As early as 1636 Pope Urban VIII extorted from the powers engaged in the
Thirty Years' War their unwilling consent to treat. In 1637 a discussion
of safe conducts was begun, which lasted nearly five years, and it was
not until 1641 that preliminaries as to time and place of the congress
were signed, and these were not ratified, nor safe conducts exchanged,
until 1643, making six years for controversies as to mere formalities.
One of the causes of this dilatoriness was that neither side really
desired peace. Captiousness and punctiliousness were doubtless
emphasized in order to obtain delay. The labor of concluding peace was
colossal; there were endless obstacles to surmount, contending interests
to reconcile, a labyrinth of circumstances to cope with, difficulties to
overcome besetting the congress from the very outset of the
negotiations, not only of arranging the conditions of peace but still
more of carrying them through the proceedings.
It is therefore fair to assume that the difficulties in establishing the
Peace of Westphalia were as great as, and probably greater than, those
now confronting the peace conference at Paris. For in the Westphalian
congress nobody desired peace, and it was not possible to agree to an
armistice, so that war continued while the congress was in session,
materially affecting the deliberations; this may be one reason why the
congress lasted as long as four years.
To avoid questions of precedence and to lessen further opportunities for
disagreement, two cities in Westphalia, Munster for the Catholics and
Osnabruck for the Protestants, were selected. These places were a short
day's ride apart. The treaty was signed at Munster October 24, 1648, and
was called "The Peace of Westphalia." In addition to the disposition for
delay, there was a tendency to criticize things generally. Thus certain
plenipotentiaries complained of their accommodations, saying that the
houses assigned to them, though high and handsome externally, were in
fact rat holes. The streets also were pronounced very narrow, so much so
that when a certain very polite diplomat, who wore a very large hat,
made from his coach an extremely low bow, his hat hit a very expensive
vase in an open window, which fell and broke, causing great
embarrassment.
First, questions of etiquette were taken up. For instance, did the
precedence belong to Spain, and what marks of honor were due to the
representatives of the neutral powers? Then came contests for the
ecclesiastical seats. The Nuncio, the representative of the Pope, wished
to sit not only at the head of the table but wanted a canopy over him to
distinguish him. The way in which the minor powers should be received
was in doubt. It was finally decided to go half-way down the stairs with
guests when departing. Also the question of titles arose. The word
"excellency" was chosen for addressing the envoys of the great powers,
but it had to be extended to the lesser powers. The Venetian envoy
obtained the honor (to his joy) of being conducted, when he visited the
French plenipotentiary, to the door of his coach, instead of to the
staircase. These few of the many incidents during the congress will
illustrate the human side of official matters. Such disputes as to
precedence and etiquette were to be expected in a proud and ceremonious
age among representatives of numerous States, especially when many of
them were of doubtful rank. There was also much display. A train of 18
coaches conveyed the French envoys in their visits of ceremony. It
appeared that France desired to show that she had not been impoverished
by the war like Germany.
The papal nuncio and the Venetian envoy were mediators as well as
members of the congress. France and Sweden were opposed to each other in
religion, but in accord on political matters. The treaty was drawn up
with such fullness and precision of language as is rarely found in
documents of this nature, due to a large body of trained lawyers among
the members. As indicating a desire for fairness in little things as
well as in larger questions, the treaty contained these words: "No one
of any party shall look askance at anyone on account of his creed." As
an example of wise provisions, the following may be noted: The
Protestants demanded the year 1618 as annus normalis for the restitution
of ecclesiastical estates, the Catholics insisted on the year 1630,
which was much more favorable to them. The congress split the difference
and made it 1624. The medius terminus is often the wisest course in
acute controversies. As to temporal affairs, all hostilities of whatever
kind were to be forgotten, neither party being allowed to molest or
injure the other for any purpose. In regard to spiritual affairs,
complete equality was to exist (aequalitas exacta mutuaque), and every
kind of violence was forever forbidden between the parties.
The peace of Westphalia was the first effort to reconstruct the European
states' system, and it became the common law of Europe. Few treaties
have had such influence, and Europe is said for the first time to have
formed a kind of commonwealth watching with anxiety over the
preservation of the general peace.