On Roman Rioting, Lutheran Graffiti, and Popish Beards
On May 6th, 1527 -- 488 years ago today -- military
troops of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, sacked the ecclesiastical capital of Western
Christendom, la città eterna, Rome. Sacking Rome
was the "thing to do" (as they say) for much of Western history. Everybody who
was anybody did it at some point: the Visigoths in 410, the Vandals in 455, the
Ostrogoths in 546, the Normans in 1084. By the time that Charles's imperial
forces got around to it, sacking the eternal city had almost become passé.
Though religious tensions ran high in 1527 -- Reformation being
in the air, and all that -- this particular sacking of Rome had more to do with
politics and family ambitions than faith. The Emperor Charles and the French
King Francis I had been at war for several years when Clement VII (from the
family Medici) assumed the papacy in 1523. After donning the triple tiara,
Clement made a habit of regularly repositioning his loyalties in that conflict,
always with an eye towards maximizing his own political influence (and control
of the papal states of Central Italy) and curbing the excessive influence of
others. In 1527 Clement had recently realigned himself with Francis, worried
about the ever-increasing clout which Charles, a Habsburg, could claim in
Western Europe.
Even so, the notion to sack the pope's city of residence was
by all accounts conceived not by Charles V, but by Charles III, the Duke of
Bourbon who commanded the Emperor's forces in Northern Italy. In April of 1527
the imperial forces had succeeded in overthrowing Medici rule in Florence.
Travelling south to try their luck against the Medici pope in Rome seemed
reasonable enough to Duke Charles. While the troops he commanded made short
work of the Swiss Guard defending Rome's city walls on the morning of May 6th,
the Duke himself died on the battlefield. In his last living moments he
realized (maybe) that wearing a distinct white coat so his own troops could
identify him and heed his commands on the battlefield did little to camouflage
him from the enemy.
Thus the imperial forces found themselves within the city
walls, lacking a leader, and -- by all accounts -- full of resentment for long
stretches of hard labor and little pay. And so they did what armies do in such
circumstances: they ran amok. Considerable harm was inflicted on the Roman
people. Roman architecture suffered some serious setbacks as well, though both
St. Peter's and the Sistine Chapel ultimately survived the shame of having
horses stabled in them.
Roman Catholic clergy underwent particular persecution.
Cardinal Giovanni del Monte -- later
Pope Julius III -- was apparently suspended for some period of time by his hair.
As he hung there, he (presumably) had few kind thoughts for Pope Clement VII,
who had traded him to the imperial forces in order to save his own skin.
Clement had himself taken refuge in the Castel Sant'Angelo, where apparently a
group of soldiers gathered at one point with the pronounced intention of eating
him alive. (Clement, incidentally, ultimately survived the sack of Rome, and
remained pope -- and duly submissive to Emperor Charles -- until his death in 1534).
When they weren't inflicting torture on cardinals or threatening to cook the
pope, the imperial soldiers played dress-up with the (spare) robes of the high
pontiff and his senior clergy. Once (im)properly adorned they played the part,
blessing and excommunicating each other, processing through town in all their
clerical splendor, and so on.
Some historians have
sought to attribute such "sport" on the part of the imperial forces to
Protestant convictions. It's doubtful, however, that any such convictions lay
at the root of the havoc wreaked upon Rome in May of 1527. For one thing, the
majority of the soldiers came from Spain, Italy, and regions of Germany which
remained Roman Catholic. For another, Protestants hardly held a monopoly on
resentment towards Rome and her religious authority. After all, ridicule (if
not something worse) of the institutional church and her clergy was standard
fare even in the most devoutly Roman Catholic regions of Europe in the early
sixteenth century. It's hardly the case, in other words, that even devout
papists would have necessarily balked
at the opportunity to tell the pope they intended to eat him for their supper. Beyond
this, it's highly questionable that the activities which took place in Rome in
May of 1527 need to be attributed to religious
sentiments of any sort. It's entirely possible -- even, I would suggest, likely -- that the imperial soldiers got up to what they got up to in the eternal city
that month because, at least to their way of thinking, it was fun. Persecution of Roman Catholic
clergy no more necessarily points to
Protestant sentiments than do acts of iconoclasm throughout Europe during this
period. Sometimes people just like to break things.
Nevertheless, religious reform does seem to have been on the
mind of at least one of Charles's soldiers in Rome. Several years before the
sack of Rome, the renaissance artist Raphael had completed a fresco called La Disputa -- a piece which shows the
church militant and church triumphant meeting at the celebration of the
Supper -- for the pope's personal library in the Vatican. As one of the imperial
soldiers wandered through the pope's vacated apartments and viewed this
remarkable piece, he decided it would be improved if he scribbled the name of
one of Europe's most famous and controversial personages across it. Thus he added
a short and simple "M. Lutherus" ("Lutherus" being the Latinized form of "Luther")
to the face of Raphael's painting. This was the early modern equivalent of
writing "Luther was here."
In actual fact, Luther hadn't been in Rome since 1510,
which -- coincidentally -- was just about the time that Raphael's painting was being
completed. It's unclear what this particular soldier intended to accomplish or
communicate by scratching Luther's name on the painting. Perhaps he wished to
convey the idea that Luther's reforming spirit
was in Rome and was manifested in the destruction wreaked upon the city. If so,
it's doubtful that Luther would have appreciated the gesture. The Reformer explicitly
denounced the sack of Rome, though he couldn't restrain himself from commenting
on the remarkable providence of God which led the "Emperor who persecutes
Luther for the pope... to destroy the pope for Luther."
One of the more insignificant, longer term fruits of the
sack of Rome was papal beards. In protest to the indignities suffered by both
pope and city, Clement, breaking tradition with earlier popes, let his facial
hair grow. Or, at least, protest over said indignities was the rationale he gave for his sudden reluctance to
shave. Herbert Vaughan suggests another motive in his early 20th century history of the Medici popes: "Although handsome, Clement's face was
rendered unattractive by reason of its disagreeable expression and the look of
suspicion which was constantly passing over it. [...] It was not until after the
sack of Rome in 1527, that Clement... allowed his beard and
moustache to grow naturally, a change which undoubtedly added dignity to the
Pope's general appearance."
Whether the beard improved Clement's appearance or not, it
was a violation of church law (which prohibited facial hair for clergy). But
Clement got away with it. His papal successors took note of his flagrant disregard
for the church's rules and followed his facial-hair lead. Nearly every pope for the next
two centuries wore a beard (after which, hardly any did ever again).
Such blatant ignoring of canon law was not entirely
inconsequential. Papal beards arguably served to reinforce the point (which
popes were keen to make) that popes are above, not under, church law. Clement
and his successors' beards were not, admittedly, so significant a move towards papal
prestige and authority as Vatican I's claim of infallibility for Peter's
supposed successors, but they were a step -- however scratchy -- towards the same.
Aaron Clay Denlinger
is professor of church history and historical theology at Reformation Bible
College in Sanford, Florida. May 6th, in addition to being the day
that Rome was sacked in 1527, is also Aaron's birthday. Cards and gifts
(preferably money) can be sent to him care of the Alliance.