Calendar of State Papers, Spain, Volume 3 Part 2, 1527-1529. Originally published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1877.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.


, 'Introduction', in Calendar of State Papers, Spain, Volume 3 Part 2, 1527-1529, (London, 1877) pp. i-xxxvi. British History Online [accessed 30 May 2024].

. "Introduction", in Calendar of State Papers, Spain, Volume 3 Part 2, 1527-1529, (London, 1877) i-xxxvi. British History Online, accessed May 30, 2024,

. "Introduction", Calendar of State Papers, Spain, Volume 3 Part 2, 1527-1529, (London, 1877). i-xxxvi. British History Online. Web. 30 May 2024,


The present volume, or Part II. of the Calendar of Papers Letters, &c. relating to the Negotiations between England and Spain, comprises the period from January 1527 to May 1529. It was the editor's original plan to extend the compilation to August, when the peace of Cambray, or " La Paix des Dames " as it has been ingeniously called by French writers, was concluded and signed; but from the already immoderate size of the volume, and the mass of letters and documents still to be abstracted and calendered, he has judged it better that this volume should end at that period of time when Margaret of Austria and Louise de Savoie, equally anxious for peace, yet desirous of not wounding in any way the susceptibilities of Charles and Francis, first met at Cambray to discuss the preliminaries of a general peace. The moment, indeed, could not have been better chosen: the Italian war was fast drawing to a close; both conqueror and conquered were growing sick of the conflict, and Europe sighed for peace. A separate convention was being negociated at Barcelona, and the Emperor himself was preparing to land in Italy for the purpose of receiving the Imperial Crown from the hands of Clement. The efforts of the two ladies were therefore crowned with success, and the peace of Cambray, definitively signed on the 5th of August, was ratified by the contracting powers early in September.

Respecting the sources from which the papers and documents abstracted in this Second Part are respectively derived, the editor has little to add to the statements already made in the Introduction to the First. No further discovery has been made, and, notwithstanding the announcement so frequently made of the speedy removal of the Spanish Public Records to Toledo or Alcalá, they are still suffered to remain in their place at the Castle of Simancas, about six miles from Valladolid, in bad order from the absence of proper registers, and with no greater facilities of access to the historical student.

The same observation may be applied to the writers of this correspondence. With one or two exceptions, the Imperial agents in Italy were the same as in 1525 and 1526, the period embraced in the First Part. The Duke of Sessa [Don Luis Fernandez de Cordoba], who died at Rome on the 18th of August 1527, a few days before the surprise and partial sacking of the Holy City by Don Hugo de Moncada and the Colonnese, was succeeded by his secretary, Juan Perez, of whose ability and zeal for the Imperial service abundant proofs are given in his numerous and well-penned despatches, generally written in cipher, and mostly in his own hand. He it was, who, in compliance with orders received from Charles, was bold enough, on the 12th of December 1526, to present to the Cardinals assembled in Consistory the threatening letter of Charles in answer to the Pope's brief of the 23d June,—an act (fn. n1) which so provoked Clement's anger that not considering himself secure at Rome, Perez left abruptly for Naples and never returned, as long as Clement lived, to the estates of the Church. On the 26th of January 1527 he wrote to the Emperor: "Much difference " of opinion prevails here amongst the Cardinals as to " whether your Imperial Majesty had, or had not, a right " to ask for a general council of the Church. I have been " told by some of them that your Majesty's letter was " conceived in rather harsh words, and that your wishes " might have been expressed in terms more decorous and " mild." Again, on 23d of February: "I have repeatedly " been told that my life is in danger, as the Pope " is exceedingly angry with me on many accounts, and " principally for having presented the Imperial letters " summoning him to assemble a Council of the Church. " Letters have been received here from England expressing " surprise that I had not been immediately committed " to prison for such a daring, and they add disrespectful, " act. This, however, will be no reason for my abandoning " this post unless I receive express orders to that " effect; I will rather die a martyr in the Emperor's service."

Later on, in March, Perez was accused by the Pope of being in treaty with Count Pitigliano and with a son-in- law of Cardinal Farnese for the purpose of creating a revolution at Viterbo and Orbieto, and making those cities declare for the Emperor; and not only did Clement credit the report, which, according to Perez, was quite false, but he told Knight-Commander Aguilera, who repeated it to him: "Were it not for the Emperor's sake I would have that man thrown into a dungeon."

Again, after the sack of Rome, and when Perez, leaving the Imperial affairs in charge of Dr. Solis, had retired to Naples with the army, he was formally accused of sending a dominican friar to Viterbo to take away the Pope's life!

At Naples Perez went on writing to the Emperor and his ministers in Spain—in what capacity is not exactly known—giving a detailed account of the events of the siege till the death of Lautrec and subsequent defeat of the French on the road to Aversa. "Whether he then returned to Spain, or was again employed in the diplomatic service is a point which I have hitherto been unable to ascertain, since he disappears suddenly from the scene, in Italy at least.

Lope de Soria remained in charge of the Imperial affairs in Genoa until the taking of that city by the confederates on the 18th of August 1527, which obliged him to take refuge with the deposed Doge, Antoniotto Adorno, in the estates of Gian Francesco Pico, lord of La Mirandola, by whom he was kindly received and, according to his own account, "handsomely entertained." Some time after, in consequence of the demise of Fernando Marin, the Abbot of Najera, who died at Rome from the plague, he was appointed to the post of Commissary-General of the Imperial armies (fn. n2) in Italy. His despatches in that capacity are highly important as depicting in vivid colours the disorderly habits of Imperial administrators; the almost total want of resources to carry on the war; the insubordination and mutinous spirit of the army; the frequent squabbles of the Imperial generals; his own dissensions with Duke Henry of Brunswick, who once threatened to have him arrested, (fn. n3) and above all his own views on the political changes and proclamation of the "Union" at Genoa, where he tried, though unsuccessfully, to be reinstated as Imperial ambassador.

Alonzo Sanchez remained at his post in Venice even after the declaration of war made by the confederates to Charles. He had formerly as his colleague in that embassy Prothonotary Marino Caracciolo, who in 1527 was promoted to the post of Chief Justice and Chancellor of the Duchy of Milan. Sanchez was not allowed to quit Venice until the ambassador of the Signory, Navagiero, reached the frontiers of France. He then removed to La Mirandola, to Mantua, Reggio, and Piacenza, wherever he considered himself most secure, and finally went to Naples, at which city he obtained the place of Imperial Treasurer.

Lope Hurtado, who had formerly been employed by Charles in various important missions to Savoy, Milan, and Rome, was in 1528 sent to Portugal as ambassador, there to promote the sale, or rather pawning, of the Spice Islands to Dorn Joāo III., for a large sum of money, as well as the recovery of Isabella's marriage portion, and lastly to procure the assistance of that monarch first in his intended duel with Francis, and secondly in Katharine's divorce case.

Suarez de Figueroa,
The easy possession of Genoa by the French had arisen not so much from the wish of the inhabitants to throw off the Imperial yoke, as from their desire to proclaim what was called the "Union" of the Fregosi and Adorni. The refusal, however, by France to surrender Savona, and place it again under the direct dominion of the Community, as it was before, contributed in no small degree to alienate the affections of the Genoese. At this juncture Andrea Doria, who from various causes had previously forsaken the part of France, personally interfered, and, having made his peace with the Emperor, was enabled to establish his rule Suarez de Figueroa. in Genoa as chief magistrate of that Community. Gomez third count and afterwards first duke of Feria, (fn. n4) was the person designated by Charles to represent him at Genoa, and keep Andrea Doria firm in his service. He appears from his despatches, which, however, are not so frequent as might have been desired, to have been a shrewd and clearsighted politician well versed in Italian affairs, and principally in those connected with Genoa.

During the few months that elapsed between Clement's hasty flight from Sant Angelo and his return to Rome, the Imperial affairs at the Papal Court were conducted by Giovan Antonio Muxetola, a Neapolitan lawyer. Whether he was or was not directly accredited by Charles is difficult to determine. He seems to have resided first at Orbieto, and afterwards at Viterbo for the express purpose of treating of certain business relating to Naples, and only as agent of the Viceroy and Collateral Council of that Kingdom. That he had besides something to do with the divorce case, such as presenting petitions and entering protests in the Emperor's name, conjointly with the general of the Franciscans or Minor Observant Friars, and that he otherwise took charge of Katharine's affairs at Rome until the arrival of Miçer Mai, appears from the letters abstracted in this volume. His name is variously spelt: Muscetula, (fn. n5) Muxetula or Mussetola, according to the dialects of the various writers; but in this case, as in others, I have followed the form most used by the native historians. (fn. n6)

Of Fr. Francisco de Quiñones, or "de Los Angeles," as he is more generally called previous to his obtaining the purple under the title of Cardinal Santa Croce, some account is necessary, as he played no inconsiderable part in the affairs of the time. He was the second son of Don Diego Fernandez de Quiñones, first Count of Luna, the representative of an ancient and illustrious family in the kingdom of Leon. Having from early youth manifested a vocation for the Church, he entered a convent of Franciscans when he was scarcely sixteen, obtained in 1519 the priorate of Los Angeles, near Cáceres, in Extremadura, and became a few years later general of the Minor Observant Friars, in which capacity he had to go to Assisi and thence to Rome as early as 1522. Four years afterwards, in 1526, Charles employed him in the intricate negociations that followed the battle of Pavia. His mission seems to have been a secret and confidential one, for the Duke of Sessa seldom mentions him in his despatches, and when he does, it is merely for the purpose of advising his journey to Spain on a mission from Clement. (fn. n7) Most likely Charles was unwilling to entrust to Sessa so delicate a mission as that of inducing the Pope to forsake the league he himself had brought about, and thought that the general of the Franciscans was better suited for that purpose than a layman. However this may be, Fray Francisco took the Pope's message to Spain, and in September 1526 the Reverend Father again landed at Genoa bearing the Emperor's ultimatum. This time he came in disguise under the pseudonym of Alvaro Perez—which seems to have greatly puzzled his namesake at Rome—took up his quarters at Araceli, a convent of his order, and did all he could to persuade Clement to accept the truce proposed by Lannoy and Don Hugo. Though he failed on this occasion, and was not more fortunate when he went to Naples, in 1528, to procure the immediate liberation of the three Cardinals retained there as hostages, as well as the surrender of the fortresses placed in the hands of the Imperialists as security for the fulfilment of the Roman capitulation, he so gained the affections and esteem of Clement that without any apparent recommendation from Charles he was raised to the purple at the end of 1527, and took his seat among the cardinals early in 1528. Mai speaks of him in rather disparaging terms, and in such a manner as to make us suppose that he was more given to mundane than to spiritual affairs; (fn. n8) and yet the chroniclers of his order uphold him as a pattern of wisdom and virtue! When in February 1529 Clement's life was despaired of, and the majority of the Cardinals were thinking of having the election out of Rome, Fr. Francisco, now Santa Croce, was one of the first to advocate the measure put forward by the partisans of France and of the League, and which, as Mai observes in one of his despatches, was entirely due to Wolsey, who, having lost all hopes of being elected Pope, wished to take his colleagues to Avignon, where he considered himself sure of the election. "Santa Croce (says Mai) is generally "supposed to be the secret friend and ally of all the Car- " dinals of the French party; he frequents their society, " dines with them, makes them presents, and yet they laugh " at his simplicity and make fun of him. He has often " been heard to say in public that should the Pope die, and " the Cardinals quit Rome for the purpose of making a " new election elsewhere, he will be the first to go; which " threat has so influenced Cardinal La Valle and other " staunch Imperialists that they have also declared their " intention to quit, alledging that if the Imperial ministers, " whose duty it is to oppose that measure, favour it, " they themselves are unwilling to take such a burden on " their shoulders. Firmly believes that all this is nothing " more than sheer levity on the part of Santa Croce, and " perhaps, too, some hope he has of securing the votes of " his colleagues at the next election, for he is known to " aim at the Pontificate, and naturally considers himself " the candidate of the Imperialists."

In another of his despatches, after openly declaring that he will no longer trust to a man who thus held with the enemy and thwarted the negociations, Mai adds: "Such " is the Cardinal's obstinacy in this blessed question of " his colleagues leaving Rome in the event of the Pope's " death, that having the other day, in the very presence of " Monte, who is no friend to the Emperor, spoken to him " on the subject, he replied: 'That is also my opinion; " 'I think the Cardinals are in their right. If they go, " 'I shall go also. I have already announced my intention " 'to the Emperor, which is to behave in these matters " 'as a good ecclesiastic. If I do not serve God first " 'I cannot serve him afterwards.' "

Mai. Conjointly with Fr. Francisco, though greatly differing from him in politics, Micer Miguel Mai, a Catalonian lawyer of some repute, and President (Regente) (fn. n9) of the Audiencia or Court of Law of Barcelona, was entrusted with the Emperor's affairs in Rome. He seems at first to have been designated by Charles to act as counsel to Katharine in the divorce case, and help Don Iñigo de Mendoza in his multifarious and intricate negociations in England, principally directed towards preventing Henry from making common cause with France. At least such appears to be the substance of his instructions, (fn. n10) wherein he is ordered "to proceed to London, assist Don "Iñigo in all matters connected with the Queen's case, and " report generally on English affairs." The instructions, however, were never signed or delivered, as the Emperor for some reason or other seems to have changed his mind, and sent Mai straight to Rome, where he arrived at the end of 1528. His despatches, mostly written in cipher, are generally obscure, and at times almost unintelligible, owing not so much to his own peculiar style, (fn. n11) as to the frequent blunders of the deciphering clerks, who very often mistook one sign for another, and transcribed whole paragraphs entirely devoid of sense. That he was a shrewd politician, well acquainted with the humours of the Roman Court, as well as with the character of Clement and his Cardinals, whom he often pourtrays with a masterly hand, appears evident from his despatches.

Besides the above-named, Charles had at various times in Rome, and in other parts of Italy, confidential agents to whom he entrusted most delicate missions to the Pope, to the Duke of Ferrara (Alfonso d'Este), to the Marquis of Mantua. (Federigo Gonzaga), or to the commanders of his several armies. Among them was the gallant and unfortunate Cesare Ferramosca, (fn. n12) who, at the end of 1526, was sent to Naples and Rome for the purpose of persuading the Pope to ratify the convention made with Don Hugo and the Colonnese. Ferramosca was a native of Capua. He was present with his two brothers at the famous "Disfida di Barletta," where 13 champions of each camp, the French and the Spanish, fought against each other for the honour of the field. (fn. n13) Having obtained a captaincy of horse under Prospero Colonna, he was subsequently promoted to the rank of first Equerry to the Emperor in lieu of Lannoy, who had gone to Naples as viceroy. Sandoval tells a gossiping story about him, which I find in no other writer of this time. He says that (fn. n14) when Lannoy returned to Spain with his royal captive he asked the Emperor to restore him to his office of first Equerry, for which he alledged he had only presented Ferramosca that he might undertake its duties during his absence, and that Ferra-mosca, desirous of retaining that or a similar post in the Imperial household, tried to court the Viceroy's favour by slandering and malicious reports about Bourbon, who, he maintained, notwithstanding their public reconciliation in the Emperor's presence, continued to be his bitter enemy, and to speak of him in the most injurious terms. Further, he relates that the Emperor had the case inquired into, and finding the accusation to be entirely gratuitous, a mere invention of Ferramosca, had him banished from his Court. Sandoval does not inform us of his authorities for this courtier's gossip; but whatever they be, it will be found that the statement is at least incorrect in one principal point, since, instead of losing the Emperor's favour, as that historian asserts, and being exiled from Court, Ferramosca was at the end of that very year (1526) sent to Rome on a most delicate and trusty mission. (fn. n15)

Ferramosca embarked at Barcelona, and arrived in Naples. On the 20th of January he was at Gaeta with Lannoy, Moncada, and Fr. Francisco de Quiñones. On the 25th he saw the Pope, delivered his credentials, and commenced—without, however, communicating the nature and extent of his instructions to Secretary Juan Perez— negociating first a truce of four months, and afterwards an armistice of eight days, neither of which Bourbon would ratify; and, having visited that general's camp at San Giovanni, returned to Rome without accomplishing the object of his mission.

But let us hear, in Ferramosca's own words, the account of this interview :—"At this juncture (he says) " Secretary Seron brought us a paper heaving the Viceroy's " signature and seal, which he had offered to take to the " Pope at Rome. I myself promised to go to Bourbon's " camp with a letter [from the Viceroy], ordering him, in " the Emperor's name, to adhere strictly to whatever " Lannoy should determine respecting the truce. Went " accordingly to San Giovanni, where the Imperial army " was at the time detained, owing to the almost total want " of provisions, and also to the rain and snow that had " fallen on the previous days. The men, I found, had " mutinied for their pay, and tumultuously surrounded " Bourbon's quarters, obliging him to leave them suddenly, " and pass the night away from the camp. The tumult, " however, was appeased, and the men quieted, on the " promise of one crown (escudo) per man, and the free use " of the Mohammedan religion. (fn. n16) When the men heard " of my coming with a message of peace they became like " infuriated lions. As the Marquis del Vasto was absent " from the camp, at Ferrara, I had to wait some days for " his return, when I intimated to him and to Bourbon " the orders whereof I was the bearer. The latter then " insisted upon having Lannoy's letter read to all the " captains assembled. This I refused at first to do, as I " knew that general's intentions not to be honest, and " that he was nowise disposed to follow the Imperial " commands; but on mature consideration, and to avoid " greater evils, I at last consented. For a whole hour did " I represent to the captains of the army the extreme " want in which they all were, the difficulties they would " have to encounter in their march upon Florence, and " the preparations that the enemy was making to impede " the same by laying waste the country all round, and " stopping the supplies. I observed to them how much " your Imperial Majesty might benefit by a peace which at " my departure from Spain was considered as certain. I " tried to impress them with the fact that Paolo d' Arezzo, " the Pope's chamberlain, had since arrived [in Italy] to " confirm your Majesty's views; and if at that time, " when the Imperial arms were most prosperous, the " terms of the peace had been approved in Spain, it could " not be expected that they were to be rejected now that " circumstances had materially changed, &c. To these " arguments of mine the captains made no answer, but " recommended that I should first go and speak to the " men, whilst they themselves would assemble their respective " companies. Bourbon, on the other hand, summoned " the men-at-arms, whom I addressed according to " my instructions. Ramirez, the Viceroy's lieutenant, (fn. n17) " answered for his comrades, that they were ready to obey " orders. As I was addressing them a message came from " the infantry captains to say that their men were determined " to go forward; and, moreover, the answer was " couched in such insolent terms that I was strongly " advised to leave San Giovanni that very night. After " consulting Bourbon, Vasto, and the Abbot of Najera, all " of whom were of opinion that my life was in danger, " I asked Ferrante Gonzaga for a horse and rode off. As " I was mounting, a trooper arrived at full gallop, and " said that the whole of the infantry had broken out " into mutiny, and that numbers of them had gone to Bourbon's quarters to look out for me. This happened " on Monday, the day of our Lady. On Tuesday I wrote " to Bourbon from the place where I was, desiring him " to give me a definitive answer. He came to see me " on Wednesday, whilst the Marquis del Vasto addressed " the infantry, one company after another. On this " occasion Bourbon, after expressing strong doubts " respecting the men under his orders, and saying " that most likely they would not be satisfied with the " offers made to them, but would carry out their designs, " held most diabolical language to me, declaring that he " was about to resign the command, and that your " Majesty might confer it on another general, as be would " serve no longer. He accused me of having prevented " the Duke of Ferrara from sending him money, and " thereby arresting his course when be bad intended to go " on, and be ended by calling me out, and saying that " he would maintain his accusation against me sword in " hand. This I declined on the plea that as lieutenant- " general of your Imperial Majesty in Italy, and himself " so great a Prince as be was, I could not accept his challenge; " but be insisted, and said: 'That may well be; " 'but, nevertheless, I am a man of honour, and will prove " ' it to you whenever you like.'

" After this, having repaired to Ferrara to ascertain what " truth there was in Bourbon's accusation, and having " obtained from the Duke an affidavit to the effect that " neither in word nor in writing bad I influenced him to " refuse the money demanded, I wrote to Bourbon, and " added that if be wished to know more about the affair " I was ready to answer him and to accept his challenge. " Up to this moment he has sent me no reply.

" But no more of my own private affairs, and let me " return to Vasto. His men said to him: 'We are determined " to go on, whether we get money or not.' The " Marquis replied: 'Had we had money, we should have " 'marched long ago. But in our present situation it " 'behoves us to take another resolution.' 'What then do " 'you want us to do ?' inquired the men, knowing, as " they did, that the Germans being in greater numbers, " they (the Spaniards) would naturally be obliged to abide " by their determination. 'If you give us leave, we will " 'send a deputation to the Germans, and inquire from " 'them what they purpose doing.' Now the Marquis knew " very well what the answer of the Germans to Bourbon " had been the day before; they had unanimously declared, " 'we will obey orders.' He also knew that if he refused " the permission required, the men would take it, and, " therefore, gave the Spaniards leave to choose 12 of their " own number, the very same who on a previous occasion " had gone to consult the Germans. The Marquis left San " Giovanni, and came to see me soon after my conversation " with Bourbon. He related all that had passed with his " men, said he expected to have soon a definitive answer, " and promised to let me know the result next day at " Ferrara, whence this present letter is written. He likewise " spoke to me of the animosity that both Germans and " Spaniards had conceived against me, and that when the " former were consulted they had replied: 'We will do " 'what the Spaniards do,' though on a previous occasion, " and in answer to Bourbon, they had only said: 'We " 'shall follow the general's orders.'

" Two days after Vasto met me at Ferrara, and related the " issue of this affair. The German deputies had called next " day upon Bourbon, desiring him to say what he intended " to do. His answer was: "I will do what you do, or would " 'wish to do.' Our wish (said the Germans) is to go " forward. 'Then,' retorted Bourbon, 'I shall go with you, " 'neither more nor less, without taking the Emperor's " 'interests into account;' and accordingly they decided " to march on Friday, the 29th, though in reality the " tents were not actually struck until Saturday the 30th. " The Marquis having heard of it went to Bourbon, and said " to him: 'As I do not wish to disobey the Emperor's " orders I will not go with the army.' To which Bourbon " replied: 'Have you not been told to obey my commands " 'implicitly? Must I give you the order in " 'writing ?' The Marquis answered: 'True enough you " 'are the Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial army, " 'I am your subordinate; but as you yourself do not " 'obey the Emperor's commands, but act contrary to " 'them, I do not consider myself bound to obey yours.'

"Thus the matter ended. The Marquis left the camp " that very night, followed by a strong escort of his own " men and by several of the captains; spent the whole of " Friday at a place two leagues from San Giovanni, and " on the ensuing Saturday, after dismissing his escort and " all those who had accompanied him, came to Ferrara, " where he now is."

Such is Ferramosca's remarkable letter, dated Ferrara the 4th of April 1527, one month before the sack of Rome. I have not seen the original, but only an old French translation, preserved in the Archives of Brussels, and published for the first time by Dr. Lanz in his Correspondent des Kayser Karl .. (fn. n18) It will help to dispel certain doubts as to the part which the Emperor took in the affair, some writers having gone so far as to assert that Bourbon acted in conformity with express orders received from Spain, whereas it is quite evident from Ferramosca's simple and trustworthy narrative of the affair that the Constable was prompted by his own ambition, goaded to the quick by Clement's dilatory expedients, and perhaps too irritated at the vacillating policy of Lannoy, his old enemy. That his design at first was only to oblige Clement to come to terms by a sudden attack upon Florence or Bologna, and at the same time to procure provisions and money for his half starved and undisciplined army, is sufficiently demonstrated not only by the despatches of Marin, Sanchez, Soria, and other Imperial agents, but by the Italian historians themselves. (fn. n19) Juan Seron, Lannoy's secretary, in his despatch to the Emperor, dated from Rome the 28th of April, says distinctly: "The Imperialists, who had left Siena behind " them the better to ensure a supply of provisions and " march afterwards on Florence, have suddenly retraced " their steps and returned to their old quarters near that " city. The object of this movement is evidently to leave " Florence on one side and come here to Rome. If so, all " of us ought to rejoice at Bourbon's determination; for " if the Imperial army should approach Rome under " present circumstances, the Pope will be prevented in " future from acting against the Emperor's interests."

The consequences of Bourbon's march on Rome are weh known, as likewise the details of the direful trial to which the Holy City was subjected, and which Lope de Soria calls a "visitation from God; a warning to the Vicar of Christ on earth, and to the rest of the Christian princes." (fn. n20) Authentic accounts by eyewitnesses, published at the time or shortly after, differ little as to the horrible scenes enacted during this sack. All writers, whether Italian or Spanish, agree that the atrocities perpetrated by the soldiers had no precedent in history, and that the sacking of Rome by Attila and his northern hordes was nothing in comparison with the one of May 1527. Indeed, Francisco de Salazar, an agent of the High Chancellor Mercurino da Gattinara, says: "So great were the atrocities committed " on this occasion that the pen actually refuses to write " them down, and that the memory of man is incapable of " recording them." The writer, himself, though a Spaniard and an ecclesiastic; Secretary Perez, at that time in charge of the Imperial embassy; Don Martin, the envoy of Portugal, and many other Imperialists of note residing at Rome, were obliged to pay a heavy ransom, whilst the Secretary, as he himself asserts, was twice in danger of his life. There is no need to mention here the various accounts of this remarkable event attributed to Guicciardini, Buonaparte, (fn. n21) and others. Suffice it to say that, however partial the authors, their narratives do not materially differ from the letters of Perez, Salazar, Gattinara, and others in the present volume. The last-named individual, whose real name was Giovan Bartholomeo da Gattinara, seems to have written for the private inspection of his uncle, the Grand Chancellor, a separate and fuller account of the sack of Rome by the Imperialists, which Baron D. Camillo Trasmondo—Frangipani dei Duchi di Mirabello published 10 years ago under the following title: Il saco di Roma sotlo Clemente VII. relazione del Commissario Imperiale Mercurino Gallinara. I need scarcely observe that Mercurino [Arborio] da Gattinara was the Emperor s Grand Chancellor; that he was not at Rome during the sack, but at Toledo or Granada, in Spain, and, therefore, that the account published could not be written by, but addressed to, him by his nephew Giovan Bartholomeo da Gattinara, (fn. n22) at that time Commissary General to the Imperial army at Rome, who in his various attempts to persuade the Pope to sign the capitulation was wounded by the Germans as he came out of Sant Angelo. (fn. n23)

Two more agents of Charles seem to have been employed Veyre. about this time, Pierre de (fn. n24) Baron of St. Julien, and Rupt sieur de Wauldry or Waury. Of the former there is a long and interesting despatch dated the 30th of September 1527, giving an account of his embarkation at Barcelona, landing at Naples, and subsequent journey to Rome. He was killed at the naval engagement in the Gulf of Salerno on the 28th of April 1528.

Respecting the Sicur de Waury, who was one of Bourbon's confidential secretaries, and consequently obliged to quit Prance and follow the fortunes of his master, very little is known. His real name appears to have been Rup or Rupt, and his prefix Adolphe or Antoine. He was Seigneur de Waury, elsewhere written Vaury, Wauldry, and Wauldrey, which Spaniards and Italians soon converted into Babri, Bauri, Bauberi, and Babery. A letter from him will be found at page 814 of the First Part, (fn. n25) written to the Emperor while his master was still in Spain; but he must have had a brother of the same name, François de Rupt, who, after the death of Bourbon, became gentleman- in-waiting to the Prince of Orange, and was employed by him in various missions to Spain, (fn. n26) the same who in August 1528 signed the articles of the contract entered into with Andrea Doria.

Respecting Gattinara, the Emperor's High Chancellor, enough has been said in the Introduction to Part I. At one time he seems to have lost the Emperor's favour, and to have asked for leave to visit his estates in Savoy. This appears to have been preceded or followed by a pilgrimage to our Lady of Monserrat, in the neighbourhood of Barcelona, an expedient to which Spanish statesmen of all times seem to have had recourse in their disgrace. What may have been the cause of his estrangement from Charles is not positively stated, though the rather exulting manner in which Salinas announces the fact to the King of Hungary makes me presume that it was connected with Italian politics, and chiefly with the Duchy of Milan, which the Emperor had then promised to his brother. However this may be, Gattinara landed at Genoa, spent a few days in that city, and, just before it was taken by the Leaguers, sailed off to Monaco and returned to Spain. He continued to be at the head of affairs, as Imperial Chancellor, until the Emperor's journey to Italy, when he was replaced by Granvelle.

Jean Lalleman, or L'Allemand, the Emperor's Chief Secretary, lost also the Emperor's favour, and indeed was deprived of his charge, imprisoned at Toledo, his papers searched, and a legal inquiry instituted on his acts. Whether the temporary disgrace of Chancellor Gattinara had anything to do with it, or, as Martin de Salinas informs us in one of his despatches, Lallemand was calumniated by his enemies at Court, certain it is that he was accused, and perhaps convicted, of peculation, as well as of having, by the dexterous intercalation of certain words in a ciphered letter from the Emperor to Antonio de Leyva, assigned to himself a pension of 1,000 ducats on the estate of Milan. Of course, Salinas, Ferdinand's ambassador in Spain, would naturally represent Lallemand as innocent of the charges brought against him, inasmuch as he had always promoted his master's general interests in Spain, encouraged and favoured his pretensions to the Duchy of Milan, (fn. n27) the investiture of which had so often been promised to him. However this may be, Lallemand never from this time seems to have recovered the Emperor's favour; and though one or two Imperial letters are countersigned by him, and another, a private one, was addressed by him to Cardinal Wolsey, he seems from that time to have been excluded from the management of affairs, his secretary- ship being given to Francisco de los Covos.

If the statements made in a recent life (fn. n28) of two celebrated Spaniards of this time, Alfonso and Juan de Valdés, be taken into account, we can easily come to the conclusion that Lallemand's unfair dealings, whatever they might be, were brought to light by the former of the above-mentioned brothers, at one time Gattinara's clerk, and subsequently Secretary to Charles. Alfonso de Valdés, who, like his brother Juan, was one of the leaders of the Reformation, kept up a curious correspondence with Peter Martyr, Maximilian of Transylvania, Erasmus, Stansaërt, Scepperus, and other learned men of his time. Some of his own private letters, as well as those he wrote in his official capacity and in the Emperor's name to Pope Clement, to the College of Cardinals, to the Roman nobles, and so forth, have already seen the public light in various collections; but the importance of some in an historical point of view, as well as the circumstance of the original draft of most being preserved in one volume in the Royal Academy of History at Madrid, have induced me to print a few of them. (fn. n29) Alfonso was also the author of the Dialogo en que particular mente se tratan las cosas acaecidas en Roma el año 1527, hitherto attributed to his brother Juan, but which, as the above-mentioned biographer of the two brothers has sufficiently demonstrated, (fn. n30) is the exclusive work of Alfonso (fn. n31). This book seems to have been the bone of contention between Valdés and Lallemand, and the origin also of their enmity, the latter having denounced it, when still in manuscript, to the Inquisition as containing Lutheran doctrines. It was in his turn Valdés who accused Lallemand of having made erasures and intercalated words and passages in the Emperor's letters to his ambassadors; and it must be said, that though the former came out of the charge innocent, the latter was thrown into prison, tried, convicted, and dismissed from the Imperial service.

Respecting Martin de Salinas, who since 1522 was the ambassador of the Archduke Ferdinand, subsequently King of Bohemia and Hungary, at the Court of his brother Charles, very little is known except what may be gathered here and there from the original copy- book of his correspondence preserved in the library of the Royal Academy of History at Madrid, a thick and closely written volume with the following title: Libro de las Cartas que Don Martin de Salinas escribió; á Alemania." He was probably a native of some town in the province of Burgos, and perhaps, too, one of the gentlemen named to compose the household of the young Archduke (fn. n32) when in 1518 he repaired to Vienna to take possession of his father's inheritance. Among Katharine of Aragon's Spanish maids of honour there was one named Doña Maria de Salinas, who seems to have exercised great influence over her; and among the poets who wrote in commendation and praise of Illescas' Historia Pontifical y Catholica, printed for the first time at Alcalá in 1564, there is one Lope de Salinas, inhabiting Burgo de Osma, in the province of Burgos, who may have been a son or close relative of Martin. However this may be, the volume of his correspondence—which contains also letters written to him by the Archduke's secretaries—begins with several addressed to Treasurer Salamanca, and dated from Brussels, where he seems to have arrived on the 26th of April. After visiting Antwerp, Ghent, Bruges, and other towns in Flanders, Salinas came over to England in the Emperor's suite, visited Greenwich, London, Windsor, and Winchester, and finally embarked at Southampton, or Antona, as he calls it, to land with the Emperor at Santander on the 16th of July. After which, in his quality of ambassador, he followed the Imperial Court wherever it went, crossed over to Italy, was present at the Emperor's coronation in Bologna, attended the expedition to Germany, and was most likely present also at the taking of Tunis in 1535.

His correspondence is not private but official, his letters being mostly addressed to King Ferdinand, or to his secretaries Castillejo (fn. n33) and Sanchez. The last bears the date of the 11th November 1539, after which the volume finishes abruptly.

Of Maximilianus Transylvanus, of John of Dantzig, ambassador of Sigismond, King of Poland; of Cornelius Duplicius Scepperus, sent by Charles on a mission to the electors of the empire as well as to Poland, Denmark, and the Hanseatic towns; of the Provost of Waldkirch, Balthasar Merklin, and others—all of whom kept up a valuable correspondence with Alfonso de Valdés—sufficient notice is given in the above-mentioned work by Don Fermin Caballero, (fn. n34) whose diligence and zeal in collecting materials for the life of the two brothers, Alfonso and Juan de Valdés, cannot be sufficiently commended.

Having so far disposed of the civil and diplomatic writers who figure in this correspondence, a few lines will not perhaps be amiss respecting each of the generals in command of the Imperial forces in Italy during the period of time comprised in these two parts, 1525-9. Of Lannoy, Pescara, and Bourbon enough has been said in the Introduction to the First Part. I shall only record here certain circumstances and facts relative to the others.

The gallant Marquis of Pescara, whose death took place at Milan on the 3d December 1525, was succeeded in the command of the Imperial forces in Italy by his cousin — sometimes, though erroneously, called nephew—Alfonso Davalos d'Aquino, Marquis del Vasto. (fn. n35) Of Pescara himself there is, besides the well known biography by Paulo Jovio, the historian, another by Ulloa, and a third by Vallés; but of Ms heir and successor in command I know none, and yet he was at the head of the Imperial forces in Italy until the arrival of Bourbon, to whom the Emperor, no longer able to give him the hand of his sister Eleanor, had solemnly promised the command-in-chief of his Italian army and the Duchy of Milan as a fief.

His letters to the Emperor are few and short, but the private and confidential ones written to Giovan Battista Castaldo, (fn. n36) his agent at the Imperial Court, contain much valuable information, and reveal the character of the man. Castaldo had been sent by Pescara to Spain for the purpose of revealing to the Emperor the deeply laid plot of Clement and the Venetians, which that general is said to have joined for the sole purpose of discovering the object of the conspirators. He was at Court when Pescara died, and therefore it was directly to him that Vasto confided the secrets of his responsible charge, the difficulties he had to contend with, and his resentment at certain grave accusations preferred against him in connexion with his civil administration in the Duchy. On the 18th of May he wrote to him: "I am told that his Majesty the " Emperor has seen with displeasure the grant of certain " public offices here at Milan. If so, I beg you to tell " the Emperor that up to the present date nothing has " been given away except to captains who have lost their " arms or legs in the service, or have been so disabled " that they cannot earn their livelihood otherwise. And " besides that the offices and charges which have been " conferred upon them are precisely those which some of " the Milanese who are now with the Duke [Francesco " Sforza] inside the castle held formerly. If his Imperial " Majesty disapproves of the grant, nothing is more easy " than to deprive the said captains of their offices, and " deduct from their pay whatever sums they may have " received. As to myself, I may tell you that not only have " I not preceived a single 'quatrino' from such a source, " but since your departure for Spain in May I have given " orders for the sale of two of my best estates in the kingdom " of Naples, and that those which I hold in this " Duchy are mortgaged. Another of my castles I have " given away to Juan de Urbina in order to keep him " contented," &c.

After Vasto's departure for Naples, Antonio de Leyva, the veteran of Pavin, succeeded to the command of the Imperial army of Lombardy, where his great experience and undaunted courage enabled him to keep his ground against superior forces of the enemy. Yet his position at Milan was a difficult and precarious one. With a small army chiefly composed of foreigners, Germans and Italians, to whom 4,000 or 5,000 Spaniards were occasionally added; very frequently—not to say always — without money and provisions, or even news from home, and having to quarter his undisciplined bands on the citizens of Milan, it is a wonder how he could defend the Duchy from the aggressions of Lautrec, St. Pol, and at one time the Papal and Venetian troops combined, not to mention the frequent riots and tumultuary risings of the Milanese, unwilling to bear the burden of war, and always ready to shake off the foreign yoke. To these disturbances—some of which were of a most serious character—Leyva is supposed to have greatly contributed by the heavy taxes imposed upon the Milanese, and the excesses committed by his men. He is even accused of rapacity, and, which is a still more serious charge, of peculation. On the 2d of June 1526, Herrera (fn. n37) wrote to the Emperor in cipher : "Leyva is discontented. " Your Majesty should write to him, for certainly these are " not times to let a captain of his quality and parts be " put in bad humour. If, as private letters from Spain " announce, he and Vasto are accused of having appropriated " the proceeds of certain offices and taxes here " at Milan, it is a most horrible calumny, the money " having been paid into the Imperial coffers, as the " Treasurer himself and I can testify."

On the 11th of July the Abbot of Najera writes in still stronger terms : "Leyva is much concerned (he says) at " hearing that your Imperial Majesty attaches faith to " the report of his being the chief cause of the risings " at Milan, and likewise of the present war, by his " extortions from the inhabitants of this city. I declare " upon oath that ever since the death of the Marquis de " Pescara, your Majesty has never had at the head of his " army a general so strict in his military duties, so honourable, " and so skilful in warfare. As for taking ransom " money, I can swear that ever since I was appointed to " the post of Commissary-General to this Imperial army, " I never knew him to take any. Nor is he the sort of " man to do anything of the sort; on the contrary, he " and the Marquis del Vasto have frequently sold their " property, or pawned their jewels and other valuables for " the support of this army in times of need."

Leyva's answer to such accusation is, if possible, still more energetic: it is that of an innocent man wounded in what he most prizes, his honour and reputation. The whole seems to have originated in the complaints of certain parties at Court, who in the distribution of grants of land and pensions on the confiscated estates in the Duchy of Milan, made by Bourbon soon after the deprivation of Francesco Sforza, had no share allotted to them. The grants were subsequently revoked by the Emperor, and the estates, with very few exceptions, returned to their legitimate owners. It is true that a pension of 10,000 ducats was promised by Sforza to Wolsey, if he would secure the support of England; that Don Iñigo, again, in the Emperor's name, offered it to the Cardinal, increased to double the amount, with a view to detach him from the French alliance. Bribery was then the common resort of politicians and statesmen, and whenever other means of attraction failed, money and pensions were offered or given to ambassadors and ministers. Clement, as will be seen in these pages, was at all times lavish of his Cardinal's hats, for the purpose of obtaining money, or ensuring the success of his political views, whilst Charles and Francis paid pensions right and left to Wolsey, to the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk, to Brian Tuke, and to other noblemen and officials in England. The revenues of the Duchy of Milan, and the firstfruits of rich bishoprics in Spain, Naples, or Flanders, seem to have been set apart for this purpose at a time when ambassadors principally, and high functionaries in general, seem to have had but scanty salaries. Some dealing of this sort appears to have brought into trouble one of the Emperor's secretaries, Pero Garcia, accused of having received a bribe for getting ready in time the investiture of the Duchy of Milan for Francesco Sforza-Visconti; whilst Pierre Lallemand, another of Charles' secretaries, and especially entrusted with the foreign correspondence, was actually cast into prison, and his papers searched, for a similar motive. (fn. n38)

After the death of Lannoy at Aversa, the command at Naples devolved upon the gallant Don Hugo de Moncada, who met with a glorious death at Capri, (fn. n39) in the Gulph of Salerno, on the 28th of April 1528. Of the active part which, previous to his appointment to Naples, he took in that famous conspiracy against Pope Clement, which ended in the sack of St. Peter, and of the palaces of the disaffected Cardinals, sufficient evidence is given in some of his own despatches to the Emperor. There can be no doubt that the suggestions which the Colonnese themselves made from time to time that "no " concessions were to be obtained from Clement, except " by sheer force," found an echo in Spain, and that the Emperor approved their plans, sending orders to Don Hugo to " help with all the forces of Naples," to forward the designs of the conspirators. To that effect a treacherous truce was concluded between the Pope and the Colonnese, through the intermediate action of Vespasiano Colonna, for no other purpose, as is confessed in Moncada's letter to Sanchez of the 14th of September, (fn. n40) than that of "lulling " Clement into security, and making him lay down his " arms." (fn. n41) Yet it is very remarkable that, with the exception of this letter, where the Spanish general plainly avows his intention of attacking Rome, no other despatch of his should be found at Simancas or in the Archives of the Royal Academy of History at Madrid, and that the very one he is known to have written [on the 22d, giving a full account of the undertaking should also be missing.

Moncada was succeeded in] the vice-royalty of Naples by Philibert de Chalon, Prince of Orange, who, after Bourbon's inglorious death in sight of Rome, obtained the temporary command of the Imperial forces. He was very young at the time—scarcely six and twenty; and though he had seen some service, been made prisoner close to Marseilles, and, as commander of the German infantry, wounded at the taking of Rome, he was not considered by Charles' ministers a fit person to command an army composed of Germans, Spaniards, and Italians more or less undisciplined, and accustomed since the taking of Rome to have their own way in every respect. However, as the lansquenets were by far the most numerous; as Lannoy, upon whom the command-in-chief of the Imperial forces naturally devolved, in his capacity of Viceroy of Naples, and older general in the service, was purposedly absent; as the Marquis del Vasto, who refused to follow Bourbon, resided at Ferrara, and Antonio de Leyva remained in Lombardy (fn. n42); as Alarcon himself would not accept that post unconditionally, and when offered to Alfonso d'Este it was also declined under specious pretences, and more particularly (fn. n43) owing to the "constant mutinies of the soldiers,"—the Prince forcibly remained for the time at the head of the Imperial army in Rome. His despatches to the Emperor are generally dated from Naples. Chalon evidently had neither the experience nor the talents required to govern an army composed of such elements, much less to repress the mutinous spirit and insatiable cravings of his German bands. After an inglorious retreat through the Abruzzi, and a battle fought against Lautrec near Troia, he shut himself up in Naples, where he remained, until, having marched against the Florentines, and laid siege to their city, he was slain in August 1530. Few of his letters have been preserved, and, with the single exception of two or three discovered by Dr. Lanz in the Archives at Brussels, (fn. n44) and published in 1844 at Leipzig, the present volume contains scarcely any of importance.

Hernando de Alarcon is another of the Imperial captains who figures most in these pages. He had served in Africa as well as in Italy, under Gonsalvo de Cordoba, the Great Captain. In 1527 he was Viceroy of Calabria, but was soon summoned to Rome, after the sack of that city, as were also Lannoy and Don Hugo, to re-establish the broken discipline of the Imperial army. Though he failed in this task, and could not obtain better terms for the Pope, almost entirely at the mercy of the Germans, his honourable character and long services, as well as his conciliating manners, ensured him the confidence of the soldiers, and he was accordingly appointed Governor of Sant Angelo, and keeper of the Pope until the latter should pay the promised ransom. He followed the army to Naples, where his eminent services were soon to be rewarded by the Emperor with the title of Marquis de la Val Ciciliana. In 1665 one of his descendants, D. Antonio Suarez de Alarcon, count of Torresvedras, published at Madrid a handsome volume with the following title: Comentarios del Señor de Alarcon; which being compiled from the original papers and correspondence of Don Hernando himself, constitutes a considerable addition to the history of these times in Italy. (fn. n45)

It now remains for me to say a few words on a subject closely connected with compilations of this kind, and to which no sufficient attention has, in my opinion, been paid. I mean the transcription and spelling of proper names. Now it is an acknowledged fact that about this time—and perhaps as late as the end of the XVIIth century—proper and geographical names were written in a capricious manner, better calculated to convey an idea of their sound than of the letters of which they were composed. And as the letters themselves had different sounds and value in the Teutonic or Neo-Latin languages, hence originated the singular fact of a proper name being at first differently pronounced, and afterwards variously written, by people of the same nation or locality, and the still more perplexing one of individuals of the same family often spelling their own names differently. If to this be added that, according to a custom prevalent throughout Europe at the time, the titled nobility, the bishops, cardinals, and high functionaries were generally designated by the titles they used or the charges they held, it will be found by no means an easy task to ascertain the names and genealogy of the many distinguished individuals and high personages who appear in these pages, at a time too when fiefs were frequently granted, and as often taken away.

I have already mentioned as an illustration of this remark—which to some may appear futile, but nevertheless is of great importance to the historian—the name among others of the celebrated commander of the lansquenets at Pavia, Rome, and Milan, whose patronymic Fruntsperg is written by his biographers and panegyrists, German as well as Italian, in five different ways. That the names of Monsieur de Bourgues, de Tarbes, de Bayonne, de Palance, .'Aire, &c., were intended to designate the bishops of those sees,—that Praët, Bèvres,Beaurain, Rœulx, Langeay, Lautrec, Granvelle, &c., are only those of the domains owned by each of those personages, —and lastly that the Spanish, and principally the Italian titles in Naples or Milan, do not always designate one and the same individual,—is a fact too well known to require confirmation. The greater care, therefore, has been taken in these pages to assign to each individual, as much as possible, his real family name, as recognised by contemporary writers, or, for greater accuracy, as derived from their own original letters, although, as I have already had occasion to observe, this is not always a certain rule. The general Index at the end of this Second Part will, therefore, contain in strict alphabetical order all the geographical and proper names scattered through the two parts of this Calendar, not indeed as they frequently appear in these pages, but as they ought to be written according to their nationality or language.

In doing so I myself may have unavoidably fallen into mistake by confounding two individuals, as for instance in the following case: Amalfi and Malfi are two towns in the kingdom of the two Sicilies, the former in the Basilicata, the latter in the province called "Principato citeriore," not far from, the Gulph of Salerno. But the Spaniards of this time made no distinction whatever between Amalfi and Malfi, or Malfa as it is called nowadays; and consequently they invariably mistook one for the other. The Prince of Malfi, so often mentioned in these pages, who, after gallantly defending his patrimonial estate, fell a prisoner into Lautrec's hands, and was ultimately persuaded to join the Italian League, was a Caracciolo (fn. n46) of the name of Gian, or more properly Ser Giano, and a relative of Prothonotary Marino, the Imperial ambassador in Venice, 1525-6, and Chancellor of the Duchy of Milan in 1528. The Prince's estate was confiscated and given to Andrea Doria. The Duke of Amalfi was a Piccolomini, (fn. n47) the ancestor of Ottavio, the Austrian general, 1599-656. Both are mentioned in these pages irrespectively as Prince or Duke of Malfi, and in such a manner that it is not always easy to recognise them.

Indeed Sandoval and the rest of the Spanish historians of this period—the translators also of Guicciardini and Jovio —have added considerably to the confusion by transcribing proper names as they heard them pronounced, not as they were written. That Citi is meant for Marc Settig or Sittig, the German captain, Beni and Dobeni for Mons. D'Aubigny, and Chyandale or Chyandele for Mons. de Candalle, may easily be allowed; but it requires some effort of imagination to recognize La Rochefoucault, sieur de Barbesieux, under the semi - barbarous appellation of Rupifucaldo-Barbesós.


  • n1. See Nos. 550, 631, and 633 of Part I.
  • n2. As the Abbot died in August, and Soria's nomination is dated the 13th of December 1527, there must have been in the meantime a commissary in Milan, and another in Rome. Soria was most probably appointed ad interim for Lombardy, and I suspect that Giovan Bartholomeo da Gattinara, Mercurino's nephew, held similar functions at Rome.
  • n3. It appears that the nonpayment of certain bills of exchange drawn upon the Affaita bank by Charles' treasurers, and payable to his order, was the cause of his protracted stay in Venice, as he obstinately refused to sign an affidavit which one of the Signory's secretaries put into his hands, declaring that no coercion of any sort had been practised upon him.
  • n4. Such is the statement made by Lopez de Haro and other Spanish genealogists; but there is an objection to it, namely, that in 1568, that is 40 years later, this very duke was ambassador of Philip II. at the Court of England, where he is said to have married on a former occasion an English lady called Katharine Dormer.
  • n5. As no original letter of his occurs in this correspondence, I have been unable to ascertain how he signed his name. That, however, is no rule; for, as I have had occasion to observe, it is not uncommon for a writer to spell his name in two or three different ways.
  • n6. Guicciardini writes Muscctola. Paolo Jovio calls him Marco Antonio Mussetula, senatore di Napoli.
  • n7. "Father Francisco (says he on the 16th of May 1526), who is a pious and virtuous man, spoke freely to His Holiness, and told him what the Romans thought and said of him, and the injury likely to result to Christianity from his present behaviour. So strongly did the friar speak that the Pope was deeply moved, and decided at once to send him over to Spain with a message. Yesterday, however, he suddenly changed his purpose, &c." Part I. No. 419, p. 689.
  • n8. No. 654, Part II., p. 933.
  • n9. As I have had occasion to observe elsewhere (p. 126), the word Regente was generally applied in Spain, in old times, to the presidents of the different boards (salas) in the Councils of Aragon and Naples, also to the presidents of "Audiencias" and Chancillerias or Chancery Courts.
  • n10. See No. 563, p. 805.
  • n11. As a native of Catalonia, or Aragon, as others will have it, Mai must have been imperfectly acquainted with the Castillian, which was at that time the official language, and has since become the Spanish of our days. I suspect even that though residing at Barcelona, his ancestors were perhaps natives of Sicily, for his name—which is frequently written May and Maij—does not sound to me as of Spanish origin, besides which the title Mieer, which in Catalonian is Mossen, seems more Italian than Spanish. In what relationship he stood to Joannes Maius or Juan Mai, one of the secretaries to the Archduke Ferdinand, mentioned in a letter of Balthasar de Waldkirch or Waltkirk to Alfonso de Valdés published by D. Fermin Caballers in his very recent work, Alfonso y Juan de Valdés, Madrid, 1876, 4to., pp. 380-4, I cannot determine; but in another of Vicente Navarra to the same, which I have had occasion to quote in a note (Part II., p. 835), and has also been given at length by Caballero (pp. 395-7), Mai is called Mains noster, as if he were the bosom friend of both correspondents.
  • n12. The name of this individual is differently written by the authors of the time: Guicciardini and Jovio call him Feramosca and Fieramosca indistinctly; Sandoval Ferra Mosca and Aferramosca. Others again make him a native of Gaeta instead of Capua.
  • n13. Such at least is the account which Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo, the well known historian of the Indies, gives of him in his Quinquagenas of Batallas, a work much quoted, and which remains still in manuscript; but it must be said that Jovio, who gives the list of the Italian champions, mentions only Ettore Fieramosca.
  • n14. Historia del Emperador Carlos V., lib. xiii., § 21.
  • n15. He was then in constant communication, and, as it would seem, on very good terms, with Lannoy; not so wi h Bourbon, to whom, as will be seen hereafter, he conveyed the Emperor's order to stop on his march.
  • n16. The words are: "A la fen on composa en donnant un ccu par homme, et en leur promettant la loix de Mahomet." However startling the asser- tion, there is nothing improbable in it, as it would appear that the Spanish infantry brought by Bourbon and Lannoy was chiefly recruited, at Alicante, Cartagena, Valencia, and other towns on the eastern coast of Spain, where the population consisted almost entirely of Moriscos, or newly converted Moors, who, for the sake of escaping persecution at home, willingly enlisted under the Emperor's banners, or crossed the Atlantic to settle in the newly discovered continent.
  • n17. Lannoy, the Viceroy of Naples, was captain of the Neapolitan men-at- arms. His lieutenant, Ramirez (Diego Ramirez Burman?), was killed before Lodi in 1528. See p. 742.
  • n18. A most valuable compilation published at Leipzig, 1844, 3 vols. 8vo. The letter may be found at page 230 of the first volume. Dr. Lanz's contributions to the history of these times have been much used by the editor of this Calendar, as well as William Bradford's Correspondence of the Emperor Charles V. and his ambassadors at the courts of England and France, from the original letters in the Imperial Family Archives at Vienna. London, 1850, 8vo.: a work conscientiously written, though singularly defective in the spelling of the proper and geographical names throughout, and especially in the Itinerary at the end.
  • n19. Consult Guicciardini, lib. xviii., and Jovio, lib xxn.
  • n20. No. 76, p. 209.
  • n21. That attributed to Jacopo Bonaparte da San Miniato, though written in 1527, was not published till 1756 at Cologne. A French translation of it, as it is said, appeared in 1809 at Paris accompanied by the Italian text, and another, and a different one, at Florence in 1830; but in 1758, also at Cologne, an anonymous Italian reprinted Il Sacco di Roma, by Guicciardini, (Paris, 1664,) which he found to be substantially the same as the one attributed to Bonaparte.
  • n22. Giovan Bartholomeo da Gattinara has been frequently mentioned in these pages. In 1525, shortly after the battle of Pavia, he went to Rome on a mission from Lannoy to Clement, and we occasionally hear of him at Siena, Florence, and other places negotiating in the Emperor's name. Besides his post of Imperial Commissary he seems to have been "Regente" at Naples.
  • n23. The original letter which Giovan Bartholomeo addressed to the Emperor on this occasion is preserved at Simancas; not so the private and more detailed one, which he intended for his uncle's perusal; the same, or a contemporary copy of which, Baron Trasmondo has discovered, and published at Geneva, 1866, 8vo., and which, notwithstanding the pains taken by its editor, contains many gross mistakes, such as confounding the Spanish captain Juan de Urbina with Francesco Maria della Rovere, Duke of Urbino, &c.
  • n24. Also called Verey, Vere, &c., Sieur de Migliau, or Millew according to English pronounciation, His letter to the Emperor is at page 407 of this Part.
  • n25. See No. 497, p. 814, Part I.
  • n26. Le Glay, Negociations Diplomatiques entre la France et l' Autriche, vol. ii., p. 9, speaks of les deux de Vaury.
  • n27. See No. 36, p. 98.
  • n28. Alonso y Juan de Valdés por Don Fermin Caballero. Madrid, 1875, 4to.
  • n29. First of all in the Apologetici pro Carolo Quinto Imperatore libri duo, first printed at Alcalá, and which is entirely the work of Alfonso de Valdés, then in the collection of Melchor Goldast, Francfort, 1613; in the Annales Reginaldi, Rome, 1646; in the Codicc Diplomatico Italiano of Lunig, 1732, &c.
  • n30. Caballero, ibid, p. 157.
  • n31. Besides Juan and Alfonso, there was a third brother called Didacus Diego, or Santiago, who became canon of Cartagena, and whom I wrongly presumed to be a cousin at page 771, note.
  • n32. It must be observed that Sancho Cota himself one of the gentlemen of Ferdinand's household, who gives the list of those appointed on that occasion, does not mention Martin de Salinas in the number. His "Memorial," which contains many interesting details for the history of Charles V., has never been printed. The original is preserved in the National Library at Paris.
  • n33. Christoval, the author of several poems, mostly lyrical, first collected by Velasco, and printed at Madrid in 1572, 8vo. As to Sanchez his name was Gabriel, probably a brother or cousin of Alfonso, the ambassador in Venice.
  • n34. Whilst this Introduction was in progress, the editor of this Calendar received intelligence of the death at Madrid, on the 18th of June, of this learned and conscientious writer. His last volume is the fourth of a series of biographies of illustrious men born at Cuenca in Castille.
  • n35. I have already had occasion to observe that this word is variously written Basto, Vasto, Gasto, and Guasto. This last is the one most commonly used by English writers, and the one I have adopted, though there can be no doubt that Vasto and not Guasto, is the real name of the castle on the coast of Naples, whence Alfonso Davalos took his title.
  • n36. Sometimes written Gastaldo.
  • n37. No. 433, p. 724.
  • n38. See above, p. xxii.
  • n39. Not far from Cuma, and near the Cape Orso in the Terra, di Lavoro. See Alarcon, Comentarios, p. 357.
  • n40. No. 545, p. 897.
  • n41. In the Emperor's letter of instructions, dated Granada, 11th June 1526, Don Hugo is informed: That three days before (on the 8th), the Cardinal's agent at Court said "he had now a good chance of expelling the Pope from Rome, and stirring up Siena and even Florence against him."
  • n42. The command was also offered to Don Hugo, see p. 254.
  • n43. See his confidential and private letter to his ambassador at Venice, Part II., No. 146.
  • n44. Part II., page 707, No. 456.
  • n45. Among the despatches contained in this Second Part those of Camillo Pignatello, count of Burrello, of Garci Manrique, the commander in Calabria, of Alonso de la Rosa, or Larossa, governor of Gaeta, and other Imperial officers, will be found to contain much historical information. In one, however, from the last-mentioned governor to the Emperor (Naples, 25th January 1528), "19,000 men" is evidently a mistake for 1,900. See No. 301, p 553.
  • n46. Consult Sansovino: Dell'Origine c fatti delle famiglic illustri d' Italia. Venice, 1670, pp. 192-6.
  • n47. His name was Alfonso Count of Celano and Marquis de Capistrano; he married Joanna d'Aragon, daughter of Arrico or Henry Marquis of Giracco or Chirazzo. See Généalogics Historiques, vol. ii. Paris, 1736, pp. 455-64.