Talk:April 1555 papal conclave
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the April 1555 papal conclave article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Untitled
editCardinal Reginald Pole was NOT present at the Conclaves of 1555. He was in England as Papal Legate. At the time of the Conclaves he was very ill at Richmond. His own letters and letters written to him (e.g. by the Emperor Charles V) attest to this, as well as a dispatch by the Venetian ambassador [Martin Haile, Life of Reginald Pole, pp. 460-462]. He was, however, recommended to the cardinals in the first Conclave of 1555 (too late) by King Henri II of France.
Vicedomino (talk) 22:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Vicedomino
- Thnx very much for pointing out this. I've checked once more the lists of the electors in the sources. Actually, although Vatican History Site and PAnvinio agree on the number of electors, in some points have discrepancies concerning the names of participants and absentees. Vatican History Site includes Pole among participants, but Panvinio indicates that he was absent. I've rewrite the list according to Panvinio, which - as contemporary source - is probably the most reliable one and better corelates with the facts you've presented CarlosPn (talk) 16:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Divisions in the Sacred College
editThis section needs some serious work. Two of the three leaders were not present at the April Conclave, and one was not present at the May Conclave. Pirie is simply wrongheaded about this, as far as the April Conclave is concerned. When you take away the names of the leaders of the April Conclave, what's left?? There was a French Party, there was a Hapsburg Party. Was there really an 'Italian Party'? 'Italian Party' is not the same thing as 'party of Italians'. Carafa was an Italian, but he was a Neapolitan subject of Charles V, but he hated Charles V. Where does he belong? Also, there were beginning to be cardinals who would best be described as 'reformers'. See Paul Herre, Papsttum und Papstwahl im Zeitalter Philipps II (Leipzig 1907), pp. 16-18. Maybe the better course would be to name the members of the factions. That would be useful information. --Vicedomino (talk) 05:39, 13 April 2016 (UTC)