words of Pirkheimer and Zola--"Ich werde nie Verschweigenswertes
enthüllen, denn die Wahrheit, die nur zeitweise bedrückt, aber niemals
unterdrückt werden kann, wird sich selbst offenbaren" (from _Der
gehobelte Eck_); and "La vérité est en avance, et rien ne l'arrêtera!"
(open letter on Dreyfus).
[118] "Alle begehrenden und wirkenden Kräfte des Gemüthes können eines
jeglichen Dinges, wie nützlich und lustbar das immer erscheinen mag,
von täglicher Übung vielem und überflüssigem Gebrauche befriedigt,
erfüllet und zuletzt verdriesslich werden, allein die Begierde viel zu
wissen; die da einem Jeglichen von Natur eingepflanzet ist, die ist
gegen solche Ersättigung gefeiert und aller Verdriesslichkeit ganz und
gar nicht unterworfen"--quoted from Dürer, in Geiger, _Renaissance und
Humanismus_, p. 384.
[119] Beck only did seven. (Total 137.)
[120] See _Albert Dürer_, by Wm. Bell Scott, p. 67.
[121] Quoted, Scott's _Dürer_, p. 69.
[122] Headlam, _Story of Nuremberg_, p. 73.
[123] Maximilian also appears in Dürer's beautiful picture, "Das
Rosenkranzfest," now at Prague. The Blessed Virgin enthroned in the
centre gently lays a crown upon the head of Maximilian, who kneels
sideways, with clasped hands, to her left.
[124] Six more were printed by Lucas Cranach.
[125] See Joseph von Aschbach, _Geschichte der Wiener Universitat_, 2
vols.
[126] At the instance of Innocent VIII.
[127] Aschbach, xi. 65.
[128] They were as follows: Velocianus, 1508; Joachim v. Watt
(Vadianus), 1514; Janus Hadelius, 1515; Rudolfus Agricola (the
younger), 1516.
[129] The former he unearthed in the monastery of St. Emmeran at
Augsburg, and edited in 1501; the latter was found in the Franconian
monastery of Ebrach, and printed in Augsburg in 1507. See Wattenbach,
_Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen_, i. 1-6. On Celtes, see A. Horawitz,
_Zur Geschichte des deutschen Humanismus_, article in _Zeitschrift für
deutsche Kulturgeschichte_, 1875.
[130] _Script. Univ. Vienn._ ii. 32, quoted Aschbach.
[131] Ovid, the hymns of Aurelius Prudentius, a Christian poet, and
_Periegesis_ by Dionysius of Alexandria.
[132] From Julius Caesar up to the death of Maximilian.
[133] Janssen, i. 256-8.
[134] See _Jahrbuch det Kunsthistorischen Sammlung des ah.
Kaiserhauses, vol. vi._ containing _Weisskunig_.
[135] Bibliography of Maximilian--"_Die Bücher die Kaeyser Max selbst
macht--Grab, Ehren, Weise Künig, Teuerdanck, Freydanck, Triumph Wagen,
Stamm Cronick, der Stamm, Artalerey; die sieben Lust-Gezirck,
Wappen-Buch, Stall-Buch, Joegerey, Valcknerey, Kücherey, Kellnerey,
Fischerey, Goertnerey, Baumeisterey, Moralitoet, Andacht St. Jürgen.
Nec ullus eorum hactenus impressus est, praeterquam is qui inscribitur
der Theuerdanck._" Quoted in "Notice sur Max. I."; in Le Glay,
_Correspondence_, vol. ii.
[136] Janssen, i. 592.
[137] See a most interesting article in the _Monthly Review_, February
1901, "An Emperor's Sporting Chronicle," by W. Baillie Grohman.
Perhaps even more extraordinary than these instances is the letter to
his daughter Margaret (Dec. 22, 1510). He desires her to make three
requests of Henry VIII.--first, for 2,000 archers for Maximilian's
expedition to Rome; second, for pardon for the Duke of Suffolk; and
_third_, for "deux beaux doghes femelles et ung masle," for the Duke of
Würtemberg--Le Glay, i., letter 269. Earlier in the same year
(February 1510), he expresses his delight at the eager way in which his
young grandson Charles is taking to the chase, and adds, "otherwise one
might deem him a bastard."
{115}
V
The wideness of Maximilian's interests, and the variety of spheres in
which those interests led him to take a part, enhance the difficulty of
estimating or defining his character as a whole, and each different
attitude demands discussion before any general conclusion can be drawn.
His political career, however, despite all its intrigues and
complications, is comparatively easy to estimate; for his persistence
in controlling his own policy and his dislike of associates and
confidants throw the entire responsibility of any given action upon the
Emperor's own shoulders. His retentive memory and tireless energy
aided him in what would otherwise have been a hopeless effort. "He
seldom or never," writes the Venetian ambassador in 1496, "discusses
with any one what he has in hand or does, especially in important
matters."[138] He was in the habit of dictating to his secretaries
late into the night, and often drew up important documents with his own
hands; while even during his meals, and in the midst of his hunting
expeditions, he dictated dispatches or gave instructions to his
councillors. For his credit as a politician this monopolizing spirit
was most unfortunate. His secrecy kept his councillors and ambassadors
ever in the dark, and rendered a firm attitude on their part almost
impossible. His over-confidence, both in his own capacity {116} and in
the honesty of others, received many a rude shock, and often made him
the dupe of his intellectual inferiors. Machiavelli tells us the
opinion of an intimate friend of the Emperor, "that anyone could cheat
him without his knowing it."[139] His condemnation as a bungler by the
Florentine statesman has been used as an argument in Maximilian's
favour; but the only possible inference is that in affairs of state the
Emperor's morals had not suffered so complete an eclipse as those of
his rivals, while his statecraft was based upon a neglect of sound
political principles. But even more prominent than the self-centred
nature of his policy are two fatal weaknesses in his character, which
account for most of his failures and disappointments--his want of
perseverance and his open-handedness. The whole history of his reign
is an illustration of the inconstancy with which he flitted from scheme
to scheme, never allowing the time {117} necessary for a successful
issue; and the disastrous consequences of this habit were only
accentuated by the fact that he remained a law unto himself,
self-deprived of all moderating influences. It was this fickle and
over-sanguine disposition which caused Louis XII. to exclaim, "What
this King says at night, he does not hold to the next morning."[140]
The criticism of Ferdinand V. is perhaps even more apposite--"If
Maximilian thinks of a thing, he also believes that it is already
done."[141] Without duly considering the means at his disposal, he
stormed impetuously towards an end which was obviously unattainable
under the circumstances, and, to make matters worse, he had already
lost all interest in the project before there was even a prospect of
its being crowned with success. In other cases, his inventive
intellect showed him two or three ways towards the same goal, with the
result that he either pursued all at once, or, confining himself to one
only, soon changed his mind and adopted a course which he regarded as
safer. "And so," writes Quirini, "he springs from one decision to
another, till time and opportunity are past ... and thus he wins from
all men a light enough reputation."[142] But perhaps the greatest
weakness of Maximilian's administration was faulty finance. It is true
that the resources at his disposal were wholly inadequate, whether in
the Empire or in his own dominions. Yet his own unpractical and
visionary nature prevented him from making the best of such means as he
possessed, and drew him into quite a needless amount of money
difficulties. He had absolutely no conception {118} of the meaning of
economy, and, deeming it an unkingly trait, gave with both hands to his
servants and his friends, and laid no proper check upon his household
expenses. The fact that he spent but little upon himself, and that his
personal requirements were frugal in the extreme, while it speaks well
for the generosity of his nature, cannot affect our estimate of his
financial incapacity. Indeed, such were his extravagance and his
penury, that the Venetian ambassador was induced to exclaim: "For a
ducat he can be won for anything."[143] And truly, the fact that he
actually served Venice and Milan, and in later years England, for hire,
after the manner of an Italian condottiere, justifies the severe
exaggeration of this remark. His liberal patronage of Art and Science,
and the magnificence of the Court entertainments, must have contributed
in some degree to his popularity among contemporaries; but his ruinous
method of raising supplies in his own dominions really transferred the
burden of his endless undertakings to the shoulders of the next
generation.[144]
As Emperor, Maximilian has been severely censured for subordinating the
Imperial to the territorial ideal, and for furthering Hapsburg
ambitions at the expense of Germany as a whole. But a survey of his
youth and early training at once helps to explain this policy and
proves it to have been inevitable. Such a path had been mapped out for
him by his father's motto, A.E.I.O.U., and Frederick's own impotence to
achieve its aspirations only served to impress {119} it more firmly
upon the youthful Maximilian. And indeed there is much truth in his
idea, that the building up of a strong hereditary State was the surest
road towards an imposing position in the Empire. While the personal
defects of Maximilian, which have already been discussed, are largely
responsible for the comparative ineffectiveness of his Imperial policy,
yet the chief cause of all was inherent in the constitution of the
Empire. It can hardly be doubted but that an Emperor far more powerful
than Maximilian ever was would have failed to combine the many
conflicting elements into a central Government capable of strong and
united action. "Constitution, Law, order in the State were everywhere
forcing themselves out of the perverted forms of the Middle Ages into
more perfect models." But as yet confusion and impotence held sway,
and the broad principles of reform were obscured from Maximilian's eyes
by a perplexing array of minor questions. Feudalism had long been in
decay, and the efforts of rulers in every State were directed towards
extending their authority and bringing the nobles and the towns into
greater dependence upon the throne. But the permanent taxation and the
standing army which made the attainment of this end possible to the
French kings, and through which France became for a number of years the
first military power of Europe, were denied to Maximilian by the
peculiar circumstances of the Empire. Not even in his hereditary
lands, still less elsewhere, was there any regular system of "aids" for
the sovereign's support; and Maximilian had to wage his wars, either
with militia, who were ever slow to assemble and prompt to disband,
whose discipline was not beyond {120} reproach, and who were not liable
to serve outside their own territory, or with mercenaries, whose
maintenance involved an expense which the absence of regular taxation
made it difficult to meet. Apart from the revenues of Crown lands and
the deeply mortgaged mines and tolls, he could raise no contributions
without the Diet's consent; and as a rule each Estate vied with the
others in resolutely setting aside all considerations of patriotism and
maintaining the tightest hold upon their purse-strings. They showed no
sympathy with Maximilian's aims and interests; while the Emperor lacked
the power to enforce his wishes upon them. Such circumstances would
almost justify his policy of retaliation by obstructing the Diet's
efforts towards reform. But in any case he can hardly be blamed for
falling back upon a strictly Austrian policy and using his Imperial
office to further Hapsburg interests.
Whenever the Emperor's political action is deserving of praise, the
House of Hapsburg rather than the Empire will be found to have reaped
the benefit. His enthusiastic belief in the future greatness of his
House was the guiding star of his whole life, and encouraged him to
consolidate his dominions internally, and thus, as he hoped, to fit
them to become the central point of a world-wide empire. Besides the
introduction of Roman law, for which he was mainly responsible, he
thoroughly reorganized the administration of the Austrian Duchies. The
revenues had become insufficient for the execution of his princely
duties, especially in time of war; and Maximilian set himself to
introduce into the country the same methods of Government which he
employed in the Netherlands. He replaced the old feudal survivals
{121} in the State by a modern officialdom, which gradually paralyzed
the opposition of the Estates, and from which certain individuals
exercised a permanent control over the government during his own
absence. Meanwhile it was his Hapsburg and territorial ambitions which
prompted him to reassert the Imperial authority in Italy, and which
were partly responsible for his eagerness to recover Croatia and
Southern Hungary from the hands of the Turks. Above all, it was these
ambitions that inspired him in his endless projects of alliances and
marriages--projects which secured for his descendants the glorious
inheritance of Spain, the two Sicilies and the New World, and the
Kingdoms of Bohemia and Hungary.
Passing from his public to his private life, we may reasonably assert
that Maximilian, while far from spotless, compares favourably with the
Princes of his time. The excesses of Charles VIII., the luxurious vice
of Louis XII., the barbaric licentiousness of Francis I., and again the
unrestrained passions of Henry VIII., and Ferdinand V.'s frank
disavowal of morality--all these traits are happily wanting in
Maximilian's life. He seems to have loved the gracious Mary faithfully
and tenderly, and it is said that, to the day of his death, any mention
of her name drew from him a deep sigh of remembrance. But for her
untimely death he might have resisted the fierce temptations of his
royal position. He had at least eight natural children, of whom two
only are known to history--George, Bishop of Brixen, who eventually
became Prince Bishop of Liège, and a daughter, who perished with her
husband, the Count of Helfenstein, in the Peasants' Revolt of 1525. It
cannot be maintained that Maximilian's second {122} marriage was a
love-match; yet there is reason to believe that, though he paid little
attention to the unfortunate Bianca Maria, he at least remained
faithful to her.
Though his table was always magnificently served, he himself was
extremely temperate, both in food and drink. Indeed, his strong
detestation of drunkenness forms a pleasant contrast to the opinions
and practice of his courtiers and even of the great princes of the
Empire. His moderation and healthy diet gave added strength to a frame
which was naturally robust and untiring. He could endure with ease the
extremes of heat and cold, prolonged journeys and want of sleep, and
even privations in food and drink. His strong constitution was united
to a pleasing countenance, which seldom failed to prepossess in his
favour. A prominent nose and well-defined features, together with the
lightning glances of his eye, imparted to him a searching look, which
seemed to pierce through men and read their very souls. Withal, he was
fully endowed with that genial and gracious manner which veils its
condescension under a mingling of good humour and perfect tactfulness.
In conversation he exercised a fascination which was not without its
effect even upon his sternest opponents; while the whole-hearted and
friendly spirit with which he threw himself into the amusements and
sports of the common people won for him an even wider respect and love
than his passion for the chase and his intimate relations with the
Tyrolese mountaineers. He frequently took his place in a village
dance, or competed with the peasants in their shooting matches; and he
recommended the chase to his descendants not merely for those delights
which none knew better than himself, but also because of the
opportunities which it {123} offered to princes of coming into contact
with their subjects, of learning their wishes and helping them in their
difficulties. His fresh joyous nature showed itself in a thousand
little touches, but perhaps in none more vividly than in his ardent
love of music and in the delight which he took in the presence of
singing-birds in the palace of Innsbruck. Thus whether fraternizing
with the peasants of his beloved Tyrol, clad in a hunting suit of
simple grey, or affably conversing with the burghers and ladies of
Frankfort or Augsburg, he awoke in all hearts an involuntary feeling of
admiration.
Before all, Maximilian was a German of the Germans. As he was the last
representative of the dying mediaeval chivalry, and the last monarch of
the ancient German stamp, so also he was the first German patriot-king
of modern times; and herein lies the secret of the love and admiration
which his contemporaries poured so fully upon him. The proud and royal
motto to which he gave utterance, "My honour is German honour, and
German honour mine," graphically reminds us that he identified himself
with the joys and sorrows, the glories and the failures of the German
race. It is neglect of this fact, and want of sympathy with German
thought and ideals, that are responsible for the indiscriminating
criticisms of several modern historians--criticisms which would often
be bestowed with greater justice upon the constitution of the Empire
than upon the Emperor himself. And the motto has been realized in a
further sense. For the feeling of Germany, turning from the weaknesses
and failures which mar the fullness of Maximilian's glory, has
reciprocated the loyalty which he expressed towards his people, and
{124} has elevated the chivalrous Emperor into one of the national
heroes, worthy to rank with Hermann and Barbarossa. For Maximilian, in
no uncertain sense, personified the dreams, the aspirations, the
strugglings of the Fatherland. The nation, chastened and revivified by
a new birth of patriotism, sought an object on whom to fix its
affections and its hopes. It turned naturally to the Emperor, the heir
of so many splendid traditions, and it was met on his side by the
ardent devotion of a whole lifetime. In a word, he and his people had
realized--incompletely it may be, yet in a very genuine sense--the true
relations of a monarch and his subjects, and, linked to one another by
ties of mutual sympathy, handed down the happy tradition as an example
to their remote posterity. "Kaiser Max" (as his people fondly called
him) was not a great man, in the strictest sense of the word; yet all
lovers of large-hearted and human characters must ever treasure his
memory in their hearts.
And here let us take our leave of Maximilian, in the kindly words of a
contemporary--
Du hattest wenig ru in dysem leben,
Darumb dir Got yetz ewig freud hat geben.
Here upon earth small rest to thee was given,
Now God hath granted thee the joy of Heaven.
[138] _Archivio Storico Ital._ vii. 2. 763, quoted Ulmann, i. 196.
[139] Opere iv. 174. See also dissertation by Rösemeier,
_Machiavelli's Erste Legation zum K. Maximilian I., mid seine drei
Schriften über Deutschland_. In the main, Machiavelli blames
Maximilian, 1st, for his openhandedness; and, as undecided, credulous,
and all the more dependent on others, in that he tries not to be. But
he qualifies his strictures by saying, "the Emperor is a great general;
he bears fatigue like the most hardened soldiers; he is brave in danger
and just in governing. When he grants an audience, he is patient and
gracious, and is a pattern of many princely virtues." Vettori is not
quite so severe--"none can deny," he says, "that he (Max) is wise and
circumspect, skilful and untiring in war, and widely experienced. He
possesses the confidence of the nation more than any of his
predecessors for more than a hundred years; but he is so amiable and
kind-hearted, that it makes him yielding and credulous"--quoted
Janssen, i. 595. Ludovico Ticiano is less critical when he declares,
that "on no general can the soldier rely more implicitly, from none can
he expect more boldness in the courting of perils and more skill in
meeting them; nor can the burgher wish for any juster or milder prince,
or one in whom justness and mildness are so equally poised"--quoted
Geiger, p. 346.
[140] See Ulmann, i. 200.
[141] Despatch of Cornero to Venice, 1508--quoted Huber, iii. 328.
[142] Albèri, _Relazioni degli Ambasciatori Veneti_, Serie I., vi. 27.
[143] See Prof. E. Heyck, _Maximilian I._, in the wellknown German
series of ideal illustrated monographs.
[144] For Maximilian's treatment of Finance, see Ulmann, i. 202,
836-845, and Huber, iii., ch. 6.
{125}
APPENDIX
APPENDIX I
Though some reference to Maximilian's relations to the question of
Imperial Reform was unavoidable, a detailed account must be sought for
rather in an authoritative history of Germany than in an essay which
centres round an individual. Hence an appendix seems the most fitting
place for dealing with the subject.
When Maximilian was elected King of the Romans (1486), it had long been
evident that, if a new or reformed constitution was to be secured, the
initiative must be taken by the Estates. During the years 1486-89
frequent deliberations took place, with a view to evolving some scheme
for strengthening the institutions of the Empire. The leaders of the
movement sought especially to impart to the Imperial Diets more regular
forms and greater dignity, and to check the resistance to their decrees
which was met with in the towns. At the Diet of 1487, the towns,
renouncing the policy of obstruction and equivocation which had
characterized them throughout the century, were fully represented, and
took an active part in the business of the committee which discussed
the Landfriede. In 1489 a new stage of development was reached by the
Diet, when the three Colleges of Electors, Princes and burghers
separated for the first time and conducted their deliberations apart.
Their proposal to limit the power of the Imperial Tribunal met with
determined opposition from Frederick the Third; and the Estates applied
to Maximilian, and obtained from him a promise of the reform of the
Kammergericht, or Imperial Chamber. The old Emperor's attitude
necessitated a postponement of the question; but on his death in 1493
it was revived with greater urgency than ever. The leading spirit of
the whole movement was Berthold of Henneberg, Elector of Mainz, whose
patriotism and calm impartiality won the respect of all parties. At
the great Diet of Worms, which opened at the end of March 1495, the
Estates united in pressing on Maximilian a fulfilment of his promises,
and persisted in refusing him all support until he submitted to their
demands. The struggle lasted {126} throughout the summer, Maximilian
throwing every obstacle in the way of reform, but finally, on August 7,
he signed his agreement to the demands of the Diet. The results of the
Diet may be classified under four heads:
1st. The Landfriede was more closely organized, and was made
perpetual. No difficulty was experienced over this point, as
Maximilian had taken the lead in enforcing the Landfriede at an earlier
date.
2nd. The Kammergericht, or Imperial Chamber, was founded, to act as a
court of first instance for all direct subjects of the Emperor. Its
jurisdiction was, however, limited to cases of prelates, nobles,
knights and towns among each other; in the event of complaints against
any of the princes or electors, an arbitration was first necessary
before the councillors of the accused Prince. The Chamber consisted of
a judge, nominated by the Emperor, and sixteen other members, appointed
by the Estates, half being of knightly birth, half learned in the law.
Its distinguishing features were:
(_a_) That it was to sit continuously in the Empire, not following the
court, but fixed permanently at Frankfurt-on-Main.
(_b_) That it could receive appeals from the Landgerichte.
(_c_) That its members were to receive their salaries out of the fees
of the court, though they might be supplemented from the Imperial
revenues if these fees proved insufficient.