The conclave, which took place in Rome for the first time for 75 years, resulted in the election of Bar tolomeo Prignano (April 8, 1378), who took the name of Pope Urban VI. (1378-1389). Canonically the election was perfectly valid; so that the only popes to be regarded as legitimate are the successors of Urban. (See Pastor, Geschichte der Pdpste, i.,
It is true that his election was immediately impugned by the cardinals on frivolous grounds ; but the responsibility for this rests, partially at least, with the pope himself, whose reckless and inconsiderate zeal for reform was bound to excite a revolution among the worldly cardinals still yearning for the fleshpots of Avignon. This revolution could already be foreseen with tolerable certainty, when Urban embroiled himself even with his political friends—the queen of Naples and her husband, Duke Otto of Brunswick. Similarly, he quarrelled with Count Onorato Gaetano of Fondi. The cardinals, excited to the highest pitch of irritation, now knew where they could look for support. Thirteen of them assembled at Anagni, and thence, on Aug. 9, issued a passionate manifesto, announcing the invalidity of Urban's election, on the ground that it had been forced upon the conclave by the Roman populace. As soon as the rebellious cardinals were further as sured of the protection of the French king, Charles V., they elected, with the tacit consent of the three Italian cardinals, Robert of Geneva, as anti-pope (Fondi, Sept. 20). Robert assumed the style of Clement VII.; the Great Schism (1378– 1417) had begun.
The chief responsibility for this rests with the worldly college of cardinals, who were longing to return to France, and thence drew their inspiration. This college was a creation of the Avignon period ; which must therefore, in the last resort, be considered responsible for this appalling calamity. Severe censure, moreover, attaches to Charles V., of France. There may be room for dis pute as to the extent to which the king's share in the schism was due to the instigation of the revolted cardinals ; there can be not the slightest doubt that his attitude was the decisive factor in perpetuating and widening the breach. The anti-pope was recog nized not only by Charles of France, but by the princes of the Empire dependent on him, by Scotland and Savoy, and finally by the Spanish dominions and Portugal. On the other hand, the emperor, Charles IV., and his son, Wenceslaus, the greater part of the Empire, England, Hungary, Poland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden, together with the majority of the Italian States—Naples excepted—remained loyal to the pope. Urban, in fact—who mean while had created a new college of cardinals with members of different nationalities—enjoyed one great advantage; his rival failed to hold his own in Italy, with which country the actual de cision virtually lay. Unfortunately, in the time that followed.
Urban was guilty of the grossest errors, pursuing his personal interests, and sacrificing, all too soon, that universal point of view which ought to have governed his policy. The struggle against his powerful neighbour on the frontier, Queen Joanna of Naples, rapidly became his one guiding motive ; and thus he was led into a perfect labyrinth of blunders. He excommunicated the queen as a stiff-necked adherent of the French anti-pope, and in 1381 con ferred Naples on the ambitious Charles of Durazzo, with whom he was soon inextricably embroiled; while, a little later, he fell out with his new college of cardinals. On Oct. 15, 1389, he died with few to lament him.
the death of Urban VI., 14 cardinals of his obedience assembled, and after prolonged negotiations elected for this high office Cardinal Pietro Tomacelli (Nov. 2, 1389). The title which he took was that of Boniface IX.
The new pope—a man of high moral character, great sagacity, eloquence, and of a kindly disposition—at once instituted an en tirely different policy from that pursued by his predecessor. This was especially the case in his treatment of Naples. In May 1390 Ladislaus, the son of Charles of Durazzo, who had been assassi nated in the February of 1386, received the royal crown at the hands of a papal legate. To his cause Boniface IX. closely at tached himself ; and his support of the king against the Angevins cost him enormous sums, without which Ladislaus could not have secured his victory over the French claimant. By these means, the schism was averted from Italy, and Naples won for the Roman obedience. The situation in the papal State, which Boniface found in the greatest confusion, was at the outset far more difficult to deal with. But here also he attained in time a considerable meas ure of success, although the methods employed were scarcely above criticism. His greatest success, however, was gained in the Eternal City itself ; for he contrived, after many vicissitudes, to induce the Romans to annul their republican constitution and acknowledge the papal supremacy, even in municipal matters.
To give this supremacy a firmer basis, Boniface fortified the Vatican and the Capitol, and restored the castle of St. Angelo— which had previously been used as a quarry—providing it with walls and battlements, and erecting a tower in the centre. This castle, indeed, yielded a safe shelter to the pope in Jan. 1400 when the Colonnas made their attempt to surprise Rome. However, the adventure failed; and by the aid of Ladislaus, the castles of the Colonnas in the vicinity of Rome were destroyed. In 1401 this powerful family made its submission, accepting the favour able terms which the pope had had the good sense to offer. Hence forward quiet prevailed, and Boniface ruled as a stern master in Rome.