The Prince under Critique. A Point of Contention: H is ...

Gert Melville

The Prince under Critique. A Point of Contention: His Genealogy

My paper examines a fundamental critique directed toward the princes of late medieval Europe –
namely, that their political demands concerning power, renown and the right of dominion, i.e. how
they by means of grand genealogical constructions should have been made credible, were not
justified, because their genealogical declarations were false or, at the very least, exaggerated.

This critique went to the core of princely self-conception, in as much as a nobleman himself, his
suitability and his rights were essentially defined by his genealogy – as I shall elucidate.

A few examples follow:

ERASMUS VON ROTTERDAM, QUERELA PACIS [THE COMPLAINT OF PEACE] (WRITTEN 1521), EDS. A.
M. HAAS / U. HERZOG, EIN KLAG DES FRYDENS: LEO JUDS ÜBERSETZUNG DER QUERELA PACIS VON
1521, ZUSAMMEN MIT DEM LATEINISCHEN ORIGINAL, ZÜRICH 1969.

But I leave the common people, who are tossed about, like the waves, by the winds of passion. I
enter the courts of kings as into a harbour, from the storm of folly. Here, say I to myself, here
must be a place for Peace to lodge in. These personages are wiser than the vulgar; they are the
minds of the commonalty, the eyes of the people. They claim also to be the vicegerents of Him
who was the teacher of charity, the Prince of Peace, from whom I come with letters of
recommendation, addressed, indeed, in general, to all men, but more particularly to such as
these.

Appearances, on my entrance into the palace, promise well. I see men saluting each other with
the blandest, softest, gentlest expressions of respect and love; I see them shaking hands, and
embracing with the most ardent professions of esteem; I see them dining together, and
enjoying convivial pleasures in high glee and jollity; I see every outward sign of the kindest
offices and humanity; but sorry am I to add, that I do not see the least symptom of sincere
friendship. It is all paint and varnish. Every thing is corrupted by open faction, or by secret
grudges and animosities. In one word, so far am I from finding in the palaces of princes a
habitation for Peace, that in them I discover all the embryos, seminal principles, and sources of
all the wars that ever cursed mankind, and desolated the universe.

But I blush to record, upon how infamously frivolous causes the world has been rouzed to arms
by Christian kings. One of them has found, or forged, an obsolete musty parchment, on which
he makes a claim to a neighbouring territory. As if it signified a straw to mankind, thus called
upon to shed blood, who is the person, or what the family of the ruling prince, whoever he be,
provided he governs in such a manner as to consult and promote public felicity. Another alleges
that some punctilio, in a treaty of a hundred articles, has been infringed or neglected. A third
owes a neighbouring king a secret grudge, on a private account, because he has married some
princess whom he intended to be his consort, or uttered some sarcasm that reflects upon his
royal person and character.

LE DEBAT DES HERAUTS DE FRANCE ET D’ANGLETERRE, ED. L.PANNIER / P. MEYER, PARIS 1872

(written between 1456/61)1

(The English Herald:)

Lady Prudence, you know that Emperor Constantine, who ruled in great honour over this whole
empire, hailed from this noble kingdom of England. Also Maximinianus, who was a noble knight
and who defeated the Gauls as well as the Lombards, came from England. And then there was
King Arthur, who was personally so courageous and was such a great conqueror, that he
belonged to the Nine Worthies. He established the Round Table, which was a thing of great
honour and at which such courageous knights sat, that still today stories throughout the entire
world tell of their deeds and keep them ever in our memory. And it is obvious that the
courageous of old times came from England and that consequently the highest honour belongs
to this kingdom...“

(The French Herald:)

„You say that Emperor Constantine, the courageous knight Maximinianus and the powerful
King Arthur hailed from the kingdom of England and that hence eternal honor belongs to this
kingdom. I retort that one must first find out whence in fact the noble knights, whom you have
named, originally come. Please believe me, Lady Prudence, that they all originated from the
gentry of Troy, and that after the conquest of Troy a courageous knight by the name of Eneas
the Trojan came to Rome accompanied by numerous noblemen, and that from him descended
a knight, who was called Brutus and who betook himself in grand accompaniment toward the
island of Albion, which today is called England, where he fought several wars with the giants
who lived there and conquered them. This Brutus decreed that the island no longer be called
Albion, but rather Britain. Those knights whom the English Herald has named descended from
this Brutus and his progeny.

Now let us also see, however, whence the English come and why the aforementioned island,
which was once called Britain, is now called England. You shall see that they came from Saxony,
a land in Germany. It is true that the Saxons were brought from Saxony to Britain because of
fratricidal wars among the descendents of Brutus. The Saxons then wished to make this their
kingdom. They conquered the descendents of Brutus under the leadership of a certain Inglus
and came to an agreement that the island, which to date was named Britain, now be called
England.

You see, Lady Prudence, how the English Herald has lied and has adorned himself with
borrowed plumes, as he attributed [to England] the honor of all knights, who belong to the
nation of Britain, the nation of the Saxons, which is today called England.

You, Lord Herald, cannot use as an argument the great deeds, which the aforementioned
knights accomplished, because one must attribute them to the honor of Britain, not to the
renown of the English.”

1 Cf. G. MELVILLE, Geschichte im Diskurs. Zur Auseinandersetzung zwischen Herolden über die Frage: Qui est le
royaume chrstien qui plus est digne d’estre approuché d’Onneur?, Les princes et l’histoire du XIVe au XVIIIe
siècle, eds. Ch. Grell / W. Paravicini / J. Voss, Bonn 1998, p. 243-262.

THE SPEECH OF THE BISHOP OF NEVERS AT THE COUNCIL OF BASEL ON THE SPECIAL PRIORITY OF THE
BURGUNDIAN LEGATE IN COMPARISON TO THE LEGATE OF THE PRINCIPALITY – AT THE SEATING OF THE
COUNCIL, ED. MANSI, SACRORUM CONCILIORUM ... COLLECTIO, VOL. 30, COL. 205-211 (written
1432)2

The sublimity of princes is perceived by means of lineages, power and the prestige of his lands.
– If I thus wish to praise the distinguished Prince (sc. Philip the Good) with the help of his
ancestry, then I take on a daunting task. Because already from his father´s side there is a
threefold provenance: First of all from the most Christian, most glorious and most powerful
house of France ... Therewith I indicate the way, by which he (sc. Philip) has a Dardanic origin
through that Trojan Prince Francus. Secondly, his lineage then goes through the glorious Prince
and King of the Burgundians, Gondulfus, who has his provenance from Evandrus, the King of
the Seven Hills, and from there further back from Janus, to the son of the son of Noah, Japhet.
And thirdly – because he had that inherited, birth-given right to the oldest house of Lorraine –
he is a member of the dynasty of the most powerful, most distinguished and most glorious
Princes Charles Martel, Pippin, Charlemagne, Louis the Pious and Charles the Bald, from which
most emperors descend. ... And I shall not keep silent about the line of his mother, through
which he obtained his origins from the old house of the Germanic Bavarians, which had
produced not a few cesars, kings, and princes. So great is the brilliance of his genealogy that he
(sc. Philip) also counts the Kings of France, England, Castile, Portugal, Aragon, Navarra, Cyprus
und Sicily among his closest relatives. ...

The orator only touched shortly then upon the question of power, whereby he listed the succession
of Philip’s dukedoms and counties. More important seemed to be the prestige of his lands. For
Burgundy they were evident in the eyes of the orator, because old age and fidelity to the Christian
faith characterized it. It was described in detail that Burgundy since ancient times was able to
produce a glorious history and active rulers, that many saints and martyrs hailed from there, and that
the principality has always dedicated itself to the advocacy of the faith.

With a fundamental comparison of lordship and office the analyses stop: personal lordship is the
preeminent category because it has anchorage in natural law. An office, however, has been only
arbitrarily conferred, as an office holder is nothing more than a mercenary. Hence, the legates of the
Burgundian Princes would have precedence before the legates of the electors.

In 1434 a response of the Emperor to the Council of Basel followed:

ASSERTIONS OF EMPEROR SIGMUND TO THE COUNCIL OF BASEL] <, ED. DEUTSCHE REICHSTAGSAKTEN,
VOL. 11, GOTHA 1898, NR. 181, P.335-338

... the Emperor retorted that the King of France is well able to determine his seats, as he pleases. It is,
however, fixed that the Duke of Burgundy in contrast to the house of France is not in the first place,
rather only in the fifth or sixth.

... and he says quite a bit more about the Duke of Burgundy, but above all: „O beloved son, do not
wish to fly too high. If you fly too high, you could burn your feathers.“

2 Cf. G. MELVILLE, Vorfahren und Vorgänger. Spätmittelalterliche Genealogien als dynastische Legitimation zur
Herrschaft, Die Familie als sozialer und historischer Verband, ed. P.-J. Schuler, Sigmaringen 1987, p.203-309.