1556, he set sail from Zeland for Spain. These
delays and difficulties occasioned some misconceptions.
Many persons who did not admire an abdication, which
others, on the contrary, esteemed as an act of unexampled
magnanimity, stoutly denied that it was the intention
of Charles to renounce the Empire. The Venetian
envoy informed his government that Ferdinand was only
to be lieutenant for Charles, under strict limitations,
and that the Emperor was to resume the government so
soon as his health would allow. The Bishop of
Arras and Don Juan de Manrique had both assured him,
he said, that Charles would not, on any account, definitely
abdicate. Manrique even asserted that it was
a mere farce to believe in any such intention.
The Emperor ought to remain to protect his son, by
the resources of the Empire, against France, the Turks,
and the heretics. His very shadow was terrible
to the Lutherans, and his form might be expected to
rise again in stern reality from its temporary grave.
Time has shown the falsity of all these imaginings,
but views thus maintained by those in the best condition
to know the truth, prove how difficult it was for
men to believe in a transaction which was then so
extraordinary, and how little consonant it was in their
eyes with true propriety. It was necessary to
ascend to the times of Diocletian, to find an example
of a similar abdication of empire, on so deliberate
and extensive a scale, and the great English historian
of the Roman Empire has compared the two acts with
each other. But there seems a vast difference
between the cases. Both emperors were distinguished
soldiers; both were merciless persecutors of defenceless
Christians; both exchanged unbounded empire for absolute
seclusion. But Diocletian was born in the lowest
abyss of human degradation—the slave and
the son of a slave. For such a man, after having
reached the highest pinnacle of human greatness, voluntarily
to descend from power, seems an act of far greater
magnanimity than the retreat of Charles. Born
in the purple, having exercised unlimited authority
from his boyhood, and having worn from his cradle
so many crowns and coronets, the German Emperor might
well be supposed to have learned to estimate them at
their proper value. Contemporary minds were busy,
however, to discover the hidden motives which could
have influenced him, and the world, even yet, has hardly
ceased to wonder. Yet it would have been more
wonderful, considering the Emperor’s character,
had he remained. The end had not crowned the
work; it not unreasonably discrowned the workman.
The earlier, and indeed the greater part of his career
had been one unbroken procession of triumphs.
The cherished dream of his grandfather, and of his
own youth, to add the Pope’s triple crown to
the rest of the hereditary possessions of his family,
he had indeed been obliged to resign. He had
too much practical Flemish sense to indulge long in
chimeras, but he had achieved the Empire over formidable