2 For the extent of French influence in the Italian peninsula during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, consult particularly de Boüard, M., Les Origines des guerres d'ltalie: la France et l'Italic au temps du Grand Schisme d'Occident (Paris, 1936)Google Scholar, and Peyronnet, G., ‘Les relations politiques entre la France et l'ltalie, principalement au XIV^e et dans la première moitié du xv^e siecle’, he Moyen Age, ser. IV, IV (1949), 301–342, and v (1950), 85-113Google Scholar.

3 Simeoni, L., Le Signorie (Milan, 1950), II, 649 Google Scholar.

4 Faraglia, N. F., Storia della lotta tra Alfonso V e Renato d'Angiò (Lanciano, 1908)Google Scholar.

5 On the many claimants to the Visconti inheritance, see particularly two articles by Cusin, F., ‘L'Impero e la successione degli Sforza ai Visconti’, Arch. stor. Lombardo, New Ser., 1 (1936), 3–116 Google Scholar, and ‘Le aspirazioni straniere sul Ducato di Milano e l'investitura imperiale (1450-54),’ ibid., 277-369; Vianello, C. A., ‘Gli Sforza e l'lmpero’, Atti e Memorie del Pritno Congresso Storico Lombardo (1936) (Milan, 1937), pp. 193 Google Scholar ff.; Robinson, A. M., ‘The Claims of the House of Orleans to Milan’, English Hist. Rev. III (1888), 34–62 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 A recent account of these events can be found in the new Storia di Milano, vol. vi, II Ducato Visconteo, 1392-1450 (Milan, 1955). Political events are narrated by F. Cognasso.

7 See Cusin's articles: ‘L'Impero,’ pp. 87 ff., ‘Le aspirazioni’, pp. 322 ff., and ‘Le relazioni tra l'lmpero e il Ducato di Milano dalla Pace di Lodi alia morte di Francesco Sforza', Arch. stor. Lombardo, New Ser., III (1938), 3-110; Vianello, , op. cit., pp. 223 Google Scholar rf.

8 Predelli, R., I libri commemoriali della Republica di Venezia: Regesti (Venice, 1901), v, no. 175, 55 Google Scholar.

9 The text of the treaty was published by Colombo, A., ‘A proposito delle relazioni tra Francesco I Sforza e Firenze (luglio 1451)’, Rendiconti della R. Accademia dei Lincei: Classe di scienze morali, storiche e filosofiche, ser. v, xv (1906), 553–560 Google Scholar.

10 An influential group of Florentine magnates, led by Giannozzo Manetti and Neri di Gino Capponi, opposed the shift in alliances. See particularly, Rossi, L., ‘Venezia e il re di Napoli, Firenze e Francesco Sforza dal 1450 al 1451’, Nuovo arch, ueneto, New Ser., x (1905), 5–46, 281-356Google Scholar; Jordan, E., ‘Florence et la succession lombarde, 1447-1450’, Mélanges d'archeologie et d'histoire de l'École Francaise de Rome LX (1889), 113 Google Scholar ff.; and recently, Baron, H., The Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance: Civic Humanism and Republican Liberty in an Age of Classicism and Tyranny (Princeton, 1955), pp. 347–350 Google Scholar. For the commercial rivalry between the two republics, consult Luzzatto, G., Storia economica dell'età moderna e contemporanea (Padua, 1932), 1, 136 ff.Google Scholar, and Sapori, A., ‘I primi viaggi di Levante e di Ponente delle galere fiorentine’, Arch. stor. italiano CXIV (1956), 69–91 Google Scholar.

11 On Alfonso's hegemonic ambitions in Italy, and on the power of the Aragonese in the Mediterranean, see Pontieri, E., Per la storia del regno di Ferrante I d'Aragona, re di Napoli (Naples, 1946), pp. 125 ff.Google Scholar, and Vicens-Vives, J., Fernando el Católico, Príncipe de Aragon Rey de Sicilia, 1458-1478 (Madrid, 1952), pp. 37 Google Scholar ff.

12 See Rossi, L., ‘I prodromi della guerra in Italia del 1452-53. I tiranni di Romagna e Federico da Montefeltro’, Atti e memorie della R. Deputazione di stor. patria delle Marche, New Ser., II (1905), 1–91, 303-353; III (1906), 63-124, 189-224, 279-305Google Scholar.

13 For the economic and political ties between Florence and the French, consult Yver, G., Le Commerce et les marchands dans l'ltalie meridionale au XIII et au XIV sièle (Paris, 1903)Google Scholar, chap, v; Doren, A., Storia economica della'Italia nel medioevo, tr. from the German by Luzzatto, G. (Padua, 1936), pp. 378–380 Google Scholar; Desjardins, M. A., Négotiations diplomatiques de la France avec la Toscane. Documents recueillis par Giuseppe Canestrini (Paris, 1859)Google Scholar, introduction to vol. 1, XI-XII, and 1–61.

14 Sforza's fears of French aggressive intentions at this early date have already been pointed out by Rossi, L., ‘La lega tra il duca di Milano, i fiorentini e Carlo VII re di Franda’, Arch. stor. lombardo, ser. IV, V (1906), 248 ffGoogle Scholar.

15 Sforza wrote to his wife on 22 Aug. 1452: ‘considerate che questo stato de Lombardia non po stare senza lo appogio overo del Imperatore o della prefatta maesta della corona de Franza, havimo deliberato fare fondamento in essa corona de Franza'. Quoted by Gaston du Fresne de Beaucourt, Histoire de Charles VII (Paris, 1881-1891), v, 171, n. 5.

16 Cusin, ‘Le aspirazioni’, p. 356.

17 The text of the instructions is in Desjardins, op. cit., I, 62-71.

18 The contents of the instructions to Acciaioli were undoubtedly discussed with Nicodemo Tranchedini da Pontremoli, Milan's resident ambassador in Florence. Moreover, Acciaioli was instructed to pass through Milan and discuss the terms of the alliance with the duke. See Rossi, ‘La lega’, pp. 253-256.

19 Sforza's policy in respect to Genoa has been surveyed by Sorbelli, A., Francesco Sforza a Genova (1458-1466). Saggio sulla politico italiana di Luigi XI (Bologna, 1901)Google Scholar, and by Sacchi-Orlandini, P., Quattro anni di storia genovese 1454-1458) alia luce dei documenti Sforzeschi (Pavia, 1953)Google Scholar.

20 Beaucourt, Histoire, IV, 230 ff.; Peyronnet, G., ‘La politica italiana di Luigi Delfino di Francia’, Riv. stor. Italiana LXIV (1952), 22–24 Google Scholar.

21 Niccolò Arcimboldi, special Milanese envoy in Florence, to Sforza, 27 Oct. 1451, in Rossi, ‘La lega’, appendix, doc. XIV, 279-281, and 257.

22 The text of the treaty without the secret clause, dated 4 Nov. 1451, is in Dumont, J., Corps universel diplomatique du droit desgents … . (Amsterdam, 1726-1731), III, pt. 1, 188—189 Google Scholar. The secret clause is in Rossi, ‘La lega’, pp. 257-258, and in Beaucourt, op. cit., v, 164-165, n. 4.

23 Acciaioli to Sforza, Tours, 22 Jan. 1452, in Rossi, ‘La lega’, appendix, XXI, 290.

24 Acciaioli to the Died di Balia of Florence, Tours, 21 Dec. 1451, ibid., XVIII, 286-288. See also the dispatch cited in the preceding note.

25 Acciaioli to Sforza, Sancto Massante, 18 Nov. 1451, and Tours, 27 Feb. 1452, ibid., XV, 282, and XXIII, 295, respectively.

26 See dispatch of 18 Nov. cited in preceding note.

27 Rossi, ‘La lega’, pp. 258 ff. and 266; Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 157 ff.; Lecoy de la Marche, M. A., Le roy Rene”, sa vie, son administration, ses travaux artistiques et littéraires (Paris, 1875), 1, 271 Google Scholar.

28 The exclusion of the pope and the emperor was a customary diplomatic practice as a sign of respect (honoris causa). See de Maulde-La-Clavière, M., La diplomatic an temps de Machiavel (Paris, 1893)Google Scholar, in, 274. The text of the treaty is in Rossi, ‘La lega’, XXIII, 292-295.

29 Acciaioli to Sforza, Tours, 27 Feb. 1452, in Rossi, ‘La lega’, XXIII, 295-296.

30 ‘Noi [Sforza] pensamo molto bene, che per quella magnifica communità [Genoa] nè per la Ex. communità de Fiorenza, nè ancora per nuy nè per li nostri figlioli non se fa che Franzosi habiano lo stato de Zenova nè cosa alcuna dal canto de qua per la condictione loro.’ Sforza to his envoys in Genoa, Giovanni Feruffini and Sceva da Curte, Milan, 21 Apr. 1452, as quoted by F. Fossati, ‘Rapporti tra Milano, Monferrato e Francia nel 1452’, Riv. di storia, arte e archeologia per laprovincia di Alessandria XLIII (1934), 10, n. 5. Cf. Sforza to Doge Pietro Campofregoso, Leno, 1 Oct. 1452, ibid., appendix, doc. 53, 81-82.

31 In the treaty Sforza is given the title of duke as well as count, but in private correspondence Charles VII addressed him only as count. See the king's letters to the ‘Count’ on 21 Feb. 1452, in Lecoy de la Marche, op. cit., II, 265; on 18 Dec. 1455 and 16 June 1458, etc. in Beaucourt, Histoire, v, docs. 10, 23 respectively.

32 Rossi, ‘La lega’, pp. 253-255, and docs, VI-VIII, pp. 274-276.

33 An incomplete text of this memorandum, dated 12 Sept. 1451, is in Buser, B., Die Beziehungen der Mediceer zur Frankreich wahrend derjahre 1434-1494 (Leipzig, 1879), appendix, pp. 372–374 Google Scholar. Cf. Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 163-164; Rossi, ‘La lega’ p. 254.

34 The Venetians declared war on 16 May 1452; Alfonso waited until 4 June: F. Fossati, ‘Francesco Sforza e la sorpressa del 16 maggio 1452’, Arch stor. lombardo, ser. VII, LXI, pt. 2 (1934), P. 330; Rossi, ‘I prodromi', in, 88.

35 During 1451, Nicholas had sought to settle by arbitration the issue of the Milanese succession; but his efforts failed to budge the contestants from their rigid positions (A. Colombo, ‘Per la difesa di Francesco 1 Sforza dinanzi al tribunale arbitramentale di Roma’, Boll. stoT.piacentinovi, 1909, 9-25, 72-82, 128-134).

36 For the opening phases of the war, consult Fossati, ‘Francesco Sforza’, pp. 330 ff., and ‘Rapporti’, passim; Rossi, ‘Prodromi’, ra (1906), 75 ff.

37 Beaucourt, Histoire, v. chap, IX, and p. 293.

38 Charles VII to the Republic of Florence, Mehun-sur-Yèvre, 17 July 1452, and to Sforza, Bourges, 31 Aug. 1452, in Desjardins, op.cit., 1, 73-76, 77, respectively; Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 186-188; B. de Mandrot, ‘Étude sur les relations de Charles VII et de Louis XI, rois de France, avec les Cantons suisses, 1444.-1483’, Jahrbuch für schweizerische Geschichte…. v (1880), 77ff.

39 Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 172; Fossati, ‘I rapporti’, pp. 25 ff.

40 Acciaioli was accompanied by a colleague, Francesco Ventura. The text of the Signoria's instructions, dated 28 Sept. 1452, is in Fabroni, A., Magni Cosmi vita … (Pisa, 1788), pp. 200–211 Google Scholar.

41 Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 294-295; Perret, P. M., Histoire des relations de la France avec Venise du XIII^e siècles a l'avenement de Charles VIII (Paris, 1896), 1, 244–247 Google Scholar, and his article, ‘Le discours d'Angelo Acciauoli au Roy de France (1453)’, Bibliothèque de l'École des Charles LIII (1892), 429 ff.

42 In fact, a clause in the treaty gave the Italians the option of breaking their engagement with René subject to giving two months’ notice and paying an indemnity of 20,000 florins. René had the same right, but was not required to pay the indemnity. See the text of the treaty, signed at Tours, in Lecoy de la Marche, , op. cit., II, 265–269 Google Scholar.

43 Colombo, E., ‘Il Re Renato alleato del Duca Francesco Sforza contro i Veneziani, 1453-1454’, Arch. stor. lombardo XXI, pt. 1 (1894), 86–87 Google Scholar; Lecoy de la Marche, op. cit., I, 277; Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 298-301.

44 Relations between the dauphin and his father had steadily deteriorated from his late teens. Restless, eager to rule, resentful of paternal authority, unscrupulous councillors, and mistresses, Louis in 1440 sided with a feudal rising of the great nobles known as the Praguerie. In 1451, he married a daughter of the Duke of Savoy against the king's wishes. There followed other acts of insubordination as result of which Louis was deprived of the royal pension. See Basin, T., Histoire de Charles VII, ed. and tr. by Samaran, Ch. (Paris, 1933-1945)Google Scholar. 1. 256 rf.; Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 143-145, 173 rf.; Legeay, U., Histoire de Louis XI (Paris, 1874), 1, 171–174 Google Scholar; Champion, P., Louis XI (Paris, 1927), 1, 167–236 Google Scholar.

45 The text of the treaty, dated Feb. 1446, was published by de Mandrot, B., ‘Un projet de partage du Milanais en 1446’, Bibliothèque de l'École des Charles XLIV (1883), 184–191 Google Scholar.

46 For the Italian ambitions of the dauphin, see particularly Beaucourt, Histoire, IV, 223 ff., v, 167-169, and Peyronnet, ‘La politica’, pp. 10-44. The latter is the only extensive study of this subject. His biographers have little to say of his Italian policy as dauphin.

47 Colombo, ‘Re Renato', pp. 87-90; Lecoy de la Marche, op. cit., 1, 277; Beaucourt, Histoire, v, 301; Perret, , Histoire, I, 252–253 Google Scholar.

48 The text of the Venetian reply, dated 31 Aug. 1453, is in Charavay, E., Lettres de Louis XI (Paris, 1888), I, appendix, 243–244 Google Scholar. See also Perret, , Histoire, I, 257–258 Google Scholar.

49 Another reason given by the duke for his refusal was his belief that the Genoese had already decided to give themselves to Charles VII. Sforza hoped that this false revelation might induce Louis to abandon his designs on Genoa. See Acciaioli to Sforza, Sale, 18 Sept. 1453, in Colombo, ‘Re Renato’, appendix, doc. 15, 122-124, and 9-91, Sforza to Acciaioli, 23 Sept. 1453, in Perret, Histoire, II, appendix, 327-328.

50 The text of the Venetian reply, dated 5 Oct. 1453, was published by Lecoy de la Marche, op. cit., II, 274, under the erroneous date of 3 Oct. See Perret, , Histoire, 1, 261–262 Google Scholar, and Colombo, ‘Re Renato’, pp. 100 ff. and 360 ff.

51 Colombo, ‘Re Renato’, pp. 272-273.

52 See the following letters: Sforza to Cosimo de’ Medici, 27 Apr. 1453; Tranchedini to Sforza, 2 May 1453; Boccaccino and Tranchedini, Milanese envoys in Florence, to Sforza 5 Sept. 1453, all in Buser, op. cit., appendix, pp. 377-384. Cf. Desjardins, op. cit., p. 77.

53 On the pope's role as a peacemaker, Pastor, consult L., Storia dei Papi dallafine del Medio Evo, new Italian ed. by Mercati, A. (Rome, 1942-1944), I, 614, 628–629 Google Scholar; Carusi, E., ‘La legazione del Cardinale Domenico Capranica ad Alfonso d'Aragona’, Arch. stor. della Soc. romana di stor. patria XXVIII (1905), 473–481 Google Scholar; Morpurgo-Castclnuovo, M., ‘II Cardinale Domenico Capranica’, ibid., LII (1929), 56 ff.Google Scholar; Canetta, C., ‘Il Congresso di Roma’, Arch. stor. lombardo IX (1882), 129–135 Google Scholar; and Pagani, L., ‘L'ainbasciata di Francesco Sforza a Niccolo v per la pace con Venezia (1453-54)’, ibid., XLVII (1920), 82–96 Google Scholar.

54 These secret negotiations have been revealed by Antonino, F., ‘La pace di Lodi e i secreti maneggi che la prcpararano’, Arch. stor. lombardo, scr. vi, LVII (1930), 239 Google Scholar ff. Consult also Canetta, C., ‘La pace di Lodi (9 aprile 1454)’, Riv. stor. italiana II (1885), 516–564 Google Scholar.

55 The treaty also contained some secret clauses giving Sforza a free hand in the recovery of certain lands, originally forming a part of the duchy of Milan under Filippo Maria, and then held by such allies of Venice as the Duke of Savoy and the lords of Monferrato and of Correggio. The secret clauses are summarized by Canetta, ‘La pace’, pp. 556-557. “The text of the treaty is in Dumont, op. cit., in, pt. 1, 202-206.

56 Antonino, , op. cit., pp. 273 Google Scholar ff.; Canetta, ‘La pace’, pp. 559 ff.

57 René attempted to make a graceful retreat by announcing that he planned to send his son John to Italy in the spring to take his place. See Colombo, ‘Re Renato’, pp. 377 ff.; Lecoy de la Marche, op. cit., 1, 283 ff.

58 These overtures, directed primarily to the dauphin, were made through Francesco Veniero, Venetian ambassador at the court of Louis of Savoy. The texts of the Signoria's instructions to Veniero are in Charavay, op. cit., 1, appendix, 244-251. Cf. Buser, op. cit., appendix, pp. 286-287.

59 Two most damaging amendments for the future peace of Italy were those giving Alfonso the right to prosecute his claims against Malatesta and the republic of Genoa without interference from the league. See the still fundamental work on the creation of the league, Soranzo, G., La Lega Italica (1454-55) (Milan, 1924)Google Scholar.

60 Consult the text of the league in Theiner, A., Codex diplomaticus dotnini temporalis S. Sedis (Rome, 1861-1862), in, 380–386 Google Scholar.

61 To date there is no monograph dealing with the entire period of the league, generally taken to span the forty years 1454-1494. In the meantime, we must rely on two articles: Cessi, R., ‘La “lega italica” e la sua funzione storica nella seconda metà del sec. xv’, Atti del R. Istituto veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti CII, pt. 2 (1943), 99–176 Google Scholar; Nebbia, G., ‘La Lega Italica del 1455; sue vicende e sua rinnovazione nel 1470’, Arch. stor. lombardo, New Ser., IV (1939), 115–135.Google Scholar

62 On the activity of Piccinino, consult Fumi, L., ‘Francesco Sforza contro Jacopo Piccinino (Dalla Pace di Lodi alia morte di Callisto)’, Boll, della R. Deputazione di stor. patria per l'Umbria XVI (1910), 507–601 Google Scholar; Banchi, L., ‘Il Piccinino nello Stato di Siena e la lega italiana (1455-56)’, Arch. stor. italiano, ser. IV, IV (1879), 44–58, 224-245Google Scholar; Soranzo, G., Pio II e la politica italiana nellalotta contro i Malatesti, 1437-63 (Padua, 1911), pp. 44 Google Scholar fF.

63 The rivalry between Alfonso and the republic of Genoa was actually a continuation of the long-standing Aragonese-Genoese struggle for naval supremacy in the western Mediterranean, and for control of the island of Corsica then held by Genoa. The republic had learned to rely on French aid against Alfonso, and in the war of the Milanese succession she had joined Alfonso's enemies. The king sought to weaken the city by interfering in its traditional internal feuds. His principal enemies were the Campofregosi, against whom he supported the Fieschi, the Adorno, and other families contending for the rule of the republic. See Orlandini, Sacchi, op. cit., pp. 3–12 Google Scholar and 34-35; Ganale, M. G., Nuova istoria della Republica di Genova … dalle origini all'anno 1797 (Florence, 1864), IV, 167–220 Google Scholar, and Schiappoli, I., ‘La marina degli aragonesi di Napoli’, Arch. stor. per le provincie napoletane, New Ser., XXIX (1943), 18 Google Scholar ff.

64 Papal investiture of the king of the Two Sicilies (this title designated the union of Sicily and Naples) had taken place for several centuries. The church based her claims of suzerainty over the kingdom on the Donations of Constantine and Charlemagne, and on other documents and customs ( Scaduto, F., Stato e Chiesa nelle Due Sicilie dai Nonnanni ai giomi nostri (XI-XIX), Palermo, 1887, pp. 58–78 Google Scholar.

65 For the struggle between Alfonso and Calixtus, and the latter's nepotism, see Pastor, Storia, 1,729 ff.

66 Tranchedini to Sforza, 4 Apr. 1458, quoted by Perrens, F. T., Histoire de Florence depuis la domination des Medicis jusqu' à la chute de la Republique (1434-1531) (Paris, 1888), 1, 196 Google Scholar, II. 2. Cf. Pius II, Commentaries, tr. Gragg, F. A., Smith College Studies in History XXXV (1939-1940), Book II, 121 Google Scholar.

67 Orlandini, Sacchi, op. cit., pp. 45 Google Scholar ff.; Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, 234 ff.; Soranzo, , Pio II, pp. 41–42 Google Scholar, 48.

68 Canetta, C., ‘Le sponsalie di Casa Sforza con Casa d'Aragona (giugno-ottobre 1455)’, Arch. stor. lombardo. IX (1882), 136–144 Google Scholar.

69 A detailed account of Sforza's diplomatic activity is in my dissertation, pp. 138-162.

70 The agent was Tommaso Tibaldo of Bologna, See one of his reports to Sforza, dated 7 Dec. 1456, in Charavay, op. cit., 1, appendix, 266-267.

71 Alfonso regarded the French as ‘men of words and howls and not of deeds’ (Antonio da Trezzo, Milanese ambassador in Naples, to Sforza, 7 Apr. 1456, quoted by Buser, op. cit., pp. 85 and 399).

72 The text of the treaty between Campofregoso and Charles VII is in Dumont, op cit., III, pt. 1, 245 ff. See also Sorbelli, , op. cit., pp. 17–19 Google Scholar; Orlandini, Sacchi, op. cit., pp. 60–63 Google Scholar; Beaucourt, , Histoire, VI, 238–239 Google Scholar.

73 Perret, Histoire, I, 283 ff.

74 Tranchedini to Sforza, 24 May 1458, in Sorbelli, op. cit., appendix, doc. I.

75 The most important contemporary source for this papal election is Book 1 of Pius II's Commentarii rerum memorabilium, quae temporibus suis continerunt…. (Rome, 1584). However, important and extensive portions of the election account were deleted from this and other editions. The complete work remains unedited in the original Latin MS., Reginensis 1995 of the Vatican Library. Recently, Professor F. A. Gragg has completed an English translation of this manuscript which constitutes the only complete printed version of the Commentarii, and it has been used here. The translation appeared in Smith College Studies in History as follows: Book 1, vol. XXII (1936-1937); Books II-III, XXV (1939-1940); Books IV-V, XXX (1947); Books VI-IX, XXXV (1951); Books X-XIII, XLIII (1957). Other contemporary accounts are contained in the dispatches of the various ambassadors and agents residing at the papal court, particularly those of the Milanese ambassador, Ottone de Carretto. Many of them are cited and summarized in my dissertation, pp. 183 ff. Important modern treatments of the election are given by Voigt, G., Enea Silvio de’ Piccolomini, als Papst Pius der Zweite, und sein Zeitaltcr (Berlin, 1863), III, chap. 1Google Scholar; Paparelli, G., Enea Silvio Piccolomini (Pius II) (Bari, 1950)Google Scholar, chap, ix; and Pastor, Storia, 11, 5 ff.

76 Commentaries, Book I, 98-100.

77 Ibid., Book I, 100.

78 It has been established that Pius compiled his Commentaries between 1462 and 1463. See Bernetti, G., ‘Ricerche e problemi sui Commentarii di Enea Silvio Piccolomini’, La Rinascitaa (1939). 450–451 Google Scholar.

79 While Calixtus lay on his deathbed, violent disorders erupted in Rome and in other areas of the Papal States during which many Catalans lost their lives at the hands of infuriated Italian mobs. Contemporary accounts of these demonstrations can be found in the dispatches of ambassadors at the Holy See, some of which have been published by Pastor, Storia, I, appendix, docs. 86-87, and in his Ungedruckte Akten zur Geschichte der Papste vomehmlich im XV, XVI, und XVII Jahrhundert (Freiburg, 1904), 1, docs. 58-59, 61-62, 64. See also Tuccia, Niccola della, Cronaca di Viterbo, Cronache e statuti della città di Viterbo, ed. Ciampi, I. (Florence, 1872), p. 256 Google Scholar.

80 For the efforts of the Milanese and Neapolitan envoys to influence the cardinals before the opening of the conclave, consult the following dispatches from Rome: Ottone de Carretto to Sforza, 26 July and 20 Aug. 1458, Galeotto Agnesi to Sforza, 15 Aug. 1458, all in Pastor, Ungedruckte Akten, pp. 78-80, 91-95, 88-89, respectively; Sforza to Ottone, Milan, 5 Aug. 1458, and Ottone to Sforza, Rome, 12 Aug. 1458, both in Morpurgo-Castelnuovo, op. cit., appendix, pp. 135-136; Ottone to Sforza, Rome, 14 Aug. 1458, in Pastor, Storia, 11, appendix, doc. I, 679-680.

81 The text of the agreement is in J. C. Lunig, Codex Italiae diplomatics … . (Franco-furti et Lipsiae, 1725-1735), II, cols. 1257-1258.

82 The Duke of Milan came to Mantua on 17 Sept. 1459 and remained until 3 Oct. (Pastor, Storia, II, 56 ff.). Little is known about his private talks with Pius. In a letter to his wife from Mantua, on I Oct. 1459, Sforza wrote that he had spoken to the pope about ‘cose private e particolare’, but he gives no details (ibid., II, appendix, 693). Pius himself fails to throw light on this matter in his Commentaries. Sforza's secretary and biographer, G. Simonetta, in his Return gestarum Francisci Sfortiae commentarii, ed. G. Soranzo, in L. A. Muratori, Return italicarum sctiptotes, new ed. XXVI, pt. 2, 417, claims that an agreement to support Ferrante was reached at Mantua. This is confirmed in a letter written by Sforza to his ambassador in Rome, Ottone de Carretto, almost a year later, on 6 Sept. 1460, in which the duke recalled that he and Pius had personally agreed at Mantua to assume an equal share of the burden for the defense of Ferrante against John of Anjou. The letter is summarized by Fumi, L., ‘Roberto Sanseverino all'impresa di Napoli per Ferdinando I’, Arch. stot. lombardo XVII (1912), 344–345 Google Scholar. Modern scholars, such as Rubieri, E., Francesco Primo Sforza (Florence, 1879), II, 354 Google Scholar, Assum, C., Francesco Sforza (Turin, 1945), pp. 441–442 Google Scholar, Voigt, op. cit., III, 65, and Pastor, Storia, II, 56-57, agree with Simonetta.

83 See Charles VII's letters to Sforza, 16 June 1458 and 31 Jan. 1459 in Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, appendix, docs. 23, 25 respectively, and pp. 232-233 for the duke's replies.

84 In June 1458, John of Anjou sent Daniele Arrighi, an exiled Neapolitan baron, to Milan from his headquarters in Genoa. He was followed in September by two envoys of René, Nicolas de Brancas, bishop of Marseille, and Giovanni Cossa, another exiled Neapolitan baron (Count of Troia). Also in September, the duke received a royal ambassador, John d'Amancier. For these embassies, see Simonetta, Rerum, Book XXVI, 417; Nunziante, E., ‘I primi anni di Ferdinando d'Aragona e l'invasione di Giovanni d'Angiò’, Arch. stor. per leptovincie napoletane XVII (1892), 755–759 Google Scholar; and Beaucourt, Histoite, VI, 242.

85 The Bishop of Marseille and Cossa proceeded to Florence, where they arrived in October 1458. They had been preceded by several days by a royal envoy, Miles d'llliers, sent to Florence on a similar mission. The speeches of the envoys, and the Signoria's responses through the Gonfaloniere, Ottone Nicolini, are in Desjardins, op. cit., 1, 82-96.

86 The Bishop of Marseille and Miles d'llliers arrived in Rome in late October or early November. Pius’ response is contained in a bull dated 27 Nov. 1458, that is, seventeen days after he had issued another bull investing Ferrante with the kingdom of Naples. The first bull is in Lecoy de la Marche, op. cit., II, cols. 44. The investiture bull was published by Lunig, op. cit., II, cols. 1262-1278. Cf. Pius II, Commentaries, Book II, 124.

87 Charles VII's ambassador, John d'Amancier, arrived in Venice during the second half of March 1459. The envoy's proposals are summarized in the response of the Venetian Senate, dated 27 March, which was published by Perret, Histoire, II, doc. 11.

88 In October 1459, the Venetian Signoria received two ambassadors from Charles VII— John de Chambes and George Havart—and the Bishop of Marseille, Nicolas de Brancas, from Rene of Anjou. The responses of the Venetian Senate to the royal envoys are in Perret, P. M., ‘L'ambassade de Jean de Chambes a Venise (1459) d'apres des documents venitiens’, Bibliothèque de I'École des Chartes L (1889), 561–566 Google Scholar. Cf. the ‘Relation de Jean de Chambes envoye’ du Roy Charles VII auprés de la seigneurie de Venise (1459)’, ed. M. E. de Stadler, ibid., IV (1841-1842), 183-196. The text of the Venetian reply to the Bishop of Marseille was published by Perret, Histoire, II, doc. XII. In May 1460, the republic also received an envoy, Antonio Gattola, sent by John of Anjou. In the following month, a certain Marino arrived as an agent of Rene. See ibid., 1, 340-343.

89 See Perret, Histoire, 1, 333 ff.

90 Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, 250-251. On the Congress of Mantua, consult Pius II, Commentaries, Books II-III, passim; Pastor, Storia, 11, 37 ff.; Picotti, G. B., La dieta di Mantova e la politica de’ Veneziani (Venice, 1912)Google Scholar; and Hefele, C. J. and Leclercq, H., Histoire des Conciles d'après les document soriginaux…. (Paris, 1907), VII, pt. 2, 1287–1315 Google Scholar.

91 The French envoys arrived in Mantua on 16 Nov. 1459. The royal delegation included Jean Bernard, William Cousinot, Thomas de Courcelles, William Chartier, Miles d'llliers, and the secretary, Nicolas Petit. They were joined by Chambes and Havart. Nicolas de Brancas represented Rene of Anjou. In addition, there were envoys representing the dukes of Brittany and Orleans and a Genoese envoy, Gottardo Stella, who sided with his French masters. The French proposals are summarized in a dispatch of Ottone de Carretto to Sforza, 1 Dec. 1459, in Pastor, Storia, II, appendix, 694-696. Pius’ principal reply took the form of a long public oration, the text of which is in L. d'Achery, Spicilegium sive collectio veterum aliquot scriptorum qui in Calliae bibliothecis delituerant. … , new ed. (Paris, 1723), III, 811-820, and in Mansi, G. D., Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, rev. ed. by Martin, J. B. and Petit, L. (Paris, 1901-1924), XXXII, cols. 230–251 Google Scholar. Cf. letter by Nicolas Petit to William Jouvenel Orsini, Chancellor of France, Mantua, 21 Nov. 1459, in D'Achery, op. cit., III, 806-807; Pius II, Commentaries, Book in, 260 ff.; ‘Relation de Fambassade envoyee par Charles vn a Mantoue (Octobre-Novembre, 1459)’, ed. G. du Fresne de Beaucourt in Annuaire-Bulletin de la Societé de l'Histoire de France n (1864), 167-177, and his Histoire, VI, 253 ff.; Pastor, Storia, II, 66 ff.; Picotti, La dieta, pp. 257ff.

92 Simonetta, Rerum, Book XXVI, 428; Nunziante, op. cit., XX (1895), 222; Perrens, op. cit., 1, 204.

93 Sforza's remarkable answer, emphasizing the danger to Italian independence, should the French be allowed to recapture Naples, is included in Simonetta, Rerum, Book XXVI, 428-429, who claims to have written it himself under the duke's dictation.

94 Pius was in Florence towards the end of January 1460 (Commentaries, Book IV, 300).

95 See Simonetta, , Rerum, XXVI, 429 Google Scholar. Gutkind, K. S., Cosimo de’ Medici, Pater Patriae, 1389-1464 (Oxford, 1938), p. 168 Google Scholar, n. I, claims that Cosimo had opposed the subsidy to John of Anjou from the beginning, and that he had reached a position of neutrality independently of the intervention of Sforza and the pope. This view is not tenable. Cosimo's pro-French stand had been consistent at least from the creation of the league, as we have seen from his correspondence with Sforza. Moreover, we have the testimony of Simonetta and Pius II, two well-informed contemporary figures. Cf. also Nunziante, loc. cit., xx, 323; Sorbelli, , op. cit., pp. 28–29 Google Scholar; Perrens, , op. cit., 1, 337 Google Scholar.

96 An ambassador of Charles VII arrived in Florence in March 1460, while envoys of René visited the city in the following June. The proposals of the envoys and the replies of the Signoria are in Desjardins, op. cit., pp. 96-100. The documents do not reveal the names of the ambassadors, but it can be assumed that they were members of the French delegation that had taken part in the Congress of Mantua. Evidence of continual Florentine secret subsidies to Sforza can be found in two dispatches of Tranchedini to the duke, Florence, 16 and 18 Mar. 1462, in Buser, op. cit., appendix, 412-413.

97 For the pro-Angevin activity of Malatesta and Piccinino, see Soranzo, Pio II, pp. 88-208, and Nunziante, Arch. star, napol. XIX (1894), 595-658; XX (1895), 456 ff.

98 An eyewitness account of the Neapolitan war was written by the humanist Giovanni Pontano, then a minor official at the court of Ferrante, in his De hello neapolitano, in Raccolta di tutti i più rinomati scrittori dell'istoria generate del Regno di Napoli, ed. G. Gravier (Naples, 1769-1772), v. The standard modern account is still Nunziante, Arch. stor. napol. XVII (1892) et seqq. See also Pontieri, E., ‘La Calabria del secolo xv e la rivolta di Antonio Centeglia’, Arch. stor. per le provincie napoletane, New Ser. X (1926), 5–154 Google Scholar.

99 In May 1460, Pius received an embassy from René of Anjou. Another from John of Anjou arrived soon after the battle of Sarno (Pius II to Cardinal Pierre de Foix, 24 May 1460, in Pastor, Ungedruckte Akten, p. 123; Pius II, Commentaries, Book IV. 325-326.

100 Commentaries, Book IV, 325-326.

101 Ibid., Book IV, 326.

102 Pius’ vacillations at this time are revealed by Simonetta, Rerum, XXVII, 436, 438. Additional evidence is given by Nunziante, op. cit., XX, 472-473. Ferrente betrothed his natural daughter, Maria, to Antonio Tedeschini-Piccolomini, who received the duchy of Amalfi as dowry, the title of Grand Justiciar of the kingdom, and later the duchy of Sessa and Terracina. Another papal nephew, Andrea Tedeschini-Piccolomini, was awarded Castiglione della Pescaia in Tuscany and the island of Giglio. See Mazzoleni, I., Regeslo della Cancellaria Aragonese di Napoli (Naples, 1951)Google Scholar, appendix, doc. XIV, 216-226; Pius II, Commentaries, Book II, 125 and n. 25; Book IV, 329-330; Book V, 378-379.

103 Pastor, Storia, II, 79, n. 4.

104 Fumi, ‘Roberto Sanseverino’, pp. 344-345.

105 Charles VII to Sforza, Razilly 24 Mar. 1460, in Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, appendix, doc. 26. The royal envoy was Regnault de Dresnay, bailiff of Sens. Sforza's reply, dated 12 May, is quoted by Beaucourt, VI, 299, n. 4.

106 The Milanese envoy was Emanuele di Jacopo. His instructions are summarized by Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, 300.

107 Ibid., VI, 300-301.

108 Ibid., VI, 302; Lecoy de la Marche, op. cit., 1, 294.

109 Actually, the only territorial prize offered to Venice was the Cremonese since the republic already possessed the Bresciano and the Bergamasco. The French were merely promising to recognize these Venetian conquests. The French embassy was composed of Nicolas Petit for the king, Guy de Brilhac for the Duke of Orleans, Jean de Rouville for the Duke of Brittany, and Jean d'Etampes for the Court of Angouleme. The alliance was to include all these princes. The ambassadors arrived in Venice on 29 Sept. 1460. Their instructions are summarized by Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, 302-303, and by Perret, Histoire, 1, 346.

110 The answer of the Venetian Senate, dated 11 Oct. 1460, is in Perret, Histoire, II, appendix, doc. XIII.

111 Basin, T., op. cit., 1, 225 Google Scholar ff.; Champion, op. cit., 1, 207-209; Calmette, J., Autour de Louis XI (Paris, 1947), pp. 65 Google Scholar ff.

112 On the background of the Lancastrian-Yorkist feud, consult Ramsay, J. H., Lancaster and York; a Century of English History (A.D. 1309-1485) (Oxford, 1892), 1, 1–205 Google Scholar; Mowat, R. B., The Wars of the Roses, 1377-1477 (London, 1914), pp. 1–100 Google Scholar.

113 See Ferrante to Sforza, 20 May 1459, in Messer, A. A., he Codice Aragonese. Contribution a I'histoire des Aragonais de Naples (Paris, 1912), pp. 224–225 Google Scholar, and Perret, Histoire, 1, 335-336.

114 Sforza's answer to Louis, dated 10 Mar. 1460, is quoted by Perret, Histoire, 1, 336, n. 1.

115 Louis’ envoys were Gaston du Lyon and Giacomo di Valperga. The principal articles of the Milanese draft are given by Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, 306-307, notes.

116 The text of the duke's instructions to Camogli, dated 27 Aug. 1460, is in Charavay, op. cit., 1, 324-326.

117 See Camogli's dispatch to Sforza, Genappe, 2 Oct. 1460, as summarized by Beaucourt, Histoire, VI, 305-306.

118 The text of the treaty is in Dumont, op. cit., III, pt. I, 266-268, in Lunig, , op. cit., III, cols. 621–627 Google Scholar, and in Charavay, , op. cit., 1, 326–330 Google Scholar. It is surprising that Philip the Good was not included in the treaty, and that no formal alliance was ever concluded between the Burgundian ruler and Sforza, in view of the former's desire for such a tie. However, it is known that the two princes enjoyed cordial relations, particularly in the economic sphere. See Martens, M., ‘La correspondence de caractere dconomique exchangee par Francesco Sforza, due de Milan, et Philippe le Bon, due de Bourgogne (1450-1466)’, Bull, de l'Inslitute historique Beige de Rome XXVII (1952), 221–234 Google Scholar.

119 Gabotto, F., Lo Stato sabaudo da Amedeo VIII ad Emanuele Filiberto (Turin-Rome, 1892), 1, 40 ffGoogle Scholar.

120 The collusion between Sforza and Romagnano has been noted by Gabotto, , op. cit., 1, 54–55 Google Scholar, and n. 2. Cf. Charvensod, M. C. Daviso di, ‘Filippo Senza Terra; la sua ribellione nel 1462 e le sue relazioni con Francesco Sforza e Luigi XI’, Riv. stor. italiana, ser. IV, VI (1935). 129–130 Google Scholar.

121 For the negotiations on the Valperga clause, see my dissertation, pp. 292 ff., 330-332.

122 Rymer, T., Foedera, 3d ed. (La Haye, 1739-1745), XI, 419 Google Scholar; Pius II, Commentaries, Book III, 268.

123 Coppini's intrigues are revealed by his numerous dispatches to Sforza and others, some of which are written in sympathetic ink. They are included in Calendar of State Papers—Milan, ed. A. B. Hinds (London, 1912), 1, in Calendar of State Papers—Venice, ed. R. Brown (London, 1864), I, and in de Mandrot, B., Deputies des ambassadeurs milanais en Prance sous Louis XI et Francois Sforza (Paris, 1916-1919)Google Scholar, 1. See also Scofield, C. L., The Life and Reign of Edward the Fourth, King of England and France and Lord of Ireland (London, 1923), 1, 73 Google Scholar rf., and, recently, Kendall, P. M., Warwick the Kingmaker (New York, 1957), pp. 67–69, 71-72, 76-77, 86-88Google Scholar.

124 The long-standing alliance between France and Castile has been studied by Daumet, G., Étude sur l'alliance de la France et de la Castille aux XIV^e et au XV^e siecles (Paris, 1898)Google Scholar.

125 Formerly it was believed that this alliance between the two kings had been concluded, as is claimed by Zurita, G., Anales de la Corona de Aragona (Zaragosa, 1610), IV, 64 Google Scholar. Recent research by Torregrosa, A. F., ‘Aspectos de la politica exterior de Juan n de Aragon’, Estudios de historia moderna II (1952), 99 Google Scholar ff., has shown that the alliance was never concluded, or if it was, it was not ratified by either side.

126 On John's foreign policy, consult the works of Vicens-Vives, J., Fernando el Católico, Rey de Sicilia, 1458-1478; Sicilia en la politica dejuan II de Aragon (Madrid, 1952)Google Scholar; Juan II de Aragon (1398-1479). Monarqula y revolutión en la España del siglo XV (Barcelona, 1953); ‘La politique mediterraneene et italienne de Jean II’ Aragon entre 1458 et 1462’, Schweizer Beiträge zur allgemeinen Geschkhte VIII (1950), 88-99; and ‘La politique europeenne du Royaume d'Aragon-Catalogne sous Jean n (1458-1479)’, Annates du Midi LXV (1953), 405-414. Among the many studies of Franco-Spanish relations by J. Calmette, see particularly Louis XI, Jean II et la révolution Catalane (1461-1473) (Toulouse, 1903), and La question des Pyrémnées et la Marche d'Espagne au Moyen Age (Paris, 1947).

127 With this gesture, Scanderbeg wished to repay similar military aid he had received from Alfonso of Naples in his struggle against the Turks. See Gegaj, A., L'Albanie et l'invasion Turque au XV^e siècle (Louvain, 1937), pp. 122–124 Google Scholar, and Noli, F. S., George Castrioti Scanderbeg (1405-1468) (New York, 1947), pp. 57–58 Google Scholar.

128 Pius II, Commentaries, Book v, 381 ff.; Pontano, De bello neapolitano, II, 50 ff.; Nunziante, Arch. stor. napol. xx, 495 ff.; xxi, 287 ff.

129 Simonetta, Rerum, XXVIII, 441-446; Pius II, Commentaries, Book v, 369-370; Sorbelli, op. cit., pp. 41 ff.

130 Calendar of State Papers—Milan, I, no. 101; Beaucourt, , Histoire, VI, 334 Google Scholar, n. 5

131 The diplomatic struggle between Louis XI on one side and Sforza and Pius II on the other is analyzed in detail in my dissertation, pp. 352-581.

132 Such claims have been made generally by Florentine historiography, and have been accepted by Cosimo's two modern biographers: Ewart, K. D., Cosimo de’ Medici (London, 1889)Google Scholar, and Gutkind, op. cit. Other scholars who agree with this estimate of the Florentine ruler are B. Barbadoro, ‘Firenze e i Medici nella storia d'ltalia', in Problemi storici e orientamenti storiografici, ed. E. Rota (Como, 1942), p. 500, and Schevill, F., The Medici (New York, 1949), pp. 80–81 Google Scholar.

133 For my views on Renaissance ‘nationalism’, see my article ‘Italianita among Some Italian Intellectuals in the Early Sixteenth Century’, Traditio XII (1956), 339-367.