 |
 |
CHAPTER
IV.
THE
LAST IMPERIAL CORONATION IN ROME,
The same
pontificate which witnessed the abdication of the last anti-Pope, and the
healing of the Schism of Basle, witnessed also the last coronation of an
Emperor in Rome. Ever since the conclusion of the Concordat at Vienna,
Frederick III had set his heart on a visit to Rome. He desired that the
reconciliation thus effected between himself and the Pope should be sealed by
his solemn coronation as Emperor in the Holy City. In spite of the almost
universal contempt for authority of every sort which had prevailed for the last
ten years and more perhaps, indeed for that very reason, a reaction in favour
of the Empire seemed setting in amongst a certain portion of the nations. Thus,
the less Frederick felt himself personally strong enough to assert his rights
and bring his surroundings into subjection, the more eagerly did he seek
compensation in the prestige that the coronation would confer on him. It was
towards the close of the year 1449 that the thought of his journey to Rome
began first to be seriously entertained at the Royal Court; but nothing was
done. Frederick's position was such as to render his absence from Germany
inexpedient, and the disturbed condition of northern Italy, consequent on the
death of the last of the Visconti, was not inviting. The execution of the plan
was therefore deferred, but it was not relinquished.
Later on the
project of a marriage between the king of the Romans and Donna Leonora,
daughter of the King of Portugal, was added to that of the coronation. In
September, 1450, Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini was despatched to Italy to enter
into negotiations with King Alfonso, Leonora's maternal uncle, for this
alliance, and with the Pope for the coronation. With his accustomed dexterity,
Aeneas Sylvius successfully accomplished both commissions, and then Frederick
began in good earnest and with unwonted energy to make his preparations both
for the journey and for the reception of his bride. He issued an invitation and
requisition to the Princes of the Empire, the Imperial cities, and all the
nobles and loyal subjects in his hereditary dominions, in compliance with
ancient usage, to attend him on his journey to Rome. The place of meeting was
to be Austria for the Austrians and Bohemians, Carinthia for the Hungarians and
Bavarians, Ferrara for the Suabians, the inhabitants
of the Rhenish provinces, and the Saxons. Accordingly in his invitation to the
Imperial cities, Cologne, Frankfort, and Strasburg, Frederick says that it is
his will to proceed to Rome in order there to receive the Imperial Crown, and
requests the above-named cities to provide him with an escort such as
"their laudable ancient customs bind them to supply to the King of the
Romans". He will himself so as to be at Ferrara by St. Catherine's day
(November 25th), from which city he purposes to start on his progress to Rome.
He therefore requests, and "in virtue of his authority as King of the
Romans, solemnly enjoins and commands", that the said escort shall be sent
by that day to Ferrara, "thoroughly equipped and well provided", as
is fitting "in order to accompany him on the said journey, for the honour
of the Holy Roman Empire and his own".
In March, 1451,
Frederick sent two of his court chaplains, Jacob Motz and Nicholas Lanckmann, to Lisbon, to effect the
formal ratification of his marriage contract. They were also commissioned to
conduct the future Empress as far as the Tuscan part of Telamone,
where a royal envoy would meet and receive her.
But, when it
became evident that Frederick was seriously intending to proceed to Italy, the
obstacles to the realization of his purpose multiplied daily. Not only were
there symptoms in Austria of a dangerous agitation against his wardship of the
young King Ladislas Posthumus, but the commotion
stirred up in Italy also by the news of his impending arrival was amazing. So
great was the alarm of the timid Pope Nicholas V that he entreated Heinrich Senftleben, then on his way to Germany, to do his utmost to
persuade Frederick to desist from his purpose. But the King now displayed that
singular stubbornness in his nature which made him blind to all dangers until
they were actually upon him. Regardless of the embarrassments he might be
leaving to his counsellors, and of anything that might happen when his back was
turned, he set his face Romewards more resolutely
than ever, and all attempts to dissuade him were still further frustrated by
the changed attitude of the Pope, who, reassured by the representations of
Aeneas Sylvius, and perhaps also influenced by other considerations, now
favoured his project. He sent him a safe conduct and a cordial letter, warmly
expressing the pleasure he felt at the prospect of soon greeting the King in
Rome. Meanwhile the worst news continued to arrive from Austria. Aeneas Sylvius
in his narrative emphasizes the fact that several of those who accompanied
Frederick urgently besought him to put off his journey and return at once to
Vienna to nip the impending insurrection in the bud. But the King was
determined to cross the Alps. It was at Canale, 1st
January, 1452, that his foot first pressed the soil of Italy. The young King
Ladislas rode by his side, and the Bohemians, the Hungarians, and his brother,
Duke Albert, with his Suabians, had already joined
the Royal party at Villach.
Frederick's
suite was neither numerous nor brilliant. In all he had not more than two
thousand two hundred men, and of these only Albert, Ladislas, and the Bishops
of Ratisbon, Gurk, and Trent were of princely rank.
Nevertheless, to avoid all possible occasion of umbrage, even this
insignificant force was divided, and advanced in separate bands! The alarmists
in Italy, who had hitherto expressed so much consternation at the prospect of
his royal progress, were silenced perforce, and in fact the reception accorded
to the harmless pilgrim was everywhere both friendly and splendid. The republic
of Venice, through whose territory Frederick first entered Italy, spared no
pains to welcome the future Emperor with befitting honours. Gaspard Enenkel, the imperial councillor, says that the King
crossed all the canals from Tervis to Padua on new bridges erected by the
republic expressly for the occasion. There was the King right worshipfully
entertained by all the people, clergy and laity, rich and poor, men, women, and
children, all falling on their knees, praising him and doing him homage; truly
if God Himself had come down from heaven they could hardly have done Him more
honour, and all the King's costs were defrayed by the Venetians, till he came
to the country of the Marquess of Verona.
His reception in
Ferrara by the Marquess Borso d'Este was exceptionally magnificent. This wealthy prince hoped that Frederick would
make him a duke, and to display his liberality he not only defrayed all the
King's own expenses during his stay in Ferrara, but also those of the Suabians, Franconians, and
Germans from the Rhenish Provinces, who had preceded him there. The
entertainment of the envoys from the city of Strasburg gives a specimen of the
splendour of his hospitality. He sent sixteen different kinds of wine, as much
bread as two servants could carry, ten chests of confectionery, three of wax
lights, thirty capons, two live calves, and provender enough to load ten men.
The chiefs of the party, Burkhardt von Mülnheim and
his son, received each a splendid gold ring set with gems, and a costly rosary.
From the moment of Frederick's arrival on the 19th January a succession of
various entertainments, pageants, balls, tournaments, etc., began, and were
uninterruptedly continued.
In the midst of
these festivities a less agreeable event occurred in the unexpected arrival of
Galeazzo Maria Sforza, eldest son of the Duke of Milan, whose title Frederick
had refused to recognize. This was on January 23rd. He was accompanied by his
uncle Alessandro Sforza, and a brilliant retinue of Lombard nobles. He brought
rich presents from his father of horses and weapons for the future Emperor, and
saluted him in a speech "as long as two chapters of St. John's
Gospel". The Duke of Milan had instructed Filelfo, a man in high repute
for his skill in such compositions, to prepare this address, and gave him
minute directions as to its length, matter, and arrangement. Galeazzo's audience took place on the 24th. The Duke's
little son delivered his oration so admirably that not only the Germans, but
the Italians also were amazed. "One would have thought", wrote
Alessandro Sforza to his brother, "that one was listening to a practised
orator of thirty, and he is but eight years old. Everybody wondered at the
child, and the King himself expressed his satisfaction". Alessandro
assured Frederick of his brother's loyal devotion, and besought him to visit
Milan on his homeward journey. The King declined the invitation, but
courteously, for he knew only too well that he had no power to enforce his
imperial rights against Sforza’s usurpation.
“After this”
(24th January), says Enenkel, "the King proceeded
to Bologna, which is a great and strong city belonging to the Pope, who has a
legate there who is a cardinal, and resides in the palace with many retainers.
There is also a bishop there, and an old university having many students, and a
broad and handsome square with great gates. The cardinal with all his retinue,
and the bishop, with his clergy, and the university, and the burghers and all
the people rode forth to meet the King, and received him with the greatest
honour, and placed his throne under a canopy in the bishop's court. Also they
supplied him with more than enough of everything that he could want, and he had
free quarters at all the inns".
From Bologna
Frederick crossed the Apennines to Florence. Aeneas Sylvius draws a vivid
picture of the rapture of the Germans at the enchanting loveliness of the
landscape on which they gazed from these heights, and especially of their
appreciation of the stately beauty of the city. The reception here was even
more magnificent than at Ferrara and Bologna. The Florentines received him
right royally. There were upwards of a thousand horsemen splendidly attired in
silk and gold, velvet and scarlet; and all knelt before him and gave him the
keys of their gates, humbly declaring themselves and all their goods to be the
King's, and that he might do, and ordain, and command there as he willed, being
their rightful and natural lord, since they belonged to him and to the Holy
Roman Empire. The clergy came to meet him outside the city, bearing the Host,
and all knelt, and with them noble ladies and maidens, all decked out and
adorned in the best that they had, and all received the King on their knees,
and with them a multitude of the common folk, men, women, and children.
We see how great
was the reverence still felt for the Roman Empire; but Frederick was, neither
in power nor character, a fitting representative of the highest temporal
dignity in Christendom. This fact did not escape the notice of the Italian
envoys who accompanied him. On this point we have most interesting testimony,
drawn from this very sojourn in Florence. Sceva de Curte, Sforza's ambassador, who was commissioned to invite
the King to Milan, there to receive the crown of Lombardy, found it extremely
difficult to obtain an audience; it seemed more important to Frederick to
choose presents for his bride than to attend to public affairs. He spent all
his time in looking at pearls and jewels, gold and velvet dresses, silken and
woollen stuffs, "as if he had been a pedlar." "He buys little or
nothing”, says this ambassador, "and meanwhile he keeps the Signoria of
this noble city, the Lord Carlo di Arezzo, many burghers, the ambassadors from
Siena, and the Marquess of Ferrara waiting from morning till night, so that all
Florence laughs at him, which I much lament."
It was in
Florence, also, that the Papal Legates, charged with the Holy Father's
greetings, joined the King; one was Calandrini,
step-brother to the Pope, the other Frederick's old acquaintance, Carvajal.
Siena was the
next stage in the journey, and it was there that the future Emperor and his
bride met for the first time. After a long and perilous voyage she had arrived
at Leghorn on February 2nd. In front of the Porta Camullia a marble pillar, bearing the arms of the Roman Empire and of Portugal, still
marks the spot where the scene took place, which, later, was immortalized by
Pinturicchio's pencil. Aeneas Sylvius witnessed, and thus describes it:
"When the Emperor first caught sight of his bride in the distance, he
turned pale, for her stature appeared to him too low. But when she drew near,
and he beheld her beautiful countenance and dignified bearing, his colour
returned and he smiled, for he saw that he had not been deceived, and that his
bride was even more lovely than report had made her. She was sixteen years of
age, of middle height, with an open brow, black and sparkling eyes, a very
white neck, and a faint colour in her cheeks. Her form was perfect, but her
beauty was eclipsed by the gifts of her mind."
All the
resources of that festive art in which the Italy of the Renaissance so excelled
were displayed for the entertainment of the noble pair during their stay in
Siena.
At first sight
the alarm displayed by Nicholas at the approach of so pacific a guest seems
incomprehensible. By his command all the defences of the city were set in
order, the guards were doubled at the gates, the Capitol, and the Castle of St
Angelo, and in addition to this, the Pope had sent for two thousand mercenaries
and appointed thirteen district marshals to keep watch over all parts of the
city. Why all these precautions? Was the Pope really afraid of Frederick? It
seems more probable that what Nicholas feared was not Frederick, but certain
dangerous elements in Rome itself, where the republican party was again
beginning to stir. An Emperor who would be almost always absent was a more
acceptable master to these people than a Pope whose rule, however mild, was an
ever present restraint. Thus it appears likely that the motive, which induced
the Pope to desire his Legates to obtain from Frederick at Siena a sworn
promise that he would respect the Papal rights, was rather mistrust of the
loyalty of the Romans than any doubt of the Emperor's good faith. Nicholas knew
the weakness of his character, and hoped thus to guard against the danger of
the pressure which might be put upon him from certain quarters to induce him to
assume the government of the city. We shall still better understand the Pope's
anxiety if we consider that the idea of the old Roman Empire was far from being
extinct It was but quite lately that Valla, in his refutation of the gift of
Constantine, had declared that it was absurd to crown as Emperor a prince who
had abandoned Rome; that in truth the crown belonged to the Roman people.
The reception of
the future Emperor was as splendid as the Pope could make it; he told the
Milanese Ambassadors that he wished to show extraordinary honour to Frederick,
and was prepared to spend from forty to sixty thousand ducats for the purpose.
Frederick
travelled from Siena by Acquapendente, Viterbo (in
which city he was scared by an unseemly brawl in the streets) and Sutri. It was during this journey that, as they were gazing
together on the "billowy Campagna with its girdle of shimmering
heights", the King prophesied to Aeneas Sylvius his elevatjon to the Papacy
On the evening
of March 8th he drew near to the Eternal City, and was met by the deputation
sent out to welcome him. First appeared the greater portion of the nobility,
the Colonna and Orsini, with a host of retainers, then the Pope's treasurer
with the militia of the city, finally the Papal Vice-Chamberlain, with the
Roman senators and the most eminent of the citizens. From Monte Mario he beheld
that marvellous panorama of the valley of the Tiber, and Rome spread out before
him, looking like a sea of houses, which Dante describes as overpowering. There
he lingered awhile, asking questions, and hardly able to tear himself away from
the enchanting spectacle of the seven-hilled city, with all her monuments and towers,
lighted up by the evening sun. The German knights were equally delighted; this
view of the true capital of the whole world was enough in itself, they
declared, to repay them for all the toils of the journey. At the foot of the
hill Frederick found the Cardinals assembled to greet him. The King was given
to understand that this honour had not been accorded to former Emperors;
whereat those who, like Aeneas Sylvius had read history, could not help
remembering that there had been a time when the Pope himself came out as far as Sutri to meet the Emperor. "But", he adds,
"all earthly power is subject to change; in former days the majesty of the
Empire eclipsed all lesser dignities, now the Pope is the greater".
An ancient
custom forbade Frederick to enter the city on the night of his arrival, and he
passed it outside the walls in the villa of a Florentine merchant. Donna
Leonora was lodged in another villa. The royal suite encamped in the meadows of
Nero, where the Pope had provided gorgeous silken tents, blue, red, and white.
Many, however, with the King's permission, entered the city. Among these was
Aeneas Sylvius, who at once hastened to the Pope, again to repeat in the most
solemn manner his assurances of the loyalty of Frederick's intentions. Nicholas,
however, still thought it wisest to be on his guard.
On the following
day, March 9th, all the bands composing the royal escort were summoned for a
grand review in the meadow opposite the Porta di Castello. But when the counts
and knights and also the mercenaries of the free cities appeared each with
their own banner, on a sudden came an order from the King that these should be
"put away, and all march under the royal standard alone. "At which”
says the Strasburg narrative, "there was great demur on the part of all
the soldiers and burghers, but more especially from the captain of the Company
of St. George, who said that it was an unheard of thing that the flag of St.
George should be thus slighted, and that though he were under the very walls of
Rome he would return home with all his men, unless the banner of this
honourable and illustrious Company were permitted publicly to enter the city;
and that in the memory of man no Emperor or King had ever refused this".
However, all opposition was in vain; there was much murmuring amongst the
knights and men-at-arms and burghers, but in the end all had to submit, and
march into Rome under the Imperial standard alone. This ensign, a single-headed
eagle on a banner of cloth of gold hung on a gilt staff, was borne by the
Burgrave Michael of Magdeburg, and the naked sword of the King was carried by
the Marshal von Pappenheim.
The bride
followed at some distance behind the King; her horse was covered with a golden
cloth, and she wore a beautiful mantle of gold and blue, and a costly gold
necklace. The Papal horsemen, three thousand strong, in gorgeous armour, with
bright helmets adorned with plumes, closed the procession, followed by a rear
guard of two hundred Roman mercenaries on foot. Each division was accompanied by
a band of trumpeters, to the intense delight of the populace, which had flocked
in from all quarters to witness the pageant, and money was scattered amongst
them.
At the Porta di
Castello the King was received with great pomp by all “the clergy and prelates,
and numbers of bishops, abbots, provosts, and other religious men with their
holy symbols and ornaments, under canopies hung with gold and silk. Truly it
was a glorious sight, and if God Himself, made Man, had come down upon earth
they could not have reverenced Him more, for they had a cross and censers, and
they sang with joyous voices: Ecce ego mitto Angelum meum vobis qui praeparabit viam ante me. The
chamberlains who went before him threw much money among the people, and the
mayor of the city carried a splendid sword behind him, and all the burghers and
noble Romans, and a great number of noble ladies and damsels, knelt down before
the King and welcomed him, as did also the common folk, of whom there was so
vast a multitude that it was a wonder to see; and all kept holiday on that day
and on the two following ones as though it had been Easter Day or
Christmas". "The King and Queen rode under two canopies to the
minster of the Prince of the Apostles, St. Peter; there the King alighted at the
foot of the steps, and some of the cardinals went down to meet him, and led him
up to where the Holy Father sat on his throne, surrounded by his clergy and
officers. Then the King kissed his foot and offered him gold, whereupon the
Pope stood up and gave the King his hand, who kissed it, and at the third time
the Pope embraced the King and gave him the kiss of peace on one cheek; then
the King knelt down before him and the Pope bent over him for a space, and
after that he made the King sit down by his side".
On the following
day Nicholas fixed the 19th March for Frederick's coronation, that being the
anniversary of his own coronation. The intervening time was spent by Frederick
in visiting the objects of interest in the city, and in frequent interviews
with the Pope. In these the King's Austrian difficulties, in which he desired
the support of Nicholas, were discussed, and also the affair of the crown of
Lombardy, which he wished to receive from the hands of the Holy Father, his
relations with Sforza in Milan being such as to make it impossible to accept it
from him. The Milanese ambassadors did their utmost to dissuade the Pope from
granting the iron crown, but in vain; they had to content themselves with a
protest.
This coronation
and the celebration of the royal marriage were arranged to take place together.
On the 16th of March, after hearing a solemn Mass, the royal pair kneeling
before the high altar in St. Peter's, received their costly wedding rings from
the hands of the Pope, and the nuptial benediction from his lips. Then, after a
second Mass, Frederick knelt again at the feet of Nicholas, and was crowned
King of Lombardy with the iron crown which he had brought to Rome for the
purpose.
On the following
Sunday {Laetare, March 19tht) the imperial coronation took place, with
the insignia brought from Nuremberg. The Pope was seated on his throne in front
of the high altar in St. Peter's, on his right the college of cardinals, on his
left the bishops and prelates. Outside the sanctuary two tribunes were erected
for the King of the Romans and his consort. First of all Frederick had to take
the oath which Louis the Pious was supposed to have sworn, and was then
admitted into the college of the Canons of St. Peter's and clad in the imperial
robes. Then, before the altar of St. Maurice, first the King and then the Queen
were anointed on the shoulder and right arm with the holy oil. From thence they
returned to their tribunes to hear the solemn coronation Mass. "Then they
began to sing the Mass", says Enenkel, "and
after the gloria, the Pope read the collects, first that for the day, and then
the collect for the Emperor, who sat close by on his chair clad in the sacred
robes of the Emperor Charles, a thing which had not for many hundred years
happened to any Emperor, and which was accounted a very great honour and
singular grace of God. After the gospel the Emperor and Empress, were led by
the Pope before St. Peter's altar, there the Emperor knelt down and the Pope
read for some while over him, and put the holy crown of the Emperor Charles
upon his head; and he said all to him in Latin. Then he put the holy sword of
Charles, bare, into his hand, and thus made the Emperor a knight of St. Peter;
he girded on the sword, drew it and waved it, and put it back into its scabbard.
"After that
the Pope put the holy sceptre into his right hand, and the royal orb into his
left hand, all with goodly collects.
“When all this
was ended, he kissed the Pope's foot and seated himself again in his chair;
then his brother, Duke Albert, and other princes, lords, knights, and men, also
those of the imperial cities, knelt before him and wished him joy and all
happiness.
"After this
the noble King Ladislas and the Duke of Teschen led
forward the fair young Queen; she was richly attired, her head was bare and her
hair very lovely to behold, falling in waving tresses over her neck behind;
thus she was brought before St. Peter's altar stnd anointed, and many collects were said over her. Then the costly crown which had
been specially prepared for her was put upon her head, and she was led back to
her chair".
When all the
ceremonies were done, the Emperor and Empress received Holy Communion from the
hands of the Pope. At the conclusion of the service the Empress returned to her
palace, while the Emperor remained to perform the duty of holding the Pope's
stirrup and leading his horse from the church door. This done, he mounted his
own, and both rode together to the Church of Sta. Maria Traspontina,
where, after giving him the Golden Rose, the Pope took leave of the Emperor.
Then Frederick rode to the bridge of St. Angelo, where he bestowed the honour
of knighthood on his brother Albert, and more than two hundred nobles, many of
whom, however, were not soldiers, and had never drawn a sword. When these ceremonies,
which occupied about two hours, were concluded, the Emperor rode to the
Lateran, where the solemnities of the day were closed by the great coronation
banquet.
On the following
day several of the Ambassadors presented congratulatory addresses, in
high-sounding words, which but little corresponded with the truth, for in the
political world the Imperial coronation passed almost unnoticed, though to
Frederick personally it was the most brilliant moment in his life.
The
newly-crowned Emperor remained in Rome until the 24th March, on which day he
started for Naples to visit his relative King Alfonso. During this interval the
two heads of Christendom again met frequently. These interviews resulted in a
series of bulls in Frederick's favour; he received numerous indulgences and
privileges, and a bull of excommunication was launched against the Austrian
rebels.
The journey of
the Imperial pair to Naples was like a triumphal procession. In all the places
through which Frederick was to pass, the pageant-loving Alfonso had given
orders for the most magnificent receptions, and provided with lavish
prodigality for every want. Naples itself was like a fairy city, drowned in a
giddy whirl of theatrical performances, tournaments, sports, dances, and
festivities of all descriptions.
From these
festive scenes the Emperor was suddenly torn by the news of the attempted
flight of his ward Ladislas, whom he had left behind at Rome. In consequence he
started at once for that city and arrived there on April 22nd; the same evening
he had a long interview with the Pope. In an open consistory he again thanked
the Holy Father and the cardinals for the honourable reception they had given
him. It was in this assembly that Aeneas Sylvius made that fiery speech against
the Turks, in which those remarkable words about the council, which have
already been quoted, occur. Then Frederick set out on his homeward journey, now
become urgent owing to the state of things in Austria, where a resort to arms
to contest his wardship of Ladislas was imminent. "Yesterday mornnig", says one of the Sienese envoys on April
27th, the Emperor left the Eternal City. Both he and his suite were loud in
their expressions of satisfaction at the noble reception given them by the
Pope. Nicholas V, who through his representatives Cardinals Calandrini and Carvajal conducted his guest as far as the frontier, was no less pleased
that the coronation had passed off peacefully and without disorder.
The Emperor did
not venture to return through Milan, rightly judging that Francesco Sforza was
not to be trusted; and in fact the Duke of Milan, already allied with France,
had also come to an understanding with Frederick's enemies in Hungary and
Vienna. He, therefore, chose the route by Florence and Ferrara, in which latter
place, with great pomp, he bestowed on Borso d'Este the title of Duke of Modena and Reggio. This was the
only imperial act of any importance that Frederick performed during this
expedition to Rome. The negotiations begun in Ferrara, for the restoration of
peace in Italy, never got beyond the first preliminaries; the ambassadors of
Aragon held aloof, and the Emperor was too much taken up with the troubles in
Germany to pursue them any farther. From May 21st to June 1st Frederick
remained at Venice, where, as before, a series of entertainments were offered
to him. But all this pageantry could not conceal the political insignificance
of the empire. When the Emperor attempted to speak to the Doge of Venice about
the pacification of Italy, the Doge replied that the Venetians had just
declared war against Sforza with good hopes of success; consequently, under
present circumstances the honour of the republic forbade any such negotiations.
"We are sensible” said the Doge "of the respect due to the most exalted
of earthly dignities, and that the Emperor should not be put off with words;
therefore, we have at once announced our decision, which is irrevocable".
Thus Frederick had not long to wait for an opportunity of testing the value of
his new dignity. Before he left he again visited the shops, (but in disguise,
that he might not be called upon to pay imperial prices), and made more
purchases.
Under the
circumstances we cannot be surprised at the severe judgment passed upon
Frederick's expedition to Rome by the usually indulgent Archbishop, St. Antoninus of Florence. "Nothing appeared in him of the
majesty of an Emperor, neither liberality nor understanding, for he almost
always spoke by the mouth of another. But everyone could see how greedy he was,
how he loved gifts and sought for them. At last he went home, leaving behind
him a sorry impression of his rapacity". In fact Frederick had traversed
the Italian peninsula not as Emperor and lord, but merely as a tolerated guest,
under the safe conduct of the Princes and cities. Of outward show there had
been enough and to spare, and his reception everywhere had been respectful, but
all this thinly veiled the mistrust with which he was regarded by more than one
of the Italian States. Without any increase of power the newly-crowned Emperor
returned to his hereditary dominions, where the insurrection broke out
immediately. In vain did Nicholas threaten the insurgents with the severest
penalties of the Church; they answered by an appeal to a future Council. They
compelled the helpless Emperor, whose Empire did nothing for him, to release
King Ladislas. But the details of these occurrences belong to the history of
the Empire.
Frederick III
was the first Emperor of the illustrious house of Hapsburg who was consecrated
and crowned in Rome. He was also the last King and Emperor to whom this honour
was vouchsafed.
CHAPTER V NICHOLAS
V AS PATRON OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ART AND LITERATURE.— ALBERTI. — FRA ANGELICO
DA FIESOLE. — FOUNDING OF THE VATICAN LIBRARY
For the history
of the world, the true significance of the reign of Pope Nicholas V is not to
be found in the political and ecclesiastical events that we have hitherto been
recording. Full of confidence in the vitality and force of the Christian idea,
this highly cultured Pontiff ventured to place himself at the head of the
Renaissance both in art and in literature; and it is in this that the real
importance of his Pontificate consists. In thus lending the resources and
authority of the Holy See for the promotion of learning and art, he inaugurated
a new era both in the history of the Papacy and in that of culture.
In the learned
and literary world the elevation of the poor professor of Sarzana was greeted
with exultation. All who had ever come in contact with the new Pope were aware
of his ardent love for learning and for the ideal in all its forms. "He
would wish", he once said, "to spend all he possessed on books and
buildings". Francesco Barbaro, like Nicholas, a
votary of the Christian Renaissance, in his graceful congratulatory letter,
quoting Plato, counts the world happy, since now the wise are becoming its
rulers, or its rulers are becoming wise. All eyes turned hopefully towards
Nicholas, expecting the dawn of a new era, and these hopes were not
disappointed. Hitherto he had had nothing but his health and his time to offer
to the cause of learning; now it soon became evident that the Pope was resolved
to devote all his means and his influence to its service.
Nicholas's plan
was to make Rome, the centre of the Church, a focus of literature and art, a
city of splendid monuments, possessing the finest library in the world, and in
so doing to secure in the Eternal City an abiding home for the Papacy.
It is of
essential importance that the Pope's motives in this undertaking should be
rightly appreciated. He has himself declared them in the Latin speech which, on
his death-bed, he addressed to the assembled Cardinals. This speech, preserved
by his biographer Manetti, is the expression of his
last wishes, and explains the guiding principle of all his actions and the end
at which he aimed.
"Only the
learned", says the Pope, "who have studied the origin and development
of the authority of the Roman Church, can really understand its greatness.
Thus, to create solid and stable convictions in the minds of the uncultured
masses, there must be something that appeals to the eye; a popular faith,
sustained only on doctrines, will never be anything but feeble and vacillating.
But if the authority of the Holy See were visibly displayed in majestic
buildings, imperishable memorials and witnesses seemingly planted by the hand
of God Himself, belief would grow and strengthen like a tradition from one
generation to another, and all the world would accept and revere it. Noble
edifices combining taste and beauty with imposing proportions would immensely
conduce to the exaltation of the chair of St. Peter". The learned Pope
fully realized what an important influence the visible presence and past
memories of the Capitol had exercised on the history of the Roman people.
The
fortifications erected in Rome and in the Papal States were intended, the Pope
explains, to serve as defences against both external and internal enemies. If
his predecessors had protected themselves in a similar manner, against the
Romans more especially, they would have been spared much tribulation.
"If", said Nicholas, "We had been able to accomplish all that We
wished, our successors would find themselves more respected by all Christian
nations, and would be able to dwell in Rome with greater security both from
external and internal foes. Thus it is not out of ostentation, or ambition, or
a vain-glorious desire of immortalizing Our name, that We have conceived and
commenced all these great works, but for the exaltation of the power of the
Holy See throughout Christendom, and in order that future Popes should no
longer be in danger of being driven away, taken prisoners, besieged, and
otherwise oppressed."
It has been
asserted that love of fame was the ruling motive which guided Nicholas in all
his actions, and that this is the true explanation of the splendour of his
court, his buildings, his libraries, his liberality towards learned men and
artists. It is evident from these words, spoken on the brink of eternity, that
this assertion is false. A man, to whose detestation of all untruthfulness and
hypocrisy both friends and foes alike bear witness would not have lied thus
upon his death-bed. No doubt Nicholas may not have been wholly insensible at
all times to the seductions of fame, but a selfish desire for his own glory was
never with him the first motive. This has been admitted even by some who
heartily detest the Papacy. "All that Nicholas undertook", writes
one, "was directed towards the exaltation of the Holy See; the one object
of his ambition was to increase its dignity and authority by the visible
splendour of its monuments, and the intellectual influence it would exert, by
making it the centre of the learning of the world".
The great
architectural undertakings which the Pope thus justified partly on practical
and partly on ideal grounds consisted of new buildings and of restorations. In
the latter he only continued the works begun by his two immediate predecessors,
to repair the neglect which had wrought such havoc in the city during the
absence of the Popes at Avignon, and the disastrous period of the schism. But
in the former he struck out wholly new paths.
Manetti, enumerating all the
Pope's undertakings with the minuteness of a loving biographer, zealous for the
honour of his hero, classes them under three heads, according as they were
intended for defence, for sanitation or embellishment, and finally for piety.
"The Pope had five things at heart, all great and important works, to
rebuild the city walls and restore the aqueducts and bridges; to repair the
forty churches of the stations; to rebuild the Vatican Borgo, the Papal Palace,
and the Church of St. Peter's". It has been justly remarked that the three
last named projects are closely connected together and differ essentially from
the two first. They are, in fact, the off-spring of the new era, conceived in
the genuine spirit of the Renaissance, while the others do not depart from the
traditional lines of the medieval Popes.
The restorations
of Nicholas are very extensive and embraced an enormous number of buildings,
both religious and secular. His first care was for the forty churches in which,
during Lent, the stations were held. The little church of San. Teodoro, at the
foot of the Palatine hill, was twice in the hands of his workmen. The
interesting church of San. Stefano Rotondo, which had
been seen by Flavio Biondo, in 1446, roofless, with its mosaics in ruins, and its
marble slabs cracked and peeling from the walls, underwent a thorough
renovation. By order of the Pope restorations of various kinds were executed in
the churches of the Holy Apostles, San. Celso, Sta. Prassede,
Sta. Maria in Trastevere, Sant. Eusebio, Sta. Maria Rotonda (the Pantheon). At the same time those already
commenced in the great Basilicas were continued, and new works begun. The
restoration in the Churches of Sta. Maria Maggiore, San. Paolo, and San.
Lorenzo fuori le mura were
especially extensive and important. On the Capitol Nicholas rebuilt the palace
of the Senators, and erected a new and beautiful edifice for the conservators.
The papal palaces, adjoining the churches of Sta. Maria Maggiore and the Holy
Apostles, were also restored.
One of this
Pope's greatest merits was the attention he bestowed on the water supply of the
city. Nothing perhaps shows more plainly the state of decay in which Nicholas
found it, than the fact that the majority of its inhabitants were dependent for
water on the Tiber and the various wells and cisterns; the only aqueduct which,
though out of repair, still remained serviceable was that of the Acqua Vergine. Nicholas restored
this, and thus made habitable that part of the city which was more distant from
the river. An ornamental fountain, to which the name of Trevi was given, was erected at the mouth of this aqueduct in 1453; it was probably
designed by the famous Alberti.
Rome also owed
to Nicholas much clearing away of ruins and masses of rubbish, which in many
places had made the streets impassable, and he began to pave them and make them
more regular. But his plans for improving and embellishing the city went much
further than this. By his command Alberti had prepared designs for pavilions
and colonnades, which were to be erected for protection from the sun on the
bridge of St. Angelo and other exposed places in Rome. The reopening of the
abandoned parts of the city also occupied his attention. Very soon after his
election, on May 23rd, 1447, in order to check the growing desertion of the
extensive district called de' Monti, he issued an edict granting special
privileges to all who should build houses in that region. This enactment, which
was confirmed a year later, was, however, not more successful in producing the
desired effect than the earlier efforts of the magistrates, or those of Sixtus
V, in later times. The district "de'Monti"
is to this day, in proportion to its size, the most thinly peopled part of
Rome.
With a just
appreciation of the needs of the times, the indefatigable Pope also turned his
attention to the improvement and protection of the approaches to the city. The
wooden central arch of the Milvian Bridge (Ponte Molle)
was replaced by a stone one; and at its entrance, on the right bank of the river,
a strong tower was begun, which was finished by Calixtus III, whose arms, the
ox of the Borgia, it bears. The other bridges in the neighbourhood of Rome,
such as Ponte Nomentano, Ponte Salaro,
Ponte Lucano, were repaired and fortified. The bed of
the Anio was cleared and made navigable, so that it
could be utilized for the transport of the large stones from the Travertine
quarries.
In 1451 the
Pope's apprehensions on the occasion of the visit of Frederick III hastened the
restoration of the city walls, which in many places were in ruins. Along the
whole boundary of the city proper, from the Flaminian gate by the river as far
as the Ostian gate, we still trace the handiwork of
Nicholas, whose name appears on the mural tablets more frequently than that of
any other Pope.
But all this
shrinks into utter insignificance when compared with his colossal designs for
the rebuilding of the Leonine city, the Vatican, and the Church of St. Peter's.
No part of Rome
had suffered more than the Leonine city, which had always formed a separate
town in itself. Eugenius IV had opened a road through the ruins and rubbish to
the bridge, and had endeavoured to attract inhabitants to it by remitting all
taxes within its precincts for a period of twenty-five years. Nicholas proposed,
in close connection with the plans for the new Vatican Palace and Church of St.
Peter's, to rebuild it altogether in the style of the Renaissance, and thus
create a monumental residence for the Holy See.
Manetti's minute description of
this vast project transports the imagination of the reader to Eastern lands,
where such vast palaces and temples are reared for the habitations of gods and
kings.
The tomb of St.
Peter, actually situated at the one extremity, was to be the ideal centre of
this grandiose plan. The opposite extremity was to be formed by a large square
in front of the Castle and Bridge of St. Angelo. From this square three
straight and broad avenues were to start, and terminate in another vast open
space at the foot of the Vatican hill; the central avenue was to lead to the
Basilica, the one on the right to the Vatican Palace, that on the left to the
buildings facing it. These streets were to be flanked with spacious colonnades
to serve as a protection against sun and rain, and the lower stories of the
houses were to be shops, the whole street being divided into sections, each
section assigned to a separate craft or trade. The upper stories were to serve
as dwelling-houses for the members of the Papal Court; architectural effect and salubrity were to be equally considered in their
construction.
The principal
square, into which these three streets were to run, and of which the right side
was to be formed by the entrance to the Papal palace, and the left by the
houses of the clergy, was to measure five hundred and fifty feet in length and
two hundred and seventy-five in breadth. In its centre there was to be a group
of colossal figures representing the four Evangelists, which was to support the
obelisk of Nero; and this again was to be surmounted by a bronze statue of the
Saviour, holding a golden cross in His right hand. "At the end of this
square", continues Manetti, "where the
ground begins to rise, broad steps ascend to a high platform, with handsome
belfry, adorned with splendid marbles, on the right hand and on the left.
Between and behind these is a double portico having five portals, of which the
three central ones correspond with the principal avenue coming from the bridge
of St. Angelo, and the two side ones with the two other streets. This
quasi-triumphal arch leads into a court surrounded with pillars and having a
fountain in the centre, and finally through this into the church itself".
All that the
progress of art and science had achieved, in the way of beauty and
magnificence, was to be displayed in the new St. Peter's. The plan of the
church was that of a Basilica with nave and double aisles, divided by pillars,
and having a row of chapels along each of the outermost aisles. Its length was
to be 640 feet, the breadth of the nave 320, the height of the dome inside 220;
this was to be richly decorated, and the upper part of the wall was to be
pierced with large circular windows, freely admitting the light. The high altar
was to be placed at the intersection of the nave and transepts, and the Papal
throne and the stalls for the Cardinals and the Court within the apse. The roof
was to be of lead, the pavement of coloured marbles, and behind the church was
to be a Campo Santo, where the Popes and prelates should be interred, "in
order that a temple, so glorious and beautiful that it seemed rather a Divine
than a human creation, should not be polluted by the presence of the
dead". An immense pile of buildings at the side was destined for the
accommodation of the clergy.
The Papal city, which,
by its natural site, was detached from the rest of Rome, was to be fortified in
such a manner, says Manetti, that no living thing but
a bird could get into it. The new Vatican was to be a citadel, but at the same
time to contain all the elegance and splendour of a palace of the Renaissance.
A magnificent triumphal arch was to adorn the entrance. The ground floor, with
spacious halls, corridors, and pavilions, surrounding a garden traversed by
cool rivulets and filled with fruit trees and flowers of all sorts, was to be
the summer habitation. The first floor was to be furnished with all that was
required to make winter agreeable; while the airy upper story was to serve as a
spring aqd autumn residence. The Papal palace was
also to include quarters for the College of Cardinals, accommodation for all
the various offices and requirements of the Papal Court, a sumptuous hall for
the coronations of the Popes and the reception of Emperors, Princes, and
Ambassadors, suitable apartments for the Conclave, and for keeping the
treasures of the Church, several chapels, and a magnificent library.
Some modern
writers have looked upon this project as chimerical; it would, they say, have
required the lifetime of twenty Popes and the treasures of a Rameses to carry
it into execution. The contemporaries of Nicholas judged otherwise, and justly,
for the Pope, at the time of his election, was only forty-nine; and with all
the resources that he could have accumulated during his peaceful Pontificate,
what might he not have accomplished if, instead of only lasting eight years, it
had continued for fifteen or twenty! What he actually achieved during the short
period granted him is amazing. Almost all the absolutely necessary restorations
and an immense number of new buildings had already been completed when death
overtook him, just at the moment when he would have been free to concentrate
all his powers on the creation of the Papal city. At fifty-seven, life was not
too far advanced to make the building of a new palace, or a church, even on a
magnificent scale, or the rebuilding of a quarter of a city impossible tasks
for a man who had talent, materials, and money at his disposal in lavish
profusion.
A modern writer
of considerable acumen in regard to all that relates to the history of art has
taken great pains to ascertain to whom the intellectual proprietorship of this
vast architectural scheme, thus minutely described by Manetti,
should be assigned. After a careful comparison between Manetti's description and the doctrines laid down in Alberti's work on architecture, he
has come to the conclusion that the whole plan, not only in its general
conception, but also in all its details, can be ascribed to no other mind.
Matteo Palmieri,
in his brief chronicles of the year 1452, says: "The Pope, wishing to
build a more beautiful church in honour of St. Peter, had laid the foundations,
and already carried the walls, (in the apse of the choir only), to a height of
52 feet; but this great work, in no wise inferior to that of olden times, was
first interrupted by the advice of Leon Battista, and finally stopped
altogether by the untimely death of the Pope. Leon Battista Alberti, a man of a
most sagacious spirit, and well versed in all the arts and sciences, laid
before the Pope his learned works on architecture".
The above-named
writer drew from these words an extremely probable conclusion. Nicholas had at
first no intention of pulling down the venerable Cathedral of St. Peter's. The
works mentioned in his account books, such as the restoration of the portico,
the repaving of the floor, renewing the mosaics, doors, and roof, and filling
the windows with stained glass, manifest, on the contrary, that his object was
to repair and secure the ancient sanctuary and preserve it as long as possible.
It was only the choir that he purposed actually to rebuild. Then the great
Alberti, the humanistic architect, appeared before the humanistic Pope, and
presented to Nicholas his ten books on architecture, the compendium of all his
science and all his aspirations. The impression produced was instantaneous,
profound, convincing. A comparison between Palmieri's statement, the testimony
of the earlier account bpoks, and Manetti's description places the matter beyond doubt. Clearly the perusal of this book,
further supported by the eloquence of its gifted author, was the turning point
with Nicholas in his building plans. The earlier conservative designs were
discarded by Leon Battista's advice and the new colossal scheme adopted.
The unsafe
condition of the old Basilica, of which we shall speak presently, may have had
an important influence on this decision. But before a single step had been
taken towards the rebuilding of St. Peter's, all was stopped by the premature
death of the Pope.t Later on, the project was resumed by Julius II, immediately
upon his accession to the Papal throne, but on different designs.
To many the
thought of pulling down this venerable temple, which had witnessed the rise and
growth of the Papacy, and the first grasp of Christianity on the ancient world,
was painful. In later times, also, the same sentiments have provoked some
severe judgments on Nicholas for his action in this matter. But in the opinion
of one who has carefully gone into its whole history, the rebuilding of St.
Peter's had become an absolute necessity. "It was", he affirms,
"only a question of sooner or later. Before fifty years were out this most
interesting building must either have fallen of itself or else have been pulled
down. From an architectural point of view the plan of the ancient Christian
basilica is perhaps the most daring that exists. Its three upper walls, pierced
with windows, rest on slender columns unsustained by
buttresses or supports of any kind, and when once they have in any notable
degree fallen out of the perpendicular, the case of the building is hopeless,
it must be pulled down. This can easily be understood by anyone, and needs no
special knowledge of the rules of architecture. Two unexceptional witnesses
testify that this was the case with the old St. Peter's. Leon Battista Alberti
states that the southern wall leant outwards to the extent of three braccia (4 ft 9 in.), and he adds, "I am convinced
that very soon some slight shock or movement will cause it to fall. The rafters
of the roof had dragged the north wall inwards to a corresponding degree".
The testimony of the archivist, Jacopo Grimaldi, is perhaps still more telling,
because unintentional. He says that the paintings on the south side are
practically invisible, from the dust which gathers upon them on account of its
slant, while those on the north wall can be seen; he estimates the deflection
at five palms (3ft. 1’1/2 in).
If, however, we
may acquit Nicholas of having needlessly laid hands on the venerable basilica
of Constantine, we cannot hold him guiltless in regard to the other ancient
buildings from which he ruthlessly purloined the materials for his own. In
doing so he only followed in the footsteps of his contemporaries and
predecessors. Nevertheless it seems strange that a Pope, who so highly
appreciated the literature of the ancients, should have shown so little regard
for their other creations. The account books of his reign are full of notices
of payments for the transport of blocks of marble and travertine from the great
Circus, the Aventine, Sta. Maria Nuova, the Forum, and, most of all, the
Coliseum. More than two thousand five hundred cart loads were carried away from
this amphitheatre in one year alone. Similar recklessness was, unfortunately,
displayed in the destruction of a precious memorial of Christian antiquity, the
mortuary chapel of the Anician family, built against
the apse of St. Peter. Had not the humanist Maffeo Vegio, as he says, by accident, found his way into the
abandoned and forgotten “Templum Probi”,
popularly called the house of St. Peter, before it was demolished, we should
have known nothing of the interior of this most interesting mortuary chapel, or
of the epitaphs of Anicius Probus and Faltonia Proba. In justice,
however, it must be said that on other occasions Nicholas showed great
reverence for the relics of the old basilica, and was really careful to
preserve the work of his predecessors. Thus he replaced the tomb of Innocent
VII, and had the slabs of porphyry, which formed the ancient pavement, kept
together and laid by. When the workmen employed in building the choir of St
Peter's found some Christian graves, he was so delighted that he presented them
with ten ducats apiece. He caused a chalice to be made out of the gold
ornaments found in these tombs.
Notable
alterations were made by Nicholas in the Vatican Palace. The account books show
that these were commenced in the first year of his reign, and a special
"architect of the Palace" appointed. The Pope began by causing one
set of rooms to be restored and decorated, and then proceeded to the execution
of the plan described by Manetti. Thus, by his
command, the new library, the hall for the equerries, the Belvidere, and the
new chapel of St. Laurence were successively built. According to Panvinius Nicholas also built a new chapel dedicated to his
own patron Saint. Walls and towers rose rapidly around the restored papal
citadel; one of the latter is still in existence. The building, which was being
thus transformed, dated from the time of Nicholas III. If we ascend the great
staircase of Pius IX, says one who knows Rome thoroughly, and thus enter the
court of Damasus, the old building will be on our
left, the greater part of its front concealed by the loggie of Bramante, and
its longer side touching the great court of Julius II. In its present state the
ground-floor dates from Alexander VI, the first-floor belongs to Nicholas V.
The famous "stanze", whose walls were
covered a little later with Raphael's paintings, together with those adjoining
them and the so-called chapel of St. Laurence, remain, for the most part,
architecturally unaltered, but, with the exception of the chapel, have been
entirely repainted. The chapel of the Blessed Sacrament, on the other hand,
built by Eugenius IV, and decorated by Nicholas V, was destroyed in the course
of the alterations made by Paul III. The proportions of these "stanze" are singularly noble and harmonious, while the
expanse of unbroken surface which their walls present and the semi-circular
spaces above them corresponding with the intersecting arches of the ceilings
make them peculiarly adapted for the reception of large compositions.
In his choice of
artists and architects Nicholas fully maintained the cosmopolitan traditions of
the Papal Court. Martin V had bought the little portable altar, now in Berlin,
painted by Roger van der Weyden; Eugenius IV. had sat for his portrait to Jean
Fouquet; Nicholas, whose ambition it was to make Rome the capital of the world,
drew artists of all sorts thither from every part of Italy, and from Germany,
the Netherlands, France, and Spain. The exuberant artistic life of Florence,
and Nicholas's former relations with that city easily account for the
preference accorded in general to Florentine masters. Alberti has been already
mentioned. Associated with him we find the celebrated Bernardo Gamberelli, surnamed Rossellino.
Before them another Florentine, Antonio di Francesco, had already entered the
service of Nicholas. From the year 1447, his name appears in the account books
as architect of the Palace, and he retained this post until the death of the
Pope. His salary was liberal, ten gold florins a month; Rossellino received fifteen; Fioravante, also an architect, only
from six to seven ducats. The fact that this Fioravante degli Alberti, a Bolognese, who, for his versatility,
was nicknamed Aristotle, was employed by the Pope, has only been discovered
quite recently. It was he who, in 1452, transported four gigantic monolith
pillars from an old edifice behind the Pantheon, and placed them in the choir
of St. Peter's. And there is no doubt that he was the person selected to put
into execution the Pope's design of placing the obelisk on the four colossal
figures of the Evangelists.
The architects
appointed by the Pope had a number of clerks of the works under them, whose
business it was to test the materials supplied, and measure the work done,
under contract. Amongst those employed in this subordinate capacity, we find
the names of artists of considerable merit. For the execution of the works
three different systems were employed. Under one, the architects and workmen
were paid fixed salaries monthly or daily, and had all materials found for
them. Under a second, the work was paid by the piece. Finally, under the third,
the whole building was put into the hands of a contractor, who provided both
labour and material, and must consequently have been a man of considerable
means. The most notable of these was a Lombard from Varese, Beltramo di Martino, to whom was entrusted the choir of St. Peter's, a portion of the
new city walls, and the fortress of Orvieto. In some years the reimbursements
received by him from the Pope on account of these works amounted to from
twenty-five to thirty thousand ducats. "It is easy to see", says a modern
writer, "what a population of workmen all these new buildings and their
accompaniments must have drawn into Rome, and how rapidly an artisan class of
citizens must have sprung up in the midst of the medieval herdsmen".
The capacity
displayed by Nicholas in harmonizing the various branches of art, and assigning
to each its proportionate place, was even more admirable than his largeness of
conception and refinement of taste. With true insight, he made architecture the
queen to whom all the rest were subordinate. If sculpture seems less favoured
by this art-loving Pope, the cause is to be found in the circumstances which
interrupted his work and left it unfinished; in the completed designs an ample
part was assigned to it. Nicholas did much to promote and encourage the art of
marquetry (Intarsia). The chapel of the Madonna della Febbre and his own study were richly ornamented with
inlaid woods. Finally, painting was extensively employed in the decoration both
of St. Peter's and the Vatican, and, amongst the many painters of whose
services Nicholas availed himself, the foremost place must undoubtedly be given
to the unique genius of Fra Giovanni Angelico da Fiesole (1387-1455).
This
"charming master of inspired simplicity" brought religious painting
to a height of perfection that it had never hitherto attained, possibly to the
greatest which it is capable of attaining. "In his work the medieval ideal
in response to the new life infused into it by the bracing air of the
Renaissance, bursts forth into gorgeous blossoms; through him we see exactly
how the kingdom of heaven, the angels, the saints, and the blessed were
represented in the devout thoughts of his time, and thus his paintings are of
the highest value as documents in the history of religion".
"If",
says the biographer of Fra Bartolommeo della Porta,
41 Giotto, at times, in his force and depth resembles the prophets of the Old
Testament or the Psalmist pouring forth his soul-stirring lays, or the face of
Moses resplendent with the reflection of the Deity, Fra Angelico is the image
of the Disciple of love. He is the painter of eternal love, as Giotto and Orcagna are the painters of the faith. Forhim,
as for St. Francis of Assisi, the whole universe is a hymn, and in all things
he sees the reflection of the uncreated love of their Divine Maker. The world
lies bathed in those golden beams which diffuse light and warmth throughout all
creation. Like St. Francis he dwells in a region so far removed from all the
discords of this world that with him some rays of light reflected from the sun
of spirits fall even on the bad. Through all the heavenly circles his gentle
spirit yearns upwards to the throne of infinite pity, from thence he looks down
upon the world; he is the herald, the prophet, the witness of the Divine mercy".
Thus the pictures of the lowly Dominician impress us
almost like a vision.
No one more
truly appreciated Fra Angelico than Nicholas V. The relations between the Pope
and the devout artist, who never took up his pencil without prayer, soon
ripened into friendship their acquaintance had probably begun in Florence.
Those wonderful paintings in the cloister of St. Mark's, which to this day are
the delight of all lovers of true art, belong to the time when Nicholas was a
student in that city. The frescoes begun by Fra Angelico in the Vatican for
Eugenius IV, and, alas! destroyed under Paul III, were its most precious
ornament at the time that Nicholas ascended the Papal throne. While still
occupied with these he had other work also to do for the Pope. The account
books of 1449 make mention of a study built for Nicholas in the Vatican,
decorated with Intarsia work and gilt friezes and cornices, and in one
it is positively stated that some paintings were executed in this chamber by
Fra Giovanni da Firenze (Fiesole) and his pupils. We gather further from these
accounts that Fra Giovanni di Roma who was a painter on glass, furnished two
windows for this room, one representing the Blessed Virgin and the other Sts. Stephen and Lawrence. But to this day we find paintings
by Fra Angelico of the lives of these saints, in good preservation, on the
walls of the chapel of St. Laurence. Hence the inference almost amounts to a
certainty tnat this celebrated chapel and the study
mentioned in these books are identical, the latter having afterwards been
converted into a private oratory for the Pope. The three walls of this chamber
are covered with a double row of paintings, depicting the principal scenes in
the lives of St. Stephen and St. Laurence. Fra Angelico thus gives visible
expression to the popular custom of uniting the names of these two heroes of
the Christian faith in a common invocation, which had prevailed ever since the
time when their venerated remains had been deposited together in the same tomb,
in the old basilica of San Lorenzo fuori le mura.
The charm of
these pictures is indescribable and unfailing, however often they may be
visited. Though past sixty when he painted them, as in Orvieto, Fra Angelico's
freshness of conception and mastery of art show no tracesof failure or decay. The ordination of St. Stephen, the distribution of alms, and,
above all, the picture of St. Stephen preaching, are three paintings which are
as perfect in their way as the best examples of the greatest masters. It would
be difficult to imagine a group more admirable in its composition, or more
graceful in contour, than that of the seated and listening women in the last
named picture. In that of the stoning there is, no doubt, some weakness in the
delineation of the fanatical rage of the executioners, but this defect was
inseparable from those qualities which are the painter's chief glory. His
imagination, habitually dwelling in a region of love and devout ecstasy, was
out of its element in such scenes of hatred and fury.
But, beyond
this, the paintings in this room possess also a special interest, because they
show, besides an increase in perfection and power in his own line, how far Fra
Angelico was from turning away from the progress of his time, as one might,
perhaps, have expected him to do. In many of these compositions the influence
of the antique is unmistakably evident. The beautiful basilica in which St.
Laurence stands while distributing alms shows how quickly Fra Angelico had
grasped the principles of the new architecture: its proportions are as chaste
as they are noble. The picture of the same saint before the judgment seat of
the Emperor Decius is an archaeological restoration. Above the hall the Roman
eagle is represented, surrounded by a laurel wreath. The only reminiscence of
the Gothic is seen in the Baldacchini over the
Fathers of the Church, everywhere else the classical style is supreme. But like
his patron and friend, Pope Nicholas, Angelico joined to his appreciation of
the antique an intense love for Christianity. Hence in all these compositions
the influence of the classical ideal is never permitted to interfere with the
Christian spirit which pervades them. He has thus proved that even in the
domain of art, the Renaissance, rightly understood, was capable of leading to a
higher perfection.
Many other
eminent painters were also attracted to Rome by Nicholas. From Perugia came
Benedetto Buonfiglio, one of the most distinguished of Perugino's predecessors,
from Foligno Bartolommeo da Foligno,
the master of Niccolò Alunno. The latter, according
to the account books, painted a hall in the Vatican between 1451-1453. His
salary was high, seven ducats a month, with board. In 1454 we find Andrea del
Castagno in the Pope's service, and, according to Vasari, Piero della Francesca and Bramantino were also employed by Nicholas. Their names do not appear in the books, but
there is a long list of others from Rome and its neighbourhood Of these the
most eminent, judging by his pay (eight ducats a month), would seem to have
been Simone da Roma; he was at work in the Vatican during almost the whole
reign of Nicholas. A German and a Spaniard also appear amongst those who
received commissions from the Pope.
Nicholas
followed his own judgment in the distribution of their tasks, as freely as he
did in the choice of the artists he employed. Thus, from Piero della Francesca he only required historical pictures; not a
single altar-piece or religious painting of any kind was entrusted to him. His
pictures contained portraits of Charles VII, the Prince of Salerno, and
Cardinal Bessarion, and were placed in the hall in which we now see the miracle
of Bolsena and the liberation of St. Peter. Nicholas
V seems to have had a special partiality for stained glass. Not only St.
Peter's, but also all the chief rooms in the Vatican, had painted windows. The
humanist Maffeo Vegio is
loud in his praises of their beauty and brilliancy.
The minor arts
were equally encouraged by this Pope. “For many hundred years”, says a
contemporary writer, “so much silken apparel and so many jewels and precious
stones had not been seen in Rome”. To this large-minded Pope also belongs the
honour of having founded the first manufacture of tapestry in Rome. He brought
Renaud de Maincourt from Paris, and gave him four
assistants and a fixed salary to weave tapestry. The goldsmiths and gold
embroiderers were unable to fulfil all the commissions of the Pope; the
resources of Rome and Florence were soon exhausted, and the workshops of Siena,
Venice, and Paris were called into requisition. The account books are full of
orders for tiaras, copes, and other vestments, censers, reliquaries, crosses,
chalices, and ornamental vessels of all sorts for the services of the Church.
In this, according to Manetti and Platina, the
purpose of the Pope was the same as in his architectural undertakings. The pomp
and magnificence displayed in the celebration of the Holy mysteries were
equally a means for exalting the dignity and authority of the Holy See. Even in
all the lesser details of its accessories and ornaments, the Church was to
reflect the splendour of the Heavenly Jerusalem.
But the
indefatigable energy of Nicholas, which astonisned his contemporaries, did not exhaust itself in his plans for Rome; the whole
Papal States were to be equally efficiently protected and embellished. With a
just sense of the dignity of the head of Christendom, this great Pope was
determined that the heritage of St. Peter should no longer be at the mercy of
the insults and attacks of turbulent vassals. What had been done for Rome by
the restoration of the walls and the forts of St. Angelo was to be done also
for all the principal places throughout the Papal States. Everywhere ruined
walls were rebuilt, churches restored, public squares enlarged and beautified.
Assisi, Civita Vecchia, Gualdo, Narni, Civita Castellana, Castelhuovo, Vicarello were
fortified and embellished by Nicholas. In Spoleto the magnificent castle of
Cardinal Albornoz was completed; in Orvieto the Episcopal Palace, the aqueduct,
and the walls were restored. At Viterbo the Pope built baths for the sick on a
princely scale. In Fabriano, which was famous for its
pure air, and where the Pope resided for some time on account of the plague
which had broken out in Rome, he rebuilt the Franciscan Church and enlarged the
principal square, which he surrounded with a wall.
In fact, since
the Carolingians, no Pope had built so much as Nicholas; the fresh eager
enthusiasm of the early Renaissance is personified in him. “The works of
Nicholas” said Aeneas Sylvius, "are as far superior to anything that the
modern world has produced as are the castle of St. Angelo and the buildings of
the old empire; they now lie scattered around us like gigantic ruins, but had
they been completed the new Rome would have had nothing to fear from a
comparison with the old". From his earliest youth Nicholas had loved and
delighted in letters; it was but natural now that he had the powers that, much
as he did for art, he should do still more for them. Under him Rome had seemed
transformed into a huge building yard, an immense workshop and studio; it
became also a vast literary laboratory. For, if architecture was the Pope's
hobby, writing and translating and collecting books and translations in
libraries was his passion. The humanists had good reason to rejoice at the
election of Tommaso Parentucelli. Insignificant and poor as he seemed, and
comparatively young for a Pope, for he was only forty-nine, they knew well,
most of them from personal acquaintance, how fully bent he was upon throwing the
whole weight of his influence and position as head of the Church into the
scales on the side of learning.
Poggio, the
humanist, who was in a certain sense the Nestor of the republic of letters at
that time, in his letter of congratulation to the new Pope, gives eloquent
expression to the hopes and wishes of his party. "I beseech you, Holy
Father", he says, "not to forget your old friends, or suffer your
care for them to grow slack because you have many other cares. Take measures to
increase the number of those who resemble yourself, so that the liberal arts,
which in these bad days seem almost extinct, may revive and flourish again.
From you alone we hope for what has so long been neglected by others. To you is
entrusted the glorious mission of restoring philosophical studies to their
former honour and pre-eminence, and resuscitating the nobler arts”. These words
found a glad response in the breast of Nicholas; they reflected his own
sentiments.
"All the
scholars in the world," says Vespasiano da Bisticci, "came to Rome in the time of Pope Nicholas,
partly of their own accord, and partly at his request, because he desired to
have them there". This, of course, is not literally true, but in point of
fact it was the Pope's wish to bind the revival of classical literature as
closely as possible to Rome and the Holy See, and with this object, from the
very beginning of his reign, he did his utmost to attract all the learned and
literary men of his day to his Court. Rising talent was sought out and
encouraged, and there was hardly a single literary man of any note who did not
receive some recompense or favour from Nicholas. When Maecenas heard that there
were still some distinguished writers in Rome, who lived in retirement, and for
whom he had as yet done nothing, he exclaimed, "If they are worth anything
why do they not come to me, who am willing to encourage and reward even
mediocrity". Had it been possible Nicholas would have been glad to have
transported the whole of Florence to the banks of the Tiber.
The golden age
of the humanists now began. Not satisfied with those whose services had already
been secured by his predecessors, Nicholas summoned a host of new literary
celebrities to the Eternal City. In a very short time he had instituted there a
veritable court of the muses, composed of all the most distinguished scholars
of the day: Poggio, Valla, Manetti, Alberti, Aurispa, Tortello, Decembrio, and many others.
The first thing
that strikes the eye in glancing over the names of this brilliant company is
that, like the artists employed by Nicholas, they are almost all strangers.
There is but one Roman amongst them. The Eternal City seems strangely barren.
Here and there we hear of a scholarly cardinal or prelate, but there is no
mention of any improvement in the education of the people, or of intellectual
tastes, with one or two exceptions, amongst the nobility, no literary activity
in the convents, and no foundations except for theological studies.t To
appreciate the full merit of this Pope we must take this state of things into
consideration. It was he who, single-handed, turned the capital of Christendom
into that brilliant centre of art and learning that it became. How much less
difficult was the task of Cosmo de Medici, who was not obliged to begin creating
an intellectual atmosphere.
Amidst the crowd
of learned and literary men who quickly gathered around the Pope the
Florentines naturally were admitted to the closest personal intimacy. Here
again the noble figure of Alberti is the first to catch the eye; but
unfortunately just as in Florence his personality is obscured by the throng of
humanists who surround him, so also in Rome no details concerning him are
extant. Giannozzo Manetti was the most intimate of all with Nicholas. As a Christian humanist he was
truly "the man after the Pope's own heart", and in 1451 Nicholas made
him Apostolic Secretary, and gave him a magnificent establishment when in 1453
he came to reside in Rome. Manetti's admirable
biography of his generous patron attests his gratitude.
The bookseller Vespasiano da Bisticci was on
very intimate terms with Nicholas. His excellent memoirs and sketches of
character, which are invaluable to the student of the culture of his time,
proclaim him to have been a man of warm heart, vigorous intellect, and sound
judgment. The good Giovanni Tortello, the first
librarian of the Vatican, also enjoyed a large share of the Pope's confidence.
Unfortunately in
his selection of the men who seemed to him to be necessary for his work
Nicholas displayed a readiness to overlook much that was seriously
objectionable, which can hardly be justified. Personally the Pope was
undoubtedly loyal to the Christian Renaissance, but he was so far carried away
by the enthusiasm of the time as to be almost wholly blind to the dangers that
were to be apprehended from the opposite side. Thus he accepted from the
unprincipled Poggio the dedication of a pamphlet in which Eugenius IV was
almost openly accused of hypocrisy, and did not scruple at raising his salary
so as to enable him to live entirely by his muse. When the cynical sceptic was
called away to Florence to become a member of the Chancery there, Nicholas took
leave of him with regret, and allowed him to retain a nominal secretaryship as
a token of regard. Filelfo, a perfect master in the art of scurrilous
vituperation, was invited to Rome, and loaded with favours when he got there.
The early death of the semi-pagan Marsuppini alone
prevented his being brought thither, and provided for in such a manner as to
enable him to give his undivided attention to the translation of Homer.
Nothing affords
a more striking proof of the indulgence with which the humanistic movement had
come to be regarded in Rome than the attitude assumed by the dissolute satirist
Valla, to whom nothing was sacred. In common with the majority of the adherents
of the false Renaissance, Valla was far from being a fanatical sceptic. Even
under Eugenius IV he had written an obsequious letter retracting his former
publications, and praying for an appointment. But the Pope very justly refused
to be propitiated. Even Nicholas did not go so far as formally to invite to
Rome and heap preferments on the author of the book "De voluptate", the declared enemy of the temporal power,
the bitter satirist of the religious orders. But he tolerated the presence of
such a man at the Papal Court, and even made him apostolic notary. The task of
translating Thucydides into Latin was entrusted to Valla.
Most of the
learned men thus summoned to Rome were employed in translating Greek authors
into Latin. This was the Pope's especial delight. He read these translations
himself with the greatest interest, liberally rewarded the translators, and
honoured them with autograph letters. Vespasiano da Bisticci gives a long list of translations which owed their
existence to this noble passion of Nicholas V. By this means Herodotus,
Thucydides, Zenophon, Polybius, Diodorus,
Appian, Philo, Theophrastus, and Ptolemy became now for the first time
accessible to students. The delights of drinking in the wisdom of Greece from
the source itself was inexpressible, “Greece”, writes Filefo,
referring to these translators and to Nicholas's collection of manuscripts,
“has not perished, but has migrated to Italy, the land that in former days was
called the greater Greece”.
At a time when
the knowledge of Greeks was confined to such a small number of students, these
translations were most valuable; they were regarded as a branch of literature
to which the most distinguished men did not disdain to devote their energies.
Nothing can be more unjust than to speak slightingly of this band of eager workers, whose activity was perpetually kept at fever
heat by the admonitions and rewards of the Pope, and call them mere operatives
in a great translation-factory. The most eminent humanists of the day — Poggio,
Guarino, Decembrio, Filelfo, Valla — laboured at
these tasks. Their productions were much admired by their contemporaries, and
royally rewarded by Nicholas, who was determined, as far as it was possible, to
render all the treasures of Greek literature accessible to Latin scholars.
Valla received for his translation of Thucydides, of which the original
manuscript is preserved in the Vatican Library, five hundred gold scudi. When Perotti presented his translation of Polybius to the Pope,
Nicholas at once handed him five hundred newly-minted Papal ducats, saying that
he deserved more, and should receive an ampler reward later. He gave a thousand
scudi for the ten first books of Strabo, and offered ten thousand gold pieces
for a translation of Homer's poems.
When we compare
these sums with the payments made to artists, we begin to realize how enormous
they were. At that period the latter were held in far less esteem than scholars
and professors. The same Pope who thought nothing of making a present of five
hundred gold florins to two humanists, and bestowed on Giannozzo Manetti an official salary of six hundred ducats,
paid Fra Angelico at the rate of fifteen ducats a month only, and gave Gozzoli
but seven.
Learned and literary
men were the Pope's real favourites; to them he gave with both hands. Vespasiano da Bisticci says that
he always carried a leathern purse containing some hundreds of florins, and
drew from it liberally on all occasions. And his manner of giving made the gift
itself more efficacious. When he insisted on the acceptance of a present he
would represent it as a token of regard rather than a recompense of merit He
would overcome the scruples of modest worth by saying with playful ostentation,
"Don't refuse; you may not find another Nicholas". Often he actually
forced his rewards on learned men. When Filelfo, conscious of some
disrespectful expressions, was afraid to ask for an audience, Nicholas sent for
him, and in the most gracious manner reproached him for having been so long in
Rome without coming to see him. When he took leave he presented him with five
hundred ducats, saying, "This, Messer Filelfo, is for the expenses of your
journey". Vespasiano da Bisticci,
who relates the story, exclaims enthusiastically, "This is liberality
indeed".
In fact Nicholas
was the most generous man of a lavish age. "In the eight years of his
Pontificate", says the historian of the Eternal City in the Middle Ages,
"he filled Rome with books and parchments; he was another Ptolemy
Philadelphus. This noble Pope might have been well represented with a
cornucopia in his hand, showering gold on scholars and artists. Few men have
had ampler experience of the happiness of giving towards worthy ends."
If Nicholas had
been permitted to accomplish his design of familiarizing the Italians with the
literature of Greece, the consequences would have been in the highest degree
beneficial. The main evil of the early Renaissance was its ignorance of Greek.
The efforts of Nicholas to correct this deserves the highest praise. Had the
culture of the humanists been derived directly from Greek sources rather than
from the degenerate Roman civilization, the whole later development of the
movement would have been different. This, as we know, he was unable to achieve.
But much was done by the band of scholars whom Nicholas assembled in Rome to
promote and diffuse the knowledge of the Greek language and literature, the
value and importance of which in the history of culture he so fully
appreciated. The writings of Aristotle, disencumbered of the veil thrown over
them by the Arabs and schoolmen, were now for the first time really understood.
Greek history, hitherto only learnt from compendiums, was now studied in the
original writings of its own historians. Herodotus, Thucydides, and many others
were by the middle of the century either wholly or partially translated. These
translations often left much to be desired both in regard to accuracy and
latinity; nevertheless, such as they were, they formed a notable accession to
the materials of learning, and were an enormous intellectual gain, especially
in stimulating the desire for further conquests.
But, while fully
admitting the value of the literary activity thus fostered by the Pope's
liberality, we must not shut our eyes to the dark side. We have already pointed
out how little discrimination he exercised in the selection of the scholars
whom he invited. It stood to reason that scandals must arise. Like Florence in Niccoli's time, only to a still greater degree, Rome became
an arena for literary squabbles and scandalous stories of authors. Bitter feuds
were carried on for years together between the Latins and the Greeks, and
between individuals, even within both parties.
The air was
thick with the interchange of accusations and abusive epithets. Sometimes they
even came to blows. One day in the Papal Chancellery George of Trebizond, in a
fit of jealousy, hit the old Poggio two sounding boxes on the ear; then the two
flew at each other, and were, with the greatest difficulty, separated by their
colleagues. The Pope himself was obliged to interfere, and George, whose
translations had proved worthless, was banished.
Equally
disgraceful was the quarrel between Poggio and Valla. "They abused each
other", says the historian of the humanists, "like a couple of
brawling urchins in the streets. Poggio raged and stormed, as in former days he
was wont to do against Filelfo, accusing his adversary of treachery, larceny,
forgery, heresy, drunkenness, and immorality, and seasoning his accusations
with scurrilous anecdotes and coarse epithets. Valla, whose motto was : ‘It may
be a shame to fight, but to give in is a greater shame’, twitted Poggio with
his ignorance of Latin and of the rules of composition, quoting faulty passages,
and altogether affecting to look upon him as already in his dotage".
But even apart
from these scandals the position of the humanists in the Court under this Pope
cannot but appear anomalous. Nicholas embraced every opportunity for
introducing learned men, who, as Platina remarked, occupied themselves much
more with the library than with the Church, seriously compromising that
ecclesiastical character which the Court of the head of the Church should
display. Under Eugenius, the highest dignities had always been bestowed on
monks, now none but scholars or translators were promoted. Not only lucrative,
but also responsible posts were conferred upon them; thus Giuseppe Brippi, a poet, was placed at the head of the Papal
Archives; and another humanist, Decembrio, was made
chief of the abbreviators. This state of things made it possible for Filelfo,
whose ambition after the death of his wife turned towards ecclesiastical
preferments, to solicit the necessary dispensation from the Pope in hexameters!
In this production, to which the Pope of course returned no answer, Filelfo
declares that from early youth he had cherished a desire of devoting himself
wholly to Christ, "the ruler of Olympus. It does not appear that this
epithet shocked anyone; it was regarded as a Latin turn of expression or a
harmless piece of pedantry.
The fact was
that the votaries of the false Renaissance had not as yet openly broken with
the Church. Doubtless many propositions are to be found in their writings which
it would be hard to reconcile with Christian dogma, or the Christian point of
view. But these were only obiter dicta, which those who uttered them
would have been ready to explain away or retract as lightly as they were
spoken. This alone can account for the fact that truly pious men like Nicholas
— he was the first Pope who carried the Blessed Sacrament in procession on foot
— could regard these things as mere harmless play.
It is evident
that the encouragement given to the humanists was a cause of scandal to many at
this time, as was also the money spent by Nicolas on his buildings, which it
was thought would have been better employed against the Turks. These foes of
the Renaissance were very numerous in the religious houses. At the same time a
treatise composed by Timoteo Maffei, the pious prior
of the regular Canons of Fiesole, is interesting as evidence of the revolution
in opinion which the labours of this large-minded Pope was gradually effecting.
He denies the assertion that "saintly ignorance" is becoming in those
who are called to the religious life, and that humanistic studies are the ruin
of piety. On the contrary, he shows by many quotations, from both sacred and
profane authors, how much profit monks, as well as other men, may derive from
classical knowledge, and ends with a reference to the Pope, to whom he says
nothing could be more agreeable than the pursuit of such studiesf
Ecclesiastical
literature was no less dear to Nicholas, who had taken a lively interest in it
long before he could have anticipated that he should ever be called to occupy
the Papal chair.
Here, then, were
many deficiencies, and some of them very important. The open-handed Nicholas
followed the example of Alexander when he set forth to conquer Asia. He
promised a reward of five thousand ducats to any one who would bring him the Gospel of St. Matthew in the original tongue. This, of
all possible discoveries, was the one he prized most. Gianozzo Manetti was commanded to translate the
"Preparation for the Gospel" of Eusebius, together with various
writings by Sts. Gregory Nazianzen, Cyril, Basil, and
Gregory of Nyssa. The translation of the eighty homilies of St. John Chrysostom
on the Gospel of St. Matthew appeared to the Pope especially desirable. This
work was entrusted to George of Trebizond, who here again proved utterly
incapable. Original works in this department were also desired by the Pope. Gianozzo Manetti was commissioned
to write an apologetic treatise against jews and
heathens, and also to translate the whole Bible from the original Greek and
Hebrew texts. Unfortunately Nicholas died before this great work was completed,
so that he was unable to reward it as he would have wished, and the plan was
never carried out in the manner originally intended. The famous Dominican
Cardinal Torquemada dedicated to him two treatises on canon law. Antonio degl' Agli, a Florentine,
afterwards Bishop of Fiesole and Volterra, wrote a book for him on the lives
and acts of the Saints. In the preface to this interesting work the author
declares that, having laid it aside, he resumed it at the express desire of the
Pope. He also explains its object. Unfortunately, he says, most of the legends
of the Saints were full of fables, and written in an uncouth or affected style,
which disgusted the humanists and made them despise Christianity. This he hopes
to remedy. He has drawn from the best patristic sources, and especially the old
Latin Manuscripts, which are more trustworthy than the Greek, as the Popes had
early taken pains to verify the acts of the martyrs. The learned Ambrogio Traversari had already
perceived the need of such a work, and begun to supply it. For himself he has
done his best to make his book worthy of a place in the Papal library; to
others he leaves the task of praising Rome's worldly heroes; his only ambition
is to celebrate the heroes of the Church. To conclude, the labours of Nicholas
V as a collector of books were indefatigable and most productive. In his
penurious days he had spent every farthing he could spare on the purchase of
manuscripts, and even been drawn into debt by his literary voracity; it is easy
to imagine with what energy he would proceed now that he found himself in
possession of such ample resources.
A noble library
was to form the crowning glory of the new Vatican. The idea of this library, by
means of which Nicholas hoped to make Rome the centre of learning for all the
ages to come, was perhaps the grandest thought of this great Pope, who was as
admirable for his genuine piety and virtue as for his many-sided culture. He wished
to place all the glorious monuments of Greek and Roman intellect under the
immediate protection of the Holy See, and thus to hand them down intact to
future generations.
The zeal
displayed by the Pope in the prosecution of this undertaking was unexampled.
Not satisfied with collecting and copying the manuscripts that were to be found
in Italy, he had agents at work in almost every country in Europe. He sent
emissaries to Greece, to England, and to the grand master of the Teutonic Order
in Prussia, to discover and buy, or copy all the hidden literary treasures that
could be found in these countries. The influence which the Holy See possessed
throughout all Christendom was exerted by Nicholas far more for the
organization of books than of power. No expense was to be spared; the more
spoil his agents brought back the better pleased was the Pope. A rumour reached
him of the existence of an exceptionally pertect copy
of Livy in Denmark or Norway, and he at once sent the well-known Alberto Enoche of Ascoli, with ample commendatory letters, to
procure it. Apparently he was not successful in bringing back anything of much
value. The private agents who were in his service in Greece and Turkey, both
before and after the fall of Constantinople, were more fortunate in procuring
new manuscripts, which were immediately copied and corrected in Rome. Armies of
transcribers, many of whom were Germans and Frenchmen, were perpetually
employed in this work. When in 1450 the plague in Rome obliged the Pope to
retire to Fabriano, where at that time the best paper
was made, he took his translators and copyists with him for fear of losing
them.
Nicholas V,
himself a calligraphist, required all manuscripts to be well executed. The few
specimens still existing in the Vatican library are bound with exquisite taste,
even when not illuminated. The material was almost always parchment, and the
covers mostly of crimson velvet with silver clasps.
By means of
these strenuous exertions the Pope succeeded, in a comparatively very short space
of time, in bringing together a really unique collection of books. "Had
Nicholas V been able to carry out his intentions", says Vespasiano da Bisticci, "the
library founded by him at St. Peter's for the whole Court would have been a
really marvellous creation". It was to have been a public institution,
accessible to the whole learned world. Besides this Nicholas collected a
private library of his own, the inventory of which is still to be found in the
Secret Archives of the Vatican. This mostly consists of profane authors.
The care of this
library was confided by the Pope to Giovanni Tortello,
a quiet and unassuming scholar, absorbed in his books, and as well versed in
theology as in classics. Few librarians have had so free a hand in regard to
expense; his purchases were always sure of a welcome, and the more books he
procured the better pleased was his patron. It has been estimated that Nicholas
spent more than forty thousand scudi altogether on books.
The numbers of
the volumes in the Papal libraries have been very variously stated, and the
discrepancies between writers who had the means of knowing accurately are
extraordinary. Tortello, who had drawn up a
catalogue, now unfortunately lost, reckoned, according to Vespasiano da Bisticci, nine thousand volumes. Pope Pius II
estimated it at three thousand; the Archbishop St. Antoninus of Florence, only one thousand. On the other hand, Manetti and Vespasiano da Bisticci,
in the biographies of Nicholas V, distinctly state that at the time of the
Pope's death the catalogue numbered five thousand volumes. This estimate is
considered by the latest writers to come nearest the truth.
Possibly,
however, even this may still be too high. In the Vatican Library there is an
inventory of the Latin manuscripts belonging to Nicholas V, which was taken
before the coronation of his successor, Calixtus III, on the 16th of April,
1455. That this inventory is complete seems evident, since it includes the
private library of the deceased Pope. The Greek manuscripts are not mentioned,
but the Latin are numbered up to eight hundred and seven. This was a large
collection for those days; the most famous libraries were hardly more numerous.
That of Niccoli, the largest and best in Florence,
only contained eight hundred volumes; that of Visconti, in his castle at Pavia,
nine hundred and eighty-eight. Cardinal Bessarion, in spite of his influential
connections and lavish expenditure, could only succeed in bringing six hundred
manuscripts together. Duke Frederick of Urbino's library, which consisted of
seven hundred and seventy-two manuscripts, was said to have cost him thirty
thousand ducats. The other Italian collections are all under three hundred
volumes. Even the Medici in 1456 possessed only one hundred and fifty-eight,
and in 1494 about a thousand manuscripts.
According to
this inventory the Latin manuscripts in the library of Nicholas V were
contained in eight large chests. The contents of the first chest were mostly
biblical, those of the second consisted of the works of the Fathers of the
Church. The Pope's favourite author, St. Augustine, had sixty volumes, St.
Jerome seventeen, St. Gregory six, St. Ambrose fifteen. The third chest
contained forty-nine volumes by St. Thomas Aquinas, and six by Albert the
Great. In the fourth were twelve books by Alexander of Hales, the same number
by St. Bonaventure, twenty-seven by Duns Scotus. In the fifth, amidst many
theological and historical works, we first encounter some of the heathen
classics, amongst these the gorgeously-bound translation of Thucidydes,
presented to the Pope by Valla . The interesting treatise by Timoteo Maffei mentioned above is also to be found here.
The eighty-five volumes which filled the sixth chest consisted almost
exclusively of works of theology and canon law. The seventh was devoted mostly
to heathen classical authors, Florus, Livy, Cicero,
Juvenal, Quintilian, Virgil, Claudian, Statius, Catullus, Terence, Ptolemy,
Seneca, Apulian, Vegetius, Frontinus, Macrobius, Sallust, Valerius Maximus, Zenophon, Silvius Italicus,
Pliny, Horace, Ovid, Homer in a translation, Justin, Columella, Euclid, etc.
The eighth chest contained a miscellaneous collection of profane and
ecclesiastical writers.
No other Pope
was ever such a genuine book-lover as the former professor of Sarzana. "It
was his greatest joy", says the historian of humanism, "to walk about
his library arranging the books and glancing through their pages, admiring the
handsome bindings, and taking pleasure in contemplating his own arms stamped on
those that had been dedicated to him, and dwelling in thought on the gratitude
that future generations of scholars would entertain towards their benefactor.
Thus he is to be seen depicted, in one of the halls of the Vatican Library,
employed in settling his books, and this, indeed, is his place by right, for he
it was who founded that noble collection of manuscripts which still maintains
its European reputation.
As the founder
of the Vatican Library the influence of Nicholas V is still felt in our own
times in the learned world to a greater extent perhaps than that of any other
Pope; this library alone is enough to immortalize his name.
CHAPTER
VI.
THE
CONSPIRACY OF STEFANO PORCARO, 1453.
STRANGELY
contrasting with the glories of the Jubilee and of the Imperial coronations
comes the conspiracy which at the very outset of the year 1453, threatened, not
only the temporal sovereignty, but even the life of Nicholas V, and there is
something peculiarly tragic in the fact that the would-be murderer of the very
Pope who had striven to render Rome the centre of the literary and artistic
Renaissance was one of the false humanists. The great patron of humanism was
himself to taste the fruit produced by that one-sided study of classical
literature which, while it annihilated the Christian idea, filled men's minds
with notions of freedom and with a longing for the restoration of the political
conditions of ancient times.
It would be a
mistake to look on the attempted revolt of Stefano Porcaro as an isolated event.
In Italy the period of the Renaissance was the classic age of conspiracies and
tyrannicide. Such assassinations were for the most part closely connected with
the one-sided Renaissance which revived the heathen ideal. Even Boccaccio
openly asks: "Shall I call a tyrant King, or Prince, and keep faith with
him as my Lord? No! for he is our common enemy. To destroy him is a holy and
necessary work in which all weapons, the dagger, conspiracies, treachery, are
lawful. There is no more acceptable sacrifice than the blood of a tyrant”. In
Boccaccio's mouth, indeed, this is little more than a rhetorical phrase, like
the pathetic declamations against tyrants often borrowed, especially in the
early days of the Renaissance, from Latin authors, and used without any serious
conviction or any practical effect. But as time went on, Brutus and Cassius,
the heroes of the humanists, found living imitators in many places.
Pietro Paolo Boscoli, whose conspiracy against Giuliano, Giovanni and Giuliode' Medici (15 13) was unsuccessful, had been a most
enthusiastic admirer of Brutus, and had protested that he would copy him if he
could find a Cassius, whereupon Agostino Capponi associated himself with him in
this character. We are told that the unfortunate Pietro, the night before his
execution, exclaimed: "Take Brutus from my mind, that I may die as a
Christian". In the case of Olgiati, Larapugnani and Visconti, the murderers of Galeazzo Sforza
of Milan, we have remarkable evidence of the manner in which the ancient
estimate of the murder of tyrants had been adopted. These misguided students of
the past held fast to an ideal Republic, and defended the opinion that it was
no crime, but rather a noble deed to remove a tyrant, and by his death to
restore freedom to an oppressed people. Cola de Montani,
a humanist teacher of rhetoric, incited them to commit the crime. About ten
days before it was accomplished, the three conspirators solemnly bound
themselves by oath in the Convent of St. Ambrose: "then", says Olgiati, "in a remote chamber, before a picture of St.
Ambrose, I raised my eyes and besought his aid for ourselves and all his
people". So terribly was the moral sense of these men perverted that they
believed the holy patron of their city and also St. Stephen, in whose church the
crime was perpetrated, would favour the deed of blood. After the Duke of Milan
had been slain (1476), Visconti repented, but Olgiati,
even in the midst of torture, maintained that they had offered a sacrifice
well-pleasing to G'od. A little before his death he
composed Latin epigrams, and was pleased when they turned out well. While the
executioner cut his breast open he cried out, "Courage! Girolamo! You will
long be remembered! Death is bitter, but glory is eternal!" We learn from
the annals of Siena that the conspirators had studied Sallust, and Olgiati's own words furnish indirect evidence ot the fact. A close observation of his character shows
that it bore much resemblance to that of Catiline, "that basest of
conspirators, who cared nothing for freedom".
The man, who
sought the life of the noble Pope Nicholas V, had a nature akin to that of
Catiline; he had been trained in the heathen school, and was filled with the
spirit of the false Renaissance.
Stefano Porcaro
belonged to an ancient family, which is mentioned as early as the first half of
the eleventh century and was probably of Tuscan origin. The ancestral mansion,
with its punning crest — a hog in a net — is still to be seen near the Piazza
of Sta. Maria sopra Minerva, in the Vicolo delle Ceste. The day and year of
Stefano's birth are unknown, and it would be difficult to obtain certain
information on the subject. There is no doubt that he devoted himself at an
early age, and with enthusiasm, to classical studies. His intellectual capacity
and humanistic culture won for him, in 1427, the honourable position of captain
of the people in Florence, and the Republic was so pleased with him that, on
the recommendation of Martin V, his appointment was renewed the following year.
His sojourn at Florence exercised an important influence on his mental
development, for he was there admitted into a circle of celebrated humanistic
scholars, and became intimate with Poggio, Manetti, Niccoli, Ciriaco of Ancona, and especially with the Camaldolese monk, Traversari, who
had a high opinion of him, and was apparently quite ignorant of the change
which had come over his spirit. The classical studies of the Roman knight had
filled him with the utmost admiration for the ancient power and glory of the
Roman Republic and the virtues of her citizens, and his head had been turned
with the idea of her former freedom. Florence then produced a deep impression
on his soul, as is witnessed by the eloquent Italian speech which he made as
captain of the people, and which was, like the popular discourses of Bruni and Manetti, so widely circulated that copies of it are to be
found in almost all the libraries of Italy. In this speech he declared that
Florence seemed to him the ideal of perfect civil and political life, and that
the grandeur, the beauty, and the glory of the Florentine Republic dazzled and
bewildered him. The establishment of a similar Republic in Rome became the
dream of his ambition. The temper of his mind is shown in his ostentatiously
changing the family name from Porcari to Porci, giving out that it sprang from an old republican
race, doubtless with the object of suggesting a reminiscence of Cato.
Like most of the
humanists, Porcaro loved travelling; he visited France and Germany, and in 1431
returned to his native city, in company with his brother, Mariano. He must at
this time have carefully concealed his republican leanings, for in 1433 Pope
Eugenius IV appointed him Podesta in the turbulent city of Bologna, where he
manifested considerable ability in restoring order and quiet. Traversari wrote of him, "All men admire him, and
praise his zeal to an incredible degree; the pacification of the factious city
is mainly due to him. Both parties trust him, and rejoice in the calm which has
succeeded the tempest".
It is uncertain
whether Porcaro had any part in the Roman Revolution of 1434; we know him in
that year to have voluntarily undertaken the task of mediation between the
Romans and the Pope, and to have gone to Florence for the purpose (September,
1434). His efforts failed, for Eugenius IV absolutely, and, as events soon
showed, wisely rejected his proposal that the Castle of St. Angelo should be
confided to a Roman. Sick and disheartened, Porcaro turned his back upon
Florence. As yet, however, he made no attempt to form a party, but managed to
keep the Pope in ignorance of his discontent. This is evident from the recently
ascertained fact that Eugenius IV in this very year appointed him Rector and
Podesta of Orvieto. Here, again, he left a very favourable impression; even the
stern Cardinal Vitelleschi highly commended his
government, and the citizens acknowledged his services by a present to the
value of sixty ducats.
The next ten
years of Porcaro’s life are still veiled in obscurity. It seems scarcely
possible that he should have lived in Rome under the severe rule of Vitelleschi and Scarampo; perhaps
during this period he became poor and embarrassed in his circumstances, and
joined himself to companions of doubtful character. His aversion to priestcraft
may naturally have been intensified by the ridicule which the humanists heaped
upon the clergy and monks, and Valla's pamphlet against the temporal power of
the Pope probably had a decided influence on the progress of his opinions, for
during the vacancy of the Holy See after the death of Eugenius IV he reappears
on the scene in a new character.
Such periods
were apt to be a time of trouble in Rome, and Stefano meant to turn the
favourable opportunity to account. He assembled in Araceli a band of men ready
for any enterprise, made an inflammatory speech declaring that it was a shame
that the descendants of ancient Romans had sunk to be the slaves of priests,
and that the time had come to cast off the yoke and recover freedom. The fear
of King Alfonso, who, with his army, was encamped at Tivoli, alone prevented
the outbreak of a revolution.
There can be no
doubt that Porcaro had actually rendered himself guilty of high treason. The
new Pope, however, magnanimously forgave him, and appointed him
governor-general of the sea coast and the Campagna, with Ferentino for his
head-quarters, hoping by this means to win a gifted and dangerous adversary,
and reconcile him with the existing state of things. The hope proved delusive,
for, having returned to Rome, Porcaro renewed his revolutionary agitation, and,
with characteristic audacity, went so far as to say: "When the Emperor
arrives we shall regain our liberty". A tumult which occurred in the
Piazza Navona, on the occasion of the Carnival, gave the ambitious man an
opportunity of inciting the populace openly to resist the Papal authority.
Nicholas V was
now compelled to take action, but he did it in the mildest manner. Porcaro was
sent away from Rome to Germany on pretext of an Embassy, and, as fresh tumults
broke out on his return, he was afterwards honourably exiled to Bologna.
Cardinal Bessarion, the friend of his literary associates, was here appointed
to take charge of him, and Porcaro was required to appear in his presence every
day. The generous Pope granted the exile a yearly pension of three hundred
ducats, and Bessarion added, from his own private resources, a hundred more —
no inconsiderable sum for those days.
Porcaro repaid
these benefits by plotting from Bologna against the Pope. Any determined man
could always find instruments ready to his hand in Rome. The Eternal City
contained a multitude of needy nobles and so-called knights, of partisans of
the Colonna and Orsini in their feuds, of bandits, robbers, and adventurers of
all sorts; and genuine political enthusiasts might also be found in the motley
crowd. The cowardly rabble could be counted on wherever plunder was to be had.
When Porcaro had
completed the necessary preparation for action he eluded the daily supervision
of Cardinal Bessarion by a feigned illness, and then stole away from Bologna in
disguise. Accompanied by but one servant, he rode in hot haste towards Rome,
hardly ever dismounting. In Forli, however, he was unwillingly delayed, as the
custom house officials would not allow him to proceed, though he declared that
he would rather lose his baggage than spend the night in the city. By the aid
of an acquaintance he managed to come to terms with them, and hastened on his
way at nightfall, regardless of all warnings of danger from the bad condition
of the roads. This incident induced him to avoid towns for the future, and in
four days he had accomplished the long journey to Rome which at that period
generally occupied twelve. On the 2nd of January he dismounted at the Porta del Popolo, went to the Church of Sta. Maria del Popolo, and then hid himself, until the first hour of the
night, in a vineyard belonging to the church. The servant gave notice of
Porcaro's safe arrival to his nephew, Niccold Gallo,
a Canon of St. Peter's, who came and took him from his place of concealment,
and they then went together to the family mansion of the conspirator, where
another of his nephews, Battista Sciarra, awaited them. The three then repaired
to the dwelling of Angelo di Maso, Porcaro's
brother-in-law.
Porcaro, his brother-in-law
and his two nephews were the heads of this conspiracy, and from their
connections in the City were able without difficulty to make their
preparations. On pretence of taking military service, Battista Sciarra engaged
mercenaries, while the wealthy Maso collected stores
of weapons, and kept in his house a number of men on whom he could rely; they
were well entertained but knew nothing of the business in hand. One evening,
when all were seated at a splendid banquet in Maso's house, Porcaro appeared amongst them in a rich, gold-embroidered garment,
"like an Emperor". "Welcome, brothers," he said; "I
have determined to free you from servitude, and make you all rich lords",
and he drew forth a purse containing a thousand golden ducats, and distributed
a share to those present. All were greatly astonished, but as yet learned
nothing further of the plot.
It is impossible
now to ascertain the exact number of those won over by the conspirators.
Porcaro afterwards declared that he had hoped to muster more than four hundred
armed men; he counted also on the aid of the greedy populace, for after the
downfall of "Priestcraft" the "Liberators" were to be
allowed to plunder freely. It was expected that the Papal Treasury, the Palaces
of the Cardinals and of the officials of the Court and the vaults of the
Genoese and Florentine merchants, would, when thus brought under contribution,
yield more than seventy thousand gold florins.
The plan of the
conspirators was to cause general confusion by setting the Palace of the
Vatican on fire on the Feast of the Epiphany, to surprise the Pope and the
Cardinals during High Mass, and, if necessary, to put them to death, then to
take possession of the Castle of St Angelo and the Capitol, and to proclaim the
freedom of Rome with Porcaro for tribune.
Porcaro's scheme
was by no means an impracticable one, for in the tranquil city there were
hardly any troops save the scanty guards of the Palace and the police. Piero de Godi, a contemporary, reckons them altogether at
fifty, and the disparity of forces would have been yet more extreme if the
hopes of external aid probably entertained by the insurgent party had been
realized.
Had the
conspirators acted at once, it is not at all unlikely that they would have
succeeded in carrying out their purpose, but the delay occasioned by Porcaro's
extreme fatigue after his hurried journey proved the salvation of the Pope.
The accounts of
the event differ in some particulars. It is certain that Cardinal Bessarion
immediately informed the Pope of Porcaro's suspicious disappearance, and Godi says that some Romans who had been invited to take
part in the treason revealed the plot to Cardinal Capranica and to Niccolò degli Amigdani,
Bishop of Piacenza, who was at the time Papal Vice-Camerlengo. An anonymous
Florentine writer asserts that the Senator Niccolò de Porcinari himself warned Nicholas V of the impending danger. According to others, the
Camerlengo Scarampo was the first to apprise the Pope
of its existence, and went at once to the Papal Palace, which was a scene of
confusion and consternation, to persuade Nicholas V of the necessity of
immediate and decisive measures, inasmuch as every moment was a gain to the
conspirators. A portion of the Palace Guard and of the garrison of St. Angelo,
accompanied by the Vice-Camerlengo, who was also governor of the city,
proceeded without delay to the house of Angelo di Maso,
and encircled it. Most of the besieged made a brave resistance, but, being cut
off from the rest of their adherents, they were compelled to yield to superior
force. Battista Sciarra, however, who, during the conflict, frequently raised
the cry of "People and Freedom!" fought his way out with a few
followers, and got away from Rome. Porcaro, with less courage, had managed to escape
in the confusion, and to hide himself in the house of his brother-in-law,
Giacomo di Lellicecchi. A price being set upon his
head, it was impossible for him to remain here, and his friend Francesco Gabadeo offered to help him in his extremity. They both
went in haste to Cardinal Orsini, in the hope that he would afford them refuge
in his palace, the House of Orsini being apparently at this time at variance
with the Pope. But the Cardinal was by no means disposed to assist the
conspirator. He caused Gabadeo, who had entered his
presence, to be at once arrested and taken to Nicholas. Stefano, who was
waiting downstairs, became suspicious at Gabadeo’s non- appearance, and fled to his other brother-in-law, Angelo di Maso, who lived in the quarter of the Regola.
Meanwhile Gabadeo, in his prison, had betrayed
Porcaro's probable place of shelter. About midnight, between the 5th and 6th of
January, armed men entered Angelo's house; at their approach, Porcaro sprang
from the bed where he was lying in his clothes, and got into a chest, on which
his sister and another woman seated themselves, but the hero's hiding-place was
discovered. As he was being led to the Vatican he kept exclaiming, “People!
will you let your deliverer die?" But the people did not respond.
After offences
so manifest and repeated, Pope Nicholas showed no further mercy. He regretted
the fate of the gifted man, but decided to let justice take its course. Stefano
Porcaro was taken bound to the Castle of St. Angelo, and on the 7th of January
made a tolerably ample confession. He related his flight from Bologna and his
meeting with the conspirators in the house of Angelo di Maso,
as we have described them, and further declared that he had personally summoned
his friends to assemble the night before the Feast of the Epiphany, and had
intended, with them, and the armed men collected by them, to the number, as he
hoped, of four hundred, to pass through the Trastevere to St. Peter's. Here they were to conceal themselves in the small uninhabited
houses near the church, and to divide into four separate bands. As soon as the
Pope's arrival in St. Peter's was announced, three of these bands were to take
possession of the different entrances, while the fourth was to occupy the open
space in front of the church. He had commanded these armed men to put to death
anyone, in the church or out of it, who should offer resistance, and to make
the Pope and the Cardinals prisoners. If they resisted, they also were to be
slain. Porcaro further said that he had entertained no doubt of being able,
after the imprisonment of the Pope, the Cardinals, and other lords, to seize
the castle of St. Angelo, in which case the Roman citizens would have joined
him. He would then have proceeded to make himself master of the strongholds in
the neighbourhood of Rome, to demolish the Castle of St. Angelo, and adopt
whatever other measures might appear necessary.
Porcaro's
statement is corroborated by the evidence of well-informed contemporaries, and
there is no doubt that the sentence of death pronounced by the Senator Giacomo dei Lavagnoli was a just one. He
was hanged on the 9th January on the battlements of St. Angelo. He was dressed
entirely in black, and his bearing was resolutely firm and dignified. His last
words were: "O, my people, your deliverer dies today!" A number of
his associates suffered the same penalty, but they were executed at the
Capitol. A reward of a thousand ducats was offered for the apprehension of
Battista Sciarra, or five hundred for his head.
The question
naturally arises as to what Porcaro intended to do with the Papacy in the event
of a successful issue to his enterprise. The conspirator's confession furnishes
no definite answer, but most writers of the day affirm that he meant to remove
the Holy See from Rome. Had the plot been carried out, Christendom would again
have fallen a prey to the calamities from which she had so recently been
delivered, and the papacy would have been exiled from Italy. An interesting
passage in relation to this subject is to be found in Piero de Godi’s Dialogue. To the objection that, after the
assassination of Nicholas V a new Pope would have been elected, and Rome would
have again been conquered, the partisan of Porcaro replies : “Perhaps an Ultramontane would have been elected Pope, and would have
gone to the other side of the mountains with the Court and left Porcaro in
peace at Rome”. The consternation caused at the Papal Court by the conspiracy
was so great that Alberti and others expressed their desire to quit the unquiet
City. But after all, if the attempted revolution had been accomplished, and the
Papacy again transferred to France, would not the Romans have very soon begun
to pray for its return, as in the Avignon days? In the beginning of the
Pontificate of Eugenius IV, when the revolution had triumphed in Rome, a few
months of a liberty which brought nothing but anarchy had sufficed for the
citizens, and they had besought the Pope to come back. A similar result would
now have ensued, and all the more surely, because many of Porcaro's associates
were men of the worst character. If his contemporaries compared him to
Catiline, we cannot ascribe their words to vindictiveness and party prejudices,
for his blood-thirsty and covetous followers were but too like the companions
of the ancient tyrant.
Porcaro's
conspiracy caused great excitement throughout Italy; it is mentioned by most of
the contemporary chroniclers but not always condemned. The judgment of history
is adverse to its author, but Roman opinion seems to have been greatly divided
on the subject. "When I hear such people talk", writes the gifted
Leon Battista Alberti, referring to those who found fault with the Pope,
"their arguments do not touch me in the least. I see but too clearly how
Italian affairs are going. I know by whom all has been cast into confusion. I
remember the days of Eugenius, I have heard of Pope Boniface and read of the
disasters of many Popes. On the one side I have seen this demagogue surrounded
by grunting swine and on the other side the Majesty of the Holy Father. That
cannot surely have been right which compelled the most pacific of Popes to take
up arms".
There were some
in Rome who looked on Porcaro as a martyr for the ancient freedom of the city. Infessura, the Secretary to the Senate, makes the following
entry in his diary: "Thus died this worthy man, the friend of Roman
liberty and prosperity. He had been exiled from Rome unjustly; his purpose was,
as the event proved, to risk his own life for the deliverance of his country
from slavery".
The attitude of the
humanists in the Court of Nicholas V is a matter of some interest. The
conspiracy was to them a most painful event, for it was not impossible that the
Pope might look on them with suspicion. A connection might be traced between
the ridicule and scorn which Valla, Poggio, and Filelfo had heaped upon the
clergy and monks, and Porcaro's enmity to the temporal power. The danger,
however, was averted by their almost unanimous condemnation of Porcaro's
attempt, and it did not occur to the Pope to hold the study of antiquity
responsible for the immoderate lust of liberty. Yet there can be no doubt that
the conspiracy was the outcome of the republican spirit which that study
fostered, and which now rose against everything that it deemed to be tutelage
or tyranny.
Other writers
living in the Pope's vicinity, but not belonging to the humanistic ranks, also
produced polemical works in both prose and verse against Porcaro. Piero de' Godi, whom we have often mentioned, wrote at Vicenza a
history of the conspiracy, which has but lately become known in its entirety.
It is in the form of a dialogue between a Doctor Bernardinus,
of Siena, and Fabius, a scholar. The latter relates the event, speaking as an
eyewitness, while the doctor, who had arrived in Rome subsequently, makes
reflections on the Providence of God and the excellent government of Nicholas
V, adducing a multitude of passages from Holy Scripture. The little work is in
many ways worthy of notice; it is valuable as an authority, and,
notwithstanding its manifestly Papal and party character, is perfectly
trustworthy. The author vigorously asserts that Rome alone can be the seat of
the Pope, and warmly upholds the temporal power of the Holy See. Considering
that many among the Romans desired its removal from Rome, and that others
shared the views regarding the annihilation of the Pope's temporal power lately
expressed by Lorenzo Valla, it seems possible that Godi's Dialogue was an official production, intended by its popular form to counteract
these widespread errors.
A similar tone
of feeling pervades the long Lamentation of Giuseppe Brippi,
who bitterly reproaches the Romans with their unpardonable ingratitude, and
reminds them of the benefits which the Popes in general, and Nicholas V in
particular, had conferred upon the city. Notwithstanding the bombastic style of
the poet — if, indeed, Brippi is worthy of such a
name, — some of his remarks are extremely just, as, for example, when he points
out to the Romans that the Papal rule has always been much milder than that of
the other municipal governors in Italy. Brippi merely
makes some general observations on the conspiracy, but he gives the Pope some
good advice, recommending him to complete the fortification of his Palace, to
be attended by three hundred armed men when he goes to St. Peter's, and to
allow no other armed men to enter the church; furthermore, to seek to gain the
affection of the Romans, to support the poor, and especially impoverished
nobles, because the love of the citizens is the best defence of a ruler.
Friendly powers
hastened to congratulate the Pope on the failure of the conspiracy; the Sienese
Ambassador was the first to arrive. He had an audience on the 6th of January
and again on the 14th, when he offered the Pope all the forces of the Republic
in case of need, and also mentioned that the city contemplated the erection of
a palace for the Pope. The idea that the Pope would leave his unquiet capital
was evidently general, and Siena wished to make sure of the honour and
advantage of a Papal residence; a similar effort was subsequently made in the
time of Pius II. The Republic of Lucca likewise sent letters to the Pope and
his brother Cardinal Calandrini, expressing the
deepest horror of Porcaro's crime. The Cardinal's answer to the authorities of
Lucca, dated 4th February, 1453, is worthy of note. He declares that there was
no question of plunder or of the freedom of the city, but that the object of
the conspiracy was to drive the Christian religion out of Italy. These words
probably refer to Porcaro's intention of banishing the Pope from the country.
It is extremely
difficult to estimate the proportions attained by Porcaro's conspiracy. On this
occasion, as on others of a similar nature, there was no lack of conflicting
accusations. Suspicions existed that Milan and Florence were implicated, and
the Florentines endeavoured to cast blame on King Alfonso and the Venetians.
Some of the conspirators certainly fled to Venice and Naples, but after the
failure of the plot those powers handed them over to the Pope, and they were
executed. Other accounts speak of members of the Colonna family as taking part
in the affair. It is impossible to arrive at any absolute certainty on the
subject, because much information must naturally have been suppressed. Too much
importance accordingly is not to be attached to the statement of the Sienese
Ambassador, who, in a despatch of the 14th January, 1453, declared, as the
result of his inquiries, that neither the Roman barons nor any foreign powers
were concerned.
The terrible
event exercised a most injurious influence on the excitable and impressionable
nature of the Pope. Immediately after the discovery of the plot, Nicholas V
displayed considerable courage by going to St. Peter's, of course with a strong
escort, and celebrating High Mass on the Feast of the Epiphany. But from the
moment that the phantom of the ancient Republic arose, threatening destruction
to his life, his authority, and all his magnificent undertakings on behalf of
art and learning, his peace of mind was gone. He became melancholy, reserved,
and inaccessible. It is said that he brought a great force of troops to Rome,
and was always henceforth attended by an armed escort when he went out. His
agitation and disquietude were increased by the knowledge that although the
city continued tranquil, there were many Romans who, like Infessura,
admired Porcaro. All the benefits conferred by the Pope, his just and excellent
government, his promotion of Romans to many ecclesiastical posts, the
advantages derived from the presence of the Papal Court, and the freedom and
prosperity enjoyed by Rome above all other cities of Italy, had not sufficed to
banish the old disloyalty. Naturally, suspicion and distrust became more and
more deeply rooted in his soul, casting a gloom over his once cheerful temper
and undermining his health, which had already been shaken by serious illness.
Nicholas V had
hardly recovered from the shock occasioned by Porcaro's conspiracy when another
terrible blow fell upon him in the tidings that Constantinople had been taken
by the Turks.
CHAPTER
VII.
THE
ADVANCE OF THE TURKS AND THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
The dogmatic
differences between the Greek and Latin Churches had been removed by the
Council of Florence, where Eastern and Western theologians had measured their
strength, and the re-establishment of actual communion with Rome seemed to be
the only means of healing the grievous wounds from which the Oriental Church,
like every other severed from the common centre of Christendom, was suffering,
and of imparting new life and vigour to the Byzantine Empire.
But when the
Greeks returned home from Florence they found it very hard to carry into effect
that which had been agreed upon at the Council, and the Union met with violent
opposition. Marcus Eugenicus soon produced his
polemical letters, and Sylvester Syropulus his
"True History of the False Union”, a work which still constitutes the
chief polemical arsenal of the Oriental schismatics. Gennadius and numerous other writers followed in the same line, and as they fostered the
national enmity of the Greeks against the Latins, their works produced more
effect than those of the friends of the Union, many of whom, however, were
distinguished and worthy men. The celebrated Cardinal Bessarion, for example,
laboured indefatigably in the cause to the end of his days, and the Protosyncellus Gregory, Archbishop Andrew of Rhodes, and
Bishop Joseph of Methone are also worthy of
honourable mention.
On this
occasion, however, as it generally happens, the defensive party was at a
disadvantage. The excellent men whom we have mentioned were unable to silence
the calumnies of the schismatics, whose champion, Marcus Eugenicus,
combined great talent and learning with extreme vehemence of character. He did
everything in his power to stir up monks, clergy, and laity against the peace
which had been concluded between Rome and Constantinople. The friends of the
Union were treated with contempt and scorn, and called azymites, traitors,
apostates, and heretics. The opposition of the majority of the clergy and of
the populace to any tokens of fellowship with those who acknowledge the
authority of Rome daily increased, while the Emperor hesitated to express his
will in such decided terms as might have given a firm basis to the Union.
Carried away by the prevailing tone of feeling, many even of those prelates who
had taken part in the negotiations at Florence now repented of their
co-operation, and openly proclaimed their regret that they had allowed themselves
to be persuaded into signing the act of Union.
Antagonism to
the West was so deeply rooted that it was absolutely impossible for the Union
to gain any ground. When Metrophanes, the new
Patriarch of Constantinople, took decided measures against the violent
opponents of ecclesiastical unity, the three patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch,
and Jerusalem issued a strong protest, commanded the clergy appointed by Metrophanes, under pain of excommunication, to resign their
posts, and threatened the Emperor that unless he abandoned the dogmas imposed
at Florence his name should be omitted from their prayers.
In Russia also
the attempt at Union had proved ineffectual. The metropolitan of Kiew, Isidore, on his return to his country as cardinal and
legate for the North had been cast into prison. In 1443 he managed to escape,
and afterwards attained important ecclesiastical offices in Rome. It had been
hoped that the whole of the Russo-Greek Church would by his means have been
brought back to unity, but only the metropolitan province of Kiew, with its suffragan dioceses of Brjansk,
Smolensk, Peremyschl, Turow, Luzk, Wladimir, Polotsk, Chelm and Halitsch, was
reconciled to the Holy See, and Russia proper, with its metropolitan see of
Moscow, continued in schism.
Under these
circumstances the tidings of the terrible defeat of the Christian army at Varna
(10th November, 1444) had a disastrous effect on public feeling at
Constantinople by destroying the hope that the alliance with Rome might bring
about deliverance from the Turks. A few years after the battle Sultan Mahomet,
in a deadly conflict of three days' duration on the plain of the Amsel (Kossowo, 1448), wrested from the noble Hunyadi of Hungary
most of the laurels he had won.
The Turkish
forces were now directed towards the Peloponesus in
the South and Albania in the West, and Hungary also was seriously threatened.
It was natural therefore that these countries should engross the principal
attention of Europe, while the Greeks were comparatively neglected. Moreover the
attitude of the Court during the recent calamities had been one of shameful
inaction, a circumstance which was calculated to increase the indifference of
the West and to confirm the growing impression that Hungaryi rather than the Greek Empire, was the "shield against the Turks".
This view was
shared by Nicholas V, who, from the beginning of his pontificate, had taken a
lively interest in Eastern affairs and endeavoured directly and indirectly to
support the operations against the Turks.
The defeat of Kossowo greatly alarmed the timid Pope, and, by means of
his Legate, he made known to the Hungarians his opinion that, for the future,
they would do well to confine themselves within the limits of their own
kingdom. Hunyadi and his people, however, would not hear of such a course, and
only reiterated their petitions for the co-operation of the Holy See. These
were not in vain, for on occasion of the Jubilee, the Pope issued a Bull, by
which, in view of the impending danger from the Turks, he dispensed all prelates,
barons, knights, and commoners of the kingdom of Hungary, who should take part
in the war against the infidels, from personal appearance in Rome, and in order
that they might not be deprived of the benefit of the plenary indulgence, he,
in the fulness of his apostolic power, decreed that it should be extended to
them on condition that on three consecutive days they should visit the
Cathedral of Wardein and certain other churches in
the kingdom appointed for the purpose, and should there deposit half of the
money that would have been spent in their journey to and from Rome and in a
sojourn of fifteen days in that city. The fulfilment of these conditions was to
be deemed equivalent to fifteen days' visits to St. Peter's, St. Paul's, St.
John Lateran, and Sta. Maria Maggiore in Rome, provided that the persons in
question should not during the year leave Hungary save to make war on the
infidels. Chests, furnished with triple locks, were to be placed in the
churches referred to to receive the offerings, and
extensive faculties, even in regard to reserved cases, were granted to all
priests.
Nicholas V also
rendered important service to the cause by endeavouring to compose the strife
which had broken out between Hunyadi and Gislira, the
captain of the kingdom, and by absolving Hunyadi, on the 12th April, 1450, from
an oath not to pass through Servia, which had been extorted from him by fear
and violence. His glorious victory at Belgrade was thus rendered possible, and
the defeats at Varna and Kossowo were amply avenged.
While the Pope
thus favoured the Hungarians, he also supported the Albanians in their
resistance to the Turkish power, and sought to induce them to make common cause
with adjacent countries; of these, the most important was Bosnia, whose King,
Stephen, had, as we have already related, returned to the Catholic Church in
the time of Eugenius IV. Nicholas V at once took a warm interest in him, and in
June, 1447, ne placed him and the reconciled magnates under the protection of
the Holy See, and appointed Thomas, the Bishop of Lesina,
his Legate. Moreover, he did everything to promote the erection of Catholic
churches in this devastated country, and took vigorous measures against the
widespread sect of the Paterines. Being informed by
the Bishop of Lesina that their errors were,
nevertheless, gaining ground, Nicholas gave him full power to grant an
indulgence and spiritual favours to those who should fight against these
"unbelievers". Furthermore, in June, 1451, he sent a new Nuncio to
Bosnia, with the authority of a Legate, to labour for the pacification of the
country. The action of the Pope was not due solely to considerations of a
spiritual nature, for the Paterines were secretly and
even openly in league with the Turks, and thus, as Rome perceived, constituted
a terrible danger to the country. Even members of the secular and regular
clergy, among the latter some few unworthy Benedictine monks, were implicated
in their treachery, and, counting on the Sultan's favour, endeavoured to lay
hands on the property of the Church. The Pope commanded his Nuncio first to
admonish these offenders in a friendly manner, but afterwards to proceed to
ecclesiastical penalties, and eventually to invoke the assistance of the civil
authorities.
The names of
Hunyadi and Skanderbeg are generally coupled together on the roll of heroes who in the fifteenth century made a valiant
warfare against the ancestral foes of Christendom. We shall speak of Skanderbeg
later on, when we come to deal with the history of Calixtus III, and must only
here observe that Nicholas V gave every support in his power to "this
champion and buckler of Christendom against the Turk"s,
who defeated them in an important engagement in the year 1449.
The action of
the Pope against the Turks was not limited to the cases we have mentioned. He
carefully watched each phase of the struggle for Rhodes, and in various ways
assisted the Knights of St. John in their gallant resistance. In 1451, when the
Island of Cyprus was seriously menaced by the infidel power, he showed the
utmost solicitude for its defence, and addressed an urgent appeal for
assistance, coupled with the grant of an indulgence of three years not only to
the Emperor but to the whole of Christendom; to France, Poland, Sweden,
Denmark, Norway, England, Scotland, Castile and Leon, Aragon, Portugal, and
Navarre, as well as to the different Italian States. At a later period Nicholas
gave half of the offerings received from France to the King of Cyprus to enable
him to rebuild the citadel of Nicosia.
The facts which
we have adduced sufficiently prove with what injustice the Pope has been
charged with neglecting the war against the infidels. The statement that he did
as little as possible for the deliverance of the Greeks is equally false. It is
perfectly true that Nicholas made the fulfilment of the terms of the Union
agreed upon at Florence a condition of his assistance, and this was evidently
his duty as Pope, for it was incumbent on him to resist the encroachments of
the schismatical Greek propaganda.
The prospects of
the Union were most gloomy in the Byzantine Empire. The new Emperor,
Constantine, the last of the Palaeologi, was unable
to withstand the fanaticism of the people, and sent a special ambassador to
Rome in the year 1451 in order to appease the Pope for the non-fulfilment of
the agreements Nicholas replied in a long and incisive brief dated October
11th, 1451.
"The matter
in question", Nicholas V declares, "is the unity of the Church, a
fundamental article of the Christian confession of faith. A united Church is an
impossibility unless there is one visible head to take the place of that
Eternal High Priest whose throne is in heaven, and unless all members obey this
one head. Where two rulers command there can be no united empire. Outside the
Church's unity there is no salvation; he who was not in Noe's ark perished in
the deluge. Schism has always been punished more severely than other crimes.
Core, Dathan and Abiron,
who sought to divide the people of God, were punished more terribly than those
who had defiled themselves by idolatry.
"The Greek
Empire itself is a living witness to this truth. This glorious nation, once so
rich in learned and holy men, has now become the most miserable of all nations;
almost the whole of Greece is given into the hands of the enemies of the cross.
What is the reason of this heavy judgment of God? The once chosen people of God
were sorely chastened by Him for two crimes. They were led into captivity in
Babylon for idolatry; and for their putting to death our Redeemer Jesus Christ
they were wholly given over into the power of the Romans, the city of Jerusalem
was destroyed, and until this very hour the whole nation is scattered in exile
throughout the world. Now we know that since the Greeks received the Catholic
Faith they have never committed either of the above-mentioned crimes, on
account of which the wrath of God might have given them into Turkish bondage.
Some other sin must have provoked the Divine Justice, and this sin is the
schism which was begun under Photius, and has since
lasted for five hundred years. Full of sorrow and with a heavy heart do we make
this complaint, and we would willingly have buried it in everlasting silence,
but if a remedy is to be applied the wound must be laid bare. For almost five
hundred years Satan, the author of all evil, and especially of division, has
seduced the Church of Constantinople into disobedience to the Roman Bishop, the
successor of St. Peter and representative of our Lord Jesus Christ. Innumerable
negotiations have meanwhile been undertaken, a great many Councils have been
held, countless embassies have been sent to and fro,
until at last Emperor John and the Patriarch Joseph of Constantinople,
accompanied by numerous prelates and great men, met Pope Eugenius IV, the
Cardinals of the Roman Church, and a considerable body of Western Prelates at
Florence in order, with the blessing of God, to put an end to the schism and
establish unity.
"These
negotiations were carried on before the eyes of the whole world, and the decree
of Union drawn up in Greek and Latin and signed by all present has been made
known to the whole world. Spain, with its four Christian kingdoms, Castile,
Aragon, Portugal, and Navarre; Great Britain, Ireland, and Scotland, the great
islands lying beyond the continent; Germany, inhabited by numerous nations, and
extending over far countries; the kingdom of the Danes, Norway, and Sweden,
situated towards the extremest north; Poland,
Hungary, and Pannonia; Gaul, which stretches between Spain and Germany from the
western ocean to the Mediterranean, are its witnesses. All these countries
possess copies of the decree of Union by which that ancient schism is at last
removed, according to the testimony of the Greek Emperor, John Palaeologus, of
the Patriarch Joseph, and of all the others who came from Greece to the Council
of Florence, and by their signatures sanctioned the Union.
"And now so
many years have already passed during which the decree of the Union has been
disregarded by the Greeks, and there appears no hope of any readiness to accept
it, the matter is put off from one day to another, and the same excuses are
always brought forward. The Greeks cannot really believe the Pope and the whole
Western Church to have lost their senses so as not to perceive the meaning of
these constant excuses and delays. They understand it perfectly, but bear with
it after the example of the Eternal Chief Pastor, who gave the barren fig tree
two years more to bring forth fruit.
"Be it
known to your Imperial Highness", continues the Pope, "that we also
will wait until this letter of ours has received your consideration, and if
you, with your great men and your people, think better of it, and accept the
decree of the Union, you will find us, the Cardinals and the whole Western
Church always ready for you and well disposed towards you. But should you and
your people refuse this, you compel us to do that which is demanded by your
welfare and our honour". The Pope then lays down as conditions of peace
that the Emperor should recall the Patriarch Gregory and reinstate him in all
his dignities, that the name of the Pope should be inserted in the Diptychs,
and that prayers should be offered for him in all the Greek Churches. Should
any persons be in doubt regarding the decree of the Union the Emperor was to
send them to Rome, where they would be honourably treated and every care taken
to remove their doubts.
The Papal letter
of the 11th October, 1451, is also interesting, inasmuch as it implies that
Rome had recognized the utter fruitlessness of the often repeated public
disputations at Constantinople, where the excited populace not only supported
the speakers opposed to the Union, but from the beginning rendered any
concession to the Latins impossible.
Meanwhile, the
danger which, during more than a generation, had been threatening
Constantinople and the whole of the East, seemed to be averted. Sultan Mahomet,
instead of attacking Cyprus, as had been apprehended, directed his forces
against the ancient enemy of his kingdom, the Mahometan Prince of Karamania.
The Greeks,
seeing their most dangerous adversary thus occupied in Asia, were deluded
enough to adopt a tone of menace towards him, and sent an embassy to his camp
to inform him that unless the pension, paid for Urchan,
the Sultan's nephew, who was being brought up at Constantinople, were doubled,
they would put him forward as claimant to the throne. Mahomet answered this
preposterous demand in a furious speech, hastily made peace with the Prince of Karamania, and satisfied the Janissaries with money, so as
to be able, without annoyance from internal or external foes, to turn his whole
power against Constantinople. As soon as he reached Adrianople he refused to
pay to the Emperor the revenue of the region on the Strymon,
which was destined for Urchan's maintenance, and then
began to take measures for the subjugation of the capital. Early in the winter
of 1451-1452 he sent orders throughout the different provinces of his kingdom,
requiring that a thousand builders, with a corresponding number of hodmen and
bricklayers, should be sent, and the necessary materials prepared for the
erection of a fortress on the Bosphorus above Constantinople. The tidings
caused the greatest consternation among the Christian population in that city, in
Thrace, and in the Archipelago. "The end of the City has come” they
exclaimed, "these things are the forerunners of the downfall of our race;
the days of anti-Christ are upon us. What will become of us? Rather let our
lives be taken from us, O Lord, than that the eyes of Thy servants should see
the destruction of the City, and let not Thine enemies say 'Where are the
saints who watch over it?’.” The Emperor Constantine despatched ambassadors to
Adrianople to remonstrate against the building of the proposed fortress. The
Sultan's answer was a declaration that he would have anyone, who again came to
him about this business, flayed. The fortress was begun in the spring of 1452,
the Sultan himself having made the plan and selected the site at the narrowest
part of the Bosphorus, where a strong current drives vessels from the Asiatic
to the European side, on the promontory of Hermaeum.
Here, then, a
fortress rapidly arose, with walls from two-and-twenty to five-and-twenty feet
thick, and towers with leaden roofs, sixty feet high. The Turks gave it the
name of Bogaz Kessen, which
means cutter off of the Straits and also cutter-off of the neck. As master of
this castle and one opposite to it, named Anatoli Hissar,
which had been built by Bajazet, the Sultan had it in
his power to cut off all communication between the republics of Genoa and
Venice and their colonies on the Black Sea, and also to deprive the city of
Constantinople of the access to that Sea which was absolutely necessary to its
inhabitants.
During the
progress of the work disputes arose with some of the inhabitants of
Constantinople who had corn-fields in the neighbourhood, and bloodshed ensued.
The Greek Emperor then addressed a grave and dignified letter to the Sultan,
who vouchsafed no other reply than a declaration of war (June, 1452), and
caused the messengers who brought it to be beheaded. Mahomet was, however, too
wise immediately to begin hostilities; for the time being, he merely
reconnoitred the walls, trenches, and gates of Constantinople, and on the ist September retired to Adrianople.
The following
winter passed by in quietness, but preparations were vigorously carried on on both sides for the decisive struggle. The Emperor again
showed himself disposed for Union with the Latins, no doubt with the view of
obtaining their assistance against the Turks. Whether in this matter he acted
in perfect good faith may be left an open question; but even granting that his
purpose was sincere, it would have been impossible for him to carry it into
effect in face of the fanatical opposition of his people. This must have become
evident at Rome, where the long-cherished hope that the whole Greek Church
would accept the Union effected at Florence had now died out.f It was necessary, however, in order not to make too light of the Pope's
dignity, that appearances should be kept up, and that his rights, which had
been acknowledged at Florence, should be officially recognized at
Constantinople, for on no other grounds could he be held bound to afford
material assistance to the Greeks.
The question of
helping the Greeks was warmly discussed in Rome, where great differences of
opinion prevailed on the subject. An anonymous treatise written there in the
December of 1452, gives us some interesting details, and endeavours, with the
learning and rhetoric peculiar to the humanists, to show that the preservation
of Constantinople was a necessity for Christendom. Conflicting opinions
prevailed in Rome as to the line of conduct pursued towards the Greeks.
Starting from the principle that no communication is to be held with heretics,
schismatics and excommunicated persons, one party was absolutely opposed to the
idea of giving them any assistance, and held that the impious schismatics would
but meet with due punishment. This view is strongly condemned by the author of
the treatise who adduces passages from the fathers of the Church, and from
Aristotle, Sallust, Valerius Maximus, Seneca, and
other classical writers. He then appeals to the principle of Christian charity,
and to the love of sinners inculcated by our Saviour, and maintains that,
notwithstanding their schism and their ingratitude, the Greeks ought to be
helped. Should assistance be refused, there is, he continues, reason to fear
that the conquest of Constantinople may be followed by a general massacre of
the Christians. If it be said that the Greeks will persist in their schism,
this is indeed true with regard to many of them, but not to all, for amongst
them are distinguished and religious men. No one knows what course these will
take; we need not trouble ourselves about the future; for the present the first
thing to be done is to grant the prayer of those who are so hardly beset by the
enemies of the Christian name. He then urges the glorious past of the City of
Constantinople. Men remarkable for their learning, their piety, and purity of
life have dwelt within her walls, which contain countless relics of the Saints
and richly adorned churches; moreover tor the sake of the great Emperor
Constantine to whom the Christian people and the Roman Church are so deeply
indebted, it is, he declares, a duty to preserve his city from falling into the
hands of the unbelievers.
He then proceeds
to point out the motives which render it incumbent on the Pope to take measures
for the preservation of Constantinople, making honourable mention of the
exertions of Eugenius IV against the Turks; he gives a lively picture of the
threatening peril, enumerates the horrible cruelties practised by the infidels,
and insists on the necessity of re-establishing peace, if only in a temporary
manner, in Italy. In view of the dangers which threaten Constantinople, Cyprus,
and the shores of the Mediterranean, Christian kings and princes, and
especially all prelates and ecclesiastics, are bound, he concludes, to arm
themselves for the defence of Christendom.
Warnings of this
nature, as a modern historian has observed, coupled with the well-grounded
apprehension that the Turks might, after the conquest of the Greek Empire,
attack Italy, produced their effect in Rome, and greatly promoted the
favourable consideration of the ceaseless petitions for aid, especially as the
Emperor accepted the conditions proposed by the Pope. In May, 1452, Cardinal
Isidore, an enthusiastic Greek patriot, was sent as Legate to Constantinople.
He was accompanied by about two hundred auxiliary troops, and by Archbishop
Leonard of Mytilene, who has left us an account of the siege of Constantinople.
The selection of Isidore as Legate was a most excellent one, and if the
reconciliation was not effected, he certainly cannot
be held responsible for its failure. The great majority of the Greeks were not
even now in earnest in the matter, and the solemn function in honour of the
Union celebrated on the 12th December, 1452, in the church of St. Sophia, with
prayers for the Pope and the exiled Patriarch Gregorius, was a mere farce.
Many Greeks did
not shrink from openly expressing their sentiments. "Once we are rid of
the Turkish dragon," they said, "you shall see whether we will hold
with the Azymites or not". Both laity and clergy conspired to frustrate
the Union, and a wild outburst of fanaticism ensued while the Turks were
actually approaching the very walls of Constantinople. The schismatic clergy,
incensed by the Emperor's open adhesion to the decrees of the Council of
Florence, solemnly anathematized all its partisans, refused absolution to those
who had been present at the function held in honour of the Union, and exhorted
the sick rather to die without the sacraments thin receive them from a Uniate
priest. The populace cursed the Uniates, the sailors in the harbour drank to
the destruction of the Pope and his slaves, and emptied their cups to the
honour of the Blessed Virgin, shouting, "What need have we of the help of
the Latins?" The friends of the Union were naturally too weak to hold
their ground against the violence of popular feeling, and succumbed in their
unequal conflict with the national will, which, impotent in all besides, proved
itself obstinate and unbending on the one point of opposition to Rome. The
Union was again rent asunder, and St. Sophia, which the schismatics called a
cave of demons and synagogue of Jews, became a mosque. This furious antagonism
to Rome extended to the highest classes of Byzantine society. The Grand Duke
Lukas Notaras, the most powerful man in the powerless
empire, was not afraid to say that he would rather see the Turkish turban in
the city than the Tiara of Rome.
It is not
surprising that the Latins showed but little zeal on behalf of a nation so
hopelessly deluded, and that both in Rome and elsewhere some were found to
maintain that no help ought to be given to the schismatics. The violently
anti-Latin temper of the Greeks explains, and in some degree excuses, the fact
that the Western Powers did not render the speedy assistance which might have
saved the glorious capital of the East.
Besides the Pope
and the King of Naples, the Republics of Venice and Genoa were the only
Christian Powers who helped the Greek Emperor, and their help was given from
mercenary motives. The Venetians and Genoese were well aware that their own
interests would be seriously affected by a Turkish occupation of the Greek
capital. Constantinople and its suburbs had become a second home to many of
their citizens. Within its walls the two republics possessed much valuable
property, both public and private, and its fall would involve the severance of
their connection with their colonies on the Black Sea, and their consequent
loss. Genoa and its colony of Chios accordingly sent war material and a
considerable body of soldiers, and, unlike their vacillating fellow-countrymen
in Pera, devoted themselves heart and soul to the
cause.
The powerful
Republic of Venice displayed far less zeal. Twice in the year 1452 did the
Ambassadors of the Greek Emperor repair to the city, earnestly imploring
counsel and aid against the threatened attack of the Turks; but no decided
promise was made to them, for the interest of the principal personages was at
this time concentrated almost exclusively on the war against the Duke of Milan.
Material considerations alone induced the Signoria to send some few ships to
Constantinople, but the despatch of a fleet was postponed until the 7th May,
1453, because it was feared that it would have to act in concert with the ships
promised by the Pope and King Alfonso. The ten vesselscommanded by Jacopo Loredano, whose arrival had been so eagerly
desired by the besieged, naturally came too late. Indeed, the following
instructions, given to Jacopo Loredano, are calculated
to awaken some misgivings as to the real intentions of the Venetian Republic.
"On the way to Constantinople you are not in any way to cause any injury
to the cities, troops, or vessels of the Turks, inasmuch as we are at peace
with them. For although we have prepared this fleet for the honour of God and
the defence of the City of Constantinople, we will not — if it can possibly be
avoided — involve ourselves in war with the Turks".
Regarding the
assistance afforded by Pope Nicholas V, the accounts which have reached us are
unfortunately very defective, and in some cases contradictory. The diary of Infessura, the Secretary to the Senate, a somewhat
untrustworthy document, informs us that the Emperor's ambassadors were detained
in Rome, and were unable to obtain a decided answer. St. Antoninus of Florence says in his Chronicle, that Nicholas V directly refused them a
grant of pecuniary assistance. As, however, the fact that this Pope sent money
in the year 1452 for the purpose of fortifying the walls of Galata, is proved
by an inscription, these accounts cannot be correct. We have, moreover, the
testimony given by the Pope himself when on the very brink of eternity.
Nicholas V
informed the Cardinals assembled around his death-bed that, on receiving the tidings
of the siege of Constantinople, he had at once determined to help the Greeks to
the best of his power. He was, however, well aware that his own unassisted
resources were insufficient to oppose an adequate resistance to the immense
armies of the Turks. He had, therefore, openly and plainly, declared to the
Greek ambassadors that his money, his ships, and his troops were at the
disposal of the Emperor, but that, inasmuch as this help was inadequate, his
Majesty ought without delay to seek the assistance of other princes; assuring
them of the support of the Papal forces. The Ambassadors had departed, well
pleased with his answer, but, after making unsuccessful application to many
princes, had returned to Rome, whereupon he had given them his help, such as it
was.
Accordingly, on
the 28th April, Nicholas V commanded the Archbishop of Ragusa, Jacopo Veniero of Recanati, to proceed
as Legate to Constantinople, with the ten Papal galleys and a number of ships,
furnished by Naples, Genoa, and Venice. The united Italian fleet did not,
however, come into action, for on the 29th of May the fate of the city was
decided.
On the 23rd
March, 1453, Mahomet II left Adrianople, and on the 6th April took up his
position within a mile of Constantinople. According to the lowest, and
therefore most probable estimate, his army numbered a hundred and sixty
thousand men. To meet this powerful, rapacious, and fanatical host, the Emperor
had, in all, four thousand nine hundred and seventy-three Greeks, and about two
thousand foreigners, Genoese, Venetians, Cretans, Romans, and Spaniards.
The siege, of
which we have details from a number of eye-witnesses, began immediately.
Besides fourteen batteries, which were planted opposite to the walls of the
city, the Sultan had twelve large pieces of artillery destined for special
positions, and discharging stone cannon-balls of from two hundred to five
hundred pounds' weight. One giant cannon, made by a Hungarian, is perhaps the
largest mentioned in history, and its stone balls weighed from eight hundred to
twelve hundred pounds.
It was evident
that the city, with its slender garrison, would ultimately be compelled to
yield to such a force. The catastrophe was delayed by the position of
Constantinople, which rendered it very difficult of assault, and by the
personal courage of the Emperor and of some few other Greeks. But the chief
credit of the defence is due to the skilful tactics of the Italian ships, and
to the foreign troops and the Venetian Catalan, and other colonists, together
with the Genoese, who had secretly come from Pera.
They ceaselessly repaired the breaches made by the enemy's artillery, and
brilliantly repelled many Turkish attacks. Moreover, under the direction of a
German engineer, countermining was carried on with such success that the Turks
finally abandoned their mines. A dangerous bastion constructed by the infidels
was destroyed in a single night, and the astonished Sultan exclaimed,
"Never could I have believed the Giaours capable of such great deeds, not
even if all the Prophets had assured me of the fact!"
The greater
number of the Greeks, however, played a pitiful part during the siege. Instead
of fighting, they consoled themselves with the foolish predictions of their
monks, wept and prayed in the churches, called upon Our I Lady to deliver them,
never considering that God is wont to help those who exert themselves, and at
the same time humbly place their confidence in Him. A historian justly
observes, "They loudly confessed their sins, but no one confessed his cowardice,
the unpardonable sin of a nation devoid of patriotism". The Emperor alone
distinguished himself by his courage, but one man could not save a nation, many
of whose members, from their bigoted hatred of the Latins, preferred quiet and
toleration under the Turkish sway.
The cowardice of
the Greeks was equalled by their avarice, which kept them from employing the
number of troops required for the defence of the widely extended walls of their
city. The unreasoning covetousness which had been the proximate occasion of
this terrible siege now contributed in great measure to bring about the final
catastrophe. The small force of defenders could no longer hold the long chain
of fortifications, partly ruined as they were by the enemy's artillery, and on
the 29th of May the Janissaries made another desperate attack. The Emperor,
with a great many of his faithful followers, fell. Cardinal Isidore, who was
not recognized, was sold as a slave. Thousands of the Greeks who escaped death
shared his fate, especially all those who had taken refuge in the church of St.
Sophia. An ancient prophecy had foretold that the Turks would advance as far as
the Pillar of Constantine, but would then be driven by an angel from heaven not
only out of the city but back to the Persian frontier. As soon accordingly as
they had entered the city, crowds pressed into the great church, which, with
all its vestibules, corridors, and galleries, was densely thronged, multitudes
who, ever since the feast held in honour of the Union had scorned the spiritual
graces which they might there have found, now seeking within its walls to save
their lives. "Had an angel really descended from heaven at this
moment", says the Greek historian Dukas,
"and brought them word to accept the Union, they would not have
acknowledged it, and would rather have given themselves up to the Turks than to
the Roman Church."
The infidels,
meanwhile, had become masters of the city, and had slain some thousands of its
inhabitants before the idea of making gain out of them as slaves arrested the
work of bloodshed. On reaching the church of St. Sophia they burst open the
doors and dragged the helpless fugitives off to slavery. The beautiful church
was desecrated by all sorts of horrors, and then turned into a mosque. A
crucifix was borne through the streets, with a Janissary's cap on its head,
while the miscreants shouted, "Behold the God of the Christians".
The Sultan did
not compel the Greeks to conform to Islam, but rather sought to win their
priesthood to his side by espousing the cause of the enemies of the Union. He
brought about the election to the Patriarchate of Gennadius,
a zealous member of the orthodox party and a violent opponent of the Latins.
The ceremony of installation took place on the 1st of June, and the procession
passed through streets still stained with blood. The Sultan, adopting the
ancient custom of the Byzantine Emperors, delivered a golden staff to the
newly-elected Patriarch, in token of investiture. The last traces of the Union
were thus obliterated in the great Turkish Empire. Henceforth it survived only
in Lithuania and Poland, in some Mediterranean Islands subject to the Latin
rule, and in the isolated Greek communities in Italy, Hungary, and Sclavonia. The Sultan jealously claimed for himself all privileges
enjoyed by the Emperors, especially the power of granting confirmation and
investiture to the Patriarchs, and it soon became the custom for each Patriarch
to pay a considerable sum of money for his investiture, and thus to purchase
his high dignity from the infidel ruler. As time went on, other Turkish
magnates also received tribute from the Patriarch; money was the only means of
obtaining anything at the Porte, and yet its magic power was not always a
certain defence from bitter humiliations, from ill-treatment and plunder.
Turkish despotism and Greek corruption brought the Patriarchate to the lowest
depths of degradation to which the head of a Church with such a history could
fall.
The tidings of
the great victory of the Turks over the "Christian dogs" were borne
on the wings of the wind throughout the East. Success was now on the side of
Mahomet II, and the consequences were more immediately disastrous there than in
the West. The Oriental Christians at once felt the shock of the great blow
which had fallen on their cause in the Bosphorus. In their first panic the
whole population of these districts thought of nothing but speedy flight, and
flocked to the seaside in order to embark for the West, on the first appearance
of the Turkish flag. Slowly but surely was the way prepared for the complete
closing up and barbarizing of the glorious lands bordering on the Mediterranean
Sea. No pause in the victorious advance of the Turks was to be expected,
although for a time the Sultan retired with his army to Adrianople, and sent
his fleet to the harbours of the Asiatic shore.
Soon indeed it
became clear that, not content with victory on land, the Porte aspired to
supremacy in the Archipelago and the Black Sea. Mahomet II spared no pains to
create a formidable fleet, and Constantinople and Gallipoli afforded him every
facility for his operations. No resource remained to the terrified Christians
on these shores but to purchase the permission to exist by the payment of a
heavy tribute. The Sultan was not slow to take advantage of their distress. On
his return to Adrianople he announced to the ambassadors, who came to
congratulate him, that for the future Chios must pay six thousand instead of
four thousand ducats, and Lesbos three thousand as a tribute. Thomas and
Demetrius, the cowardly Byzantine despots of the Peloponesus,
who had meditated flight to Italy, laid a present of a thousand gold pieces at
his feet, and received in return empty promises of peace and friendship. The
Emperor of Trebizond was required by the Porte to pay the annual tribute of two
thousand gold pieces for himself and the neighbouring shores of the Black Sea,
and also to appear at an appointed time every year in the Sultan's Court. The
despot of Servia had to purchase Mahomet's good will by a tribute of twelve
thousand ducats a year.
It would be
difficult to describe the terror of Western Christendom on learning that
"the centre of the old world and the bulwark which protected European
civilization from Asiatic barbarism" had fallen into the hands of the
infidels. Men felt the event to be a turning point in the history of the world.
In the downfall of the Byzantine Empire, which united Eastern Europe with Asia,
and which had been so instrumental in the civilization of the Slavonic races, the
ruin of all that the first great medieval period had accomplished was begun.
The Christian conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 was tardily avenged by the
foundation of a Turkish Empire on European soil, which had the effect of
paralyzing the whole political system of Europe. All common action on the part
of Christian nations was crippled, and Stamboul became that smouldering centre of discord which it still continues to be in the
Eastern question of the present day. In face of the constant danger from the
Turks the reforms, social as well as ecclesiastical, so urgently needed by
Christendom, were neglected, and the Holy Roman Empire, second only in prestige
to that of Byzantium, was drawn into the vortex of revolution.
"The
Kingdom of Mahomet II” according to a modern historian, "was for the first
time thoroughly consolidated by the conquest of that magnificent central
position uniting the great lines of communication between the Adriatic and
Mesopotamia, and Belgrade and Alexandria, and carrying with it the sovereignty
of the Empire of the Caesars and the Constantines.
The magnitude and danger of the Eastern question dates from this event".
The Republic of
Venice was the first among the Western powers to learn that Constantinople had
fallen, and that the bravest of the Palaeologi had
died a hero's death. The tidings came on the 29th June, when the great Council
was sitting; Luigi Bevazan, the Secretary of the
Council of Ten, read the letters in which the Castellan of Modone and the Bailo of Negroponte announced the calamity.
The consternation and grief which overpowered all present were so great that no
one ventured to ask for a copy of the terrible news.
From Venice it
soon spread in all directions. On the 30th June the Signoria sent word to the
Pope, adding that they deemed it likely that His Holiness would have already
heard of the disaster by some other means.
On the 8th July
it was known in Rome. The celebrated preacher, Fra Roberto of Lecce, told the
populace, who broke out into loud lamentations. As it was a long time before
any other accounts arrived to confirm those received from Venice, and as
Constantinople was known to be well-provisioned, many persons both in Rome and
Genoa considered them to be false. Later on some maintained that the city had
been reconquered in a marvellous manner. "This", wrote Cardinal d'Estouteville, on the 19th July, "is possible but not
probable". The consternation at Rome was increased by a report that the
Papal ships had been captured by the infidels, and that the Turks were
preparing, with a fleet of three hundred vessels, to follow up the conquest of
New Rome by that of the ancient city.
All writers
agree in stating that the Pope and the Cardinals were overwhelmed at the
tidings of the fate of Constantinople. The dominant feeling, however, in the
mind of Nicholas V and throughout the West was rather apprehension of further
advances of the infidels than pity for the Greeks, who, by their dishonesty in
regard of the Union and by the hatred which they never failed to manifest for
the Latins had alienated the sympathy of the rest of Christendom. Moreover, the
rich Greeks had been as unwilling to make material sacrifices for the defence
of their metropolis as they were to put aside their animosity. The
well-informed chronicle of Bologna expressly attributes the fall of
Constantinople to their avarice in not furnishing money for the payment of the
troops, and St. Antoninus of Florence declares that
in the year 1453, the Pope was extremely indignant at their again beseeching
the impoverished Italians to give them pecuniary aid, although themselves
possessed of hoards of wealth which would have amply
sufficed to pay for troops.
The Pope's first
measure on hearing of the calamity was to despatch legates to the different
Italian powers in order to put an end to the internecine wars which raged
amongst them. The excellent Cardinal Capranica accordingly left Rome for Naples on the 18th of July, and two days later
Cardinal Carvajal started on his mission to Florence, Venice, and the camp of
the Duke of Milan. Nicholas V also ordered five triremes to be equipped at
Venice at his expense (the cost amounted to seventeen thousand three hundred
and fifty-two Venetian gold ducats); and the Genoese, Angelo Ambrogini was sent with three galleys to the Greek waters.
He found the Mediterranean already swarming with Turkish ships, and had great
difficulty in making his escape.
On the 30th
September the Pope addressed a Bull of Crusade to Christendom in general. In it
he declared Sultan Mahomet to be a forerunner of anti-Christ, and to restrain
his diabolical arrogance called upon all Christian princes to defend the faith
with their lives and their money, reminding them of their Coronation Oath. A
plenary Indulgence was granted to everyone who should for six months, from the
1st February of the following year (1454), personally take part in the holy
war, or send a substitute. Every warrior was, as in former times, to wear the
cross on his shoulder. The Church aided the cause by contributing money. The Apostolic
exchequer devoted to the Crusade all the revenues which it received from
greater or smaller benefices, from archbishoprics, bishoprics, convents, and
abbeys. The cardinals and all the officials of the Roman Court were to give the
tenth part of their whole income, and anyone who should be guilty of fraud or
fail to pay this tenth was to be excommunicated and deprived of his post. A
tithe was also imposed on Christendom at large under pain of excommunication,
and anyone who should treacherously provide the infidels with arms, provisions,
or materials of war was to be severely punished. Furthermore, that the
undertaking might not in any way be hindered, the Pope, acting under the
authority of Almighty God, determined and commanded that there should be peace
throughout the Christian world. Prelates and dignitaries of the Church were
authorized to mediate between contending parties, and, if possible, effect a
reconciliation. In any case a truce was to be concluded. The refractory were to
be punished by excommunication, or, in the case of whole communities proving
obstinate, by interdict. "Western Europe", to quote the words of the
historian of Bohemia, "now witnessed a renewal of the scenes which had
taken place at the beginning of the Hussite war. Missioners were preaching, distributing crosses and indulgences, collecting tithes,
holding popular assemblies, and promoting warlike preparations, but the
indifference was greater, and the results smaller than they had previously
been, for the institutions and symbols which had once been able to inflame the
world with ardent zeal in the cause of the Holy Sepulchre and the Promised Land
had now but little power over men's minds." The states of Europe were too
much divided and too much occupied with their own internal affairs to rise up
and unite in resisting the Turk. The great political unity of the Middle Ages
was broken, Christendom as a corporate body had ceased to exist. Clear-sighted
contemporaries were fully alive to the melancholy fact. Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini
bitterly complained that Christendom had no longer a head who could command
general obedience. "People", he says, "neither give to the Pope
what is the Pope's, nor to the Emperor what is the Emperor's. Respect and
obedience are nowhere to be found. Pope and Emperor are considered as nothing
but proud titles and splendid figure-heads. Each State has its particular
Prince, and each Prince his particular interest What eloquence could avail to
unite so many discordant and hostile powers under one banner? And if they were
assembled in arms, who would venture to assume the general command? What
tactics are to be followed? What discipline is to prevail? How is obedience to
be secured? Who is to be the shepherd of this flock of nations? Who understands
the many utterly different languages, and is able to control and guide the
varying manners and characters? What mortal could reconcile the English with
the French, the Genoese with the men of Aragon? If a small number go to the
Holy War they will be overpowered by the infidel, and if great hosts proceed
together, their own hatred and confusions will be their ruin. There is
difficulty everywhere. Only look at the state of Christendom." Under these
circumstances Hungary, whose danger was the most imminent, had to undertake
alone the war with the terrible enemy.
The decision
arrived at by the Parliament assembled at Buda in January, 1454, corresponded
to the urgency of the case. The celebrated Hunyadi was chosen General for a
year, and a summons was issued declaring that not merely the landed
proprietors, great and small, but also the Prelates were bound to perform
military service. Nobles who, without adequate cause, should leave the camp
were to be punished by the confiscation of their property, and com-moners by death. Nevertheless, Hunyadi could not but see
that his army was far too weak to gain complete success
After Hungary
the Republic of Venice was undoubtedly the power exposed to greatest danger.
The Sultan had offered her a direct insult by causing the Venetian Bailo at Constantinople to be executed, and imprisoning
upwards of five hundred Venetian subjects. Added to this was the serious loss
of merchandise, estimated by Sanudo at two hundred thousand ducats. Immediately
on receiving tidings of the fall of Constantinople, Cardinal Bessarion had
addressed an urgent letter to Francesco Foscari, the Doge, calling upon him to
defend the cause of Christendom. If we may credit Filelfo the appeal was not in
vain. He says that the Doge made an impressive speech, declaring that no time
was to be lost, but that hostilities with the Turks ought at once to be
commenced in order to avenge the affronts offered to the Republic at
Constantinople.
During the
consultations at Venice, however, the opinion that every effort should be made
to arrive at some kind of understanding with the Sultan prevailed. The
threatening attitude of Milan, solicitude for the five hundred captives, the
increasing financial difficulties of the Republic and the mercantile interests
which overruled everything, all tended to confirm this decision. The merchants
well knew what the fall of Constantinople implied; they were perfectly aware
that their rich possessions in the East were in the most serious danger, and
that the Italian Peninsula itself might next be imperilled. Yet, with their
usual short-sighted egotism, their first thought was to save anything that
might at this critical moment be saved, to gain an undue advantage over all
other naval powers by securing the favour of the Porte, and to maintain their
mercantile importance at the high point which it had reached before the
catastrophe at Constantinople.
We cannot,
therefore, be surprised to find that the words of the Papal Legate fell upon
deaf ears. Instead of beginning the holy war, the Signoria recognized the peace
which formally existed with the Sultan, and employed Bartolomeo Marcello to
open negotiations for the release of the captive Venetians and the renewal of
friendly relations with the Porte, and also to prepare the way for the conclusion
of a commercial treaty. Jacopo Loredano was in the
meantime sent with twelve galleys to protect Negroponte.
Marcello was
successful in his mission, and on the 18th April, 1454, concluded a treaty with
the ruler of the infidels, which served as a basis for all subsequent relations
between Venice and the Porte. The first paragraph of this shameful compact runs
as follows: — "Between Sultan Mahomet and the Signoria of Venice,
including all its present and future possessions, as far as the banner of St.
Mark floats, henceforth, as formerly, there is peace and friendship".
Another article expressly lays down that Venice shall not in any way, by ships,
weapons, provisions, or money, support the Sultan's enemies in their
undertakings against the Turkish kingdom. "And thus", indignantly
exclaims the historian of Turkey, "the Republic of Venice was the first
Christian power which, after the fall of Constantinople, neglected all other
considerations, and, simply for its own advantage, entered into a treaty of
peace with the Sultan, and secured for itself freedom of commerce throughout
the whole Turkish Empire and the right of employing its own representatives to
look after the interests of its subjects settled there.
It cannot be
said that the Signoria was unconscious of the shameful nature of this
proceeding, for, before the conclusion of peace with the Sultan, it addressed a
somewhat confused letter of apology to Nicholas V.
The Republic of
Genoa, which, next to Venice, was the naval power of Italy most interested in
Eastern affairs, also endeavoured to enter into friendly alliance with the
Sultan. The tidings of the fall of Constantinople had caused unexampled alarm
and discouragement amongst her inhabitants, and here, as elsewhere, many had
clung to the hope that they were false. It was at once decided in Council that
all available ships should be made ready, that ambassadors should immediately
go to King Alfonso, and that if the terrible report were confirmed, an envoy
should be sent to all States of Christendom to bring about a general peace,
inasmuch as the loss of the whole of the Levant and of the Archipelago appeared
in such a case to be imminent.
But these good
resolutions ended the matter, and the Genoese, weakened by internal dissensions
and by the war with Naples, took no decisive step; indeed, in their utter
helplessness and despondency they would have nothing more to do with their
possessions on the Black Sea, and on the 15th November, 1453, made them over by
a formal contract to the Bank of St. George. This great financial company,
which by its immense pecuniary resources, the well-known rectitude and solidity
of its administration, its considerable landed possessions, and its widely
extended foreign connections, had acquired the position of a State within the
State, seemed alone able to accomplish that which the exhausted Republic could
no longer undertake. But even the Bank of St. George was unable to prevent
Caffa, the chief emporium on the Black Sea, from becoming tributary to the
Porte.
The cause of the
crusade found no better support from King Alfonso of Naples than from the
Republics of Venice and Genoa. This crafty politician was, indeed, lavish of
fair words, and in the spring of 1454 he seemed ready to come forward as the
champion of Italy and the avenger of the terrible disgrace which the conquest
of Constantinople had brought upon Christendom. By his example, he wrote to the
Cardinals, he hoped to incite the other Christian princes to an expedition
which should drive the Turks completely out of Europe. But his professions were
not followed by action. He cared for nothing but his own exaltation and that of
his dynasty, and never struck a single blow for the defence of Christendom.
The conduct of
the Duke of Milan was equally unworthy. Delighted to see his enemies, the
Venetians, fully occupied by Eastern affairs he caused his troops to advance
into the territory of Brescia. This circumstance must be taken into account in
extenuation of the attitude of the Venetian Republic.
The Republic of
Florence, allied as it was with the Duke of Milan in opposition to Venice and
Naples, shared his sentiments. From reliable sources we learn the almost
incredible fact that in the blind hatred of Venice the Florentines viewed the
terrible blow dealt to the Christian cause in the East with satisfaction.
Nicodemus of Poutremoli, Francesco Sforza's
Ambassador to Florence, when announcing the disaster, wrote: "I also wish
that it may go ill with the Venetians, but not in this manner to the detriment
of the Christian faith. I doubt not that your feeling is the same. Would to God
that Pope Nicholas had built less and had believed me! How often have I told
him that, besides its other innumerable advantages, the pacification of Italy
would greatly tend to the honour of His Holiness".
While the
Italians, to quote the words of a contemporary chronicler, were thus tearing
each other to pieces like dogs, most of the other Western States held aloof
from the proposed crusade. None of them, indeed, openly refused assistance; on
the contrary, all the princes formally professed themselves ready to take part
in the expulsion of the Turks from Europe, but when it came to the point not
one was prepared to act. Aeneas Sylvius openly admits that nothing was to be
expected from the northern kingdoms. England was a prey to perpetual civil
wars, and Nicholas V vainly endeavoured to restore her to peace and unity. We
shall have to relate the utter failure of the crusading projects of the
powerful Duke Philip of Burgundy, and all through the great kingdom of France
the Pope's summons was almost unheeded. The French King, Charles VII, had not
even deigned to answer Filelfo, who, before the fall of Constantinople,
submitted to him the plan of an expedition. The Emperor Frederick III, who, according
to the medieval view, was above all other princes bound to defend the Christian
cause, was not, as the following pages will show, the man to make up his mind
to such an undertaking. Portugal was perhaps the only power, with the exception
of Hungary, which made serious preparations for war against the infidels. Its
King, Alfonso, promised to maintain twelve thousand soldiers at his own expense
for a year, and at a considerable cost and amid many complaints from his people
made ready for action, but obstacles of various kinds made it impossible for
him to accomplish his purpose.
The words-which
Aeneas Sylvius had written to the Pope were but too true; discord was rampant
in Europe, and the different nations hardly ventured to move against the common
foe of Christendom. Moreover, the tranquillity of the past months had persuaded
them that the danger which threatened from the East was not so imminent as it
had seemed in the first shock of the catastrophe. The Papal summons to the Holy
War failed to evoke a sympathetic response throughout Europe, and it became
evident that the bond which in the great medieval ages held princes and peoples
together had grown slack.
CHAPTER
VIII.
NEGOTIATIONS
FOR PEACE IN ITALY— THE CRUSADE IN GERMANY — SICKNESS AND DEATH OF THE POPE
While
consultations were being held throughout Western Christendom as to the means of
repelling Turkish aggression, a cause for which no one was ready to make any
real sacrifice, envoys arrived from Cyprus and Rhodes. They implored
assistance, bearing witness to the magnitude of the peril which threatened
Europe, and unanimously asserting that no cessation of Turkish hostilities was
to be expected. These envoys were accompanied by Cardinal Isidore of Russia,
some Franciscans of Bologna, and a few other Italians, who had escaped from the
massacre at Constantinople or from bondage among the infidels. The Cardinal,
more fortunate than Cesarini, had escaped the terrible massacre which followed
the victory of the Turks, by dressing a corpse in his own clothes and taking
those of the dead man. Unrecognized in this disguise, he had been captured and
sold as a slave, but at length succeeded in making his escape, at first at the Peloponesus, and thence to Venice, where he arrived in the
end of November, 1453, as one returned from the dead. He and the Franciscans
were the first to make known the full details of the catastrophe of the 29th
May, 1453.
Cardinal Isidore
gave a terrible account of the cruelties practised by the Turks, and declared that
they were determined to conquer Italy. The danger was, he believed, imminent,
and the necessity for the union of Christians imperative. He thought the forces
at the Sultan's command more numerous than those of Caesar, Alexander, or any
other conqueror, and the pecuniary resources at his disposal to be equally
enormous. The Turkish fleet already consisted of two hundred and thirty ships,
the cavalry was thirty thousand strong, and there seemed to be no limit to the
numbers by which the infantry might be increased. Calabria would probably be
the spot selected for the first incursion of the infidels, and it was possible
that Venice might also be attacked. According to the report of the Sienese
ambassador in Venice, the Cardinal was firmly persuaded that unless within six
months peace was restored another year and half would see the Turks in Italy.
It was evident
that serious measures against the Turks could not be contemplated until concord
had been re-established in the Italian peninsula, and accordingly Nicholas
summoned the ambassadors of all the Italian powers to a Peace Congress in Rome.
The matter was pressing, and the Pope's messengers were despatched in all haste
towards the close of September. About a month later the ambassadors began to
appear in the Eternal City. On the 24th of October, 1453, envoys from the
Republic of Florence and Venice arrived; the latter were specially charged to
excuse the Signoria for their negotiations with the Turks.
The Duke of
Milan, who believed that the Venetians were merely endeavouring to gain time
for fresh warlike preparations, reluctantly resolved to take part in the
Congress. The delay of his ambassadors created a most unfavourable impression
in Rome, and tht Pope and his cardinals bitterly
complained of Francesco Sforza. On the 10th November the long-expected envoys
at length arrived,t and business accordingly could
begin. The despatches which have come down to us regarding this Congress are
unfortunately of a very fragmentary character, and those of the Venetian and
Neapolitan envoys are altogether wanting. It is, therefore, impossible to give
a clear account of these complicated proceedings, but there can be no doubt
that the greatest difficulties arose in the way of a satisfactory settlement.
All parties, indeed, were profuse in professions, but when their proposals were
brought forward it became evident that the pretensions of each Power were so
extravagant as to render the restoration of peace almost hopeless.
King Alfonso of
Naples demanded from the Florentines the repayment of the sums which the war
had cost him; the latter, far from being disposed to pay anything, called upon
the King to deliver up to them Castiglione della Pescaja in the Maremma. The
Venetians insisted that Sforza, for whose assassination they had, on the 14th
September, 1453, promised a hundred thousand ducats, should restore all his
conquests in the territories of Brescia and Bergamo, evacuate Cremona, and
consider the banks of the Po and the Adda as the boundary of his States.
Sforza, however, instead of making any concession to the Republic of St. Mark,
asked that Crema, Bergamo, and Brescia should be restored to him. He had not
the least intention of concluding peace so quickly, and his ambassadors
complained of the pretensions of Naples and Venice to rule over Tuscany and
Lombardy. Each one of the hostile powers brought violent accusations against
his adversary before the Pope. The envoy of the Marquess of Mantua assured
Nicholas that Venice, if victorious, would strive to make the Pope her
chaplain, adding that his master would rather fall into the hands of the Turks
than into those of the Venetians!
If anything had
been wanting to render a favourable result of the Congress impossible, the
deficiency was supplied by Nicholas. He had already endeavoured secretly to
foment the dissensions of the other Italian powers, with the object of
diverting hostilities from his own dominions and securing for them alone the
blessing of peace, and to this line of policy he continued to adhere. Impossible
as it is to justify the Pope's conduct, we nevertheless take into account the
circumstances which partially excuse it. Had the States of the Church been
involved in the conflicts of the period, all that he had accomplished at
immense cost, and by the labour of years, in the hope of making Rome the centre
of art and of learning, would have been undone. This idea took such possession
of his mind that all other considerations had to give way. Moreover, the
relations which existed between him and King Alfonso of Naples were of a
character unfavourable to the success of the Congress. The King did everything
in his power to complicate the negotiations and hinder Nicholas from taking any
step which might have tended to peace. If we may credit the ambassador of Francesco
Sforza, Alfonso, even in the month of July, had threatened to ally himself with
the revolutionary party in Rome in the event of the Pope adopting a policy at
variance with his wishes. The monarch had supporters in the Court, his
influence over the timid Pontiff had for years been excessive, and Nicholas
yielded unduly, carrying on the negotiations, as even his eulogist Manetti admits, in a lukewarm and indifferent manner. The
state of his health no doubt had much to do with his timidity; at the end of
August he was ill, and in December he was confined to his bed with so severe an
attack of gout that for a long time even the Cardinals were not admitted to his
presence. After a short period of improvement, the malady returned at the end
of January with fresh intensity, and for fully a fortnight Nicholas V was again
unable to grant any audiences. A secret Consistory, which had been fixed for
the 29th January, 1454, had, on account of the Pope's condition, to be held in
his bedroom. The reports of the Florentine ambassadors enable us accurately to
follow the history of Nicholas's illness. After announcing on the 6th of
February that the Pope was again holding receptions, they had, five days later,
to say that the gout had returned. In the beginning of March they speak of a
fresh attack, and so it went on, for he never again rose from his sick bed. Can
we wonder that in the midst of such suffering, and oppressed by ceaseless
anxieties, he had not sufficient energy for vigorous and determined action?
The Congress
finally arrived at the end which had been foreseen. On the 19th March, 1454,
the Sienese ambassadors announced to their Republic the utter failure of the
negotiations, and on the 24th the Florentine envoys left Rome; the assembly
effected nothing, and its members parted in mutual dissatisfaction.
A simple
Augustinian friar, Fra Simonetto of Camerino,
accomplished that which the Congress had been unable to effect. The Venetians,
whose finances were exhausted, and who were in need of peace, sent him as a
secret messenger to Francesco Sforza to treat with him personally and lay fair
proposals before him. The unquiet state of Sforza's own camp made him willing
to accede to these, and Cosmo de' Medici, who alone was in the secret, favoured
the negotiations. He knew that the intolerable burden of taxation was causing
increasing discontent among the Florentines, and that there was a general
longing for peace throughout the city. Francesco Contarini, the Venetian
ambassador to Siena during the years 1454 and 1455, repeatedly informs the
Signoria of the general feeling which prevailed at Florence. "The
citizens", he writes in April, 1454, "had raised a great outcry
against the new taxes, and used strong language against Cosmo and the others
who desired war".
Fra Simonetto's negotiations were brought to a conclusion at
Lodi on the 9th April, 1454, when Sforza agreed V to restore to the Venetians
all his conquests in the territories of Bergamo and Brescia, with the exception
of a few castles, only laying down the condition that those who had espoused
his cause should remain unpunished. The Duke of Savoy and the Marquess of
Montferrat were, if they desired to share in the benefits of peace, to deliver
up the places which they had taken in Novara, Pavia and Alessandria; in the
event of their refusal the Duke of Milan held himself free to recover them by
force. The Lords of Corregio and the Venetians were
to give back to the Marquess of Mantua the part of his territory which they had
annexed, and he was to restore to his brother Carlo his inheritance; finally
the Castle of Castiglione della Pescaja in Tuscany, which King Alfonso had conquered, was to be retained by him on
condition that he should withdraw his army from the rest of the Florentine
States. All the Italian powers were called upon to give in their adhesion to
the peace within an appointed time if they desired to partake of its benefits.
The peace of Lodl did not at once produce the effects expected by the
States, which were longing for tranquillity. Venice and Milan had kept the
matter so secret that, with the exception of Florence, no power had been aware
of what was going on. Accordingly the announcement that a treaty had been
concluded on the 9th April was a surprise to all, and especially to King Alfonso
of Naples. He had hitherto imagined that, as the most important of Italian
princes, he could at his will impose peace, and now found himself treated as a
secondary power, and invited to subscribe to an agreement framed without his
knowledge. He expressed his indignation in no measured terms to the Venetian
Ambassador, Giovanni Moro, and endeavoured, as it proved, in vain, to hinder
his allies, the Sienese, from becoming parties to it.
On the 30th
August Venice, Milan, and Florence entered into a League for five-and-twenty
years for the defence of their States against every attack, but Alfonso, in his
anger, held aloof for nearly a year, and tedious negotiations, prolonged by
dread of France, ensued. The Pope, who had at first resented his exclusion from
the compact of Lodi, brought these to a happy conclusion by sending Cardinal Capranica, the most distinguished among the members of the
Sacred College, to Naples as his legate, with the special mission of persuading
Alfonso to join the League. The Cardinal was successful, and, on the 30th
December, 1454, Sforza was informed by his ambassadors at Naples that the King
had determined publicly to proclaim peace, and to enter into the alliance on
the approaching Feast of the Epiphany. "On the Feast of the Epiphany, when
the solemnity of the Three Kings takes place, Alfonso, after the example of
those Three Kings who offered Gold, Frankincense, and Myrrh, will bring as an
offering to God — first, peace for all Italy; secondly, the League for greater
quiet and security; and thirdly, the League against the enemy of Jesus Christ
for the defence of our holy Faith. On that day the Papal Legate will celebrate
Mass, and this holy Peace, the League and Alliance will be proclaimed, it God
permit and your Highness consent". The peace was, however, actually
confirmed by the Neapolitan Monarch on the 26th January, 1455, but with the
condition that the Genoese, whose ancient offences Alfonso could not pardon,
and Sigismondo Malatesta, who had deceived him, should be excluded from it. By
a further compact the Pope, Naples, Florence, Venice, and Milan bound
themselves by an offensive and defensive alliance for five-and-twenty years.
The Pope ratified this great Italian League on the 25th February, 1455, and it
was solemnly published in Rome on the 2nd March. The happy event was celebrated
with splendid festivities by the command of Nicholas V in that City and
throughout the States of the Church.
There was good
cause for these rejoicings, for now Italy might be considered as at peace, and
the peace seemed likely to prove permanent. In Upper Italy, Milan and Venice,
and in Lower Italy the Pope and the King of Naples counterbalanced each other.
Florence was determined to maintain the political equilibrium, and never to
join those who evidently desired to impair it. The eyes of all were anxiously
turned towards the East. Many of the lesser princes were ardently devoted to
the interests of art and learning, and the rest, if not exempt from the vices oftyrants, were at least capable of appreciating the
general intellectual revival which distinguished the age. Venice, Genoa, and
Florence, with their rich commerce, were naturally averse to the continuance of
war. Accordingly with Fra Simonetto's peace begins
the most flourishing period of the Italian Renaissance. King Alfonso, Duke
Francesco Sforza, Cosmo de Medici and the Republic of Venice, together with
Pope Nicholas V, constituted the intellectual aristocracy of Italy, and the
lesser princes followed them.
While the
negotiations for the pacification of Italy were thus successful, the
deliberations which took place in the Holy Roman Empire in 1454 and 1455
regarding the means of defending Europe from the Turk came to little good. It
soon became sadly evident that the solidarity of Christendom as opposed to
Islam had ceased to exist.
Frederick III
had summoned a great diet to meet at Ratisbon on St. George's Day (23rd April),
1454, "to deliberate concerning the defensive and offensive measures to be
taken against the enemies of Christ in order that these should be punished, the
sufferings of the martyrs avenged, the friends of God and Christian men
consoled, and the faith upheld in an honourable and suitable manner, since all
those who help this cause become partakers of the grace of God in the Papal
indulgence for the health of their souls and obtain everlasting life."
Frederick III
promised himself to be present unless prevented by some special hindrance. The
imperial letter of invitation was addressed, not merely to the German States,
but to all princes and republics of Christian Europe, so that it was generally
supposed that a Congress of Christendom, like the Council of Constance, was
about to assemble. But when the time drew near the disappointment was immense.
The Emperor did not come in person, but only sent a representative. The Pope
sent Bishop John of Pavia as his legate, and an embassy came from Savoy, but
otherwise the Italian powers were unrepresented. The only foreign prince who
came to Ratisbon was the Duke of Burgundy, and of all the many princes of
Germany none but the Margrave Albert Achilles of Brandenburg and Duke Louis of
Bavaria appeared. Stranger still, no one came on behalf of the young King of
Bohemia, for whom the help of Christendom had been in a special manner invoked.
In February there was a prospect of his presence at the Diet, but intrigues
among those about him probably kept him away. In Buda a plan was made for the
removal of Hunyadi from the government, in view of his appointment as General
of the whole Christian forces against the Turks; but there is no doubt that the
real object of this scheme was to keep him at a distance.
The empire never
appeared to less advantage than at this Diet, and the result of the Emperor's
appeal was all the more deplorable at a moment when the nation was in a state
of anxious and alarmed expectation. The intestine divisions of Germany, and the
weakness of its ruler, were patent to all, and we cannot wonder that even the
fiery eloquence of Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini failed to bring the Diet to any
important decision. It was merely resolved that peace should be maintained in
all countries, and that about Michaelmas another, and, if it pleased God, a
more numerous and effective assembly should be held. In the event of the
Emperor appearing in person, Nuremberg was selected as the place of meeting,
otherwise it was to be Frankfort. The blustering Duke of Burgundy declared that
if the other princes would likewise take part in the expedition he would
proceed against the Turks with a force of sixty thousand men. The Diet
assembled at Frankfort-on-Maine in October, 1454, was somewhat more numerously
attended than that of Ratisbon. Albert of Brandenburg, together with the
Margrave of Baden, represented the Emperor; Aeneas Sylvius and the Bishop of Gurk appeared as his ambassadors; the Bishop of Pavia, who
was engaged in the collection of the ecclesiastical tithes in Germany, was
commissioned to act as the Pope's plenipotentiary; Jakob of Treves and Dietrich
of Mayence alone of the German electors were present;
Archduke Albert, who arrived after the proceedings had commenced, was the only
one of the temporal princes to answer the summons. A tone of drowsy
indifference characterized the Diet. Many of its members openly expressed their
aversion to a crusade, and their contempt for Emperor and Pope. Both of these
lords, they said, “merely want to extort money from us, but they will find
themselves mistaken, and learn that we are not so simple as they imagine”. The
discourses of Capistran and of Aeneas Sylvius, and
the urgent prayers of the Hungarian envoys, were powerless to evoke any zeal
for the common cause of the West. "The lords had no good will in the
matter", says a chronicler. The energy and exertions of the Margrave of
Brandenburg alone saved the deliberations of the Diet from complete failure,
and at least kept up a respectable appearance". A German force of thirty
thousand infantry and ten thousand cavalry was to be sent the following year to
assist the Hungarians, but it was necessary that a fleet should at the same
time proceed against the Turks from the Italian ports. The fleet was to be
provided by the Pope, the King of Naples, and the Republics of Venice and
Genoa, while the Emperor was to come to an agreement with the German princes at
Vienna to furnish the land forces. The Diet of Vienna accordingly was the
consequence of that of Frankfort, which in its turn had been the result of one
held at Ratisbon. The witty saying of Aeneas Sylvius, in the year 1444, that
the German Diets could not be accused of sterility, since each was the parent
of a new one, was thus again verified.
The Vienna Diet
was even more pitiful than its predecessors. The Empire was so scantily
represented that practically it consisted only of the Emperor himself and the Electoral
College. Its leader and ruler was the crafty Jakob of Treves; he personally
represented four electors, and the others were his puppets. They came,
commissioned to evade the Turkish question, and to urge on the Emperor their
projects of reform; and, notwithstanding the speeches made by Aeneas Sylvius, Capistran and Johannes Vitez of Zredna the proxy for King Ladislas, adhered to their
purpose. Vexatious explanations ensued, and the Turkish question remained
unsettled. On the 12th April the tidings of the death of Nicholas V arrived,
and were far from unwelcome to this miserable assembly, furnishing, as they
did, a decent pretext for the departure of its members, who agreed to put off
to the following year further consultations regarding the crusade.
The health of
Nicholas V had always been indifferent. Even as a boy he had dangerous
illnesses, and there can be no doubt that the fatigues and privations of his
youth, as well as the wearing labours of his maturer years, had told on his weakly constitution. His nervous anxiety about his
health is thus easily accounted for. The pressure of work and of care had been
greatly increased from the time that he wore the tiara, yet, during the earlier
years of his pontificate, he seems to have enjoyed a fair amount of health and
to have displayed immense energy.
In the year 1450
we hear that a sudden and severe illness attacked Nicholas V at Tolentino, and
that his physician, the celebrated Baverio Bonetti of
Imola, had no hopes of his life. Nevertheless, the Pope very soon recovered,
but in December of the same year he again fell ill, and from this time forth he
never seems to have been really well. A great change was remarked in his
disposition; his former expansiveness gave place to excessive reserve. Francesco
Sforza's ambassador, Nicodemus, whom we have often mentioned, wrote, on the 7th
January, 1453, to the Duke, that during the previous year an extraordinary
change had taken place in the Pope, and that one of its causes was his
sickness.
The year 1453
was in every way a disastrous one to Nicholas V. It opened with Porcaro's
conspiracy, and the tidings of the fall of Constantinople arrived when its
course was half run. The account, which says that grief for this event killed
Nicholas V, may be an exaggeration, yet there can be no doubt that the
agitation and anxieties, which were its inevitable consequence, must have had a
most injurious effect. The Pope had a bad attack of gout soon after Porcaro's
conspiracy, and another before the year was over. From the end of August, 1453,
until June, 1454, he was, with short intervals, confined to his bed, hardly
ever able to give audiences and altogether incapable of taking part in the
great feasts of the Church. In August, 1454, he was again suffering acutely
from the gout, and the baths of Viterbo failed to give him any relief. In the
early part of November he was afflicted with gout, fever, and other maladies,
and the ambassadors contemplated the possibility of his decease. The sickness
which was consuming the Pope's life manifested itself in his countenance, for
his brilliantly clear complexion had become yellow and dark brown.
His physical
sufferings were aggravated by disappointment and anxiety. From the beginning of
his reign he had attached the greatest importance to the maintenance of peace
in the States of the Church, and had been successful in re-establishing it. But
from the time of Porcaro's conspiracy serious changes took place. Not only did
the revolutionary party gain strength in Rome, but a dangerous agitation
prevailed throughout the States of the Church. "The whole of the States of
the Church are in commotion", writes Contarini, the Venetian ambassador in
Siena, on the 14th May, 1454, "and messengers are sent from all sides,
especially from the Marches to Rome". Troops of disbanded soldiers, who
had taken part in the war of Lombary, overran the
defenceless country. The Pope was soon convinced that many, even among his own
people, were unworthy of confidence. The auditor of the governor of the
patrimony of St. Peter was imprisoned as a suspicious character.
Towards the end
of the reign of Nicholas V great troubles broke out in the patrimony and the
adjacent portion of Umbria. They originated in a quarrel between the cities of
Spoleto and Norcia, in which Count Everso of Anguillara espoused the cause of Spoleto. The Pope, hoping
to bring about a reconciliation between the hostile cities, forbade the Count
to take part in the contest, and also endeavoured to hinder Spoleto from
entering into an alliance with Everso. Neither party,
however, heeded the Papal behest, and accordingly Nicholas was constrained to
intervene with an armed force. Spoleto submitted, but the Count, aided by the
treachery of Angelo Roncone, managed to escape. The
Pope punished the traitor with death. Fresh tumults also occurred in Bologna.
The following
spring brought no alleviation to the Pope's sufferings. From the beginning of
March he grew daily worse; he was perfectly aware of his state, and, as we
learn from the Milanese ambassador in a letter of the 7th March, spoke of the
place where he wished to be buried, and seriously prepared for death. On the
15th of the month he received the sacrament of extreme unction; on the previous
day he had ordered that briefs should be sent to the chief cities of the States
of the Church, requiring them in all things to obey the Cardinals until God
should give the Church a new Pope.
With a view of
making a good preparation for death Nicholas V summoned to his presence Niccolo of Tortona and Lorenzo of Mantua, two Carthusians
renowned for their learning and sanctity; these holy men were to assist him in
his last hours, and accordingly were to remain constantly with him. Vespasiano da Bisticci has given
us a minute description of the last days of the Pope. He tells us that Nicholas
was never heard to complain of his acute physical sufferings. Instead of
bewailing himself he recited Psalms and besought God to grant him patience and
the pardon of his sins. In general his resignation and calm were remarkable.
The dying man comforted his friends instead of needing to be comforted by them.
Seeing Bishop John of Arras in tears at the foot of his bed he said to him,
"My dear John, turn your tears to the Almighty God, whom we serve, and
pray to Him humbly and devoutly that He will forgive me my sins; but remember
that today in Pope Nicholas you see die a true and good friend". But the
Pope also passed through moments of deep dejection, in which his terrible
bodily sufferings and his anxieties regarding the disturbances in the States of
the Church almost overwhelmed him. At such times he would assure the two
Carthusian monks that he was the most unhappy man in the world.
"Never", he said, "do I see a man cross my threshold who has
spoken a true word to me. I am so perplexed with the deceptions of all those
who surround me, that were it not for fear of failing in my duty I should long
ago have renounced the Papal dignity. Thomas of Sarzana saw more friends in a
day than I do in a whole year". And then this Pope, whose reign was
apparently so happy and so glorious, was moved evea to tears.
As Nicholas felt
that his last hour was close at hand, his vigorous mind roused itself once
more. When the Cardinals had assembled around his dying bed he made the
celebrated speech designated by himself as his will. He began by giving thanks
to God for the many benefits conferred upon him, and then, in the manner which
has already been related, justified his action in regard to the great amount of
building which he had undertaken, adding the request that his work might be
completed. He then spoke of his measures for the deliverance of Constantinople,
because complaints had been raised against him by a great many superficial men
unacquainted with the circumstances. After a retrospect of his early life and
of the principal events of his Pontificate, Nicholas continued: "I have so
reformed and so confirmed the Holy Roman Church, which I found devastated by
war and oppressed by debts, that I have eradicated schism and won back her cities
and castles. I have not only freed her from her debts, but erected magnificent
fortresses for her defence, as, for instance, at Gualdo,
Assisi, Fabriano, Civit& Castellana, at Narni,
Orvieto, Spoleto, and Viterbo; I have adorned her with glorious buildings and
decked her with pearls and precious stones. I have provided her with costly
books and tapestry, with gold and silver vessels, and splendid vestments. And I
did not collect all these treasures by grasping avarice and simony. In all
things I was liberal, in building, in the purchase of books, in the constant
transcription of Latin and Greek manuscripts, and in the remuneration of
learned men. All this has been bestowed upon me by the Divine grace, owing to
the continued peace of the Church during my Pontificate". The Pope
concluded by exhorting all his hearers to labour for the welfare of the Church,
the Bark of St Peter.
Then Nicholas
raised his hands to heaven and said: "Almighty God, give the Holy Church a
pastor who will uphold her and make her to increase. I also beseech you and
admonish you as urgently as I can to be mindful of me in your prayers to the
Most High". Then, with dignity, he raised his right hand and said, in a
clear, distinct voice, "Benedicat vos omnipotens Deus, Pater, et Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus". Soon after this
Nicholas, whose eyes were to the last fixed on a crucifix, gave back his noble
soul to Him whose place he had filled on earth.
"It was
long", says Vespasiano da Bisticci,
"since any Pope had passed in such manner into eternity. It was wonderful
how he retained his perfect senses to the last. So died Pope Nicholas, the
light and the ornament of God's Church and of his age."
Nicholas V was
laid in St. Peter's, near the grave of his predecessor. The costly monument
erected in his honour by Cardinal Calandrini was
transferred in the time of St. Pius V to the Vatican grotto, where some parts
of it are still to be seen. Here is also the modest effigy of the great Pope,
with the four-cornered white marble urn which contains his mortal remains. His
epitaph, composed by Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini, is the last by which any Pope
was commemorated in verse.
EPITAPH
ON NICHOLAS V.
Hie sita sunt Quinti Nicolai antistitis ossa,
Aurea
qui dederat saecula, Roma, tibi.
Consilio illustris, virtute illustrior omni,
Excoluit doctos, doctior ipse, viros.
Abstalit errorem quo schisma infecerat orbera,
Restituit mores, moenia, templa,
domos.
Turn
Bernardino statuit sua sacra Senensi,
Sancta Jubilei tempora dum celebrat.
Cinxit honore caput Friderici et conjugis aureo,
Res Italas icto foedere composuit.
Attica
Romans complura volumina linguae
Prodidit. Heu! tumulo fundite thura sacro.
|
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
