In 1480, the Milanese architects who were building the Moscow Kremlin were puzzled by an important political question: what shape should the battlements of the walls and towers be made - straight or dovetail? The fact is that the Italian supporters of the Pope, called the Guelphs, had locks with rectangular teeth, while the opponents of the Pope, the Ghibellines, had dovetail locks. On reflection, the architects decided that the Grand Duke of Moscow was certainly not for the Pope. And now our Kremlin repeats the shape of the battlements on the walls of Ghibelline castles in Italy. However, the struggle between these two parties determined not only the appearance of the Kremlin walls, but also the path of development of Western democracy.
In 1194, a son, the future Frederick II, was born to the Holy Roman Emperor Henry VI Hohenstaufen. Soon after this, the court, roaming around Italy, stopped for some time in the south of the country (the Kingdom of Sicily was united with the imperial territories thanks to the marriage of Henry and Constance Hauteville, heiress of the Norman kings). And there the sovereign turned to the Abbot Joachim of Flores, famous for his eschatological concept of history, with the question of the future of his heir. The answer was devastating: "Oh, king! Your boy is a destroyer and a son of destruction. Alas, Lord! He will destroy the earth and will oppress the saints of the Most High."
Pope Adrian IV crowns Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa of the Hohenstaufen family in Rome in 1155. Neither one nor the other has yet imagined that soon the Italian world will split into "admirers" of the tiara and the crown, and a bloody struggle will break out between them.
It was during the reign of Frederick II (1220-1250) that the confrontation between the two parties began, which in different degrees and in different forms influenced the history of Central and Northern Italy up to the 15th century. We are talking about Guelphs and Ghibellines. This struggle began in Florence and, formally speaking, has always remained a purely Florentine phenomenon. However, over the decades, driving out the defeated opponents from the city, the Florentines made almost the entire Apennine Peninsula and even neighboring countries, primarily France and Germany, complicit in their strife.
In 1216, at a rich wedding in the village of Campi near Florence, a drunken brawl ensued. Daggers were used, and, as the chronicler tells, the young patrician Buondelmonte dei Buondelmonti killed a certain Oddo Arriga. Fearing revenge, the well-born youth (and Buondelmonte was a representative of one of the noble families of Tuscany) promised to marry a relative of Arriga from the merchant family of Amidea. It is not known: either the fear of misalliance, or intrigue, or maybe genuine love for another, but something made the groom break his promise and choose a girl from the noble family Donati as his wife. On Easter morning, Buondelmonte rode on a white horse to the bride's house to swear the marriage vow. But on the main bridge of Florence, Ponte Vecchio, he was attacked by the offended Arrigi and killed. “Then,” says the chronicler, “the destruction of Florence began and new words appeared:the Guelph Party and the Ghibelline Party. The Guelphs demanded revenge for the murder of Buondelmonte, and those who tried to conceal the case began to be called Ghibellines. There is no reason not to believe the chronicler in the story of Buondelmonte's unfortunate fate. However, his version about the origin of two political parties in Italy, which had a huge impact on the history of not only this country, but also the entire new European civilization, raises fair doubts - a mouse cannot give birth to a mountain.but the whole new European civilization raises fair doubts - a mouse cannot give birth to a mountain.but the whole new European civilization raises fair doubts - a mouse cannot give birth to a mountain.
The groups of Guelphs and Ghibellines were indeed formed in the 13th century, but their source was not the everyday “showdown” of the Florentine clans, but the global processes of European history.
The so-called Emperor's Castle (at one time it belonged to Frederick II of Hohenstaufen) in Prato served as the headquarters for the local Ghibellines.
At the time, the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation extended from the Baltic Sea in the north to Tuscany in the south and from Burgundy in the west to Bohemia in the east. In such a large area, the emperors found it extremely difficult to maintain order, especially in Northern Italy, separated by mountains. It is because of the Alps that the names of the parties that we are talking about came to Italy. German "Welf" was pronounced by the Italians as "Guelfi"; in turn "Ghibellini" - a distorted German Waiblingen. In Germany, this was the name of two rival dynasties - the Welfs, to whom Saxony and Bavaria belonged, and the Hohenstaufens, immigrants from Swabia (they were called "Weiblings", after one of the family castles). But in Italy the meaning of these terms has been expanded. Northern Italian cities found themselves between a rock and a hard place - their independence was threatened by both German emperors and popes. In turn, Rome was in a state of continuous conflict with the Hohenstaufens, who were seeking to conquer all of Italy.
Promotional video:
By the 13th century, under Pope Innocent III (1198-1216), there was a final split between the church and the secular government. Its roots go back to the end of the 11th century, when, on the initiative of Gregory VII (1073-1085), the struggle for investiture - the right to appoint bishops - began. Previously, it was possessed by the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire, but now the Holy See wanted to make investiture its privilege, hoping that it would be an important step towards the spread of papal influence in Europe. True, after a series of wars and mutual curses, none of the participants in the conflict managed to achieve complete victory - it was decided that the prelates elected by the chapters would receive spiritual investiture from the Pope, and the secular one from the emperor. The follower of Gregory VII - Innocent III achieved such power that he could freely interfere in the internal affairs of European states,and many monarchs considered themselves vassals of the Holy See. The Catholic Church gained strength, gained independence and received large financial resources at its disposal. It turned into a closed hierarchy that zealously defended its privileges and its inviolability over the next centuries. Church reformers believed that it was time to rethink the unity of secular and spiritual authorities (regnum and sacerdotium) characteristic of the early Middle Ages in favor of the supreme authority of the Church. A conflict between the clergy and the world was inevitable. Church reformers believed that it was time to rethink the unity of secular and spiritual authorities (regnum and sacerdotium) characteristic of the early Middle Ages in favor of the supreme authority of the Church. A conflict between the clergy and the world was inevitable. Church reformers believed that it was time to rethink the unity of secular and spiritual authorities (regnum and sacerdotium) characteristic of the early Middle Ages in favor of the supreme authority of the Church. A conflict between the clergy and the world was inevitable.
The cities had to choose whom to take as their allies. Those who supported the Pope were called Guelphs (after all, the Welf dynasty was at enmity with the Hohenstaufens), respectively, those who were against the papal throne - Ghibellines, allies of the Hohenstaufen dynasty. Exaggerating, we can say that in the cities for the Guelphs was popolo (people), and for the Ghibellines - the aristocracy. The mutual balance of these forces determined urban politics.
Otto IV, Emperor of the Welf family.
So, the figures on the geopolitics board are placed - the emperor, the Pope, the cities. It seems to us that their threefold enmity was the result of more than human greed.
The participation of cities is what was fundamentally new in the confrontation between the popes and the German emperors. The citizen of Italy felt the vacuum of power and did not fail to take advantage of it: simultaneously with the religious reform, a movement for self-government began, which was to completely change the balance of forces not only in Italy, but throughout Europe in two centuries. It began precisely on the Apennine Peninsula, because here the urban civilization had strong ancient roots and rich traditions of trade relying on its own financial resources. The old Roman centers, which suffered at the hands of the barbarians, were successfully revived, in Italy there were much more townspeople than in other countries of the West.
Urban civilization and its characteristic features in a few words no one can describe to us better than a thoughtful contemporary, the German historian of the mid-12th century Otto Freisingensky: “Latins (inhabitants of Italy), - he writes, - to this day imitate the wisdom of the ancient Romans in the arrangement of cities government management. They are so fond of freedom that they prefer to obey the consuls rather than the lords in order to avoid abuses of power. And so that they do not abuse their power, they are replaced almost every year. The city forces everyone living in the territory of the diocese to submit to itself, and it is difficult to find a signor or a noble person who would not submit to the authority of the city. The city is not ashamed to knight and admit young men of the lowest origin, even artisans, to rule. Therefore, Italian cities surpass all others in wealth and power. This is facilitated not only by the rationality of their institutions, but also by the long absence of sovereigns who usually remain on the other side of the Alps."
The economic strength of the Italian cities turned out to be almost decisive in the struggle between the Empire and the Papacy. The city did not at all oppose itself to the traditional feudal world. On the contrary, he did not think of himself outside of him. Even before the commune, this new way of political self-government, finally crystallized, the urban elite realized that the enjoyment of freedoms should be recognized by the emperor or the pope, better by both. They were to protect these freedoms. By the middle of the XII century, all the values of the urban civilization of Italy were concentrated in the concept of freedom. The sovereign, who encroached on her, turned from a defender into an enslaver and a tyrant. As a result, the townspeople went over to the side of his enemy and continued the incessant war.
When, in the 1150s, the young German emperor Frederick I Barbarossa appeared on the peninsula with the aim of returning the northern Italian provinces to obedience, a kind of huge chessboard appeared to him, where the squares represented cities with more or less large provinces subordinate to them - contado. Each pursued his own interests, which ran into opposition from the nearest neighbor. Therefore, it was difficult for Mantua to become an ally of Verona, and Bergamo, say, Brescia, etc. Each city sought an ally in a more distant neighbor with whom it had no territorial disputes. The city tried with all its might to subordinate the districts to its own orders, as a result of this process, called comitatinanza, small states arose. The strongest of them tried to absorb the weakest.
The strife in Lombardy, Veneto, Emilia, Romagna, Tuscany did not see the end in sight. The cruelty that the Italians showed to each other is striking. In 1158 the emperor laid siege to the rebellious Milan, and “no one,” writes the chronicler, “participated in this siege with greater fury than the Cremonians and the Pavians. The besieged, too, showed no more hostility to anyone than to them. There has long been rivalry and strife between Milan and these cities. In Milan, many thousands of their people were killed or suffered in grievous captivity, their lands were plundered and burned. Since they themselves could not properly take revenge on Milan, who surpassed them both in their own strengths and in the number of allies, they decided that the time had come to pay off the insults inflicted on them. The combined German-Italian troops then managed to break proud Milan,its fortifications as the most important symbol of freedom and independence were torn down, and an equally symbolic furrow was drawn along the central square. However, the glorious German knights were not always lucky - the city militias, especially those united under the auspices of the Lombard League, inflicted equally crushing defeats on them, the memory of which was preserved for centuries.
Cruelty was an indispensable part of the struggle of the Italian medieval parties. The government was cruel, but the townspeople were just as cruel towards it: the "guilty" podesta, consuls, even prelates were beaten, their tongues were torn out, they were blinded, they were driven in shame through the streets. Such attacks did not necessarily lead to regime change, but gave the illusion of temporary release. The authorities responded with torture and stimulated denunciation. A suspect of espionage, conspiracy and connections with the enemy was threatened with expulsion or the death penalty. Normal legal proceedings were not applied in such matters. When the criminals went into hiding, the authorities did not shun the services of hired killers. The most common punishment was deprivation of property, and for wealthy families, the demolition of a palazzo. The methodical destruction of towers and palaces was intended not only to erase the memory of individuals, but also of their ancestors. The ominous concept of proscriptions returned (this is how even in the time of Sulla in Rome the proclamation of a certain citizen was called outlaw - his murder was allowed and encouraged, and the property went to the treasury and partly to the murderers themselves), and often they now extended to the children and grandchildren of the convict (along the male line). So the ruling party uprooted whole family trees from public life. So the ruling party uprooted whole family trees from public life. So the ruling party uprooted whole family trees from public life.
In addition, the daily stream of violence also emanated from special organized groups, such as extended tribal "militias" ("consortium"), parish "squads" of a certain church, or "contrads" (quarterly "teams"). There were various forms of disobedience: an open refusal to follow the laws of the commune (actually a synonym for "city"), a military attack on the entire hometown by those expelled from it for political reasons, "terrorist attacks" against magistrates and clergy, theft of their property, the creation of secret societies, subversive agitation.
I must say that in this struggle, political preferences changed with the speed of a kaleidoscope. Who are you, Guelph or Ghibelline, is often decided by momentary circumstances. Throughout the thirteenth century, there is hardly one large city where the power has not changed violently several times. What to say about Florence, changing the laws with extraordinary ease. Everything was decided by practice. The one who seized power formed the government, created laws and monitored their implementation, controlled the courts, etc. Opponents - in prison, in exile, outside the law, but the exiles and their secret allies did not forget the insult and spent their fortunes on a secret or overt struggle. For them, the government of the adversaries had no legitimate force, at least not greater than their own.
The Guelphs and Ghibellines were not at all organized parties subordinate to the leadership of their formal leaders. They were a network of independent factions that collaborated with each other up to a certain point under a suitable banner. The Guelphs often turned their weapons against the Pope, and the Ghibellines acted without considering the interests of applicants for the imperial crown. The Gibellines did not deny the Church, and the Guelphs did not deny the Empire, but they tried to minimize their real claims to power. Guelph governments were often excommunicated. Prelates often came from aristocratic families with Ghibelline roots - even some Popes could be accused of Ghibelline sympathies!
The castle of Villafranca in Moneglia near Genoa passed from Guelphs to Ghibellines and vice versa many times.
The Guelph and Ghibelline parties were mobile, while maintaining their employees and corporate rules. In exile, they acted as mercenary gangs and political groups, exerting pressure alternately through war and sometimes through diplomacy. Returning home, they became not so much a power, but the most influential social force (the concept of a party in power did not exist). For example, when in 1267 the Guelphs once again established control over Florence, their captain and consul entered the government. At the same time, their party remained a private organization, which, however, was officially “awarded” the confiscated property of the exiled Ghibellines. With these funds, she began, in essence, the financial enslavement of the city. In March 1288, the commune and popolo owed her 13,000 florins. This allowed the Guelphs to put pressure on their fellow countrymen,that they sanctioned the outbreak of war against the Tuscan Ghibellines (which led to the victory at Campaldino in 1289). In general, the parties played the role of the main censors and guardians of political "faithfulness", ensuring, with varying degrees of success, the loyalty of the townspeople to the Pope or the Emperor, respectively. That's the whole ideology.
The leader of the Pisan ghibellines, Ugolino della Gherardesca, together with his sons, was imprisoned in the castle of Gualandi, where he died of hunger.
Reading medieval prophecies, the historiosophical reasoning of the followers of Joachim of Flores or the writings of Dante, promising troubles to Italian cities, one gets the impression that there were no right or wrong in that struggle. From the Scottish astrologer Michael Scott, who spoke to Frederick II in 1232 in Bologna, both the rebellious Guelph communes and the cities loyal to the Empire got it. Dante, Count Ugolino della Gherardesca of Pisa, condemned him to the terrible torments of hell for betraying his party, but despite this, under his pen he became almost the most humane image of the whole poem, at least of its first part. The 13th century chronicler Saba Malaspina called both the Guelphs and the Ghibellines as demons, while Jeri of Arezzo called his fellow citizens pagans because they worshiped these party names like idols.
Is it worth looking for a reasonable beginning behind this "idolatry", any real political or cultural beliefs? Is it possible at all to understand the nature of the conflict, the roots of which go far into the past of the Italian lands, and the consequences - in the Italy of the New Time, with its political fragmentation, "neogwelphs" and "neohibellines"? Perhaps, in some ways, the fight between Guelphs and Ghibellines is akin to the fights of football tifosi, sometimes quite dangerous and bloody? How can a self-respecting young Italian not root for his native club? How can he be completely "out of the game"? Struggle, conflict, "partisanship", if you will, in the very nature of man, and the Middle Ages in this is very similar to us. Trying to look in the history of the Guelphs and Ghibellines exclusively for the expression of the struggle of classes, estates or "strata" is perhaps not worth it. But we must not forgetthat from the struggle between Guelphs and Ghibellines, the modern democratic traditions of the West are largely derived
Maneuvering between the two implacable enemies - the Pope and the Emperor - did not make it possible for either party to achieve final military and political superiority. In another case, if one of the opponents turned out to be the owner of unlimited power, European democracy would remain only in history books. And so - it turned out a kind of unique power parity, in many respects and ensured in the future a sharp leap forward of Western civilization - on a competitive basis.
Author: Oleg Voskoboinikov
