1576 Edition | Book 6 | Page 734 
MarginaliaThe high Angell of the popes pallace throwne downe. In the tyme of this Pope Alexander, also it happened (which is not to bee pretermitted) how that the Aungell which stoode in the high toppe of the Popes Church, was beaten downe with a terrible thunder: which thyng semed then to declare the ruine and fall of the Popedome.MarginaliaPope Pius. 3. After this Pope next succeded Pius the 3. about the yeare of our Lord, 1503.MarginaliaPope Iulius. 2. After whom came next Iulius the second,
CloseThe following account of Julius II, including the poems and epigraphs, is taken, word-for-word, from Bale, Catalogus, pp. 636 and 642-4.
Cum contra Gallos bellum papa Iulius esset
Gesturus, sicut fama vetusta docet:
Ingentes martis turmas contraxit, & vrbem
Egressus sæuas edidit ore minas.
Iratusq; sacras claues in flumina iecit
Tibridis, hic vrbi pons vbi iungit aquas.
Inde manu strictum vagina diripit ensem,
Exclamansq̀; truci talia voce refert:
Hic gladius Pauli nos nunc defender ab hoste,
Quandoquidem clauis nil iuuat ista Petri.
In Gallum vt fama est, bellum gesturus acerbum,
Armatam educit Iulius vrbe manum:
Accinctus gladio, claues in Tibridis amnem
Proijcit, & sæuus talia verba facit:
Quum Petri nihil efficiant ad prælia claues,
Auxilio Pauli forsitan ensis erit.
When Iulius Pope agaynst the French
determind to make warre:
As fame reportes, he gathered vp,
great troupes of men from farre.
And to the bridge of Tybur then,
marchyng as he were wood:
His holy keyes he tooke, and cast
them downe into the flood.
And afterward into hys hand
he tooke a naked sword:
And shakyng it, brake forth into,
this fierce and warlike word.
This sword of Paule (quoth he) shall now
defend vs from our foe:
Since that this key of Peter doth
nothyng auayle therto.
MarginaliaThe popes lawe geueth leaue to kill all that be accursed by hym. Of this Iulius it is certainly reported, that partly with hys warres, partly with hys cursinges, within the space of 7. yeres, as good as two hundred thousand Christiãs were destroyed.MarginaliaThe warres and bloudshed of pope Iulius. 2. First he besieged Rauenna agaynst the Venetians, then Seruia, Imola, Fauentia, Foroliuium, Bononia, and other cities, which he gatte out of Princes handes, not without much bloudshed. The Chronicles of Iohn Sledane maketh mention, that when this Iulius was made Pope, he tooke an othe, promising to haue a Councel within two yeares: but when he had no laysure therunto beyng occupied with hys warres in Italy amongest the Venetians, and wyth the French kyng, and in Ferraria, and in other countreyes: ix. of hys Cardinals departing from hym, came to Millayne, and there appoynted a Councel at the citie of Pise, amongest whome the chiefe were Bernardinus Cruceius, Gulielmus Prenestinus, Franciscus Constantinus with diuers others: amongest whom also were adioyned the procuratours of Maximilian the Emperour, and of Ludouicke the Frēch kyng. So the Councell was appointed the yeare of our Lord. 1511. to begin in the Kalendes of September.MarginaliaThe pope periured. The cause why they did so call this Councell was thus alledged, because the Pope had broken his oth. and all this whyle he gaue no hope to haue any councell, and also because there were diuers other crimes, MarginaliaA councell called to depose pope Iulius.wherupon they had to accuse him. Their purpose was to remooue hym out of hys seat, the which he had procured through bribes & ambition. Iulius hearyng this, geueth out contrary commaundement vnder great payne, no man to obey them, and calleth hymselfe an other coūcell agaynst the next yeare, to be begon the xix. day of Aprill. The French Kyng vnderstandyng Pope Iulius to ioyne with the Venetians, and so to take their part agaynst hym, conuented a Councell at Thurin in the moneth of September, in the which councell these questions were proposed.
[Back to Top]Whether it was lawfull for the Pope to mooue war against
any prince without cause.
Whether any prince in defendyng himself, might inuade his
aduersary, and deny hys obedience.
Vnto the which questiõs it was aunswered, that neither the byshop ought to inuade, and also that it was lawfull for the king to defend hym selfe.Marginalia The Pragmaticall Sanction established, mentioned before pag. 674. Moreouer that the Pragmaticall sanction was to bee obserued thorowe the realme of Fraunce:MarginaliaNo vniust excommunication to be feared. Neither that any vniuste excommunications ought to be feared, if they were founde to be vniuste. After thys the kyng sent vnto Iulius, the aunswere of his councell, requiring him either to agree to peace, or to appoynt a generall councell some other where, where thys matter might bee more fully decised. Iulius woulde neither of both these, but forthwith accursed Ludouicke the French king, with all hys kingdome. At þe lēgth, at Rauēna in a great warre, he was ouercome by the Frēch king, & at last, after much slaughter & great bloudshed, and mortall warre, thys Pope dyed in the yeare of our Lord. 1513. the. xxj. day of February.
[Back to Top]
CloseIn a number of ways the sudden inclusion of a large - even by A&Mstandards - section on the history of the Turks in an ecclesiestical history is somewhatsurprising. Virtually no attention had been paid to this subject in either of Foxe'sLatin martyrologies. There were, moreover, only cursory references to the Turks in the 1563 edition (pp. 422 and 442): although the characterization of the Turks' 'extreme cruelty and tirrany' in the first of these passages is revealing of Foxe'sattitudes. Foxe himself recognized that his account of the Turks was an unusual ex-cursus and offered several justifications for it: that an understanding of the history ofthe Turks was necessary for an understanding of Biblical prophecy; that it was impor-tant to understand the danger the Turks presented to the survival of the Church; thatit enabled the reader to recognize the Turks as God's scourge and to repent sin; thatit would inspire Christians to unite against the Turks; that it showed that the Turkswere backed by the Devil and could only be defeated with God's aid and finally thatthe English tended to minimize the imminence of the Turkish threat and needed to bealerted to it.
[Back to Top]All of these reasons were inter-connected. The importance of understanding the Turkish role in prophetic history, at least to Foxe, is demonstrated by the fact thathe devoted a section of his account of the Turks to the subject. Two thingsare essential to understanding Foxe's view of the Ottoman empire. The first is that hethought, whether or not it was Antichrist (as we shall see, Foxe was unsure about this), it was unquestionably in league with Satan. Moreover, the rise of the Ottomanempire took place in what - in Foxe's eyes, at least - was the the final days of theworld, with the Apocalypse imminent. Thus the Ottoman empire was not a politicalpower, posing a military threat, it was a spiritual power, posing a supernatural threatand it had to be fought by spiritual means. Yet the Turks were also part of God's planand should inspire people to repentance and right conduct. By emphasizing the powerand the cruelty of the Turks (which he would do stridently), Foxe was following whathe believed was his duty: alerting God's flock to danger and exhorting them to repentance.
[Back to Top]The interesting question is why did Foxe believe that the Ottomans were adiabolical threat? One reason was their invincibility. Foxe wrote his account of theTurks in 1566, at the very end of the reign of the greatest sultan of the Ottomanempire, Süleyman I (reined 1520-1566). From this vantage point, the trajectory of theOttoman empire was one of almost unbroken success. Secondly, and probably mostimportantly, the Turks seemed to fit the descriptions of Antichrist in certain key respects, such as their cruelty and their hostility to Christianity. Less obviously, butof equal importance to Foxe, was that their state was tyranny without law, order ormorality; a diabolical parody of a godly commonwealth. But above all, at least inFoxe's eyes, the Turks had no true family structure. Instead of godly monogamousmarriage, the Turks had concubines and harems; instead of an orderly successionfrom father to son, there were assassinations and civil wars.
[Back to Top]Finally Foxe was greatly influenced in his perception of the Turk by hisexile. Continental writers, particularly those in Germany and Italy, were greatly concerned about the Ottoman threat, for obvious reasons, and in Basel, Foxe wasexposed to their writings on the subject. In fact, much of his history of the Turkswould be based on two works, both of which were printed in Basel. One of theseworks, De origine et rebus gestis Turcorum, was printed by Foxe's employerJohann Oporinus in 1556; Foxe may well have corrected. The other work wasTheodore Bibliander's Latin translation of the Koran, which was printed in 1550,a few years before Foxe arrived in Switzerland. It is not easy to perceive Foxe's indebtedness to these books. Both works were actually compilations of texts about the Turks. De origine is a collection of histories of the Ottomans by different authors; it is usually attributed to the Greek humanist Laonicus Chalkokondylas, but, in fact, he was only the author of the first work in the collection. Bibliander's translation of the Koran was also bound with works on the history and religion of the Turks. Foxe did not cite these works, but rather the individual works contained in them, giving the impression that he had read dozens of books when he had read two books.
[Back to Top]Apart from these two works, Foxe also drew on a few reliable and obvious sources: Sebastian Munster's Cosmographia and Caspar Peucer's edition of Carion'schronicle. Foxe also consulted Johann Cuspinian's De Turcorum origine. These sources, although secondary, were some of the finest works on the Ottomans in sixteenth-century Europe. As a result, Foxe's history of the Ottomans was the bestavailable in English during the sixteenth century.
[Back to Top]Because of its quality, the relative popularity of the Acts and Monuments, and the authority Foxe's work enjoyed, his account of the Turks was quite influential. This was especially true in two areas. One of these was in the exegesis of Revelationand the development of apocalyptic thought in England. The other wasin English literature, particularly drama. Christopher Marlowe based his drama Tamburlaine on the Acts and Monuments. (See William J. Brown, 'Marlow'sDebasement of Bajazet: Foxe's Actes and Monuments and Tamburlaine, Part I',Renaissance Quarterly 24 [1971], pp. 24-38 and Roy W. Battenhouse, Marlowe'sTamburlaine [Nashville, 1964]).
[Back to Top]Thomas S. Freeman
University of Sheffield
MarginaliaThe first cause. First for the better explainyng of the Prophecies of the new Testament, as in S. Paules Epist. ad Thessall. and also in the reuelations of S. Iohn. Whiche Scriptures otherwise, without the opening of these historyes, can not so perfectly be vnderstand. Of the whiche Scriptures wee minde hereafter (Christ graunting) orderly, as the course of matter shall leade vs, to make rehearsall.
[Back to Top]MarginaliaThe second cause. An other cause is, that we may learne thereby, either with the publique Churche, to lament with our brethren such a great defection and decay of Christian fayth, through these wicked Turkes: or els may feare thereby our owne daunger.
MarginaliaThe thyrd cause. The thyrd cause, that we may põder more depely with our selues, the scourge of God for our sinnes, and corrupt doctrine, which in the sequele hereof, more euidently may appeare to our eyes, for our better admonition.
MarginaliaThe fourth cause. Fourthly, the consideration of this horible persecution of the Turkes, rising chiefly by our discorde and dissention among our selues, may reduce vs agayne from our domesticall warres, in killing and burning one of another, to ioyne together in Christian patience and concord,
MarginaliaThe fift cause. V. but chiefly these great victories of the Turkes and vnprosperous speede of our men fightyng agaynst them, may admonish and teach vs, followyng the example of the old Israelites, how to seke for greater strength to encounter wyth these enemies of Christ, then hitherto we haue done. Fyrst, we must consider, that the whole power of Satan, the prince of this world, goeth wyth the Turkes. Which to resiste, no strength of mans arme, is sufficient, but onely the name, spirite, and power of our Lord Iesus the sonne of God, goyng with vs in our battayles, as among the olde Israelites, the Arcke of Gods couenaunte and promise went wyth them also, fightyng agaynst the enemies of God. For so are we taught in Scripture, that we christen men haue no strēgth, but in Christ onely.MarginaliaAdmonition to fight agaynst the turke. Whether we warre agaynst the deuil, or agaynst the Turke, it is true that the Scripture sayth: Sine me nihil potestis facere. i. without me you can doe nothing. Otherwise there is no puissãce to stãd agaynst þe deuil or to conquere the world, Nisi fides nostra:MarginaliaChristian fayth necessary to be ioyned with outwarde force against the turke. that is, our fayth
[Back to Top]