¹ Voigt, G., Enea Silvio de Piccolomini als Papst Pius der Zweite und sein Zetalter, 3 vols (Berlin 1856–1863).Google Scholar

² For an account of Burckhardt's influence in Germany see Ferguson, W. K., The Renaissance in Historical Thought (Cambridge, Mass. 1948) 178–252.Google Scholar

³ Joachimsen, P., ‘Der Humanismus und die Entwicklung des deutschen Geistes,’ Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift für Literaturwissenschaft 8 (1930) 435.Google Scholar

⁴ An attempt to modify the severity of Voigt's verdict was first made by Pastor, L. in his Geschichte der Päpste. His efforts were soon supplemented by the broadly conceived biographical studies of Boulting, W., Aeneas Silvius Orator, Man of Letters, Statesman, and Pope (London 1908); Ady, C. M., Pius II the Humanist Pope (London 1913); Paparelli, G., Enea Silvio Piccolomini-Pio II (Bari 1950); Michell, R. J., The Laurels and the Tiara Pope Pius II 1458–1464 (London 1962). None of these major studies offered a carefully structured refutation of Voigt's conclusions. Most of the twentieth-century interest in Aeneas Sylvius has been of a fragmentary character, frequently limited to a portrayal of his times, activities, projects and ideology. Only recently has the able scholarship of Berthe Widmer succeeded in providing a critical analysis of the Voigt thesis as well as an alternative interpretation of this fifteenth-century pope. Enea Silvio Piccolomini in der sittlichen und politischen Entscheidung (Basler Beiträge zur Geschichtswissenschaft 88, Basel 1963).Google Scholar

⁵ Wolkan, R., Der Briefwechsel des Eneas Silvius Piccolomini (Fontes Rerum Austriacarum: Diplomataria et Acta 61; Vienna 1909) I.1. ep. 25.Google Scholar

⁶ Cherubini, L., Magnum Bullarium Romanum (Luxemburg 1727) 378.Google Scholar

⁷ His own account of the matter would almost suggest this. ‘Cum Felicem omnes reliquerent, nec ejus papatum amplecti vellent, ego ad Fredericum Caesarem me recipi, nec enim volui statim de parte ad partem transire.’ Mansi, J. P., Pit II.P. M. olim Aeneae Sylvii Piccolominei Senensis Orationes Politicae et Ecclesiasticae (Lucca 1759) III 149.Google Scholar

⁸ The Voigt tradition of a self-seeking ambitious Piccolomini rightly minimizes the religious overtones of this ‘conversion.’ The problem is possibly not one of inner religious sincerity, but of his interest in public order. Though a small part of his correspondence between 1442 and 1445 reflected rather austere views on judgment and death, the problems of temporal existence remained the focal point of his endeavors. As early as 1443 his Pentalogus sought to promote political stability in Europe.Google Scholar

⁹ Creighton, M., ‘Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini, Pope Pius II,’ Historical Essays and Reviews by Mandell Creighton, ed. Creighton, Louise (New York 1902) 64.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Sigmund, P. E., Nicholas of Cusa and Medieval Political Thought (Cambridge, Mass. 1963) 137–187; Posch, A., ‘Die Concordantia catholica des Nicolaus von Cusa’ (Görres-Gesell-chaft zur Pflege der Wissenschaften im katholischen Deutschland 54 [1930]) 55ff.Google Scholar

¹¹ Kallen, G., ‘Die handschriftliche Überlieferung der Concordantia catholica des Nikolaus von Kues’ (Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften 2 [1963]); also by the same author, ‘Der Reichsgedanke in der Reformschrift De concordantia catholica des Nikolaus von Cues,’ Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher (1940) 66.Google Scholar

¹² Hay, D. and Smith, W. K. (eds.), Aeneas Sylvius Piccolominus de gestis coneilii basiliensis commentariorum libri II (Oxford 1967) 35, 51, 65, 77, 85.Google Scholar

¹³ Wolkan, , op. cit. I.1. ep. 140, 319.Google Scholar

¹⁴ de Roselli, Antonio, ‘Monarchia,’ in Goldast, M., Monorchia sancti romani imperii (Hanover 1611) I 252–556.Google Scholar

¹⁵ ‘Pentalogus de rebus ecclesiae et imperii,’ in Pez, B., Thesaurus anecdotorum novissimus (Augsburg 1728) III 637–744.Google Scholar

¹⁶ The text, with a German translation, is available in Kallen, G., Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini als Publizist in der Epistola de ortu et auctoritate imperii romani (Veröffentlichungen des Petrarca-Hauses. Deutsch-Italienisches Kulturinstitut [Cologne 1939]) 52–96. The text of De ortu is also published in Schard, S., De jurisdictione autoritate et praeeminentia imperiali (Basel 1566) 313–328; Alciati, A., De formula romani imperii (Basel 1559) 261–297.Google Scholar

¹⁷ There is little originality of thought in either the Pentalogus or the De ortu. To argue that the imperial supremacy espoused by the first secretary ‘in der ganzen mittelalterlichen Publizistik keinen Analogen findet’ reveals a lack of appreciation for the multiplicity of political literature in the fifteenth century. Muesel, A., Enea Silvio als Publizist (Breslau 1905) 80. Clarity must not be confused with originality. The portrait of monarchical absolutism presented by Piccolomini had been rather elaborately sketched prior to 1443 or 1446, though a wide range of opinion on the question of Aeneas' sources prevails. H.G. Gengler credited him with originality. Über Aeneas Silvius in Seiner Bedeutung für die deutsche Rechtsgeschichte (Erlangen 1860) 16. F. Battaglia stressed his dependence on Roman law, Enea Silvio Piccolomini e Francesco Patrizi due Politici Senesi del Quattrocento (Siena 1936). Eckermann, K. observed his dependence on Roselli, Studien zur Geschichte des monarchischen Gedankens im 15. Jahrhundert (Berlin-Grunewald 1933) 107–108. G. Kallen admitted the use of secondary sources but felt that primary sources were chiefly used. The best explanation may lie in the fact that in the matter of source dependency Aeneas was eclectic, in his selection of sources utilitarian. Google Scholar

¹⁸ Pez, , op. cit. 671ff.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ibid. 639. At Basel Piccolomini had expressed his enthusiasm over Sigismund's proposed Italian expedition. Wolkan, , op. cit I.1. ep. 25. This Italian orientation was again evidenced in a letter directed to Albert II prior to his coronation: cf. Beckman, G. (ed.), Deutsche Reichstagsakten unter König Albrecht II., 1438 Deutsche Reichstagsakten 13 (Göttingen 1957) n^o 42.Google Scholar

²⁰ The imperium, which included Italian dominion, was not only the right of the German Nation, but the latter was honor-bound to uphold the same, ‘… ut honori germanico consulerem, ne me recusante nationem Germanicam exiret imperium.’ Pez, op. cit. 719. Imperial assertion in Italy would augment the power of the Emperor to a level where no one would dare resist his authority: ‘Nemo tam audax erit, qui resistere illi audeat…’ Ibid. 734. The final glorious reward for the successful execution of the Piccolominian scheme would be the permanent amalgamation of the imperial crown with the House of Habsburg. ‘Hoc maximum decus est domus tuae Austrialis, ut imperium orbis sibi valeat vendicare et apud se stabilire.’ Ibid. 737.Google Scholar

²¹ Voigt, , op. cit. I 297.Google Scholar

²² Rowe, J. G. ‘The Tragedy of Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini (Pope Pius II): An Interpretation,’ Church History 30 (1961) 301.Google Scholar

²³ Wolkan, , op. cit. I.1, ep. 55.Google Scholar

²⁴ The tract was possibly composed during February or March, 1443. Hallauer, H. J., Der Pentalogas des Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini (Dissertation, Cologne 1951) 13.Google Scholar

²⁵ Wolkan, , op. cit. I.1. ep. 119.Google Scholar

²⁶ Ibid.: ‘ajunt… ajo, negant nego. ipsi si fuerint sapientes laudem ferent, si stulti eorum quoque dedecus erit, nulli invideo gloriam et nullius dolere infamia volo.’ Google Scholar

²⁷ See Wolkan, , op. cit. I.2, n^o 13; I.1, n^o 47; Chmel, J., Geschichte Kaiser Friedrichs IV. und seines Sohnes Maximilian I. (Hamburg 1843) 11 (Beilage XII) 768.Google Scholar

²⁸ In writing to Caspar Schlick on December 28, 1443 Aeneas commented on the universal desire for peace. Wolkan, , op. cit. I.1. n^o 108, p. 255.Google Scholar

²⁹ See his letter to Hartung von Kappel, April, 1443, ibid. n^o 47, as well as his correspondence with Carvajal, Juan, ibid. n^o 92.Google Scholar

³⁰ To Carvajal Aeneas wrote on May 20, 1444: ‘theologorum est hec disputatio, mihi satis sentire fuerit, quod plures senserint.’ Ibid. n^o 139.Google Scholar

³¹ ‘postquam enim alterius partis majus est beneficium, non est illinc recedendum nec mini videtur fieri aliquid in Basilea posse, quod alteri parti jus aufferat, quia non quod majores, sed quod multitudo vult, illic obtinetur.’ Ibid. n^o 103.Google Scholar

³² ‘…. ille mihi Anchises erit, quem universalis ecclesie consensus dederit…’ Cf. ibid. n^o 92.Google Scholar

³³ ‘… communi sententie auscultare …’ cf. ibid. Google Scholar

³⁴ Pez, , op. cit. 724.Google Scholar

³⁵ ‘non vocetur concilium, vocetur conventus, vocetur conciliabulum, congregatio, sinagoga, nichil interest, dum scisma depellat.’ Wolkan, , op. cit. I.1. n^o 108.Google Scholar

³⁶ Pez, , op, cit. 716.Google Scholar

³⁷ F. Battaglia credited Aeneas with originating a modern concept of sovereignty (op. cit. 45–47). This position is in part shared by Rehm, H., Geschichte der Staatrechtswissenschaft (Freiburg 1896) 196. From the standpoint of theoretical content the De ortu compares favorably with the new sovereignty concepts emerging in the later Middle Ages. See Gierke, O., Das Deutsche Genossenschaftsrecht (Graz 1954) III 627–640. Its modern character might well be upheld from the standpoint of pure content analysis, but not from the standpoint of the author's intent, or the particular circumstances governing the composition of the tract.Google Scholar

³⁸ Thus the usual theological suppositions regarding the sources of imperial might were superficially treated. Reference to jurisprudence became devoid of scholastic tendencies. Citations from famous authorities proved non-existent. Illustrations centered only on the absolute competence and power of the emperor; even papal supremacy was conveniently ignored. The oath of obedience which Albert I swore to Boniface VIII in 1303, found no mention. Similarly, the dignity of the imperium did not come by the hand of the pope as in the days of Innocent III, but by the consent of the Roman people.Google Scholar

³⁹ Kallen, , op. cit. 58; 60.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ ‘ex jure naturae fundatum constet imperium.’ Ibid. 72.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ibid. 70.Google Scholar

⁴² Battaglia, , op. cit 39.Google Scholar

⁴³ Kallen, , op. cit 92.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ See ibid. 90–92.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Ibid. 62.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Ibid. 68.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Wolkan, R., Der Briefwechsel des Eneas Silvius Piccolomini (Fontes Rerum Austriacarum: Diplomataria et Acta 67; Vienna 1912) II. ep. 19.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Ibid, 19, 62–63.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Ibid. 63.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Cf. for example the analysis of Weiss, A., Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini als Papst Pius II. Sein Leben und Einfluss auf die Literarische Cultur Deutschlands (Graz 1897) 32, note 1.Google Scholar

⁵¹ To maintain that his crusading zeal was conditioned by an equally constituted duality consisting of humanist and medieval elements involves a neglect of his ‘conversion.’ Morrall, J. B., ‘Pius II: Humanist and Crusader,’ History Today (January, 1958) 33. Aeneas' duality was one of degree rather than equality. It was a question of dominant and latent traits. Prior to his transformation humanism overshadowed his inherent medieval residue. By 1446 these roles were permanently reversed. Henceforth, humanism functioned to endow a medieval political orientation with a remarkable vitality.Google Scholar

⁵² Picotti, G. B. suggests that Aeneas used the crusade as a pretext to win Hungary for Frederick III. La dieta di Mantova e la politica de'Veneziani (Venice 1912) 5, note 3.Google Scholar

⁵³ Aeneas to Nicholas V. (November 25, 1448), in Jorga, N., Notes et extraits pour servir à l'histoire des croisades au XV ^e siècle (series 4; (Bucharest 1915) 42. Cf. also Pfeffermann, H., Die Zusammenarbeit der Renaissancepäpste mit den Türken (Winterthur 1946) 66.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Piccolomini, A. S., Opera quae extant omnia (Basel 1571) ep.399; Mansi, , op. cit. I 173ff; Kollar, , op. cit. II 307–318.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Opera, ep. 162 (July 12, 1453). Since the fall of Constantinople had not fully been confirmed by this date, a second letter was addressed to Rome on August 10, 1453. Ibid. ep. 163.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ On Sept. 25, 1453, Aeneas wrote to Leonardo Benvuglienti: ‘At Cesar ipse ut tibi fateor quod in re est, etsi Christiane religionis cladem invitus audit, non is est, qui tam potenti resistere possit, neque christianitas ea est que unius capitis subire judicium velit.’ Weiss, , op. cit. n^o 66; 181.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ von Heinemann, Dr., Aeneas Sylvius als Prediger eines allgemeinen Kreuzzuges gegen die Türken (Bernburg 1855) 12.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Mansi, , op. cit. Appendix 54–65.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Frederick simply did not wish to face the electors, lest under cover of reform in the empire, they should diminish imperial power to an even greater extent. ‘It is difficult,’ he apparently informed his counsellors, ‘to take care of the common good at one's own expense. I see no person who is more eager for the good of others than for his own benefit.’ Mansi, , op. cit. Appendix 9. Aeneas' outlook after the Regensburg meeting presented a stark contrast to his theoretical formulations in 1443 and 1446. ‘Neque summo sacerdoti, neque imperatori quae sua sunt dantur. Nulla reverentia, nulla obedientia est. Tanquam ficta nomina, picta capita sint, ita papam imperatoremque respicimus.’ Opera, ep. 127.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Mansi, , op. cit. I.263–285; Müller, J. J., Reichtagstheatrum (Jena 1713) 474–484.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Piccolomini's implication that this state of affairs existed in the assembly until modified by his personal eloquence hardly appears credible when viewed from the perspective of the fifteenth-century diets. Gragg, F. A., ‘The Commentaries of Pius II,’ Smith College Studies in History 22 (October, 1936-January, 1937) 72.Google Scholar

⁶² Mansi, , op. cit. I.316–329. At Neustadt as on other occasions, imperial traditionalism was strangely contrasted with political realism. Piccolomini's classical comment on the the-atrical nature of the German diets agreed chronologically with the Neustadt deliberations. ‘Theatrum hoc loco futurum est, ludos Circenses habebimus. Ajunt nostri aediles, spectacula magnificentissima se edituros, qualia neque Gn. Pompei neque J. Caesaris neque posteriorum Caesarum fuisse traduntur.’ Opera, ep. 405; 948.Google Scholar

⁶³ March 8, 1457, ‘Nam profecto nihil est, quod nomini tuo auctoritatique augustali magis conveniat, quam pro defensione fidei catholicae et Christiana salute arma et scutum sumere. Cum omnes in tuam Majestatem oculos ita intentos habeant, ut ea proficiscente profecturi, ea quiescente quieturi videantur.’ Ibid. ep. 238; 780.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Ibid. ep. 242; 260, 261; 262.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Assemblies convened by the Rhenish electors in 1456 at both Frankfurt and Nuremberg presumptuously attempted to make Frederick answerable for disorders within the empire.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ A sum promised Frederick by Pope Nicholas V had never been paid. Düx, J. M., Der deutsche Cardinal Nicolaus von Cusa und die Kirche seiner Zeit I, 4 (Regensburg 1847). Aeneas assumed Calixtus would gladly pay this sum in return for imperial homage.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Piccolomini, A. S., ‘Historia rerum Friderici III. Imperatoris’ (ed. Kollar, A. F. in Analecta Monumentorum Omnis Aevi Vindobonensia, Opera et Studia; Vienna 1762) II 289. Aeneas' Historia has been the object of extensive critical investigation. The more prominent studies in this connection include Voigt, op. cit. II. 329ff.; Bayer, V., Die Historia Friderici III. Imperatoris des Enea Silvio de Piccolomini. Eine kritische Studie zur Geschichte Kaiser Friedrichs III. (Prag. 1872). A history of the compilation of the text was made by Kramer, H., ‘Untersuchungen zur “Österreichischen Geschichte” des Aeneas Silvius,’ (Mitteilungen des österreichischen Instituts für Geschichtsforschung 45 [1931]) 23–58. O. Lorenz in his Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter (Berlin 1876) 284–287 used Voigt and Bayer as his chief sources, but added no real contribution to their work. The work was treated from a legal and cultural-historical point of view by Gengler, H. G., op. cit. In general the Historia can be considered as a valid and rather important historical work. Although complimentary to Frederick III it does not overlook his faults. Bayer, , op. cit. 13; Voigt, , op. cit. II.329. The work is probably the best contemporary account of the struggle between the emperor and the princes of the realm. Except for its record of Piccolomini's reflections on the nature of Frederick's coronation, however, the Historia provides no additional perspective to his imperial outlook.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Kollar, , op. cit. 291.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Ibid. 292.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Cf. Mansi, , op. cit. I.274 and Wolkan, , op. cit. I.1, n^o 192.Google Scholar

⁷¹ The letter was never dispatched. It is nevertheless an interesting commentary on Pius' expanded view of his obligations and duties as pope.Google Scholar