Lollardy

What was Lollardy, and why was it so dangerous or objectionable that Sir John Oldcastle needed to be executed for it in 1414? That Wycliffe had to be condemned for it, especially when he translated the Bible? Why was it part of the Peasants' Revolt of 1381? Why was it important to Thomas Arundel to stamp it out?

Lollardy was an attempt in the later 14th century to make radical reforms in Western Christianity and the Roman Catholic Church. It had a synonym in "Wycliffite," because Lollards were followers of the reform ideas of John Wycliffe. "Lollard" was a pejorative nickname whose origin is uncertain, but may come from Middle Dutch lollaerd, "mumbler." In fact, "lollaerd" was used in the Netherlands much earlier than Wycliffe's movement  for non-mainstream groups such as the Beghards/Beguines and Fraticelli.

So what are some of Wycliffe's points that caught on? One is the belief in consubstantiation. The Roman Catholic Church had been teaching transubstantiation: that the bread and wine were transformed into body and blood in a way that meant they were no longer bread and wine. Wycliffe said they remained bread and wine even though the presence of God was in them as well.

What else? How about that baptism and confession were not necessary for salvation? In the New Testament, in 1 Peter 2:9, it reads:

You are royal priests, a holy nation, God’s very own possession. As a result, you can show others the goodness of God, for he called you out of the darkness into his wonderful light. 

Exodus 19:6 has "And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation."

The Lollard idea was that everyone is part of a "universal priesthood" and therefore the Church does not have the ability to give a particular divine authority to a priest. With no special divine authority, there is no value in making a confession to a priest, and anyone can baptize.

Wycliffe also believed that everyone should have access to the Bible, and so he produced the first Bible translation into Middle English vernacular. (The illustration from the 19th century shows him giving his Bible translation to his followers.) I say "produced" because scholars now believe he guided others to write parts of it and did not write it all himself. Some think there were earlier English versions that he used/incorporated/was inspired by.

So how did Lollardy catch on? If it was so different from what the Church officially believed, was it going to receive a wide acceptance? Tomorrow we'll see who from the upper echelons of society might have adopted Lollard ideas.

The Oldcastle Revolt

When Sir John Oldcastle escaped from the Tower of London to avoid execution for the heresy of Lollardy, he fled to Cooling Castle and became the center of an attempt to revolt against King Henry V. Oldcastle sent messages to Lollard friends, many of whom were wealthy and could afford to outfit followers with weapons.

One group started rebelling prematurely on 26 December 1413 in North Lincolnshire, but ended it to head to London, where they were all supposed to meet on 9 January 1414. There were many priests among the Lollards who believed in the need for reform in the Church. They helped organize groups in Derbyshire, Essex, Leicestershire, Bristol—everywhere in England, in fact.

They were not numerous enough to make a difference, however. Two yeomen spied on the rebels and found Oldcastle's hidden location. Oldcastle, learning that he was found out, decided to move ahead and destroy churches, ultimately hoping to overthrow the king.

Henry gathered troops the evening of the 9th to confront the group that was assembling in London, and sent troops on the roads to stop any others from joining the rebels. Dozens of Lollards were taken into captivity after a (not surprisingly) brief battle of two very unmatched armies. On 10 January trials were held for the heretics/traitors.

Oldcastle had managed to evade capture for a few days, but was caught—badly wounded in the process—and brought to London on a horse litter. As a heretic he should have been burned at the stake. As a traitor who turned against his king, he merited hanging (and drawing and quartering). They decided to do both. The illustration in this and yesterday's posts show him burning in the gallows. If he were lucky, then the hanging killed him before he could suffer the agonizing torture of being cooked in the flames. (It is possible that Henry—mindful of their earlier friendship—arranged this so that he would die from hanging first, saving him some suffering.)

I mentioned in yesterday's post that Oldcastle was the subject of an anonymous Elizabethan play that was likely the source material for Shakespeare's treatment of Falstaff. I also said Oldcastle's family would become important later. In fact, when Shakespeare's Henry IV appeared on stage in 1597-98, the character we know as Sir John Falstaff was called "Sir John Oldcastle." In Henry IV, Part 1, Prince Hal calls Falstaff "my old lad of the castle." In an early text of Henry IV, Part 2 in 1600, one of Falstaff's lines is preceded by "Old." instead of "Fals." And the iambic pentameter is thrown off in some lines that include "Falstaff" that would scan properly if "Oldcastle" were substituted.

The truth is, in the Elizabethan Age Protestantism had changed England and the world, and executed Lollards were seen as holy martyrs. Moreover, the Cobhams were very powerful. Objections to their famous ancestor being portrayed in this light caused the change in the Henry plays.

So what ideas was Lollardy promoting that were so threatening to the established order? Let's go into that next.

Sir John Oldcastle

Thinking of King Henry V of England often brings to mind the play by Shakespeare and the characters within. Shakespeare probably learned about them from an anonymous Elizabethan play, The Famous Victories of Henry the fifth: Containing the Honourable Battel of Agin-court: As it was plaide by the Queenes Maiesties Players. The play describes Prince Henry as an irresponsible youth who later becomes king and takes a completely serious turn, turning his back on his earlier lifestyle and the friends he had then. Its first printing was 1594; Shakespeare's first of the Henry plays, Henry IV, Part 1, came out in 1597.

One of Henry's friends was Sir John Oldcastle, the model for the Shakespeare's character of Falstaff. His family was well-to-do (this becomes important tomorrow). He was involved in the Welsh campaigns against Owain Glendower, and was made a captain of some of the Welsh castles. It was probably around this time that he came to know young Henry. Sir John was in parliament in 1404 as a Knight of the Shire for Herefordshire. He was later High Sheriff of Herefordshire and justice of the peace. When he married Joan, heiress of Cobham (an important Kent family), his financial fortunes rose: he came to own several manors as well as Cooling Castle. From then on his title in Parliament was "Lord Cobham."

He had another trait, however, that did not aid him in advancement. He was a Lollard.

Lollards were "proto-Protestants," a movement that was sparked by the ideas of John Wycliffe who wanted reform in Western Christianity. Lollards were considered heretics and dealt with accordingly when confirmed in their ideas. When the churches on his (wife's) estates engaged in unlicensed preaching, Sir John was accused of Lollardy. Henry was informed of this, but refused to take action against his friend until firm proof could be found.

It was. Something he had written was discovered that confirmed his Lollard beliefs. Again, Henry would not condemn his friend until he had spoken to him personally. Oldcastle was willing to offer up to the king "all his fortune in this world," but would not change his beliefs. He fled from Windsor and the king's presence to Cooling Castle. At this point, Henry had to let the wheels of justice run their course. Oldcastle refused the summons by the archbishop to appear before court, but Oldcastle obeyed when Henry issued a Royal Writ. Oldcastle was sentenced to burning as a heretic.

Henry ordered a reprieve of 40 days in the Tower of London to allow Oldcastle to repent. In that time, he escaped the Tower. At that point, with nothing else to lose, he decided to strike back.

How? I'll tell you tomorrow, as well as why I wrote that parenthetical note in the first sentence of the second paragraph.

Henry's College Years

Henry V (16 September 1386 - 31 August 1422) was King of England from 1413 until his death.

For a time, in his youth, he was at Queens College in Oxford. There are no records saying he was enrolled (he would have been very young at the time, considering that he was away from Oxford by the time he was sixteen, fighting the Battle of Shrewsbury), but there is other evidence to examine.

For one, his uncle Henry Beaufort was chancellor there from 1397-99. A resident of Oxford named John Rouse affirms in a history that Henry studied there "under the guardianship of his uncle Henry Beaufort, then Chancellor of Oxford."

As king, Henry supported Queens College's rights in a dispute with Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Arundel. After this, Henry made sure that Queens would not be bothered by Canterbury, and instead put it under the protection of the Archbishop of York.

It is also recorded that he learned to appreciate literature and music while at Queens. Prior to Queens he had learned the harp, the recorder, and the flute. While campaigning in 1421 in France he even had a harp delivered to him. As king he granted pensions to musical composers. He is even known to have set to music two parts of the Mass, the Gloria and the Sanctus. Note the illustration and the words in red in the upper-left corner: "Roy Henry." The music is "highly skillful" and was possibly done with help from a professional composer. You can hear the selections at this link.

In a first for an English king, he learned to write in the Middle English vernacular.

Most people's knowledge of Henry is based on Shakespeare's plays. If they remember anything about the plays, it is probably the larger-than-life character of Falstaff. Falstaff was based on a real friend of Henry, Sir John Oldcastle. And yes, Henry had to change his attitude toward Oldcastle radically from when he was a prince. The colorful Sir John Oldcastle and his fate is a good tale for next time.

The Royal Physician

Where there are royals and people of means, they will endeavor to have the best health care. A physician who had a good track record was well worth his fees (and worth giving special dispensations to; consider the example in the 5th paragraph of this post).

Although I would never want to live in the time before modern medicine, I have to admit there were some clever men and women who certainly made a difference in people's lives. One such was John Bradmore, court surgeon to King Henry IV of England. He was from a family of surgeons: his brother Nicholas was a surgeon, and his daughter Agnes married a surgeon named John Longe.

A lot of surgeons in the Middle Ages had side hobbies as metalworkers, no doubt because it was convenient to be able to visualize and manufacture your own instruments. John was a metalworker (and also called a "gamester," suggesting he made jewelry, or used gems for their supposed curative properties (see the use of amethyst here). Facility with metals could arouse suspicion, however.

The Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403 between forces led by King Henry's son Henry (who would become Henry V) and Henry "Hotspur" Percy resulted in an arrow embedded in the prince's left cheek. Higher and it might have taken out an eye and gone into his brain. Lower and it might have hit his throat and he could have bled to death. He survived the blow, but the arrow was going to require careful handling.

Normal procedure for an arrow in the flesh was to push it through and treat the wound; this could not be done without driving it through Henry's skull. The surgeons on hand tried to pull it back out, but either the shaft broke or it came free from the point; either way, the arrowhead was still there at the bottom of a deep wound.

John Bradmore would have been the ideal choice for the procedure. There was one problem: Bradmore was in jail. He was suspected of counterfeiting coins, a serious offense against the Crown. This was no time for standing on principle, however. Bradmore was sent for with haste.

Bradmore wrote one of the first treatises on surgery, called Philomena, and in it he describes his steps to help young Henry. He used the pith from an elder branch wrapped in honey-soaked linen to probe the wound to assess its depth. He then used increasingly larger probes to expand the wound. He designed an instrument (the illustration is one re-creation of it based on his description) that he could insert, twisting a screw to open the tongs and grip the arrowhead. He was able to wiggle the arrowhead back and forth and exact it. He then filled the wound with white wine, laying over it a poultice of bread, flour, barley, and honey. He stayed with the prince, changing the dressing as needed, until Henry recovered.

Bradmore died nine years later, in 1412, but lived on a handsome pension from the King in that time. He deserved it; surviving a wound like that was nearly impossible: septicemia or tetanus would have killed anyone without the extreme care that Bradmore provided. Henry went on to become King Henry V, win the Battle of Agincourt, etc.

Before Henry went on to fight battles and get wounded, he had other pursuits. I want to talk about his youth a little more, and his time at college. See you tomorrow.

Henry V

Henry of Monmouth was so-called because he was born in a tower at Monmouth Castle in Wales, but the date of his birth was not recorded because he was never expected to be king. (It has since been decided to call it 16 September 1386.)

King of England at the time was Richard II. Henry's father was the king's cousin (Henry senior was the son of John of Gaunt, younger brother of Richard II's father, Edward the Black prince.) Henry senior took part in a revolt against Richard, which resulted in his exile in 1398.

At that point, Richard took the twelve-year-old Henry under his wing, taking him to Ireland. A year later, his grandfather John of Gaunt died and the Lancastrian rebellion overthrew Richard and put Henry's father on the throne as Henry IV. Young Henry was now the eldest son of the reigning king, and was named heir apparent, Prince of Wales, and Duke of Lancaster. He also became Duke of Cornwall, Earl of Chester and Duke of Aquitaine.

In 1400 he was named Sheriff of Cornwall and put in charge of part of the military (note that he is about fourteen years old). In 1403 he led an English army to fight Owain Glendower (previously mentioned here). At the battle of Shrewsbury in 1403 against Henry Percy (immortalized as "Hotspur" in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part 1), an arrow was embedded in the left side of our Henry's face.

This would have been dire for any soldier, but the king's son was going to receive the best care. The royal physician treated it with honey as a natural antiseptic, and developed a tool to extract the embedded arrowhead before flushing the wound with alcohol. The patient survived with impressive scars that proved his battle experience (although you'll note the absence of scars in the portrait above).

That physician was John Bradmore, and is too interesting a character to not stop and talk about him next.

The Order of the Dragon

Sigismund, King of Hungary, had an awkward relationship to that title. He only became king because of his marriage to Queen Mary of Hungary. But let me go back a bit.

Mary was born in 1371, and with the death of her father, Louis I the Great, in 1382, she was crowned "King"; her mother, Elizabeth of Bosnia, managed her regency. A female king did not sit well with the nobles, who would rather have had the throne go to Mary's distant cousin, Charles III of Naples. Charles agreed.

Charles decided he should rule Hungary, and took steps to that end, arriving in Dalmatia September 1385. Meanwhile, Sigismund of Luxembourg invaded Upper Hungary (now Slovakia) in 1385, forcing Elizabeth to give him Mary in marriage. Charles' stronger claim meant he was crowned king on 31 December 1385, but the queen mother Elizabeth managed to get Charles killed in February of 1386. Mary was restored to the throne, giving Sigismund the chance to become king. Charles' supporters captured Elizabeth and Mary that July. Elizabeth was killed in January 1387, but Mary was released in June. During their captivity, Sigismund had been crowned by the nobility, and so was in a position to have his bride freed. Mary died in her early twenties in 1395, falling from a horse on a hunting trip while pregnant. (This is leading to the titular topic, never fear.)

This left Sigismund as King of Hungary under circumstances that seemed very tenuous, especially after Mary's death. He needed a way to elevate his importance in the eyes of Hungary and its neighbors and allies. An example of his status was when, in the 1396 Battle of Nicopolis that attempted to help liberate Bulgaria from the Ottomans, Sigismund's leadership was ignored by the French leader John of Nevers. It was small consolation that John was overwhelmed and Sigismund was one of the few survivors.

In December 1408 he founded a new chivalric order. The primary purpose was to unite leaders in the fight against the Ottomans; its secondary purpose (which could not have escaped notice) was to unite leaders under the founder. He did not give it a name: members wore a badge (the illustration is a recreation based on what remnants exist in museums); since the badge was clearly a dragon, it was referred to by names that were variations on "Order of the Dragon."

It lasted until the 16th century, and included many nobles and princes from that part of the world, including Vlad II Dracul and his son Vlad III Dracul, the inspiration for Bram Stoker's Dracula. There were few members from Western Europe; some of them declared themselves allies because they believed in the anti-Ottoman cause, but did not take the oath and wear the badge. One of these was, like Dracula, also the subject of a work of fiction, this time by Shakespeare (and others, to be honest). Tomorrow I'll talk a little about Henry V of England.

Vlad the Father

Vlad III Dracul was the son of Vlad II Dracul. Vlad the father was an illegitimate son of Mircea I of Wallachia, voivode (military leader) of Wallachia, who died in 1418. Under Mircea, Wallachia controlled the largest territory in its history. After his death, succession passed through a few of his sons before it got to Vlad II.

We know little about Vlad II's early life, but he must have been born prior to 1395 because historians agree that by that date he was sent to Hungary as a hostage to King Sigismund. Vlad spent some time there: Sigismund claimed that Vlad had been educated at his court.

When Vlad's father died (and the succession was fought over by various sons, both legitimate and otherwise), Vlad stayed in Hungary and other parts of the Holy Roman Empire. Sigismund treated him well, inducting him into the chivalric Order of the Dragon (the inspiration for Vlad and his son to add Dracul "Dragon" as an epithet). He was even asked to be the official receiver when the Emperor of Constantinople, John VIII Paleologos, visited to ask for help against the Ottomans in 1423.

Vlad hoped some day to return to Wallachia as its leader, but while waiting for that day he settled in Transylvania. While there he lived in Sighișoara, in a house where there is now a plaque commemorating his time. The plaque claims that his son Vlad II was born there. Vlad the elder also had coins minted there.  Sighișoara is a UNESCO World Heritage Site because it is the model of a small medieval fortified town.

Vlad ruled Wallachia twice. The first time was 1436-1442 after his brother Alexander I. In 1442, after being accused of treachery by the Ottomans (long story), he was summoned by the Ottoman governor of Bulgaria to show loyalty. He left his eldest son Mircea in charge. Vlad was captured by the Ottomans. released later, he returned to Wallachia and became voivode again from 1443-1447, after which he was dethroned by the governor of Hungary who put his nephew Vladislav in place. Vlad II was executed.

Sigismund of Hungary had created the Order of the Dragon ostensibly to fight the Ottoman Empire. Let's see how that worked out for him next time.

The Night Attack at Târgoviște

Most of the history of human beings was spent in the dark; that is, without efficient illumination. There were ways and ways of maneuvering in the dark of the night, but they were a far cry from flashlights and streetlights. Accomplishing tasks in the dead of night were hampered by the lack of lighting. War, especially, was difficult, because you needed to distinguish friend from foe, and not trip over things. Military engagements were rarely staged at night.

So when Vlad Tsepes, voivode of Wallachia, chose a night-time attack on Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire, he showed particular daring. Here's why and it happened.

Mehmed had aided Vlad in re-taking Wallachia from Vlad's usurping cousin, but was outraged that Vlad would not therefore pay him homage (he impaled the two envoys sent to collect the homage, called jizya). 

But let's jump back a bit. Mehmed would have really liked free rein of the Danube, whose left bank was controlled by Wallachia from which an attack on Ottoman ships could come. Pope Pius II had called for a Crusade against the Ottomans in 1460, but Vlad was the only potentate who showed any interest in it. The lack of enthusiasm for a Crusade emboldened Mehmed to spread his power further. In pursuit of his goal, he wound up capturing a friend of Vlad's, torturing his men and sawing Vlad's friend in half.

This is when Vlad wrote to Mehmed, saying he could not afford to pay the jizya, nor could he accept Mehmed's offer to meet and negotiate because he feared Hungary would try to conquer Wallachia if he left. That is when Mehmed discovered that Vlad was going to actually meet with Hungary's Matthias Corvinus, and Mehmed sent men to arrange an ambush. Vlad learned about it beforehand and ambushed the ambushers, attacking with handguns while they were trapped in a narrow pass.

Shortly after, Vlad invaded Bulgaria and caused great devastation and death. When Mehmed next entered Bulgaria, he discovered (by Vlad's count, in a letter to Corvinus) 23,884 Turks impaled waiting for him. There were several skirmishes and battles between Vlad's and Mehmed's armies, and Vlad prevailed in all.

Later, Mehmed advanced toward the Wallachian capital of Târgoviște. On 17 June 1462, Vlad attacked during the night. He was prepared: he had disguised himself as a Turk and snuck into the camp, wandering around the make sure he knew the layout of the camp and where the Sultan's tent was. He attacked in the night with thousands of horsemen, blowing bugles and carrying torches (see illustration). An Italian chronicler claims they attacked several times from three hours after sunset until four in the morning. A recounting by a Wallachian veteran claims that Mehmed fled shamelessly in the confusion.

Vlad's army was pursued days later, leading to another grisly sight: the road leading to the Bulgarian capital was lined with 20,000 impaled Ottomans. Vlad certainly understood the value of psychological warfare.

A note on the name "Dracula." It simply means "Son of Dracul." Vlad was the third of that name, the son of Vlad Dracul II. Dracul means "Dragon." So did Vlad III get his bloodthirstiness from his father, along with the name? We'll look at dad Dracul next time.

Dracula versus the Turks

Long before he engaged in the bloodthirsty military tactics that made him the historical inspiration for a vampire count, Vlad Tsepes (a young teen) and his brother Radu (12; called "the handsome") were hostages of the Ottoman Empire to ensure the loyalty of their father, Vlad II "The Dragon," Voivode (Prince, military leader) of Wallachia.

Vlad's father and eldest brother were killed when a governor of Hungary invaded Wallachia in 1447 and installed Vlad's cousin Vladislav, but then Hungary tried to attack the Ottomans with Vladislav along. The Ottomans decided the best counter was to invade Wallachia with Vlad Tsepes along. It was successful, but when Vladislav re-invaded within a year, Vlad had to return to the Ottoman Empire for safety.

Later, Vladislav's alliance with Hungary deteriorated, and Hungary threw its influence in with Vlad, so he invaded Wallachia, and after some bloody exchanges including starting the practice of impaling enemies (and earning the nickname "Vlad the Impaler"), he installed himself as voivode in 1460.

Because he had been freed and had help from the Ottomans, Sultan Mehmed II sent two envoys to Vlad to demand homage; Vlad had them impaled (of course). In February 1462 he invaded Ottoman territory, impaling (of course) tens of thousands of Turks. Mehmed decided that revenge was best served by replacing Vlad in Wallachia with his younger brother Radu. Vlad decided an alliance with the King of Hungary, Matthias Corvinus, was his next best option for help. Mehmed learned that Vlad was heading to see Corvinus, and had his men ambush Vlad. Vlad managed to escape the ambush.

His next move is known as the Night Attack at Târgoviște. That, and the end of Dracula, will be presented tomorrow.

The Pope and Dracula

Pope Pius II (18 October 1405 - 14 August 1464) was very busy, looking for political alliances and ways to expand his authority.

It wasn't all politics: in 1461 he canonized Saint Catherine of Siena. Much of the rest of his energy was put into more worldly actions, however, even if they had religious goals.

One of his first actions in 1458 was to make an alliance with Ferdinand II of Aragon who was pressing a claim to Naples (Naples was being contested between the House of Aragon and the House of Anjou.) In 1461, however, he persuaded King Louis XI of France to abolish something called the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges, established in 1438 that required a Church Council every ten years that had power to overrule the papacy in France. Louis thought that, in turn, Pius would support him in the Naples question, but Pius stood by his alliance with Ferdinand and Louis reinstated the Pragmatic Sanction again.

He tried to mediate between the two sides of the Thirteen Years' War between Poland and the Teutonic Knights. Failing to bring them to agreement, he declared both groups anathema.

When Duke Sigismund arrested Nicholas of Cusa (when he was bishop of Brixen) for attempting reforms and reclaiming lost diocesan revenue, Pius excommunicated Sigismund.

He was very concerned about the Turks, who had come as far west as they ever had in 1453 with the taking of Constantinople. He convened a congress in Mantua in 1459 to arrange a new Crusade against the Turks. The attempt failed; Christendom did not rise to the occasion. He did, however, inspire a prince of Wallachia, a province in Romania, to mount a war against Sultan Mehmed II of Turkey. That prince was named Vlad Tsepes, also known as Vlad III, or Vlad the Impaler, but whose other nickname came down to modern times as a famous literary figure: Dracula.

Tomorrow I'll tell you about how Dracula tried to save Christendom from infidels.

The Loving Pope Pius II

Pius II was the only pope to write an autobiography while he reigned. Lest you think he probably sanitized his life so that it seemed more appropriate for a pope, in this case he included events that were quite the opposite. He was an author of more than an autobiography: he also wrote Historia de duobus amantibus ("A Tale of Two Lovers"; see the illustration), and others.

Born Enea Silvio Bartolomeo Piccolomini to a soldier, he was one of 18 children (many of whom did not live long). He worked at the family farm until the age of 18, when he left to study at Siena, where he settled as a teacher. In 1431 he left teaching to be secretary to a bishop who was on his way to the Council of Basel, but changed jobs when that bishop ran out of money. He then went to Scotland on a secret mission, where he had a dalliance and fathered a child, who died young. He described Scotland as "wild, bare and never visited by the sun in winter."

Back in Basel, he was offered a diaconate, but disliked the obligation of abstinence. He was sent to Strasbourg, where he fathered another child (who died at 14 months). Later, at the court of Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III, he was named court poet for his cleverness and facility with language. While there, it is believed that he observed events that were turned into the "Tale of Two Lovers."

Enea did not care much for morals or strictness, but he realized that the way to power lay in the Church. His diplomatic skills working for Pope Eugene IV impressed those around him, so Eugene's successor Nicholas V made him Bishop of Trieste, and later Bishop of Siena. Now he wanted to advance, and desired to become a cardinal. He thought his chance came in 1455, but then Pope Calixtus III wanted to promote his own nephews first, and so Enea did not become a cardinal until 1456.

That meant, however, that he was part of the papal conclave on 10 August 1458, right after Calixtus died. Enea did his best to work his diplomatic skills among the cardinals and, although there were many with more experience and better ethical reputations, he managed to gather the votes so that a second ballot elected him unanimously.

According to his own writing, he did not rise above the desires of the flesh, but he did not neglect papal duties, and was keen on spreading Christianity, calling for a crusade against the Turks, who had taken Constantinople in 1453 and were now a strong presence in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Politics makes strange bedfellows, and successful Crusades sometimes required allying oneself with potentates you would not normally work with. Pius reached out to a voivode ("chief military leader") of a region in Romania called Wallachia, whose position north of the Turks would make him a helpful ally in surrounding them. Tomorrow, I'll talk about the link between Pius and a few other people mentioned in this blog, and then about his alliance with someone who had never before been mentioned: Dracula.

See you then.

Decline of the Republic of Siena

After a number of different governing bodies (a pun will become clear once you read this), Siena turned to Gian Galeazzo Visconti to lead them against the threat of Florentine expansion. He was thrust out of power five years later, however, and they went back to a council, in this case the Ten Priors. In an even more surprising move, they allied with Florence against Naples' King Ladislaus.

Also, although the Noveschi families had been exiled, a prominent Sienese named Enea Silvio Bartolomeo Piccolomini became Pope Pius II, and his influence allowed the nobles to return. The head of the Noveschi was Pandolfo Petrucci, who spent his time gathering political power until finally he was able to set himself up as a tyrant.

As with Gian Galeazzo Visconti, sometimes a strong individual is needed to get a government back on track. (Machiavelli's advice on this came about a decade after Petrucci's coup.) He did lead Siena back to greatness, promoting arts and sciences. Unfortunately, the Petrucci family was power-hungry. Pandolfo was succeeded by his son Borghese, but four years later Borghese was ousted by his cousin Raffaello. Raffaello was a cardinal, and his duties forced him to hand the control his nephew Francesco, who managed a year before Pandolfo's youngest son Fabio ousted him. Fabio was not well-liked, and in 1525 Siena exiled him.

With the Petrucci family gone, Siena saw even more internal strife. Once again the Noveschi were ousted. They were supported by Pope Clement VII, who sent an army to Siena, but it was defeated. Taking advantage of the chaos, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V installed a Spanish garrison about 1529, but Siena got rid of them in 1552 with help from France. Charles sent an army with Florentine help to lay siege to Siena, who endured for 18 months before giving up, surrendering to Spain. Since King Philip II of Spain owed large sums to the Medicis, he gave Siena to Florence. Self-rule was denied them for a long time.

One of the creations of the Republic was the Monte di Pietà or "mount of piety," founded in 1472, where poor people could get loans with manageable interest. It got its funds from charitable donors, and loans would be assured by the borrower handing over possessions as collateral. Yes, it functioned more like a pawnbroker, or an organized charity, but it helped numerous people and inspired similar arrangements all over Europe. This Siena institution never stopped functioning. Today it is called the Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, and qualifies as the oldest continuously functioning bank in the world.

Pope Pius II has been mentioned before, once even involving politics, but I'd like to look at him more closely, especially because he has a link to an even more interesting character that you all have heard of, but has not yet been mentioned here. More tomorrow (and, of course, the next day).

Republic of Siena

According to legend, Siena was founded by Senio and Ascanio, who were sons of Remus (who founded Rome with his brother Romulus). More verifiably, Romans established a military outpost in 30CE.

After the fall of Rome and prior to the Republic of Siena, for many years the city and area was run by the bishops. During a territorial dispute with Arezzo, the bishop asked for help from the nobility, who demanded a greater say in administering the city in exchange. This led eventually to ending the control by the bishops and the founding in 1125 by a consular government.

Siena prospered under the Republic, becoming a center of money-lending and the wool trade. It expanded its influence over Southern Tuscany. In 1286 the government evolved to the Nove, "The Nine," chosen from the Noveschi political party of wealthy merchants. Under the Nove Siena rose to new heights of power, producing the Cathedral of Siena and improving the city walls.

Under the Noveschi, Siena's political and economic power grew in southern Tuscany until it became a rival to Florence. Of particular issue was the fact Siena was predominantly Ghibelline versus the Florentine Guelphs. This post explains the difference; Dante mentions their conflict in his Commedia. With help from Manfred of Sicily, Siena defeated Florence in the 1260 Battle of Montaperti. Some 15,000 Florentines were killed in the battle, and Siena entered a Golden Age until...

...the Black Death. Siena was devastated, In 1355, just as they might have been recovering from the plague, Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV of Luxembourg entered Siena and the population decided to throw out the Nove and the power of the Noveschi, replacing it with the Dodici, "The Twelve." They were presently replaced by the Quindici, "The Fifteen" in 1385, then the Dieci (Ten, in 1386), then the Undici, (Eleven, 1388-1398), followed by the "Twelve Priors" from 1398-99. Ultimately, all these experiments in governing by councils ended when the fear of Florentine expansion motivated the city to turn to a single strong ruler, Gian Galeazzo Visconti, the first Duke of Milan.

Tomorrow I'll tell you about the return of the Nove, the decline of the Republic, and (my favorite), the "mount of piety," which still exists.

The Start of the Italian Renaissance

Because there are no "hard and fast" dates for cultural eras (although I nominate 1453CE for one), the Italian Renaissance painting is carefully divided up into four phases: the Proto-Renaissance (1300–1425), the Early Renaissance (1425–1495), the High Renaissance (1495–1520), and Mannerism (1520–1600, which we in this blog can safely ignore). Cimabue (c.1240 - 1302) is often called the first great artist of the Proto-Renaissance period in Italian art. Why "photo"? If it's new and part of the rebirth, why can't we just say he is the first of the Italian (prefix-free) Renaissance?

Part of the problem is that the Renaissance does not begin everywhere all at once. These phases represent trends in art and are tied to specific artists who tried something "new" and whose work influenced the style of others. The Proto-Renaissance in Italian art was dominated by two figures: Cimabue and Duccio of Siena (his Madonna and Child, now in the London National Gallery, is shown above). Along with two contemporaries, Guido of Siena and Coppo di Marcovaldo, they seem to have been influenced by the unknown the so-called Master of St Bernardino. They specialized in stylized religious paintings in which the angle of the head and position of the hands, for instance, were determined by traditional icon paintings in the Byzantine style.

Proto-Renaissance painting was dominated by religious art. During this Proto period the Black Death inspired a change in theme to the need to approach death in a state of penitence; images of death and the torments of Hell began to dominate church art. More than one painting is named "Triumph of Death" from this era.

Much of this was happening in Siena, ruled by a republic since 1125. I'd like to talk about its history next time.