https://ehne.fr/en/encyclopedia/themes/european-humanism/europe-wars-religion/a-prelude-wars-religion-sack-rome-1527 |
The Sack of Rome in May 1527 by the troops of Emperor Charles V—king of
Germany, Spain, Naples, and Sicily, and ruler of the Netherlands—was an
event of rare violence that left a deep impression during the sixteenth
century. An accident of a war opposing a considerable
portion of European princes, it partially served as an outlet for
religious tensions that had been growing since the late Middle Ages.
Protestant but also Catholic soldiers united in a sacred intoxication
that announced the religious conflicts to come. The soldiers
nevertheless conserved a genuine rationality that lent its full support
to a logic of predation. Quickly known throughout Europe, these
exactions were interpreted by the vast majority as a religious event:
well-deserved punishment for the papal Antichrist or the corruption of
the Church, a divine scourge, sacrilege, or an occasion to reconcile
Christians within the universal reformation.
Rome, Martyr City of a European Conflict
On
May 5, 1527, an imperial army consisting of Spaniards, Flemings,
Italians, and Germans encamped in front of Rome. With the Duke of
Bourbon at its head, it threatened the continent’s religious capital. He
spent over a month living off the land, while seeking to contain the
disgruntled troops who had been deprived of pay for over a year.
One
must go back two years in time to February 24, 1525, in order to
understand the situation. On that morning, imperial troops crushed the
French before Pavia: Francis I, who was at the head of his armies, was
captured and transferred to the Emperor Charles V in Spain. Italy and
Europe were frightened in the face of this overly fortunate prince; a
dual league formed around Pope Clement VII to expel the emperor from
Northern Italy. Already occupying Parma, Florence, and Modena, the
pontiff expanded to Milan and Venice on one side, and to France and
England on the other.
Imperial troops counter-attacked without
coordination. Ugo Moncada, the Governor of Naples, helped the Cardinal
Pompeo Colonna to foment a revolt against the pope in Rome in September
1526. In Cartagena, the Duke of Bourbon set sail for Genoa with a new
Spanish army; he was joined in Milan by twelve thousand lansquenets from
Germany. In Rome itself, Viceroy Charles de Lannoy played the card of
military intimidation, and obtained an agreement with the pope on March
25, 1527. Facing mutiny in Bologna in March, Bourbon began to pillage
Romagna on the way to Florence, whose siege would enable him to pay his
soldiers. On April 25, the arrival of troops from the league in
Florence, in addition to the pope’s breaking of the truce, prompted the
duke to change target. He launched his army against Rome, promising the
booty of the world’s richest city. Bourbon died during the first
assault. Lacking a leader—the emperor’s orders took weeks to arrive, and
the young Prince of Orange chosen to succeed the duke did not have his
predecessor’s authority—the army rampaged through the city.
The
city was subject to looting and violence for eight days. The defenders
were quickly eliminated in the fighting. The population was massacred,
tortured, and ransomed with no distinction between age or sex,
nationality or allegiance. Even the sick in hospices and well-known
allies of the imperial cause were killed. Women were raped. Churches and
palaces were forced open and emptied of their valuable objects.
Archives and libraries were burned. The pope and a part of his court
succeeded in shutting themselves in the Castel Sant’Angelo, where they
remained safe during the pillaging. The Venetian ambassador described
the situation as being worse than hell itself. There were at least
twelve thousand deaths, a number that grew with the victims of hunger
and epidemics. The violence continued despite the signing of a treaty in
June, especially when the army returned from its summer quarters in
September.
Sacred Violence and Economy of Predation
The
religious violence of the German lansquenets was emphasized in
particular. For over ten years, Luther and his disciples had denounced
the pope as the Antichrist and Rome as the new Babylon; they vehemently
condemned the superstitions of papists such as the worship of saints and
relics, the luxury of churches, etc. The exactions of German troops
echoed this preaching. In churches they profaned or destroyed relics,
tore or smeared images, and stole and dismantled liturgical ornaments.
They parodied Catholic pomp by installing a prostitute dressed in
priestly clothing on the throne of Saint Peter while singing “Vivat
Lutherus pontifex!” in false processions, or while presenting animals
for communion. Clergymen were the preferred targets of soldiers, as
prelates were killed, humiliated, or sold as slaves, while nuns were
raped and monks were castrated.
However, religious violence was
not solely the act of Lutherans. In Catholic Europe as well, there was
criticism against the corruption of the pope and the Curia, in addition
to the prophets and astrologers that announced the imminent punishment
of the Church, a prelude to its universal reform and the return of
Christ. There had been increasing portents of the scourge to come since
1524. Yet Bourbon and a part of the European knighthood saw themselves
as the instrument of God in a world governed by providence. For them the
fighting was something mystical, an ordeal in which abandoning oneself
to divine will was a way of saving one’s soul and bringing about God’s
reign on Earth.
Beyond the religious element, the sack was also a
question of money. The occupiers established a ransom economy, in which
one had to pay to save one’s life and property. The Italian and
imperial general Ferrante Gonzaga paid large sums of money to these men
through his mother in order to avoid the pillaging of the family palace.
Similarly, many of the acts of torture were carried out by soldiers who
wanted their victims to admit where they had hidden their money, or to
force them to lend it out. The economy of predation also applied to
relics, which were subject to trafficking and speculation.
Europe as Witness
While
a few humanists opted for a historical interpretation by likening the
event to Alaric’s sack of the City in 410, most observers emphasized the
religious and even providentialist view of the Roman tragedy. News of
the sack spread throughout Europe, initially in the form of rumors, and
later as increasingly precise and coherent witness accounts. The
dispatches of ambassadors, which were only known in courts, were
succeeded by letters and reports by survivors, as well as by newspapers
and occasional printings for broad diffusion. The first of these came
from the presses of Venice in mid-May.
In Germany, Luther and the
Protestants exulted. The Roman Antichrist and his new Babylon had
finally been punished. In Spain, France, and the Netherlands, Erasmists
and moderate evangelists were more guarded. Many saw the sack as
deserved punishment for the corruption of the Curia and the pope, and
believed that the emperor should take advantage to call a council and
impose the reformation of the Catholic Church they had been waiting for
since the beginning of the century; the scope of the massacres and
destruction nevertheless horrified them. Some Catholics shared this
opinion, while others were foremost scandalized by the sacrilege
committed by the emperor and his ungodly troops.
The imperial
chancellery was thus forced to justify itself, despite the divisions
among its members. Charles V, who was stupefied, retreated into grief.
Gattinara, his Chancellor, urged him to depose the pope and call a
universal council, or to repudiate his generals. In late July, the
imperial secretary Alonso de Valdes wrote a dual justification of his
master: a letter addressed to all Christian princes, and a Dialogue on
the Things that Occurred in Rome. These two texts of providentialist and
Erasmian inspiration described the sack and its exactions as the act of
a mutinous army, with neither leaders nor orders. Emphasizing the deep
regret that the event had caused the emperor, Valdes likened it to a
divine scourge directed against Clement VII and the corruption of the
Curia, which should enable the reconciliation and reformation of all
Christianity.
Through both the violence that was unleashed and
the interpretations that it prompted, the Sack of Rome prefigured the
wars of religion that would soon tear Europe apart. It also represented a
threshold beyond which Catholic anti-Romanism, which had been very
strong since the fifteenth century, began to decline. For the papacy, it
finally marked the beginning of a reconstruction: pagan
antiquity—honored at the papal court since the 1490s—was repudiated in
favor of biblical antiquity, while the City was taken in hand to become
the symbol of the purity of the Church.
No comments:
Post a Comment