Europe in the Sixteenth Century 1494-1598 Part 16

| The rebels of Franconia and Thuringia.

In Franconia, amidst violent excesses, we find the demands for social reform connected with a scheme of political reconst.i.tution of the Empire on a democratic basis--a scheme which betrays the hand of a more educated mind. But it was in Thuringia and the district round the Harz mountains that the extravagance reached its climax. The leader, Thomas Munzer, taught doctrines which were subversive of all authority in Church and State, and of the existing conditions of society. Received at Mulhausen in Thuringia as a prophet, he proposed to make that town the seat of his authority, whence he should rule his kingdom according to revelation.

| Social Anarchy threatened.

For a moment the social fabric of Germany was imperilled. On all sides the peasants triumphed. The n.o.bles were either driven from their strongholds or forced to join the leagues as 'brothers.' The smaller towns, many of which suffered from the same oppressions as the peasants--even some of the lesser imperial cities--joined the movement. Ulrich of Wurtemberg seized the opportunity to attempt a recovery of the dominions which he had forfeited by misrule (cf. p.

131), and called the rebels to his aid.

| Causes of failure of the Revolt.

Germany was indeed threatened with anarchy; yet it is doubtful whether the peasants had any chance of permanent success. The leaders were for the most part visionary and ignorant fanatics. Munzer was neither a prophet, nor a general, and the rebels had no effective organisation.

Moreover, the middle cla.s.ses, led by Luther, declared against them.

Luther at first had preached moderation and reconciliation. While condemning the revolts against authority as contrary to divine law, he had rebuked the Princes and the lords for their oppression, and urged them to redress the grievances of their villeins. The extravagance of the peasants, however, shortly disgusted and frightened him. He disliked their views, and feared lest his own position and work might be compromised. He pointed out that the spiritual principles of Christianity might not without peril be transferred to the sphere of society and politics; and that, if the gospel demands the freedom of the soul, it does not thereby emanc.i.p.ate the body from the control of law. He denounced the rebels with his usual violence of language, and bade the authorities cast away all scruple, and 'stab and kill and strangle' without mercy.

| The defeat of Leipheim. April 4.

At this moment the news of the victory of Pavia strengthened the cause of order. The Suabian League took up arms against Duke Ulrich. The Swiss, who had at first shown some sympathy with the peasants, and had supported the Duke, now withdrew their contingent, partly on account of disturbances at home, partly from fear of Charles' vengeance, and Ulrich was forced to beat a hasty retreat. On April 4, the army of the League inflicted a decisive defeat on the peasants at Leipheim, near Ulm. On the 15th of May, the Princes, once more led by Philip of Hesse, crushed the army of Munzer near Frankenhausen. Munzer was taken prisoner and was executed at Mulhausen. The Duke of Lorraine took Zabern in Alsace, and restored order in the Vosges. The reduction of the city of Wurzburg by the united forces of the Suabian League, of the Elector of Treves, and of the Elector Palatine on June 7, decided the fortunes of Franconia; and shortly after, the peasants of the Upper Rhine and the Black Forest either came to terms, or were crushed. The Princes and the n.o.bles, once more masters, rivalled the cruelties of the rebels. Numbers of unfortunate peasants were cut down without mercy, and the grievances of the survivors remained, with a few exceptions, unredressed.

| Effect of the Peasants' Revolt on the Reformation.

But although the peasants failed in their attempt, the effect of the revolt upon the course of the Reformation was profound. The utter incapacity of the Council had been once more displayed, while the defeat of the peasants had saved Germany from religious and social anarchy. Of the four possible results of the Lutheran movement which we have indicated above (p. 165), two alone now remained. The question was whether Charles would succeed in completely re-establis.h.i.+ng his authority, or whether the spirit of territorialism would be too strong for him. The cause of the Princes had indeed been strengthened. Once more, as in the case of the Knights' War, they had a.s.serted their power, and, with the Suabian League, had shown themselves the real masters of the country. Luther had lost to some extent the support of the lower cla.s.ses, and was forced to lean still more upon the Princes. Yet the position of the Emperor was most threatening. The opponents of Luther, with scant justice, laid the responsibility of the disturbances to his charge, and many of the more timid and refined were alienated from his cause. Charles himself became still more convinced that heresy and rebellion were synonymous. He was determined therefore to crush out heresy, and the victory of Pavia seemed to offer him a brilliant opportunity. All depended upon what the issue of that victory should be.

FOOTNOTES:

[42] Cf. _Cambridge Modern History_, ii. 416.

[43] On this point cf. Armstrong, _Charles V._, II. c. iii.

[44] To understand the future course of the Reformation in Germany, it is necessary to study the map, and note--

_a._ The extraordinary number of princ.i.p.alities into which Germany was divided.

_b._ The division of the dominions of the greater princes among branches of the same family, many of whom took opposite sides. This will be best seen from the following table:--

PROTESTANT. CATHOLIC.

House of Wettin, in Saxony.

Ernestine, Electoral Branch Albertine, at Meissen.

at Wittenberg.

| Ernest, 1464-1468. | Albert, 1485-1500.

| | | _Frederick the Wise_, 1486-1525. | Duke George, 1500-1535.

John, his brother, 1525-1532. | Henry, his brother, 1535-1541, | | becomes Protestant.

John Frederick. 1532-1554. | Maurice, 1541-1553, secures the Electorate.

Hohenzollern.

Younger Branches. Electoral Branch.

| (1) Albert of Prussia, Grand Master | Albert Achilles, 1470-1486.

of Teutonic Order, 1512-1568. | | Secularises his Duchy, 1525. | John Cicero, 1485-1499.

(2) Albert Alcibiades, Margrave of | | Culmbach, 1536-1557. | Joachim I., 1499-1535.

(3) John of Kustrin, Margrave of | | Neumark, brother of Joachim | Joachim II., 1535-1571. Becomes II., 1571. | Protestant in 1539, though he | never breaks with the Emperor.

Wittelsbach.

| (1) Bavaria. Munich.

| Albert II., 1460-1508.

| | | William I., 1508-1550.

| (2) Palatinate.

| Frederick the Victorious, | 1451-1476.

| Philip, his nephew, 1476-1508.

| | | Lewis V., 1508-1544.

| Frederick II., his brother, | 1544-1556, becomes | Protestant.

Welf.

Duke Ernest I., of Luneburg, | Duke Henry IV., of Wolfenb.u.t.tel, 1532-1541. | 1514-1568.

Wurtemberg.

| Ulrich I., 1503-1550, became | Protestant 1534.

_c._ The number of ecclesiastical states. The three great electoral archbishoprics of Treves, Mayence, Cologne--with the bishoprics of Metz on the Moselle, and Strasburg and Worms--so dominated the upper Rhine and its tributaries as to give it the name of Priest Street. The dioceses of Utrecht, Bremen, Munster, and Paderborn stretched in an almost continuous line along the north-west. To these we must add Hildesheim, Halberstadt, Magdeburg, Wurzburg, Bamberg in central Germany; and in the south, the archbishopric of Salzburg, and the bishopric of Trent. The existence of these numerous ecclesiastical princ.i.p.alities had a twofold effect. It caused a strong feeling in Germany against papal exactions, of which the bishoprics were the victims, or the agents; while the desire on the part of the Princes to extend their dominions by secularising these ecclesiastical states, had a potent influence on many an Elector and Prince, both Catholic and Protestant. In many cases, too, the bishops were the relations of the Princes, and their policy was guided by family interests or rivalries.

[45] He was Lord of 2 princ.i.p.alities, 2 duchies, 4 counties, 2 viscounties, and 7 lords.h.i.+ps. _See_ Map of France.

_Cause of the quarrel between Francis and Bourbon._--Charles, Count of Montpensier had been allowed by Louis XII. to marry Susanna, the heiress of Duke Peter of Bourbon. After the death of his wife without children, the Queen-mother, Louise of Savoy, claimed some of his possessions as niece of Duke Peter. Francis, with better right, demanded the restoration of others in fulfilment of Duke Peter's original promise, that in default of male issue he would leave all the alienable possessions of his House to the Crown.

CHAPTER IV

FROM THE TREATY OF MADRID TO THE TREATY OF CRESPI

Treaty of Madrid--League of Cognac--Sack of Rome--Medici driven from Florence--Battle of Aversa--Treaty of Barcelona--Peace of Cambray--Charles crowned Emperor--Diets of Spires and Augsburg--League of Schmalkalde--Zwingle in Switzerland--Peace of Nuremberg--Barbarossa of Algiers--Renewed war between Charles and Francis--Truce of Nice--Revolt at Ghent suppressed--The Anabaptists at Munster--Diet of Ratisbon--Campaign of 1542--Treaties of Crespi and Ardres.

-- 1. _Treaty of Madrid and League of Cognac._

| Behaviour and difficulties of Charles after the | victory of Pavia.

Charles maintained the same imperturbable composure at the news of his good fortune as he had displayed in the days when defeat seemed to stare him in the face. He forbade all public rejoicing. He attributed all to G.o.d, and protested that his only desire was for a lasting peace, so that he might turn the arms of Christendom against the Turk. But he had before a.s.serted that the only hope of peace lay in the submission of France, and he had not changed his mind. Yet how was that submission to be effected? War was at the moment out of the question. Charles had no money, and even the payment of the troops was in arrear. The Peasants' War still continued in Germany, and Ferdinand could not help. Henry VIII. might perhaps have been prevailed upon to invade France, if the Emperor would have recognised his claim to the French throne; but Charles did not wish to see England thus aggrandised, and refused all definite promises. Wolsey therefore had his way, and, in August, concluded a treaty of alliance with the Regent of France, in which Henry, in return for an annual pension, promised to demand the liberty of the King on honourable terms. Italy was forming a league of self-defence, and Clement, though still full of promises, was known to be playing double. France, although she had lost an army and her King, was still France, and was determined to resist invasion to the last penny in her purse, and the last drop of her blood. War then was not to be thought of; nor did Charles' prospects of gaining his end by treaty seem much better. His demands that Burgundy and Artois should be ceded to him, and that Bourbon should hold Provence independently of France, were indignantly rejected. To the mutilation of their territory, the French would not submit, and the French King declared that he would sooner die in captivity than buy his freedom by such dishonour. Francis, however, had not the strength of character of his rival, and presently began to pine for freedom. Hearing that it was proposed to send him a prisoner to Naples, he prevailed upon Lannoy to send him to Spain instead (June), for he hoped much from a personal interview with Charles. He did not understand the man with whom he had to deal. Nothing is more remarkable than the tenacity, often amounting to obstinacy, with which Charles clung to a decision once made. He looked upon his claims to Artois and Burgundy as just; Burgundy especially was the cradle of his race, and had been wrongly taken from his grandmother, Mary of Burgundy; it should be restored to him. In vain Francis and the French envoys pleaded for some abatement of his demands. Charles remained unmoved: he even refused to see the King of France until a serious attack of fever threatened the prisoner's life. The news that Clement and the Italians were making a league with France, that Francesco Maria Sforza of Milan, his own creature, was turning against him; the attempt of Morone, the Milanese chancellor, to corrupt the honour of his best general Pescara--an attempt which Pescara,[46] urged by feelings of loyalty or self-interest, betrayed to his master--all this had no effect on Charles. Morone was seized, Sforza was declared to have forfeited his dukedom, and was besieged, in his citadel, by the imperial troops.

Francis, having recovered from his serious illness, tried to escape; but the plan was betrayed. There was nothing for it but to abandon Burgundy; and to this course the queen-mother, Louise of Savoy, now urged him. Francis accordingly yielded; but, a.s.serting that he alone could obtain the consent of his people to the cession, offered to leave his two eldest sons as hostages, and promised to return to captivity if that consent could not be obtained. Charles was most unwilling to grant even this, and was supported by his chancellor Gattinara, who predicted the result. The condition of Italy was, however, desperate. Pescara died on December 3, urging his master almost with his last breath to make peace with France, if he would save Italy; all his other counsellors were of the same opinion.

Charles accordingly gave way, and consented to the Treaty of Madrid.

| The Treaty of Madrid. Jan. 14, 1526.