The Great Western Schism of 1378- 1417 is generally considered to have been resolved at the ecumenical council held between 1414 and 1418 in Constance, Southern Germany (commonly referred to as the Council of Constance). The Council sought to accomplish 3 main goals: “To reform the corrupt morals of the church” (which was achieved with somewhat limited success), “To eradicate heresies” (such as those of John Hus of Bohemia, who was burned at the stake in Constance in 1415) and to find the aforementioned resolution to the Papal Schism, the third of which would have the deepest running implications for Catholicism (after all they were deciding who was to imminently lead the church). Voting on decisions at the council took place in the form of four “ecclesiastical provinces” (England, France, Germany and Italy), a system that was “so much out of harmony with conciliar tradition" that it acts as evidence in itself of increased national sentiment and pursuits of domestic agendas in Europe at the time. As a result of this novel system, there had to be sizeable compromise both within the council as a whole (as a majority decision was clearly unobtainable) and also within each individual province; particularly as none of the four provinces were unified under a single crown (Germany and Italy weren’t to become single kingdoms until the 19th century, and the provinces of England and France also included representatives of smaller kingdoms), as certain agendas pursued by one kingdom within a particular “province” may not necessarily be shared by the other kingdoms of that same province (which would prove challenging owing to the aforementioned nationalism). One must bear this in mind when evaluating the significance of the papal allegiance of the Kingdom of Naples during the Council- as other kingdoms in what would later become Italy were afforded opportunities to contribute in the voting direction of the ecclesiastical province of Italy. Furthermore, the election of a third claimant to the papacy in Pisa further undermined the significance of Naples at the Council of Constance, with the seeming legitimacy of this antipope ( Alexander V who was to be succeeded by John XXIII) adding weight to the wishes of Pisa at the expense of other parties such as Naples. With that said however, the political strength of the Kingdom of Naples at the time, coupled with its strategic significance and its ability to provide forces to either Avignon or Rome should such action be required, made the Kingdom of Naples’ allegiance significant both within the confines of the Italian voting province and on a wider scale at the council.
Naples
The decision of Joanna of Naples (reigned 1343-1382) to support Clement VII in Avignon at the expense of the Roman pope Urban VI ( a move described as “obscure and puzzling” owing to Urban himself being a Neapolitan )resulted in the appointment of Louis of Anjou ( described as Clement’s “keenest French supporter” and a cousin of Charles V of France ) as her heir. The appointment resulted in conflict between Joanna and her cousin and original heir Charles of Durazzo, who took the throne by force by murdering Joanna in 1382, which in turn lead to an attempted invasion by Louis. The invasion was a significant in the eventual resolution to the Schism as Charles (and later his son Ladislaus), who was supporting the Roman claimant to the papacy, was being challenged for his kingdom by a supporter of the papacy in Avignon, in a region of Europe that (as previously mentioned) was perfectly geographically positioned to provide assistance to either claimant should such assistance be required. Naturally, both papal claimants attempted to aid their respective supporters in this conflict, with the Roman claimant Urban moving into Naples himself in order to give “full support” to his ‘candidate’. Such a relationship between the See and Naples was not only mutually beneficial but necessary for both parties: the Pope needed Neapolitan backing (both during and indeed after the Schism) owing to the insecurity of not only his spiritual position but also his temporal one, and the king of Naples needed Papal recognition for his position owing to the claim from Anjou (that was itself receiving its own papal backing). Despite the inadequacies of Urban’s attempted intervention (Charles ended up turning on Urban by 1385; besieging him in Nocera and torturing 6 of his cardinals), the fact that by the culmination of the Council of Constance the descendants of Charles remained both on the Neapolitan throne and still loyal to the Roman Papacy adds weight to the significance of the allegiance of the Kingdom of Naples. In the only situation that could conceivably be seen as an actual conflict between the two papacies throughout the duration of the schism, the fact that the claimant to the throne of Naples backed by the See in Rome ultimately remained in power must have added credence to the Roman desire for a permeant return of the papacy to Rome, owing to both Naples’s regional significance and that fact that, by essentially backing the losing party in the conflict, the papacy in Avignon appeared to have been ‘defeated’ by the time the council of Constance was in session. Thus, one can deduce that the allegiance of Naples proved crucial not only as a powerful voice in the Italian voting bloc, but also acting as somewhat of a battleground for the rival papacies, with the maintained loyalties to Rome meant that in when placed in direct conflict the Roman papacy came out on top, which may have contributed to the Holy See being returned to Rome in 1417.
Haec Sancta
The election of said third claimant to the papacy in Pisa in 1409 (Alexander V and later John XXIII) had the potential to complicate the council further, as each of the three popes could claim (with reasonable grounds in all three cases) legitimacy in their election as pontiff. The fact that the third claimant was added into proceedings could have had the potential to undermine the significance of all present parties (Naples included), particularly when the council itself was called by Antipope John XXIII. However, the publication of the decree Haec Sancta essentially absolved the three claimants of their powers when in contention with the council- with the decree noting that the council “has power directly from Christ” and that “anyone of whatever condition… who contumaciously refuses to obey the past or future mandates, statutes, ordinances or precepts of this sacred council… shall be duly punished” Such a decree (which has maintained its validation in all ecumenical councils since its publication) essentially elevated the council as a whole above any one man, which gave delegates from kingdoms such as Naples (who were not putting forward a Papal candidate themselves) collective authority above that of a Pontiff, undoubtedly making them more powerful. With that said, the fact that every represented power at the council was afforded this power raises questions as to the effect on the significance of the Kingdom of Naples. Whilst Naples had become more powerful within Catholicism as a whole, the fact that all kingdoms present at the council had become more powerful within Catholicism meant that Naples’ relative position remained unchanged. As such, the Haec Sancta decree did not hugely affect the significance of the allegiance of the Kingdom of Naples at the Council of Constance, but in the same vein the third claimant elected in Pisa also was of minimal significance owing to Haec Sancta. The decree effectively removed papal power from all three claimants and bestowed it on the council, making the number of claimants (in practically) insignificant owing to the lack of power and authority any claimant would have had when the council were in session. Thus, despite Haec Sancta not resulting in the allegiance of the kingdom of Naples becoming more significant relative to those already at the council, the decree made Neapolitan allegiance more significant outside of the council, owing to it now superseding papal power. With this in mind however, strictly within the context of the Council of Constance both the Haec Sancta decree and the addition of a further claimant had minimal impact on the significance of the allegiance of the Kingdom of Naples.
Shifting Support
The fact that support for the initial two claimants for the papacy was divided amongst European kingdoms from the outset was a contributory factor in the prolonging of the Schism, however by 1414 and the start of the Council of Constance it is notable that many kingdoms had withdrawn their support for the two candidates. Notably, the withdrawal in support for the Roman claimant Gregory XII by the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund acted as a potential death knell for the Roman Papacy, as the Empire has been described as the “most important institution of Western Europe.” Indeed, the fact that pressure from Sigismund himself was a driving force behind the council coming into session could be seen as a further obstacle for the Roman papacy. Had the council been resolved been resolved with a return of the Holy See to Avignon, the modern student of history could have conceivably seen such pressure from Sigismund to initiate an ecumenical council as an attempt to remove the papacy form Rome: his former supported papacy. The fact then, that the papacy ended up permanently returning to Rome following the conclusion of the Council surely is indicative of significance of those at the council that did support the Roman papacy, such as the Kingdom of Naples. Whilst the Holy Roman Empire was immeasurably more significant in European politics than any backers of the Roman papacy, the fact that Naples was able to contribute in bringing the papacy back to Rome despite the likes of the Holy Roman Empire being unwilling to contribute in achieving this must surely be indicative of Naples’ having a large amount significance within the Council. Furthermore, the fact that many of Gregory’s cardinals in Rome withdrew their support for his papacy is significant when evaluating the significance of those present at the Council. Despite Gregory’s grip on papal power being weak, the fact that the Papacy was able to not only avoid collapse but be in a position to negotiate the end of both the claims to the Papacy from Avignon and Pisa must surely act as evidence that those who fought the corner of the Roman Papacy were very significant, a camp the Kingdom of Naples finds itself in. Thus, while weakening the Roman Pontificate as a whole, the desertion of many of Gregory XII’s cardinals ultimately resulted in an increased significance of the Kingdom of Naples.
France
Of even greater strength than the Holy Roman Empire, however, was the Kingdom of France, which was the largest in Europe both geographically and indeed in terms of political influence in the early 15th century (the start of the Council of Constance). Indeed, French support for the Avignon Papacy was a primary factor in the schismatic Papacy lasting as long as it did, with the 1408 withdrawal of French support coinciding with a decline in the Papacy until its dissolution in 1417. The fact that the Avignon claimant (Antipope Benedict XIII) was excommunicated from the Church by the Council and deposed (rather than resigning as Pope Gregory XII and Antipope John XXIII had done in 1415) is indicative of the tenacity of both Benedict as a man but also of the Avignon papacy as a whole, for despite his minimal support of both his cardinals and any particularly powerful kingdoms, Benedict was still able to be considered a claimant to the papacy by the start of the Council in 1414. The fact that the Avignon papacy was able to continue for as long as it did without any significant external support somewhat undermines the significance of the Kingdom of Naples. As the Roman Papacy possessed a far larger number of supporters than their counterparts in Avignon from the conclusion of the Council of Pisa in 1409, one may argue that it was a lack an ally that was significant enough to bring the Schism to an end in 1409 that resulted in the Schism lasting until 1417, and that Naples’ insignificance was contributory towards this. Furthermore, the aforementioned bloc voting system was of benefit to France, as any decision regarding voting tendencies could have been made centrally owing to unity under the French crown. However, such an argument lacks an appreciation of how significant the Kingdom of Naples was relative to how significant a kingdom of that size should have been. If the Kingdom of France was responsible for the Avignon papacy’s survival, Naples was (at least partially) responsible for the Roman papacy’s. Although not as significant as the Kingdom of France (owing to the power and strength the French possessed), the fact that one is able to draw comparisons between the largest and most powerful kingdom in the known world and a kingdom that was comparatively dwarfed in both regards when talking about the Schism speaks volumes as to how much Naples ‘overachieved' in terms of its significance. Thus, whilst the lack of French support for the Avignon Papacy from 1409 is indicative of a lack of Neapolitan significance as a singular event, the fact that such an event draws comparisons between the two kingdoms grants Naples a sense of significance for the council as a whole. The system of voting also acted in favour of Naples when evaluating the significance of its allegiance, for despite the added obstacle of being unable to account for the tendencies of kingdoms that made up the Italian bloc alongside Naples, the fact that Naples was able to remain significant in spite of this speaks volumes as to the ‘overachievement’ Naples achieved regarding significance at the Council of Constance.
Conclusion
Despite being a somewhat unfashionable area of research for the modern student of history, the fact that the Council of Constance was able to achieve unity in the Catholic Church after half a century of schism must surely place it as a crucial juncture in the history of the Church. Whilst the Kingdom of Naples was not the only significant Kingdom at this the 16th ecumenical council, the fact that one can proclaim it to be significant at all when compared to the considerably larger France and Holy Roman Empire (and indeed more significant than kingdoms such as England) is testament to the significance the Kingdom achieved. This significance was achieved through both Naples’ geographical strategic value to both Avignon and Rome, as well as its significance as a political and indeed military battleground between the two papacies and a number of their allies following Queen Joanna’s disinheritance of Charles of Durazzo. Furthermore, acts taken within the council (such as the publication of the Haec Sancta decree), whilst not necessarily resulting in an increase in the significance of the Kingdom of Naples, certainly resulted in Naples becoming more powerful within Catholicism, which in itself allowed the third claimant to the papacy elected in Pisa in 1409to be of minimal significance to Naples. Whilst its significance was admittedly somewhat neutered by the unprecedented bloc voting system (a system that aided the significance those ecclesiastical provinces that were united under a single crown), the fact that Naples was able to achieve significance at the council indicates an overachievement for a kingdom of that size and strength. Without events prior to the Council taking place, Naples would have been a healthy scratch when evaluating the Council of Constnace, however the fact that these events took place elevates the Kingdom of Naples to a point of significance that superceeds the majority of those present at Constance.
Bibliography