CRISTO RAUL.ORG |
READING HALLTHE DOORS OF WISDOM |
HISTORY OF THE POPES FROM THE CLOSE OF THE MIDDLE AGES |
|||
---|---|---|---|
BOOK VI PAUL II.A.D. 1464-1471
the Election OF PAUL II
The Cardinals in attendance on Pius II had hastened to Rome as soon as it was decided that the election
should be held in that city. The
period of the vacancy of the Holy See was
one of great disquiet, as it had often been before. The Sienese in Rome suffered much, and were assailed by a hostile crowd wherever they appeared.
Cardinal Roverella returned from his Mission to Naples on the 23rd August, and Cardinal Gonzaga reached Rome on the 24th. The Sacred College assembled in the
morning of the 25th in the house
of Cardinal Scarampo. In this preliminary
meeting, doubts were expressed as to the prudence of holding a Conclave in the Vatican while Antonio Piccolomini, Duke of Amalfi, still kept possession of the Castle of St. Angelo, and many Cardinals
advised that the Election should
take place in the Minerva or at the Capitol.
The Duke of Amalfi, who was at this time absent from Rome, seems to have been an object of suspicion,
principally because of the close
relations which existed between him, the
Orsini, and King Ferrante of Naples. Some of the Cardinals feared that, in the event of a Pope being
chosen who was not agreeable to
the King, he might make difficulties about giving up St. Angelo. On the other
side, it was maintained that
Antonio Piccolomini had given the most
positive assurances, and that regard for his brothers, one of whom was a member of the Sacred College, would deter him from doing anything that could interfere
with the liberty of the Conclave.
This consideration prevailed, and it was
determined that the Election should be held in the Vatican.
On the evening of the 28th August, the Cardinals went into Conclave. We have a graphic account of the
proceedings from the Duke of Mantua's Envoy. The little Chapel of the Palace was chosen for the actual
Election. The doors and windows
were walled up. The chambers to be
occupied during the election were like monks' cells; they were twenty-five feet square, and were so dark that
artificial light was almost constantly necessary. The cells were marked with a letter of the alphabet, and assigned to
the different Cardinals by
lot. Each Cardinal had his meals brought
to him at regular hours by his servants, in a coffer called a cornuta,
adorned with his coat of arms. These coffers
had to pass three sets of guards who surrounded the Conclave. The first was composed of Roman citizens,
the second of Ambassadors, and the third of Prelates; they carefully examined the contents of the coffers, so that no letters should be introduced with
the provisions.
Bessarion was invested with the dignity of Dean, and for a long time it seemed likely that the tiara would
fall to his share. After him
the most notable among the Cardinals
were, d'Estouteville, the head of the French party; Carvajal, with his untiring zeal; Torquemada,
who was looked upon as the
first theplogian of his time; and the two
antipodes, Scarampo and Barbo. Of the more youthful members of the Sacred College, Roderigo
Borgia was distinguished by his
position of Vice-Chancellor. His
private life, like that of Francesco Gonzaga, was anything but edifying.
Cardinals Filippo Calandrini, Francesco Todeschini Piccolomini, Juan de Mella, Angelo
Capranica, Lodovico Libretto, and
Bartolomeo Roverella, by their irreproachable
conduct formed a great contrast to Borgia and Gonzaga. In Ancona, Roverella had, like Capranica, Carvajal, and Calandrini, been named as a candidate
for the papacy. On the other
hand, even in June, 1464, when
the condition of Pius II had become worse, Cardinal Barbo's prospects had been highly thought of. The Milanese Ambassador advised his master at that time to make a friend of this Cardinal.
On the 27th August, one of the Ambassadors then in Rome wrote as follows: “The negotiations regarding the Papal Election are being carried on in every direction
in secret, and with great
zeal. God grant that the Holy Spirit,
and not human passions, may preside! Some few persons conclude, from certain predictions, that
Cardinal Torquemada will be Pope,
but he is very suffering, and this
morning was said to be dead, which, however, I do not believe. Others are of opinion that the choice will
fall on one who is not a member
of the Sacred College, and, in virtue
of some prophecies, Battista Pallavicini, Bishop of Reggio, is named”.
The statements regarding Cardinal Torquemada's
prospects of election are confirmed by one of the Duke of Milan's Envoys. On the 29th August he informed his master of the general impression that Cardinal
Torquemada, who had that morning been carried into the Conclave, would never
return to his own dwelling, but would either
become Pope or die, as he was so old and feeble. After Torquemada, Scarampo was thought by many likely to be the favoured candidate.
The discourse pronounced by Domenico de' Domenichi, the eloquent Bishop of Torcello, in St. Peter’s,
before the Conclave began, gives a
picture of the general state of affairs,
and describes the disposition of the Electors. The preacher took for his text the words of Jeremias, “To what shall I equal thee, O virgin, daughter of Sion? For great as a sea is thy destruction: who shall heal
thee?”, and applied them to the state of
Christendom. He recalled the fall of Constantinople, and the Christian losses, in the East, which followed on that deplorable
event. Things had now, he said, reached
such a point that tidings of defeat were
frequently, indeed almost daily, received; and
yet the Princes took no heed, and were, as had been evident during the life-time of Pius II, deaf to the
exhortations of the Supreme Head of Christendom.
After an affecting
picture of the dangers from without, Domenichi turned to the contemplation of the ills which the Church had to suffer from her own sons. The clergy, he said,
are slandered, the goods of the Church
plundered, ecclesiastical jurisdiction
impeded, and the power of the keys despised. He frankly blamed the Popes for their compliance with the unjust demands of Princes, and attributed the sad condition of the times to the fact that those in
authority had sought their own interests,
and not those of Jesus Christ. Help, he
maintained, could be looked for only from
a Chief Pastor who would give back to the Church her former liberty, and would not fear the power of Princes. He pointed out that the relations between the Pope and the Bishops had also been impaired. “Burdened by you”, exclaimed the Orator, addressing the
Cardinals, “the Bishops favour your
enemies; oppressed by the Princes, they
turn, not to the Mother who appears to them in the guise of a step-mother, but seek the favour of those into whose power they have been allowed to fall”.
Finally, Domenichi
declared that the position of the Sacred College itself was not what it had been. “Where”, he asked, “is
the former splendour of your authority? where is the Majesty of your College?
Once, whatever was to be done, was first laid before your Senate, hardly
anything was determined without your counsel”. Domenichi concluded by lamenting the complete change that had taken place, and pronouncing the existing state of things to be
insupportable, inasmuch as the authority, dignity, and splendour of the Sacred College had well-nigh disappeared.
These last words were hailed with delight by those Cardinals who sought as much as possible to limit the Papal authority. On the first day of the Conclave this party framed an Election Capitulation, which all the Cardinals, except Scarampo, signed, and swore to
observe.
The provisions of this document would necessarily have
involved a transformation of the monarchical character of the Church’s
Constitution, and have reduced the Pope to the position of the mere President
of the College of Cardinals.
The Capitulation began by binding the future Pope to prosecute
the Turkish war, and to devote to this purpose all the revenue derived from the
Alum quarries. He was, moreover, to reform the Roman Court, was not to remove it
to any other Italian city without the consent of the majority of the Cardinals,
nor to any place out of Italy without the consent of the whole body. A General
Council was to be summoned within three years’ time. This Council was to reform
Ecclesiastical affairs, and to summon the temporal Princes to defend
Christendom against the Turks. It was further decided that the number of the Cardinals
should never exceed four and twenty, and that one only should be of the Pope's
kindred; no one was to be admitted into the Sacred College under the age of
thirty, and also no one who did not possess the requisite amount of learning.
Creations of new Cardinals, and nominations to the greater benefices, were only
to be made with the express consent of the Sacred College. The Pope was further
to bind himself not to alienate any of the possessions of the Church, not to
declare war, or enter into any alliance without the consent of the Cardinals;
to confer the more important fortresses in the Patrimony of St. Peter exclusively
on Clerics, who, however, were not to be his kinsmen; no relation of his was to
occupy the position of Commander-in-Chief of his troops. In State documents, the
formula, “after consultation with our Brethren”, was only to be used when the
Cardinals had actually been summoned together in Council. Every month these
resolutions were to be read to the Pope in Consistory, and twice in the year
the Cardinals were to examine whether he had faithfully observed them; should
this not be the case they were, “with the charity due from sons towards their
parents”, to remind him three times of his promise. What was to take place, in the event of these warnings being unheeded, is not stated. Schism was the only
course open.
The arrangement of the Election Capitulation was
followed by the Election, which, on this occasion, was very rapidly concluded. The first scrutiny took place on
the 30th August. Scarampo had
seven votes, d'Estouteville nine,
and Pietro Barbo eleven. The last-named Cardinal, who, six years before, had almost obtained the tiara,
now at once received three
more votes by way of accessit. His election was accordingly secured. The other Cardinals also agreed, invested him with the Papal robes, and
did him homage. Thus the
high-born but needy Sienese Pope was
succeeded by a rich Venetian noble. The populace assembled in front of the Vatican received the news
with joy. The Pope was then
carried to St. Peter’s, where the throng
was so great that it was most difficult to find a passage through it.
The unusual rapidity of Cardinal Barbo’s Election was looked upon by many as a miracle, for an Election preceded by less than three scrutinies had not
occurred within the memory of man;
but a little consideration enables
us to understand the motives for the haste of the Cardinals. The first of these was the anxious state of public affairs, together with fear of the King of
Naples and of the Duke of
Amalfi, the latter of whom had his troops
encamped on the frontiers of the States of the Church; moreover, Torquemada, Scarampo, and Barbo were very ailing, and Rodrigo Borgia had not yet
recovered from his illness; he
appeared in the Conclave with his head
bound up. The confinement and privations of the Conclave must necessarily have been doubly irksome to these invalids, and made them desirous to get through the Election without delay.
Cardinal Ammanati says that Barbo at first wished to take the name of Formosus; the Cardinals, however, objected, on the ground that it might seem to be an allusion to his good looks. Barbo, who had been
Cardinal Priest of St. Mark's,
then thought of selecting Mark, but this was the war-cry of the Venetians, and was therefore
deemed unsuitable. Finally, he
decided to be known as Paul II.
The new Pope was, as Ammanati in a confidential autograph letter informed the Duke of Milan, indebted for his elevation to the elder Cardinals, that is to
say, to those who had been
members of the Sacred College before the
time of Pius II; they were of opinion that the late Pope had shown so little regard to the Cardinals, because his own experience as a member of the Sacred College had been very short. Some of the younger
Cardinals, and amongst them Ammanati, joined the party of the elders.
The Prelate so quickly elevated to the Supreme dignity of Christendom was at this time in the 48th year of his age. His pious mother was sister to Eugenius IV, and the youth, originally destined for a mercantile career, had been very carefully brought up, and owed his education,
as well as his ecclesiastical advancement, to that Pope. The teachers selected by Eugenius IV for his nephew were men of ability, yet the progress of the latter was but slow; he took no interest in Humanistic studies, History and Canon Law had more attraction for him. Barbo’s favourite pursuit at that time was the collection of coins, gems, and other antiquities.
As early as 1440, Barbo was, together with his rival Scarampo, raised to the purple; he also became
Cardinal Deacon of Sta Maria
Nuova (now Sta Francesca Romana), which Church he afterwards exchanged for S. Marco.
Under Nicholas V and Calixtus III, he continued to occupy the same influential position as he had enjoyed during the pontificate of his uncle. His relations
with Pius II were not of so
agreeable a character. The Cardinal
of S. Marco derived a princely income from his numerous benefices, and made a most generous use of it, sometimes for the benefit of less wealthy
colleagues, such as Cusa and Aeneas
Sylvius. A lover of splendour, like all
Venetians, he began in 1455 to build a great palace, and in 1458 undertook the restoration of his titular
Church. He was also a diligent
collector of antiques and artistic treasures,
and in this respect, rivalled even the Medici.
The Cardinal of Venice, as Barbo was also styled, was one of the most popular personages in the Court and
City of Rome. His generosity,
liberality, affability, and gentleness, soon won all hearts. His devotion to
his friends was manifested
on the occasion of the fall of the Borgia. Any one who enjoyed his patronage was deemed
fortunate. He used to visit the sick
in his neighborhood with kindly solicitude,
and had a little pharmacy from which he dispensed medicines gratis. The poor
were loud in their praises
of the open-handed and tender-hearted Prince of the Church, and strangers were delighted with the
kindness of his welcome and his
readiness to serve them. Any one who had
matters of business at the Roman Court, might reckon on success if Barbo took an interest in him.
Genial wit and good humour
reigned at his table, and he used to say in
jest that when he became Pope each Cardinal should have a beautiful villa, to which he might retire
during the heat of summer.
Cardinal Barbo added to his amiable qualities the
charm of an imposing appearance; he was tall, well-made, and his bearing was
dignified, advantages which have always been greatly valued by the Italians.
For half a century, says a chronicler, a handsomer man had not been seen in the
Senate of the Church. The weak points in his character were his jealousy, his
vanity, and an overweening love of pomp, which betrayed his Venetian and
mercantile origin.
According to the rude custom of the age the Romans used to plunder the abode of a new-made Pontiff; even Cardinals who had not been elected, frequently
suffering on these occasions, Barbo
and Scarampo had taken the precaution of placing military guards in their
Palaces. An attack made on Scarampo’s
Palace, when a report of his election
had been circulated, was repulsed. After Barbo's elevation became known, his Palace, which was full of treasures and works of art, was besieged by the
rabble. Nothing but a haystack,
however, fell into their hands. Some of
the marauders then rushed to the Convent of Sta Maria Nuova, under the erroneous impression that
property belonging to the
newly-elected Pope was hidden there. Defensive
preparations had, however, been made, and the mob returned to the Palace. They seemed about to storm it, but were pacified by a present of 1300 ducats.
Extensive preparations for the Pope’s Coronation were undertaken by three Cardinals chosen for the purpose. Even before this solemnity took place, he was
delivered from the anxiety which
had beset the first days of his reign in
regard to the Duke of Amalfi. After the Election, the Castle of St. Angelo and the fortresses of Tivoli,
Spoleto, and Ostia, were still
held by Sienese captains in the Duke's name;
the garrisons' declared that they would not give up these strongholds until the sum of 30.000 ducats,
which he said he had advanced
to the Roman Church, had been repaid.
In order to guard against the recurrence of such a danger, the Pope entrusted St. Angelo, which was
finally given up to him on the
14th September, to the learned Spaniard,
Roderigo Sancio de Arevalo. In compliance with the stipulations of the Election Capitulation,
the Pope also arranged that for
the future the governors of all the fortresses
in the States of the Church should be Prelates.
The Pope's Coronation took place on the 16th
September. Cardinal Borgia, as the senior of the Cardinal Deacons, was entitled to perform the ceremony, but, as
he was indisposed, Cardinal
Forteguerri acted in his stead. The ceremony took place on a tribune erected in
front of St. Peter's. It was observed
that Paul II did not, like other Popes,
get a new tiara made for himself, but used the old one, which is said to have belonged to Pope St.
Sylvester.
After his Coronation the Pope took possession of the Lateran. It was long since the Romans had witnessed more splendid festivities. More than 23,000 florins
were spent on this occasion,
according to the accounts of the Apostolic
Treasury. The Pope rode from St. Peter's to Sta Maria Nuova on a palfrey adorned with crimson
and silver, which had been
presented to him by Cardinal Gonzaga.
Ancient custom gave the Roman populace a claim to the horse ridden by the Pope to the Lateran; and, after the Coronation of Pius II, as well as on
many other occasions, a riot
had been the result. To avoid this, Paul II
dismounted at the Convent of Sta Maria Nuova, leaving the palfrey there, and having himself carried
in a litter the rest of the
way. The function in the Lateran was
followed by a banquet. The Pope spent thenight in the Palace of Sta Maria Maggiore, and on
the following morning, after he had heard Mass, returned to the Vatican.
Many Embassies soon arrived to pay homage to the new
Pontiff. The first was from the King of Naples, which was admitted to an
audience two days after the Coronation, when Paul II reminded the Envoys of the
benefits received by King Ferrante from the Apostolic See. The Neapolitan
Embassy was followed by others from Lucca, Siena, Mantua, Milan, and Florence,
this latter being remarkable for its magnificence. All these were received in
public, but the Embassies from the States of the Church in Secret Consistories;
which furnished an opportunity for making complaints and asking for favours.
Paul II, who, especially at the beginning of his reign, appeared to think a
good deal of his own importance, was not very ready to comply with these
requests, and disputes with the Bolognese arose in consequence. Some of the
speeches made by the Ambassadors were masterpieces of Humanistic eloquence,
filled with quotations from the ancient authors. That of the Jurist, Francesco
Accolti, who was attached to the Milanese Embassy, was specially admired. On
the 2nd December the Ambassadors of the Emperor Frederick III arrived; they
were commissioned to treat also of the affairs of Bohemia.
Some
of the Articles of the Election Capitulation were so obnoxious that even a Pope
less imbued with a sense of his own importance
than Paul II would have been driven to resist this fresh attempt to introduce
an oligarchical character into the government of the States of the Church, and,
as a necessary consequence, into that of the Church itself. As a Venetian, the
Pope was only too well-acquainted with the defects of this system, and was
firmly resolved not to allow himself to be reduced “to the helpless position of
a Doge, controlled by Committees of the Nobles”. He was encouraged in this resolve, if we may believe Ammanati, by two Bishops who were aspiring to the purple.
The Pope, himself, prepared the Ambassadors for an alteration in the Election Capitulation. To one of
them he bitterly complained
that its stipulations tied his hands so that
he could hardly do anything without the consent of the Cardinals. “I perceive”, wrote the Duke of
Milan’s Ambassador on the 21st
September, “that His Holiness will
endeavour, if he possibly can, to mitigate the Election Capitulation”.
One of the reasons which, from Paul II's point of
view, compelled him to take this course was, that, under existing circumstances,
any limitation of the Monarchical power of the Pope in the States of the Church
would necessarily interfere with the free exercise of that power in matters purely
ecclesiastical.
According to the Catholic Doctrine, the Constitution
of the Church is, by Divine
appointment, monarchical; any attempt,
therefore, to alter it was unlawful, and the oath to observe the Election Capitulation invalid. It is,
moreover, an article of Faith that
each Pope receives the plenitude of power
as directly from God as when it was first conferred by the Divine Founder of the Church. Prescriptions of limitation, therefore, whether contained in an
Election Capitulation or in the
enactments of a predecessor, can only
affect the new Pope as counsels or directions, not as binding obligations.
According to trustworthy contemporaneous testimony, the intentions of many of the Cardinals in framing the Election Capitulation were far from disinterested. In reality, their aim was, not the removal of prevailing
abuses, but an unlawful elevation
and extension of the authority of the Sacred
College. At the head of this party was the worldly-minded Cardinal d'Estouteville, who would have had much to apprehend from a genuine reform. A very well-informed Ambassador, writing on the 11th
September, 1464, says that the
stipulation regarding the Council was not
made in good faith by the Cardinals, but adopted by them as a means of keeping the Pope in fear, and
inducing him to comply with their demands. Paul II, who thoroughly understood these designs, soon made it
clear how much this resolution
displeased him.
The Pope was required to publish a Bull, confirming
the Election Capitulation, on
the third day after his Coronation; but the Bull did not appear and, instead of framing it, Paul II was occupying himself in devising means of recovering the free exercise of the
Monarchical power. He caused several
legal authorities to draw up opinions
on the question, whether the articles to which he had sworn in the Conclave were binding on him. These authorities answered in the negative, and the Pope then laid a document, differing very essentially from the
Election Capitulation, before the
Cardinals, and persuaded, or constrained, them to sign it. All yielded, with
the exception of the aged Carvajal, who was immovable in his opposition.
The excitement in the Sacred College reached such a height that Cardinal Alain, brother of the Admiral of France, told the Pope to his face that his whole life
for twenty-four years had
been nothing but a plot to deceive them.
Cardinal Gonzaga, whose relations with Paul II were in general friendly, and who had received many favours from him, wrote word to his father, on the 4th September, that the Pope was very much taken up with his dignity, and was proceeding in a most dictatorial manner.
“Possibly”, he added, “the council which is to take place in three years may
humble him”. Even in October, it was reported at the French Court that a schism
had begun.
Happily this danger was averted, but the relations between the Pope and the Cardinals continued for a
long time far from friendly.
No improvement took place, even though
he granted pensions to the poorer members of the Sacred College, and to all Cardinals in general the privilege
of wearing the red biretta, and a large mitre of silk damask, embroidered with pearls, such as had hitherto been worn only by the Popes.
Cardinal Ammanati, who now fell into complete
disgrace, was the most bitter in his complaints of Paul II. “All”, he wrote, “is suddenly changed, affability has
given place to harshness,
friendliness to a distant and repellent behaviour, a happy commencement to an evil progress”.
The estrangement was aggravated by the Pope’s
inaccessibility, induced by his peculiar manner of life. Changes, which he considered necessary for the sake of his
health, were made in the arrangements
of the Court; day was turned
into night, and night into day. Audiences were only granted at night. A German Ambassador writes : “His Holiness gives no more audiences by day, and, as mine was the first, I sat all night in the Pope's
chamber until 3 o'clock in the
morning”. Other accounts say that even
good friends of the Pope had to wait from fifteen to twenty days before they could see him. To obtain an audience, the Envoy from Breslau writes, has now
become quite an art. He had
recently spent as much as five hours in the
Palace, and had then been put off till the following evening. “It has now become three times as difficult
to have an audience as it
was under Papa Pio”, says this same Ambassador,
adding that he had often seen even Cardinals obliged to go away, after waiting two hours, without
having obtained their object. It
is not astonishing to find that business
was greatly delayed and continued to accumulate.
The progress of affairs was further hindered by the slowness, indecision, and distrustfulness which were
natural to Pope Paul II. In many
cases he went so far as to instruct
the Chancery not to accept authentic copies of documents, but to require the originals.
The Ambassadors also lamented the difficulties which the Pope made in granting dispensations and important favours. All these causes tended seriously to diminish
the incomes of the officials,
and discontent soon prevailed amongst
them. This dissatisfaction led to the expression of unfavourable opinions regarding the Pope, which have
not always been received with due caution.
There is certainly no foundation for the charge of
parsimony so often made and repeated against Paul II. Cardinal Ammanati, who originated it, must have had many
opportunities of witnessing the Pop’s generosity. He granted 100 florins a month to Cardinals whose income was
under 4000 golden florins; he
was most liberal in assisting Bishops
who were poor or exiled from their Sees. Impoverished nobles, destitute widows
and orphans, the weak and the
sick, and especially the members of the dethroned families from the East, who had taken refuge in Rome, were all partakers of his princely beneficence.
Almost every page of the account books of his reign furnishes
documentary proof of his magnificent benevolence. Entry after entry records
alms bestowed on needy widows and maidens, on nobles, on invalids or fugitives
from the countries which had fallen under Turkish domination, from Hungary, and
from the East. He made admirable arrangements for the care of the poor of Rome,
and by his orders the Apostolic Treasury, every month, "for the love of God"
(amore Dei), distributed 100 florins to those in want.
Fixed sums were also received at regular intervals by
a number of poor Convents
and Churches in Rome; as, for example,
S. Agostino, S. Marcello, Sta Maria sopra Minerva, Sta Maria Ara Celi, Sta Maria del Popolo, Sta Sabina, S. Martino ai Monti, S. Giuliano, S. Clemente, S.
Onofrio, SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Sta Susanna, S. Alessio, S. Francesco in
Trastevere, S. Cosimato and S. Pietro in Vincoli; but his bounty was not confined within the limits of the Eternal City; the Hospital of S. Matteo at Florence
looks upon Paul II as, after
Leo XI, one of its chief benefactors.
From the beginning of his Pontificate, Paul II devoted much care to the concerns of the City of Rome, a care rendered all the more necessary on account of the
series of calamities, floods,
tempests, and earthquakes by which it had
then been visited. These were followed by pestilential epidemics, which raged
in the autumn of 1464 to such a
degree that one of the Ambassadors says that all the Cardinals' houses had become hospitals. This
Plague lasted on into the colder
months, and returned in the following
years. Paul II rightly judged that the sanitary condition of the city could only be improved by a greater attention to cleanliness; he accordingly caused the
streets to be purified, and sewers and
aqueducts to be repaired.
A great benefit was conferred on Rome by Paul II, in the revision of its Statutes, which was completed in
1490, and had for its object
the better and more rapid administration of justice. The revised Statutes were
printed in the time of this Pope,
probably in the year 1471. They are
divided into three books: Civil Law, Criminal Law, and Administrative Law. This reform did not materially
alter the principles of the Statutes of 1363, and the external and internal
rights of the city remained unaltered.
Paul II took great pains to win the affection of the Roman people. In 1466 he gave them the Golden Rose, and the precious gift was borne in triumph through the streets. But they appreciated still more the variety
and splendour with which the
popular festivals, and especially the
Carnival, were now celebrated.
Hitherto the Carnival had been confined to the Piazza Navona, the Capitol, and Monte Testaceio. In 1466,
Paul II allowed the races to
be held in the principal street of Rome,
which from that time came to be called the Corso. The triumphal Arch of Marcus Aurelius, near S. Lorenzo in Lucina, was the starting point, and the Palace of
S. Marco was the goal. Games
and prizes were multiplied.
“In order”, writes Canensius, in his Life of Paul II, “that
none of the elements, out of which Roman society was formed, might be left out,
he instituted races for Jews, for boys, for grown men, and, finally, for old
people, each with its suitable prize. The palls which it was customary to bestow
as prizes on the successful race-horses were, by his directions, made of more
costly materials”.
The great banquets, in the Square of S. Marco, to
which the Pope invited the magistrates and the people, formed a new feature in
the festivities. From a window of his Palace, Paul II looked down upon these
entertainments, and at their conclusion money was distributed amongst the people.
To give greater variety to the scene, donkey and buffalo races were added.
Amusement of a higher grade was provided in the magnificent processions “which
represented the triumphs of the ancient Roman Emperors, a favourite theme of
the imagination of the period”. No doubt these “pictures of old Roman days
were, in all archaeological simplicity, clad in the brightest colours of the
style of the early Renaissance, but that only gave more life and variety to the
scene”. These worldly proceedings were even at the time condemned by some, but Paul II paid no heed. He counted much on these popular amusements for counteracting the evil influences of the revolutionary demagogues. How much the festivities were generally appreciated may be gathered from the detailed and enthusiastic descriptions given by different
chroniclers.
The care with which Paul II promoted the better supply of provisions for the City, and his measures against
the robbers who infested its
neighborhood, gave him a further
title to the gratitude of the Romans. The Pope likewise endeavoured to check the vendettas and
blood-feuds, to which so many lives were sacrificed in Rome and in all the Italian cities.
Paul II hated violence, and made it his special object
to ensure the preservation
of peace in the City. His government displayed a happy combination of firmness
and gentleness. No malefactor
escaped punishment, but the sentence
of death was hardly ever carried out. The Pope met remonstrances against this great leniency by
asking whether it were indeed a
small thing to take the life of so wonderful
a work of God as is man,—and a being upon whom Society has for many years expended so much pains. Criminals who had deserved death were generally sent to the galleys, but he gave express orders that they should not be treated with cruelty. The Pope was so tender-hearted and compassionate that he could not
bear to see beasts led to the
slaughter, and often bought them back
from the butchers. It is said that he had great difficulty in refusing any
request, and was obliged to shun doubtful
petitioners lest he should, against his own better judgment, grant what they
asked.
Paul II was a true friend and benefactor, not only to
the Romans, but to all his
other subjects. He was zealous in the
promotion of all useful public works. In poor places such as Cesena and Serra San Quirico, he contributed towards the repair of the harbours and the city walls. He repeatedly took measures to protect the Bolognese territory from being flooded by the Reno. In the
second year of his reign, he
issued very salutary regulations for the
better organisation of the Mint in the States of the Church. For a long time the rule prevailed that money should be coined nowhere but in Rome; afterwards,
however, the privilege was
extended to the cities of Fermo, Ancona, Ascoli, and Recanati, with the stipulation that the
conditions previously laid down should be exactly observed. In 1471 the Senate of the City of Rome was strictly enjoined to be diligent in proceeding against all who
coined false money, or clipped
the silver from the Papal mint.
A very wholesome Decree of this Pontiff forbade all Legates, Governors, and Judges to receive presents,
and their conduct in this
matter was closely watched. In grateful
recognition of his excellent government the inhabitants of Perugia determined, in the year 1466,
to erect a bronze statue of
the Pope in their city.
CHAPTER II.
The Conspiracy of 1468.—Platina and POMPONIUS Laetus
The great intellectual
movement of the Renaissance was at the time of Paul II, still expanding and
developing. Through each one of its phases the two currents of heathen and
Christian tendency are always clearly discernible, but the attentive observer
cannot fail to recognise a considerable difference between its condition under
Nicholas V and under Paul II.
In the time of Nicholas V the genuine and noble
Renaissance, which had grown up on Christian principles, and, while embracing
classical studies with enthusiasm, had made them subordinate and subservient to
Christian aims and ideas, still thoroughly held its own against the other tendency.
Subsequently, a change took place, and the school which inclined to substitute
the heathen ideal of beauty for the central sun of Christianity, became
predominant. In the second generation of Humanists that one-sided devotion to
classical antiquity, which led to a completely heathen view of life, gained
considerably in extent and importance.
Opposition on the part of the highest ecclesiastical authority was inevitable. Even before the accession of Paul II the Church and the heathen Renaissance would already have come into collision, had it not been so extremely difficult to lay hold of this tendency by
any external measures. A
formal heresy might be condemned, but it
was much harder to discern the many byways into which this new, and, in itself, lawful and salutary
form of culture had strayed, and
any interference with its course would
almost necessarily have destroyed not only that wh ch was evil, but also much that was excellent. Moreover,
the partisans of the heathen Renaissance carefully avoided any appearance of conflict between their
learning and theology, and
altogether contrived to assume such an innocent
air of dilettanteism that it would have seemed ridiculous to attempt to deal seriously with them.
If, however, a case arose which did not admit of being excused as mere harmless classicism, the Humanists at once made the strongest professions of submission to
the dogmas of the Church, and
either altered or abandoned the theories
which had been called in question. Thus, by their very frivolity and utter want of principle, the
Literati were able to avoid any serious
conflict with authority.
But however complaisant the Literati might be in matters of this kind, it was quite another affair
wherever their material interests
were concerned. Any one who failed
to treat them in this respect with the greatest indulgence and consideration
must be prepared for the most violent
attacks. Neither age nor rank were any protection against the envenomed tongues and pens of the
disciples of Cicero. Lies and
slanders pursued Calixtus III and Pius
II, even to their graves. And the same fate in a yet greater degree befell Paul II.
A measure passed in the very beginning of his Pontificate
gave occasion to a calumny which has not even yet completely died out, and
which represents him as a barbarous
enemy of classical studies and of all intellectual activity, in fact a “hater
of learning”.
The measure in question affected the College of the Abbreviators of the Chancery. In November, 1463, Pius
II had made a Decree that
this body should be composed of
seventy members, of whom only twelve were to be appointed by the Vice-Chancellor. The work and the pay were to be distributed only amongst these seventy, and not directly by the Vice-Chancellor. In May, 1464, Pius II, reorganised the College; the former officials were suppressed, and a number of Sienese, chosen from the Humanist party, were appointed, some by favour and others by purchase. Paul II, who had always kept up friendly relations with the Cardinal Vice-Chancellor,
reinstated him in his former powers, and reversed the arrangements made by his predecessor. Thus the Abbreviators, who had enjoyed the favour of Pius II,
lost both their places and
their means of living. This was undoubtedly
a hardship to those who had bought their positions, although an order was given that the
purchase money should be refunded.
The indignation of those affected by this change was extreme. The secretaries, poets, and Humanists at the Roman Court really considered themselves the most important persons in the world; they seriously
believed that they “conferred on
the Papal Court as much honour as they
received from it”, and were firmly persuaded that “men of their stamp were absolutely necessary to the Pope, and that he must seek them out from all parts of the world, and attach them to himself by the promise of rich rewards”.
The distress of these self-important men was equal to their
astonishment. They resolved, in the first instance, to have recourse to
friendly representations; and even the lowest members of the Papal Court were
importuned for assistance to obtain them an audience. For twenty consecutive
nights they besieged the entrance to the Palace without gaining access to the
presence of Paul II.
One of their number, Bartolomeo Sacchi da Piadena (a
small place between Cremona and Mantua), known as an author by the name of Platina,
the Latin form of Piadena, then resolved on a desperate measure. He wrote a pamphlet in the form of a letter, and, by his
own confession, addressed the Pope in the following terms:— “If it is
permissible for you to despoil us, without a hearing, of that which we had
justly and fairly purchased, it must be allowable for us to complain of so undeserved
an injury. Since we find ourselves contemptuously repulsed by you, we will
address ourselves to the Kings and Princes, and urge them to assemble a Council,
before which you will be constrained to justify yourself for having robbed us
of our lawful possession". The letter concluded with the subscription
:—"Servants of Your Holiness, if the new regulations are cancelled”.
Platina gave this letter sealed to the Bishop of
Treviso, the Pope's most
confidential Counsellor, remarking that it was written by the Humanist, Ognibene da Lonigo.
Hitherto Paul II had kept silence; now he acted. Platina was summoned to the Papal Palace, where he appeared with a defiant air, and, when the Bishop of Treviso called him to account for his conduct, answered very insolently. He was committed to St. Angelo,
where, notwithstanding the
intercession of Cardinal Gonzaga, he had that same evening to undergo an examination by
torture, “I am very anxious on his
account”, wrote one of the Ambassadors,
then in Rome, on the 15th of October, “for the Pope has spoken very violently about him to many, and no one ventures to take the part of a man guilty
of so great a crime”. On the
following day another writer mentions
that Paul II had talked of having him beheaded.
“As Platina is an excellent author”, he adds, “every one laments this mischance, more particularly Cardinal Gonzaga, in whose service he was at one time; but he is unable to help him in this matter. It is
true, however, that when the
Pope spoke to the Cardinal, he excused
Platina as a madman. This deed of folly, indeed, proves him to be such”.
In the cold solitude of St. Angelo, Platina had full
time for reflection. When, after four months of confinement, Cardinal Gonzaga’s
persevering intercession procured his release, he could hardly stand. He was
obliged to promise that he would not leave Rome. The Papal enactment was never
repealed, and the ejected Literati, and more especially, their ill-starred
leader continued to meditate vengeance.
The meeting of these malcontents, and of the
heathen-minded Humanists, took place in the house of a scholar well know throughout Rome for his intellectual gifts
and for his eccentricity.
Julius Pomponius Laetus was an illegitimate scion of the princely house of
Sanseverino, had come to
Rome at an early age from his home in Calabria, and had become Valla’s disciple, and afterwards
succeeded him as Professor in the
University. “Of all the worshippers of
antiquity, whose exclusive ideal was ancient Rome and the oldest words of the Latin tongue, he was the
most extreme”. No scholar,
perhaps, ever lived so completely in the
heathenism of the past; “the present was to him a mere phantom; the world of antiquity was the reality in
which he lived and moved and
had his being”.
Pomponius Laetus lived in antique style, in haughty poverty, like a second Cato. In the cultivation of his
vineyard he followed the rules of Varro and Columella. He would often come down, with buskined feet, before
daybreak to the University, where the hall could hardly contain the crowd of his eager scholars. The vivacious little
man might frequently be seen
wandering alone through the ruins
of ancient Rome, suddenly arrested, as if in a rapture, before some heap of stones, or even bursting into tears. He despised the Christian religion, and passionately inveighed against its adherents. As a deist, Pomponius believed in a Creator, but, as one of his most devoted disciples tells us, as an antiquarian he revered the “Genius of the City of Rome”, or what would, in modern
language, be called “the Spirit of
Antiquity”.
His house on the Quirinal was filled with fragments of ancient Architecture and sculpture, inscriptions and
coins. Here, in an atmosphere
charged with the spirit of heathen Rome,
he assembled his disciples and friends. Disputations were held on ancient
authors, and philosophical questions,
discourses and poems were read, Comedies of Plautus and Terence were sometimes performed, and an infatuated admiration for the old Republic was cherished.
Such was the origin of a "literary society”,
called the Roman Academy, whose
object was the cultivation of pure Latinity,
and of the ancient national life of Rome. “Pomponius, the founder of the
Society, went so far as to refuse to
learn Greek, lest he should injure the perfection of his Latin pronunciation”.
Around Pomponius, the representative of pagan
Humanism, soon gathered a number of young freethinkers, semi-heathen in their views and morals, who sought to make up for their lost faith by a hollow worship of antiquity.
The members of the Academy looked upon themselves as a
Confraternity; they laid aside their ordinary names, and adopted ancient ones
instead. The original name of Pomponius, who was venerated by all as their
leader and teacher, is not even known. Bartolomeo Platina and Filippo
Buonaccorsi, who was called Callimachus, are the most noted of the other
members. We also hear of Marcantonio Coccio of the Sabine country, called
Sabellicus; Marcus Romanus, or Asclepiades; Marinus Venetus, or Glaucus; a certain Petrus or Petrejus; Marsus
Demetrius, Augustinus Campanus, &c.
It may be admitted that this use of heathen names was a
mere fancy, for which a parallel may be found in the increasing preference for
such names, and even those which were of evil repute, in baptism. But other
practices of the Academicians cannot be thus explained. The fantastic “enthusiasm
of the adherents of the old Calabrian heathen” found vent in religious
practices which seemed like a parody of Christian worship. The initiated constituted
their learned Society into “a formal Antiquarian College of Priests of the
ancient rite, presided over by a pontifex maximus, in the person of Pomponius
Laetus”. The sentiments and the conduct of these “pantheistic votaries of
Antiquity” were certainly more heathen than Christian. Raphael Volaterranus, in
his Roman Commentaries, dedicated to Julius II, plainly declared that the
meetings of these men, their antique festivities in honour of the birthday of
the City of Rome and of Romulus, were "the first step towards doing away
with the Faith."
There was certainly some ground for the charges
brought against the Academicians of contempt for the Christian religion, its
servants and its precepts, of the worship of heathen divinities and the
practice of the most repulsive vices of ancient times. Pomponius Laetus was the
disciple of Valla, and was certainly an adherent and disseminator of the
destructive doctrines of his master. A heathen idea of the State, hostility to
the clergy, and the dream of substituting for the existing government of Rome a
Republic of the ancient type, prevailed in this circle, together with Epicurean
and materialistic views of life. “Experience had already sufficiently shown
that the enthusiastic veneration
of the old Roman commonwealth was not
unlikely to have practical consequences”.
This heathen and republican secret society seemed all
the more dangerous in the
increasingly excited state of the Roman
populace. Many of the youths of the city were ready for any sort of mischief, and numerous exiles
lurked on the Neapolitan
frontiers. In the June of 1465, when Paul II
went to war with Count Everso of Anguillara, there was a decided movement in favour of the tyrant.
A year later, many
adherents of the Fraticelli were discovered; their trial revealed the opposition
of their rites and doctrines to those of
the Church. Further inquiry showed
that the partisans of this sect were at work not only in the March of Ancona, but also in the Roman Campagna and in Rome itself. There is no proof of any connection between these heretics and the Roman Academy. It is, however, certain that various
fanatical demagogues, and some of
the angry Abbreviators, held intimate
relations with the Academicians, and that in their assemblies strong language
against the Pope was freely indulged in. Thus “all the hostile elements of
Heathenism, Republicanism and Heresy seemed to have their centre in the Academy”.
In the last days of February, 1468, the inhabitants of Rome suddenly learned that the police had discovered a conspiracy against the Pope, and had made numerous arrests, chiefly among the Literati and members of the Roman Academy.
Disquieting reports of various kinds had, for some
time, been prevalent in the city, and predictions of the Pope's speedy death
had been circulated. Paul II had attached no importance to these rumours, but, after receiving a
warning letter from a temporal Prince, he looked on the matter in a more
serious light. His anxiety increased, and his determination to act was
confirmed, when some of the Cardinals also made communications of an alarming character.
On the same night an order was issued for the arrest of the ringleaders of the
Conspiracy. Four members of the Roman Academy, viz., Callimachus, Glaucus, Petrejus,
and Platina, had been named to the Pope as the chiefs. The first three, having
received intimation of the danger which threatened them, succeeded in making
their escape. Callimachus, himself, in a letter subsequently written for his
own justification, declares that he had at first remained hidden in Rome, and
then fled secretly to Apulia.
Others who had been connected with the Academicians were,
together with Platina, incarcerated in St. Angelo, and afterwards examined by
torture. “Every night some one is arrested”, wrote the Milanese Ambassador, Johannes
Blanchus, on the 28th February, “and every day the matter is better understood;
it is not, as Cardinal Ammanati supposed, a dream, but a reality. The plan would
have succeeded if God had not protected the Pope”.
It is most interesting to observe the manner in which Paul
II himself took the whole affair. Hitherto, we have had little save the
somewhat scanty account of his biographer, Canensius, to guide us. He informs
us that the Pope had taken measures to make an example of an infamous band of
young Romans of corrupt morals
and insolent behaviour. They had maintained that the Christian religion was a
fraud, trumped up by a few Saints, without any foundation in facts. Hence, it was
allowable to copy the Cynics, and give themselves up to the gratification of
their passions. “These persons”, Canensius goes on to say, “despise our
religion so much that they consider it disgraceful to be called by the name of
a Saint, and take pains to substitute heathen names for those conferred on them
in baptism. The leader of this Sect, whom I will not here name, was a
well-known teacher of Grammar in Rome, who, in the first instance, changed his
own name, and then those of his friends and disciples in this manner. Some
abandoned men associated themselves with him: as, for example, the Roman,
Marcus, who is called Asclepiades; the Venetian, Marinus, who is called Glaucus;
a certain Petrus, who has styled himself Petrejus; and Damian, a Tuscan, who is
known as Callimachus. These had bound themselves to murder the Pope”.
This account enables us to look at the affair from the
point of view of the Pope’s position as “Guardian of Faith and Morals”, and
recently discovered Reports of the Milanese
Ambassadors serve yet more clearly to elucidate its significance in this
respect. Their independent character,
and the direct nature of their testimony, entitle them to be considered as documents of the greatest
importance.
It was not easy for the Ambassadors of the League, then in Rome, to obtain really authentic information regarding the events which had just taken place there, for the most varied and fantastic accounts were
circulated.
Many different statements were made as to the day fixed upon for carrying the plot into effect. Some
said that Paul II was to have
been murdered on Ash-Wednesday, at the Papal Mass, others that the crime was to have been perpetrated on Carnival Sunday, when all the people, and even the Papal Guards, would have gone to Monte Testaccio for the accustomed festivities.
Others again declared Palm
Sunday to be the day selected. It was
further reported that the conspirators had, with a view to the accomplishment of their purpose, associated
with themselves Luca de Tocio,
a banished Roman, belonging to the
party of the Orsini, who was a member of the Council at the Court of Ferrante I at Naples. This man was believed to be in league with other banished persons. Four or five hundred of them were to enter the city secretly, and to hide themselves in the ruins of the
houses which had been pulled down
in order to enlarge the Papal Palace.
On the other side, forty or fifty partisans were to join the conspirators, and begin an attack on the
attendants of the Cardinals and
Prelates, who would be waiting in the Square
in front of the Palace. By this means the Pope's small Guard would be occupied, and the conflict was to serve as a signal to the hidden outlaws, who would
then make their way into the
Church and murder the Pope and those about
him. General pillage was to ensue, and Luca de Tocio was to establish a new Constitution.
Even more alarming than the plot itself was the
reported extent of its
ramifications. The King of Naples was accused
of taking part in it, and some were of opinion that the King of France was also engaged, while others declared Sigismondo Malatesta to be one of the
conspirators.
These varied accounts led the Ambassadors of the League
to seek from the Pope himself more accurate information, and, at the same time,
to express their sympathy and offer assistance on behalf of their several
masters. An account of the Audience was drawn up by the Milanese Ambassadors
personally, and in duplicate. This document makes it perfectly evident that,
from the very first, the Pope clearly distinguished between the Anti-Christian
and immoral life of many Academicians, or their heresy, as the Ambassadors
shortly style it, and the Conspiracy against his person.
On the first of these points Paul II made some very important
statements, representing the Academicians as complete heathens and Materialists.
They deny, he said, the existence of God, they declare that there is no other world
than this, that the soul dies with the body, and that, accordingly, man may
give himself up to the indulgence of his passions without any regard to the law
of God; all that is needed
is to avoid coming into collision with the temporal power.
Paul II had much more to tell of the evil deeds of
these Epicureans, who seem,
indeed, to have adopted the doctrines promulgated by Valla in his book “on
pleasure”. They despised the commands
of the Church, he said, ate meat on
fast-days, and reviled the Pope and the Clergy. They said that the priests were the enemies of the laity, that they had invented fasting and forbidden men to
have more than one wife.
Moses, they taught, deceived the Jews,
his law was a forgery, Christ was a deceiver, Mahomet a great intellect, but also an impostor. They were ashamed of their Christian names and preferred those which were heathen, and they practised the most
shameful vices of antiquity. Some
of these free-thinkers are said to have
contemplated an alliance with the Turks. Predictions of the speedy death of the
Pope were circulated by them; then
there would be a new Election and a complete change in the state of affairs.
Paul II named Callimachus, Petrejus, Glaucus, and Platina
as the ringleaders of the Conspiracy. He deeply regretted that the first three
had escaped beyond the reach of justice. He evidently considered the matter to
be most important, and expressed to the Ambassadors his determination to root
out this “heresy”, and his regret that he had not sooner become aware of its
existence.
In regard to the Conspiracy against his person, the
Pope said he had heard the
prevalent reports, but added that he could
form no decided opinion as to whether they were well-founded or not, because those believed to be the
leaders in the plot had escaped.
According to the report of one of the
Ambassadors, Paul II had, at first, a suspicion that Podiebrad, the Hussite King of Bohemia, might be
implicated; it appeared to him not improbable that one heretic might help another.
The Pope was particularly disquieted by the rumour about Luca de Tocio, who had taken part in the
troubles in the time of Pius II.
He at once sent a courier to Naples
to ascertain whether he had really left that city. As it was also affirmed that Tocio had given 1000
ducats to the guards of St.
Angelo, as a bribe to induce them to deliver
up the fortress, the Pope caused searching enquiries to be made, but very little information was obtained. Even at the time, it was suspected that
these reports had been set
afloat by persons whose interest it was to
raise a cloud of dust as a stratagem to escape punishment.
A reward of 300 ducats was offered for the discovery
of the whereabouts of Callimachus,
Glaucus, and Petrejus, and 500 for
that of Luca de Tocio. The Pope hoped to get hold of some, if not all, of the conspirators. On the
29th February, it was believed
that a clue to Callimachus' abode had
been found; he was considered next in importance to Luca de Tocio.
The houses of the fugitives were, of course, searched,
and the licentious poems which were found furnished fresh proof of the immorality
of the Academicians.
“We cannot wonder that the Pope did not consider the existence of such a Conspiracy as in itself
incredible. He had incurred the
bitter hatred of the aggrieved Abbreviators.
Stefano Porcaro, the head of the conspiracy against Nicholas V, had also been a Humanist, and had dreamed of the restoration of the ancient Republic.
The Giibelline bands in Rome
were still in existence, and their alliance
with the party-chiefs of the city, and with the fugitives and exiles beyond its limits, constituted an abiding danger. Again, in the days of Pius II, young Tiburzio, at the head of a similar Catiline band, had
stirred the people up to cast off
the priestly yoke, and revive the ancient
liberty of Rome. By his decided action, Paul II, at any rate, repressed disorder, and provided himself
with material for
investigation”.
Until the official documents are brought to light, it will be impossible to give an exact account of these proceedings, which were conducted by Cardinal Barbo,
and watched with the greatest
interest by Paul II. They would
furnish us with the means of checking the detailed relation of Platina, whose participation in the events renders it necessary to receive his statements with
the greatest caution. In many
cases they are, moreover, at variance
with facts otherwise established.
He certainly is guilty of gross misrepresentation in his Life of Paul II, when he affirms that, in his
examination, he had shown the indolent
Callimachus to be incapable of
independently originating a Conspiracy. In Platina’s letters, written during his imprisonment, we find him,
on the contrary, laying the whole
blame on the blustering folly
of Callimachus. “Who”, he asks, in one of these letters, “would believe that the drunken dreams of
this man, whom we mocked at and
despised, could have brought us into
such trouble? Alas! for us, poor wretches, who must pay for the silly temerity of another! That crazy bestower of treasures and kingdoms roams about freely, drunk with wine and glutted with food, while we, for
being imprudent enough not to
reveal his mad dreams, are tortured
and shut up in dungeons”. In almost all the other letters of this period Platina reiterates these
accusations.
The constancy with which Platina claims to have undergone
examination and endured torture must also be relegated to the domain of
fiction.
The letters written during his imprisonment also
testify against him. Anything
more abject than his petitions addressed
to the Pope can hardly be imagined. His error, in not showing up the drunken Callimachus, had been
one of negligence, not of
malice. For the future, however, he promised,
whenever he hears anything against the name or the welfare of the Pope, even from a bird of the
air, at once to report it to His
Holiness. He approves of the measures
taken for the repression of Humanistic license, inasmuch as it is the duty of a good shepherd to
preserve his flock from contagion.
He confesses that, when turned out of
his office, he accused God and man; he repents of this, and will not again so far forget himself.
Finally, he promises, if restored to
liberty and secured from want, to become the
Pope’s most ardent panegyrist, to celebrate in prose and verse “the golden age of his most happy Pontificate”; he is even ready to abandon classical
studies and devote himself
entirely to Holy Scripture and Theology. The Humanist, however, again comes out
when he reminds the Pope that
poets and orators confer immortality on Princes: Christ was made known by the Evangelists, and Achilles by Homer. The prevailing
tone of the letter is
expressed in its concluding words: “Only give hope to us who, with clasped hands and bended knees humbly await your mercy”.
Utterly broken and crushed, Platina in his distress built much on the assistance of Rodrigo Sanchez de Arevalo, Bishop of Calahorra and Prefect of St.
Angelo, and besieged him with
elegant letters. Rodrigo had the courtesy
to grant Platina’s request that he would refresh him with a letter. This led to a brisk correspondence between the two Humanists, one of whom was a
representative of the Christian and the other of the heathen Renaissance. Rodrigo sought to calm and elevate Platina's mind by presenting to him religious motives of
consolation. It is curious to see how
difficult the latter found it to respond
to the Bishop's thoughts. In spite of some convulsive snatches after Christian reminiscences, the antique element is the one that predominates in his
letters, and certain fatalistic
observations which escaped from his pen,
induced Rodrigo to enlighten him as to the manner in which a Catholic ought to speak of Fortune and of Fate.
The letters in which Platina invoked the intercession of a number of the Cardinals and Prelates are as deplorable
as the “abject and fulsome flatteries” with which he overwhelmed his gaoler.
All these letters are full of the praises of those to whom they are addressed, and
of Paul II and Sanchez de Arevalo. In one of them Platina confesses that he
contemplated suicide. In answer to the accusation of irreligion, he maintains
that, as far as human frailty permitted, he had always fulfilled his religious
duties, and denies that he had ever impugned any article of Faith. He is
conscious of no crime save his silence regarding the babble of Callimachus.
Pomponius Laetus, who was delivered up to the Pope by Venice, during his detention at St. Angelo’s showed
little of the ancient Roman stoicism
which he had so ostentatiously professed. At first he seems to have given some sharp answers to his examiners; but he soon followed
the example of his friend
Platina, and sought by obsequious flattery
to win the favour of his gaoler and of the Pope. He protested in the strongest terms that he was
innocent, and, at the same time,
begged for some books to read in his
solitude. Instead of Lactantius and Macrobius, for which Pomponius asked, Rodrigo de Arevalo sent him his treatise on the errors of the Council of Basle. Pomponius was little gratified by the substitution, but thanked
him in an offensively fulsome
letter. This was meant to pave the way
for another petition, and, on the same day, he expressed a wish for a cheerful companion, with whom
he might interchange ideas.
In support of his request, he quoted
the words of Scripture : “Bear ye one another’s burthens, and so you shall fulfil the law of Christ”."This application was granted.
The Apology drawn up by Pomponius Laetus, while in prison, is also a pitiful production. He meets an accusation,
in regard to his relations with a young Venetian, by an appeal to the example of Socrates. He had withdrawn from all intimate intercourse with Callimachus from
the time he had become aware
of his wickedness. Everywhere, and especially in Venice, he had extolled Paul
II. He confesses with regret
that he had spoken strongly against
the clergy; he had said these things in anger because he had been deprived of his maintenance; he
begs to be forgiven for the
sake of the sufferings of Christ. He brings
forward witnesses to prove that he had fulfilled his Easter duties, explains his disregard of the law of
fasting by the state of his health,
and declares that he had received the
necessary dispensation. Finally, in evidence of his Christian sentiments, he refers to the verses which he
had composed on the Stations
of the Cross, to his discourse in
honour of the Blessed Virgin, and his treatise on the Immortality of the Soul. He concludes by a penitent admission that he has done wrong, and prays that, for
the sake of the Risen
Saviour, mercy may prevail over justice.
This pitiful document seems to have decided the fate of Pomponius. Paul II came to the conclusion that the writer of such a letter was incapable of originating a
Conspiracy, and, with regard to the other charges against him, he probably considered that the severe lesson which he had received was sufficient to reform him. The reason
of Platina’s far longer
detention in prison was evidently that the
suspicions against him were stronger, owing to his former conduct.
Paul II still hoped that the ringleaders of the
Conspiracy would fall into his hands, and, if we may believe Platina, Petrejus was actually apprehended, but
confessed nothing.
That the affair had a political side is evidenced by
the fact that, immediately on
the discovery of the plot, the Pope transferred
his residence from St. Peter's to S. Marco, “in order to remove from the neighbourhood of the Orsini
and place himself near the
Colonna”. “But”, as the Ambassador, from
whom we learn of this change, remarks, “danger is everywhere”."
Things, however, did not now seem so alarming. The report
of the departure from Naples of Luca de Tocio, the partisan of the Orsini, and
of his participation in the Conspiracy, proved to be mistaken. Paul II,
nevertheless, considered it well to surround himself with a strong guard. The
Carnival amusements, as Augustinus de Rubeis, on the 4th March, informed the
Duke of Milan, took place just as usual. “Regarding the Conspiracy against the
Pope’s person”, writes the same Ambassador, “enquiries have been most carefully
made, but as yet nothing has been discovered but some blustering talk of
murdering the Pope, which may easily have arisen in the way I have already described. As the populace and the whole Court are
discontented, it was only necessary for some one to make a beginning in order
to carry all with him”.
The obscurity in which this Conspiracy is involved
will never be completely
cleared away. Platina and Pomponius Laetus,
“with touching unanimity concur in laying all the blame on the cunning of the fugitive who was not there
to defend himself”. Even in
distant Poland, where he hoped to find
sure refuge with Paul II's enemy, King Casimir, Callimachus had good cause to guard his lips, for the
Pope made great, though
ineffectual, efforts to get him into his power. Again, in the year 1470, the Papal Legate,
Alexander, Bishop of Forli, urged the General Diet at Petrikau to deliver up the conspirator, who only escaped through
a combination of favourable
circumstances.
Although enquiries regarding this Conspiracy were
finally abandoned in Rome for
want of evidence, yet the prosecution of what was designated as the “heresy” of
the Academicians, was carried
on, and this with all the more reason,
inasmuch as Platina himself had not ventured to deny the charge of heathen practices. Unfortunately, trustworthy information on this subject is but scanty. From many sources, however, we learn that Paul II
meditated measures of extreme severity against the heathen and philosophical extravagances of the Professors and Literati.
“If God preserves my life”, said the Pope to one of
the Ambassadors very soon
after the discovery of the plot, “I will do
two things; in the first place, I will forbid the study of these senseless histories and poems, which are full
of heresies and blasphemies,
and, secondly, I will prohibit the teaching
and practice of Astrology, since so many errors arise thence”. “Children”, continued the Pope, “when hardly ten years old, even without going to school,
know a thousand villanies. What,
then, must they become when, later
on, they read Juvenal, Terence, Plautus, and Ovid? Juvenal certainly makes a show of blaming vice, but he leads his readers to the knowledge of it”. “There are many other books”, he added, “through which a sufficient amount of learning may be attained; it is better to
call things by their true
names and to avoid poetical circumlocution. These Academicians are worse than
the heathen, for they believed in God,
while these deny Him”. The Ambassadors
expressed their agreement with the Pope, especially Lorenzo of Pesaro, who delighted him by demonstrating the faith of the ancients with a great
display of learning. The Ambassadors also considered it very advisable to forbid Ecclesiastics to study Poetry
and Astrology. The Pope
concluded by declaring that he also meant
to take measures against the Roman habit of spreading false reports.
In the consultations, which were held during this
time, to devise the best means of
attacking the false Renaissance, the
Pope may have had in his mind a treatise which Ermolao Barbaro, the excellent Bishop of Verona, had dedicated to him in 1455. This author, looking at the matter exclusively from a moral point of view,
vehemently protests against the
undue estimation in which the ancient poets
were commonly held, and in some places altogether condemns the whole of the old heathen poetry. He goes through the whole series, first of the Greek, and then
of the Latin poets, and
cites a number of extracts from the
writings of the Fathers, in which immoral poets are condemned. In his opposition to the fanatical admirers of ancient poetry, Barbaro sometimes flies to the
other extreme, and completely
condemns the art in itself. The conclusion
which he deduces is, that if the study of these heathen writers, even by the laity, requires much
circumspection, this must be still more necessary in the case of religious and priests.
One of the Ambassadors expressly states that, in the middle of March, 1468, all the teachers in Rome were, on account of the danger of heresy, forbidden to make use of the old poets; further details are wanting. It
is, however, probable that
the Papal prohibition was confined to the
schools. At any rate, it did not apply to all poets, but only, as the Pope clearly explained to the
Ambassadors of the League, to those
who were objectionable on the score of
morals. Every one must admit that the moral aspect was the one which a Pope was bound to consider in
forming a judgment on the Classics. The vindication of the Christian moral law in this domain was, therefore, a
most salutary act. Poison is
poison still, even if contained in crystal
vials.
As regards the issue of the trial, we have only
Platina’s report, and it cannot be looked upon as trustworthy. According to
him, the Academicians were acquitted from the charge of actual heresy, nothing
more than flippancy and undue licence in language being proved against them. Accordingly,
the prisoners were now no longer shut up, but merely detained in the Papal
Palace, then within the precincts of the Vatican, and finally, at the
intercession of some of the Cardinals, especially Bessarion, only in the City
of Rome; but the Academy was dissolved, and certain limitations were imposed upon
classical studies.
The severe lesson given by Paul II to the wanton insolence of the Humanists, was no doubt a salutary one. No one can deny that the Pope was acting within his rights when he took measures against the practical heathenism of the Academicians. Platina, himself, in a letter to Pomponius Laetus, confessed that the
heathenish practices of the Academy
must, necessarily, give offence. “And so”,
he adds, “we must not complain if the Pope defends himself and the Christian religion”.
The action of Paul II towards the Roman Academy has
received a remarkable justification from recent investigations in the Catacombs.
Until the 15th century the subterranean necropolis of the early Christians had, with the exception of the Catacomb of St. Sebastian, been completely forgotten. Traces of visitors begin to reappear from the year
1433. First, we have names of
Monks and Pilgrims, led there by devotion.
“I came here”, writes Brother Laurentius of Sicily, “to visit this holy place, with twenty
companions of the Order of the Friars
Minor, on the 17th January, 1451”.
Then, suddenly, we come upon the autograph scratches (Graffiti) of Humanists and Roman
Academicians : of Pomponius, Platina, Volscus, Campanus, Pantagathus, Ruffus,
Histrius, Partenopaeus, Perillus, Calpurnius, &c. They call themselves “a company of venerators
and students of Roman
antiquity, under the leadership of the pontifex
maximus, Pomponius”. Pantagathus describes himself as “Priest of the Roman Academy”. These men were in search, not of Christian, but of heathen,
antiquity. In his large collection
of inscriptions Pomponius inserted but one
which is Christian, and this one because it was metrical, and its polished form had a flavour of heathenism.
Even more characteristic is
the fact that these “modern heathens” ventured,
in the venerable vaults of the Catacombs, where the very stones preach the Gospel, to scrawl flippant
inscriptions on the walls! With this evidence before us, therefore, we cannot wonder that, even after their liberation from prison, the contemporaries of the Academicians should persist in maintaining that they were heathens rather
than Christians.
Of all the Academicians no one had been treated with more severity than Platina. After his release he
cherished the hope that his cringing
flattery would, at least, have secured
him some appointment from the Pope. Paul II. however, did not see any necessity for employing the
pen of this violent and
immoral man. This disappointment intensified
the hatred of the Humanist. He swore that he would have his revenge, and took it, after the
death of Paul II, in his widespread Lives of the Popes.
In this work he describes his enemy as a monster of cruelty, and a barbarian who detested all learning.
This “biographical caricature”
has for centuries imposed itself on
history. Even scholars, well aware of Platina’s bias, have not succeeded in avoiding the influence of the portrait, drawn with undeniable skill and in a bright
and elegant style. Some few
over-partial attempts to vindicate his
character have only served to increase the confusion, until, at length, recent critical investigation of the
Archives has brought the truth to
light.
It must always be remembered that Paul II was not an opponent of the Renaissance in itself, yet he is not
to be looked upon as a Humanist, like Nicholas V. The boastfulness and conceit
of its adherents repelled him : he preferred men of practical knowledge and
practical tendencies. Poetasters had little to expect from him, and, in view of
the pseudo-classical rhymes of a Porcello or a Montagna, this was not much to
be regretted.
The favours which Paul II granted to the Roman and other High Schools, as well as his generosity to a
number of learned men, prove him
to have been no enemy of culture and
learning. While still a Cardinal he repeatedly visited Flavio Biondo in his last sickness, gave him
assistance, and promised
to provide for his children. As Pope, he fulfilled this promise by giving the charge of the Registers to
Gasparo Biondo, in recognition of his father's deserts. When the pious and enthusiastic scholar, Timoteo Maffei, fell
ill, Paul II sent him a present of
money and a skilful physician, and, on
his recovery, he conferred on him the Bishopric of Ragusa. Bishoprics were also bestowed on the three former preceptors of the Pope, and one of them, Amicus Agnifilus, was even raised to the purple. Learned men, like Perotti, were promoted to positions of some
importance in the States of the
Church. Niccolò Gallo, Professor of Jurisprudence,
when seriously ill, asked for a Confessor furnished with faculties to absolve from every sin;
the Pope granted his request,
and added a present of 20 ducats.
He summoned to Rome many scholars whose acquaintance he had made while a Cardinal; for
example, Domizio da Caldiero and Gasparo
da Verona, who was subsequently his biographer. The Florentine, Lionardo Dati, was made Bishop of Massa, and Sigismondo de' Conti and Vespasiano da Bisticci bear witness to the Pope’s
affection for him; the latter
declares that, if the life of Paul II had been prolonged, Dati would have been a Cardinal. In
the year 1470, Paul II showed
the interest he took in historical studies
by causing some Chronicles to be copied for him.
Among the scholars advanced by Paul II to the
Episcopal dignity, was Cardinal Cusa’s intimate friend, Giovan Andrea Bussi of Vigevano, a man who deserves the
highest praise for his labours in
the diffusion of printing throughout Italy.
The numerous books dedicated by this Prelate to the Pope prove the interest taken by Paul II in the introduction of the newly discovered “divine art”. “Your pontificate, most glorious already, will never be
forgotten”, says Bussi, “because this
art has been taken up to your Throne”.
It is impossible to say, with certainty, who it was
that summoned the first German
printers—Conrad Schweinheim from
Schwanheim, opposite Hochst on the Maine, Arnold Pannartz from Prague, and Ulrich Hahn from
Ingolstadt—to Italy. Cusa was deeply interested in the important discovery, but he died before these Germans arrived in Italy. There can be no doubt that to Subiaco, “the
Mother House of the Benedictine
Order, which has done so much for the cause of learning, is due the honour of
having given a home to the first German printers”. Constant relations between this great seat of Western culture and Germany had been maintained ever since the days of the
excellent Abbot Bartholomaus III
(1362, &c.), who, in his zeal for the
improvement of the monastic spirit, had invited from beyond the Alps many German monks, remarkable alike for their learning and their austerity of life. Again,
also, in the middle of the 15th
century there were many German Benedictines
at St. Scholastica.
In the retirement of Subiaco, Schweinheim and Pannartz
printed, first the Latin Grammar of Donatus, which was extensively used in the
Middle Ages, then Cicero’s work on Orators,
and the Instructions of Lactantius
against the Heathen. The last of these books was completed on the 29th October,
1465. Two years later, an edition of St. Augustine’s City of God issued from the Convent printing press at Subiaco. The
States of the Church may therefore claim, after Germany, the honour of first
producing printed books.
Of Ulrich Hahn’s labours at Subiaco no trace now
remains. The learned Cardinal Torquemada induced him to come to Rome, and here,
in 1467, Hahn, who is generally known by the name of Gallus, finished printing
the "Contemplations" on the picture in the Court of Sta Maria sopra Minerva, which his patron had composed. In the September of the same year, 1467, Schweinheim and Pannartz had also migrated to the Eternal City. Here in the Massimi Palace, near the German National
Hospice, they established their printing press. Its first
production was the Letters of Cicero to his Friends. In the course of a few years this was followed by two editions of
Lactantius, a second edition of Cicero’s Letters,
St. Augustine’s City of God,
the works of St. Jerome, the Holy Scriptures, St. Cyprian’s Letters, the Catena of St. Thomas, and, amongst other classical works, those of Caesar, Livy,
Virgil, Ovid, Pliny, Quintilian,
Suetonius, Gellius and Apulius.
The corrector, or, as we should now say, the editor,
of these works was the indefatigable classical scholar, Bussi. Almost all the
books we have mentioned had fervid dedications to the Pope from his pen, and
contained verses written by him. On one occasion he thus alludes to the names
of his typographers, which had to the ears of his countrymen a barbarous sound
:—
The harsh-sounding German names awaken a smile :
Let the admirable art soften the unmelodious tones.
The friendly attitude of the Pope towards the new art and
the extraordinary liberality with which he allowed Bussi to make use of the
precious Manuscripts in the Vatican Library, greatly contributed to promote the
success of the Bishop’s efforts.
The important post of Corrector—with whom scientific textual
criticism had its beginning—was also filled at Hahn's printing-house by a
Bishop, Giantonio Campano, a fact
which shews the esteem in which typography was held at this period.
After the death of Torquemada, Caraffa became a warm patron
of the art of printing; nor did he stand alone among his colleagues in this
respect. In 1469 Bussi writes, “We have as yet found no one in the Sacred
College of Cardinals who has not been favourable to our efforts, so that the
higher the dignity the greater has been their zeal in learning. Would that we
could say as much for other orders”. As time went on, the Roman clergy
maintained an unflagging interest in
the “sacred art” which, in the dedication
to Paul II prefixed to the letters of St. Jerome, is said to be “one of the most auspicious of all the
Divine gifts bestowed during his
pontificate on the Christian world, enabling
even quite poor men at small cost to procure books”.
The account-books of Paul II’s pontificate, which have lately been brought to light, show how little he can
be charged with systematic
hostility towards classical antiquity. They lead us to the conclusion that this
so-called barbarian watched over
the preservation of ancient remains even
more carefully than the scholarly Pius II. The triumphal arches of Titus and Septimius Severus, the Colossus of Monte Cavallo, and the equestrian statue
of Marcus Aurelius were
restored by his desire, and many forgotten
and neglected relics of antiquity were brought to the Palace of S. Marco.
The magnificent collection of antiquities and works of art, which Paul II had brought together in this Palace while yet a Cardinal, contained the most important
treasures of this kind from the
time of the destruction of the Roman Empire.
It contained numerous rare and most precious examples of antique Cameos and engraved gems, medals,
and bronzes. From Byzantium
there were pictures with golden backgrounds,
little domestic altars with mosaics, reliquaries, ivory carvings, and gorgeously embroidered vestments.
To these objects, whose
value was enhanced by their age or their origin, was added a splendid selection of more recent
works of art, such as Flemish
tapestries, Florentine work in gold, vases
and jewels. An inventory of this collection, taken in 1457, while Barbo was still a Cardinal, is one of the
most interesting documents in
the Roman State Archives, and is of
great value in connection with the history of art and civilisation in the Renaissance period. A comparison
of the objects here
mentioned with those in the Museums of the
present day, enables us to realise the wealth of the Collection at S. Marco's. The Museum of Vienna
contains about 200 ancient Cameos,
and the Paris Library about 260;
the inventory of Barbo’s collection mentions 227. The Cardinal collected about a hundred ancient gold, and a thousand ancient silver, coins. He had
twenty-five domestic altars with
mosaics, a number greater than that now
possessed by all the Museums of Europe together.
But all these ancient, modern, and Eastern treasures were not sufficient to satisfy the soul of a collector
like Paul II. On the contrary,
now that the means at his disposal were greater, his schemes assumed yet larger
proportions. He seems to have seriously entertained the idea of transferring the whole of the library of Monte Cassino
to his palace, and he is
said to have offered to construct a new
bridge for the inhabitants of Toulouse in exchange for a Cameo.
The Pope, however, was not merely an enthusiastic collector, but also an expert in matters of art. His
memory was so extraordinary that
he never forgot the name of a person
or a thing, and he was able at a glance to tell where an ancient coin came from, and give the name of the
Prince whose image it bore.
The Churches of the Eternal City shared the care which he bestowed on the ancient monuments; works of
restoration, of a more or less extensive character, were carried on at the Lateran, S. Lorenzo in Piscibus, Sta Lucia in Septemviis, Sta Maria in Araceli, Sta Maria Maggtore, Sta Maria sopra Minerva and the Pantheon.
The bridges, gates, walls, and many of
the public buildings in Rome were repaired
by his command. Similar benefits were conferred upon Tivoli, Ostia, Civitavecchia, Terracina, Viterbo
and Monte Cassino.
The progress of Architecture, under Paul II, was most remarkable, and in this branch of creative art the
Pope appears as the champion
of the Renaissance. In the erection of the magnificent Palace of S. Marco he was
the first to apply the theories of
Vitrubius and definitely to break with
the Gothic style. The splendid and extensive buildings at the Vatican secured the triumph of the new style in Rome. The fact that Paul II reverted to Nicholas V's grand scheme for the reconstruction of St. Peter's,
and proceeded with the
erection of the Tribune, is of the highest interest. A medal and a couple of lines in Canensius’ Biography
of the Pope were, until lately, our only sources of information on this subject, and, accordingly, it
came to be supposed that only
works of restoration were alluded to. The
accounts preserved in the Roman State Archives, however, furnish absolute proof of the magnificent
projects entertained by the Pope.
A passage, unfortunately very laconic,
in a letter from Gentile Becchi to Lorenzo de' Medici, confirms this statement.
The transportation of the Obelisk on St. Peter’s
square— another scheme of his
great predecessor’s—was also taken in hand
by Paul II. The distinguished architect, Ridolfo Fioravante degli Alberti, one of the first men of his
day, had prepared the plans,
and the work had already been commenced
when the Pope died.
The Palazzo di S. Marco, now Palazzo di Venezia, is
the most magnificent creation
of Paul II. Recent investigations of the Archives have thrown some light on the
history of this gigantic work,
but many questions regarding it are still
unanswered. Medals struck on this occasion, and frequently found during restorations in earthenware
caskets, together with an
inscription on the façade, bear witness that these extensive works were begun in the year 14554
This magnificent building was
designed in truly Roman proportions. A whole quarter had to be pulled down in
order to make room for it, and,
although the works went on during the whole of Paul II’s pontificate, the
Palace “within which the newly decorated
Basilica of St. Mark was contained
like a chapel” was not completed at the time of his death. But even in its unfinished state it is
one of the grandest of Roman
Monuments, and, in a remarkable manner, exhibits the transition from the
mediaeval fortress to the modern
Palace, and from the Gothic to the Renaissance
style. In the Palace proper, the character of a fortress predominates. “It is”, to quote the
words of a gifted historian of art, “a
speaking monument of an age of
violence, presenting to the mob a stern and imposing aspect, devoid of all grace or charm, jealously
concealing all the beauty of its
spacious and decorated halls, destined to be
the home of a luxurious life, and the scene of many a gorgeous spectacle”. The grand unfinished court, with
its portico ornamented with
pilasters in the Doric-Tuscan style
below and Corinthian above, the Palazzetto, begun in 1466, joining it at the right-hand corner, and the
vestibule of S. Marco, connected
with the Palace, are all in the Renaissance
style.
From 1466, Paul II had, during a great part of the
year, taken up his abode in this stupendous Palace, which was situated in the middle of the City, at the foot of the
Capitol and in the domain of the friendly Colonna family. The Apostolic
Treasury was also transferred there. Subsequent Popes frequently, as their
Bulls bear evidence, lived there. Just a century after the Election of Paul II,
this grand building was given by Pius IV to the Republic of Venice. Afterwards,
when Venice fell into the hands of Austria, it became the property of that
Empire, whose Ambassadors now occupy it.
CHAPTER
III.
The War against the Turks.—Skanderbeg in Rome.
The death of Pius II inflicted a heavy blow
upon the Church, more especially because its effect
was to arrest the movement for the defence
of Christendom against Islam, which had then just
commenced. Cardinal Bessarion, one of Greece’s noblest
sons, gave expression to his sorrow in touching words. The
Crusade was, for the time, at a standstill, but the idea lived on in the minds
of the Popes. Paul II had, even while a
Cardinal, taken a deep interest in the Turkish question, and
his friends hoped great things from him.
The
first steps taken by the new Pope in no way disappointed these expectations. In
the letters by which he informed the Italian
Princes of his election, he gave expression to his zeal for “the defence of the
Christian Faith against the fury of the
Turks”. One of the principal hindrances in the way of
Pius II's magnificent schemes had been his constant
financial difficulties. Paul II, the practical Venetian,
sought to remedy this state of things, by removing the charge
of the revenue derived from the Alum monopoly, and, in
virtue of the Election Capitulation, destined for the Holy War, from the
Apostolic Treasury to a Commission composed of
Cardinals Bessarion. d'Estouteville and
Carvajal. These Cardinals, who were styled “Commissaries
General of the Holy Crusade”, were to deliberate on all
measures necessary for the prosecution of the war, and to
report accordingly. “Also the income from Indulgences and
from the tithes paid by the clergy for this purpose, as far
as it had hitherto been at the disposal of the Camera Apostolica, was now, for
the most part, directly handed over to the
Commission, or expended according to its
decision”. The magnificent support afforded by the
Commission to the brave Hungarians has won for it an abiding
and honourable remembrance.
In
the autumn of 1464, when the Envoys of the Italian States
came to Rome to do homage, the Pope took the opportunity
of bringing forward the Turkish question. Special negotiations were set on foot
with the splendid Embassy of the Venetian
Republic. They proceeded to treat with the
Commission of Cardinals, and a fresh scheme was
proposed for the Italian States, according to which the Pope
and Venice were each to contribute 100,000 ducats, Naples
80,000, Milan 70,000, Florence 50,000, Modena 20,000,
Siena 15.000, Mantua 10,000, Lucca 8,000 and Montferrat,
5,ooo.
The
plan was by no means well received by the Italian powers.
The Pope, who declared himself ready to pay the
100,000 ducats, even if he should have to take it out
of his household expenditure, had great difficulty in obtaining
a promise to let the matter be again brought under
discussion in Rome. The deliberations lasted for six months.
No one was prepared to pay the appointed contributions, which the Pope intended
to devote to the assistance of the Hungarians. Each sought to diminish his own share,
and the more powerful States attached onerous conditions to their compliance.
Venice, Florence and Milan demanded the remission
of the Papal tax of the tenth, twentieth and thirtieth,
and the King of Naples the complete remission of
the tribute which he owed to the Holy See. In order to
enforce his request, Ferrante informed the Pope that
the Sultan had made offers of alliance to him, with a
sum of 80,000 ducats, if he would stir up a war in Italy.
Subsequently, when the relations between Rome and Naples
had become still more unfriendly, he openly threatened to ally himself with the Turks.
The
Ambassadors assembled in Rome displayed a true Italian
talent for evasion and procrastination. It was evident
that not one amongst them would do anything. This
hopeless state of things induced Paul II to lift the veil,
and let all the world know whose fault it was that, after six
months of deliberation, not a single step in advance had been
made. The just displeasure of Paul II found vent in
bitter complaints. “The outcry against the burdens imposed
is only raised in order to avoid giving support to the
Venetians. May it not prove that, in thus forsaking the Venetians,
people are forsaking themselves and all the faithful”.
They desire to discharge their obligations with the
money of the Church, and thus to render it impossible for
her to assist the Hungarians. The consequence will be that
Hungary will be compelled to make peace with the Turks.
What is left for the Venetians but to take the same course,
especially as Mahomet has offered them tolerably favourable
conditions? When both these champions are removed,
the way to Italy by land and sea lies open to the enemies
of Christendom.
These
complaints were as powerless to rouse the Italian powers
from their lethargy as the tidings of the immense naval
preparations of the Turks, which reached Rome in May,
1465, denoted immediate danger to Italy. Yet at this
very time Florence refused the payment of a yearly contribution
for Hungary demanded by the Pope.
Even
in the States of the Church the Pope encountered obstinate
opposition to the payment of the Turkish tithes. Not
only the smaller towns, like Viterbo, Toscanella and Soriano,
but even the wealthy city of Bologna had to be seriously
admonished to fulfil the obligation. Tivoli and Foligno
begged for a remission of the tax; Ferentino lay
for a long time under an Interdict for resisting the claims
of the Apostolic Treasury; the Counts of Conti in
the Campagna were utterly recalcitrant. Ecclesiastical penalties
proved useless, and in the end it was necessary to resort
to force.
Meanwhile,
Paul II maintained the war against the enemies of the Faith as
well as his own resources permitted, making great sacrifices,
especially on behalf of Hungary. A modern historian,
after mentioning 42,500 (or 40,000) ducats given to Matthias
Corvinus at Ancona, speaks of “some smaller” sums of
money sent by Paul to Hungary. This statement is
directly contradicted by the testimony of the
Pope’s contemporary, Vespasiano da Bisticci, who says that
Paul II sent about 80,000 ducats to Hungary in 1465,
and also promised an annual contribution. The account-books
preserved in the Roman State Archives shew that on the 23rd
May, 1465, the Commissaries General of the Crusade
paid 57,500 golden florins to the Ambassadors of King
Matthias of Hungary from the proceeds of the Alum
monopoly alone, and, on the 28th April, 1466, a further
sum of 10,000 Hungarian ducats. The expense of the mercenaries
meanwhile was so heavy that the Hungarian
Monarch felt obliged to give up all offensive warfare
against the Turks. Venice, also, at this time
thought of making peace with the enemy. The deplorable policy of the Italian
States, which Paul II had vainly endeavoured to
gain to the common cause, explains this universal
discouragement. “Naples and Milan kept on good terms with the
Porte, Genoa and Florence hankered after the reversion
of the commerce of Venice in the Levant”. Under these
circumstances, it was well that the heroic Skanderbeg
and the war in Asia Minor, “by which the feudatory
kingdom of Caramania was annexed in 1466”, fully occupied
the Turkish forces.
To
prevent the conclusion of a peace with the Turks, Paul
II. made large offers of money, and resolved to send Cardinal
Carvajal, the most distinguished member of the Sacred
College, to Venice. This prelate, who had through life
ardently espoused the cause of the Holy War, was of all
others the best fitted to accomplish so difficult a mission. His
appointment as Legate for Venice took place on the 30th
July, 1466; he left Rome on the 20th August, and did not
return till the autumn of the following year.
In
November, 1466, a Diet, energetically promoted by Paul
II, was held at Nuremberg to consider the Turkish question.
The despatch of an army to the assistance of Hungary
was discussed at great length, but neither this Assembly
nor those which followed had any definite result.
In
July, 1466, the Pope invoked the assistance of the European
Princes on behalf of Skanderbeg. For two years had
this hero resisted all the attacks of the Turks, who had been
repeatedly defeated by him. To avenge this disgrace, the
Sultan determined on an expedition against Albania. In
the spring of 1466 a Turkish force, 200,000, or, as some few
writers say, 300.000 strong, began its march against Croja,
the capital city. At the end of May a messenger reached
Ragusa with the news that Skanderbeg had been defeated
by treachery, and that a number of Christians had been
slain; a second Turkish army was also said to threaten
Hungary. The Italians were panic-stricken. Piero
de' Medici shed tears over the fate of Albania and promised
help. The Pope, who had already aided Skanderbeg, again sent money, and lost no
time in calling on the Christian powers to
bestir themselves. He spoke in moving terms of the affliction
of Christendom, of the terror of the nations on the Adriatic coast,
and of the fugitives who were constantly arriving from
the East. “One cannot without tears behold those ships
that flee from the Albanian shore to take refuge in Italian
harbours; those naked, wretched families,
driven from their dwellings, who sit by the sea, stretching out their hands to heaven and filling the air with lamentations uttered in an unknown tongue”.
The account-books of his pontificate bear witness to the magnificent liberality with which Paul II succoured these
unhappy creatures. The Pope might indeed
say that he had done what lay in his
power; the Hungarians alone had in the preceding
year received 100,000 golden florins, but he could not do everything; effectual support from the Christian powers was more than ever a necessity.
Happily
the apprehensions regarding the fate of Albania were
not realised. The heroic valour of its champion rendered Croja invincible. “Skanderbeg
pursued his ancient, well-tried tactics,
and from the woodlands of Tumenistos he
ceaselessly harassed the besiegers, inflicting so much loss and disgrace on the Turkish army, that the
Sultan, finding corruption and force
alike useless, left Balaban with 80,000 men
to continue the siege of Croja and starve it into submission, and himself
retired with the bulk of his troops into winter
quarters at Constantinople”.
The
fate of Albania depended on the deliverance of Croja, which
Balaban had encircled with a girdle of fortresses, and the
task was beyond the unassisted powers of the Albanians and
Venetians. Skanderbeg, therefore, resolved to go in person
to Italy to beg for money and arms from Rome and Naples.
In
the middle of December, 1466, the Albanian champion reached Rome, where he was received with honours. “He is”, to quote the words of an eye-witness, “an
old man in his sixtieth year; he came
with but few horses, in poverty; I hear
that he will ask for help”. It has been again and again falsely asserted that,
in consequence of his “too Venetian sympathies”, Skanderbeg obtained
nothing from the Pope beyond the Indulgence and
the Proclamations addressed to the deaf ears of Western Christendom,
together with some pious exhortations and the
renewal of the never fulfilled promise of the crown of Epirus
and Macedonia.
His
biographer, on the contrary, not only relates the honourable
and friendly reception of the hero in Rome, but
expressly observes that the Pope, like the Cardinals, had
generously responded to his requests. “With many presents,
and with a considerable sum of money”, says Barletius,
“Skanderbeg returned cheered and encouraged to
his people”. Other authentic documents give fuller particulars
as to the results of the journey to Rome. In the
account-books of Paul II we find that first of all Skanderbeg
received for his maintenance on one occasion 250,
and on another, 200 ducats, and that furthermore on the
19th April, 1467, 2700, and on the 1st September 1100
ducats were paid to him. Regarding the Secret Consistory
of January 7th, 1467, in which the assistance to be
given to the Albanian hero was considered, we have the
testimony of Cardinal Gonzaga, who took part in it. He
says that the Pope at once declared his readiness to pay
5000 ducats; the necessity of protecting his own country
was his reason for not contributing yet more largely;
Cardinal Orsini, who was hostile to Paul II, ventured
to observe that the Pope had nothing to apprehend from any quarter. This remark
greatly angered the Pope, and provoked some
interesting disclosures as to his relations with Naples.
He said that he knew with certainty that Ferrante was eager to attack the
States of the Church. One of the King's five confidants
on this matter had given information to Rome. It is
evident that, under these circumstances, the
Holy See could not do more for the champion of Albania.
A Secret Consistory of the 12th January, 1467,
determined that in any case Skanderbeg should have 5000 ducats.
Not only Venice, but also Ferrante, whose relations
with Skanderbeg had long been of an intimate
character, received him and sent money, provisions
and munitions. On his return to his beloved country
he soon won fresh laurels; in April, 1467, the Turks
were defeated and Balaban's brother taken prisoner. A
second victory quickly followed, in which Balaban fell and
his troops took to flight. Croja was saved. The danger,
however, was not at an end; a second Turkish army
appeared, and Skanderbeg had to keep the field throughout
the whole year. In the midst of these conflicts, death overtook the Albanian
champion; on the 17th January, 1468,
Skanderbeg succumbed at Alessio to the effects of a fever.
No
greater loss had befallen Christendom since the death
of Hunyadi and St. John Capistran. This was but too
plain to the enemies of the Faith. It is said that when the Sultan heard the news, he exclaimed, “At last Europe and Asia are mine. Woe to Christendom! she has
lost her sword and her shield!”
The
effect of the blow was felt at once by the hard-pressed Albanians. The Turks overran their country—"in the whole of Albania we saw nothing but Turks”, says a
contemporary account—8000 unhappy creatures were sent away as slaves within a few weeks. But Albania was
not yet completely vanquished : Scutari
and Croja, whose garrisons were strengthened
by Venetian troops, continued to hold out.
The enthusiastic honour paid by the afflicted people to the memory of their departed chief was most touching. “Choirs of Albanian maidens”, Sabellicus
informs us, “though surrounded with the
din of battle and the clang of barbarian
arms, assembled regularly every eighth day in
the public squares of the cities of the principality to sing hymns in praise of their departed hero”. The valour with which the little nation resisted the
overwhelming power of Mahomet for more
than a decade is a proof that the spirit
of Skanderbeg still survived amongst them, though
he himself had passed away.
CHAPTER IV.
Struggle against the Domineering
Policy of the Venetians and Louis XI of France.
the independent attitude which the island city of Venice maintained towards the
other Italian States is equally marked in the domain of ecclesiastical
politics. In no portion of the Appenine Peninsula do we meet with such early
and persistent efforts for the extension of the authority of the State at the
expense of the liberty of the Church. The Popes were the natural opponents of
these efforts, and more than once found themselves under the sad necessity of
inflicting the sharpest ecclesiastical penalties on the proud Republic.
The great piety of the Venetians, to which their
numerous churches still bear silent witness, seems to contrast strangely with
these efforts to subjugate the Church to the State. A deeply religious spirit
no doubt existed among the people, and of this the rulers of the Republic, who
loved to call it by the name of St. Mark, were obliged to take some account.
Yet this St. Mark was almost constantly in conflict with the Holy See, because it strove in
every way to degrade the freeborn Church into the position of handmaid to the
State. Further contests with Rome were also occasioned by the efforts of the
Republic to obtain possession of the Romagna. In 1441 the Venetians had gained
a footing in Ravenna, and ever since that period they had been constantly bent
on the extension of their dominion to the detriment of the States of the Church.
These more external disputes, however, were driven into the background, by the
contests which arose from the pretensions of the Venetian oligarchy to absolute
dominion over the whole life of its subjects, even in regard to ecclesiastical
matters.
Even while a Cardinal, Paul II had come into collision with the government of his native city. In 1459, on
the death of Fantin Dandolo,
Bishop of Padua, Pius II had conferred
the See on Cardinal Barbo. By this appointment he intended to please both the
Cardinal and the Republic,
which had always been glad to see her Bishoprics occupied by the sons of her noble families. The
Venetian government had, however,
on this occasion selected another candidate,
Gregorio Correr, and now made every effort to give effect to their choice. It was resolved that,
unless the Cardinal should within
twenty days renounce his Bishopric, all his
revenues derived from Venetian territory should be sequestrated. Moreover, Paul Barbo was to put pressure on his brother in the same direction, and if he failed
to induce him to resign, was
to be banished from the Venetian territory
and deprived of his possessions! Soon afterwards, the Signoria wrote many urgent letters on the matter
to the Pope and to various
Cardinals. As Cardinal Barbo did not
yield, the Venetian Ambassador was strictly charged not to visit him. So firmly did the Signoria adhere to their purpose that the Cardinal was at last obliged to give way. Jacopo Zeno, however, not
Gregorio Correr, became Bishop of
Padua. He was required to pay 2000
ducats yearly to Cardinal Barbo, and the resolutions against Paul Barbo were rescinded.
Great was the embarrassment of the Venetian statesmen when, a few years later, the Cardinal who had been
treated in this manner was
elevated to the Papal throne. No election could have been less agreeable to
them. They were, however,
prudent enough carefully to conceal their vexation. Arrangements for public rejoicings were made
immediately, and an Embassy of
surpassing splendour was sent to Rome to
proffer obedience to Paul II. The usual number of Envoys on such occasions was four. In the case of
Eugenius IV, who was a Venetian,
this number was doubled; but now ten
were sent. The Pope perfectly understood the value of these outward tokens of honour. Even before the arrival of the Mission he spoke in bitter terms to
the Milanese Ambassador about
the arrogance and the personal hostility
of certain Venetian statesmen, and expressed his opinion that before the Envoys had been a fortnight in Rome, disputes would break out. In fact, unpleasant explanations began almost immediately, and the tension kept on growing from day to day, for no European power was viewed in Venice with such jealousy as the Roman See. At the end of 1465, Paul II poured forth a whole list to the Milanese Ambassador of charges against his fellow-countrymen. In the Turkish matter, he said,
they had, by a simple act of
arbitrary power, imposed a tithe on the
clergy. They claimed tribute from Cardinals visiting Venice, a thing which no Christian Prince had ever
done. They were perpetually
incurring reprimands for contemptuous conduct towards their Bishops. They had
forbidden the Archbishop of Spalatro
to enter his See. They were seeking to take possession of the Morea, which
belonged to Thomas Palaeologus. The Venetian Merchants, by buying alum from the
Turks, put Christian money in the pockets of their enemies. The penalty of
Excommunication would have to be pronounced against them. Assuming the position
of mistress of the Adriatic, Venice oppresses Ancona; she holds wrongful possession
of Cervia and Ravenna. The Knights of St. John at Rhodes, and the Emperor, complain
of the Republic, and indeed every one has some grievance against her. The law
which prohibits any one who has a relation among the clergy from being a member
of the Council is absolutely intolerable; the infidels themselves could not do
worse; this measure must be repealed.
Nothing of the kind was contemplated in Venice; the remonstrances
of the Pope were utterly unheeded. In the following spring the appointment to
the Patriarchal Throne gave occasion for further conflicts with Rome, which
were aggravated in the summer, when the Signoria took advantage of the scare
about the Turks again arbitrarily to impose taxes on ecclesiastical property.
Many in Rome were of opinion that this was done with the object of concealing a
secret understanding with the Sultan. It is quite certain that a powerful party
in Venice favoured a peace with the Porte; some few Venetians, according to the report of the Milanese Ambassador, even went so
far as to say that it would be well, not merely to make peace with the Turk,
but also to open the way to Rome for him, that he may punish these priests!
In the summer of 1466 the Republic raised the question of the Council. This so incensed Paul II that he spoke of
excommunicating them, and laying them under Interdict. Several Consistories took place, in which these extreme
measures were seriously
considered. Two grave motives weighed against
a breach with Venice: in the first place, the necessity of previously securing the support of an
Italian Power, and secondly, the
fear that the Signoria might actually
conclude peace with the Infidels. Even in July the Milanese Ambassador was persuaded that,
notwithstanding the threats which had been pronounced, the Pope would in the end endeavour to come to an amicable
understanding. This difficult undertaking was entrusted to Cardinal Carvajal, who, however, was empowered, in
case of necessity, to
pronounce the Interdict. What has transpired of the instructions given to him,
makes it evident that
the Pope sincerely endeavoured to bring about a satisfactory understanding. Cardinal Gonzaga believed Paul II to have contemplated an alliance with Venice,
as a protection against the
animosity of the King of Naples. Details
regarding the protracted negotiations carried on by the distinguished Cardinal are unfortunately
wanting. He is, however, said to
have admirably discharged his arduous
mission. If he was not successful in bringing all questions between Rome and Venice to a solution, he at any rate prevented the conclusion of a peace with the Porte, and prepared the way for better relations
between Paul II and the Republic.
The question of the tithes having
been settled in 1468, in a manner which contented the Venetians, in the May of the following year the
Pope and the Signoria entered
into an alliance directed chiefly against
the treacherous Roberto Malatesta. The double game which the Venetians subsequently played, and
fresh disputes regarding the
Turkish tithes, again caused discord between
the allies. When Paul II died, things had reached such a pass that there was no Venetian Ambassador at
the Roman Court.
Paul II had repeated differences with Florence on matters connected with the liberty of the Church, and
in 1466 and 1469 about the
arbitrary taxation of ecclesiastical property. The obstinacy of the opposition
encountered by the Pope may be estimated by the frequency of his remonstrances. One was published but a few days before his death. Beyond the Italian frontier the
appointment to the See of Brixen also gave rise to a conflict.
The omnipotence claimed by the State was also the occasion of considerable tension in the relations
between the Pope and the French
King. Louis XI wished to reign alone,
alike in State and Church; his will was to be in all things supreme. Even in the beginning of November,
1464, fresh anti-Roman measures
of the King were reported in Rome.
It was said that Louis XI had announced that the publication of Apostolic Bulls throughout the whole of
his kingdom must depend on his permission, and had also prohibited expectances. “These things”, wrote the Milanese Ambassador, “are poor
tokens of obedience; these measures are worse than the Pragmatic Sanction,
which formerly prevailed in France”. No wonder that Paul II distrusted the French Monarch, whose tyrannical and ambitious
disposition was well known to him.
A treatise, written by Thomas Basin about the end of
the year 1464, shows the
state of feeling which then prevailed at the
court of Louis XI. He twisted the words in which homage was paid to Louis XI so as to deduce from them that this document only bound the King to Pius II
personally. By the death of that Pope, Louis XI was freed from all further obligation. Basin also insisted on the
necessity of speedily convening a
French National Synod.
Evil counsels of other kinds came to the French King from Milan. In March, 1466, an Envoy from that State was charged to advise Louis XI to defer his profession of obedience as long as possible, on the ground that,
while this matter was in
suspense, the Pope would be obliged to show
himself pliable. The French Monarch, however, did not take this view; his honour, he thought,
allowed of no further delay, and
that which had already taken place had
been injurious to him. When, however, the representative of Milan again brought
forward his request, the King
consented to procrastinate as long as possible. “As the French fear the heat
and the Plague”, adds the Milanese Envoy, “the Embassy which is to do homage in
the usual form will not start before September. The Archbishop of Lyons,
Charles of Bourbon, will be its leader; Cardinal Jouffroy, who is to accompany
and support the Envoys, will not, his people say, begin his journey before
September”.
This last piece of news was untrue, for Jouffroy
reached Rome on the 4th October, 1466. The great Embassy, however, did not
leave Lyons until the end of the month. In a letter to the Pope the King
excused his tardiness on the plea of the troubles in his kingdom.
The instructions given to the Envoys seemed to promise
a favourable change in the ecclesiastical policy of France. They were desired,
in the first place, to express the sincere devotion of the King to the Holy See,
of which the decree abrogating the Pragmatic Sanction, in spite of the
opposition of almost all the kingdom, was a token. Besides making the
profession of obedience in the form which, since the days of Martin V, had been
in use, the Ambassadors were charged to apologise in Louis’s name for the
anti-Roman ordinances of 1464; and to explain that they were not the act of the
King, but due to the Bishop of Bayeux and the Patriarch of Jerusalem. The King
would be an obedient son of the Holy See; in return he asked for the right of
appointing to twenty-five Bishoprics.
Paul II was not deluded by these fair words, for he
was well aware that the
Bishop of Bayeux had acted by the directions
of the King. The Ambassadors obtained nothing. At this time, Jean de La Balue, Bishop of Evreux, and afterwards of Angers, another favourite of Louis, took
part with Cardinal Jouffroy in
the negotiations concerning the
ecclesiastical policy of France. This designing man, who was exactly of the same stamp as Jouffroy and his apt pupil, sought, like him, to win the purple by
means of the question of the Pragmatic
Sanction. For a while Paul II
resisted the admission of such a man into the Senate of the Church, but the hope that Louis XI would now really suppress the Pragmatic Sanction induced him at last to yield. “I know the faults of this priest”,
he is reported to have said, “but
I was constrained to cover them with
this hat”.
In return for the red hat conferred upon his
favourite, Louis XI issued a declaration against the Pragmatic Sanction of a more stringent nature than those which had preceded it. When La Balue, on the 1st October,
1467, appeared in Parliament
with this document, the Procurator-General refused to register it. In order to
work upon the mind of the King, much stress
was laid upon the abuse of commendams, and
the large sums of money sent to Rome from
France.
The University of Paris, like the Parliament, declared against the abrogation of the Pragmatic Sanction. An appeal to a future Council was even issued. Now, however,
the Procurator-General resigned his post, and the Royal Declaration remained in full force, although not registered. The ecclesiastical policy of France, nevertheless,
remained as unsatisfactory and disquieting as ever, for the King never relaxed his efforts to bind the
Church fast within the toils of
the State. His favourites, Jouffroy and La
Balue, turned the position of affairs to their own advantage. His acceptance of the anti-Roman project of a Council, put forward by the Hussite King of Bohemia, enables us to estimate the value of the “filial
obedience” to the Holy See so often
spoken of by his Envoys in Rome. In
1468, when the French demand for a general Council was again mentioned to Paul II, he said that he would hold one that very year, but that it should be in
Rome.
Meanwhile, in the person of the new Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, the King encountered so dangerous a political adversary, that ecclesiastical affairs were
again for a time completely in
abeyance. Ever since the subjugation of Liege, Charles had reigned more
absolutely than any of
his predecessors, and his immense financial resources gave him a great advantage over the French King. Louis fought his enemy with the weapons of treachery and corruption. He had an interview with him at Péronne, during which tidings arrived of a fresh rising of the
Liegeois, excited by the agents of
Louis. The Duke of Burgundy was
furious, and, it is said, contemplated the murder of the King, who was in his power. The demands which the Duke now made would have appeared to a high-minded man worse than death: Louis was to proceed in person against Liege, which he had himself incited to revolt. Utterly destitute of every feeling of honour, he made
no difficulty, and at once
consented to join the Duke in his expedition
against the Netherlands, and thus witness with his own eyes the barbarous sack of Liege.
The immediate consequence of these events was the downfall
of La Balue, by whose advice the meeting at Péronne had taken place. His good
fortune was short-lived, and the King thought that he had before him evidence
of a treacherous understanding between the Cardinal and the Duke of Burgundy.
He resolved to take signal vengeance on the man whom he had raised from nothing
to be the first of his subjects. La Balue was despoiled of his possessions and
imprisoned. A like fate befell the Bishop of Verdun, who was believed to be in league
with him. Even a tyrant like Louis XI saw that a Cardinal could not be tried
without the Pope, and two Envoys were charged to enter into negotiations on
this subject with Rome. The conditions which the Pope laid down for the trial
were perfectly in accordance with the prescriptions of the Canon law, but they
were not to the King's taste. Under these circumstances, it was deferred, and
La Balue remained in prison.
The hostility of Louis XI to the Holy See was further evinced by the efforts which he made, in the year
1470, to induce the Pyrenean
Princes, as well as those in the Appenine
Peninsula, to support his Conciliar projects, which were aimed directly against Paul II. All these
anti-Roman machinations, however, led to no definite result.
Paul II was a steadfast defender of the privileges of
the Holy See, not only
against the temporal power, but also against
ecclesiastical encroachments. On the 1st June, 1466, he strictly prohibited the use of the Tiara by
the Archbishop of Benevento,
and reserved the right of consecrating the Agnus
Dei to the Holy See. In 1469 a stop
was put to the loss inflicted on the Apostolic Treasury by the frequent practice of uniting benefices
to each other which were
subject to Annates. It was decided that
henceforth all ecclesiastical Corporations were, every fifteenth year, to contribute what were called “Quindennium”,
instead of Annates, for the benefices united by them.
This last measure, and the great delight which the Pope took in pomp and splendour, have been made the subject of severe strictures. It cannot be said that
these reproaches are altogether
unfounded; but, on the other hand,
the surrounding circumstances must be taken into account. In a time of such general magnificence as the period of the Renaissance, the Papacy could not,
without a loss of dignity, be
clothed in Apostolical simplicity. Paul II was firmly persuaded that the Pope ought to appear in a style befitting the highest position on earth.
His private life was as simple
as his appearance in public was
sumptuous. He always went in state from the Vatican to his Palace at S. Marco, scattering money amongst the crowd. All Church Festivals in which he took part were celebrated with exceptional
magnificence. His coronation and the
ceremony of taking possession of the
Lateran had given the Romans a foretaste of future glories. The following Christmas the Pope appeared in gorgeous vestments and wore the Tiara. It was then reported that a new Tiara, more costly and splendid than any that had yet been seen, was to be made. At the Easter of 1465 the Pope wore this work of art, which
was the wonder of his
contemporaries. Holy Week and Easter
were always celebrated with great pomp and solemnity. Thousands of foreigners crowded on these occasions to the tombs of the Apostles. The Pope had a new litter made for the Christmas of 1466, and it
must have been a marvel of
workmanship. It is said to have cost
more than a palace.
At these great festivals all beholders were deeply
impressed by the noble figure and countenance of the Pope, the magnificence of his vestments, and his majestic
bearing. Even on the lesser
festivals the ceremonial was very carefully carried out. The love of splendour
which belonged to his artistic
temperament led him to surround the person of the Vicar of Christ with corresponding magnificence. We have already mentioned the measures taken at the beginning of his reign to give greater external
dignity to the Cardinals. Another
change was made at the same time.
Any one who has seen the Papal leaden seals will be able to recall the ancient type : the heads of SS.
Peter and Paul are on one side,
and on the reverse the name of the
Pope of the day. In the time of Paul II, we find on the face of the seal the Pope himself enthroned and dispensing graces, with two Cardinals by his side, and in the foreground a number of other persons; on the reverse are the full-length figures of the Princes of the Apostles, seated. This alteration, however, was not maintained, and the ancient type reappears under Sixtus IV.
The necessity of reforms, especially in Rome, had been insisted on by Paul II, immediately after his
election, and soon the question as to
the manner in which they were to be
accomplished arose. In the very first Consistory the matter was seriously considered, and a number of
wholesome regulations were framed. It was on this occasion that several Cardinals declared themselves in favour
of the abolition of reservations; no less a personage, however, than the excellent Carvajal adduced such weighty
reasons against this measure that
it was abandoned. It is certain that Paul
II was anxious to introduce a thorough reform amongst the officials of the Court, and also that, at
the very outset of his reign, he
opposed the simoniacal and corrupt practices
which prevailed there.
If, in the sequel, the Venetian Pope did not prove such a zealous reformer as the sad state of affairs perhaps required, he cannot be charged with absolute inaction. “The abuse of the commendams and expectances was, if not removed, yet
practically much restrained; simoniacal practices were combated, the receiving of gifts by
Legates, Governors and Judges was
forbidden, and also the alienation of Church property, or leasing it for more
than three years; and the interests
of benevolent foundations were protected”.
In the matter of refusing presents, the Pope himself set a good example. When the Ambassadors who came to congratulate him on his elevation offered
the customary gifts, he
steadfastly declined them all, whatever their value might be. He desired nothing, he said, but perfect fidelity to the Holy See. During the whole of
his reign he adhered to this
practice. In the spring of 1471, the
Archbishop of Treves sent him an ornament composed of diamonds and rubies, and the Pope, who did not
think it possible to refuse the
present, at once sent in return a cross adorned with similar stones, adding that it was not
his habit to receive gifts.
The high and fixed principles on which Paul II. acted
in making appointments to ecclesiastical offices was greatly calculated to
improve the condition of the Church. In other matters, he is reported to have
said, the Pope may be a man, but in the choice of Bishops he must be an Angel, and
in that of members of the Sacred College, God. Canensius expressly informs us
that he conferred ecclesiastical dignities only after mature and impartial
deliberation, having strict regard to the merits of the recipients, and he adds
that many excellent men were appointed Bishops without their previous
cognisance and in their absence.
Paul II did much to promote monastic reform,
particularly in Lombardy, Modena, Ferrara and Venice as also in Western and Southern Germany, especially in
Cologne, Bavaria and Wurtemberg.
In 1469 he issued a Bull for the
better regulation of the Augustinian Congregation in Lombardy. A few months before his death the Pope exhorted the Patriarch of Venice to proceed against
all clergy and monks who led
irregular lives, without respect of
persons, and also took measures for raising the standard of education amongst
the clergy in the Diocese of Valencia.
The evil star which presided over the Briefs of Paul II has consigned much interesting information
on this subject to unmerited
oblivion.
The fact that Paul II was always surrounded by men of worth is one that speaks well for his own character.
In the autumn of 1466 the
Milanese Ambassador mentions the Archbishop
of Spalatro, Lorenzo Zane, who became Treasurer; Stefano Nardini, Archbishop of
Milan; and Teodorode Lelli,
Bishop of Feltre and, after the 17th September, 1466, of Treviso, as possessing much influence with the new
Pope. The Bishop of Aquila, who
had been his preceptor, is also named
amongst those who occupied positions immediately about him. Lelli, as it was at once surmised, took the
first place. No letter, or
decree of importance, was issued until it had
been examined by this excellent man. On his death in 1466, the Pope took his nephew Marco Barbo,
and Bessarion into his
confidence. Agapito Cenci de' Rustici Bishop
of Camerino, who had been greatly valued by both Pius II and Paul II, had passed away in October, 1464. Giovanni Barozzi, Patriarch of Venice from the year
1465; the learned Angelus
Faseolus, Lelli’s successor in the See of
Feltre; Valerius Calderina, Bishop of Savona; Pietro Ferrici, Bishop of Tarasona, afterwards a Cardinal; and Corrado Capece, subsequently Archbishop of Benevento,
were also in the Pope's confidence. Most of the Sienese had left Rome; many of them were called to
account by the Pope for extortion
or embezzlement. Even Platina bears
witness to the strict order and discipline which he maintained in his Court and among his dependents.
Moreover, at the very beginning of his pontificate it was observed that Paul II engaged no Venetians among his guards.
The disorders of the Fraticelli (fraticelli de opinione) were, like
the abuses at the Court, energetically repressed by Paul II. In the summer of 1466 it became evident that the partisans of this sect had gained a footing,
not only in the March of
Ancona and the adjacent district of Romagna,
but also in the Campagna, and even in Rome itself. The headquarters of these dangerous heretics
were Assisi and the little
town of Poli near Palestrina, where Stefano
de' Conti was accused of being in league with them. The Pope caused this Baron and all the rest of the accused to be confined in St. Angelo, where
they were tried. Five Bishops
were appointed to conduct the enquiry. Many statements made by the accused are
extant, but as most of them were
extorted by the rack their value may be
questioned. One of their principal doctrines seems to have been, that of all the successors of St. Peter,
no one had really been the Vicar
of Christ who had not imitated the
poverty of his Chief; from the time of John XXII, who spoke against the poverty of Christ, in
particular, all Popes
had been heretics and excommunicate, as also had all Cardinals, Bishops and Priests consecrated by them.
Paul II was no true Pope.
These heretics were, moreover, charged
with immoral practices in their assemblies, and other crimes. In the record of the trial, mention is
made of a small codex found in
the possession of a priest of this sect,
which confirmed the truth of these allegations. A Fraticelli bishop is named in this, thus a formal
Church must have been
contemplated. The Hussite principle, that unworthy priests lose their powers, was also a part of
their teaching. It is certain,
at any rate, that the movement was one
which threatened great danger to the Papacy, and which had for a long time been making progress in the locality we have named. One of the women accused said that St. Jacopo della Marca had converted her, and
that she had again relapsed into
error. All these heretics, Platina
says, were punished: those who continued obstinate, with the greatest severity.
Such as acknowledged their
errors, and sought for pardon, were treated more leniently.
The extent to which these doctrines had spread, and
the serious manner in which
they were viewed in Rome, may be
estimated from the numerous refutations which at once appeared, although the Franciscan, St. Jacopo della
Marca, had already published a
work dealing thoroughly with the subject.
Nicholas Palmerius, Bishop of Orte, one of the prelates who took part in the enquiry, composed a
treatise on the poverty of Christ,
and dedicated it to Cardinal Jouffroy. Rodericus
Sancius of Arevalo offered his work on the same subject to the Pope himself; in this treatise he shows that there is no contradiction between the
statements of Nicholas III and John XXII in regard to the poverty of Christ. There are also treatises on this subject
from the pens of Torquemada and of Fernando of Cordova.
At this time tidings reached Rome of the discovery in Germany of a sect similar to that of the Fraticelli.
The copy of a letter,
addressed to Bishop Henry of Ratisbon by
Rudolf of Rudesheim, Bishop of Lavant and the Papal Legate, on the 11th June, 1466, contains details
regarding these dreamy fanatics,
whose chiefs were Brothers John and
Livin of Wirsberg. A member of this sect called himself John of the Eas he was to be the forerunner of the anointed Redeemer, the One Shepherd of whom Christ had spoken. These heretics declared the Pope to be
Antichrist, and all Catholics who did not believe in the “anointed Redeemer”
to be members of Antichrist. John of
Wirsberg promulgated his doctrines in Eger as well as in the country, and even in the Bishopric of
Eichstatt; his most zealous adherent,
however, was his brother Livin, who
died in prison in 1467, after having abjured his errors.
It is very probable that Paul II also took measures against these sectaries. Direct evidence, however, is
wanting, for the Secret Archives of the Vatican only contain Briefs belonging to the second half of the seventh
year of his pontificate. These
Briefs shew that he proceeded against
heretics in the Diocese of Amiens, and afterwards in Bologna.
The solicitude of Paul II for the spiritual welfare of
the faithful committed to his
charge is manifested by his decision
that the Jubilee should, for the future, be celebrated once in every twenty-five years. The Bull on this subject was published on the 19th April, 1470. “The thought of all that the Church had suffered from schism at two periods, and all that it had cost her to end it; the
terror of Western Christendom when,
by the fall of Constantinople, the
Turks gained a footing in Europe; the alarming outbreaks of devastating
maladies; finally, the ruin which ceaseless
wars had wrought in the very life of the Western kingdoms, led men to turn their eyes to Heaven, and showed that, in order to avert the strokes of the chastening
hand of God, it was needful that all should tread the paths of penance”. Moved by considerations such as these, and by the fact that, under the former
regulations, but few could partake of
the Jubilee Indulgence, the Pope made
the Decree we have mentioned, which was at once solemnly announced throughout Christendom. But Paul was not destined to see the beginning of the new Jubilee
year.
Towards the end of this pontificate a remarkable
effort was made to prepare the
way for the union of the Russian with the
Roman Church, and also to gain the Grand Duke Ivan III as a champion against the Turks. The idea originated with Bessarion, and found great favour with Paul II, who had just at that time expressed to
the Maronites his wish that
they should conform more closely to the
Roman ritual. An Ambassador was sent to Moscow to propose a marriage between the Grand Duke and Zoe (Sophia), the daughter of the unfortunate
Thomas Palaeologus. Ivan entered
into the project, and the Ambassadors
were at once sent back to Rome to bring a portrait of the bride. After a time things were so
far settled that a Russian
Embassy was sent to Rome to conduct Zoe to her new home. When this Embassy,
bearing letters to Bessarion and
to the Pope, reached Italy, Paul II had
ceased to live. His successor, however, took up the matter with equal zeal.
CHAPTER
V.
The New and the Old Cardinals.—Church Questions in Bohemia.
The appointment
of new Cardinals was spoken of in the
earliest months of Paul II's pontificate. At the Christmas of 1464, or, at the latest, in the following
Lent, he seems to have
contemplated an increase of the members of the Sacred College. Marco Barbo, Bishop of Vicenza, and Stefano Nardini, Archbishop of Milan, were named as candidates. No nomination, however, according to Canensius, actually took place until the second year
of his reign, and Teodoro de'
Lelli, Bishop of Treviso, and Giovanni Barozzi,
Patriarch of Venice, the only Prelates then elevated to the purple, both died before their publication.
A creation of Cardinals was positively announced for December, 1466; but it did not take place. The consent of the Sacred College probably could not be obtained. At last, in the beginning of the fourth year of his
reign, on the 18th September, 1467,
Paul II was able to create a large
number of Cardinals. Three of the eight then admitted to the Sacred College were foreigners: Thomas Bourchier, Archbishop of Canterbury; Stephan de Varda, Archbishop of Colocsa, and Jean de La Balue, Bishop of Angers. The last-named prelate, who, “by his
cleverness and cunning”, had risen
from a very obscure position, was at this
time Louis XI’s Ambassador to Rome, and was engaged in negotiations regarding the repeal of the
Pragmatic Sanction; this explains his appointment.
Of the five Italians promoted, one of the most
distinguished was Olivieri Carafa, Archbishop of Naples. He was a jurist, a theologian, an antiquarian, and a statesman; he had even taken part in warfare as
Admiral against the Turks. Highly
esteemed and influential in his own
country, he was remarkably popular in Rome. His popularity was due to the use which he made of his
ample income and to his
affability. He was generous in supporting learning and learned men; many youths
were won by him for the Church and
for serious studies. Paulus Cortesius
praises his great discretion, his uprightness, and his blamelessness.
The character of Paul II’s nephew, Marco Barbo,
Bishop, first of Treviso
(1455-64) and afterwards of Vicenza, was still more admirable. A singular sweetness of
disposition and deep piety were in
his case united with a rare capacity for
business and great learning. He was absolutely disinterested. During his
lifetime he gave almost all his income
to the poor, to whom he afterwards bequeathed what remained, “for”, he said, “the goods of the
Church are, according to the teaching
of the Fathers, the inheritance of Christ’s
poor”. His fine library was the only gratification he allowed himself. Of all the Pope's relations, he
was the one most closely
united with him; his “inexhaustible power
of work and his consummate prudence” were of great use to Paul II.
Amicus Agnifilus, the third of the Cardinals nominated on the 18th of September, 1467, had been a member of the household and a friend of Domenico Capranica, and subsequently tutor to Paul II. When raised from low estate to be Bishop of Aquila, he had chosen, for his armorial bearings, a lamb and a book. His epitaph
praises his generosity to the poor,
his discretion, and his thorough knowledge
of Canon Law. Little has been handed down concerning the fourth Cardinal, the Protonotary,
Marquess Theodore of Montferrat,
and even less concerning Francesco della Rovere, the General of the
Franciscans, on the occasion
of whose elevation to the purple Paul II is said to have observed that he had chosen his successor.
On the 19th September, the Red Hat was conferred on those
among the newly-created Cardinals who were at the time in Rome. On the 2nd
October, the mouth of Cardinal Barbo was opened, and S. Marco assigned to him as
his titular Church. On the 22nd of the month, Agnifilus reached Rome; the
Cardinal's Hat was at once given to him in a Public Consistory, and, on the
13th November, he received the Church of Sta Balbina, which, on the
13th October, 1469, he exchanged for that of Sta Maria in Trastevere.
S. Pietro in Vincoli was the titular Church of Francesco della Rovere, and SS.
Pietro e Marcellino that of Carafa, who arrived in Rome on the 3rd December,
1467. Cardinal Theodore of
Montferrat did not make his entry into Rome until the 21st April, 1468, when S.
Teodoro was assigned to him.
On the 21st November, 146S, Paul II created two more Cardinals,
who, like Marco Barbo, were of his own kindred : these were Battista Zeno and
Giovanni Michiel, the sons of two of his sisters. They received the Red Hat,
and the Churches of Sta Maria in Porticu and Sta Lucia,
on the 22nd Nov., and the ceremony of the opening of their mouths took place on
the 9th December. The Pope’s nephews were both men of unblemished character.
None of the Cardinals were excessively wealthy or influential.
Towards the end of his reign, Paul II created four
other Cardinals. This was done
in a secret Consistory, and with the
proviso that, in the event of his death, they were to be considered as published. They were Johann Vitez, Archbishop of Gran, Pietro Foscari, Giovan Battista
Savelli, and Francesco Ferrici.
Between the Cardinals created by Paul II, who were called the Pauleschi, and the Puscli, who owed their elevation to his predecessor, a certain opposition
existed. Of the latter number,
Ammanati fell into complete disfavour, while Forteguerri, Roverella, and Eroli
enjoyed the good graces of Pope Paul
II, and the first of these three Cardinals
enjoyed great influence with him. At the beginning of the pontificate, Richard Longueil, who, on the 1st October, 1464, was sent as Legate to
Perugia, was also at the French
Court believed to have considerable influence.
Cardinals Borgia and Gonzaga also received marked favours; the latter, however, was not a friend
of the Pope. On the 18th February, 1471, he was
appointed Legate at Bologna,
possibly with the object of removing him
from the Court.
The relations which existed between the Pope and Cardinal Scarampo were of a peculiar character. The latter, whose contemporaries deemed him remarkable for his cunning, had, shortly after his rival’s elevation,
made peace with him. The
reconciliation seems to have been tolerably
complete, for, in September, 1464, the Pope had no hesitation in granting to Scarampo the full
exercise of his post of
Cardinal-Camerlengo. “Neither Calixtus III, nor Pius II, nor even Nicholas V, would have done this”, observed a secretary in Cardinal Gonzaga’s service.
The fact that, after the
death of Cardinal Pierre de Foix, Paul II
conferred the Bishopric of Albano upon Scarampo shows that some degree of friendly feeling existed.
That there was, however, a
certain amount of friction in the relations
between the former rivals, is far from improbable. For instance, in answer to a pointed remark of the Cardinal's regarding the cost of the Palace of S.
Marco, the Pope is said to have
declared that it was far better to spend
his money in buildings than to play it away.
At the beginning of March, 1465, Scarampo fell ill,
and, on the 22nd, he died. He was a thoroughly worldly man, and was known at
the Roman Court by the name of Cardinal Lucullus. As a Prince of the Church,
his example was bad. As a statesman and politician, however, by restoring regular
government in Rome, by promoting employment, and looking after the welfare of
the people, by his consummate skill in the conduct of the negotiations with the
Italian Princes, as well as by his care for the army and fleet, he did good
service to the restored Papacy at a critical period.
The close of Scarampo’s career was followed by a
somewhat painful episode. He had availed himself of the right conceded to him of making testamentary dispositions to bequeath his whole property, amounting to 200,000, or, according to some accounts, to 400.000 golden florins,
to his nephews. Scarcely
anything was left to the Church in whose
service he had amassed these riches. To the general satisfaction, Paul II set aside this will and devoted
the whole of the property to
charitable purposes, such as churches,
the poor, and refugees from the countries which had been conquered by the Turks. The nephews of the deceased were also remembered; even Platina here
admits the kindness of the Pope.
His friendship for Cardinal Bessarion speaks well for Paul
II. The dispute about the Election Capitulation had temporarily estranged them,
but, in the year 1468, the Duke of Este’s Ambassador spoke of Bessarion as
enjoying more consideration than all the other Cardinals, and, in the following
year, he wrote word that Barbo and the Greek Cardinal were much in the Pope’s
confidence, and were the only men trusted with the most secret affairs. In
fact, “in the history of this period Bessarion stands forth almost like a
father of the Church; his majestic presence, his noble Greek profile with his
long flowing beard, also contributed to enhance the esteem and deference which
were everywhere accorded to him”.
Bessarion, who was an ardent patriot, not only took
the deepest interest in the proposed Crusade, but also endeavoured in every way
to awaken the compassion of Western Christendom on behalf of his exiled
countrymen. The unselfishness with which he assisted the scattered fugitives, and
his “noble efforts to preserve and render profitable whatever it had been
possible to rescue from a vanishing civilisation, call upon us to deal
leniently with his weaknesses”.
The Greek Cardinal's state of health became so much worse during Paul's reign that, in 1466, he caused the simple tomb, which is still well-preserved in the
Church of the SS. Apostoli, to be
prepared. In the following year he
stayed for a considerable time at Viterbo, where he had on former occasions taken the baths. In spite of his bodily sufferings he devoted himself as zealously as
ever to study; his celebrated
work in defence of Plato appeared at this
time. He was also in constant intercourse with the Humanist Scholars in Rome. His house at SS. Apostoli was common ground for the most noted Greeks and
Italian Hellenists, where all
were welcomed by their learned host with
the most winning kindness. “Here Andronikos Callistos, Constantine Laskaris, and Theodore Gaza
held brilliant and genial
converse with the Cardinal in friendly rivalry
with his pupil and favourite, Niccolo Perotto, who translated Polybius, and composed a metrical poem”. Francesco della Rovere, afterwards Sixtus IV, Domizio da Caldiero, Johannes Müller Regiomontanus, the great astronomer and geographer, and many others, also frequented his house, and Bessarion took part in their learned disputations with unfailing interest.
As Protector of the Basilian Order, the Greek Cardinal's labours were both extensive and important. The reforms which the Order at this time required, and which
Martin V had already attempted,
were energetically taken in hand. Persuaded
that the extent of the malady demanded a comprehensive remedy, Bessarion began by drawing up a Rule in Italian and in Greek, which he strictly
imposed upon the Monasteries in Italy
and Sicily. He increased their revenues
by recovering lands which had been alienated, and by regulating their household expenses, and endeavoured to give new splendour to the Order by beautifying its ancient buildings and by constructing on the old lines
skilfully arranged additions. Bessarion everywhere insisted on serious study; he encouraged the monks to apply
themselves to the Greek classics, to
transcribe and collect Manuscripts and to
establish good schools. Among these, the Gymnasium of Messina acquired a great
reputation. Laskaris, whom
Bessarion appointed Professor at this Institution in 1467, soon attracted scholars from all parts of Italy.
In recognition of these important services Pius II, in August 1462, nominated Bessarion Commendatory Abbot of Grottaferrata. This celebrated Abbey, which had
long been considered as a link
uniting East and West, had, at the
period of which we are speaking, fallen into a state of dilapidation. Bessarion at once devoted himself
most ardently to the work of
restoration, and quickly succeeded in
effecting a thorough renovation, both material and spiritual, in this interesting spot, so rich in
classical associations and Christian memories. His chalice, his famous Inventory (Regestum Bessarionis), and some valuable Manuscripts, presented by him to his Abbey, are still
preserved at Grottaferrata.
The Vatican Basilica, the Camaldolese Abbey at
Avellana, and the Church of the Holy Apostles in Rome, were also generously enriched by Bessarion. The last-named Church, which Eugenius IV had assigned as his title,
was the special object of his
paternal solicitude. In the beginning of Paul II’s pontificate the Cardinal caused
the Chapels of the Archangel
Michael, of St. John the Baptist, and of
Saint Eugenia, at the left of the High Altar, to be completely restored and decorated by the painter
Antonazzo Romano. In the centre of the vaulting appeared the figure of Our Lord, enthroned and surrounded with
nine choirs of Angels, in a
blue firmament strewn with stars and encircled
by a frieze. In the corners were the four Evangelists, with a Latin and a Greek
Father of the Church writing in his
cell beside each. On the upper part of the wall behind the Altar was the apparition of the Archangel Michael
on Monte Gargano, and
beneath this the birth of St. John the Baptist.
On the side walls, between two real and two painted windows, stood two Archangels above, and the third
with St. John the Baptist below. From
half-way up the wall down to the
ground, curtains ornamented with patterns in flowers and gold were painted. On each of the six pilasters
was the figure of a Saint
under a canopy. The framing-arch was
adorned with a frieze, and three shields with the arms of the founder.
Amongst the nearest and dearest of Bessarion’s friends was Juan de Carvajal, the most devoted of all the sons
of the Church. His motto was
“To suffer all things for Christ and His
Church!”. In consequence of his extreme modesty, and utter disregard of fame, the memory of this
distinguished man has not been honoured as it deserves. The student of history can discover but scanty records of
the life of this saintly Cardinal,
who proved his fidelity and self-sacrificing devotion to the cause of the
Church in twenty-two Legations and “from all his journeys brought back nothing but the reputation of an unspotted priesthood”.
Since the autumn of 1461 Carvajal had again been living in Rome. The vigorous man, whom Pope Calixtus had sent to Hungary at the time when Belgrade was threatened by the Turks, had grown old and feeble in that severe climate, amid the turmoils of the Court
and camp, and the fatigues of
travel. His teeth were so loose in his
mouth that he could only use them with the aid of artificial appliances. Yet it was political reasons
rather than considerations of
health, which at last induced him to
abandon this bleak country of moorlands and marshes. He left behind him the memory of a pure and beneficent life, and his merits, which have never been questioned
by any historian, met with
an honourable appreciation in Rome.
No other Cardinal, it was justly observed, did so much and endured such sufferings as Carvajal in the
six years during which he was
Legate for Hungary, while championing
the Church's highest interest, the purity of her faith.
Extreme simplicity and exemplary order prevailed in his modest dwelling near S. Marcello. His ascetic manner of life enabled him to be very liberal
to the poor, and to provide
for needy churches. He was never
absent from any great ecclesiastical function or from a Consistory. In Consistory he expressed his opinion freely, but in a conciliatory manner. In their brevity, simplicity, and clearness, their strict logic
and their utter absence of
rhetoric, his discourses form a striking
contrast to the bombastic and artificial productions of the literary men of his
day; his Reports while a Legate
have the same “restrained and impersonal character”.
Though always genial in his intercourse with others, there was a something about Carvajal which inspired a certain awe in all who saw much of him. Cardinal Ammanati observed of him: “our age may rightly place him by the side of the ancient Fathers of the Church”,
and these words expressed the
general opinion of the members of the
Sacred College. It might be said that Rome did not contain a single man who had not done homage to “the height and depth of his character”. Pomponius Laetus, “who admired nothing in ruined Rome but the heroic grandeur of its earliest founders; who hardly deigned to bestow a glance on the Barons and Prelates of the Papal City,—the proud Platonist, the cynic scorner of all flattery and of every kind of dignity,
who never uncovered his head,
or bowed to any one, made but one
exception, and that was the aged Cardinal of S. Angelo”.
Subsequent historians have unanimously endorsed the esteem and admiration of his contemporaries for
Carvajal. The latest biographer of
Pius II, who is generally disposed to
believe the worst of men, speaks of Carvajal with the greatest reverence. Even the Hussite historian of
Bohemia says of him : “Not only
in zeal for the Faith, in moral purity
and strength of character, was he unsurpassed, but he was also unequalled in knowledge of the world, in experience of ecclesiastical affairs, and in the
services which he rendered to the Papal
authority. It was chiefly due to his
labours, prolonged during a period of twenty years, that Rome at last got the better of Constance and Basle,
that the nations returned to
their allegiance, and that her power and
glory again shone before the world with a splendour that had not been seen since the time of Boniface
VIII. Carvajal’s colleagues knew
and acknowledged this, and in all
important matters were guided by his counsels. Paul II himself feared him, and
yielded to all his wishes. Thus, his personal influence, and his opinion
regarding King George and the doctrine of the Hussites, had great weight in
Rome”.
As a member of the Commission appointed by Paul II to consider the state of ecclesiastical affairs in
Bohemia, Carvajal was associated
with Bessarion and d'Estouteville. From
the beginning he advocated stern measures. The ill-advised conduct of the King of Bohemia, who
omitted to send any one from his
Court to offer the congratulations usual
from Princes to a new Pope, had confirmed the Cardinal in the conviction “that it would be
absolutely necessary to employ the
knife in the case of wounds which admitted
of no other remedy, and to guard against fatal corruption by severing the decayed members from the
body of Holy Church”.
The Pope at first hoped that gentleness might be successful with George Podiebrad. The proceedings
which Pius II had commenced
were at once suspended. Paul II declared
that, if the Bohemian King fulfilled his promises, he would be to him not a Pope, but a loving brother.
It soon became evident that
the double-tongued monarch had no
thought of keeping his oath. When all Christian Princes sent Ambassadors to Rome, none appeared from Bohemia. Fresh complaints were constantly made by the Catholics. The “pacific inclinations” of Paul II
gradually vanished. The letter
which the King of Bohemia sent to Rome on
the 7th March, 1465, only apologises in a passing way for the delay of the Embassy; its main purpose is
to explain the reasons why
George did not think it well to comply
with the Pope's desire, and raise the siege of the fortress of Zornstein, which belonged to the Catholic Heinrich von Lichtenburg. Paul II's reply to this
letter was not addressed to the King
himself, but to the Bohemian Prelates
and Barons (13th May, 1465), a fact which shews the change in his feeling. By the middle of the summer
of this year the stern views
of Carvajal had completely prevailed,
and from henceforth guided the Pope in all his decisions. On the 2nd August, Podiebrad was summoned by Cardinals Bessarion, Carvajal and Eroli, who were entrusted with the management of the Bohemian affair,
to appear at Rome within 180
days to answer charges of heresy,
of relapse into heresy, of perjury (in regard to the breach of his coronation oath), of spoliation of
churches, and of blasphemy. “In
order, however, to guard against a further
outbreak of heresy during the trial, and to protect the oppressed Catholics”, the Pope, on the 6th August, empowered the Legate Rudolf, Bishop of Lavant, to
inflict ecclesiastical censures
on all George's adherents, and to declare
all engagements entered into with him null and void.
Meanwhile George’s position had become much worse, the chief lords of Bohemia, dissatisfied with his
arbitrary government, having become
more and more hostile to him. He therefore made new proposals of accommodation
with Rome; but Rome was weary
of these endless negotiations.
“Long years of prevarication had destroyed all
confidence in George, so that even those who had once depended upon his word
now turned from him with feelings embittered by disappointment, and firmly
resolved never again to be deceived by him”. As early as the 8th December,
1465, Paul II had released George's subjects from their oath of allegiance; on
the 6th February, 1466, the proposals made through Duke Louis of Bavaria in
favour of the King of Bohemia were absolutely rejected.
In order to understand the severe language of this document,
we must remember the shameful manner in which George had trifled with Calixtus
III and Pius II regarding the Turkish question. It is strange to find the King
now bringing forward this question, and demanding to be rewarded beforehand for
his return to the Church, and his participation in the Crusade, by the title of
Emperor of Constantinople for himself, and the Archbishopric of Prague for one
of his sons. Is a relapsed heretic, a perjured man, Paul II remarks, to ask,
instead of penance and punishment, for a reward such as could hardly be granted
to the most Christian Princes, who had rendered the greatest services to
religion? He desires to traffic with his conversion to the Faith, and sell his
conscience for gain. His feigned obedience would indeed be a precious boon to
the Church, while the old leaven would still ferment throughout the kingdom. Is
the Apostolic See to beg for this, while he reserves to himself the right to
accept or reject what is offered? The proposed Archbishop is a youth, scarce
twenty years of age, who has grown up in the midst of his father’s crimes and
deceits, in ignorance of all law,
either human or Divine; he has but just ceased to be a heretic, and is now to
be made a Bishop! Equally obnoxious is the request that the Archbishop should have
as assistant an Inquisitor who will prosecute all “heresies outside the Compact”.
That is very cunningly devised : is it not equivalent to a covert demand that
the Compacts should be re-established? Again, what is the meaning of the
petition for the Imperial Crown of Constantinople? Evidently its object is only
to secure an easier passage from one Confession of Faith to another (the Greek).
But the dominion of the Infidels, who have never known the truth, is a lesser
evil than the rule of a heretic and schismatic, who has apostatised from that
which he professed. The Church has not yet fallen so low as to be compelled to
seek the protection of heretics and robbers of churches.
The fact that Podiebrad, in the summer of 1466, took
the excommunicated Gregor
Heimburg into his service is a proof
that the Pope had not judged him too severely. His connection with this unscrupulous man, who, “for
twenty years, had been at the
head of every opposition offered outside
the limits of Bohemia to the restoration of the Papal power”, was equivalent to a renunciation of all
idea of reconciliation with
the Church. Even on the 28th July,
Heimburg, who had formerly made a parade of his German sympathies, published a manifesto in defence of the “honour and innocence” of the Czech monarch, who had been treated by Rome worse “than the fratricide
Cain and the Sodomites!”.
George, he said, was no private individual
whom the Pope might summon to Rome at his pleasure, but a King, and a King of great merit. This advocate found excuses for everything, even for the
imprisonment of Fantinus, which was a breach of the law of nations. The Pope was accused of credulity, and his
conduct characterised as hasty, as an offence against Divine and natural law, and opposed to reason and Scripture.
He further insisted that a
Diet should be summoned, at which the
Envoys of the temporal Princes should, in the presence of a Legate, deliberate on the ecclesiastical affairs
of Bohemia. As this
manifesto was at once sent, not only to all
the German Courts, but also to the King of France and the other Princes of Christendom, it was
impossible for the Papal party to be
silent. The autumn had not passed before
letters in answer appeared from Rudolf von Rudesheim, Bishop of Lavant, and
from Cardinal Carvajal. The former
sought to surpass his opponent in violence of language, and lost himself in prolix explanations,
while Carvajal, in his brief,
simple and logical style, exposed the
treacherous arts of the Czech monarch and of his advocate. In particular, he brought forward the sacrilegious
manner in which George had violated the right of nations by his conduct towards Fantinus and the
double-faced policy by which he had trifled with the Holy See. What Rome now commanded was the result of mature deliberation, and was in accordance with justice.
George's intrigues are unmasked,
the axe is laid to the roots; he must prove
his innocence or else experience the rigour of justice.
Heimburg soon wrote a second apology for King George, in which he gave vent to his violent hatred of the two heads of Christendom and for the Cardinals. All manner of false charges were here made against both Pope and Emperor, and amongst others that of immorality. The “very violence and indecency of these accusations
destroyed their effect”. The only
result of this letter was entirely to put an
end to the friendly relations which had existed between George Podiebrad and Frederick III. The action of George’s counsellor was certainly not that of a
statesman.
The decided measures advocated by Carvajal did not meet
with universal approval at the Roman Court. Looking at the matter from a merely
human point of view, some urged that there was no one who could carry into effect
the sentence of the Holy See. Nothing was to be expected from the irresolute
Emperor, and Poland also displayed little inclination to be of use. King
Matthias of Hungary had, indeed, given the best assurances of goodwill, but it
was generally desired that he should reserve his forces for the Turkish war. It
was doubtful whether the power of the Bohemian nobles was equal to the
occasion. In the face of these grave difficulties, Carvajal remained unmoved in
his opinion that justice ought to take its course, and that there was a duty to
be accomplished. God would, he believed, provide for all.
After Carvajal had left Rome as Legate to Venice, on the 20th August, 1466, Cardinals Ammanati and
Piccolomini were the chief advocates of strong measures. After long deliberations their opinion finally prevailed. On
the 23rd December a Consistory
was held, in which George Podiebrad
was deposed from his dignities of King, Marquis and Prince, his posterity declared disqualified for any honour or inheritance, and his subjects absolved from
their oath of allegiance.
The Papal Bull announcing this decision made a deep impression on loyal Catholics, and in order to lessen
its effect, Podiebrad, on the
14th April, 1467, published a solemn
appeal to a General Council, which ought properly, he said, to have been assembled before this time, and had been put off only by the Pope’s negligence. This document,
which attacked the Pope personally, was drawn up by Heimburg. It was
immediately sent to all the German Princes. At the same time an Ambassador was
despatched from Prague to the Court of the French King. He was to propose the
conclusion of an offensive and defensive alliance between Louis XI and
Podiebrad, into which the Poles and a number of the German Princes were to be
drawn, especially the rulers of Saxony and Brandenburg, whose sympathies were
with Bohemia. The immediate object of the allies was to be the humiliation of
Burgundy. When this was accomplished, Louis XI was to summon a Council, “which
should be held by the nation”, and which should put down all strife and all arrogance, especially the pretensions of the Pope and
the Emperor, who were to be
brought low and punished!
At the
French Court the Ambassador maintained that the Pope was endeavouring “to get both swords into his hands, and thus subject all rulers to himself, so that the
clergy might have their way in
everything”. Words like these found a
ready access to the ear of a tyrant like Louis XI. He promised to exert himself in Podiebrad’s favour in Rome, and also to use his influence to maintain the Compacts of the Holy Council of Basle in force; he
further advised that the German
Princes should be persuaded to advocate
the assembling of the Council. George’s efforts in this matter were unsuccessful, and complications in
his own dominions, and with
England, so fully occupied the French
King, that he was unable to pursue his anti-Roman project of the Council. The
close relations which continued
to exist between Louis XI and the Bohemian monarch is evidenced by the fact that when, in the
following year, Paul II wished to
have the Bull of Maundy Thursday, in
which Podiebrad was mentioned by name, published in France, the French King at once raised objections,
and the Duke of Milan did the
same.
While Podiebrad was somewhat unsuccessfully labouring to elevate his personal contest with Rome into a
matter of general importance to
all the temporal powers, the opposing
party within his kingdom did not remain idle. Nothing decisive, however, was done, even after the
formation of a great Catholic League in the December of 1467. It became more and more evident that the League could only hope to prevail against George if assisted
by some powerful Prince. All
efforts to obtain such aid proved fruitless,
and accordingly in the end no alternative remained to the Pope and the League, save to listen to the overtures made to them by the King of Hungary.
The adversaries of George greatly rejoiced when
Matthias Corvinus (1468, March 31)
declared war against Bohemia. Cardinal
Ammanati’s letters to Paul II and Carvajal bear witness to their satisfaction. The necessary
interruption of the war with the Turks
was looked upon as a lesser evil. The Apostolic Faith was deemed to be in
imminent danger unless the Bohemian King should voluntarily abandon his schismatic
position, or be forcibly deprived of the power of doing harm. On the 20th
April, 1468, the Pope had again pronounced the severest ecclesiastical penalties
on all the adherents and abettors of George, and had moreover promised a number
of Indulgences to those who should either personally, or by pecuniary contributions,
take part in the war against him. Lorenzo Roverella, the Bishop of Ferrara, who
had but lately returned to Rome, was again sent to Germany to publish these
Indulgences, and furnished with fuller power.
During the year 1468 the fortunes of war favoured the King of Hungary. In the following February, Matthias advanced into Bohemia, but was completely shut in by Podiebrad in the defiles near Wilimow, and his case
seemed hopeless. He then began
to negotiate for a truce, and promised
to obtain from the Pope the toleration of the Compacts for the Bohemians. On the 24th March, the two Kings purposed to meet at Olmutz, and conclude a permanent peace. The Papal Legate, Roverella, hastened to the spot to prevent this, and succeeded in doing
so.
In July, 1469, the war broke out afresh, Matthias
having been two months previously solemnly elected King of Bohemia. No decisive
advantage was gained by either party during that year or the next. The war was
one of mutual devastation, and seemed likely to be endless. Notwithstanding all
the efforts of his opponents, George held his ground, paying his partisans out
of the spoils of the Church. He failed, however, to accomplish his plan of
founding a Czech dynasty by securing the succession to one of his sons.
Meanwhile, the “greatest, and, in regard to his moral character, the most estimable, of the enemies of
Bohemia in the Sacred College”,
Juan Carvajal, had died in Rome (6th
December, 1469). At the same time it was reported that one of the Cardinals had advocated a pacific
arrangement with Podiebrad; this induced the latter to express to the Cardinal in question, whose name is
unfortunately unknown, his desire for
reconciliation with Rome. He declared
that he had never intended to injure the Holy Father, and yet had undeservedly to endure his severe
displeasure. He had never believed himself to be outside the Holy Church, in which alone is salvation. If in any
way he had departed from the
unity of the Faith, he had done it in
ignorance. Although he had already entrusted his reconciliation with Rome to King Casimir of Poland, he now sent another Ambassador, whom he hereby accredited
to the Pope.
If these endeavours at reconciliation were really
sincere, the increasing danger from the Turkish power gave them a prospect of
success. But when matters had gone so far a higher Hand intervened. On the 22nd
February, 1471, Rokyzana, “the soul of all the anti-Catholic efforts of the
Utraquists”, died in Prague, and on the 22nd March George Podiebrad followed him. The opinion that the King was, before his death, reconciled to the Church
is erroneous. It is,
however, certain that Gregor Heimburg, the man
who had exercised so potent an influence on his anti-Roman policy, did, before his death (1472), make
his peace with the Church.
The struggle about the Compacts, which were not really observed in any of the Utraquist Churches, was not
terminated by the deaths of the spiritual and temporal chiefs of the party; the Polish Prince Wladislaw, when elected
by the Bohemians in May,
1471, as their King, was obliged expressly
to bind himself to uphold them. The hopes cherished by the father of the newly-elected sovereign,
that the Bohemian position
would be recognised by Rome were accordingly
without foundation; for this was no mere question of externals, but a deep-seated and essential separation which might be for a time concealed by a formula of union, but could not be conclusively
settled by any such means.
CHAPTER VI.
The Peace of 1468. Second Journey of Frederick III to Rome.
Paul II,
who was by nature anything but warlike, was in the early part of his reign more
successful in his conflicts with tyrants in the States of the Church than in
his expeditions against the Turks and Hussites. The robber Knights of
Anguillara were the first to claim his attention.
The cruel Count Everso of Anguillara had already given
great trouble to his immediate predecessors. During the Pontificate of Pius II
he had taken possession of all the territory formerly held by the Prefects, and
there in his mountain fortresses securely guarded the spoils gathered from the
plunder of towns, pilgrims, and merchants. Like Malatesta, he had been the ally
of all the enemies of the Pope. Cardinal Ammanati says that he despised God and
the Saints and yet made pious foundations. Much has lately been heard of the portion of his Palace which
still exists, a gloomy tower in Trastevere, which was in danger of falling a
sacrifice to a destructive work of restoration. Happily this interesting
building, which commands a splendid view of the City, has for the present
escaped; who can say, however, how long it may be spared?
Count Everso, who had to the last defied Pius II, died
on the 4th September, 1464. His two sons, Francesco and Deifobo, began by
making the fairest promises to the Pope, but soon betrayed a disposition to
follow in the footsteps of their father, and ruin the peace of the whole neighbourhood.
Paul II then determined to make war upon this race of tyrants, who had braved
the authority of four successive Popes, and were a scourge to that portion of
the States of the Church. His prudence and caution enabled him to take the
Counts completely by surprise.
At the end of June, 1465, the sentence of Excommunication
was pronounced against them, and Cardinal Niccolo Forteguerri, Federigo of Urbino, and Napoleone Orsini
at once advanced with an
armed force. They were joined by troops
from the King of Naples, who had a personal quarrel with Deifobo. Thirteen castles, some of which had been deemed impregnable from their position and
fortifications, were
taken almost without a blow. In these robbers' nests were found implements for coining Papal money, correspondence
of a compromising character, and numbers of unhappy captives, doomed by the tyrants to perpetual imprisonment. Deifobo escaped to Venice; Francesco was imprisoned, together with his children, but was
soon liberated at the instance
of Stefano Colonna. Twelve days
sufficed to break the power of the Anguillara; the conquered towns and fortresses came under the immediate rule of the Holy See.
The year 1465 also witnessed an extension of Papal authority in the Romagna. By virtue of the treaty
concluded in 1463 with Pius II, the towns possessed by the Malatesta were, on the extinction of their line, to
revert to the Holy See.
Malatesta Novello, Lord of Cesena, dying
childless on the 20th November, 1465, his nephew, Roberto, sought to occupy Cesena and Bertinoro. His efforts were, however, frustrated by the loyalty with
which these cities adhered to
the promise given to the Holy See. The
inhabitants had good reasons for preferring immediate dependence on the government of the Church, which
allowed them far greater liberty,
and did not harry them with oppressive
taxation. In order to conciliate and win over the warlike Robert, Paul II. invested him with the
fiefs of Meldola, Sarsina, and
some other small places, and took him
into his service as a captain of mercenaries.
Not long after the downfall of the Anguillara, the
Pope came into conflict with
the King of Naples, “the terrible and
faithless Ferrante”.
The unreasonable demands of the King, and his
prevarications about the payment of his tribute, had, even at the beginning of the Pontificate, caused some estrangement between Naples and the Pope. Although, according to the Bull of Investiture granted by Pius II, the
severest penalties—such as
Excommunication, Interdict, deposition from
the throne, and forfeiture of his fief—were to be incurred by non-payment of the tribute, Ferrante steadily
neglected it. When called upon to
pay, he never failed to find some excuse;
at one time he pleaded the great difficulties occasioned by internal troubles,
at another the expenses in which he had been involved by his share in the war
against the Anguillara. The tension constantly increased. When Ferrante, who
already owed the Pope 60,000 golden ducats, sent the customary palfrey, but not
a farthing with it, the Pope returned it. The King went so far as to threaten that,
if the claim were still insisted upon, he would enter into alliance with the Turks,
whereupon the Pope answered that he would provide for having Ferrante driven
from his kingdom, and the Turks expelled from the Christian dominions.
The complicated relations which existed between Naples and the Apostolic See made it possible for the King to keep the Pope in perpetual alarm, by constantly making fresh demands. The real ground of Ferrante’s hostility was the jealousy with which he viewed the consolidation of the Papal power in the States of the Church, and accordingly he harassed the Pope in every way that he could.
The energetic measures of Paul II against the lawless Barons in the Roman territory had not perfectly
restored peace; feuds were constantly
breaking out amongst them, as well
as amongst the lesser nobles, while bloody and barbarous revenges were of frequent occurrence. Yet much had been gained. The Pope laboured unremittingly, by means of his Cardinals and Prelates, to bring about reconciliations. At the same time he did what he could to maintain among the Italian powers that peace which the danger of Turkish invasion rendered so necessary. His prompt action at the critical moment of the death
of Francesco Sforza, which
occurred on the 8th March, 1466, after
an illness of but two days, was specially judicious and effective. This unexpected event caused the
greatest consternation at the French
Court, as well as in Florence and in
Rome, where the news arrived on the 16th March. A Consistory was at once held, in which, at the Pop’s suggestion, it was determined that the Holy See should use every possible means for the maintenance of peace. Paul II forgot all previous differences with Milan,
and sent a special Ambassador
to express his sympathy, and declare
his intention of standing by the Duchess and her children. He also addressed Briefs to all the Italian Governments, informing them of his determination to maintain peace in the Peninsula, and earnestly
exhorting them to avoid all disturbances.
The warning was needed, especially
in regard to the Republic of St. Mark, whose policy had given the Pope just cause for dissatisfaction. Many exiles from Florence had at this time betaken
themselves to Venice to hatch in safety conspiracies against the rule of the Medici. The Signoria, ever ready to
fish in troubled waters, while avoiding
any open breach of the peace, by no means
discouraged these plots. The old grudge
against Florence, on account of the defeat of their schemes against Milan by Cosmo, revived. The resentment of the banished Florentines was to be
turned to account to establish a
government there, which should be dependent
on the support of Venice, and to overthrow the Sforzas in Milan. Bartolommeo Colleone, an ambitious and avaricious Condottiere, was to be the instrument
employed for the accomplishment of these designs. In order to enable the exiled Florentines to avail themselves
of his services, the Signoria dismissed
him with promises of money.
In face of the threatening attitude of Colleone, the Ambassadors of Florence, Naples and Milan, on the 4th January, 1467, entered into a defensive alliance at
Rome, under the protection of
Paul II, with a view of securing the peace
of Italy. This was a time of great anxiety for the Pope; he placed no confidence in Ferrante, who showed symptoms of meditating an attack on the temporal
possessions of the Holy See. In the month of March the Ambassador of Modena was of opinion that Ferrante
would declare war on the Pope.
Besides Colleone, the Florentine exiles took Ercole of
Este, Alessandro Sforza of Pesaro, Pino degli Ordelassi, Lord of Forli, the
Lords of Carpi and Galeotto de' Pici della Mirandola into their pay. An army,
14,000 strong, was assembled. The Republic of Florence engaged the services of
the Count of Urbino, while Ferrante sent auxiliary troops, and Galeazzo Maria himself
hurried to the front, at the head of 6000 men. The two most famous Italian
Generals of the day, Colleone and Federigo of Urbino, thus stood opposed to one
another, each at the head of a considerable force. On the 23rd July, 1467, they
met at La Molinella, in the territory of Imola; but the battle led to no
decisive result.
After this action, more than half a year was spent in useless
marches and entrenchments, and in wrangling, recriminations and negotiations.
At last Paul II determined, on the Feast of the Purification, 1468, after Mass
at Araceli on the Capitol, to proclaim peace by his own authority. The Bull
published on this occasion first insists on the necessity of peace in face of
the danger from Turkey, then relates the efforts made by the Pope for the restoration
of tranquillity, and requires Venice, Naples, Milan, and Florence, within the space
of thirty days, to come to terms. Colleone was named General of the Christians,
with a salary of a hundred thousand florins, to which all the Italian States were
to contribute, and he was to carry on the war with the Turks in Albania; the
territory which he had won from the Florentines, and from Taddeo Manfredi of Imola,
was to be restored within fifty days.
Milan and Naples, however, would not do anything towards
paying Colleone. A chronicler sums up their reply in the following words : “We
desire peace, but as to Colleone, we will not give him even a biscuit”. Other difficulties were also raised; and for some time it
seemed as if the war must break
out again. Paul II was obliged to give
up the stipulation regarding Colleone. On the 25th April peace was proclaimed in Rome, and soon
afterwards in Florence, and celebrated
everywhere with brilliant festivities. Some fresh obstacles were now created by
Venice, but finally these, too,
were happily overcome, and on the Feast
of the Ascension peace was proclaimed in the territories of the Republic. By
the 8th May the conditions had
been officially drawn up in Rome in the Pope’s presence.
On Ascension Day there was a magnificent procession,
in which Paul II himself took
part on foot. Hymns were composed
for the occasion by Lionardo Dati and an eloquent discourse was pronounced by Domenico de' Domenici.
Paul II’s satisfaction at the advent of peace was enhanced
by the hope which it encouraged that Italy would now offer a serious resistance
to the Turks. For this object he had already expended no less than the sum of
two hundred thousand florins, and his disappointment, when clouds again
overspread the political horizon, must have been in proportion to his interest
in the cause.
Ferrante of Naples was the disquieting element. In the summer of 1468, when Paul II had attempted to occupy the important fortress of Tolfa, which commanded the
alum mines, he had been prevented
by the Neapolitan troops, who not
only supported the Orsini, who were the lords of the soil, in their resistance, but even threatened
Rome itself. The Pope was so much
alarmed that he meditated flight. His
most valuable property had already been hidden in St. Angelo, when the Neapolitan army turned against Sora.
During the contest for the throne of Naples, Pius II
had become Sovereign of this
important Duchy, and he had maintained
his rights over it against all the efforts of Ferrante. On the accession of Paul II, the King had again endeavoured to recover Sora. He now deemed the moment to have arrived for the forcible accomplishment
of his object, and certainly
the opportunity seemed favourable. Paul
II, who always shrank from outlay for military purposes, was almost defenceless; in vain did he
reproach the faithless Monarch
with ingratitude towards the Holy See, to
whose favour he owed his crown. Fortunately for him, Cardinal Roverella was successful in persuading Ferrante not to advance any further. In October, 1468, the Pope gave orders that fresh troops should be
levied, to occupy the frontier
between the States of the Church and
Naples, which shows how little confidence he had in his neighbour. Paul II was unsuccessful in his attempts to obtain possession of Tolfa; subsequently, an amicable arrangement was arrived at, and in June, 1469, the Apostolic Treasury purchased the place for
17,300 golden ducats.
Ferrante was also the Pope's chief opponent in regard
to the territory of
Malatesta.
In the October of 1468, Sigismondo Malatesta, who had not long returned from the Turkish war, died without leaving any legitimate heir, and accordingly, in
virtue of the treaty which had been
made, Paul II justly claimed Rimini.
Sigismondo’s wife, Isotta, however, assumed the government of the city. Roberto Malatesta, who was at the time in Rome, promised the Pope, by oath and in writing, that he would deliver up Rimini to him. Upon this he was at once commissioned to take possession of
the city on behalf of the Holy
See. But no sooner had he succeeded,
with the assistance of the inhabitants, and by means of the subsidies granted by Paul II, in getting
rid of the Venetian garrison and
making himself master of the citadel,
than he informed the Pope that he did not consider himself bound by the promise he had given. A secret alliance with the King of Naples encouraged him to
venture on this step. “The Pope,
finding himself thus betrayed, collected
an army, and in a short time nearly all the Italian States were involved in the war about Rimini”.
Such was the political situation of the Italian
Peninsula when Frederick III
determined to undertake a pilgrimage to
Rome, in fulfilment of a vow which he had made in 1462, while a prisoner in the Castle of Vienna, and of which he had repeatedly postponed the accomplishment. The Emperor's suite was not a large one; it consisted of
fourteen Princes and Counts, and a number of knights, and amounted altogether
to 700 horsemen. All were in mourning garb on account of the death of the
Empress.
Frederick travelled by the same route as that which he
had followed sixteen years before; it led through Treviso to Padua, where the
Venetian Ambassadors met him and paid their respects, then by Rovigo to
Ferrara. At Francolino on the Po, Borso d'Este welcomed his noble visitor. From
Ferrara the pilgrims continued their journey by Ravenna along the coast to the
Sanctuary of Loreto. The gates of Rimini were closed by Robert Malatesta, who distrusted
the Emperor. This obliged him to alter his route, but the swampy character of
the ground compelled him again to approach the city. The inhabitants at once armed
themselves and hastened to the walls, where they remained until the travellers
were out of sight. He met with even greater rudeness from the Ambassadors of
Duke Galeazzo Maria Sforza, who, when informed by Frederick that he looked upon
Milan as belonging to the Empire, had, we are told, the audacity to reply, that
Galeazzo’s father had won the Duchy by the sword, and that his son would not lose it save by the sword.
Paul II looked forward with some apprehension to the Emperor s arrival. He took precautions against
possible disturbances in Rome by
bringing large bodies of troops into
the city. Special Briefs were sent to all the officials of the States of the Church, desiring them to receive Frederick III with honour, and to entertain him at the expense of the Holy See. The Governor of the March of Ancona, by order of the Pope, accompanied the
Emperor to Rome, and a number of
members of the Papal Court
were appointed to meet him. On Christmas Eve Frederick approached the walls of Rome. He had
proceeded by water from Otricoli to Castell Valcha, where Cardinals d'Estouteville and Piccolomini met him with
a numerous escort.
He was met at Ponte Molle by the Vice-Camerlengo, the City Prefect, the Conservators, and the rest of
the municipal authorities,
with the Roman nobles, by command of the
Pope. The Sacred College had a long time to wait at the Porta del Popolo. The late hour at which Frederick arrived made it difficult to carry out the order of
the procession, every detail of which had been arranged by Paul II.
At this gate of the city, Bessarion made a speech, and he and Cardinal d'Estouteville then took their
places, one on each side of the
Emperor. They then proceeded fir.st to S.
Marco, all the streets through which they passed being richly decorated. The Emperor, clad in black,
rode with the Cardinals under
a baldacchino of white silk damask,
embroidered with gold, and bearing the Papal and Imperial arms. One of Frederick's suite estimated the number of torches in the procession at 3000.
The Imperial pilgrim was met in front of St. Peter's
by the clergy of the city bearing a cross and relics. At the fifth hour of the
night he entered the venerable Basilica, and, going at once to the tomb of the
Prince of the Apostles, knelt for a long time in prayer. The Pope, who was very exact in matters of the kind, had most minutely arranged the ceremonial to be observed at the meeting of the two chief powers of Christendom. This appeared to their contemporaries so significant as a token of
the relations then existing
between them, that Augustinus Patritius,
the Papal Master of Ceremonies, carefully transcribed the whole in a special
note-book.
“As soon”, Patritius says, “as the Emperor beheld the Pope upon his throne, he bent the knee before him, and
repeated this act several times during his approach. When he had got up to the Pope,
he did homage to the Vicar of Christ by kissing his feet. Paul II bent his eyes
upon Frederick with an expression of great benevolence, put his arms round him,
and permitted him to kiss both his knees; then he rose a little and embraced
him warmly. He pointed out to him the place he was to take on his right hand
above the Cardinals. The Emperor's seat, which had a back, was covered with
green cloth, embroidered with gold; the Papal throne was so placed that the
Emperor's seat was at the same height as the feet of the Pope”. After the conclusion of the ceremonies in St. Peter's, which
were accompanied with chanted
psalms, “the Emperor departed to a
noble palace, hung with cloth of gold and precious tapestry, wherein he was to have his abode, and every
one of his people, according
to his rank and dignity, was conducted to a well-appointed chamber therein”.
The Christmas festival was celebrated with great splendour.
“When it came to the holy Gospel”, says Wilwolt von Schaumburg, “the Emperor
put on a dalmatic. The Pope gave him, as was fitting, a costly hat; they say
that it must have been worth 8000 ducats. And when the Emperor was to begin
singing the Gospel, one of the highest of his servants, who was appointed for the
purpose, took the hat from his head, and put the naked sword, which was
commonly carried before him, into his hand. The Emperor held it solemnly aloft,
and ever and anon, while he sang the Gospel, he brandished the sword lustily”.
After the Offertory, the Emperor was incensed next after the Pope; Paul II, having given him Holy
Communion with his own hand, bestowed on him the kiss of peace. The Pope administered the Blessed Sacrament to the Emperor, Deacon and Sub-Deacon, under the species of Bread only, although it was usual to give the Chalice
in such cases to all who
communicated with him. On this occasion
the practice was discontinued on account of the erroneous teaching of the Hussites.
After the conclusion of Mass, the Pope and the Emperor venerated the veil of St. Veronica. Then Paul II solemnly imparted his Blessing, and an Indulgence was
proclaimed. After the customary form,
the words, and for our Emperor Frederick,
that the Lord God may grant him victory over the heretical Bohemians, the Turks, and the other
enemies of the Christian name,
were added.
Throughout these solemnities, and during the days
which followed them, Frederick III behaved towards the Pope with the utmost
respect and deference. When Paul II returned his visit, he accompanied him back
to his chamber, and, on New Year’s Eve, when they quitted the Lateran together,
Frederick sprung forward to hold the Pope’s stirrup. The Pope, however,
declared that he would not allow this, and refused to mount until the Emperor
had dispensed him from receiving, and himself from rendering, this service. “The
Pope’s affability”, Patritius observes, “was thought all the more of, because the credit of
the Papacy is no less than in
former times, and its power is far
more considerable; for God has so disposed things, that the Roman Church, through the sagacity of her
Pontiffs, and especially of the
present Pope, has so increased in power
and wealth, that she can hold her own by the side of kingdoms of the first rank. The Roman Empire, on the
other hand, has fallen into such deep decay, that nothing but the name is left
to its chief. Under these altered circumstances, the smallest mark of honour
comes to be very highly regarded”. In the sequel he lays much stress on the Pope’s
courtesy towards the Emperor, and says that he treated him in all points as an
equal.
The ceremony at which, in presence of the Pope, the Emperor conferred knighthood on 125 Germans in the middle of the bridge over the Tiber, provided an
imposing pageant for the Romans.
On this occasion Frederick III also
declared Galeazzo Maria to have forfeited the Duchy of Milan, and granted investiture of this fief to his
grandson.
The first point to be discussed between Frederick III and the Pope was the war against the Turks and the Hussites. A Public Consistory for this purpose was held but four days after Christmas. The Emperor began by declaring, through his spokesman, that it was not
merely his vow which had brought
him to Rome, but also his concern
for the general good, and that he desired to learn the views of the Holy Father in regard to the measures
to be adopted against the
Turks. Paul II caused all the efforts
of the Holy See for this great object to be related, saying that his resources were now exhausted, and it
had become the duty of the
Emperor to counsel and to act. When
Frederick explained that he had come to receive, and not to give, counsel, the Pope repeated what he
had already said.
The Emperor then, with his Counsellors and all the Ambassadors who were present, withdrew into an adjoining hall to deliberate on the subject, and
remained there for an hour. As the
result of their consultation, he proposed
that a general assembly should be held at Constance, in the presence of the Emperor and the
Pope. Afterwards, Ammanati
informs us, most of those who were
accustomed to weigh matters at that period doubted whether the proposal had originated from the Emperor, who might have been anxious to show his zeal for the Faith, or from the politic Venetians. The Pope and the Cardinals, however, were agreed that the existing
state of affairs did not demand
such a measure, which past experience
had shown to be dangerous. It was at last settled that the Ambassadors of all the Christian
Princes should be invited, in the
name of the two heads of Christendom,
to a Congress, to be held in Rome in September,
and that the Venetians should be allowed to levy a tenth part from the clergy, the twentieth part from the Jews, and the thirtieth from the laity, in
their dominions.
It is equally hard to ascertain the exact nature of
the claims which Frederick at
this time made on the Pope, and the
special purpose of the Imperial pilgrimage. According to Dugoss, he sought, but did not obtain, from the Holy See the confirmation of the succession
in Hungary and Bohemia to
himself and his son Maximilian. He would
seem also to have tried unsuccessfully to procure the transfer of the electoral vote belonging
to the Crown of Bohemia to
the house of Austria. The Court
of Rome looked upon King Matthias as its principal champion in Christendom, and
would consent to nothing that would be distasteful to him. In reference to the Crown
of Bohemia, moreover, its views differed wholly from those of the Emperor, as
it desired the suppression of this dignity. The Emperor, on the other hand, obtained
the confirmation of the Order of St. George, as also the commencement of the
process of canonisation of Margrave Leopold of the house of Babenberg, and the erection
of two Bishoprics, one at Vienna and one at Wiener-Neustadt. This last measure
fulfilled a desire which had been ardently cherished by Rudolf of Hapsburg.
On the 9th January, 1469, the Emperor left Rome, enriched
with many Indulgences, relics, precious stones, and pearls. The Pope had borne
all the expenses of his suite. Cardinals Capranica and Borgia escorted him as far as Viterbo. Here, as well as in Rome and
throughout his return journey, Frederick III conferred many honours.
Soon after the Emperor’s return, the war, which
Roberto Malatesta’s treacherous
usurpation of Rimini had rendered inevitable,
broke forth. The Pope and the Republic of Venice, formerly rival claimants for the possession of
the city, now united against
Roberto, who had deceived them both.
On the 28th May, 1469, an alliance was concluded, by which Venice undertook to assist the Pope energetically, both by land and sea. Paul II made haste to collect troops, and took Napoleone Orsini and Alessandro
Sforza into his service. Lorenzo
Zane, Archbishop of Spalatro, was
appointed Legate for the Papal army. The war began in the month of June, and it seemed as if the crafty Malatesta was doomed to destruction.
Things, however, took a different turn. Roberto’s
escape was principally due to
Federigo of Montefeltre, an ancient enemy
of his house, who unexpectedly became his friend and helper. Federigo, the most powerful feudal lord in the States of the Church, looked upon the Pope's
zealous and successful efforts to
diminish the number of feudal potentates
in his territory as a danger to himself. For the same reason, not only the King of Naples, who was almost always more or less at variance with the Pope,
but also Milan and Florence,
declared against him. All these powers
were agreed that any increase of the authority of the Popes in their temporal principality, at the
expense of its feudal nobility, was
to be strenuously resisted. The element
of weakness, caused by the partition of the States of the Church among a number of feudal nobles, must be retained.
The support of these allies emboldened Roberto
Malatesta to command his General,
Federigo of Montefeltre, to assume the
offensive. On the 30th August, just when Rome was celebrating the sixth anniversary of Paul II's
elevation to the Chair of St. Peter,
he attacked the Papal army, and completely
routed it. Three thousand prisoners, a number of guns and other booty from the enemy's camp, were seized by the victors. Amongst the spoils was all the Legate’s silver plate.
The consequences of this victory might have been serious, but Federigo of Montefeltre shrank from
attacking the actual territory of
the Holy See. He contented himself with subjugating thirty castles and the
territories of Rimini and Fano to the
authority of Roberto Malatesta, and
then, in November, 1469, disbanded his troops.
The cooperation of Florence and Naples, which had made this successful resistance on the part of his
rebellious vassal possible, deeply
incensed the Pope. Before the assembled
Consistory he broke forth into bitter complaints of the Medici and of Ferrante. “The King”, he said to the Milanese Ambassador, “immediately after my elevation, demanded the surrender of Ascoli and other things so preposterous that I can never be his friend. He is so crafty and malignant that no one can trust him.
Moreover, he is no son of King
Alfonso's; Pope Calixtus told me the names
of his real parents”.
The confederates were in no way intimidated either by Paul II’s complaints or by the warlike preparations
which he carried on with much
energy. On the contrary, in July,
1470, Naples, Milan, and Florence renewed their alliance, and determined, with their united forces, to
protect Malatesta against the
Pope, not only in the possession of Rimini,
but also in that of all the conquests which he had since made in the States of the Church or might yet
make, unless within two months
the Pope should agree, on his restoration
of these spoils, to be reconciled to him and to invest him with the remainder of his family dominions
playing a very double game, more intent on the extension of their own power in the Romagna than on the support
of the Papal government. A
yet more decisive influence was exercised
by an event which now filled Christendom in general and Italy in particular with fear: Negropont
was taken by the Turks.
CHAPTER
VII.
The Fall of Negropont.— Sudden Death of the Pope.
Ever since the naval fortunes of Venice had
under the command of Niccolò Canale
(1468), taken a more favourable turn,
Sultan Mahomet, with the energy which was his characteristic,
had laboured to increase and improve his fleet.
Many new ships of war were built, and numerous Jews
and Greeks, then deemed the best seamen, were engaged
to man them. In the spring of 1470, he thought that
the favourable moment had arrived for avenging his former defeat and dealing a crushing blow to the Venetian power. Mahomet himself set out for Greece at the
head of an army more than 100,000 strong,
while Mahmoud Pasha, with a fleet of
about 400 vessels, 1000 which were men-of-war, put
to sea. In the latter half of June the tidings that this great expedition was on the way reached Venice, and from thence passed on to Rome. It was not yet known
for certain that Euboea, the pearl of the
Italian dominions in Greece, was its goal,
but the greatness of the peril was manifest.
A
Consistory was at once summoned in an unusual
manner by the Pope; Cardinal Gonzaga informs us
that he was prepared, for the sake of restoring peace in Italy, to renounce his claim to Rimini and the other places taken from him in the war, and that a
Congregation of Cardinals was appointed
to take counsel regarding further measures.
In view of the confusion prevailing in the whole
of Europe, and more particularly in Italy, and the failure of all former attempts at combination against the ancestral enemy of Christian civilisation,
the task was somewhat hopeless.
Yet
Paul II at once issued an urgent general appeal for help.
King Ferrante of Naples, who, next to Venice, seemed
the most immediately threatened, declared his readiness
not only to join a general alliance of all the Christian
powers, but also to enter into a special agreement
with Venice and Rome. As the bitter enmity which
existed between Venice and Milan left little prospect of
a general alliance among the Princes of Christendom, Paul
II, forgetting the injuries which he had received from the
Neapolitan monarch, accepted his second proposal. He
gave orders that eight of the Cardinals, postponing all other
business, should assemble once in every four days to take
counsel regarding the measures to be adopted. Their first
meeting was held on the 8th August, at which time no answer
had yet been received from either Milan or Florence to
the Papal Briefs despatched to them at the same date as
that to Naples. From the outset it was evident to all experienced
persons that the negotiations were likely to be extremely
protracted. On the 3rd of August a fresh Brief had
been addressed to Florence, and also to Milan, insisting on
the imminent danger with which the siege of Negropont threatened
Italy, and exhorting these powers to despatch Envoys.
Meanwhile,
the growing power of Islam had again given proofs
of its strength; on the 12th July, after a desperate resistance
on the part of the besieged, Negropont, which had
been accounted impregnable, had fallen into the hands of
the Turks. The terrible tidings caused the greatest consternation
throughout Italy, and nowhere was the feeling more intense
than in Venice. The Milanese Ambassador to that city,
in a despatch of the 7th August, said that he had seen
the proud nobles weep as if their own wives and children
had been slain. “All Venice”, he added, some days
later, “is struck with dismay; the inhabitants, half-dead
with fear, say that the loss of all their possessions on the
mainland would have been a less disaster”. “The glory
and credit of Venice are destroyed”, wrote
the chronicler Malipiero, “our pride is humbled”.
The
conquest of Euboea by the Turks was in fact an event
of such importance that the latest historian of Greece
considers it as the close of an epoch. All the Greeks,
with the exception of a small fraction, were now in
the clutch of the Sultan. Venice was driven back into Crete
and a few small islands and fortresses on the outer rim
of Greece.
The
alarm of the Venetians was increased by the strained
relations which existed between them and the Pope,
the Emperor and the King of Hungary, as well as
by the openly hostile attitude of Duke Galeazzo Maria Sforza,
who was the centre of a party which sought to take
advantage of the misfortunes of the Republic, and recover
the territory surrendered in 1454. In Bergamo, Crema,
and Brescia an immediate invasion of Milanese troops
was apprehended; guards were doubled, and the work
of strengthening the defences was carried on day and
night. Happily, the King of Naples declared to the
representative of Milan that, in presence of the actual
danger from Turkey, he would take no part in any
attack upon Venice. The attitude of the King of Hungary,
on the other hand, was by no means reassuring. Paul
II, however, with a true sense of his high position, laid
aside all resentment against Venice, and laboured earnestly
for the restoration of peace and the conclusion of
an alliance against the Turks.
On
the 25th August he informed all the
Christian powers of the fall of Negropont, drew a vivid picture of the danger
which lowered from the East, and urgently implored
assistanc : prompt action on their part, he
said, would give him the greatest consolation. The Pope
earnestly entreated the Duke of Milan, who had
attacked the Lords of Correggio, to lay down his arms, and
urgently admonished the Venetians to desist from the works
they had begun on the Mincio, which were a menace to
the Marquess of Mantua, and were calculated to
excite fresh troubles. Paul II himself set a good
example, by determining to waive his rights regarding
Rimini, and to refrain from punishing the Neapolitan King. On
the 18th of September an invitation was addressed
to all the Italian powers, calling upon them to send
Ambassadors as soon as possible to Rome, in order to
consult on measures for the general defence and the preservation
of their own liberties.
The
Pope had no more zealous supporter in his labours than
Cardinal Bessarion, who addressed several long circular letters
to the Italian Princes and people, vividly representing the
magnitude of the common peril and the necessity for unanimous
action against their cruel foe. With the impression
of his soul-stirring words fresh on their minds, the
Italian Envoys commenced their deliberations in Rome. There
were apprehensions to be removed and disputes to be
settled, but at length the efforts of Paul II, were crowned
with success. On the 22nd December, 1470, a general
defensive alliance of the Italian States against the Turks
was concluded, on the basis of the League of Lodi, Roberto
Malatesta being included among its members. Public
thanksgivings were offered and bonfires kindled throughout
the States of the Church by desire of Paul II.
But
this time again the hopes of the Pope were far from being realised. Sforza did
not ratify the treaty, ostensibly because his wishes were disregarded in some unimportant
points in the draft of the document, but in reality because he disliked
committing himself to a war against the Turks. Although the Florentine Signoria
sent their ratification, Guicciardini put it aside, because Lorenzo, who
desired to hold with Milan, and, like his grandfather, not to break with the
Sultan, had secretly instructed him not to sign.
In
France and Germany the prospect was not any brighter.
The Pope sent special envoys to both countries. Cardinal
Francesco Piccolomini, the Legate for Germany, left
Rome on the 18th March, 1471, to proceed in the first instance
to Ratisbon, where a Diet was to open at the end of
April.
Piccolomini
was chosen for this mission, first, on account of
his distinguished personal qualities, and secondly, because
he could speak German, and was a nephew of Pius
II, whose memory was still warmly cherished at the Imperial
Court.
He
entered Ratisbon on the 1st May, where all his energies
had first to be applied to the allaying of the ill- feeling
occasioned by the prolonged delay of the Emperor. His
position was by no means an easy one: he desired and was
even bound to defend the Emperor, and yet he could not
altogether deny the justice of the complaints made by the
impatient Assembly. At last, on the 16th June, Frederick
III arrived, and the great Christian Diet began
on the 24th. During the deliberations which ensued, the
zeal displayed by Cardinal Piccolomini fully justified the
repeated commendations of the Pope. But neither his acknowledged
eloquence, nor the urgent entreaties of the unhappy
victims of the Turkish invasion from Croatia, Carniola,
and Styria, sufficed to remove the manifold obstacles
in the way of unanimous and energetic action.
“The
question of aid against the Turks proceeds so slowly”,
wrote an Italian Ambassador on the 7th July, “that
the Cardinal Legate is wearied to death, and looks for
little result from this Diet, on which he had built such great
hopes!”. After fully four weeks of negotiations, no decisive
resolution binding all the states of the Empire had
been arrived at. All went well till it came to the determination
of the amount to be contributed by each power,
because, up to that point, general promises and offers
sufficed; but when definite engagements were to be set
down in black and white, difficulties of all kinds were raised,
absurd pretexts invented, conditions imposed, and fresh
proposals made to escape the obnoxious task" For a
little while, to the delight of the Cardinal, things seemed again
to take a more favourable turn; but the issue of this Diet,
the largest within the memory of man, was no better
than that of those which had preceded it. Private interests on all sides outweighed the general interests of the Empire. Only two among the Princes—Ernest,
Elector of Saxony, and Albrecht of
Brandenburg, who had made his peace with
the Pope at Ratisbon—sent troops to the threatened
frontiers; none of the others stirred.
“O
the blindness of men!” exclaims Rodericus de Arevalo.
“The Catholic Princes see the blazing torch of
the infidel at their very doors, ready to set fire to all the kingdoms of Christendom, while they are
squabbling each one for his portion. With
their own eyes they behold the destruction
of the Faithful, while every heathen jeers at their
struggles to conquer each other, without thinking of saving themselves”.
Besides
the threatened danger from Turkey, the year 1471
had brought many other troubles to Paul II. At its very
outset, disturbances had broken out in the Bolognese territory;
in Florence, as well as in Venice, there had been
troublesome discussions about the contributions for
the Turkish war, and scarcely anywhere, either in Italy or elsewhere, was any genuine zeal for the defence of Christendom to be found. Tidings of a very
anxious nature had come from the Knights
of St. John at Rhodes. It would appear
that, for some time past, the Christians in that
island had completely lost heart. Paul II hastened to encourage the Knights to stand firm, promised assistance, and exhorted them to put the fortifications of
the island into a state of thorough
repair. A serious attack of the Turks might,
under the actual circumstances of the
island, have been successful. Happily, no such attempt
was made, the attention of Mahomet being at
that time much engaged by the Turcoman Prince Usunhassan.
Of
all the Italian Princes, no one was on more friendly terms
with Paul II than Duke Borso of Modena; there was
much intellectual sympathy between them, both were warm
patrons of Art, and had a taste for external splendour, which
the Duke, as well as the Pope, believed to have a great
effect on the popular mind. Borso’s most ardent desire
was to add the ducal title of Ferrara to that of Modena;
during the pontificate of Pius II he had vainly laboured
for the realisation of this wish. Under Paul II further
negotiations were carried on, and, in the spring of 1471,
they were brought to a successful conclusion.
Borso
came to Rome to receive his new dignity. On the
13th March he left Ferrara with an almost royal train. The
Lords of Carpi, Correggio, Mirandola, and Scandiano formed
part of the company, and a host of nobles and knights;
there were more than 700 horses and 250 mules, all adorned
with costly trappings, and some of them bearing the arms
of Este. Paul II sent his friend, the Archbishop of Spalatro,
to welcome the Duke, who, on his arrival in Rome,
was received by Cardinals Barbo and Gonzaga, all the
great Barons, the Ambassadors, the Senate, and all the
other city dignitaries. A contemporary informs us that,
in the opinion of the Romans, no such honours had ever
been accorded to any King or Emperor as were now paid
to Borso. Festal music resounded through the richly-decorated
streets which he traversed on his way to the Vatican. Shouts
of “Paulo, Paulo! Borso, Borso!” from the crowd mingled
with the clang of the trumpets. The Pope received his
visitor seated on a throne adorned with gold and ivory, and
the Palace of Cardinal Castiglione, which adjoined the
Vatican, was assigned to him as his residence. The rest of
his followers were provided for, at the expense of the
Apostolic Treasury, in the numerous inns which then existed
in Rome.
On
Palm Sunday, after Mass, Paul II assembled the Cardinals
and informed them of his intention regarding Borso.
They all approved of the Pope’s decision, and the
Duke was then called in. Paul II told him what had
passed, and Borso warmly expressed his gratitude.
Easter
Sunday (14th April) was the day fixed for Borso’s solemn
investiture with the title of Duke of Ferrara. All
the Cardinals, Bishops, and Prelates then in Rome, together
with all the members of the Court, were assembled in
the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles, where Borso was
in the first place made a Knight of St. Peter. The Pope
himself handed him a naked sword, saying: “Take this
in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,
and use it for your own defence and that of God’s Holy
Church, and for the destruction of the enemies of the
holy Cross and of the Faith”. The High Mass then began,
the music being rendered by the Papal Choir. When
the Epistle had been sung, Borso took the oath of
allegiance to the Pope. After the Communion, he and
his followers received the Sacred Host from the hands
of Paul II, who then bestowed on Borso the Ducal
robes and the other insignia of his new dignity. The veneration of the Veil of St. Veronica, the Papal Benediction, and the proclamation of a Plenary
Indulgence closed this imposing function,
which was witnessed by an immense
multitude gathered from far and near. When Borso
sought to accompany the Pope back to his apartments, his Holiness desired the
Cardinals to pay that token of respect to
the Duke, who was enchanted with the
distinctions heaped upon him. He wrote to his Secretary:
“We have been treated as we were a King
or an Emperor”.
On
the following day Borso accompanied the Pope to St.
Peter’s, and there received the Golden Rose. From there
he rode, carrying the Rose, to the Palace of S. Marco,
where a great banquet was prepared. During the ensuing
days the same pomp and ceremony were displayed in
various other entertainments provided for the new Duke, especially
at a grand hunting-party, in which many of the Cardinals
took part.
After
all these festivities were over, the Duke still lingered in
Rome. The extraordinary honours of which he was the
object, and his frequent interviews with the Pope, had, from
the time of his arrival, attracted general attention. Even
the Cardinals were kept in the dark as to the subjects of
these conversations. With a view of obtaining some information,
Cardinal Gonzaga told Borso of the pleasure which
it had given him to hear it said at the Court that the
Pope meant to accompany the Duke back to Ferrara; and
further expressed his opinion, that, considering the dispositions
of Germany and the perpetual demands of France
for a Council, such an Assembly might with advantage
be held in that City. Borso replied that the Cardinal’s
view was most reasonable, adding: “Would to God
that everyone thought the same”. “These words”, wrote
the Cardinal to his father, “make me think that something
of the sort may be in the wind”. In a second conversation
the Duke expressed his confident hope of bringing
the Pope to Ferrara. Cardinal Battista Zeno, the Pope’s nephew, at this time said that it would be wise to hold a Congress at some suitable place in
Italy, for that by doing so in time, and
of his own accord, the Pope would avoid
the danger of having it forced upon him, when also
some undesirable place would probably be selected.
The
learned Bishop of Calahorra, Rodericus Sancius de Arevalo,
had some years previously, in a treatise dedicated to
Cardinal Bessarion, declared against the holding of a Council,
the demand for which had always been the war-cry of
the opposition. Nothing of the sort was required to deal
with either the Turkish question or that of Reform. Hard
fighting, not a Congress, was the means by which the
Infidels must be repelled. From the outset of his pontificate,
Paul II had done everything in his power to protect
Christendom against them. The example of the Synod
of Basle was not one to encourage another attempt of
the kind. And as to the Congress of Mantua, it had been
utterly fruitless, and even prejudicial, for it had made the disunion of Christendom patent to the Turks.
Another
project to which Paul II had turned his mind seemed
far more likely to prove beneficial than the meeting of
a Congress. This was an alliance with the enemies of the
Sultan in the East, and especially with the Turcoman Prince,
Usun Hassan, who was now at the summit of his power.
Following the example of the Venetians and of his predecessors,
Calixtus III and Pius II, Paul I, leagued himself with this Prince, the only
one among the Oriental rulers who could venture to
measure swords with Mahomet. Usun Hassan indeed made such solemn promises of
co-operation against the common foe, that powerful aid
from the East seemed a certainty. At this crisis Paul II
suddenly died.
The
Pope, whose constitution was naturally strong, had appeared
to be in excellent health. At the beginning of his reign
he had suffered from the dangerous Roman fever; in 1466, and again in 1468, he
had been ill, but had quite recovered; at this moment
there seemed no cause for apprehension.
On
the morning of the 26th July the Pope was perfectly well,
and had held a Consistory lasting for six hours; he then
dined bare-headed in the garden and freely indulged his
taste for melons and other indigestible food. At the first
hour of the night he felt ill, and his chamberlain advised
him to postpone the audiences usually granted at that
time, and to rest for a while. Paul II was suffering from
a sense of oppression and lay down on a bed, while the
chamberlain left the room to dismiss those who were waiting
without. After an hour had passed, he heard a knocking
on the door of the bed-chamber, hurried in, and found
the Pope half-insensible and foaming at the mouth. With
difficulty he lifted the sick man on to a bench and rushed
out to summon assistance. By the time he returned the
Pope had expired, having died of a stroke. Cardinal Barbo
was at once called, and the corpse, accompanied by a
few torches, was borne to St. Peter's. Here the obsequies for
the departed took place; the mortal remains of Paul II were deposited in an
imposing monument erected by Cardinal Barbo in the Chapel of St. Andrew. It was
the work of Mino da Fiesole, an artist who exercised a very important influence
on sepulchral decoration, and vith whom began a new and brilliant epoch in
monumental art. Fragments of the tomb are still to be seen scattered about in the
Grotto of St. Peter's.
“Pope
Paul”, says the chronicler of Viterbo, “was a just,
holy, and peaceable man; he established good government
in all parts of his dominions”.
His
labours, as a practical ruler, to strengthen and
consolidate the authority of the Holy
See throughout the States of the Church, may indeed be
considered one of the chief characteristics of his
reign. A modern historian sums up his judgment of the
Pope in the following words: “Paul II was certainly a
born ruler, and one animated by the most noble
intentions”. It may be regretted that the mitre was compelled
to give way too much to the tiara, and that his
pontificate displayed an excess of worldly splendour, but
it cannot be said that ecclesiastical interests suffered in
any direct way from this. In many matters he was a zealous
reformer.
Witnesses
who are above suspicion attest his
determination in opposing all simoniacal
practices. If, weighed down beneath the burden of
affairs, he was not always successful in accomplishing the good he desired, we must not be harsh in our judgment of one whose uprightness is admitted even by
his enemies. The nepotism from which he
was not free, never took the offensive
and mischievous form which we have to lament
in his immediate successor. Even his enemies do
not venture to say that it was ever hurtful to the Church.
In
opposition to Platina's calumnies, it must be
remembered that Paul II opposed only that heathen abuse of learning which seemed dangerous to religion; apart from that he encouraged it. It was not
the learning of the Humanists that he
hated, but that tendency which Dante
characterised as the stench of heathenism. All Platina’s
other charges against the Pope are merely insinuations, not facts. “How
virtuous”, concludes a non-Catholic scholar, “must he have been when so
diligent and malicious an enemy as this Humanist could
bring forward so little against him”.
The
statement that Paul II did not realise the Turkish danger
is also unjust. It is true that this war was not the
one all-engrossing object of his life, as it had been with
Pius II, but the silence of those who hated him most
is in itself a proof that no cause of complaint can be found
against him on this head. Recent investigations, moreover,
have brought to light many facts which are much
to his credit. It is impossible that a conclusive judgment
can be formed until our information is completed by
further examination of the Archives.
We
have, as yet, before us but scanty particulars as to the
negotiations which took place in 1471 for the purpose
of organising defensive measures against the Osmanli. A
newly-discovered letter of Cardinal Gonzaga, written on the 17th
of January in that year, shows that Paul II was prepared
to devote 50,000 ducats, the quarter of his annual income,
to the expenses of the Turkish war. This sum does
not include the revenue derived from the Alum monopoly,
which, from the beginning of his reign, he had assigned
to the objects of the Crusade. Subsidies and pensions
were provided out of these funds for all the unfortunate
exiles who had been driven by Turkish conquests to take refuge
in the States of the Church. The account-books of his
pontificate are full of entries of this description,
sometimes reaching the annual amount of 20.000 to 30,000
ducats. The name of Thomas, the dethroned Despot of the
Morea, appears as the recipient of a monthly pension of
300 florins. After the death of Thomas, the Pope
continued this allowance to his children, who were
brought up under the care of Cardinal Bessarion. Catherine, Queen-Mother
of Bosnia, who migrated to Rome in 1466, from that time
received 100 florins a month, and in the following year
a further annual allowance of 240 florins
was made to her for the rent of her house. To the Despot
Leonard of Arta, were granted, as assistance
in the war against the Turks, 1000 golden florins on
the 12th March, 1465, 1200 on the 18th July, 1466, and
another 1000 on the 2nd April, 1467. Monthly pensions were
likewise bestowed on Queen Charlotte of Cyprus,
Prince John Zacharias of Samos, Nicolaus Jacobus, a
citizen of Constantinople, Thomas Zalonich, and many others.
From the year 1467 the Archbishop of Mitylene and
the Despot of Servia also received regular
allowances, which were supplemented by occasional presents.
These facts prove the princely liberality of Paul II.
It is
also worth noting that now, as on many subsequent occasions,
possession of the States of the Church enabled the
Holy See to offer an asylum to the persecuted and exiled,
and to succour the oppressed and unfortunate. The
dominions of the Church have a characteristic which distinguishes
them from all other kingdoms; in contradistinction to the exclusiveness of
other States, they partake of the Catholicity of
the Church. They form a separate realm; but as their Monarch
is the Supreme Head of Christendom, this realm
is the common patrimony of all Christians. No
nationality is excluded from its offices and dignities,
and its educational institutions and Convents are open
to all races.
SIXTUS IV.A.D 1471-1484.
|