^{page 21 note 1} The ‘Signoria’ of King Robert of Naples (1313–22) was more in the nature of a protectorate; cf. Davidsohn, R., Geschichte von Florenz, iii (Berlin, 1912), p. 531Google Scholar.

^{page 21 note 2} ‘Diceria fatta per un Fiorentino…’, ed. Ceruti, A., Propugnatore, i [ii] (1869), 101Google Scholar: 'santissima libertà.

^{page 21 note 3} ‘Canzone morale di patria e di libertate’, in Giovanni da Prato, Il Paradiso degli Alberti, ed. Wesselofsky, A., i [ii] (Bologna, 1867), no. 27, p. 438Google Scholar. Cf. Medin, A., ‘I Visconti nella poesia contemporanea’, Arch. Stor. Lomb., xviii (1891), 784–5Google Scholar.

^{page 22 note 1} Fons memorabilium, i, Florence, Bibl. Laurenziana, MS. Aed. 170, fo. 262r.

^{page 22 note 2} περί τ⋯ς πολιτεῖας τ⋯ν ϕλωρενίνων, ed. L. W. Hasper (Leipzig 1861), pp. 14–15, and Iorio, G., Rivista Abruzzese… di Teramo, x (1895), 542–3Google Scholar; for the date, ibid., pp. 491–2 (c. 1439).

^{page 22 note 3} Cronica, ed. Dragomanni, F. G. (Florence, 1846), vi. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 22 note 4} Op. cit., p. 439.

^{page 23 note 1} Ficker, J., Urkunden zur Gesckichte des Roemerzuges Kaiser Ludwigs des Bayern (Innsbruck, 1865), pp. 152–4Google Scholar.

^{page 23 note 2} The treaty with the Visconti, etc., in Muratori, , Antichità Estensi, ii (Modena, 1740), 98–102Google Scholar; with da Carrara, Marsilio in Lazzarini, V., ‘Storia di un trattato tra Venezia, Firenze e i Carraresi’, N. Arch. Ven., xviii (1899), no. 1, pp. 273–9Google Scholar. Cf. Cipolla, C., Storia delle Signorie italiane dal 1313 al 1530 (Milan, 1881), pp. 66 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 23 note 3} I Capitoli del Comune di Firenze, ed. Guasti, C., ii (Florence, 1893), 280–1Google Scholar.

^{page 23 note 4} Documenti storici del sec. XIV estratti dal R. Archivio di Stato fiorentino, ed. Pepoli, A. (Florence, 1884), no. 1, pp. 3–12 (21 11 1341)Google Scholar. Cf. Caggese, R., Roberto d'Angiò, ii (Florence, 1930), 272Google Scholar. The Pisans held Lucca from 1342 to 1369.

^{page 23 note 5} Cf. Sorbelli, A., La Signoria di Giovanni Visconti a Bologna (Bologna, 1901), pp. 43 and 101, no. 34, p. 375Google Scholar. Baldasseroni, F., ‘La guerra tra Firenze e Giovanni Visconti’, Studi Storici, xi (1902), 366–7Google Scholar. Instructions to Florentine embassy, 16 Nov. 1350 (Canestrini, G., ‘Alcuni documenti risguardanti le relazioni politiche dei Papi d'Avignone coi Comuni d'ltalia’, Arch. Stor. Ital., App. vii (1849), no. 37, pp. 380–2)Google Scholar: ‘ragionino come il nostro comune ha sentito… ch'e signori di Lombardia… sono desiderosi di venire a lega co’ comuni di Toscana; et a noi parrebbe utile che la lega si facesse co' predecti…' In a letter of 5 Aug. 1351, the Florentines ask the lords of Verona, Ferrara, and Ravenna to ally with them against Giovanni Visconti, ‘dominus suis limitibus non contentus’. Their argument is interesting: ‘agitur enim res vestra dum potenter resistimus illi qui singulos cupit viribus facere se minores…’ (Florence, Archivio di Stato, Signori, I^a Cancelleria, Missive, Reg. X, fo. 90V., to be quoted henceforth as Missive.)

^{page 23 note 6} Cf. e.g. Villani, M., Cronica, ix. 20Google Scholar, on the common action in 1359 with Bernabò and other Signori against the Great Company. Missive XII, fos. 64 ff. (1359), contains copies of letters and commissions of embassies to Signori, to secure help against the Company. On Bernabò's project of an Italian league against the Companies in 1380–1, cf. Landogna, F., La politlca dei Visconti in Toscana (Milan, 1929), pp. 41 ffGoogle Scholar. Thus the league of August 1385 with Giangaleazzo Visconti was directed against the Companies (Collino, G., ‘La politica fiorentino-bolognese dall' avvento al principato del Conte di Virtù…’, Accad. d. Scienze Torino, Memorie, 2nd ser., liv (1904), 132 ff., nos. 56 ff., pp. 164 ff.)Google Scholar, and the league of October 1389 contained provisions against the mercenaries (see below, p. 39, n. 4).

^{page 24 note 1} On the treaty of July 1375, cf. the letter to Pisa and other Tuscan towns in Gherardi, A., ‘La guerra dei Fiorentini contro Papa Gregorio XP’, Arch. Stor. Ital., 3rd ser., vi [i] (1867), no. 14, p. 219Google Scholar. On the face of it, the alliance was aimed at the Company of John Hawkwood. Cf. below, p. 38, n. 5.

^{page 24 note 2} Bernabò did not, however, prove an enthusiastic ally; cf. Mirot, L., La politique pontificale et le retour du Saint-Siègé à Rome en 1376 (1899), p. 85Google Scholar. On Florentine apprehensions cf. ibid., pp. 25 ff. Cf. also Dupré-Theseider, E., ‘La rivolta di Perugia nel 1375…’, Boll. Dep. di storia patria per l'Umbria, XXXV (1938), 101 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 24 note 3} See below, p. 37.

^{page 24 note 4} Missive VI, fo. 86v. (10 Aug. 1341). Similar letters to Taddeo Pepoli and Giovanni and Luchino Visconti, ib., fos. 86r–87r.

^{page 24 note 5} Missive XII, fo. 136r. (9 July 1360); XV, fo. 12V. (9 Oct. 1375). Cf. the commission of embassy to Bernabò's son Ambrogio, Missive XIII, fo. 66r. (19 Sept. 1365): ‘direte che'l suo padre e lui reputiamo singulari amici e che sempre… gli abbiamo reputati singulari amici e benivoli del comune nostro…’

^{page 25 note 1} Florence, Archivio di Stato, X di Balìa, Legaz. e Comm., Reg. I. 74 (April 1388): ‘poi verrete a mostrare al detto Signore la buona e optima dispositione nostra verso la sua Signoria… Ricordando la grande amicicia che tenemmo colla buona memoria del suo padre e poi con lui…’

^{page 25 note 2} ‘Ingegnandovi questo mostrargli con tutte le ragioni e dimostrationi che saprete…’ Florentine ambassadors were sometimes asked to use their powers of persuasion in support of their missions; cf. e.g. Missive XI, fo. 57V. (11 Nov. 1353): ‘Nelle predecte cose usando quella matura prolatione di parole inductive chevederanno che si convegna si a l'onore del comune e si a l'effecto di quello che si dimanda.’ Cf. also the protestations of friendship for Giangaleazzo Visconti in the letter to Giangaleazzo's secretary Nicoletto Diversi of 12 June 1388, in Collino, G., ‘La preparazione della guerra venetoviscontea contro i Carraresi’, Arch. Stor. Lomb., XXXIV [ii] (1907), 275, n. 4Google Scholar.

^{page 25 note 3} Vice versa, they would also emphasize the friendship of individual Signori for Florence; thus in 1359 they write to Bernabò: ‘Agnoscentes magnificientie vestre erga commune nostrum sinceros affectus…’ (Missive XII, fo. 87r: 2 May 1359.)

^{page 25 note 4} The Signori, in their turn, did not act differently towards the Florentines; cf. the letter to Diversi of 12 June 1388 (Collino, , op. cit., p. 275, n. 4)Google Scholar: ‘Recepimus litteras vestras per quas veram dilectionem exprimitis, quam magnificus… comes Virtutum ad nos et populum nostrum habet.’

^{page 26 note 1} ‘Sit inter vos fraterna concordia, ut vester status de bono in melius dirigatur, ad cuius conservationem nos et posse nostrum requirite, quod vobis magis realiter quam verbis offerimus…’ (Missive XVI, fo. 37V.: 25 Oct. 1375.) Cf. also the letter of condolence to Antonio della Scala on the death of his brother, Missive XIX, fo. 152r. (22 July 1381).

^{page 26 note 2} Collino, G., ‘La guerra veneto-viscontea contro i Carraresi’, Arch. Stor. Lomb., xxxvi [i] (1909), 316, n. 1Google Scholar. Cf. also the letters of congratulation on occasion of Giangaleazzo's victory over Antonio della Scala in 1387, in Collino, ‘La guerra viscontea contro gli Scaligeri’, ibid., xxxiv [i] (1907), 139, n. 3.

^{page 26 note 3} ‘…facciendo questa lega… popoli suoi, ancora se fussono punto sollevati, rimarranno al tutto senza aspetto d'alcuna libertà, e puossi dire seranno sotterrati’ (Florence, Archivio di Stato, Consulte e Pratiche, Reg. XXVII, fo. 3r.). Fos. 1–4 contain a remarkable summary, in Salutati's writing, of the arguments for and against a league with Giangaleazzo referring to the negotiations in 1389; see below, pp. 43–4.

^{page 27 note 1} ‘Possint ipsi soli cum suspitione diligere. Sit ipsorum magis amicos atque domesticos quam hostes et extraneos formidare…’ (Missive XXII, fo. 67r.). This famous letter (‘Italicis’) is printed in Lami, G., Deliciae Eruditorum, xvi (Florence, 1754), pp. lxxxvii–xcvGoogle Scholar.

^{page 27 note 2} 27 Oct. 1387. Collino, , Arch. Stor. Lomb., xxxiv [i], 141, n. 4Google Scholar. See above, p. 25, n. 1.

^{page 27 note 3} See above, p. 23, n. 1. The league was joined by King Robert of Naples; Caggese, , op. cit., p. 155Google Scholar.

^{page 27 note 4} Cronica, , ed. cit. (Florence, 1844–1845), x. 201Google Scholar.

^{page 28 note 1} Ibid., ix. 20.

^{page 28 note 2} ‘Popoli liberi co'tiranni non stanno insieme’, X di Balìa, Comm., I, fo. 200 (15 July 1389), in Silva, P., ‘Il governo di Pietro Gambacorta in Pisa…’, Annali d. Scuola Normale di Pisa, xxiii (1912), no. 21, p. 327Google Scholar. The ambassadors were to discuss the question of the league with Giangaleazzo; see below, pp. 43–4.

^{page 28 note 3} Borgo, F. Dal, Diplomipisani, iii (Pisa, 1765), 363Google Scholar, and Ficker, , op. cit., no. 290, p. 143Google Scholar (12 Aug. 1329). On the treaty, cf. Davidsohn, R., op. cit., 877Google Scholar. A number of other Tuscan towns were included in the peace.

^{page 28 note 4} Azzi, G. degli, ‘La dimora di Carlo, Duca di Calabria, a Firenze’, Arch. Stor. Ital., 5th ser., xlii (1908), 272–3Google Scholar. Davidsohn, , op. cit., p. 862Google Scholar.

^{page 28 note 5} ‘Tirannos moleste patimur in longinquis nedum possimus iuxta nostrorum cordium viscera substinere’ (24 Feb. 1341), cit. by Caggese, , op. cit., p. 259, n. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 29 note 1} Cf. G. Villani, xi. 116. Volpe, G., Volterra (Florence, 1923), pp. 199–200Google Scholar.

^{page 29 note 2} 24 Oct. 1340 (Caggese, p. 256, n. 1). The Florentines ask Robert to intervene, ‘ne Vulterranum flagitium in pessimum deducatur exemplum’; Missive V, fo. 77V.

^{page 29 note 3} The question will be discussed in a separate article.

^{page 29 note 4} A good example of the respective use of dominus and tyrannus is provided by the following commission of 15 Sept. 1352 for an embassy to Charles IV: ‘dominos Lombardie et Romandiole, excepto tyranno Mediolanensi’ (Baldasseroni, , op. cit., xii (1903), no. 13, p. 92)Google Scholar.

^{page 29 note 5} E.g. Consulte e Pratiche, cit., I, fos. 26r., 27r, 105r., 119V. and passim. Missive XXII, fo. 59V. (2 May 1390): ‘pro libertatis nostre defensione… arma movemus’. Quotations could be easily multiplied.

^{page 30 note 1} Missive XI, fo. 49V. (7 Sept. 1353), instruction for embassy to Genoa, on the eye of her submission to the Visconti: ‘Signoria e libertà, delle quali a mortali niuna cosa è più cara nè più accepta’.

^{page 30 note 2} Cf. Perrens, F. T., Histoire de Florence, v (1883), pp. 115–16Google Scholar. It was given to the troops sent to the assistance of towns which had rebelled against the Papacy. During the conflict with the Papacy, the defence of libertas assumed also a ‘national’ anti-French meaning in Florentine propaganda; cf. e.g. Gherardi, , op. tit., vi [ii], (1867), no. 99, p. 251Google Scholar; vii [i], (1868), no. 125, p. 219.

^{page 30 note 3} Cronaca fiorentma, ed. Rodolico, N., Rer. It. Script., xxx, rubr. 753Google Scholar. Thus the Florentines hailed the Prefetto di Vico as liberator when Viterbo rebelled under him against the Pope at the end of 1375. Cf. Gherardi, , op. cit., vi, no. 99, p. 251Google Scholar.

^{page 30 note 4} Istoria di Firenze, ed. Pratesi, L. (Norcia, 1904), pp. 134–5Google Scholar. On the date of its composition, p. xiii, n. 2.

^{page 30 note 5} Cf. e.g. M. Villani, iii. 1, viii. 24, ix. 20, xi. 1; Giovanni da Prato, cited above, p. 21.

^{page 30 note 6} Missive XXII, fo. 65v. (28 May 1390): ‘…cum hoc bellum sit inter tirannidem et libertatem’.

^{page 31 note 1} Missive XXII, fo. 59V. (2 May 1390): ‘pro libertatis nostre defensione, ac liberate populorum, quos tarn grave iugum opprimit, arma movemus’.

^{page 31 note 2} Missive XXII, fo. 66v. (25 May 1390): ‘…non solum domi libertatis cultrix, sed etiam extra nostros terminos conservatrix’.

^{page 31 note 3} Cf. above, pp. 21–2.

^{page 31 note 4} Cf. e.g. M. Villani, xi. 1: ‘non solo i popoli che vivono in libertà, ma quelli che sottoposti sono al crudelissimo giogo della tirannia’.

^{page 31 note 5} Cf. e.g. instructions for embassy to Perugia, 13 April 1358: the Perugians should cease hostilities against Siena ‘sì che non sieno cagione del guastamento de' Toscani Comuni che vivono in libertà’ (Vittelleschi, G.Degli Azzi, ‘Le relazioni tra la Repubblica di Firenze e l'Umbria…’ Boll. Dep. di st. p. per l'Umbria, x, App. i (1904), no. 276, p. 82)Google Scholar. The Florentines considered Perugia one of the great Tuscan communes.

^{page 31 note 6} iii. 1. This Roman libertyis contrasted with ‘tirannesche suggezioni di popoli’.

^{page 32 note 1} iv. 77. In this passage, libertà is used in the sense of independence and sovereignty, in face of the Empire, on the lines of Bartolus' commentary on Dig. Nov., ii (D. xlviii, 1. 7): ‘dicerem cum quaelibet civitas Italiae hodie, et praecipue in Tuscia, dominum non recognoscat, in se ipsa habet liberum populum…’

^{page 32 note 2} Rubinstein, N., ‘The beginnings of political thought in Florence’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, v (1942), 201, 212 ff., 217Google Scholar.

^{page 32 note 3} Missive XXII, fos. 51V. (11 April 1390): ‘Nos esse vobis non solum vicinitate situs, sed identitate regiminis, ac studio libertatis, et similes et conformes.’

^{page 32 note 4} viii. 24.

^{page 32 note 5} E.g. commission for Pisa, 20 June 1354: a league is to be concluded to ‘torre l'appetito a ogni signore o comune o altra persona ch'avesse appetito di guastare o d'oppressare lo stato libero di Toscana’ (Missive XI, fo. 91V.).

^{page 32 note 6} Missive XIII, fo. 26V. (commission for Siena, 21 Jan. 1365): Florence is ‘disposto affare quelle cose, che si cognoscano essere salutevili e utili a conservare lo stato, riposo, e libertà de' comuni di Tos chana…’

^{page 33 note 1} See above, p. 28. The letter referred to the disorders at Prato in 1341; although they were hardly the only motive of the Florentine request that the custody of that town should be entrusted to them, the Florentines were dearly perturbed at the situation in the neighbouring town and afraid of the consequences. Florence bought Prato in 1351 from Queen Joanna, on the eve of the war with Giovanni Visconti (Villani, i. 73.)

^{page 33 note 2} Cf. Silva, , op. cit., pp. 34 ff., 74, 289Google Scholar.

^{page 33 note 3} M. Villani, x. 67. Cf. Cecina, L., Notizie istoriche della città di Volterra (Pisa, 1758), pp. 163 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 33 note 4} Missive XIII, fo. 37V. (29 March 1365): ‘essendo noi per conservatione dellostatopopolarelibero e guelfodi Volterra dispostidi mectere tutto nostro podere in conservatione de la loro liberta, e stato pacificho di quella citta, de la quale per affectione amichevole non minore cura avremo, che del nostro proprio…’

^{page 33 note 5} Cecina, , op. cit., pp. 175 ff.Google Scholar; Capitoli di Firenze, ii. 330–3.

^{page 33 note 6} Missive XX, fo. 138r. (14 Dec. 1385): ‘Scimus et maiores nostros urbem vestram tune sub tirannorum discordia fluctuantem, non minus servitutis certain, quam avidam libertatis, in nostri communis protectionem, libertatis donande vobis gratia suscepisse…’ Cf. also the arenga of the treaty of 1361: ‘Quia maius est conservare quam querere libertatem, circa ipsius perseverantiam maiori diligentia convenit, ne intolerabilior tirannidis per recidivam incumberet, vigilare.’

^{page 34 note 1} Cf. above, pp. 22–3.

^{page 34 note 2} ‘Veniret ad comunem statum, et in liga cum Comunibus Venetiarum et Florentie…’ (Simeoni, L., ‘Le origini della guerra veneto-fiorentino-scaligera (1336–9)’, Memorie d. Accad. d. Scienze Bologna, 3rd ser., iv (1929–1930) no. 17, p. 64.)Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 3} Cf. above, p. 23.

^{page 34 note 4} Muratori, , Ant. Est., ii. 100Google Scholar. To be on the safe side, the respective article in the original treaty between Florence and Venice was modified accordingly before the conclusion of the new league; Simeoni, , op. cit., no. 18, pp. 64–5Google Scholar.

^{page 34 note 5} Missive V, fo. 24r. (27 Aug 1341): ‘ut civitatem Lucanam diu suppositam dire tirampnidi… reduceremus ad communitatem et unitatem antiquam et solitam.’

^{page 34 note 6} Ibid., fo. 26v.

^{page 35 note 1} Except for the short periods during which Florence was under a Signoria.

^{page 35 note 2} The matter was, of course, different when a town came under the full dominium of Florence. Even such towns, however, preserved a not insignificant degree of self-government.

^{page 35 note 3} Cronaca fior., rubr. 644.

^{page 35 note 4} On the opposition to Florentine territorial policy, cf. the important Lucchese despatches from Siena of 1387, in Regesti Arch, di Stato Lucca, ii [ii] (1903), ed. Fumi, L., nos. 1343 ff., pp. 254 ff.Google Scholar, especially no. 1353, p. 260. Cf. de Mesquita, D. M. Bueno, Giangaleazzo Visconti… (Cambridge, 1941), pp. 92–3Google Scholar.

^{page 35 note 5} 10 Aug. 1375 (Regesti, no. 525, p. 79).

^{page 35 note 6} Salutati, Coluccio, Invectiva in Antonium Luschum (Florence, 1826), p. 51Google Scholar.

^{page 36 note 1} Ibid., pp. 52–3.

^{page 36 note 2} Cf. e.g. M. Villani, i. 68, on the acquisition of Bologna by Giovanni Visconti in 1350: the ‘comune di Firenze, a cui disiaceva la vicinanza di sì potente tiranno…’

^{page 36 note 3} Heywood, W., A History of Perugia (1910), pp. 195–6Google Scholar. Villani, ii. 42.

^{page 36 note 4} Missive XI, fo. 18v. (3 March 1353): ‘Melius enim est ipsam terrain liberam remanere quam sub praesenti tyrampnide a qua vobis et nobis ceterisque Tuscis incommoda personarum rerumque discrimina pervenire…’ On the contents of the respective proposals, cf. Sorbelli, , op. cit.. p. 157Google Scholar. San Sepolcro was at that time under the dominium of Giovanni Visconti; cf. the peace treaty of Sarzana of 1353, Rer. I ted. Script., xv [i], 234.

^{page 37 note 1} 10 Nov. 1350: Canestrini, , op. cit., no. 37, p. 382Google Scholar.

^{page 37 note 2} This, at least, is his story: Cronica domestica, ed. Lungo, I. Del and Volpi, G. (Florence, 1914), p. 208Google Scholar: ‘questo paese sarebbe sotto tirannia, e fedele’.

^{page 37 note 3} xi. 44.

^{page 37 note 4} ii. 4.

^{page 37 note 5} Op. cit., p. 281. This was written shortly after the event, since Donato died in July 1370.

^{page 37 note 6} Silva, , op. cit., pp. 53, 57 ffGoogle Scholar. Perrens, , op. cit., v. 72Google Scholar.

^{page 37 note 7} Zerbi, L., I Visconti di Milano e la Signoria di Lucca (Como, 1894), pp. 17 ff.Google Scholar; Silva, pp. 62ff.; Landogna, , op. cit., pp. 16 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 38 note 1} M. Villani, v. 17, ‘nemici originali’.

^{page 38 note 2} Cf. the remarks of Silva, , op. cit., pp. 167–8Google Scholar, on the development of a ‘politics regionale’ during the second half of the century.

^{page 38 note 3} E.g. the leagues of 1349 (Pepoli, , Documenti, no. 4, pp. 27–36)Google Scholar, 1380 (Capitoli di Firenze, ii. 213–18), 1384 (ibid., 218–24), 1385 (ibid., 226–34), 1389 (ibid., 240–3). Canestrini, G., ‘Documenti per servire alia storia della milizia italiana’, Arch. Stor. Ital., xv (1851), pp. xlviii, lviGoogle Scholar, gives some references to these Tuscan leagues, but has to be used with caution.–The league of 1349 was to be directed against the Company and non-Italian princes; cf. letter of 2 Sept. 1349: ‘…si faccia a riparo d'ogni signore oltramontano et della Compagna…; ma in caso ció non si potesse fare, procedete solo a resistere a la Compagna…’ (Canestrini, , Arch. Stor. had., app. vii, no. 24, p. 368)Google Scholar.

^{page 38 note 4} See below.

^{page 38 note 5} Most of these treaties contained also general provisions for mutual defence; cf. e.g. Capitoli, ii. 215 (art. 9). The alliance concluded between Florence and Bernabò at the beginning of the war with Gregory XI (see above, p. 24) was, on the face of it, directed against the English Company: cf. Gherardi, , Arch. Stor. Ital., 3rd ser., vi [i], no. 14, p. 219Google Scholar; in fact, it was also aimed at the Pope (and the Emperor): cf. letter to Bernabò, 10 Aug. 1375, ibid., no. 22, pp. 111–12: ‘quamvis in pactis eiusdem lige nulla fuerit de Papa et Imperatore facta mentio singularis, nos tamen eamdem ligam ad ipsos Papam, et Imperatorem… extendi et intelligi tenore presentium declaramus’. (Gherardi prints this letter without indication of his source; it is not copied in the registers of Missive for 1375.) The treaty itself is not extant, but a document of 1376 refers, in detail, to stipulations contained in it, implicitly providing for support of risings in the Papal States (league between Florence and Modigliana, 29 March 1376, ibid., vii [ii], no. 197, pp. 240–7). Cf. also Stefani, , op. cit., rubr. 751, pp. 292–3Google Scholar.

^{page 39 note 1} Perrens, , op. cit., v. 73 ffGoogle Scholar. Temple-Leader, G. and Marcotti, G., Giovanni Acuto (Florence, 1889), pp. 52–6Google Scholar.

^{page 39 note 2} Epistolario, ed. Novati, F., ii (1893), 157 (25 10 1385)Google Scholar.

^{page 39 note 3} Capitoli, ii. 240–3. Cf. Silva, , op. cit., p. 258Google Scholar.

^{page 39 note 4} Osio, L., Documenti diplomatici tratti dagli archivj milanesi, i (Milan, 1864), no. 201, pp. 278–93Google Scholar, and Favale, S., ‘Siena nel quadro della politica viscontea nell' Italia centrale’, Bull. Stor. Senese, xliii (1936), no. 2, pp. 351–70Google Scholar. This league also contained articles against the Companies (art. 9 ff.).

^{page 39 note 5} Art. 16.

^{page 39 note 6} Similarly, the peace treaty of Sarzana with Giovanni Visconti of 1353 was followed, at the beginning of 1354, by the renewal of the Tuscan league; cf. Sorbelli, , op. cit., pp. 169 ff.Google Scholar, Baldasseroni, , op. cit., pp. 80 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 39 note 7} Capitoli, ii. 210. Rer. It. Script., xv [i], 208–9.

^{page 39 note 8} ‘Contra ogni signore o tyranno, o altri che volesse turbare od occupare la libertà o stato et reggimento de' detti collegati, o alcuno di loro…’ (Missive X, fo. 53r. (16 Nov. 1350); Canestrini, , op. cit., no. 37, p. 380)Google Scholar. The league was finally concluded, after lengthy negotiations, on 26 September 1351 (Baldasseroni, , op. cit., p. 388)Google Scholar.

^{page 40 note 1} And of the Tuscan Communes and Bologna; cf. Collino, , Arch. Stor. Lomb., xxxvi [i], 15, n. 2 (17 07 1388)Google Scholar: ‘flat concordia cum Senensibus et unitas Tuscorum et Bononiensium’.

^{page 40 note 2} Missive XI, fo. 53r. (15 Oct. 1353): ‘che per lo comune di Firenze fu pensato assai necessario alia conservatione della libertà de' comuni Toschani… e che niuno altro modo è più utile nè più salutevole che unirsi alia difesa della loro libertà…’

^{page 40 note 3} 12 Aug. 1388: Collino, , Arch. Stor. Lomb., xxxvi [i], 34, n. 4Google Scholar.

^{page 40 note 4} M. Villani, v. 83: ‘…i Perugini vaghi di crescere signoria… accettarono la guardia (of Montepulciano)… Quests cosa conturbò molto il comune di Siena; e perciò facendosi la lega che seguì appresso de' Toscani, i Sanesi non vi vollono essere…’ Cf. Heywood, , op. cit., pp. 223 ffGoogle Scholar. The league was concluded on 18 Feb. 1356, without the Sienese: Azzi, Degli, op. cit., ii, no. 419, pp. 114–16Google Scholar.

^{page 40 note 5} Ibid, i, no. 315, p. 96. (6 Apr. 1359). Florence was afraid that Siena might invoke the help of Bernabò cf. ibid., no. 280, p. 83 (20 Apr. 1358) and Missive XII, fo. 23V. (1 June 1358); the Sienese are to be told how much ‘scandolo seguire ne potrebbe et diturbatione della liberta di tutti i Comuni liberi di Toscana…’

^{page 41 note 1} The Florentines felt considerable apprehension about the expedition of Charles IV in 1354–5; cf. M. Villani, iii. 41. Perrens, , op. cit., iv. 438 ffGoogle Scholar. But, the days of Henry VII were over. Papal policy in the Patrimony constitutes a chapter of its own; Albornoz' successes form the background to the war of 1375–8.

^{page 41 note 2} Rodolico, N., La democrazia fiorentina nel suo tramonto (Bologna, 1905), p. 343Google Scholar, appears to underrate their importance.

^{page 41 note 3} Capitoli, ii. 22, art. 133–4. Rer. Ital Script., xv [i], 323. Already in 1351, immediately after the outbreak of the war, an embassy was sent to the Visconti to reach, among other things, agreement on non-intervention in Tuscany; Sorbelli, no. 37, p. 377 (28 July). In December, the Florentines write to Siena that peace should be concluded only if it was stipulated that the Visconti ‘in Tuscie partibus se decetero non debeat immisceri’ (Baldasseroni, , op. cit., xii, no. 10, p. 90Google Scholar: 23 Dec).

^{page 41 note 4} See above, p. 39, n. 4.

^{page 41 note 5} Rousset, J., Suppl. au corps univ. dipt., i [ii] (1739), pp. 249, 262Google Scholar. Capitoli, ii. 403, art. 12, 404.

^{page 41 note 6} Neither in 1389 nor in 1392 did Florence achieve complete prohibition of intervention. See below, p. 44.

^{page 42 note 1} In the treaty of 1389, a line running along the river Secchia to Modena, i.e. north of the traditional boundaries of Tuscany, is agreed upon as demarcation line between the respective spheres. This line plays an important role in the negotiations preceding the league. Cf. Mesquita, ; op. cit., no. 3, pp. 343, 345Google Scholar; Silva, , op. cit., doc. no. 19, p. 324Google Scholar. The traditional northern boundaries were, in the west, the river Magra, then the ‘Apennine Alps’ (Dante, , Paradiso, ix, verses 89–90Google Scholar; G. Villani, i. 43; Mussato, Historia Augusta, in Muratori, , Script., x. 431Google Scholar (‘Alpes Lunae’)).

^{page 42 note 2} Collino, , ‘La politica fiorentino-bolognese…’, Mem. Accad. d. Sc. Torino, Memorie, 2nd sen, liv (1906), no. 29, p. 156Google Scholar. It is not without interest that these words go back to a letter from Bernabb. He obviously knew what would appeal to the Florentines.

^{page 42 note 3} The Florentines aimed not only at including a strip north of the Apennines and Bologna in the sphere of non-intervention for the Visconti, but also the whole Romagna. Cf. the treaty of 9 Oct. 1389. For the early fifteenth century, cf. the remarks of Soranzo, G., ‘Cpllegati, raccomandati, aderenti negli Stati italiani dei sec. XIV e XV,’ Arch. Stor. Ital., xcix (1941): 17–19Google Scholar.

^{page 42 note 4} See above, p. 39, n. 3.

^{page 42 note 5} And Bologna, , Capitoli, ii. 322, art. 135Google Scholar. Rer. Ital. Script., xv [i], 237–8. This naturally also applied to her Tuscan allies.

^{page 42 note 6} For the treaties of 1389 and 1392, see above, pp. 39, n. 4, 41, n. 5.

^{page 42 note 7} See below. The Romagna was a different matter. Although Florence usually desired only alliance with Bologna, the possibility of acquiring control of that town had not always been entirely absent from Florentine diplomacy. There appear to have been plans to that effect just before Bologna fell into the hands of Giovanni Visconti in 1350. Cf. M. Villani, I. 67. Sorbelli, , op. cit., pp. 19 ffGoogle Scholar. On Florentine ambitions in the Romagna at the beginning of the fifteenth century, see Soranzo, , op. cit., pp. 18–19Google Scholar. This aspect of Florentine policy deserves further study.

^{page 43 note 1} Perrens, , op. cit., v. 113 ffGoogle Scholar. See above, p. 30.

^{page 43 note 2} See above, p. 26.

^{page 43 note 3} See above, p. 31.

^{page 43 note 4} Mancarella, A., ‘Firenze, la chiesa e 1'awento di Ladislao di Durazzo al trono di Napoli’, Arch. Stor. Napol., xlvi (1921), doc. no. 22, pp. 215–16Google Scholar, calendars the instruction. Cf. Durrieu, P., Les Gascons en Italie (Auch, 1885), pp. 46–7Google Scholar; Mirot, L., La politique française en Italie de 1380 à 1422, i (1934), 11–12Google Scholar. In the treaty of alliance with Charles VI of 30 June 1396 it was stipulated that the places acquired during the war in Lombardy were, with a few exceptions, to remain at the disposal of the king. Capitoli, ii. 407, art. 5. Cf. Jarry, E., Les origines de la domination française à Gênes (1896), pp. 191–3Google Scholar.

^{page 44 note 1} Cf. instruction for embassy to Pisa, etc., 11 April 1389, Silva, , op. cit., no. 19, p. 324Google Scholar: ‘che il conte non si potesse in alcun modo intromettere… ne' fatti di Toscana, nè di Bologna…’ If he accepts this condition, ‘noi pensiamo dell' altre cose accordarsi insieme’.

^{page 44 note 2} Consulte e Pratiche, XXVII, fo. 3r.: ‘che faciendo la lega, si perde la ragione del patto di Sarzana, che è ch'egli non possa mandare giente in Toscana, perchè vuole potere atare gl'amici suoi.’ See above, p. 26, n. 3.

^{page 44 note 3} See above, p. 39, n. 4.

^{page 44 note 4} See above, p. 40.

^{page 44 note 5} Cf. Fatini, G., ‘L'ultimo secqlo della Repubblica Aretina’, Bull. Stor. Sen., xxxi (1924), pp. 96 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 44 note 6} Cf. Collino, , Arch. Stor. Lomb., xxxiv [i], 125 ff.Google Scholar, xxxiv, [ii], 234ff., 269 ff., 281 ff., xxxvi [i], 34ff., 325 ff., 331ff., 358 ff. Favale, , op. cit., 316 ff.Google Scholar; Mesquita, , op. cit., 90 ffGoogle Scholar. The treaty with Siena of 22 September is printed in Favale, no. 1, pp. 347–51

^{page 45 note 1} See above, p. 30.