A Story of the Guelfs and Ghibellines Through the Eyes of Leonardo Bruni
"A Story of the Guelfs and Ghibellines Through the Eyes of Leonardo Bruni" is an essay by Shawn D. Mathis, submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for HU 7311 "Introduction to Humane Letters" at Faulkner University. The essay, written under the guidance of Dr. Robert Woods, was submitted on November 1, 2014.
Introduction
The work of Leonardo Bruni chronicles the lives of the people of Tuscany, the Florentines, and the Guelf and Ghibelline factions. In preparation for this paper, the author has read the entirety of Leonardo Bruni’s three volume work entitled History of the Florentine People. Dr. James Hankins prepared these volumes as a contribution to The I Tatti Renaissance Library published by Harvard University Press. The I Tatti series provides access to literary, historical, philosophical, theological, and scientific works originally written in Latin now available in English.
The Tuscan revival motif is the story of change led by the people of Florence. To understand the cultural milieu surrounding the Guelfs and Ghibellines is to contextualize the birth of Renaissance. This research paper offers an introductory exposition of key Guelf and Ghibelline texts, extracted from the first four of twelve books within the History.[1]
Bruni developed many themes simultaneously including a detailed study of the Peninsula (a term used to describe what we know of today as “Italy”) from the early days of Rome (circa 80 B.C.), the transition of numerous papal offices, the era of the Medieval arriving at the birth of Renaissance (circa 1402),[2] the humanities and civic life emerging as a civic-minded humanist society,[3] the Medici and oligarchical culture of Florence,[4] and the brutal wars leading to the coalescing of the people in the peninsula to form one Italy.
Party rivalry borne of revolution is a story of the Guelfs and Ghibellines in a tightly woven narrative within the Tuscan revival motif. Bruni lived during late trecento until mid-quattrocento (1370-1444).[5] Being among the most respected scholars of the day his work led to service as apostolic secretary in the pontifical office of four popes (1405-14) and as chancellor of Florence continuing during the Medici regime until his death while in office (1427-44). Within his lifetime he was a translator of classic works, prolific historian, and civic leader. In short, he was a noted humanist. The Bruni dialogues are the source of scholarly debate on “Etruscan wars with Rome” and the Tuscan superiority of “political and cultural ideologies”[6] christening him as the leading Florentine humanist of the Italian Renaissance.[7]
War was the natural result of organized conflict to enact change in Tuscany. Historians like Bruni and others were active participants in party rivalry. Bruni and Compagni were members of parte guelfa and Villani was a Ghibelline. Bruni relied heavily upon two pre-Renaissance sources for research: Dino Campagni’s Chronicle of Florence[8] and Giovanni Villani’s Chroniche Fiorentine of Giovanni Villani.[9] Compagni lived in Florence from 1255-1324 being a historian prior to the birth of Bruni. Villani lived in Florence from 1275-1348 as an author and wealthy Florentine merchant. Both Compagni and Villani predate the earliest transition into Renaissance circa 1350 and a later date of 1402. Compagni and Villani chronicled early civic humanist themes but did not experience life in a civic minded humanist society.[10] Bruni did.[11] Drawing upon standard works of Florentine history—Campagni and Villani—the maturing of Bruni’s worldview had the benefit of reflection beyond that of his source histories even though he was born only twenty-two years after the last of these two men died. Together, Bruni, Compagni, and Villani form the standard texts for study of the Guelf and Ghibelline movements.[12]
In the six centuries since Bruni’s History, a notable book was published in 1894, entitled Guelphs and Ghibellines: A Short History of Medieval Italy from 1250-1409 by Oscar Browning in London.[13] Only a limited number of peer reviewed journal articles exist pertaining to the Guelfs and Ghibellines. Fewer books exist referencing the Guelf and Ghibelline as serious influencers in the development of civic humanism of the Italian Renaissance. The author sees a vacuum in scholarly contribution toward the mission critical function of the Guelf and Ghibelline activity in the emergence of civic humanism within the genre of Italian Renaissance.[14] Bruni, Compagni, and Villani are the primary resources for Guelf and Ghibelline history in the development of the Italian Renaissance. Bruni being the most celebrated of the three. Albeit as a secondary source Browning is valuable for the narrative aspect of the parties.
Disorder in the region led to the civic order of the Italian Renaissance. The political battles in all twelve books and memoirs paint page by page a colorful canvas throughout the history of the Florentine people. Bruni’s message: two political factions—the Guelfs and the Ghibellines—were the physical laborers of war between the pontifical state and the empire.[15]
The players of the day had no window into the picture modern man has in the birth of one of the most pivotal eras in all of humanity. The Italian Renaissance is generally noted as an era from 1350-1550 A.D. Many themes converge in the two hundred year window that eventually became known as Italian Renaissance. Typically, three key terms are employed as nomenclature for the era: duecento,[16] trecento[17] and quattrocento. Although Bruni’s work spans 80 B.C. to 1402 A.D it is midway through Book VII when his history begins the discussion of the year 1350 and continues until the final chapter of Book XII concluding with the year 1402. Nearly half of the History explores a fifty-two year time span of the Florentine People. The actual history of the duecento is discussed near the end of Book I through the end of Book IV. His Memoirs consolidates information from all twelve books and ends with the year 1440 adding thirty-eight years of Florentine history.
The author is engaged in an in-depth study of each reference to the Guelf and Ghibelline movements: city names, geographical details, sectarian parties, sub-factions, and proper names associated with each group. This is a study beyond the scope of a singular research paper. The delimitation of the present work is to examine pivotal references to Guelf and Ghibelline alike in Bruni’s History during the duecento, or the 13th century. This covers pages 101-390 in the first volume of Bruni’s History.
Shaping Civic Order by Revolution of State
The origin of Guelf and Ghibelline conflict is founded in controversies between Roman pontiffs and emperors. Bruni condensed the long history with a simple yet provocative thought: the pontiffs and emperors "brought plentiful tinder to our local wars and quarrels.”[18] Herein lies the crux of the matter for generations to come. Themes of patriarchal, political, and pontifical strife lie at the revolutionary heart of the Florentine Renaissance.
Early in the History Bruni retraced the origin of conflict. His synopsis recorded in full below is one of the most prolific texts in the entire historical narrative. He wrote,
"The many disputes between the Roman pontiffs and emperors brought plentiful tinder to our local wars and quarrels. For the empire which began with Charlemagne and was founded mainly for the protection of the Roman church, once it was, as we have explained, transferred to Germany, fell into the hands of successors whose main purpose in life seemed to be the persecution and overthrow of the popes. What had once been a source of security became a vortex of evil. The cause of the hostility was essentially that the popes tried to hold on to certain ecclesiastical rights while the emperors tried to usurp them on the basis of outmoded prerogatives. Against the emperors the popes therefore directed the strongest possible condemnations and censures, which at the time were their only arms, and urged cities and princes to oppose the imperial excesses, threatening them with heavy punishments if any of them should obey the emperors' edicts. The emperors, terrible in arms, marched against them. As the facts of the dispute remained ambiguous, attitudes varied; some favored the popes, some the emperors."[19]
Bruni chronicles the breach between Roman pontiffs and emperors. Some four hundred years prior to the duecento the il dado e tratto (the die is cast) in which there was a point of no return (circa 800 A.D.). A scene violently erupted in the duecento wherein the deep-seated and long held views were embodied in battles between the Guelfs and Ghibellines. Deeply rooted disputes became embedded not to be lessened for centuries. The Roman pontiffs, of necessity, desired to protect their domain as heads of the Roman church. The emperors equally desired to acquire new lands including access to wealth. Wicksteed astutely concludes, "In truth neither the popes nor the emperors had any sympathy with the real objects of either party, though they were ready enough to seek advantage in alliances with them."[20] More palpable is the thought that the emperors had no sympathy for the people within the parties since the secular body did not claim a close alliance with a spiritual or ecclesial obligation. A bit more difficult to comprehend is the lack of sympathy shown to the people with whom the pontiffs sought alliance.
The Pontifical State was more of a monarchical entity than a spiritual repository of divine blessing from above. Bruni concluded that both ecclesial and secular powers “brought plentiful tinder to our local wars and quarrels.”[21]
The origin of the pontifical and emperor alliance was for the protection of the spiritual institution. The French Carolingian[22] ruler, Charlemagne, founded his empire upon alliances intended for “the protection of the Roman church.”[23] Robert Folz, author of The Coronation of Charlemagne, 25 December 800, considers the impact of the coronation by Pope Leo III (A.D. 750-816) as having religious and spiritual implications especially during the lifetime of Charlemagne.[24] Leo crowned Charlemagne, the infamous Teutonic warrior, as imperator Romanum gubernans imperiuma (“Roman emperor governing the empire”).[25] The Christianization of the Saxons was the primary focus of the leader of the Franks.
The emperor’s vision was not transferred to his successors. Once Charlemagne’s tenure expired the “empire fell into the hands of successors whose main purpose in life seemed to be the persecution and overthrow of the popes.”[26] The origin of the Carolingian empire was borne aloft when the Pontiff and the Emperor established a “holy alliance” structured for the protection of the interests of the church. However, Charlemagne’s successors lived for near a millennium after the Emperor wreaking havoc on the Roman church as an entity and the people as subjects.
The legacy of the Emperor’s successors shaped the Italian Renaissance in its finest hour. Bruni made a classic statement when he asserted, “What had once been a source of security became a vortex of evil.”[27] The choice of the word “vortex” is highly descriptive and a well selected word that bears fruit in the three volumes of Bruni’s History where he chronicles intense war spanning the next six hundred years. “Vortex” alludes to a whirlpool irresistibly engulfing its object. What once was the source of stability became an irresistible force of evil between the pontifical state and the secular empire. This author interprets Bruni’s use of evil in the sense that harm was being enacted against civic order rather than a moralistic, spiritual evil.
The struggle for dominance between the commoners and the nobility was at the heart of the development of civic order. After Pope Innocent III[28] excommunicated Emperor Otto IV he named Frederick of Hohenstaufen, king of Sicily, as the new head of the empire.[29] Those loyal to Otto called themselves Guelfs. Those who accepted Frederick called themselves Ghibellines. To grasp the flow of Florentine history one must consider the “informal internal organization of the two bodies” that opposed one another since “the struggle is between the military and territorial aristocracy on the one hand, and mercantile democracy of the city on the other.”[30] Further, Wicksteed advances the idea of a “struggle for the supremacy of the mercantile democracy and the Roman Law over the military aristocracy with its 'barbarian' traditions, that lies at the back of the Guelf and Ghibelline troubles of the thirteenth century."[31]
This segmentation centered on “the problem of civic autonomy, a goal towards which the city had been moving in the previous century."[32] Internal struggle within the party greatly diminished the strength of the party has a whole. Notwithstanding the bitter conflict between the Guelfs and Ghibellines a second division into two distinctive bodies became a third agenda in the ever-growing conflict when the Guelfs divided into the White and Black parties in Florence.
The Guelf dichotomy marks the trilateral, or three pronged agenda of Ghibellines, White Guelf and Black Guelf juxtaposed at the time. Not only were the Guelfs and Ghibellines in contention over the question of empire but the Guelfs were placing emphasis on the development of the civic independence of Florence.
The centerpiece of conflict was the emergence and sustainability of empire. The emergence of empire is an entrepreneurial pursuit requiring a unique skillset to successfully build a power base. The sustainability of empire requires an entirely different set of management and leadership skills of the controlling power. The issue of empire on the peninsula being the predominant question for 1,300 years was no new thought to the Florentine. While the conflict concerning empire raged the central agenda was to determine whose empire would prevail. The Holy Roman Empire or the Papal throne? One oriented solely in the expansion of power and empire while the other proclaimed a message of universal Christianity. Yet, in practicality the enduring conflict was a mortal combat bringing all available military and political strength to bore in the vigor of revolution leading to civic order. In effect, the revolutionary passion of the people led to the migration of the Peninsula into an organized Italy.
The People
Events lead to epochs. Seminal events occur that may seem to have little significance at the moment but have signature, long-term implications. The story of Buondelmonte de’ Buondelmonte is held by many to be the demarcation for the full rivalry of the Guelfs and Ghibellines. The Buondelmonte clan was a wealthy Florentine family. Buondelmonte was a young man who enjoyed a quarrel.
A gesture of disrespect directed at Buondelmonte and Uberto Infangati led to a brawl in which great insult was directed at Oddo Arrighi. As recompense for the insult the Arrighi family determined that the insult could be appeased if Buondelmonte were to marry an Arrighi. Marriage was used as a bartering tool for creating contractual alliances often among opposing foes. Initially Buondelmonte accepted the wedding but had a change of heart when offered the opportunity to wed a more beautiful young lady.
Certain offenses merited civil means of reconciliation while others were punishable by death. A second offense occurred sparking bitter rivalry not to be appeased. It was determined that Buondelmonte was to be executed on Easter morning in 1216 on the Ponte Vecchio with the deadly blow to be delivered by Oddo Arrighi.
Folklore becomes the stuff of legend. Legend becomes fodder for historical archival of events of the past. Of this incident, Dante wrote, “Oh Buondelmonte, wrong you were to flee the nuptials as the promptings of another! How fitting for Florence to sacrifice a victim to the mutilated stone that guards her bridge to mark the end of peace."[33]
Vendetta was particularly acute during this period of time. According to N.P.J. Gordon, one of the most celebrated commentators on Dante's Divine Comedy, “though all men naturally tend to vendetta, the Florentines are especially ardent in this, both publicly and privately.”[34] Dante and Villani regarded the Buondelmonte incident of 1216 as the cause of conflict between the White and Black Guelf factions. Bruni summarizes, "Thus the city was divided, clans were divided, families were divided- there were even brothers who took opposite sides. So the faction that used to be known as the Guelfs was split in two, and two factions arose from one."[35]
As time passed adherents to the cause often forget the reason for the agenda. De Winter further concludes, "The truth is that the terms of Ghibelline and Guelf had by this time lost all real political meaning."[36] "The name Guelf (of Welf in German)—that of the family of which Henry the Lion is the most illustrious figure—is often cited by students of Medieval history, as it has also come to stand for the political faction siding with the papacy in the age-long conflict between church and state, and opposing the Ghibellines, backers of the Holy Roman emperors."[[37]] No Guelf in this period is recorded as having knowledge of the origin of the term.
"The Guelfs, whose cradle had been in Weingarten, a picturesque alpine spot north of the Lake of Constance, had left their mark on German politics beginning in the preceding century. An earlier member of the family, Guelf V, uncle of Henry the Proud, had married Countess Matilda of Tuscany, before whose castle at Canossa, Henry IV, Holy Roman emperor, knelt barefoot in the snow to ask and receive absolution from Pope Gregory VII.[38] “It was a crucial moment in the age-long conflict between ecclesiastical and secular power, and marked the complete, if momentary, victory of the pope.”[39]
Ardent struggle has a proclivity toward darker societal times often leading to times of renewal. In his introduction to the Bruni works, Dr. James Hankins described the long struggle between Guelfs and Ghibellines as having “darkened the first centuries of the Tuscan revival.”[40] The dark struggle prepared the corridor for revival unlike any known to mankind for many centuries. The Tuscan revival was the birth of Renaissance. Tuscany was being revived from the death grip of inter-collegial death matches. Inherent in conflict was the struggle for dominance of one party over the opposing party. Bruni’s first reference to either party by name is a mention of the Volterran Ghibelline party. He stated that “it was evident that men of the Ghibelline party had the upper hand at that time on the city.”[41]
The center of Bruni’s work was Florence. The city of Volterra was poised on a sharp cliff that was difficult to storm. The Florentines marched over forty miles from Florence to Volterra scaling the terrain eventually overtaking the enemy.
The Volterran people asked for forgiveness of the Florentines which was granted. It is within this context that Bruni began the detailed narrative of Ghibelline and Guelf strife. Born from the conflict was the opportunity to establish a republican form of government. “Hence no one was injured after Volterra was entered; no one’s goods were taken; only a few leaders of the Ghibelline faction were sent into exile and a republican constitution was set up. Several days were spent making these arrangements.”[42] Of note is the attention in Bruni’s commentary that a republican constitution was set up apparently under the joint guidance of the Volterran and Florentine leaders of a Guelf orientation. Unfortunately, Bruni did not provide detail as to the content of the constitution. Here is a hint to the historical method of writing as engaged by Bruni who wrote of the glory of Florence as a great people working toward liberty. The entire History is a polemic in favor of political power of Florence through military accomplishment. Here, Bruni mentioned a republican constitution as the form of government embraced by the Florentine people.
Those who remain at risk of resistance were removed from the social strata to preserve civic order. The assumed reasoning on selection of which Ghibellines were to be sent into exile was that they were key leaders of faction in the city. An example: "Before the Aretines had left home, they had expelled from the city all the members of the Ghibelline faction in order to prevent a coup in the absence of the army."[43]
A War Engine of Revolution
The unremitting wars were exhausting on the common people. Around this time the Aretine Guelfs who were holding on to their city grew tired of the long and unremitting warfare. The leaders of the party seeing the coming oppression of the commoners made the decision to evacuate the city. When their adversaries, collecting forces from Florence and Siena, were preparing to set upon them with still greater fury, and when it became evident that the commoners and the urban masses were not going to put up with a siege, the leading Guelf partisans adopted a plan to emigrate. Aid from external sources was often the deciding factor in whether a party gained victory over the opposition.[44]
A college was established for the purpose of formally training the leadership for protection of the interests of the people. “Thus for the first time, as some think, there was established a college for the Guelf Party with publicly chosen captains, so that there should be individuals specially entrusted in perpetuity to oversee its interests. But I have discovered that there were leaders of the Party in the city long before that time, and this fact is visible in the public records in many places”[45]
Bruni transitions the reader’s mind to the Lucchese territory whose inhabitants seemed to favor the Ghibellines. After conquering a city the usual next step was to agree upon terms and begin a new form of government. When the besieged began discussing terms, the Florentines embraced the more pliant party and persuaded them to accept terms. Alliances have expected esprit de corp to be maintained at the heart of the loyalty to one another. However, the Florentines were then upbraided by the Luchessi for having lost, through contact with Ghibellines, their old zeal for protecting partisan interests. Thus all hope of reconciliations was lost.”[46]
Horrors of War
The simple threat of retribution was often sufficient to stifle the agenda of the opposition. Guglielmino, the bishop of Arezzo, took possession of the castle of Cecilia (circa 1285). His “threats of rebellion” frightened the Sienese who mobilized their troops along with the Florentines to surround the castle. Threats of conflict frightened the people of Tuscany.
Even those who make threats can be deterred when imposing reinforcement appears in opposition. Due to the “size of the war machine arrayed against him” the bishop chose not to “reinforce his troops” leading to an abandonment of the castle by his troops.[47] The physical size of the “war machine” dictated the cadence of battle.
The paradigm of the era was to continually 'one-up' the opposition with a stronger military presence. The German king and Emperor Rudolf desired by papal authority the coronation as Holy Roman Emperor. Due to this desire Rudolf supported papal policy including support of the parte guelfa. By commission of Emperor Rudolf Princivalle dal Fiesco was sent to Tuscany to “demand the submission of the cities in the emperor’s name.”[48]
Ethnicity and political affiliation was not enough to sway partisan rivalry. Princivalle had been chosen on purpose since he was an Italian and a Guelf sympathizer and as such his ambassadorship would cause less resentment.[49] However, Princivalle was not successful in gaining support in either Florence or Arezzo.
Leaders were chosen from among those of common interests. The Aretines elected a “man of popolano status” whose name was Guelfo in an attempt to recover the Aretine castles from the nobility. He captured and destroyed numerous castles particularly those of the Pazzi and Uberti families. Finally, he besieged Civitella, where dwelt Bishop Guglielmino, a Ghibelline and a man hostile to the Aretine people.[50]
Fear and hatred foment the execution of military agenda. Hostilities toward constituents of opposing factions was deadly in practical execution toward political and personal power. The Aretine nobility became fearful that the town might be captured by the people under the leadership of Guelfo. Fear combined with hatred motivated the Ghibelline faction to capture Guelfo plucking “out his eyes, leaving behind a revolting spectacle for their fellow citizens.”[51]
Torture was a tool of diplomacy and execution of political agenda. Thus mistrust arose, and Bishop Guglielmino, together with the Ubertini and the Pazzi (to whose families he himself belonged) and the other Aretine clans of Ghibelline sympathies, preemptively seized arms and with great vigor expelled the rest of the nobility from the city.[52] Social unrest coupled with political instability provides the opportunity for a grab for power. Bishop Guglielmino “made himself tyrant” through his “great vigor” in expelling two factions from Arezzo: a plebian group in alliance with the Prior of the Guilds and “a noble faction.”[53] Common foes aligned to become uncommon allies in the midst of tyranny. These two unlikely groups formed an alliance to combat the tyranny of Bishop Guglielmino.[54]
Gaining alliance with a stronger partner shifts the outcome of the conflict. Realizing their militia was not strong enough to effectively conquer the Guglielmino constituency “they sent a legation to the Florentines led by a certain Domiziano, from an old family, to beg for aid.”[[55]] Civil disorder prepared the foundation for new order.
To strengthen their request the Aretine exiles prepared a speech reminding the Florentines of “the antiquity of their friendship and their common political sympathies.”[56] There has been no longer lasting alliance than this very party and the Florentines; that the Florentines had long ago entered into an “alliance with this party after the death of Frederick;”[57] twice this party had gone to battle with the Florentines against the Sienese having lost their own troops that “had been slaughtered, more than any other allied city; and, because of the Aretines “King Charles was sent by heaven to aid their party” lending support to oppose Conradin.[58] Now these same men had been expelled from Arezzo by the violence of a Ghibelline faction consisting less of citizens than of foreigners; Guglielmino had acquired all his power from clients and nearby tyrants of the Ghibelline faction; he had expelled the Guelfs, partly by force and partly by betrayal, when they had been struggling against domestic rebellions of the common people and the nobility.[59] Their final plea being that “the Pazzi and Ubertini and men of that sort” were “enemies of tranquility and liberty.”[60] The Florentines decided to aid the Aretine exiles and renewed their league for this reason. The league began daily attacking the walls of Arezzo leading those who controlled the city to seek aid from the Ghibellines.[61]
Guerilla Warfare among the Commoners and Nobility
The convergence of many smaller battles has the potential for a fully engaged war. Bruni chronicled many skirmishes that erupted into full war in Tuscany. The political strata being unstable created a proclivity to constant ploys for power. Ongoing conflict at the most fundamental level created civil disorder amid attempts for survival. These wars broke out as a means of survival that demanded nothing less than political agendas imposed by war.
Diplomacy was unsustainable at this stage in the civil development of Tuscany. Unsuccessful attempts were made to create a stable environment but could not be sustained with the like of Bishop Guglielmino plucking out the eyes of opponents, the murder of the populace, and razing of property. Diplomatic efforts simply could not halt these acts of violence.
Violent action required in kind resistance. The act of revolution was an act of ideological pursuit in the form of physical determination. The result for the pacifists or one given to rhetorical pleadings was either exile or death. Amid the struggle for life the ideas of civic humanism were being tested as by fire. The era was marked with guerilla warfare tactics. The Ghibelline auxiliaries who had assembled there were making Florentine and Sienese territory unsafe with their sudden incursions.[62] The picture throughout Bruni’s History is that of bandits or guerillas prowling the countryside inflicting terror on those with whom they encounter.
A break in strategic execution appeared in the most unlikely places and unexpected windows of opportunity. “It seemed as though they were going to be nesting there [near the Arno river] indefinitely when a certain Lupus, a Florentine exile [likely for his Ghibelline affiliation] in command of the garrison, grew terrified at the size of the Guelf war machine and made an agreement permitting him to leave unharmed with his troops.”[63] The cycle is repeatedly told by Bruni. A singular leader begins to make trouble in a city. He attacks another leader gaining leverage over constituencies. As the skirmish grows the stakes increase. Eventually leading to death or deportation by exile of the opposing faction whether Guelf or Ghibelline. The exiles approach a neighboring city gaining support that eventually erupts in full on war. In this instance, Lupus became afraid of the Guelf war machine leading to his handing over the town to the Guelf leadership. A pivotal event triggered by fear on one part and military presence on the other.
Cycle of Unrest
Social elevation, civil position, and family party alignment do not guarantee an impenetrable alliance. Another factional strife that prompted the cycle of civil disorder with Pisa appeared in the form of Count Ugolino. Count Ugolino (whom we have mentioned above) expelled from Pisa Judge Ugolino of Gallura, a man who was of his own party and a blood-relation.
Betrayal by one individual of another, a faction or city was the method of breaching the strength of the opponent. Count Ugolino was ill advised to seek the favor of the Ghibellines again, since shortly thereafter they captured him and threw him into prison.[64] “When he saw that he had won his fellow-citizens over to his way of thinking, Ugolino toppled the leaders of the Ghibelline party and now began governing the city in his own name.”[65] Here familial relationship did not stop the conflict. The Ugolino family—both the Count and the Judge—were of the same parte guelfa and of blood relation. Yet the Count became turncoat to the Guelfs and his family in order to seek favor of the Ghibellines. Bruni does not describe what favor Count Ugolino expected but it was misguided as his attempt for favor led to his imprisonment.
Less than 80 miles from Arezzo is the city of Pisa. Florence lies almost midway between Pisa and Arezzo. Pisa is a coastal city while Arezzo is in the interior of Tuscany. In this same period the Pisans, under the influence of partisan passion, summoned, after a campaign of letter-writing, Guido of Montefeltro, who had been exiled to Lombardy by papal command, and made him their captain.[66]
Partisan passion had the power to ignite emotion as a driving revolutionary force, even though the motive may not align with those who eventually hold the seat of power. Partisan passion fueled the disorder found during the duecento period of the Italian Renaissance. In this portion of the History Bruni described a scenario that displays much to the reader of the various layers of geo-political interplay to be found in the duecento. The Pisans secured Guido’s military services to resist the Lucchesi who provided Judge Ugolino with refuge after his exile.[67] Also, to resist the “rest of the Guelfs, Judge Ugolino of Gallura and the other recently-expelled exiles, who were harassing them in the war.[68] The Aretine Ghibellines provoked Judge Ugolino and the Guelfs early in the conflict. Now that opposing forces became intense against them they secured the services of Guido because the Guelfs were harassing them in war.
Men of letters were to be found in many circles including those who seek aid from stronger military sources. The Pisans embarked upon a letter-writing campaign to secure the military expertise of one Guido of Montefeltro (1223-98). The campaign being successful the Pisans secured the services of Guido to serve as their captain in battle against the Guelf armies. There was an interesting discussion surrounding the motivation of all the involved parties as history migrates toward all-out war between various factions. The Pisans were fueled by passion to implore Guido serve as their military captain.
A wounded, but wise fox, a fearful pontiff, and many miles of exile will not protect the innocent. Guido was excommunicated and exiled to Lombardy nearly two hundred miles from Pisa by Pope Honorius. Being considered the “most cunning military strategist in Italy” he earned the name “the fox” he was one of the most feared leaders of the Ghibelline cause.[69]
The choice of leader was crucial to the successful implementation of the campaign. Three years later Guido of Montefeltro led the Pisans into battle against Pontedera. Guido had learned of a weakness in the fortification of the Pontedera thus quietly preparing a stratagem and engaging a sneak attack in the night. He successfully overtook the city.
Submission of the opponent did not guarantee the end of the conflict. Forty-six miles away the Florentine People were greatly incensed due to the strategic loss of the city and the embarrassment to their nationalistic pride since “the Florentines had occupied this town and provided it with exceptionally good defenses, building an impregnable citadel over it with towers and moats.” [70] Now that the “vendetta had become their own, the Florentines themselves of their own accord entered Pisan territory” laying waste to fields and castles with “great ferocity.”[71]
Natural forces altered the course of destiny. Winter allowed the Florentines time to gather military strength and leadership. Due to inclement weather the Florentines marched back to Florence waiting “the harvest-time, and then return to fight the enemy.”[72] The season of inclement weather allowed time to properly prepare their instruments of battle and to add another layer of strength to the Florentine Guelf military position.
There was great value in the rhythm of battle which included the pause to prepare for complete destruction of the enemy. Meanwhile, the Florentines assembled an impressive supply of military equipment and chose as their commander Gentile Orsini, a distinguished warrior and Guelf partisan. He arrived in Florence with a band of Roman and Campanian knights, and led all the Florentine forces against the Pisans.[73] Gentile Orsini being a renowned warrior and strong support of parte guelfa traveled to Florence with a band of highly trained knights from Rome and Campania. The Campanian Knights were loyal to the Roman cause.[74] This rigor being marshalled for Florence with the support of the Rome as opposed to Guido who was known for stratagems and crafty as a fox who led a group of militia like guerilla fighters to serve the cause for which he was the raconteur.
Full preparation founded in a deep passion to engage was a terrible force to be reckoned with on the day of battle. The Florentines and allies were keen for a fight. Bruni states, “The Florentines had never been so keen to fight. Indeed, they were so passionate about the shameful loss of their fortified position that they eagerly challenged the enemy” to engage in a “decisive battle.”[75]
Never underestimate the value of age, which may equate to sage wisdom and experience. Guido of Montefeltro who was “inside the city” of Pontedera at the time of the attack of the Florentines had earned the reputation of being “a deep and crafty fellow when it came to stratagems” but was known to be “reserved in the face of open battle.”[76] Bruni does not provide detail of the historical implication of Guido of Montefeltro to the reader of his History. This was likely due to the fact that Guido was a Ghibelline while Bruni’s allegiance was to the parte guelfa.
Guido being one of the most renowned military strategists of the era he continued to bear the name “the fox.” Further, being a man of sixty-eight years of age he was no novice to war. He was a man of deep seasoning in the art of war strategy. Bruni’s comments tend to suggest that the reason Guido "was reserved in the face of open battle" was a tendency toward cowardice. [77] Guido was quite the opposite. Guido “refused to make a sally of any sort.” The Pisans held back from battle. Eventually the Florentines “marched back to Florence without engaging the Pisans in battle.”[78] Guido was a man of deep clarity and strategy in how to engage battle. Bruni’s interpretation of Guido of Montefeltro was that of a man of counsel but not of open action.
Reputation was a powerful tool to employ in serious strategic conflict. Baika, in “Tongues of Fire and Fraud in Bolgia Eight,” wrote of Dante’s Inferno twenty-six that Guido of Montefeltro was punished in the eighth bolgia (or pouch) for the sin of consiglio frodolente, or fraudulent counsel.[79] The eighth ditch is one of the vilest places in hell. The eighth bolgia is likely reservoir for Guido in the eyes of Dante. The historical record of Guido as coward by Bruni. A likely conclusion by Dante and Bruni, both of the Guelf party.
As the cause ages so does the support among the people. As momentum increased the size of the following increased as well. In addition there were the citizens of the Guelf party who had been expelled from Arezzo and had occupied a string of castles around the city; they, too, had joined the alliance. The entire confederation was in a fever of preparation for war. On the other side were the Aretines of the Ghibelline faction inside the city, whose lord, for all practical purposes, was Bishop Guglielmino.[80]
The consequence of war was no small matter. Bishop Guglielmino led many “distinguished Ghibellines who were considered the most experienced warriors of the day.”[81] They struck the center of gravity for the enemy with “great violence from behind and forced them to pay attention to their rear; and those elements of the allied forces who had been bitterly resisting the Ghibellines, once the pressure was lifted, were able to fall upon them.”[82] On that day “more than three thousand Aretines fell in battle” including Bishop Guglielmino and other leaders of the Ghibelline party.[83]
Propaganda was a tool of war to ensure the glory of the victor was not tarnished. Bruni has the habit of embellishing the history of Florence to ensure the glory of Florence or the party did not suffer in stature.
“In public records the victory was described as the defeat of the Ghibellines at Campaldino. It was so described because Aretine exiles were present at the battle as allies and confederates. That was why it seemed more honorable to say, ‘the Ghibellines were defeated’ and not ‘the Aretines’; it avoided stigmatizing those Aretines who had been loyally attached to the Guelf cause in friendship and alliance”[84]
Conclusion
The Tuscan Revival was borne of the desire of the Florentine people to strengthen the glory of Florence through the sustainability of the public affair. In Bruni’s History we see a crucial role of the pontiffs and emperors in the ongoing saga for a period of over a 1,400 years. At the foundation of all change was the motivation of the people to forge forward in their own cause. Because of these activities new governments were formed some of which dissolved as quickly as formed yet others became the foundation for long term viability such as the Republic of Florence after many years of alliances, skirmishes, wars, and unrest. These advances ushered the transition from a Medieval to a Renaissance humanist civic order.
Endnotes
[1] Leonardo Bruni, History of the Florentine People (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001).
[2] Hans Baron, The Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966), 46. Baron wrote of the year 1402: “At that time the role of city-state independence and liberty, in the past as well as the present, emerged in a new light.” Hans Yoran, “Florentine Civic Humanism and the Emergence of Modern Ideology,” History and Theory 46, no. 3 (2007): 326-44. Yoran wrote, “According to Baron, Petrarchean humanism of the fourteenth century was a nostalgic classicist literary movement steeped in medieval notions, most notably adherence to the ideal of the vita contemplativa.” See, for example, Jr. Albert Rabil, ed., Renaissance Humanism: Foundations, Forms, and Legacy, vol. II, Humanism Beyond Italy (Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988), 152-154.
[3] Paul Oskar Kristeller, Renaissance Thought: the Classic, Scholastic, and Humanist Strains (Harper & Row, 1961), 4. “The Renaissance is a very complex period and it encompassed, just as do the Middle Ages or any other period, a good many chronological, regional, and social differences.”
[4] Gary Ianziti, “Leonardo Bruni, the Medici, and the Florentine Histories,” Journal of the History of Ideas 69, no. 1 (2008): 3.
[5] Trecento is a reference to the 14th century or the 1300s. Quattrocento is a reference to the 15th century or the 1400s.
[6] Erik Schoonhoven “A Literary Invention: The Etruscan Myth in Early Renaissance Florence,” Renaissance Studies 24, no. 4 (2010): 459-71. “And in spite of the lengthy and well-known records describing the Etruscan wars with Rome that were penned by Livy, Virgil and Pliny the Elder, it was not until the efforts of Leonardo Bruni that the Etruscan past began to participate in political and cultural ideologies. This usage would reach a high point with the Medici dukes and grand dukes, who combined biblical and classical history into an effective and propagandistic display of Tuscan superiority.”
[7] Carol Quillen, “The Uses of the Past in Quattrocento Florence: A Reading of Leonardo Bruni's Dialogues,” Journal of the History of Ideas 71, no. 3 (2010): 363-85. “This essay first briefly describes the scholarly debates that have surrounded Bruni's Dialogues, particularly as these illustrate competing definitions of Florentine humanism.”
[8] N.P.J. Gordon, “Plotting Conflict in Florence 1300,” Renaissance Studies 24, no. 5 (2010): 621-37. Gordon comments that Compagni “drew and extended on a historical tradition in which events illuminated underlying patterns so that the narrative revealed the civic and moral significance of the past.”
[9] Dino Compagni, Chronicle of Florence (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1986), 5-6. Compagni wrote of glorious Florence noting that “for these reasons many people from distant lands come to see Florence- not because they have to, but because of it’s crafts and guilds, and the beauty and decoration of the city.” See also, Philip Henry Wicksteed, Rose E. Selfe, and Giovanni Villani, Villani's Chronicle: Being Selections from the First Nine Books of the Croniche Fiorentine (Ulan Press, 2012. Villani is said to have died of the Black Death.
[10] Jacob Burckhardt, The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1958), 353.
[11] Wallace Ferguson, The Renaissance (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1953), 2. “The Renaissance was an age of transition.” See also, Paul Oskar Kristeller, Renaissance Thought II: Papers On Humanism and the Arts (Harper & Row, 1965).
[12] Ianziti, Leonardo Bruni, Bruni is criticized as having simply rewritten the histories of Campagni and Villani embellishing sections to suit his own agendas. Here Ianziti comments, “Bruni’s rewriting of the Scarperia material is by no means an isolated incident. Another example of his pro-Medici sympathies occurs in book eight of the History. Here we find Bruni once again in damage repair mode.
[13] Oscar Browning, Guelphs and Ghibellines: A Short History of Mediaeval Italy from 1250-1409 (London: Methuen & Co., 1894).
[14] Henry Sedgwick, Italy in the Thirteenth Century (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1912), 426-40. Sedgwick’s volume is an example of well-written historical narrative but not regarded a standard resource.
[15] See Bruni, History of the Florentine People, 349. “For history has two parts or limbs, as it were- foreign and domestic affairs- and it should be understood that domestic conditions are as important to comprehend as foreign wars. Well, then, in Florence there seems to have been an ancient even primeval struggle between the nobility and the common people.”
[16] Duecento is a reference to the 13th century or the 1200s. Trecento and quattrocento are defined above in footnote 3.
[17] John M. Najemy, “Guild Republicanism in Trecento Florence: The Successes and Ultimate Failure of Corporate Politics,” American Historical Review 84, no. 1 (1979): 53.
[18] Bruni, History, 101.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Wicksteed, Chronicle, xl.
[21] Bruni, History, 101.
[22] Matthew Innes, “The Classical Tradition in the Carolingian Renaissance: Ninth-Century Encounters with Suetonius,” International Journal of the Classical Tradition 3, no. 3 (1997): 265. “The Carolingian renaissance clearly did create "that informed readership to which Einhard could address a new kind of book, in the confidence that his recapitulation of Latin style and scholarship would be recognised and appreciated.”
[23] Ibid.
[24] Robert Folz, review of The Coronation of Charlemagne, 25 December 800, by Peter Munz, American Historical Review 81, no. 4 (1976): 836.
[25] Hywel Williams, “Charlemagne the Pragmatist,” History Today, 2010, 72.
[26] Bruni, History, 101.
[27] Ibid.
[28] John C. Moore, Pope Innocent III (1160/61-1216): To Root up and to Plant (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009). Pope Innocent III used papal power to expel heresy, to gain imperial domination of the christendom at the expense of spiritual renewal, and leveraged the papacy as a supreme court with limited jurisdictional authority.
[29] Richard Cassaday, The Emperor and the Saint: Frederick II of Hohenstaufen, Francis of Assisi, and Journeys to Medieval Places (Northern Illinois University Press, 2011). Paul Ruggiers, Florence in the Age of Dante (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1964), 3. For example, see George W. Dameron, Florence and Its Church in the Age of Dante (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005).
[30] Wicksteed, Chronicle, xxxviii.
[31] Ibid., xl.
[32] Ruggiers, Florence in the Age of Dante, 3.
[33] Dante Alighieri, Paradiso, trans. Mark Musa (New York: 1986), 140-47.
[34] N.P.J. Gordon, “The Murder of Buondelmonte: Contesting Place in Early Fourteenth-Century Florentine Chronicles,” Renaissance Studies 20, no. 4 (September 2006): 459-77.
[35] Bruni, History, 393.
[36] Wicksteed, Chronicle, xliii.
[37] Patrick De Winter, The Sacral Treasure of the Guelphs (Indiana University Press, 1985), 7.
[38] Beth L. Holman, “Exemplum and Imitatio: Countess Matilda and Lucrezia Pico Della Mirandola at Polirone,” Art Bulletin 81, no. 4 (1999): 637. “Matilda of Canossa (1046-1115), the ruler of vast territories in central and northeastern Italy, is best known for her donation of lands known as the Patrimony of St. Peter's and for her defense of the papacy. Immediately upon her accession as countess of Tuscany in 1076 and throughout her reign, she was embroiled in the Investiture Strife between pope and emperor. In one of its climactic moments, Emperor Henry IV was humbled at Matilda's family stronghold of Canossa. The emperor stood penitent and barefoot in the snow outside her castle for three days in 1077, until Pope Gregory VII (r. 1073-85) agreed to a reconciliation. This dramatic episode remains a touchstone in Italian medieval history and an enduring image of victory for the Church and its "soldiers of Christ."
[39] De Winter, Sacral Treasure, 52.
[40] Bruni, History, xv.
[41] Ibid., 119.
[42] Ibid., 123.
[43] Ibid., 161.
[44] Ibid.
[45] Ibid.
[46] Ibid., 293.
[47] Ibid., 311.
[48] Ibid.
[49] Ibid., 313.
[50] Ibid.
[51] Ibid., 315.
[52] Ibid.
[53] Ibid.
[54] Werner Gundersheimer, “Hans Baron's Renaissance Humanism: A Comment,” American Historical Review 101, no. 1 (1996): 142-44. “This point of view helps to explain Baron’s lifelong insistence that the only alternative to republican civic virtue is what- closely following Bruni- he recurrently calls ‘tyranny,’ a term that loses any precise significance and becomes an all-purpose pejorative synonym for monarchical regimes of various types.” Ronald Witt, “The Crisis After Forty Years,” American Historical Review 101, no. 1 (1996): 110-18. Witt comments that Bruni “revived the ancient Roman republican concept that any form of government short of popular rule was tyrannical.”
[55] Ibid.
[56] Ibid.
[57] Ibid., 317.
[58] Ibid.
[59] Ibid.
[60] Ibid.
[61] Ibid.
[62] Ibid.
[63] Ibid., 321.
[64] Ibid., 323.
[65] Ibid., 307.
[66] Ibid., 327.
[67] Ibid., 325.
[68] Ibid., 327.
[69] Jay Rudd, Critical Companion to Dante: a Literary Reference to His Life and Work (New York: Facts on File (2008), 461.
[70] Bruni., History, 355.
[71] Ibid., 357.
[72] Ibid.
[73] Ibid.
[74] Travers Twiss, An Epitome of Niebuhr's History of Rome, with Chronological Tables and an Appendix(Camp Press, 2011), 70.
[75] Bruni, History, 357.
[76] Ibid.
[77] Ibid.
[78] Ibid.
[79] Gabriella Baika. “Tongues of Fire and Fraud in Bolgia Eight. Tongues of Fire and Fraud in Bolgia,” Quaderni D'italianistica 32, no. 2 (2011): 5-26.
[80] Robert Black, review of Studies in Renaissance Humanism and Politics: Florence and Arezzo., Renaissance Quarterly 65, no. 4 (2012): 1179-80.
[81] Bruni, History, 335.
[82] Ibid., 339.
[83] Ibid., 341.
[84] Ibid.