinals for 20,000 ducats, and on
August 5 left the city with his Catalan friends. The Orsini
occupied the gates and watched the roads to prevent his
escape ; only by the friendly aid of Cardinal Barbo did he
manage to flee, in the darkness of the night. Barbo led him
to the Tiber, where he took boat and made his way to Civita
Vecchia.2 Next day, Aug. 6, Calixtus III. died. The Orsini at
once plundered the houses of the Catalans and all that bore the
arms of the Borgia. Calixtus was buried with little respect
in the vault of S. Peter's, and was followed to the grave only
by four priests.
The pontificate of Calixtus III. was a violent reaction
against the policy of Nicolas V. The energy of Nicolas V. and
the greatness of his schemes had naturally caused some dismay
among the Cardinals, who heard the murmurs of Germany and
feared the results of localising the Papacy too exclusively in
Kome. Under the influence of this feeling they elected a
stranger, whose advanced age was a guarantee that his ponti
ficate would only be a temporary breathing space, in which
they might recover from the impetuosity of Nicolas V. But the
reaction of Calixtus III. was too violent and too complete. He
not only checked the works of his predecessor ; he allowed them to
fall into decay. Had he continued in any degree the buildings
of his predecessor, the schemes of Nicolas V. might have been
slowly realised in the future side by side with other objects of
Papal interest. Bat the entire suspension of the works by
Calixtus III. was fatal. The scheme of the Eenaissance, instead
of advancing to gradual completion, was laid aside to be super
seded by the more splendid, though less thorough, plan of
1 Simoneta, Vita, Sfortia, in Mur. xxi. 686.
2 Cannesio, Vita Pauli II., in Mur. iii. pt. 2, 1003.
CHAEACTER OF CALIXTUS III. 363
a later age. Eome, that might have borne the impress of the CHAP.
calm strength and simplicity of Nicolas V. and Alberti, is / _^
stamped with the more passionate magnificence of Julius II.
and Bramante. No institution, least of all an institution like
the Papacy, admits of a sudden change of policy, or can without
loss direct its energies entirely into a different channel. While
we may admire the zeal of Calixtus III. for a crusade against
the Turks, we must regret that it was so exclusive as to sacri
fice with impatience all the labours of Nicolas V.
Even Calixtus III. did not entirely abandon some care for
the architecture of Eome ; but his wilfulness is shown in the
works which he did, no less than in those which he left undone.
He restored the Church and the palace of SS. Quattro Coronati,
because from the Church he took his title as Cardinal, and the
palace had served as his residence. He restored also the
Church of S. Calixtus, in honour of his Papal name ; and the
Church of S. Sebastiano Fuori, because it was situated over the
Catacombs of S. Calixtus. Besides these, he did some repairs to
the Church of S. Prisca, and began a new ceiling in S. Maria
Maggiore. The few painters who remained in Eome in the
days of Calixtus III. were employed for the purpose of painting
standards to be borne against the Turks.1
If Calixtus III. was thus inconsiderate and narrow-minded
in despising the work of his predecessor, the same qualities
stood in the way of his success in the object which was fore
most to himself. It must always be an honour to the Papacy
that, in a great crisis of European affairs, it asserted the im
portance of a policy which was for the interest of Europe as a
whole. Calixtus III. and his successor deserve, as statesmen,
credit which can be given to no others of the politicians of the
time. The Papacy, by summoning Christendom to defend
the ancient limits of Christian civilisation against the assaults
of heathenism, was worthily discharging the chief secular duty
of its office. Of the zeal and earnestness of Calixtus III. there
was no question ; but the lethargy of Europe prevented him
accomplishing much. Moreover, the zeal of Calixtus was dis
played by passionate impetuosity, which disregarded the means
in its desire to reach the end. All that Bulls, exhortations,
and indulgences could do, Calixtus did ; but he trusted merely
1 See Miiutz, Lea Arts a la Gour des Papcs, i. 196, &c.
364 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK to words, and took no means to remedy the evils which
>_ IY' __. kept Europe suspicious and divided and prevented the pos
sibility of combination for a common object. He did not try
to win the confidence of Grermany by wise measures of eccle
siastical reform, which might have formed the beginning of a
political reorganisation. He did not even in Italy strive to
maintain the pacific spirit which he found. Under the influ
ence of his greedy nephews the Papacy again threatened to be
a centre of territorial aggression.
Character The impetuosity of youth has passed into a common phrase.
in,3 1 The history of the Papacy gives many examples of the no less
dangerous impetuosity of old age. Men of decided opinions, who
come to power late in life, expend on accomplishing their
cherished desires the accumulated passion of a lifetime. In
flexible, overbearing, inconsiderate, Calixtus III. pursued his
own plans, and seemed to form no part of the life around him.
He brooked no contradiction ; he saw no one who was not
prepared to re-echo his opinions ; he had no care of anything
outside the circle which he had marked for himself. The vow
which he made on his election was one of the ornaments of
his chamber ; l it was ever before his eyes and ever in his
thoughts. He left at his death 150,000 ducats, which he had
stored up for the Turkish war.
Personally Calixtus III. was a man of rigid piety and of
simple life. He was largely charitable and attentive to all
religious duties. Little could be said against him save that he
was obstinate and irritable ; yet he inspired little affection and
accomplished little. His weakness left more permanent results
than did his strength. The ardour of his zeal for Christen
dom is forgotten ; the evil deeds of his nephew Kodrigo and
his race have made the name of Borgia a byword, and Calixtus
III. is remembered as the founder of a race whose actions
marked the Papacy with irretrievable disgrace.
1 Mtintz (Les Arts a la Cour des Papes, i. 213) gives from the Roman
Archives an inventory of the furniture of the rooms occupied by Calixtus III.
in the Vatican. Amongst them we find ' Item votum domini Calisti in una
carta magna.'
365
CHAPTER VI.
PIUS II. AND THE CONGRESS OF MANTUA.
1458-1460.
ON August 10 the eighteen Cardinals who were in Rome en
tered the Conclave in the Vatican Palace. The first day was
spent in preliminaries. The next day was devoted to framing The Con-
the solemn agreement, which since the death of Martin V. had August
been subscribed by all the Cardinals before a Papal election, ^g8'-
It contained the chief points to which the College wished to
bind the future Pope, and so expressed the desire of the electors
to limit, while there was yet time, the absolute power of the
infallible ruler whom they were about to set over the Church.
On the present occasion the points insisted on were, the pro
secution of the Turkish war, respect for the wishes of the Car
dinals in new creations, proper provision for the Cardinals,
due consultation of the College in all important matters, care
for the States of the Church, and such like matters.1 On .
the third day the first scrutiny was taken, and it was found
that Cardinals Piccolomini and Calandrini had each received five
votes, while no other candidate received more than three. The
first scrutiny, however, was generally of little consequence, and
merely served as a means of opening private discussions among
the Cardinals. It soon appeared that the French Cardinal
Estouteville, by his wealth and magnificence, had gained a
considerable following, and could count with certainty on six
votes. A little private consultation showed that the real issue
was the election of Estouteville or an Italian. Estouteville had
many arguments to use in his own favour. < Will you take
^Eneas,' he said, * who is both gouty and poor ? How can one
who is poor and infirm govern the Church ? Perhaps he will
transfer the Papacy to his beloved Germany, or introduce his
heathenish poetry into the statutes of the Church. Calandrini
1 In Raynaldus, 1458, no. 5.
366 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK is incapable even of governing himself. I am an older car-
, ' _• dinal than they ; of the royal race of France, rich, and with
many friends ; my election will vacate many benefices which
will be divided among you.' The adherents of Estouteville
met in secresy l and bound themselves to secure his election.
They counted on eleven votes, and regarded the election as
won ; already Estouteville had promised them the due rewards
of their zeal in his cause.
But at midnight Calandrini visited the cell of Piccolomini.
< To-morrow,' he said, ' Estouteville will be elected. I counsel
you to rise and offer him your vote so as to win his favour. I
know from my experience of Calixtus III. how ill it is to have
the Pope for one's enemy.' JEneas answered that it was against
his conscience to do so ; he could not vote for one whom he
considered unworthy. But ^Eneas was disturbed in his mind,
and early in the morning visited Cardinal Borgia, to see if he
was pledged. Borgia said that he did not wish to be on the
losing side, and had received from Estouteville a document
promising to confirm him in the office of Vice-Chancellor, which
he had held under Calixtus III. * Are you not rash in trusting
to the promise of an enemy to your nation ? ' said ^Eneas. ' Do
you not know that the Chancery is also promised to the Car
dinal of Avignon ? which promise is the new Pope most likely
to keep ? ' Next ^Eneas sought Cardinal Castiglione and asked
him if he had promised his vote to Estouteville. Castiglione
made a like answer ; he did not wish to stand alone, since the
affair was as good as settled. ^Eneas recalled the miseries of
the Schism, the dangers of a French Papacy, and the disgrace
which it would bring on Italy : had they escaped the Catalans
only to fall before the French ? JEneas next met Cardinal
Barbo, who was equally anxious that some decisive step should
be taken to defeat the schemes of Estouteville's party. Barbo
was one of those who had entertained hopes of his own elec
tion ; he determined to lay them aside, and try to gain a
majority for the best candidate of an Italian party. He in
vited the Italian Cardinals to assemble in the cell of the Car
dinal of Genoa, and six answered his summons. He laid
1 JEn. Syl., in Meuschen, Ceremomalia, ' in latrinis ; ' but this was in
mediaeval times a spacious hall, with only a row of cells at one side for its
ostensible purpose.
ELECTION OE JENEAS SYLVIUS PICCOLOMINI, POPE PIUS II. 367
before them the condition of affairs, appealed to their national CHAP.
sentiment, exhorted them to lay aside all personal feelings, ^_ _ ^ _
and proposed Piccolomini as their candidate. All agreed ex
cept ^Eneas, who modestly declared himself unworthy of the
honour.
Soon after this the public proceedings of the Conclave began Election
with the mass, which was followed by a scrutiny. Estoute- Sylvius**
ville, pale with excitement, was one of the three cardinals
whose office it was to guard the chalice, while the rest advanced Piusn
in order and dropped into it their votes. As ^Eneas approached 145!"*
the altar, Estouteville whispered, < ^Eneas, I commend myself
to you.' ' Do you commend yourself to a poor creature like
me ? ' answered ^Eneas, as he dropped his vote. Then the
chalice was emptied on a table and the scrutineers read out the
votes : when this had been done, Estouteville announced that
^Eneas had eight votes. £ Count again,' said ^Eneas, and Estoute
ville was obliged to confess that he had made a mistake ; and
^Eneas had nine votes, and he himself had six. It was clear
that, with nine votes out of eighteen, ^Eneas had won the day ;
only three votes were wanting, and the Cardinals remained
seated to try the method of accession. ' All sat,' says ^Eneas,
4 pale and silent, as though rapt by the Holy Grhost. No one
spoke or opened his mouth, or moved any part of his body
save his eyes, which rolled from place to place. The silence
was wonderful as all waited, the inferiors expecting their supe
riors to begin.' * At last Borgia arose and said, ' I accede to
the Cardinal of Siena.' The conversation of ^Eneas about the
Vice-Chancellorship had no doubt shown Borgia which way his
interest lay. ^Eneas had now ten votes, and in a desperate
attempt to prevent the election being made that day, Isidore
of Russia and Torquemada rose and left the Conclave. No one
followed, and they soon returned. Then Cardinal Tebaldo rose
and said, ' I also accede to the Cardinal of Siena.' One vote
only was wanting, which Prospero Colonna rose to give. Estoute
ville and Bessarion upbraided him for his desertion of their
cause, and seizing his arms tried to lead him from the Con
clave ; but Colonna loudly called out, 4 1 also accede to the
Cardinal of Siena and make him Pope.' The deed was done ;
the intrigues were at an end. In a moment the Cardinals were
1 Pii II. Commentarii, p. 30.
368
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Coronation
of Pius II.
September
3, 1458.
prostrate at the feet of the new Pope. Then they resumed
their seats, and formally confirmed the election.
Bessarion, in the name of the adherents of Estouteville,
addressed JEneas. < We are pleased with your election,
which we doubt not comes from God ; we think you worthy of
the office and always held you so. Our only reason for not
voting for you was your bodily infirmity : we thought that
your gouty feet might be a hindrance to that activity which
the perils from the Turks might require. It was this that led
us to prefer the Cardinal of Eouen. Had you been strong in
body there was no one whom we would have chosen before you.
But the will of God is now our will.' ' You have a better
opinion of us,' answered ^Eneas, 4 than we have of ourselves ;
for you only find us defective in the feet, we feel our imperfec
tions to be more widely spread. We are conscious of innume
rable failings which might have excluded us from this office ;
we are conscious of no merits to justify our election. We
would judge ourselves entirely unworthy, did we not know that
the voice of two-thirds of the Sacred College is the voice of
God, which we may not disobey. We approve your conduct in
following your conscience and judging us insufficient. You
will all be equally acceptable to us ; for we ascribe our election,
not to one or another, but to the whole College, and so to God
Himself, from whom comes every good and perfect gift.'
^Eneas then put off his robes and assumed the white tunic
of the Pope. He was asked what name he would bear, and
with a Virgilian reminiscence of ' Pius ^Eneas,' answered ' Pius.'
Then he swore to observe the agreement entered into by the
Cardinals at the beginning of the Conclave. He was led to the
altar, and there received the reverence of the Cardinals, Then
the election was announced to the people from a window. The
attendants of the Conclave plundered the cell of the newly-
elected Pope, and the mob outside rushed to pillage his house,
which they did with such completeness that they tore even the
marble from the walls. Unfortunately he was one of the
poorest cardinals ; but part of the mob professed to mistake
the cry of ' 11 Sanese ' for ' II Genovese,' and plundered the
house of Cardinal Flisco as well.
The election of Cardinal Piccolomini was popular with the
Romans : the citizens laid aside their arms, with which they
BEGINNINGS OF PIUS II. 369
were provided in case of a tumult, and went to S. Peter's. CHAP.
Pius II. was placed on the high altar, and received the adoration . v*- _.
of the cardinals, the clergy, and the people. At nightfall the
magistrates of the city came on horseback, bearing blazing
torches, to pay their respects to the new Pope. On Sept. 3
he was crowned in S. Peter's, and rode in solemn procession
to the Lateran, where he experienced the unruliness of the
Roman mob, who, according to old custom, seized the horse
and trappings of the Pope. So eager were they for their booty
that they made a rush too soon. Swords were drawn in the
fight for the plunder, and the crippled Pope was in danger of
his life in the confusion. He was, however, happily saved
from hurt, and entertained the cardinals, the foreign ambas
sadors, and chief citizens at a banquet.
The election of Pius II. gave general satisfaction in Italy, Feelings of
where the new Pope was well known to most of the princes ^n^
and republics. His reputation for learning and his diplomatic election,
ability made everyone look upon him with respect. The
French, however, felt aggrieved at the rejection of Estoute-
ville, and the opponents of the Emperor in Germany looked
with suspicion on one whose cleverness they knew too well.
To Pius II. himself his elevation was a source of mingled joy
and fear. True, he was ambitious, vain, desirous of glory ;
true, he had schemed and plotted for his own advancement,
and had made success the great object of his life. But when
success came at last, he shrank from the responsibilities of
which he well knew the extent. He was no inexperienced
enthusiast who might dream that he had the future in his
hands. Though only fifty-three years old, Pius II. was already
old in body, racked by the gout, suffering from gravel, afflicted
by the beginnings of asthma. He knew fall well how useless
it was in the existing condition of Europe to hope for any
great opportunities which he might use to leave his mark
upon the world. He had reached the height of his ambition,
and saw nothing but difficulties before him. When in the
first moments after his election his friends thronged round him
with joyful congratulations, he burst into tears. ' You may
rejoice,' he said, ' because you think not of the toils and the
dangers. Now must I show to others what I have so often
VOL. II. B B
370
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Crusading
policy of
Pius II.
demanded from them.' ! During all the festivities of his acces
sion his face was careworn and melancholy.
When Pius II. reviewed the condition of Europe he had no
hesitation in deciding that the chief object of his policy must
be the same as that of his predecessor, the prosecution of war
against the Turk. What Calixtus III. had urged with the
unreflecting fanaticism of a recluse, Pius II. would press with
the wisdom of a statesman. Already Pius II. had identified
himself with the cause of the crusade ; his speeches, his
writings, had advocated it ; his knowledge of European politics
convinced him of its absolute necessity. But he saw that,
to ensure success, the crusade must be undertaken by the
whole of Christendom, and Christendom must be united for
this purpose by wise management on the part of the Pope.
Accordingly Pius II. determined to proceed with stately de
liberation, and put the project on its proper footing. He lost
no time in laying before the Cardinals a plan for a general
conference of the princes of Europe, to be held under the
Pope's presidency. But the Cardinals were half-hearted ; the
majority of them were content to stay in Kome and enjoy
themselves, and shrank from the trouble of a serious under
taking. They raised difficulties about the place of the pro
posed conference ; the princes of Europe could not well be
summoned to Kome ; there was a danger, if an assembly were
held in France or Germany, that it might turn into a Council,
whose very name was hateful. Pius II. pointed out that the
state of his health gave him an excuse for refusing to cross
the Alps, while he was ready to show his zeal by going to some
place in North Italy, so as to meet the European represen
tatives half way : he proposed Udine or Mantua as suitable
places for the Congress. The Cardinals reluctantly consented ;
and Pius II. hastened to publish his resolution to an assembly
of ambassadors and prelates in S. Peter's. There were present
eleven cardinals, three archbishops, twenty-nine bishops, and
the ambassadors of Castile, Denmark, Portugal, Naples, Bur
gundy, Milan, Modena, Venice, Florence, Siena, and Lucca.
To them Pius II. announced his plan ; though an old man and
infirm, he would brave the dangers of crossing the Apennines
to confer with the princes of Europe on the step to be taken
1 Campanus, Vita Pii II., Mur. iii. pt. 2, p. 974.
PIUS II. AND NEAPOLITAN AFFAIRS. 371
to avert the ruin of Christendom : he asked for their opinion CHAP.
and advice. For a time there was silence. Then Bessarion ._. i ' ..
begged the ambassadors to speak. One after another they
praised the zeal of the Pope, and asserted the good intentions
of their several states. Pius II. was pleased with these ex
pressions of assent, and invited all to a public consistory to be
held in three days' time, on October 13. There a solemn
summons to a Congress to be held on June 1, 1459, was read
to the assembly,1 and a few days afterwards Pius II. sent letters
to the various kings of Christendom, urging their presence at
this great undertaking.
But before he could proceed to a Congress, Pius II. had a Affairs i
political question to settle nearer home. Calixtus III. had
refused to recognise the succession of Ferrante in Naples, and
had claimed the kingdom as a fief of the Holy See. He had
not conferred it on any claimant, and any scheme that he might
have had of establishing his nephew in Naples was at once
overthrown by his death. An envoy of Ferrante had been
sent to the Cardinals during the vacancy ; Pius II. found the
Neapolitan question pressing for his decision. Nor was the
question one which could be decided easily on general
grounds. The condottiere general, Jacopo Piccinino, had occu
pied in Ferrante's name Assisi, Gualdo, and Nocera. The
States of the Church were in confusion, and in many cities Pius
II. had to buy off the Catalan governors, and assert his rule with
difficulty. The presence of Piccinino was a continual menace.
Moreover, the general lines of the Papal policy towards
Naples had been somewhat obscured by the predecessors of
Pius II. The Papacy had, on the whole, favoured the Ange
vin party. Eugenius IV. had been the constant opponent
of Alfonso, and Nicolas V. had only recognised him for the
sake of peace. The question which Calixtus III. had opened
was full of difficulty. Pius II. might well doubt the wis
dom of supporting in Naples the line of Anjou, and intro
ducing into the neighbourhood of the Papacy the influence of
the country of the Pragmatic Sanction. Pius II. himself had
known and liked the scholarly Alfonso, and his own sympathies
were probably on the side of Ferrante. But the French
party was strong among the Cardinals, and the envoys of the
1 It ia given by Cribelli in Mur. xxiii. 70.
u u 2
372
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Pius II.
recognises
Ferrante
as king.
October
1458.
Departure
of Pius II.
for the
Congress
of Mantua.
January
1459.
French King laid before the Pope the impolicy of offending a
prince so powerful as their master. As the Archbishop of
Marseilles pleaded in this strain, Pius II. suddenly asked him
if Rene of Anjou were ready to drive out Piccinino from the
States of the Church. The Archbishop was driven to answer
' No.' ' Then what are we to expect from one who cannot help
us in our straits ? ' said the Pope. 4 We need a king in Naples
who can protect both himself and us.'
So Pius II. proceeded to make the best bargain he could
with Ferrante. When Ferrante wished to negotiate, the
Pope roundly answered that he was no merchant to barter with.
On October 17 an agreement was made that Pius II. should
free Ferrante from all ecclesiastical censures, and invest him
with the kingdom of Naples, ' without prejudice to another's
right.' The Pope did not venture to decide entirely against
the Angevin claims, but merely recognised Ferrante as the
actual king. Ferrante undertook to pay the Pope a yearly
tribute, and recall Piccinino from the States of the Church
within a month. Benevento, which had been granted as a
personal fief to Alfonso, was restored to the Church ; but Terra-
cina, which was held in the same way, was to be retained by
Ferrante for ten years. The French cardinals still opposed
the agreement, and refused to sign the Bull in which it was
embodied. Piccinino was driven to leave the States of the
Church, and Pius II. sent Cardinal Orsini to crown Ferrante in
Naples.
When peace had thus been restored to some extent at home,
Pius II. proceeded with the preparations for his departure to
the Congress. The Komans were ill pleased to see the Pope
leave his city. Some exclaimed that he was going to take the
Papacy to Germany; others declared that he would go no
farther than Siena, and there would devote himself to the
adornment of his native land. All joined in lamenting the loss
which the city would sustain from the departure of the Curia.
They deprecated the danger to which the Pope was about to
expose his life, and foretold that his departure would be the
signal for disturbances in the Papal States. To allay their
anxiety Pius II. left some cardinals and officials of the Curia
behind him, that Rome might not be entirely deprived of its
glory ; he appointed the Cardinal Nicolas of Cusa Vicar during
PIUS II. AT CORSiaNANO. 373
his absence. He decreed that if he died away from Rome, the CHAP.
election of his successor should still take place in that city after ._ "^" _.~
a due delay for the return of the absent cardinals. He granted
their ancient privileges to the cities in the Papal States, and
remitted their tribute for three years. Finally he summoned
the Roman barons, and administered to them an oath that
they would keep the peace during his absence. As a token of
his zeal for the crusading cause, he founded a new military
order, the order of S. Mary of Bethlehem. But the day for
military orders was gone, and this revival existed only in name.
After these precautions he set out from Rome on January 22,
1459, accompaniedjby six cardinals — Calandrini, Borgia, Alain,
Estouteville, Barbo, and Colonna.
The journey of Pius II. was like a triumphal progress. It
was long since a Pope had been seen by any of the dwellers in
the Papal States. Throngs of people welcomed him wherever
he went with shouts of rejoicing and expressions of goodwill,
which afforded sincere enjoyment to Pius II. who fully ap
preciated the dignity of his office.
At Narni the crowd thronged round his horse , and strove to Pius n.
carry off the baldachino held over his head. Swords were
drawn in the struggle, and Pius II. thought it wiser in the
future to be carried in a litter, so as to avoid such unseemly
brawls. At Spoleto he was entertained for four days by his
sister Catarina. Thence he passed through Assisi to Perugia,
where he stayed three weeks.1 He was loth to pass by his
native place, and leave Siena unvisited ; but there was a
conflict between the Pope and the government of Siena,
where the popular party were in the ascendent, and had
driven out the nobles. They had tried to pacify the Pope
by admitting the Piccolomini to office, but Pius II. de
manded the restitution of the nobles. The popular party gave
way a little at the Pope's pressure, and relaxed the rigour of
their proscription, but they regarded the Papal visit with un
disguised suspicion. From Perugia Pius II. crossed the lake
Trasimene, and entered the Sienese territory at Chiusi. He
turned aside to visit his native place, Corsignano, a little town
perched among the hills, which he had left as a poor boy and
now entered as the head of Christendom. He experienced the
1 ^'ampanus, in Mur. iii. pt. 2, p. 975.
374
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Pius II.
at Siena.
February-
March
1459.
same sad feelings that attend everyone who revisits the haunts
of his youth. His father and mother were dead ; those whom
he had known were mostly confined to bed through sickness ;
faces which he remembered flushed with the pride of youth
were unrecognisable in the deformity of old age.1 Here, in
the little church, the Pope celebrated mass on February 22,
the festival of S. Peter's installation. He resolved to honour
his native place by elevating it to a bishopric under the name
of Pienza. He ordered workmen to be collected to build there
a cathedral and a bishop's palace.
After a sojourn of three days Pius II. left Corsignano for
Siena. There he stayed nearly two months, and strove to
propitiate the people by presenting the city with the golden rose
on Palm Sunday. At last he brought before the magistrates
his political object, and urged on them the restoration of the
excluded nobles. After some opposition they agreed to admit
them to a quarter of some offices and an eighth of others.
Pius II. was not satisfied with such a small concession, but
thanked them for what they had done, and said that he hoped
on his way back to hear that they had granted more. At Siena
Pius II. received the first ambassadors from the powers beyond
Italy, who sent to offer their obedience to the new Pope.
There came representatives of the Kings of Castile, Aragon,
Portugal, and Matthias Corvinus, the new King of Hungary.
All were received with due state, and were answered by Pius
with his wonted eloquence. The Imperial ambassadors were at
Florence, and when they heard that the envoys of Matthias
Corvinus had been received by the Pope, raised difficulties
about presenting themselves, as Frederick III. still urged his
own claims on Hungary and refused to recognise Matthias. But
Pius II. had himself given the Imperial envoys an example not
to be too careful about their master's dignity in dealing with
the Papacy. They were readily mollified by the assurance of
the Pope that in such formal matters he only dealt with the
existing state of things, and treated as king him who held
the kingdom. They came to Siena, and gave to Pius II. the
obedience of the Emperor. Pius II., on his part, could not
1 Pii II. Comment. 44 : ' Major pars iequalium e vita excesserat, et qui
adhvtc superabant, gravati senio morbisque domi detinebantur ; et hi qui sese
exhibebant mutati vultibus vix agnosci poterant, exliausti viribus et deformes.'
GEORGE PODIEBRAD IN BOHEMIA. 375
do less than confirm to the Emperor the provisions of the CHAP.
secret agreement which he himself had negotiated, and for , - <1 — ,
which the German obedience had been sold to Eugenius IV.
To Siena came also the envoys of George Podiebrad, who policy of
had been elected King of Bohemia, and their coming brought
before Pius II. the chief difficulty which he had to face. Podie- King of
brad, as governor of Bohemia under Ladislas, had pursued with
firmness and sagacity a successful policy in uniting Bohemia
and bringing back order into the distracted country. He was,
above all things, a statesman who appreciated the exact bear
ings of the situation. He saw that Bohemia must be united
on a basis which would allow the various factions to live peace
ably together, and would also free the country from its
isolation from the rest of Christendom. He aimed at bringing
about this union on the basis of moderate utraquism. He
overthrew the fanatical Taborites, and reduced their stronghold.
He wished to be on good terms with the Papacy ; but he knew
that Bohemia would not be content with less than a faithful
observance of the Compacts made with the Council of Basel,
and the recognition of Rokycana as Archbishop of Prag. But
the Compacts had been wrung out of the Council by necessity,
and the restored Papacy had no idea of frankly accepting
them. They were in its eyes a temporary compromise to be
withdrawn as soon as possible. If Podiebrad hoped to draw
the Papacy to toleration, the Papacy hoped to bring back
Bohemia to submission. Cusa, Carvajal, Capistrano, and ^Eneas
Sylvius had tried all that diplomatic skill and religious en
thusiasm could do, and all had failed against the resolute
determination of the Bohemians. Rokycana was still unrecog
nised, the Compacts were still treated as temporary provisions,
while Bohemia under Podiebrad was again organising itself
into the strongest kingdom in Eastern Europe.
So long as Ladislas lived the Papacy had hopes that his Recog-
influence might grow with years. But on his death the election George by
of Podiebrad to the Bohemian crown made the Bohemian ques-
tion important both to the Papacy and to Germany. To
Germany it meant the destruction of German influence in
Bohemia, and the rise of a power which might become the
arbiter in the affairs of Germany itself. Podiebrad, consciou s
of the difficulties in his way, desired a legitimate position as
376 THE PAPAL BESTORATION.
BOOK King of Bohemia, accepted by Utraquists and Catholics alike.
' . Hence he shrank from receiving the crown at the hands of
Rokycana, and wished for recognition by the Pope. Calixtus
III., in his crusading zeal, was willing to put great confidence
in one who could put an army in the field to war against the
Turk. Podiebrad led the Pope to suppose that he would make
greater concessions than he intended. He applied to Carvajal,
the Papal legate in Hungary, to send two bishops for his coro
nation. The request could not well be refused ; nor could
Carvajal expect from Podiebrad an open abjuration, which
would have alienated his people. He charged the bishops,
however, not to crown him before he had sworn to root out
heresy and establish the Catholic faith in Bohemia. King
Greorge managed to have the oath couched in general terms,
without any direct mention of the Compacts or of the utraquist
faith. He swore secretly before the bishops to bring back his
people from their errors to the faith and worship of the
Catholic Church. Then he was crowned on May 7, 1458.
Carvajal and Calixtus III. recognised in Greorge a true,
though secret, friend of the Church, and believed in his sin
cerity and good intentions. Greorge wrote to Calixtus proffer
ing his aid against the Turks, and Calixtus in reply addressed
him not only as king, but as his dear son. The letter of
Calixtus was spread far and wide by Greorge, and cut away the
ground from those who would have opposed him as a heretic.
The Grerman and Catholic provinces of Silesia, Lusatia, and
Moravia, which were ready to rebel, returned to their obedience.
When it was too late the eyes of Calixtus III. Avere opened, and
he died with the knowledge that he had been deceived.1
Policy of In this condition Pius II. found the Bohemian question.
JUJjJJriJj -^e was no^> ^ke Calixtus III., without experience of Bohemia
Bohemia, or of Greorge. He knew that the King's oath was not meant
by him to signify a withdrawal from the Compacts ; but he
knew that an open quarrel with Bohemia would hinder his plan
of a Congress, and he hoped through the Congress to put the
Papacy in a position which would enable .it to deal with
Bohemia in the future. He judged it best to affect to look on
George's oath as a promise of complete submission. He sent
him a summons to the Congress, and gave him the title of
1 Cardiiudis Pa^ncn&ii Commentarii, p. 430.
POLICY OF PIUS II. TOWARDS BOHEMIA. 377
king ; but sent the summons through the Emperor, saying that CHAP.
Bohemia was a fief of the Empire, and that the Pope recognised t _ V(L ,. ,
as king whoever the Emperor recognised. Frederick II L,
embarrassed by Hungary and Austria, began to look on George
as a possible ally. He admitted him to a conference near
Vienna in September 1458, and so gave him moral support.
As Pius had intended, the Emperor sent on the summons
to Greorge, who at once published it. The Silesian League,
which still opposed George's accession, began slowly to melt
away before this proof of his success. Breslau, animated by
Catholic zeal, still held out, and sent envoys to Pius II. at
Siena, complaining of his recognition of George, as harmful
to Catholicism. Thither came also the ambassadors of Greorge,
professing the obedience of their master to the Pope. Pius II.
was sorely embarrassed. He could not receive the obedience
of a King who had not yet disavowed his heresy : he could not
refuse his support to those who were resisting him in the name
of the Catholic faith. Accordingly, he attempted a com
promise. In a secret consistory he received the personal
obedience of Greorge, but declined to give him the rank of a
king till he had made public profession of Catholicism. The
envoys of Breslau he praised for their zeal, and promised to
find a remedy for their grievances ; he hoped that George
would show himself true to his oath to the Papacy, and prove
himself a Christian king; otherwise he would have to take
other measures. For a time the Pope's answer satisfied both
parties. George used this period of truce to increase his
prestige in Germany. In April he held a conference at Eger,
to settle territorial disputes about the possessions of Bohemia,
Brandenburg, and Saxony ; by his conciliatory policy he
gained recognition at the hands of his German neighbours,
and also entered into a perpetual peace and alliance with
Saxony and Brandenburg. On July 30 Frederick III. met
George at Briinn, and in return for promises of help against
Matthias of Hungary, conferred on him the Imperial investi
ture of the Bohemian kingdom. The policy of George had so
far succeeded in establishing his power on a legitimate basis.
It remained for Pius II. to see if his Congress could exercise
any influence on the restoration of Catholicism in Bohemia.
After a stay of nearly two months in Siena Pius II. set out
378
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Pius II. at
Florence
and
1459.
on April 23 for Florence, whither he was escorted by the young
Graleazzo, son of Francesco Sforza, of Milan, as well as by
several vassals of the Church. In Florence, where he stayed
for eight days in the cloister of S. Maria Novella, the Pope
received all honour and magnificent tokens of respect. But
Cosimo de' Medici kept his bed on the plea of sickness, and
the visit of Pius II. had no political fruit. From Florence he
passed to Bologna, the rebellious vassal city of the Church. It
is true Bologna was not in open rebellion : she admitted a Papal
legate, but allowedthim no authority, for the power was exer
cised . by Xarito de' Bentivogli, supported by a council of
sixteen.1 The rulers of Bologna doubted whether to admit the
Pope within their walls. On the one hand, if he passed by
the city, such a mark of displeasure might encourage the
Bolognese exiles to renew their attempts at revolution ; on the
other hand, the presence of the Pope within the walls might
encourage a rising of the popular party. At last it was de
cided to invite the Pope to Bologna, but to summon a large
body of cavalry from Milan to keep the city in order during his
stay. Pius II. was obliged to accept these conditions ; but the
Milanese leaders took an oath of fidelity to the Pope, and the
whole body was put under the command of Galeazzo Sforza.
The entry of Pius II. into Bologna through lines of armed men
was different from the peaceful procession which he had
hitherto enjoyed. Bologna was sullen and suspicious. The
orator who welcomed the Pope gave offence to the rulers by
the way in which he spoke of the condition of the city. He
was exiled for his outspokenness, and was restored only on the
entreaties of Pius II.2
Pius II. was glad to leave the uncongenial city for Ferrara,
where Borso of Este received him with open arms. Borso
had many demands to make from the Pope ; he wished for
the title of Duke of Ferrara and the remission of his yearly
tribute to the Papacy for the fief which he held. Though
Pius II. refused to go so far, yet he gave Borso many proofs
of his friendliness, and his stay in Ferrara was one unceasing
festivity.
1 ' Legatum admisit qui verius ligatus appellari potuit,' says Pius, Comm.
55.
2 Catnpanus, Vita Pit II., Mur. iii. pt, 2, p. 976.
ENTEY OF PIUS II. INTO MANTUA. 379
When Pius II. first announced his Congress, he mentioned CHAP.
as the place for its assembling Udine or Mantua. Udine w v .
was in the Venetian territory ; and the Venetians, who had made pius n.
a treaty with the Turks for commercial purposes, did not think
it wise to lend their cities for a hostile demonstration against MaJ 27>
their ally. It had been, therefore, settled that the Congress
was to meet at Mantua. Thither Pius II. travelled by boat up
the Po ; he was welcomed by the Marquis Ludovico Gronzaga,
and entered the city, on May 27, in solemn procession. First
came his attendants and three of the cardinals ; then twelve
white horses without riders, with gold reins and saddles. After
these were borne by three mounted nobles the three banners,
of the Cross, the Church, and the Piccolomini. Then fol
lowed a rich baldachino, behind which walked the clergy of
Mantua in their robes. Next were the royal ambassadors, then
the officials of the Curia, preceded by a golden cross and fol
lowed by a white horse bearing the Eucharist in a gold box,
under a silken canopy surrounded by lighted candles. Then
came Graleazzo Sforza and Ludovico Gronzaga, followed by the
cardinals. After them the Pope, clad in full pontifical attire
and blazing with jewels, was borne in his litter by nobles, and
was followed by a crowd of prelates. At the entry of the gate
Gronzaga dismounted, and presented to the Pope the keys of
the city. Then the procession moved over carpets strewn with
flowers to the cathedral. Next day Bianca, the wife of Sforza,
with her four sons and her daughter Ippolita, visited the
Pope. It is characteristic of the education of the age that
the youthful Ippolita addressed the Pope in a Latin speech,
which excited general admiration, and received from him an
appropriate answer.1
So far all things had smiled on Pius II. He had enjoyed to Pius n.
the full the pleasures of pomp and pageantry, and had received Mantulu
all the satisfaction that fair speeches and ready prom ises could June 14°9-
give. He was now anxious to reap the fruits of his journey
in the results of the Congress. With laudable punctuality he ar
rived in Mantua three days before the appointed time, June 1 ;
but he found no one there to meet him. The ambassadors
who had been sent to him at Siena were not empowered to
represent their masters at the Congress. On June 1 a service
1 They arc given by Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, ii. 192.
380
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Arrival of
envoys of
the despot
of Morea.
was held in the cathedral, after which the Pope addressed th e
prelates. He lamented the lukewarmness of Christendom, and
his own disappointment. He asked them to pray that Grod
would give men greater zeal for His cause. He would stay in
Mantua till he had found what were the intentions of the
princes : if they came, the Congress would proceed, if not, he
would go back home and bear the lot which Heaven assigned.
They were brave words ; and those who had heard them thought
that they befitted the occasion. But as Pius II. remained
in Mantua week after week, the patience of the Cardinals
became exhausted and they longed to return to the pleasures
of Eome. Mantua, they murmured, was marshy and unhealthy ;
did the Pope mean to destroy them by pestilence in that
stifling spot, where the wine was poor, the food scarce, and
nothing could be heard save the croaking of the frogs ? < You
have satisfied your honour,' they pleaded to Pius. i No one
imagines that you alone can conquer the Turks. The princes
of Europe pay no heed to us : let us go home.' Bessarion and
Torquemada were the only cardinals who held by the Pope.
Scarampo, who had left his fleet to come to Mantua, withdrew
to Venice, where he openly ridiculed the Congress.
But Pius II. hoped too much from the Congress to give it
up so readily. Not only was he in earnest about the crusade,
but he wished the Congress to give a practical overthrow to the
Conciliar movement. At Constance the hierarchy under the
presidency of the Emperor had decided the affairs of the
Church ; Pius II. desired to establish a precedent of the princes
of Europe under the presidency of the Pope deciding the
affairs of Christendom. If even partial success should follow
such an attempt, it would be the completion of the Papal
restoration, the assertion of the Papal supremacy over the
nationalities of Europe. Pius II. hoped that the Papacy
would show its superiority over the fruitless Diets of Ger
many, and would establish its authority, high above the Empire,
as the undisputed centre of the state-system of Christendom.]
The first envoys who came to Mantua were sent by Thomas,
the despot of the Morea, a brother of the last Greek Emperor,
Constantine Palyeologus. Thomas and his brother Demetrius
had maintained themselves in the Morea on condition of paying
tribute to the Sultan. But they quarrelled with one another ;
BURGTJNDIAN ENVOYS AT MANTUA. 381
the Turks advanced against them ; they were incapable either CHAP.
of fighting or paying tribute. The envoys of Thomas brought ._ YL ,
as a present to the Pope sixteen Turkish captives, and with
the boastfulness of his race, represented himself as victorious ;
he did not want much help ; with a handful of Italians he
would clear the Morea of Turks. His request was discussed
by the Cardinals, and at the earnest instance of Bessarion,
against the better judgment of the Pope, it was resolved to send
him three hundred men. They were rapidly equipped, and
received the Pope's benediction before they departed for Ancona.
Of course their services were of no real use, and they were
little better than freebooters.
There was no lack of envoys clamouring for aid, though Arrival
those who could offer aid were wanting. From Bosnia, Albania, imperial
Epirus, Illyria, Cyprus, Ehodes, and Lesbos, came messengers
demanding help. At last came three ambassadors from the
Emperor — the Bishop of Trieste, Heinrich Senftleben, and 1459.
Johann Hinderbach, who had been fellow-secretaries with ^Eneas
in the Emperor's Chancery : they were men of no standing to
represent the Emperor in a matter concerning the interests of
Christendom. Pius II. sent them back with a severe letter of
remonstrance ; he did not recognise them as ambassadors, and
urged the Emperor to come himself, or send men of rank
and position. Letter followed upon letter ; but the Emperor
tarried and the other German princes followed his example. At
last at the end of August, the envoys of the Duke of Burgundy,
— his nephew, John of Cleves, and Jean de Croy — drew near.
The Pope wished that they should be received outside the walls
by the Cardinals ; but the Cardinals answered that they were the
equals of kings, and ought not to pay honour to a duke. Pius
II. urged that all appearance of arrogance should be avoided,
and finally the Cardinals Orsini and Colonna offered to go as
a deputation from the Sacred College. The Burgundians were
honourably received, and on the day after their arrival were
welcomed by the Pope in a public consistory. The Bishop of
Arras made a speech excusing the Duke of Burgundy's absence
on the ground of age. Pius II. replied in praise of the Duke's
zeal. But when these ceremonies were over, and the Pope
wished to turn to business, the Duke of Cleves brought forward
a private question f his own. He had taken under his protec-
382
THE PAPAL KESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Nego
tiations
with the
Burgun-
dians.
tion the town of Soest, which had rebelled against the Arch
bishop of Koln. The case had long been before the Papacy,
and Pius II. had issued an admonition to Soest to return to its
rightful allegiance. The Duke of Cleves demanded that this
admonition should be recalled, and refused to treat of the busi
ness of the Congress till the Pope had complied with his request.
Pius II. was in a strait : he could not abandon the possessions of
the Church ; he did not wish to draw down failure on the Con
gress. He adopted a dubious policy of delay. 6 The Roman
Pontiffs,' he says, ' have been accustomed, where justice cannot
be done without public scandal, to dissemble till a convenient
season. Nor do the lawgivers forbid such a course ; for the
greater evil must always be obviated.' ] So Pius II. withdrew
his admonition to Soest, to satisfy the Duke of Cleves, and
promised the representatives of the Archbishop of Koln that
he would renew it as soon as affairs allowed.
After this the Pope tried to bring the Burgundian envoys
to business ; but it soon became evident that the crusading
zeal of their master had cooled. Their instructions simply
empowered them to hear the Pope's views and report them
to the Duke of Burgundy. They added that the Duke con
sidered an expedition against the Turks to be a matter that
would tax the energies of united Christendom ; in its present
discordant state a crusade was hopeless. Pius II. in reply
pointed out the peril to Europe if the Turks were to become
masters of Hungary. The pacification of Europe was no doubt
desirable ; but it would take some time to wipe out the hos
tilities of years. Meanwhile Hungary was in extremities.
Though Europe was troubled, yet if every nation contributed
equally to the crusade, the balance of power would be left
unaltered. No vast expedition was needed ; fifty or sixty
thousand men would be as many as could be fed and main
tained in the field, and would be enough to keep the Turk in
check. Surely that was not much to ask from Europe. So
pleaded the Pope. Many conferences and many arguments
were needed before the Burgundian envoys at length promised
that the Duke would send into Hungary 2,000 knights and
4,000 foot, and would maintain them so long as the Christian
1 Comment ai 'ii , p. 68.
FRANCESCO SFORZA IN MANTUA. 383
army remained in the field. When this was settled the Duke CHAP.
of Cleves prepared to go. In vain Pius II. strove to keep _VtL _.
him at Mantua. He and his colleague departed, leaving a few
of the humbler members of the embassy behind. Again
Pius II. and his Cardinals were left alone ; again the mur
murs of the Curia waxed loud against the useless sojourn in
Mantua.
In the middle of September came Francesco Sforza, Duke Arrival of
of Milan, who again was welcomed by the Cardinals. Again ^MOan6
was held a public Consistory, and Francesco Filelfo, the cele- September
brated scholar, delivered a long and eloquent speech in behalf
of Sforza. The change of human affairs had brought about
that the young Sienese lad, who had once scraped together
money to go to Florence and attend the lectures of the famous
Filelfo, now sat on the Papal throne and received the elegant
adulation of his former teacher. Pius II. listened and ap
plauded ; in his reply he called Filelfo the < Attic Muse,' and
extolled Sforza as a model of Christendom. But Sforza had
his own political ends to serve. He wished to agree with the
Pope on an Italian policy, which for the next thirty years gave
Italy peace such as she had not enjoyed for centuries. He
proposed to the Pope a league in defence of the throne of
Ferrante in Naples. Sforza saw clearly enough that the suc
cess of the House of Anjou in Naples would make French
interest predominant in Italy, and would bring upon Milan
the claims of the House of Orleans. If Naples, Milan, and
the Papacy were united, the danger of French intervention
might be averted.1 Moreover, Sforza wanted the aid of the
Pope to procure for him from the Emperor the investiture of
the Duchy of Milan.
The coming of Sforza had at least the effect that it induced Arrival of
most of the Italian powers to send their envoys to Mantua; envoys.
if the Congress did not become of great importance to Europe,
it was at least a great conference of the Powers of Italy.
It is true that Borso of Modena would not forgive the Pope
for his refusal to make him Duke of Ferrara ; he preferred
his own amusements to the dull work of the Congress. But
Florence, Siena, Lucca, Bologna, and Grenoa sent envoys, as
1 See Simoneta, Vita Sfortice, Mur. xxi, 690.
384
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Speech of
Pius II.
September
20, 1459.
did Ferrante of Naples. An embassy came also from Casimir,
King of Poland, and tardily from the Duke of Savoy. Even
Venice, which had refused to give offence to the Turks, sent
two envoys when the news of Sforza's arrival was received.
At last Pius II. might claim that something which might
be called a Congress was assembled at Mantua. There was
no time to wait any longer, as Sforza was already anxious to
depart. So on September 26 the Congress was opened by a
solemn service in the cathedral, after which the cardinals and
envoys assembled before the Pope. Then Pius II. delivered a
speech, which was regarded as a masterpiece of oratory. Copies
were circulated throughout Europe ; and if an appreciation of
eloquence had borne any practical fruit, the Turk would soon
have been driven back into Asia. For three hours the rounded
periods of Pius II. rolled on ; and, though he was affected by
a cough, his excitement freed him during his speech from
that troublesome enemy of rhetorical effect.1 After an invoca
tion of divine assistance Pius II. put forth the causes of war,
the losses which Islam had inflicted on Christendom, both in
the remote past and in more recent days. Even though the
present might be endured, the worst had not yet been reached.
The Turks were still pressing on, and if Hungary fell before
them there was no further barrier for Europe. ' But alas, Chris
tians prefer to war against one another rather than against the
Turks. The beating of a bailiff, even of a slave, is enough to
draw kings into war ; against the Turks, who blaspheme our
(rod, destroy our churches, and strive to destroy the whole
Christian name, no one dares take up arms.' Then he turned
to his second point, the chances of success. The Turks had
conquered only degenerate peoples, and were themselves an
easy prey to the superior strength of Europeans, as the exploits
of Hunyadi and Scanderbeg might show. Moreover, God was
on the Christian side, for Islam denied the divinity of Christ.
Here Pius II. lowered the level of his rhetoric by turning aside
to display his learning ; he gave a summary of the arguments
by which Christ's divinity was maintained. But he skilfully
used this as the ground for an impassioned appeal to his hearers ;
1 Pii II. Cotntn. p. 82 : ' Quamvis tussi per eos dies laborasset gravissime
divina tamen ope adjutus inter orandum neque tussivit unquam neque vel
minim vim ostendit impedimentum.'
SPEECH OF PIUS II. AT MANTUA. 385
he besought them to show the sincerity of their faith, the CHAP.
depth of their reverence for their divine Redeemer, by driving . VL .
from Christendom the Turks who blasphemed His name. Then
Pius II. proceeded to his third point, the rewards which the
war would bring. First there were kingdoms, booty, glory,
all in abundance that usually stirred men to war. Besides this
was the sure promise of the heavenly kingdom, and the plenary
indulgence of sins which he had granted to all crusaders. How
short was life in comparison with eternity ! How full were the
joys of Paradise, where they would see God, and His angels,
and all the company of the blessed, and would understand
all things ! ' Our soul freed from the chain of the body will,
not as Plato says, recover, but, as Aristotle and our own doc
tors teach, attain to the knowledge of all things. It is a
prospect which once stirred men to martyrdom. But we do
not ask you to undergo the martyr's tortures ; heaven is pro
mised you at a lesser price. Fight bravely for the law of
God, and you will gain " what eye never saw nor ear heard."
0 fools and slow to believe the promises of Scripture ! Would
that there were here to-day Godfrey or Baldwin, Eustace,
Hugh the Great, Bohemund, Tancred, and the rest who in
days gone by won back Jerusalem ! They would not have
suffered us to speak so long, but rising from their seats, as
once they did before our predecessor Urban II., they would
have cried with ready voice, " Deus lo vult, Deus lo vult " ! '
'You silently await the end of our speech, nor seem to be
moved by our exhortations. Perhaps there are among you
those who think, " This Pope says much why we should go to
war and expose ourselves to the enemy's swords. Such is the
way of priests ; they bind on others heavy burdens which
themselves will not touch with their finger." Think not so of
us. No one was ever more ready than ourselves. We came
here, weak as you see, risking our life, and the States of the
Church. Our expenses have greatly increased, our revenues
diminished. We do not speak boastfully, we only regret that
it is not in our power to do more. 0 if our youthful strength
still remained, you should not go to the field without us. We
would go before your standard, bearing the cross ; we would
hurl Christ's banner amidst the foe, and would count ourselves
happy to die for Jesus's sake. Even now, if you think fit, we
VOL. II. C C
386
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Proceed
ings of the
Congress.
Proposals
of Pius II.
will not hesitate to vow to the war our pining body and our
weary soul. We shall deem it noble to be borne in our litter
through the camp, the battle, the midst of the foe. Decide
as you think best. Our person, our resources, we place at your
disposal ; whatever weight you lay upon our shoulders we will
bear.'1
When the Pope had ended, Bessarion spoke on behalf of the
Cardinals. Not to be outdone by Pius II., he also addressed
the assembly for three hours. If Pius II. showed his learning
by a defence of the divinity of Christ, Bessarion made a dis
play of scholarship by citing historical instances of those who
had died for their country. He was at first tedious ; but when
he described the capture of Constantinople he grew eloquent,
and when he spoke of the actual condition of the Turkish
resources, which he estimated at 70,000 men, he was listened
to with more attention.2 When he had ended, the envoys
present praised the Pope's speech and extolled his zeal. Sforza
spoke in Italian, with ' a soldier's eloquence,' says the Pope.
Last of all the Hungarian envoys addressed the assembly, and
loudly complained of the Emperor's interference in Hungarian
affairs, thus adding to their trouble when the Turk was at their
gates. The Imperial envoy, the Bishop of Trieste, had not a
word to say. Pius II. himself had to defend his former
master by saying that this was not the place for general
political discussion ; he knew that both the Emperor and the
King of Hungary were just and upright, and he had sent a
legate to heal their quarrels.
The Congress contented itself with decreeing war against
the Turks in general terms, and Pius II. saw that this was all
that he could expect the Congress to do. Next day he sum
moned the envoys to a conference in his palace for the discus
sion of ways and means. He put before them the questions —
were the Turks to be attacked by land, or sea, or both ? What
soldiers were necessary, and how they were to be obtained ?
1 In Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, ii. 9, &c.
2 M. Vast (Le Cardinal Bessarion^ Paris, 1878) gives a summary of this
speech from a MS. in the Bibliotheque National e at Paris, p. 238. In spite of
M. Vast's admiration for his hero, he seems to have been somewhat dull, and
was regarded as the standing bore on the Eastern question — excellent but
tedious.
PEOPOSALS FOE WAEFAEE. 387
Sforza rose and gave his opinion as a soldier. The Turks should CHAP.
be attacked by land and sea ; soldiers should be furnished by ._\L _
Hungary and the neighbouring lands, as being best acquainted
with the tactics to be e mployed in fighting the Turks ; Italy
and the rest of Christendom should furnish money. The Ve
netians agreed, and added that thirty galleys and eight barks
would suffice to cause a diversion on the shores of Greece and
the Hellespont, while 40,000 horsemen and 20,000 foot would
be enough for war by land. Gismondo Malatesta, Lord of
Kimini, seeing an opportunity of booty for himself, advocated
that the war should be carried on by Italian forces. Pius II.
observed significantly, that Italian generals did not care to fight
outside Italy, and in this war there was little to gain except
for their souls. Other countries offered troops, but would not
offer money ; their offer must be accepted or nothing would
be got from them. The Turkish troops numbered about
200,000, of whom the only real soldiers, the Janissaries, were
40,000: to face them 50,000 European troops would suffice,
and thirty galleys would also be required. To raise money
he proposed that the clergy should pay a tenth, the laity a
thirtieth of their revenues for three years, and the Jews a
twentieth of all their possessions. The assembly approved the
decree in general ; but when the Pope proposed that all should
sign it, there was much hesitation. Florence and Venice espe
cially hung back. The Venetians at length declared that they
would sign it if double the number of ships were provided, and
they were paid for supplying them, and received all the con
quests made by the crusaders. Matters began to wear a doubtful
aspect when Pius II. attempted to turn general promises into
definite undertakings. Sforza had done his duty by joining
the Congress, and left Mantua for Milan.
Pius II. professed himself satisfied with the results which
he obtained, and strove in public to maintain a semblance of of thePope.
contentment. His real feelings, however, are expressed in a
letter to Carvajal, written on November 5. ' We do not find,
to confess the truth, such zeal in the minds of Christians as we
hoped. We find few who have a greater care for public matters
than for their own interests. Yet we have shown how false is
that calumny so long cast against the Holy See; we have
proved that no one ^ to be accused except themselves. We
c c %
388
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Arrival of
French
envoys.
November
16, 1459.
Reception
of the
French
envovs.
seem, however, to have disposed affairs in Italy for God's
service, since the princes and potentates have entered into
obligations confirmed by their own signatures. But we hear
that Genoa is sending a fleet to urge the French claims in
Naples, and we fear that we shall lose not only help from those
engaged in war, but that all the rest will be drawn into the
struggle. Unless God help us, the first fruits of our labour
will be lost in the calamities of Christian people.' l
In truth everything depended for Pius II. on the attitude
assumed by France, whose ambassadors were announced as on
their way to Mantua. They had halted at Lyons on receiving
the news of the reception given to the Burgundians, and
doubted whether it became the national dignity that they
should advance farther. One of their number, the Bishop of
Chartres, went on beforehand. He had a private end to serve ;
for having been appointed Bishop according to the Pragmatic
Sanction, he had not been confirmed by the Pope. Pius II.
readily gave him his confirmation, and the Bishop returned to
his colleagues, but never went back to Mantua. The French
embassy was joined by the envoys of Eene of Anjou, and of the
Duke of Brittany. At last on November 16 they entered
Mantua. France was represented by the Archbishop of Tours
and the Bishop of Paris ; Kene by the Bishop of Marseilles ;
and the Duke of Brittany by the Bishop of S. Malo. Genoa
also sent an embassy, and soon after arrived from the Emperor
envoys more worthy to represent him — Charles of Baden and
the Bishops of Eichstadt and Trent.
It was the general expectation that the French envoys
would at the outset challenge the Pope's proceedings in regard
to the Neapolitan kingdom, and would refuse obedience or
threaten a General Council. Some anxiety was felt when they
were admitted before the consistory on November 21. The
Bishop of Paris spoke for two hours in praise of the French
King and his anxiety about the Neapolitan question. He said
little about the Turks, less about any aid in a crusade. Finally,
he offered to the Pope the obedience of the French Church
as that of a son to a father ; he said this pointedly to
exclude any notion of dependence as on a master.2 The obe-
1 Raynaldus, 1459, No. 78.
2 Pii II. Comm. p. 88 : ' Filialem obedient iain appellavit, tit serrihm ex
cluder et."
THE FRENCH ENVOYS AT MANTUA. 389
dience of Rene and of Grenoa was afterwards tendered by their
envoys. Pius II. in his answer dwelt on the dignity of the
Apostolic See, established by Grod, and not by councils or decrees,
above all kingdoms and peoples. Twice he repeated this, with
increased emphasis, and then passed on to say that he wished
to receive with all favour ' his dear son in Christ, Rene, the
illustrious King of Sicily,' but would answer more privately
his demands.1 Both sides were satisfied with the result of
their first interview. The Pope was content that, after all their
threats, the French had at least submitted formally to his
obedience. The French flattered themselves that the Pope had
recognised the power of the PVench King, and was willing to
obey his will.
But these proceedings were merely formal ; the real struggle Protest of
began when the French envoys came to lay before the Pope
their complaints about his Neapolitan policy. They were the Pope's
resolved to show no diplomatic reserve, and brought with them policy.
to the audience all the envoys who were present at Mantua.
The Bailly of Rouen spoke in praise of France, ' the nation of
the Lilies,' as he persisted in calling it. He dwelt on the
services rendered by France to the Papacy and on its connexion
with Naples ; he complained that Alfonso had seized Naples by
force, not by right ; that Pius had acted wrongly in recognising
Ferrante his bastard son, which even Calixtus III., though an
Aragonese, had not ventured to do. He demanded that Pius
should recall all that he had done for Ferrante, should invest
King Rene, and help his forces to gain the kingdom ; should
recognise the French party in Grenoa, and revoke all ecclesi
astical censures against the city. The friends of France list
ened to the trenchant orator, and raised their crests in triumph :
they thought the Pope would not venture to reply. Pius an
swered, that what he had done regarding Naples had been done
with the advice of the Cardinals, whom he must consult before
saying more. So saying he dismissed the assembly.
Next day Pius II. was attacked by a cramp in the stomach, Answer
and a violent cough which confined him for some days to his to tile8 1!*
bed. The French declared that this was a pretence to cover Frencll«
his confusion and escape from answering their attack. Perhaps
the Pope made the most of his illness to gain time to prepare
1 His clever speech is given in Mansi, Pii II. Oratiotws, ii. 31, &c.
390 THE PAPAL RESTOEATION.
BOOK his answer, and render its delivery more effective. ' Though I
- _ . ' - should die in the middle of my speech, I will answer them,' he
said, and summoned all the ambassadors to a public audience.
He dragged himself from his sick bed, and, with pale face and
trembling limbs, seated himself on his throne. At first he
could scarcely speak for weakness and excitement ; soon gather
ing strength, he spoke for three hours, and his effort had such a
beneficial effect that it entirely freed him from his cramp. In
his speech the Pope complained of the charges brought against
him by the French. He spoke of the glories of their nation in
language which outdid even their own orator. He set forth their
services to the Holy See and the benefits which they had in
turn received. Then he traced the history of the Neapolitan
succession under his immediate predecessors. 'We did not
exclude the French, we found them excluded,' he said ; ' we
found Ferrante in possession of the kingdom, and recognised
the actual state of things. If the French had been nearer we
would have preferred them. We could not disturb the peace
of Italy for those who were at a distance. In recognising Fer-
rante we reserved the rights of the House of Anjou. The
case is still open for our decision.' He urged the need of peace
in Christendom and war against the Turks. Finally, as the
French had spoken of the gratitude due to France from the
Holy See, the Pope turned to the Pragmatic Sanction by which
the power of the Pope in France had been reduced to such
limits as pleased the Parlement of Paris. He admitted the
good intentions of the French King, but warned him that by
his present course he was imperilling the souls of his people.1
The French ambassadors expressed their wish to answer some
things that the Pope had said, as being contrary to the
honour of their King. Pius II. replied that he was willing
to hear them when, and as often as, they chose, and so
retired. The Curia thronged round him with joy. ' Never,'
said they, * within the memory of our fathers have words been
spoken so worthy of a Pope as those about the Pragmatic
Sanction.' Pius II. had won an oratorical triumph, and had given
another proof that it was impossible to get the better of him
in discussion. Next day the French appeared before him in
1 Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, ii. 40, &c.
ENGLAND AND THE CONGRESS. 391
private, in the presence only of eight Cardinals. The time for CHAP.
public displays, they felt, was past. There was some more dis- ._ VJ- _.
cussion about the Pragmatic Sanction, and the envoys in their
private capacity made their peace with the Pope. But this
political wrangle had driven into the background the question
of the crusade. When Pius II. asked them what help he
might expect from France, he was answered that France could
do nothing till she was at peace with England. The Pope pro
posed that France and England should contribute an equal
number of soldiers, so as to leave the balance unaltered : if
they could not send troops, they might give money. The
French said that they had no powers for any such undertaking,
but assented to the Pope's proposal for a conference to arrange
peace with England.
England was too much involved in internal conflicts to pay England
much heed to the request of Pius that it should send envoys to Congress.
Mantua. Henry VI. had nominated an embassy, at the head
of which was the Earl of Worcester, but it never set out for
Mantua. Two priests arrived on the King's behalf, proffering
the Pope the obedience of England and bringing his excuses.
Their credentials bore the usual endorsement, ' Teste Kege ; '
and we are surprised to find Pius II. so ignorant of the forms
used in England that he thought that the King, bereft of
all officials, had been compelled to act as his own witness in
default of others.1 To England, however, was sent as Papal
legate, to make .peace, the Bishop of Terni, who fell into the
hands of the Earl of Warwick, identified himself with the cause
of the House of York, excommunicated the Lancastrians, and
gathered for himself large sums of money from the English
Church. When the Pope heard of this he recalled his legate,
degraded him from his priestly office, and confined him in a
monastery for the rest of his life.2 However, no efforts of a
Papal legate could have given peace to England or obtained
from her aid for a crusade. France was offended by the
Pope's dealings with Naples, and was more anxious to assert
1 « In litteris mandati non f uerunt de more, aut testes nominati, aut sub
script! tabelliones ; sed adnotata erat regis manu hujuscemodi subscriptio,
Henricus teste me ipso : et sigillum regni appensum. Contempsit Pontifex
derisitque tanti regis lam vilem legationem.' — Pii II. Comm. 88.
2 Pii II, Comm. 277 ; Ca/rdinalis Papiciisis Epistola, \ fi2.
392
THE PAPAL EESTOEATION.
BOOK
IV.
Arrival
of Sigis-
inund of
Austria.
the claims of Kene than to attack the Turks. England and
France alike were useless for any help to the Pope in his great
endeavour.
It only remained for Pius II. to see what promises he could
get from Germany. There were in Mantua the ambassadors of
the Emperor and of many German princes ; chief amongst
them was the old opponent of JEneas Sylvius, Gregory Heim-
burg, who represented Albert of Austria. Pius II. called them
together, and wished to obtain a common understanding. The
Imperial envoys were ready to accept his proposals ; but those
of the princes, led by Heimburg, refused. Heimburg was con
vinced that the Pope's proposal of levying a tenth and granting
indulgences was merely a scheme for enriching himself and his
Imperial ally. He would agree to no general proposal ; and
Pius II. had to deal with each embassy separately. By means
of private negotiations the Pope at length contrived to obtain a
renewal of the promise made at the Diets of Frankfort and
Neustadt to equip 10,000 horse and 32,000 foot. To arrange
for general peace, and settle all preliminaries, a Diet was to be
held at Mirnberg, and another in the Emperor's dominions,
to make peace between him and Matthias of Hungary; the
Pope was to send a legate to both. Pius II. was compelled to
accept the sterile procedure of a Diet, the futility of which he
knew so well, and which Calixtus III. had endeavoured to
escape without success. He appointed as his legate Bessarion,
probably because he was the only cardinal whose zeal would
induce him to undertake the thankless office. Moreover,
Pius II. attempted to give the agreement greater denniteness
by appointing Frederick general of the crusading army, and
empowering him, if he could not lead it himself, to nominate a
prince in his stead.
While these negotiations were in progress Sigismund of
Austria arrived in Mantua on November 10, with a brilliant
train of 400 knights. He was honourably received, and Heim
burg, in a public audience, spoke in Sigismund's behalf. He
recounted the glories of the House of Austria and the virtues
of Sigismund ; he dwelt on the acquaintance that had existed
in earlier days between Sigismund when a boy and JEneas
Sylvius, the Imperial secretary. ^Eneas had indeed written for
Sigismund love-letters, which were not edifying ; and Heimburg,
GKEGORY HEIMBURG AT MANTUA. 393
embittered by resentment against the Pope, mockingly re- CHAP.
called the past, which Pius II. would fain have forgotten. The ^_ — ^ — .
culture of Sigismund, he said, had been greatly formed by the
delightful love-letters which his Holiness had transplanted from
Italy to Germany.1 Pius II. had to sit with a conviction that
he* was being laughed at, unable with any dignity to reply.
In truth neither Sigismund nor his orator Heimburg were Quarrel of
friendly disposed towards the Papacy. Sigismund had on his 0fTustria
hands an ecclesiastical quarrel which was destined to give ^alCQ^sa
Pius II. a great deal of trouble, and whch dated ten years back. 1451-1457.
In 1450 Nicolas V. conferred on Nicolas of Cusa, whom he had
just made Cardinal, the Bishopric of Brixen. Cusa was a poor
man and needed the means of supporting his new dignity ; but
the provision of Nicolas V., made without waiting for a capi
tular election, was in direct contravention to the Concordat,
and was also an infringement of the agreement made with
Frederick III., as Brixen was one of the bishoprics to which
the Emperor was allowed to appoint during his lifetime. The
Chapter of Brixen made their election, and turned to Sigis
mund, as Count of the Tyrol, to help them to maintain their
rights; but the Pope and the Emperor were too strong for
them. Sigismund did not judge it expedient to prolong the
contest, and Cusa was unwillingly admitted as Bishop of Brixen
in 1451. Cusa was for a time employed as Papal legate, in
selling to the Germans the benefits of the year of Jubilee without
giving them the trouble of going to Rome, and in stirring up
the crusading spirit. He was not in earnest with either of
these tasks, and returned as soon as he could to his own diocese,
which he proposed to make a model to the rest of Germany.
1 Pius, in his Commentaries, p. 90, gives his account of the matter : ' Inter
caetera dixerat Gregorius Sigismundum Pii, cum in minoribus ageret, fuisse
discipulum, qui suas epistolas avide legisset, quarum volumen apud se haberet,
et aliquse illarum Sigismondo essent scriptas ; quod verum inveniet, si quis
epistolas sasculares legerit quas Pius nondurn sacris initiatus scripsit.' The
remark is apologetic, and the letter addressed to Sigismund about his mistress
(No. 1 22, ed. 1551) is not one which a Pope would care to be reminded of. Voigt
(sEneas Sylvius, iii. 100) quotes from a Munich MS. of Heimburg's speech : ' Quse
(noticia) simul cum aetate crevit adaucta feliciter fomentum subministrantibus
litteris illis oratoriis quas ipsa S. V. persona ab Ytalis traduxit in Germanos .
. . . Dixi, pater beatissime, firmamentum contracte noticie (et) amoris accens i
prsestitisse litteras illa» oratorios, &c.' He suggests that oratorias makes no
sense, and is probably a mistake for amatorias ; there seems much probability
in this correction.
394 THE PAPAL EESTOEATION.
BOOK Cusa was a man of learning — not the learning of the
. Iy* Kenaissance, but the technical theology of the schoolmen. Of
Cusa as humble extraction, he had nothing save his talents on which to
Bvixeu.° rely. He had been a follower of Cesarini at Basel, had aban
doned with the other moderates the Council's cause, and had
made his reputation by his learned writings in favour of the
Papacy. He was an able but narrow-minded man, whose bent
was to abstractions and technicalities rather than to zeal or
statesmanship. He did not abandon the reforming ideas he had
held at Basel, but transferred them from one field to another.
He had striven to reform the Church in its head ; he was equally
bent on reforming it in some of its members. A movement
such as that expressed at Basel could not entirely die out ; but
it was easily diverted to trivialities. If the entire Church
system could not be reformed, there was at least one part of it
to which a mechanical rule might be app lied. If the ecclesias
tical organisation was not to be revised, it might at least be more
tightly strung and reduced to greater uniformity. There was
a decided feeling that the monastic orders ought to be brought
back to a straiter observance of their original rule. It was
a cry which afforded some satisfaction to the technical mind of
a man like Cusa, who could point to success in this sphere as
the proper beginning of a conservative reformation within the
Church itself.
Cusa'si So Cusa began a strict visitation of the monasteries within
ofmonas-0n hig diocese. If his visitation had only aimed at restoring neg
lected observances and ceremonies in the cloisters, it would at
least have been harmless. But a rigid visitation of monasteries,
in the face of a strong opposition, raised many legal questions
concerning the Bishop's visitatorial power. It was hard to
define the limits of the spiritualities and the temporalities of
the monasteries. It was difficult to determine what were the
powers of the Bishop as visitor, and what were the rights of the
Count of the Tyrol as protector of the temporalities of founda
tions within his dominions. The Benedictine nuns of Sonnen-
burg in the Pusterthal resisted the Bishop and appealed to Sigis-
mund as protector of their monastery. Sigismund was loth to
quarrel with Cusa, who laid the nuns under an interdict. He
mediated with the Cardinal ; but the Sonnenburg difficulty em
bittered the feelings of both parties and broadened into other and
QUARREL OF CARDINAL CUSA AND SIGISMUND OF THE TYROL. 395
more important issues. Cusa turned the formal acuteness of
his mind to determine the exact rights of the Bishopric of
Brixen. He established to his own satisfaction that the pro
tectorship over monastic foundations, exercised by the Counts of
the Tyrol, was granted to them by the Bishop of Brixen, to
gether with lands, for which they were vassals to the see. The
Bishop of Brixen was a prince of the Empire, and the Emperor
was in things temporal the protector of the see ; the rights of
the Counts of the Tyrol depended only on a grant from their
Bishop. Sigismund naturally asserted that the Bishopric of
Brixen was under the Counts of the Tyrol, to whom belonged
the protectorate with all its rights, however much the formal
investiture had been conferred on the Counts by the Bishops.
The angry feelings on both sides waxed high ; but Cusa had
only the weapons of interdict and excommunication. As he
was extremely unpopular through his harshness, the national
sentiment was all on the side of Sigismund, and the excommu
nications were little heeded.
Attempts were made to bring about a peace, and Sigismund Open
invited Cusa to an interview at Wilten in 1457. Whether between
Cusa lost his nerve, or whether he deliberately chose to set up ^.l^ aml
a plea for further proceedings, cannot be determined. But he 1457
fled from Wilten, declaring that his life was in danger, though
the evidence which he could afterwards produce for his terror
was very slight. Still Cusa had the ear of the Curia, and Calix-
tus III. laid Sigismund under an interdict till he had satisfied
Cusa of his freedom and personal security. Sigismund, prompted
by Gregory Heimburg, appealed to a better-informed Pope, but
offered full security to Cusa, and declared himself ready to
withdraw his appeal if friendly overtures were made. Cusa
was inflexible, proceeded with the interdict, and showed his
willingness to use forcible means. He forbade the peasants
who held under the Sonnenburg nuns to pay their dues to the
rebellious abbess. The convent employed a band of forty men
to collect them ; whereupon a captain in Cusa's pay fell upon
this luckless band and cut it to pieces.
Thus matters stood when Calixtus III. died, and both the Piusil.
combatants turned with expectation to his successor. Cusa
had been an old iuend of ^Eneas, and hastened to Rome to lay
his case before him. Sigismund had been a pupil of ^Eneas November
1459.
396 THE PAPAL KESTORATION.
BOOK when he was at Frederick's Court. Pius II. was in all things
._ / _^ desirous of peace, and would fain have mediated in the quarrel.
On setting out for Mantua he left Cardinal Cusa as his re
presentative in Kome ; but Cusa was afterwards summoned to
Mantua, that the Pope might try to settle matters between
him and Sigismund. It was for this purpose that Sigismund
had come. Pius II. offered his services as a mediator ; he did not
decide as a judge. In the presence of the Cardinals and of the
Imperial ambassadors, he listened to the complaints of both
parties. He had no desire to favour one rather than the
other, and at last patched up a temporary reconciliation, on the
understanding that the legal question of the relations between
the Bishop and the Count was to be decided by a process
within two years, and the other points in dispute were to be
arranged between the two parties at a Diet to be held in Trent.
Thus nothing was definitely decided, and Sigismund departed
from Mantua in indignation on November 29.1 Pius II. had
no feeling against Sigismund as to the points in dispute ; but he
had seen enough to know that, under Heimburg's advice, Sigis
mund was ready to prosecute his cause in a manner most offen
sive to the Papacy. The appeal to a future Council was a relic
of the state of things which Pius II. hoped to obliterate for
ever ; it was a revolutionary memory which must never be again
awakened in Grermany. Pius II. was ready to wait for a while
and see if Sigismund would pursue a more respectful course ;
if not, he must at least cut the ground from under his feet
before he pressed him further.
The Bull If one object of Pius II. was to wage war against the Turk,
biiJ/U tne other was to wipe out of the ecclesiastical system all traces
18^460 °^ ^e conciliar movement. The two objects were, moreover,
closely connected. The Neapolitan question threatened to
bring the Papacy into collision with France, and France might
use its old engine of a Council. If Germany were to be useful
for the crusade, if the Papal decrees for taming Grermany were
to be effective, the Diets must be prevented from throwing
hindrances in the way by raising untoward questions of the
1 The details of tins long straggle are to be found in Jiiger, Dar Streit des
Cardinals Nicolas von Cma mit clem Herzogc Sigmund von Oesterreich als
Grafen von Tirol. Innsbruch, 1861. Jager has also published a register of
the whole matter in Archivftir osterreickischer Guscliichtsgiiicllen, Bde. vi. vii.
THE BULL ' EXECRABILIS.'
397
rights of the G-erxnan Church, clamouring for further reform CHAP.
and appealing to future Councils. The example of Sigismund, — ,' _,
the machinations of Heimburg, must be checked from doing
further mischief; the power of the restored Papacy must be
fully asserted in the person of one who had devoted the best
energies of his life to the cause of that restoration. It was
pardonable that Pius II. should wish to put the crown to his
life's work. If the Congress of Mantua had not been successful
in raising the prestige of the Papacy, and showing Europe the
unwonted sight of a Pope directing the activity of Christendom,
it might at least be made memorable as the occasion of a firm
assertion of the Papal authority. Pius II., after Sigismund's
departure, unfolded his scheme to the Cardinals and prelates
assembled in Mantua, who all gave their cordial assent. A
Papal Constitution was accordingly drawn up and published on
January 18, 1460, known, from its first words, as < Execrabilis
et priscis inauditus temporibus.' In it the Pope condemns, as
an 6 execrable abuse, unheard of in former times,' any appeal to
a future Council. It is ridiculous to appeal to what does not
exist and whose future existence is indeterminate. Such a
custom is only a means of escaping just judgment, a cloak for
iniquity, and a destruction of all discipline. All such appeals
are declared invalid ; anyone who makes them is declared ipso
facto excommunicated, together with all who frame or witness
any document containing them.1 The Bull was a master
stroke on the part of one who well knew the dangers against which
he had to contend. If Bulls could have established the Papal
authority, Pius II. would have known how to frame them. His
precaution was wise ; but it failed of effect. Both Rene of
Anjou and Sigismund of the Tyrol lodged appeals in spite
of the Papal denunciation. Yet the Bull of Pius II., though
not immediately successful, worked its way into the ecclesiastical
system and became one of the pillars on which the Papal au
thority rested.
Only one other prince visited Mantua, Albert of Branden- Dissolution
burg, whom Pius II. greeted warmly as < the German Achilles.' ^olfress
He made the usual protestations of zeal against the Turks, and January
received from the Pope, on the Festival of the Epiphany, a
consecrated sword. But Albert had his own ends to serve ; it
1 Pii. II. Com. p. 90. Raynaldus, 1460, 10.
398
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Results of
the Con
ss of
antua.
gre
Ma
suited his position in Germany to be on good terms with Em
peror and Pope. When Albert had gone there was nothing
more to do at Mantua, On January 14 Pius II. declared war
against the Turks, and promised indulgences to all who took
part in it. He issued, also, decrees imposing a subsidy of a
tenth on the clergy and a thirtieth on the laity, especially in
Italy. Then on January 19, after a speech in which he magnified
the offers of help which had been made, Pius II. enumerated his
expectations. It was not all that he had hoped for, yet it was
a fair show.1 The ambassadors present solemnly renewed their
promises. Then Pius II. knelt before the altar and chanted
some appropriate psalms. The Congress was over, and next
day the Pope left Mantua after a sojourn of eight months.
The Congress of Mantua could not be called a success, yet
Pius II. could urge, with some show of truth, that it could not
be called an entire failure. It was true that the Papacy had not
gathered round itself the enthusiasm of Christendom, and had
not drawn the powers of Europe from their national jealousies to
common action for the common weal. But at least the Congress had
shown the sincerity of the Pope's intentions, and had freed him
from blame. Pius II. had not disguised from himself the diffi
culties which beset the politics of Europe ; he had hoped that
a little enthusiasm might sweep some of them away. He had
forgotten that the restored Papacy was scarcely in a position to
appeal to the enthusiasm of Europe. He had forgotten his own
antecedents, but others had not. He had been too closely con
nected with the questionable intrigues which brought about the
Papal restoration to stand high in the estimation of Europe.
The shifty diplomat was not likely to be trusted however cleverly
he talked about common interests. The appeal of Pius II.
awoke no general response.
Yet the Congress of Mantua had its results. If it had not
succeeded in raising Europe above its particular interests, it at
least brought those interests clearly to light. Pius II. was able
to gauge the attitude of France towards Naples ; he saw that
Grermany centred round the new power of Bohemia, and was
able to consider how far he could cope with the Bohemian king ;
1 « Fatemur non omnia facta sunt quas putavimus, sed neque omnia praster-
missa : neque maxima neque minima sunt quae Christian! principes promisere,
was the judgment of Pius II. Orationes, Mansi, ii. 79.
RESULTS OF THE C01S7GEESS OF MANTUA. 399
he saw in Sigismund of the Tyrol the strength of the remnants CHAP.
of the Grerman neutrality. Above all things, the Congress of VL
Mantua established the system of Italian politics, and gave the
Pope a commanding influence. Pius II. saw that his interests
lay in opposite directions. As an Italian power he could not
satisfy France ; as head of the Church he could not satisfy
Bohemia or pacify Sigismund. With the greatest desire for
peace at home and war against the Turk, he saw the probability
of the failure of his crusade before the threats of war at home.
To pacify Europe he was asked to sacrifice Italy and the Church.
It would need all his cleverness to avoid this dilemma. In
preparation for the difficulties which he foresaw, he strengthened
the Papal armoury by the Bull ' Execrabilis,'
400
THE PAPAL EESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Civil war
in Naples.
Jean of
Anjou in
Naples.
October
1459.
CHAPTER VII.
PIUS II. AND THE AFFAIRS OF NAPLES AND GERMANY.
1460-1461.
BEFORE Pius II. left Mantua war had broken out in Naples,
and events soon made it necessary for the Pope to decide what
part he was prepared to play. Alfonso had won the kingdom
of Naples by his own sword, and ruled it with magnificence.
His strong hand and statesmanlike wisdom had kept in subjec
tion the barons, who had grown in power and turbulence during
the long period of conflict to which the kingdom had become
habituated. They had accepted Ferrante at first, but soon
raised their heads in conspiracy against him ; for civil war in
creased their power and suited their interests. They had been
so long accustomed to play off one claimant against another
that they hastened to seize the opportunity which was now
offered to their spirit of lawlessness. The withdrawal of Pic-
cinino from the States of the Church had alienated from Fer-
rante's side that powerful condottiere general. Headed by
the Prince of Taranto, the Neapolitan barons plotted against
Ferrante, and invited Rene to prosecute his claims on Naples.
Rene himself had had enough of Neapolitan warfare, and
preferred to lead an artist's life in Provence. But his son Jean
assumed th e title of Duke of Calabria, and received promises of
help from the King of France, and from Genoa, which was then
under French influence. Moreover, Jean took possession of
twenty-four galleys, which had been built out of the proceeds
of the Turkish tithe levied on France by Calixtus III., and
which then lay at Marseilles. On October 4, 1459, Jean set
sail from Genoa, and appeared before Naples. He landed at
Castellamare, and the barons of Naples one by one flocked to
his standard. Ferrante was confounded at this almost uni
versal treachery and scarcely knew where to turn. Only the
CIVIL WAR IN NAPLES. 401
coming of the winter saved him from disaster ; he shut him- CHAP.
self up in Naples, and summoned Pius II. and Sforza to his . _ .
aid. The first object of their endeavour was to prevent the
Angevin party from receiving the aid of Jacopo Piccinino, who
on withdrawing sulkily from the States of the Church had
sought to enrich himself at the expense of Gismondo Mala-
testa, Lord of Rimini. Gismondo was a strange mixture of an
unscrupulous condottiere and a munificent patron of art and
letters. He adorned Rimini, held a splendid court, and cast
longing eyes on the dominions of his neighbour Federigo da
Montefeltro, Duke of Urbino. Federigo and Piccinino made
common cause against him, and at Mantua he had called on
the Pope to mediate. Pius II. was in too great need of soldiers
to refuse his favour even to one who, like Gismondo, openly
avowed his contempt for all religion and lived in defiance of
all law. Pius mediated between Gismondo and his enemies,
but sold his mediation at a good price. He took into his hands,
as security for a payment of 60,000 ducats due from Gismondo
to the King of Naples, Sinigaglia and Fano, which he after
wards conferred on his favourite nephew. Piccinino, by this
mediation of the Pope, saw himself a second time robbed of
his prey and was more indignant than before against Pius II.
and Ferrante. The first object of Pius II. and Sforza was to
prevent Piccinino from making his way from Cesena, where he
was posted, to Naples. They trusted to Federigo of Urbino ;
while Piccinino was aided by Malatesta, and secretly by Borso
of Este.
When Pius II. left Mantua he retraced his steps to Fer- Pius II.
rara, where Borso perfidiously offered to treat with Piccinino in
his behalf ; but Pius II. was not deluded by this offer. He pur
sued his way to Florence, where he conferred with Cosimo de'
Medici about the condition of Italy, and urged on him the pru
dence of supporting Ferrante for the purpose of excluding the
French from Italy. Florence had always been on the Angevin
side in Naples, and Cosimo was not convinced. Nor did Pius II.
succeed in inducing the wary Florentines to accept his decree
of a tax for the crusade ; he might perhaps be permitted to
tax the clergy, but the laity demurred. On January 31, Pius
II. entered Siena, where he took up his abode for some time.
VOL. II. D D
402 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK The archbishopric of the city had just become vacant, and
_ IV> - Pius II. conferred it on his nephew Francesco de' Todeschini, a
youth of the age of twenty-three.
Creation of When the period in the Lenten season arrived at which
March ' creations of Cardinals were usually made, Pius II. announced
his intention of exercising his power. On March 5, he sum
moned the Cardinals to a Consistory ; they agreed to the crea
tion of five new Cardinals, on condition that only one should
be a nephew.1 ' You will not,' said Pius II., < refuse a sixth
whom I will name as above all controversy.' The Cardinals
pressed that he should be named before they consented. Pius
refused, and ultimately had his own way. He named Ales-
sandro Oliva, General of the Augustinian Order, a man re
nowned for piety and theological learning. The others were
the Bishops of Reati and Spoleto, men whom Pius II. needed
for the government of the States of the Church ; the nephew
Francesco, Archbishop of Siena, Niccolo di Fortiguerra, a relation
of Pius II. 's mother, and Burchard, Provost of Salzburg, whose
nomination was not announced till other Transalpine Cardinals
were created. Pius II. was of opinion that he had deserved
well of Italy for creating five Italian cardinals. He was also
proud of the fact of having created two of his own relatives in
the same Consistory. It must be admitted that his two rela
tives both proved themselves worthy men. Fortiguerra was
the chief adviser of the Pope in military matters, and the
nephew Francesco was himself raised to a brief tenure of the
Papacy°m 1503.
Troubles in The ecclesiastical festivities consequent on this creation
were disturbed by the news that Piccinino had succeeded in
eluding Federigo of Urbino and the Papal Legate, who were
watching him, and by forced marches had made his way along
the coast into the Abruzzi. Men said that both Federigo and
the Pope had connived at his escape, being glad to see their
own territories free from the risk of a protracted war.2 The
arrival of Piccinino was a new terror to Ferrante ; but Pius
1 ' Ea lege adjecta ut nepos unus esset,' says Pius II., Com. 98. He seems
to wish to represent that the Cardinals desired one nephew, as he says (99),
' negavit se promoturum fuisse [nepotem] nisi cardinales multis precibus id
exegissent.'
2 Simoneta, in Mur. xxi. 709 : ' Quod sibi quisque timeret ne bellum in sua
finitimorumque ditione renovatum diutius quam vellent duceretur.'
PIUS II.'S ENJOYMENT OF THE COUNTRY. 403
II. sent him reinforcements under his condottiere general CHAP.
Simonetto. s -'.
While awaiting news from Naples Pius II. lingered in Siena, country
which he loved so well, under pretext of his health. It would
seem that, after his long life of wandering and exile, Pius
returned with deep satisfaction to the scenes of his youth,
where only he could be genuinely happy and content with the
simple enjoyments of country life, which are always dear to a
man of real culture. Pius feasted his eyes on the lovely land
scape which from the hills of Siena lay open to his view, in all
the freshness of fine spring weather. He made his health a
reason for indulging his taste for country life by expeditions to
Macereto and Petrioli in the neighbourhood. The language
of Pius II. is interesting as showing his many sidedn ess, his
keen susceptibility to the pleasures of the eye. ' The pleasant
springtime had begun ; and round Siena all the valleys smiled
in their dress of leafage and of flowers, and the crops were
rising luxuriant in the fields. The view from Siena was inex
pressibly charming; hills of a merciful height, planted with
fruit trees and vines, or ploughed for corn, overhang pleasant
valleys, green with crops and grass, or watered with a constant
stream. There are, moreover, many woods, resonant with the
sweet song of birds, and every height is crowned by magnificent
country houses of the citizens. On one side are splendid
monasteries peopled with holy men, on the other the castellated
houses of the burghers. The Pope passed with joy through
this country, and found the baths equally delightful, lying in
a valley about ten miles from the city. The land is watered
by the river Mersa, which is full of eels, sweet in flavour
though small. The valley at its entrance is cultivated, arid full
of castles and villas, but grows wilder as it approaches the baths,
where it is shut in by a stone bridge of massive workmanship,
and by cliffs covered thick with trees. The hills which circle
the valley on the right are clad with evergreen ilex, on the left
by oaks and ash trees. Bound the baths are small lodging-
houses. Here the Pope stayed a month, and though he
bathed twice a day, never neglected public business. Two
hours before sunset he would go out into the meadows by the
riverside, and in the greenest spot received embassies and
petitions. The countrywomen came daily, bringing flowers and
D D 2
404 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK strewing them in the way by which the Pope went to the bath,
. _ *y* -. content with the reward of kissing his foot.' l
Dissolute While leading this simple life at Petrioli the Pope was
cardinal scandalised by hearing of the dissolute life of Cardinal Borgia,
Borgia. W}1O already showed the qualities which were to render him
infamous as Alexander VI. A story reached the Pope that an
entertainment given by Borgia was the talk of Siena. The
Cardinal had invited some Sienese ladies to a garden, from
which their fathers, husbands, and brothers were carefully ex
cluded ; for five hours the Cardinal and his attendants had
engaged in dances of questionable decorum.2 Pius II. wrote
him a letter of severe yet friendly remonstrance. 'If we were
to say only that this conduct displeases us, we should be wrong.
It displeases us more than we can say; for the clerical order and
our ministry is brought into disrepute, and we seem to have
been enriched and magnified, not for righteousness of life, but
for an occasion to licentiousness. Hence the contempt of
kings, hence the daily scoffs of the laity, hence blame on our
own life when we wish to blame others. The Vicar of Christ,
who is believed to permit such things, falls into the same
contempt. Kemember your various offices and dignities. We
leave it for yourself to judge if it befits your station to toy with
girls, to pelt them with fruits, to hand to her you favour the
cup which you have sipped, to look with delight on every kind
of pleasure, and to shut out husbands that you may do this
with greater freedom. Think of the scandal you bring on us
and on your uncle, Calixtus III. If you excuse yourself on the
.ground of youth, you are old enough ' (Borgia was twenty-nine)
' to understand the responsibility of your position. A cardinal
ought to be irreproachable, an example of conduct, good not
only for the souls but for the eyes of all men. We are indig
nant if princes do not obey us ; but we bring their blows upon
ourselves by making vile the authority of the Church. Let
your prudence, therefore, check this vain conduct ; if it occurs
again, we shall be driven to show that it is against our will, and
our rebuke must needs put you to open shame. We have
always loved you, and regarded you as a model of gravity and
1 Pii II. Comment. 101.
2 « Saltatum est, ut accepimus, cum omni licentia ; nullis illecebris
amatoriis parsum.'— Raynaldus, 1460, No. 31.
AHGEVIN VICTOEY AT SAKNO. 405
decorum : it is for you to re-establish our good opinion. Your
age, which gives hopes of reformation, is the cause why we
admonish you as a father.'
On his return to Siena in June Pius II. soon had graver Angevin
matter of disquietude than the delinquencies of Cardinal Borgia, samo7 a
News reached him that on July 7 Ferrante of Naples had been Jui«v 1460>
repulsed in an attempt to storm the city of Sarno, into which
Jean of Anjou and the Prince of Taranto had retired; the
Pope's general, Simonetto, had been killed, and many horses
and men had fallen into the enemies' hands. Stirred to
activity by the news, Piccinino, in the Abruzzi, attacked and
defeated, after a stubborn battle, Alessandro Sforza and
Federigo of Urbino. These battles, according to the custom
of Italian warfare, were neither bloody nor decisive. The
Prince of Taranto would not let Jean of Anjou pursue his
victory by an attack on Naples, but led him into Campania,
where he spent the summer in sieges of insignificant places.
Still, the loss of these battles required additional men and
money from Sforza and the Pope, and for a moment Pius II.
began to waver. The French party in the Curia did not
hesitate to show its joy at the Angevin successes; it even went
so far as to light bonfires in Siena and insult members of the
Pope's household. But Sforza was well versed in Italian war
fare, and knew that the ultimate success lay with him who
held out longest. He was more than ever convinced that his
own security lay in keeping the French out of Italy, and he
managed to inspire the Pope with greater confidence.1 So Pius
II. put on a bold front to the Angevin envoys, who requested
him to recognise Eene, or, at least, declare, himself neutral. He
took his stand on the peace of Lodi, declared that he was only
recognising the existing state of affairs, expressed his willing
ness to decide the question of right if Eene submitted it to his
legal cognisance, and complained of Eene for disturbing by
violence the peace which was so necessary for a crusade.
Finally, he warned Eene against persisting in an appeal to a
future Council, lest he incurred the penalties of the decree
1 Pius, in his Comm. 106, represents himself as heroic and patriotic in this
extremity; but Simoneta (Mur. xxi. 713) calls him ' exterritum auxiliique
incertum,' and Pius wrote to Federigo of Urbino bidding him not risk another
battle, ' quod status noster facile pati posset.' Raynaldus, 1460, N o. 63.
406 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK recently issued at Mantua.1 Pius II., however, used Ferrante's
>_^ , distress as a means of obtaining grants for his own family.
The town of Castiglione della Pescaia and the island of Griglio
were given to Andrea, the Pope's nephew — not, as the Pope ex
plains, for his own good, but for che good of the country, whose
coast could now be made secure.2
Troubles in The pleasant sojourn of Pius II. at Siena was brought to
1460. ' an end by bad news from Rome, where the Pope's absence was
the signal for disorder. Cardinal Cusa, who had been left in
charge of the city, soon left Rome for Mantua, and thence
went to Brixen. The Sienese senator, whom Pius had put in
office, was not strong enough to rule the turbulent city. The
spirit which had been kindled by Stefano Porcaro still burned
in the hearts of some of the Roman youth, but showed itself in
a desire for license rather than for liberty. A band of three
hundred youths, many of respectable families, enrolled them
selves under Tiburzio and Valeriano, the two sons of Angelo de'
Maso, who had been executed for his share in Porcaro's plot.
They levied blackmail on the citizens, committed outrages
with impunity, and filled the city with alarm. The governor,
afraid of a rebellion if he called the citizens to arms, judged it
prudent to withdraw from his palace in the Campo dei Fiori to
the more secure shelter of the Vatican. This open show of
incompetence emboldened the rioters, till at last one of them,
who went by the appropriate nickname of Inamorato, seized and
carried off a girl on her way to her wedding. The magistrates,
driven to action, imprisoned Inamorato ; his comrades captured
one of the senator's household in return, and entrenched
themselves in the Pantheon, where they obtained supplies by
raids on the neighbouring houses, till at last, after nine days,
the magistrates, fearing the end of such confusion, negotiated
an exchange of prisoners, and Inamorato went free. The
rioters in the city were supported by the barons of the Cam-
pagna, the Colonna, the Savelli, and Everso of Anguillara.
The governor was afraid that, if he took strong measures against
Roman citizens, he would not be supported by the citizens
themselves, and might give occasion to an invasion from with
out. The Pope's nephew, Antonio, on his way to Naples,
1 In Mansi, Oratwnes, ii. 158. Mansi wrongly dates it 1462.
2 Conim. 108.
TROUBLES IN ROME. 407
made an attempt to capture some of the rioters, but they re- CHAP.
treated into the palace of Cardinal Capranica, and Antonio was >_ r '_,
afraid to commence a siege. Tiburzio ruled Rome as a king,
and did as he chose in all things. At last the chief citizens
warned him that they could no longer endure this anarchy,
and begged him to depart peaceably from the city. Tiburzio
graciously consented, knowing that he could return when he
pleased. He was escorted to the gates by the magistrates, as
though he were some mighty prince, and the people thronged
to witness his departure. Soon after this a band of rioters
broke into the nunnery of S. Agnese, violated the nuns, and
plundered the sacred vessels.
Pius II. was not to be moved from his pleasant quarters in
Siena by these disorders so long as they only affected the
citizens of Rome. It became a different thing when they
threatened to imperil the States of the Church. Piccinino
thought the opportunity favourable for an inroad into the
Roman territory, and marched to Rieti ; he was joined by the
Colonna and Savelli, and plundered far and wide. At the
same time a messenger between the Colonna and the Prince of
Taranto was seized in Rome, and confessed that he was nego
tiating a scheme for seizing Rome in the interests of Jean of
Anjou, the Roman barons, and Tiburzio. Pius II. wrote for
help in great agitation to Francesco Sforza, who testily ex
claimed that his alliance with the Pope gave him more trouble
than all his enemies.1 However, he wrote to the Pope exhort
ing him to return to Rome, and all would still be well.
On September 10 Pius II. left Siena with tears at the Eeturnof
thought that he might never revisit it. He journeyed over toKom'e.
Orvieto to Viterbo, where envoys from Rome greeted him.
The Pope, in his reply, dwelt on his unwillingness to leave
Rome, and his regret that his health had prevented him from
returning sooner ; he grieved over the disturbances during his
absence, and praised the Romans for their loyalty. ' What
city,' he continued, ' is freer than Rome ? You pay no taxes,
you sell your wine and corn at what price you choose, you fill
the most honourable magistracies, and your houses bring you in
good rents. Who also is your ruler ? Is it count or marquis,
duke, king, or emperor ? Greater still is he whom you obey—
1 Simoneta, p. 717.
408
THE PAPAL EESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Suppres
sion of
the Roman
revolt.
October 31,
1460.
the Koman Pontiff, successor of S. Peter, Vicar of Jesus Christ,
whose feet all men desire to kiss. You show your wisdom in
reverencing such a lord ; for he enriches you and brings you the
world's wealth ; you feed the Roman Curia, and it feeds you
and brings you gold from every land.' They were fine words, but
poor comfort for the absence of government from which Eome
during the last year had been suffering.
As Piccinino was threatening Rome, many of the Cardinals
counselled that they should go no farther ; but Pius II. pro
ceeded, though he found scanty preparations made for his enter
tainment, and could only get rustic fare. When the governor
and senator advanced to meet him, they found the Pope reclin
ing beside a well, and trying by an early dinner to eke out
the scanty supper of the previous night. Six miles from Rome
he was greeted by the Conservators with a band of Roman
youths, who had come to carry his litter. Many advised him
to beware of these youths, who had belonged to the Tiburtian
band. * I will walk on the asp and the basilisk,' said Pius II.
with a smile, * and will trample on the lion and dragon.' The
rebels carried him safely, and on October 7 Pius II. entered
his capital.
The conspirators still continued their plots ; but their rash
ness proved their ruin. One of them, Bonanno Specchio,
entered the city secretly, and was there joined by Valeriano
and others. An informer warned the Pope, and an ambush
was laid for them in the Colosseum, where Bonanno was taken
prisoner, though Valeriano and the others escaped. Tiburzio
heard of this at Palombaria, a castle of the Savelli, near Tivoli,
where he had his head-quarters. Thinking that his brother also
was a prisoner, he hurried to Rome to the rescue with a band
of only fourteen men. He raised the cry of c Liberty,' and
called on the citizens to rise. ' It is too late,' was the general
answer. The Papal body-guard advanced against the rebels,
who fled outside the city and hid in the brushwood. They
were hunted by dogs, and were trapped like pheasants among
the grass.1 Tiburzio, with his hands tied behind his back, was
led into the city, surrounded by a crowd, who mocked the king,
the tribune, the restorer of ancient liberty. Tiburzio only
1 ' Obvolutis sub herba capitibus in morem fasaniarum avium comperti per
pedes abstract! sunt.' — Pd II. Comment. 119.
HITS II. RESTORES ORDER IN ROME. 409
asked for speedy death, and the Pope interfered to prevent him CHAP.
from being tortured. On October 31 Tiburzio, Bonanno, and „ v*Ij .
six others were hanged in the Capitol. In the following March
eleven others of his confederates shared the same fate.
The Eoman plot thus ended in entire failure ; but Pius II. Pius II.
was helpless to reduce the rebellious barons or free himself nino. 1460.
from Piccinino at Eieti. He had brought with him to Kome
only a small band of horsemen, and had no troops save those
in Naples. He wrote in distress to Sforza, even to Florence,
for aid ; l but Florence saw no reason to interfere, and Sforza
was not sorry to give his troublesome ally a lesson, as Pius II.
had just given another instance of his readiness to take ad
vantage of Ferrante. Terracina, which Pius II. had granted to
Ferrante for ten years, had been taken by the Angevins ; but
the people unwillingly endured the French yoke, and called
for the protection of the Papal troops. The Pope's nephew,
Antonio, became master of the city ; and the Pope, instead of
restoring it to Ferrante, conferred it on Antonio, to the great
wrath of Ferrante and the Duke of Milan. Still they could not
entirely abandon their ally ; and during the winter the troops
of Sforza and Federigo of Urbino, feebly aided by Antonio
Piccolomini, forced Piccinino to quit the Papal States, and
reduced the Savelli to submit. Pius II., like most of his suc
cessors, trusted not so much to any definite organisation or
government to keep peace and order in his own dominions, as
to foreign help rendered on grounds of political necessity. He
spent the winter in restoring order in Rome, haranguing the
Romans on the advantage of the Papal Government, and receiv
ing complaints against Grismondo Malatesta, which he appointed
Cardinal Cusa as his commissioner to investigate.
In the spring of 1461 Ferrante showed great activity in Rising of
recovering the castles near Naples, and some of the barons who JJ^t the
had joined the Angevin side began to return to his allegiance. French.
These signs of a reaction in his favour made him more anxious 1461.
to hold his party together. He promised the Pope to confer
on the nephew Antonio the hand of his illegitimate daughter
Maria and the Duchy of Amalfi. Antonio at the head of
the Papal forces went to justify these promises in the field,
but was not very successful. The decision of the Neapolitan
1 Raynaldus, 1460, No. 70, 71.
410
THE PAPAL BESTOKATIOtf.
BOOK
IV.
Pius II. at
Tivoli.
June 14GI.
war was suddenly transferred from Naples to Grenoa, where an
attack of the exiled party of the Adorni and Fregosi on March 10
succeeded in raising the city on their side and drove the
French into the citadel. Charles VII. of France at once sent
reinforcements to their succour, and Rene of Anjou set out
himself for Grenoa. But the Grenoese, supported by Sf orza, fell
upon the French troops and nearly annihilated them . Kene,
unfortunate as ever, had to withdraw hastily to Marseilles.
The French garrison in the castle was driven to surrender.
Grenoa was again free from French influence ; the Angevin
party in Naples saw itself cut off from supplies, and deprived
of its chief support. In Naples itself nothing of moment
was done, save that the brave Albanian leader, Scanderbeg,
brought to the aid of Ferrante a troop of 800 horse, who
distinguished themselves by a few plundering raids, and then
departed to the worthier task of defending their own land
against the Turk.
Pius II. meanwhile saw his home troubles disappearing.
Rome was quiet ; Piccinino had gone ; the rebellious barons were
reduced ; his nephew Antonio was prospering in Naples. In
June 1461 the Pope gratified his love for Siena and his desire
to exercise his oratory by canonising Catharine of Siena, the
Bull of whose canonisation he tells us that he dictated himself.
Anxious to escape the summer heat in Rome, he departed early
in July for Tivoli, under the escort of Federigo of Urbino,
with ten squadrons of horse. 'The Pope was pleased with
the flash of arms, the trappings of men and horses, as the sun
gleamed on shields, breast-plates, nodding plumes, and forests
of lances. The youths galloped on all sides, and made their
horses move in circles ; they brandished their swords, levelled
their spears, and engaged in mimic contests. Federigo, who
was a well-read man, asked the Pope if the great heroes of
antiquity had been armed like men of our day. The Pope
answered that in Homer and Virgil mention was made of every
arm now in use, and many that were used no longer. So they
fell talking about the Trojan war, which Federigo wished to
make little of ; while the Pope asserted that it must have been
great to leave such a memory behind. Then they talked about
Asia Minor, and were not quite agreed about its boundaries .
So the Pope afterwards used a little leisure at Tivoli to write
FRUITLESS DIETS IN GERMANY. 411
a description of Asia Minor from Ptolemy, Strabo, Pliny, CHAP.
Q. Curtius, Solinus, and Pomponius Mela, and other ancient . WI' ,
writers.' 1 So ready was Pius II. to receive pleasure from
outward impressions, so active was his mind to turn with un
abated freshness to a new topic of interest. In Tivoli Pius II.
began the rebuilding of the citadel, so as to have a strong
fortress of defence for the Papal territory, and busied himself
in the reorganisation of the monastery, from which he ejected
the Conveatuals and established Observants in their stead.
Eighteen months had now passed since the end of the Con- Fruitless
gress of Mantua, and nothing had been done in the matter of Germany.
a crusade. The Neapolitan war had absorbed all the forces of ]4G°-1461-
the Pope and all the military resources of Italy ; nor was
Grermany more free from political complications. Bessarion,
in spite of the infirmities of age, hastened from Mantua in the
winter storms to be present at the Diet of Niirnberg on
March 2, 1460. Few princes appeared, and they paid no heed
to Bessarion ; for attention was all directed to the war which
was imminent between Albert of Brandenburg, the friend of
the Pope and Emperor, and Lewis of Bavaria, the leader of
the opposition to the Emperor. Soon the war broke out and
ended in the rapid discomfiture of Albert, who was obliged
to surrender all that his opponent claimed. The Emperor
suffered by this defeat of his chief partisan, and became more
powerless than ever. Bessarion sorrowfully went to Vienna to
hold there the second Diet, which had been resolved at
Mantua. Not till the middle of September did the Diet meet ;
and then none of the princes appeared in person. In vain Bes
sarion reminded their representatives of the promises made at
Mantua ; in vain he asked them to agree to the levying of
a tenth in Grermany. They answered with many protestations
of zeal, but said that they had no powers to do anything
definite. The Grermans were lukewarm, and Bessarion was
not the man to conciliate them. In vain he employed his
eloquence ; his words seemed only to be twice-told tales.2 The
only means that Pius II. could devise for kindling the zeal of
Grermany was to offer the title of general of the crusading
army to the Pfalzgraf Frederick, the military leader of the
1 Piill. Com. 136.
a Ibid. 126 : ' Verba ejus quasi fabulas exceperimt.'
412 THE PAPAL KESTO&ATION.
BOOK dominant party. Frederick refused the proffered honour, and
. , ' Bessarion, early in 1461, left Germany, vexed and dispirited.
Further Yet the Pope was not entirely free from blame for the
Cusalmd dissensions of Germany. There, as in Italy, the requirements
ofgAusfria °^ ecclesiastical politics were a disturbing cause. Pius II.
1460. could not unreservedly put himself at the head of a united
Christendom, because the needs of the Papal policy led him to
take a part in creating internal dissensions. The quarrel be
tween Cardinal Cusa and Sigismund of the Tyrol had only been
patched up at Mantua, and broke out afresh immediately upon
Cusa's departure to his bishopric. Neither party had any con
fidence in the legal termination of their disputes. Hostilities
were carried on by both alike. At length Sigismund de
termined on making a bold stroke. In April 1460 Cusa was at
Bruneck negotiating with Sigismund, displaying his usual
obstinacy, and threatening to betake himself again to the Pope.
Sigismund sent him a formal defiance, as did also most of the
vassals of the Church of Brixen. Gathering his forces, Sigis
mund closed round Bruneck, and Cusa found himself a prisoner
in his hands. He granted all that Sigismund demanded, with
the intention of protesting that it was extorted by violence.
As soon as he could escape he fled to the Pope at Siena and
clamoured for aid. Pius II. would willingly have escaped
a conflict ; but he could not overlook violence offered to a car
dinal, and behind Sigismund stood the hated Gregory Heim-
burg, the representative of the German opposition to the
Papacy. The Pope issued an admonition to Sigismund, in which
he declared that his criminality was proved by its notoriety,
and had involved him in the penalty of excommunication : he
was willing, however, to hear him personally, and summoned
him to a Consistory to be held on August 4. Sigismund in
reply assumed that the Pope was ignorant of Cusa's encroach
ments on the rights of the Count of the Tyrol, which had made
his capture at Bruneck a necessary step. He detailed his
grievances, and appealed to a better-instructed Pope. Sigis-
mund's attitude was conciliatory, but decided ; he stood on the
ground of the conciliar movement against the arbitrary action
of an individual Pope, and by so doing interposed a technical
objection against the validity of the coming sentence, while he
still left the dispute open bo friendly settlement .
PIUS II. AND SIGISMUND OF THE TYROL. 413
But Cusa would be satisfied with nothing but unconditional CHAP.
submission to his demands, and the Pope was determined to do ^ VH'_-
away with every trace of the conciliar heresy. The Emperor also Pius n-
was glad to see Sigismund in trouble, as he had shown himself Sigismund
a dangerous neighbour. Accordingly, when August 4 arrived, communi-
and Dr. Blumenau, as Sigismund's proctor, handed in the appeal, cation,
the Pope's wrath broke out against him. He was seized and 1460.
imprisoned as a heretic for drawing up and presenting an
appeal contrary to the bull ' Execrabilis.'* Blumenau escaped,
and fled in terror across the Alps to his master. On August 8
the Pope declared that the penalty of excommunication had
been incurred by Sigismund, all who had joined with him in
defying Cusa, all who had been hostile to Cusa, and especially
the inhabitants of Bruneck. He followed this by declaring the
dominions of Sigismund under an interdict, and took the see
of Brixen under the Papal protection till its bishop could return.
Sigismund was prepared for this, and knew that excommuni- Sigis-^
cation and interdict had little force when directed against an protest*
entire people. The men of the Tyrol gathered round their thei^fe
Count, and so long as they stood by him he had little to fear. August
On August 1 3 Heimburg drew up for Sigismund a second appeal,
in which he said that, as all human judgment might err, the
remedy of appeals had been devised by our forefathers as a
help for the oppressed. As the Pope's conduct showed that
his ears were closed to justice, it was useless to appeal to
him when better instructed : 4 We appeal, therefore, to a
future Pope, who may revise the doings of his predecessor ;
further, to a General Council, to be held in accordance with the
decrees of Constance and Basel. Nor is this appeal a subterfuge,
as we do not wish to avoid the course of natural justice. As
the Pope has rendered himself notoriously suspected, we will
accept any impartial judge whom he may name ; we do not
refuse his sentence as president of a General Council. If this be
denied us, we appeal further to the whole people of our Saviour
Jesus Christ ; we appeal to all who love justice and favour in-
nocency. If this be denied us, we call God to witness that it
is not our fault that justice is not done, and that we are
oppressed.'1 This spirited document was meant for general
1 This remarkable document is given in Goldast, Manarchia, ii. 1587, and
in Frelier, Rerum Gc'nnanicarum Scrijjtorcs (ed. Struvius), ii. 201.
14 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK publication ; it was addressed directly to the public opinion of
/ _. Christendom, and was fixed on the church doors even of Florence
and Siena.
ritings A war of writings now began. Pius justified himself and
eimlfurg. denounced Sigismund in letters addressed to all Christian people.
Cusa attacked the life and character of Sigismund. Heimburg,
in moderate language, but with many cutting references to the
early life of the Pope, detailed the grievances of his master.
So indignant was the Pope against Heimburg that he did not
scruple to write to the magistrates of Niirnberg and Wiirzburg,
ordering them to seize Heimburg's goods which were in their
cities, and bidding them no longer harbour one whom he called
6 a child of the devil, the father of lies.' ] Not content with
this, the Pope called on all the powers of Germany to seize
Heimburg, wherever he might be, and hand him over to the
judgment of the Church.
Heimburg's reply breathed the scornful honesty which
characterised his entire life. He is a noticeable figure in the
history of these times as the representative of German as
opposed to Italian culture, as the determined opponent of the
subtil ty by which ^Eneas Sylvius had won back Germany for
the Papacy, as the resolute supporter of ecclesiastical reform for
his country. The personal antipathy of the two men lent a
zest to the struggle between Heimburg and the Pope ; and
Heimburg never forgot in the Vicar of Christ the shifty secretary
of Frederick IV. The dignity of the Pope would not allow him
to answer Heimburg's personal thrusts ; but he keenly felt that
the laugh was turned against him by Heimburg's dexterous
references to his past career. The answer of Heimburg to the
Pope's proceedings against himself is the most powerful state
ment of the position of the German reformers in that day.
He begins by complaining that the Pope has condemned
him unheard, unsummoned, by his own arbitrary power. He
has given no grounds, except that Christ set S. Peter as ruler
over His Church, and therefore that rebellion against the
successor of S. Peter is heresy. But Christ gave command
ment to all the Apostles to teach all nations ; and the successors
1 ' Quidam ex patre diabolo mendaciomm natus, Gregorius de Heimburg,'
in Goldast, Monarchia, ii. 1691 ; also in Ebendorffer, « Chronicon Austriacum,'
in Fez. Per. Aust. Scriptores, ii. 930, where also is Heimburg's answer.
WETTINGS OF GEEGOEY HEIMBITRG. 415
of the Apostles as a body are General Councils which ought, CHAP.
from time to time, to revise the actions of the Pope and correct ^_V*L_
his errors. The superstition which Pius II. is trying to set up,
that the Pope is greater than a Council, must be overthrown.
The Pope appeals to the Congress of Mantua in support of his
decree ; but that Congress was not a Council, but an assembly
of ambassadors. The decree was made by the Pope and
Cardinals simply that they might pillage Germany under the
pretext of a crusade, and might not be hindered by any
threat of a Council. i A Council, the fostering mother of liberty,
the Pope shudders at as though it were an offspring of unlawful
passion ; by a monstrous decree he condemned it before its birth,
and by his condemnation justified. His prohibition showed his
fear ; his condemnation has given life to what was almost ob
scured by long silence. He would have been more prudent if he
had imitated Solon, who, when asked why he had enacted no
special penalty against parricide, answered, " Lest by forbidding
I might suggest." Wherefore, prelates of Germany, hold to this
point of the Council as the strongest fortress of your freedom.
If the Pope succeed in carrying it, he will tax you at his pleasure,
will take your money for a crusade, and send it to Ferrante of
Naples. For the Pope is fond of bastards ; for that reason he
calls Heimburg " a child of the devil," because he was born in
lawful wedlock. He calls Heimburg also greedy, turbulent,
lying. If he strove with blessings, he would be answered ; as
he strives with curses, he must find another to reply. I am
not such a one. My goods are less than my deserts ; I have
done more work than I have received pay ; I have always loved
liberty more than flattery. These are no signs of greed. Let
the Pope consider his own past and the life he once led.
4 1 leave these personal matters and go back to the Pope's
decree. If the whole body of the Apostles was above Peter, a
Council is above the Pope. If an appeal can be made to the Pope
during a vacancy, it can be made to a Council which is not sum
moned ; for the power of the Church, like the Church itself, never
dies. By forbidding such an appeal the Pope treats us like
slaves, and wishes to take for his own pleasures all that we and
our ancestors have gained by our honest labour. The Pope calls
me a chatterer — the Pope, who is himself more talkative than a
magpie. I own I have given some attention to the windiness
416
THE PAPAL BESTORATION.
HOOK
IV.
Contro
versy with
Heimburg.
of words, but I have never for that neglected the study of civil
and canon law; the Pope has never even smelt at them, but
has contented himself with sheer verbosity. I profess myself a
member of the lawyer tribe ; the Pope is one of those who think
that everything can be managed by the force and artifice of a
rhetorician. If the Pope excommunicates me for talking, who
deserves the penalty more than himself, who has no merit save
wordiness ? The Pope declares me guilty of treason ; he is
using a flynet to catch an eagle.1 He calls me a heretic because
I say a Council is above the Pope ; I call him a heretic because
he says that the Pope is above a Council. He orders my goods
to be confiscated ; I trust that I live amongst those who count
my services as of more value than any gain they could expect
from my possessions. He says that they who seize my goods
will do a service to the Catholic Church ; such a statement
would be ridiculous if we had not seen at Mantua the Pope's
folly when he, with a flow of words, praised adultery and
illegitimacy.
4 So much for the Pope's charges. Yet all men may appeal
from an inferior to a superior tribunal. Like the woman who
appealed from Philip drunk to Philip sober, I appeal from the
Pope angry to the Pope appeased, from the topical orator to the
same man when his fit of wind is over, when he has sent away the
Muses and has turned to the canon law. In the second place,
I appeal to him, if he will bind himself to judge according to
the decision of a good man. In the third place, I appeal to any
man above suspicion to whom the Pope may choose to delegate
the matter. In the fourth place, I submit myself to the judg
ment of the Pope, if he will remove all cause for suspicion.
Finally, if the Pope contemn all these, nothing remains save to
appeal to the Universal Church, as men of old appealed from
the Senate to the Koman people. Let not the Pope object
that the Church is not assembled ; that is not my fault, but his.'
This answer of Heimburg's was largely circulated through
out Europe, and Pius II. keenly felt its bitter sarcasm. By
his attack on Heimburg the Pope had made a serious mistake :
he had given a private person an opportunity of making an
1 Heimburg makes a pun here which is untranslatable : ' Irretiat ipse
Keatinos suos, aut eos, quos servili metu constrictos habet ; mecum erit (Deo-
duce) libertas Diogenis et Catonis.'
CONTKOVERSY WITH IIEIMBURG. 417
onslaught on personal grounds upon the Papacy. So long as CHAP.
Heimburg was writing in Sigismund's name, he could only -._ . '
speak on general grounds of ecclesiastical grievances. By at
tempting to crush a private person, Pius II. exposed himself to
the indignity of a private attack, which it was beneath his lofty
position to answer or even to recognise. One of his friends in
the Curia, Teodoro de' Lelli, Bishop of Feltre, answered in the
Pope's behalf, and asserted in the strongest terms the principles
of the restored Papacy — the necessity of a Papal monarchy over
the Church, the divine institution of the rights of S. Peter and
his successors. He paid back the sneers of Heimburg with the
contemptuous vituperation which the language of ecclesiastical
controversy has always bestowed on one who can be branded
with the name of heretic.1 This only gave Heimburg an op
portunity of returning to the charge. * Like a Molossian hound,'
he said, 6 1 will track my prey even through the snow.' He
scoffed at Lelli as the Pope's stalking-horse, content to put his
vanities into shape and bear blows on his behalf. The Pope
himself will do nothing. ' If you were to put before him the
library of Ptolemy, you would not call him away from his care
for Corsignano and the Piccolomini. But if your other follies,
Lelli, turn out as well as this, you will get your reward, and
your crown will soon be red with a Cardinal's hat.' He hit
Cusa, calling him ' a hard and rigid man, stern, ungenial, in
exorable, vehement in stirring up others, keen in discovering
those who can help him or hurt his adversary, with no wisdom
to help himself, and no restraint over his passion.' He next
considered the proceedings of the Congress of Mantua, whither
he went himself to test the Pope's sincerity. ' I laid before
him and the Cardinals obvious considerations of the difficulties
in the way of a crusade. I urged that it must be a decided
success, or it would do more harm than good. I showed that
agreement amongst the soldiers was necessary for success, and
pleaded that the establishment of peace between the Emperor
and the King of Hungary was the first step to be taken. I
spoke to the dead ; I told my story to the deaf. All the juice
of the Jubilee was exhausted, and the Pope and Cardinals were
1 The pamphlet of Lelli and Heimburg's answer are given in Goldast,
Monw'chia, 1595, and in Freher, ii. 228. The greater part of both is taken up
with technical arguments for and against the Papal supremacy.
VOL. II. E E
418 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK seeking something on which to fasten like leeches. You, Car-
^ /_- dinal Cusa, answered my arguments for prudence by saying,
" Let us lay all this aside, and put our trust only in Grod," —
which was the same as saying that rashness and not wisdom
ought to direct affairs. This is the heresy of Gregory Heim-
burg, — his constancy in resisting the Pope's avarice, his persis
tency in giving wise advice. This is his sacrilege, — his plea for
liberty, his support of the oppressed, his defence of General
Councils, which the Mantuan decree aimed at overthrowing.
This is his treason, —he disturbed the Papal plot for taming
Grermany.' The defence of Lelli had only given Heimburg a
chance of going further in his attack upon the whole policy of
the Pope.
Citation of Pius II. no doubt had been led by Cusa to think that a little
January1 determination on his part would raise the Tyrol in rebellion
against Sigismund, and would bring upon him many foreign foes.
The Pope was careful in his interdicts to save all the rights of
the House of Austria: neither the Emperor nor his brother
Albert was to be injured, and might if they chose seize the
Tyrol for themselves. But no one stirred against Sigismund.
The Pope vainly tried to incite the Swiss ; but they preferred
to use the opportunity to make a peace which satisfied their
own interests. The Pope appealed on all sides for someone to
punish Sigismund ; but even his ally the Duke of Milan refused
to move, and would not allow the excommunication to be
published in his dominions. In this state of things Pius II.
felt himself bound at least to do something ; and, by way of
opening up a new stage in the proceedings, which might pos
sibly lead to new negotiations, he issued on January 23, 1461, a
citation to Sigismund and his associates to appear within sixty
days and answer to a charge of heresy. The citation called
Sigismund * a principal limb of Satan,' declared him suspected
of the heresy which is above all other heresies, of not believing
the article of the Creed, ' I believe in one Holy Catholic and
Apostolic Church,' seeing that he refused to heed the censures
of the Pope, who was the head of that Church.1 Probably the
Pope thought that by transferring the matter to a doctrinal
ground he might open a way to reconciliation.
But Sigismund and Heimburg remained true to their policy
1 In Frelier, ii. 191.
FUETHEE APPEAL OF SIGISMUND. 419
of appeal, and answered by renewing it. The Pope summoned
Sigismund for despising his censures — he did not recognise the
validity of those censures. The Pope summoned Sigismund's
adherents to Home, more than 100,000 men ; who was to nurse Sigismund.
the children and look after the country in their absence ? Did
he wish to drive a whole people into banishment ? What had
rustics to do with disputes about the Creed, which was the busi
ness of theologians ? Sigismund believed in the Church of the
Apostles" Creed and of the Mcene Creed ; but the Creed did not
ask him to believe in the Church in the same way as he believed
in the persons of the Trinity. He could not say anything about
the obedience required by the Pope and Cusa, lest he should be
called to worship a creature instead of the Creator.1 He renewed
his appeal to a future Council, which the Pope, contrary to the
decrees of Constance, was striving to bind and fetter. The Pope
took no notice of this appeal, but in the greater excommuni
cation, issued on Maundy Thursday, Sigismund and Heimburg
appeared in the same class as Wicliffites, Pirates, and Saracens.
As the next step in the controversy, Cardinal Cusa wrote an
anonymous pamphlet, with the object of separating Sigismund
from Heimburg. He besought Sigismund to return to the
Christian faith and shake off the man who had so long misled
him. Heimburg retorted, and at once exposed his anonymous
foe. ' Crab, Cusa, Nicolas,' he began, playing on Cusa's family
name of Krebs, 4 who call yourself Cardinal of Brixen, why do
you not come openly into the lists ? ' In this strain he answered
Cusa's statements one by one, and repeated his own arguments.2
It was clear that Heimburg was a dangerous controversialist,
and that he and Sigismund stood firm in their position.
Nor was the quarrel with Sigismund the only one in which Strife
Pius II. was engaged in Germany. In 1459 the Archbishop of Arch-
Mainz died, and there were two candidates for the vacant office, bishopric
' or Mainz.
Diether of Isenburg and Adolf of Nassau ; each had three votes in 1459-61.
the Chapter, and the seventh vote, which decided the election, was
said to have been secured by bribery in favour of Diether. When
1 ' Jam satis respondimus nos credere imam sanctam Catholicam et Apos-
tolicam Ecclesiam ; non autem in illam, ne latriam soli Deo debitam creatime
et facturse impendamus.'— Freher, 195. He draws a difference between
' Credo in ecclesiam ' and * Credo ecclesiam.'
2 In Goldast, MonarcMa, ii. 1624. FreLer, ii. 265.
a a 2
420
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Scheme
for the de
position
of Frede
rick III.
1460-1461.
the representative of Diether sought the pallium from the Pope
in Mantua, Pius II. wished to use the opportunity. First he
required that Diether should assent to the levy of a Turkish tithe
in Grermany ; then he summoned him to appear at Mantua.
Diether sent his excuses and a proctor to arrange about the
payment of annates, which were negotiated by bonds drawn on the
bankers of the Curia. These obligations he afterwards repudiated,
alleging that his proctor had been induced to promise more than
the ordinary payment. He refused to go to Eome when sum
moned, brought his complaints before the Diet, spoke of a
future Council, and welcomed Heimburg at his court. His ob
ject clearly was to frighten the Curia and escape the payment
of the money which had been promised on his behalf. The
judges of the Papal Camera pronounced an excommunication
against Diether for not paying his debts. Diether replied
that he had offered to pay all that his predecessors had paid ;
if that was refused, he appealed to a future Council.
The differences with Sigismund of the Tyrol and with the
Archbishop of Mainz were troublesome enough in themselves;
but they began to wear a more serious aspect in the light of
the movement in Grerman politics, which agitated the end of
the year 1460. It became clear that King Greorge of Bohemia
was scheming to depose Frederick and obtain the Imperial
crown. Already the plan of setting aside the feeble Frederick
had often been mooted ; the defeat of Frederick's chief ally, the
Markgraf of Brandenburg, and the power of the Bohemian king,
gave a new impulse to the wish to have a reorganisation of
Grermany under a competent head. In Church matters Greorge
of Bohemia purposed to work for the summons of a Council, and
sent Heimburg to secure the co-operation of. Charles VII. of
France. Secretly a scheme was formed between George of Bo
hemia and the Pfalzgraf ; the Archbishop of Mainz wTas only
too willing to join in anything that would overthrow the Em
peror and the Pope. The Archbishop of Trier and the Elector
of Saxony were both related to the Emperor, and could hardly
be won over, unless the Markgraf of Brandenburg set them an
example. A Diet at Niirnberg, March 1461, called on the
Emperor to reform the empire and war against the Turk; it
invited him to appear personally at a Diet in Frankfort in June,
when the conspirators hoped to proceed to a new election.
PLAN FOE THE DEPOSITION OF FREDERICK III. 4.21
The Emperor and the Pope were now genuinely alarmed. CHAP.
Pius II. wrote letters to all the Grerman princes, defending his ._ r_; ,
action in the matter of the Turkish tithe. The Emperor began pja™^
to negotiate peace with Hungary, and forbade the meeting of Emperor,
the Diet at Frankfort. The citizens of Frankfort sided with
the Emperor and closed their gates against the princes. In
stead of a Diet in Frankfort an assembly was held at Mainz, at
which the only Electors present were the Pfalzgraf and Diether
of Mainz. The Pope sent representatives, and Heimburg came
to plead the wrongs of Sigismund of the Tyrol. The discussions
turned almost entirely on ecclesiastical matters ; but Diether
was only seeking his own interest, and was easily won over to
withdraw his appeal to a Council and submit himself to the
Pope's indulgence. Still he did not trust the Pope, nor could
the Pope trust him. Pius II. was secretly engaged in taking
measures to overthrow Diether, and his emissaries were busy at
Mainz. The assembly separated without any definite conclu
sion. Matters in Germany advanced into a new stage by the
outbreak of a war between the Emperor and his brother Albert
of Austria, who, in August 1461, advanced with his forces
against Vienna.
It was of great importance to cause a diversion in Germany, Deposition
and Pius II. was ready to do so by attacking Diether of Mainz, of Mainz.
He had sent John of Flassland, Dean of Basel, as a confidential t±f"st'
agent to Mainz, and John had succeeded in raising a party
against Diether. It was agreed that the Pope should depose
Diether, and set up in his stead Adolf of Nassau, whom the
Archbishop of Trier, the Markgraf of Baden, the Count of
Wirtemberg, and others, promised to support. Secretly John
collected evidence against Diether and bore it back to Pius II.
in his summer retreat at Tivoli. There, with equal secresy,
Pius II. laid the evidence before the five Cardinals who were
with him. They agreed that the charges against Diether were
matters of notoriety, and that a regular process against him was
unnecessary. On August 21 Pius II. issued a Bull deposing
Diether ; ! at the same time Adolf was appointed, by a Papal
provision, archbishop in his stead. Armed with these docu-
1 The matter is told by Pius II., Comment. 143, &c., and in his Bull ,
Raynaldus, 1461, 21. Diether's side is given by Bodman in Rheiiiischen
Archiv, iv. 7, &c.
422 THE PAPAL EESTORATION.
BOOK ments, John of Flassland hurried back to Mainz. Adolf gathered
*y* _. his friends around him, took Diether by surprise, and was en
throned on October 2. Diether made his escape, called on the
Pfalzgraf for help, and renewed his appeal to a future Council.
Both sides gathered their forces round them and prepared for
war.
Dissensions Thus, in the middle of 1461 Pius II. saw in Grerrnany also
many. his crusading policy rendered useless by the conflict between a
large policy of European interest and a policy of small expedi
ency. The Pope might preach a crusade, might exhort Europe
to peace, but the question was, Where was peace to begin ?
The Pope did not see his way to set an example of patience.
He could not afford to let himself be smitten on one cheek
without resistance, for he was afraid lest he should be smitten
also on the other. So far from pacifying Grermany, he was a
cause of dissension : in Mainz and in the Tyrol alike there was
warfare in the name of the Holy See. We cannot wonder that
the princes of Grermany were equally jealous of their own rights,
and were more eager to use every opportunity of asserting their
own interests than to promote the well-being of Christendom.
Grermany was distracted by intrigues and divided into parties.
The war of Albert of Austria against the Emperor attracted all
its attention.
423
CHAPTEK VIII.
PIUS II. AND HIS RELATIONS TO FRANCE AND BOHEMIA.
1461-1464.
IF Pius II. found nothing but disappointment and trouble CHAP.
in Germany, he had more cheering prospects in France. . YIiIL_.
Charles VII. died on July 22, 1461, and from his successor, Afc£e(^1>n
Louis XI., the Papacy expected great things. The Dauphin XI. in
Louis had been on bad terms with his father, had fled from juiy 1461.
France, and, for the last five years of his father's life, had
been a refugee in the Court of the Duke of Burgundy. As an
outcast and a dependent Louis thought it wise to make friends
where he could. He had entered into friendly relations with
the Pope, whose aid might stand him in good stead if any
attempt were made to set him aside from the succession. On
the death of Charles VII. Louis returned in haste to France,
and was surprised to find that he met with no opposition. But
Pius II. did not forget the promises made by the exile, and on
August 20 sent Jean Geoffroy, Bishop of Arras, as his legate to
France to urge the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction.
It was natural that the Papacy should hate the Pragmatic The Pa-
Sanction with a bitter hatred. It was the standing memorial th?Prag-
of the conciliar movement, and kept alive in Europe its prin- £iatic.
. Sanction.
ciples and its endeavours. Moreover, it was a memorial of
national opposition to the theory of the Universal Church : it
expressed the claim of a temporal ruler to arrange at his
pleasure the affairs of the Church within his realms. So long
as France retained the Pragmatic Sanction she gave an example
to which other countries might appeal, and was a standing
threat to the Papal power. So long as the Pragmatic Sanction
remained unrepealed, the restored Papacy could not claim to
have entirely re-established its authority. The position of
France was founded on the decrees of Constance and Basel, and
424: THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK France was bound to sympathise with any movement which had
> ^ — ' for its object the assertion of the supremacy of a Council over
the Pope.
Not only was the theory of the Pragmatic Sanction opposed
to the principles of the Papal monarchy, but its working was
still more prejudicial to the Papal interests. Grants of bene
fices in expectancy were entirely lost to the Pope, and reserva
tions were only allowed to the smaller posts. Annates were
not paid, and appeals to Kome were only made in important
matters. The power of raising money in France was largely
forbidden to the Pope, and the Curia saw an important source
of revenue removed from its grasp. It was not to be expected
that the Papacy should endure without a struggle this dimi
nution of its authority. Eugenius IV. protested against the
Pragmatic Sanction, and refused to recognise it. Nicolas V.
trusted to the growth of the Papal prestige to overcome the
opposition of France. Calixtus III. raised the question more
decidedly by sending Cardinal Alain of Avignon as legatus a
latere to raise Turkish tithes in France. Charles VII., however,
would not let him exercise his functions except by his permis
sion, and made him execute a document that he would do
nothing contrary to the royal pleasure, or against the liberties
of the Galilean Church as secured by the Pragmatic Sanction.1
The King granted leave to collect tithes from the clergy, on the
condition that the money was spent in building galleys at
Avignon. He was true to the national principle that French
gold was not to be taken to Kome, and he probably had even
then formed the plan of using the galleys against Genoa or
Naples when occasion suited. Yet many of the French clergy,
headed by the University of Paris, protested against this Papal
taxation and appealed to a future Council. Calixtus III.
angrily bade his legate proceed to Paris, rebuke the insolence
of the University, and demand the revocation of the appeal.2
The King had to interpose and settle the difference by a decla
ration that he had granted the Pope a tithe from reasons of
public expediency; though this had been done without the
formal assent of the clergy, the King did not thereby intend
to derogate from the liberties of the Grallican Church.3
1 Preures des Libertes de VJSglise Gallicaine, ed. 1651, 496.
2 Raynaldus, 1457, No. 55. 3 Pnnives des Libertes (ed. 1651), 566.
THE PBAGMATIC SANCTION OF FRANCE. 425
Charles VII. was firm in his adhesion to the Pragmatic CHAP.
Sanction ; and the attack upon it made by Pius II. at Mantua _ — rj_^
awakened the determined resistance of the French, who re
garded it as a political manoeuvre of the Pope to justify his
support of Ferrante of Naples. When Pius II. issued his
Bull 4 Execrabilis ' France at once accepted the challenge.
A Master of the University, Jean Dauvet, as proctor for
the King, registered a formal protest that nothing in the
Bull should deprive the King of his right to press for the
summoning of a Council according to the Constance decrees ;
if the Pope were to inflict any ecclesiastical censures in France,
the King would call on a future Council to judge between
him and the Pope ; if the Pope refused to summon a Council,
the King would instigate the princes of Europe to summon it
themselves.1 Pius II. judged it prudent to take no notice of
this protest ; but he did not cease in his letters to Charles VII.
to urge upon him gently and persuasively the abolition of the
Pragmatic Sanction.2
It must not be supposed that the Pragmatic Sanction was Working
an unmixed good to the Grallican Church. The Papal pragmatic
supremacy had been accepted by the Church throughout
Europe because it set up a barrier against royal and aristocratic
oppression. As the Papal sovereignty grew more and more
exacting, churchmen were willing to rid themselves of its
taxation, which seemed to outweigh the advantages of its
protection. The Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges adopted so
much of the reforming decrees of Basel as seemed to suit the
national needs, and gave them validity for France by a royal
decree. Thus the French Church was exempt from the techni
calities of the canon law : the decree itself could be explained
by royal judges, and left no loophole for Papal interference.
Its provisions sounded fair ; but they did not in practice come
up to all they promised. It enacted that elections to eccle
siastical benefices should be free according to the canons : but
this was subject to many exceptions in practice. First, there
was the royal right of the regale, by which the King enjoyed
the revenues of vacant benefices and the disposal of them
during vacancies. If disputes arose about the election, as only
1 See letter in Raynalclus, 1460, 46, &c.
2 Preuves, 229.
426
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Views of
PiusH.
about the
Pragmatic
Sanction.
too often happened, the King had as great an interest in pro
longing the vacancy so as to enjoy the revenues, as had the Curia
in protracting the appeal that it might receive larger fees.
Besides, the nobles used their rights of nomination in such a
way as to override the Chapters. Moreover, the Pragmatic
Sanction assigned to graduates of the Universities a third of
all vacancies, on the ground of encouraging learning. The
Universities were not slow to claim their privilege, and were
skilful in extending its limits. The jurisdiction in ecclesiastical
matters was exercised by the Parlement and the University of
Paris; and these bodies did not show themselves more dis
interested or more expeditious than the Curia had been. It is
doubtful whether the Grallican Church was more free from prac
tical abuses under the Pragmatic Sanction than it had been
under the Papal rule ; * but it made all the difference that at
least the oppressors were men of the same nation as the
oppressed, that French gold stayed in the kingdom, and did
not flow to Rome, where it might be used against the interests
of France. There was no murmuring within France itself ; the
French clergy were all willing to stand by the Pragmatic, and
the Pope had no opportunity afforded from within to justify
his interference.
Still the position of France was anomalous, and there was
some excuse for the view taken of it by Pius II. ' The prelates
of France,' he says, 4 who thought that they would be made free
by the Pragmatic Sanction, were reduced to the most entire
slavery and became the creatures of the laity. They were
compelled to answer in all causes before the Parlement, to
confer benefices at the will of the King, or other princes or
nobles, and to ordain unfit persons. They were bidden to
pardon men whom they condemned for their misdeeds, and
to absolve excommunicated persons without satisfaction. No
power was left them of inflicting ecclesiastical censures. Who
ever brought into France letters from the Pope which were
adverse to the Pragmatic, was liable to the punishment of
death. Cognisance of episcopal causes, of metropolitan
churches, of marriages, of heresy, was taken by the Parlement.
Such was the presumption of the laity that even the most
holy body of Christ, borne in procession for the veneration of
1 See Du Clercq, Memoires, Bk. IV. ch. iv. and xxiv.
PIUS II. AND LOUIS XI. OF FRANCE. 427
the people, or being carried to the sick, was bidden to stand CHAP.
still by the mighty hand of the King. Bishops and other . VI.IL_-
prelates, venerable priests, were hurried to the public prisons ;
estates belonging to the Church, and the goods of clergy, were
seized on slight grounds by a decree of a secular judge. The
Pragmatic Sanction gave rise to much impiety, sacrilege, heresy,
and indecorum, which were either ordered or permitted by the
ungrateful King.' l
The accession of Louis XI. opened up an alluring prospect ^®^^:
to Pius II., who had already negotiated with him for the abo- Pius n.
lition of the Pragmatic. So bitterly was Louis XI. opposed to XL
his father, that the reversal of his father's policy had in itself a
charm for his mind. On his visit to his father's grave he
allowed the Bishop of Terni, who had so grossly misconducted
himself as Papal legate in England, to pronounce an absolution
over his father's ashes, as though he had died excommunicated
for his adhesion to the Pragmatic. The Bishop of Arras was
sent by Pius II. to take advantage of this favourable state of
mind of the King ; and his zeal was spurred by the under
standing that a cardinal's hat was to be the reward of his success.
Louis XI. dismissed his father's ministers, and looked coldly on
the Parlement and the University by whose aid the Pragmatic
Sanction had so long been maintained. His policy was to
maintain the royal power in its existing privileges, by the help
of the Pope, rather than by the help of the constitution of the
realm. It was the task of the Bishop of Arras to negotiate
skilfully the details of such an arrangement.
While awaiting the results of this negotiation Pius II. Country
spent the autumn in making an excursion from Tivoli to p-ms n.
Subiaco, to visit the mighty monasteries that clustered round 1461<
the cave of the great S. Benedict. As usual, he enjoyed a
leisurely journey by the side of the Anio, and was pleased with
the simple homage of the rustics. He would dine by a spring
of water, with a crowd of peasants at a respectful distance.
When he resumed his journey the peasants plunged into the
water to fish, following the Pope in his course. When a fish
was caught a loud shout called the Pope's attention to the fact,
and the trout were given as a friendly offering to the Pope's
1 Pii II. Commentarii, 160.
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
attendants.1 From Subiaco Pius II. paid a visit to Palestrina,
and on October 6 returned to Kome.
Soon after his return Pius II. was reminded of his crusading
scheme, which the current of events had thrust into the back
ground. The luckless Queen Charlotte of Cyprus came to
demand help against the Turks. The island of Cyprus had
been handed over by Eichard I. of England to the House of
Lusignan, under whose feeble and profligate rule it had been a
medley of Greek and Latin civilisation. It was further dis
tracted by being a field for the commercial rivalry of Venice
and Genoa, and was a helpless prey to Egyptian pirates. Queen
Charlotte in 1459 had married Louis, son of the Duke of Savoy;
but her bastard brother, John, fled to Egypt, offered his
homage to the Sultan, and, with the help of an Egyptian
fleet, overran Cyprus, shut up Louis in the castle of Cerina, and
drove Charlotte to seek for help in Western Europe. She was
received at Ostia with royal honours. The Pope was favourably
impressed with the Queen, a handsome woman of twenty, with
merry eyes, a pleasant address, and stately carnage, who spoke
in Greek manner like a torrent, but dressed in French fashion.2
She poured out her griefs to the Pope, who magnanimously
promised that he would never desert her, but pointed out that
her misfortunes were due to the lukewarmness of Savoy at the
Congress of Mantua. All that he could do was to provide her
with means to go to Savoy and plead with her father-in-law.
She went to Savoy, but with no result ; she could only return
to Venice, and thence make her way back to Ehodes.
Meanwhile the Bishop of Arras was rapidly advancing the
Pope's interests in France. Pius II. knew well how the national
opposition in Germany had been overcome by a secret understand
ing to the mutual advantage of the King and the Pope, and he
practised the same plan in France. The Bishop of Arras pro
mised Louis XL that the Pope would send a legate to France,
who would dispose of benefices at the King's pleasure. Pius II.
himself wrote to the King, commending his independent spirit,
and urging him to abolish the Pragmatic without taking counsel
with any. ' You are wise,' he said, 4 and show yourself a great
king, who are not ruled, but rule ; for he is the best prince who
knows and does what is right by himself, as we trust is the case
1 Pii II. Comment. 167. 2 Ibid. 179.
ABOLITION OF THE PEAGMATIC SANCTION OF FKANCE. 429
with you.' He adds significantly, * If your prelates and the Uni- CHAP.
versity desire anything from us, let them use your mediation ; for ._ _ •_ ,
if any Pope was ever well disposed to France, we certainly will
be found the chief to honour and love your race and nation, nor
will we ever oppose your honourable requests.' 1 Pius II. meant
to imply that the King would find a close alliance with the
Papacy to be the best way of making the French clergy depen
dent on himself. Louis XI. kissed the Pope's letter, and
ordered it to be placed in a gold box amongst his treasures.
On November 27, 1461, he wrote to the Pope announcing the
abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction, and sent the letter to the
Parlement to be registered as a royal ordinance.
Thus Louis XL, by the plenitude of the royal power, swept Creation of
away the bulwark of the liberties of the Gallican Church, and December
Pius II. wept with joy to receive the news. Louis XI. had 1461-
abolished the obnoxious decree without making any conditions ;
but he expected his reward, and it was a question for the Pope
how he could best meet his views. With characteristic astute
ness Pius II. used the opportunity first of all for his own
advantage. He longed to use his power in the creation of
Cardinals, and now laid before the College the necessity of
pleasing the French King by creating some French Cardinals ;
the Ultramontane s had been omitted in the last creation, and
their claims ought to be considered. The Cardinals, who
were reluctant to see the College increased, were driven un
willingly to consent. Pius II. seized his opportunity, and
having secured a majority by private interviews, proposed six
creations in a Consistory on Dec. 18. The Cardinals sat in
silence and looked at one another. Pius II. at once declared
his creations, and the publication was made on the same day,
though the Pope was suffering so severely from an attack of the
gout that he had to entrust the ceremony to Cardinal Bessarion.
The Cardinals created at the request of the French King were
the Bishop of Arras, and Louis d'Albret, a prince of the blood
royal. Besides these were Don Jayme de Cardona, a relative
of the King of Aragon ; Francesco Gonzaga, son of the
Marquis of Mantua, a youth of seventeen ; Bartolommeo
Rovarella, Bishop of Ravenna, an old official, of great experience
in the affairs of the Curia ; and Jacopo Ammannati, Bishop of
1 Ejt. 387 (ed. Basel), dated October 26, 1461.
430 THE PAPAL KESTOKATION.
BOOK Pavia, the special favourite of Pius II., the only one of the
,. JV' ^ new creations who was a scholar and a man of culture. Pius II.
Neapolitan could now plume himself that he had done great things for
1462. Louis XI., who ' had obtained two cardinals from one litter,'
as the Pope put it. He also sent him, on Christmas Day, a
consecrated sword, with an inscription : * Let your right hand,
Louis, draw me against the furious Turks, and I will be the
avenger of the blood of the Greeks. The Empire of Mahomet
will fall, and again will the renowned valour of the French,
with you for leader, reach to heaven.' 1 This was very pretty,
no doubt; but Louis XI. wished for something more substantial.
He had been led to suppose that the Pope, in return for the
abolition of the Pragmatic, would withdraw from his alliance with
Ferrante of Naples, and would even espouse the Angevin side.
Pius IT. had behaved as though he were wavering in this
matter. His ally, Francesco Sforza, had been seriously ill of a
fever during the summer, and Sforza's death would have entirely
changed the aspect of affairs. Pius II. held himself ready for
any contingency ; he intimated to Louis XI. that he was weary
of the trouble of the Neapolitan war, and thought it better to
rule the States of the Church in quietness.2 But when the
abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction was completed, when Sforza's
recovery was assured, and above all the marriage of his nephew
Antonio to Maria, the illegitimate daughter of Ferrante,
solemnised, Pius II. began to be more resolute, and bethought
himself that his honour would not allow him to abandon
Ferrante.
French Pius II. was disappointed to find that the new Cardinal of
RcIiie.Sn Arras, so soon as he had gained all that the Pope had to
we™11 giye> transferred his services to the King's side, and became
an ardent negotiator in favour of the Angevin claims. He
besought the Pope to ensure the favour of Louis XI. by with
drawing from the Neapolitan war. He offered, on the King's
behalf, that Ferrante should have Sardinia with the title of
1 Pii II. Comment aril, 184 : —
' Exerat in Turcas tua me Ludovice f urentes
Dextera ; Graiorum sanguinis ultor ero.
Corruet imperium Maumetis, et inclyta rursus
Gallorum virtus te petet astra duce.'
2 Simoneta, Vita Sfortice, in Muratori, xxi. 731 ; he says of Pius II. : ' Ut
erat ingenio astuto callidoque.'
DISCONTENT OF LOUIS XI. WITH THE POPE. 431
king, and the lands of the Prince of Taranto, and that the
Pope's nephew, Antonio, should have a portion of Calabria;
otherwise Louis XI. would ally with Venice and pour his troops
into Milan, so that the Pope would be left single-handed. On
March 13, 1462, a French embassy, headed by the Cardinals of
Arras and Coutances, entered Eome to announce the abolition
of the Pragmatic, and to receive the Pope's answer about
Naples. In a public Consistory the Cardinal of Arras presented
the royal letters abolishing the Pragmatic, spoke much in
praise of Louis, and said that so soon as Naples was secured for
the Angevin dynasty, and Genoa had again submitted to
France, Louis was ready to send 40,000 horse and 30,000 foot
against the Turks, drive them from Europe, penetrate into
Syria, and recover the Holy Sepulchre. Pius II. was wearied
with the pompous and mendacious speech, and anxiously
awaited its end.1 He answered with equally high-sounding
praises of Louis XI. and of his predecessors on the French
throne ; about Naples he briefly said that he would speak
privately.2 He placed the red hat on the Cardinal's head, and
proclaimed a general holiday for three days. Eome blazed with
bonfires for joy at the Papal triumph in winning back the un
conditional allegiance of France.
When the festivities were over the French ambassadors
returned to the Pope, who offered to negotiate a truce, or to
withdraw his troops, provided the Neapolitan question were
referred to a judicial decision of the Curia. This was all that
the Pope would promise; and the embassy returned with loud
complaints of the Papal ingratitude. If, in France, the aboli
tion of the Pragmatic had been hateful at first, it now seemed
a positive indignity. The story was current that Pius II., on
receiving the news, had waved his cap and cried out, l Guerra,
guerra ' (war, war), meaning that the increased revenues now
secured to him would enable him to carry on more vigorously
the Neapolitan war. Pius wrote to Louis XL to contradict this
story, and it was even judged wise that Cardinal Ammannati
should write in the name of the College and disclaim it.3 Louis
1 Comment. 187 : ' Ampullosa miscens verba et aperta mendacia pro veris
affirmans . . . expectation et din desideratum finem fecit.'
2 Mansi, Pii II. Orationcs, ii. 103.
3 Cardinalis Pajjiensis Ejristohe, 1.8.
432 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK XI. wrote angrily to the Pope to this purport r1 ( I thought to
^ IV" _. win your kindness by benefits. I abolished the Pragmatic
Sanction ; I gave you my free obedience ; I promised help
against the Turks ; I gave a stern answer to innovators who
talked about a Council ; I could be persuaded to nothing that
was contrary to your dignity. Who would not have thought
that this would have softened your harshness ? But the
reverse has happened. You seek to drive from his kingdom
my own flesh and blood. What am I to do if kindness will not
win your unquiet spirit ? Shall I try the opposite way? No,
it is not my will to persecute the Vicar of Christ. I will pursue
the way I have begun, though there is none of my counsellors
who does not advise me otherwise. Perhaps some day you
will repent.'
This letter was followed by^the Seneschal of Toulouse, a
man who knew neither Latin nor Italian, and delivered through
an interpreter a message that if the Pope did not change his
ways, he had orders from the King to bid the French prelates
leave the Curia. At first this caused some alarm ; but Pius II.
was shrewd enough to know that it was a mere threat. He
answered that the French prelates might go if they chose ; they
made a pretence, but did not go. Louis XI. felt that he had
been out-manoeuvred by the Pope ; embassies passed between
them fruitlessly, and the national feeling in France only grew
more strong against the Papacy.
Pius n. If Pins II. could flatter himself that he had succeeded in
of B(?e°lge sweePmg away from France the memorials of the Council of
Basel, he was obliged to confess that he had been deceived in
his hopes of obtaining a like result in Bohemia. Greorge
Podiebrad had lulled the Pope into a false security while he
needed time to secure himself on the Bohemian throne, and by
the Pope's help had made a truce for three years with the
Catholics of Breslau. But the men of Breslau were not so con
fiding as the Pope, and watched Greorge with suspicion. When
at last George began to intrigue for the Imperial crown, Pius II.
was driven to admit that his policy was opposed to the Papacy.
As a claimant for the empire Greorge was the leader of the anti-
papal party, the upholder of a Council, the ally of Diether of
1 We only have the letter given by Pius II., Comm. 207, who says, ' dictavit
ad Poiitificeni in hunc tnodmn epistolam,'
BOHEMIAN ENVOYS IN ROME. 433
Mainz. The failure of G-eorge's scheme weakened his position : CHAP.
he had abandoned his attitude as mediator in the disputes of . _ ' ..
G-ermany ; he had thrown off the mask, and had shown himself
to be opposed to Pope and Emperor ; he had alienated some
what his Bohemian subjects, who suspected that in these
schemes of higher policy their national interests might be
betrayed. Pius II. began to listen more needfully to the
reports that came from Breslau. He pressed for the embassy
which was to declare at Kome the obedience of Bohemia,
according to the promise which Greorge, before his coronation,
had made to the Pope. At length the embassy, which had
been so long delayed, arrived in Rome on March 10, two days
before the arrival of the French embassy which was to announce
the abrogation of the Pragmatic Sanction.
The coincidence seemed auspicious for the Papal success ; Bohemian
but Pius II. was soon driven to admit that Bohemia was dif-
ferent from France. The Bohemian embassy was headed by
Procopius of Kabstein, a Catholic, an old friend of Pius II., who
had been his colleague in the chancery of Frederick III., and
Sdenek Kostka of Postupic, an Utraquist baron who stood high
in the King's confidence ; with them was Wenzel Coranda, burgo
master of Prag. Pius II. adopted his usual plan of endeavouring
to discover in a private interview the commission of the envoys,
before he admitted them to a public audience.1 On March 13 he
summoned Procopius and Kostka, who said that they were sent to
offer to the Pope the obedience of the Bohemian King 6 as was
customary and as his predecessors had offered it.' The Pope
answered that the realm of Bohemia did not stand like other
realms in the unity of the Church ; the King had promised at
his coronation to bring back his people from the error of their
ways ; before his obedience could be accepted he must take oath
to do so. The envoys answered that they could only do what
they were commissioned to do. The question was referred to a
committee of Cardinals, chief of whom were Carvajal, Cusa, and
Bessarion. There were many conferences and a repetition of
the arguments that had been used at Basel ; but the Bohemians
remained firm to their position, that by accepting the Compacts
they remained in the unity and obedience of the Church, and
1 The account of this embassy is given in a relation of Wenzel Coranda,
which has been followed by Palacky, Gescliiclite von Bolimen, iv. pt. 2,215, &c.
VOL. II. FF
434
THE PAPAL RESTOKATION.
BOOK.
IV.
Pius II.
annuls the
Compacts.
March 31,
1462.
that they stood by the Compacts. On March 21 a public
audience was given. Kostka, after making excuses for the
delay of the embassy in appearing at Kome, professed the obe
dience of his King. < You only offer the obedience of the King,'
said the Pope, ' not of the kingdom.' Procopius whispered to
Kostka, 6 What shall we do ? I will offer the obedience of my
party, of which I am sure ; do you the same on behalf of yours.'
i Speak in the name of all,' answered Kostka ; ' what the King-
does all will accept.' Then Procopius repeated the declaration
of obedience in the name of the King and the realm. 4 If
you have anything else to say,' said the Pope, 6 say on.'
Then Wenzel Coranda, with the loud voice and rapid speech
which the Pope had so often heard from the Bohemians at
Basel, set forth the origin of the Hussite movement, the
troubles in Bohemia, the peace negotiations at Basel, and
the Compacts ; by holding fast to them King Greorge had given
peace to Bohemia ; that peace was endangered by the open and
secret attempts made in Bohemia and outside it, to do away
with the Compacts ; the Bohemians were called heretics and
schismatics. He besought the Pope to free Bohemia from all
suspicion, to give it peace and enable it to turn its energies
against the Turks, by confirming the Compacts so that there
should be no misunderstanding in the future. The Pope
answered in a long speech which gave a history of Bohemia,
showed how prosperous it had been while it remained Catholic,
complained that the Compacts, which were a conditional indul
gence granted by the Council of Basel, had been so violated in
every way by the Bohemians, that they had ceased to be bind
ing. Finally, he declared that the demand made of him was
impossible, for it was contrary to the unity of the Church ; yet
he would consult further with the Cardinals.
More conferences were held and more arguments were ad
vanced on both sides. Carvajal pointed out the weakness of the
Bohemian position. They declared that only the recognition of
the Compacts could give Bohemia peace ; yet peace was impos
sible so long as there were two different rituals. The aim of the
Utraquists was the abolition of the Catholic ritual and the union
of Bohemia under their own views. As the Compacts would never
bring peace, he urged that it was better to drop them. Kostka
was not a disputant ; but he was for that reason all the better
PIUS II. ANNULS THE COMPACTS. 435
fitted for his office. He answered that, if the King were to CHAP.
attempt anything against the Compacts, the Hussites would rise ^ VI11^
and a more bloody war than had been seen before would devas
tate Bohemia ; he trusted that the Pope would listen to the re
quest that had been made ; if not, Bohemia must maintain itself
in the future as it had done in the past. It was clear that nothing
could come of controversy, and on March 31 the Pope gave his
answer to the envoys. He spoke words of warning about the obe
dience which had been offered on the King's behalf : < We praise
the King, who seeks the door of the Lord, which is the Apostolic
seat, to which are entrusted the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
The King is wise in seeking the true door, the true pasture, the
true shepherd ; ourselves, though undeserving, he honours as
the Vicar of Christ. In virtue of that obedience just offered
we bid him remove all novelties from his kingdom ; obedience
is shown not in words but in deeds.' l Then the Pope turned to
the request that he would confirm the Compacts. He repeated
the familiar arguments used at Basel against the Communion
under both kinds. The Compacts gave an indulgence in Bo
hemia and Moravia to those who united with the Church ; they
promised that the Council would give power to certain priests
to administer the rite under both kinds to those who desired it
in Bohemia. It did not appear that the Council had ever em
powered any priests to do so, nor that Bohemia had returned to
the unity of the Church. No argument in favour of their request
could be founded on the Compacts themselves. If he was asked
to grant them by his apostolic power, it would be impossible
for hini to grant what his predecessors had refused, what would
scandalise Christendom, give offence to other nations and be
harmful to themselves. ' As Christ said to the sons of Zebedee,
so say I to you, " Ye know not what ye ask." We are the
stewards of the mysteries of Grod ; it is for us to feed the sheep
and guide the flock of the Lord in the way of safety. Not all
understand what is for their good.'
When the Pope had ended, his Procurator-fiscal rose and
read a public protestation, < that our most holy Lord the Pope
has extinguished and destroyed the Compacts granted by the
Council of Basel to the Bohemians, and has said that the Com
munion under both kinds is nowise necessary to salvation, nor
1 Pii 77. Oration PS, ii. 93.
F F 2
436
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Bohemian
policy of
Pius II.
Reception
of the head
of S. An
drew in
Rome.
April 11,
1462.
will he hold the obedience made to be real obedience, until the
King, uprooting and extirpating all errors, has brought the
kingdom of Bohemia to union with the Eoman Church, and has
conformed himself and his kingdom in all things and through
all things to the Koman Church.' *
There was now no doubt of the Pope's meaning. Next day
the Bohemian envoys took leave of the Pope, who received them
in his garden and gave them his blessing. He bade them tell
the King that he was willing to do all he could for Bohemia
consistently with his honour and that of his office. Let the
King himself communicate under one kind only, and the people
would follow the example of a prince whom they loved. If he
remained obstinate the Church would have to try other methods ;
it was better to have the glory of restoring his land to the
union of the Church than to suffer compulsion. The Bohe
mians asked that someone should accompany them to carry the
Pope's instructions to the King. The Pope commissioned for
this purpose Fantinus, a Dalmatian priest, who had for two years
acted as King George's proctor at Kome. He was a Catholic
who had discharged his mission with good faith in the King's
intentions. The Pope, who had been suspicious of him at first,
was now secure of his integrity ; and the nomination of the King's
own proctor seemed a conciliatory measure. On April 3 the
Bohemians left Rome. Pius II. had taken a decided step, and
had forced George to declare himself. The Bohemian King had
to consider whether he would face the difficulties of a breach with
the Pope and with his Catholic subjects and neighbours, or
whether he would abandon the Utraquists. Pius II. awaited his
opportunity in either case.
From the troublesome task of receiving refractory embassies
Pius II. turned gladly to the more congenial occupation of
organising an impressive display of ecclesiastical ceremonial.
A holy relic, the head of the Apostle S. Andrew, had been carried
away from Patras by the despot Thomas Palseologus that it
might be saved from the Turks; and Pius II. offered it a
secure refuge in Eome. It was received at Ancona by Cardinal
Oliva and safely conveyed to Narni. Now that times were
peaceable, Pius II. prepared for its reception at Rome. Three
1 In Palacky, TTrkundliclie Beitrage, in Fontes Iferum Austriacum, vol. xx,
p. 269.
RECEPTION OF THE HEAD OF S. ANDREW. 437
cardinals were sent to bring it from Narni, and on Palm Sunday, CHAP.
April 11, carried their precious burden to Ponte Molle, where .. v* L .
on the following day the Pope went out to meet it. The
weather was wet and stormy, but Pius II. tells us with great
satisfaction that the rain ceased during the time of the pro
cession. A lofty stage was erected in the meadows by the Ponte
Molle, large enough to contain all the clergy in Home, and in
the middle was an altar. The Pope and prelates advanced
carrying palms in their hands. As the Pope mounted the plat
form on one side, Bessarion and two cardinals advanced on the
other side bearing the reliquary. The Pope received it with
reverence, placed it on the altar, and kneeling, with pale face
and tremulous voice broken by tears, poured forth a prayer of
welcome. The people who thronged around wept tears of devout
joy, and when the Pope, rising, exposed the relic to their gaze,
the ' Te Deum ' burst from their lips. Then was sung a hymn
in Sapphic verse specially composed by the Bishop of Ancona.1
Then the Pope bore the relic to the city and deposited it on the
altar of S. Maria del Popolo, where he himself passed the
night.
The ceremony of the next day seemed likely to be spoiled
by the rain, which fell with violence during the night ; but the
prayers of the sightseers prevailed, and in the morning the
sun shone again.2 Still the streets were covered with mud, and
the Cardinals expressed a desire to take part in the procession
on horseback. The Pope would not allow the effect to be
1 It ended—
1 Da Pio vitam, rogitamus omnes ;
Solus in Turcos animo perenni
Ausus Alpinos superare monies
Arma vocavit ;
Et caput prsebet proprium libenter,
Nomen ut Christ! veneretur orbis ;
Et viam nostrag videat salutis
Perfidus hostis.'
Pii II. Commentar'd, 196.
2 Pius II. tells us that the distich rushed into his mind : —
' Nocte pluit tota, redeunt spectacula mane,
Divisum imperium cum Jove Caesar habet. '
Campanus adapted it to the requirements of piety : —
' Nocte pluit tota, redierunt tempora nostra ;
Nox fuit acta hostis, lux erit ista Dei.'
PHIL Co mm. 197.
438 THE PAPAL KESTOKATION.
BOOK marred by this incongruity ; he ordered all who could to walk ;
^ t ' > those who were too old or feeble might go to S. Peter's and
there welcome the procession on its arrival. ' It was a great
sight,' he tells us, ' full of devotion, to see old men going on
foot through the slippery streets, carrying palms in their hands,
with mitres on their hoary heads, their eyes fixed on the ground,
intent on prayer : many nurtured in luxury who could scarce
endure to go a hundred yards on horseback, on that day easily
accomplished two miles on foot, through the mud and wet,
carrying the weight of their priestly attire.' The Pope's eye
was keen to see how some of the more corpulent managed to
carry the burden of their flesh. 4 It was love,' he exclaims,
' that bore the weight ; nothing is difficult to one who loves.'
Pius II. was delighted with the devotional effect produced upon
the people ; he estimated that more than 30,000 wax candles
were burned during the procession. The whole city was de
corated, and boys dressed as angels sang hymns along the way.
At last the Pope reached S. Peter's. Bessarion delivered an
address, and Pius II. followed with a few words : he gave his
benediction, and indulgences were announced in his name. So
pleased was the Pope with the success of his festival, that he
gave notice that on Easter Sunday he would celebrate mass in
S. Peter's, and would again display the head of S. Andrew. It
was four years since the Komans had seen a Pope say mass.
So crippled was Pius II. with the gout that means had to be
devised by which he might perform the office half-seated.
Eccie- But ecclesiastical ceremonies could not satisfy the restless-
cerenioni ness °^ ^ie P°Pe* He longed for the delights of country life and
in Viterbo. for greater freedom ; and on the pretext that his health required
him to take baths, he set out in May for Viterbo. There he
was carried into the fields in the fresh hours of early morning
6 to catch the breeze and admire the green crops, and the flax
in flower which imitated the hues of heaven, and filled beholders
with delight.' In Viterbo also Pius II. resolved to try the effect
of a splendid ecclesiastical ceremonial in celebration of Corpus
Christi Day. He caused to be erected a tent adorned with
splendid hangings and tapestries ; from this tent to the Cathe
dral each cardinal undertook the decoration of a portion of
the way. The Arras tapestries of the French Cardinals pro
voked great admiration. The Cardinal of S. Sisto contributed
ECCLESIASTICAL CEREMONIES IN VITEEBO. 439
a representation of the Last Supper. Carvajal set forth a dragon CHAP.
surrounded by a herd of horrible demons ; as the Pope passed . VIIL .
by, S. Michael descended and cut off the dragon's head, and
all the demons fell headlong, barking as they fell. Bessarion
had a band of quiring angels. But Cardinal Borgia outdid all
others in splendour. He erected a large tent covering the road
with purple trappings ; as the Pope approached, two angels
advanced and knelt in reverence to the Host which the Pope
carried ; then turning towards the tent they sang, 4 Lift up your
heads, 0 ye gates, and King Pius, Lord of the world, will come
in.' Five kings and a band of armed men tried to prevent
the entrance, crying out, i Who is the King Pius ? ' ' The lord
strong and mighty,' replied the angels ; the curtain fell, the +
kings and their troops knelt before the Pope and sang songs
in his honour, to the accompaniment of a band of musicians.
A wild man of the woods led in chains a lion, and strove
with him from time to time, as a symbol of the Pope's might.
Next Cardinal Forteguerra showed his taste in the decora
tion of the chief piazza, which he roofed in with star-spangled
cloth ; on twelve columns sat twelve angels, who sang in alter
nate verses ; in the middle of the piazza was a representation of
the Holy Sepulchre, with the sleeping soldiers and the angels
keeping watch around. An angel descended by a rope and
sang in honour of the Resurrection. A gun was fired ; the
soldiers woke and rubbed their eyes ; the tomb opened, one
bearing the banner of the Resurrection stepped out, and in
Italian verse announced to the crowd that their salvation had
been won. In the piazza before the Cathedral, Cardinal Milo
had fitted up a representation of heaven ; on the housetops
were stars and angels and Grod in glory, while below was the
tomb of the Virgin. Mass was said in the Cathedral, and the
Pope blessed the people. As he left the Church, the tomb of the
Virgin opened, and a lady stepped out who was borne by angels
to the housetops, dropping her girdle on the way. Then she
was received into heaven amid the joy and songs of the angels.1
The Pope was so satisfied with all he saw that day, that he
1 I give the realistic description in the words of the Pope himself : ' Cui
occurrens Filius, idemque Pater et Dominus in fronte osculatus matrem, et
oblatam aeterno Patri.ad dexteram suam collocavit. Turn canere cselestium
spiritumn agmina.' — Com. 210.
440 THE PAPAL RESTORATION
BOOK says> ' Those who beheld these wonders thought that they had
. ]y-_^ doubtless entered the realms above, and said that they had seen
while alive in the flesh the presentation of their heavenly
country.'
The restless spirit of Pius II. was not long content to
remain at Viterbo. Taking occasion of an alarm of plague, he
withdrew to Bolsena, and thence gradually made his way towards
his native Corsignano, which had probably been his destination
when he first left Rome. He wished to see the buildings with
which he had adorned the little town. He strove still further
to convert it into a memorial of himself by changing its
name Corsignano into Pienza, and elevating it to the dignity of
a bishopric. From Pienza Pius II. went to the baths of Petrioli
and thence to Todi : he did not return to Rome till Decem
ber 18.
ttolTof1"' Meanwhile success attended the Papal policy in Italy. On
Sigismondo August 1 8 Ferrante of Naples won a decided victory over Picci-
October nmo and Jean of Anjou at Troja. The effect of his success
was to shake the confidence of the Angevin barons and incline
them to sue privately for peace. In September the powerful
Prince of Taranto abandoned the caus e of Jean ; and in
October a French embassy came to propose a truce to the Pope.
Pius II. objected to include in it GKsmondo Malatesta, an excom
municated heretic ; and the negotiations were broken off. The
Pope had no wish to make peace with Malatesta, who now
seemed entirely in his hands. He had in the summer invaded
the lands of the Pope's nephew, Antonio Piccolomini, but had
been surprised by Federigo of Urbino, while attempting to
withdraw from Sinigaglia which he had seized, and had been
entirely defeated on August 12. His troops were scattered ; his
castles fell before Federigo ; he was driven to seek the good
offices of Venice to escape entire destruction. In October 1463
he had to accept the Pope's terms. His proctors publicly ab
jured in his name the heresies with which he was charged, and
the Pope freed him from the ban on condition that he fasted
every Friday on bread and water. He was left only in posses
sion of Rimini and the territory a few miles round. The power
of the Malatesta was humbled, and Pius II. could plume him
self on having won a signal success. But it was a small thing
that a Pope who wished to hurl Europe against the Infidel.
GEORGE OF BOHEMIA RESISTS THE ABOLITION OF COMPACTS. 441
should triumph in overthrowing, after four years of warfare, one CHAP.
Italian baron. ^J^I_
In Germany Pius II. was not so successful. Since 1461 Troubles in
that unhappy country had been plunged in war and confusion. H61-1462.
Frederick III. was attacked by his brother Albert of Austria,
and peace was only made by the interposition of the Bohemian
King. The opposing parties in the Empire had broken out
into open war. On one side was the Pfalzgraf and Lewis of
Bavaria, on the other Albert of Brandenburg and Charles of
Baden, the Emperor's friends. With this the struggle about
the Archbishopric of Mainz was naturally connected, and the
claims of Diether were supported by the party opposed to the
Emperor. On July 2, 1462, the Emperor's friends were
entirely defeated. Frederick III. was afraid of an attack from
his brother Albert and was helpless; nor could the Pope do
more than utter mild expostulations in behalf of peace.
This state of affairs in Germany reacted speedily on Bo- George of
hernia, where Pius II. had hoped by his resolute demeanour to and the*
strike terror into Greorge, compel him to abandon the Com- l^Com °f
pacts and reduce Bohemia to obedience to Rome. Greorge was pacts.
not in Prag on the arrival of the Pope's envoys. When he re
ceived from Fantinus the Pope's demands that he should publish
through Bohemia the Papal sentence, should himself and his
family receive the Communion under one kind only, and should
dismiss all heretical priests, he did not give an immediate
answer, but referred the matter to a Diet which was to meet
in Prag on August 9. No doubt the part which the King then
resolved to play was largely determined by the weakness of the
Pope's friends in Grermany.
The Diet met on August 12 in large numbers. Catholics Diet at
and Utraquists alike were doubtful about the King's attitude ; August
there was great uneasiness and great excitement. The King 1462*
took his seat, with the Queen on his right hand, and briefly
opened the proceedings. By their advice, he said, he had sent
an embassy to Rome in confident expectation of securing
thereby the peace of the realm : what obstacles had hindered
this result he knew not. He asked the envoys to give their
own account of what had befallen them, that common counsel
might be taken about the future. Procopius and Kostka gave
a plain and truthful statement of the facts. Then George
42 THE PAPAL KESTOEATION.
BOOK rose and said, 4 We wonder what the Pope means : perhaps he
— ,i — ' wishes to plunge again into discord this kingdom which was
united by the Compacts. How can he annul and take away
what the Holy Council of Basel, which is more than he, and
what his predecessor Eugenius, granted us ? If every Pope is to
abolish what his predecessor granted, who will feel justice
secure? We are accused by the Pope of not fulfilling the
oath made at our coronation. We will read the oath.' Then
he read it in Bohemian, and continued : ' You hear that we
swore to do away with all heresy from our realm. Assuredly
we have no love for heretics. But to do as the Pope wishes
and make the reception of the Communion under both kinds
a heresy was never our intention ; for it is founded on Christ's
gospels, and on the institution of the primitive Church, and,
moreover, was granted to us by the Council of Basel as a privi
lege for our devotion and virtue. The Pope says we swore to
put this away. By no means ; but know for certain that as
we were born and bred in this Communion, and in it were
raised to the royal dignity, we promise to uphold it and live
and die in its defence. So too our queen, our children, and all
who wish to do us pleasure, will live as we do in this matter.
Nor do we think that there is any other way for the salvation
of our souls than to die in this faith, and use the Communion
under both kinds according to the Saviour's institution.'
The King hoped to produce an impression by this unex
pected firmness, and he succeeded. The majority of the Diet
burst into tears. Greorge determined to use his opportunity :
he ordered the confirmations of the Compacts of Sigismund,
Albert, and Ladislas to be read, and finally the Compacts
themselves. Then he arose : ' I ask you all severally,' he said,
' if anyone, whoever he be, wishes to defy and defame us and
our kingdom on account of the Compacts, will you lend us your
aid? ' The Utraquists, after a brief conference, deputed Kostka
to answer. < Sire,' he said, 6 we hear with pleasure that you, your
queen, and your children, are with us in the faith, and we
give you thanks without measure ; we promise sev erally to aid
you with our goods and with our persons in upholding the
Compacts.' The King turned to the Catholics, who were in a
minority in the Diet : ' Say openly what you will do.' Th e
Bishops of Breslau and Olmiitz were present amongst others.
GEOEGE OF BOHEMIA BEEAKS WITH THE POPE. 443
After a short conference amongst themselves, Sdenek of Stern- CHAP.
berg answered : ' Sire, you know that hitherto we have had . vm'_
nothing to do with the Compacts ; but as we were born and
have lived in the union and obedience of the Koman Church,
so we wish to live and die. As you say that you must hold
to the faith in which you were born, we argue that we must
equally hold to ours. As to your request for help, you never
asked our counsel, as is customary ; as you have decided to
maintain the Compacts, you will have the help of those by
whose counsel you made your decision. We promise to do all
that is according to justice for your honour and that of the
kingdom.' The King, who had apparently expected that the
Catholics would have been impressed by the scene which they
had witnessed, was dissatisfied with this answer, and pressed
for something more explicit. It was, however, now late ; and
the Catholics demanded an adjournment, which the King at
last granted, saying that next day they would hear Fantinus as
the Pope's nuncio ; 6 as my proctor,' he added, ' I have some
complaints against him.'
Fantinus was warned that the King was much displeased George of
at him for his conduct as royal proctor at Rome ; but he was breaks
resolved to discharge faithfully his mission from the Pope. plth the
When he appeared before the Diet he seemed to the Catholics
' like a lamb among wolves ; ' and it was noticed that he had no
special place assigned to him, but stood among the rest. He
spoke in Latin, and his words were translated into Bohemian by
an interpreter. He began by demanding the rights of an ambas
sador to speak freely according to the law of nations. When this
was granted, he proceeded to attack the Compacts, denounced
as heretical the Communion under both kinds, asserted the
Papal power and defended the Pope's action in annulling the
Compacts. He insisted that the interpretation of George's
oath was a matter for the superior, not the inferior ; for him
who received, not for him who gave the promise ; for the Pope,
not for the King. Greorge angrily interrupted him. ' In all
and everything we have kept our oath as our conscience
teaches us. If the Pope or anyone wished us to interpret
it against our conscience, we would give him full satisfac
tion and support ourselves as best we could. We doubt not
that we keep our oath as truly as the Pope or anyone else.'
444 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK Fantinus resumed his speech undaunted. He went on to say
« rl«^ that, if he had believed that the King wished to act as protector
of the Compacts and of the Communion under both kinds, he
would never have acted as his proctor ; he publicly renounced
that office, and in the Pope's name declared the suspension
from the priesthood of all clergy who upheld the Compacts ;
he warned the King that he ran great risks in opposing the
Pope's will. The King briefly said : ' My lords, you have
elected me your King and protector ; you have the power of
electing a lord, and you must stand by him.' In private his
anger blazed forth ; he bitterly complained of the indignities
which Fantinus and the Pope heaped on him, and declared
that he would be avenged. ' You know,' he added, ; that on
the Apostolic seaihave sat many renegades and wicked men ; it
is not the seat of holiness, but of pestilence. The holy seat is
the union of all faithful people, and that is not Kome.' l
If King Greorge had hoped by his sudden display of firm
ness to kindle the enthusiasm of the Hussites, so that it should
carry away the Catholics or fill them with terror, the boldness
of Fantinus upset his plans. The grandeur of the King on
the first day was overshadowed by the determined bravery of
Fantinus on the second. The Catholic party at once plucked
up courage and prepared for the contest, which began next
day, when the King ordered Fantinus to be imprisoned for
treacherous dealings as royal proctor, and also deprived Pro-
copius of Kabstein of his office as Chancellor. The Bishops of
Breslau and Olmutz at once fled from Prag, and it was clear
that Greorge's hopes of a peaceable settlement of Bohemia had
failed. Fantinus was kept in prison for a short time, and
Pius II. tells us that Greorge visited him and said, * I can
scarce restrain myself from strangling you with my own hands.'
6 1 expected a common executioner,' said Fantinus, ' but if a
king puts his hands to the work I shall die more honourably ;
but you will grudge me the glory/ The mediation of Lewis
of Bavaria persuaded Greorge at length that it was unwise to
imprison the Papal nuncio. In October Fantinus was released
1 The account of this Diet, given by Pius II., Comment. 237, has clearly
been elaborated from the two reports given by Palacky, Urkimdliche Beitrdge
zur GescMclite Geary's von Podiebrail, p. 272, &c.
KING GEORGE AND THE BOHEMIAN CLERGY. 445
and returned to Kome, where Pius II. rewarded his services CHAP.
with a bishopric.1 -^VI,Al'_
If George had not succeeded in winning all the nobles Dealings
to his side, he hoped that he might be more fortunate with
the clergy. He ordered the administrator of the Arch- Bohemian
<DtJ clergy.
bishopric of Prag to summon all the clergy to an assembly on
September 16, to hear what he intended for the good of peace.
There came 714 clergy, of whom about 200 were Catholics.
The Catholics assembled by themselves, and agreed who was to
be their spokesman and what he should answer. Then they
formed in procession, three abreast, and advanced to the royal
presence, where the Utraquists under Eokycana were already
assembled. The King spoke : ' We always seek the peace of
our kingdom ; but you priests quarrel amongst yourselves,
accuse one another of heresy, refuse sepulture to the dead,
exclude the living from the churches ; you pollute your priest
hood by consorting with light women, play at dice, and commit
many other disorders. Unless you change your manners we
will proceed against you, as you have no spiritual judge. We
bid you, however, observe faithfully the Compacts granted for
the peace of the realm by the Council of Basel to our pre
decessors. If anyone does otherwise he will provoke our
anger.' The Catholics listened in silence : after a short de
liberation they made answer : 4 We thank your Majesty for the
peace which we enjoy, and pray that it may long continue. We
do not deny that ill deeds are done by the clergy ; in such
a multitude there must be some who are evil. Yet we do not
know who they are : if you would point them out they should
be punished, for we still have authority amongst ourselves. As
to the Compacts, we answer as did your nobles. We never
wanted them ; we do not want them ; the Eoman See never
granted them, but the Council of Basel gave them as an indul
gence. Whether or no those to whom the indulgence was given
use it as it was granted, God must judge. The peace which you
say the Compacts have brought we gladly accept : that they bring
any aid in gaining our salvation we do not see. We feel sure
that your Majesty will not hinder the Church of Prag in her
ceremonies, and will not impose on us any other ritual than
1 Pii II. Comment. 241.
446
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Position of
George as
regards
Germany.
that handed down to our ancestors by the Apostolic See — which
is the gate of heaven.'
King George angrily declared that he was no heretic : he
had never resisted the Apostolic See, but he would not abandon
the Communion under both kinds : he must obey God rather
than the Pope. He produced an intercepted letter from a
Catholic priest, in which he was denounced as a heretic : he
bitterly complained of such conduct. Next day the assembly
met again ; but George did not succeed in obtaining from the
Catholic clergy more than he had obtained from the Catholic
nobles. Yet he still strove to keep his position as a mediator.
Kokycana brought before him a complaint against one of the
clergy. ' You wish that everyone should obey you,' was the
King's answer, ' while you obey no one.' The assembly was
dismissed in peace. George did not attempt to interfere with
the Catholic services. In spite of the breach with the Papacy,
men said that the peace of Bohemia had never been more
secure.1 Pius II. was ready to proceed to extremities : on
October 8 he issued a letter to the men of Breslau, releasing
them from their allegiance to George, ' as he had not returned
to the bosom of the Church, but held in his kingdom doctrines
that had been condemned.' The Pope was ready to plunge
Bohemia into another civil war ; George trusted that events
might still be too powerful for Pius II., and might drive him to
leave the Bohemian question alone, if not formally to ratify
the Compacts.
The Bohemian King was soon able to claim the mediation
of the Emperor. Austria was a prey to plundering bands of
soldiers, whom Frederick III. was helpless to repress. The
people of Vienna rose in rebellion against their incompetent
prince. They solemnly defied him on October 5, called in his
brother Albert, and besieged Frederick in the citadel. George
of Bohemia went to the Emperor's aid. 'As an Elector
of the Empire,' he said, ' he felt himself bound to support his
lord/ By his means peace was made between the two brothers.
Albert was to govern Austria for eight years, and Frederick was
to be allowed to depart in safety. He left Vienna ignominiously
1 Palacky, Urhundliclie Beltrage, 281. Zeitungen aus Prag, October 5 :
' Die Slesier . . . habin vorstanden, das sie in besserm fride nye gewesin sein
derm itzunder.'
DISSENSIONS WITHIN THE FRANCISCAN OEDEE. 447
and withdrew to Neustadt ; but it was understood that he was to CHAP.
repay his Bohemian ally by interceding on his behalf with the . VItIL .
Pope. Though Pius II. was determined to continue his policy
of opposition to the Compacts in Bohemia, he judged it wise to
hold his hand for a time. He could not attack the King who
held in his hands the peace of Germany.
Other struggles and other heresies claimed the Pope's Dissen-
attention. It was as difficult to keep the peace between the within the
monastic orders as between the Catholics and Utraquists in
Bohemia. Contests as fierce raged within the bosom of the
Church as those which distracted it from without ; and the
heresies of Bohemia were not the only ones which the Pope was
called upon to decide. The reaction that produced the Papal
restoration intensified also a movement within the Franciscan
Order for the revival of the old rule of S. Francis in all its pristine
simplicity. The Minorites of the Observance, as they called
themselves, denounced as renegades their brethren who were
content to dwell in settled abodes and hold the property which
the piety of their predecessors had won. The strife waxed
bitter between the Observantists and Conventuals ; and each
party strove to gain the favour of the Pope. Eugenius IV.,
whose highest ideal was a monastic reformation, naturally
favoured the Observantists, and hoped to make of them a
bulwark of the Papal power. He gave them the privilege
of electing a Vicar of their own, exempt from the authority
of the General of the Order, and conferred on them other
favours, which put them in a position of superiority over the
Conventuals. Nicolas V. had no interest in these disputes, and
to promote peace withdrew some of the special favours which
had most irritated the Conventuals. This brought upon him
the remonstrances — even the wrath — of the great leader of the
Observantists, Fra Giovanni Capistrano; but Nicolas V. was
not the man to be moved from his determination by clamour.
It was now the turn of the Conventuals to act on the aggressive.
They demanded that the Observantists should either renounce
their separate Vicar, or should leave the Franciscan Order alto
gether, and call themselves ' Brethren of the Bull,' or ' The
Privileged.' Calixtus III. in vain strove to make peace. Peace
was impossible ; but as Calixtus saw that the Observantists
were useful for his purpose by preaching a crusade and gather-
448
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Dispute
about the
worship
due to the
Blood of
Christ,
ing Turkish tithes, he resolved to support them. Yet his Bull
wore the appearance of a compromise. All Franciscans were to
obey the General of the Order, and the Vicars of the Obser-
vantists were to attend the chapters ; they were to submit to
the G-eneral three names, from whom he should choose one to
be Chief Vicar of the Observantists ; this Vicar was to have over
the Observantists all the authority of the General.1 The com
promise only awoke new questions about the right of the Obser
vantists to vote at the election of a General, to whom they did
not owe obedience. Pius II. revoked the Bull of Calixtus III., and
restored that of Eugenius IV. The alternations of the Papal
policy were admirably adapted to keep alive the spirit of
rivalry which they professed to heal.
Under Pius II. the conflict entered upon a new stage.
Pius II. favoured the Observantists, because he needed them
for his crusading projects ; and they, no doubt, thought that
the opportunity was favourable for gaining still higher privi
leges for themselves. One of their oldest and most respected
members, Fra Giacomo della Marca, took occasion, in preaching
at Brescia on Easter Sunday, 1462, to assert that 'the Blood of
Christ shed on the ground during the Passion was not an
object of worship, since it was separated from the Divine
Person.' It was an old question of dispute whether the Blood of
Christ so shed had lost, or not, ' the hypostatic union of the Logos.'
By raising the question at Brescia, the seat of the Dominican
Inquisitor, Fra Giacomo threw down the gauntlet, and showed
his wish to provoke a trial of strength. The Inquisitor
accepted the challenge, condemned the opinion as heretical,
and ordered Fra Giacomo to recant. But Giacomo appeared
in the pulpit, and after recounting his long services to the
Church during his career of forty years as a preacher, proceeded
to confirm his opinion by citing authorities. This was the
beginning of a furious strife ; the people were divided between
the two parties, and the hatred of rival theologians was let
loose in all its fanaticism. The Bishop of Brescia in vain inter
posed. The matter was referred to the Pope, who proclaimed
a truce, and summoned both . sides to a disputation at Rome.
Three eminent theologians appeared for either party ; and the
dispute began before the Pope and Cardinals on Christmas
1 Wadding, Annales Minorum, vi. 304.
PIUS II. AND THEOLOGICAL CONTROVERSY. 449
Day 1462. For three whole days they argued, the Dominicans
maintaining that the Blood of Christ, inasmuch as it returned to
His body, never lost the hypostatic union ; while the Minorites
asserted that during the three days of the Passion this union
ceased. Pius II. has preserved in his ' Commentaries ' l a long
record of the arguments ; but he felt little real interest in the
matter, and regarded the disputants with amusement. To him
theological disputation seemed a form of athletic exercise, not
merely mentally but physically. ' It was a pleasant and agree
able thing,' he says, ' to hear the fine intellects of learned men
contend with one another, and to see now one, now another,
shoot ahead. They strove, as was fitting before the Pope's
majesty, with modesty and fear ; but so sharp was the contest
that, though it was the middle of winter and the world was
stiff with frost, the disputants were bathed with sweat ; such
was their zeal for victory.' When all had been heard, the Pope
conferred with the Cardinals for several days. The majority
were on the side of the Dominicans ; and Pius II. agreed with
the majority. But he determined not to publish his decision,
* lest the crowd of Minorites, whose help was necessary in
preaching against the Turks, should be offended.' He con
tented himself with accepting from the Dominicans, and entering
in the Papal archives, a copy of a decision in their favour on this
subject given by Pope Clement VI. in 1351. The Friars were
contented not to have their doctrine condemned ; and this
momentous discussion was allowed to rest for a few years in
peace.
Pius II. had now established the custom of taking excur- Visit of
sions for pleasure from Rome, and in May 1463 accepted an toOstis.
invitation from Cardinal Estouteville to pay him a visit at Ma^' 1463'
Ostia. Pius II. went, as a modern traveller would do, to in
spect the antiquities and enjoy the natural beauties of the
place. His enjoyment was slightly marred by a terrible storm
of wind and rain, which rose suddenly in the night and
wrought considerable havoc. As the Bishop's palace was not
large enough to accommodate all the Cardinals and their at
tendants who had accompanied the Pope, many of them were
sleeping in tents. The tents were blown away, and the occu
pants, in their attempts to gain shelter in the darkness of the
1 Pages 279-292.
VOL. II. G G
450
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
/BOOK
IV.
Piccinino
deserts the
Angevin
cause in
Naples.
August
1463.
night, suffered many misadventures. Even in the palace the
Pope was afraid that the roof might fall, and was being
wrapped up that he might sit outside in the rain rather than
run the risk indoors, when the wind ceased, ' as though fearing
to incommode the Pope,' Pius complacently observes.1
After his return from Ostia Pius II. did not stay long in
Rome. He again set out for an excursion to Albano ; thence
he went to Castel Grandolfo, rejoicing in the beauties of the
Alban Lake ; and finally to Rocca di Papa. As he journeyed
along the Appian Road he was grieved to see the tombs being
used as quarries for neighbouring buildings, and gave orders
that they should be taken under the protection of the Pope.
He returned to Rome for Whit Sunday, but at the end of
June, complaining of the heat, departed to Tivoli, where he
remained till the middle of September.
The summer of 1463 saw the end of several of the Pope's
little contests. It was decisive for the Neopolitan war, which,
since the battle of Troja, had lingered on while the Angevin
barons were avowedly seeking to find what were the best terms
they could make for themselves. Jean of Anjou discovered that
he had been from the beginning the tool of the Neapolitan
barons, headed by the Prince of Taranto. When the Prince of
Taranto found that he was no longer profitable, he did not
scruple to abandon his cause. The condottiere Piccinino was
Jean's only support, and Piccinino was also preparing to
desert him. In August 1463 Alessandro Sforza offered battle
to Piccinino, which Piccinino did not find it convenient to
accept. He came instead into Sforza's camp to talk matters
over. His arguments, as given by Pius II., are extremely
characteristic of the general condition of Italian politics.
6 Why,' said he, ' do you wish to conquer me ? It is I who
bring you glory, riches, pleasure — all that you enjoy. Because
I took up arms and overthrew the peace of Italy, you who were
lying idle at home, were called to the field. Will you do any
good by taking me prisoner ? Who wants peace ? No one,
save priests and merchants, the Roman Curia, and the traders
of Venice and Florence. Peace in Italy brings them all they
want, and leaves us nothing to scrape together. In peace we
are despised and sent to the plough ; in war we become mighty,
1 Comment., p. 304,
END OF THE NEAPOLITAN WAR. 451
and may follow the example of Francesco Sforza, who has CHAP.
raised himself to a dukedom. Our policy is to refuse to -_VI1II'_-
conquer, and prolong the war, the end of which is the end of
our gains.' Many of the captains agreed with Piccinino ; but
Alessandro Sforza answered : ' Do not fear. Italy will never be
free from war till she is under one rule, and that is a far
distant prospect. Let us finish this war and betake ourselves
to a greater. You need not boast, Piccinino, as if you only kept
war on foot. Had not the Pope and the Duke of Milan sent
us against you, you would have finished this war long ago in
favour of the French, an unworthy undertaking for an Italian,
for one who had borne arms for Aragon and for the Church.'
Piccinino replied : ' I was driven to fight for the French because
no one else wanted me. Bred in arms, I could not leave the field.
I would rather have declared war against my own father than
have disbanded my troops. I served the French because they
gave me pay. Now I am free, and willing to negotiate with
you if you will give me worthy terms.' It was agreed that
Piccinino should be made Ferrante's commander-in-chief, with
a salary of 90,000 ducats, and should keep his conquests in the
Abruzzi. Ferrante and Pius II. in vain protested against these
terms ; the military leaders were agreed, and all others had to
submit.1 Piccinino changed sides, and Jean of Anjou retired
to Ischia, awaiting ships and men from France, which never
came. In April 1464 he left Ischia and returned to France.
Ferrante was now undisputed master of Naples ; but he had
learned how little confidence he could place in his barons, and
waited quietly his opportunity to reduce their power. To the
very last Pius II. kept his hold on Naples, and tried still further
to enrich his nephews. The county of Celano, whose young
Count had joined the Angevin party, was overrun by the Pope's
troops in the name of the Church ; Pius II. succeeded in hand
ing it over to Antonio Piccolomini. The Neapolitan policy of
Pius II., no doubt, was sound as regarded Italian affairs : the
success of Ferrante secured the peace of Italy so long as he
lived. But the part which the Pope played had been a perpetual
hindrance to his good understanding with France, and its most
immediate result had been to make a good provision for two
of the Pope's nephews.
1 The account c" this is given by Pius II., Comment. 319-21.
G G 2
452
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Anger of
Louis XI.
at the
Pope's
Neapolitan
policy.
Anti-Papal
measures of
Louis XL
This turn of affairs in Naples filled up the measure of the
French King's wrath against the Pope. He had abolished the
Pragmatic Sanction partly out of caprice, partly with an expec
tation of receiving an adequate reward. He was now conscious
that he had acted contrary to his own interests and that he had
been beguiled by the Pope. He wrote to Pius II. a letter,
' unworthy of his dignity ' as Pius II. plaintively remarks,
' and as though he were the Pope's superior, condemned his
doings and gave him rules of life.' ] Unfortunately we have only
the Pope's account of the contents of this letter; but that
describes them as sufficiently severe. The Pope's policy was
submitted to a damaging criticism : he had disturbed Naples, had
ruined the Church of Mainz, had excommunicated the Pfalzgraf
and Sigismund of Austria, had accused the Bohemian King of
heresy — in short, would allow no one to live in peace ; it would
be much better if he would turn his attention to the Turks. At
the same time Louis XI. wrote also to the Cardinals asking if
they could inform him what the Pope's intentions really were.
Pius II. has not told us what the French party said in the
Consistory when these letters were laid before them; but he
felt that he was put on his trial before the College, and
found it necessary to justify himself. The Cardinals affected to
wonder at the tone of the letters and to doubt that they were
really what the King had intended. Pius II. did not answer in
writing, but proposed that he should send one envoy and the
Cardinals another, with instructions to excuse the Pope, to ap
pease the King, and urge on him, as the supreme remedy for all
differences of opinion, that he should wage war against the
Turk.2
The envoys were, however, unable either to stem the tor
rent of the royal displeasure or to gain from France any help
for the crusade. Louis XI. showed that he did not intend to
leave the Pope much room for interference in France. A strife
had been for some time raging between the Bishop of Nantes
and the Duke of Brittany, in which the Bishop had called on the
Pope for aid. Louis XI. suddenly interfered in the matter,
declared that Duke and Bishop were alike vassals of the crown
of France, took prisoner the Pope's legate who was on his
way to Brittany, and deprived him of his letters on the ground
1 Comm. 323.
2 Comm. 343.
ANTI-PAPAL MEASURES OF. LOUIS XI. 453
that in a dispute concerning a fief of the French crown he CHAP.
and not the Pope was the judge. Pius II. calls this ' a tyran- . Yln'_.
nical and lying statement ; ' l it was indeed an assertion of feudal
rights for which Duke and Bishop were as little prepared as was
the Pope. Not content with this, Louis XI. deprived Cardinal
Alain of Avignon of his temporalities for having advised the
sending of the nuncio ;" he treated similarly two bishops, nephews
of Alain, and even threatened Cardinal Estouteville. In vain
the Pope expostulated. ' Who ' he bitterly exclaims, ' could
persuade a king who takes his greed for law and listens only
to those who tickle his ears ? '
As soon as it was seen that Louis XI. was willing to oppose Royal
the Pope the Grallican party at once revived. The Parlement °estorTthe
and the University laid their grievances before the King, and PJ °]Jions
the clergy who had felt the weight of the exactions of the Pragmatic
Curia were ready to accept relief at the King's hands. A 1463-U64.
series of royal ordinances were issued which took back almost
all that had been granted to the Papacy by the abolition of the
Pragmatic. ' The King,' says Pius II. sadly, ' did not show him
self so religious by the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction as
he showed himself sacrilegious by issuing such decrees.' 2 The
first of these ordinances, dated February 17, 1463, set aside a
Constitution of the Pope which took into the Papal Camera the
goods of deceased prelates, together with half the benefices
which they held in commendam. When the Papal officials
tried to avoid this edict by threats of excommunication against
those who refused to pay, a second edict was issued in June
1464, forbidding all such exactions and punishing by confis
cation of goods and banishment from the kingdom all collectors
who strove to levy them.3 Another edict (May 1463) main
tained the royal right of disposing of benefices during vacancies,
as against those who came provided with Papal reservations and
the like. 4 All cases concerning such matters were declared to
be under the cognisance of the Parlement ; in case of Papal
censures being directed against this ordinance the Proctor-
general was ordered to appeal to a future Council. 5 In June
1 Coimn. 330. 2 Comment. 324.
3 The edicts are given in Preuves des Libertes, 467-70.
4 ' Ordonnance ' in Preuves, 300.
5 Letter to Parlement, Preuves, 705.
454 THE PAPAL KESTOEATION.
BOOK 1464 another ordinance declared the sole right of the royal
- ^ — • courts to determine causes concerning the claims of the
crown ; those who appealed to the Curia against them were
banished from the kingdom; ecclesiastics who aided in such
appeals were declared incapable of holding benefices in France.1
To protect the Parlement against Papal interference it was
declared that its officials were responsible to no court outside
the boundaries of Paris. When Pius II. regarded all these
edicts he might well feel that if he had deluded Louis XI. into
the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction by false hopes, Louis XI.
showed himself capable of retaliating. The extinction of the
Pragmatic proved illusory in its turn, and the place of the
legislation which had been abolished was rapidly filled up by a
new series of laws still more markedly anti-papal in their spirit.
Gradual Germany in 1463 seemed tending towards peace. After
of Ger- the rescue of Frederick by George of Bohemia, Adolf of Nassau
surprised Mainz by night, had driven out Diether and
his adherents, set parts of the town in flames, and ruined for
his own quarrel the prosperity of his cathedral city. It was a
happy stroke and did much to restore the balance of parties in
Germany. Negotiation was again possible ; the Pfalzgraf be
came reconciled with Albert of Brandenburg. Diether, after
many conferences, agreed to renounce the Archbishopric of Mainz
in return for a portion of its lands, over which he was to exer
cise ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; Adolf succeeded to the title, the
debts and the ruins of the greatest see in Germany. The death
of Albert of Austria in December 1463 paved the way also for a
reconciliation between Frederick and Sigismund of the Tyrol,
who renounced his claims in Austria, on the understanding that
Frederick was to reconcile him with the Pope. Pius II. and
Cusa were weary of their long struggle ; Sigismund made sub
mission and was absolved in the beginning of 1464. The Pope
might claim that he had vindicated the dignity of the Papacy ;
but assuredly he had lost more than he had gained in the long
duel with Heimburg. Before the final agreement about the
disputes concerning Brixen was made, Pius II. and Cusa were
both dead, and Heimburg had sought a refuge in the Court of
the Bohemian King.
Pius II. was a skilful diplomat, and no doubt expected great
RESULTS OF THE ENERGY OF PIUS II. 455
results from the energy which he had displayed on so many CHAP.
sides. Yet, after all, the general aspect of affairs remained . VI1II'_.
much the same as it had been at the end of the Congress of
Mantua. France was still hostile to the Papacy ; Bohemia was
still unsubdued. It is true that Naples had been won for Fer-
rante, Gismondo Malatesta had been overthrown, Pienza had
been beautified, and the Pope's nephews had been well provided
for. On the other hand, Mainz had been well nigh ruined, Heim-
burg had dealt many crushing blows at the Pope's prestige,
the Papacy had become more closely involved in the party
struggles of Germany, and the German opposition had become
more purely political.
456
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Attitude
of Pius II.
towards
the cru
sade.
Opinion of
Europe.
CHAPTER IX.
CRUSADE AND DEATH OF PIUS II.
1464.
SINCE the end of the Congress of Mantua little has been heard
about the war against the Turks ; yet we should wrong Pius II.
if we did not admit the sincerity of his desire for a crusade. But
he had not the fanaticism of Calixtus III. to drive him to do
something, however inadequate it might be, nor had he the
resoluteness of a great statesman to pursue constantly one
supreme end. His early training had made him ready to catch
at advantages as they offered themselves. He did not try to
mould European affairs into accordance with his own plans ; but
he strove to make the Papal power prevail along the whole line
of its pretensions, and trusted in the long run to have his way.
While animated by a desire for the general interests of Chris
tendom, he could not rise above the particular interests of the
Papacy. He failed to impress his contemporaries with his
sincerity ; even had he done so, he seems to have felt it doubt
ful wither he could win them to united action.
Pius II. must have felt that the action of his predeces
sors had not been such as to inspire Europe with much confi
dence. Nicolas V. had gathered Turkish tithes, which he had
spent on the adornment of Rome. Calixtus III. had squan
dered his treasure in insignificant expeditions, which showed
no sense of the work in which he was engaged. Pius II. might
have expected that his protestations at Mantua would be sub
jected to tne calm criticism of observers. His leisurely and
magnificent progress to the Congress seemed a needless waste
of money : his share in the Neapolitan war was opposed to his
expressed desire for universal peace. Italy hesitated to grant
him the supplies which he demanded. Europe saw in the Con
gress of. Mantua a series of negotiations on matters which
PIUS II. AND HUNGARY. 457
concerned the Papal interests. When Pius sojourned at ease in CHAP.
his beloved Siena, men said that the whole matter was merely ^J^l .
an excuse to enable the Pope to leave Eome .and enjoy a visit
to his native place. Few thought that the Pope was in earnest,
or that his future action would go beyond eloquent protestations
from time to time.
We have seen enough of the Pope's activity to feel that ^s^'n
there was some justification for those who judged that he had gary.
not the cause of a crusade so deeply at heart as to forego for its
sake any advantage to himself. He did not even interfere
decidedly in such matters as might have furthered it. Hun
gary had long been the bulwark of Christendom against the
Turk, and bravely had John Hunyadi defended it. On John's
death the Hungarian nobles took as their king his young son
Matthias Corvinus, in the hopes that they would find him a
powerless ruler under whom they might pursue their own
interests. When the young Matthias displayed the same
resolute disposition as his father, they began to pay more heed
to the claims on Hungary of the Emperor Frederick, whom
in February 1459 the discontented party solemnly elected as
their king. Here was a matter which clearly demanded the
Pope's • intervention as a mediator. The internal peace of
Hungary was of vital importance to Christendom, was of prime
necessity if the Turk was to be held at bay. But Pius II. saw
the political difficulties in the way of quarrelling with the
Emperor ; the interests of Christendom could not outweigh in
his mind the advantages to be gained by the Curia through its
Imperial ally. Pius II. could not bring himself to act with
decision : he received the obedience of Matthias and called him
king on the principle, which he wished to be allowed to apply
to Naples, of recognising things as they were. Beyond this he
assumed an attitude of impartial neutrality, and kindly offered
to judge the rival claims if they were submitted to his decision.
Whatever other steps might be taken with advantage, there
could be no doubt of the need of supplying Matthias with
money to enable him to war against the Turks. Pius II. had
much good advice to give and many expressions of sympathy ;
but all the urgency of Carvajal, who was legate in Hungary,
could not obtain supplies that were of any purpose.
Still Pius II. had undertaken the cause of the crusade, and
458
THE PAPAL EESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Impos-
torous
embassy
from the
East. 1461.
however much he might pursue more immediate objects, he
did not entirely forget it. Some of the things that befell him
as advocate for the Christian cause are ludicrous enough. A
Franciscan Friar, Ludovico of Bologna, had gone to the East
in the days of Calixtus III. and brought back reports of
Christians in Persia who were ready to submit to the Pope, and
join an alliance against the Sultan. Soon after the return of
Pius II. to Rome from the Congre ss of Mantua, Fra Ludovico
appeared, bringing with him envoys from potentates of the
East, the Emperor of Trapezus, the King of Persia, the King of
Mesopotamia, the Duke of Greater Iberia, and the Lord of
Armenia Minor. They had come through Scythia over the
Don and the Danube, through Hungary to Germany, where
they had been welcomed by the Empero r ; thence they had passed
through Venice to Rome. They were received with honour
as royal ambassadors, and had quarters and food assigned to
them, — which was indeed necessary, as some could eat as much
as twenty pounds of meat a day. When admit ted to an audience
they set forth, through Fra Ludovico as interpreter, that their
kings had heard from him of the Congress of Mantua, and were
willing to attack the Turks in Asia, while the Christians at
tacked them in Europe ; for this purpose they would raise an
army of 120,000 men ; they begged the Pope to make Ludovico
Patriarch of the Eastern Christians. The Pope assented to
their request, and offered to pay the expenses of their journey to
the Courts of France and Burgundy, on whose co-operation the
proceedings in Europe mainly depended. They were coldly
listened to in France and Burgundy ; but no doubt they passed
the time pleasantly. Meanwhile the Pope began to suspect
Fra Ludovico, and on his return to Rome threatened to imprison
him for having styled himself Patriarch on his travels, without
having received consecration. He was, however, allowed to
depart for his companions' sake. At Venice he prevailed on
some unwary bishops to ordain him priest and patriarch.
When Pius II. heard this, he wrote to the Patriarch of Venice
to imprison the impostor ; but Ludovico was warned by the
Doge, and made his escape. It was a cruel imposture, and was
by no means the only one of which the Pope had to complain.1
1 Pius II. tells us about this embass}r in Comm. 127. Cornelius Zantniet,
Ch-nmieum, in Martene and Durand, Amp. Coll. v. 502, gives an account of
it in Germany, and Du Clercq, Bk. IV. ch. xxvii., in Burgundy.
LETTER OF PIUS II. TO THE SULTAN. 459
Still more extraordinary than this pretended embassy is the CHAP.
fact that Pius II. actually attempted to convert the Sultan by
his eloquence. As rhetoric was the only contribution to a
crusade which the Pope saw his way towards making, he seems to the
to have resolved to try its effect to the uttermost. It is a
strong testimony to the tolerant spirit of the Turks that stories
were rife of the Sultan's willingness to listen to Christian
teaching. It is no less characteristic of the temper of the early
Kenaissance that Pius II. should have thought that all sub
jects admitted of reasonable discussion. He wrote a long letter
to the Sultan pointing out the advantages that would follow
from his acceptance of Christianity. Already the spread of
the Turkish arms had led Cardinal Cusa to write an elaborate
examination of the Koran, from which Pius II. borrowed many
of his theological arguments. His letter dwelt first upon
the horrors of war, and his desire to avert them ; he does not
hate the Sultan, though his foe, but rather wishes him well.
The conquest of Europe is not like that of Asia ; it is impossible
to the Turkish forces ; yet Mahomet may obtain all the glory
that he wishes without bloodshed, by means simply of the little
water needed for baptism. If he accepted that, the Pope would
recognise him as Emperor of Asia and of Greece ; what he now
possessed by violence would become lawfully his : by this means,
and by this only, might the golden age be brought back to the
world. The Sultan might object that the Turks would refuse
to follow him if he abandoned his religion. The Pope reassured
him by the examples of Clovis and Constantine. How great is
the glory that he might so attain ! All literature, Latin, Greek,
and Barbarian alike, would extol his name. More than this, he
would gain the heavenly promise, and would be able to add to the
virtues of a philosopher the three theological virtues of faith,
hope, and charity, without which no man can be perfect. The
Pope then unfolded to him the Christian scheme and discussed
the points in which it differs from the Koran ; he expatiated on
the superiority of the law of Christ over that of Mahomet, and
again exhorted the Sultan to consult his own interests, both here
and hereafter, by accepting Christian baptism.1
The letter forms a bulky pamphlet, and is written with
1 In Raynaldus, 1461, 44, &c. Pii II. Epistolce (ed. Basil), No. 396.
There is no date given to this letter, but perhaps it may be assigned to the
end of 1461.
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
great spirit and clearness : it abounds in historical allusions and
quotations from classical poets and philosophers. It is to be
regretted that we have no answer from the Sultan, nor do we
read that any was returned. Still the Pope's letter was widely
read in Europe, and produced a great effect on the imagination
of Christendom. From this time forward forgeries of a similar
correspondence formed part of the vast store of literature which
gathered round the Turkish war.
While Europe was engaged in quarrelling, and the Pope
was busy writing, the Turks pursued their conquests. The
Morea fell into their hands, as did Rhodes, Cyprus, Lesbos, and
the chief islands of the ^Egean ; Scanderbeg, in Albania, was
driven to make peace, and Bosnia fell before the Turks' arms.
Pius II. was stirred to action, and in March 1462 he summoned
six Cardinals to a private meeting, and to them unfolded his
schemes. ' You think, perhaps, my brothers,' he said, ' as all
the world does, that we think nought of the general interest,
because since our departure from Mantua we have made no
preparations, and uttered no words about the crusade, though
day by day the foe presses nearer. We have, indeed, been
silent and have done nothing ; but it was through lack of
power, not through lack of will. We have often thought what
could be done for Christendom. We have passed many sleep
less nights, tossing from side to side, and were ashamed of our
inaction. Our bosom swelled, our old blood boiled. To pro
claim war by ourselves is useless, for the Holy See cannot,
with its own resources, wage a war against the Turk ; we need
the help of the princes of Christendom. We considered all
possible means to obtain this, but none seemed fitting. If we
think of a Congress, the experience of Mantua shows that it is
vain. If we send legates, they are mocked. If we impose
tithes on the clergy, an appeal is made to a future Council. If
we promulgate indulgences, we are accused of avarice ; every
one thinks that it is done to scrape up money ; no one believes
our words. Like bankrupt merchants we have lost all credit.
Whatever we do is construed for the worse ; everyone measures
our character by his own. We turn our mind's eye everywhere
and find nothing firm. Meditating day and night, we have hit
upon one remedy, perhaps the only one, certainly the most
efficacious.' Then the Pope went on to unfold his scheme.
PAPAL PLAN FOE A CKUSADE. 461
Philip of Burgundy had vowed to go on the crusade if some CHAP.
other prince did so ; he was bound by a solemn oath, which he IX- _,
would not venture to set aside. Old as he was, the Pope would
offer to set out himself; Philip could not refuse to accompany
one who was both Pope and King, — one who was greater than
King or Emperor. If Burgundy set out, France would, for very
shame, send some forces, and so would the other powers of
Europe. It was, however, useless to propose this till Venice
would provide a fleet. Venice must first be sounded, then
France and Burgundy. When they agreed, the Pope would
proclaim a European truce for five years, call on the clergy for
subsidies, under pain of excommunication, and by indulgences
raise money from the laity. 4 The noise of our plan,' he added,
* will come like a crash of thunder, and rouse the minds of the
faithful to the defence of their religion.' l
The Cardinals heard the Pope's plan with amazement, and Answer of
asked for some days to deliberate. All the difficulties that they J^? X
could raise were foreseen and answered by the Pope. They at
length pronounced the scheme worthy of the Vicar of Christ,
and Pius II. wrote at once to the Doge of Venice binding him
to secresy for the present. The Bishop of Ferrara was at the
same time sent to Louis XI. of France. But Louis was not on
such terms with the Pope as to look on his proposals with a
friendly eye. He regarded them as a blind to draw his
attention from the affairs of Naples ; and the only answer that
he would vouchsafe was, that he purposed sending an envoy to
the Pope who would treat about Naples and the crusade
together. Meanwhile, he added, he had on hand the business
of restoring to his throne Henry VI. of England, which he
hoped to do within a year. ' I will give you four years more
for that,' said the legate, as he took his leave.2
On arriving at Brussels the Bishop of Ferrara found Philip Zeal of the
of Burgundy dangerously ill of a fever. Philip had shown great Burgundy,
lukewarmness at Mantua, and had been busied since then in 1462-
attempting to consolidate the Burgundian dominions by obtain
ing from the Emperor the title of King, and so reviving the
old middle kingdom of Lotharingia. But illness awoke
again the old man's zeal for the holy cause. The Bishop of
Ferrara was admitted to an audience of the Duke, who was in
1 Pii II. C wnentarii, 189-91. '-' Comment. 221.
BOOK
IV.
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
bed. When he heard the Pope's letter he exclaimed, *I
thought that the fever would conquer and would carry rne off ;
but you have brought me health by your message. Death
seemed to me hard, because I would leave my father's captivity
unavenged on the Turks. Now I will live to avenge my father
and benefit Christendom.' He began at once to arrange details
with his counsellors, and promised to send an envoy to the
Pope in October.1 Difficulties, however, arose with France.
Louis XI. summoned the Duke of Burgundy as his vassal to
aid in an expedition against England, and a rebellion of the
Liegois against their Bishop occupied the Duke's attention. As
he recovered his health, the crusade was again forgotten, and a
Papal nuncio, sent in the spring of 1463 to remind the Duke
of his promises, found him engaged in festivals, dances, and
sports. His counsellors were all opposed to the crusade as
both chimerical and dangerous, and they threw all possible
hindrances in the way of its accomplishment. Suddenly the
Duke took ill and became unconscious ; his life was for a time
despaired of ; but he recovered, and with his recovery his good
intentions returned. The Papal envoy was dismissed with a
new promise that representatives of Burgundy would be at
Rome on August 15.
Perhaps an additional stimulus was given to the determina
tion of Pius II. by a discovery which materially increased the
Papal revenues. Ah Italian merchant who had been driven
from Constantinople by the Turks, and who had experience of
the alum works of Asia Minor, discovered alum in the barren
hills of Tolfa, not far from Civita Vecchia. At first Pius II.
was incredulous ; but the discoverer brought workmen from
Grenoa and established the truth of his surmise. The alum was
speedily worked, and proved to be of excellent quality. In
April 1463 Pius II. informed all the faithful of the com
passion of Heaven in depriving the unbelievers of the revenues
which they obtained from Christians by the sale of alum, which
the Holy See was now prepared to supply ; he warned them no
longer to buy from the Turks.2 The alum mines of Tolfa were,
indeed, as profitable to the Pope as was the year of jubilee,
and are said to have yielded a revenue of 100,000 ducats.
1 Comment. 231.
2 Bull in Raynaldus, 1463, No. 84.
See also Pii IT. Com, 185.
CONGRESS AT ROME. 463
The first practical step towards opposing the Turks was the CHAP.
establishment of peace between Frederick III. and Matthias of ^ IX>
Hungary, a task which the Pope took earnestly in hand in Pacifica-
the spring of 1463. It required two Papal legates to arrange Hungary.
the terms ; but at last peace was made in July. Matthias 1463>
was recognised as king, on condition of paying the Emperor
80,000 ducats and submitting to a rectification of frontier;
in case Matthias died childless, Hungary was to go to the Em
peror's second son. When Hungary was thus freed from in
ternal troubles, Matthias found no further difficulty in making
an alliance with Venice, which had always shown more readi
ness to help Hungary than had the Pope. Venice was by this
time thoroughly alarmed at the losses which the progress of
the Turk was inflicting on her commerce, and on September 1 2
signed an alliance with Hungary for war against the Turks.
Meanwhile the Burgundian envoys found Pius II. at Tivoli, and
brought him the assurance of their master's zeal. The Pope
set out for Eome, where he arrived on September 9, ready to wel
come the Italian envoys whom he had summoned to consultation.
The Congress at Eome was not so full as had been the Congress
of Mantua ; but it was more in earnest. The Bishop of Tournay,
on the part of the Duke of Burgundy, promised 6,000 men in
the spring ; the Duke himself would lead them if his health
allowed. Pius II. then asked the Italian envoys for money,
according to the Mantuan decree ; but all, save Venice, declared
that they had no powers for the purpose, and must consult their
States. The Florentine envoy privately approached the Pope
and warned him that this war would be for the sole benefit of
Venice, which, if the Turks were overcome, would turn its
hand to the subjugation of Italy ; it would be wise to leave the
Venetians and the Turks to weaken one another. Pius II.
rejected this policy as shortsighted and unworthy of a Christian
people, and the envoy referred the Pope's opinion to the
Florentine Government.
While awaiting the return of the Italian envoys, Pius II. Speech of
judged it well to arrange matters with the Cardinals. He J^tE*1"
knew that his plan was opposed by the French party in the Cardinals.
.,, /, , r i September
College, and was not popular with those who preferred a quiet i46y.
life at Eome to a dangerous expedition abroad. Calling a
Consistory, the P^pe addressed the Cardinals. For six years, he
64 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK said, he had sat on the Papal seat, and the policy which by the
__^^. advice of the Cardinals he had initiated at Mantua was yet
unfulfilled: he had been most desirous to carry it out, but
troubles at home prevented him. c We were bound either to
give up Eome or fight against the French, who, despising our
commands, contrary to all law occupied the kingdom of Naples
and attacked our vassals. We fought for Christ when we
defended Ferrante ; we warred against the Turks when we smote
the lands of Malatesta. At last victory has crowned the Papal
arms, and Italy is at peace ; at last the time has come for
action. " But what," it will be asked, " can you do in war : an
old man, a priest, a martyr to a thousand ailments ? What use
are the Cardinals in a camp? They spent their youth in
pleasure ; will you starve their old age with war ? Better stay
at home with your Cardinals, and send your fleet and your
money to the Hungarians." It would be sound advice if we had
any money ; but our treasury is exhausted. Our revenues never
exceed 300,000 ducats, and half of that sum is required for the
necessary expenses of the Papal rule. The Turkish war would
need 1,000,000 ducats yearly for three years at least. You
will say : " If so much is required for the war, what hopes have
you of obtaining it before you start ? " We answer : " The war is
necessary : if we do not undertake it we should be deservedly
infamous." Money is hard to raise, for the people do not trust
us. They say that we live in pleasure, amass money, follow our
ambition, have fatter mules and better horses than other folk,
make broad the hems of our garments, walk through the
city with cheeks puffed out beneath a red hat, keep dogs for
hunting, give much to actors and parasites, nothing for the
defence of the faith. These charges are not altogether false ;
there are many among the Cardinals and other members of the
Curia of whom this is true. There is too much pride and
luxury in the Curia ; so that when we speak the truth to the
people we are so hated that we are not heard. What, then, is
to be done ? Abstinence, chastity, zeal for the faith, religious
fervour, the desire for martyrdom, these made the Eoman Church
pre-eminent over the world. We must imitate our predecessors
and show that we are willing to sacrifice our lives for the pre
servation of the flock committed to our charge. Our purpose is
to go to war against the Turks, and invite the princes of
SPEECH OF PIUS II. TO HIS CARDINALS. 465
Christendom to follow. Perchance when they see their master, CHAP.
the Vicar of Jesus Christ, though old and sick, advancing to the . IX'
war, they will feel ashamed to stay at home. If this way does
not rouse Christians to arms, we know no other. We know that
we are going to meet certain death, but that does not deter us.
We commit all to Grod, and will die happy if we end our days in
His service.
4 You, too, who advised us to begin the war against the Turks,
cannot remain at home at ease. The members must follow
their head ; and what we do is done of necessity. We do not
go to fight ; but will imitate Moses, who, when Israel fought
against Amalek, prayed on the mountain. We will stand on our
ship's prow, or on some hilltop, and having before our eyes
the holy Eucharist, will ask from Jesus Christ safety and
victory for our soldiers in the battle.1 (rod will not despise a
contrite heart. You will be with us, and will join your prayers
with ours ; the old only will be left behind.' Then the Pope
explained that he would leave in Kome two legates, one for
temporal and the other for spiritual affairs, and would make
provisions for the discharge of the ordinary business of the
Curia. The nephew Antonio, with 3,000 horse and 2,000 foot,
would provide for the safety of the States of the Church.1
The Pope's voice was often broken by tears, in which the
Cardinals also joined. When called upon to give their opinions,
no one save the Cardinal of Arras spoke very decidedly against
the scheme. Though the French party was opposed to it, even
Estouteville did not raise any insuperable objections. Cardinal
Erolo, though he was one of the six whom the Pope had first
consulted, raised some objections, 'to show himself cleverer
than anyone else,' says the Pope. The objections were, however,
overcome, except in the case of the Cardinal of Arras, who
left Eome and returned to France.
The Italian envoys soon returned with their answers to the Congress
Pope's request for money. Ferrante of Naples, the Duke of October6'
Milan, the Marquis of Modena, the Marquis of Mantua, the 1463-
cities of Bologna and Lucca, all assented. Some states, how
ever, held aloof. Genoa was too busy with her own factions
1 In Pii II. Comm. 336, &c. ; but the Pope there omits the severer part of
the accusations against the clergy which are in Mansi, Pii II. Orationes, ii.
168.
VOL. II, H H
466 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK to pay any heed to general matters ; the Duke of Savoy and
_ IV' . the Marquis of Monteferrate also sent no representatives. The
Florentines refused to take any part till they had had time to
withdraw their merchants from Constantinople. The Sienese,
to the indignation of the Pope, pleaded poverty, and offered the
paltry sum of 3,000 ducats, which they afterwards increased to
10,000. Pius II. wrote most pressingly to the Duke of Milan,
urging him to come in person and assume the command of
the Papal forces. The letter of the Pope was a masterpiece
of persuasive eloquence ; the answer of the Duke was similarly
a masterpiece of courteous prevarication. He deplored the
woes of Christendom, professed his firm resolve to war against
the Turk, his confidence in the Pope, and his desire to do
everything that he required ; but he added that his health was
not yet restored, that the time allowed for preparation was
not quite adequate, that the undertaking was difficult and
needed careful measures.1 The Pope understood that he was
not coming in person, and soon learned that 3,000 men was all
the contingent which he proposed to send.
On October 22 was held a public consistory in which was
read the Pope's Bull proclaiming a crusade. Pius II. recounted
all his efforts for the holy cause, proclaimed his zeal, combated
objections, called on all to help, and promised indulgences
to those who either came in person or contributed their sub
stance.2 The Bull took two hours to read, and the Pope was
gratified with the effect which it produced. ;The sweetness
of the composition, the novelty of the thing itself, and the
readiness of the Pope offering his life for his sheep, drew tears
from many bystanders.' 3 The Bishop of Tournay, on behalf of
the Burgundians, warmly thanked the Pope for his zeal. But
the Romans were touched by no sentimental enthusiasm for
the weal of Christendom ; they only saw that the Pope was
going to leave Rome, and they feared that the hope of their
gains was gone. Pius II. answered their loud murmurs by the
assurance that the officials of the Curia would be left behind.
1 The Pope's letter is in Mansi, Orationes, iii. 103 ; Sforza's answer in
Pii II. Epistola (ed. Basel), 393.
2 The Bull 'Ezechielis prophets' is No. 412 in Pii 77. Epistolce (ed.
Basel).
3 Pii IT. Comment. 344,
PREPAEATIONS FOR THE CRUSADE. 467
Then, racked with gout, till he could scarce restrain himself CHAP.
from showing his anguish, he was carried to his bed. . _ T • _ .
A few days before Pius II. had signed an alliance with Venice pP1? "J6 of
and Hungary, by wrhich they bound themselves to carry on the with
f AiT -.f j r XT >- Venice and
war for three years if necessary, and no one of the contracting
powers was to withdraw without the rest. The Pope promised
that, on the arrival of Philip of Burgundy in Italy, he would set
out with him for Greece. Hungary and Venice were already
engaged in warring against the Turk. Matthias invaded Bosnia
with some success, and the Venetians sent a fleet to the Morea
which rose against the Turkish yoke : Lemnos and several islands
fell into the hands of the Venetians. Cardinal Bessarion was
sent by the Pope to Venice, and enjoyed a success such as
had never yet befallen him. He was received in state by the
Doge on the 6 Bucentaur,' and preached the crusade to a people
already convinced. A box was placed in the Piazza to receive
the contributions of the faithful, and was soon found to contain
700,000 ducats. Pius II. wrote to the Doge, Cristoforo Moro,
urging him to come in person to the war, and join the Pope and
Philip of Burgundy ; if he appeared in ducal array on board the
' Bucentaur,' not Greece only but Asia and all the East would
be terrified. ' We shall be three old men,' he says, ' and God
rejoices in trinity. Our trinity will be aided by the Trinity of
Heaven, and our foes will be trampled under our feet.' ! The
Great Council of Venice voted almost unanimously that the
Doge should go ; when the Doge, a few days afterwards, tried to
excuse himself on the ground of age and incapacity before the
Collegio, he was told by one of the Council, < If your highness
will not go of goodwill, we will make you go by force, since the
honour and welfare of this land is dearer to us than your person.'
The Doge answered that if the land wished it he was content.2
Before the end of the year news came that the Turks had forced
the wall which guarded the entrance to the Peloponnesus, and
had driven out the Venetians. This news did not affect the zeal
of Venice, which prepared at once to send out reinforcements ; but
it gave Philip of Burgundy an opportunity to write to the Pope
1 Malipiero, Annali Veneti, in Archive Storico Italiano (prima serie), vol.
vii. pt. i. p. 18.
2 Sanudo in Muratori, xxii. 1174.
H H 2
468 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK and urge a delay in the expedition to enable Venice to recover
. IV> . her strength. Pius II. refused to accede to this request ; 1 he
had written, he said, throughout Europe, and must not now
delay. In truth, the Pope's legates were busy in almost every
land : everywhere they were received with enthusiasm by the
people, everywhere they received from the princes fair words
enough, but no definite promises of help.2
Political It soon became obvious that the political intrigues of
Italy!81 Europe were throwing hindrances in the way even of the
accomplishment of such promises as the Pope had received.
First of all, Italy received a shock which deeply stirred men's
minds, by the news that Louis XI. of France had made an
alliance with the Duke of Milan, and had invested him with
Grenoa and Savona. We have seen that Florence looked with
jealous eyes on the crusading project as likely to increase the
power of Venice ; she entered into a close alliance with Milan
for their mutual protection, and did her utmost to reconcile
Francesco Sforza with Louis XI. of France.3 Louis XI. was
embarrassed with the possession of Savona, in which the
French garrison was entirely useless since the loss of Grenoa
to the French. He was not indisposed to rid himself of
an incumbrance, and in doing so to gain an ally in North
Italy. The Neapolitan war had taught him the power of
Sforza, and Louis XI. had a genuine admiration for a man
whose success had been so brilliant. In February 1464 Savona
was given up to the Milanese, and the Italian Powers were
astonished by a notification from Louis XI. that he had made
over to the Duke of Milan his rights over Grenoa.
This news filled Italy with alarm. It was clearly a blow
aimed by Florence and Milan against Venice. The Duke of
Modena feared this increase of the power of Milan ; Lucca and
Siena were afraid of the designs of Florence ; Ferrante of
Naples thought himself betrayed to the French by his former
ally. Sforza tried to restore confidence by protesting that he
had entered into no engagements which could disturb the
peace of Italy ; by taking Grenoa into his power he had re-
1 Raynaldus, 1464, 4, &c.
2 See Book XIII. of Pii II. Commentarii, published by Voigt, JEneas
Sylrhis, ii. 360, &c., from the hitherto unedited MS.
3 See Buser, Die Bezielmnyen der Medicaer zn Frankreich, p. 101, &c.
POLITICAL DISTUEBANCES. 469
moved the only ground for French interference in Italian
affairs. The Archbishop of Genoa, Paolo Fregoso, who was at
the head of the government of the city, clamoured for help
against Sforza ; but Pius II. advised him to submit rather than
hinder the war against the Turks. The archbishop fled, and
Sforza advanced against the city. It was at all events clear
that neither Milan nor Genoa would send any forces to the
crusade.
From Burgundy also the Pope received doubtful news. Troubles in
Duke Philip was not on good terms with his son Charles, who UQJ™ y'
had left his court and gone to Holland. If Philip went to the
TurkisTi war, Charles would naturally be regent during his
absence, and this prospect was very distasteful to a strong
party headed by the powerful family of the Croy. They
strove to increase the feud between the Duke and his son so
as to keep Philip at home. Philip, however, was resolute.
Charles returned, and was reconciled to his father. Next the
Croy represented to the Duke the dangers which might befall
his land if he departed before the war between France and
England was at an end ; they besought him to remain, at least
till a truce was arranged. Louis XI. joined his entreaties to
the same purpose ; if a truce were made with England France
could join in the Crusade with Burgundy. The Duke wavered,
and asked the Pope to defer the expedition for the purpose of
this pacification. Pius II. knew that delay meant entire failure,
and refused. Then the Croy managed to bring about an inter
view between Louis XI. and the Duke at Lille in February
1464. Louis XL repeated his desire that the Duke should stay
till France was at peace with England : neither Venice nor the
Pope was ready; in a year's time he would send 10,000 men
to the Turkish war. When the Duke pleaded his promise,
Louis XL ordered him as his vassal to remain at home, and
handed him a written injunction to obey. The Duke gave
way, and announced to his people the King's commands : next
year he would himself go against the Turk ; meanwhile, not to
disappoint the Pope, he would send his illegitimate son, the
Bastard of Burgundy, with 2,000 men. The tower, says Pius II.,
fell at last before the repeated strokes of the battering-ram ,
and the Croy triumphed.1
1 Pii II. Commentarii, Book XIII., in Voigt, ii. 369, &c.
470 THE PAPAL KESTORATION.
BOOK Pius II. had left Rome in February to recruit his health at
^_ *y~ _^ the baths of Petrioli, and stayed at Siena during the month of
Persistency March. On Thursday in Holy Week, the day on which excom
munications were published, the Pope anathematised all heretics
and all, even kings, who strove to hinder the crusade. The
anathema was aimed at those who were shaking the constancy
of the Duke of Burgundy ; but Pius II. soon found that it had
been delivered too late. On Good Friday, March 30, he re
ceived the letter of the Duke of Burgundy, * worthy,' he says,
6 of being read on the day of the Lord's Passion.' Yet Pius II.
was not entirely unprepared for the blow ; he had already con
sulted with eight Cardinals, who were present, what course he
should adopt in case Philip refused to go. They were unani
mous in their opinion that, though the Pope was in that case
released from his engagement, he should solemnly renew it.
This was also his opinion ; and he communicated his resolution
as a decree to the absent Cardinals, who murmured at his
obstinacy.
Pius II. Pius II. was resolute in his determination in spite of all
George of hindrances. Yet we cannot assign this resolution solely to
Bohemia. zea| for ^ie gOO(j of Christendom ; there was mixed with it
also a motive of utility for the interests of the Papacy. There
was still a power in Europe which stood opposed to the Pope,
and whose activity threatened danger. George of Bohemia
was a formidable foe, and had devised a scheme which might
lead to serious results if it were not baffled, Pius II. had
brought to an issue the question of the relations between
Bohemia and the Holy See. Greorge must either alienate the
majority of his people by submitting to the Pope's demands,
or must expose himself, by refusing, to the hostility of a deter
mined minority who looked for help outside Bohemia. The aim of
George was to pacify Bohemia on the basis of toleration offered
by the Compacts, and weld it into a powerful kingdom. The
Pope was keenly alive to the danger which might ensue if
a power at variance with the authority of the Church became
predominant in Germany. Pius II. and George were equally
convinced of the magnitude of the issue at stake. Each was
equally resolute and equally far-seeing ; but the Pope had the
advantage of being able to choose his time for the attack.
George met it by attempting to inaugurate a new policy in
SCHEME OF GEORGE OF BOHEMIA. 471
European affairs. He had first hoped to cope with the Papacy CHAP.
by possessing himself of the Empire ; when that failed, he . l*'- .
stayed the Pope's hand by binding the Emperor to his cause
by conferring benefits upon him. This could only be a tem
porary check ; he tried to find a permanent one in the esta
blishment of a confederation of European States against the
Papal aggression. According to his scheme the States of
Christendom were to take back again into their hands the
supremacy in matters temporal and spiritual which they had
been content to delegate to the Emperor and the Pope; a
Council of European States was to regulate the international
relations of Christendom.
The agent of George in this matter was Anton Marini, a George's
knight of Grenoble, who in August 1462 proposed to Venice a parliament
league between France, Bohemia, Poland, Hungary, Burgundy,
and Saxony, for war against the Turk. Venice replied that princes.
notwithstanding Marini's arguments the Pope's co-operation
was necessary ; for the presence of the head of Christendom
was of great weight in such a plan.1 Louis XL, in his
anger against the Pope, listened to Marini's proposals, and sent
him back to Venice with an expression of his readiness to join
such a league. Venice, now engaged in war against the Turks,
was ready to accept help from any side ; and the league of the
Pope with Venice and Hungary was no doubt hastened by a
desire to cut away the ground from Marini's feet. The crusade
of the Pope was in part an appeal to the sympathies of Europe
to defeat the machinations of the Bohemian King. He could
not shrink from it without giving a dangerous handle to his
foe. In March 1464 Marini was at the Court of Hungary,
offering Matthias a league against the Turks and a Council of
European Powers to promote the peace and welfare of Chris
tendom ; in June he was at the Court of Louis XL In the
face of such activity Pius II. could not retreat from his
engagement.
Pius IL, however, though determined to proceed on his ex- Prepara-
pedition, had neither the physical vigour nor the qualities requi-
site for the organisation of such a scheme. Money came in sade-
slowly from Italy, and the Burgundian envoys at Rome saw little
to impress them with a sense of military stir ; they reported
1 Palacky, Urkututtieke .BeMrtige, p. 290.
472
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Citation of
George of
Bohemia.
June 6,
1464.
Departure
of Pius II.
on his
crusade.
June 18,
1464.
that it was the poorest preparation they had ever seen, and that
two galleys only were ready.1 The Pope vaguely trusted that
soldiers would flock from different parts of Europe, prepared to
serve for at least six months at their own expense, and that the
Venetians would give them convoys. The crusade was preached
with zeal throughout Europe by the friars ; but they were
scarcely to be trusted to arrange in an intelligible shape definite
instructions to the crusaders. Many flocked to Venice before
the time, and met only with scoffs when they had not money to
pay their passage. The clear-sighted Venetians did not want
enthusiasm but capacity on the part of those engaged in the
enterprise. Their cruelty was published throughout Europe ;
but wiser heads thought that they had exercised a justifiable
discretion.2 Many crusaders returned with disappointed hopes :
many died of hunger and pestilence ; many came to Rome or
Ancona, and found no signs of preparation.
Pius II. returned to Rome early in May to prepare for
his departure. Before going he aimed a blow at George of
Bohemia, whom in a Consistory on June 1 6 he cited to appear in
Rome within 180 days to answer to the many charges against
him. Pacific as he might now feel towards other Powers,
Pius II. could make no truce with Bohemia. The beginning
of his crusade was to him an earnest of his triumph over the
heretical king. The time had come to lay the axe to the root
of the tree that had threatened to overshadow the Holy See
with its branches.
On June 18 he took the cross in S. Peter's, and after re
peating his conviction of the necessity of his undertaking and
deploring the hindrances which it had suffered, he prayed before
the high altar and then set out in his litter accompanied by
all the prelates. At Ponte Molle he took leave of them, and
attended by the Cardinal of Pavia, the Bishops of Torcello,
Tiferno, and Camertino, his secretary Groro Lolli, and his nephew
Andrea, embarked on a barge on the Tiber. This method of
1 Chastellain, ed. Buchon, part iii. cli. xxi. : ' Selon lenr rapport c'estoit la
plus povre disposition qu'ils veirent oncques ; et n'avoit en tout le monde,
pour celle heure, que deux gallees.'
2 Chastellain, ch. xx. : < Les Venetiens, qui sages gens sont et cler voians,
firent mieux de veer le passage & tel monde de gens inutiles que de leur
ouvrir ; car ne soulit point en tel cas d'avoir les gens, mes il convient avoir le
sens et le povoir pour fa ire effect.'
PIUS AT ANCONA. 473
conveyance was chosen to spare the Pope the fatigue of a land CHAP.
journey ; he was already suffering from a slight fever, but for- „ l*- .
bade his physicians to mention it. The first night was spent by
the Pope on the barge, as he was too weary to quit it. Navi
gation was difficult up the stream, and on the second night he
had only advanced to Fiano. On the third day the Pope was
grievously distressed by an accident which befell one of the
rowers who fell into the river and was drowned before his eyes.
Pius II. lay silent and with tears prayed for his soul. Cardinal
Carvajal came to him from Kome with the news that a crowd of
crusaders were assembled at Ancona vainly seeking for means
of transport ; the authorities of the city were afraid of a tumult
and besought the Pope to take means to prevent it. Pius II.
besought Carvajal in spite of his seventy years to undertake this
difficult task, and the brave old man, already broken by his
many labours, answered, ' My motto is, Gro and I go : I cannot
refuse to Christ's service the end of my life.' Next morning he
set off for Ancona.
The Pope proceeded up the Tiber as far as Otricoli, whence Pius n.
he was carried in a litter by easy stages to Spoleto. There the JSSSaf*
Cardinal of Pavia was seized with a fever and had to be left ^ly 18,
behind. Already the Pope was distressed by the sight of
crusaders returning from Ancona ; to hide from his eyes this
melancholy sight, the physicians pretended that the wind was
injurious to him and closed the curtains of his litter. Slowly
he proceeded under the blazing heat of an Italian summer
through Foligno, Assissi, and Fabriano, across the Apennines to
Loreto ; there he offered a golden cup and bowl to the Virgin,
whose cottage had been borne by angels from Bethlehem to
its resting place on a hill by the Adriatic. Finally on July 18
he entered Ancona and took up his abode in the Bishop's palace,
on the hill by the church of S. Ciriaco.
The first question was how to deal with the crowd of cru- Pius II.
saders who disturbed the peace of the citizens of Ancona.
Pius II. had only asked for such as would serve for six months
at their own cost ; he found a miserable herd expecting him to
supply them with pay and food. As this was impossible, the
Pope rewarded their zeal by a plenary indulgence ; and they sold
their arms as a means of obtaining money to take them to their
homes. Those who could afford to do so remained in expecta-
4/4 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK tion of the Venetian ships which were to give them transport.
. ,: — ' Day by day they waited ; but the ships delayed. At last the
crusaders graduall '.dispersed, so that when the ships came
in sight there were no soldiers to embark. The Pope mean
while lay helpless and saw his hopes fade away. Messen
gers moreover arrived from Kagusa that the Turkish army had
advanced to the siege and demanded the immediate surrender
of its vessels. Pius II. called Carvajal to counsel. 'What
must be done,' he asked, ' if Kagusa is besieged ? ' 'I will go
to-night,' answered the intrepid old man, ' with the two galleys
that are in the harbour and will either break the siege or give
spirit to the disconsolate citizens.' 4 What hinders me from
sailing with you ? ' said the Pope, ' the knowledge of my pre
sence will either drive away the Turks or will incite Christendom
to follow with help.' Cardinal Ammannati, who had recovered
from his fever and had followed the Pope ; cried out against this
plan. £ I miserable,' he says, ' savouring of the flesh rather
than of the spirit, dissuaded him, not because I did not think
that what he proposed would succeed, but because I saw that to
his body wasted with fever the voyage would bring the end .'
Yet the Pope remained firm in his intentions ; and preparation s
were being made, when in four days the news was brought that
the Turks had retired from Eagusa.
Death of Pius II. was rapidly sinking ; the fever raged fiercely and the
August' 14, burning heat of the weather denied him any relief. The physi
cians said that he had but a few days to live, when at last on th e
morning of August 12 the Venetian fleet was seen in the offing.
The Pope roused himself and ordered his galleys to advance to
meet them. He was carried with difficulty to the window of
his chamber whence he could see the stately entry of the fleet
into the harbour. Next day he was too ill to receive a visit
from the Doge. The day after was the eve of the Assumption
of the Virgin, when it was customary for the Pope to appear at
Vespers. He could not go, but sent the Cardinals and after
wards summoned them to his bed. He told them that his last
hour was at hand ; he died in the faith of Christ and committed
to their hands the work which he had begun. He admonished
them to behave worthily of their high calling, and asked forgive
ness if he had offended them in aught. Finally, he commended
to their good offices his household and his relatives. The Car-
DEATH OF PIUS II.
dinals wept, and Bessarion as their spokesman said a few fare
well words and begged for his blessing. All kissed his hand in
tears, and he blessed them saying : ' May the Grod of pity pardon
you and confirm a right spirit within you ! ' Then he received
the sacrament, and arranged to receive it again next morning
from the hands of Cardinal Ammannati in special honour of the
Virgin. But as the sun went down Pius II. also began to sink.
He received supreme unction and was left alone with Cardinal
Ammannati, Goro Lolli, and his nephew Andrea. He talked a
little with Ammannati and again commended his nephews to his
care. Ammannati asked him if he wished to be buried at Eome.
4 Who will take care of that ? ' he answered with tears. When
Ammannati undertook to do so he seemed relieved. Again he
beckoned Ammannati to his bedside. ' Pray for me, my son,' he
said, ' for I am a sinner.' Then after a pause he added, ' Bid
my brethren continue this holy expedition and help it all you
can ; woe to you if you desert Grod's work.' Ammannati could not
speak for tears ; the Pope put his arm round his neck, and
said, < Do good, my son, and pray to Grod for me.' They were
the last wTords he spoke. He listened to the prayers that were
being read till his spirit passed away.1
Next day the corpse of Pius II. was borne into the Cathe
dral, and the funeral mass was said. Then the Cardinals
assembled in the palace, and the Doge of Venice in a long
speech bewailed the Pope's death, praised his zeal, and
besought the Cardinals to elect a worthy successor. The
Cardinals decided to show their good intentions by giving over
to the Doge the Papal galleys which lay in the harbour, on
condition that they should be restored to the new Pope if he
purposed undertaking the expedition in person. The money
which Pius II. left behind, 48,000 ducats, was sent by them to
Matthias of Hungary. Next day, August 1 6, the Doge sailed back
to Venice, and the crusade of Pius II. was at an end. The body
of the Pope was taken to Rome, and buried in S. Peter's, in
the chapel of S. Andrea ; thence it was transferred, when
1 The account of the last hours of Pius II. is given by Cardinal Ammannati,
Commentarii, 357-62, also in his letters, Nos. 41-57. Campanus adds a few
details, but Ammannati was an eyewitness and Campanus only knew by
hearsay. I have o^ly followed him for a few of the more personal remarks of
Pius II. which Ammannati might think it desirable to omit.
76 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK S. Peter's was restored by Paul V. in 1614, to the Church of
, ' _ • S. Andrea della Valle, where a monument was erected in his
honour.
Pius II. was lucky in the moment of his death. He left
behind him the touching memory of an old man who died in
the attempt to do his duty. When the princes of Europe were
heedless of the welfare of Christendom, the dying Pope pain
fully dragged his feeble body to martyrdom for the common
weal. It was well that he died when he did ; for his expedition
had no elements of success, and was already doomed to failure.
He died before its failure had become too manifest, before an
inevitable retreat exposed to ridicule the Papal prestige. He
died in time to bequeath to Christendom the memory of the
greatness of his undertaking, unblurred by any feeling of its
hopelessness. The feeling of his contemporaries is shown by a
coin struck in his honour, which bore the impress of a pelican
feeding its young with its own blood; underneath was the
inscription-
Ales ut hsec cordis pavi de sanguine natos .
Like this bird I feed my children with my heart's blood.1
Yet even at the last there were many who were incredulous of
the Pope's intentions. It was the doom of Pius II., even on his
deathbed, to be distrusted by those who could not forget his
previous career, who sought in all he did for some motive of
self-interest or vain display. The Venetians did not think
that he was in earnest. The Doge, on his arrival at Ancona,
regarded the Pope's illness as a feint, and sent his own
physician to see if it was real. He was of opinion that his
arrival was a disappointment to the Pope, who never intended
to go on the expedition, and hoped to escape by throwing the
blame on Venice.2 Filelfo was still more ill-natured. He
declared that Pius II. had gone to Ancona to seize the citadel,
and hand over the town to his nephew Andrea ; then he in
tended to sail to Kagusa and await quietly the result of the
Hungarian arms ; if they were defeated he would at one e
retreat, if • they succeeded he would go to Constantinople and
1 Vanuti, Numismata Pontificum Momanorum, p. 21.
2 Malipiero, p. 29 : ' El Papa senti gran dolor, perch^ ghe despi iseva anda r
in persona, e ghe despiaseva anche mancar della promessa.
DIFFEKENT OPINIONS ABOUT PIUS II. 477
seize it for a Piccolomini.1 The Milanese envoy did not
credit the Pope with any loftier pretensions ; he reported to
Sforza that, if Pius II. had lived, he meant to sail to Brindisi and
stay there during the winter, return to Rome in the spring,
and throw the blame of failure on the lukewarmness of the
princes of Christendom.2 A Brescian chronicler imputes to
him another design : he went to Ancona without any intention
of proceeding farther, simply in consequence of a secret under
standing with Florence and Milan for the purpose of seizing
Ancona, and handing it over to the Florentine republic.3 Italy
was so accustomed to look upon Pius II. as an astute diplomatist
that she could not credit him with purely disinterested
motives.
It is the fate of a character like Pius II. to lend itself to Different
different interpretations, and to remain enigmatical. One who JheTha-
has changed his opinions is always liable to the charge of insin- ™.cter of
cerity, which comes with double force when a policy of easy
pliancy raises him to a lofty position. Such a judgment, how
ever, is generally crude, and misses the real elements of
character. The distinguishing feature of Pius II. was his
readiness to learn from events. He equipped himself with
the panoply of the new learning, and went forth as a knight-
errant in quest of adventures. He had no prepossessions, no
prejudices, no definite opinions. His object was to make the
most of life, to learn from its experience, to win what it had to
give, to reap its successes, to adapt himself to its requirements.
^Eneas Sylvius was not an adventurer in the sense that he
intended to prey upon the world ; he was an explorer who
set out bravely upon the stormy sea of life, resolved to make
his voyage as prosperous as might be. He was ready to run
before the wind, to make for any haven which he could reach
with sails flying. His skill consisted in seeing how the wind
was likely to blow, and steering his course accordingly. He
cannot claim the praise of high resolve, 'of steady purpose, of
great design, or laborious achievement. He was not a man to
mould the world ; but he frankly offered himself for the world
to mould. He was not heroic; but he was not base. He
1 Letter of Filelfo to Paul II,, September 15, 1464.
2 Simoneta, in Mur. xxi. 764.
3 Cristoiuro da Soldo, ib. p. 900.
78 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK cannot fairly be accused of self-seeking, for self was in him the
1 , ' _^ product of the exigencies amongst which his lot was cast. He
was content to do the thing which needed to be done, and to
reap the fruits of his foresight in being the first to perceive its
necessity.
Many, we might say the majority, of politicians have little
better claims to respect than Pius II. ; but no man who rose to
such distinction has left behind him so complete a record of his
career. It is hard that Pius II. should be treated with con
tempt because he was a man of letters as well as a man of action,
because he has frankly told us his impressions of events as they
arose. We know his inconsistencies chiefly from his own con
fessions, while for those who have been more reserved about
themselves we are at liberty to frame an imaginary consistency.
The very frankness of Pius II. is a proof of his sincerity : he
did not wish to make himself out to be nobler than he was.
The record of his soul's progress might contain pages which he
wished to forget ; but he left all to the judgment of posterity,
with the consciousness that in the end the verdict formed on
the fullest knowledge would be the truest and most lenient.
He who fixes his attention upon a few passages of the life of
Pius II. tends to judge him with severity ; he who follows him
through his whole career forgives him much, and recognises a
steady growth in greatness and nobility. Weakness and strength
are strangely blended ; vanity and littleness mix with high
purpose and far-reaching plans ; but before the eyes of
Pius II. there floated fitfully a loftier ideal of Christendom
than was visible to any of his contemporaries, and juster views
than he was enabled to express in action.
It was the fate of Pius II. to reap the fruit of his early
inconsistencies. In 1440, while secretary of Felix V., he wrote
some dialogues in favour of the conciliar system, which he
sent to the University of Koln.1 During his Pontificate, a
quarrel arose between the burghers of Liege and their bishop ;
the bishop was upheld by the Pope, the burghers applied
to the University of Koln, which used the authority of ^Eneas
Sylvius for an appeal to a better instructed Pope. This drew
from Pius II. a Bull addressed to the University, dated April 26,
1 They are printed in Kollar, Analecta Vindobonensia, ii. 685.
PITTS II.'S BULL OF RETRACTATION. 479
1463, in which he gives his own defence of his early life.1 He
erred, he says, < but what mortal does not err ? Who is wise
save the good ; who is good save (rod alone ? We walked
in darkness ; we erred not to ourselves alone, but drew others
with us ; as blind leaders of the blind, wre fell with them into
the ditch. Our writings may have deceived many, whose
blood if God require at our hands, we can only, answer that as
men we sinned, and our hope is placed in God's mercy only.
Some would rather die than confess their error. Some go on in
their error, that they may keep the reputation of constancy, and
act with pride, wishing to seem gods rather than men, as did
Hus and Jerome, who were burned at Constance. We are men,
and confess that as men we sinned ; not, however, like Arius
and Nestorius, who deliberately chose the way that was con
demned ; we sinned like Paul, and ignorantly persecuted the
Church and the Holy See. We are ashamed of our error, we
repent of our writings and our deeds ; but we did more hurt by
writing than by deeds. What are we to do? The word once
written and sent forth speeds on irrevocable ; our writings are
not now in our power, they have fallen into many hands and
are generally read. Would that they were in obscurity, lest
they cause scandal in the future, lest men say, " He who wrote
this sat at length in S. Peter's seat." We fear lest the words
of JEneas be counted those of Pius.'
To avoid this, the Pope goes on to say, he will imitate the
example of S. Augustine, and make full confession of his short
comings. He professes his belief in the commission given by
Christ to S. Peter, in the supremacy of S. Peter's successors
over the Universal Chnrch. < If you find anything contrary to
this doctrine either in our Dialogues, or in our Letters, or in
our other works (for we wrote much in our youth), cast it forth
and contemn it. Follow what we now say : believe the old
man rather than the youth ; esteem not the layman higher
than the Pope ; reject ^Eneas, accept Pius ; the Gentile name
was given us by our parents at our birth, the Christian name
we took on our Pontificate. Perhaps some may say that our
1 He had done so previously, in 1447, in a letter to the Rector of the
University of Koln ; see supra p. 281-2. Fea's Pius II. a cahtmniis vindicates,
gives the completest version of this Bull, ' In minoribus agentes ; ' Raynaldus,
1463, 114, &c., givee -xtracts.
BOOK
IV.
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
opinion came to us with the Papacy, that our views were
changed by our dignity. It was not so ; far otherwise.'
Pius II. goes on to plead his youth and inexperience when
first he went to Basel. Great names supported the Council,
and he heard nothing save abuse of Eugenius IV. The Pope
himself at last recognised the Council, and when he attempted
to transfer it the claims of the Council were zealously put
forward. < We taught, therefore, what we heard, and after
some years, thinking we were somebody, we exclaimed with
Juvenal —
Semper ego auditor tantum, nunquamne reponam ? l
We were ashamed always to be a pupil ; we began to talk, and
occupy the teacher's place ; we wrote letters and pamphlets,
and, like all poets, loved our own children and were pleased
with the applause they won. When Cesarini and others left
Basel, we believed that they acted through fear of losing their
temporalities ; as we had none to lose, we boldly stayed, and
on the deposition of Eugenius IV. accepted Felix as the true
Vicar of Christ. But when Frederick, the future Emperor,
came to Basel and refused to treat Felix as Pope, then first we
began to think it possible that we were in error. As we
would not willingly err, we accepted his invitation to join his
household, and went over to the neutral side that we might
learn the truth. At the Court of Frederick we discovered the
falsity of much that had been said against Eugenius. In the
Diets of Germany we heard both sides, and the darkness at last
fell from our eyes ; we recognised our error, we went to Eome,
cast off the doctrines of Basel, submitted to Eugenius, and were
reconciled to the Koman Church. Not till after that did we
assume the priesthood. Such was our conversion, in which
Thomas of Sarzana, afterwards Pope Nicolas V., had the chief
share.'
Pius II. is frank enough in his confession, and probably
believed that he was actually frank. He might phrase it as he
chose, but men credited him solely with a capacity for floating
with the stream. His keen susceptibility to outward circum
stances and impressions was the secret of his greatness, and
was at the same time the source of his weakness. It brought
1 Still shall I hear and never quit the score ?
CHAKACTER OF PIUS II. 481
him to the highest earthly dignity ; but it robbed him of the CHAP.
strength to secure the lasting fame that his great gifts might > ^JL_ ^
otherwise have deserved. He aspired as Pope to be the leader
of Christendom ; but he had not the moral position to inspire
the confidence necessary for this task. His equivocal past rose
up against him at every turn, and the mental habits of his
early life prevented him from rising to the greatness after which
he longed. He could not resist the temptation of grasping the
advantage which he saw to be immediately attainable. Though
he saw clearly and declared resolutely that the expulsion of the
Turks from Europe was the first duty of Christendom, he had
not sufficient self-restraint to devote himself with singleness
of purpose to the task which he recognised as supreme. The
conquest of the States of the Church, the aggrandisement of
the Piccolomini, the restoration of the Papal prestige, the
abolition of the last spark of the conciliar spirit — these he pur
sued when a tempting opportunity offered, and did not trust
that if he was faithful to his first great duty, all else would
follow unsought. To him and to Nicolas V. alike culture, gave
largeness of mind and set a lofty imaginative ideal. But in
Nicolas V. the ideal subordinated to itself the strong practical
sense which he possessed:- he. swept away all obstacles from his
path, and devoted himself with unceasing energy to the one
object that he had in view. In Pius II. practical capacity was
led away into any field which offered a tempting opportunity for
its display ; the imaginative ideal remained imaginative to the
last. Pius II. 's energies were expended on a number of small
matters in which success was possible at the time, but little
result remained for the future. He grew conscious that fame
was slipping away from his grasp, and rallied his dying force to
give a faint expression to the aspirations which he really felt,
but was not strong enough to turn to shape.
Those who saw Pius II. close at hand were impressed by his Character
geniality, his mental quickness, and his unceasing energy in pjati!iay
spite of bodily infirmities. Platina has left us a finished picture and Canv
of the master whom he respected above all others whom he
served. ' Pius II.,' he. says, ' was a man of undoubted courage
and remarkable foresight, born not for ease and idleness, but
for conversance with great affairs. He so apportioned his
time that he could not be accused of slothfulness. He rose
VOL. II. I I
482 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK with the dawn, and after divine service at once engaged in
.._ l^' _< public business. Then he was carried through the gardens
for a little relaxation before breakfast. He was moderate in
his use of food, and did not care for delicacies : he was very
sparing of wine, which he drank greatly diluted. After break
fast he would talk for half an hour with his attendants,
then enter his chamber for rest and devotion : after that he
would read or write as long as his public duties permitted. After
dinner he did the same, and read or dictated till late at night,
lying in his bed ; he never slept more than five or six hours.
In appearance he was below middle height, slender in his youth,
but gaining flesh in old age. His eyes were cheerful, but
kindled easily with anger ; his head was prematurely bald.
His face was pallid, and fell with the slightest sign of illness.1
He was attacked almost every month by stone; he suffered
from gout, so that he had almost lost the use of his legs ; he
was also troubled by a cough. So severe were his sufferings
that often there seemed nothing but his voice to tell you that
he was alive. He had such command over himself that, while
racked with stone, he would continue a speech without giving
any sign of his pain except by biting his lips. He could endure
toil, hunger, thirst, and heat. He was always easy of access,
sparing of words, and unwilling to refuse a petition. He was
quick to anger, but quick to repress it. He readily pardoned
insolence unless it injured the Apostolic seat, whose dignity he
steadfastly upheld. Towards his household he was kind and
genial : those who erred through ignorance or sloth he ad
monished with fatherly affection. He never put down those
who spoke against him, for he wished all to speak freely in a
free state. When someone complained one day of being
maligned, ' You will find plenty who abuse me, too,' said the
Pope, 6 if you go into the Campo dei Fiori.' He had no love for
luxury, saying that books were his sapphires and chrysoliths.
He did not care for grandeur at table, but preferred to picnic by
a fountain or in a wood. When he was in the country he never
dined indoors, save in winter, or when the weather was wet.
One day a shepherd gave him a wooden cup full of milk, and
his attendants smiled to see how dirty it was. ' It is cleaner,'
1 I have introduced a few more particular details given by Campano,
Vita Pii II,
APOPHTHEGMS OF PIUS II. 483
he said, * than the cup of Artaxerxes : he who is thirsty does not CHAP.
need a glass.' He loved the country, and inquired about every- . l*- ^
thing he saw, connecting the history with the place, and ex
pounding it to them around him.
' He was a man true, upright, open, without deceit or simu- Apoph-
lation. He was a devout and sincere Christian, frequent in piSfif.
confession and communion. He despised dreams, portents, and
prodigies, and showed no sign of timidity. He was neither
elated in prosperity nor depressed by adversity. ' Misfortune,'
he used to say, ' could be cured by wisdom, if it were applied in
time.' He was a master of proverbs, of which the following
may be quoted : —
The nature of God can be better grasped by believing than by
disputing.
Christianity, even if it were not approved by miracles, ought to be
received for its own worth (honestate).
A miser cannot be satisfied with money, nor a wise man with
knowledge.
He who knows most is most persecuted by doubt.
Serious matters are settled by arms, not by laws.
A cultivated man submits his own house to his city, his city to
his country, his country to the world, and the world to God,
As rivers flow to the sea, so vices flow to courts.
A king who trusts no one is useless, and he is no better who
believes all.
He who rules many ought to be ruled by many.
Fit men should be given to dignities, not dignities to men.1
Bad physicians kill the body, unskilful priests the soul.
Their virtues enriched the clergy, their vices make them poor.
For weighty causes marriage was taken from the priests, for
weightier it ought to be restored.
He who spoils his son nourishes an enemy.
A miser pleases men in nothing save his death.
These appreciative remarks of Platina show us that the Pius II. as
personality of Pius II. was deeply attractive to his associates. fe™e™ of
But the character which Platina has sketched is that of a
cultivated man of letters, not of a statesman or a theologian.
It is, indeed, as a man of letters that Pius II. has the deepest
claims on our attention. He is one of the earliest representa
tives of the man of letters pure and simple ; he is, perhaps, the
1 ' Dignitatibus virus dandos, non dignitates hominibus.''
II 2
484 THE PAPAL BESTORATION.
BOOK only man of letters who has been equally eminent in literature
fL , and in statesmanship. His capacity for affairs developed out
of his literary instinct; the keen eye and the ready apprehension,
which he gained from the study of the world around him, were
the means by which he won his way to high position. When
first he came to Basel, fresh from his university career, he had
a young man's gift for writing verses, which he exercised in
Ovidean love poems and Horatian epistles. He wrote a long
poem, which he called ' Nymphiplexis,' in honour of the mistress
of his Sienese friend Mariano de' Sozini, and rejoiced that it
was more than two thousand lines in length.1 It has not come
down to us ; but Campano pronounced it to be flowing rather
than correct in versification. ^Eneas prided himself on his
poetry, and gladly received from Frederick III. the laureate's
crown. But he soon had the practical sense to see that Latin
verse would not do much for him, and his attendance at the
Council stimulated him to seek the reputation of an orator.
The example of Cesarini fired his emulation. Night after
night he spent in study, while his comrade, Piero da Noceto,
who shared his room, would laugh and say, 4 Why thus exhaust
yourself, JEneas ? Fortune favours the unlearned as much as the
learned.'2 Still ^Kneas studied, and seized the first opportunity
to air his eloquence ; but it is noticeable that he spoke in
behalf of a hopeless proposal to transfer the Council to Pavia.
He spoke merely to win the applause of the Fathers and to
gain the good graces of the Duke of Milan. His oratory was
artificial, and lacked depth of purpose and sincerity. ^Eneas
was never sufficiently in earnest to be a great speaker, nor was
he a sufficiently polished master of words to satisfy the cultivated
taste of the Italians.3 But the Fathers of Basel were wearied
with the formless utterances of scholastic disputants, which
might be logical in reasoning but were wearisome to hear.
The neat, flowing, and ornate style of ^Eneas pleased them, and
he established his reputation as an orator.
1 Epist. 35 (ed. Basel) : ' Absolvi libellum vcrsuum ultra duo milia
quern appellavi Nymphiplexim de laudibus Baptistge tuas.' Campanus calls it
'Niraphileticum versu magis faoili et expedite quam accurate.'
2 jEneas recalls this twelve years after in a letter of 1456. Ep. 188 (ed.
Basel).
3 So Campano judges: 'Sententiis quam verbis iUustriores ; copia mira
ct ad magnitudinem rerum excrescente.'
HISTORICAL WRITINGS OF JENEAS SYLVIUS. 485
The chief quality of the mind of ^Eneas was a ready recep- CHAP.
tivity of outward impressions, which prompted him to narrative ._ ^ _.
writing. He seems to have designed a history of the Council Historical
of Basel, and wrote a description of the city which was to serve pius u.
as an introduction.1 If his work had been carried out, he would
have given us a precious memorial of the actual life at Basel,
and of the intrigues in the Council ; what knowledge we have
on these points comes from his letters.2 Probably, however,
^Eneas felt that such a work would lead him into questions
of controversy, in which he had no keen personal interest. He
did not, therefore, write the history of the Council as a whole ;
but in 1440, when he was secretary of Felix V., he wrote three
books of Commentaries on the Council of Basel, which dealt
only with the circumstances leading to the deposition of
Eugenius IV. and the election of Felix V. The work was
really a pamphlet in defence of his master Felix ; only here
and there do we find the vivid touches of personal interest
attaching to its pages, which otherwise merely cast the cover
of an historical narrative over the learned arguments adduced
by theologians in the Council's favour. The preface is
ingeniously adapted to beguile the reader, unawares, into a
controversial pamphlet, and with an affected artlessness to beg
promotion for the writer. * It is my misfortune,' says ^Eneas,
4 to waste my energies on writing history when I ought to spend
them in providing for my old age. My friends say to me,
" What are you doing, ^Eneas ? Are you not ashamed, at your
age, of having no money ? Do you not know that a man should
be stalwart at twenty, cautious at thirty, rich at forty ? He
who has passed that limit will try in vain." I acknowledge the
truth of this ; time after time I have put aside poets and
historians, but like a moth round a candle I nutter back to my
ruin. Since fate wills it, so let it be. The poor as well as
the rich can live till death calls him. Poverty is wretched in
old age, but it is the more wretched to those who have no taste
for literature. I will enjoy what heaven sends, content, in the
words of Horace —
Nee turpem senectam
Degere nee cithara carentem.'
1 Tt is given in Urstisius, Epitome Instance Ba&ttece.
2 Especially that oi May 21, 1437, to Piero da Noceto, in Mansi, xxxi. 220.
48G
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Dialogues
of Pius II.
In this graceful way JEneas announced that he was serving
Felix in hopes of preferment ; nor was the form of historical
writing the only one which he was prepared to use for this pur
pose. He followed the example of Poggio in reviving the
Ciceronian dialogue. The occasion of this production was a
decision given by the University of Koln to some questions sub
mitted to them by their Archbishop concerning the controversy
between Eugenius and Felix. The University set forth their
views in three propositions, which asserted the supremacy of
general councils, condemned the German neutrality, and said
that the Church was synodically assembled at Basel, if the
Council had not been lawfully translated. The saving clause was,
as ^Eneas calls it, ' the sting at the end of the serpent's tail ; '
and ^Eneas generously offered the University of Koln to remove
its venom. His interest really lay in stating the common
place arguments in favour of the Council with taste and grace.
For this purpose he wrote his pamphlet in a series of dialogues.
He and his co-secretary, Martin Lefranc, a Frenchman, are
returning from a day's ramble outside Basel, delighted with
their holiday, expatiating on the blessings of a country life,
and expanding the Yirgilian idylls into very tolerable Latin
prose. Another couple draws near them, Nicolas of Cusa and a
Novarese legist, Stefano da Caccia, also in earnest converse.
^Eneas and his friend retire behind the bushes and listen to
their disputation. The literary skill of the dialogue consists in
the alternation of the two pairs of interlocutors. When the
scholastic arguments of Cusa and his friend may be supposed
to have wearied the reader, ^Eneas gives a little relief by
discussions on classical archaeology, literature, history. When
quotations from Fathers and decrees of Councils have palled,
quotations from Virgil and Latin historians succeed. This
reaches a climax when Cusa and Caccia pause at vespers to say
their hours. ^Eneas and Martin agree that literary discussion is
more profitable than the repetition of canonical hours, which
may be a useful solace in the cloister, but is a weariness to men
of learning. The two pairs at length show themselves to one
another. Cusa, who had maintained the cause of Eugenius,
•confesses himself vanquished, and goes back to Basel to sup
with Lefranc. ^neas also invites himself on the ground that
he is so poor he has nothing in his house. We are tempted to
LITERARY ACTIVITY OF JENEAS SYLVIUS. 487
think that the dialogues of ^Eneas, like the propositions which CHAP.
he combats, were meant to carry their point in their tail.1 , ^ ,
At Vienna /Eneas had increased reason to use his pen for Muiti-
the purpose of gaining fame. He turned again to light and activity of
frivolous subjects, wrote love poems, epigrams, epitaphs, what
ever he thought would be read and admired. He wrote a Latin
comedy in the style of Terence, called ' Chrisis,' and a Latin
novel in the style of Boccaccio, 4 Lucretia and Euryalus,' which
was the most famous of his works, and had still greater circu
lation after its author became Pope. It was not a book which
the Pope could read without shame, and Pius II. apologised for
having written it. It contained, he said, two things — an in
delicate story and an edifying moral ; all read the first, but few
heeded the last.2 They might indeed be forgiven for overlook
ing it, as it is by no means obvious ; /Eneas wrote his tale
without any desire for edification, merely to please Kaspar
Schlick, whose amours it most probably describes. In matters
ecclesiastical he signalised his position as a neutral by writing a
treatise, the ' Pentalogus,' in which he put the arguments for
neutrality as cogently as before he had advocated the cause of
the Council.3 He wrote treatises on all subjects — on the favourite
theme of ' The Miseries of a Court Life,' on ' Education ' for
the young Ladislas of Hungary, on 6 The Nature and Care of
Horses.' Nothing came amiss to the pen of ./Eneas ; but the
subjects in which he was most interested were history and
geography, and it is his great merit that he saw the close con
nexion between these two studies. To him curiosity supplied
the spur as well as the method ; to observe and to inquire
were the first steps, and he was then content to arrange
his knowledge as he obtained it. He is the Herodotus of
the fifteenth century, without the simplicity and dignity of
his forerunner ; too much concerned himself in what he relates
to be entirely trusted, yet with the same quickness of appre
hension, the same vividness, and the same profound belief in
the mighty movement of human affairs. His first account of
the events at Basel was rather a polemical pamphlet than an
historical work. But when the fate of the Council was decided,
1 These dialogues are given by Kollar, Analccta Vindobon. ii. G01.
2 Epistolw, No. 395.
3 In Fez, Tliesaiirus Ancedotorum, t. iv. part iii. 650.
488 THE PAPAL KESTOEATION.
BOOK ^Eneas in a second book set forth his new opinions, displayed
, 1^: , the mischievous activity of the conciliar movement, and traced
with precise brevity the steps in its rise and fall.1 He followed
this by a collection of short biographical sketches of illustrious
contemporaries.2 In 1452 he began a history of Frederick III.,
which he continued up to the time when he left Germany.3 On
his return to Italy he undertook to write for Alfonso of Naples a
history of Bohemia, which he carried to the death of Ladislas.
The picturesqueness of the Hussite wars attracted the fancy of
^Eneas, and he described them in his best Livian style. In
1458, while suffering from an attack of the gout, he was asked
by a bookseller to revise a sketch of universal history and carry
it down to his own times. This led ^Eneas to put together the
contents of his commonplace book in the form of a book
4 about the condition of Europe,' which is a mixture of geo
graphy and history, with little attention to style and no pro
portion in the events related. This was the beginning of a
' Universal History and Geography ' which he projected, and
of which when Pope he found time to write the part dealing
with Asia. He redacted also for popular use the ' Decades ' of
Flavius Blondus, so far as the accession to the Papal throne of
John XXIII.
Apology I11 the preface to the ' Asia ' Pius II. apologises for the fact
devotion to ^ia^ a P°Pe should have any time to devote to literature,
literature. < There will be malign interpreters of our work who will say that
we rob Christendom of our time and devote ourselves to what is
useless. We answer that our writings ought to be read before
they are blamed. If elegance of style has no charms for the
reader, he will still find much useful information. Our time has
not been taken from our duties ; but we have robbed our old age
of its rest that we might hand down to posterity all that we
know to be memorable. We have given to writing the hours due
to sleep. Some will say that we might have spent our vigils
better. We know that many of our predecessors made better
use of their leisure ; but ours is not unfruitfully employed, for
knowledge begets prudence, and prudence is the leader of life/
1 This is published by Fea, Pius II. a calumniis vindicatus. Home, 1822.
2 De Viris Claris, as appendix to Mansi, Oratio-nes, iii. 144 ; more fully, De
Viris lllustribus, in the publications of the Literary Society in Stuttgart, 1843.
8 The fullest edition is in Kollar, Analecta Vindobon. ii.
COMMENTARIES OF PIUS II. 489
The Pope's critics might have been strengthened in their
opinion, had they known that he was also engaged in writing a
history of his own pontificate. The Commentaries of Pius II. The Com-
is his most important literary work, and contains a full account Of pius n .
of all the events in which he was engaged. Platina in his Life
of Pius II. mentioned the existence of these Commentaries ;
but they were not published till 1584, by Francesco Bandini
de' Piccolomini, Archbishop of Siena, who possessed a manu
script which had been copied by a German priest, Johannes
Gobellinus. Archbishop Piccolomini assigned to the copyist
the honour of being the author. The Commentaries of Pius II.
were published under the name of Gobellinus, and have con
tinued to be quoted by his name. Campano, however, in a letter
to Cardinal Piccolomini, tells us that Pius II. wrote Com
mentaries, and handed over to him for correction the results of
his hurried dictation ; l he pronounces that they need no other
hand to increase their dignity, and are the despair of those who
would wish to imitate them. Campano, however, divided them
into twelve books, and probably made a few additions and
alterations. Platina mentions the beginning of a thirteenth book
which Gobellinus did not include in his manuscript.2
In his Commentaries we have the best literary work of
^Eneas. The study of history was to him the source of instruc
tion in life, the basis for the formation of his character. He
looked upon events with reference to their results in the future,
and his actions were regulated by a strong sense of historical pro
portion. Similarly, the present was to him always the product
of the past, and he shaped his motives by reference to historical
antecedents. It was probably this historical point of view
which made him engage in so many schemes, because he felt
that, when once affairs were in movement, the skilful statesman
might be able to reap some permanent ad vantage. He was not
willing to let slip any opportunity which might afford an open
ing for his political dexterity. Had he been less of a student,
had his mind been less fertile, he might have concentrated his
energies more successfully on one supreme object.
We have made sufficient use of the writings of Pius II. to
1 Campani Opera (ed. Rome, 1495), Epistol. i. 1.
2 The thirteenth book is published by Voigt in the appendix to vol. ii. of
his 2klnea Sylcio de' Piccolomini.
490 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK illustrate his vividness of pictorial power, his insight into
v__I^__^ character, his statesmanlike analysis of political motives. But
Scientific Pius II. is not content only to record matters in which he was
Pius n. himself engaged. His Commentaries are full of digressions
about European affairs generally. He never mentions anything
without fully investigating its causes ; he never sees a town
which he does not describe with reference to its past. Pius II.
is the first writer who attempted to represent the present as
it would look to posterity ; who consciously applied a scientific
conception of history to the explanation and arrangement of
passing events.
In illustration of this genuine historical insight the judg
ment of Pius II. on the life of Jeanne Dare may be quoted.
Pius II. tells the story with commendable accuracy, and then
sums up : * Thus died Joan, a wondrous and stupendous maid,
who restored the fallen and almost ruined kingdom of France,
and inflicted many serious disasters on the English. Making
herself a leader of men, she preserved her modesty unharmed
amid troops of soldiers, and nothing unseemly was ever heard
about her. Whether her work were of God or of man I
should find it difficult to affirm. Some think that when the
French nobles were at variance, and one could not endure the
leadership of another, the successes of the English drove one,
who was wiser than the rest, to devise a scheme by which they
might be induced to submit to the leadership of a maid who
asserted that she was sent by Heaven ; in this way the conduct
of the war was entrusted to her, and a supreme command was
assured. This, at all events, is most certain, that it was a maid
by whose leadership the siege of Orleans was raised, by whose
arms the territory between Bourges and Paris was conquered, by
whose advice Rheims was recovered and the coronation there
performed, by whose onslaught Talbot was routed and his army
slain, by whose boldness the gate of Paris was burnt, by whose
care and zeal the fortunes of France were secured. It is a
worthy matter to hand down to memory, although posterity
may lend it admiration rather than belief.' l We seem to be
reading the words of a modern critic who stands on a basis of
assured fact, and though suggesting a rationalistic explanation of
1 Comment. 157-8.
LITERARY REPUTATION OF JEXEAS SYLVIUS. 491
what is almost incredible, still prefers to keep a suspended CHAP.
judgment. ^ _ ^
In spite of his literary gifts, JEneas Sylvius did not enjoy a His
great reputation in Italy ; nor was he famous before his eleva- reputation
tion to the cardinalate. Italian men of letters were very exclu- m Ital-v-
sive, and reigned within their own circles, absorbed in their own
labours and their own jealousies : one who lived in Grermany
was regarded as outside the pale of culture. When .ZEneas be
came Cardinal many were ready to flatter him ; but^Eneas knew
the trick of flattery too well to be deceived. In truth he had
left Italy too young to be a finished scholar ; he knew scarcely
anything of Greek, and he was by nature a man of action rather
than a student. He could not in respect of knowledge compete
with the professed scholars of Italy, Gruarino, Filelfo, and the
like. Moreover, as a stylist he was imperfect and lacking in
finish. His residence in Grermany had infected his Latinity with
barbarisms,1 and in Italy Latinity was nothing if it was not
strictly classical.
Thus Pius II., though the most eminent man of letters of Pius II. as
his age, and one who deserves a high position amongst literary
men of all times, was not regarded as a member of the literary
clique which prevailed in Italy. He was not a profound
scholar, he was not an elegant stylist ; his penetration, his ready
sympathies, his knowledge of human nature, his largeness of
view were qualities which the literature of his time regarded as
of little moment. Pius II., on his side, was not concerned to
gain the applause of the famous scholars of his own day. No
doubt he would have welcomed it, if it had been genuinely
given ; but he did not choose to beg the homage of a crowd of
literary sycophants. He had too great a sense of his personal
worth to accept flattery which was prompted only by an ex
pectation of future favours. He had too keen a knowledge of
men to confound genuine merit with a capacity for writing
eulogy. He was too confident in himself to trust to the praises
of others rather than his own record of his own actions, to com
mend him to the consideration of posterity. Hence the great
literary Pope proved to be but a poor patron. The hopes of
the humanists, which had risen high on the accession of Pius II.
1 ' De verboru; • delcctu non nihil illi German ia dctraxerat, coacto saspe
apud barbaros cultiora negligere,' saj-s Cainpano.
THE PAFAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
to the pontificate, were rudely dashed. An army of copyists
was not re-established in Rome ; there was no zeal for the col
lection of manuscripts, no orders for translations or com
pilations, no glad acceptance of dedications or of complimentary
verses. Not that Pius II. was heedless of such things ; but he
could do all that he wanted for himself, or with the assistance
of a few trusted friends. He did not wish, like Nicolas V., to
found his fame on the patronage of literature and art ; he did
not wish to narrow the sphere of his activity. The reputation
of a man of letters he was sure to gain by his own writings ;
it was necessary for him to emphasise his practical energy rather
than his care for literature, if his fame was to acquire its due
proportion.
Great was the disappointment of the humanists when the
sad truth dawned upon them. For a time they hoped by
perseverance to overcome the Pope and convince him of their
usefulness. The older generation — Poggio, Guarino, Manetti,
Valla — had almost died out when Pius II. ascended the Papal
throne. Filelfo was the one literary veteran who remained,
and he resolutely pursued the siege of the Pope's goodwill.
Pius II. treated him with courtesy rather than with honour,
received his letters and compositions, listened to his speeches
with good humour rather than with gratitude, and made him
presents which were marks of recognition rather than of favour.
It soon became known that the Pope behaved as a critic and
not as a patron, that he pulled to pieces the poems presented
to him, and that his motto was, ' poets and orators ought
to be supreme, or they are nothing.' He professed his con
tempt for mediocrity, and cared only for such compositions as
were really excellent. He did not value the fashionable style
of oratory in Italy, but declared that a needless use of words
showed the indolence of the speaker.1 Sentiments more shocking
to the views of the humanists of the fifteenth century could not
have been expressed. We are not surprised that his biographer
adds to his account of Pius II., ' he incurred great odium.'
An epigram of the Pope's, which he made during his sojourn
at Mantua, was rapidly spread through literary circles, and
excited the wildest wrath. Ammannati, who was then the
Pope's secretary, tells us how the epigram arose, and gives us a
1 Campano, Vita Pit, in Mur. iii. pt. 2, 986.
UNPOPULARITY OF PIUS II. WITH THE HUMANISTS. 493
faithful picture of the Pope's amusements.1 One day at CHAP.
Mantua, while weary with affairs, Pius II. took his usual ^_ l*' _.
relaxation of a ramble in the country. With Ammannati and
three other of his friends, he took boat on the Mincio to visit a
monastery about three miles distant. To beguile the journey,
his secretary read aloud some of the congratulatory poems which
had been addressed to the new Pope at his accession, and had
been laid aside till a convenient season offered when they might
be read. The sound of verses soon kindled the poetic flame,
and impromptus began to fly about the company. Presently
was read a poem by Campano, which said that gifts ought not
to be given to those who asked, but to those who did not ask,
and then insinuated that, as he had not asked, he ought to
receive. On this the Pope produced the following repartee :
Munera, Campane, si non sunt danda petenti,
Jure tuos surda currimus aure preces.
To your request you've made our duty plain,
Since he who asks ought nothing to obtain.
As all the poems asked for something, the Pope at last said
with a smile, ' I will give you something for your poets,' and
then made the epigram :
Discite pro numeris numeros sperare poetae,
Mutare est animus carmina non emere.
Take, poets, for your verses, verse again ;
My purpose is to mend, not buy your strain.
Ammannati capped this by another :
Discite pro numeris nummos tractare poetse,
Expectata dabit munera nulla Pius.
Learn, poets, to turn from your verses to gain,
From the bounty of Pius you nought will obtain.
But Pius II. had had his joke, and altered Ammannati's epigram
into —
Discite pro numeris nummos sperare poetse,
Expectata dabit munera magna Pius.
Hope, poets, hope on, from your verses for gain,
From the bounty of Pius you much will obtain.
At the same time he granted the petitions of the needy bard*.
1 Cardinalis Papicnsis Eyistolic, 49.
494 THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK This is Ammannati's account of the jocular way in which the
. *y- epigram of Pius II. was thrown off ; but
Mutare est animus carmina non emere
was passed on from mouth to mouth in literary circles, and
awoke the profoundest wrath. A stinging repartee was also
current, which was attributed to Filelfo, but which Filelfo
himself assigned to Angelo Pontano.1 It ran :
Si tibi pro nuineris numeros fortuna dedisset,
Non esset capiti tanta corona tuo.
Verse for your verse if fate had given to you,
The Papal crown had never decked your brow.
Pius II. was decidedly unpopular amongst the humanists.
Filelfo, after long hoping against hope, at last attacked the
Pope in an anonymous invective,2 which assigned to him the
practice of every classic vice. After the death of Pius II. the
tongue of Filelfo was still more loosened. He wrote a poem
of triumph on the death of Pius II., and set to work to blacken
his memory. At first the friends of Pius were indignant at
such scurrility, and used their influence to keep Filelfo from
the good graces of the new Pope ; but Filelfo managed to play
upon the vanity of Cardinal Ammannati by offering him his
literary homage. Ammannati demanded a faint retractation
of the calumnies against Pius, and then extended the hand of
friendship to Filelfo. So venal was the praise of the humanists,
so interested the judgments which they offered to hand down
to posterity. It was an additional testimony of the penetration
and profound practical sense of Pius II. that he disregarded
their windy homage, and estimated at its due value their in
fluence over posterity. No man could be more desirous of
glory than Pius II. ; but he was shrewd enough to see that
glory would be won by his own" acts and by his own writings
more surely than by the inflated eulogies of hired pedants. As
was natural for a man of wide culture, Pius II. had a keen
sense of reality, and was not deceived by a display of the
apparatus of learning, and by the false glitter of laborious style.
He was a foe to pedantry and ostentation ; he knew that mere
1 Filelfi EpistolcP, xxvi. 1, quoted by Voigt, JEncas Sylvius, iii. 628.
2 We know of this from the defence of Girolamo Agliotti, Oyuscul. ii.
346, &c.
FRIENDS OF PIUS II. 495
verbiage had no genuine vitality. In this, as in most other CHAP,
points of his character, Pius II. stands a little way outside the . _ Ix* _ „
common current of his age. Himself a humanist, he saw the
shallowness of many of the prevalent literary tricks. He strove
to estimate at its real value everything by which he was sur
rounded. He was a critic of his own life as well as that of
others ; he knew the worth of the fashions which he followed,
of the opinions which he heard and expressed ; he could use all
things, but would not surrender himself to any.
But though Pius II. refused to form a literary court and simple life
surround himself with humanists, dependent on his bounty, c
he had a small circle of scholars whom he chose as his inti
mates. The private life of Pius II. was singularly simple.
When occasion offered, his sense of decorum and his cultivated
taste led him to display a becoming magnificence. He was
careful to do all that beseemed a Pope ; but he was not prepared
to sink his personality entirely in his office. His Papal duties
were thoroughly performed ; but he reserved to himself the
right of using his leisure in literary pursuits, He gave audience
daily, and read and signed all documents presented to him ;
but he would not bind himself to do it always at Kome in the
Vatican. If his taste so chose, those who needed him might
find him beneath the chestnut trees of Petrioli, or by the side
of a fountain at Tivoli. A magnificent court, the constant
presence of a band of literary flatterers — such things would have
been intolerable to him. Pius II. was a genuine man, and
would not lay aside his natural tastes. He needed a few trusty
friends with whom he could unbend freely. Warm-hearted
and affectionate, he wished to feel the contact of a few con
genial minds, chosen not because they were distinguished or
might be useful, but because they were personally attractive to
his character and tastes.
It was this strong personality that led him to seek the pro- Cardinal
motion of his nephews, and made him feel such a strong interest
in men of Sienese extraction. His two secretaries, to whom he
dictated his writings, Goro Lolli and Agostino de' Patrizzi, were
both Sienese. . Francesco de' Patrizzi also, who was chancellor
of the Sienese republic, and was obliged for political reasons to
quit his country, received from Pius II. the rich bishopric of
Gaeta. The cuief friend, however, of Pius II. was Jacopo
406
THE TAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
Campano.
Ammannati, a man of lowly origin, born near Peschia, in the
Lucchese territory, who had gone to Rome to seek his fortune
as a scholar in the palmy days of Nicolas V. Calixtus III.
made him one of his secretaries, and Pius II. found in him a
literary nursling. He made him Bishop of Pavia and Cardinal ;
he adopted him into the family of the Piccolomini, and procured
for him the citizenship of Siena, Ammannati took the Pope as
his model both in character and in literary composition. He
continued the Commentaries of Pius II. for the five years fol
lowing his death, and adopted the same style and method.
During all the pontificate of Pius II. Ammannati enjoyed his
full confidence, and at the last closed his eyes in death. He
was a true friend, and did not abuse the Pope's confidence to
enrich himself. He was acute rather than profound, a man
of letters of the same type as Pius II., without his practical
capacity or his loftiness of aim. He did not aspire to be a
statesman, and his attempts at ambition did not rise higher
than vanity. He had the same delight in life as Pius II. ; but
in him it took the shape of an excessive devotion to the plea
sures of the chase. He was an excellent and amiable man, but
not a strong one, a sympathetic companion rather than a
counsellor to Pius II.1
The other distinguished literary friend of Pius II. was
Grianantonio Campano. He was the son of a peasant in Cam
pania, and his surname is merely taken from the province in
which he was born. At the age of three he lost his father, and
soon afterwards his mother ; under the guardianship of his aunt
he was sent into the fields as a shepherd boy. His precocious
intelligence induced a neighbouring priest to take him as a
domestic servant, and give him some instruction in his leisure
hours. Soon he advanced far enough to act as tutor to the sons
of a noble in Naples. Here he attended the lectures of Lorenzo
Valla, and in six years of persistent study gained a large fund
of knowledge. From Naples he betook himself to Perugia,
where at the age of twenty he began to teach and soon
acquired a considerable reputation. In Perugia he stayed for
some time, wrote love poems of a questionable sort, and made
speeches when speeches were needed. On the accession of
1 There is a notice of him by Jacopus Volterranus prefixed to his Com
mentaries (edj. 1G14), but his character appears sufficiently from his letters.
AMMANNATI AND CAMPANO. 497
Pius II. he went with the Perugian embassy to congratulate CHAP.
the new Pope. He seems to have felt that the Curia was his
sphere, for he followed Pius II. to Mantua, ingratiated himself
with Ammannati, then with the Pope, and was soon rewarded
by the Bishopric of Croton, which was afterwards exchanged
for the richer see of Teramo.1
Campano was a sort of buffoon whose sallies amused the
Pope. He was a genuine peasant, and carried his character in
his appearance. Short, thick-set, and clumsy, with an enor
mous paunch, he had a large face with a turned-up nose and
broad spreading nostrils. His small, keen, twinkling eyes were
deep set under a bushy and projecting brow. He was, as he
tells us himself, covered all over with hair like a wild boar. It
was clear that Pius II. was not considering abstract decorum
when he bestowed on such a man a bishopric.2 He needed
Campano to amuse him with his ready geniality and his power
of good-humoured satire ; moreover, the pen of Campano was
always at the Pope's command for an epigram, an inscription,
or whatever was needed. He was a master of a clear, flowing,
incisive style, who won reputation as a historian by his Life
of Bracchio, and as an essayist by a composition against in
gratitude. When Pius II. wished to unbend himself in private,
the refinement of Amman rjati and the sturdy joviality of Cam
pano gave him the social elements which he required.
As in literature, so also in art, Pius II. possessed too genuine Pius II.
a taste to indulge in indiscriminate patronage, and his strong
individuality impelled him to seek a field where he might leave
a record entirely his own. Pius II. was catholic in his taste,
and did not merely follow the prevailing fashion. Though a
lover of antique art, he did not shut his eyes to the great
artistic revival which was going on in Italy. He saw that art
and literature went hand in hand. ' After Petrarch,' he writes,
' literature emerged. After Giotto rose a band of painters, and
1 There is a life of Campano by Michael Fermis prefixed to his works, of
which there are two editions, Home, 1495, and Venice, 1502 : see also Paulus
Jovius, Elogia.
1 Campano was at least not vain; he describes himself, Jfy. iji, 47:
' Quid in Campano ? Totas noctes stertit ; videas medio in thoro hominem
nudum feris omnibus horrid iorem quas sylvas alunt : pedcs uncos : curvas et
hirsutas roanus; nares platas et patentes, et subductam f rontem ; turgidum
jam novis ferculis et intiatum ventrem ; membra brevia, teretia, corpulenta.'
VOL. II. K K
498
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
BOOK
IV.
His build
ings in
Home and
Siena.
Buildings
in Piunza.'
now we see both arts at their height.' 1 He did not, like most
of his contemporaries, draw all his artistic ideas from classical
antiquity ; but he admired the paintings of Giotto at Assissi,
and boldly declared that the sculptors of the facade of the
Cathedral at Orvieto were no way inferior to Phidias and
Praxiteles.2 Nor was his admiration confined to Italian work
only ; he could appreciate the beauties of London, the splendour
of York Minster, and the magnificence of the Sebalduskirche
Niirnberg.3
With these wide sympathies Pius II. was as little likely to
make his pontificate an epoch of architectural splendour as of
literary activity. He collected manuscripts, but with discre
tion ; he built, but it was in moderation. He respected the
great schemes of Nicolas, without being carried away by them,
and was content to contribute his share towards the projected
splendours of the Vatican and S. Peter's. He built a tower at
the entrance of the Vatican palace and adorned several of its
rooms. • He restored the terrace which led to S. Peter's and
ornamented it with colossal statues of S. Peter and S. Paul,
while inside he erected a chapel of S. Andrew. But it was not
Eome which stood first in the affections of Pius II. ; in the
6 loggia del Papa ' and the Piccolomini palace at Siena we find
more enduring records of his architectural taste.
The abiding memorial, however, of Pius II. is his birth
place, Corsignano, which he indissolubly associated with himself
by giving it his name and elevating it to the seat of a bishopric
under the title of Pienza. The little town lies high upon a
spur of the volcanic hills that form the Sienese territory. It
looks upon the old Etruscan seat of Eadicofani and the lofty
heights of Monte Cetona and Monte Amiata. There Pius II.
erected the full equipment of buildings necessary to give
grandeur to an Italian city. On one side of a spacious piazza
lies the Cathedral ; over against it the Palazzo Pubblico, a
younger sister of the stately Palazzo dei Signori at Florence ;
the other sides of the piazza are enclosed by the Archbishop's
palace and the palace of the Piccolomini. The architect of
these buildings was Bernardo of Florence, most probably Ber
nardo Eosellino.4 Yet in the building of the Cathedral Pius II.
1 Epistolcs, 119. 2 Comment. 111. 3 De Ititu Germanitc, 1054.
4 Vasari puts down these works to Francesco di Giorgio ; but Pius II., in
DECORATION OF PIENZA. 499
would not place himself entirely at the disposal of an Italian archi- CHAF.
tect. He remembered some features that had struck him in the • r— — '
churches of Germany, and ordered that the aisles should be of
the same height as the nave, while in the arrangement of the
five chapels into which the apse is divided, we trace still further
the influence of the German Gothic. The building is impres
sive through its simplicity and elegance, but unfortunately has
suffered through the crumbling of the tufo on which it is built,
which offered from the first great difficulties in the way of laying
a foundation.
The facade is divided into three equal parts, with three
square-headed doorways, separated from one another by massive
pilasters, flanked by pillars, which are continued to the second
tier of the building, and there are symmetrically formed into
an arcade. Above this rises a triangular architrave, in the
centre of which is a lunette, containing the Papal arms, with
the crossed keys above. The Piccolomini palace is an exquisite
specimen of the domestic architecture of which Siena contains
so many examples ; but its great feature is the second court
yard, which leads into a garden, descending with terraces along
the precipitous hill-side. Here the Pope has emphasised his
love of nature as part of the accompaniments of cultivated life
— the two lower storeys of the house on this side are broken by
arcades of delicate and graceful architecture, which extend
along the whole length of the building, and afford a glorious
prospect over the Etruscan hills.
The care of Pius II. extended also to the details of his
building. Two massive fountains still adorn his palace, and the
cathedral is full of records of his taste. The choir books are
enriched by illuminations ; the sacristry contains a cope, which
is a marvel of embroidery, adorned with the history of David
and Solomon, on a ground wrought with birds and flowers. He
also gave a series of tapestries to hang round the piazza on days
of great festivals, a pastoral staff, a pax, a chalice, a mitre set
with enamels, and a head of S. Andrew in gold. Nowhere can
more characteristic specimens of the varied works of the early
the Commcntami, 235, calls him ' Bernardus natione Florentinus,' and Kumohr,
Italiemselic Forschwigen, ii. 182, identifies him with Bernardo Rosellino, though
others have identifier' him with Bernardo di Lorenzo. See Miiritz, Ley Arts
a la Cour des fapes, i. 233.
K K 2
500
THE PAPAL RESTORATION.
General
results of
the ponti
fical e of
Tins II.
Renaissance be seen than at Pienza, which, from its remote
situation, has many times escaped the spoiler's hand.
Pius II. hoped to make Pienza a considerable town ; it still
remains a village with about nine hundred inhabitants. The
Cathedral is sinking in its foundations ; the Piccolomini palace
is scarce better than a desolate ruin. The Pope's scheme to
give importance to his birthplace has proved a failure ; the
individuality that resolved to leave its mark upon the world has
been baffled by the laws that regulate man's affairs. This is
but a symbol of all that Pius II. did. He coped successfully
with the world in his own day, but his plans were founded on
l.io individual powers or caprices, not on a large sympathy with
the needs and aspirations of mankind. Yet still Pius II. has
the reward that ever attaches to the strong work of a genuine
man. At Rome one building superseded another, and the
traces of each man's energy have to be reconstructed in detail.
Few may visit Pienza ; but those who do so are at once brought
into close communication with the mind of Pius II., which
there speaks without contradiction from others. So with the
rest of the achievements of Pius II. They did not leave any
decisive mark upon the world's history ; but they were founded
on a higher and nobler conception of Christendom and of the
Papal mission than prevailed for the next century.
We have lingered over Pius II. partly because the records of
his pontificate are so full that they serve to illustrate much
that was common to all popes, partly because Pius II. is a
character most illustrative of the changes that were slowly
passing over Europe in his day. In him the modern and the
mediaeval spirit meet and mingle. His life covers a great epoch
in the history of the Church, the epoch in which reformation
from within was pronounced impossible. His skill did much
to sweep away from the ecclesiastical system all traces of the
abortive attempt, and to make good the position of the Papal
monarchy against the threatened re volution. He further strove
to set the Papacy once more in the forefront of European
politics, and although he was not entirely successful, yet he did
not entirely fail. He left the question still open, and it-
depended on his successors to determine the future direction of
the Papal policy.
APPENDIX.
APPENDIX.
1. Lives of Martin V.
MURATORI, iii. pt. ii. 857-88, prints two lives of Martin V., from ^
MSS. in the Vatican. The first is short and annalistic, opposed to
Martin V. on the grounds of his avarice and nepotism, written under
the influence of the reaction of the Curia which set in after Martin's
death. Even this hostile writer is bound to confess *suo tem-
pore tenuit stratas et vias publicas securas ; quod non fuit auditum
a ducentis annis et circa.' The second life is fuller, and is eulogistic ;
it is in general accurate, but is the work of one who thinks little of
the coiiciliar movement, and rejoices over the dissolution of the
Council of Siena as averting the danger of another schism. This
last life was known to PLATINA, who has taken it as the basis of his
life of Martin V., incorporating other information.
2. Florentine Authorities.
For the relations of Martin V. with Florence we have informa
tion from POGGIO, Hist. Florentina in MURATORI, xx. 322, and
LEONARDO BRUNT, Commentarii in MURATORI, xix. 630. As both of
these were in the confidence of the Pope, their information is valu
able. Still more important are the Commissioni di Rinaldo degli
Albizzi, edited by Cesare Guasti (Florence, 1867). Rinaldo was a
celebrated Florentine statesman, born in 1370, and engaged in the
business of the Republic from 1399 to 1434, when he went into exile
before the power of Cosimo dei Medici. Rinaldo went in 1418 as
ambassador of Florence to Martin V., whom he met at Pa via, and in
his Commissioni (i. 294) we have an account of the negotiations
which brought the Pope to Florence. Again, in 1421, Rinaldo was
ambassador at Rome to make peace in Naples (i. 312). In 1424 he
was again sent +o Rome to win over Martin V. to side with Florence
FL011ENTINE AUTHORITIES.
APP- . against the Duke of Milan (ii. 85, &c.). In 1425 Rinaldo again
returned to Rome for the same purpose (ii. 320). From RinaFdo's
complaints of Martin's long delays in answering we see the Pope's
caution and diplomatic skill. The Commissioni of Rinaldo generally
are full of incidental remarks on the Pope's policy, and chronicle
the rumours which from time to time prevailed. They show us that
Martin Y. commanded the respect of the politicians of Italy.
For the period of Martin V. the Chronicon Domini Antonini
Archiprcesulis Florentine becomes valuable. S. ANTONINUS was the
son of a Florentine notary, who entered the Dominican order in that
city at the age of 16, about the year 1405. He was celebrated for
his theological learning as well as for the sanctity of his life, and his
Summa Theologies was a work of considerable repute. He distin
guished himself as a theologian in the Council of Florence, and in
1445 Eugenius IV. made him Archbishop of that city, where he was
much venerated till his death in 1459. In 1523 he was canonised.
He wrote a universal chronicle, compiled with the carefulness of a
theologian rather than with the insight of a historian. His chronicle
was continued till the time of his death. Though it is deficient in
m
critical spirit, is destituta of style and abounds in inaccuracies, it
still contains valuable information on many points of detail which
cannot be found elsewhere. For the early period of Martin V. he
has borrowed largely from Leonardo Bruni, and becomes more valu
able as he approaches matters of which he was contemporary.
3. Bracchio and Sforza.
For the history of these condottieri generals we have two lives
which relate their exploits at length. MUKATORI, xix. 435, prints
Vita Bracchii Perusini, by JOANNES ANTONIUS CAMPANUS, the friend
of Pius II. and Bishop of Croton. Unfortunately the life of Bracchio
is written chiefly as an exercise of style, and though it relates the
actual facts of Bracchio's exploits, the information that it contains
has to be stripped of turgid laudation, and the real meaning of events
has to be supplied from other sources. Similarly we have a life of
Sforza by LEODORISIO CRIVELLI in MURATORI, xix. 628. Crivelli was
a member of a noble Milanese family, arid intended to write a history
of Francesco Sforza, to which this account of his father was to serve
as a- preface; the work, however, was not continued beyond 1424.
There is another work of Crivelli in Muratori, xxiii. 21, De Ex-
peditione Pii II. in Turcas, written when Crivelli was a Papal
secretary, an office on which he entered in 1458. Some writers have
wished to make out that these works are by two different authors of
the same name; but the reasons which induce them to do so seem
BKACCHIO AND SFOKZA. 505
inadequate (see Tiraboschi). Though we know little of Crivelli we APP.
are justified in assuming that he was amply acquainted with affairs. •
His life of Sforza is, like that of Campanus, of the nature of a panegyric,
but is more modest and restrained.
4. Naples.
For the general history of Naples we have the authorities referred
to in Appendix to vol. i. The Annales Bonincontrii Miniatensis in
MURATORI, xxi., are also useful. Lorenzo Boniiicontri was born at
S. Miniato in 1410 ; but his father was obliged to go into exile in
1431, in consequence of an appeal to the Emperor Sigismundto save
S. Miniato from the tyranny of Florence. Bonincontri, after many
wanderings, settled at Naples under the protection of King Alfonso.
He was celebrated as an astrologer, a poet and a scholar, and wrote
works on astrology as well as poems. He was a friend of learned
inen, amongst others of Marsilio Ficino. He began a history of
Naples, which did not go beyond the year 1436, i.e., did not reach
the period with which he himself was personally familiar. Muratori
has printed his Annales from 1366 to 1458. They are brief, but to
the point — a pithy summary of facts with few judgments; his narra
tive, though not vivid, is correct and careful.
5. The Council of Siena.
Till recently very little was known about the Council ; what was
known was principally gathered from casual mentions by the various
chroniclers previously mentioned, the letters in RAYNALDUS sub anno,
and a few documents in MANSI, vol. xxviii.
Valuable as a more vivid picture of the relation of an Italian
city towards the Papacy and towards a Council is the brief chronicle
of FRANCESCO DI TOMMASEO in MURATORI, xx. 23. It is one of a
series of Sienese chronicles. The writer tells how the Sienese re
garded the Council and were discontented at losing the prospects of a
rich harvest from its dissolution.
The chief authority, however, for the Council of Siena is JOHN
STOJKOVIC of Ragusa, who was himself present as a representative of
the University of Paris, both at Rome before the Council, at Pa via,
and at Siena. He afterwards went to the Council of Basel, and wrote
Initium et Prosecutio Basiliensis Concilii, edited by Palacky, in vol. i.
of Monumenta Conciliorum Generalium Seculi XV. (Vienna, 1857).
Pages 1-65 of this work are occupied with an account of the Council
of Siena, which I have mostly followed, though it differs in many
particulars from the accounts of the chroniclers mentioned above.
THE COUNCIL OF SIENA.
APP. They wrote in view of the ignominious collapse of the Council, which
no one really wanted ; to John of Ragusa it was a necessary link
between the decree Frequens and the Council of Basel. His account
is detailed, and is by an ecclesiastical eye-witness ; the other men
tions are only those of outsiders, who looked solely on the political
aspect of the matter. As regards the numbers present at Siena,
John seems to exaggerate as much as the others seem to minimise.
6. France and England.
The documents relating to Martin Y. and France are to be found
in Preuves des Libertes de VEglise Gallicane, ch. xxii. Martin Y.'s
correspondence with Chichele and Beaufort is in RAYNALDUS, Annales
Eccksiastici, and WILKINS, Concilia, vol. iii. 471, &c. Additional
documents are to be found in DUCK'S Life of Chichek (1617), and
SPENCER'S Life of Chichek (1783).
7. Rome.
The letters of the celebrated scholar POGGIO BRACCIOLINI, edited
by TONELLI (Florence, 1832), give us some idea of the atmosphere
of the Curia under Martin V. Poggio was a Papal secretary, and
though it is disappointing that his letters say so little about actual
events, still they give us an idea of the extortion that prevailed.
See especially the letter to the secretary of the Bishop of Winchester,
Tonelli, ii. 18. A still more vivid picture of the Court of Martin V. is
to be found in the letters of the ambassadors of the Order of the Teutonic
Knights, who watched over the interests of the Order at Rome. Ex
tracts from these letters, which are in the Archives of Kb'nigsberg, are
given by J. VOIGT, /Stimmen aus Rom uber den pdpstlichen Hof im
fiinfzehnten Jahrhundert in YON RAUMER'S Historisches Taschenbuch,
vol. iv., 1833. These letters are written in a plain, business-like
spirit, which treats bribes to the Pope as a necessary and natural
source of expense. The following may serve as a specimen : — ' Der
Papst thut dieses nur daruin mit so grosser Yerfolgung undtJbermuth,
well er unszu zwingen meint, ihm 10 bis 12,000 Gulden zuzuweisen,
was wir doch, ob Gott will, nimmer thun wollen, denn er 1st so gierig,
ubermiithig und driickend gegeii diejenigen, liber die er Macht zu
haben meint, als nur jemals ein Papst gewesen ist ' (p. 170).
Concerning the relations of Martin Y. with his family, informa
tion is to be found in COPPI'S Memorie Colonnesi (Rome, 1855), and
YAN REUMONT, Beitrdge zur Itcdienischen Geschichte, vol. v.
MURATORI, xxiv. 1106, prints the Mesticanza di Paolo di Liello
Petrone de lo JKione di Ponte, a diary written by a Roman citizen ;
ROME. 507
some of the MS. is lost, but the part which remains covers the period AP.P.
between 1433 and 1446 ; it is the work of an eye-witness who was ' *~ '
keen and observant.
8. Death of Benedict XIII., and End of the Schism.
The death of Benedict XIII. is assigned by RAYNALDUS to the
year 1423, on the ground of his condemnation in the Council of
S:ena as " damnatse memorise ; " also Martin Y.'s letter to Alfonso,
announcing the transfer of the Council from Pavia to Siena, begins :
* Per litteras crebras et nuntios habetur quod Petrus de Luna ab hac
luce subtractus est ' (Raynaldus. 1423, § 9). But Mansi, in his note to
Raynaldus, points out that a French Cardinal of Benedict XIII. 's
obedience, Jean Carrer, in a letter to the Count of Armagnac gives
the following circumstantial account of the death of Benedict XIII.
and the election of his successor : — ' Novembris die xvii. anni Domini
MCCCCXXIV. sanctse memorise dominus Benedictus XIII. Papa
verus incipiens infirmari eodein mense die xxvii. quatuor cardinales
. . . creavit ; quibus creatis die penultirna ejusdem mensis inter
septimam et octavam horam in Domino expiravit ' (MARTENE,
Thesaurus, ii. 1731). This letter was written in 1429, protesting
against the action of the Cardinals who elected Gil Munoz. The
writer says that he was not present himself, and received no notice
of Benedict XIII.'s death from the Cardinals who were present, nor
did he hear of it till the following June, when he was informed by
the Count of Armagnac. If this were so in his case, we need not
wonder that rumours of Benedict XIII.'s death had prevailed
previously, and that Martin Y. believed him to be dead in 1423.
Contelorius, in CIACONIUS, Vitce Paparum, ii. 744 ; Vita Da/ice says : —
' Extat Martini V. Diploma datum quinto Idus Octobris Anno X.
Pontificatus (1427) in quo narratur Benedictum mense Septembri
die ante obitum anno 1424 in Paniscola de novo enunciasse iion-
nullos Cardinales ; ' from which it would appear that Martin Y.
afterwards learned the truth.
The documents relating to the end of the schism are in MARTENE,
Thesaurus Novus Anecdotorum, ii.
9. The Hussite Wars.
The difficulty that I have found in this chapter has been to give a
condensed account of the affairs in Bohemia, selecting only such points
as are necessary for an understanding of the problem which faced
the Council of Basel. I regret that many picturesque details had to
be omitted ; but I am not dealing primarily with the history of Bohe
mia. This subject has received much attention in the present century.
508 THE HUSSITE WARS.
APP. The current accounts till a few years ago were taken from German
and Catholic sources. The fluent pen of ^ENEAS SYLVIUS in his
Historia Bohemica produced an admirably interesting account of
Bohemian affairs, which he had many opportunities of personally
studying at Basel, Vienna, and afterwards in Bohemia itself. The
artistic rendering of ^35neas was mainly followed by succeeding
writer's, such as COCHL^EUS and DUBRAVIUS, whose writings were in
corporated by LENFANT in his Histoire de la Guerre des Hussites et du
Concile de Bale. The present century, however, has seen the opening
out of the historical records of Bohemia itself, chiefly through the
labours of Palacky, Holier, and more recently Tomek. PALACKY'S
Wurdigung der alien bohmischen Geschichtschreiber (1830) was the
beginning of studies the results of which are expressed in the ten
volumes of his Geschichte von Bohmen. As I do not know the Tcheck
language, I have followed Palacky in all points in which he draws
from the Bohemian writers in that tongue. Many Latin documents
dealing with the beginning of the religious movement in Bohemia are
contained in PALACKY, Documenta Magistrum Joh. Hus. illustrantia,
which reaches to the year 1418. The period from 1418 to 1436 is
illustrated by the documents contained in PALACKY, Urkundliche
Beitrage zur Geschichte des Hussitenkriegs (1873). A number of
annals and chronicles are published by HOFLER, Geschichtschreiber der
Hussitischen Bewegung (1856-1866), and Hofler's preface contains
much valuable criticism.
The most interesting among the Bohemian chronicles is LAUREN-
TIUS OF BREZOVA, HOFLER, i. 321, &c., whose chronicle is of the ut
most importance for the years 1419-1423, where it unfortunately ends.
This is the period of the outbreak of the religious war, and Brezova
enables us to judge of the feeling of the Bohemian people. He was
at the Court of Wenzel and was an eye-witness of affairs in Prag ; he
is a strong Utraquist, but is decidedly opposed to the Taborites. On
the Catholic side we have a more lengthy chronicle by BARTOSCHEK
OF DRAHONICZ, in DOBNER, Monumenta Historica, i. 130, &c. ; it ex
tends from 1419 to 1443, and though without style or proportion, it
is valuable for military history. Bartoscheck was a royalist baron
and soldier. The same period is also illustrated by the Tractatus de
Longcbvo Schismate of the Abbot LUDOLF OF SAGAN, edited by LOSERTH
(Vienna, 1880). PALACKY in his Italienische Reise had already called
attention to this work, which has little new to say, but is important as
giving the impressions of a contemporary from the strong Catholic
point of view. The work begins with the election of Urban VI., and
goes down to the year 1423. On the other hand, we have the
Chronicon Taboritarum of NICOLAS OF PELHRSCHIMOW, in HOFLER, ii.
475, &c., which deals, chiefly from a theological point of view, with
the disputes between the Taborites arid the theologians of Prag ; it
THE HUSSITE WARS. 509
extends to the year 1444. It may suffice to have indicated these four AFP.
works as illustrating the different sides of contemporary opinion. * - ~*
Amongst German writers WINDECK in MENCKEN, i. 1073, shows
us the opinion which Sigismund and his circle entertained of the
Hussites and their doings. So, too, does ANDREAS RATISBONENSIS, an
Augustinian canon of S. Magnus at Regensburg, who devoted himself
to historical writing, stimulated, it would seem, by the Council of
Constance. He entered the Augustinian order in 1410, and his
writings extended to the period of 1439. His works dealing with the
Hussites have been published by HOFLER ; they are De JKxpeditioni-
bus in Bohemia contra Hussitas Jiereticos (HOFLER, ii. 406, &c.),
which embraces the period from 1418 to 1429, and the DIALOGUS
( HOFLER, i. 505) between Ratio and Animus, in which the theological
as well as the political significance of the Hussite movement is dis
cussed. These writings of Andreas give us the general feeling of
the orthodox party in Germany. Andreas writes from the clerical
point of view and is indignant at the lukewarmness of the princes ; in
a Sermo secrete editus (HOFLER, ii. 416), dated 1422, he makes a violent
attack on Sigismund, whom he accuses as a deceiver and beguiler of
the Church, spending its wealth in profligate living and heeding not
its distress.
Further examination of the writings of this period may be
found in PALACKY'S Wiirdigung and HOFLER'S preface. For modern
works on Bohemia PALACKY'S Geschichte von Bohmen supersedes all
others. ASCHBACH'S Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds tells the tale from
a German point of view ; but the most accurate examination of the
period of warfare against the Hussites is that of BEZOLD, Konig Sig-
mund und dieReichskriegegegendie ffusiten, 3 vols., Munich, 1872-7.
For the general aspect of the Hussite movement in its religious and
political character, BEZOLD'S Zur Geschichte des Husitenthums (Munich,
1874) is excellent. A more popular book dealing with the entire
subject is DENIS, Ihiss et la Guerre des Hussites, Paris, 1878.
10. Eu genius IV.
1. Lives of Eugenius IV. : — •
The life in MURATORI, vol. iii., part 2, 868, is slight and unim
portant save for the Pope's dealings with the Colonna at the
beginning of his pontificate. On this point we gather much additional
information from the diary of STEFANO INFESSURA in MURATORI, iii.,
part 2, 1123. Infessura's career is not known; but in 1478 he was
praetor in Horta, and afterwards secretary of the Senate. His
diary begins in 1295, and is very fragmentary ; it is written partly in
Latin and parti, in Italian. It grows more connected as it approaches
10 EUGENIUS IV.
APP. his own time, but has some information, not given elsewhere, of the
• — • ' events of the years 1431 and 1434.
The life of Eugenius IY. by PLATINA can scarcely be ranked as an
authority, though it has some value as a compilation made while
events were still fresh ; but there is little in Platina that we do not
find more fully elsewhere, save again the episode of the Colonna
rising.
More valuable is the life by VESPASIANO DA BISTICCI, in his most
interesting book Vite di Uomini Illustri, first published by MAI, in
the Spicileyium Romanum, vol. i. Vespasiano was a Florentine book
seller, born about 1420, and who lived certainly till 1493. He had
to do with the formation of many great libraries, especially those of
S. Marco at Florence, of Nicolas V., and of the Duke of Urbino. In
his position as copyist of manuscripts he was intimate with almost
all the chief patrons of learning in the fifteenth century. He writes
with great simplicity, and is a biographer rather than a historian ;
but his book is full of interesting traits of the men of his time, and
no work gives such a vivid impression of the greatness of the early
Renaissance movement. About Eugenius IV., he chiefly informs us
of his stay at Florence and his zeal for the reformation of the
neighbouring monasteries. He had 110 personal knowledge of Euge
nius IY., but regards him primarily as the patron of Nicolas Y.
His judgment of Eugenius IY. is expressed in. the words which he
puts into the mouth of the dying Pope — ' 0 Gabriello, quanto sarebbe
suto meglio per la salute dell' anima tua, che tu non fussi mai suto
n6 papa, n& cardinale, ma fussiti morto nella tua religione.'
Other authorities, who have been previously mentioned, are S.
ANTONINUS, whom Eugenius made Archbishop of Florence ; BONICON-
TRIUS in MURATORI, xxi. ; POGGIO, Historia Florentines in MURATORI,
xx. ; BILLIUS and LEONARDO BRUNI, in MURATORI, xix. The ecclesi
astical ceremonies during the stay of Eugenius IY. in Florence are
chronicled in an anonymous Istorie di Firenze, in MURATORI, xix.
949.
2. The Vita Cardinalis Firmani, by BATTISTA POGGIO, son of the
famous Poggio Braccioli, in BALUZE Miscellanea, iii. 266, is mainly an
exercise of style, and was dedicated to Cardinal Ammannati as such.
Still it contains some materials for the beginning of the pontificate of
Eugenius IY.
The letters of POGGIO BRACCIOLINI, who was in the service of
Eugenius IY. till his flight to Florence, give us notices of what was
passing at Rome. In a letter written just after the election of
Eugenius IY. (TONELLI, iv. 20), he says : ' Deus autem effecit ut
Pontificem habeamus quern cupiebamus, eum scilicet qui prseteritorum
errorum reformation! vacaturus videatur suscepturusque publicam
orbis curam, si ei per aliorum molestias liceret. ... Id me con-
solatur nos habere Pontificem bene cordatum et qui non terreatur
EUGENIUS IV. 51.1
inanibus minis aut vagis rumoribus.' More important still is the A PP.
Dialogue De Varietatibus Fortunes (Paris, 1723), a work owing its • "
origin to the sight of the ruins of Rome, containing a most valuable
description of the city in his day, and full of picturesque details of con
temporary history. It was written in 1447, just after the death of
Eugeneus IV. The sight of the ruins of Rome leads the writer to
moralise on the mutability of fortune, of which he produces many
historical examples. Finally, he settles on the pontificate of
Eugenius IV., as amply illustrating his theme, and Book III. of the
Dialogue is devoted to a sketch of the troubles of Eugenius. f Cum
pace uti posset, bello se implicuit minime necessario,' is his comment
(p. 87) on the attempt made by the Pope on the Colonna.
Still more important for the history of Italy during the first ten
years of Eugenius IV. are the Decades Historiarum of FLAVIUS
BLONDUS (Basel, 1569). Flavio Biondo was a native of Forli,
born in 1388, and died in 1463. He was a diligent student of
antiquity, and went to seek his fortune at the Papal court early in
the pontificate of Eugenius IV. ; he served as secretary to Eugenius
and his three successors. His labours in elucidating the antiquities
of Italy are amply shown in his great works, Roma Restaurata and
Italia Illustrate. His Decades mark an important epoch in historical
writing. Beginning with the invasion of Alaric, Biondo traces the
history of Italy up to his own times : his work was cut short by his
death, and extends only to the date 1440. He divided it into decades,
after the example of Livy. His work is excellent in arrangement,
in largeness of view, and in diligent research. He writes like a true
student seeking for light in dark places. We are, however, con
cerned only with the period of Eugenius IV., whose flight from
Rome in 1434 he describes with masterly vividness. Of the entire
history of Italy during this period he gives a careful sketch. Biondo
shows us the passion for knowledge of the humanists before their
attention had been devoted primarily to style. But the desire for
style had begun to prevail before his death ; Pius II. made an
epitome of the Decades so as to make them more popular, and speaks
of Biondo's book as 'opus laboriosum et utile, verum expolitore
emendatoreque digmim' (Com. xi.)
3. Sigismund in Italy.
Besides the general authorities above quoted and those which
especially deal with Sigismund, such as WINDECK, we have some
special sources of information. The learned Sienese, PIETRO Rossi,
in his Chronicle in MURATORI, xx. 40, <fec., gives a detailed account
of Sigismund's sojourn in Siena. To this period of Sigismund's
history is to be referred the famous novel of ^ENEAS SYLVIUS, Lucretice
et Euryali Amores, which is founded upon a love story of Kaspar
Schlick, Sigismund's chancellor. Schlick supplied JEneas with the
outlines, which he worked up into a tale, and contributed the details
512 EUGENIUS IV.
APP. of Sienese life with which it is coloured. A description of Sigis-
' ' ' mund's coronation is given by POGGIO in a letter to Niccoli in
BALUZE, Miscellanea, iii. 183 (ed. Luca). From the German side
the fullest account, except that of Windeck, is given by CORNELIUS
ZANTFLIET in his C/ironicon, in MARTENE and DURAND, Amplissima
Collectio, vol. v. Zantfliet was a monk of S. Jacob at Liege : his
chronicle extends to the year 1461, when he probably died. We do
not know the sources from which he gained his information ; but
concerning Sigismund in Italy, he seems to have had especially
accurate accounts, and gives details which are not to be found else
where.
For Sigismund's relations with the Council during this period we
have several cf his letters in MANSI, xxix., in MARTENE, Amplissinia
Collectio, vol. viii., also in JOHN OF SEGOVIA. Much interesting
information is given by KLUCKHOHN in an article on Herzog
Wilhelm III. von fiayern in Forschungen zur Deutschen Geschichte,
vol. ii. (1862), 521. The article contains the results of the writer's
research into the letters of William of Bavaria, who represented
Sigismund at Basel, addressed partly to Sigismund, partly to his own
brother in Bavaria. They are preserved in the Reich s Archiv at
Munich.
4. For Italian politics at the end of the pontificate of Euge-
nius IY. we have the remarkable Life of Filippo Maria Visconti,
by PIERO DECEMBRIO CANDIDO, in MUHATORI, xx. 986, &c. Piero's
father was secretary to Giovanni Maria Yisconti, and he himself was
born in 1399. He was a famous scholar, and served first the Duke of
Milan, afterwards Nicolas V., and finally Alfonso of Naples. His Life
of Filippo Maria is one of the most notable biographies of the period,
and shows the power of delineating character, and the careful apprecia
tion of individuality, which existed amongst the early humanists.
We are tempted sometimes to think that Piero has exaggerated
slight traits in his desire to produce a finished picture of a typical
Italian despot. His Life of Francesco Sforza in MURATORI, xx. 1024,
is more brief, and as 't treats of a living personage is more guarded ;
but the description of Sforza's entering into Milan is vivid and
powerful.
More important for the life of Francesco Sforza is Res gestce
Francisi Sforticv, by GIOVANNI SIMONETA, in MURATORI, xxi. 179.
Simoneta was Sforza's secretary, and from the year 1444 to his death
in 1466 was constantly in his service. He conducted many negotia
tions for his master, and State papers passed through his hands, so
that he is an authority of the highest importance for the relations
between Sforza and the Popes.
For the war between Sforza and Venice we have also C ommentarii
Jacobi Piccinini of PIERO PORCELLIO, in MURATORI, xx. 69, &c., con
tinued in MURATORI, xxv. 1. <fec. Porcellio was the envoy of Alfonso
EUGENIUS IV. 513
of Naples to Venice, and during the interregnum after the death of APP.
Filippo Maria Yisconti he was in the camp of Piccinino and informed ' '
Alfonso of events as they passed. He afterwards reduced his
impressions to a definite form in his Commentaries, which cover the
years 1451-1453. Porcellio writes a somewhat inflated panegyric
on his hero, and has not much real historical insight. More valu
able is the Vita di Niccolo Piccinino, by PIERO DECEMBICO CANDIDO,
in MURATORI, xx. 1051 ; it was written as a funeral oration on Nic-
colo's death in 1444, and gives a brief sketch of his life and exploits
in a laudatory strain.
A modern work which gathers much information about the
condottieri of Italy is EICOTTI, Storia delle Compagnie di Ventura
in Italia (1845).
A work which covers much of the history of the Papal States is
Cronica de' Principali Fatti d' Italia dal anno 1417 al 1468, by
NICCOLO BELLA TUCCIA, edited by Orioli, Rome, 1852. Tuccia was a
merchant of Viterbo, born in 1400, who wrote also a chronicle of
Viterbo, besides this general record of Italian affairs. For the
pontificates of Eugenius IY. and Nicolas Y. his sketch is full and
accurate ; for the later period he becomes more annalistic.
1 1 . The Council of Basel.
The Acts of the Council, and a number of documents relating to
it, are given in MANSI, Consilia, vols. xxix.-xxxi. For this period
Mansi's collection is particularly rich. The greater part of vol. viii.
of MART^NE and DURAND, Amplissima Colkctio, is also devoted to
letters and documents dealing with this subject. The Acts of the
Council of Basel were largely circulated, and the Council produced
its own historiographer in John of Segovia, whose vast collection of
documents remained at Basel. It was used by AUGUSTINUS
PATRICIUS, a canon of Siena, who, in 1480, wrote a Summa Concilii
Basiliensis at the request of Cardinal Piccolomini. He says about
the MS. of John of Segovia : ' Hos quidem codices ipsi Basilese
vidimus, magna cliligentia ut Sibyllarum libros a civibus servatos ;
quorum exemplum a Reverendissimo Domino Cardinal! Sancti
Marci, rerum ecclesiasticarum diligentissimo perscrutatore, nuper
habuimus.' He cannot, however, have had a transcript of all
John of Segovia's MS., but at best an abstract. He had,
however, other sources of information : ' Habui et primarn
hujus synodi partem collectam a piss memorise Dominico Cardinale
Firmano qui tamdiu Concilio interfuit, quamdiu mansit concordia
cum Eugenio Pontifice.' Besides this use of Capranica's papers by
Patricius, they wre also used by MICHAEL CATALANUS, De Vita et
Scriptis Dominici Capranicce, Firmi, 1793. The use of these authori-
VOL. II. L L
514 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL,
APP. ties gave the work of Patricitis great weight; it is published in
SCHANNAT and HARTZHEIM, Concilia Germanics, vol. v. 774, &c.
But the work of Patricius has been thrown into the shade by the
publication of JOHN OF SEGOVIA'S Gesta sacrosanctce synodi generalis
Basiliensis in Monumenta Conciliorum generaliutn sceculi decimi
quinti, vol. ii. (Vienna, 1873.) Unfortunately only the first part of
this vast collection has yet appeared ; but it covers the most
interesting part of the Council's activity, up to the departure of
Cesarini at the end of 1437. John of Segovia, as his name shows,
was a Spaniard, a learned canonist, one of the first who came to the
Council, and one of the last who left it. His history contains the
decrees and many of the letters of the Council, which his position
enabled him easily to procure. He was one of the leading members
of the assembly, thoroughly convinced of the rightfulness of the
Council's position, and a firm adherent of the conciliar principle. He
was, however, a wise and moderate man, averse from extreme
measures, and dragged against his will to follow the lead of the
Cardinal d'Allemand. He was one of the Cardinals of Felix V., and
after the dissolution of the Council returned quietly to a small
bishopric in Spain, to which Nicolas V. appointed him. His work is
devoid of style, and is the production of a canonist rather than a
historian, but it is a careful collection of documents and an accurate
statement of facts. "We can only regret the absence of picturesque
details, and the exclusively theological nature of the judgments which
it contains. John of Segovia is only interested in tracing the
development of the conciliar principle, which he does in an abstract
manner. Yet his work remains as the most complete account of the
Council's activity as a whole.
What is wanting in John of Segovia is partly supplied by
^ENEAS SYLVIUS PICCOLOMINI, who projected an entire history of the
Council, of which we have only the beginning in a letter describing
Basel, printed at the end of URSTISIUS, Historice Basiliensis Epitome.
We possess, however, two works of his concerning the Council — (1.)
Commentarii de Gestis Basiliensis Concilii, which is printed in all
the editions of his works. This is, however, a fragment ; it begins
with the Diet of Nurnberg in 1438, and reaches to the election of
Felix Y. in 1439; it was probably written soon after "he events it
describes. It has a strong theological aspect, and gives at length the
arguments of the Council in favour of its final proceedings against the
Pope. As an appendix is a letter of ^Eneas to John of Segovia,
describing the coronation of Felix Y. (2.) More important is his
second work, De Rebus Basilice Gestis Commentarius, dedicated to
Cardinal Carvajal, written probably in 1451, when the Council of
Basel was a thing of the past. In this ^neas writes as a historian
and gives a philosophical survey of the causes of the conciliar move
ment and its failure. He looks at the Council in the light of his
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL. 515
own after-experiences, and so takes a clear and decided view of its ApP
revolutionary character and its unfounded pretensions. The great " « '
merit of the book is its clear and incisive judgments of character.
The step from John of Segovia to ^Eneas Sylvius is from the
mediaeval to the modern world. The one deals with abstract ideas,
the other with definite personalities ; one is obscure and involved
in style, the other writes with epigrammatic terseness in every sen
tence. This interesting work is only to be found in FEA, Pius II. a
calumniis vindicatus, Rome, 1822.
Another work of ^neas Sylvius, in defence of the Council of
Basel, is the Libellus Dialog orum de generalis Concilii authoritate et
Gestis Basiliensium in KOLLAR, Analecta Vindobonensia, ii. 685.
These dialogues are written in the style of Cicero's Tusculans, and
are a masterpiece of elegant style in dressing up the arguments in
favour of the conciliar principles in an attractive manner, and
enlivening the tedium by appropriate digressions. They show
j^Eneas bidding for the Council's favour by his power of fine writing.
He is dazzling the theologians by showing them what a scholar
can do.
The letters of JEneas Sylvius, written from Basel, contain
incidental notices of the Council, especially one of May 20, 1437, in
MANSI, xxxi. 220.
The history of the beginning of the Council of Basel, and of its
relation with the Councils of Constance and Siena, is given by JOHN
OF KAGUSA, Initiutn et Prosecutio Basilietisis Concilii in Mon. Con-
ciliorum, i. 1, &c. It extends only to October 1431, the period in
which John represented Cesarini.
If John of Segovia writes from the conciliar point of view, and
^Eneas Sylvius somewhat as an indifferentist, we have the Italian
opinion in the letters of AMBROGIO TRAVERSARI, the learned general
of the Camaldulensians, who was the envoy of Eugenius IY. to
Basel in 1435, and afterwards to Sigismund in 1436. These letters
have been edited by MEHUS (1759), whose Life of Traversari is a
mine of information about the literary history of the time. The
letters of Traversari to Eugenius IY., to Sigismund, and to Cesarini
are especially valuable. It was largely owing to Traversari's argu
ments and to his mediation that Cesarini was reconciled to the
Pope, and his letters enable us to see the motives which weighed
with Italian Churchmen. They show the general feeling of the
Council, and give many details about its chief members. Traversari
was also an active member of the Council of Florence, and tells us
much about the Greeks, especially Bessarion. He died soon after
the end of the Council of Florence in October, 1439. YESPASIANO
DA BISTICCI has written a short life of him.
For Cesarini we have, besides other authorities, a most attractive
L L 2
516 THE COUNCIL OF BASEL.
APP. life by YESPASIANO DA BISTICCI, which gives us a clear picture of his
" ' ""' gentleness and tact as well as his sterling worth. The eulogium of
POGGIO pronounced on Cesarini's death also contains some infor
mation about him.
Other details about the Council are to be found in the Formicarius
of JOHANNES NIDER, a Dominican prior of Basel, who was employed
in the negotiations with the Bohemians, and died in 1438. The
Formicarius is a parable of the Christian life founded on the ex
ample of the ant ; it gives many details of the religious life of the
time, with incidental references to passing events.
1 2. The Council of Basel and the Hussites.
The labours of Herr Palacky and the munificence of the Austrian
Government have made public a series of relations which enable us to
follow in detail the proceedings of the Council with the Bohemians.
These interesting works are printed in vol. i. of the Monumenta
Conciliorum sceculi decemiquinti, and are written by members of the
Council who took a leading part in the events which they record.
(1.) JOHN STOJCOVIK OF RAGUSA has already been mentioned
as an envoy of the University of Paris to urge the assembling of the
Council, and as acting as Cesarini's representative at the opening.
We have seen him taking a chief part in the disputation with the
Bohemians at Basel in 1433. In 1435 he was sent by the Council
to Constantinople to arrange matters with the Greeks ; this proved
a difficult task, and he remained at Constantinople till the beginning
of 1438. In the same year he was sent to confer with the new King
of the Romans, Albert of Austria, whom he found at the siege of
Tabor. He entered the service of Felix "V., and was by him made
Cardinal, under the title of S. Sixtus, and died in 1444. He was
staunch in his allegiance to the Council, but by an error he has been
confounded with another John, ' dvvjp <£iAocro<£os rwv AartVwv/ ' pro-
vincialis Lombardise,' who was a disputant against Mark of Ephesus
in the Council of Florence. It is impossible that John of Ragusa
should have quitted Basel for Florence and have again returned to
Basel. Echard, Scriptores ordinis Prcedicatorum, identifies the
orator at Florence with John of Montenegro, provincial of the
Dominicans in Tuscany. The Tractatus quomodo Bohemi reducti
sunt ad unitatem ecclesice, in Mon. Condi, i. 1358, begins with
the first negotiations of the Council with the Bohemians at the end
of 1431, and gives all the documents relating to the preliminaries, and
an account of the Conference till the end of February 1433, when it
abruptly ends. The relation of John of Bagusa to the Council con
cerning his Greek embassy is printed by CECCONI, Studi Storiti,
No. clxxviii.
THE COUNCIL OF BASEL AND THE HUSSITES. 51
(2.) Still more important is the Liber Diurnus of PETER OF SAAZ, APP.
Mon. Condi, i. 289. Peter of Saaz was one of the Hussite repre- ' • —
sentatives, and his journal covers the period of the presence of the
Hussites in Basel in 1433. Besides its historical value, it throws
much light on the feelings and opinions of the different sections of
the Bohemians.
(3.) GILES GARLIER, dean of Cambray, one of the scholars of
Gerson and D'Ailly at the University of Paris, went to the Council
of Basel as the representative of his bishop. He was a famous theo
logian, and was one of the four disputants chosen by the Council to
answer the Bohemians. He was one of the envoys who accompanied
the Bohemians to Prag in April 1433; he was also sent to Regens-
burg to meet Sigismund and the Bohemians in August 1434, and
again to the Diet of Briinn in 1435. Soon after this he saw the
troubles impending over the Council, and judged it wisest to return to
his Cathedral of Cambray early in 1436. His Liber de Legationi-
bus Concilii Basiliensis pro reductione J3okemorum, in Mon.
Condi. 361, gives an account of the three embassies in which he
was engaged, as well as the second embassy to Prag in September
1433, in which he did not take part.
(4.) THOMAS EBERNDORFER OF HASELBACH was a leading member
of the University of Vienna, who came to Basel as the University's
representative in 1432 and stayed there till 1435, when he was bound
to return, because he had taken an. oath to the University that he
would never consent to grant the Hussites the Communion under
both kinds. He was, however, present, at Sigismund's request, at
the Diet of Iglau in 1436. His Diarium in Mon. Condi, i. 703,
&c., covers the period from 1433 to 1436, and is especially valuable
for the Diet of Iglau. Eberndorfer took part in several of the diets
held later on, and laboured to make peace between the Council and
Eugenius IV. He was at first an adherent of the Council, but would
not follow it in its bitter antagonism to the Pope. He was after
wards engaged in the stormy politics of Austria till his death in
1464. Eberndorfer was a considerable writer of history. His
Chronicon Austriacum, in PEZ, Scriptores Rerum Austricearum,
ii. 689, is useful for the period of his own lifetime, though it is put
together in the form of scattered notes rather than a consecutive
history. He also wrote a Liber Augustalis, or history of the Empe
rors, and a Chronicon Pontificum fiomanorum, which have not been
printed ; but Palacky, in his Geschichte von Bohmen, has made use of
the MSS. and quotes passages from them.
(5.) The Registrum of JOHN OF TOURS in Mon. Condi, i. 782,
reaches to the departure of Rokycana from Prag in June 1437. Of
John we know little save that he was a notary who accompanied the
Council's envoATC; to Bohemia.
518 THE COUNCILS OF FEKRARA AND FLOEENCE.
A PP. 13^ The Councils of Ferrara and Florence.
The preliminary negotiations between the Greeks, the Pope, and
the Council, tedious and unimportant as they may seem, are yet a
most interesting record of diplomacy. Thanks to the diligence of a
Florentine canon, CECCONI, Studi Storici sul Concilio di Firenze,
Florence, 1869, we can study them at length. He has" brought
together and arranged the documents already printed, and has sup
plemented them largely from the Florentine and Vatican archives.
For the proceedings of the Council we have —
(1.) On the Latin side, the Acts of the Council first compiled
from the Vatican archives in 1638, by Orazio Giustiniani, the
Vatican librarian, and published in MANSI, Concilia, xxxi., and
LABBE, Concilia, xiii. 825, &c. The important part of Giustiniam's
collection is by ANDREA DE S. CROCE, a Roman, and pontifical ad
vocate, whose work is thrown into the form of a dialogue between
himself and Ludovico Pontano, a form which is not conducive to
clearness of expression in a record of the sittings of a deliberative
assembly.
(2.) On the side of the Greeks, who were in favour of the union,
we have what is known as the Acta Grceca, in MANSI and LABBE, as
above. It is the work of a Greek who was present and who was
well acquainted with everything that passed. It is principally
engaged with an account of the disputes in the Council, and is
evidently written from notes made at the time. It has no writer's
name appended to it ; but all critics are agreed that it must be the
work either of Dorotheus, Archbishop of Mitylene, or of Bessarion.
The evidence is purely internal, and the arguments on either side are
put forward by Fromman, Kritische Beitrdge zur Geschichte der
Florentines Kircheneinigung, 69, &c., who argues for Dorotheus, and
by Vast, Cardinal Bessarion, Appendix I. I incline to think that
Vast has made out a strong case in favour of Bessarion's authorship.
(3.) SYLVESTER SYROPULUS was a Greek ecclesiastic, who, under
the title of //.eyas €/<KAr;cria/o^^s KCU SiK<xio(£i>Aa£, went in attendance on
the Patriarch Joseph. He wrote a history of the proceedings of the
Greeks, to which he applies the title of 'ATro/xv^/xoveiyxara. His work
was first published from a MS. in Paris by Robert Creyghton, chap
lain to Charles II., in 1660. It was issued under the title Vera
Historia Unionis non verce ; but the Latin translation which accom
panies it is by no means to be trusted. The work of Syropulus is
most interesting ; for he tells us not so much the sessions of the
Council as the private doings of its members, the dissensions among
the Greeks, the persistency of Bessarion, and the pressure used by
the Emperor. Syropulus signed the decree of the Council in favour
THE COUNCILS OF FERRARA AND FLORENCE. 519
of union, unwillingly, but afterwards repented, and wrote his History APP.
as a kind of retractation. • '
The theological points raised by the Council of Florence are many
and interesting, and I have been reluctantly compelled to pass them
by. The historical importance of the union entirely dwarfed its
theological aspect, and it was the result of necessity, not of conviction.
The whole aspect of the relations between the Eastern and Western
Churches is drawn out with care and impartiality by PICHLER,
Geschichte der Kirchlichen Trennung zivischen dem Orient und Occi
dent, Munich, 1864. From the Papal point of view the history of
the Council has been fairly set forth by HEFELE, Concilien Geschichte ;
from the point of view of the Greek Church by an anonymous Russian
writer (Professor Gorski in Moscow), whose work has been trans
lated into English, History of the Council of Florence, by BASIL
POPOFF, edited by NEALE (London, 1861); and finally a German
Protestant has dealt critically with the authorities, FROMMAN, Kritische
Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Florentiner Kircheneiniyung (Halle, 1872).
The real question in dispute is whether Syropulus or the Acta Grceca
is to be regarded as the record of what happened. There were
clearly two parties amongst the Greeks from the beginning, and
these two authorities express their different views. As a matter of
history, it is not difficult to combine them ; as a theological question
affecting the proceedings of a general Council, there are greater
difficulties. Added to the other difficulties in the way of arriving
at the exact facts, we must remember that the Greeks and Latins
knew little of one another's language, which must have hindered an
understanding on small points of discussion.
Even concerning the Union-decree itself many curious questions
have arisen. Syropulus tells us that there were five original copies,
signed by the Greeks ; but the Protosyiicellus Gregorius signed only
the first on July 5, and refused to sign the others, which were sub
mitted on July 20. The Pope was anxious to have several copies of
the decree to circulate as widely as possible. Many more than
five were current. BREQUIGNY, in vol. xliii. of Memoires de VAca-
demie de Belles Lettres de Paris (1786), mentions ten copies, but none
of them was the original. YESPASIANO DA BISTICCI, in his Life of
Cesarini, says that Cesarini was entrusted with the superintendence
of the decree ; wishing to keep the original at Florence in the
Palazzo dei Signori, he consequently only gave copies to others.
This original decree, with the signature of Gregorius, in the box in
which Cesarini put it, is preserved in the Laurentian Library of
Florence; it has been published by MILANESI in Archivio Storico
Italiano, vol. vi. Nuova Serie (1857), p. 219.
The account of the reception of the union by the Greeks is given
by GEORGE PE "\\NTZES, Chronicon Majus, bk. ii., in MIGNE'S Patro-
loyia, clvi.
520 ECCLESIASTICAL POLICY OF FRANCE AND GERMANY.
APP. 14. The Ecclesiastical Policy of France and Germany.
The Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges is given in full in the Ordon-
nances des Rois des France de la troisieme Race, vol. xiii. 267. Many
documents concerning it are in PINSON, Caroli /Septemi Pragmatic®
Sanctio (Paris, 1666); also Traitez des Droits et Libertez de I'Eglise
Gallicane.
For German affairs the documents are to be found in MULLER'S
Reichstag stheatrum unter Keyser Friedrich V. (1713) ; Kocn, Sanctio
Pragmatica Germanorum (1789); HUNCH'S Sammlung aller altern
und neuern Konkordate ; LEIBNITZ, Mantissa Codicis Juris Gentium
diplomatici • WURDTWEIN, Subsidia Diplomatica, viii. ix. ; BRAUN,
Notitia Historica, vol. vi.
Besides these are the documents more immediately relating to
Frederick TLl.,mC&MEL'sMaterialien zur osterreichischen Geschichte ;
CHMEL'S Regesten des Friedrich III. ; CIIMEL, Zur Kritik der
osterreichischen Geschichte (1850-51); CHMEL'S Literarische Reise
(1851). CIIMEL has also written Geschichte Kaiser Friedrich IV.,
which unfortunately reaches only to the year 1452.
We have need to hold fast by all the documentary evidence which
we can obtain in order to check the narrative of ^CNEAS SYLVIUS,
who is an excellent representative of the dangerous facility of a man
of letters writing the history of things in which he himself took part.
"Valuable as are the writings of ^Eneas, we have always to allow for
the strong personal element which they contain. No doubt ^Eneas
tells us how things looked to him ; but it is necessary to look beyond
his narrative for the forces which were at work. The accounts of
^Eneas are to be found in his Commentaries in FEA, and his other
Commentaries edited by GOBELINUS, in his Historia Frederici, of
which the only complete edition is that of KOLLAR, Analecta Vindo-
bonensia, ii. 2, &c., and in his letters, the chronological arrangement
of which has been determined by YOIGT, in Archiv fur Kunde oster-
reichischer Geschichts-Quellen, xvi. 323, where some are given that have
riot been previously published. There is a valuable criticism by
BAYER, Die Historia Frederici III. Imperatoris des jEneas Silvio di
Piccolomini (Prag, 1872).
The work, however, which guides us through the complications
of German ecclesiastical policy in this period is PUCKERT, Die Kiir-
furstliche Neutralitdt wahrend des Easier Concils (Leipzig, 1858).
Piickert has used as his material the papers in the Dresden archives,
consisting of instructions to ambassadors, correspondence, and drafts
of negotiations, drawn up during the period of the prevalence of the
oligarchical policy, between 1438 and 1448. He has disregarded
^Eneas Sylvius, and gives us the diplomacy without the picturesque
details.
NICOLAS V. 521
For a more general view of this period, DROYSSEN'S GescJiichte APP.
Preussens Politik, vols. i. and ii., is excellent. '
15. Nicolas V.
(1.) For Nicolas V. we are lucky in possessing the Life written by
GIANOZZO MANETTI in MURATORI, iii. pt. ii. 907. Manetti, as the
Pope's secretary, who was employed in literary work, had ample oppor
tunities of seeing and estimating the activity of the Pope, which he
celebrates in a tone of ardent eulogy. Yet Manetti is given to bom
bast, and strives to lend an air of miraculous greatness to his subject.
The value of Manetti's Life is not so much political as literary and
artistic. He gives accurate details of the buildings contemplated and
erected by Nicolas V., of his work in gathering MSS., of the treasures
of every sort which he collected. For this reason his book is a store
house of information for the architectural and artistic history of the
early Renaissance. The ' Testamentum Nicolai Y./ which forms the
third book of his Life, can hardly be regarded as strictly historical.
No doubt Nicolas V. addressed his cardinals, and no doubt he said
something of the sort which Manetti attributes to him ; but we are
not to take this testamentum as a literal account of the Pope's last
words. ' Hsec et alia qusedam hujus modi memoriter peroravit,' says
Manetti. His speech is to be regarded as a speech of Thucydides — it
graphically expresses the tendencies and aims of the life of Nicolas Y.,
but it is not to be taken as his own view of himself.
The Life of PLATINA is a tolerable compendium of events, but is
marked by no special merit.
The Life by YESPASIANO DA BISTICCI is one of Yespasiano's best
and happiest. He knew Nicolas Y. as a book collector in his days of
poverty, and the sympathy of a common taste connected the two
men. Yespasiano's account of his interview with Nicolas Y. after
his accession to the Pontificate is a piece of life-like description.
Besides these we have a valuable authority for Nicolas Y. in
GEORGIO, Vita Nicolai Quinti (Rome, 1742). Georgio was chap
lain to Pope Benedict XI Y., and had access to the Yatican archives,
which he used in compiling his work.
For the early life of Nicolas Y. we have much information in
.^ENEAS SYLVIUS PICCOLOMINI, Commentarius, ed. FEA. The circum
stances of the death of Eugenius IY. and the election of Nicolas Y.
are related at length by .^Eneas in a relatio to Frederick III., printed
by MURATORI, iii. pt. ii. 878, &c.
(2) For German affairs we have ^ENEAS SYLVIUS, Vita
Frederici III., with the same authorities to check it as have been
mentioned before. Interesting, however, are the brief remarks of
MATTHIAS DORING, the continuator of the chronicle of Engelhus, in
522 NICOLAS V.
APP. MENCKEN, Rerum Germanicarum Scriptores, iii. 1, &c. Doling was
a Franciscan professor of theology at Erfurt and minister of Kiritz in
Saxony ; his share of the continuation of Engelhus seems to extend
from 1420-1464. He is chiefly concerned with the affairs of Saxony
and Brandenburg ; but his pronounced personality makes him speak
out, and his opinions on matters of ecclesiastical as well as general
politics show us the tone of independent German feeling. Thus of
the year of jubilee he says, * Magnus populus Romam visitavit
propter spem vanam absolucionis sine restitucione injuste detentorum
et ablatorum.' Pie calls Frederick ' Rex Romanorum, verius Judse-
orum.' Of his conduct towards the crusade he says, * in his omnibus
Imperator Fredericus Australis sedit in domo, plantans ortos et
capiens aviculas ignavus.' These are but samples of the flashes of
suppressed scorn which illumine Doring's pages.
For the activity of Fra Capistrano in Hungary we have several
letters of his and of his followers in WADDING, Annales Fratrum
Minorum, vol. vi., especially the letters of Giovanni da Tagliacozzo
and Nicola de Fara, who tell of Capistrano's death ; but they magnify
his acts with a view to his canonisation.
For Frederick III.'s coronation ^ENEAS SYLVIUS* Ilisforia
Frederici is almost a journal of events. We have also Desponsatio et
Coronatio Frederici Imperatoris tertii, by NICOLAS LANCKMAN VON
FALKENSTEIN, one of Frederick's envoys to Portugal, who accom
panied Leonora, and gives a diary of the diplomatic and ceremonial
proceedings in which he was engaged. It is printed in FEZ, Rerum
Austricearum Scriptores, ii. 572, &c. CHMEL, Regesta Fredrici
III., i. Anhang, publishes a Descriptio introitus Itn. Frederici III.
by GOSWIN MANDOCTES, who calls himself ' cantor in capella papse/
and was an eyewitness.
Further materials for German affairs are given by ^ENEAS
SYLVIUS, Oratio adversus Australes, in MANSI,/JU II. Orationes, i. 184.
Mansi also publishes a work of ^Eneas Sylvius, De Ratisbonensi
Dieta, iii. 1, &c. The crusading zeal of the Duke of Burgundy is
narrated by MATTHIEU DE GOUSSY (ed. Buchon), the excellent con-
tinuator of Monstrelet.
(3). The conspiracy of Stefano Porcaro is an interesting episode in
the history of the city of Rome, and as such excited considerable atten
tion. The authorities are INFESSURA, Diarium, in MURATORI, iii. pt.
ii. 1 1 34, who gives a brief account of affairs as he had gathered them ;
he is full of the Roman spirit, and calls Porcaro ' uomo di bene ed
amatore della sua patria.' More important is the account by the great
architect, LEO BATTISTA ALBERTI, De C onjuratione Porcaria, in
MURATORI, xxv. 293. Alberti, as an aristocrat and a friend of
Nicolas V., regards with horror this attempt against the Pope, and
has no interest in the Roman side of the question. An interesting
work has recently been published by PERLEACH, Petri de Godis,
NICOLAS V. 523
Dyalogon de Conjurations Porcaria (1879). Piero de Godi was a APP.
native of Yicenza, apparently a curial, as his Dialogue, written at the N • '
time, is full of admiration of the Pope and detestation of Porcaro. It
contains much information about Roman affairs. Still more import
ant is TOMMASINI, Documenti relativi a Stefano Porcari (Rome,
1879), who publishes a letter from a Florentine resident in Rome,
which was clearly the basis of the account given by MACHIAVELLI in
his Storia Fiorentina, and is a plain account given by an observer of
events. Tommasini also publishes Conformatio Curie Romania
loquentis cdita per Joseph B. (probably Giuseppe Bripio, a learned
Milanese in the employment of Nicolas Y.). This is a poem cele
brating the deliverance of Nicolas V. ; its importance has already
been noticed by Ranke, Die Iiomische Pdpste, Anhang i., but it is
now published entire, and enables us to compare the views of another
writer with those of Manetti on the greatness of the works of
Nicolas V.
16. Calixtus III.
It was natural that a man like Calixtus III., succeeding one like
Nicolas Y., should meet with small affection from men of letters.
After the copious materials for Nicolas Y. we have little about
Calixtus Til. His Life, by PLATINA, is short and almost contempt
uous, yet does full justice to the excellent intentions of the Pope, and
his blameless private life, save as regards nepotism. The Life of
Capranica, by POGGIO, in Baluze, Miscellanea, iii. 263, gives us some
information of the feeling of the Cardinals. We have also the letters
of ./ENEAS SYLVIUS, and the mention in his Commentaries, ed.
GOBELINUS. For Germany the authorities remain the same. For the
crusading projects of Calixtus III. we have the documents in
WADDING, vi., and many mentions in SANUDO, Vite dei Duchi di
Venezia, in MURATORI, xxii. 1158, &c. ; also documents in THEINER,
Monumenta ffungariam sacram illustrantia, vol. ii. \ and in
D'ACHERY, Spidlegium, iii. A somewhat inflated account is given by
LEODORISUS CRUVELLI, De Expeditione Pii If. in Turcas, in MURA
TORI, xxiii. 21, &c.
Pius II.
For the Pontificate of Pius II. we are exceptionally well sup
plied with materials, of which the most important are the Com-
mentarii Pii II., which are supplemented by the Cardinalis Papi-
ensis Commentarii in the Frankfort edition of 1614. Ammannati
begins his Commentaries with the Crusade of Pius II,, and so takes up
the story where "°ius ceases. Besides these we have Vita Pii II., by
his friend CAMPANO, in MURATOPI, iii. part ii. 969 ; and also his Life
524 PIUS II.
APP. by his secretary, PLATINA. Campano writes in the humanistic
strain, somewhat as a discreet panegyrist of one whom he feels to be
unpopular with his readers. Platina, on the other hand, looks back
upon the days of Pius II. as golden in comparison with those of
Paul II., and writes with genuine affection and respect. It is
customary to speak in terms of high praise of the biography of Cam
pano ; but I find it laboured, and though it contains many intimate
details, yet it has little real power of characterisation and is badly
put together. The Life by Platina, on the other hand, is by far his best
work, and though to some extent founded upon Campanus, it is full
of individual appreciation of an extremely attractive man.
Besides these Lives, the letters of AMMANNATI, following the Oom-
mentarii in the Frankfort edition of 1614, as well as the letters of
CAMPANO, and FILELFO, tell us much of Pius II. in his personal and
literary character.
For Italian affairs under Pius II. we have, as of special value,
SIMONETA, De Rebus gestis Francisci Sfortice, in Muratori, xxi.
Simoneta's account of the relations of Sforza and the Pope regarding
Neapolitan affairs gives us Sforza's view, while Pius II. in his Com
mentaries tells his own. It is interesting to compare the two, and
the comparison affords material for appreciating Pius II. 's estimate of
his own doings. For the Neapolitan wars we have JOVIANUS PON-
TANUS, De Bello Neapolitano, Pontano was a literary favourite of
Ferrante, and was present with him in several expeditions during
the campaign. Pontano was a highly gifted-man, a poet, an as
tronomer, and a philosopher, as well as a historian; but his chief
claim to glory will not rest on his historical merits. His book aims
at imitating Livy, and is neither good for military nor political history,
but confuses, in an attempt after the graces of style, the accounts
even of things which he himself saw. COSTANZO has used Pontano,
iind supplemented him from other sources.
For a brief account of Pius II. in relation to Siena we have
Fragmentum Historic Senensis, by FRANCESCO TOMMASIO, in MURATORI,
xx. 55. For the wars of Federigo of Montefeltro, and Piccinino
\VQ have the Chronicon Eugubinum of GUERNIER DE BERNI, in
MURATORI, xxi. 923. This chronicle deals with events, as seen at
Gubbio, from 1350 to 1472. Berni served under Federigo, and
dedicates his book to him ; his avowed object is to contrast the
miserable state of Gubbio from internal dissensions in former times
Avith the happiness and glory which it enjoys under the rule of the
Montefeltri. Federigo of Urbino has two historians, who date from
the middle of the sixteenth century — GIROLAMO Muzio and BERNAR
DINO BALDI, who both used documents preserved at Urbino. The
only English book that deals with any thoroughness with Italian
history of the period which I have traversed is DENISTOUN'S History
of the Duke of Urbino (1851).
PIUS II. 525
Tliere are many incidental mentions in SANUDO, Vite de' Ducld di APP.
Venezia, in MURATOEI, xxii., a work founded on a knowledge of ' •
Venetian documents. Still more important are the Annali Veneti of
DOMENICO MALIPIERO, published in vol. vii. of the first series of the
Archivio Storico Italiano. These annals cover the period from 1457
to 1500, and are written with the care which distinguishes the
Venetian writers of this and the following century. Malipiero was
born in 1428 and died in 1515 ; he took part in the conduct of
Venetian affairs, and had access to documents which he has incor
porated in his work. The Annali are divided into two parts, ' Delle
Guerre coi Turchi,' and * Delle Guerre d'ltalia.' The first part
enables us to judge of the crusading schemes of Pius II.
For the proceedings of the Congress of Mantua we have a brief
narrative from NICOLAS PETIT, a French ambassador, in D'ACHERY,
Spicilegium, vol. ii. 806, where are also some other documents
relating to the Congress. Other accounts of the Congress and the
subsequent proceedings of the Duke of Burgundy in relation to the
crusade are given by the two excellent Burgundian contemporary
chroniclers, MATTHIEU DE COUSSY and JACQUES DU CLERCQ (ed.
Buchon). They also tell us much of the dealings of Pius II. with
Louis XI. The documents relating to the Pragmatic Sanction are
to be found in Preuves des Libertes de VEglise Gallicane.
For Pius II. and Germany we have the authorities already
mentioned for Frederick III., with a number of other sources
of information about points of detail. For the strife of Nicolas of
Cusa and Sigismund of the Tyrol we have the results of a diligent
investigation amongst the archives of the bishopric of Brixen,
preserved at Innsbruck, in a lengthy work by JAGER, Der Streit des
Cardinals Nicolaus von Cusa mit dem Herzoge Sigmund von Osterreich
als Grafen von Tirol (Innsbruck, 1866.) The interesting controversy
with Heimburg is given in GOLDAST, Monarchia, ii. 1587, &c., and in
FREHER, GermanicarumRerum Scriptores,**.. 120, &c. A work which
deals with Heimburg in detail is BROCKHAUS, Gregor von Heimburg,
Leipzig, 1861, which has, however, the qualities of a biography
rather than a history. For the dealings of Pius II. with the Arch
bishopric of Mainz we have a narrative by a citizen of Mainz,
Nachricht von der Unterjochung der Stadt Mainz, published by
BODMANN, in vols. iv. and v. of the Rheinisches Archiv (1811.)
For Bohemian affairs we have important sources of information
in PALACKY, Urkundliche Beitrdge zur Geschichte Bohmens in Zeit-
alter Georg's von Podrebrad, forming vol. xx. of Fontes Rerum Aus-
triacarum. Most valuable is the Historic, Wratislaviensis of PETER
ESCHENLOER, edited by MARKGRAF, in vol. vii. of Scriptores Rervm
Silesiacarum. Eschenloer was a native of Niirnberg, who came as
town clerk to Breslau in 1455, and died in 1481. His history
extends from 1457 to 1471, but after the year 1468 becomes annal-
526 Pius n.
APP. istic, as though his interest were gone. About the relation of the Latin
version of Eschenloer to a German version published by KUNISCH in
1827 I must refer to Markgrafs preface and LORENZ, DeutscJdand's
Geschichtsquellen, ii. 234. As a supplement to Eschenloer, MARKG«AF
has also published Politische C orrespondenz fireslau's, 1454-1463, vol.
viii. of Scriptores Rerum Silesiacarum. It contains several reports
and letters of Fantinus, the Papal envoy in Bohemia. The entire
period of the Catholic reaction in Bohemia is largely illustrated by
KLOSE, Documentirte Geschichte und Beschreibung von Jlreslau (1780),
of which vol. iii. is full of valuable information respecting the attitude
of the Catholics towards King George. For this period of Bohemian
history, besides PALACKY'S Geschichte Bohmens, we have an excellent
work by JORDAN, Das Kdnigthum Georg's von Podebrad, Leipzig,
1861, which treats especially of the ecclesiastical side of George's
political position.
For the whole period comprised by the Life of Pius II., lam under
great obligations to VOIGT, JEnea Silvio de' Piccolomini als Papst
Pius der Zweite, und sein Zeitalter, Berlin, 1856-63.
INDEX.
ADA
A DAMTTES, sect of, destroyed by
J\. Zizka, ii. 46
Adolf of Nassau, candidate for Arch
bishopric of Mainz, ii. 419 ; recog
nised by Pius II., ii. 421 ; captures
Mainz, ii. 422; succeeds to Arch
bishopric of Mainz, ii. 454
Adornow, Antoniotto, Doge of Genoa,
his dealings with Urban VI., i. 85
Alain, Cardinal of Avignon, his part
in the election of Calixtus III., ii.
345 ; influence with Charles VII. of
France, ii. 350 ; deprived of his
temporalities by Louis XI., ii. 453
Alapo, Pandolfello, favourite of Gio-
vanna II., ii. 4-5
Albergata, Cardinal Niccolo, Papal
president at Council of Basel, ii.
117 ; Papal legate at Congress of
Arras, ii. 142-3 ; obtains Eugenius
IV. 's forgiveness for Bishop of No-
vara, ii. 169 ; opens Council of
Ferrara, ii. 176 ; goes as legate to
Niirnberg, ii. 199 ; has ^Eneas Syl
vius as secretary, ii. 236 ; patron
of Tommaso Parentucelli, ii. 276 ;
death of, ii. 277
Albert II., King of the Romans, his
succession wished by Sigismund, ii.
161 ; elected King, ii. 197 ; his cha
racter, ii. 197 ; his death, ii. 214
Albert of Austria, brother of Fre
derick III., recognises Felix V., ii.
216 ; set up as rival to his brother,
ii. 323-4; sends Heimburg to the
Congress of Mantua, ii. 392 ; wars
against his brother, ii. 421 ; peace
made by George of Bohemia, ii. 441,
446 ; his death, ii. 454
Albert of Brandenburg, partisan of
Frederick III., at Diet of Frankfort
(1446), ii. 260; wins over his brother
the Elector, ii. 261 ; his violent
conduct at Neustadt, ii. 303-4; at
the Congress of Kegensburg1, ii. 31 9-
20 ; urges reform of the Empire, ii.
ALF
322 ; at the Diet of Neustadt (1455),
ii. 324 ; makes party in favour of
Frederick III. ii. 354 ; at the Con
gress of Mantua, ii. 397; discomfited
by Lewis of Bavaria, ii. 411 ; again
defeated, ii. 441 ; reconciled with
his enemies, ii. 454
Albik, Archbishop of Prag, his peace
ful policy in religious matters, i. 324
Albizzi, Rinaldo degli, strife between
him and Cosimo dei Medici, ii.
167-8 ; his ' Commissioni,' ii. 503-4
Albornoz, Cardinal, recovers States of
the Church, i. 48-9
Ales of Riesenberg, made governor of
Bohemia, ii. 112; lays down his
office, ii. 140
Alexander III., Pope, his struggle
with Frederick I., i. ]8-19
Alexander V., Pope, election of, i. 219 ;
early life of, i. 219-20; dissolves
the Council of Pisa, i. 220-1 ; recog
nises Louis of Anjou as King of
Naples, i. 227 ; in Bologna, i. 229 ;
his death, id. ; his Bull in favour of
the Mendicants, i. 231 ; defeated
by University of Paris, i. 232 ; cha
racter of, i. 232-3 ; his dealings
with Bohemia, i. 319-20
Alfonso V. of Aragon, sends envoys
to Council of Constance, i. 377;
attacks Corsica, ii. 11 ; allies with
Giovanna II. of Naples, id. ; breach
with Giovanna II., ii. 14 ; returns
to Aragon, ii. 15 ; ends the anti-
popes and makes peace with Martin
V., ii. 23 ; claims Neapolitan king
dom, ii. 170; captured by Genoese,
ii. 170; makes alliance with Duke
of Milan, ii. 171 ; opposed by Eu
genius IV., ii. 172; enters Naples,
ii. 228 ; keeps peace in Rome at
death of Eugenius IV., ii. 274;
visited by Frederick III., ii. 300;
patron of literature and art, ii. 343-
4 ; death of, ii. 359
528
INDEX.
ALL
Allemand, Louis d', Cardinal of Aries,
leader of advanced party at Basel,
ii. 127 ; disputes with Archbishop
of Taranto, ii. 148 ; succeeds Cesa-
rini as president of the Council, ii.
165 ; urges deposition of Eugenius
IV., ii. 202-6; his policy, ii. 207;
his share in the election of Felix V.,
ii. 209-12; at Diet of Mainz, ii.
217-8 ; at Frankfort and Aachen, ii.
220-1 ; repulsed by the Diet of
Frankfort (1446), ii. 263 ; death of,
ii. 286
Amadeus VIII. , Duke of Savoy, his
early history, ii. 210-1 ; elected at
Basel Pope Felix V., ii. 212
Ammannati, Jacopo, Bishop of Pavia,
made Cardinal, ii. 429-30; writes
to Louis XL, ii. 431 ; his account of
the last hours of Pius II., ii. 474-5 ;
his account of an epigram of Pius
II., ii. 492-3 ; his life and character,
ii. 495-6 ; his Commentaries and
letters, ii. 523-4
Ancona, death of Pius II. at, ii. 473 -5
Andreas of Regensburg, his writings,
ii. 509
Andrew of Hungary, murdered in
Naples, i. 69
Andrew, S., head of, brought to Rome,
ii. 436-8
Angelo, S., Castle of, destroyed by
Romans, i. 67-8 ; restored by Boni
face IX., i. 144 ; besieged by Komans,
i. 167 ; death of Cardinal Vitel-
leschi in, ii. 227 ; sold to the Car
dinals by Pedro Borgia, ii. 362
An nates, proposal for their abolition at
Constance, i. 370-1, 451 ; abolished
at Basel, ii. 122 ; forbidden by
Pragmatic Sanction, ii. 198
Antichrist, Wyclif's view of, i. 106;
Milicz of Kremsier preaches, i. 309
Antoninus, S., Archbishop of Florence,
his opinion of Frederick III., ii. 301-
2 ; his life and writings, ii. 504
Appian Road, Pius II. preserves tombs
along, ii. 450
Aquila, taken by Ladislas, i. 120; be
sieged by Braccio, ii. 15 ; defeat of
Braccio at, ii. 21
Aragon, recognises Clement VII., i.
95-6 ; negotiations of Sigismund
with for ending the schism, i. 362-
5 ; incorporation of with the Council
of Constance, i. 376-7 ; end of the
antipopes in, ii. 23
Armagnacs, The, incursion of against
the Swiss, ii. 223-4
Arras, Congress of, ii. 142-3
BAR
Arras, John Geoffrey, Bishop of. See
Geoffrey.
Articles of Prag, the four, contents of,
ii. 44 ; accepted by the Diet of
Caslau, ii. 45 ;assertedby the Bohe
mians, ii. 58 ; discussed at Basel, ii.
95-9 ; discussed in the Diet of Prag
with the Council's envoys, ii. 104-
5; urged on Sigismund, ii. 130, 132
Arundel, Thomas, Archbishop of Can
terbury, proceeds against the Lol
lards, i. 304-5
Aschaffenburg, Congress of (1447), ii.
281
Assisi, Boniface IX. at, i. 122
Austria, rising of against Frederick
III. in behalf of Ladislas, ii. 295-6 ;
repulse of Frederick III. from, ii.
303 ; speech of JEneas Sylvius
against, ii. 304-5 ; terms made with
Frederick III. by, ii. 366-7 ; dissen
sions of Frederick III. and Albert
in, ii. 421 ; peace made by George
of Bohemia in, ii. 441, 446; paci
fication of (1463), i. 454
Avignon, papacy transferred to, i. 31-
2 ; departure of Urban V. from, i.
48 ; return of Clement VII. to, i.
68 ; burning of bridge at, i. 133 ;
University of, i. 133 ; besieged by
Boucicaut, i. 138-40; Benedict
XIII.'s escape from, i. 156 ; the
Papal palace in restored, i. 157 ;
Council of Basel appoints a legate
for, ii. 77 ; chosen by Council of
Basel as place for conference with
the Greeks, ii. 145; fails to pay its
promised contributions, ii. 146 ;
division in the Council about, ii.
147-50
BANDERISI, the, Roman magis
trates, prepare for conclave of
Urban VI., i. 55-7 ; disagree with
Boniface IX., i. 123 ; abolished by
Boniface IX., i. 144; futile attempt
to revive, i. 189
Barbaro, Francesco, his letter about
union with the Greeks, ii. 193
Barbiano, Alberigo da, founds band
of Condottieri, i. 66; tights for
Urban VI., i. 67; besieges Nocera,
i. 82; serves Ladislas, i. 117-8;
serves Florence, i. 152; his con
quests in Romagna, i. 203 ; his
death, i. 205 ; generals trained by,
i. 242-3
Bartoschek of Drahonicz, his writ
ings, ii. 508
INDEX.
529
BAS
Basel, description of, ii. 61 ; arrival
of Bohemians in, ii. 93 ; plague at,
ii. 208; visit of Frederick III. to,
ii. 222 ; attacked by the Armagnacs,
ii. 224
— • Council of, opened, ii. 61 ; in
vites Bohemians, ii. 62-3 ; dissolu
tion of by Eugenius IV., ii, 63-4 ;
refuses Bull of dissolution, ii. 64-
5 ; reasserts decrees of Constance,
ii. 71 ; organisation of, ii. 71-3 ;
recognised in Europe, ii. 70, 73;
summons Eugenius IV., ii. 75 ; ac
cuses Eugenius IV. of contumacy,
ii. 77 ; takes Sigismuncl under its
protection, ii. 78 ; presses Eugenius
IV. for absolute revocation of his
dissolution, ii. 79-80 ; suspicious
of Sigismund's reconciliation with
Eugenius IV., ii. 81-2; presses for
Eugenius IV.'s adhesion, ii. 83-4 ;
discusses the suspension of Euge
nius IV., ii. 85 ; receives Sigismund,
ii. 86 ; prolongs the term granted to
Eugenius IV., ii. 87 ; its decree es
tablishing synodal action, ii. 88 ; re
ceives the adhesion of Eugenius IV.,
ii. 89 ; negotiates with the Bohe
mians, ii. 93-114 ; its desire to reform
the Papacy, ii. 117; admits the Papal
presidents, ii. 117; appoints legates
a latcre,ii. 118 ; begins negotiations
with the Greeks, ii. 119-20 ; reform
ing decrees of (1435), ii. 121 ; angry
with Pope about the Greeks, ii.
121 ; abolishes annates, ii. 122 ;
sends envoys to Constantinople, ii.
124 ; decrees reform of Pope and
Cardinals, ii. 125 ; grants indul
gences, ii. 125 ; its democratic orga
nisation, ii. 127-8 ; merits of its
policy towards Bohemia, ii. 140-1 ;
negotiates place for a conference
with the Greeks, ii. 144 ; chooses
Avignon, ii. 145 ; allows Avignon a
term to pay its promised money, ii.
146 ; schism in, concerning the
choice of Avignon, ii. 147 ; publica
tion of conflicting decrees in, ii.
149 ; dispute about sealing the de
crees, ii. 149-50 ; summons Eu-
geniusIV.,ii. 151 ; declares Eugenius
IV. contumacious, ii. 152 ; is dis
solved by Eugenius IV., ii. 152-3 ;
its last conference with the Bohe
mians, ii. 159-60; transferred by
Eugenius IV. to Ferrara, ii. 164 ;
appoints Cardinal d'Allemand pre
sident, ii. 165 ; suspends Eugenius
IV., ii. 165; effects of Council of
VOL. II. M M
BEN
Florence upon, ii. 192-3 ; question
of deposition of Eugenius IV. by, ii.
1 95 ; attitude of Germany towards,
ii. 196 ; its decrees recognised by
the Pragmatic Sanction of France,
ii. 198 ; refuses mediation of Ger
man Electors, ii. 199 ; its reforming
decrees accepted by Germany, ii.
200 ; discusses heresies of Eugenius
IV., ii. 201-5 ; deposes Eugenius
IV., ii. 207-8 ; appoints triumvirs
to choose electors for the papacy,
ii. 209 ; nomination of electors, ii.
210; publishes election of Felix V.,
ii. 212; relations to Felix V., ii.
213-4, 216, 219 ; forsaken by Felix
V., ii. 226 ; abandoned by Germany,
ii. 263 ; dissolution of, ii. 285-6 ;
authorities for, ii. 513-6
Beaufort, Henry, Bishop of Win
chester, comes to Constance, i. 392,
394 ; nominated Cardinal, ii. 25 ;
legate against the Hussites, ii.
27 ; in Bohemia, ii. 53-4 ; leads
the English crusaders against the
French, ii. 55
Benedict XII., Pope, his relations to
Emperor Lewis, i. 42-3
— XIII, Pope, election of, i. 129-30;
previous life of, i. 130; first negoti
ations for his abdication, i. 131-3 ;
opposition of University of Paris to,
i. 133-5; required to abdicate, i.
135; withdrawal of French alle
giance from, i. 136-7; besieged in
Avignon, i. 138-40 ; protected by
Duke of Orleans, i. 140, 155 ; escapes
from Avignon, i. 155-6 ; forgives his
rebellious cardinals, i. 156 ; restora
tion of French obedience to, i. 157 ;
resolute behaviour of, i. 158; nego
tiates with Boniface IX., i. 159; ne
gotiates with Innocent VII., i. 170;
goes to Genoa, i. 171 ; goes to Sa-
vona, i. 171 ; withdrawal of French
revenues from, i. 172, 177; expresses
desire for union of Church, i. 178;
at Marseilles, i. 178; agrees to con
ference at Savona, i. 179; receives
ambassadors of Charles VI., i. 180- 1 ;
sends envoys to Eome, i. 183 ;
attempts to form a party in Rome,
i. 190 ; threatens to excommunicate
French King, i. 193 ; his Bull torn
in pieces by the University, i. 194 ;
goes to Perpignan, i. 195; holds
council at Perpignan, i. 196; cha
racter of, i. 198-9; declared con
tumacious by Council of Pisa, i.
208 ; deposed by Council of Pisa, i,
530
INDEX.
BEN
215-6; his envoys refused a hearing
at Pisa, i. 217 ; retires to Peniscola,
i. 222 ; summoned to Council at
Constance, i. 253; sends envoys to
Constance, i. 275 ; proposals for
conference with, i. 280-1 ; refuses
to abdicate at conference, i. 363-4 ;
withdrawal of allegiance of Aragon
from, i. 366; cited by Council of
Constance, i. 381 ; deposed by the
Council, i. 388 ; authorities for his
life, i. 431-4 ; death of, ii. 22 ; date
of his death, ii. 507
Benedict XIV., anti-pope, deposed,
ii. 23
Benevento, Urban VI. at, i. 84
Bernardino of Siena, his preaching and
canonisation, ii. 292-3
Bessarion, Bishop of Nicea, at Council
of Ferrara, ii. 179-80; favours
union with Latin Church, ii. 181-2 ;
devises compromise, ii. 186, 188 ;
made Cardinal, ii. 213 ; his con
troversy with George of Trapezus,
ii. 338 ; candidate for the Papacy,
ii. 345 ; his speech at the Congress
of Mantua, ii. 386 ; legate in Ger
many, ii. 411 ; envoy in Venice,
ii. 467 ; his authorship of the ' Acta
Grseca ' of the Councils of Ferrara
and Florence, ii. 518
Bethlehem, Chapel of, in Prag, Hus
preaches in, i. 314-5, 320, 325
Biondo, Flavio, his life and writings,
ii. 342 ; his ' Decades,' ii. 511
Bisticci, Vespasiano da, his account
of the death of Eugenius IV., ii.
269 ; his interview with Nicolas
V., ii. 278 ; his relations to Nicolas
V., ii. 335 ; his life of Eugenius IV.,
ii. 510 ; his life of Cesarini, ii. 515 ;
his life of Nicolas V., ii. 521
Bohemia, early history of, i. 307-8 ;
reign of Charles IV. in, i. 308 ; first
efforts of reform in, i. 308-10 ; teach
ing of Hus in, i. 314-16 ; victory of
Bohemians over Germans in govern
ment of, i. 317-19 ; Bull of Alexan
der against heresy in, i. 319-20;
first martyrs of Reformation in, i.
325- 6 ; opinion of, about Sigismund,
i. 350 ; effects of Hus's death in, i.
355-6 ; formation of Hussite and
Catholic leagues, i. 356 ; authorities
for the history of, i. 445-7 ; failure
of the Council of Constance to
pacify, ii. 37 ; Hussite wars in, ii.
38-60 ; invited to send envoys to
Basel, ii. 63; consents to negotiate
with the Council, ii. 73 : agrees to
BOL
send envoys to Basel, ii. 76 ; their
conferences with the Council, ii.
94-102 ; influence of the conference
upon, ii. 103 ; its internal dissen
sions, ii. 104-6 ; accepts basis of
agreement with the Council, ii.
110-1; disorganisation in, ii. 111-2;
formation of Council's party in, ii.
1 14 ; plan for a national organisation
of the Church in, ii. 132 ; holds con
ferences with Sigismund, ii. 132-6 ;
recognises Sigismund, ii. 136; signs
the Compacts at Iglau, ii. 138; Ca
tholic reaction in under Sigismund,
ii. 155-8 ; sends last envoys to the
Council, ii. 158-9; refusal of its de
mands by the Council, ii. 160 ; out
break in, stopped by death of Sigis
mund, ii. 161 ; power of George
Podiebrad in, during minority of
Ladislas, ii. 293 ; attitude of Papacy
towards, ii. 294 ; Capistrano, Cusa,
and ^neas Sylvius in, ii. 294-5 ; re
cognises Ladislas as king, ii. 303 ;
doubtful succession in, ii. 359 ; affairs
in, under Ladislas, ii. 375 ; George
Podiebrad recognised as king by
Calixtus III., ii. 375 ; vacillating
policy of Pius II. towards, ii. 376-7 ;
power of, under King George, ii. 420 ;
Pius II. presses for declaration of
obedience, ii. 432 ; Bohemian envoys
in Koine, iii. 433-4 ; Pius II. annuls
Compacts, ii. 434-6 ; Diet at Prag
to consider Pius II. 's proceedings,
ii. 441-3 ; Breach between King
George and Pius II., ii. 443-4 ;
attitude of the Bohemian clergy, ii.
445-6 ; Pius II. restrained from
openly attacking, ii. 446-7 ; Pius
II.'s dread of, ii. 470-1 ; citation of
King George by Pius II., ii. 472;
authorities for the Hussite wars in, ii.
507-9; authorities for its negotia
tions with the Council of Basel,
ii. 516-7
Bologna, rise of University of, i.
17 ; won by Boniface IX., i. 152 ;
Cardinal Cossa made legate in, i.
152 ; his power in, i. 202-3 ; opin
ion of University of, about basis of
Council of Pisa, i. 209 ; Alexander
V. in, i. 229 ; election of John
XXIII. in, i. 234; departure of
John XXIII. from, i. 239 ; lost to
John XXIII., i. 241; restored to
John XXIII., i. 253 ; John XXIII.
in, i. 255 ; buys its liberty from
Braccio, ii. 5 ; recovered for Martin
V., ii. 10 ; rising of, put down by
INDEX,
531
BON
Martin V., ii. 22 ; Eugenius IV. in,ii.
172 ; revolts against Eugenius IV., ii.
173 ; under the Bentivogli, ii. 231 ;
Parentucelli, Bishop of, ii. 277 ;
recognises Papal sovereignty, but
governed by Bentivogli, ii. 287 ;
banishment of Stefano Porcaro to,
ii. 308-9 ; Pius II. in, ii. 378
Boniface VIII., Pope, his pontificate
and its results, i. 25-8
— IX.,Pope, election of, i. 98 ; character
of, i. 99, 160-1 ; conciliatory mea
sures, i. 99 ; helps Ladislas in
Naples,!. 100; holds Jubilee (1390),
i. 100; recognises Papal Vicars, i.
101 ; resisted by England, i. 101,
115-6 ; extortions of, 116-7 ; em
bassy to Charles VI. of France, i.
125; difficulties in Eome, i. 141;
his nepotism, i. 141 ; rising of Eome
against, i. 142 ; embassy of D'Ailly
to, i. 143; becomes master of Eome,
i. 144; wins back lands of the
Church, i. 145 ; discountenances
the Flagellants, i. 146; celebrates
Jubilee "(1400), i. 146; puts down
rising of Colonna, i. 147 ; helps the
Ehenish Electors, i. 148-9 ; nego
tiates with Eupert, i. 151 ; embassy
from Benedict XIII. to, i. 159;
death of, i. 160; authorities for his
life, i. 434-5
Bonincontri, Lorenzo, his life and
writings, ii. 505
Borek of Militinek, wins battle of
Lipan, ii. 115
Borgia, Alfonso, helps to end antipopes,
ii. 23 ; early life of, ii. 345-6 ;
elected Pope Calixtus III., ii. 345
— Eodrigo, Cardinal (see Lancol),
rebuked by Pius II., ii. 404 ; his
pageant at Viterbo, ii. 439
Borsoof Este, relations of, to Pius II.,
ii. 378 ; does not come to the Con
gress of Mantua, ii. 383
Boucicaut (Jean le Maingre), Marshal,
besieges Avignon, i. 138-40 ; go
vernor of Genoa, i. 171 ; attempt on
Eome of, i. 190 ; threatens Benedict
XIII., i. 195 ; loses Genoa, i. 235-6
Bourges, Pragmatic Sanction of, ii.
197-9 ; Congress at, to end the
Schism, ii. 280-1
Braccio da Montone, in the service of
John XXIII., i. 239 ; early history
of, ii. 5 ; occupies Eome, ii. 6; visits
Florence, ii. 9-10 ; besieges Acerra,
ii. 14 ; besieges Aquila, ii. 15 ; death
of, ii. 21 ; life of by C-mpano, ii. 504
Bracciolini, Poggio, his account of the
BUT
trial of Jerome of Prag, i. 358 ; his
dialogue ' Against Hypocrisy,' ii.
272 ; his judgment of Frederick
III., ii. 302 ; his literary labours, ii.
336-7 ; his quarrel with Valla, ii.
340-1 ; his letters, ii. 506, 510-1
Breslau, opposes George Podiebrad,
ii. 377, 432-3 ; released by Pius II.
from its obedience to George, ii.
446
Brethren of Common Life, the rise of,
i. 408 ; defended against Grabow at
Council of Constance, i. 409
Brezova, Laurentius of, his writings,
ii. 508
Briget, S., canonised, i. 275
Brixen, Cardinal Cusa, Bishop of, ii.
393 ; question of. rights of Bishop
of, ii. 395
Bruni, Leonardo, his description of
Eome in 1404, i. 166 ; his testimony
in favour of Gregory XII., i. 183 ;
his summary of the negotiations
between the rival Popes, i. 187 ; his
account of Gregory XII.'s creation
of Cardinals, i. 191-2; his character
of Gregory XII., i. 197-8 ; his ac
count of John XXIII.'s dealings
with Sigismund, i. 252 ; Poggio's
letter to, from Constance, i. 358 ;
his life and writings, i. 435-6 ; his
interview with Martin V., ii. 12
Brtinn, Diet of (1419), ii. 41 ; confer
ence of Sigismund and Bohemians
at (1435), ii. 133-6
Bull, ' Clericis Laicos,' i. 26 ; « Eeg-
nans in Ecclesia,' i. 231 ; ' Execra-
bilis,' ii. 396
Burgundy, Philip the Bold, Duke of,
negotiates with Benedict XIII. , i.
131-3 ; rivalry with Duke of Orleans,
i. 155
— John the Fearless, Duke of, op
posed to the Council of Constance,
i. 284 ; refuses to take up arms for
John XXIIL, i. 295; his com
plicity in the murder of the Duke
of Orleans, i. 372 ; his relations to
wards Petit's propositions, i. 373-6
— Philip the Good, Duke of, recon
ciled to Charles VII. at Arras, ii.
142-3; his power, ii. 317 ; his 'vow
of the pheasant,' ii. 318; at the
Congress of Eegensburg, ii. 319-21 ;
sends envoys to the Congress of
Mantua, ii. 381-2; alternations of
his crusading zeal, ii. 461-2 ; per
suaded to abandon the Crusade, ii.
469
Butillo. See Prignano, Francesco
M2
532
INDEX,
CAL
NS, origin of name, ii. 45 ;
\J opinion of, ii. 106
Calixtus III., Pope, election of, ii. 345 ;
his crusading zeal, ii. 346 ; recog
nised by Germany, ii. 347-8 ; his
nepotism, ii. 349 ; proclaims war
against the Turks, ii. 349 ; sends a
fleet against the Turks, ii. 350-1 ;
helps Frederick III., ii. 357 ; refuses
to recognise Ferrante of Naples, ii.
359 ; his relations to his Cardinals,
ii. 360 ; opposes succession of Fer
rante, ii. 361 ; death of, ii. 362 ;
results of his pontificate, ii. 362 ;
architectural works of, ii. 363 ;
character of, ii. 364 ; his dealings
with the Franciscan Order, ii.
447-8 ; authorities for, ii. 523
Campano, Gianantonio, his account
of the Commentaries of Pius II., ii.
489 ; his life and character, ii.
496-7 ; his life of Braccio, ii. 504
Camplo, Jacopo da, candidate for the
Papacy, i. 396-7
Candido, Piero Decembrio, his life and
writings, ii. 512-3
Canterbury, Treaty of, between Sigis-
mund and HeDry V., i. 368
Capistrano, Fra Giovanni da, preaches
in Vienna, ii. 293 ; preaches at
Frankfort, ii. 322 ; letter of, to Ni
colas V., ii. 323 ; letter of ^Eneas
Sylvius to, ii. 324 ; stirs up Hun
gary against the Turks, ii. 351 ; at
siege of 13elgrad, ii. 352 ; death of,
ii. 353
Capranica, Domenico, Cardinal, goes
to Basel, ii. 75 ; confirmed in the
Cardinalate, ii. 76 ; at Council of
Florence, ii. 185 ; his life of Bat-
tista Poggio, ii. 510
Caraccioli, Giovanni, favourite of
Giovanna II., ii. 5; suspected by
Martin V., ii. 9 ; quarrels with
Alfonso, ii. 14 ; his death, ii. 169 ;
his tomb, ii. 170
Cardinals, Papal election given to, i.
14; rebel against Urban VI., i.
62-4 ; Urban VI.'s treatment of, i.
80, 81, 83, 86 ; compact of, at elec
tion of Gregory XII., i. 176; oppose
Gregory XII., i. 191-3 ; summon
Council at Pisa, i. 196 ; difficult
position of, at Constance, i. 287-90,
294; ranked with natioES in the
Council, i. 295 ; regain power at
the Council, i. 369-70, 383; press
for a new election, i. 389-90 ; pro
posed reorganisation of, at Con
stance, i. 414 ; constitution of Mar-
CES
tin V. concerning, ii. 19-20 ; rela
tions of Martin V. to, ii. 29 ; their
agreement in conclave of Eugenius
IV., ii. 32 ; their treatment of Ca
pranica, ii. 75 ; many of them leave
Eugenius IV., ii. 80 ; reform of, at
Basel, ii. 125 ; treatment of, by
Calixtus III., ii. 360-1 ; speech of
Pius II. to, about Crusade, ii. 463-5
Carlier, Giles, appointed by Council of
Basel to dispute with the Hussites,
ii. 92, 99 ; sent as envo}r to Prag, ii.
104 ; his writings, ii. 517
Carrer, Jean, Cardinal, elects a Pope
for himself, ii. 23
Carvajal, John of, legate of Eugenius
IV. at Mainz, ii. 217; legate in
Germany, ii. 351 ; helps Hunyadi
in war against Turks, ii. 352 ; letter
of Pius II. to, ii. 387-8 ; argues with
the Bohemians in Rome, ii. 434 ;
sent to Ancona by Pius II , ii. 473 ;
his zeal for the crusade, ii. 474
Castiglionchio, Lapo da, arranges
terms between Urban VI. and
Charles of Durazzo, i. 73
Castile, recognises Clement VII., i.
94-5 ; questions raised b}^ incor
poration of with Council of Con
stance, i. 382-4
Catharine of Siena, urges return of
Pope to Rome, i. 50; supports
Urban VI., i. 67 ; character of, i.
70-1 ; canonised, ii. 410
Celestine V., Pope, his sanctity and
abdication, i. 24-5
Cenek of Warteiiberg, leader of the
Hussite League, ii. 39, 40 ; joins
Sigismund, ii. 42
Cesarini, Giuliano, Cardinal, legate
in Bohemia, ii. 30 ; proposed for
Pope, ii. 32 ; preaches Hussite Cru
sade in Germany, ii. 57 ; his letter
to the Bohemians, ii. 58 ; takes part
in the Crusade, ii. 59 ; arrives in
Basel, ii. 60 ; first steps of, in Coun
cil, ii. 62; his letter to Eugenius
IV., ii. 65-8 ; ceases to be president
of council, ii. 71 ; resumes the pre
sidency, ii. 77 ; refusal to share
presidency with Papal legate, ii.
80 ; receives the Hussite deputies,
ii. 93 ; his conciliatory attitude to
the Hussites, ii. 95, 96, 97, 99, 100;
bids farewell to the Hussites, ii.
102 ; his influence on the Hussites,
ii. 1 02-3 ; urges on the Council the
question of reform, ii. 119 ; loses bis
influence over the Council, ii. 126-7 ;
joins the Papal party, ii, 145;
INDEX.
533
CES
leaves Basel, ii. 164 ; meets Greeks
at Venice, ii. 175 ; at the Council
of Ferrara, ii. 177-83 ; at the Coun
cil of Florence, ii. 185-94; his
opinion of the election of Felix V.,
ii. 213 ; legate in Hungary, ii. 243 ;
death of, at Varna, ii. 249 ; autho
rities for, ii. 515-6 ; his care for
the Union Decree with the Greeks,
ii. 519
Cesena, massacre at, by Robert of
Geneva, i. 65 ; Gregory XII. at,
i. 245
Chalcedon, Council of, receives letter
of Leo L, i. 6
Challant, Cardinal, John XXIII. 's en
voy to Sigismund, i. 252
Chancery, Papal, its rules, i. 399-400 ;
Martin V. issues edition of John
XXII., i. 399
Charles the Great, Emperor, his re
lations to the Papacy, i. 10-12
— the Bald, receives Empire from the
Pope, i, 13
— I., King of Naples, his position in
Italy, i. 23
— II, King of Naples, lends Avignon
to the Pope, i. 31
— III., King of Naples, early life of,
i. 72 ; invested with Naples by
Urban VI., i. 73 ; defeats and kills
Giovanna II., i. 74-5 ; his dealings
with Urban VI., i. 76-82 ; invades
Hungary, i. 86 ; death of, i. 87
— III., King of Navarre, recognises
Clement VII., i. 95-6
— IV., King of Bohemia, Emperor,
wars against Lewis, i. 44 ; death of,
i. 66 ; his policy in Germany, i. 148 ;
his policy in Bohemia, i. 307 ; his
care for the reformation of the
Church, i. 308-9
— VI., King of France, relations with
Clement VII., i. 125-6; relations
with Benedict XIII., i. 129-30;
conference with Wenzel, i. 136;
restores obedience to Benedict XIII.,
i. 157-8 ; madness of, i. 172 ;
threatened excommunication of, by
Benedict XIII., i. 193; proclaims
neutrality of France, i. 194 ; pro
posals of Sigismund to, i. 366-7 ;
death of, ii. 24
— VII., King of France, re-estab
lishes Papal power in France, ii. 24 ;
his attitude towards the Council of
Basel, ii. 165 ; publishes Pragmatic
Sanction, ii. 197-9 ; sends the
Armagnacs to l^lp Frederick III.,
ii. 223-4 j proposes a meeting of
COL
princes to end the Schism, n. 224 j
negotiations with German Electors,
ii. 248 ; holds Congress at Bourges,
ii. 280; arranges abdication of
Felix V., ii. 280-1, 285-6; urges a
Council in France, ii. 291 ; refuses
to allow publication of Bulls of
Calixtus III., ii. 350 ; sends envoys
to the Congress of Mantua, to pro
test against the Neapolitan policy
of Pius II, ii. 388-91 ; death of, ii.
423 ; absolution of his ashes, ii. 427
Charlotte, Queen of Cyprus, seeks
help from Pius II., ii. 428
Chiaromonte, Manfredo di, his power
in Sicily, i. 118-9
Chichele, Henry, Abp. of Canterbury,
humbled by Martin V., ii. 25-8
Chrysolaras, Manuel, John XXIII.'s
envoy to Sigismund, i. 252 ; dies at
Constance, i. 411-2
Church, early organisation of, i. 45 ;
mediaeval theory of, i. 11 ; Wyclif's
theory of, i. 107-8; Gerson and
D'Ailly's theory of, i. 210-11;
Niem's theory of, i. 265-6; Hus's
theory of, i. 328-9; proposed na
tional basis for, in Bohemia, ii.
131-2
Cividale, Gregory II. 's Council at, i.
222
Clemanges, Nicolas de, made secretary
of Benedict XIII., i. 134 ; perse
cuted by University of Paris, i. 194;
his < De Kuina Ecclesioe,' i. 262-4 ;
his letters, i. 433-4
Clement V., Pope, his position at
Avignon, i. 31-3
— VI., Pope, his dealings with Lewis
of Bavaria, i. 45-7 ; recognises
Anrlrew, King of Naples, i. 69
- VII., Pope, election of, i. 64 ; pre
vious life of, i. 65 ; in Naples, i.
68 ; retires to Avignon, i. 68 ; nego
tiates with Florence, i. 89 ; wins to
his obedience the Spanish king-
dorr) s, i. 94-6 ; relations to Uni
versity of Paris, i. 96-7, 123-4 ; to
doctrine of Immaculate Conception,
i. 98 ; intrigues against University
of Paris, i. 126 ; bis misfortunes and
death, i. 126 ; character of, i.
127-8; authorities for his life, i.
431-3
- VIII., Gil de Munion, anti-pope,
ii. 23
Clugny, reforming ideas initiated at,
i. 13, 14
Colonna, Antonio, grand chamberlain
of Naples, ii. 34-0
534
INDEX,
COL
Colonna, Egidio, writes about the
basis of the Papal power, i. 36
— Giovanni, hostile to Innocent VII.,
i. 165-6; retreats from Eome, i. 169
— Oddo, made cardinal, i. 166 ; com
missioner for affairs of Bohemia, i.
322 ; elected Pope Martin V.,i. 396-7
— Prospero, Cardinal, his relations
to Eugenius IV., ii. 34-6
— Sciarra, attacks Boniface VIII.,
i. 28 ; crowns Lewis of Bavaria,
i. 41
— Stefano, his relations to Eugenius
IV., ii. 34-6
— family of, persecuted by Boniface
VIII., i. 25 ; rising of, against Boni
face IX., i. 147; submit to Boni
face IX., i. 148 ; rising of, on death
of Boniface IX., i. 162 ; elevation
of, under Martin V., ii. 22, 34;
attacked by Eugenius IV., ii. 35-6 ;
rebuild Palestrina, ii. 287
Como, Sigismund at, i. 252
Communion under both kinds, neces
sity of, taught by Jakubek of Mies,
i. 341-2 ; approved by Hus, i. 342 ;
decree of the Council of Constance
against, i. 351 ; accepted by the
Hussites as their symbol, ii. 37 ;
asserted in the Articles of Prag, ii.
44 ; discussed at Basel, ii. 95-6 ;
the one point on which all the
Hussites agreed, ii. 106 ; Council
of Basel resolves to grant it, ii.
106-7 ; proposals of Bohemians
about, ii. 132 ; declared by Council
of Basel not to be a precept of
Christ, ii. 160-1
1 Compacts,' the, basis of, ii. 110 ;
disputes about, ii. 112-3 ; difficul
ties about their interpretation, ii.
133-4; signed at Iglau, ii. 138-9;
final discussion of, at Basel, ii.
159-60; policy of Nicolas V. to
wards, ii. 293-4 ; accepted by King
Ladislas, ii. 303 ; relation of George
Podiebrad to, ii. 375 ; annulled by
Pius II., ii. 435 ; George Podiebrad
stands by, ii. 441-6
' Concilium Pacis,' the, i. 124
Concordats of Constance, framed, i.
406 ; contents of, i. 407 ; results of,
i. 412-3
— of Vienna, its framing and contents,
ii. 282-4
Condottieri, organised by Alberigo da
Barbiano, i. 67 ; account of, i. 241-3
Condulmier, Gabriel, made Cardinal,
i. 191 ; with Gregory XII., i. 245 ;
elected Pope Eugenius IV., ii. 32
CON
Conrad, Archbishop of Prag, letter of
Gerson to, about Hus, i. 334
- of Waldhausen, preaches in Bo
hemia, i. 308-9
Constance, arrival of John XXITI. in,
i. 258 ; arrival of Sigismund at, i.
272; description of, during the
Council, i. 273 ; tumult at flight of
John XXIII., i. 286; Hus arrives
at, i. 338 ; departure of Sigismund
from, i. 410-1 ; account of, i. 441
Constance, Council of, accepted by
John XXIII. 's envoys, i. 252 ; open
ing of, i. 268 ; proposals for its proce
dure, i. 270-2 ; right of voting in,
i. 277 ; organised by nations, i. 278 ;
proceeds against John XXIII., i.
288-90 ; decrees of third session of,
i. 288-9 ; decrees of fourth session
of, i. 291 ; decrees re-enacted in
fifth session, i. 292 ; cites John
XXIII., i. 296 ; deposes John XXIII.
i. 298 ; its general attitude towards
John XXIII., i. 300-1 ; its attitude
towards Hus, i. 334-5 ; drives Sigis
mund to hand over Hus, i. 338-9 ;
condemns the writings of Wyclif,
i. 340-1 ; imprisons Jerome of Prag,
i. 343; tries Hus, i. 344-9: con
demns the administration of Com
munion under both kinds, i. 351 ;
condemns Hus, i. 353; tries and
condemns Jerome of Prag, i. 358-61 ;
joy of, at Articles of Narbonne, i.
365; appoints first Keform Com
mission, i. 369; decree of, about
opinions of Jean Petit, i. 373-4 ;
opinions in, about Petit's propo
sitions, i. 374-5; dispute about
incorporation of Aragon, i. 377 ;
quarrel of French and English in,
i. 379-81 ; cites Benedict XIII., i.
381 ; question of its procedure, i.
382-3 ; formation of parties in, i.
383-4 ; conflict in, about procedure,
i. 386-7 ; deposes Benedict XIII.,
i. 388 ; passes reforming decrees,
i. 393-4 ; decrees Papal election, i.
395 ; embassy of Greeks to, i. 403 ;
reform statutes of March 1418, i.
405 ; condemns opinions of Grabow,
i. 409 ; dissolved, i. 409-10 ; defective
organisation of, i. 419-20; autho
rities for history of, i. 440-2 ; decree
of fourth session of, discussed, i.
443-5
Constantinople, foundation of, i. 5 ;
envoys of Eugenius IV. and Council
of Basel in, ii. 120-1, 124 ; quarrel
of envoys in, ii. 153-4 ; Departure
INDEX.
535
CON
of Greeks from, for Ferrara, ii.
174-5 ; reception of Union decree
in, ii. 1 91-2 ; captured by the Turks,
ii. 311 ; effects of its capture on
European sentiment, ii. 312-3
Conventuals, the, struggle of, against
Observantists, ii. 447-9
Coranda, Wenzel, Bohemian envoy at
Eome, ii. 433 ; his account of the
embassy, ii. 434
Correr, Angelo, elected Pope Gregory
XII., i. 176 ; early life of, ii. 32-3
—Antonio, fixes conference at Savona,
i. 178-9 ; in Paris, i. 180 ; plans of,
with Ladislas, i. 182 ; his greed, i.
188 ; refused possession of bishopric
of Bologna, i. 203
— Paolo, pursues fugitive cardinals,
i. 192
Corsignano, visited by Pius II., ii.
373-4 ; name changed to Pienza, ii.
440 — vide Pienza
Cortona, captured by Ladislas, i. 205 ;
sold to Florence, i. 241
Cossa, Gaspar, Papal admiral, i. 145
— Baldassare, Cardinal, made legate
of Bologna by Boniface IX., i. 152 ;
early life of, i. 202-4 ; share in
election of Alexander V., i. 219 ;
power over Alexander V., i. 228-9 ;
elected Pope John XXIII., i. 234-5 ;
submits to Martin V., ii. 8 ; dies in
Florence, ii. 9
C ostanza, wife of Ladislas of Naples,
divorced, i. 118-9
Council, of Sardica, i. 6 ; of Chal-
cedon, i. 6 ; ' The Earthquake,' i.
Ill ; of Pisa, i. 205-22 ; of Perpi-
gnan, i. 196-7 ; of Cividale, i. 222 ;
of Rome, i. 246-7 ; of Constance,
i. 268-410 ; of Pavia, ii. 15-16 ; of
Siena, ii. 16-19 ; of Basel, ii.
61-286 ; of Ferrara, ii. 176-183 ; of
Florence, ii. 183-191
Courtenay, Bishop of London, i. 105 ;
Archbishop of Canterbury, con
demns Wyclif, i. Ill ; puts down
Wyclifite teachers in Oxford, i.
111-2
Cramaucl, Simon, Patriarch of Alex
andria, presides over French synod,
i. 136-7 ; ambassador to Benedict
XIII., i. 180-1 ; to Gregory XII., i.
184 ; at the Council of Pisa, i.
214-5 ; made Archbishop of Rheims,
i. 222
Cremona, John XXIII. and Sigismund
at, i. 254
Crivelli, Leodorisio, his writings, ii.
504
DUE
Cusa, Nicolas of, at the Council of
Basel, ii. 101 ; envoy of Eugenius
IV. to Mainz, ii. 200; at second
Diet of Mainz, ii. 217 ; his early
life and writings, ii. 232 ; in Bohe
mia, ii. 294 ; at Congress of Eegens-
burg, ii. 316, 318-9; as Bishop of
Brixen quarrels with Sigismund
Count of Tyrol, ii. 393-5 ; fruitless
mediation of Pius II., ii. 396 ; fur
ther quarrel with Sigismund, ii.
412 ; attacked by Heimburg, ii. 419
Cyril, converts Bohemia, i. 307
D'AILLY, Peter, envoy to Clement
VII., i. 98 ; made Bishop of
Cambrai, i. 134; first embassy to
Benedict XIII., i. 138-9; embassy
to Boniface IX., i. 143 ; attempts
to mediate between the University
and Benedict XIII., i. 177 ; envoy
to Gregory XII., i. 185 ; threatened
by the University of Paris, i. 194 ;
opinions of, about conciliar principle,
i. 210-1 ; arrival at Constance, i.
269 ; proposes order of procedure,
i. 271, 274 ; arguments of, for abdi
cation of the three Popes, i. 276 ;
discusses right of voting in the
Council, i. 277 ; courageous conduct
of, at the third session, i. 289 ; part
of, in Hus's trial, i. 346-9 ; leads the
French Nation, i. 379 ; wins the
French to the Curial party, i. 385-6 ;
candidate for the Papacy, i. 396-7 ;
attacks opinions of Grabow, i. 409 ;
death of, i. 412 ; his failure at Con
stance, i. 419
D'Anchorano, Piero, at the Council of
Pisa, i. 214
Dante, ' De Monarchia,' i. 30-1 ; his
position in Italian literature, ii. 332
Dare, Jeanne, account of, by Pius II.,
ii. 490
Decretals, Isidorian, i. 12, 17
Decretum of Gratian, i. 17
'Defensor Pacis,' the, i. 37-41
Despenser, Henry le, Bishop of Nor
wich, i. 112-3
Diether, Archbishop of Mainz, doubt
ful election of, ii. 419-20 ; deposed,
ii. 421-2 ; resigns his see, ii. 454
Dominic, S., founds Order of Friars,
i. 20
' Dominium,' Wyclif 's theory of, i.
104-5
Doring, Matthias, his life and writ
ings, ii. 521-2
Durazzo, House of, i. 69
536
INDEX,
EAS
E ASTON, Adam, Cardinal, impri
soned by Urban VI., i. 86, 99
Ebendorfer, Thomas of Haselbach,
envoy of Council of Basel to Prag,
ii. 104 ; his life and writings, ii. 517
Edward I., King of England, his rela
tions with Boniface VIII., i. 26
— III., King of England, passes
Statutes of Provisors and Prasmu-
nire, i. 47 ; relations of, to Wyclif ,
i. 102-3 ; death of, i. 105
Eger, conference of, ii. 57-8
Elizabeth, Queen of Hungary, murders
Charles III. of Naples, i. 86-7
Empire, Koman, connexion with
Papacy, i. 5
— Holy Roman, theory of, i. 10, 1 1
England, conversion of, i. 8 ; relations
with Innocent III., i. 24; with
Boniface VIII., i. 26 ; resists Papal
extortion, i. 47; repudiates Papal
tribute, i. 48, 102-3 ; resists extor
tions of Boniface IX., i. 101-2,
114-6 ; sends envoys to Council of
Pisa, i. 214 ; helps to raise petition
of grievances to Alexander V., i.
221; Sigismund's visit to, i. 367;
quarrels of, with France, at Con
stance, i. 368-80; deserts Sigis-
mund, i. 391-3 ; influence of, in
arranging new election, i. 394;
Concordat with Martin V., i. 406-7;
dealings of Martin V. with, ii. 24-8 ;
^Eneas Sylvius in, ii. 236-9 ; its
relations to Pius II., ii. 391
Ernest of Pardubic, Archbishop of
Prag, his endeavours to reform the
clergy, i. 308
Estouteville, Cardinal, candidate for
the Papacy, ii. 365-7
Eugenius IV., Pope, early life of, ii.
32-3 ; first zeal of, ii. 34 ; quarrels
with the Colonna, ii. 34-6 ; dissolves
Council of Basel, ii. 64 ; relations
with Sigismund, ii. 69, 73-4 ; sum
moned to Basel by Council, ii. 75 ;
accused of contumacy, ii. 77 ; turns
to Sigismund for help, ii. 77-8 ;
assents to Council of Basel, ii. 79 ;
his helpless position, ii. 80-1 ;
reconciled to Sigismund, ii. 81 ;
crowns Sigismund emperor, ii.
82-3 ; story of him and Sigismund,
ii. 85 ; Sigismund intercedes for
him with the Council of Basel, ii.
86-7; recognises the Council of
Basel, ii. 88-9; rising of Rome
against, ii. 91; negotiates for
union with the Greeks, ii. 120-1 ;
his 'Apology,' ii. 126; reaction in
PEL
his favour at Basel, ii. 127-8; his
policy in union with the Greeks, ii.
143 ; decrees a Council in Italy, ii.
150 ; summoned to appear at Basel,
ii. 151 ; dissolves Council of Basel,
ii. 152; wins over Greeks, ii. 153-4;
his stay in Florence, ii. 167-8 ;
receives submission of Rome, ii.
168-9; plot to seize him, ii. 169;
claims Neapolitan kingdom, ii.
170 ; goes to Bologna, ii. 172 ; goes
to Ferrara, ii. 173 ; receives Greek
Emperor and Patriarch, ii. 176 ; at
the Council of Ferrara, ii. 177-81 ;
at the Council of Florence, ii. 183-
91 ; effects of union of Greek
Church for, ii. 192-3; sends envoys
to Germany, ii. 199 ; process against
at Basel, ii. 201-6 ; deposed by the
Council, ii. 207 ; sends envoys to
Diet of Mainz, ii. 217; transfers
Council of Florence to Rome, ii.
220 ; gains ground in Italy, ii. 226-
7 ; excommunicates Sforza, ii. 228 ;
affected by fall of Angevin party
in Naples, ii. 228 ; recognises
Alfonso, ii. 229 ; returns to Rome, ii.
229; attacks Sforza, ii. 230; recovers
the March of Ancona, ii. 231 ;
theological reaction in his favour,
ii. 223 ; pardons JSneas Sylvius, ii.
251 ; attacks the German Electors,
ii.252 ; makes treaty with Frederick
III., ii. 252-3 ; deposes Electors of
Trier and Koln, ii. 255 ; receives
proposals of German Electors, ii.
258-9 ; negotiations with Germany,
ii. 264-5 ; receives restoration of
German obedience, ii. 266-8 ; death
of, ii. 268-9 ; character of, ii. 269-
72 ; literary men among his secre
taries, ii. 334 ; his dealings with
the Franciscan Order, ii. 447 ;
authorities for,ii. 509-13.
T71AENZA, won by Cossa, i. 203;
-C recovered by Manfreddi, i. 236
Falkenberg, John of, demand for his
condemnation at Constance, i. 404,
409
Fantinus, proctor of George of
Bohemia in Rome, ii. 436 ; resolute
behaviour of, in Pius II. 's behalf, ii.
443; imprisoned by George, ii.
444
Felix V., Pope, Amadeus VIII. Duke
of Savoy, elected, ii. 211-2;
nominates Cardinals, ii. 213; his
coronation, ii. 214 ; receives adhesion
INDEX.
537
FEE
of some German princes, ii. 215-6 ;
party of, ii. 216 ; relations to
Council, ii. 216-7 ; proposed
marriage of his daughter to
Frederick III., ii. 221; his interview
with Frederick III. in Basel, ii.
222; league amongst Electors in
favour of, ii. 223, 226 ; takes up his
abode at Lausanne, ii. 226 ; negotia
tions for abdication, ii. 280-1 ;
abdication of, ii. 285-6; death of,
ii. 287
Ferdinand I. King of Aragon, confers
with Sigismund at Perpignan, i.
363-4; withdraws allegiance from
Benedict XIII., i. 366 ; death of,
i. 376
Ferrante, King of Naples, refused
recognition by Calixtus III., ii.
359 ; recognised by Pius II., ii. 372 ;
his claims discussed at Congress of
Mantua, ii. 388-91 ; revolt of
barons against, ii. 400 ; claims of
Rene of Anjou advanced against,
ii. 400 ; defeated at Sarno, ii. 405 ;
success of, in 1461, ii. 409-10;
marriage of his daughter to Antonio
Piccolomini, ii. 430 ; victory of, at
Troja, ii. 440 ; pacification of Naples
by, ii. 451
Ferrara, Council of, opened, ii. 176 ;
annuls proceedings of the Council
of Basel, ii. 177 ; arrangements for
its business, ii. 177-8 ; conferences
between Greeks and Latins about
Purgatory, ii. 179-80; second session
of, ii. 181-2 ; transferred to Florence,
ii. 183 ; authorities for, ii. 518-9
Filarete, Antonio, makes doors of S.
Peter's, ii. 271
Filastre, Cardinal, proposes abdication
of the three Popes at Constance, i.
275-6 ; proposals for suffrage in the
Council, i. 277; envoy to John
XXIII., i. 295
Filelfo, Francesco, his early life and
patronage by Nicolas V., ii. 341-2 ;
makes a speech at Mantua, ii. 383 ;
pays court to Pius II., ii. 492 ; his
hatred against Pius, ii. 494
' Filioque ' clause in Nicene Creed, dis
cussed at Council of Ferrara, ii.
181-2
Flagellants, the, i. 145-6
Flassland, John of, Papal envoy in
Germany, ii. 421-2
Florence, forms an Italian league, i.
49 ; mediates between Urban VI.
and Ladislas, i. 89 ; negotiates with
Clement VII., i. 89; at war with
FRA ,.
the Duke of Milan, 1390, i. 121 ;
hard pressed by him, i. 151 ; league
with Boniface IX., i. 152 ; con
gratulates Ladislas on the capture
of Rome, i. 191 ; joins league
against Ladislas, i. 204; won over
by Ladislas, i. 241 ; flight of John
XXIII. to, i. 250; checks the
advance of Ladislas, i. 255 ; Martin
V. at, ii. 4; death of Baldassare
Cossa in, ii« 9 ; Martin V.'s
departure from, ii. 12 ; helps
Eugenius IV. against the Colonna,
ii. 35 ; receives Eugenius IV., ii. 91 ;
strife of Albizzi and Medici in, ii.
167-8 ; Cathedral of, opened by
Eugenius IV., ii. 172 ; arrival of
Greek Emperor and Patriarch in, ii.
183; Council of, ii. 184-91; depar
ture of Eugenius IV. from, ii. 229 ;
Pius II. in, ii. 378 ; hangs back
from Pius II. 's crusading projects,
ii. 387 ; authorities for Council of,
ii. 518-9
Florence, Council of, ii. 183-91 ;
results of, ii. 191-3; authorities
for, ii. 518-9
Fondolo, Gabrino, lord of Cremona, i.
254
Forli, won by Cossa, i. 203 ; recovered
by Ordelaffi, i. 236
Fortebracchio, Niccolo, attacks Eu
genius IV., ii. 89 ; killed in battle,
ii. 169
France, worsts the Papacy under
Boniface VIII., i. 26-8 ; its influence
over the Papacy at Avignon, i. 31-
3 ; no longer secure for Papacy, i.
48 ; strives to win back Papacy by
election of Clement VII., i. 64;
dealings of, with Clement VII., i.
124-7 ; attempts to bring about
abdication of Benedict XIII., i.
131-40 ; reaction of, in favour of
Benedict XIII., i. 154-9 ; negotiates
for a conference of rival Popes, i.
177-85 ; withdraws from obedience
of Benedict XIII., i. 193-5 ; favours
Council of Pisa, i. 215-6; revolt of
Genoa from, i. 235-6 ; opinions of,
at opening of Council of Constance,
i. 263-5 ; its policy about the
contending Popes, i. 271, 273;
animosity of, against England in
the Council, i. 281-3; attempt of
Sigismund to pacify, i. 366-7 ; tries
to abolish annates, i. 370-1 ; dis
sension in, about the opinions of
Petit, i. 372-6 ; discord between
French and English at Constance,
538
INDEX.
FRA
i. 377-80 ; abandons cause of
reform at Constance, i. 385-6 ;
Concordat with Martin V., i. 406-7;
results of the Concordat, i. 412-3 ;
abandons the cause of reform at
the Council of Siena, ii. 18-9 ;
regulates ecclesiastical affairs by
Pragmatic Sanction, 1438, ii. 197-
9 ; helps Frederick III. against the
Swiss, ii. 223-4 ; intrigues of Ger
man Electors with, ii. 248 ; ends
the schism of Felix V., ii. 285-6 ;
protests at Congress of Mantua
against Neapolitan policy of Pius
II., ii. 388-91 ; abolishes Pragmatic
Sanction, ii. 423-8; dissatisfied
with Pius II., ii. 430-2 ; pursues
anti-papal policy, ii. 452 ; restores
the provisions of the Pragmatic
Sanction, ii. 453-4 ; prevents Duke
of Burgundy from joining the
Crusade of Pius II., ii. 469
Francis, S., of Assisi, founds Order of
Mendicants, i. 20
Franciscans, origin of, i. 20; strife
with John XXII., i. 34-41 ; parties
of Observants and Conventuals in,
ii. 447-9
Frankfort, Diet at (1409), i. 200;
election of Sigismund at, i. 237 ;
German neutrality published at, ii.
196 ; election of Albert II. at, ii.
197 ; Diet of 1442 sends envoys to
the two Popes, ii. 220-1; Diet of
1446 ends in overthrow of the
Electoral League, ii. 260-4 ; Diet
of 1454, ii. 321-3
Franks, kingdom of, its early history,
i. 9
Fraticelli, the, their relations to John
XXII., i. 34
Frederick I., Emperor, his struggle
with Alexander III., i. 18
— II., Emperor, his conflict with the
Papacy, i. 22-3
- Duke, of Austria, makes compact
with John XXIII. at Meran, i. 258;
comes to Constance, i. 280; out
done by Sigismund in his dealing
with the Swiss, i. 283 ; helps John
XXIII. to flee from Constance, i.
284-5 ; put under ban of the
Empire, i. 292 ; attacked on all
sides, i. 293 ; makes submission to
Sigismund, i. 296-7
— III., elected King of the Eomans,
ii. 215; his dubious policy in
ecclesiastical matters, ii. 217, 220 ;
at Diet of Frankfort, ii. 220-1 ;
visits Basel, ii. 221-2 ; his relations
GEO
with the Swiss, ii. 223-4; at the
Diet of Niirnberg, ii. 224-5 ;
crowns ^Eneas Sylvius poet, ii. 241 ;
!£ inclines to Eugenius IV., ii. 248 ;
sends ^Eneas as envoy to Eugenius
IV., ii. 250; makes treaty with
Eugenius IV., ii. 253-4 ; receives
proposals of Electors, ii. 256-7 ;
betrays the Electors to Eugenius
IV., ii. 258; restores obedience of
German}'-, ii. 268; makes Concordat
of Vienna, ii. 282-3 ; his reasons
for so doing, ii. 285 ; negotiations for
his marriage, ii. 291 ; sets out for
Italy, ii. 295; his marriage and
coronation, ii. 297-9 ; visits Naples,
ii. 300 ; leaves Italy, ii. 301 ; Italian
opinion of, ii. 301-2; rebellion of
Austria against, ii. 296, 302; his
humiliation, ii. 303-7 ; summons
Congress at Eegensburg about Cru
sade, ii. 315-6 ; plans of the Elec
tors against, ii. 322-5 ; renewed
opposition to, in Germany, ii. 353-4 ;
sends envoys to Pius II., ii. 374 ;
invests George Podiebrad with Bo
hemia, ii. 377; sends poor envoys
to Congress of Mantua, ii. 381 ;
defended by Pius II., ii. 386; scheme
for the deposition of, ii. 420-1 ;
attacked by his brother Albert, ii.
446-7 ; attitude towards Matthias
Corvinus, ii. 457; reconciled with
Matthias Corvinus, ii. 463
Friars, relations of, to secular clergy,
i. 230 ; Bull of Alexander V. in
favour of, i. 231 ; favoured by
Eugenius IV., ii. 272 ; their efforts
for a Crusade, ii. 349
GARA, Nicolas, his intrigues in
Hungary, i. 86-7
Garatoni, Cristoforo, envoy of
Eugenius IV. to the Greeks, ii.
120-1 ; bishop of Coron, ii. 151
Genoa, Urban VI. at, i. 85 ; hands
over its signiory to France, i. 142 ;
recognises Benedict XIII., i. 171 ;
Benedict XIII. at, i. 171 ; revolts
from France, i. 235-6; Baldassare
Cossa flies to, ii. 8 ; defeats Alfonso
of Naples off Ponza, ii. 170 ; revolts
from Milan, ii. 172 ; rises against
French, ii. 410; granted by Louis
XI. to Francesco Sforza, ii. 468
Gentien, Benoit, attacks the Cardinals
at Constance, i. 291-4
Geoff roy, John, Bishop of Arras, urges
abolition of Pragmatic Sanction in
INDEX.
539
GEO
France, ii. 423, 427-8 ; created
Cardinal, ii. 429 ; on the side of
Louis XI., ii. 430-1
George of Trapezus, his literary
activity, ii. 337-8
German neutrality, declaration of, ii.
196-7 : extended, ii. 199 ; renewed,
ii. 215 ; negotiations about, at
Mainz, ii. 217-8 ; at Diet of Frank
fort, ii. 220-1 ; opinion of Jineas
Sylvius about, ii. 244 ; intrigues for
its abolition, ii. 252-63 ; abolition
of, ii. 267
Gerson, Jean, ambassador to Clement
VII., i. 98 ; proposals of, to end the
schism, i. 175 ; envoy to Gregory
XII., i. 185 ; opinions of, about
conciliar principle, i. 211 ; his
sermon at Constance, March 1415,
i. 287 ; writes to Bohemia against
Wyclifite errors,!. 334-5; denounces
opinions of Petit, i. 373; hostility
to Burgundian party, i. 374-5 ; his
eagerness in the question of Petit,
i. 376 ; advocates union of the
Greeks, i. 403 ; opposes constitution
of Martin V.,i. 404 ; attacks opinions
of Grabow, i. 409 ; last years of, i.
412 ; his failure at Constance, i. 419
Giovanna I., Queen of Naples, deal
ings with Urban VI., i. 61 ; joins
the Cardinals, i. 62 ; previous
history of, i. 69 ; death of, i. 75
— II., Queen of Naples, her tomb
of Ladislas, i. 256 ; her favourites,
and marriage to Count de la Marche,
ii. 4-5 ; alliance with Martin V., ii.
6-7 ; suspected by Martin V., ii. 9 ;
allies with Alfonso V. of Aragon,
ii. 11 ; quarrels with Alfonso, ii.
14 ; her distracted reign, ii. 169 j
death of, ii. 170
Gobelin Person, his account of Urban
VI.'s flight from Nocera, i. 84-5;
his account of the extortions of
Boniface IX., i. 116-7 ; his cha
racter of Boniface IX., i. 161 ; his
life and writings, i. 428-9
Grabow, Mathias, his opinions con
demned at Constance, i. 408-9
Greek Church, union with, discussed
at Constance, i. 403-4 ; begun by
Council of Basel, ii. 121 ; begun by
Eugenius IV., ii. 122 ; envoys of
Council at Constantinople, ii. ] 24 ;
Greeks accept the Pope's terms, ii.
153-4 ; attitude of Greeks towards
union, ii. 173 ; causes of separation
of Churches, ii. 173-4 ; the Greeks
at the Council ol Ferrara, ii. 175-83 ;
HEI
the Greeks at the Council of Flor
ence, ii. 183-91 ; acceptance of
union by the Greeks, ii. 189-90;
decree about union published, ii.
190-1 ; reception of, in Greece, ii.
191-2 ; renewed in 1452, ii. 312
Gregory I., Pope, i. 7-8
— II, Pope, i. 8-9
— VII., Pope, i. 15-18
— IX., Pope, i. 23
- XI., Pope, i. 49, 50 ; his dealings
with England,!. 103-4; with Bo
hemia, i. 310
- XII., elected Pope, i. 176 ; early
life of, i. 176-7; professes desire
for union of Church, i. 177; agrees
to Conference at Savona, i. 179 ;
his nepotism, i. 182 ; intrigues of
Ladislas against, i. 183 ; equivoca
tions of, to French ambassadors, i.
184-5 ; leaves Eome for Siena, i.
186 ; fails to appear at Savona, i.
187 ; goes to Lucca, i. 188 ; disavows
the intention of abdicating, i. 191 ;
new creation of Cardinals, i. 191-2 ;
deserted by the Cardinals, i. 192 ;
retires to Kimini, i. 195 ; character
of, i. 197-8; sells States of the
Church to Ladislas, i. 204 ; declared
contumacious by Council of Pisa, i.
208 ; deposed by the Council of
Pisa, i. 215-6 ; holds Council at
Cividale, i. 222 ; flees to Gaeta, id. ;
abandoned by Ladislas, i. 245 ; flees
to Kimini, id. ; summoned to Coun
cil of Constance, i. 253; sends
legates to Constance, i. 269 ; prof
fers abdication, i. 275; abdicates,
i. 362 ; death of, i. 403 ; authorities
for, i. 437-8
Groot, Gerard, founds Brethren of
Common Life, i. 408
HALLAM, Robert, Bishop of Sa
lisbury, at the Council of Pisa,
i. 214 ; made Cardinal, i. 246 ; at
Constance, i. 343 ; at the trial of
Hus, i. 343 ; his relations to Sigis-
mund, i. 368 ; death of, i. 392
Hanska, Martinek, burned in Prag for
heresy, ii. 46
Hayton, John, attacks University of
Paris, i. 134
Hawkwood, Sir John, at the massacre
of Cesena, i. 65 ; a typical con-
dottiere, i. 241-2
Heimburg, Gregory, brings proposals
of German Electors to Eugenius
IV., ii. 220 ; envoy of the Electors
540
INDEX.
HEN
to Frederick III., ii. 257 ; envoy to
Eugenius IV., ii. 257-9 ; at Diet of
Frankfort, ii. 261 ; at Diet of Neu-
stadt (1452), ii. 304 ; representative
of Albert of Austria at Congress of
Mantua, ii. 392 ; speech in behalf
of Sigismund of the Tyrol, ii. 392-
3 ; prompts Sigismund to appeal to
a future Council, ii. 395 ; his ap
peals, ii. 412-3; his writings against
Pius II., ii. 414-20; flees to the
Bohemian Court, ii. 454
Henry III., Emperor, restores Empire
and Papacy, i. 14
- III., King of England, ally of
Papacy, i. 24
— IV., Emperor, humbled by Gregory
VII., i. 16
— IV., King of England, his attitude
to the Lollards, i. 305-6
- V., King of England, his dealings
with Sigismund, i. 367-8 ; attitude
towards Council of Constance, i.
385; deserts Sigismund, i. 392-3;
prevents Bishop of Winchester from
becoming Cardinal, ii. 25
- VI., King of England, letter of, to
Council of Basel, ii. 165 ; his letter
to Pius II., ii. 391
— VII., Emperor, his Italian expedi
tion, i. 32
- of Trastamare, ousts Peter the
Cruel from Castile, i. 94
Hildebrand of Saona, leader of re
forming party in the twelfth cen
tury, i. 14
Household, Papal, i. 225-6
Hungary, its relations with Naples, i.
69 ; alliance of Urban VI. with, i.
71-2 ; sends Charles of Durazzo
to Naples, i. 73 ; murder of Charles
of Durazzo in, i. 86-7; ill success
of Sigismund in, i. 149, 151, 250 ;
attempt of Ladislas upon, i. 153-4 ;
its relation to the Hussite wars, ii.
39, 41, 44 ; Sigismund's disposition
of, ii. 161 ; position of Albert in, ii.
197 ; Frederick III.'s position as
guardian of Ladislas, posthumous
son of King Albert, ii. 215; Wla-
dislaf of Poland chosen king, ii.
243 ; Cesarini legate in, ii. 248 ;
battle of Varna, ii. 249 ; negotia
tions about succession, ii. 250 ;
rising of, under John Hunyadi
against Frederick III., ii. 302 ; wars
against the Turks under Hunyadi,
ii. 351 ; siege of Belgrad, ii. 352 ;
death of Hunyadi and King La
dislas, ii. 352-3 ; accession of Mat-
INN
thias Corvinus, ii. 374 ; dealings of
Pius II. with, ii. 457; peace between
Matthias and Frederick III., ii. 463 ;
alliance of Pius II. with, ii.
467
Hunyadi, John, Governor of Hungary,
ii. 351 ; saves Belgrad from the
Turks, ii. 352 ; death of, ii. 352-3
Hus, John, early life of, i. 314 ;
teaches in Prag, i. 315 ; leads the
Bohemian masters in the University,
i. 317 ; summoned before Archbishop
Zbynek, i. 319 ; appeals from Pope
Alexander V., i. 320-1 ; summoned
before the Pope, i. 322 ; excom
municated, id. ; protests against the
sale of indulgences, i. 324-5 ; leaves
Prag, i. 327 ; opinions of, i. 328-30 ;
journeys to Constance, i. 331-2 ; his
arrival in Constance, i. 333 ; his
hopes from the Council, i. 335;
brought before the Cardinals,i. 336;
imprisoned, i. 337 ; taken to Gott-
lieben, i. 340 ; declares for Com
munion under both kinds, i. 342 ;
first audience before the Council, i.
344-5 ; second audience, i. 345-7 ;
third audience, i. 348-9 ; attempts
to procure his retractation, i. 351-3 ;
condemned to death, i. 353 ; exe
cuted, i. 354 ; fairness of his trial
discussed, i. 355 ; effects of his death
on Bohemia, i. 355-6; Martin V.
condemns, i. 405 ; authorities for
the history of, i. 445- 7
— Nicolas of, see Nicolas
TCONOCLASTIC controversy, i. 9
L Iglau, Compacts signed at, ii.
138-9
Indulgences, granted at the Jubilee,
i. 100 ; protest of Hus .against the
sale of, i. 324-5 ; proposed sale of,
by Council of Basel, ii. 121-2; de
cree granting indulgences issued by
the Council, ii. 125 ; protest of
Martin Mayr against, in Germany,
ii. 355 ; defended by Cardinal Pic-
col omini, ii. 358-9
Infessura, Stefano, his writings, ii.
509-10
Innocent III., Pope, importance of his
pontificate, i. 19-22
- IV., Pope, his struggle against
Frederick II., i. 23
VI., Pope, sends Albornoz to Italy,
i. 48
- VII., Pope, election of, i. 163 ;
early life of, i. 163; dealings of
INDEX.
541
INV
Ladislas with, i. 164 ; factious con
duct of Romans to, i. 165-7 ; flees
from Home, i. 168; in Viterbo, i.
168 ; recalled by Romans, i. 169 ;
negotiates with Benedict XIII., i.
170 ; makes peace with Ladislas, i.
173 ; death of, i. 173; character of,
i. 173-4 ; authorities for his life, i.
437
Investitures, contest about, i. 15-18
Isolani, Cardinal, John XXIII. 's legate
in Rome, ii. 6
JACOB, S., battle of, ii. 224
Jacob, Archbishop of Trier, urges
summons of a new Council, ii. 218 ;
forms league on behalf of Felix V.,
ii. 223; deposed by Eugenius IV.,
ii. 255 ; at Congress of Bcurges, ii.
280; reconciled to Nicolas V., ii.
282 ; schemes against Frederick
III., ii. 322 ; his plan for reform of
the Empire, ii. 323 ; presses his plan
at Neustadt, ii. 325 ; his death, ii.
353
Jakubek of Mies, teaches the neces
sity of reception of Communion
under both kinds, i. 341-2 ; ii. 37
Jerome of Prag, at Oxford, i. 313;
disputes against indulgences, i. 325 ;
early life of, i. 342 ; brought pri
soner to Constance, i. 343 ; recants
his opinions, i. 357 ; accused before
the Council, i. 357-8 ; his trial, i.
359-60 ; his execution, i. 361
Jobst, Markgraf of Moravia, elected
King of the Romans, i. 237 ; his
death, i. 238
John I. King of Aragon, recognises
Clement VII., i. 95
— I. King of Castile, recognises Cle
ment VII., i. 95
— VIIL, Pope, confers Empire on
Charles the Bald, i. 13
- XXII., Pope, his conflict with
Lewis of Bavaria and the Frati-
celli, i. 33-7 ; his last years, i.
41-2
- XXIII., Pope, elected, i. 234 ; cha
racter of, i. 235 ; supports Louis of
Anjou against Ladislas, i. 235 ;
dealings with Carlo Malatesta, i.
236-7 ; first dealings with Sigis-
mund, i. 238 ; returns to Rome, i.
239 ; his triumph at the battle of
Rocca Secca, i. 240; deserted by the
League, i. 241 ; deserted by Sforza,
i. 243 ; makes ^eace with Ladislas,
i. 244-5; summons Council at Rome,
JOH
i. 246-7 ; driven from Rome by La
dislas, i. 248-9; flees to Florence, i.
250 ; appeals for help to Sigismund,
i. 251; agrees to Council at Con
stance,!. 252 ; conference with Sigis
mund at Lodi, i. 253 ; at Cremona,
i. 254 ; recovers Rome, i. 257 ; hesi
tates to go to Constance, id. ; his
journey to Constance, i. 258; opens
the Council of Constance, i. 268 ;
beginning of opposition to, i, 269 ;
canonises S. Briget, i. 275 ; pro
posed abdication of, i. 276 ; charges
against, i. 278 ; agrees to abdica
tion, i. 279 ; presents golden rose to
Sigismund, i. 280; flees to Schaff-
hausen, i. 284-5 ; excuses his flight,
i. 286 ; summons Curia to quit Con
stance, i. 287 ; flees to Lauffenberg,
i. 290 ; to Friburg, i. 293 ; cited by
the Council, i. 296 ; articles against,
i. 297 ; deposed, i. 298 ; character
of, i. 299-30] ; his dealings with
Bohemia, i. 322-3, 327, 330; his
dealings with Hus at Constance, i.
332, 337-8 ; authorities for his life,
i. 442-3.
John of Chlum, accompanies Hus to
Constance, i. 332 ; anger at Hus's
imprisonment, i. 336-7 ; efforts of,
in behalf of Hus, i. 341, 344 ; affronts
Sigismund, i. 347 ; his interview
with Hus, i. 352-3
— of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster,
his relations to Spanish politics, i.
94-5 ; his ministry in England, i.
103 ; his relations to Wyclif, i.
103, 111
- of Jenstein, Archbishop of Prag,
his relations to Wenzel, i. 311-2
— of Montenegro, disputes with
Greeks at Council of Florence, ii.
184-5
— S., Nepomucen, a saint by mis
take, i. 312
— Paleeologus, Greek Emperor, at
Venice, ii. 174-5 ; at Ferrara, ii.
176-83; at Florence, ii. 183-91;
his fortunes in Greece, ii. 192
— of Palomar, at opening of Council
of Basel, ii. 58 ; deputed to dispute
against Hussites, ii. 92, 99 ; sent as
envoy to Prag, ii. 104 ; his report to
the Council on Bohemian affairs,
ii. 105-6 ; advises the concession of
Communion under both kinds, ii.
106 ; sent on a second embassy to
Prag, ii. 107 ; negotiates with the
Diet of Prag, ii. 109-11 ; Council's
envoy at Regensburg, ii, 130
542
INDEX.
JOH
John of Pomuc, put to death by Wenzel,
i. 312
— of Segovia, at Council of Basel, ii.
208 ; one of triumvirs to appoint
Electors, ii. 209 ; created Cardinal
by Felix V., ii. 217; at Diet of
Mainz, ii. 217-8 ; quarrels with the
Council, ii. 219 ; last years of, ii.
286 ; his history of the Council of
Basel, ii. 513-4
- Stoikovic, of Ragusa, envoy of
University of Paris to Martin V.,
ii. 15 ; at the Council of Siena, ii.
17-8 ; urges summons of Council of
Basel, ii. 56 ; at Conference of Eger,
ii. 57 ; deputy of Cesarini at Council
of Basel, ii. 58 ; deputed to dispute
with the Hussites, ii. 92 ; dines with
Procopius, ii. 9-4 ; attacks the first
article of Prag, ii. 98-9 ; disputes
with Rokycana, ii. LOO ; envoy of
the Council to Constantinople, ii.
121 ; his pacific counsels at Con
stantinople, ii. 153 ; his account of
the Council of Siena, ii. 505 ; his
account of the Council of Basel, ii.
515 ; his account of the Hussites, ii.
516
Joseph, Patriarch of Constantinople,
his meeting with Eugenius IV., ii.
176 ; at the Council of Ferrara, ii.
177-83 ; arrives in Florence, ii. 1 83 ;
death of, ii. 186-7
Jubilee, instituted in 1300, i. 27 ; pro
claimed for 1390 by Urban VI., i.
91; held in 1390, i. 100; held in
1400, i. 146; held in 1450, ii. 290
"JTALTEISEN, Heinrich, appointed
JV to dispute against Hussites at
Basel, ii. 92, 99
Korybut, Sigismund, of Poland, comes
as ruler of Bohemia, ii, 49 ; recalled
from Prag, ii. 49 ; returns as leader
of the Moderates, ii. 50 ; his nego
tiations with Rome, ii. 51 ; at the
battle of Aussig, ii. 52 ; failure of
his plan of reconciliation, ii. 53.
Kostka, Sdenek, Bohemian envoy to
Pius II., ii. 433-4
Kuttenberg, Sigismund defeated at,
by Zizka, ii. 48
LADISLAS, King of Bohemia and
Hungary, ward of Frederick III.,
ii. 215 ; accompanies Frederick III.
to Italy, ii. 295 ; plots to carry him
away from Frederick III., ii. 299,
300 ; given up to Court of Cilly, ii.
LEW
303 ; recognised King of Bohemia,
ii. 303 ; cowardice of, ii. 351-2 ;
death of, ii. 353
Ladislas,King of Naples, his accession,
i. 87 ; the coronation, 100 ; ill success
at first, i. 117-8 ; his first marriage
and divorce, i. 118-9 ; captures
Aquila, i. 120 ; besieges Naples, i.
141 ; puts down rising of the Ro
mans, i. 142 ; makes expedition
against Hungary, i. 153-4; helps
Innocent VII., i. 163 ; forms a party
in Rome, i. 164 ; sends troops against
Rome, i. 169; makes j>eace with
Innocent VII., i. 173 ; attempts to
seize Rome, i. 182-3 ; prepares to
renew his attack, i. 187 ; enters
Rome, i. 189; his influence over
Gregory XII., i. 190 ; relations to
Cossa, i. 204 ; fails to prevent
Council of Pisa, i. 205 ; captures
Cortona, id. ; loses Rome, i. 227-8 ;
defeated at Rocca Secca, i. 239;
excommunicated by John XXIII.,
i. 241 ; makes peace with John
XXIII., i. 245 ; his policy, i. 247-8 ;
occupies Rome, i. 248-9 ; advances
to Perugia, i. 255 ; death of, i. 256 ;
character of, i. 256-7
Lahnstein, deposition of Wenzel by
the Rhenish Electors at, i. 149
Lancol, Rodrigo, made Cardinal, ii.
349 ; takes name of Borgia, ii. 360 ;
see Borgia
— Don Pedro Luis de, made Gonfa
lonier of the Church of Calixtus III.,
ii. 360 ; Vicar of Benevento and
Terracina, ii. 361 ; flees from Rome,
ii. 362
Langenstein, Henry, writes the ' Con
cilium Pacis/ i. 124
Lclli, Teodoro de,his pamphlet against
Heimburg, ii. 417
Leo I., Pope, settles disputes between
East and West, i. 7.
— III., Emperor, results of his icono'
clastic edict, i. 8-9
- III., Pope, crowns Charles the
Great, i. 10
— IX., Pope, excommunicates Greek
Patriarch, ii. 174
Lewis the Great, King of Hungary,
his relations to Naples, i. 21-2 ;
his death, i. 86
• — of Bavaria, Emperor, attacked*"by
John XXII., i. 33 ; allies with Fra-
ticelli, i. 35 ; helped by Marsiglio,
i. 36-7 ; crowned in Rome, i. 41 ;
mistakes in his policy, i. 42-44
— III. of Bavaria, Pfalzgraf, protects
INDEX.
543
LEW
envoys of Benedict XIII. at Con
stance, i. 275; restores order on
John XXIII.'s flight, i. 286; Pro
tector of the Council, i. 299 ; has
custody of the deposed John XXIII.,
i. 299 ; sells John XXIII. to the
Florentines, ii. 7-8
Lewis IV., Pfalzgraf, marries Mar
garet, daughter of Felix V., ii. 225 ;
recognises Nicolas V., ii. 282
Limousin Cardinals at conclave of
Urban VI., i. 56-7
Lipan, battle of, ii. 115
Livorno, rebellious Cardinals at, i.194
Lodi, conference of Sigismund and
John XXIII. at, i. 253
— pacification of, 1454, ii. 315
Lollards, growth of, i. 303 ; petition
of, to Parliament, i. 304 ; opposed
by Archbishop Arundel, i. 304-5 ;
their political significance, i. 306
Lombards, the, their kingdom in Italy,
i. 7, 9-10
Lothar II., King of the Franks, re
buked by Nicolas I., i. 12
Louis I., Duke of Anjou, his claims
to Naples sanctioned by Clement
VII., i. 72 ; invades Naples, i. 75-6 ;
ill success and death, i. 78-9
— II., Duke of Anjou, his claims to
Naples, i. 87-9; regent of France,
i. 97 ; crowned King of Naples, i.
98; success in Naples, i. 117; driven
from Naples, i. 145 ; supports
Benedict XIII., i. 155; renews
war on Ladislas, i. 227-8 ; with
John XXIII. in Bologna, i. 235-6 ;
in Home, i. 239 ; victory at Rocca
Secca, i. 239-40 ; departure to Pro
vence, i. 240 ; death of, i. 241
— III., Duke of Anjou ; prosecutes
his claims in Naples, ii. 11 ; retires
to Home, ii. 14
— IX. of France, his crusade, i. 23 ;
his Pragmatic Sanction, i. 24
— XL, King of France, accession of,
ii. 423 ; negotiations of Pius II.
with, ii. 427 ; abolishes Pragmatic
Sanction, ii. 428-9 ; complaisance
of Pius II. to, ii. 430 ; Qomplaints
of, against Pius II., ii. 431-2;
anger of, at Neapolitan policy of
Pius II., ii. 452 ; his anti-papal
measures, ii. 452-3 ; by royal ordi
nances restores the Pragmatic
Sanction, ii. 453-4; his answer to
Pius II. 's crusading project, ii. 461 ;
investsFrancesco Sf orza with Genoa,
ii. 468 ; forbid? Duke of Burgundy
to go on Crusade, ii. 4G9
MAL
Louis, Duke of Orleans, ambassador to
Benedict XIII, i. 113 ; protects
-.Benedict XIII., i. 140; rivalry with
Duke of Burgundy, i. 1 55 ; supports
Benedict XIII, i. 155; prevails on
Charles VI. to restore obedience to
Benedict XIII, i. 157-8 ; his under
taking on behalf of Benedict XIII,
i. 158 ; assassinated, i. 193-372
Liibeck, Bishop of, advocates marriage
of clergy at Basel, ii. 1 18
Lucca, Urban VI. at, i. 88 ; Gregory
XII. at, i. 188 ; flight of the Car
dinals from, i. 192
Ludovico, Fra, of Bologna, his impo
sition on Pius II, ii. 458
Lupak, Martin, Bohemian envoy to
Basel, ii. 105, 113-4; at Regens-
burg, ii. 130 ; elected Bishop by the
Bohemians, ii. 136
Lusignan, Cardinal of, made le-gatus
a latere by Council of Basel, ii.
118 ; Council's envoy at Congress
of Arras, ii. 142-3
Lysura, John of, adviser of German
Electors, ii. 200 ; at Diet of Frank
fort, ii. 262 ; share of, in restoration
of German obedience, ii. 267-8 ; at
Congress of Kegensburg, ii. 319
MAGYARS, invasion of, i. 307
Mahomet II, repulsed from
Belgrad, ii. 352 ; letter of Pius II
to, ii. 459
Mainz, Diet of, 1439, accepts some
of the Basel decrees, ii. 199; Diet
of, 1441, proposes a new Council,
ii. 217-8; dispute about the arch
bishopric of, ii. 419-21 ; settlement
of dispute, ii. 454
Malatesta, Carlo, befriends Gregory
XII, i. 178, 195 ; at the Council of
Pisa,i. 213 ; his dealings with Cossa,
i. 234; hostility against John XXIII,
i. 236-7 ; repulsed from Bologna, i.
241 ; receives Gregory XXII in
Rimini, i. 245 ; urges summoning
of a Council, i. 247; fights for
Venice, i. 251 ; threatens Bologna,
i. 253 ; proctor for Gregory XII's
abdication, i. 362 ; defeated by
Braccio, ii. 5 ; puts down rising of
Bologna, ii. 22
— Gismondo, Lord of Rimini, at Con
gress of Mantua, ii. 387 ; mediation
of Pius II in behalf of, ii. 401 ; de
feated by Federigo of Urbino, ii. 440
Malesec, Cardinal, presides at Council
of Pisa, i. 208
544
INDEX,
MAL
Malipiero, Domenico, his ' History of
Venice,' ii. 525
Manetti, Gianozzo, his harangue to
Nicolas V., ii. 279 ; his character
and works, ii. 335 ; his Life of
Nicolas V., ii. 521
JManf reddi, Ettore dei, put to death by
Cossa, i. 203
Mantua, Congress of, proclaimed by
Pius II., ii. 370; arrival of Pius II.
at, ii. 379 ; proceedings of, ii.
380-397; results of, ii. 398-9;
authorities for, ii. 525
Margaret Maultasch, Imperial dis
pensation for her marriage, i. 43
— Queen Regent of Naples, struggles
against the Angevin party, i. 87-8 ;
appeals to the soldiers for Ladislas,
i. 120
Marini, Anton, agent of George of
Bohemia, ii. 471
Marino, victory of Alberigo da Bar-
biano over the Clementists at, i. 67
Mark, Bishop of Ephesus, represents
conservatism at the Council of
Ferrara, ii. 179-80 ; his arguments
about Nicene Creed, ii. 181-2; dis
putation of, at Florence, ii. 184-5 ; re
fuses compromise, ii. 1 86 ; opposes
union in Greece, ii. 191-2
Marsiglio of Padua, his ' Defensor
Pacis,' i. 36-42
Martin of Aragon, makes good his
claim to Sicily, i. 118-9
Martin V., Pope, election of, i. 396-7 ;
early life of, i. 398 ; confirms rules
of the Papal Chancery, i. 399;
coronation of, i. 400 ; his reform
programme, i. 402 ; issues consti
tution forbidding appeal from Pope,
i. 404 ; dissolves Council of Con
stance, i. 409 ; leaves Constance, i.
410 ; accounts of his election dis
cussed, i. 451-3 ; at Geneva, ii. 3 ;
takes up his abode at Florence, ii.
4 ; allies with Giovanna II., ii. 6, 7 ;
receives submission of Baldassare
Cossa, ii. 8 ; suspicious of Giovanna
II., ii. 9 ; his treaty with Braccio,
ii. 10 ; his discontent with the
Florentines, ii. 11-2 ; summons
Council at Pavia, ii. 15; dissolves
Council of Siena, ii. 19 ; publishes
constitution regulating cardinals, ii.
19-20 ; recovers the States of the
Church, ii. 21-2 ; his government,
ii. 22 ; his relations with the Eng
lish Church, ii. 25-8 ; his architec
tural works in Rome, ii. 28 ; re
duces the cardinals, ii. 28-9 ; his
MIL
death, ii. 29-30; his character, ii.
30-1 ; breaks down alliance between
Poland and Bohemia, ii. 49 ; Council
of Basel urged on, ii. 56 ; appoints
Cesarini legate in Germany, ii. 57 ;
authorities for, ii. 503-7
Mary of Hungary, marries Sigismund,
i. 86
Mathias of Janow, preaches in Bo
hemia, i. 310
Matilda, Countess of Tuscany, bequest
of her domain to the Papacy, i. 18
Matthias Corvinus, King of Hungary,
sends envoys to Pius II., ii. 374 ;
his position in Hungary, ii. 457;
allies with Venice and Pius II.
against the Turk, ii. 467 ; treasure
of Pius II. sent to, ii. 475
Mayr, Martin, attacks Papal policy
in Germany, ii. 355-6 ; negotiates
for Archbishop of Mainz, ii. 357
Medici, Cosimo dei, his exile and re
storation, ii. 167-8; conference of
Pius II. with, ii. 401
— Giovanni dei, befriends Baldassare
Cossa, ii. 7-9
Meinhard of Neuhaus, chief of Sigis-
mund's adherents in Bohemia, ii.
Ill; at Regensburg, ii. 130; his
advice to Sigismund, ii. 137
Methodius, converts Bohemia, i. 307
Michael ' de Causis,' opposes Hus,
i. 333, 342, 349
— of Cesena, his ' Tractate against
the errors of John XXII.,' i. 35
Migliorati, Cosimo dei, elected Pope
Innocent VII., i. 162-3
— Ludovico, murders eleven Romans,
i. 167, 169; makes peace with
Ladislas, i. 173 ; dispossessed of
Ancona, i. 182 ; serves Ladislas,
i. 187
Milan, Giovanni Galeazzo Visconti
buys title of Duke of, i. 150 ; his
power, i. 151 ; his death, i. 151-2 ;
fate of his dominions, i. 152 ; Mar
tin V. in, ii. 3, 4 ; Sigismund in, ii.
69 ; Filippo Visconti, Duke of,
uses the Council of Basel for
political objects in Italy, ii. 99 ;
tries to get a Council at Pavia, ii.
144 ; supports Felix V., ii. 211 ;
supports Bologna in rising against
Eugenius IV., ii. 226 ; dealings with
Piccinino and Sforza, ii. 230-1 ;
claimants for, on death of Filippo
Maria Visconti, ii. 288-9 ; Francesco
Sforza becomes Duke of, ii. 289-90 ;
allies with Papacy and Naples
against French influence, ii. 383 ;
INDEX.
545
MIL
on side of Ferrante of Naples, ii.
401-2, 405, 430; disappoints Pius
II. in help for the Crusade, i. 568
Milicz of Kremsier, preaches in Bo
hemia, i. 309-10
Montefeltro, Federigo de, Duke of
Urbino, attacks Gismondo Mala-
testa, ii. 401 ; his talk with Pius II.,
ii. 410-1
Montjoie, Count of, fights for Clement
VII., i. 66; defeated by Alberigo
da Barbiano, i. 67
Montson, Jean de, opinions of, i. 97-8
Moro, Cristoforo, Doge of Venice,
sent on a crusade, ii. 467
Munion, Gil de, anti-pope, Clement
VIIL, ii. 23
NAPLES, early history of, i. 69-70 ;
relations with Urban VI., i.
72-83, 87-8 ; Clement VII. in, i. 68 ;
Ladislas supported by Boniface IX.,
i. 99-100 ; ill success of Ladislas in,
i. 117-9 ; Ladislas established in,
i. 120, 145 ; influence of, in Rome
under Innocent VII., i. 163-9;
makes peace with Innocent VII., i.
173 ; relations of with Gregory XII.,
i. 186-91; attempts to hinder Coun
cil of Pisa, i. 204-5 ; recovery of
Rome from, i. 227-8 ; Louis II. of
Anjou in, i. 239-41 ; makes peace
with John XXIII., i. 244; aban
dons Gregory XII., i. 245 ; seizes
Rome, i. 247-9 ; death of Ladislas
in, i. 255-6 ; fortunes of, under
Giovanna II., ii. 4-5 ; dealings of
Martin V. with, ii. 6-7, 9 ; Alfonso
of Aragon in, ii. 11 ; Louis III.
of Anjou in, ii. 11-14; troubles
in, on death of Giovanna II., ii.
169-72 ; establishment of Alfonso
in, ii. 228 ; keeps peace in Rome at
conclave of Nicolas V., ii. 274 ;
Lorenzo Valla in, ii. 339-40; pat
ronage of learning in, ii. 343; Ca-
lixtus III. refuses to recognise
succession of Ferrante in, ii. 359-
62 ; policy of Pius II. towards, ii.
371-2 ; Pius II. recognises Ferrante,
ii. 372 ; alliance of with Papacy
and Milan against France, ii. 383 ;
war of Ferrante in, ii. 400-2, 405,
430 ; establishment of Ferrante in,
ii. 450-1
Narbonne, Sigismund at, i. 364 ; ar
ticles of, i. 365
Narni, Pius II. at, ii. 373
Nepotism of Urban VI., i. 73, 77, 87,
VOL. IT. N N
NIB
93 ; of Boniface IX., i. 141 ; of
Innocent VII., i. 167, 170; of
Gregory XII., i. 182, 185, 187 ; of
Martin V.,ii. 7, 22 ; of Calixtus III.,
ii. 349, 360-1 ; of Pius II., ii. 401-2,
409, 455
Neustadt, Frederick III. besieged in,
ii. 303 ; meeting of princes at, ii.
304 ; Diet at, about the crusade
(1455), ii. 324-5
Niccolo d'Este, mediates for peace in
Italy, ii. 81
Nicene Creed, addition to, by Latin
Church, discussed at Council of
Ferrara, ii. 181-2
Nicolas I., Pope, his extension of the
Papal power, i. 12-13 ; his dealings
with the Greek Church, ii. 174
- V., Anti-pope, crowned by a friar
in Rome, i. 41-2
— V., election of, ii. 275-6 ; early life
of, ii. 276-7 ; conciliatory measures
of, ii. 277-8 ; Deceives embassies,
ii. 278-9 ; recognised by German
Electors, ii. 282 ; his Concordat
with Germany, ii. 283-4 ; ends the
schism, ii. 286 ; holds jubilee in
1450, ii. 290; defers French de
mand for a Council, ii. 291-2 ; canon
ises Bernardino of Siena, ii. 293 ;
crowns Frederick III., ii. 298-9;
threatens Austria with excommuni
cation, ii. 302-3 ; recalls his threat,
ii. 307 ; plot of Porcaro against, ii.
308-10 ; help sent to Greeks by, ii.
312 ; effects of fall of Constan
tinople on, ii. 313 ; proclaims a
crusade, ii. 313-4 ; his Italian
policy, ii. 314-5 ; death of, ii.
325-6 ; ' testament ' of, ii. 326 ; cha
racter of, 327-8; plans of, for the
adornment of Rome, ii. 329-30 ;
founds the Vatican Library, ii. 334-5 ;
learned men in his court, ii. 335-44 ;
his policy reversed by Calixtus III.,
ii. 347, 350 ; his dealings with the
Franciscan Order, ii. 447; autho
rities for his life, ii. 521-2
— of Hus, leader of the Hussites, ii.
40 ; death of, ii. 48
— of Pilgram, defends the second
Article of Prag, ii. 96
Niem, Dietrich of, his account of
Urban VI.'s helplessness, i. 64 ; his
account of the torture of the car
dinals, i. 81 ; his charges against
Gregory XII., i. 183 ; his expression
of the desires of the German re
formers, i. 265-7 ; account of his
life and writings, i. 425-8
546
INDEX.
NOG
Nocera, granted to Butillo, i. 78 ;
Urban VI. in, i. 80; siege of, i.
82-3
Nogaret, Guillaume de, helps Philip
IV. against Boniface VIII., i. 28
Normanni, Galeotto, ' Knight of
Liberty,'! 165, 183
Normans, the, in Italy, i. 15, 17 ; in
Sicily, i. 69
Niirnberg, Diet of, 1438, proffers me
diation between the two Popes, ii.
199 ; Diet of 1444 shows discord
between Frederick III. and Electors,
ii. 225 ; .-Eneas Sylvius at, ii. 245 ;
its lessons, ii. 248 ; Diet of 1461,
ii. 420
OBSERVANTISTS, the, struggle of,
against Conventuals, ii. 447-9
Occam, William of, his examination
of the Papal claims, i. 35-6
Oldcastle, Sir John, rising of, i. 306
Onorato, Count of Fundi, quarrels with
Urban VI., i. 62 ; protects the car
dinals, i. 64 ; attacks Rome, i. 66 ;
declares for Benedict XIII., i. 141 ;
makes peace with Boniface IX., i.
143-4 ; death of, i. 145
4 Orphans,' party of, in Bohemia, ii.
50-1 ; opinions of, ii. 106
Orsini, Cardinal, of Manupello, re
veals scheme of the cardinals to
Urban VI., i. 80 ; legate of Viterbo,
i. 89 ; anger of Urban VI. against,
i. 90
— Paolo, his irreverence, i. 174 ; his
power under Gregory XII., i. 185
in the service of Ladislas, i. 227
fights for Alexander V., i. 228
wars against Ladislas, i. 239-40 ;
quarrels with Sforza, i. 243 ;
attacked by Sforza, i. 248 ; threat
ened with death by Ladislas, i.
255
Ostia, visit of Pins II. to, ii. 449-50
Otto IV., Emperor, recognises Papal
claims to States of the Church, i. 21
— Duke of Brunswick, husband of Gio-
vanna II. of Naples, i. 70 ; in Rome,
i. 61-2; his opinion of Urban VI.,
i. 63 ; defeated at S. Germano, i.
74 ; made prisoner by Charles of
Durazzo, i. 75 ; released, i. 78 ;
wars against Ladislas, i. 88
Oxford, University of, religious move
ment in, i. 102 ; condemns Wyclif s
teaching against transubstantia-
tion, i. 110 ; suppression of Wy-
clifite teachers in, i. 111-2; loses
PAR
its independence, i. 112 ; Bohe
mians at, i. 313
PALECZ, Stephen, opposes Hus, i.
333, 349 : tries to induce Hus to
recant, i. 352
Palermo, Archbishop of, defends Euge-
nius IV. at Basel, ii. 202-6
Palestrina, besieged by Boniface IX.,
i. 148 ; Nicolas V. allows rebuilding
of, ii. 287
Parentucelli, Tommaso, his poor
opinion of ^Eneas Sylvius, ii.
252 ; Papal envoy to Vienna, ii.
252, 257; travels to Rome with
jEneas Sylvius, ii. 258 ; at the Diet
of Frankfort, ii. 259, 263 ; elected
Pope Nicolas V., ii. 275-6
Parenzo, Bishop of, envoy of Eugenius
IV. at Basel, ii. 64-5
Paris, John of, criticises Papal power,
i. 31
- Parlement of, sanctions with
drawal of revenues from Benedict
XIII., i. 172 ; rejects Concordat of
Constance, i. 413 ; protests against
decree of Charles VII., ii. 24 ; pro
tected by Louis XI. against the
Pope. ii. 453-4
— University of, its theological im
portance, i. 17, 96; opposes John
XXII., i. 42 ; recognises Clement
VII., i. 96 ; controversy in, about
Immaculate Conception, i. 97-8 ;
begins efforts to end the Schism,
i. 123-5 ; proposals for that object,
i. 126 ; sends embassy to cardinals
on death of Clement VII., i. 129-30;
its scheme for Papal abdication
resisted by Benedict XIII., i. 132 ;
hostility to Benedict XIII., i. 133-5 ;
carries withdrawal of French alle
giance from Benedict XIII., i.
136-7 ; weakness of this policy, i.
138 ; urges a second withdrawal,
i. 172, 182 ; bitterness of, against
Benedict XIII., i. 177; condemns
Bull of Benedict XIII., i. 193-4 ;
its ideas prevail in Council of Pisa,
i. 210-5 ; protests against Bull « Reg-
nans in Ecclesia,' i. 231 ; its re
lation to mendicant orders, id. ; its
general principles at Constance, i.
265 ; its failure at Constance, i. 384,
386, 401, 412; urges summons of
Council of Pa via, ii. 15 ; its relation
towards Pragmatic Sanction, ii. 426 ;
protests against Papal taxation, ii.
424
INDEX.
547
PAR
Parliament, English, answers the
claims of Boniface VIIL, i. 26-7;
passes Statutes of Provisors and
Praemunire, i. 47 ; refuses tribute
to Urban V., i. 102 ; prohibits ex
portation of money to Rome, i. 105 ;
checks extortions of Boniface IX.,
i. 116-7; petition of Lollards to, i.
303-4; legislation of, against Lol
lards, i. 305-6 ; refuses request of
Archbishop Chichele for abolition
of Statute of Prasmunire, ii. 26-7
Pa via, Council of, transferred to Siena,
ii. 15-6
Pa}aie, Peter, a slippery controversi
alist at Basel, ii. 94 ; defends the
third Article of Prag, ii. 97 ;
speeches in the Council, ii. 100-1 ;
at Diet of Prag, ii. 109 ; banished
from Bohemia as a heretic, ii. 158
Peniscola, Benedict XIII. retires to, i.
222, 364 ; the Council's envoys at,
i. 381 ; death of Benedict XIII.
at, ii. 22; coronation of Clement
VIIL, Anti-pope, in, ii. 23
Perpignan, Benedict XIII. flees to,
i. 195; Council at, i. 196-7; con
ference of Sigismund and Ferdi
nand at, i. 363
Perugia, Urban VI. at, i. 89-90 ; dis
turbances in, i. 121 ; Boniface IX.
at, i. 121-2; lost by Boniface
IX., i. 122 ; recovered by Boniface
IX., i. 152; taken by Ladislas, i.
189 ; Braccio in, ii. 5-6 ; recovered
by Martin V., ii. 21
Peter de Luna, wins Castile and Ara-
gon to Clement VII., i. 95 ; baffles
University of Paris, i. 126 ; elected
Pope Benedict XIII., i. 129, 130
— IV., of Aragon, recognises Clement
VII., i. 95
Petit, Jean, pleads against Benedict
XIII., i. 172 ; envoy to Gregory
XII., i. 185; his opinion about
tyrannicide, i. 372 ; condemned by
the Bishop of Paris, i. 373 ; action
of cardinals towards, i. 375 ; opin
ions in Council about, i. 375-6 ;
attitude of Martin V. towards, i.
404
Petrioli, Pius II. at, ii. 403
Philargi, Peter, elected Pope Alexan
der V., i. 219
Philibert, Bishop of Coutances, Presi
dent of the Council of Basel, ii. 71 ;
sent as envoy to Bohemia, ii. 104 ;
goes on second r mbassy, ii. 107 ;
Council's envoy at Regensburg, ii.
130; at signing of Compacts, ii.
N N 2
TIC
138; disputes with Rokycana, ii.
139 ; exercises episcopal authority
in Bohemia, ii. 155, 157, 158
Philip IV., King of France, his strife
with Boniface VIIL, i. 26-8 ; rela
tions to Clement V., i. 31-3
- VI., King of France, his dealings
with Benedict XII., i. 42
Piccinino, Jacopo, invades States of the
Church, ii. 371 ; recalled by Fer-
rante, ii. 372; leconciled by Pius
II. with Gismondo Malatesta, ii.
401 ; marches into the Abruzzi,
ii. 402 ; his victory over Federigo
of Urbino, ii. 405 ; advances into
States of the Church, ii. 407;
deserts Angevin side in Naples, ii.
450-1 ; authorities for, ii. 512-3
- Niccolo, raises Bologna against
Eugenius IV., ii. 173; attacks
Eugenius IV., ii. 226-7 ; death and
character of, ii. 230
Piccolomini, ^Eneas Sylvius, comes to
Basel, ii. 76; his account of the
Bishop of Liibeck's proposal for the
marriage of the clergy, ii. 118-9;
his account of the schism in the
Council of Basel, ii. 148-9; his cha-
racterof Sigismund, ii. 162 ; stricken
by plague at Basel, ii. 208 ; his
opinions in 1444, ii. 225 ; early life
of, ii. 235 ; at Basel, ii. 236 ; his
journeys to Scotland and England,
ii. 236-9; a partisan of the Council,
ii. 239-40; crowned poet, ii. 241 ;
secretary to Frederick III., ii. 241 ;
his life at Vienna, ii 241-2 ; at
tached to Kaspar Schlick, ii. 242-3;
tends to the side of Eugenius IV.,
ii. 244 ; his dissolute life, ii. 245-7;
ambassador to Eugenius IV., ii.
250; reconciled with. Eugenius IV.,
ii. 250 ; betrays proposals of the
German Electors to Eugenius IV.,
ii. 257 ; his double-dealing, ii.
258-9; his cleverness at the Diet
of Frankfort, ii. 262 ; negotiates
restoration of German obedience,
ii. 264-8 ; his description of the
conclave of Nicolas V., ii. 274-5 ;
made Bishop of Trieste, ii. 279-80 ;
his Apology to the University of
Koln, ii. 281-2 ; negotiates mar
riage of Frederick III., ii. 291 ;
helps Nicolas V. to refuse a Coun
cil, ii. 291 ; his embassy to Bohe
mia, ii. 294-5 ; attends Frederick
III. in Italy, ii. 297-8 ; at Neustadt,
ii. 304; his speech 'Adversus Aus-
trales,' ii. 304-6 ; his letters on fall
548
INDEX.
PIC
of Constantinople, ii. 312-3 ; im
perial envoy to Congress of Regens-
burg, ii. 316-21 ; his opinion of the
Congress, ii. 321 ; at Diet of Frank
fort, ii. 321-2 ; offers obedience of
Germany to Calixtus III., ii. 347-8 ;
made cardinal, ii. 351 ; controversy
with Martin Mayr, ii. 355-7 ; over
throws German opposition, ii. 357-8 ;
his work ' De ritu et situ German
ise,' ii. 358-9 ; his relations with
Cardinal Borgia, ii. 360-1 ; elected
Pope Pius II., ii. 365-7 ; his writ
ings about the Council of Basel, ii.
514-5 ; his writings about Ger
many, ii. 520
Piccolomini, Antonio, receives Terra -
cina, ii. 409 ; in Naples, ii. 409-10 ;
marries daughter of Ferrante, ii.
430 ; seizes county of Celano, ii. 451
Pienza (see Corsignano), buildings of
Pius II. in, ii. 498-500
Pileo, Cardinal, of Kavenna, a turn
coat, i. 99, 121
Pilsen, holds to Catholicism, ii. 107 ;
besieged by Hussites, ii. 108 ; dis
putes of Council of Basel and Bo
hemians about, ii. 112; help sent
by Council to, ii. 114
Pippin the Short, his relations to the
Papacy, i. 9-10
Pisa, description of, i. 205-7 ; election
of Alexander V. at, 219
- Council of, summoned, i. 196;
preparations for, in Germany, i.
200-1 ; opening of, i. 207 ; first
session of, i. 2Q8 ; declares Popes
contumacious, id. ; receives ambas
sadors of Rupert, i, 212 ; refuses the
mediation of Carlo Malatesta, i.
213 ; appoints commissioners to try
the Popes, id. ; pronounces their de
position, i. 216-7 ; dissolution of, i.
221 ; proposals of reform in, i.
221-2 ; influence of, i. 222 ; defects
in, i. 223 ; doubtful authority of, i.
224 ; how regarded at Constance, i.
270-2 ; authorities for, i. 439
Pius II., Pope, election of, ii. 365-7 ;
coronation of, ii. 368; feelings of
on his elect ion, ii. 369 ; his crusading
policy, ii. 370; recognises Ferrante
in Naples, ii. 372 ; sets out for Con
gress of Mantua, ii. 372; visits
Corsignano, ii. 373-4 ; at Siena, ii.
374-5; his Bohemian policy, ii.
376-7 ; in Florence and Bologna,
ii. 378 ; arrives in Mantua, ii. 379 ;
waits for the assembling of the
Congress, ii. 380-1 ; his speech at
PIU
the Congress, ii. 384-5; his pro
posals for a crusade, ii. 386; dis
appointed at their reception, ii.
387-8 ; receives and answers the
envoys of France, ii. 388-91 ; his ig
norance of English custom, ii. 391 ;
negotiates with Germany for troops
for the crusade, ii. 392 ; speech of
Heimburg to, ii. 392-3; tries to
mediate between Cusa and the
Count of the Tyrol, ii. 336 ; issues
the Bull ' Execrabilis,' ii. 397 ; dis
solves the Congress of Mantua, ii.
397-8 ; his dealings with Gismondo
Malatesta, ii. 401 ; his first creation
of cardinals, ii. 402; his country
life at Siena, ii. 403; rebukes
Cardinal Borgia, ii. 404; receives
Angevin envoys, ii. 405 ; returns
to Rome, ii. 407-8 ; suppresses
revolt of the Romans, ii. 409; at
Tivoli, ii. 410 ; helps Cusa against
Sigismund of Tyrol, ii. 412-3;
writings of Heimburg against, ii.
414-7; cites Sigismund, ii. 418-9;
takes part in disputed election to
see of Mainz, ii. 419-20; deposes
Diether, Archbishop of Mainz, ii.
421-2 ; his opinion of the Pragmatic
Sanction of Bourges, ii. 426-7 ;
negotiates with Louis XI., ii. 427 ;
at Subiaco, ii. 427-8 ; receives
Queen of Cyprus, ii. 428 ; his second
creation of cardinals, ii. 429-30;
receives abolition of Pragmatic
Sanction, ii. 430-1 ; dissatisfaction
of Louis XI. with, ii. 431-2 ; rela
tions of George of Bohemia with, ii.
432-3 ; receives Bohemian envoys,
ii. 433-4 ; annuls the Compacts, ii.
434-6 ; his policy towards Bohemia,
ii. 436 ; receives the head of S.
Andrew, ii. 436-8 ; visits Viterbo,
ii. 438-9 ; presides at a theological
disputation, ii. 448-9 ; visits Ostia,
ii. 449-50 ; dealings with Louis XL,
ii. 452-4 ; results of his policy in
1454, ii. 454-5 ; his attitude towards
the crusade, ii. 456 ; European
opinion about, ii. 456-7 ; his deal
ings with Hungary, ii. 457 ; imposed
upon by a pretended embassy from
Eastern Christians, ii. 458 ; his
letter to the Sultan, ii. 459 ; his
plan of a crusade, ii. 460-1 ; his
alum mines at Tolfa, ii. 462 ; pro
poses crusade to the cardinals, ii.
463-5 ; holds Congress at Rome for
crusade, ii. 465-6 ; allies with
Venice and Hungary, ii. 467 ; per-
INDEX.
549
PLA
sists in his crusade in spite of
Burgundy's defection, ii. 470; his
fears of George of Bohemia, ii.
470-1; his preparations for a
crusade, ii. 471-2; cites George of
Bohemia, ii. 472 : departs from Rome,
ii. 472 ; arrives at Ancona, ii. 473 ;
his death, ii. 474-5 ; contemporary
opinion about his crusade, ii. 476-
7 ; different opinions of, ii. 477-8 ;
his Bull of Retraction (1463), ii.
478-80 ; his character, ii. 480-1 ;
as described by Platina and Cam-
pano, ii. 481-3 ; as a man of letters,
ii. 483-4; his historical works, ii.
485 ; his dialogues, ii. 486 ; his
many writings, ii. 487-8 ; his Com
mentaries, ii. 489 ; his scientific
spirit, ii. 490 ; his literary reputa
tion in Italy, ii, 491 ; as a patron,
ii. 491-2 ; his unpopularity with the
humanists, ii. 492-4; his simple
life, ii. 495 ; his friends, ii. 495-7 ;
his relations to art, ii. 497-8 ; his
buildings, ii. 498-500 ; general
results of his pontificate, ii. 500 ;
authorities for, ii. 523-6
Platina, his character of Pius II., ii.
481-3; his life of Martin V.,ii. 502 ;
his life of Eugenius IV., ii. 510; his
life of Nicolas V., ii. 521; his life
of Calixtus III., ii. 523 ; his life of
Pius II., ii. 524
Podiebrad, George, Governor of
Bohemia, ii. 293; interview of
jEneas Sylvius with, ii. 294-5 ; his
policy as King of Bohemia, ii. 375 ;
recognised by Calixtus III., ii. 375-
6 ; policy of Pius II. towards, ii. 376-
7 ; schemes for imperial crown, ii.
420 ; sends envoys to Rome, ii.
433 ; holds Diet at Prag (1462), ii.
441 ; holds by the Compacts, ii.
442 ; breaks with Pius II., ii. 443-
4 ; attempts to win over the
Bohemian clergy, ii. 445-6 ; aids
Frederick III., ii. 446-7 ; opposes
Pius II., ii. 470 ; his plan for a
parliament of European princes, ii.
471 ; cited by Pius II., ii. 472
Poland, its relations to Bohemia, ii.
48-9; abandons its Panslavonic
policy, ii. 49-50; Wladislaf of,
King of Bohemia, ii. 243
Pontanus Jovianus, his life and
writings, ii. 524
Ponte Molle, held against Innocent
VII., i. 167
Ponza, victory ul Genoese over
Alfonso, off, ii. 170
PRI
Porcaro, Stefano, early life of,ii. 273 ;
republican leader in Rome, ii. 274 ;
exiled to Bologna, ii. 308 ; his plot
against Nicolas V., ii, 309 ; death
of, ii. 310 ; different judgments
about, ii. 310-1 ; authorities for
his conspiracy, ii. 522-31
Prasmunire, Statute of, its meaning,
i. 47, 101 ; final passing of, i. 115;
attempts of Martin V. to abolish,
ii. 24-7
Prag, condition of Church in, i. 308 ;
tumult in, 1412, i. 325-6 ; descrip
tion of, i. 327 ; Wenzel's change of
government of Altstadt of, i. 327-
8 ; beginning of religious disturb
ances in, ii. 38 ; revolts against
Sigismund, ii. 41 ; Sigismund re
pulsed from, ii. 43-5 ; Four Articles
of, ii. 44 ; first envoys of the Council
of Basel in, ii. 104-5 ; second envoys
of the Council in, ii. 108-11 ; Sigis
mund enters, ii. 140; progress of
Catholic reaction in, under Sigis
mund, ii. 155-7 ; Rokycana driven
from, ii. 158; Podiebrad's dealing
with Diet of (1462), ii. 441-5
— University of, its growth and com
position, i. 311 ; condemns opinions
of Wyclif, i. 315; struggle of
Bohemians and Germans in, i. 317;
disruption of, i. 318 ; Hussite party
in, i. 326-7 ; league in favour of the
Church formed in, ii. 113; its
masters abandon Rokycana, ii. 156;
demand for its reformation, ii. 160
Pragmatic Sanction, the, of Louis IX.,
i. 24; of Charles VII., ii. 198-9;
discussecT at Congress of Mantua,
ii. 390-1 ; hatred of Papacy against,
ii. 423-4 ; its working in France,
ii. 425-6; opinion of Pius II. about,
ii. 426-7; abolition of, by Louis
XI., ii. 428-9; its provisions restored
by royal ordinances, ii. 452-4
Prignano, Bartolommeo, elected Ur
ban VI., i. 57-9; early life of, i.
59
- Francesco (Butillo), grants of
Urban VI. in favour of, i. 73 ; his
misconduct, i. 77 ; Urban VI. 's
plans for, i. 80; captured by Charles
Vll.,i. 83; escapadeof, at Perugia, i.
90 ; fortunes and death of, i. 141-2
Primacy, Papal, growth of, i. 5-10 ;
Marsiglio's criticism of, i. 39;
Wyclif's view of, i. 108 ; view of
the Parisian theologians about, i.
124-5, 136-7; D'Ailly's opinion
about, i. 210-1 ; Gerson's opinion
550
INDEX.
PRO
about,!. 211; view of, at Council
of Pisa, i. 222-4 ; views of the
German reformers at Constance
about, i. 265-6; how affected by
decrees of Constance, i. 291, 443-5 ;
exercised in England by Martin V.,
ii. 25-8; attacked by Council of
Basel, ii. 79-80, 122-3 ; discussed
with the Greeks, ii. 1 88-9 ; discussed
at Basel, ii. 201-2 ; defended by
canonists, ii. 231-2 ; asserted by
Pius II. 's Bull ' Exeerabilis,' ii.
396-7
Procession of the Holy Ghost, dis
cussed at Council of Ferrara, ii.
181-2; discussed at Council of
Florence, ii. 184-5; compromise of
Latins and Greeks about, ii. 185-6
Procopius, ' the Great,' leader of the
Bohemians, ii. 52; wins the battle
of Aussig, ii. 52 : his policy in
Bohemia, ii. 53-4 ; devastates
Germany, ii. 55 ; comes to Basel, ii.
93 ; his speeches before the Council,
ii. 96, 98, 99, 101, 102 ; at the Diet
of Prag, which negotiates with the
Council, ii. 105 ; mutiny against,
ii. 108; at the Diet of Prag, ii. Ill;
death of, at Lipan, ii. 115
— of Rabstein, P>ohemian envoy in
Eome, ii. 432-4 ; reports his mis
sion to Bohemian Diet, ii. 441
Provisions, growth of, i. 46 ; dealings
of England with, i. 47, 101, 115
Provisors, Statutes against, why made,
i. 47, 101 ; final passing of, i. 115 ;
influence of, upon English policy at
Constance, i. 401
Purgatory, doctrine of, discussed at
Council of Ferrara, ii. 179-80;
agreement about, in Council of
Florence, ii. 187-8
T)ABAN, Archbishop of Trier, de-
Jit vises the neutrality of German}',
ii. 196
Reform, proposed at Council of Pisa,
i. 221-2; general desire for, at
Constance, i. 261-6 ; first com
mission for, at Constance, i. 369 ;
its report, i. 388-9 ; second reform
commission at Constance, i. 389;
reforming decrees of Oct. 9, 1417,
i. 393-4 ; third reform commission
at Constance, i. 401 ; reform pro
posals of Martin V., i. 402 ; statutes
of March 1418, i. 405 ; Concordats
of Constance for, i. 406-7 ; reforms
mooted at Constance, i. 413-8 ;
ROC
causes of failure of reform move
ment at Constance, i. 418-20 ;
tractates, about at Constance, i.
449-50 ; proposals for, at Council of
Siena, ii. 17 ; reforming constitu
tions of Martin V., 1424, ii. 19-20 ;
reform of Papacy discussed at the
Council of Basel, ii. 117; reforming
decrees of 1435 at Basel, ii. 121 ;
abolition of annatesbythe Council,
ii. 122; reform of Pope and Cardinals
by the Council, ii. 1 25 ; made in
France by the Pragmatic Sanction
of Bourges, ii. 197-9 ; made in
Germany by acceptance of the
Basel decrees, i. 200; abandoned
by Frederick lll.,.ii. 253-5; pro
visions for in Concordat of Vienna,
ii. 283-4
Regensburg, conference of Sigismund
with Bohemians at, ii. 130-1 ; Con
gress of , 1454, ii. 316-21
Rene of Anjou, Count of Provence,
recognised as heir to the kingdom
of Naples, ii. 1 70 ; driven from
Naples, ii. 228 ; sends envoys to
Congress of Mantua, ii. 388-9 ;
driven from Genoa, ii. 410
Reichenthal, Ulric, his account of
Sigismund 's departure from Con
stance, i. 411 ; his life and writings,
i. 440-1
Rense, decree of Electors at, i. 43
Reservations, Papal, origin of, i. 46;
under Boniface IX., i. 116 ; how
dealt with at Constance, i. 415-7;
cut off by Pragmatic Sanction of
Bourges, ii. 198 ; abolished in Ger
many, ii. 200 ; protest of Martin
Mayr against, ii. 355 ; defended by
^Eneas Sylvius, ii. 356
Rheims, conference of Wenzel and
Charles VI. at, i. 136
Riccio, plot of, against Eugenius IV.,
ii. 169
Richard II., King of England, his
dealings with Boniface IX., i. 115 ;
joins ecclesiastical policy of France,
i. 135 ; results of his marriage with
Anne of Bohemia, i. 313
Rimini, Gregory XII. at, i. 195, 245
Ripaille, hermitage of Amadeus VIII.
of Savoy at, ii. 211 ; ^neas Sylvius
at, ii. 236
Robert of Geneva, Cardinal, i. 61 ;
elected Pope Clement VII., i. 64
— King of Naples, helped by Cle
ment V., i. 32 ; failure of Lewis of
Bavaria against, i. 42
Rocca Secca, battle of, i. 239
INDEX.
551
ROK
Rokycana, John, incites Bohemians
against Korybut, ii. 53 ; preaches
before the Council of Basel, ii. 95 ;
defends the First Article of Prag,
ii. 95-6 ; conciliatory attitude to
the Council, ii. 97 ; dispute with
John of Kagusa, ii. 100-1 ; at the
Diet of Prag, ii. 109 ; at conference
of Regensburg, ii. 130 ; at confer
ence of Briinn, ii. 133-4; elected
Archbishop of Prag, ii. 136 ; disputes
with legates of the Council, ii. 1 39 ;
set aside in Prag, ii. 155-8 ; driven
to leave Prag, ii. 1 58-9 ; returns to
Prag, ii. 293; recognised Archbishop
by Ladislas, ii. 303
Rome, return of Urban V. to, i. 48 ;
tumult in, at election of Urban VI.,
i. 57-9 ; plot in, against Urban VI., i.
70 ; return of Urban VI. to, i. 91 ;
misery of, i. 91 ; makes agreement
with Boniface IX., i. 120-1 ; recalls
Boniface IX., i. 122 ; submits to
Boniface IX., i. 123; rising in, put
down by Ladislas, i. 142 ; its con
stitution altered by Boniface IX.,
i. 144-5; Flagellants in, i. 146;
rising of Colonna in, i. 147 ; dis
turbance in, at death of Boniface
IX., i. 162 ; Ladislas in, i. 163 ; go
vernment of, under Innocent VII.,
i. 164 ; factious conduct of, to In
nocent VII., i. 166 ; flight of Inno
cent VII. from, i. 168; attacked
by Ladislas, i. 169 ; recalls Inno
cent VII., i. 169 ; makes terms with
Innocent VII., i. 173 ; intrigues of
Ladislas in, i. 183 ; opinion of citi
zens of, about Schism, i. 185 ; depar
ture of Gregory XII. fiom, i. 186;
capture of, by Ladislas, i. 188-9 ;
won for Alexander V., i. 227-8 ;
invites Alexander V. to return, i.
229 ; return of John XXIII. to, i.
239 ; revival of old Republic in, i.
248 ; occupied by Ladislas, i. 249 ;
recovered for John XXIII., i. 257 ;
condition of, during abe37ance of
Papacy, ii. 5 ; occupied by Braccio,
ii. 6 ; ruinous condition of at Martin
V.'s return, ii. 13 ; restoration of
by Martin V., ii. 28 ; conflict in
between Eugenius IV. and the Co
lonna, ii. 34-6 ; coronation of Sigis-
mund in, ii. 81-5 ; Eugenius IV.
driven from, ii. 91 ; recovered by
Vitelleschi, ii. 168-9 ; power of Vi-
telleschi in, ii. 227 ; return of Eu
genius IV. to, 11. 229 ; its buildings
restored by Eugenius IV., ii. 271;
SFO
republican movement in, 1447, ii.
273-4 ; coronation of Frederick III.
in, ii. 297-300; plans of Nicolas V.
for the adornment of, ii. 329-30 ;
riot in at coronation of Calixtus
III., ii. 346 ; departure of Pius II.
from, ii. 372 ; disturbances in, ii.
406-7 ; return of Pius II. to, ii.
407-8 ; pacification of, ii. 408-9 ;
Queen of Cyprus visits, ii. 428 ;
ecclesiastical ceremonies in, at re
ception of head of S. Andrew, ii.
436-8 ; Congress in, about crusade,
ii. 465-6 ; buildings of Pius II. in,
ii. 498
Rosellino, Bernardo, architect of Pius
II., ii. 498
Rupert, Pfalzgraf (Klem), elected
King of the Romans, i. 1 48-50 ; ex
pedition to Italy, i. 151 ; his atti
tude to the Council of Pisa, i. 200-
1 ; sends ambassadors to object to
the Council of Pisa, i. 212 ; refuses
to acknowledge Alexander V., i.
237 ; his death, i. 237
SAAZ, Germans repulsed from, by
Zizka, ii. 46
— Peter of, his ' Liber Diurnus,' it,
516-7
Sacchetti, Franco, his story of Sir
John Hawkwood, i. 242
Sardica, Council of, i. 6
Satires against Benedict III. and Gre
gory XII., i. 201-2
Sautre, William, burned for heresy,
i. 305
Savona, proposed conference of Popes
at, i. 179, 184-5, 187
Scarampo, Ludovico, made cardinal,
ii. 227 ; made Admiral of the Fleet
by Calixtus III., ii. 350-1 ; ridicules
Congress of Mantua, ii. 380
Schaffhausen, flight of John XXIII.
to, i. 285 ; Curia summoned to, i.
288
Schlick, Kaspar, Imperial Chancellor,
dubbed knight by Sigismund, ii.
83 ; patron of ^Eneas Sylvius, ii.
242; his character and aims, ii.
242-3 ; his love story told by JEneas
Sylvius, ii. 247
Sforza da Cotignola, in the service of;
John XXIII., i. 239 ; joins Ladislas*
i. 241 ; early history of, i. 242-3 ;
attacks Paolo Orsini, i. 248 ; driven
from Rome, i. 257 ; rivalry with
Braccio, ii. 5 ; drives Braccio from
Rome, ii. 6 ; allied with Martin V.,
552
INDEX.
SFO
ii. 9 ; defeats Alfonso V. at Naples,
ii. 14 ; death of, ii. 20-1 ; life of,
by Crivelli, ii. 504
Sforza da Francesco, invades the
March of Ancona, ii. 89 ; made Vicar
of the March by Eugenius IV., ii. 90 ;
defeats Fortebracchio, ii. 169 ; op
posed by Piccinino, ii. 226-7 ; mar
ries Bianca Visconti, ii. 228 ;
checked by Eugenius IV. and Duke
of Milan, ii. 228 ; attacked by
Eugenius IV., ii. 230-1 ; abandons
March of Ancona, ii. 281 ; becomes
Lord of Milan, ii. 289-90 ; main
tains Ferrante in Naples against
Calixtus III., ii. 361-2 ; at the Con
gress of Mantua, ii. 383, 386 ; en
courages Pius II. in his Neapolitan
policy, ii, 405 ; appealed to by Pius
II., ii. 407; illness of (1462), ii.
430 ; invested with Genoa by Louis
XL, ii. 468 ; life of, by Simoneta,
ii. 512
Sicily, Normans in, i. 69 ; passes to
Martin of Aragon, i. 118-9
Siena, Council of, ii. 16-9; Sigismund
in, ii. 76-7 ; Frederick III. in, ii.
297 ; Pius II. in, ii. 374, 401-4
Sigismund, Emperor, betrothed to
Mary of Hungary, i. 86 ; ill success
in Hungary, i. 151 ; dealings with
Wenzel, i. 153 ; dealings with Boni
face IX., i. 153-4; elected King
of the Romans, i. 237-8 ; first rela
tions with John XXIII., i. 238;
urges summoning of a Council, i.
247 ; early history of, i. 250 ; war
with Venice, i. 251 ; appeal of John
XXIII. to, i. 250 ; proclaims Coun
cil of Constance, i. 252 ; confer
ence with John XXIII., i. 252-3;
crowned at Aachen, i. 269 ; arrives
in Constance, i. 272 ; accepts
D'Ailly's policy, i. 274 ; presented
with Golden Hose, i. 280; urges
abdication of John XXIIL, i. 281 ;
quarrels with the French Nation, i.
282 ; outdoes Frederick of Austria
with the Swiss, i. 283 ; visits John
XXIIL, i. 284 ; restores order after
John XXIII.'s flight, i. 286 ; present
at fourth session, i. 291 ; pronounces
ban of the Empire against Freder
ick of Austria, i. 292 ; anger of, at
Hus's imprisonment, i. 337 ; driven
to abandon Hus, i. 338-9 ; at Hus's
t,rial,i. 345-9; his incautious speech
about Bohemia, i. 350 ; large pro
jects of, on leaving Constance, i.
362 ; at Perpignan, i. 363 ; nego-
SIG
tiates the articles of Narbonne, i.
365 ; journeys to Paris, i. 366 ; to
England, i. 367 ; makes treaty of
Canterbury with Henry V., i. 367-8 ;
returns to Constance, i. 368 ; stops
the French attack upon the Eng
lish, i. 380-1 ; opposition to, in the
Council, i. 383-4 ; attacked by the
Curial party, i. 386-7 ; agrees to
order of procedure in the Council
of Constance, i. 387-8; his anger
against the Cardinals, i. 390-1 ;
deserted by the English, i. 392-3 ;
consents to a Papal election, i.393 ;
proceedings of, at conclave, i. 396 ;
his joy at election of Martin V., i.
397-8 ; at Martin V.'s. coronation,
i. 400-1 ; hopeless of further refor
mation at Constance, i. 401 ; re
cognised by Martin V. as King of
the Romans, id. ; tries to keep Mar
tin V. in Germany, i. 410 ; leaves
Constance, i. 411 ; authorities for
his history, i. 447-8 ; his relations
to Wenzel and the Hussites, ii. 38 ;
temporising policy towards the
Hussites, ii. 39, 40 ; holds Diet at
Briinn, ii. 41 ; revolt of Prag
against, ii. 41-2; repulsed from
Witkow, ii. 43 ; driven from Bo
hemia, ii. 44 ; second invasion of
Bohemia and repulse from Kutten-
berg, ii. 46-8 ; negotiates with the
Hussites, ii. 54 ; at conference of
Eger, ii. 57-8 ; protects Council of
Basel, ii. 68 ; his Italian expedition,
ii. 68-9; relations to Eugenius IV.
and Council, ii. 69-70, 73-4 ; at
Siena, ii. 76-7 ; taken under the
Council's protection, ii. 78 ; recon
ciled with Eugenius IV., ii. 81 ;
crowned Emperor, ii. 82-3 ; medi
ates between Eugenius IV. and
the Council, ii. 83-4 ; his saying to
Eugenius IV., ii. 85 ; at the Coun
cil of Basel, ii. 86-8 ; prevails on
Council to admit Papal presidents,
ii. 117 ; slighted by the Council, ii.
118; leaves Basel, ii. 119; holds
conference with the Bohemians at
Regensburg, ii. 130-1 ; at Briinn,
ii. 133-6; separates from the Coun
cil in his Bohemian policy, ii.
134-5 ; present at signing of Com
pacts, ii. 138-9 ; recognised King
of Bohemia, ii. 140; opposes the
outbreak of a Schism, ii. 151-2;
his policy in Prag, ii. 155 ; organ
ises a Catholic reaction, ii. 156-8 ;
his death, ii. 161-2 ; his character,
INDEX.
553
SIG
ii. 162-3; authorities for his later
years, ii. 511-2
Sigismund, Count of Tyrol, ward of
Frederick III., ii. 215 ; letters of
^Eneas Sylvius to, ii. 245-6; at
Congress of Mantua, ii. 392 ; origin
of his quarrel with Cardinal Cusa,
ii. 393-5 ; fruitless mediation of
Pius II., ii. 396; further quarrel
with Cusa, ii. 412 ; appeals to a
future Council, ii. 413 ; denounced
by Pius II., ii. 413 ; cited by Pius
II., ii. 418 ; makes submission to
Pius II., ii. 454
Simoneta, Giovanni, his life of Fran
cesco Sforza, ii. 512, 524
Soest, its quarrel with the Arch
bishop of Koln, ii. 382
Sonnenburg, quarrel of Cardinal Cusa
with Abbess of, ii. 394-5
Sophia, Queen Regent of Bohemia, ii.
39,40
States of the Church, origin of, i. 7,
10, 21, 22; government of, under
Boniface IX., i. 100-1; sold by
Gregory XII. to Ladislas, i. 204 ;
scheme of Ladislas for their secu
larisation, i. 248, 256 ; recovered
by Martin V., ii. 21-2 ; lost by
Eugenius IV., ii. 89-91 ; partial
recovery of, by Eugenius IV., ii.
228-31
Stefanacci, Cardinal, his intrigues in
Rome, ii. 6
Stefaneschi, Cardinal, left legate in
Rome by Gregory XII., i. 186 ; gives
up Rome to Ladislas, i. 188-9
Stokys, Peter, Archbishop Courtenay's
commissary in Oxford, i 11 1
Sudbury, Archbishop, calls Wyclif to
trial, i. 105 ; murdered by peasants,
i. Ill
Syropulus, Sylvester, his history of
the Councils of Ferrara and Flor
ence, ii. 518-9
TABOR, fortified by Zizka, ii. 43 ;
visit of J^neas Sylvius to, ii.
294-5
Taborites, the, origin of name, ii. 38,
40 ; their tenets, ii. 45-6 ; division
of, on Zizka's death, ii. 51; opinions
of, ii. 106; defeated at Lipan,
ii. 115 ; chronicle of Nicolas of
Pelhrschimow, ii. 508
Tachau, repulse of Germans at, ii. 53
Taranto, Archbishop of, Papal presi
dent at Ba»ol, ii. 117; protests
against abolition of annates, ii.
TJLK
122 ; resigns his presidency, ii. 126
heads Papal party at Basel, ii. 146 ;
creates a schism in the Council, ii.
147 ; struggles with Cardinal of
Aries, ii. 148; accused of tampering
with the Council's seal, ii. 150
Tartaglia, enters Rome, i. 249 ; sides
with Braccio against Sforza, ii. 5 ;
put to death by Braccio, ii. 14
Tauss, defeat of Germans at, ii. 59
Tebaldeschi, Cardinal, proposed for
Pope, i. 58-9 ; his death, i. 63
Terni, Bishop of, legate of Pius II. in
England, meddles in English poli
tics, ii. 391 ; absolves ashes of
Charles VII., ii. 427
Thomas, S., of Aquino, political ideas
of, i. 29-30 ; views on the Immacu
late Conception, i. 97
— despot of Morcea, ii. 380-1
— of Stitny, preaches in Bohemia,
i. 310
Tiburzio de Maso, leader of revolt in
Rome, ii. 406-7 ; his capture and
death, ii. 408-9
Tiem, Wenzel, sells indulgences in
Prag, i. 324 ; at Constance, i. 333
Tivoli, fortified by Pius II., ii. 411
Todeschini, Francesco dei, made
Archbishop of Siena and Cardinal
by Pius II., ii. 402
Tolfa, discovery of alum mines at, ii.
462
Tomaceni, Andrea, brother of Boni
face IX., Duke of Spoleto, i. 141
— Antonello, holds castle of S. An-
gelo, i. 168
— Giovanni, serves Boniface IX., i.
120-141
— Piero, elected Pope Boniface IX.,
i. 98
Torquemada, John of, writes in favour
of the Papacy, ii. 232 ; his uncom
promising character, ii. 264
Toulouse, University of, sides with
Benedict XIII., i. 134,155 ; opinions
of condemned by Parlement, i. 172
Transubstantiation, Wyclif's attack
on, i. 109-10 ; importance of this
attack, i. 1 1 4
Traversari, Ambrogio, Papal envoy at
Basel, ii. 122-3 ; letter of, to Sigis
mund, ii. 128-9 ; friend of Porcaro,
ii. 273 ; his writings, ii. 515
Troja, Count of, holds Rome, i. 228
UCCELLI, Paolo, his picture of Sir
John Hawkwood, i. 241.
Ulk, Jacob, opposes in Prag recon-
554
INDEX.
ULR
ciliation with the Council of Basel,
ii. 104, 108
Ulrich of Zynaim, defends the third
Article of *Prag, ii. 96-7
Urban II., Pope, preaches crusade, i. 17
— V., Pope, returns to Rome, i. 48-9 ;
refusal of tribute to, by England, i.
1 02 ; appeal of Milicz of Kremsier
to, i. 309
Urban VI., Pope, election of, i. 57-9 ;
character of, i. 60, 92-3 ; opposition
of cardinals to, i. 62-65 ; becomes
master of Rome, i. 67 ; dealings with
Giovanna I. of Naples, i. 61, 70, 71 ;
summons Charles of Durazzo, i. 72 ;
enters Naples, i. 76 ; his nepotism
i. 73, 77, 90 ; fortifies Nocera, i. 78 ;
quarrels with Charles III. of Naples,
i. 79 ; tortures suspected cardinals,
i. 80-1 ; besieged in Nocera, i. 82 ;
flees from Nocera, i. 83 ; in Genoa,
i. 85 ; in Lucca, i. 88 ; in Perugia,
i. 89 ; returns to Rome, i. 90 ; his
death, i. 92; authorities for the
account of his election, i. 423-5
Utraquists, meaning of, ii. 45
T7ALENTINE, Cardinal of Hungary,
V his opinion of Gregory XII. 's
court,, i. 187-8
Valla, Lorenzo, his life and writings,
ii. 338-9 ; controversy with Poggio,
ii. 340-1
Varna, battle of, ii. 249
Venice, dispute of Sigismund with, i.
251 ; early life of Eugenius IV. in,
ii. 32-3 ; coming of the Greeks to,
ii. 174-5; its relations to Francesco
Sforza, ii. 289 ; makes commercial
treaty with the Turks, ii. 379;
coolness to wards Pius II.'s crusading
project at Mantua, ii. 387 ; alliance
of with Hungary and Pius II.
against the Turk, ii. 467; rejects
proposals from George of Bohemia,
ii. 471 ; its dealings with the cru
saders, ii. 472 ; sends galleys to
Ancona, 474-5
Vico, Francesco da, put to death at
Viterbo, i. 89
— Giovanni da, war of Boniface IX.
against, i. 120-1 ; submits to Boni
face IX., i. 145
Vienna, ^Eneas Sylvius in, ii. 241-3 ;
his manner of life in, ii. 247-8 ;
Papal diplomacy at, ii. 253 ; Con
cordat of, ii. 282-4 ; Capistrano
preaches in,ii. 293 ; Diet of (1452),
ii. 303-4
WIN
Visconti, Filippo Maria, unites his
dominions, i. 251 ; policy of, ii. 4,
15 ; his conduct towards Sigismund,
ii. 69 ; his dealings with Eugenius
IV., ii. 169; makes alliance with
Alfonso of Aragon, ii. 171 ; his deal
ings with Sforza and with Eugenius
IV., ii. 228-31 ; death of, ii. 287 ;
character of, ii. 287-8
Visconti, Gian Galeazzo, feared by
Florence, i. 89 ; dealings with Wen-
zel, i. 150; death of, i. 151; cha
racter of, i. 152
Vitelleschi, Giovanni, with Eugenius
IV. in Florence, ii. 168; takes pos
session of Rome for Eugenius IV.,
ii. 169; made legate in Naples, ii.
170; his power in Rome, ii. 226;
his death, ii. 227
Viterbo, surrendered to Urban VI.,
i. 89 ; Innocent VII. at, 168-9 ;
ecclesiastical ceremonies in, ii.
438-9
Vrie, Dietrich, his writings, i. 261-2
WENZEL, King of the Romans,
accession of, i. 66 ; conference
with Charles VI. of France, i. 136 ;
agrees with French policy, i. 143;
deposition of by Rhenish "Electors,
i. 148-9 ; dealings with Sigismund,
i. 153 ; recognises the Council of
Pisa, i. 200 ; his position on Ru
pert's death, i. 237 ; his dealings
with Archbishop John of Jenstein,
i. 311-2; favours Hus, i. 316; his
relations to the Council of Pisa, i.
317; his decree in favour of the
Bohemians in the University of
Prag, i. 318 ; recognises Alexander
V., i. 319 ; opposes Archbishop
Zbynek, i. 322-3; tries to pacify
Bohemia, i. 326-7 ; anger of, at the
execution of Hus, i. 356 ; his deal
ings with the Hussites, ii. 38 ; death
and character of, ii. 39
William, Duke of Bavaria, appointed
by Sigismund Protector of the
Council of Basel, ii. 69 ; arrives in
Basel, ii. 70 ; his difficult position
in Basel, ii. 74 ; his influence, ii.
75, 78 ; present at the disputations
with the Hussites, ii. 97 ; mediates
between Council and Hussites, ii.
100 ; urges concession to the Bohe
mians, ii. 106
Windeck, Eberhard, employed by
Sigismund, i. 368 ; his life and
writings, i. 447
INDEX.
555
WIT
Witold, Grand Duke of Lithuania, his
political schemes, ii. 48-9
Wladislaf, King of Poland, chosen
King of Hungary, ii. 243 ; his death
at Varna, ii. 248-9
Woodford, William, his polemic
against the Lollards, i. 305
Wyclif, John, compared to Marsiglio
of Padua, i. 41 ; early life at
Oxford, i. 102 ; commissioner at
Bruges, i. 103; proceedings against,
i. 104 ; his theory of dominion, i.
104-5 ; attacks the Papal primacy,
i. 106; his theory of the Church, i.
107 ; view of the Papal primacy, i.
108; attacks transubstantiation, i.
109 ; condemnation of his opinions
by the University of Oxford, i. 110;
by the Earthquake Council, i. 1 1 1 ;
death of, i. 112 ; importance of his
teaching, i. 112-3 ; condemned by
the Council of Rome, i. 246; phases
of his Reaching, i. 303 ; opinions
condemned by Archbishop Court-
enay, i. 304 ; results of his teach
ing in England, i. 306-7 ; his writ
ings carried to Bohemia, i. 313 ;
condemned by the University of
Prag, i. 315 ; condemned by Arch
bishop Zbynek, i. 320; his writings
burned in Prag, i. 321 ; articles
from, condemned by Wenzel, i. 328 ;
articles from, condemned by Coun
cil of Constance, i. 341 ; condemned
by Martin V., i. 405 ; authorities
ZIZ
dealing with, i. 438-9 ; references
to at Council of Basel, ii. 97-8
F7ABARELLA, Cardinal, John
/J XXIII.'s envoy to Sigismund, i.
252 ; courageous conduct at third
session of Council of Constance, i.
289 ; refuses to read decree of
fourth session, i. 291 ; envoy to
John XXIIL, i. 295 ; part of in
Hus's trial, i. 346-9 ; dealings with
Petit's propositions, i. 375 ; death
of, i. 396
Zbynek, Archbishop of Prag, his re
lations to Hus, i. 316 ; opposes the
Council of Pisa, i. 317 ; refuses to
recognise Alexander V., i. 319;
condemns Wyclif 's writings, i. 320 ;
burns Wyclif s writings, i. 321 ;
opposed by Wenzel, i. 321-3 ; death
of, and character, i. 323-4
Zizka, John, of Trocnow, first appear
ance amongst the Hussites, ii. 38 ;
leader of the Taborites,ii.40 ; allies
with Prag, ii. 42; fortifies Tabor,
ii. 42-3 ; repulses Sigismund from
Prag, ii. 43-4 ; repulses Germans
from Saaz, ii. 46 ; military system
of, ii. 47 ; defeats Sigismund at
Kuttenberg, ii. 48 ; his political
difficulties, ii. 48 ; his 'bloody year,'
ii. 50 ; death of, and character, ii.
50-1
END OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
T.OXD0X : riUXTfiD BY
8POTTISWOODK AXD TO., NEW-8TPRET SQtV. UK
A>'1> PARLIAMENT STREET
BX
955
C8
188?
V.?
C.I
iROBA
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11