through Guyenne and Flanders was to wound them in their most
sensible parts, to deprive them of cloth and wine. They sold
their wool at Bruges, in order to buy wine at Bordeaux. On the
other hand, without English wool, the Flemings were at a
stand-still. Edward prohibited the exportation of wool,
reduced Flanders to despair, and forced her to fling herself
into his arms. At first, a crowd of Flemish workmen emigrated
into England, whither they were allured at any cost, and by
every kind of flattery and caress. ... I take it that the
English character has been seriously modified by these
emigrations, which went on during the whole of the fourteenth
century. Previously, we find no indications of that patient
industry which now distinguishes the English. By endeavouring
to separate Flanders and England the French king only
stimulated Flemish emigration, and laid the foundation of
England's manufactures. Meanwhile, Flanders did not resign
herself. The towns burst into insurrection. They had long
hated the count, either because he supported the country
against the monopoly of the towns, or because he admitted the
foreigners, the Frenchmen, to a share of their commerce. The
men of Ghent, who undoubtedly repented of having withheld
their aid from those of Ypres and of Bruges at the battle of
Cassel, chose, in 1337, as their leader, the brewer,
Jacquemart Artaveld. Supported by the guilds, and, in
particular, by the fullers and clothiers, Artaveld organized a
vigorous tyranny. He assembled at Ghent the men of the three
great cities, 'and showed them that they could not live
without the king of England; for all Flanders depended on
cloth-making, and, without wool, one could not make cloth;
therefore he recommended them to keep the English king their
friend.'"
J. Michelet,
History of France,
book 6, chapter 1.
ALSO IN
F. P. Guizot,
Popular History of France,
chapter 20.
J. Hutton,
James and Philip Van Altevelde,
part 3.
J. Froissart,
Chronicles
(Johnes's translation),
book 1, chapter 29.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1345.
The end of Jacques Van Artaveld.
"Jacob von Artaveld, the citizen of Ghent that was so much
attached to the king of England, still maintained the same
despotic power over all Flanders. He had promised the king of
England, that he would give him the inheritance of Flanders,
invest his son the prince of Wales with it, and make it a
duchy instead of an earldom. Upon which account the king was,
at this period, about St. John the Baptist's day, 1345, come
to Sluys, with a numerous attendance of barons and knights. He
had brought the prince of Wales with him, in order that Jacob
von Artaveld's promises might be realized. The king remained
on board his fleet in the harbour of Sluys, where he kept his
court. His friends in Flanders came thither to see and visit
him; and there were many conferences between the king and
Jacob Von Artaveld on one side, and the councils from the
different capital towns on the other, relative to the
agreement before mentioned. ... When on his return he [Van
Artaveld] came to Ghent about midday, the townsmen who were
informed of the hour he was expected, had assembled in the
street that he was to pass through; as soon as they saw him,
they began to murmur, and put their heads close together,
saying, 'Here comes one who is too much the master, and wants
to order in Flanders according to his will and pleasure, which
must not be longer borne.' With this they had also spread a
rumour through the town, that Jacob von Artaveld had collected
all the revenues of Flanders, for nine years and more. ... Of
this great treasure he had sent part into England. This
information inflamed those of Ghent with rage; and, as he was
riding up the streets, he perceived that there was something
in agitation against him; for those who were wont to salute
him very respectfully, now turned their backs, and went into
their houses. He began therefore to suspect all was not as
usual; and as soon as he had dismounted, and entered his
hotel, he ordered the doors and windows to be shut and
fastened. Scarcely had his servants done this, when the street
which he inhabited was filled from one end to the other with
all sorts of people, but especially by the lowest of the
mechanics. His mansion was surrounded on every side, attacked
and broken into by force. Those within did all they could to
defend it, and killed and wounded many: but at last they could
not hold out against such vigorous attacks, for three parts of
the town were there. When Jacob von Artaveld saw what efforts
were making, and how hardly he was pushed, he came to a
window; and, with his head uncovered, began to use humble and
fine language. ... When Jacob von Artaveld saw that he could
not appease or calm them, he shut the window, and intended
getting out of his house the back way, to take shelter in a
church adjoining; but his hotel was already broke into on that
side, and upwards of four hundred were there calling out for him.
At last he was seized by them, and slain without mercy: his
death-stroke was given him by a sadler, called Thomas Denys.
In this manner did Jacob von Artaveld end his days, who in his
time had been complete master of Flanders. Poor men first
raised him, and wicked men slew him."
J. Froissart (Johnes),
Chronicles,
book 1, chapter 115 (volume 1).
{1127}
FLANDERS: A. D. 1379-1381.
The revolt of the White Hoods.
"We will ... speak of the war in Flanders, which began about
this time [A. D. 1379]. The people were very murderous and
cruel, and multitudes were slain or driven out of the country.
The country itself was so much ruined, that it was said a
hundred years would not restore it to the situation it was in
before the war. Before the commencement of these wars in
Flanders, the country was so fertile, and everything in such
abundance, that it was marvellous to see; and the inhabitants
of the principal towns lived in very grand state. You must
know that this war originated in the pride and hatred that
several of the chief towns bore to each other: those of Ghent
against Bruges, and others, in like manner, vying with each
other through envy. However, this could not have created a war
without the consent of their lord, the earl of Flanders, who
was so much loved and feared that no one dared anger him." It
is in these words that the old court chronicler, Froissart,
begins his fully detailed and graphic narrative of the
miserable years, from 1379 to 1384, during which the communes
of Flanders were at war with one another and at war with their
worthless and oppressive count, Luis de Maele. The picturesque
chronicle is colored with the prejudices of Froissart against
the Flemish burghers and in favor of their lord; but no one
can doubt that the always turbulent citizens were jealous of
rights which the always rapacious lord never ceased to
encroach upon. As Froissart tells the story, the outbreak of
war began with an attempt on the part of the men of Bruges, to
dig a canal which would divert the waters of the river Lys.
When those of Ghent had news of this unfriendly undertaking,
they took counsel of one John Yoens, or John Lyon, a burgher
of much cunning, who had formerly been in favor with the
count, but whom his enemies had supplanted. "When he [John
Lyon] was prevailed on to speak, he said: 'Gentlemen, if you
wish to risk this business, and put an end to it, you must
renew an ancient custom that formerly subsisted in the town of
Ghent: I mean, you must first put on white-hoods, and choose a
leader, to whom everyone may look, and rally at his signal.'
This harangue was eagerly listened to, and they all cried out,
'We will have it so, we will have it so! now let us put on
white-hoods.' White-hoods were directly made, and given out to
those among them who loved war better than peace, and had
nothing to lose. John Lyon was elected chief of the White
Hoods. He very willingly accepted of this office, to avenge
himself on his enemies, to embroil the towns of Ghent and
Bruges with each other and with the earl their lord. He was
ordered, as their chief, to march against the pioneers and
diggers from Bruges, and had with him 200 such people as
preferred rioting to quiet."
Froissart (Johnes),
Chronicles,
book 2, chapters 36-102.
When the White Hoods had driven the ditchers of Bruges from
their canal, they returned to Ghent, but not to disband.
Presently the jealous count required them to lay aside the
peculiar badge of their association, which they declined to
do. Then Count Louis sent his bailiff into Ghent with 200
horsemen, to arrest John Lyon, and some others of his band.
The White Hoods rallied, slew the bailiff and drove his posse
from the town; after which unmistakable deed Ghent and the
count were distinctly at war. The city of the White Hoods took
prompt measures to secure the alliance and support of its
neighbors. Some nine or ten thousand of its citizens marched
to Bruges, and partly by persuasion, partly by force, partly
by the help of the popular party in the town, they effected a
treaty of friendship and alliance--which did not endure,
however, very long. Courtray, Damme, Ypres and other cities
joined the league and it soon presented a formidable array.
Oudenarde, strongly fortified, by the count, became the key of
the situation, and was besieged by the citizen-militia. In the
midst of the siege, the Duke of Burgundy, son-in-law of the
count, made successful efforts to bring about a peace
(December 1379). "The count promised to forget the past and
return to his residence in Ghent. This peace, however, was of
short duration; and the count, after passing only two or three
days in Ghent, alleged some cause of dissatisfaction and
returned to Lille, to recommence hostilities, in the course of
which, with the assistance of the richer citizens, he made
himself master of Bruges. Another peace was signed in the
August of 1380, which was no more durable than the former, and
the count reduced Ypres; and, at the head of an army of 60,000
men, laid siege to Ghent itself, the chief and soul of the
popular confederacy, in the month of September. But the
citizens of Ghent defended themselves so well that he was
obliged to raise the siege in the middle of November, and
agree to a truce. This truce also was broken by the count's
party, the war renewed in the beginning of the year 1381, and
the men of Ghent experienced a disastrous defeat in the battle
of Nevelle towards the middle of May. It was a war of
extermination, and was carried on with extreme ferocity. ...
Ghent itself, now closely blockaded by the count's troops, was
only saved by the great qualities of Philip Van Artevelde [son
of Jacques Van Arteveld, of the revolution of 1337], who, by a
sort of peaceful revolution, was placed at the head of affairs
[January 25, 1381]. The victory of Beverholt, in which the
count was defeated with great slaughter, and only escaped with
difficulty, made the town of Ghent again master of Flanders."
T. Wright,
History of France,
book 2, chapter 8.
ALSO IN
J. Hutton,
James and Philip Van Arteveld,
chapters 14-16.
W. C. Taylor,
Revolutions, Insurrections and Conspiracies of Europe,
volume 2, chapters 7-9.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1382.
The rebellion crushed.
By the marriage of Philip, Duke of Burgundy, to the daughter
and heiress of the Count of Flanders, that powerful French
prince had become interested in the suppression of the revolt
of the Flemish burghers and the restoration of the count to
his lordship. His nephew, the young king of France, Charles
VI., was easily persuaded to undertake a campaign to that end,
and an army of considerable magnitude was personally led
northwards by the monarch of fourteen years. "The object of
the expedition was not only to restore to the Count of
Flanders his authority, but to punish the turbulent commons,
who stirred up those of France to imitate their example.
Froissart avows it to have been a war between the commons and
the aristocracy. The Flemings were commanded by Artaveldt, son
of the famous brewer, the ally of Edward III. The town of Ghent
had been reduced to the extreme of distress and famine by the
count and the people of Bruges, who supported him. Artaveldt
led the people of Ghent in a forlorn hope against Bruges,
defeated the army of the count, and broke into the rival town,
which he took and plundered. After this disaster, the count
had recourse to France. The passage of the river Lys, which
defended Flanders, was courageously undertaken, and effected
with some hazard by the French.
{1128}
The Flemings were rather dispirited by this first success:
nevertheless, they assembled their forces; and the two armies
of French knights and Flemish citizens met at Rosebecque [or
Roosebeck], between Ypres and Courtray. The 27th of November,
1382, was the day of battle. Artaveldt had stationed his army
on a height, to await the attack of the French, but their
impatience forced him to commence. Forming his troops into one
solid square, Artaveldt led them against the French centre.
Froissart compares their charge to the headlong rush of a wild
boar. It broke the opposite line, penetrating into its ranks:
but the wings of the French turned upon the flank of the
Flemings, which, not having the advantage of a charge or
impulse, were beaten by the French men at arms. Pressed upon
one another, the Flemings had not room to fight: they were
hemmed in, surrounded, and slaughtered: no quarter was asked
or given; nearly 30,000 perished. The 9,000 Ghentois that had
marched under their banner were counted, to a man, amongst the
slain: Artaveldt, their general, was among the foremost who
had fallen. Charles ordered his body to be hung upon a tree.
It was at Courtray, very near to the field where this battle
was fought, that Robert of Artois, with a French army, had
perished beneath the swords of the Flemings, nearly a century
previous. The gilded spurs of the French knights still adorned
the walls of the cathedral of Courtray. The victory of Rosebecque
in the eyes of Charles had not sufficiently repaid the former
defeat: the town of Courtray was pillaged and burnt; its
famous clock was removed to Dijon, and formed the third wonder
of this kind in France, Paris and Sens alone possessing
similar ornaments. The battle of Rosebecque proved more
unfortunate for the communes of France than for those of
Flanders. Ghent, notwithstanding her loss of 9,000 slain, did
not yield to the conqueror, but held out the war for two years
longer; and did not finally submit until the Duke of Burgundy,
at the death of their count, guaranteed to the burghers the
full enjoyment of their privileges. The king avenged himself
on the mutinous city of Paris; entered it as a conqueror; took
the chains from the streets and unhinged the gates: one hundred
of the citizens were sent to the scaffold; the property of the
rich was confiscated; and all the ancient and most onerous
taxes, the gabelle, the duty on sales, as well as that of
entry, were declared by royal ordinance to be established
anew. The principal towns of the kingdom were visited with the
same punishments and exactions. The victory of Rosebecque
overthrew the commons of France, which were crushed under the
feet of the young monarch and his nobles."
E. E. Crowe,
History of France,
chapter 4.
ALSO IN
Sir J. Froissart (Johnes),
Chronicles,
book 2, chapters 111-130.
J. Michelet,
History of France,
book 7, chapter 1 (volume 2).
F. P. Guizot,
Popular History of France,
chapter 23 (volume 3).
FLANDERS: A. D. 1383.
The Bishop of Norwich's Crusade.
The crushing defeat of the Flemings at Roosebeke produced
alarm in England, where the triumph of the French was quickly
felt to be threatening. "English merchants were expelled from
Bruges, and their property was confiscated. Calais even was in
danger. The French were at Dunkirk and Gravelines, and might
by a sudden dash on Calais drive the English out." There had
been aid from England promised to Van Artevelde, but the
promise had only helped on the ruin of the Ghent patriot by
misleading him. No help had come when he needed it. Now, when
it was too late, the English bestirred themselves. For some
months there had been on foot among them a Crusade, which Pope
Urban VI. had proclaimed against the supporters of the rival
Pope Clement VII.--the "Schismatics." France took the side of
the latter and was counted among the Schismatics. Accordingly,
Pope Urban's Crusade, so far as the English people could be moved
to engage in it, was now directed against the French in
Flanders. It was led by the Bishop of Norwich, who succeeded
in rousing a very considerable degree of enthusiasm in the
country for the movement, despite the earnest opposition of
Wyclif and his followers. The crusading army assembled at
Calais in the spring of 1383, professedly for a campaign in
France; but the Bishop found excuses for leading it into
Flanders. Gravelines was first attacked, carried by storm, and
its male defenders slaughtered to a man. An army of French and
Flemings, encountered near Dunkirk, was routed, with fearful
carnage, and the whole coast, including Dunkirk, fell into the
hands of the English. Then they laid siege to Ypres, and there
their disasters began. The city held out with stubbornness
from the 9th of June until the 10th of August, when the
baffled besiegers--repulsed in a last desperate assault which
they had made on the 8th--marched away. "Ypres might rejoice,
but the disasters of the long siege proved final. Her stately
faubourgs were not rebuilt, and she has never again taken her
former rank among the cities of Flanders." In September a
powerful French army entered Flanders, and the English
crusaders could do nothing but retreat before it, giving up
Cassel (which the French burned), then Bergues, then
Bourbourg, after a siege, and, finally, setting fire to
Gravelines and abandoning that place. "Gravelines was utterly
destroyed, but the French soon began to rebuild it. It was
repeopled from the surrounding country, and fortified strongly
as a menace to Calais." The Crusaders returned to England
"'dripping with blood and disgracing their country. Blessed be
God who confounds the proud,' says one sharp critic, who
appears to have been a monk of Canterbury."
G. M. Wrong,
The Crusade of MCCCLXXXIII.
ALSO IN
Sir J. Froissart, (Johnes),
Chronicles
book 2, chapters 130-145 (volumes 1-2).
FLANDERS: A. D. 1383
Joined to the Dominions of the Duke of Burgundy.
"Charles V. [of France] had formed the design of obtaining
Flanders for his brother Philip, Duke of Burgundy, afterwards
known as Philip the Bold--by marrying him to Margaret
[daughter and heiress of Louis de Maele, count of Flanders].
To gain the good will of the Communes, he engaged to restore
the three bailiwicks of Lille, Douai, and Orchies as a
substitute for the 10,000 livres a year promised to Louis de
Maele and his successors in 1351, as well as the towns of
Peronne, Crèvecœur, Arleux and Château-Chinon, assigned to him
in 1358. ... On the 13th May, 1369, the 'Lion of Flanders'
once more floated, after an interval of half a century, over
the walls of Lille, Douai, and Orchies, and at the same time
Flemish garrisons marched into St. Omer, Aire, Bethune and
Hesdin. The marriage ceremony took place at Ghent on the 19th
of June." The Duke of Burgundy waited fourteen years for the
heritage of his wife. In January, 1383, Count Louis died, and
Flanders was added to the great and growing dominion of the
new Burgundian house.
J. Hutton,
James and Philip van Arteveld,
chapters 14 and 18.
See BURGUNDY (THE FRENCH DUKEDOM): A. D. 1364.
{1129}
FLANDERS: A. D. 1451-1453.
Revolt against the Burgundian Gabelle.
See GHENT: A. D. 1451-1453.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1477.
Severance from Burgundy.
Transference to the Austrian House by marriage of Mary of
Burgundy.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1477.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1482-1488.
Resistance to Maximilian.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1482-1493.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1494-1588.
The Austro-Spanish sovereignty and its oppressions.
The great revolt and its failure in the Flemish provinces.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1494-1519, and after.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1529.
Pretensions of the king of France to Suzerainty resigned.
See ITALY: A. D. 1527-1529.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1539-1540.
The unsupported revolt of Ghent.
See GHENT: A. D. 1539-1540.
FLANDERS: A. D. 1594-1884.
Later history.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1594-1609, to 1830-1884.
----------FLANDERS: End----------
FLATHEAD INDIANS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: FLATHEADS.
FLAVIA CÆSARIENSIS.
See BRITAIN: A. D. 323-337.
FLAVIAN AMPHITHEATRE, The.
See COLOSSEUM.
FLAVIAN FAMILY, The.
"We have designated the second period of the [Roman] Empire by
the name of the Flavian family--the family of Vespasian [Titus
Flavius Vespasian]. The nine Emperors who were successively
invested with the purple, in the space of the 123 years from
his accession, were not all, however, of Flavian race, even by
the rites of adoption, which in Rome was become a second
nature; but the respect of the world for the virtues of
Flavius Vespasian induced them all to assume his name, and
most of them showed themselves worthy of such an affiliation.
Vespasian had been invested with the purple at Alexandria, on
the 1st of July, A. D. 69; he died in 79. His two sons reigned
in succession after him; Titus, from 79 to 81; Domitian, from 81
to 96. The latter having been assassinated, Nerva, then an old
man, was raised to the throne by the Senate (A. D. 96-98). He
adopted Trajan (98-117); who adopted Adrian (117-138). Adrian
adopted Antoninus Pius (138-161); who adopted Marcus Aurelius
(161-180); and Commodus succeeded his father, Marcus Aurelius
(180-192). No period in history presents such a succession of
good and great men upon any throne: two monsters, Domitian and
Commodus, interrupt and terminate it."
J. C. L. Sismondi,
Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 2.
FLEETWOOD, OR BRANDY STATION, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JUNE: VIRGINIA).
FLEIX, The Peace of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1578-1580.
FLEMINGS.--FLEMISH.
See FLANDERS.
FLEMISH GUILDS.
See GUILDS OF FLANDERS.
FLEURUS, Battle of (1622).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1621-1633.
FLEURUS, Battle of (1690).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1689-1690.
FLEURUS, Battle of (1794).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (MARCH-JULY).
FLODDEN, Battle of (A. D. 1513).
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1513.
FLORALIA, The.
See LUDI.
FLORÉAL, The month.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (OCTOBER).
FLORENCE:
Origin and Name:
"Fæsulre was situated on a hill above Florence. Florentine
traditions call it the metropolis of Florence, which would
accordingly be a colony of Fæsulre; but a statement in
Machiavelli and others describes Florence as a colony of
Sulla, and this statement must have been derived from some
local chronicle. Fæsulre was no doubt an ancient Etruscan
town, probably one of the twelve. It was taken in the war of
Sulla [B. C. 82-81]. ... My conjecture is, that Sulla not only
built a strong fort on the top of the hill of Fæsulre, but
also the new colony of Florentia below, and gave to it the
'ager Fæsulanus.'"
B. G. Niebuhr,
Lectures on Ancient Ethnography and Geography.
volume 2, page 228.
"We can reasonably suppose that the ancient trading nations
may have pushed their small craft up the Arno to the present
site of Florence, and thus have gained a more immediate
communication with the flourishing city of Fiesole than they
could through other ports of Etruria, from whatever race its
people might have sprung. Admitting the high antiquity of
Fiesole, the imagined work of Atlas, and the tomb of his
celestial daughter, we may easily believe that a market was
from very early times established in the plain, where both by
land and water the rural produce could be brought for sale
without ascending the steep on which that city stood. Such
arrangements would naturally result from the common course of
events, and a more convenient spot could scarcely be found
than the present site of Florence, to which the Arno is still
navigable by boats from its mouth, and at that time perhaps by
two branches. ... 'There were,' says Villani, 'inhabitants
round San Giovanni, because the people of Fiesole held their
market there one day in the week, and it was called the Field
of Mars, the ancient name: however it was always, from the
first, the market of the Fiesolines, and thus it was called
before Florence existed.'
{1130}
And again: 'The Pæetor Florinus, with a Roman army, encamped
beyond the Arno towards Fiesole and had two small villages
there, ... where the people of Fiesole one day in the week
held a general market with the neighbouring towns and
villages. ... On the site of this camp, as we are also assured
by Villani, was erected the city of Florence, after the
capture of Fiesole by Pompey, Cæsar, and Martius; but Leonardo
Aretino, following Malespini, asserts that it was the work of
Sylla's legions, who were already in possession of Fiesole.
... The variety of opinions almost equals the number of
authors. ... It may be reasonably concluded that Florence,
springing originally from Fiesole, finally rose to the rank of
a Roman colony and the seat of provincial government; a
miniature of Rome, with its Campus Martius, its Capitol,
Forum, temple of Mars, aqueducts, baths, theatre and
amphitheatre, all erected in imitation of the 'Eternal City;'
for vestiges of all these are still existing either in name or
substance. The name of Florence is as dark as its origin, and
a thousand derivations have confused the brains of
antiquarians and their readers without much enlightening them,
while the beautiful Giagiolo or Iris, the city's emblem, still
clings to her old grey walls, as if to assert its right to be
considered as the genuine source of her poetic appellation.
From the profusion of these flowers that formerly decorated
the meads between the rivers Mugnone and Arno, has sprung one
of the most popular opinions on the subject; for a white plant
of the same species having shown itself amongst the rising
fabrics, the incident was poetically seized upon and the Lily
then first assumed its station in the crimson banner of
Florence."
H. E. Napier,
Florentine History,
book 1, chapter 1.
FLORENCE: A. D. 406.
Siege by Radagaisus.
Deliverance by Stilicho.
See ROME: A. D. 404-408.
FLORENCE: 12th Century.
Acquisition of republican independence.
"There is ... an assertion by Villani, that Florence contained
twenty-two thousand fighting men, without counting the old men
and children,' about the middle of the sixth century; and
modern statisticians have based on this statement an estimate
which would make the population of the city at that period
about sixty-one thousand. There are reasons too for believing
that very little difference in the population took place
during several centuries after that time. Then came the sudden
increase arising from the destruction, more or less entire, of
Fiesole, and the incorporation of its inhabitants with those
of the newer city, which led to the building of the second
walls. ... An estimate taking the inhabitants of the city at
something between seventy and eighty thousand at the period
respecting which we are inquiring [beginning of the 12th
century] would in all probability be not very wide of the
mark. The government of the city was at that time lodged in
the hands of magistrates exercising both legislative and
administrative authority, called Consuls, assisted by a senate
composed of a hundred citizens of worth--buoni uomini. These
Consuls 'guided everything, and governed the city, and decided
causes, and administered justice.' They remained in office for
one year. How long this form of government had been
established in Florence is uncertain. It was not in existence
in the year 897; but it was in activity in 1102. From 1138 we
have a nearly complete roll of the names of the consuls for
each year down to 1219. ... The first recorded deeds of the
young community thus governed, and beginning to feel conscious
and proud of its increasing strength, were characteristic
enough of the tone of opinion and sentiment which prevailed
within its walls, and of the career on which it was entering.
'In the year 1107,' says Malispini, 'the city of Florence
being much increased, the Florentines, wishing to extend their
territory, determined to make war against any castle or
fortress which would not be obedient to them. And in that year
they took by force Monte Orlando, which belonged to certain
gentlemen who would not be obedient to the city. And they were
defeated, and the castle was destroyed.' These 'gentlemen,' so
styled by the civic historian who thus curtly records the
destruction of their home, in contradistinction to the
citizens who by no means considered themselves such, were the
descendants or representatives of those knights and captains,
mostly of German race, to whom the Emperors had made grants of
the soil according to the feudal practice and system. They
held directly of the Empire, and in no wise owed allegiance or
obedience of any sort to the community of Florence. But they
occupied almost all the country around the rising city; and
the citizens' wanted to extend their territory.' Besides,
these territorial lords were, as has been said, gentlemen, and
lived as such, stopping wayfarers on the highways, levying tolls
in the neighbourhood of their strongholds, and in many ways
making themselves disagreeable neighbours to peaceable folks.
... The next incident on the record, however, would seem to
show that peaceful townsfolk as well as marauding nobles were
liable to be overrun by the car of manifest destiny, if they
came in the way of it. 'In the same year,' says the curt old
historian, 'the men of Prato rebelled against the Florentines;
wherefore they went out in battle against it, and took it by
siege and destroyed it.' Prato rebelled against Florence! It
is a very singular statement; for there is not the shadow of a
pretence put forward, or the smallest ground for imagining
that Florence had or could have claimed any sort of suzerainty
over Prato. ... The territorial nobles, however, who held
castles in the district around Florence were the principal
objects of the early prowess of the citizens; and of course
offence against them was offence against the Emperor. ... In
1113, accordingly, we find an Imperial vicar residing in
Tuscany at St. Miniato; not the convent-topped hill of that
name in the immediate neighbourhood of Florence, but a little
mountain city of the same name, overlooking the lower
Valdarno, about half way between Florence and Pisa. ... There
the Imperial Vicars perched themselves hawk-like, with their
Imperial troops, and swooped down from time to time to
chastise and bring back such cities of the plain as too
audaciously set at naught the authority of the Emperor. And
really these upstart Florentines were taking the bit between
their teeth, and going on in a way that no Imperial Vicar
could tolerate. ... So the indignant cry of the harried Counts
Cadolingi, and of several other nobles holding of the Empire,
whose houses had been burned over their heads by these
audacious citizens, went up to the ears of 'Messer Ruberto,'
the Vicar, in San Miniato.
{1131}
Whereupon that noble knight, indignant at the wrong done to
his fellow nobles, as well as at the offence against the
authority of his master the Emperor, forthwith put lance in
rest, called out his men, and descended from his mountain
fortress to take summary vengeance on the audacious city. On
his way thither he had to pass through that very gorge where
the castle of Monte Orlando had stood, and under the ruins of
the house from which the noble vassals of the Empire had been
harried. ... There were the leathern-jerkined citizens on the
very scene of their late misdeed, come out to oppose the
further progress of the Emperor's Vicar and his soldiers. And
there, as the historian writes, with curiously impassible
brevity, 'the said Messer Ruberto was discomfited and killed.'
And nothing further is heard of him, or of any after
consequences resulting from the deed. Learned legal
antiquaries insist much on the fact, that the independence of
Florence and the other Communes was never 'recognised' by the
Emperors; and they are no doubt perfectly accurate in saying
so. One would think, however, that that unlucky Vicar of
theirs, Messer Ruberto, must have 'recognised' the fact,
though somewhat tardily."
T. A. Trollope,
History of the Commonwealth of Florence,
book 1, chapter 1 (volume 1).
Countess Matilda, the famous friend of Pope Gregory VII.,
whose wide dominion included Tuscany, died in 1115,
bequeathing her vast possessions to the Church.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1077-1102.
"In reality she was only entitled thus to bequeath her
allodial lands, the remainder being imperial fiefs. But as it
was not always easy to distinguish between the two sorts, and
the popes were naturally anxious to get as much as they could,
a fresh source of contention was added to the constant
quarrels between the Empire and the Church. 'Henry IV.
immediately despatched a representative into Tuscany, who
under the title of Marchio, Judex, or Praeses, was to govern
the Marquisate in his name.' 'Nobody,' says Professor Villari,
'could legally dispute his right to do this: but the
opposition of the Pope, the attitude of the towns which now
considered themselves independent and the universal confusion
rendered the Marquis's authority illusory. The imperial
representatives had no choice but to put themselves at the
head of the feudal nobility of the contado and unite it into a
Germanic party hostile to the cities. In the documents of the
period the members of this party are continually described as
Teutonici.' By throwing herself in this juncture on the side
of the Pope, and thus becoming the declared opponent of the
empire and the feudal lords, Florence practically proclaimed
her independence. The grandi, having the same interests with
the working classes, identified themselves with these; became
their leaders, their consuls in fact if not yet in name. Thus
was the consular commune born, or, rather, thus did it
recognize itself on reaching manhood; for born, in reality, it
had already been for some time, only so quietly and
unconsciously that nobody had marked its origin or, until now,
its growth. The first direct consequence of this
self-recognition was that the rulers were chosen out of a
larger number of families. As long as Matilda had chosen the
officers to whom the government of the town was entrusted, the
Uberti and a few others who formed their clan, their kinsmen, and
their connections had been selected, to the exclusion of the
mass of the citizens. Now more people were admitted to a share
in the administration: the offices were of shorter duration,
and out of those selected to govern each family had its turn.
But those who had formerly been privileged--the Uberti and
others of the same tendencies and influence--were necessarily
discontented with this state of things, and there are
indications in Villani of burnings and of tumults such as
later, when the era of faction fights had fairly begun, so
often desolated the streets of Florence."
B. Duffy,
The Tuscan Republics,
chapter 6.
See ITALY: A. D. 1056-1152.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1215-1250.
The beginning, the causes and the meaning of the strife of the
Guelfs and Ghibellines.
Nearly from the beginning of the 13th century, all Italy, and
Florence more than other Italian communities, became
distracted and convulsed by a contest of raging factions. "The
main distinction was that between Ghibellines and Guelphs--two
names in their origin far removed from Italy. They were first
heard in Germany in 1140, when at Winsberg in Suabia a battle
was fought between two contending claimants of the Empire; the
one, Conrad of Hohenstauffen, Duke of Franconia, chose for his
battle-cry 'Waiblingen,' the name of his patrimonial castle in
Würtemburg; the other, Henry the Lion, Duke of Saxony, chose
his own family name of 'Welf,' or 'Wölf.' Conrad proved
victorious, and his kindred to the fourth ensuing generation
occupied the imperial throne; yet both war-cries survived the
contest which gave them birth, lingering on in Germany as
equivalents of Imperialist and anti-Imperialist. By a process
perfectly clear to philologists, they were modified in Italy
into the forms Ghibellino and Guelfo; and the Popes being
there the great opponents of the Emperors, an Italian Guelph
was a Papalist. The cities were mainly Guelph; the nobles most
frequently Ghibelline. A private feud had been the means of
involving Florence in the contest."
M. F. Rossetti,
A Shadow of Dante,
chapter 3.
"The Florentines kept themselves united till the year 1215,
rendering obedience to the ruling power, and anxious only to
preserve their own safety. But, as the diseases which attack
our bodies are more dangerous and mortal in proportion as they
are delayed, so Florence, though late to take part in the
sects of Italy, was afterwards the more afflicted by them. The
cause of her first division is well known, having been
recorded by Dante and many other writers; I shall, however,
briefly notice it. Amongst the most powerful families of
Florence were the Buondelmonti and the Uberti; next to these
were the Amidei and the Donati. Of the Donati family there was
a rich widow who had a daughter of exquisite beauty, for whom, in
her own mind, she had fixed upon Buondelmonti, a young
gentleman, the head of the Buondelmonti family, as her
husband; but either from negligence, or because she thought it
might be accomplished at any time, she had not made known her
intention, when it happened that the cavalier betrothed
himself to a maiden of the Amidei family. This grieved the
Donati widow exceedingly; but she hoped, with her daughter's
beauty, to disturb the arrangement before the celebration of
the marriage; and from an upper apartment, seeing Buondelmonti
approach her house alone, she descended, and as he was passing
she said to him, 'I am glad to learn you have chosen a wife,
although I had reserved my daughter for you'; and, pushing the
door open, presented her to his view.
{1132}
The cavalier, seeing the beauty of the girl, ... became
inflamed with such an ardent desire to possess her, that, not
thinking of the promise given, or the injury he committed in
breaking it, or of the evils which his breach of faith might
bring upon himself, said, 'Since you have reserved her for me,
I should be very ungrateful indeed to refuse her, being yet at
liberty to choose'; and without any delay married her. As soon
as the fact became known, the Amidei and the Uberti, whose
families were allied, were filled with rage," and some of
them, lying in wait for him, assassinated him as he was riding
through the streets. "This murder divided the whole city; one
party espousing the cause of the Buondelmonti, the other that
of the Uberti; and ... they contended with each other for many
years, without one being able to destroy the other. Florence
continued in these troubles till the time of Frederick II.,
who, being king of Naples, endeavoured to strengthen himself
against the church; and, to give greater stability to his
power in Tuscany, favoured the Uberti and their followers,
who, with his assistance, expelled the Buondelmonti; thus our
city, as all the rest of Italy had long time been, became
divided into Guelphs and Ghibellines."
N. Machiavelli,
History of Florence,
book 2, chapter 1.
"Speaking generally, the Ghibellines were the party of the
emperor, and the Guelphs the party of the Pope; the
Ghibellines were on the side of authority, or sometimes of
oppression, the Guelphs were on the side of liberty and
self-government. Again, the Ghibellines were the supporters of
an universal empire of which Italy was to be the head, the
Guelphs were on the side of national life and national
individuality. ... If these definitions could be considered as
exhaustive, there would be little doubt as to the side to
which our sympathies should be given. ... We should ... expect
all patriots to be Guelphs, and the Ghibelline party to be
composed of men who were too spiritless to resist despotic
power, or too selfish to surrender it. But, on the other hand,
we must never forget that Dante was a Ghibelline."
O. Browning,
Guelphs and Ghibellines,
chapter 2.
See, also, ITALY: A. D. 1215.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1248-1278.
The wars of a generation of the Guelfs and Ghibellines.
In 1248, the Ghibellines, at the instigation of Frederick II.,
and with help from his German soldiery, expelled the Guelfs
from the city, after desperate fighting for several days, and
destroyed the mansions of their chiefs, to the number of 38.
In 1250 there was a rising of the people--of the under-stratum
which the cleavage of parties hardly penetrated--and a popular
constitution of government was brought into force. At the same
time, the high towers, which were the strongholds of the
contending nobles, were thrown down. An attempt was then made
by the leaders of the people to restore peace between the
Ghibellines and the Guelfs, but the effort was vain; whereupon
the Guelfs (in January, 1251) came back to the city, and the
Ghibellines were either driven away or were shut up in their
city castles, to which they had retired when the people rose.
In 1258 the restless Ghibellines plotted with Manfred, King of
the Two Sicilies, to regain possession of Florence. The plot
was discovered, and the enraged people drove the last
lingerers of the faction from their midst and pulled down
their palaces. The great palace of the Uberti family, most
obnoxious of all, was not only razed, but a decree was made
that no building should ever stand again on its accursed site.
The exiled Ghibellines took refuge at Siena, and there plotted
again with King Manfred, who sent troops to aid them. The
Florentines did not wait to be attacked, but marched out to
meet them on Sienese territory, and suffered a terrible defeat
at Montaperti (September 4, 1260), in the battle that Dante
refers to, "which coloured the river Arbia red." "'On that
day,' says Villani, ... 'was broken and destroyed the old
popular government of Florence, which had existed for ten
years with so great power and dignity, and had won so many
victories.' Few events have ever left a more endurable
impression on the memory of a people than this great battle
between two cities and parties animated both of them by the
most unquenchable hatred. The memory of that day has lasted
through 600 years, more freshly perhaps in Siena than in
Florence." As a natural consequence of their defeat at
Montaperti, the Guelfs were again forced to fly into exile
from Florence, and this expatriation included a large number
of even the commoner people. "So thorough had been the defeat,
so complete the Ghibelline ascendency resulting from it, that
in every city the same scene on a lesser scale was taking
place. Many of the smaller towns, which had always been Guelph
in their sympathies, were now subjected to Ghibelline
despotism. One refuge alone remained in Tuscany--Lucca. ...
And thither the whole body of the expatriated Guelphs betook
themselves. ... The Ghibellines entered Florence in triumph on
the 16th of September, three days after their enemies had left
it. ... The city seemed like a desert. The gates were standing
open and unguarded; the streets were empty; the comparatively
few inhabitants who remained, almost entirely of the lowest
class of the populace, were shut up in their obscure
dwellings, or were on their knees in the churches. And what
was worse, the conquerors did not come back alone. They had
invited a foreign despot to restore order;" and so King
Manfred's general, Giordano da Anglona, established Count
Guido Novello in Florence as Manfred's vicar. "All the
constitutional authorities established by the people, and the
whole frame-work of the former government, were destroyed, and
the city was ruled entirely by direction transmitted from the
King's Sicilian court." There were serious proposals, even,
that Florence itself should be destroyed, and the saving of
the noble city from that untimely fate is credited to one
patriotic noble, of the Uberti family, who withstood the
proposition, alone. "The Ghibelline army marched on Lucca, and
had not much more difficulty in reducing that city. The
government was put into Ghibelline hands, and Lucca became a
Ghibelline city like all the rest of Tuscany. The Lucchese
were not required by the victors to turn their own Guelphs out
of the city. But it was imperatively insisted on that every
Guelph not a native citizen should be thrust forth from the
gates." The unfortunate Florentines, thus made homeless again,
now found shelter at Bologna, and presently helped their friends
at Modena and Reggio to overcome the Ghibellines in those
cities and recover control. But for five years their condition
was one of wretchedness. Then Charles of Anjou was brought
into Italy (1265) by the Pope, to snatch the crown of the Two
Sicilies from King Manfred, and succeeded in his undertaking.
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1250-1268.
{1133}
The prop of the Ghibellines was broken. Guido Novello and his
troopers rode away from Florence; 800 French horsemen, sent by
the new Angevine king, under Guy de Montfort, took their
places; the Guelfs swarmed in again--the Ghibellines swarmed
out; the popular constitution was restored, with new features
more popular than before. In 1273 there was a great attempt
made by Pope Gregory X. in person, to reconcile the factions
in Florence; but it had so little success that the Holy Father
left the city in disgust and pronounced it under interdict for
three years. In 1278 the attempt was renewed with somewhat
better success. "'And now, says Villani, 'the Ghibellines were
at liberty to return to Florence, they and their families. ...
And the said Ghibellines had back again their goods and
possessions; except that certain of the leading families were
ordered, for the safety of the city, to remain for a certain
time beyond the boundaries of the Florentine territory.' In
fact, little more is heard henceforward of the Ghibellines as
a faction within the walls of Florence. The old name, as a
rallying cry for the Tory or Imperialist party, was still
raised here and there in Tuscany; and Pisa still called
herself Ghibelline. But the stream of progress had run past
them and left them stranded."
T. A. Trollope,
History of the Commonwealth of Florence,
book 1, chapters 4-5,
and book 2, chapter 1 (volume 1).
ALSO IN
N. Machiavelli,
Florentine Histories,
book 1.
J. C. L. de Sismondi,
History of the Italian Republics,
chapter 4.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1250-1293.
Development of the popular constitution of the Commonwealth.
When it became clear that the republic was to rule itself
henceforth untrammelled by imperial interference, the people
[in 1250] divided themselves into six districts, and chose for
each district two Ancients, who administered the government in
concert with the Potestà and the Captain of the People. The
Ancients were a relic of the old Roman municipal organization.
... The body of the citizens, or the popolo, were ultimately
sovereigns in the State. Assembled under the banners of their
several companies, they formed a parlamento for delegating
their own power to each successive government. Their
representatives, again, arranged in two councils, called the
Council of the People and the Council of the Commune, under
the presidency of the Captain of the People and the Potestà,
ratified the measures which had previously been proposed and
carried by the executive authority or signoria. Under this
simple State system the Florentines placed themselves at the
head of the Tuscan League, fought the battles of the Church,
asserted their sovereignty by issuing the golden florin of the
republic, and flourished until 1266. In that year an important
change was effected in the Constitution. The whole population
of Florence consisted, on the one hand, of nobles or Grandi,
as they were called in Tuscany, and on the other hand of
working people. The latter, divided into traders and
handicraftsmen, were distributed in guilds called Arti; and at
that time there were seven Greater and five Lesser Arti, the most
influential of all being the Guild of the Wool Merchants.
These guilds had their halls for meeting, their colleges of
chief officers, their heads, called Consoli or Priors, and
their flags. In 1266 it was decided that the administration of
the commonwealth should be placed simply and wholly in the
hands of the Arti, and the Priors of these industrial
companies became the lords or Signory of Florence. No
inhabitant of the city who had not enrolled himself as a
craftsman in one of the guilds could exercise any function of
burghership. To be scioperato, or without industry, was to be
without power, without rank or place of honour in the State.
The revolution which placed the Arts at the head of the
republic had the practical effect of excluding the Grandi
altogether from the government. ... In 1293, after the
Ghibellines had been defeated in the great battle of
Campaldino, a series of severe enactments, called the
Ordinances of Justice, were decreed against the unruly Grandi.
All civic rights were taken from them; the severest penalties
were attached to their slightest infringement of municipal
law; their titles to land were limited; the privilege of
living within the city walls was allowed them only under
galling restrictions; and last not least, a supreme
magistrate, named the Gonfalonier of Justice, was created for
the special purpose of watching them and carrying out the
penal code against them. Henceforward Florence was governed
exclusively by merchants and artisans. The Grandi hastened to
enroll themselves in the guilds, exchanging their former
titles and dignities for the solid privilege of burghership.
The exact parallel to this industrial constitution for a
commonwealth, carrying on wars with emperors and princes,
holding haughty captains in its pay, and dictating laws to
subject cities, cannot, I think, be elsewhere found in
history. It is as unique as the Florence of Dante and Giotto
is unique."
J. A. Symonds,
Florence and the Medici
(Sketches and Studies in Italy, chapter 5).
ALSO IN
C. Balbo,
Life and Times of Dante,
volume 1, Introduction.
A. Von Reumont,
Lorenzo de Medici,
book 1, chapter 1.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1284-1293.
War with Pisa.
See PISA: A. D. 1063-1293.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1289.
The victory of Campaldino, and the jealousy among its heroes.
In 1289 the Ghibellines of Arezzo having expelled the Guelfs
from that city, the Florentines made war in the cause of the
latter and won a great victory at Campaldino. This "raised the
renown and the military spirit of the Guelf party, for the
fame of the battle was very great; the hosts contained the
choicest chivalry of either side, armed and appointed with
emulous splendour. The fighting was hard, there was brilliant
and conspicuous gallantry, and the victory was complete. It
sealed Guelf ascendency. The Ghibelline warrior-bishop of
Arezzo fell, with three of the Uberti, and other Ghibelline
chiefs. ... In this battle the Guelf leaders had won great
glory. The hero of the day was the proudest, handsomest,
craftiest, most winning, most ambitious, most unscrupulous
Guelf noble in Florence--one of a family who inherited the
spirit and recklessness of the proscribed Uberti, and did not
refuse the popular epithet of 'Malefami'--Corso Donati.
{1134}
He did not come back from the field of Campaldino, where he
had won the battle by disobeying orders, with any increased
disposition to yield to rivals, or court the populace, or
respect other men's rights. Those rivals, too--and they also
had fought gallantly in the post of honour at Campaldino--were
such as he hated from his soul--rivals whom he despised, and
who yet were too strong for him [the family of the Cerchi].
His blood was ancient, they were upstarts; he was a soldier,
they were traders; he was poor, they the richest men in
Florence. ... They had crossed him in marriages, bargains,
inheritances. ... The glories of Campaldino were not as oil on
these troubled waters. The conquerors flouted each other all
the more fiercely in the streets on their return, and
ill-treated the lower people with less scruple."