A detailed firsthand account of the origins of the Great Schism of the West has never been adequately exploited. I refer to a treatise written by Alfonso Pecha, best known as an associate of St. Bridget of Sweden, but after Bridget's death a confidante of the Spanish cardinal Pedro de Luna at which time he became a day-to-day observer of events in Rome in the spring of 1378. Alfonso wrote two pro-Urbanist accounts of the origins of the Schism. The first, Informationes super creatione Urbani, written in 1379, has long been recognized as a valuable source, but the second, Conscriptio bona sub triplici via de electione … domini Urbani pape sexti, has been neglected. It was edited in 1909 from a manuscript in Basel by Franz Bliemetzrieder,Footnote 1 but afterwards it has scarcely been put to use.Footnote 2 Spurred by the recognition of a second complete copy in a manuscript in Prague, as well as a small portion in a manuscript in Uppsala and passages in a world chronicle,Footnote 3 I turned my attention to the work and published my initial findings in 2012.Footnote 4 There I limited myself to a general introduction and to a close analysis of the treatise's first and third parts. Space limitations forbade an equivalent analysis of the second — and frustratingly so because this part treats specific events of the Schism. Accordingly I turn to it now and then present a critical edition of the entire work.
Alfonso Pecha
Because a presentation of the necessary background for considering the Conscriptio appears in my article of 2012, I will hold that here to a minimum.Footnote 5 Alfonso Pecha of Guadalajara was born of a Spanish noble family in Segovia in 1327. (He is often referred to as “Alfonso of Pecha,” but Pecha is not a toponym.) Groomed for a career in the Church, he studied canon law, traveling to Bologna to work under the leading canonist of the day, John of Legnano. (This is a new biographical datum, obtainable from the Conscriptio.Footnote 6 ) Made bishop of Jaén by papal provision in 1359, he abruptly resigned his bishopric in 1368. The resignation was caused by a conversion experience, apparently catalyzed by his brother, Pedro Fernandez Pecha, who had forsaken his own worldly career to take up a life as a hermit in Castile.Footnote 7 Pedro in fact became the leader there of an eremitical community that subsequently, in 1374, was recognized by Pope Gregory XI as the order of Jeronimites. Although Alfonso could have stayed with his brother, he traveled once more to Italy, where he remained until his death. Initially he joined an eremitical community associated with fraticelli, somewhere near Spoleto or Perugia, but he seems to have been temperamentally unable to remain in a hermitage.
What concerns us here is that between 1370 and 1378 Alfonso left his community, first for intervals and then permanently, to serve as confessor to Bridget of Sweden. Although he continued to call himself a “hermit” for the duration of his life,Footnote 8 he gradually became a curialist. He undertook separate diplomatic missions from Rome to Avignon on behalf of Bridget and of his brother Pedro's campaign to gain formal papal recognition of the new order of Jeronimites. So trusted was he by Gregory XI that Catherine of Siena called him the pope's “vicar.”Footnote 9 Sometime before the papal election of April 1378 Alfonso had taken a dwelling in the Roman district of Trastevere.Footnote 10 Intent on lobbying for Bridget's canonization after her death in 1373, he gained a very highly placed patron when Gregory XI arrived in Rome with his entourage of cardinals early in 1377. This was Pedro de Luna, the only Spanish cardinal and a leading personality in the ecclesiastical politics of the day. (He was elected pope in Avignon in 1394 as Benedict XIII.) By the time of the papal election in Rome in April 1378, Alfonso had become Cardinal Pedro de Luna's confessor and most trusted familiar.Footnote 11
Alfonso's Informationes
We will see that Alfonso's privileged position at the right hand of the cardinal afforded him an extraordinary vantage point for observing events of the Great Schism. But before we do, it is necessary to introduce his two writings on the subject. Alfonso's Informationes super creatione Urbani was a brief written for an “inquest” held in Rome in March 1379 by Spanish supporters of Urban VI. His partisanship for Urban was virtually predetermined. Before the Schism his heroine Bridget of Sweden had propagandized passionately for the return of the papacy from Avignon to Rome; hence for Alfonso a move now in the other direction would have been unthinkable. Moreover, after Bridget's death he hoped to achieve her canonization and, given the anti-Avignon bias of Bridget's visions, that could only have been implemented by a Romanist pope. In the Informationes, Alfonso argues in favor of Urban VI's legitimacy on three grounds: 1) God's will as expressed in revelations to Bridget and others; 2) the events surrounding his election; and 3) the authority of canon law. The Informationes was preserved in the dossier of sources pertaining to the Schism compiled in the 1390s by the Spanish cardinal of the Avignon obedience, Martin of Zalva.Footnote 12 Housed in the Vatican archives, it was published in the seventeenth century by Odorico Rinaldi and expertly reedited by Arne Jönsson in 1989.Footnote 13 Most reputable secondary accounts draw on it.
Alfonso's Conscriptio
Footnote
14
Circumstances of Composition
The Conscriptio is roughly twice the length of the Informationes. It is organized according to the same three-pronged organizational principle of the prior work: proving that Urban VI is the true pope 1) via spiritus (through supernatural visions); 2) via facti (through the events surrounding his election); and 3) via iuris (through confirmation by canon law). But although it contains passages that roughly duplicate passages in the Informationes, it contains much material that is lacking in its predecessor. By the time Alfonso wrote the Conscriptio he had moved from Rome to the newly founded Jeronimite house in Quarto, a suburb of Genoa.Footnote 15
In my initial study of the work I overlooked a dating index. Referring to a certain Nicholas of Cremona, Alfonso states that at the time of the election of Urban VI this person was an auditor of the Cardinal of St. Peter but “now” is archbishop of Naples,Footnote 16 referring to Nicholas's tenure in Naples from 1384 until his death in 1389. But one can narrow down that broad dating span. The hitherto unstudied Prague copy of the Conscriptio includes a salutation lacking in the copy used by Bliemetzrieder. This indicates that Alfonso addressed his work to “Lord Manfred, marquis of Saluzzo, councilor of the illustrious lord, the count of Vertus.” The “count” in question was Giangaleazzo Visconti, who had become sole ruler of the territories of Milan after having overthrown his uncle Bernabò in May 1385. Giangaleazzo, who by these means had become the mightiest ruler of northern Italy, could have been addressed as “lord of Milan,” but his highest honorific was “count of Vertus” (a small county in France), for the rulers of Milan only became “dukes” in 1395. His councilor Manfred of Saluzzo was a titular marquis, having been deprived of the real office by a rival. Thereafter he joined the retinue of Giangaleazzo Visconti.Footnote 17 He witnessed a treaty between Giangaleazzo and the count of Savoy in 1378; he helped engineer the election of his son, Antonio, as archbishop of Milan in 1380; he witnessed the marriage contract made in Paris between Giangaleazzo's daughter, Valentina, and Louis of Orléans in 1387; and he made his testament in Giangaleazzo's palace in Milan in 1389.Footnote 18
The salutation is followed by a preamble present in both manuscripts. From this we learn that Manfred had asked Alfonso to reconsider a demand made by an unnamed person to write fully about who was the true pope and that now Alfonso, moved by his conscience, was acceding. Evidently Manfred was soliciting a statement in favor of Urban in order to influence his lord. After Giangaleazzo had assumed rule in Lombardy it would have been appropriate for him to have made a decision about which of the rival popes he would support, for the Viscontis until then had been neutral. Moreover, the presence of Urban VI in nearby Genoa as of the autumn of 1385 apparently provoked debate. A sprawling prophetic treatise written under the name of “Telesphorus” that supported the Clementist cause was dedicated to the Doge of Genoa on 3 September 1386.Footnote 19
The picture is enhanced by neglected evidence indicating that between late 1385 and late 1386 the prominent French diplomat, Philippe de Mézières, was present in Giangaleazzo's court and arguing there in behalf of Clement VII.Footnote 20 An anonymous tract written in England between 1400 and 1402 reports that de Mézières visited Giangaleazzo in order to seek his allegiance for Avignon. According to this account, Giangaleazzo concurrently summoned Alfonso Pecha because he was well informed about the Schism, having been Pedro de Luna's confessor in Rome. The source (written from the Urbanist side) adds that Alfonso adduced a libellus that employed a threefold argument in favor of Urban, and this vanquished Philippe de Mézières.Footnote 21 The libellus in question must be our Conscriptio, for the work does use a threefold argument, and although his Informationes did the same, it is inconceivable that Alfonso, who seems to have written the Conscriptio right before then, would have been adducing this much earlier and sketchier work.
The Conscriptio itself refers to de Mézières. When telling of how a one-time Clementist, Pierre Bohier, had changed sides and become an Urbanist, Alfonso interjects: “Lord Philippe de Mézières who was staying then in the convent of the Celestines at Paris knows this well.”Footnote 22 This remark would have been irrelevant had Alfonso not been thinking of de Mézières as his antagonist in a contest for persuading Giangaleazzo Visconti about the truth of the Schism. It is unclear only whether Alfonso had intended his work to be a vehicle of public dueling before Giangaleazzo with the Frenchman. (Whatever the case, he did not win the day, for, although Giangaleazzo continued to maintain formal neutrality, his tilting toward the Clementists became clear in January 1387 with the marriage contract of his daughter to the brother of the king of France dated according to the reign of Clement VII.Footnote 23 )
The foregoing would indicate that the Conscriptio was composed in 1386 when Urban VI was residing in Genoa. (Urban departed in December 1386.) Corroboration rests on extensive verbatim borrowings from the Conscriptio and explicit mention of Alfonso as its author in the Cosmidromius, a world history written by a certain Gobelinus Person.Footnote 24 Inasmuch as Person wrote in Paderborn in 1406, the question arises as to how he gained a copy of a treatise written earlier in a suburb of Genoa. Fortunately the answer is clear. At the start of his career he had been in Urban VI's retinue: he arrived with the pope in Genoa in September 1385, was ordained to the priesthood there on 21 April 1386, and left for Germany sometime before 8 February 1387.Footnote 25 As a familiar of Urban's treasurer, Peter de Lupis, he dwelled in the same residence as the pope.Footnote 26 It follows that Gobelinus Person acquired a copy of Alfonso's work when he was in Genoa and retained it when he departed.
The Worth of the Source
The second part of Alfonso's Conscriptio is a vivid and circumstantial account of the events surrounding the election of Urban VI. The author provides a readable and colorful narrative: the cardinals enter the conclave “after the meal” to the sound of “trumpets, caramellas (a hapax legomenon?), and other musical instruments” (lines 371–72). He offers conversations of intriguers, sometimes in direct discourse, pursuing their interests. (The vividness in this regard might interest a literary historian.) He presents lively moments: when Bartholomew, the archbishop of Bari, for whom none of the cardinals have any real love, begins to launch into a sermon on humility before his enthroning as pope, the cardinals cut him off (lines 455–61).
Certainly the work is biased in favor of the Urbanist cause, but were historians to shun any contemporaneous writing about the Schism on those grounds no sources would remain, for all of them were biased. Granted that Alfonso's partisan brief concentrates on evidence that supports his cause, he is honest enough to avoid making a hero out of Urban; he even grants that as soon as Urban became pope he began to exasperate the cardinals by chiding and reproving them scathingly.
Alfonso strives for reliability. When he reports speech he is careful to qualify that he is recalling the words as best he can — “in effectu” (lines 313, 380, 391, 444). Recognizing that his account could be challenged unless he frequently specified his sources of information, he identified his main informant as the Cardinal de Luna. At the beginning of his narrative he states that he was the confessor of “one of the cardinals” and that this cardinal often consulted with him and two other of his familiars about “secrets” and “arduous counsels” outside of the confessional (lines 264–66).Footnote 27 Later Alfonso reports that immediately after the election of the archbishop of Bari as pope, this person, now mentioned by name as Pedro de Luna, informed him that the conclave had acted willingly and without pressure (lines 391–96). In this context Alfonso specifies the exact time when de Luna told him this — “at the first hour of the night after compline” — and that he did so in the presence of two other of his familiars whom Alfonso mentions by name. Toward the end of his account, he sums up: “these things I know and heard from the Lord Cardinal de Luna, who told me much about what happened every day with his own mouth when he came back from the palace” (lines 509–11) Alfonso also names two other informants: Agapito Colonna, chaplain of Cardinal Robert of Geneva, and Nicholas of Cremona, “the closest familiar of the Cardinal of Aigrefeuille” (lines 313–14, 340–43). Not least he refers to a conversation he held with the archbishop of Bari who was soon to be elected as Urban VI (lines 356–63).
The author's role as an “insider” appears independently in the testimony of his brother Pedro at an inquest concerning the Schism held at the bidding of the king of Castile between the late spring of 1380 and the winter of 1381 in Medina del Campo. Pedro reported that before entering the conclave “the cardinal of Aragon” (de Luna) heard a mass presided over by Alfonso and received the sacrament from him.Footnote 28 Afterwards, when the cardinals exited from the conclave after the vote was taken, “Lord Alfonso” went to Pedro de Luna who informed him of the election of the archbishop of Bari.Footnote 29 For practical purposes then, one must consider Alfonso's treatment of the relevant events an eyewitness report.
It may be observed that two prominent recent treatments of the origins of the Schism, while acknowledging the biases of all contemporary accounts, Urbanist or Clementist, offer unqualified narratives that are pronouncedly Clementist.Footnote 30 Daniel Williman takes as given a lack of majority among the cardinals on entering the conclave and has the Roman people frightening the cardinals by “howling,” “threatening riot and slaughter,” and “terrifying” them.Footnote 31 Joëlle Rollo-Koster, after granting “it is quite clear that the Schism historiography is bogged down in subjectivity,”Footnote 32 indulges in some herself by adhering to an account that has the cardinals in the conclave initially disagreeing and later becoming nervous because of the crowd's “bellowing.”Footnote 33 Perhaps a future treatment would do better to offer readers a range of contemporary avowals including the one we have here that offers details of the cardinals’ prior consensus about electing the archbishop of Bari before entering the conclave and how they then proceeded to vote in that way “willingly and without pressure” (lines 393–94).
New Particulars
The Conscriptio is much richer than Alfonso's earlier Informationes in its recounting of events surrounding the Schism. Just to note its narrative of developments preceding the opening of the conclave, it goes beyond the Informationes in its presentation of the following: 1) Cardinal Robert of Geneva's desire to elect Agapito Colonna and his discussion with him about this; 2) Agapito's proposal that they support the archbishop of Bari and Robert's agreement thereto; 3) the possible candidacy of Martin of Zalva; 4) the secret negotiations between the two parties of cardinals with details of their self-interested motivations; and 5) the archbishop of Bari's lobbying of Pedro to have him talk to the cardinal de Luna in his behalf.
To proceed to detail, we may begin with an account that Alfonso reports early in his narrative. He explains that it became clear on the eve of the papal election in April 1378 that the division within the college of cardinals between the “Limousin” and the “French” factions precluded the possibility of electing a cardinal from either party because neither could gain a two-thirds vote. Assuming that a candidate who would be sufficiently acceptable to both sides would have to be found from outside the ranks of the cardinals, the leader of the “French” faction, Robert of Geneva, favored a prominent member of the Roman Colonna family. Actually this person, Agapito Colonna, was hardly neutral. He had served as chaplain of Robert's uncle, the mighty Guy de Boulogne, until the latter's death in 1373, and now he was Robert's chaplain. Alfonso pointed to these facts to indicate why Robert favored Agapito, although he neglected to mention another consideration, that the Colonna candidate would have satisfied the desire of the local populace for the election of a Roman pope.Footnote 34
According to Alfonso, Robert called Agapito to his presence with the announcement that he wished to propose him as candidate for the papacy. But Agapito responded “prudently” that “this should by no means be done.” His explanation was that “this would cause great indignation in Rome and in the patria [presumably Italy] because an Orsini, Lord Giacomo, was one of the cardinals, and there [were] many magnates in Rome of the house of Orsini.” As he went on to say, “many of the opposing party, namely, of the house of Colonna, are enemies [of the Orsini]. Thus such an election would cause great indignation and controversy owing to the said factionalism.”Footnote 35 Robert then replied: “So, whom do you think we should elect?” Upon which Agapito proposed Bartholomew, the archbishop of Bari, because he was a familiar of Robert's: “if he were pope, he would do anything the cardinal wished.” In addition he “was learned, honest, and good, and knew the practices of the apostolic chancery, and the methods of doing business and the style of the Roman curia.” Satisfied with this proposal, Robert of Geneva swore that he would labor with all his powers to see that the archbishop of Bari would be elected pope.Footnote 36
Did something like this lively conversation really take place? Certainly it served Alfonso's ulterior motives. He was intent on proving that Bartholomew Prignano, the archbishop of Bari, was the preferred candidate of the cardinals before they entered the conclave and that they did not elect him, as they subsequently insisted, under the threat of violence by the Roman crowds. Moreover, Alfonso was surely pleased to designate Robert of Geneva, who in September became Clement VII, as the original supporter of the man whom he very soon would try to unseat. Yet the mere fact that the account suited Alfonso's purposes does not prove that the discussion did not occur approximately as recorded. One might have thought that Robert of Geneva would have known of the impossibility of electing a Colonna because of the Orsini rivalry, but he had never been part of the Roman scene and might have arrived too recently in Rome to have been aware of local realities. As for the question of whether Alfonso would have known of the purported conversation, Robert and Pedro de Luna were allied in the “French” faction of the cardinals, so that Agapito, a familiar of Robert, might well have confided in Alfonso, a familiar of the other. (Alfonso was residing in Trastevere, and Robert and his retinue were residing in a dwelling appurtenant to the church of Sta. Maria in Trastevere.Footnote 37 ) Nor should one discount the fact that Alfonso offered solemn assurances of the interview's veracity, stating that Agapito reported it to him in the presence of a witness, Alfonso's brother Pedro, “placing his hand on a book of decretals and securing by oath the truth of what he had said by the holy gospels of God there written.”Footnote 38
A counterpart to this account is another in which Alfonso tells of unedifying motives that moved two “Limousin” cardinals to vote for the archbishop of Bari. Alfonso had already maintained in his Informationes that one of the leaders of the Limousin party, the cardinal of Aigrefeuille, favored Bari even before the conclave because he thought of him as “almost a household familiar” and “loved him much.”Footnote 39 In the Conscriptio he specifies that Aigrefeuille had decided for Bari, who had been a special servant of Aigrefeuille's. Then he adds that the Limousin cardinals reckoned that if Bari were elected he would raise one of their allies, Nicholas de la Rocha, a nephew of the deceased Gregory XI, to the cardinalate and also bring the curia back to Avignon.Footnote 40 Alfonso maintained that he had heard this from Nicholas of Cremona, who was then an intimate of the said cardinal of Aigrefeuille.
Doubtless, Alfonso presented the accounts of both the cardinal of Geneva's preference for the archbishop of Bari and the same preference of the two Limousin cardinals because of his desire to prove that the election of Bartholomeo Prignano had been predetermined. But were his details substantially true? For my part, I find it difficult to believe that he invented an extended conversation between Agapito Colonna and Robert of Geneva out of whole cloth or that he would have named a second party, Nicholas of Cremona (who was still alive), as witness for the motives of the Limousin cardinals. With requisite caution I would thus be inclined to place Alfonso's picturesque reports of conversations and shabby motives within a larger narrative of the Schism.
Less caution seems necessary regarding another original detail in Alfonso's account. According to this, before the cardinals entered the conclave they considered two candidates for the papacy: the archbishop of Bari and also the Navarrese bishop of Pamplona, Martin of Zalva. It seems entirely credible that Martin's name was brought forward, and if so it would have been proposed by Pedro de Luna, who would have been pleased to have had a Spanish pope. Before the election, Martin of Zalva had been a professor of canon law in Avignon and had also served Gregory XI as referendarius.Footnote 41 Then he accompanied Gregory to Rome in January 1378 and was soon trusted by the pope with an important mission to Lucca to negotiate peace with the Florentines. Evidently he was a man of some ability, but according to Alfonso his candidacy, once bruited, was set aside on two counts. First, he was “rather young.” Actually Martin was forty-one, but given the grasping proclivities of the cardinals most were probably not inclined to elevate someone who might have been able to entrench his own appointees and power for a great length of time. (Robert of Geneva was elected as Clement VII in September 1378 at age thirty-six only because of urgent circumstances then at work.) Martin's other handicap was that he was absent from Rome, being still on his mission to Tuscany. This alone was reason enough to rule him out, for the local Romans were intent on the election of a Roman pope, or “at least an Italian,” and the election of a Spaniard would have been most difficult to accomplish if he were not present for immediate consecration.
The Mission of Pierre Chambon
Although Alfonso's account of the maneuverings and intrigues that preceded the conclave of April 1378 is vivid, they do not convey information that alters the main substance of what long has been known. An exception is a passage that refers to a mission to King Charles V of France that in my estimation puts knowledge of Charles's role in the Schism on a new footing. For well over a century Noël Valois's four-volume work, La France et le Grand Schisme d'Occident, has justly been considered the most minute and authoritative account, and his narrative of Charles V's actions in the drama is unexceptionable as far as it goes. The main lines are as follows.Footnote 42 From the time of Urban VI's election in April until the end of July, the king of France recognized Urban as pope. A charter of 2 July issued by the bishop of Lisieux (Nicole Oresme), an intimate counselor of the king, is dated according to the first year of Urban VI's reign. The same holds for an act drawn up in Poitiers in the presence of royal officials as late as 30 July. But in August an emissary of the cardinals who had fled to Anagni, one Jean de Guignicourt, arrived in Paris with the news that all the cardinals had broken with Urban and declared his election null and void because it had been extracted from them out of fear. Having confidence in the word of the princes of the Church, Charles immediately accepted their account and sent financial support; at the same time he instructed Gascon and Breton routiers in Italy to lend the cardinals their protection. These acts were decisive, for the cardinals now knew that they had the mightiest support to allow them to proceed with the election of a new pope, as they did in September.
But Valois could have gone further had he known Alfonso Pecha's Conscriptio, which lay unpublished when he wrote. Here is Alfonso:
By the devil's instigation, the cardinals, and especially Geneva and Amiens, began most secretly to treat about accomplishing a schism. Then they sent Lord Petrus Chambonis, chamberlain of the cardinal of Geneva, to the king of France and to the duke of Anjou [Louis, the king's brother] in order to complain to them about the Limousin cardinals. They wanted the king to write to them [the Limousins] threateningly and harshly because they had elected such a man [Urban VI] who was not French but Italian to the detriment of the king of France, so, that frightened by threat and terror, these cardinals would arrange for uniting in this schism, et cetera.Footnote 43
Pierre Chambon (Petrus Chambonis) is identifiable. He appears as an auditor of Gregory XI in a document of 1371. More directly relevant is a document of 3 November 1378 wherein he is identified as a former chaplain and auditor of the cardinal of Geneva and currently as a familiar of the latter who had now become Clement VII.Footnote 44 Clearly Alfonso was not inventing the identity of a trusted minion. As for the substance of his report, it seems perfectly credible. The two cardinals mentioned by Alfonso were close to Charles V. Robert of Geneva descended from the counts of Geneva and thereby was a cousin of Charles V's stepmother, Jeanne d'Auvergne. The cardinal of Amiens, Jean de la Grange, was one of Charles V's “principal counselors” and for practical purposes Charles's most trusted minister for papal affairs.Footnote 45 It stands to reason that both sought to elect a “French” as opposed to a “Limousin” pope and believed that they needed royal pressure to sway the Limousin cardinals to support such an outcome. In this instance Alfonso does not mention the source of his information, but we know that he had his ear to the ground.
If we accept the historicity of Chambon's mission, the date can be inferred. It must have been roughly during the month before the election of Robert of Geneva as Clement VII because the purpose was to sway the Limousins to vote for him. (Electing Jean de la Grange would have been ruled out because he was too egregiously a man of the king.) Thus the secret mission to the royal court came at about the same time as the public one of Jean de Guignicourt in August and confirms the view that the cardinals regarded the support of the French king as crucial for their planned momentous undertaking. Whether Charles V actually did attempt to intimidate the Limousins cannot be established. But it does seem likely: after all, Robert of Geneva was elected pope unanimously.
Manuscripts Used
B Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, A. IX. 8.
The manuscript consists of two originally independent parts, of which the second, a biblical concordance at fols. 155–274, need not be considered here. The first part (parchment; 25 × 15 cm; single column) is a collection of texts written in different hands pertaining to the Great Schism; Alfonso Pecha's Conscriptio is located at fols. 87r–100v. The treatise is copied in a careful cursiva libraria with a second contemporary hand providing a title in the top margin; a few marginalia include an extended remark by the canonist Nicholas Vener, datable to the year 1407. The orthography has an Italian underlay (“ambaxiata”). A catalogue description of the manuscript is lacking, but compensation exists in treatments by Hermann Heimpel.Footnote 1 As Heimpel indicates, part one was assembled in the Charterhouse of Trier, with near certainty late in 1394. The purpose was to propagandize for the Roman obedience. In 1406 the prior of the Trier Charterhouse joined the newly founded Charterhouse of Basel and brought the collection with him.
P Prague, Národní Knihovna, MS VIII. D. 15.
A description of this manuscript, which includes a detailed list of contents, exists.Footnote 2 Pecha's Conscriptio is located at fols. 21v–26v, copied in a cursiva libraria. On the grounds of a text written immediately following it in the same hand the most likely dating is between 1398 and 1404 because the latter text knows of the subtraction of obedience from the Avignon pope and refers to Boniface IX as the reigning pope.Footnote 3 (This assumes that the copyist was the author of the text or someone commissioned by the author; if not, the terminus ante quem must be 1415 because of concern for the Schism.) The orthography is “German,” thereby strongly suggesting that the Prague copy was made in Bohemia.Footnote 4 There is good reason to believe that it descended from a copy brought to Prague by the theologian Matthew of Cracow, for he was in Genoa in 1385 as an envoy of the University of Prague and brought back with him a copy of Alfonso's version of the Revelationes of Bridget of Sweden.Footnote 5
U Uppsala, Universitetsbibliotek, MS C15.
See the thorough description in Margarete Andersson-Schmitt and Monica Hedlund, Mittelalterliche Handschriften der Universitätsbibliotek Uppsala: Katalog über die C-Sammlung, vol. 1 (Stockholm, 1988), 151–55. The manuscript does not contain the entire Conscriptio but only (at fols. 136v–137r) the admonitory letter that was sent by the Infante Pedro of Aragon to Charles V of France. The provenance is the Bridgettine monastery of Vadstena; the part of the manuscript, roughly of 1440, that contains Pedro's letter is otherwise devoted to materials pertaining to the canonization of Bridget of Sweden. Evidently the treatise, which is replete with passages concerning Bridget's sanctity, was part of the Bridgettine dossier in the Vadstena archives.
Textual Witness Not Used: Gobelinus Person
As noted, the world history of Gobelinus Person, the Cosmidromius, completed in Paderborn in 1406, contains a considerable number of verbatim quotations (as well as paraphrases) of the Conscriptio. Since Person's exemplar most likely was made in Genoa contemporaneously with the Conscriptio’s composition there would be good reason to include the relevant passages from his work in an edition. One might call particular attention to the fact that Person's borrowings refer to Bridget of Sweden as “domina,” whereas B and P refer to her as “beata,” implying that Person's exemplar dated from the time before Bridget's canonization in 1391 and that the exemplars of B and P were made shortly afterwards. Unfortunately, however, the manuscript tradition of the Cosmidromius is unstable, making use of the work impractical: a variant apparatus for the Conscriptio that drew on the Cosmidromius would have to note variants of variants.
Ratio editionis
The copy of the letter sent by the Infante Pedro of Aragon to Charles V of France in U is superior to the same in B and P. A control exists in an independent copy made under the direction of Cardinal Martin of Zalva (“Z”) for a collection of Schism documents now in the Vatican archives.Footnote 6 In most cases of variants from Z, manuscripts B, P, and U align themselves with each other, and in one instance they offer a noteworthy correction.Footnote 7 But on several occasions U, but not B and/or P, matches Z. I infer from this that when B and P diverge from the common readings of U and Z they are a stage removed from an independent superior copy of Pedro's letter. Otherwise collation indicates that P contains the invocation to Manfred of Saluzzo and supplies one passage missing in B (lines 200–6). Yet in almost all other cases of variants B is superior to P. Hence I use B as the base manuscript, aside from the letter of the Infante Pedro where the base manuscript is U. In reading B, I return to the manuscript instead of relying on the edition by Bliemetzrieder which contains some errors.
Principles of Presentation
I follow the orthography of B and U except in supplying v for consonantal u, and F for ff in cases of capitalization. Variants in orthography are ignored, except for some proper nouns. Punctuation and capitalization are modernized. Quotation marks are supplied for speech or implied speech. Variants in word order are ignored. A thoroughgoing historical apparatus identifying persons and events would make this edition vastly too cumbersome. Much of the relevant information concerning parts one and three can be found in my “Alfonso Pecha on Discriminating Truth about the Great Schism” (n. 4 in article above). Throughout the text a separate apparatus identifies the cardinals whom Alfonso, as customary, names by toponymics.
Tractatus de assumptione domini nostri Urbani pape VI editus per dominum Alphonsum episcopum, olym Gremiensis, puram continens veritatem.
MagnificoFootnote 1 viro domino Manfredo, marchioni Salluciarum, consiliario illustris domini comitus Vertutum, detur ex parte Alphonsi heremite, olym episcopi Gremiensis. Magnifice mi domine reverendissime.Footnote 2 Rogastis me humiliter quod reputo ad preceptum ut de intencione mea qualiter ego eram in consciencia mea informatus de facto creacionis veri pape et qualemFootnote 3 verum papam esse credebam, utrum Urbanum vel Clementem, vos plenius informarem. Super quo cogitans, cogitavi et dixi unde hoc et quare sic interrogatus sum, forte quia Hyspanus sum et non Neapolitanus, nec de Francia nec de Ytalia. Ideo interrogatus sum quia non sum suspectus in causa et discordia que super papatu [Basel, 87r, 10] versatur inter Neapolitanos et Gallicos et Ytalicos, quiaFootnote 4 a fide catholica et a bona consciencia et veritate nec natio nec amicicia nec amor nos debet deviare [Prague, 1, 10] parentum. Vel forte interrogatus sum quia meumFootnote 5 episcopatum dimisi et renunciavi dignitati, relinquens eciamFootnote 6 patrimonium meum propter amorem Christi omnesqueFootnote 7 divicias terrenas et mundanosFootnote 8 vanos honores, nec optoFootnote 9 ascendere ad beneficia nec illaFootnote 10 a sede apostolica impetrare, et ideo presumit ille dominus qui me interrogavit, quod non sum suspectus, quod teneam plus cum una parte quam cum alia, vel forte temptative interrogatus sum. Et dum sic talia mecum cogitarem, non cum modica admiracione mentali occurrit in mente mea: “Scribe veritatem tue consciencie [Prague, 2, 1 from top] ad [Basel, 87r, 20] honorem Dei, et quidquid Deus permiserit, fiat.” Coactus igitur caritate et obediencia vestra in nomine Iesu Christi, scribam aliquasFootnote 11 informaciones per quas consciencia mea super predicta interrogacione vestra extitit informata.
Fui namque,Footnote 12 dulcissime pater et domine, utFootnote 13 coram Deo veritatem loquar tribus modis plenissime informatus: per viam spiritus, id est, per informacionem spiritualem, volens coniecturare et scire quid esset super hoc voluntasFootnote 14 Dei; per informacionem eciam facteFootnote 15 eleccionis Urbani,Footnote 16 narrando illa que vidiFootnote 17 et scio et qualiter fueritFootnote 18 in factoFootnote 19 per viam eciamFootnote 20 [Basel, 87v, 1] et informacionem iuris eciam perquisivi curioseFootnote 21 et audivi quid tenendum essetFootnote 22 in hac materia.Footnote 23
De [Prague, 2, 11 from top] primo autem, id est, de informacione per viam spiritus, constat mihi et dico quod ante annum IubileiFootnote 24 tempore Clementis pape sexti beata Brigida, deFootnote 25 regno Suecie, essendo in regno Suecie sola semel in oracione dominus noster Iesus Christus apparuit ei et loquendo cum ea etFootnote 26 dedit sibi duas revelaciones: unam, quam deberet statim mittere dictoFootnote 27 Clementi pape, et aliam regibus Francie et Anglie. In prima Christus precipiebat quod ipse papa veniret et duceret Romanam curiam ad Romam et reformaret se [Basel, 87v, 10] et ecclesiam Dei universalem, et quod denunciaret annum Iubilei et faceret pacem inter predictos reges, et cetera, utFootnote 28 in celesti libro revelacionum beate Brigide hoc lacius continetur. Et predictas revelaciones portaverunt dictoFootnote 29 pape et dictis regibus ex parte Christi et dicte domine beate Brigide reverendi et sancti [Prague, 2, 20] viri, quondamFootnote 30 dominus HemmingusFootnote 31 episcopus Abuensis et frater Petrus, prior monasterii sancte Marie de Alvastro ordinis CisterciensisFootnote 32 de regno Suecie. Que omnia ego audivi ab ipsa domina beata Brigida et a dicto priore sepius dum essem in familia ipsius domineFootnote 33 . Ex quibus et aliis revelacionibus, quas ipsa divinitus habuerat, sepe certificabat me [Basel, 87v, 20] et alios duos suos confessores quod omnino voluntas Dei erat quodFootnote 34 curia Romana et papa recederent de Avinione et transferentur ad Romam et ibi, residendo in sua propria sede apostolica, fieret spiritualis reformacio Romane curie et universalis ecclesie, utFootnote 35 patet in dicto libro celesti. Quibus revelacionibus dictus papa Clemens noluit credere, nec ipse nec rex Francie voluit eis obedire, sed rex Anglie, Eduardus nomine, [Prague, 2, 30 from top] obtulit se ad obediendum dicteFootnote 36 divine revelacioni et voluntateFootnote 37 Dei, propter quod statim post modicum tempus facto prelio inter duosFootnote 38 reges. Eduardus rex Anglie, tamquam obediens Christo, habuit victoriam, et rex Francie, [Basel, 87v, 30] inobediens, succubuit in bello et ibi cum filio captus est, multaque mala ex illa inobediencia postea evenerunt dicto [Basel, 88r, 1] regno Francie, ut in dictis divinis revelacionibus sibiFootnote 39 antea fuerat prenunciatum. Require dictas revelaciones in libro celestiFootnote 40 imperatoris ad reges et in sexto libro celestiFootnote 41 beate Brigide divinitus revelatoFootnote 42 .
Post hec autem elapsis aliquibus annis post mortem pape Innocencii, successit ei Urbanus quintus, et statim postquam fuit assumptus ad sedem apostolicam dum esset quidam vir religiosus ordinis sancti Francisci sancte vite nomine frater [Prague, 2, 20 from bottom] Petrus de Aragonia, pater regine Cypri domine Elionoris, quondam uxoris regis Petri dicti regnisFootnote 43 Cypri et avunculus [Basel, 88r, 10] regum Francie et Aragonie, in conventu BarchnionieFootnote 44 orando. Dictus frater Petrus habuit plures revelaciones a Deo divinitus in quibus Christus precipiebat quod iret ipse ad dictum Urbanum papam quintum et diceret ei ex parte Christi quod recederet de Avinione et iret Romam et duceret illucFootnote 45 Romanam curiam et ibi reformaret universalem ecclesiam in sanctis moribus et virtutibus, et cetera. Propter quod dictus frater Petrus, certificatus multipliciter de voluntate Dei, ivit statim Avinionem et ex parte Christi dixitFootnote 46 dicto Urbano pape et dedit ei in scriptis dictas revelaciones. Et ex ista causa dictus Urbanus quintus [Basel, 88r, 20] venit tunc in Ytaliam et Romam cum sua curia, et cum [Prague, 2, 10 from bottom] esset papa predictus iamFootnote 47 in recessu MarssilieFootnote 48 tunc dictum fuit dicto fratri Petro in oracione a Christo: “Sic dic pape quod non redeat amplius ad terrasFootnote 49 istas ubi electus est; alioquin erit IosiasFootnote 50 , incipiens et non perficiens, erit David incipiens etFootnote 51 perficiens, et cetera.” Et dabit locum scismati in proximo venturo in quo milia milium animarum sub gladio spiculatoris peribunt. Que omnia narravit mihi indigno seriose dictus frater Petrus ante tempus scismatis temporeFootnote 52 pape Gregorii Avinione anno Domini m° ccc° lxxii°, et dedit [Basel, 88v, 1] mihi omnia in scriptis de manu fratris Raymundi, confessoris sui, et habeo omnia ista in monasterio nostro sancti IeronimiFootnote 53 prope Ianuam. Ecce attende quod voluntas Dei est quam dicto fratri Petro et pape Urbano ipse DominusFootnote 54 ostendit, scilicet, quod papa se transferret ad Romam cum sua curia et ibi [Prague, 3, 1 at top] resideret et quod non rediret ad Avinionem, et hoc Deus precepit ut prefertur cum comminacione et prenunciacione presentis dolorosi scismatis. Venit igitur dictus papa Urbanus quintus Romam, sed non reformavit ecclesiam, et postea, peractis aliquibus annis, instigacione parentum [Basel, 88v, 10] et consiliariorum cardinalium disposuit ad Avinionem redire. Ipso autem in hoc proposito perseverante et ad recessum operam dante, tunc beata Brigida, dumFootnote 55 esset Rome, in oracione sua quadam die apparuit ei Virgo Maria et loquens ei dixit quod papa volebat redire adFootnote 56 Avinionem contra voluntatem Dei et deserere Ytaliam etFootnote 57 Romanam curiam propriamFootnote 58 , redarguens eum acriterFootnote 59 de dicto recessu, et comminabatur dictoFootnote 60 pape ipsa mater Dei dicens [Prague, 3, 10 from top] quod si recederet et rediret ad Avinionem statim post modicum moreretur et rederet racionem Deo de recessu et de aliis, et cetera. Quam revelacionem ipsa [Basel, 88v, 20] domina beata Brigida presentavit dicto Urbano pape scriptam de manu mea in Monteflasconis antequam ipse recederet in vigilia Assumpcionis beate Marie virginis. Et istud secretum nemo sciebat ibi in Romana curia nisi ipsa dominaFootnote 61 beata Brigida et ego, tunc confessor suus et indignus scriptor, et dominus cardinalis Bellifortis, qui postea fuit papa Gregorius, et dominus Nicolaus de Auximo, secretarius pape et protonotarius. PostquamFootnote 62 dictus UrbanusFootnote 63 papa de Monteflascone recessit et ad Avinionem rediit contra voluntatem Dei et ideo perFootnote 64 illam inobedienciam mortuus est, ut prenunciatum [Basel 89r, 1] fueratFootnote 65 in dicta [Prague, 3, 20 from top] revelacione divinitus, et tunc fuit ibi electus in papam dominusFootnote 66 cardinalis Bellifortis qui solus inter cardinales dictum secretum sciebat, et sentenciam Dei prenunciatamFootnote 67 contra antecessorem suum completam experimentaliter viderat. Ecce attende et nota per dictam propheciam revelacionem et inobediencie papalis divinam punicionem quod voluntas Dei erat et est quod papa et Romana curia resideant Rome in sua propria sede apostolica et ibi reformeturFootnote 68 tota universalis ecclesia. Et de hoc, scilicet, quod Rome debet reformari universalis Ecelesia, eciam habes aliquam [Basel, 89r, 10] revelacionem in vio libro celesti beate Brigide. Et scias tamen quod nec beata Brigida cognoscebat predictum fratrem Petrum de Aragonia, nec ipse cognoscebat eam, nec de factis eius aliquid noverat, sedFootnote 69 [Prague, 3, 30 from top] radius Spiritus sancti per utrumque ipsorum, diversis tamen temporibus, voluntatem DeiFootnote 70 predicto Urbano pape prophetice, ut prefertur, expresse annunciaverat.Footnote 71
Creato igiturFootnote 72 Gregorio in papam Avinione, tunc beata Brigida, existens Rome, quadamFootnote 73 die in oracione sua vidit divinam visionem etFootnote 74 habuit divinitus revelacionem quam Christus precipiebat mittereFootnote 75 in scriptis dicto Gregorio pape in qua continebatur quod voluntas Dei erat quod statim veniret Romam [Basel, 89r, 20] dictus papa Gregorius cum sua curia, et quod veniret non cum pompa, sed cum humilitate et paterna caritate ad residendum Rome in sua sede apostolica et ibi reformaret universalem ecclesiam et exstirparet certa punita que vigebant in Romana curia, et ceteraFootnote 76 . Cominabatur eciamFootnote 77 graviter ibiFootnote 78 Christus dicto Gregorio pape si in predictis nonFootnote 79 velletFootnote 80 obedire. Quam revelacionem divinam scriptamFootnote 81 de manu mea et roboratam suo nomine misit beata Brigida secrete dicto pape Gregorio cumFootnote 82 Latino de Ursinis nobili [Prague 3, 20 from bottom] milite Romano. Post hec autem ipse Gregorius papa misit inFootnote 83 Ytaliam etFootnote 84 ad terras ecclesie sibi subiectas in thesaurarium et collectoremFootnote 85 [Basel, 89v, 1] universalem dominum GerardumFootnote 86 , abbatem Maioris Monasterii Turonensis, qui postea fuit factusFootnote 87 cardinalis per ipsum Gregorium, et cum dicto abbate dictus dominus papa misitFootnote 88 mihi specialem ambaxiatam, in qua mihi precipiebat quod statim irem Romam ad beatam Brigidam ad consulendamFootnote 89 eam de tribus: primo videlicet, si credebat ipsa firmiter esse voluntatemFootnote 90 Dei quod omnino ipse veniret Romam; secundo, si credebat quod tunc fieret firma pax quam ipse tractabatFootnote 91 inter Franciam et Angliam; tercioFootnote 92 , si credebat placere Deo quod ipse papa mitteret ultra mare ad pasagium [Basel, 89v, 10] illas magnas societates hominum armorumFootnote 93 que tunc [Prague 3, 10 from bottom] erant Francie. Ego vero tunc cumFootnote 94 litteris credencie predictis abbatis ivi Romam super predictis ex parte pape ad predictam dominam. Que posteaFootnote 95 in oracione existens, habuit responsum ad omnia et specialiter in illa revelacione tunc sibi facta divinitus precipiebatur dicto pape Gregorio quod veniret usque ad certum tempus determinatum ad Ytaliam et Romam modo quo supra in alia prima, scilicet, cum humilitate, et cetera; alioquin cominabatur ipsiFootnote 96 pape divinitus de terribili divino iudicio, et ultra hec dictum fuit beate Brigide tunc divinitus sic: “Dic Alfonso heremite olim episcopo quod scribat [Basel, 89v, 20] hanc revelacionem et clausam et sigillatam portet ad illum abbatem, quam ipse statimFootnote 97 mittat ad papam. Scribat eciam ipse Alfonsus dicte revelacionis copiam in papiro et portet secum apertam et ostendat eam dicto [Prague, 4, 1 from top] abbati, ut ipse abbas eam legat et videat quid continetur in eaFootnote 98 . Postea vero in presencia dictiFootnote 99 abbatis, ipse Alfonsus dilaceret ipsam copiam in frusticulaFootnote 100 quiaFootnote 101 sicut ipsa revelacionis tunc dilacerabatur in frusticula, ita, si papa non veniatFootnote 102 tempore sibi assignato ad Romam, omnes terre ecclesie que modo sub una obediencia pape sunt [Basel, 90r, 1], dilacerabuntur in frusticulaFootnote 103 per manus tyrannorum et inimicorum ecclesie.” Que omnia sic completa sunt. Predictam autem revelacionem portavit secrete pape Gregorio dominus Nycolaus, comes de Nola, et fuerunt ei dati de camera pape pro expensis vie xcvFootnote 104 floreni. Et tunc ego facta ambaxiata predicto modo dicto abbati, reversus fui Romam et ivi cum beata Brigida in Ierusalem. In reversione autem de Ierusalem invenimus dictum comitem de Nola [Prague, 4, 10 from top] in li reversum de Avinione. Qui ex parte dicti domini pape Gregorii locutus fuit beate Brigide [Basel, 90r, 10] in mei presencia ex parte pape, et eciam dictus comes dixit mihi quod dominus papa volebat quod plenius ego me informarem a beata Brigida de materia dictarumFootnote 105 revelacionum et de voluntate Dei, et quod cum illis informacionibus iremFootnote 106 ad ipsum papam Gregorium ad Avinionem. OranteFootnote 107 igitur quadam die super predictis beataFootnote 108 Brigida in Neapoli, Christus apparuit et locutus est ei verba valde terribilia contra predictumFootnote 109 papam precipiens quod statim veniret Romam sine mora cum humilitate et non cum gentibusFootnote 110 armorum,Footnote 111 ut ibi laciusFootnote 112 continetur, precipiens eciam beate Brigide quod in scriptis mitteret mecum dicto pape illa verba in una clausa [Basel, 90r, 20] littera. Quam quidem litteram ego secrete apportavi pape manu mea conscriptam et nomine beate Brigide [Prague, 4, 20 from top] roboratam annoFootnote 113 Domini 1372°. Super qua materia, que secretissime tunc tractabatur inter papam et me ibi Avinione, ipse iterum voluit quod ego scriberem ex parte sua de AvinioneFootnote 114 ad Romam beate Brigide, et tunc requirebat eam ipseFootnote 115 dominus papa de certis punctis super dicto adventu ad Romam, et utrum erat voluntasFootnote 116 Dei quod faceret pacem inter se et dominos de Mediolano. Super quibus habuit ipse dominus papa in brevi responsa in scriptis a beata Brigida divinitus sibi data. Tandem operante dyabolo [Basel, 90v, 1] dictus dominus papa ad terminum sibi prefixum divinitus non venit, et ideo terras ecclesie perdidit, ut sibi prophetice prenunciatum fuit. Et postea, quando post contumaciam venit RomamFootnote 117 , non tenuit modum inveniendoFootnote 118 quem Christus divinitus sibi precepit, quia non cum humilitate, sed cum pompa et cum multitudine BritonumFootnote 119 armigerorum [Prague 4, 30 from top] Ytaliam ingressus est, et sic adFootnote 120 Romam devenit, nec ecclesiam universalem reformare incepit, nec terras ecclesie perditas recuperavit, quia mandato Dei non obedivit. Post reditum quippe de Agnania ipse dominus papa suggestionibus [Basel, 90v, 10] consiliariorum carnalium et cardinalium inclinatus volebat et disponebat redire Avinionem sicut antecessor eius fecerat, et tunc Christus hoc noluit consentire, sed eum de hac vita [Prague 4, 30 from bottom] subtraxit, volens naviculam suam, id est, RomanumFootnote 121 pontificem etFootnote 122 collegium apostolicum in Romana sede sua propria perpetuo cum suo sacro collegio firmare et perpetuo stabilire.
Ex quibus predictis omnibus collegi et colligo pro informacione consciencie meeFootnote 123 per viam spiritus quod ex iusticia divina dicti summi pontificesFootnote 124 Gallici, quia noluerunt residere in Roma, nec ad eam venire tempore et modo debito, sed voluerunt redireFootnote 125 [Basel, 90v, 20] in Egyptum ad ollas carnium, ideo a Deo per mortem tamquam inobedientes puniti sunt. Et remedium tale tunc ecclesiaFootnote 126 vacante a Deo inventum est quod esset discordia inter cardinales in eleccione summi pontificis talis et taliter quod ad summum pontificatumFootnote 127 tunc nullus Gallicus elegereturFootnote 128 , sed Ytalicus quiFootnote 129 Ytaliam amaret et in Roma cum suaFootnote 130 curia personaliter resideret, quia contra Deum non est concilium [Proverbs 21:30], et cetera. ProptereaFootnote 131 credo firmiterFootnote 132 ex predictis [Prague 4, 20 from bottom] Urbanum esse verum papam secundum voluntatem Dei, et non Clementem, quantum ad claves ecclesie, et hanc meam credulitatem veram esse confirmarunt mihi postquam [Basel, 91r, 1] scisma est ortum, multi et magni servi et amici Dei, tam heremite quam alii sancti viri et sancte mulieres magne virtutis et vite singularissime viteFootnote 133 note de Almannia,Footnote 134 de Ytalia,Footnote 135 de Suecia, et de Yspania, quos ego rogavi singillatimFootnote 136 ut premissa super hac materia efficaci oracione ad DeumFootnote 137 me certificarent, quid per viam oracionis senciebant esse voluntatis Dei, et omnes singillatim.Footnote 138 Nesciendo unoFootnote 139 de alio dixerunt Urbanum esse verum papam in voluntate Dei; super quo habuerantFootnote 140 diversimode plures revelaciones divinitus et inter personas [Basel, 91r, 10] predictas sancte viteFootnote 141 loquendo cum una ipsarum magne virtutis et fame dixit ei sic: “Urbanus est verus papa et [Prague 4, 10 from bottom] sponsus ecclesie, sedFootnote 142 in regimine suo tenebit modum sine modo.” AliusFootnote 143 vidit chorum cherubin parare unum altare in solempni ecclesia altissimi montis, et tunc ivit ut iuvaret et assisteret et dum solvere vellet duos lintheos colligatos quidam angelus redarguit hunc dicens hec verba. “Tu perdis tempus insolvendo nodos dum debes intendere divinorum obsequiis; homines debent esse solliciti in terris sicut angeli in celis sunt.” Et dictum altare parabatur pro papa Urbano sexto ibi celebraturo ut ipsi videnti revelatum est qui prius dubitaverunt sed ex causa certificatus est.
Frater Petrus eciam supradictus de Aragonia, ut mihi narravit eius confessor, postquam scisma fuit ortum orando habuit a domino nostro Iesu Christo super hoc specialem revelacionem, quam Christus precepit mittere [Prague 5, 1] Carolo quondam regi Francie et Enrico quondam regi Castelle, cuius revelacionis tenor noscitur esse talis:
“IllustrissimeFootnote 144 acFootnote 145 magnifice princeps domine neposque carissime. Semper dilexi personam vestram et domum regiam [Basel, 91r, 20] Francie tamquam meam, in qua natus sum, propter beneficia et honores multiplices, quos deFootnote 146 ipsa vestra domo regia multipliciter sum adeptus. Ideo displicet mihi multum quod dominacio vestra faciat aliquid contra Deum, et quia dictum est et communi fama habetur quod repulistisFootnote 147 Urbanum et una simul cum regno vestro recepistis Clementem. Volo dominacioni vestre reserare et notum facere quod mihi indigno est de hac materia a domino revelatum. Die enim mercurii xxx Marcii hora tarda post completorium, dum orassem, audivi dominum meum Iesum Christum loquentem mihi peccatori indigno in hunc modumFootnote 148 : ‘Reges [Basel 91v, 1] et principes mundi mirantur,Footnote 149 magni clerici et doctores disputant et faciunt questiones de commocione et impetu Romanorum. Ego feci, quia fieri permisi. Ego enim induravi cor Pharaonis, ut diceret: “Dominum nescio et Israel non dimittam.” EgoFootnote 150 excecavi Iudeos, ut coram PylatoFootnote 151 clamarent: “Crucifige, crucifige eum.” Ego commovi populum Romanum, ut clamarent scilicetFootnote 152 : “Pontificem Romanum de Roma natum volumus, vel de Ytalia.” Fuit bona induracio Pharaonis? Non. Sed de ipsa induracione emanavitFootnote 153 gloriosus exitus filiorum Israel de Egypto. Fuit bona [Basel 91v, 10] excecacio Iudeorum? Non. Sed de ipsa excecacione [Prague 5, 20 from top] emanavit salvatioFootnote 154 humani generis per mortem meam. Fuit bona commocio Romanorum? Non.Footnote 155 Sed de ipsa commocione emanavit translacio ecclesie de potestate et regimine avarorum et ambiciosorum LemovicensiumFootnote 156 ad potestatem et regimen Ytalicorum in quibus fundata fuit primitusFootnote 157 et per patresFootnote 158 antiquitus bene recta.’ Ego tunc clamavi cum lacrimis et dixi: ‘O bone Iesu et quid est hoc? Tu revelas ista parvulis miseris pauperibus et ydiotis et magnosFootnote 159 in sua cecitate dimittis’. RespondensFootnote 160 dominus dixit: ‘Respice verba que locutus sumFootnote 161 patri in ewangelio Matthei: Confiteor [Basel 91 v, 20] tibi pater, domine celi et terre, quia abscondisti hec a sapientibus et prudentibus et revelasti ea parvulis, quoniam sic fuit placitum ante te (Matthew 11:25, 26).’ Domine mi,Footnote 162 ista estFootnote 163 conclusio littere: voluntas est domini meiFootnote 164 Iesu Christi quod vos cum regno vestro tamquam rexFootnote 165 catholicus, qui de sancta et catholica [Prague 5, 30 from top] domo super universas domos regias mundi exortusFootnote 166 estisFootnote 167 , recipiatis Urbanum tamquam verum summum pontificem et vicarium Iesu Christi et eius obediencie vos subdatis, quia numquam Francia fabricata est ydolum nec monstruoFootnote 168 se subiecit. Caveatis de indignacione divina quia super regesFootnote 169 populos, naciones,Footnote 170 regna ira deseviet, nisi subiciantur [Basel, 92r, 1] Urbano. ScriptaFootnote 171 manu propria in GandiaFootnote 172 die veneris prima Aprilis.
EiusFootnote 173 humilis avunculus et orator frater
Petrus de Aragonia, inter minores minimus
humilis Christi servus.”
Et hec supra dicta credo sufficere mihi secundum viam spiritus ad informacionem consciencie mee quod Urbanus sextus sit verus papa. Taceo autem multa alia propter brevitatem ex quibus spiritus meus est plenissime informatus et certificatus de hac materia.Footnote 174
[Basel, 92r, 10] Superius autemFootnote 175 dixi quod habui pro consciencia mea satisFootnote 176 plenam informacionem per viam facti eleccionis dicti domini UrbaniFootnote 177 viti super quo scilicetFootnote 178 multa sintFootnote 179 et essent dicenda. Attamen ego breviter narrabo aliqua que vidi et audivi tunc temporis dum ibi presens essem Rome et que scio in hac materia.
Vacante igitur per mortem Gregorii XI sedeFootnote 180 apostolica Rome fuit ordinatum quod fabricaretur conclave, utFootnote 181 moris est in quo cardinales includerentur, ad eleccionem faciendam summi pontificis [Prague 5, 20 from bottom]. Et tunc collegium cardinalium notificavit aliis cardinalibus absentibus mortem pape et quod venirent Romam infra decem dies ut iura volunt [Basel 92r, 20] ad eleccionem futuri pastoris ecclesie faciendamFootnote 182 . Durante autem isto tempore cardinales in Roma existentes tractabant inter se de persona eligenda ad pontificatum, aliquando convenientes in unum, aliquando latenter divisim per suos secretarios et personas interpositas de quibus confidebant. Et tunc ego eram, licet indignus, confessor unius ipsorum cardinalium qui me de suis secretis et arduis consiliis extra confessionem sepius requirebatFootnote 183 et duos alios suos familiares [Basel 92v, 1] de quibus multum confidebat. Facta autem est tuncFootnote 184 ex dispensacione divina contencio inter discipulos, id est, inter cardinales quis eorum videretur esseFootnote 185 maior, id est [Prague 5, 10 from bottom], quis eorum deberet prefici et eligi ad sedem apostolicam. Erant enim ex parte una cardinales aGebennenses, bGlandancenses, cBritannenses, dLunensesFootnote 186 et dominus de eAlvernio, qui verbis cavilosis et allectivis traxerunt ad se cardinalem fFlorentinum, gMediolanum et hUrsinum; ex alia veroFootnote 187 parte contraria erant dominiFootnote 188 iLemovicensis et jVivariensis, sancti kEustachii, de lAgrifolio, mPictaviensis et Maioris nMonasterii, qui traxerunt ad se dominum cardinalem sancti oPetri. VolebantFootnote 189 [Basel, 92v, 10] isti cardinales Lemovicenses habere de se papam Lemovicensem more solito etFootnote 190 iure quasi hereditario possidere sanctuarium Dei. Sed cardinales quidam Gallici et alii supra dicti adverse partis hoc nolebant, ne sanctuarium Dei, id est, sedes apostolica possideretur iure hereditario. Et isto tempore mediante applicuit Romam dominus cardinalis [Prague 6, 1 from top] Gebennensis, qui erat Ancone et fuerat capitaneus Britanorum. In tantum denique augmentata estFootnote 191 discordia inter cardinales super eleccionemFootnote 192 futuri pontificis quod utraque partisFootnote 193 ipsorum clare videbat quod non poterantFootnote 194 eligere aliquem de collegio apostolico quia nulla [Basel 92v, 20] pars ipsorum poterat habere duas partes vocum cardinalium ad aliquem ipsorum eligendum, prout iura volunt. OportetbatFootnote 195 ergo eligere in pastorem aliquem virum de extra collegium; nam si aliqua dictarum parcium cardinalium potuisseFootnote 196 pro se habere duas partes vocum cardinalium, certissime scio quod numquam de extra collegium elegissent virum Ytalicum, nec alium, nec timuissent super hoc a Romanis habere aliquam impressionem. Coacti igitur per illam discordiam ex dispensacione divina inter eos exortamFootnote 197 [Prague 6, 10 from top] devenerunt ad tractandum eleccionem faciendamFootnote 198 de aliquo viro qui esset deFootnote 199 extra collegium. Et tuncFootnote 200 dominus cardinalis [Basel 93r, 1] Gebennensis, tamquam caput unius partis illorum, videlicet Gallicorum, volebat quod eligeretur dominus Agapitus de Columpna Romanus, tunc episcopus Ulisbonensis capellanus suus, qui iam fuerat capellanus domini cardinalis quondam Bononiensis avunculi ipsius cardinalis Gebennensis, et fecitFootnote 201 dominus Gebennensis ad se vocari dictum dominum Agapitum, dicens ei quod volebat cum cardinalibus tractare quod ipse dominus Agapitus eligeretur in papam, ex quo impossibile erat eligere de collegio cardinalium. Tunc vero dominus Agapitus respondit prudenter, dicens quod nullo modo [Basel 93r, 10] hoc faceret, quia hocFootnote 202 esset ponere scandalum magnum in Roma et in illa patria, ex eo, videlicet, quod in collegio cardinalium [Prague 6, 20 from top] erat unusFootnote 203 de Ursinis scilicet, dominus Iacobus, et in Roma sunt multi potentes et magni domini de domo Ursina, multi eciam de parte adversa, scilicet, de domo Calumpne, qui sunt semperFootnote 204 quasi inimici ad invicemFootnote 205 sic ex illa eleccione generaretur magnum scandalum et controversia, propter dictamFootnote 206 parcialitatem, que viget in Urbe et in illa patria. Auditis ergoFootnote 207 dictis verbis tunc dictus dominusFootnote 208 cardinalis Gebennensis dixit ei: “Ergo quid videtur [Basel 93r, 20] vobis, quem debeamus eligere?” Ad quod dominus Agapitus respondit quod esset bonumFootnote 209 dominum BartholomeumFootnote 210 archiepiscopum Barensem vicecancellarium, ex eo quia erat multum domesticus et familiaris ipsius cardinalis, et si esset papa faceret quidquid ipse cardinalis vellet, et ex eo quod erat dictus archiepiscopus vir litteratus honestus et bonus, et sciebat practicam cancellarie apostolice [Prague 6, 30 from top] et modum expedicionis negociorum et stilum Romane curie. Tunc vero ipse Gebennensis cardinalis contentus fuit de isto consilio domini Agapiti et iuravit quod ipse laboraret et faceret iuxta vires suas quod dictus Barensis archiepiscopus [Basel 93v, 1] eligeretur in papam. EtFootnote 211 hec omnia ego in effectuFootnote 212 audivi ab ipso domino Agapito, quiFootnote 213 mihiFootnote 214 me et fratre meo Petro de Yspania ordinis sancti IeronimiFootnote 215 hec nobis narravit, ponendo [Prague 6, 30 from bottom] manus super librum decreti et cum iuramento firmabat predicta esse veraFootnote 216 per illa sanctiFootnote 217 Dei evangelia ibi conscripta. Ecce nota quod sine aliqua impressione ante introitum conclavis fuit tractatum et quodammodo determinatum per dictumFootnote 218 Gebennensem cardinalem, quiFootnote 219 caput unius dictarum duarum partium erat collegii quod archiepiscopus Barensis eligeretur in papam, licet non esset Romanus [Basel 93v, 10] sed Neapolitanus. Preterea scio et audivi quod tunc temporis, antequam cardinales intrarent inFootnote 220 conclave, videntes ipsi quod non poterant concordare, ut prefertur, de eligendo aliquem de collegio ipsorum in pontificem, devenerunt ad tractandum quis esset melior de extra collegium ad eligendum eum in summum pontificem, et tractabant de duobus, videlicet de dicto domino archiepiscopo Barensi et de domino Martino de Calva,Footnote 221 decretorum doctore, referendario predicti domini pape Gregorii [Prague 6, 20 from bottom], nunc Pampilinensi episcopo. Sed quia dictus dominus Martinus magis iuvenis et absens erat quiaFootnote 222 cumFootnote 223 [Basel 93v. 20] cardinali Ambianensi adFootnote 224 provinciam Tuscie ad tractandum pacem inter Ecclesiam et Florentinos iverat ideo decreverunt dictum dominum archiepiscopum Barensem ibi Rome presentem eligere in summum pontificem. Et tractatus iste fiebat secretissime per utramque partem, et forte utraque pars credebat quod hoc nesciebat altera. Nam tractabat hoc cardinalis Gebennensis ut supra dixi. Tractabant hoc eciam adversarii, videlicet, LemovicensesFootnote 225 cardinales, eligere predictumFootnote 226 archiepiscopum Barensem in papam et specialiter dominus [Basel 94r, 1] cardinalis de Agrifolio, quia dictusFootnote 227 Archiepiscopus erat multum sibiFootnote 228 domesticus et specialisFootnote 229 servitor. Et sperabant dicti Lemovicenses cardinales quod si ipsum archiepiscopum haberent in papam, statim ipse crearet [Prague 6, 10 from bottom] in cardinalem dominum Nicolaum, filium domini Hugonis de la Rota, GallicumFootnote 230 et nepotem dominiFootnote 231 Gregorii pape, ipsorum consanguineum, et quod rediret ipse archiepiscopus Barensis, si fieret papa, in Avinionem et illucFootnote 232 se transferret et reduceret Romanam curiam. Et ista tractabantur, ut audivi, per dominum Nicolaum de Cremona, tunc [Basel 94r, 10] auditorem domini cardinalis sancti Petri qui modo est Neapolitanus archiepiscopus, et erat tunc familiarissimusFootnote 233 et intimus dicti domini cardinalis de Agrifolio. Qui quidem dictusFootnote 234 Nicolaus de Cremona laborabat quod dominus cardinalis sancti Petri adhereret dictis cardinalibus Lemovicensibus, sicut et factum est.
Pendentibus igitur istis, ego scivi a domino cardinali de Luna qui mecum sua consilia conferebat quod negocium eleccionis fiende erat dispositum ad eligendum dictum dominum archiepiscopum Barensem. Et tunc ego per 3 vel 4 dies [Prague 7, 1 from top] ante introitum conclavis ivi ad dominam Katherinam [Basel 94r, 20], filiam beate Brigide de regno Suecie, et dixi ei quod statim iret ad dictum dominum archiepiscopum Barensem et faceret ei humillimam reverenciam et recomendaret ei efficaciter negocium canonizacionis matris sue beate Brigide, quodFootnote 235 tunc pendebat et tractabatur in curia coram papa Gregorio, sed nichil diceret archiepiscopoFootnote 236 de materia eleccionis. Quod et ipsa adimplere non distulit et invenit eum in sancti Petri ecclesia et ibi recommendavit ei dictum negocium canonizacionis matris sue.
Quadam eciam die hora completorii ipse [Basel 94v, 1] archiepiscopus Barensis venit ad dominum cardinalem de Luna ante introitum conclavis forte per duosFootnote 237 dies et in recessu invenit me ibi in camera paramentiFootnote 238 dicti cardinalis et venit mecum ad quandam fenestram. Et tunc instanter ipse archiepiscopusFootnote 239 exhortabatur [Prague 7, 10 from top] et rogabat me quod ego loquerer etFootnote 240 tractarem cum dictoFootnote 241 cardinali de Luna et cum aliis cardinalibus quod eligerent aliquem probum virum etFootnote 242 amicum Dei, verumFootnote 243 iustum et timentem Deum in summum pontificem, qui ecclesiam Dei reformaret in sanctis moribus et virtutibus, et ceteraFootnote 244 . Tunc autem [Basel 94v, 10] ego nolui ei detegere tractatus qui erant de eligendo ipsum, sed dixi ei ad aurem: “Domine mi reverende, modo videbimus et probabimusFootnote 245 virtutem vestram.” Et sic discessimus ab invicem, quia tarde erat.
Die autem feria quarta ante introitum conclavis scivi ab uno domino de cardinalibus quod ipse intrabat cum intencione eligendi dictum dominum archiepiscopum Barensem in summum pontificem, et illa hora ille dominus recepit sacramenta confessionis et corporis Christi.
Intraverunt denique illa die post comestionem [Prague 7, 20 from top] cardinales in conclaviFootnote 246 cum tubis et charamellis et aliis instrumentis musicorumFootnote 247 consolacionis [Basel 94v, 20] et magne leticie, licet aliqui de populo Romano tunc clamabant: “Romano lo volemo o Ytaliano,” sed non dicebant hec cum verbis minatoriisFootnote 248 , sed rogatoriis. Die autem sequenti celebrata missa Sancti Spiritus hora tercie ambulantibus cardinalibus per conclave, tuncFootnote 249 cardinalis Lemovicensis, qui tunc Penestrinus vocabatur et erat de parte cardinalium Lemovicensium, obviavit domino cardinali de Luna, qui erat adverse partis, ambulanti eciam per conclave et dixit ei [Basel 95r, 1] sic: “Quid videtur vobis domine de eleccione fienda? Qualem eligemus in summum pontificem?” Cui dominus de Luna in effectu sic respondit: “Reverendissime pater, si credatisFootnote 250 mihi, nos eligemus unum probum virum, venerabilem, [Prague 7, 30 from top] aptum, et famosum, de quo bene provisum erit Romane ecclesie: scilicet, dominum archiepiscopum Barensem vicecancellarium sedis apostolice.” Et tunc dictus dominus cardinalis Lemovicensis multum gavisus est et vocavit dominum cardinalem de Agrifolio ambulantem inFootnote 251 conclave et dixit ei: “Videte quod dominus isteFootnote 252 cardinalis de Luna dicit quod eligamus dominum [Basel 95r, 10] archiepiscopum Barensem, et certe mihi placet hoc. Quid vobis videtur?” CuiFootnote 253 dominus de Agrifolio, respondens, dixit: “Certe bonum est, et [Prague 7, 30 from bottom] mihi eciam multum placet.” Et tunc vocaverunt dominum cardinalem Pictaviensem, et interrogaverunt de intencione sua. Qui respondit idem. Vocaverunt eciam aliquos alios cardinales utriusque partis, qui idem responderunt in effectu. Et tunc dixerunt: “Ergo vadamus et sedeamus ad eligendum.” Congregatis igitur omnibus cardinalibus qui erant in conclavi, sederuntFootnote 254 per ordinem ad eligendum, et omnes eligeruntFootnote 255 dictum dominum archiepiscopum Barensem sponte et sine impressione in summum pontificem [Basel 95r, 20]. Et hec narravit mihi eadem die prima hora noctis post completorium dictus dominus cardinalis de Luna cumFootnote 256 magna leticia, presentibus decano Tirasenensis capellano suo et Iohanne cubiculario sue camere, dicens quod ista tunc tenerem secrete propter Romanos qui credebant dominum cardinalem sancti [Prague 7, 20 from bottom] Petri esse electum in papam, quia invenerant eum inFootnote 257 capella palacii sedentem cum mitra et cappa apostolica in quadam cathedraFootnote 258 , licet renitentem et clamantem: “Ego [Basel 95v, 1] non sum papa,” et cetera.
Tandem eleccionemFootnote 259 sic celebratam noluerunt cardinales statim detegere quia credebant quod displiceretFootnote 260 Romanis, sed ordinaverunt mittere cedulas unius tenoris ex parte collegii certis prelatis Ytalicis Rome tunc presentibus, scilicet archiepiscopo Pisano et archiepiscopo Barensi, episcopo NucerinoFootnote 261 et abbatiFootnote 262 Montiscassini, per quas cedulas notificabatFootnote 263 collegium apostolicum sigillatimFootnote 264 dictis prelatis quod propter aliqua ardua que emergebant in conclavi precipiebat eius collegium quod statim visa cedula venirent ad conclave, et cetera.
Hiis autem peractis, quilibet [Basel, 95v, 10] cardinalis ivit ad prandium ad cellam suam in conclaveFootnote 265 et dicti prelati Italici [Prague 7, 10 from bottom] vocati collacatiFootnote 266 fuerunt ad prandendumFootnote 267 in camera paramenti domus papalis, que erat prope conclave. Post hec autem hora none, dum silencium tenerent Romani, dixit dominus cardinalis sancti Petri aliis cardinalibus: “Ecce domini, modo nullus clamat de Romanis, sedeamusFootnote 268 et iterum eligamus dictum dominum ne postea dicatur quod eleccio fuissetFootnote 269 impressiva.” Tunc autem sederunt cardinales et iterum elegerunt in papam dictum dominum archiepiscopum Barensem.
Hora autem vesperarum, postquam cardinales exiverunt de conclavi, aliqui ipsorum [Basel, 95v, 20] iverunt et incluserunt se in castro sancti Angeli, aliiFootnote 270 iverunt ad castra Zagaroli et VicovariiFootnote 271 , alii vero reversi fueruntFootnote 272 in pace ad hospicia sua cum honore et societate RomanarumFootnote 273 , scilicet dominus cardinalis Florentinensis, dominus de Luna, dominus Maioris Monasterii. Et dominus cardinalis sancti [Prague 8, 1 from top] Petri remansit in palacio papali. Tunc vero cardinalis Gebennensis, existens in procinctu recedendi ad castrum Zagaroli quia timebat populum Romanum, venit ad eum dictus dominus Agapitus [Basel, 96r, 1] de Columpna et dixit ei: “Domine, quia multi multa loquntur de eleccione quam fecistis, et nescimus quem elegeritisFootnote 274 in summum pontificem, ideo supplico quod dicatis mihi quia paratus sum ire ad eum et iuvare in eo quo potero.” Cui tunc dictosFootnote 275 cardinalis Gebennensis respondit: “Domine Agapite, si vultis liberare ecclesiam Dei, vadatis cum comitiva vestra quia magnusFootnote 276 estis in Urbe et cum vestris parentibus custodite bene ista nocte dominum archiepiscopum Barensem, qui est absconsus in palacio papali, quia ipsum elegimus et ipse est verus papa [Prague 8, 10 from top; Basel 96r, 10], licet populus credat quod sit papa dominus cardinalis sancti Petri.” Et tunc ipse cardinalis Gebennensis armavit se et ivit ZagarolumFootnote 277 et dominus Agapitus cum magna sua comitiva ivit ad custodiam domini archiepiscopi Barensis, in papam electi et ad papale palacium, et stetit ibi cumFootnote 278 domino papa.
Vespere autem sabbati, id est, feria sexta summo mane, orto iam sole, dominus Barensis archiepiscopus electus in papam misit pro cardinalibus inclusis in castro sancti Angeli quod est in Urbe, et pro omnibus aliis cardinalibus qui erant in Urbe et pro illis qui de Urbe recesserantFootnote 279 , ut omnes venirent ad intronizandum eum et adFootnote 280 faciendum [Basel, 96r, 20] illas solempnitates et illaFootnote 281 officia eis pertinencia que post eleccionem summi pontificis per cardinales fieri moris est. Et tunc venerunt statim dicti cardinales de intra et extra civitatemFootnote 282 convenerunt [Prague 8, 20 from top] in palacio pape in capella minori. Preparatis igitur ibi vestibus et ornamentis papalibusFootnote 283 per confessorem quondam pape Gregorii etFootnote 284 per aliquos de capellanis papeFootnote 285 ad tergum altarisFootnote 286 eiusdem capelle et clausa capella, tunc dictusFootnote 287 dominus archiepiscopusFootnote 288 Barensis, electus in papam, dixit cardinalibus in effectuFootnote 289 verborum: “Domini et patres reverendissimi, quia [Basel 96v, 1] dicitur quod me indignum elegistis in summum pontificem, rogo et supplico in nomine Iesu an hoc fecistis voluntarioFootnote 290 et libero animo?” Qui tunc responderunt et iuramento firmarunt quod per aliquam impressionem non eum elegerantFootnote 291 , sed libere, et quod eleccio erat legittima iusta et canonica, sicut unquam fuitFootnote 292 facta eleccio de aliquo post sanctum Petrum summo pontificeFootnote 293 .” Et statim sederunt ipse dominus electus et cardinales ordine [Prague 8, 30 from top] debito et in talibus solito. Tunc vero dominus cardinalis Florentinus episcopus [Basel, 96v, 10] Portuensis, quia ad eum spectabat proponere, statim per modum brevis sermonis seu collacionis incepit proponere ad intronizacionem faciendam hec verba Apostoli: talem decet esse episcopum, et cetera [cf. Hebrews 7:26] et prosequitus est sermonem suum breviter ordine debito. Ad illa autem [Prague 8, 30 from bottom] verba tunc dominus electus in papam incepit respondereFootnote 294 eciam per modum sermonis recipiens hoc themaFootnote 295 : Timor et tremor venerunt super me [Psalm 54:6], et volebat prosequi sermonem suum ordine debito, et tuncFootnote 296 cardinales interrumperunt verba eius dicentes ei: “Non est moris quod vos super hoc faciatis aliquem sermonem, sed quod sedeatis in loco ordinato [Basel, 96v, 20] et quod nos induamus vos vestibus et ornamentis papalibus et intronizemus vos in summum pontificem, et ceteraFootnote 297 .” Tunc autem exeuntes illi ministri qui ad tergum altaris cum vestibus et ornamentis parati erant, apportaverunt illa coram cardinalibus et statim spoliantes eundemFootnote 298 dominum electum vestibus suis, dicti cardinales et illi ministri induerunt et ornaverunt ipsum papaliter cum gaudio et leticia cantantes canticum: Te deum laudamus, et cetera. Et confestim ordine debito exhibuerunt ei reverenciam [Prague 8, 20 from bottom] papalem singillatimFootnote 299 , quilibet ipsorum cardinalium osculando [Basel, 97r, 1] pedem ipsius domini pape, manum et os more in talibus solito, et impositum fuit sibi nomen: Urbanus. Expletis vero predictis, presentaverunt eum cardinales in papam verum et summum pontificem presencialiter gentibus et Romano populo, et per suas litteras domino imperatori, regibus, et principibus Christianis et prelatis multisFootnote 300 de gentibus in universo mundo, ordinaverunt eciam de coronando ipsum solempniter in papam in die pasce resurreccionis proximoFootnote 301 futuro.
In die veroFootnote 302 Resurreccionis preparato perguloFootnote 303 ligneo ad plateam [Basel, 97r, 10] super gradus ante primas portas ecclesie sancti Petri et preparatis omnibus ad dictam solempnitatem pertinentibus, ubi erat multitudo copiosa gencium et populorum diversarum nacionum, videlicet, Ytalicorum, Romanorum, Alamannorum, Gallicorum, Yspanorum [Prague 8, 10 from bottom], Ungarorum, Anglicorum, et ceterarum nacionum omnium Christianorum qui convenerant pro indulgenciis, tunc cardinales ascendentes pergulumFootnote 304 supra dictum de lignis fabricatum ibi cum maxima sollempnitate et leticia coronaverunt dictum dominum et dederunt ipsum in papam et vicariumFootnote 305 ChristiFootnote 306 illi universeFootnote 307 mundo et christianitatis populo, et equitantes [Basel 97r, 20] statim induti pontificalibus ornamentis albis duxerunt eum sic solempniter ad ecclesiam sancti Iohannis de LateranoFootnote 308 , ubi celebraverunt maximum festum et eciam compleverunt tunc in eo et cum eo omnes solempnitates et cerimonias que in coronacionibus summorum pontificum antiquitus servari solentFootnote 309 . Et sic coronatum reduxerunt eum ad sanctum Petrum et introduxerunt eum in palacio apostolico.
Nec ego in istis vidi aliquam impressionem, sed summum [Prague 9, 1 from top] gaudium omnium ibi astancium, ymmo multum displicuit Romanis [Basel, 97v, 1] quod cardinales non Romanum, sed Neapolitanum virum in summum pontificem elegerunt.
Post hec autem vidi quod cardinales impendebant ei reverenciam et obedienciam etFootnote 310 honorem ut aliis suis antecessoribus summis pontificibus. Veniebant enim ad eius consistoria secreta et publica et ad eius consilia. Impetravit quoqueFootnote 311 ab eo cardinalis Glandacensis episcopatum Ostiensem. Et alii cardinales impetrabant pro se ab eo et pro aliis officia et beneficia. Plenariam quoqueFootnote 312 indulgenciam receperunt cardinales ab eo tunc et se fecerunt absolvi plenarie [Basel, 97v, 10] de peccatis suis, sicut in aliis creacionibus summorum pontificum ex ipsorum consuetudine fieri solet. [Prague 9, 10 from top] Omnes quoqueFootnote 313 actus exercuerunt cum eodem domino Urbano papa vio dicti cardinales, quos cum aliis suis antecessoribus summis pontificibus exercere solebant et in celebracione missarum et divini officii et in consistoriis et in cancellaria et in penitenciaria, et cetera. Sed ipse dominus papa incepit statim exasperare dictos cardinales, reprehendere, redarguere et increpare suis verbis et gestibus acriter, forte minus debito modo et tempore, et presertim dominum cardinalem Ambianensem quando rediit ad [Basel, 97v, 20] Romam de Tuscia. ProptereaFootnote 314 quadam die, dum essentFootnote 315 papa et ipse cardinalis coram aliis cardinalibus in magnis contencionibus verborum extra modum usitatum in camera, tunc dixit dominus cardinalis Gebennensis dicto domino pape sic: “Sic pater sancte,Footnote 316 facitis modicum honorem cardinalibus in verbis [Prague 9, 20 from top] vestris et gestibus, et non tractatis eos honorifice, sicut antecessores vestri fecerunt. Et ideo forteFootnote 317 nos taliter faciemus quod vosFootnote 318 habebitisFootnote 319 modicum honorem a nobis.” Hec autem scio et audivi a domino cardinali de Luna, qui cottidie, quando rediebatFootnote 320 de palacioFootnote 321 [Basel 98r, 1] multa talia que contingebant, mihi narrabat ore proprio.
Propter que dyabolo instigante inceperunt illico secretissime cardinales, presertim Gebennensis et Ambianensis, tractare de conficiendo scismate. Et tunc miserunt ad regem Francie et adFootnote 322 ducem pAndagavie dominum Petrum Chambonis, camerarium ipsius cardinalis Gebennensis ad conquerendum eiFootnote 323 de cardinalibusFootnote 324 Lemovicensibus, ut ipse rex scriberet eis verba comminatoria et aspera quia talem virum, etFootnote 325 non Gallicum, sed Ytalicum eligerantFootnote 326 in detrimentum regniFootnote 327 [Basel, 98r, 10] Francie, et ut ex illa comminacione etFootnote 328 terrore perterriti, per [Prague 9, 30 from top] ipsos cardinales ordinaretur modusFootnote 329 compaginandi hoc scisma, et cetera.
Que omnia satis fuerunt postea divulgata in Romana curiaFootnote 330 multaFootnote 331 alia scio et habeo in scriptis per informaciones solempnes quas frater meus carnalis, scilicet, frater Petrus de Yspania, fundator ordinis sancti Ieronimi, habuit me presente aFootnote 332 multis solempnibus viris iuramento precedente in Romana curia, quando rex qui dicitur Castelle misit eum ambaxiatorem super exploracione et inquisicione istius materie [Prague 9, 30 from bottom] ad Romam et ad Ytaliam, que omnia habeo in scriptis inFootnote 333 civitate Ianue [Basel, 98r, 20] ad informacionem et clarificacionem consciencie mee, per que luce clarius liquetFootnote 334 et in verum factum eleccionis, intronizacionis, coronacionis et aliorum actuum quos cardinales tenuerunt in hac materia, dominum Urbanum vitum esse verum papam et summum pontificem. Et hec sufficere puto ad informacionem mee consciencie per viam narracionis facti eleccionis et istius presentis materie.
Dixi tercio quod eram informatus per viam iuris de veritate [Basel, 98v, 1] in ista materia; nam licet ego in consciencia mea per modos supra scriptos et per aliqua iura fuissem plenissime informatus, nichilominus tamenFootnote 335 multa contraria audiebam. Volui tamenFootnote 336 ad maiorem habundanciam clarificacionis consciencie mee et aliorum qui sepe ad me veniuntFootnote 337 [Prague 9, 20 from bottom] pro confessionibus et suarum animarum consiliis recipiendis, me adhuc plenius clarificare, quid de iure tenendum esset in hac materia. Et in hoc feci sicut mercator volens emere aliquem lapidem preciosum magni valoris, qui non plene confidens de se inquirit aliquem expertissimum magistrum [Basel, 98v, 10] lapidarium qui sciat plene etFootnote 338 integraliter cognoscere naturas et virtutes lapidum preciosorum et qui sciat discernereFootnote 339 vitrum etFootnote 340 cristalum fabricatum artificialiter ad modum preciosi lapidis a vero preciosoFootnote 341 et naturali lapide ne decipiatur in empcione illius lapidis. Ita et ego perquisivi excellenciores doctores iuris canonici quos ego sciebam in universo, qui oretenus et per ipsorum scripturas et solempnes tractatus, quos super hac materia composuerunt, me de veritate iuris quid tenendum de papa essetFootnote 342 , [Prague 9, 10 from bottom] plenissime informaverunt. Fui enim cum illo
egregio et excellentissimo utriusque iuris doctore, quondam magistro meo, domino [Basel, 98v, 20] Iohanne de Lignano, qui tamquam aquila iuris canonici super cunctos mundi doctores alcius evolabat, aliquociensFootnote 343 in collacione super hac materia, qui necdum verbis me clarificabat seriose et latissime, ymo habeo eius tractatum per eum compositum et dedit mihi quandam pulcram addicionem quam postea fecit super hoc, per quam responditFootnote 344 racionibus quas Gallici doctores adversarii ponunt in suis tractatibus contra eumFootnote 345 . Per que satisfactus remansi inFootnote 346 hoc negocio plenissime. Fui eciam personaliter super hoc puncto cum illo egregio doctore utriusque iuris, domino Baldo de Perusio, qui eciam mihi de hoc verbotenus plenissime satisfecit, et vidi duos tractatus [Basel, 99r, 1] quos edidit de ista materia. [Prague 10, 1 from top] Qui ambo decretorumFootnote 347 doctores mihi dixerunt etFootnote 348 per suos tractatus clarissime toti mundo ostenderunt et denunciaverunt Urbanum esse verum papam rite et canonice electum et summum Romanum pontificem quantum ad claves ecclesie. Preterea posteaFootnote 349 quidamFootnote 350 virtuosus et sancte intencionis vir, scilicet dominus frater Petrus monachus sancti Benedicti, nacione Gallicus civitatis Narbonensis, quondam episcopus Urbevetanus,Footnote 351 decretorum doctor egregius, me in hac veritate de papatu per suum quendam secretarium plenissime informavit, qui episcopus dimisit [Basel, 99r, 10] antipapam et curiam suam propter stimulum consciencie, quem habebat, et postea persuasionemFootnote 352 KaroliFootnote 353 regis Francie, Parisius residebat in monasterio Celestinorum. Et quia terra illa et provincia [Prague 10, 10 from top] erat subiecta antipape, ideo captata hora eciamFootnote 354 inde recessit et ad partes Ytalie ad summum pontificem Urbanum se transferre non distulit, quia unam literam suam in qua aliquid tractat de hac materia, cardinaliFootnote 355 de Luna per me transmittendam, mihi transmisit ad civitatem Ianue cum hac condicione quod prius eam legerem. Cuius littere tenor dinoscitur esse talis.
“Reverendissime pater. Alias, venerabilis paterFootnote 356 , [Basel, 99r, 20], scripsi post reversum meumFootnote 357 de Italia, fui apud dominum regem et prima die Augusti recessi de Parisius tendens versus meum episcopatum et verius apud cellam sancti Ieronimi Sublacensis et steti Perusio usque nunc, non valens transire ultra propter viarum discrimina. OportebatFootnote 358 illic flere cum flentibus quia tempus exultacionis abscessit. Perscrutans enim diversas scripturas iussu domini Karoli [Prague 10, 20 from top] quondam regis Francie volentis utFootnote 359 super hystoriisFootnote 360 RomanorumFootnote 361 pontificum a Damaso, rogatu ipsius fratrisFootnote 362 aliquid scriberem concordando canones et practicam curie nunc currentem, multa vidi que meam conscienciam ingrossarunt [Basel, 99v, 1] contra provisionem factam secundo apud Fundis. Quid enim, ut dicunt aliqui, valereFootnote 363 potuit facta eleccio pro Romana ecclesia ab inimicis ipsius Romane ecclesie? Nec forte, ut asserunt, primamFootnote 364 vim habuisset, si facta fuisset predicta racione a solis cardinalibus, sedFootnote 365 roborata fuit a clero et populo Romano et quodammodo a toto mundo, quia iure divino et canonico episcopalis eleccio ad clerum spectat et populum civitatis. O utinamFootnote 366 reperirem qui mee consciencie satisfaceret et racionibus que contra secundam provisionem obstare videntur!Footnote 367 venerabilisFootnote 368 pater, videre opto et valere [Basel, 99v, 10; Prague 10, 30 from top] feliciter. Novit omnipotens qui actus vestros dirigat ad utriusque hominis sospitatem. Ad dominum Alfonsum aput Ianuam morantem misi hanc literam vobis destinandamFootnote 369 . Scriptum Perusii, X°. Marcii.
‘Vester humilis orator Petrus
UrbevetananussFootnote 370 episcopus.’”
Quante enimFootnote 371 virtutis et bone consciencie ac perfeccionis hic predictus episcopus est, non sufficio enarrare. Vidi enim, dum ipse suum episcopatum [Prague 10, 30 from bottom] pacifice possidebat, anno Domini m° ccco lxx quarto, quod ipse pervenit ad sanctum monasteriumFootnote 372 [Basel, 99v, 20] Specus Sancti Benedicti in abbacia Sublacensi prope Romam ad 32 miliaria, ubi beati Benedicti laudabiliter observatur regula. Et vocatis in mei presencia priore ipsius monasterii et monachis, proposuit se velle in illa valle edificare quodam monasterium sub vocabulo beati Ieronimi et subFootnote 373 Benedicti regula et dotare eum pro xii monachis, ac eciam renunciare et dimittere suum episcopatum et in ipso monasterio se includere et monachale iterFootnote 374 ut verus monachus in observancia regule et in paupertate ibidem vivere, statimque fecit fabricari in illa valle dictum cenobium sancti [Basel, 100r, 1] Ieronimi. In quo cuiusFootnote 375 quidemFootnote 376 monasterioloFootnote 377 novo ego fui personaliter. Sed quia istud scisma in ecclesia Dei supervenitFootnote 378 , ideo desiderium [Prague 10, 20 from bottom] suum adimplere nequivit.
Quante vero sciencie isteFootnote 379 episcopus eximius doctor in iure canonico est, attende. Scias enim quod per aliquos annos segregavit se a turbisFootnote 380 gencium et a dyocesi sua et stetit in dicto monasterio Specus et in castro Sublacensi, ut ibi componeret super decretum unum solempnem librum qui vocatur Codex Canonum, quem iam perfecit et est liber sollempnissimusFootnote 381 . Preterea scias quod dictus [Basel, 100r, 10] rex Francie, nomine Karolus, fecit eum venire deFootnote 382 Avinione ad civitatem Parisius, ut ipse revolveret et studeret ibi omnes cronicas que fuerunt ibiFootnote 383 a temporeFootnote 384 Damasi sanctiFootnote 385 pape, omnium summorum pontificum et super hiis librum componeret et per illasFootnote 386 videret quid de eleccione domini Urbani et Clementis de iure tenendum esset. Qui quidem episcopus ex precepto dicti regis hoc cum magno studio et solicita [Prague 10, 10 from bottom] inquisicione perfecit in quo quidem libro concludit Urbanum vitum esse verum papam. Perfecto igitur libro de Parisius recessit propter stimulum consciencie et ad dominum nostrum [Basel, 100r, 20] dominumFootnote 387 Urbanum papam ad Ytaliam se transtulit. Hec autem bene scit dominus Phylippus de Masseris quia in eodemFootnote 388 conventu Celestinorum eodem tempore Parisiis fuit commoratus. Ex quo igitur ego fui a duobus tantis et talibus doctoribus Ytalicis de hoc plene informatus et a predicto episcopo tam virtuoso etFootnote 389 egregio decretorum doctore nacionis Francie, qui dimisso antipapa et sua patria et parentibus, propter stimulum consciencie venit ad dominum nostrum papam ad partes Ytalie. Intellexi quod sufficiebant consciencie mee [Basel, 100v, 1] tales informaciones tantorum virorum ad credendum firmiter et tenendum quod de iureFootnote 390 Urbanus vitus est verus papa et in terris vicarius Iesu [Prague 11, 1 from top] Christi, maxime quia video quod maior pars Christianitatis, ubi sunt tanti principes,Footnote 391 sanctiFootnote 392 viri, tantique prelati solempnes et infiniti magni doctores, qui nec sunt nacionisFootnote 393 Francie, nec Ytalie, et omnes tenent Urbanum esse verum papam. Et ideo istam partem tenere decrevi racionibus supra dictis et aliis, quas causa brevitatis taceo.
Parcatis mihiFootnote 394 , mi domine, de tam longa scriptura, [Basel, 100v, 10] quia consciencia mea et caritas vestra me cogeruntFootnote 395 ad tam prolixam informacionem meam vobis prolixe propter amoremFootnote 396 Dei amicabiliter reservandiFootnote 397 , precipientes mihi in omnibus fiducialiter tamquam vestro. Spiritus Sanctus doctor veritatis, ymo ipsa veritas vos et totam ecclesiam Dei illustret cito in hoc et in aliis suo sancto lumine benedicto.Footnote 398
