DEATH
IN FLORENCE: THE MEDICI, SAVONAROLA AND THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE RENAISSANCE
CITY (XI)
20. THE TABLES ARE TURNED
WORD
QUICKLY REACHED Rome about Savonarola’s drastic intention to send a circular
letter to the rulers of Europe. This was the most serious threat yet to
Alexander VI’s papacy, and he knew that it must be stopped at once, no matter
the cost. Making use of all his many loyal contacts both within Florence and
throughout Italy, Alexander VI would do his best to intercept Savonarola’s
letters. In Florence the Augustinians and other religious orders, as well as
the Arrabbiati sympathisers and even the moderate Tiepidi,
were all utterly opposed to the summoning of a council. Such a revolutionary
move would do nothing but throw the Church into disarray, pitting leaders and
national interests against each other, possibly even resulting in a split such
as the disastrous Great Schism, which had only with great difficulty been
healed just over eighty years previously.
Throughout
March 1498, Arrabbiati spies watched all gates in the city
walls from their opening at dawn until their closing at dusk, apprehending any
Dominicans who might be messengers carrying copies of Savonarola’s letter.
Savonarola had been prepared for this and made astute use of several sympathisers
amongst the secular population. His close friend, the merchant and former gonfaloniere Domenico
Mazzinghi, was instructed to write a personal letter to his friend Giovanni
Guasconi, the Florentine ambassador at the French court, who would then
discreetly pass this on to Charles VIII. In the event, Mazzinghi wrote two such
letters, in the hope that at least one of them would reach its destination.
Simone del Nero, who had remained loyal to Savonarola despite the recent
execution of his brother Bernardo, sent a letter to his brother Niccolò, who
was the Florentine ambassador in Spain, with orders to make a discreet approach
to the joint rulers, King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen Isabella of Castile.
At the same time, Giovanni Combi, an ardent champion of the city’s new
independence, was induced to write to Maximilian I in Germany. Each of these
letters was conveyed by courier, sealed and addressed as if it were a personal
or commercial communication, yet each also contained Savonarola’s circular
letter, together with his appended private communication to each individual
ruler.
The
precise fate of these letters remains something of a mystery. The King of Spain
was away in Portugal and never received his copy. The letters to England and
Hungary vanished without trace, as it seems did the letter to Germany.
Mazzinghi’s precautions proved fully justified, as only one of his letters was
received by Charles VIII. Disastrously, the courier carrying the other letter
to France was waylaid and robbed by a group of brigands as he crossed Milanese
territory. The brigands realised the value of the letter in their possession
and sold it to Ludovico ‘il Moro’, Duke of Milan, who in turn passed it on to
the pope. Alexander VI now had in his possession concrete evidence of Savonarola’s
treachery to the papacy.
Yet
ironically the chief threat to Savonarola at this point would arise from an
incident that took place within Florentine territory. The incident itself had
obscure beginnings, being instigated by one of Savonarola’s most bitter
enemies, Francesco da Puglia, a monk from the opposing Franciscan order whose
Florentine headquarters was Santa Croce, in the east of the city. A year or so
previously, during early 1497, Francesco da Puglia had delivered a sermon at
Prato, some ten miles north of Florence, during which he forcibly expressed his
objections to Savonarola and all that he stood for – challenging anyone who
believed in his doctrines, and accepted the invalidity of his excommunication
by Alexander VI, to undertake with him an ordeal by fire. This ancient medieval
practice involved the contestants walking through fire, sometimes barefoot over
a lengthy bed of red-hot coals, at others times passing along a passageway
through a large bonfire. The winner was the contestant who managed to complete
the ordeal unharmed – this being taken as a sign from God that his cause was
the true one. All the evidence indicates that Fra Francesco was in fact being
rhetorical here, indicating the strength of his abhorrence for Savonarola; he
did not seriously expect anyone to accept his challenge to such an outmoded
ritual.
Yet it
so happened that on this very day Savonarola’s closest and most loyal
supporter, Domenico da Pescia, had also been in Prato, and his ingenuous
enthusiasm had led him to take up Fra Francesco’s challenge. When the
Franciscans in Florence got wind of what had happened, Fra Francesco was at
once ordered to return to Santa Croce and the matter was quietly forgotten.
However,
during the 1498 Lenten sermons that Savonarola was having delivered for him by
Domenico da Pescia, he again emphasised that God spoke through him. On this
occasion he was particularly insistent. His claims culminated in the
exhortation:
I entreat each one of you to pray
earnestly to God that if my doctrine does not come from Him, He will send down
a fire upon me, which shall consume my soul in Hell.1
Although
it was not intended as such, this was seen by Fra Francesco as a direct
provocation, and during the sermon that he preached on 25 March at Santa Croce
he returned to the theme of ordeal by fire, this time directly challenging
Savonarola himself, on account of the claim he had made to his congregation.
Savonarola
simply ignored this challenge. At the time he was not only composing the
written texts of the forthcoming Lenten sermons that he was to have delivered
for him, but was also preoccupied with making arrangements for his
all-important circular letter to be delivered to the rulers of Europe, as well
as formulating his additional personal messages to each of these rulers.
Besides, he had long considered medieval practices such as ordeal by fire to
belong to the superstitions of the past. On the other hand, he did not dismiss
such medieval practices as self-flagellation and extreme fasting, as well as
other self-imposed ordeals and penances – these he accepted as bringing the
soul of man closer to God and an understanding of the truth. Even the gift of
prophecy, his visions, his dreams, and his conviction that he spoke with God,
he accepted: these he felt to be part of his actual experience[1]. Other medieval
practices, such as ordeal by one of the elements[2], divination,
hermetic practices, alchemy and astrology, he dismissed with contempt. He could
also muster strong biblical and intellectual arguments against belief in such
practices, as he had shown in his debates with his friend Pico della Mirandola,
in which he had eventually triumphed over his brilliant adversary’s every
objection. Ordeal by fire fell into the category of superstition, and thus a
challenge such as that issued by Fra Francesco was not worthy of consideration.
Yet
Savonarola had not reckoned on the naïve, unthinking fervour of his disciple
Domenico da Pescia. Savonarola had delegated Fra Domenico as one of the loyal
Dominicans to deliver sermons on his behalf, and as a consequence Fra Domenico
not only saw himself as the public face of Savonarola, but also chose to see
himself as the object of Fra Francesco’s challenge. As before, he was not
willing to shirk what he saw as his responsibility. On 28 March Landucci
recorded:
‘Fra Domenico preached in San Marco, saying that he was willing
to pass through fire … On the same day Fra Francesco preached at Santa Croce declaring that he
too was willing to pass through fire, declaring, ‘I believe that I shall burn,
but I am willing to do so for the sake of liberating the people of this city.
If he does not burn,
then you may believe that he is a prophet’.2
This
makes it clear that there was little doubt about Fra Francesco’s expectations
concerning the ordeal: he was now willing to die, in order to rid Florence of
Savonarola. But as soon as he heard that Savonarola was not going to take part,
and that instead Fra Domenico would take Savonarola’s place, he insisted that
‘his quarrel was with Savonarola alone, and although he himself expected to be
consumed by the flames he was quite ready to enter the fire in order to ensure
the destruction of that disseminator of scandal and false doctrine. On the
other hand, he would have nothing to do with Fra Domenico.’3
This
should have been the end of the matter. Savonarola had already admonished Fra
Domenico in the strongest possible terms, and Fra Francesco was only too
relieved to be freed from his obligation to undergo what he had come to believe
would be certain death. But by now other parties had become involved, and were
determined that the matter should go ahead. If such a trial was to take place,
it would first require the permission of the Signoria, which meant that this
was no longer just a matter for the appropriate Church authorities, but was a
political matter. By now Gonfaloniere Popoleschi had browbeaten his Signoria
into a more reliably Pro-Arrabbiati stance, and as such they were
all in favour of proceeding with the ordeal. The Arrabbiati, who
may well have been behind the entire challenge in the first place, now became
the driving force: pressure was exerted upon the Franciscans to persuade Fra
Francesco to insist upon Savonarola personally accepting his challenge. Rumours
were spread that if Savonarola refused the challenge, he would be revealed as a
charlatan and a heretic, unwilling to put his doctrine to God’s test. These
rumours were said to emanate from Fra Francesco, whilst at the same time
the Arrabbiati disingenuously assured him that he would never
have to enter the fire, as no ordeal would be permitted to take place.
Yet
the more extreme members of the Pro-Arrabbiati faction would
tolerate no such thing. When the hot-headed, gilded youth of the Compagnacci gathered
at their regular banquet, they decided:
If Savonarola enters the fire, he will
certainly be burned; if he does not enter the fire, he will lose all credit
with his followers. We will then be able to raise a riot, during which we will
be able to seize him in person.4
There
can be no doubt that some amongst them were intent upon murdering Savonarola.
It was now that Fra Domenico’s enthusiasm once again got the better of him, and
he played into their hands. The day after this banquet, ignoring Savonarola’s
instructions and without his consent, Fra Domenico published a document
entitled Conclusiones:
The Church of God needs to be reformed, it
must be scourged and renovated. Likewise Florence too must be scourged before
it can be renovated and return to prosperity. The infidels must be converted to
Christianity. All these things will come to pass in our time. The
excommunication issued against the reverend father our brother Hieronymo is
invalid. Those who choose to ignore this excommunication are not sinners.5
In
fact, these Conclusiones said no more than Savonarola had been
preaching in his sermons for some time now. However, this was precisely the
opportunity for which the Compagnacci and the Arrabbiati had
been waiting. Here, in writing, was confirmation of Savonarola’s defiance of
the Church; here was the acceptance of Fra Francesco’s challenge. On 28 March
the Signoria insisted upon their notary examining the document, and then
summoned Fra Domenico to the Palazzo della Signoria, requiring him to
authenticate it with his signature. Soon after this Fra Francesco was persuaded
to acknowledge this challenge with his signature, which he eventually did with
extreme reluctance. To complicate matters, another of Savonarola’s acolytes,
called Fra Mariano Ughi, now also put himself forward, saying that he was
willing to accompany his fellow Dominican, Fra Domenico, into the fire if the
Franciscans were also willing to produce a second candidate.
Versions
of what was happening at the Palazzo della Signoria swept through the city,
with rumour followed by counter-rumour. Things appeared to be getting out of
hand, and a general atmosphere of hysteria was beginning to spread through the
streets. Barbaric and superstitious medieval practices like ordeal by fire had
long since lapsed in such a cultured and sophisticated city as Florence.
Indeed, it was well over a hundred years since such a thing had taken place
here. Many were horrified, while others amongst the population were only too
keen to witness such a gruesome spectacle: few talked of anything else.
Meanwhile Savonarola remained alone in his cell at San Marco, praying for God’s
guidance. At this stage he appears to have concluded that he was being
politically outmanoeuvred, and that there was nothing he could do about this.
On
Friday 30 March a Pratica council was held at the Palazzo della Signoria to
decide upon the matter, and whether such a thing should be permitted to take
place within a civilised city. As usual the meeting was attended by 200 or so
of the ruling citizens, who would debate the matter before it was finally voted
upon by the Signoria. This would be a repeat of the recent debate over the
appeal against the death-sentence for the five ‘traitors’, though all present
were aware that the outcome of this Pratica was liable to be of even graver
importance for the republic. No sooner had the meeting begun than Savonarola’s
supporter, former gonfaloniere Domenico Mazzinghi,
unexpectedly declared that he was in favour of the trial taking place, ‘for
this will surely result in such a miracle that it will reflect upon the glory
of God, as well as bringing peace to our city’.6 The
moderate Girolamo Rucellai took a more commonsensical approach, though
ultimately he too came to the same conclusion:
All this uproar about a trial by fire is
so much nonsense. The most important thing we should be discussing here is how
we can get rid of the friars and the non-friars, the Arrabbiati and the
non-Arrabbiati, so that we can bring peace to our people. As far as I am
concerned, if this trial restores harmony amongst our citizens, then let it go
ahead … We should be worried about the city, not about a few friars getting
burned.
At
this point, the worldly Filippo Guigni tried to defuse the increasingly fraught
situation with an attempt at levity, remarking:
To me, this idea of passing through fire
seems all very odd, and I for one am against it. Why don’t we instead use a
trial by water? This would be much less dangerous. If Fra Girolamo could pass
through water without getting wet, then I would certainly join in asking for
his pardon.
But by
now passions had run too high to appreciate such attempts at wit. At one point,
Giovanni Canacci, one of Savonarola’s most bitter enemies, became so enraged
that he leapt to his feet to interrupt the proceedings; yet it was this very
anger that caused him to make practically the only contribution which reflected
well upon those present:
When I hear you all saying such things, I
wonder whether I would be better off dead than alive. If our forefathers who
founded this city could but hear that we were even discussing such a matter,
making ourselves such a disgrace that we will become the laughing stock of the
world, they would have refused to have anything whatsoever to do with us. Our
glorious city has sunk to its lowest ebb for many a long year, and all about us
there is nothing but confusion.
Yet in the end even Canacci could see no
other way out of their predicament: ‘I implore your Excellencies [the Signoria]
to deliver our people from this wretchedness no matter the cost, either by
fire, air, water or any other method you want.’
So low
had the city of Lorenzo the Magnificent now sunk – in its own eyes, as well as
the eyes of all Italy. The city that had given birth to the Renaissance had
fallen into division and disgrace, its commerce all but stagnant and its
‘vanities’ consigned to the flames, its embittered people faced with the
prospect of anarchy, its weak rulers reduced to abject collusion. Barely any of
those present at the Pratica, even amongst Savonarola’s most enthusiastic
secular supporters, believed that the ordeal by fire would result in a miracle.
Anyone who took part in it would undoubtedly be burned. Yet the decision of the
Signoria, overwhelmingly backed by the Pratica, was that the ordeal should go
ahead, with the two Franciscans taking part against the two Dominicans. The
Pratica also solemnly decided what action should be taken when the result of
the ordeal was known. If one of the Dominicans was burned to death, then
Savonarola would be exiled. If one of the Franciscans was burned to death, then
Fra Francesco would be exiled. (By now one of his fellow Franciscans had
offered to take his place in the ordeal, as by this stage he had become too
terrified to do so.) Furthermore, the Pratica decided, if either side refused
to submit to the ordeal, then their leader would automatically be exiled.
However, if both sides suffered deaths, then the Dominicans would be declared
the losers (in which case Savonarola would be exiled). The reasoning of the Pratica
was as transparent as it was unjust: they were determined to get rid of
Savonarola.
Yet
this could not be the final dispensation. Although the ordeal itself fell under
the jurisdiction of the Signoria of Florence, those taking part in it were
members of the Church, which meant that it would also require the permission of
Alexander VI. The Signoria sent a despatch to the Florentine ambassador in
Rome; but when Bonsi was granted an audience with Alexander VI, His Holiness
informed the ambassador that he could not possibly give his official consent to
such an ordeal. On the other hand, it soon became clear that the pope was going
to issue no Brief condemning it. However, a covert message now reached the
Signoria, probably by way of Fra Mariano da Genazzano in Rome to the
Augustinians in Florence, that Alexander VI was in fact in favour of the ordeal
taking place. This would be the end of Savonarola, and as soon as he was exiled
from Florence, Alexander VI would have him arrested and brought to Rome.
Ironically,
Savonarola himself reacted to the prospect of the ordeal with a remarkably
similar ambiguity. Initially, he had abhorred the entire idea of an ordeal by
fire. But as he fasted alone in his cell at San Marco the secret belief had
grown within him that this event might indeed produce the miracle that would
justify him and all his actions. This would be akin to the fulfilment of his
prophecies, just as when Charles VIII had arrived as the ‘scourge of God’.
Several contemporary sources confirm this change of heart in Savonarola,
alluding to a series of events that brought it about.
One of
Savonarola’s closest followers amongst the monks at San Marco was Fra Silvestro
Maruffi, a man of deep spirituality who was prone to ill-health, hypochondria
and insomnia, a condition that rendered him susceptible to having visions
similar to those of his prior. Savonarola had formed the most profound respect
for Fra Silvestro, to the point where he now placed as much faith in the other
monk’s visions as he did in his own. At this time, Fra Silvestro described to
Savonarola a vision he had experienced in which the guardian angels of both Fra
Domenico and Savonarola himself had promised him that Fra Domenico would pass
through the flames unscathed. This, combined with Fra Domenico’s unwavering
faith and enthusiasm for taking part in the ordeal, had finally convinced
Savonarola that he should give it his blessing. Savonarola then sent word to
the Signoria confirming that he did so, saying that it should take place a week
later, on Friday 6 April. Several contemporary sources corroborate this, as
well as what happened next, differing only in detail. Guicciardini gives the
general picture:
The day having been decided, Fra Girolamo
was given permission by the Signoria to preach; and preaching in San Marco he
showed the great importance of miracles and said that they should not be used
except in necessity when reason and experience proved inadequate. Because the
Christian faith had been proved in infinite ways and the truth of the things
predicted by him had been shown with such efficacy and reason that anyone who
was not obstinate in evil living could understand them, he had not made great
use of his ability to perform miracles so as not to tempt God. Nevertheless,
because they had now been challenged, they willingly accepted this challenge,
and all could be sure that on entering the fire the result would be that their
friar would emerge alive and unharmed while the other would be burned. If the
opposite took place, they might boldly state that all he had preached was
false. He went on to say that not only his friars but anyone who entered the
fire in defence of this truth would emerge in a similar fashion. And then he
asked them whether, if necessary, in the cause of so great a work ordained by
God, they too would be willing to go through the fire. With a great shout
almost all present answered that they would: this was the most amazing thing,
for without any doubt, if Fra Girolamo had told them to, very many would indeed
have entered the fire.7
This
sermon was delivered before a packed congregation consisting of friars and
nuns, as well as lay Piagnoni, women and children. Savonarola’s
preaching must have inspired a collective hysteria that went far beyond those
who had taken holy orders.
The
ordeal was to be held in the Piazza della Signoria so that the miracle, or the
sight of the victims burning alive, could be witnessed by as many of the
population as possible. In the midst of the piazza a raised walkway consisting
of brick and rubble covered with earth was constructed. This was seven feet
high, ninety feet long and sixteen feet wide[3]. On either side of
the walkway were heaped two lines of logs, covered with brushwood and boughs,
and ‘all the wood was soaked with oil, spirit and resin to make it burn
better’.8 For the ordeal, these two incendiary lines
were to be set alight along their entire length until they blazed like an
inferno. Between the two lines was a pathway just five feet in width, and the
contestants in the ordeal were each to start simultaneously at opposite ends of
this ninety-foot-long path, walking through the inferno until they emerged at
the other end unscathed, or were consumed by the flames.
News
of this coming event was by now spreading to all the major cities of Italy and
even beyond the Alps. The courts, the monasteries and the merchant classes all
had their own information networks by way of ambassadors, travelling friars,
commerce routes, couriers and so forth. Such had been the interest generated by
Savonarola and his previous activities, especially his sermons and his
prophecies, that news of this latest development quickly filtered down to the
public at large. The coming ordeal by fire was a topic of speculation, from the
taverns and market places to the palazzi and the priories. Was Savonarola
really capable of perfoming a miracle? This time there could be no question of
fakery or mass delusion, or even prophetic coincidence: this ordeal would take
place for all to see.
It
could hardly be claimed that this would represent a turning point in the
evolution of human consciousness, yet there can be no doubt that the result of
such a sensational event, which had so taken hold of the public imagination,
might be seen as a contributory factor to the lengthy process of transformation
that was taking place during this era, which we now refer to as the
Renaissance. Concrete physical confirmation, or a single practical disproof, of
the belief in miracles would at this point doubtless spread ripples of
speculation far and wide amongst those of an enquiring disposition. Here, at
the earliest dawning of the new scientific understanding, the truth was to be
judged by an experiment whose result was verifiable. (‘The ordeal by fire’ was
called in Italian L’esperimento del fuoco. A century later, Galileo
and his contemporaries, the true pioneers of scientific experimental method,
would start using the word esperimento to describe the tests,
or ordeals, to which they subjected their practical ideas.)
During
the days leading up to the ordeal, Savonarola himself wrote and published a
short document entitled Riposta, in which he attempted to justify
himself and his attitude towards the coming event. This ends:
Those who know themselves to be genuinely
inspired by the Lord will certainly come through the flames unharmed, if the
ordeal actually takes place, which is by no means certain. As for me, I am
keeping myself for a greater cause, for which I shall always be prepared to lay
down my life. The time is at hand when the Lord will manifest himself in
supernatural signs and omens, but these will not come about as a result of the
beseeching or the will of men. For the time being, let it be sufficient that,
by sending some of our brethren, we will be equally exposed to the wrath of the
people if the Lord does not allow them to pass unscathed through the fire.9
During
the final days leading up to the ordeal, Savonarola ordered the gates of the
monastery of San Marco to be locked: no one was permitted to enter or leave.
Sealed off from the outside world, the community of friars embarked upon a
vigil of continuous prayer on behalf of their two brethren who were about to
take part in the ordeal.
Then,
on Thursday 5 April, the very eve of the ordeal, the Signoria suddenly
announced that it would be postponed for a day. The Signoria evidently had
reason to believe that a message from Alexander VI forbidding the ordeal was on
its way from Rome. Yet within twenty-four hours the Signoria mysteriously
appear to have convinced themselves that no message forbidding the ordeal would
be forthcoming, and decreed that it should go ahead the next day, Saturday 7
April. At the same time they issued an unpexpected new decree, modifying their
previous one, and specifically stating: ‘In the event that Fra Domenico is
burned, Fra Girolamo is to leave Florentine territory within three hours.’10
The
combination of the Signoria’s certainty that no papal Brief would arrive, and
the issuing of the new decree immediately banning Savonarola from Florentine
territory (under the circumstances, the border would almost certainly have
taken longer than three hours to reach) further indicates that the Signoria
must have received covert instructions, perhaps by way of Genazzano and the
Augustinians, from Alexander VI. The specific details of Savonarola’s speedy
banishment would have meant that in just three hours from the moment the result
became clear at the event itself, at which he was certainly expected to be
present amidst the packed Piazza della Signoria, he would have had to flee
through the angry throng (in some danger of his life even then) and make his
way to a fast horse that had been kept waiting in preparation. Not only did
Savonarola abhor this privileged form of transport, but it would have been
unthinkable to him to make prior arrangements for what he would have seen as a
cowardly flight in the event of his loyal friend’s excruciating death. Even so,
he would certainly have been apprehended after three hours, by which time he
would no longer have been deemed under Florentine protection, even if he was
still travelling through Florentine territory. This would have meant that he
could have been intercepted and arrested on behalf of the pope within hours of
leaving the city gates, by whichever band of armedArrabbiati or Compagnacci was
lying in wait for him, having already been commandeered for this very task. In
a matter of days he would have been delivered to Rome, into the hands of
Alexander VI. Here the ‘little friar’ who had had the temerity to send letters
to the rulers of Europe, encouraging them to call a Council of the Church
intended to depose the pope, could have expected little mercy from a man such
as Alexander VI.
NOTES
1. ‘I
entreat each one …’: Savonarola, Prediche sopra l’Esodo,
cited in Pastor, History of the Popes, Vol. VI, p.41
2. ‘Fra
Domenico preached …’ et seq.: Landucci, Diario,
p.167
3. ‘his
quarrel was with …’: cited in Villari, La Storia … Savonarola,
Vol. II, pp.138–9; p.139 n.1 gives an elaboration of the contemporary sources.
4. ‘If
Savonarola enters …’: ibid., p.139, citing the contemporary diarists
Burlamacchi and Cerretani as his sources
5. ‘The
Church of God …’: ibid., p.140 n.2 for Latin text
6. ‘for
this will surely result …’: et seq.: highly similar, but
not always identical, accounts of the meeting of the Pratica on 30 March 1498,
as well as the attributed quotes, appear in all the main biographies. See, for
instance, Villari, La Storia … Savonarola, Vol. II, p.142 et
seq.; p.144 n.1 discusses the contemporary sources and their reliability. I
have also been guided by Ridolfi and Martines (who cites Consulte e
pratiche della republica fiorentina, 1498–1505, ed. Denis Fachard, 2 vols
(Geneva, 1993), Vol. I, pp.64–5).
7. ‘The
day having …’: Francesco Guicciardini, Opere, Vol.
VI, Storie fiorentine(Bari, 1931), p.149
8. ‘all
the wood …’: Landucci, Diario, p.135
9. ‘Those
who know themselves …’: see Villari, La Storia … Savonarola,
Vol. II, pp.147–8, which cites the entire document. The autograph draft is in
the codex of San Marco, sheet 168. This original manuscript is undated, but
internal evidence confirms it as being written during the early days of the
week preceding the date set for the ordeal.
10. ‘In
the event that …’: cited in Villari, La Storia … Savonarola,
Vol. II, p.150, where n.2 gives full details of the original source in the
Florentine archives.
Savoranola
execution
21. ORDEAL BY FIRE
BY
DAWN ON 7 April 1498 people were already filing into the Piazza della Signoria.
Only three entrances were left open, and these were heavily guarded by armed
men. No spectator was permitted to carry arms, and on specific orders of the
Signoria no women or children were permitted to enter the square, on the
grounds that their expressions of emotion might stir the crowd beyond control.
By ten o’clock in the morning the piazza was crammed with spectators, a large
portion of whom were Piagnoni and their supporters; but it was
equally evident that other large sections of the crowd were openly
anti-Savonarolan. Anticipating this tense situation, the Signoria had commandeered
a thousand men to take up various strategic positions throughout the piazza,
with the aim of maintaining order and quickly thwarting any disturbances that
might occur. These armed men too consisted of representatives of both sides of
the divided population, making no effort to hide their sympathies. With a show
of characteristic arrogance, Doffo Spini, the head of theCompagnacci,
led in a group of several hundred of his supporters, all resplendent in full
armour. Warned by the Dominicans that the Compagnacci might
well make a move to seize Savonarola, the Piagnoni sympathiser
Marcuccio Salviati had raised a corps of 300 armed men who also reported for
guard duty in the piazza that day. All troops present were nominally under the
command of Giovanni della Vecchia, the Signoria’s Captain of the Square, who in
addition commanded 500 armed men of his own. Most of the men of this detachment
were ordered to guard the Palazzo della Signoria, containing Gonfaloniere
Popoleschi and his Signoria, in case any attempt was made to storm the building
by Piagnoni, who were now under no illusions concerning the
Signoria’s anti-Savonarolan sympathies.
By
noon all three public entrances to the piazza had been sealed to prevent any
further spectators cramming into the already overcrowded space. Despite the
colourful appearance of the multitude and the soldiery beneath the April sky,
the atmosphere was far from festive, with tension mounting as the time passed.
The contesting parties had been ordered to present themselves in the piazza at
1 p.m., and at the appointed hour 200 Franciscans duly arrived. Dressed in
their plain brown robes tied with knotted white ropes, they filed silently
between the cleared crowds across the piazza, their heads bowed. Without any
outward display or show of emotion, they took up their allotted position in the
open Loggia dei Signori, beside the Palazzo della Signoria, which had been
divided in two by a wooden barrier to separate the opposing parties. The
Franciscan side of the barrier, on the eastern side closest to the Palazzo, was
protected by breastplated Compagnacci, whilst Salviati had deputed
a squad of his pro-Savonarolan troops to guard the western side. Before the
Loggia, stretching from the edge of the raised pavement in front of the Palazzo
della Signoria towards the western side of the piazza, stood the long
raised-earth walkway ready for the ordeal, its sides piled with
incendiary-soaked logs and brushwood.
Around
noon Savonarola had celebrated High Mass at San Marco, before delivering a
brief sermon to a large audience of fellow friars and supporters. Curiously,
even at this late stage, he told them: ‘I cannot be sure whether the ordeal
will take place, because this does not depend upon us.’1 Yet
he went on to assure his audience, ‘if it does take place, victory will
certainly be ours’.
Savonarola
and his Dominican delegation then set out from San Marco, reaching the Piazza
della Signoria half an hour after the arrival of the Franciscans. Landucci
watched their entrance:
And then came the Dominicans, with the greatest show
of devotion. There was a great number of Frati, about 250, walking in pairs, followed by Fra Domenico
bearing a crucifix, and then Fra Girolamo holding aloft the Host; whilst behind
them was a great multitude with torches and candles, devoutly singing hymns.
After they had taken their place in the Loggia and prepared an altar, they sang
a mass; and the people awaited the great spectacle.2
Yet
the expectant crowds were in for a disappointment if they expected the ordeal to
get under way at once. It soon became clear that the Francisans were determined
to raise certain procedural objections. According to the eyewitness Parenti,
Fra Domenico had taken it upon himself to don for the occasion a full-length
cloak ‘of fiery red velvet’.3 It was evident to many
present that he was playing up to the full his central role in this potentially
miraculous occasion, although the ironic symbolism of his flame-coloured attire
seems to have escaped him. As Martines has observed, it was as if he was
‘engaged in an extraordinary and contradictory pantomime of the martyrdom that
he believed would not overtake him’.4 Chief amongst the
Franciscan objections were these very robes that Fra Domenico had decided to
wear (‘The Franciscans were afraid they might be bewitched’5)
in order to protect him from the flames. When his red cloak was removed, the
Franciscans further protested that the Dominican robes he was wearing
underneath the cloak might also be ‘bewitched’, and Fra Domenico was taken into
the Palazzo della Signoria, where these too were removed and he was stripped
naked. According to word that later circulated amongst the Piagnoni,
the Franciscans even insisted upon scrutinising his genitals for any untoward
supernatural signs.
Fra
Domenico was made to don the robes of another Dominican friar before he
returned to the Loggia. Even then, the Franciscans insisted that Savonarola or
one of his fellow Dominicans might attempt to bewitch him before the ordeal, so
he was made to wait amongst the Franciscans, where he stood clutching the
crucifix that he firmly believed would protect him from the flames.
Next
the Franciscans insisted that Fra Domenico should not be permitted to enter the
flames carrying his crucifix, in case this too was somehow ‘enchanted’.
Savonarola proved willing to concede this point, on Fra Domenico’s behalf, and
suggested that instead he should enter the flames bearing a piece of the
consecrated Host[4] that Savonarola himself
had borne into the piazza. Once again there was an objection, and
representatives of the Dominicans and the Franciscans were invited into the
Palazzo della Signoria for a theological discussion of this matter, while Fra
Domenico and Savonarola waited outside. The Franciscans were determined not to
let the Host enter the flames, on the grounds that this ‘was most wicked’6 and
‘against the Church’, whilst the Dominicans insisted that even if the
appearance of Christ’s body (the bread) was consumed by the flames, its essence
(Christ’s body itself) could not possibly be affected.
Outside,
the mood of the vast confined crowd was beginning to change. All had come
expecting a spectacle – some in the belief that they would witness a miracle,
no less; others stirred by anticipation of the gruesome sight of people being
burned to death. In expectation of such a wonder, one way or the other, both
factions had been willing to remain patient for a considerable time, but by now
their patience was beginning to wear thin, as the disputations went on and on
behind the closed doors of the palazzo. Savonarola, becoming increasingly
worried about this developing state of affairs, sent an urgent message into the
palazzo, insisting that both sides settle their differences as soon as possible
so that the ordeal could go ahead. The reply from the palazzo made it clear to
Savonarola that if this was his attitude, the Dominicans were quite free to
proceed with the ordeal on their own. Savonarola naturally turned down this
request. Villari, summarising the many detailed eyewitness reports, described
what happened next:
The patience of the multitude was now running out.
All of these people had been assembled in the piazza for many hours: most had
been without food or water since dawn, and were becoming impatient at the
boredom and futility of waiting in vain for something to happen. Grumbling
murmurs were beginning to arise from all parts of the crowd, interspersed with
the occasional seditious cry. The Arrabbiati,
who had been eagerly awaiting just such an opportunity, tried to turn it to their
advantage. A lackey employed by Giovanni Manetti was encouraged to incite a
disturbance, and all of a sudden the piazza was in a tumult. Many of the exits
from the piazza were closed, so that the people found themselves hemmed in and
confined on all sides. Consequently they began to rush forward towards the
palazzo. This had evidently been the moment when the Arrabbiati had planned to grab
Savonarola and put an end to him with their bare hands. Indeed, they attempted
to do just this, but Salviati lined up his men in front of the Loggia, and then
drew a line on the ground with his sword, exclaiming: ‘Whoever steps over this
line will find himself run through by the sword of Marcuccio Salviati!’ And
such was the determined manner in which he said these words that no one dared
step forward.7
Meanwhile
the troop of soldiers employed by the Signoria to guard the palazzo, seeing the
crowd surging forward, advanced into their path and began forcefully driving
them back. ‘By now the Signoria was completely at a loss as to what to do.’
Fortunately the situation was transformed by the outbreak of a sudden violent
storm, with thunder, lightning and a deluge of rain. This might have put an end
to the entire proceedings, but the crowd was by now so determined that they
refused to budge, continuing to stand there despite the continuing downpour.
Even so, some could not help seeing this as an omen of God’s displeasure at the
ordeal taking place. Then the storm ceased as suddenly as it had begun. The
city mace-bearers, the official heralds of the Signoria, emerged from the
palazzo to announce that the ordeal had been cancelled. This was greeted with
consternation amongst the crowd.
By
now it was becoming dark, and the Arrabbiati did their best
once again to take advantage of the situation. Rumours were spread that the
ordeal had been cancelled because Savonarola had not permitted Fra Domenico to
take part in it. There was some truth in this, as Savonarola had refused the
Dominican pair permission to undertake the ordeal on their own, and the crowd
had witnessed this refusal. Those at the front who had been able to hear and
understand what was going on had quickly relayed the information to those
behind them. Even the Piagnoni were now becoming persuaded
that Savonarola ought to have taken up the challenge himself. Here had been his
chance to reveal his miraculous powers before all who believed in him, and at
the last moment he had been revealed as a charlatan. The mood of the crowd
began to change. The Franciscans soon departed the square, and some time
afterwards the Dominicans were hustled out through the angry crowd under cover
of darkness, making their way quickly back to San Marco.
With
hindsight, it is possible to see that Savonarola was tricked into this ordeal.
Indeed, judging from his words, it seems that he himself may well have had
increasing misgivings about the entire affair for some days beforehand. The aim
of the Signoria, in league with the Arrabbiati and theCompagnacci,
had been to turn the crowd against Savonarola, and in this they certainly
succeeded. Savonarola was now seen as the one who had deprived the people of
Florence of their spectacle: he was a charlatan and a cheat, who was incapable
of miracles and had never intended his friars to be put to the test. The
remaining crowd in the piazza began giving vent to their anger, before they
were eventually dispersed and sent home into the night by the attendant armed
troops.
This
was in many ways the significant event, the pivotal moment. Prior to the
planned ordeal the city had been divided. As a result of this fiasco, even
the Piagnoniturned against Savonarola – in significant numbers, if
not totally. From now on the Arrabbiatihad the upper hand and were
determined to exploit this.
NOTES
1. ‘I cannot be sure whether …’:
cited in Villari, La Storia … Savonarola, Vol. II, pp.152–3.
See Esortazione fatta al popolo in San Marco il di 7 Aprile
1498, which is included at the end of his Prediche sopra l’Esodo
(Sermons on Exodus)
2. ‘And then came the Dominicans …’:
Landucci, Diario, p.169
3. ‘of fiery red velvet’: cited in
Martines, Savonarola, p.226, giving as his original source
Parenti, Storie fiorentine (Schnitzer), p.257
4. ‘engaged in an extraordinary …’:
ibid.
5. ‘The Franciscans were afraid …’:
Guicciardini, Opere, Vol. I, p.150
6. ‘was most wicked’ et seq.:
cited in Martines, Savonarola, p.228
7. ‘The patience of the multitude …’ et
seq.: see Villari, La Storia … Savonarola, Vol. II, pp.157–8.
This account makes use of the detailed descriptions in Lorenzo Violi, Le
giornate, ed. G. C. Carfagnini (Florence, 1986) and Fra Benedetto [of
Florence] Luschino, Vulnera diligentis, ed. S. dall’Aglio
(Florence, 2002), as well as Burlamacchi,Savonarola, while others such
as Landucci also confirm these events. Fra Benedetto and Violi confirm
Salviati’s threatening words. These several descriptions vary in minor details,
especially with regard to the order of some events, but Villari’s would seem to
be the most considered and vivid summary.
[1] There would appear to be no hypocrisy or misuse of
reason in Savonarola’s argument here. Even modern psychology does not deny that
such experiences may indeed seem all too real to those who undergo them.
[2] As well as ordeal by fire, during the medieval era
there had been in various parts of Europe ordeals by the other three elements:
ordeal by water (which could result in drowning), earth (that is, burial) and
air (being cast from a high tower or cliff).
[3] The details of this construction can be found in
Landucci, Diario, p.135, where he gives the proportions in the
contemporary measurements of braccia. Braccio means ‘arm’, and
this was effectively a length of just under two feet. Thus Landucci gives the
height of the walkway as four braccia, its length as fifty.
[4] Holy Mass during this period usually involved the
taking of a piece of bread torn from an unleavened loaf, known as the Host, as
well as a sip of wine, after they had both been consecrated by the priest, a
ritual that transformed them into the body and blood of Jesus Christ. This was
no mere symbolic act, and the Host was regarded as the actual body of Christ.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario