|
|
LUDWIG VON PASTOR'S
HISTORY OF THE POPES FROM THE CLOSE OF THE MIDDLE AGES
CHAPTER I.
The Conclaves in the Spring of 1605.
Leo XI and Paul V.
The French Cardinals could not have appeared at a better moment,
reported Henry IV’s ambassador Béthune, to his king, overjoyed when the
necessity for a conclave arose on March 4th, 1605. The instructions given by
the French king, with this eventuality in view, five months before, to Cardinal
Joyeuse on his return to Rome, were then opened. They were drafted with his
usual clearness and precision. The French Cardinals Joyeuse, Givry, Sourdis, Olivier and Du Perron were instructed to remain
united and always to remember their duty as good priests and good Frenchmen.
Henry gave them to understand that no one must be elected Pope whose views were
very strong or partial, that is to say, no partisan of
the Spaniards. From this point of view the king indicated Cardinals Galli, Montelparo, Bianchetti and Bernerio as unacceptable to him. Provided that they were
kept well out of the pontificate, they were not to be formally excluded, since
the king did not wish to make any enemies. He also considered uncongenial Zacchia and the able but independent Blandrata. As regards
the others, such as Camillo Borghese, who modestly kept in the background,
Henry IV was indifferent; they were neither to favour nor oppose them. Among
the Cardinals whom he would like to see raised to the See of Peter, there stood
in the front rank his friend and kinsman Alessandro Medici and the famous
Church historian Cesare Baronius, both of whom had proved faithful friends of
France.
In a later instruction of March 7th, 1605, to Joyeuse the desirability
of the adherence of Cardinal Pietro Aldobrandini was especially taken into consideration.
“If we can win him over with money”, Henry IV decided, “it will be well
invested, and I do not think he will despise it; because though he has more
abundant wealth than any other Cardinal before him, nevertheless I imagine that
he will gladly increase it. For all that he will not refrain from favouring the cause of Spain, but he will do so less openly
and will be on our side in one matter or another” .
The Spanish Government was even more keenly concerned than Henry IV in
the possibility of a pontifical election. It has been calculated that during
the thirteen years of the reign of Clement VIII the Spanish Cabinet had
considered this possibility and formed opinions about it at least twenty-six
times. At Clement’s death there were still in force the
proposals, confirmed by Philip III, of a consultation in August, 1601, which had been concerned with the next conclave. According to these,
three members of the Sacred College, Valiero, Medici
and Arigoni, ought to be absolutely excluded by the
Spanish Cardinals. Although the learning and piety of Valiero were generally recognized, his Venetian origin and sentiments constituted, in
the eyes of the Spaniards, an insurmountable obstacle to his obtaining the
tiara. Medici's French sympathies and his close connection with the Grand Duke
of Tuscany were enough to decide his exclusion; as regards Arigoni,
whose learning and ability were unquestioned, the obstacle was his age,
fifty-three, since, in the opinion of the Spanish statesmen, a weak, aged man,
easy to influence, was the best Pope.
Altogether unwelcome to the Spaniards was the choice of either Cardinals
Baronius or Bellarmine, both were distinguished by their learning and strict
conscientiousness. If, in 1601, they had not been among those excluded by name,
it was solely because it was thought that they stood no chance if being
elected. A remarkable instance of the lack of comprehension on the part of
Spanish diplomacy when confronted with the moral greatness of these shining
lights of the Church is the summing up of their character. “Baronius is a man”,
it was drily said, “who is only good at writing history”.
Like Baronius, Bellarmine also was distinguished by piety and
unselfishness as well as by learning, and was content
to possess nothing beyond the allowance granted to him by the Pope. Such was
the extreme simplicity of his life that he did not require this annual income,
amounting to the comparatively small sum of eight thousand ducats, but
distributed almost all of it among the poor. Bellarmine undoubtedly possessed
all the virtues to recommend him for the highest position in the Church. The
Spanish and other diplomats questioned, rightly or wrongly, his capacity to
govern. They were also of the opinion that his belonging to the Order of the
Jesuits would not help him.
Of what sort then were the Cardinals for one of whom the Spanish
Government intended to secure the tiara? The memorandum of 1601 mentions six
names. In order to realize the strong preference for
old men, it is worthy of note that three of them, Santori, Rusticucci and Salviati, were already dead in 1605.
The extreme age of Rusticucci had reached such a
stage in 1601 that the Spanish memorandum spoke of him as if he were already
considered a complete dotard. Yet this was the man whom the king of Spain and
his advisers thought suitable to rule the Church in such difficult and stern
times! Of the other candidates favoured by the
Spaniards, Tolomeo Galli, besides his pro-Spanish
sentiments, had what was in their eyes the supreme advantage of being
seventy-nine years old; Sauli was considered
irresolute and though Piatti was indeed a good
scholar he seemed to be, in other respects, a person of little importance.
In these circumstances it must be considered fortunate for the Church
that the influence of Spain had much decreased in Rome, and that the management
of Philip III’s policy in the Curia was in the hands of a man as incompetent as
the Duke of Escalona. It was also fortunate that
national and political differences had abated in the College of Cardinals to
such a degree that few of them could be called wholeheartedly Spanish or French
in sympathy.
The Sacred College at the death of Clement VIII was composed of
sixty-nine members (fifty-six Italians, six French, four Spaniards, two Germans
and one Pole). Nine of them were absent: Ascanio Colonna, Fernando de Guevara,
Bernardo de Sandoval, Antonio Zappata and the nuncio Domenico Ginnasio were in Spain;
Pietro Gondi and Charles of Lorraine were in France, Bernard Maciejowski in Poland, and Francis von Dietrichstein in Austria. Only the last named could possibly arrive before the end of the
conclave.
Of the Cardinals present in Rome only one, Tolomeo Galli, owed his creation to Pius IV; six : Medici, Pinelli, Joyeuse, Bernerio, Sforza and Valiero, had been created by Gregory
XIII; nine: Antonio Maria Galli, Sauli, Pallotta, Pierbenedetti, Montelparo, Giustiniani, Monte, Borromeo and
Montalto by Sixtus V; five : Sfondrato, Aquaviva, Piatti, Paravicini and Farnese
by Gregory XIV; one, Facchinetti, by Innocent IX; thirty-eight : Pietro Aldobrandini, Tarugi,
Bandini, Givry, Blandrata, Borghese, Bianchetti,
Baronius, Avila, Mantica, Arigoni,
Bevilacqua, Visconti, Tosco, Zacchia, Bellarmine, Sourdis, Olivier, Spinelli, Conti, Madruzzo, Du Perron, Bufalo, Delfino, Sannesio, Valenti, Agucchio, Pamfili,
Taverna, Marzato, Cinzio Aldobrandini, Cesi, Peretti,
Este, Deti, Silvestro Aldobrandini, Doria and Pio owed their elevation to Clement VIII.
The state of the parties was substantially the same as in 1603. The
Cardinals of longer standing, viz. those created by Pius IV and Gregory XIII,
formed one group, the four chosen by Gregory XIV, led by Sfondrato,
another. In direct opposition were the adherents of Montalto and those of
Aldobrandini.
Several men of saintly life, who had always kept aloof from outside
influence and who were firmly determined to consider no interests other than
religious ones in the election of the Pope, formed a distinct group. None of
them thought of his own elevation. This group of whom contemporaries said that
they would follow nothing but their own conscience in the election, was
composed of four men who were generally regarded as ornaments of the Sacred
College. They were the Oratorians Baronius and Tarugi, the Jesuit Bellarmine and Federico Borromeo, the
nephew and spiritual heir of St. Charles.
The strongest party was that of Pietro Aldobrandini; of the thirty-eight
Cardinals of Clement VIII. twenty-two followed him, and according to some
authorities, as many as twenty-eight. Aldobrandini had assembled the Cardinals
created by his uncle, on the eve of Clement VIII's death, and exhorted them to
unity. It was an unusual meeting, which the other Cardinals viewed with
displeasure. Montalto had only eight votes at his disposal, the Spaniards
thirteen at the most. But since Montalto and the Spaniards stuck together, they
too had a sufficient number of votes to secure an
exclusion. Neither of the other parties had the required two-thirds majority. Thus there was no change even when Aldobrandini, forgetful
of his previous promises to the Spaniards, when he saw that his opponents
Montalto, Sfondrato, Aquaviva, Sforza and Facchinetti had joined them, even before the conclave went
over to the French side. This party was eight strong, since besides the French
Cardinals they could also count on Medici, Valiero and Monte. Such being the situation, it is easy to understand the popular
opinion that a long and animated conclave might be expected.
According to the agreement with the French initiated by Joyeuse,
Aldobrandini had to make the concession of abandoning Galli, whom he had
previously supported as being an opponent of Montalto, and
also Bianchetti; but in return the nephew of
Clement VIII demanded from the French that they should drop the candidature of Bernerio and Montelparo. But this
hardly driven bargain was in danger of being immediately wrecked, because the
Spaniards were spreading the rumour that the French
had decided to exclude not only Blandrata but also Zacchia, Aldobrandini’s chief but secret candidate. There
ensued a weighty discussion between Aldobrandini and Joyeuse, but they ended by
agreeing that the French would accept Blandrata and Zacchia,
on condition that Aldobrandini would support Cardinal Medici.
Not only the divisions among the Cardinals, but also the great number of
eligible candidates (papabili) promised a long
conclave. A contemporary account gives no less than twenty-one names : Galli,
Medici, Valiero, Bernerio, Sauli, Pallotta, Pierbenedetti, Montelparo, Piatti, Tarugi,
Blandrata, Baronius, Bianchetti, Mantica, Arigoni,
Tosco, Zacchia, Olivier, Ginnasio, Pamfili and
Pinelli. There was no serious discussion in the conclave about
any of the above mentioned except Baronius and Medici, who, being both favoured by France, were not at all desired by the
Spaniards. Medici was one of those already excluded in 1601. But the long standing aversion of the Spaniards to Baronius had
developed into real hatred ever since, in the eleventh volume of his great
historical work, the Ecclesiastical Annals, which appeared in 1605, he had
submitted to severe criticism the alleged privilege of the legates of Urban II,
on which the Spanish Government based its exorbitant pretensions in
ecclesiastical matters, collected in the so-called Monarchia Sicula. To discredit the important grounds on which
the Cardinal based his attack on the integrity, and thus, indirectly, on the
authenticity of this pontifical document, the Government of Madrid not only set
its learned men to work, but prohibited that
particular volume of the Annals in all the dominions subject to the Spanish
rule. Booksellers who sold the work were severely punished, at Naples even by
condemnation to the galleys. The Spanish Government thenceforward decided that
a man like Baronius was not to become Pope, as it considered even the slightest
questioning of the ecclesiastical claims of the Catholic king as impious
treason. However, not all the Cardinals of the Spanish party in Rome approved
of the exclusion of one of the most learned, respected and devout members of the Sacred College. Spinelli openly showed his contempt
for this policy, and Sforza and Borromeo were also thought to be of the same
opinion. Baronius knew very well what hostility and persecution he would draw
upon himself from the Spaniards when he treated of the document of Urban II in
his great historical work. But his contempt of human favour and his love of
truth regardless of consequences did not allow any scruples to arise in him. He
was well aware of the discussions which had taken
place under Pius V and Gregory XIII about the Monarchia Sicula and also of their inconclusiveness. As the
question had to be treated in his historical work, and as it was also of great
importance for the Church, he applied himself to it with all the enthusiasm of
a conscientious student. When he repeatedly used expressions of great severity,
he did so on purpose, because he was of the opinion that a Cardinal above all ought not to show weakness in a matter of such importance
for the Church; nevertheless, on the advice of some friends, he modified
several passages, so as not to be lacking in the respect due to the King of
Spain. When the work was finished, he presented it to Clement VIII, who read it
attentively and decided that Baronius ought to have it printed without
alteration. Several other Cardinals whom the Pope consulted were of the same
opinion. Baronius in a private letter expressed his joy at the result, as he
hoped that it would be no small assistance towards his remaining in his present
condition, for the treatise would give the Spaniards the opportunity of showing
themselves his opponents during the election of a Pope. Such being his
sentiments Baronius bore with equal patience the fact that even two Cardinals,
Anselmo Marzato and Ascanio Colonna censured his
work.
An incident which took place before the conclave showed to what kind of
means the Spanish Government had recourse in order to oppose the candidature of Baronius. On March 9th, 1605, Cardinal Avila laid
before the Cardinals assembled in Congregation two letters from the Viceroy of
Naples, one addressed to the dead Pope, the other to Sacred College. The
contents of both constituted a violent attack on Baronius, who was accused of
having drawn up his treatise On the Monarchia Sicula from French sources. The Viceroy asked for the
prohibition of Baronius’ work! Cinzio Aldobrandini at
once raised doubts as to the authenticity of the letters. Baronius thought he
ought not to keep silent about their contents, since the Monarchia Sicula was not a personal matter but one that
concerned the Church. Calmly but firmly he made it
clear that he had used sources from the Vatican Library alone, and that none
had come from France. Moreover he had submitted his
work to the censorship of the Pope, who had read it and consigned it for
examination to three Cardinals, who in turn had entirely approved of it before
it was printed. He was not taking part against the King of Spain,
but acting in his real interests. In addition, he had used no
expressions beyond what the subject demanded. His speech created a profound
impression. On the proposal of Medici it was resolved
to leave the decision to the new Pope. The confusion of the Spanish party was
further increased when it transpired that the letters were a forgery. If the
election had taken place at once, Baronius would probably have been raised to
the Chair of Peter.
The days which elapsed before the opening of the conclave were
diligently used by the diplomats. The French ambassador Bethune was hopeful
enough of the issue. “Now we are sure”, he wrote to Villeroi on March 11th, “that none of our enemies will be elected, and not without hope
that one of our friends will be promoted”. With even more certainty he wrote
the same day to Henry IV: “The Spaniards are driven on to the defensive, but we
have not yet reached the goal”. When the conclave was closed late at night on
March 14th, the activity of Béthune, like that of the other diplomats, came to
an end. Then came the Cardinals’ turn. Those favouring the Spaniards still directed all their energies to obtaining by every possible
means the exclusion of Baronius, whose humility was thereby delighted. Cardinal
Avila acted in the matter with more zeal than discretion. He loaded
Aldobrandini with reproaches for deserting the Spanish cause,
and declared that he would prefer to remain in conclave for a year
rather than allow anything to be done to the detriment of his king.
Aldobrandini replied that he would not mind remaining two years, since he was
determined to endure anything rather than confer the tiara on anyone not among
the number of his own favoured Cardinals.
On March 19th it was rumoured that Baronius
had obtained thirty-nine votes. The news proved false. In fact the well-informed thenceforward doubted whether Aldobrandini really desired the
elevation of the great historian to the pontificate, since he had hindered his
being elected by adoration. It was thought that Aldobrandini favoured rather the election of Tosco, who, besides
Baronius, had received a number of votes at the
beginning. In reality the candidate secretly favoured by the late Pope’s nephew was still Zacchia, of whom, however, Joyeuse would not hear. A
decision was hoped for when the absent Cardinals would have arrived. The Spaniards
cherished the hope that it might still be possible for Guevara, Colonna and Zappata to arrive in time. Aldobrandini was waiting for Ginnasio. But none of these appeared. Instead, Dietrichstein arrived on March 19th. The opponents of Spain
reminded him of the favours which Clement VIII had
bestowed on him, and represented to him that he ought
to entertain the highest esteem for the person of Baronius.
With anxious tension everybody wondered on which side the German
Cardinal would range himself. Dietrichstein certainly
wavered between his own inclinations and his obligations to the House of
Hapsburg, but eventually he was persuaded by Madruzzo,
Doria and Farnese, who were all on the Spanish side, to withhold his support
from Baronius. The Spaniards now commanded at least twenty-three votes for the
latter’s exclusion. But the opposite party did not give up the struggle. On
March 24th Baronius had twenty-three votes. The rumour actually spread in Rome that he was elected, but a
little later it became known that his election had been wrecked by the
opposition of the Spaniards. These even had the effrontery to appeal to St.
Thomas Aquinas, who taught that unsuitable persons, even if virtuous, ought not
to be raised to high dignity, as they might occasion wars and scandal! They
recalled that Baronius had not only written against the Monarchia Sicula,
but had even questioned the sojourn of St. James in Spain. It is not
difficult to understand that the great historian’s adherents did not change
their opinion on such grounds.
Foresto,
the Mantuan envoy, wrote on March 26th that Baronius, who had received
twenty-seven votes on the preceding day, would probably obtain the tiara, if no
change took place during the following days. Of all the candidates he had the
fewest obstacles to overcome. Foresto added that
Baronius did nothing towards his own election, on the contrary he even took
pains to spoil his chances in every way. He dissuaded the Cardinals, reminding
them of his humble origin and his coming from a long-lived family. All Clement
VIII’s Cardinals, continued Foresto, are favourable to this blameless man, especially Borromeo, Paravicini and Bandini, besides Giustiniani;
even some of Montalto’s Cardinals, such as Pinelli and Pierbenedetti, showed themselves not averse.
Notwithstanding, Foresto was not yet entirely sure of
Baronius’ success. Not all on his side, he thought, were as sure and faithful
supporters as were Borromeo and Paravicini. As regards both Cinzio and Pietro Aldobrandini, Foresto entertained serious
doubts, since during the pontificate of Clement VIII. Baronius in his frankness
had repeatedly criticized the actions of the papal nephews. Foresto hinted that he knew from a reliable source that Pietro Aldobrandini did not
wish for the election of Baronius, because he thought him too independent and also because he did not think it prudent to break
altogether with the Spaniards. The envoy believed that Aldobrandini really
wished to secure the tiara for another candidate, preferably Zacchia, or, failing him, Ginnasio,
Tosco or Blandrata, thus making use of the candidature of Baronius only in order to obtain the election of one of these.
Meanwhile during the next few days the votes
for Baronius increased, to the utmost alarm of the Spaniards. He had thirty-one
on March 27th, and thirty-two on the 30th. But he obviously could not obtain
the further eight votes necessary for the two-thirds majority,
since the Spaniards held firm. In the meantime an important change took place, which provided well-grounded hope for a speedy
end to the wearisome electoral contest.
During the days immediately before the election the name of Cardinal
Medici had often been mentioned; but in the first week of the conclave it was only rarely spoken of, although in the scrutinies he always secured a certain number of votes.
Joyeuse never lost sight of Medici’s candidature for a single moment. Assisted
by Du Perron, he displayed an indefatigable activity for this end, without
however finding in Aldobrandini the support on which he had counted. Arigoni and Visconti also exerted themselves upon Clement
VIII’s nephew; but it was in vain, for he still had in mind the elevation of Zacchia.
The more evident it became that Baronius would not obtain the two-thirds
majority, the more must Medici’s star be in the ascendant. The Spaniards, of
course, opposed his candidature now as before, but there were hopes of
overcoming their opposition, since several of the more important Cardinals of
the Spanish party, such as Aquaviva, Farnese and his friend Sfondrato were bound to Medici by the closest ties. Baronius, entirely unselfish, openly
declared himself for Medici throughout the whole conclave. While Aldobrandini
still hesitated in coming to a decision, Joyeuse succeeded at the end of March
in gaining Montalto for Medici. This was of the greatest importance. At that very
moment Viglienna, the Catholic king’s ambassador,
committed one of his usual follies. In the night of March 31st-April 1st he
appeared at the door of the conclave, where the greatest excitement and tension
prevailed. He informed the Cardinals that a group of English students from
Padua, disguised as pilgrims, intended to rob the treasury of the sanctuary at
Loreto. But this news had already been known for three weeks and all
precautions had long ago been taken against any such attempt. This solemn
communication to the Cardinals made the Spaniards ridiculous and discredited
their cause.
The scrutiny on the following day, April 1st, yielded no result;
Baronius had only twenty-eight votes and Medici thirteen. After this Joyeuse
decided to carry his candidate’s cause to a conclusion. He went to Aldobrandini
and explained to him all the reasons for the election of Medici. Aldobrandini
still hesitated. Joyeuse only gave him a little time to decide. Meanwhile
Visconti, Borromeo and Bernerio left no stone
unturned to persuade the nephew to accept Medici’s candidature, for which they
had also gained some of Avila’s party.
Cardinal Avila, who had not yet officially published the Spanish
exclusion,4 did not pay proper attention to these events. Though informed by
Doria and Madruzzo of the danger which threatened, he
thought the election of Medici impossible and did not allow his tranquillity to be perturbed. He evidently thought that the
election would be no more than just another regular taking of votes. In this he
was completely mistaken. Like the other friends of Spain, Dietrichstein also decided to support the election of Medici, after the latter had allayed
his anxiety by assuring him that he would always be attached to the Emperor
Rudolph and King Philip, and would protect both of
them as pillars of the Church. Aldobrandini, still reluctant, was urged by his
own adherents to decide at once. After Baronius had once more spoken in favour
of Medici and urged his immediate election, Aldobrandini finally yielded. When
he went to Medici’s room, more than two-thirds of the electors were found to be
assembled there, and they had elected him Pope without any further scrutiny.
Not till this was announced did the scales fall from the eyes of Avila. He
hurried along the corridors of the conclave to call together his former
adherents for a formal exclusion, and all the time he uttered vehement
protests; but it was too late. Avila renewed his protest in the Pauline Chapel,
where the Cardinals had gone for the adoration of the new Pope, calling out at
the top of his voice that the Catholic king did not want Cardinal de Medici as
Pope. But his own adherents rejoined that any kind of protest was useless
against one who was already elected Pope. Simply as a matter of customary form
an open scrutiny was then held for Medici, who chose the name of Leo XI. The
night being already well advanced, the conclave was not thrown open, in order to avoid any disorder, and the election was only
announced to the public on the following morning, April 2nd.
The election of Medici was an event of the greatest importance,
since it had taken place with open disregard for the wishes of the King
of Spain. From the Spanish side an impudent calumny was started that the
Cardinals had been bribed by France. In contrast to the discontent at Philip
III’s court was the joy in Paris. Henry IV wrote to Joyeuse that he had secured
for him the greatest triumph which he had gained since his elevation to the
throne. In Rome unanimity prevailed as to the admirable qualities of the new
Pope. Giovanni Battista Marini in one of his poems expressed the hope that a
long life would be granted him.
Alessandro de Medici was descended from a collateral line of the
celebrated Florentine family. Born on June 2nd, 1535, the son of Ottavio de
Medici and Francesca Salviati, a niece of Leo X, he gave proof even from
earliest infancy of extraordinary gifts of mind and heart. He was an exemplary
son and sincerely pious. His close connection with the Dominicans at San Marco
led his relations to suspect that he intended to enter their Order. But this
was not the case; the youth, who had a poetic temperament, dreamed rather of a
career in the world, and not till he was in his twenties did he decide to
become a priest. His first priestly charge was in a quiet rural district, until
Cosimo de' Medici in 1569 entrusted to his gifted kinsman the important post of
ambassador in Rome. Alessandro filled it to the satisfaction of his patron as
well as of Pius V and Gregory XIII. In Rome he won the friendship of Cardinals
Pacheco and Morone, and also of Philip Neri. In a short time he became one of the Saint’s favourite disciples. It
was Medici who, in 1595, solemnly laid the foundation stone of the magnificent
Oratorian church, S. Maria in Vallicella later, when
the church was opened for worship, it was he who sang the first High Mass.
Cosimo was full of praise for the way in which Alessandro de Medici
discharged his duties. In 1573 he obtained the diocese of Pistoia, whilst he
retained his post as ambassador. As a conscientious man he took care that the
decrees of the Council of Trent were enforced in his diocese through his
representative. When the Archbishop of Florence, Antonio Altoviti,
died towards the end of 1573, Medici succeeded him. But not even then was he
allowed to rule his diocese in person, since he seemed indispensable in Rome.
It was to Medici’s credit that he nevertheless did everything possible to
introduce the necessary ecclesiastical reforms among secular and regular clergy
alike. In this he proceeded with such prudence and firmness that it seemed as
if he had been employed for years in nothing but diocesan affairs. In Rome he
enjoyed the highest reputation. A report of the year 1574 heaped praises upon
him. Ten years later Gregory XII admitted him to the Sacred College (December
12th, 1583). The nomination took him completely by surprise; he welcomed it
chiefly because it freed him from the almost insupportable burden of the
Embassy, which he had borne for fifteen years. To distinguish him from Cardinal
Ferdinando de Medici, Alessandro became now generally known as the Cardinal of
Florence. Even as a Cardinal he still remained closely
associated with Philip Neri. The fact that Medici did
not share Philip Neri’s veneration for Savonarola,
which on the Saint’s part was based on insufficient knowledge of the man, in no
way interfered with their friendship. The Cardinal often hastened to the room
of the founder of the Oratorians, which he is said to
have called his Paradise.
During the eventful pontificate of Clement VIII, Medici and Philip Neri were entirely at one in their opinion of the French
situation. Both had great influence on the decision in favour of Henry IV.
Medici’s grief was profound when, on May 26th, 1595, death removed his friend and
spiritual father; his sweetest consolation in this grievous loss was still to
show him all the affection and veneration possible. Having learned that the Oratorians, from humility and poverty, had buried the body
of their beloved Father in the common burying-place, he and Federico Borromeo
together prepared a special tomb for him; when the Saint’s body was found quite
intact four years later, he placed on the head with his own hands a crown made
of gold and precious stones at his own expense, and took a costly ring from his
own finger to put on the hand of the beloved dead.
When Pope Clement VIII, in 1596, entrusted to Alessandro de Medici the
important legation to France, d’Ossat gave the
following description of him: “The Cardinal, now sixty years old, has the reputation of being
an excellent, prudent, moderate, and upright man in whom there is no guile. The
Pope loves and esteems him. He was always in favour of the absolution of our
king. Wholly devoted though he is to the Holy See, he is nevertheless closely
associated with the Grand Duke of Tuscany, his kinsman, whose ambassador in
Rome he was for many years and to whom he owes in part his admission to the
Sacred College”.
Cardinal Medici spent two whole years in France. When he returned to
Rome in the autumn of 1598 he had completely won the
friendship of Henry IV. Although he was thoroughly disliked by the Spaniards
for his French sympathies, yet he was thenceforward considered a serious
candidate for the tiara. In a report of the year 1600, it was said that his
prospects in this respect were excellent. Medici, according to a statement made
at the time by Dolfin, the Venetian ambassador, was
much esteemed and also considered a good ecclesiastic.
He had many friends and no avowed enemy. Montalto’s party would certainly put
him forward as their candidate in case of an election. Gregory XIII’s Cardinals
also supported him and Pietro Aldobrandini, after striving in vain for his own
candidates, would prefer him to any other.
The aversion of the Spaniards for Cardinal Medici, whose sympathies were
French, was further increased by his close relations with the Grand Duke of
Tuscany. The Cardinal did not mind. He complained with great frankness of the
interference of Spanish statesmen in the internal affairs of the Church. Not
they, he remarked on one occasion, had received the stole and the keys. This
remark gave the lie to the reproach levelled against Medici by the Spanish
party that he was very timid in dealing with public affairs. Equally
questionable was the opinion, due to the same party, that he had a hasty
temper. It is true that as a genuine Florentine he loved delicate wit, but he
always kept within the limits of courtesy. In his private letters he shows
himself a typical Tuscan, distinguished, highly gifted, modest and pious.
MedicI’s generosity, especially towards writers, was widely admired as well as his
interest in art. The latter greatly proved very beneficial to S. Maria in Trastevere and S. Martino ai Monti. In 1574 Medici already
possessed a fine collection of statues, which he placed in his villa near S.
Francesca Romana. Later he also acquired the villa on the Pincio which bears his name.
The hostility of the Spaniards towards the Cardinal did not cease
throughout the pontificate of Clement VIII. On the Pope’s death they were sure
that the Catholic king would demand his exclusion. In order
to discredit him, it was given out from the Spanish side that he was
unsuited to govern; but that he was an admirable man could not be denied even
by his enemies.
Leo XI, according to the accounts of his contemporaries, was a handsome
man, of imposing stature, spotless and pure in his conduct, and deeply imbued
with a sense of the great obligations of the Papacy. He appointed as Secretary
of State his able great-nephew Roberto Ubaldini; his Treasurer was the
Florentine Luigi Capponi, his Secretary for Briefs another fellow countryman,
Pietro Strozzi. At the head of the Consulta he placed
Pietro Aldobrandini. Of all the Cardinals the learned and pious Sfondrato had the greatest influence.
One of the first matters upon which Leo XI was engaged was the support
of the Imperialists in Hungary against the Turks, which had been agreed to in
the terms of election. He declared his immediate readiness to help to the
utmost of his ability, although the Camera Apostolica was burdened with debts. This was decided in a Congregation of Cardinals for
Hungarian affairs on April 13th, 1605, on which occasion the new Pope expressed
his intentions regarding the government of the Church in a way calculated to
raise the highest hopes. Very generous help was sent to the hard-pressed
Emperor. In conformity with the terms of election, Leo XI convoked a
Congregation of Cardinals without delay for the reform of the conclave. The
method then in use of electing the Pope by means of general homage (adoration)
was to be abolished, and that of secret voting substituted. Du Perron remarks
that Aldobrandini’s opponents would agree to this,
since he would thus lose his control over Clement VIII’s Cardinals, and that
those opposed to the Spaniards would be even better pleased, since then
everyone would be able to give his vote freely and without the pressure of
their tyranny. Further, Leo XI did not show any undue favouritism to France, as the Spaniards had feared. When Joyeuse asked a favour of him in
the name of Henry IV, he roundly rejected the petition, saying that his duty
was to rule justly and rightly and not to be complaisant to anyone. Leo XI won
over the Romans by abolishing some oppressive taxes. April 10th, Easter Sunday,
on which the coronation of the new Head of the Church took place, was a double
holiday for the city. It was characteristic of the Pope’s strictness with regard to his relations that none of them were allowed
to be present when he took possession of the Lateran.
On the occasion of this function, which took place on April 17th, the old man of seventy caught a
which led to his death on April 27th. While the Pope lay on his death-bed at the Quirinal, he was assailed with requests
from various quarters, especially from the Spaniards, to confer the purple on
his nephew Ottaviano de Medici. Leo XI would not hear
of it, thereby showing himself to the very end a worthy disciple of Philip Neri, who, so it was said, had predicted not only that the
tiara would be conferred on him but also the short duration of his pontificate.
The mourning for the death of this noble Pope extended to all circles in Rome;
in Florence also the grief was profound.
The sorrow in France was as great as the rejoicing had been a little
before.
The mortal remains of Leo XI were buried in St. Peter’s. His nephew,
Roberto Ubaldini, who had received the purple under Paul V, had a marble
monument erected there in the left aisle, the execution of which was entrusted
to Francesco Algardi, who had a reputation as a
restorer of ancient remains. The work was stopped by the death of Ubaldini
(1635) and so the tomb was not completed until about the end of the first half
of the seventeenth century. The material is white marble and the work is distinguished by its simplicity and unity. As with the famous
monument which Bernini erected to Urban VIII, so there too the Pope is
represented enthroned above the sarcophagus and as giving his blessing, while
beside him stand the figures of Wisdom, represented by Minerva, and
Munificence, pouring gold and jewels from a cornucopia. But what a contrast to
the celebrated work of Bernini! Instead of a vast recess, ornamented with
variegated stones, Algardi was content with a slight
excavation of the walls which only serves as a dull background to the principal
figure, so that the contour seems cramped. Beauty cannot be denied to the
figures at the side, which Algardi carved with the
help of his pupils Giuseppe Peroni and Ercole Ferrata, but they are not
organically related to the monument. The sarcophagus, decorated with a relief
(representing the completion by Cardinal Medici of Henry IV’s reconciliation to
the Church) gives an impression of heaviness. The pedestal is gracefully
ornamented with the heraldic rose of the Pope, which was interpreted by the
allegorical taste of the time as an allusion to the extreme shortness of his
reign. The best part of the whole work is the simple statue, which portrays
very well the tired old man, his right hand only half raised in benediction.
On May 8th, 1605, fifty-nine Cardinals entered the conclave. Zacchia and Madruzzo were ill; Agucchio had died on April 27th. This time the discussions
were even more violent than after the death of Clement VIII, a natural
consequence of the disorganization of parties as the result of recent events. Aldobrandini’s attitude during the conclave which elected
Leo XI, had considerably increased the number of his opponents; twenty-one of
them were entirely in accord, including twelve of Montalto’s party and five of Sfondrato’s adherents. The French and the Spaniards were
independent with five votes each, as also the Venetians with three. Aldobrandini’s party had twenty-six votes. Immediately
after Leo XI’s death, Clement VIII’s nephew had tried to effect a rapprochement with the Spaniards. He was ready to unite with them, if this
time his ardent desire, the elevation of a Cardinal of his own party, could be
satisfied. In his interviews with Philip III’s ambassador, Aldobrandini strove
before all else to win over the Spaniards to the candidature of Ginnasio or else for that of Zacchia,
Tosco or Blandrata; only if they met with insurmountable obstacles would he
support Galli. These negotiations were specially directed against Montalto, who
had fallen so far short of the Spaniards’ expectations, and for whom the
elevation of Galli would be a terrible blow. On April 30th the Mantuan envoy
reported that if Aldobrandini’s plans failed, Sauli would have a considerable chance of success.
Cardinal Sauli had the reputation of being a
statesman of importance. He drew a pension from Philip III and was definitely favoured by the
Spaniards. Sfondrato’s party, comprising seven votes,
also supported him. Even during the conclave which elected Clement VIII the
French were not averse to this combination. Sauli was
now regarded as their candidate also. But Aldobrandini showed himself his
determined opponent, not only because Cardinal Sauli owed his elevation to Sixtus V but for many other
reasons also; above all, he could not forget that at the time of the election
of Clement VIII Sauli had worked against him. He
knew, moreover, that one of Sauli’s partisans had
suggested that a Pope ought to be elected who would punish Clement VIII’s
nephew. The danger became the more grave for
Aldobrandini, who moreover had suffered from fever since the end of April,
when some of his Cardinals, such as Visconti and Bandini, gave their support to Sauli. Thanks to the efforts of Visconti and Giustiniani, the negotiations on Sauli’s behalf seemed to have made such progress, that it was calculated, at a meeting
held in Sfondrato’s room, that they could rely on
thirty-five votes. But every effort to win over Aldobrandini was met by him
with a decided refusal. In these circumstances there could be no hope of an
agreement with the Spaniards.
Pierbenedetti,
though emphatically rejected by the Spaniards as well as Baronius and Valiero, was considered as a rival to Sauli.
When it was discovered that the Spaniards would not have any of Aldobrandini’s Cardinals, instead of the desired agreement
violent opposition arose; the conclave was hardly over before the nephew
complained of the perfidy of the Spaniards, who had completely disregarded him
and, partly through malice and partly through stupidity, had tried to injure
him as much as they could. The position of the French in regard to Sauli’s candidature, which they could not abandon without
acting directly contrary to the orders of Henry IV, was difficult; on the other hand they realized that to support him meant a break
with Aldobrandini.
In addition to Sauli, there was much talk on
the eve of the conclave of Baronius and more particularly of Tosco; the latter
was supported especially by Bevilacqua, Cesi,
Delfino, Este and even Aldobrandini, although in his inmost heart he adhered to
his old candidates, Zacchia, Ginnasio or else Blandrata. Next to Tosco came Bianchetti, but
like Galli, Montelparo and all the Cardinals
belonging to Religious Orders, except the Capuchin Marzato,
he too was rejected by the French. For these reasons it seemed quite possible
that the majority would agree upon Valiero, who was
an excellent man and much more acceptable to the Sacred College than Galli.
Aldobrandini and Montalto had absolute faith in Valiero.
The only obstacle which presented itself was the opposition of Spain, but it
was thought possible to overcome that through the fear of Baronius’ election,
in comparison with which Valiero’s seemed a less evil.
During the first days of the conclave the attempt was made, especially
by Cardinals Baronius, Sfondrato, Aquaviva, Farnese,
Sforza and Piatti and their adherents, to obtain the
tiara for the famous Jesuit Bellarmine. Bellarmine himself desired his election
so little that he said that he would not so much as pick up a straw if that
alone would obtain it. Cardinal Dietrichstein relates
that when he revealed to Bellarmine what was intended for him, the latter
replied that he even had it in mind to renounce the dignity of Cardinal. After
the conclave Bellarmine wrote to a friend that, realizing his own weakness, he
had prayed to God with his whole heart not to allow him to attain so perilous a
height.
The elevation of Bellarmine failed. The Capuchin Marzato made capital of the position which the famous theologian had taken up on the
question of grace. Aldobrandini employed passive resistance to his candidature.
Avila informed Bellarmine that he was openly excluded by the Spanish king,
without waiting for instructions on the point. Whereupon Montalto proposed
Cardinal Pierbenedetti, who was positively hated by
the Spaniards, and especially by the ambassador, the Duke of Escalona. Aldobrandini made no objection, but meanwhile Sfondrato revealed the matter to Cardinal Avila, who
frustrated Montalto’s project. Then on May 14th, when Aldobrandini came forward
with the candidature of Blandrata, Montalto and other opponents of Aldobrandini’s schemes, such as Sfondrato,
Farnese, Este and Visconti, met in Aquaviva’s cell to proclaim emphatically the exclusion of Blandrata. The young Cardinals,
Carlo Pio and Silvestro Aldobrandini, whom Pietro
Aldobrandini had sent to the meeting, were thus unwilling witnesses of an
occurrence so humiliating for their leader. Aldobrandini retaliated the
following day by the open exclusion of Sauli,
obtaining thirty-two votes against him. At the same time the nephew’s party
decided to give their votes to none but to one of his Cardinals and to exclude
all whom their leader excluded.
While violent discussions arose between Cardinals Avila, Aquaviva and Sauli, on the night of May 15th-16th the candidature of
Tosco came to the fore. On May 14th it was already rumoured in Rome that Tosco’s election to the Papacy was imminent. Aldobrandini had
drawn attention to this Cardinal, who was favoured by
the Spaniards and Sfondrato and his party, and for
whom the French also showed an inclination, as they did not wish to fall foul
of Clement VIII’s nephew. Even Montalto showed favour to this candidate, though
not very willingly. Este, Cesi, Bevilacqua and Monte
exerted themselves energetically for Tosco. Pio, who had had disputes with
Tosco, was pacified by Bevilacqua. Only three of the Cardinals appointed by
Clement VIII who, like the saintly religious that they were, proceeded with the
utmost conscientiousness, opposed the candidature of Tosco, namely the Oratorians Baronius and Tarugi and the Jesuit Bellarmine; Cardinals Taverna, Pio and Olivier also showed
disinclination.
The opposition to Tosco’s elevation was not without foundation. Tosco,
though a notable jurist, had only become a priest late in life, and had
retained from his early military career such rough manners that, although
seventy years of age, he did not seem suited to the dignity of Sovereign
Pontiff. In particular he was reproached for his free use of coarse and offensive expressions, such as the people employed, and which his friends
tried to excuse as Lombardisms. On May 16th Tosco’s
adherents tried to make him Pope by adoration. At this critical moment Baronius
threw the whole weight of his authority into the scales. While Aldobrandini and
Montalto were going with their adherents to elect Tosco, they met Baronius and Tarugi in the Sala Ducale. Aldobrandini and Aquaviva
invited Baronius to join them. But he loudly declared that the election of a
man whose manners and speech so plainly disclosed the old soldier, would cause
grave scandal on all sides; he, Tarugi and Bellarmine
had no intention of causing a schism, but they would be the last to consent to
such a decision. This courageous declaration proved decisive. Montalto withdrew
his support from Tosco, remarking that it would be better to elect the holy old
man who had spoken so fearlessly and so much to the point. Thereupon Giustiniani called out loudly: “Let us elect Baronius!”. Plinio, Montalto’s conclavist, raised the cry: “Long live
Baronius!” . Whilst some Cardinals acquiesced, others
loudly declared for Tosco. A regular tumult ensued; in the confusion some of
the Cardinals had their rochets torn. In this way the Sala Regia was reached.
From there the opponents of Tosco and the adherents of Baronius withdrew to the
Pauline Chapel, and the supporters of Tosco to the Sistine. Among the latter
were five Frenchmen who, however, deserted Tosco. Baronius’ party, which
counted more than twenty-two votes, wanted to proclaim the famous historian
Pope, but Baronius opposed this with such force that they had to give up the
attempt. Thirty-eight Cardinals still stood firm for Tosco, and Madruzzo, now recovered from his illness, joined them.
A contemporary, who was in the neighbourhood of the conclave, thus relates what he was able to hear through the tumult which
reigned there. He distinctly heard Aldobrandini call out: “I tell you he is Pope!”.
With equal distinctness he heard the answer of some others: “He is not and he never will be!”. There was already a fear that a
schism might occur; the number of the guards was doubled. Rumours spread in Rome that Tosco, or alternatively Valiero was elected; a great crowd collected in front of the houses of both.
In spite of all the efforts of Tosco’s supporters, they could not obtain the two votes
still lacking for the two-thirds majority. Baronius’ candidature, which the
Spaniards opposed with the utmost violence, seemed equally hopeless. Finally,
after seven hours of fruitless negotiations, the senior Cardinals of Clement
VIII and Sixtus V realized that a compromise was
imperative. Aldobrandini and Montalto then met in the Sala Regia for an
interview. Clement VIII’s nephew would have liked to impose Blandrata. Montalto
allowed himself to be won over, but Farnese opposed the candidature so
vehemently that it could not possibly succeed.
In the course of the subsequent negotiations between Aldobrandini and Montalto, the conversation
turned unexpectedly upon Camillo Borghese, one of Clement VIII’s Cardinals, who
enjoyed the esteem of all and had no particular enemy. Aldobrandini and
Montalto agreed on him in a very short time. Both informed their friends, who
likewise approved. Borghese, who had hitherto kept modestly in the background,
would not believe at first that he was being seriously considered. But he found
himself greeted on all sides as Pope. Aldobrandini himself conducted him to the
Pauline Chapel, where his election took place by open ballot the same evening.
When Borghese’ s name was pronounced, the storm of the electoral contest
was suddenly and unexpectedly calmed. The change was so instantaneous that even
contemporaries attributed it to divine Providence; some of the Cardinals had
implored the help of heaven during the critical period in which the two
contending parties wrestled with each other. While the others negotiated and
disputed these knelt in prayer.
Even well-informed diplomats did not know for certain whether it was
Montalto or Aldobrandini who first proposed Borghese. It is certain, however,
and it was also the opinion of the majority of the
electors, that the greater credit for loosing the
knot belonged to Montalto, inasmuch as he prevented Tosco’s success.
The election of Cardinal Borghese, only fifty-two years of age, who, in
gratitude to the Farnese Pope, his father’s patron, took the name of Paul V,
was a surprise to the whole world. If at the last conclave an aged invalid had
been elected, this time the youngest and most robust of all the candidates was
chosen. As the new Head of the Church had been born in Rome, where he had many
relations, the inhabitants of the Eternal City showed as much joy as those of
Siena, the home of the Borghese. To the French Paul V was not as welcome as Leo XI, since he enjoyed a pension of 2,000 scudi from the
Spaniards. Nevertheless Henry IV was not displeased
with the election, since the Pope’s father had emigrated from Siena when the
city was conquered by the Spaniards. It is quite comprehensible that the Bourbon king should have exclaimed, when he first heard the
news: “God be praised; the French Cardinals have shown that I have some power
in Rome and in the conclave”. In comparison with the result of previous
elections, the present event might certainly be considered very favourable to France. On the other hand the Spaniards had found no more favour for their candidates with the majority
of the Cardinals in the second conclave of 1605 than they had obtained in the
first. Their annoyance at their defeat in a sphere which they had dominated for
so long was all the greater, inasmuch as what they had
lost, the French had gained.
Antecedents, Character and Environment
of Paul V.
|