CHAPTER XI

1351-1352

TWO EMBASSIES

Boccaccio did well to be anxious. The greed of the Visconti, the

venality and indifference of the Pope, threatened the very liberty of

Tuscany, and though Boccaccio had till now held no permanent public

office in Florence, we have seen him as a witness to the donation

of Prato, as ambassador for the Republic in Romagna, and as its

representative offering Petrarch a chair in the new university. He

was now to be entrusted with a more delicate and serious mission.

But first, on his return from Padua in January-February, 1351, he

became one of the Camarlinghi del Comune.[419] During the remainder

of that year we seem to see him quietly at work in Florence,[420]

most probably on the _Decameron_, and then suddenly in December he

was called upon to go on a mission to Ludwig of Brandenburg, Count

of Tyrol.[421] Florence was tired of appealing to the Pope always

in vain and had at last looked for another champion against the

Visconti. Deserted by the Church, at war with the Visconti, Florence

had either to submit or to find a way out for herself, and with her

usual astuteness she hoped to achieve the latter by calling to her

aid the excommunicated Ludwig. The moment was well chosen. Ludwig was

just reconciled with Charles IV, King of the Romans, the greatest

enemy of his house. He was poor and in need of money, little loved

in his own country, and not indisposed to try any adventure that

offered. So Boccaccio set out. The letters given to him December

12, 1351, were directed to Conrad, Duke of Teck, who had already

visited Florence in 1341, and to Ludwig himself.[422] We know,

however, nothing personal to Boccaccio with regard to this mission.

In fact save that it was so far successful that Ludwig sent Diapoldo

Katzensteiner to Florence to continue the overtures we know little

about it at all. Katzensteiner's pretensions, however, proved to be

such that the Florentines would not accept them, and communications

were broken off.[423] That was in March, 1352. On May 1 a new project

was on foot. Florence decided to call the prospective Emperor Charles

IV, the grandson of her old enemy Henry VII, into Italy to her

assistance.[424]

That a Guelf republic should turn for assistance to the head of

the Ghibelline cause seems perhaps more strange than in fact it

was. Guelf and Ghibelline had become mere names beneath which local

jealousies hid and flourished, caring nothing for the greater but

less real quarrel between Empire and Papacy. Charles, however, was to

fail Florence; for at the last moment he withdrew from the treaty,

fearing to leave Germany; when he did descend later, things had

so far improved for her that she was anything but glad to see him

especially when she was forced to remember that it was she who had

called him there. After these two failures Florence was compelled to

make terms with the Visconti at Sarzana in April, 1353, promising

not to interfere in Lombardy or Bologna, while Visconti for his part

undertook not to molest Tuscany.[425] But by this treaty the Visconti

gained a recognition of their hold in Bologna from the only power

that wished to dispute it. They profited too by the peace, extending

their dominion in Northern Italy. In this, though fortune favoured

them, they began to threaten others who had looked on with composure

when they were busy with Tuscany. Among these were the Venetians,

who made an alliance with Mantua, Verona, Ferrara, and Padua, and

were soon trying to persuade Florence, Siena, and Perugia to join

them.[426] Nor did they stop there, for in December, 1353, they too

tried to interest Charles IV in Italian affairs. When it was seen

that Charles was likely to listen to the Venetians the Visconti too

sent ambassadors to him, nor was the Papacy slow to make friends.

[Illustration: THE PALACE OF THE POPES AT AVIGNON]

In 1352 Clement VI had died, and in his stead Innocent VI reigned

in Avignon. He was determined to assert his claims in Italy, and

especially in the Romagna, and to this end despatched Cardinal

Albornoz, the redoubtable Spaniard, to bring the unruly barons

of that region to order. The whole situation was delicate and

complicated. Florence was in a particularly difficult position. She

had called Charles into Italy without the Pope's leave--she, the

head of the Guelf cause. He had not come. Now when she no longer

wanted him he seemed to be coming in spite of her and with the Pope's

goodwill. She seems to have doubted the reality of that, as well

she might. Moreover, though she and her allies would have been glad

enough to join the Venetians, the situation was too complicated for

hurried action, especially as a treaty only two years old bound them

not to interfere in Lombardy and Bologna so long as they were left

alone.

Charles's own position can have been not less difficult. Now that he

seemed really eager to enter Italy, both sides seemed eager for him

to do so. Should he enter Italy as the "Imperatore de' Preti," and so

make sure of a coronation, or descend as the avenger of the imperial

claims? He hesitated. In these circumstances it seemed to the

Florentines that there was but one thing to do--to inform themselves

of the real intentions of the Pope, and when these were known, to

decide on a course of action. In these very delicate missions his

countrymen again had recourse to Boccaccio. He set out on April 28,

1354.[427] His instructions were to find out whether the Emperor

was coming into Italy with consent of His Holiness, to speak of the

loyalty of Florence to the Holy See, and to protest her willingness

to do whatever the Pope desired. At the same time he had to obtain

at least this, that the Pope should exert himself to save the honour

and independence of the republic. Again, if the Pope pretended that

heknew nothing of the advent of Charles, but asked the intentions of

Florence in case he should enter Italy, Boccaccio was instructed to

say that he was only sent to ask the intentions of His Holiness. In

any case he was to return as quickly as possible.

The Pope's answer seems to have been far from clear. Boccaccio

returned, but a few months later Dietifeci di Michele was sent as

ambassador to Avignon with almost the same instructions and with the

same object in view.

Can it be that Florence really did not understand the situation as

we see it, or was that situation in reality very dangerous to her

liberty? It is difficult to understand how she can have failed to

see that the Pope had already won. It was obvious that he had come

to some arrangement with Charles, which proved to be that the Church

would crown him on condition that he only spent the day of his

incoronation in Rome and respected the sovereignty of the Pope in the

states of the Church. Moreover, if this were not enough, as Florence

knew, the presence of Albornoz in Romagna had already drawn the teeth

of the Visconti so far as they were dangerous to Tuscany. However,

it seems to have been in considerable fear and perplexity that she

saw Charles enter Padua early in November, 1354. Now if ever, some

thought doubtless, the White Guelf ideal was to be realised. Among

these idealists was, alas, Petrarch, whose hymn, not long written

perhaps, _Italia Mia_, surely dreamed of quite another king than a

German prince. Boccaccio was, as I think, better advised. In his

seventh Eclogue he mercilessly ridicules Charles, who in fact, though

not maybe in seeming, was the instrument of the Pope. He entered

Italy by the Pope's leave. Padua received him with honour, but Cane

della Scala of Verona clanged to his gates, and the Visconti with

bared teeth waited to see what he would do. He went to Mantua and

Gonzaga received him well. There he expected the ambassador of

Tuscany, but as the Pope's friend the Ghibellines knew him not, they

smiled bitterly at the "Priests' Emperor," only Pisa pathetically

stretching out her hands to Cæsar's ghost, while, as claimant of the

imperial title the Guelf republics would have none of him. Florence

need have had no fear, the Church had out-manœuvred her enemies as in

old time.

Charles, however, was not contemptible. Simple German as he was,

he soon grasped the situation. He made friends in some sort with

Visconti, and in this doubtless Petrarch, who had urged him on, was

able to assist him. From them he received the iron crown, though not

indeed at Monza, but in Milan, in the church of S. Ambrogio, and at

their hands. That must have been a remarkable and unhappy time for

the King of the Romans, in spite of Petrarch's talk and friendship.

Presently he set out for Pisa and so to Rome, where he received the

imperial crown on April 4, 1355, and, returning to Pisa, as though

in irony of Petrarch's enthusiastic politics, crowned the grammarian

Zanobi da Strada poet laureate. Yet this was surely but a German

joke. As for Florence, still trembling it seems, she took as firm a

stand as she could, and asked only the protection and friendship of

the Emperor, offering no homage or subordination. The Sienese, on

the other hand, in spite of their treaty with Florence, offered him

their lordship. Others followed their example, and Pisa was filled

with Ghibellines claiming the destruction of Florence, the head and

front of the Guelf faction. Charles, however, refused to adventure.

He demanded from Florence only money, as a fine, by paying which she

was to be restored to his favour, and that her magistrates should be

called Vicars of the Empire. She forfeited nothing of her liberty and

none of her privileges as a free republic. Yet at first she refused

to acquiesce. It was only after an infinite number of explanations

that she was brought to consent. Indeed, we read that the "very

notary who read out the deed broke down, and the Senate was so

affected that it dissolved. On the next day the Act was rejected

seven times before it was passed. The bells were the only merry folk

in Florence, so jealous were her citizens of the liberty of their

state."

FOOTNOTES:

[419] Cf. CRESCINI, _op. cit._, p. 258. I quote the document.

_Camarlinghi del Comune_ Quad. 75 and 76 Gennaio-Febbraio 1350-1.

"In dei nomine amen. Hic est liber sive quaternus In se continens

solutiones factas tempore Religiosorum virorum fratris Benedicti

caccini et fratris Iacopi Iohannis de ordine fratrum sancti marci de

flor. Et discretorum virorum domini Iohannis Bocchaccij de Certaldo

pro quarterio S^i Spiritus et Pauli Neri de bordonibus pro quarterio

S^e Marie novelle laicorum, civium florentinorum, camerariorum camere

comunis florentie pro duobus mensibus initiatis die primo mensis

Ianuarij Millesimo trecentesimo quinquagesimo [1351, n.s.] Ind iiij,"

etc. etc.

[420] In May, as we have seen, he was inscribed in the Arte dei

Giudici e Notai. Cf. _supra_, p. 145, n. 4.

[421] Cf. HORTIS, _Boccaccio Ambasciatore_, _cit._, p. 8, n. 4, and

Docs. 2, 3, 4, 5.

[422] Cf. HORTIS, _op. cit._, p. 9. n. 1. BALDELLI, _op. cit._, pp.

112-13, and WITTE are wrong in supposing Ludwig to be Ludovico il

Romano, as Hortis shows.

[423] Florence broke off communications after consulting Siena and

Perugia. Cf. _Arch. Stor. Ital._, Ser. I. App. VII, p. 389.

[424] Cf. _Arch. Stor. Ital._, _u.s._, p. 389.

[425] Cf. MATTEO VILLANI, Lib. IV. In July (see letter quoted

_supra_) we know Boccaccio to have been in Ravenna. He says to

Petrarch, "Pridie quidem IIII ydus julii forte Ravennam urbem

petebam, visitaturus civitatis Principem et ut ferebat iter Livii

forum intravi...." He arrived, then, on July 12, and it was a

friend he met in Forlì (Livii) who told him that Petrarch had

entered the service of the Visconti. He reproaches him, as we have

seen. Nelli, whom he here calls Simonides, was also in Ravenna. He

upbraids Petrarch, as we have seen, in allegory, asking how Sylvanus

(Petrarch) can desert and betray the nymph Amaryllis (Italy) and go

over to the oppressor Egon (Visconti), the false priest of Pan (the

Pope), a monster of crime. Cf. CORAZZINI, _op. cit._, p. 47.

[426] See docs. cited in _Arch. Stor. Ital._, _u.s._, pp. 392-4.

[427] Baldelli, Hortis, Landau, and Koerting are all in agreement

that this mission took place in April, 1354, not April, 1353. The

instructions of the Republic, which I quote _infra_, were published

by Canestrini in _Arch. St. It., u.s._, p. 393, but under the

erroneous date of April 30, 1353. In April, 1353, Charles was not

about to set out.

The letter of instruction is as follows:--

"Nota agendorum in Romana Curia cum domino Summo Pontifice, pro

parte suorum et Ecclesie devotorum, Priorum artium et Vexillifero

Iustitie Populi et Comunis Florentie, et ipsius Comunis per providum

virum dominum Iohannem Bocchaccii de Certaldo, ambaxiatorum Comunis

predicti.

"Primo quidem, idem orator eosdem Priores et Vexilliferum et Comune,

ea qua videntur, prelatione debita et devota, Sanctitati Apostolice

humiliter commendabit.

"Secundo, narrabit Sanctitati Sue quod Illustris Romanorum et

Boemie Rex, per suas licteras, et nuncios Comuni Florentino et eius

Regiminibus, advenctum suum ad partes Italicas fiendum in proximo

nuntiavit: que annuntiatio miranda venit auditui predictorum, pro eo

quod, nunquid descendat de Summi Pontificis conscientia vel non, in

Comuni Florentie non est clarum. Quod Comune, devotum Sancte Romane

Ecclesie intendens, ut consuevit, hactenus a Sancta Matre Ecclesia,

in nichilo deviare, certiorari cupit die Apostolica conscientia ut

in agendis procedat cauctius, et suis possit, favore apostolico,

negotiis providere. Cuius Summi Pontificis si responsum fuerit, se

et Ecclesiam Romanam de eiusdem Imperatori descensu esse contentos,

tunc subiungat supplicando, quod Populum et Comune Florentie

dignetur recommendatos habere tamquam devotos Ecclesie et Apostolice

Sanctitatis, ut in devotione solita possint idem Comune et populus

erga Sanctam Matrem Ecclesiam libere conservari.

"Si vero idem dominus Summus Pontifex eiusdem discensus diceret se

conscium non esse, et vellet de intentione Comunis Florentie ab eodem

oratore perquirere; dicat se non habere mandatum, nisi sciscitandi

Summi Pontificis voluntatem.

"Et qualequale precisum et finale responsum ad promissa datum fuerit

per Apostolicam Sanctitatem, idem ambaxiator festinis gressibus

revertatur.

"Insuper, exposita eidem Sanctitati devotione qua floruerunt hactenus

nobiles de Malatestis de Arimino ... Ceterum, dominum Clarum de

Peruzziis, episcopum Feretranum et Sancti Leonis....

"Particulam quoque, que advenctus Romani Regis in Ytaliam agit

seperius mentionem, nulli pandat orator affatus, nisi quatenus

iusserit deliberatio Apostolice Sanctitatis."

The entry in the Libri d' uscita della Camera dei Camerlinghi del

Comune--Quaderno del Marzo-Aprile, 1354, under date April 29, is

given by CRESCINI as follows:--

"Domino Iohanni del Boccaccio

Bernardo Cambi.

honorabilibus popularibus civibus Florentinis ambaxiatoribus

electis ad eundum pro dicto Comuni ad dominum summum pontificem,

cum ambaxiata eisdem per dominos priores et vexilliferum Imponenda,

pro eorum et cujusque ipsorum salario quadragintaquinque dierum

Initiandorum ea die qua iter arripient de civitate Florentie ad

eundum pro dicto Comuni in ambaxiatam predictam, ad rationem:

librarum quatuor et solidorum decem flor. parv., cum tribus equis

pro dicto domino Iohanne; et solidorum viginti flor. parv. cum uno

equo pro dicto Bernardo, per diem quamlibet, vigore electionis

de eis facte per dictos dominos priores et vexilliferum Iustitie

cum deliberatione et consensu officij Gonfaloneriorum sotietatis

populi, et duodecim bonorum virorum dicti Comunis; ac etiam vigore

provisionis et stantiamenti facti per dictos dominos priores et

vexilliferum Iustitie una cum off^o duodecim bonorum virorum

dicti Comunis, publicati et scripti per ser Puccinum ser Lapi

notarium, scribam officij dictorum priorum et vexilliferi et vigore

apodixe transmisse per dictos dominos priores et vexilliferum per

dictum ser Puccinum notarium, in summam inter ambos ... libro

ducentasquadraginta septem, solidos decem fl. parv."

Giovanni Boccaccio, a Biographical Study · 第 11 / 20 章