[183] Garibay, Comp. Historial de España, Lib. XVI. c. 31.—La Puente, Epit. de la Cronica de Juan II., Lib. IV. c. i.—Pelayo, Heterodoxos Españoles, I. 546-7.—Mariana, Lib. XXI. c. 18.—Rodrigo, Inquisicion, II. 11-12.—Paramo, p. 131.

[184] Wadding. ann. 1383, No. 2.—Gobelinæ Personæ Cosmodrom. Æt. v. c. 84 (Meibom. Rer. German. I. 317).

[185] Baluz. et Mansi IV. 566 sqq. In 1606 Paul V. allowed the Jesuats to take orders.

[186] Wadding, ann. 1350, No. 15; ann. 1354, No. 1, 2; ann. 1362, No. 4.—Chron. Glassberger ann. 1352, 1354, 1355.

[187] Wadding. ann. 1368, No. 10-13.

[188] Wadding. ann. 1375, No. 44; ann. 1390, No. 1-10; ann. 1403, No. 1; ann. 1405, No. 3; ann. 1415, No. 6-7; ann. 1431, No. 8; ann. 1434, No. 7; ann. 1435, No. 12-13; ann. 1453, No. 18-26; ann. 1454, No. 22-3; ann. 1455, No. 43-7; ann. 1456, No. 129; ann. 1498, No. 7-8; ann. 1499, No. 18-20.—Chron. Glassberger ann. 1426, 1430, 1501, 1517.—Theiner Monument. Hiberu. et Scotor. No. 801, p. 425, No. 844, p. 460.—Æn. Sylvii Opp. inedd. (Atti della Accademia del Lincei, 1883, p. 546).—Chron. Anon. (Analecta Franciscana I. 291-2).

The bitterness of the strife between the two branches of the Order is illustrated by the fact that the Franciscan Church of Palma, in Majorca, when struck by lightning and partially ruined in 1480, remained on this account unrepaired for nearly a hundred years, until the Observantines got the better of their rivals and obtained possession of it.—Dameto, Pro y Bover, Hist. de Mallorca, II. 1064-5 (Palma, 1841). It is related that when Sixtus IV., who had been a Conventual, proposed in 1477 to subject the Observantines to their rivals, the blessed Giacomo della Marca threatened him with an evil death, and he desisted.—(Chron. Glassberger ann. 1477).

The exceeding laxity prevailing among the Conventuals is indicated by letters granted in 1421 by the Franciscan general, Antonius de Perreto, to Friar Liebhardt Forschammer, permitting him to deposit with a faithful friend all alms given to him, and to expend them on his own wants or for the benefit of the Order, at his discretion; he was also required to confess only four times a year.—(Chron. Glassberger ann. 1416). The General Chapter held at Forli in 1421 was obliged to prohibit the brethren from trading and lending money on usury, under pain of imprisonment and confiscation.—(Ib. ann. 1421). From the Chapter of Ueberlingen, held in 1426, we learn that there was a custom by which, for a sum of money paid down, Franciscan convents would enter into obligations to pay definite stipends to individual friars.—(Ib. ann. 1426). In fact, the efforts of reform at this period, stimulated by the rivalry of the Observantines, reveal how utterly oblivious the Order had become of all the prescriptions of the Rule.

[189] Raynald. ann. 1418, No. 11; ann. 1421, No. 4; ann. 1424, No. 7.—Jo. de Ragusio de Init. Basil. Concil. (Mon. Conc. Gen. Sæc. XV. T. I. pp. 30-1, 40, 55).—Ripoll II. 645.

[190] Wadding. ann. 1426, No. 1-4.—Raynald. ann. 1428, No. 7.—Jac. de Marchia Dial. (Baluz. et Mansi II. 597, 609).

[191] Wadding. ann. 1426, No. 15-16; Regest. Mart. V. No. 162; ann. 1432, No. 8-9; ann. 1441, No. 37-8; ann. 1447, No. 10; ann. 1456, No. 108; ann. 1476, No. 24-5.—Raynald. ann. 1432, No. 24.—Jac. de Marchia Dial. (Baluz. et Mansi II. 610).

[192] Jac. de Marchia l. c.

[193] Steph. Infessuræ Diar. Urb. Rom. ann. 1467 (Eccard. Corp. Hist. II. 1893).—Platinæ Vit. Pauli II. (Ed. 1574, p. 308).—Rod. Santii Hist. Hispan. P. III. c. 40 (R. Beli Rer. Hisp. Scriptt. I. 433).—Wadding. ann. 1371, No. 14.—Ripoll IV. 22.

[194] Barbarano de’ Mironi. Hist. di Vicenza. II. 164-5.—Poggii Bracciol. Dial. contra Hypocrisim.

[195] Wadding. ann. 1481, No. 9; ann. 1487, No. 3-5; ann. 1495, No. 12.—Addis and Arnold’s Catholic Dictionary, s.v. Recollects.

[196] Concil. Lateran. ann. 1102 (Harduin. VI. II. 1861-2).—Epist. Sigebert. (Mart. Ampl. Coll. I. 587-94).—Chron. Cassinens. IV. 42, 44. (Cf. Martene Ampl. Coll. I. 627.)—Hartzheim III. 258-65.—Martene Ampl. Coll. I. 659.

[197] Schumacher, Die Stedinger, Bremen, 1865, pp. 26-8.—Adam. Bremens. Gest. Pontif. Hammaburg. c. 203.—Chron. Erfordiens. ann. 1230 (Schannat Vindem. Litt. I. 93).—Chron. Rustedens. (Meibom. Rer. Germ. II. 101).—Albert. Stadens. Chron. ann. 1207 (Schilt. S. R. Germ. I. 299).—Joan. Otton. Cat. Archiepp. Bremens. ann. 1207 (Menken. S. R. Germ. II. 791).

[198] Albert. Stadens. Chron. ann. 1208-17, 1230.—Joan. Otton. Cat. Archiepp. Bremens. ann. 1211-20.—Anon. Saxon. Hist. Impp. ann. 1229 (Menken. III. 125).—Chron. Rustedens. (Meibom. II. 101).

There is considerable confusion among the authorities with regard to these events. I have followed the careful investigations of Schumacher, op. cit. pp. 219-23.

[199] Emonis Chron. ann. 1227, 1230 (Matthæi Analecta III. 128, 132).—Schumacher, p. 81.

[200] Hist. Diplom. Frid. II. T. IV. p. 497.—Albert. Stadens. Chron. ann. 1232, 1234.—Raynald. ann. 1232, No. 8.—Hartzheim III. 553.—Joan. Ottonis Cat. Archiepp. Bremens. ann. 1234.—Anon. Saxon. Hist. Imperator. ann. 1229.—Chron. Cornel. Zantfliet ann. 1233.—Epistt. Select. Sæcul. XIII. T. I. No. 539 (Pertz).

[201] Emonis Chron. ann. 1234 (Matthæi Analecta III. 139 sqq.).—Potthast No. 9399, 9400.—Epistt. Select. Sæcul. XIII. T. I. No. 572.—Meyeri Annal. Flandr. Lib. VIII. ann. 1233.—Chron. Cornel. Zantfliet ann. 1234.—Schumacher, pp. 116-17.—Chron. Erfordiens. ann. 1232.—Sächsische Weltchronik No. 376-8.—H. Wolteri Chron. Bremens. (Meibom. Rer. Germ. II. 58-9).—Chron. Rastedens. (Ib. II. 101).—Joan Otton. Cat. Archiepp. Bremens. ann. 1234.—Albert. Stadens. ann. 1234.—Anon. Saxon. Hist. Imperator. ann. 1229.

[202] Potthast No. 9777.—Hartzheim III. 554.

As the contemporary Abbot Emo of Wittewerum says, in describing the affair—“principalior causa fuit inobedientia, quæ scelere idololatriæ non est inferior” (Matthæi Analect. III. 142).

[203] Epistt. Selectt. Sæc. XIII. T. I. No. 720, 801.—Berger, Registres d’Innocent IV. No. 4181, 4265, 4269.—Ripoll I. 219, 225.—Vaissette, IV. 46.

[204] Th. Aquinat. Sec. Sec. Q. 11, No. 2-3.—C. 1, Extrav. Commun. I. 8.—Zanchini Tract, de Hæret. c. ii., xxxvii.

It was probably as a derivative from the sanctity of the power of the Holy See that the Inquisition was given jurisdiction over the forgers and falsifiers of papal bulls—gentry whose industry we have seen to be one of the inevitable consequences of the autocracy of Rome. Letters under which Frà Grimaldo da Prato, Inquisitor of Tuscany in 1297, was directed to act in certain cases of the kind are printed by Amati in the Archivio Storico Italiano, No. 38, p. 6.

[205] Th. Cantimpratens. Bonum universale, Lib. II. c. 2.—Matt. Paris ann. 1255 (p. 614).—Ripoll I. 326.—Raynald. ann. 1264, No. 14.—Arch, de l’Inq. de Carcassonne (Doat, XXXII. 27).

Clement IV. (Gui Foucoix) was regarded as one of the best lawyers of his day, but in the severity of his application of the law against Manfred he was not unanimously supported by the cardinals. On February 20 he writes to the Cardinal of S. Martino, his legate in the Mark of Ancona, for his opinion on the question. Manfred and Uberto Pallavicino had both been cited to appear on trial for heresy. Manfred had sent procurators to offer purgation, but Uberto had disregarded the summons and was a contumacious heretic. To the condemnation of the latter there was therefore no opposition, but some cardinals thought that Manfred’s excuse was reasonable in view of the enemy at his gates, even though he could easily avert attack by surrender.—Clement PP. IV. Epist. 232 (Martene Thesaur. II. 279).

[206] C. 1, Sexto v. 3.—C. 1, Extrav. Commun. v. 4.

[207] Barbarano de’ Mironi, Hist. Eccles. di Vicenza II. 153-4.—Regest. Clement. PP. V. T. III. pp. 354 sqq.; T. IV. pp. 426 sqq., pp. 459 sqq.; T. V. p. 412. (Ed. Benedictin., Romæ, 1886-7).—Chron. Estense ann. 1309-17 (Muratori S. R. I. XV. 364-82).—Ferreti Vincentini Hist. Lib. III. (Ib. IX. 1037-47).—Cronica di Bologna, ann. 1309-10 (Ib. XVIII. 320-1).—Campi, Dell’ Histor. Eccles. di Ferrara, P. III. p. 40.

Even the pious and temperate Muratori cannot restrain himself from describing Clement’s bull against the Venetians as “la piu terribile ed ingiusta Bolla che si sia mai udita” (Annal. ann. 1309). We have seen in the case of Florence what control such measures enabled the papacy to exercise over the commercial republics of Italy. The confiscation threatened in the sentence of excommunication was no idle menace. When, in 1281, Martin IV. quarrelled with the city of Forli and excommunicated it he ordered, under pain of excommunication not removable even on the death-bed, all who owed money to the citizens to declare the debts to his representatives and pay them over, and he thus collected many thousand lire of his enemies’ substance.—Chron. Parmens. ann. 1281 (Muratori S. R. I. IX. 797)

[208] Preger, Die Politik des Pabstes Johann XXII., München, 1885, pp. 6-10, 21.—Petrarchi Lib. sine Titulo Epist. xviii.—Raynald. ann. 1317, No. 27; ann. 1320, No. 10-14; ann. 1322, No. 6-8, 11.—Bernard. Corio, Hist. Milanese, ann. 1318, 1320, 1321-22.

A bull of John XXII., Jan. 28, 1322, ordering the sale of indulgences to aid the crusade of Cardinal Bertrand, recites the heresy of Visconti and his refusal to obey the summons for his trial as the reason for assailing him.—Regest. Clem. PP. V., Romæ, 1885. T. I. Prolegom. p. cxcviii.

[209] Sarpi, Discorso, p. 25 (Ed. Helmstadt).—Albizio, Risposto al P. Paolo Sarpi, p. 75.—Continuat. Guill. Nangiac. ann. 1317.—Bern. Corio, ann. 1322.—Regest. Joann. PP. XXII. No. 89, 93, 94, 95 (Harduin. VII. 1432).

[210] Ughelli, Italia Sacra, IV. 286-93 (Ed. 1652).

[211] Raynald. ann. 1324, No. 7-12.—Martene Thesaur. II. 754-6.

[212] Martene Thesaur. II. 743-5.—Wadding. ann. 1324, No. 28; ann. 1326, No. 8; ann. 1327, No. 2.—Ripoll II. 172; VII. 60.—Regest. Clement. PP. V., Romæ, 1885, T. I. Proleg. p. ccxiii.—Theiner Monument. Hibern. et Scotor. No. 462, p. 234.—C. 4. Septimo v. 3.—Mag. Bull. Rom. I. 204.—Baluz. et Mansi III. 227.—Ughelli IV. 294-5, 314.—Raynald. ann. 1362, No. 13; ann. 1363, No. 2, 4; ann. 1372, No. 1; ann. 1373, No. 10, 12.

In spite of the decision of Benedict, Matteo and his sons, Galeazzo, Marco, and Stefano, were still unburied in 1353, when the remaining brother, Giovanni, made another effort to secure Christian sepulture for them.—Raynald. ann. 1353, No. 28.

[213] Raynald. ann. 1348, No. 13-14; ann. 1350, No. 5.—Muratori Antiq. VII. 884, 928-32.

[214] Werunsky Excerptt. ex Registt. Clem. VI. et Innoc. VI. pp. 37, 74, 87, 101.—Wadding. ann. 1356, No. 7, 20,—Raynald. ann. 1356, No. 33.

This abuse of spiritual power for purposes of territorial aggrandizement did not escape the trenchant satire of Erasmus. He describes “the terrible thunderbolt which by a nod will send the souls of mortals to the deepest hell, and which the vicars of Christ discharge with special wrath on those who, instigated by the devil, seek to nibble at the Patrimony of Peter. It is thus they call the cities and territories and revenues for which they fight with fire and sword, spilling much Christian blood, and they believe themselves to be defending like apostles the spouse of Christ, the Church, by driving away those whom they stigmatize as her enemies, as if she could have any worse enemies than impious pontiffs.”—Encom. Moriæ. Ed. Lipsiens. 1829, II. 379.

That the character of these papal wars had not been softened since the horrors described above at Ferrara, is seen in the massacre of Cesena, in 1376, when the papal legate, Robert, Cardinal of Geneva, ordered all the inhabitants put to the sword, without distinction of age or sex, after they had admitted him and his bandits into the city under his solemn oath that no injury should be inflicted on them. The number of the slain was estimated at five thousand.—Poggii Hist. Florentin. Lib. II. ann. 1376.

[215] MSS. Chioccarello T. VIII.—Wadding. ann. 1409, No. 12.—Ripoll II. 510, 522, 566.

[216] H. Haupt, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, 1883, pp. 323 sqq.—Vaissette, Éd. Privat, X. Pr. 2089.

[217] Monstrelet, II. 53, 127.—Martene Ampl. Coll. VIII. 92.—Altmeyer, Précur seurs de la Réforme aux Pays-Bas, I. 237.

[218] Burlamacchi, Vita di Savonarola (Baluz. et Mansi I. 533-542).—Luca Landucci., Diario Florentine, Firenze, 1883, p. 30.—Steph. Infessuræ Diar. (Eccard. Corp. Hist. Med. Ævi II. 2000).

Villari shows (La Storia di Gir. Savonarola, Firenze, 1887, I. pp. viii.-xi.) that the life which passes under the name of Burlamacchi is a rifacimento of an unprinted Latin biography by a disciple of Savonarola. I take this opportunity of expressing my thanks to Signore Villari, for his kindly courtesy in furnishing me with the second volume of the new edition of his classical work in advance of publication. My obligations to it will be seen in the numerous references made to it below.

[219] Processo Autentico (Baluz. et Mansi IV. 529, 551).—Burlamacchi (Baluz. et Mansi I. 534-5, 541-2).—Villari, op. cit. Lib. I. c. 5, 9.

[220] Landucci, op. cit. pp. 72, 88, 94, 103, 108, 109, 123-8, 154.—Mémoires de Commines Liv. VIII. c. 19.—Marsilii Ficini opp. Ed. 1561, I. 963.—Nardi, Historie Florentine, Lib. II. (Ed. 1574, pp. 58, 60).—Perrens, Jérome Savonarole, p. 342.—Burlamacchi (loc. cit. pp. 544-6, 552-3, 556-7).

[221] Landucci, p. 163.—Burlamacchi, pp. 558-9.—Nardi, Lib. II. pp. 56-7.

[222] Villari, Lib. II. cap. iv. v.; T. II. App. p. ccxx.—Landucci, pp. 92-4, 112—Processo Autentico (Baluze et Mansi IV. 531, 554, 558).

[223] Landucci, pp. 110, 112, 122.—Villari, I. 473.—Mémoires de Commines, Liv. VII. ch. 19.—Processo Autentico (loc. cit. pp. 524, 541).—Perrens, p. 342.

[224] Guicciardini Lib. III. c. 6.—Burlamacchi, p. 551.—Villari, T. I. pp. civ.—cvii.—Landucci, p. 106.

[225] Villari, I. 402-7.—Landucci, p. 120.—Diar. Johann. Burchardi (Eccard, Corp. Hist. II. 2151-9).

[226] Villari, I. 417, 441-5.—Landucci, pp. 125-9.—Perrens, p. 361.

[227] Villari, I. 489, 492-4, 496, 499, cxlii.; II. 4-6.

[228] Processo Autentico, pp. 533-4.—Perrens, pp. 189-90.—Landucci, pp. 144-6.

[229] Landucci, p. 148.—Villari, II. 18-25.

[230] Villari, II. 25-8, 35-6, 79; App. xxxix.—Processo Autentico, p. 535.—Landucci, pp. 152-3, 157.

[231] Landucci, pp. 161-2.—Machiavelli, Frammenti istorici (Opere Ed. 1782, II. 58).

[232] Landucci, p. 164.—Perrens, p. 231.—Villari, II. App. lxvi.

[233] Perrens, pp. 232-5, 365-72. Cf. Villari, II. 115.

The obnoxious appeal to God had really been made by Savonarola in his sermon of February 11 (Villari, II. 88).

[234] Perrens, pp. 237, 238.—Landucci, pp. 164-66.

[235] Landucci, p. 166.—Villari, II. App. pp. lviii.-lxii.

[236] Villari, II. 129, 132-5; App. pp. lxviii.-lxxi., clxxi.—Baluz. et Mansi I. 584-5.—Perrens. pp. 373-5.—Burlamacchi, p. 551.—In his confession of May 21, Savonarola stated that the idea of the council had only suggested itself to him three months previously (Villari, II. App. cxcii.).

[237] Landucci, p. 113.—Chron. Glassberger ann. 1482.—Raynald. ann. 1492, No. 25.—Pulgar, Cronica de los Reyes Catolicos, II. civ.—Comba, La Riforma in Italia, I. 491.—Nardi, Lib. II. (p. 79).

The contemporary Glassberger says of Andreas of Krain’s attempt, “Nisi enim auctoritas imperatoris intervenisset maximum in ecclesia schisma subortum fuisset. Omnes enim æmuli domini papæ ad domini imperatoris consensum respiciebant pro concilio celebrando.” A year’s imprisonment in chains exhausted the resolution of Andreas, who executed a solemn recantation of his invectives against the Holy See, This was sent with a petition for pardon to Sixtus IV., who granted it, but before the return of the messengers the unhappy reformer hanged himself in his cell (ubi sup. ann. 1483).

[238] Burlamacchi, p. 559.—Landucci, pp. 166-7.—Processo Autentico, pp. 535-7.—Villari, II. App. lxxi. sqq.

[239] Landucci, pp. 167-8.—Processo Autentico, pp. 536-8.—Villari, II. App. xci.-xciii.

[240] Perrens, pp. 379-81.—Burlamacchi, pp. 560, 562.—Landucci, p. 168.—Processo Autentico, pp. 540-1.

[241] Landucci, pp. 168-9.—Processo Autentico, p. 542.—Burlamacchi, p. 563.—Villari, II. App. pp. lxxv.-lxxx., lxxxiii.-xc.—Guicciardini, Lib. III. c. 6.

The good Florentines did not fail to point out that the sudden death of Charles VIII., on this same April 7, was a visitation upon him for having abandoned Savonarola and the republic.—Nardi, Lib. II. p. 80.

[242] Landucci, p. 170.—Processo Autentico, pp. 534, 543.—Burlamacchi, p. 564.

[243] Landucci, p. 171.—Processo Autentico, pp. 544, 549.—Burlamacchi, p. 564.—Nardi, Lib. II. p. 78.—Villari, II. 173-77; App. pp. xciv., ccxxv., ccxxxiii.

[244] Landucci, pp. 171-2.—Villari, II. 178; App. p. clxv.—Processo Autentico, pp. 550-1.

Violi (Villari, II. App. cxvi.-vii.) says that the torture was repeatedly applied—on one evening no less than fourteen times from the pulley to the floor, and that his arms were so injured that he was unable to feed himself; but this must be exaggerated in view of the pious treatises which he wrote while in prison. Burlamacchi says that he was tortured repeatedly both with cord and fire (pp. 566, 568). Burchard, the papal prothonotary, states that he was tortured seven times, and Burchard was likely to know and not likely to exaggerate (Burch. Diar. ap. Preuves des Mémoires de Commines, Bruxelles, 1706, p. 424). The expression of Commines, who was well-informed, is “le gesnèrent à merveilles” (Mémoires, Lib. VIII. ch. 19). But the most emphatic evidence is that of the Signoria, who, in answer to the reproaches of Alexander at their tardiness, declare that they had to do with a man of great endurance; they had assiduously tortured him for many days with slender results, which they would suppress until they could force him to reveal all his secrets—“multa et assidua quæstione, multis diebus, per vim vix pauca extorsimus, quæ nunc celare animus erat donec omnia nobis paterent sui animi involucra” (Villari, II. 197).

[245] Landucci, p. 172.—Processo Autentico, p. 550.—Perrens, pp. 267-8.—Burlamacchi, pp. 566-7.—Villari, II. 188, 193; App. cxviii.-xxi.

It is part of the Savonarola legend that Savonarola threatened Ser Ceccone with death within a year if he did not remove certain interpolations from the confession, and that the prediction was verified, Ceccone dying within the time, unhouselled, and refusing in despair the consolations of religion (Burlamacchi, p. 575.—Violi ap. Villari, II. App. cxxvii.).

Ceccone performed the same office for the confession of Frà Domenico (Villari, II. App. Doc. XXVII.).

[246] Processo Autentico, pp. 551-64, 567.—Villari, II. App. cxlvii. sqq.

Violi states that the confession as interpolated by Ceccone was printed and circulated by the Signoria as a justification of their action, but that it proved so unsatisfactory to the public that in a few days all copies were ordered by proclamation to be surrendered (Villari, II. App. p. cxiv.).

[247] Landucci, p. 173.—Burlamacchi, p. 567.

[248] This confession was never made public. Villari, who discovered the MS., has printed it, App. p. clxxv.

[249] Landucci, p. 174.—Processo Autentico, p. 563.—Villari, II. 210, 217.—Nardi, Lib. II. p. 79.

[250] Landucci, p. 174.—Nardi, Lib. II. p. 79.—Wadding. ann. 1496, No. 7.—Perrens, p. 399.—Processo Autentico, p. 522.—Burlamacchi, p. 568.—Brev. Hist. Ord. Prædicat, (Martene Ampl. Coll. VI. 393).

[251] Landucci, p. 176.—Nardi, Lib. II. pp. 80-1.—Burlamacchi, p. 568.—Violi (Villari, II. App. cxxv.).—Villari, II. 206-8, 229-33; App. clxxxiv., cxciv., cxcvii.

There was one peculiarity in this examination before Romolino which I have not seen recorded elsewhere. During the interrogatory of May 21 Savonarola was subjected to fresh torture as a preliminary to asking his confirmation of the statements just made under repeated tortures (Villari, II. App. cxcvi.).

[252] Landucci, pp. 176-7.—Processo Autentico, p. 546.—Villari, II. 239; App. cxcviii.—Cantù, Eretici d’ltalia, I. 229.—Burlamacchi, pp. 569-70.—Nardi, Lib. II. p. 82.

[253] Landucci, p. 178.—Perrens, p. 281.—Processo Autentico, p. 547.—Nardi, Lib. II. p. 82.—Villari, II. 251.

Burlamacchi’s relation (pp. 570-1) of the manner in which an arm, a hand, and the heart of Savonarola were preserved for the veneration of the faithful, has the evident appearance of a legend to justify the authenticity of the relics.

[254] Nardi, Lib. II. pp. 82-3.—Landucci, pp. 190-1.

[255] Wadding. ann. 1498, No. 23.—Landucci, p. 178.—Perrens, pp. 296-7.—Processo Autentico, pp. 524, 528.—Cantù, Eretici d’Italia, I. 234-5.—Benedicti PP. XIV. De Servorum Dei Beatificatione, Lib. III. c. xxv. §§ 17-20.—Brev. Hist. Ord. Prædic. (Martene, Ampl. Coll. VI. 394).—Reusch, Der Index der verbotenen Bücher, I. 368.

A goodly catalogue of miracles performed by Savonarola’s intercession will be found piously chronicled by Burlamacchi and Bottonio (Baluz. et Mansi I. pp. 571-83).

[256] Ripoll II. 566.—Wadding. ann. 1409, No. 12.—Tamburini, Storia Gen. dell’ Inquis. II. 437-9.

[257] Jac. de Vitriaco Hist. Hierosol. cap. 65 (Bongars, II. 1083-4).—Rolewinck Fascic. Tempor. (Pistorii R. Germ. Scriptt. II. 546).—Regula Pauperum Commilitonum Templi c. 72 (Harduin. VI. ii. 1146).—Règle et Statuts secrets des Templiers, §§ 125, 128 (Maillard de Chambure, Paris, 1840, pp. 455, 488-90, 494-5).

Since this chapter was written the Société de l’Histoire de France has issued a more correct and complete edition of the Rule and Statutes of the Templars, under the care of M. Henri de Curzon.

[258] Jac. de Vitriaco loc. cit.—Roberti de Monte Contin. Sigeb. Gembl. (Pistorii, op. cit. I. 875).—Zurita, Añales de Aragon, Lib. I. c. 52-3.—Art de Vérifier les Dates V. 337.—Teulet, Layettes, I. 550, No. 1547.—Grandes Chroniques, IV. 86.—Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. I. c. xxiii.—Hans Prutz, Malteser Urkunden, München, 1883, p. 43.

A curious illustration of the prominence which the Templars were acquiring in the social organization is afforded in 1191, when they were made conservators of the Truce of God, by which the nobles and prelates of Languedoc and Provence agreed that beasts and implements and seed employed in agriculture should be unmolested in time of war. For enforcing this the Templars were to receive a bushel of corn for every plough.—Prutz, op. cit. pp. 44-5.

[259] Rymer, Fœdera, I. 30.—Can. 10, 11, Extra. III. 30.—Prutz, op. cit. pp. 38, 46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 56-61, 64, 76, 78-9.

[260] Prutz, op. cit. pp. 38-41, 43, 45, 47-8, 57, 64-9, 75-80.—J. Delaville le Roulx, Documents concernant les Templiers Paris, 1882, p. 39.—Bini, Dei Tempieri in Toscana, Lucca, 1845, pp. 453-55.—Raynald. ann. 1265, No. 75-6.—Martene Thesaur. II. 111, 118.

The systematic beggary of the Templars must have been peculiarly exasperating both to the secular clergy and the Mendicants. Monsignor Bini prints a document of 1244 in which the Preceptor of Lucca gives to Albertino di Pontremoli a commission to beg for the Order. Albertino employs a certain Aliotto to do the begging from June till the following Carnival, and pays him by empowering him to beg on his own account from the Carnival to the octave of Easter (op. cit. pp. 401-2, 439-40). For the disgraceful squabbles which arose between the secular clergy and the Military Orders over this privileged beggary, see Faucon, Registres de Boniface VIII. No. 1950, p. 746.

[261] Guillel. Tyrii Hist. Lib. XVII. c. 27; XX. 31-2.—Gualt. Mapes de Nugis Curialium Dist. I. c. XX.—Innoc. PP. III. Regest. X. 121. Cf. XV. 131.—Règle et Statuts secrets, § 173, p. 389.—Michelet, Procès des Templiers, I. 39; II. 9, 83, 140, 186-7, 406-7 (Collection de Documents inédits, Paris, 1841-51).

When, in 1307, the Templars at Beaucaire were seized, out of sixty arrested, five were knights, one a priest, and fifty-four were serving brethren; in June, 1310, out of thirty-three prisoners in the Château d’Alais, there were four knights and one priest, with twenty-eight serving brethren (Vaissette, IV. 141). In the trials which have reached us the proportion of knights is even less. The serving brethren occasionally reached the dignity of preceptor; but how little this implies is shown by the examination, in June, 1310, of Giovanni di Neritone, Preceptor of Castello Villari, a serving brother, who speaks of himself as “simplex et rusticus” (Schottmüller, Der Ausgang des Templer-Ordens, Berlin, 1887, II. 125, 130).

The pride of birth in the Order is illustrated by the rule that none could be admitted as knights except those of knightly descent. In the Statutes a case is cited of a knight who was received as such; those who were of his country declared that he was not the son of a knight. He was sent for from Antioch to a chapter where this was found to be true, when the white mantle was removed and a brown one put on him. His receptor was then in Europe, and when he returned to Syria he was called to account. He justified himself by his having acted under the orders of his commander of Poitou. This was found to be true; otherwise, and but that he was a good knight (proudons), he would have lost the habit (Règle, § 125, pp. 462-3).

[262] Matt. Paris. ann. 1228, 1243 (Ed. 1644, p. 240, 420).—Mansuet le Jeune, Hist. des Templiers, Paris, 1789, I. 340-1.—Prutz, op. cit. pp. 60-1.—Mag. Chron. Belgic. ann. 1274.—Faucon, Registres de Boniface VIII. No. 1691-2, 1697.—Marin. Sunuti Secret. Fidel. Lib. III. P. ix. c. 1, 2 (Bongars, II. 188-9).

The Hospital was open to the same reproaches as the Temple. In 1238 Gregory IX. vigorously assailed the Knights of St. John for their abuse of the privileges bestowed on them—their unchastity and the betrayal of the cause of God in Palestine. He even asserts that there are not a few heretics among them.—Raynald. ann. 1238, No. 31-2.

A sirvente by a Templar, evidently written soon after the fall of Acre, alludes bitterly to the sacrifice made of the Holy Land in favor of the ambition and cupidity of the Holy See—

It is also to be borne in mind that indulgences were vulgarized in many other ways. When St. Francis announced to Honorius III. that Christ had sent him to obtain plenary pardons for those who should visit the Church of S. Maria di Porziuncola, the cardinals at once objected that this would nullify the indulgences for the Holy Land, and Honorius thereupon limited the Portiuncula indulgence to the twenty-four hours commencing with the vespers of August 1.—Amoni, Legenda S. Francisci, Append, c. xxxiii.

[263] Mansuet, op. cit. II. 101, 133.—De Excidio Urbis Acconis (Martene Ampl. Coll. V. 757).—Raynald. ann. 1291, No. 30, 31.—Archives Nat. de France, J. 431, No. 40.—Chron. Salisburg. ann. 1291 (Canisii et Basnage III. II. 489).—Annal. Eberhard. Altahens. (Ib. IV. 229).—De Recuperatione Terræ Sanctæ (Bongars, II. 320-1).

[264] Raynald. ann. 1306, No. 3-5, 12.—Regest. Clement. PP. V. (Ed. Benedict. T. I. pp. 40-46; T. II. p. 55, 58, Romæ, 1885-6).—Mansuet, op. cit. II. 132.—Raynouard, Monuments historiques relatifs à la Condamnation des Chevaliers du Temple, Paris, 1813, pp. 17, 46.

The summons to the Grand Master of the Hospital is dated June 6, 1306, (Regest. Clem. PP. V. T. I. p. 190). That to de Molay was probably issued at the same time. From some briefs of Clement, June 13, 1306, in favor of Humbert Blanc, Preceptor of Auvergne, it would seem that the latter was engaged in some crusading enterprise (Ibid. pp. 191-2), probably in connection with the attempt of Charles of Valois. When Hugues de Peraud, however, and other chiefs of the Order were about to sail, in November, Clement retained them (Ib. T. II. p. 5).

It has rather been the fashion with historians to assume that de Molay transferred the headquarters of the Order from Cyprus to Paris. Yet when the papal orders for arrest reached Cyprus, on May 27, 1308, the marshal, draper, and treasurer surrendered themselves with others, showing that there had been no thought of removing the active administration of the Order.—(Dupuy, Traitez concernant l’Histoire de France, Ed. 1700, pp. 63, 132). Raimbaut de Caron, Preceptor of Cyprus, apparently had accompanied de Molay, and was arrested with him in the Temple of Paris (Procès des Templiers, II. 374), but with this exception all the principal knights seized were only local dignitaries.

I think also that Schottmüller (Der Untergang des Templer-Ordens, Berlin, 1887, I. 66, 99; II. 38) sufficiently proves the incredibility of the story of the immense treasure brought to France by de Molay, and he further points out (I. 98) that the preservation of the archives of the Order in Malta shows that they could not have been removed to France.

[265] Perhaps the most detailed and authoritative contemporary account of the downfall of the Templars is that of Bernard Gui (Flor. Chronic. ap. Bouquet XXI. 716 sqq.). It is impossible to doubt that had there been anything savoring of Catharism in the Order he would have scented it out and alluded to it.