fingers lost their hold. The archbishop held it before his
eyes, and with the cry of "_Ay Jesus!_" died, in the words of his
faithul squire D. Luis de Quijada, "the chief of men that had ever been
or would ever be." Posterity need not agree, but no great man can boast
a more honest panegyric.
In character Charles stands high among contemporary princes. It consists
of pairs of contrasts, but the better side is usually stronger than the
worse. Steadfast honesty of purpose was occasionally warped by
self-interest, or rather he was apt to think that his own course must
needs be that of righteousness. Self-control would give way, but very
rarely, to squalls of passion. Obstinacy and irresolution were fairly
balanced, the former generally bearing upon ends, the latter upon means.
His own ideals were constant, but he could gradually assimilate the
views of others, and could bend to argument and circumstance; yet even
here he had a habit of harking back to earlier schemes which he had
seemed to have definitely abandoned. Intercourse with different
nationalities taught him a certain versatility; he was dignified with
Spaniards, familiar with Flemings, while the material Italians were
pleased with his good sense. His sympathies were neither wide nor quick,
but he was a most faithful friend, and the most considerate of masters.
For all who sought him his courtesy and patience were unfailing. At his
abdication he dwelt with reasonable pride upon his labours and his
journeyings. Few monarchs have lived a more strenuous life. Yet his
industry was broken by fits of indolence, which were probably due to
health. In his prime his confessor warned him against this defect, and
it caused, indeed, the last great disaster of his life. Fortunately he
was conscious of his obstinacy, his irresolution and his indolence. He
would accept admonition from the chapter of the Golden Fleece, would
comment on his failings as a warning to his son. When Cardinal Contarini
politely assured him that to hold fast to good opinions is not obstinacy
but firmness, the emperor replied, "Ah! but I sometimes stick to bad
ones." Charles was not cruel, indeed the character of his reign was
peculiarly merciful. But he was somewhat unforgiving. He especially
resented any slight upon his honour, and his unwise severity to Philip
of Hesse was probably due to the unfounded accusation that he had
imprisoned him in violation of his pledge. The excesses of his troops in
Ital
|