Chapter 20 Cardinals and the Vacant See
John M. Hunt
With Sixtus v’s death on 27 August 1590 the Papal States fell into the disarray and violent disorder that often accompanied the Sede Vacante, the period be- tween a pope’s death and the election of his successor. A few days after the pope’s death the exiled Sienese noble and captain, Alfonso Piccolomini, with his band of brigands reclaimed his fief, Monte Marciano, located in the March- es near Ancona. A courier brought this news to the papal court, adding that Piccolomini had said, “in the Sede Vacante everything was permissible.”1 Three weeks later, Piccolomini was still roaming throughout the Papal States, holding travellers for ransom and looting villas and farmhouses. During that October the bandit-lord petitioned the College of Cardinals to restore his feudal rights over his fief. The cardinals responded that “it would not be wise to make a deci- sion [on the matter], which might cause further problems in these troubling times.”2 This episode involving Piccolomini highlights two intertwined aspects of the Sede Vacante: the populace’s assertion of freedom to do things normally proscribed during the Sede Plena (when the reigning pope was alive) and the limitations that the College of Cardinals faced in restraining the disorder as- sociated with the papal interregnum.3 This chapter will examine the little- studied matter of the governing power of the College of Cardinals during the Sede Vacante. With the papacy’s definitive return to Rome in 1420, after several decades of destabilization of the Great Schism, absolutist popes – in an evolu- tionary march towards centralization – sought to curtail the authority of the College of Cardinals. Once great princes of the Church who challenged the popes for leadership roles, by the late 16th century the cardinals had assumed mainly advisory roles within the papacy, serving as administrators in various congregations or as governors in the provinces of the Papal States.4 However,
1 asf, Mediceo del Principato, Lettere di Particolari, f. 822, letter of 30 September 1590 from Domenico Grimaldi, Archbishop of Avignon, to the Grand Duke Ferdinand, fol. 30r. 2 bav, Urb. lat. 1058, Avvisi di 1590, newsletter of 17 October 1590, fols. 535r-v. 3 On this violence and the freedom of Sede Vacante, see John M. Hunt, The Vacant See in Early Modern Rome: A Social History of the Papal Interregnum (Leiden: 2016), 132–73. 4 Paolo Prodi, The Papal Prince. One Body and Two Souls: The Papal Monarchy in Early Modern Europe, trans. Susan Hawkins (Cambridge, Eng.: 1987), 17–58. See also Mario Caravale and
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���� | doi:10.1163/9789004415447_022
Alberto Caracciolo, Lo Stato pontificio da Martino v a Pio x (Turin: 1978), 383–87. For the chal- lenge of the cardinals at the papacy’s return to Rome, see Carol M. Richardson, Reclaiming Rome: Cardinals in the Fifteenth Century (Leiden: 2009). 5 Luigi Tomassetti et al. (eds.), Bullarium Romanum: Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorim sanctorum romanorum pontificum (Turin: 1862), 4:37–38. 6 See Laurie Nussdorfer, “The Vacant See: Ritual and Protest in Early Modern Rome,” The Six- teenth Century Journal 18 (1987), 173–89; Hunt, The Vacant See; Maria Antonietta Visceglia, Morte e elezione del papa: Norme, riti e conflitti. L’Età moderna (Rome: 2013); and Joëlle Rollo- Koster, Raiding Saint Peter: Empty Sees, Violence, and the Initiation of the Great Western Schism, 1378 (Leiden: 2008). 7 Lorenzo Spinelli, La vacanza della Sede apostolica dalle origini al Concilio tridentino (Milan: 1955). 8 Nussdorfer, “The Vacant See,” and Hunt, The Vacant See, 32–46 and 50–60. 9 Miles Pattenden, Electing the Pope in Early Modern Italy, 1450–1700 (Oxford: 2017).