The empress and the humanist: profit and politics in the correspondence of Anne of Świdnica and Petrarch

ABSTRACT This article presents a reassessment of Anne of Świdnica (1339–62), Holy Roman Empress and queen of Bohemia, based on a reading of Petrarch's De laudibus feminarum. By reinterpreting their correspondence as an act of gift-giving within a framework of court patronage, it makes a case for her calculated effort to benefit her public image by corresponding with Petrarch, while he, in turn, benefited by representing himself as an intimate of the imperial family. It also situates his letter within the context of the ongoing political exchanges between Petrarch and the Prague court, and suggests that he sought to harness Anne's influence for his political agenda. What emerges is a new vision of Anne, one with greater learning and agency.

scholarship on her reign; instead, she is known as the mother of Wenceslas IV (b. 1361), the 'Idle' king of Bohemia (1378-1419) and, until his deposition, the king of the Romans (1376-1400). Anne was dismissed as 'an ornament to the court' and a 'handsome' 'capricious girl-woman' by one of her few biographers, František Kavka, and although he conceded her intelligence, he speculated that her husband's influence underlay her decision to write to Petrarch. 3 A closer reading of this correspondence, however, challenges this portrayal, suggesting that Anne was more than just the passive recipient of Petrarch's outpouring of learning. As she had been educated excellently she very likely understood the letter's historical references. Furthermore, her presence at the Prague court, which for nearly eight years prior to her correspondence with Petrarch had received correspondence expressing his political dreams, suggests that she could grasp the political aspects of De laudibus feminarum, which may be read as an encouragement for her to influence her husband Charles in that direction. It testifies to her agency, political influence (or illusion thereof) and arguably to an attempt to use Petrarch's fame to benefit her reputation.
The first section of this paper describes Anne's education (formal and informal), and the milieu in which she was raised and the one into which she married, which provided access to art and literature with historical themes. It further suggests that there was a reason grounded in dynastic politics for her to engage with these materials, and that being versed in classical history was unexceptional for a woman of her status. The second section describes the cause of the Prague court's interest in cultivating Petrarch, and of his interest in the court. It argues that Anne participated in the pursuit of a reputation for culture through her correspondence with Petrarch; it was in the expectation of his letter that she wrote, confident that his reverence for her status would see him respond, and in a manner plausibly providing the desired effect upon her public image. It also suggests that their correspondence had a place within the broader political exchange between Petrarch and Prague. The final section proposes that the catalogue of illustrious women provided an example of a woman's contribution to the peace of the Empire, which Petrarch would have hoped Anne might follow. ('the charming sixteen-year-old queen became an ornament of the festivities'); 131: 'Představuje se nám v nich jako pohledná žena-dívka, zvídavá, rozmarná, ale i inteligentní (všimněme si jejího zájmu o Petrarku, byt' byl třeba ovlivněn Karlem)' ('a handsome girl-woman, curious, capricious, but also intelligent [note her interest in Petrarch, although she may have been influenced by Charles].') Kavka further highlighted her frivolity without, however, providing any evidence to support his view, 100: 'Do Luccy se Anna několikrát vypravila na několik dní i sama. Snad ji vedla i ženská touha potěšit se luxusními textiliemi, jejichž výrobou město proslulo' ('Anne went to Lucca several times on her own for several days. Perhaps she was also led by a woman's desire to be pleased by luxury textiles, the production of which made the city famous'). See also Jaroslav Čechura, Milan Hlavačka and Eduard Maur, Ženy a milenky českých králů (Prague: Nakladatelství Akropolis, 1994), 71 Educating Anne: the cultural milieu of the Hungarian and Bohemian courts Anne was the only child of Henry II of Świdnica (c.1316-c.1345), a Silesian duke, and Catherine of Hungary (d. 1355), the daughter of Charles I (Charles Robert) of Hungary (1288-1342). Henry died while Anne was young, so she was taken to the Hungarian court, to be raised by her mother and stepgrandmother, Charles Robert's widow, Elizabeth of Poland (1305-80). 4 It is unclear how involved Elizabeth was in Anne's education, but close supervision would be natural, as Anne was a kinswoman and expected to make a good marriage, since she was not only her father's heir, but also that of her paternal uncle, Bolko II of Świdnica (1312-68), whose duchy had resisted incorporation into the Czech kingdom. 5 At age 11, Anne was betrothed to Charles IV of Bohemia's infant heir, Wenceslas (1350-1), but after he died and Charles was widowed (in 1353), she married the latter. Although events did not fall quite as planned, she lived in the expectation of queenship, and thus must have received a suitable education.
Elizabeth of Poland was an educated queen, both literate and Latinate. She owned at least four religious texts in Latin, and while the books of royal Hungarian ladies are not as well known as one would wish, 59 have been traced back to their ownership, 17 to queens before 1400. 6 So Elizabeth was no anomaly, and is indeed tenuously connected to the commissioning of two of the most important Hungarian chronicles (alongside her husband and eldest son, respectively), the Hungarian Angevin Legendary and the Hungarian Illuminated Chronicle. 7 A further testimony to the level of education provided to ladies of high birth at her court is Elizabeth of Bosnia (1339-87), who married Louis I (1326-82), Elizabeth of Poland and Charles Robert's son, thereby becoming queen of Hungary, Croatia and later Poland. Elizabeth of Bosnia was raised alongside Anne, and therefore she likely received a similar education. 8  raised with Anne, that both Elizabeth and Anne would have been able to read such a book), 9 and either she or her daughter-in-law wrote a now lost manual for the instruction of her daughters. 10 While the evidence is admittedly indirect, it seems legitimate to assume Anne's high level of literacy, in Latin and probably also French, the language of the Hungarian court; this in turn suggests that Anne had the capacity to write to Petrarch and understand not only his response to her, but also all the letters he sent to Prague and other manuscripts she had access to.
These manuscripts included works of history, as the Hungarian royal family was interested in the subject, as is suggested by the chronicles that were commissioned and the library of Anne's uncle Louis. Thirteen books have been traced back to it, including three chronicles, De re militari and the Secretum secretorum of Pseudo-Aristotle. 11 Louis' tastes, including a partiality for Italian culture, are unlikely to have been confined solely to him and would probably have influenced (and been influenced by) those of others in his circle. He fought in Naples during his socalled Neapolitan Adventure (1347-52) and the half of a chronicle describing these campaigns, the Vita Ludovici regis, was produced while Anne lived in Hungary. 12 Louis also acquired a text possibly authored by Petrarch and looted the library of King Robert the Wise of Naples (1276-1343), apparently making a gift of some of the spoils to his Italian physician, Conversino da Ravenna. 13 Robert was a famously cultured king with an extensive library, the fruit of the manuscript-loving Angevins of Naples; this likely included humanist influences, as he had been a patron to Petrarch and Boccaccio (1313-75). 14 It is unclear which of these Angevin manuscripts Louis acquired, but that ancestral library had contained several works of history. These included a work by Seneca; a Cronica containing Fragmentum de Sibyllis; De bello Macedonico by Livy; De illustribus viris (likely by Jerome); the Gesta Francorum; a history of the adventurer Robert Guiscard; a table of Roman history; De mirabilibus 9 Mielke, Archaeology and Material Culture, 209; Mielke, 'Medieval Queens of Hungary', 156. The bequest reads: 'Item iam dicte domine regine filie nostre … unum brevarium ('and to the said lady, our daughter the queen … a breviary'). Budapest, Hungarian National Archive, DL 6692. 10 Mielke, Archaeology and Material Culture, 237-8, believes that Elizabeth of Bosnia, as the mother of three daughters, was the more likely candidate, but there is no definite indication of authorship. This manual was described in a book of deportment written in 1371-2 by Geoffroy IV de la Tour-Landry, a nobleman of Anjou: 'Si les devoit l'en tout au commencement prendre à chastier courtoisement par bonnes exemples et par doctrines, si comme faisoit la Royne Prines, qui fut royne de Hongrie, qui bel et doulcement sçavoit chastier ses filles et les endoctriner, comme contenu est en son livre.' Geoffroy de la Tour-Landry, Le livre du chevalier de La Tour Landry, pour l'enseignement de ses filles, ed. Magni Canis; and other unspecified histories. 15 These are but a sample of the wealth of historical texts available to a mid fourteenth-century monarch, and provide a glimpse of the literary culture Louis' reignand notably his lootingwith which Anne could have been put in contact. And while we must be careful not to exaggerate her knowledge of history (she was only 14 when she left Hungary), it is clear that she could have had access to many books of history, including a range of classical texts, and that an interest in history suffused her cultural environment.
This interest was not out of place among contemporary queens or noblewomen. Looking at the Bohemian context, for example, Anne's daughter-in-law, Sophie of Bavaria (1376-1428), owned a romance of Alexander the Great, 16 while Anne's stepdaughter, Anne of Bohemia (1366-94), was the dedicatee and 'imagined audience' of Chaucer's The Legend of Good Women, which recounted the deeds of 10 women from antiquity (and others in passing in the prologue). 17 In France, Clémence of Hungary (1293-1328), the Neapolitan-raised queen of France and Navarre (and the sister of Charles Robert, Anne of Świdnica's grandfather), owned a history of the Trojan War. 18 So did Isabella of France (1295-1358), queen of England; 19 Mahaut, countess d'Artois (1268-1329), the mother of two queens of France, had two. 20 Furthermore, these women all owned other books of history: Clémence had Enfans Ogier, set in the age of Charlemagne, and La Conqueste de Césile, which was probably an account of her grandfather's Sicilian campaigns; Isabella had the deeds of King Arthur; and Mahaut had two copies of the Brut (a history of Britain), a history of the crusades, the travels of Marco Polo and a chronicle of the kings of France. 21 In addition, Jeanne d'Évreux (1310-71), queen of France, purchased nine books listed in Clémence's inventory as roumans, which category included history; she may even have purchased Ovide moralisé (Clémence's Trojan War), further spreading queenly knowledge of classical history at the French court. 22 This in turn may have influenced Anne's reading materials, as the courts of Hungary, Bohemia and France were closely connected, and several manuscripts and princesses circulated between them in the fourteenth century. 23 These French examples are of additional interest for being a more complete snapshot than that which has survived for the Hungary or Bohemia of Anne's lifetime, and as they predate Boccaccio's De mulieribus claris (first drafted 1361-2), which was based upon De laudibus feminarum and sparked several imitations, including The Legend of Good Women (c.1386) in England and Le livre de la cité des dames in France (1405). 24 The weight of the evidence overwhelmingly supports the view that royal women in the wider courtly culture within which Anne was raised and lived took an interest in classical history prior to De laudibus feminarum, and thus it is more than likely that Anne did so too.
In 1353 Anne married into the Bohemian royal family, which is known for the literacy and literary patronage of its women. 25 Thomas described a 'continuum of learned women' that included St Agnes of Bohemia (1211-81), 26 Abbess Kunigunde of Bohemia (1265-1321) for her library and patronage of the arts 27 and the literary patronage of Jutta/Bonne of Luxembourg, 28 and Queens Elizabeth Rejčka (1288-1335), 29 22 Proctor-Tiffany, 'Queen's Manuscripts and Identity', 99. 23 The ruling dynasties at these three courts were connected by an intricate web of family ties. It is only scratching the surface to note that Charles IV of Bohemia was raised at the French court; his first wife, Blanche/Margaret of Valois (1317-48), was the sister of John II of France (1319-64); the latter had been married to Charles' sister Bonne/Jutta , xii-xxi. Christine de Pizan, Le livre de la cité des dames, eds. and trans. Thérèse Moreau and Eric Hicks (Paris: Stock, 1986). 25 Thomas described an 'unusually high rate of literacy among the female members of this family': Thomas, Anne's Bohemia, 2; Thomas, Reading Women in Late Medieval Europe, 1-44. 26 Thomas, Anne's Bohemia, 41; Thomas, Reading Women in Late Medieval Europe, 29-31. 27 Thomas, Reading Women in Late Medieval Europe, 31-7. 28 Thomas, Reading Women in Late Medieval Europe, 38-9. Bonne of Luxembourg (1315-49), duchess of Normandy, was the sister of Charles IV of Bohemia and the wife of John II, King of France (1319-64). 29 Thomas, Reading Women in Late Medieval Europe, 37. Elizabeth Rejčka (Richeza) of Poland was queen of Bohemia and Poland (1303-5) by her marriages to Wenceslas II of Bohemia (1271-1305) and later Rudolph III (c.1282-1307), duke of Austria and Styria. Elizabeth commissioned and donated eight illuminated manuscripts to her Cistercian foundation of Aula Sanctae Mariae, and later took the veil herself.
Sophie of Bavaria, 30 Anne of Bohemia 31 and the margravine of Moravia, Elizabeth of Oettingen, who was Anne of Świdnica's sister-in-law. 32 These women demonstrate that the 'continuum' survived the extinction of the native Přemyslid dynasty and the ascent of the Luxembourgs in 1310, and included princesses both born and marrying into the royal family. Elizabeth Rejčka commissioned eight illuminated manuscripts; 33 Sophie possessed 13 manuscripts at her death, while her court at Hradec Králové was associated with the production of the devotional Hradec Králové Codex (c.1380) and The Weaver (c.1407/9), a debate between a bereaved weaver and Misfortune; 34 the margravine requested a German translation of the Life of Jerome; 35 and Anne of Bohemia may have been Chaucer's patron and audience; he seems to compliment her in the opening book of Troilus and Criseyde and perhaps imagined her in the role of Alceste in his Legend of Good Women, while Thomas speculated whether Pearl, an anonymous Middle English poem, might have been written as her elegy. 36 There are glimpses of Anne of Świdnica maintaining the 'continuum' by possibly commissioning the Krumauer Bildercodex, an illustrated codex of saints' lives, and Thomas suggested her as the 'primary audience' for the Czech Life of St Catherine, which although possibly commissioned by Charles, had a reference to St Anne that was absent from the Latin original. 37 With all this in mind, it is less surprising that Anne extended her patronage to a humanist, and there is less cause for doubting, as Kavka did, that it was at her own initiative.
The cultural milieu of Charles IV's Prague was particularly rich; its remains are visible today in the university, the art, the architecture. Yet, as we have seen with Louis of Hungary, a king's tastes affected and were affected by those of the individuals around him, in some combination of fashionable imitation, genuine interest and heighted accessibility. For example, Charles' interest in humanist and vernacular literature is reflected in the manuscripts of his family members: his son Sigismund (1368-1437) owned several humanist texts and possibly also the Divine Comedy; 38 his son Wenceslas owned at least 30  three manuscripts in German; 39 his daughter Anne had the Gospels in Czech and German, as well as Latin; 40 his daughter-in-law Sophie had one manuscript in German and 11 in Czech; 41 and his sister-in-law, Elizabeth of Oettingen, received two collections of German prayers from the imperial chancellor, whom she had asked to translate his Life of Jerome into German and dedicate this to her. 42 Particularly given her own background, therefore, it seems more likely than not that Anne of Świdnica, too, shared in these interests; accordingly, it is likely that she read or listened to works related to her husband's interest in history, revealed by the cycle of Roman emperors painted in Prague Castle, his autobiography and the five chronicles he commissioned. 43 One of these, the Chronica Boemorum by his well-travelled Florentine chaplain, Giovanni de' Marignolli (c.1290-c.1359), provided Charles with an illustrious genealogy, making him a descendant of classical, biblical and royal worthies, like Aeneas and Julius Caesar. 44 This text increased the knowledge of classical history at the Prague court. So too did the Pantheon, a universal history by Godfrey of Viterbo (c.1120-c.1196), which contained catalogues of the rulers of Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome and Troy. 45 Žůrek argues for its popularityand so for the increase of classical contentat Charles' court despite the lack of extant copies from the era; 46 perhaps this, like Marignolli's chronicle, was a text Anne read or heard read. It is possible she did so before corresponding with Petrarch, which she did at roughly the time of Marignolli's death, and he had had access to the Pantheon shortly beforehand. 47 One reason for Charles' interest in history was its usefulness for his expressions of prestige and legitimacy. 48 It was incorporated into his dynastic propaganda, notably the lost genealogical frescoes at his castles at Prague, Karlštejn, Tangermünde and possibly Vyšehrad. 49  crown, he highlighted his maternal descent from the native Přemyslid dynasty and the Bohemian patron saint, St Wenceslas. 50 To this effect, he promoted the saint's cult by writing his Life, founding a chapel to him in the cathedral in Prague and had frescoes painted of him in Karlštejn. 51 He also followed in the example of the Přemyslids, including his grandfather, Wenceslas II (1271-1305), and his father, John of Luxembourg (1296-1346), by naming his son Wenceslas; in fact, he did so twice, first his shortlived son (to whom Anne of Świdnica had been betrothed) with Anne of the Palatinate (1329-53) and then his son with Anne of Świdnica. It was more than a family name: it was a signal of dynastic legitimacy. John, Charles claimed, had been concerned about his lack of Czech blood; he also named his firstborn by his union with the Czech princess, Elizabeth of Bohemia (1292-1330), Wenceslas; later, after this child had adopted the name Charles, John named his son by his second, French wife, Beatrice of Bourbon (1320-83), Wenceslas. 52 This child had no Přemyslid blood, yet he held a claim to the Bohemian throne, and that was clearly worth highlighting. 53 When it came to the Holy Roman Empire, Charles' rule of which was contested, and which he won with the assistance of papal favour, Charles wished to present himself as unbeholden and meritorious of it on account of his illustrious bloodline, despite the way in which the Luxembourgs were not included among the great European dynasties. 54 The remedy, as presented artfully by Marignolli in his Chronica, was to embellish his lineage. The appearance of the Karlštejn genealogical frescoes can be reconstructed with caution  52 Balázs Nagy, 'Saints, Names and Identities', 166-7. Charles claimed his father was made to feel politically threatened that while he lacked Czech blood, his son did not. Charles of Bohemia, Karoli IV imperatoris Romanorum Vita, 74-5: 'Tunc mali et falsi consiliarii invaluerunt contra nos aput patrem nostrum, lucrum proprium pretendentes, tam Boemi quam de comitatu Luczemburgensi. Accedentes patrem nostrum sibi suggesserunt dicentes: Domine, provideatis vobis, filius vester … expellet vos quando voluerit; nam et ipse heres regni et de stirpe regum Boemie est, et multum diligitur a Boemis, vos autem estis advena' ('Then evil and false advisers, seeking their own advantageboth Bohemians and Luxemburgersprevailed against us with our father. Approaching our father they whispered to him, saying: "Lord, take care. Your son … will be able to drive you out whenever he wishes. For he himself is the heir to the kingdom and of the royal house of Bohemia. He is much loved by the Bohemians; you, however, are a foreigner."') 53 John was king, not king consort to his Czech wife, as women could not inherit the Bohemian throne (although they could help a husband's claim to it). Accordingly, at her death, he remained king, and the child of his subsequent marriage had a place in the line of succession. Balázs Nagy, 'Saints, Names and Identities', 166-7. 54 In Charles' pursuit of electoral victory as king of the Romans in 1346, the opposition camp, centred on Ludwig the Bavarian (1282-1347), dubbed him the rex clericorum on account of his apparent acquiescence in papal demands. It was also necessary to make concessions to the pope, his former tutor Clement VI, to secure his coronation as emperor (which eventually happened in 1355). See Rosario, Art and Propaganda, 30; 110, n. 7. Charles' election in 1346 was contested by Ludwig until his death; the opposition was then briefly assumed by Günther XXI von Schwarzburg (1304-49) in 1349. from depictions of them in two sixteenth-century codices. 55 They were likely inspired by the Chronica, and gave biblical and mythological figures, classical heroes, Merovingians, Carolingians, saints, and the dukes of Lorraine and Brabant to Charles as ancestors. 56 They concluded with a depiction of Charles and his wife. 57 Anne understood this type of dynastic promotion, as she did the same for her own family saints, St Hedwig of Silesia and St Elizabeth of Hungary, through the churches and frescoes she commissioned to them in Prague, and possibly through the Krumauer Bildercodex, which depicted them both. 58 She was also the mother of a Wenceslas. The importance of knowingor revising one's family history was not lost on her, not as the mother of the Luxembourg dynasty; nor as Charles' consort (in which role she was probably depicted in the genealogy); nor as an empress with her own authority. Charles even brought Anne directly into his political iconography, for example in the double portrait of them both at Karlštejn, with imagery reminiscent of St Helena, the Byzantine empress, and her son, Emperor Constantine, in an expression of their majesty and Charles' imperial right. 59 If Caroline propaganda had personal and political significance to Anne, and could only be grasped by knowing history, there was all the more reason to pursue the subject after she married.
In light of all the evidence presented above, it is safe to conclude that Anne was highly educated, literate, Latinate and had sustained contact with historical works, both during the years of her formal education in Hungary and then at the Bohemian and imperial court. Such knowledge would not have been unusual for a contemporary woman of her class and suggests that she knew several of the historical figures in De laudibus feminarum. Her decision to write to Petrarch was equally in keeping with her background and status; although she had never done so before, it was part of a trend for literary patronage by royal women of the Bohemian dynasties, and easily in line with her abilities. Patronage, politics and the pursuit of the renovatio imperii Petrarch's standing is well known: a humanist scholar, with a prominent part in the Italian-born movement combining the study of the liberal arts with a revived interest in classical antiquity, with emphasis on its languages and literature, which spurred efforts to rediscover, circulate and imitate classical texts. 60 He achieved public recognition for his talents from the Roman Senate, which crowned him poet laureate in 1341; news of this reached Prague. 61 Charles IV had fought in Italy in his youth and journeyed to Rome with Anne for their imperial coronation in 1355, and their court had had other contacts with Italian culture prior to receiving letters from Petrarch: the archbishop of Prague, for example, Arnošt (Ernst) of Pardubice (1297-1364), had studied at the same university as Petrarch, and the Roman revolutionary Cola di Rienzo (1313-54) corresponded with Charles, who received him in Prague and later imprisoned him. 62 Charles and Petrarch first met on his imperial coronation journey, speaking at Mantua over several days in December 1354. 63 Anne's presence at this meeting is speculative, but she is known to have spoken with Petrarch when he visited the Prague court as an ambassador for the Visconti of Milan in July 1356. 64 His impressions of this trip, and of Anne, are unrecorded. Petrarch also corresponded with Charles, the archbishop, and the imperial chancellor Jan of Středa (John of Neumarkt) (1310-80) over the course of 14 years. 65 Petrarch edited and published the majority of his side of the correspondence; it is therefore possible the letter Anne received differed from the surviving version. 66 His letters to Charles were largely of a political nature (albeit filled with humanism), while those to the others were principally cultural, but they had a political dimension and at times political content. 67 The correspondence was accompanied by verbal messages and the occasional Petrarchan text, which increased the humanist content at court. 68 A poet like Petrarch brought not only culture, but cultural capital. 69 He added lustre to the prince's court, contributed to his reputation as a man of learning, 'lent charisma to power and plausibility to aspiration'; it was therefore desirable to retain a humanist at court, provide him with income or marks of favour, and receive his works and praises. 70 Robert of Naples, for example, had been Petrarch's patron since 1338, so Petrarch dedicated Africa to him, highlighting his majesty and learning. 71 Petrarch also remarked that Robert's approval guaranteed him a readership. 72 In a similar vein, Charles sent Petrarch gifts and letters, requested a meeting in Mantua, received him in Prague, sought to retain him there, and suggested his awareness of the benefits of a dedicated text when he requested Petrarch to give and dedicate De viris illustribus to him (although Petrarch refused). 73 The essence of the prince-poet relationship was a mutually understood and beneficial exchange of fame, literary talent, prestige and cultural capital. 74 A woman could participate: Robert's granddaughter Joanna I of Naples (1325-82) received a chapter in her praise in Boccaccio's De mulieribus claris and he considered dedicating this book to her, a public honour which ultimately went to the countess of Altavilla, Andrea Acciaioli. 75 It was in the poet's interest to elevate his patron's reputation for learning, so that rather than seeming to engage in 'mere patronage', a mercenary transaction, the patron would appear to have both the status and the scholarly authority to bestow his cachet and to authenticate the poet's genius. 76 It was for this reason that Petrarch underwent three days of interrogation by Robert of Naples, prior to obtaining his sponsorship for Petrarch's coronation as poet laureate: as McCabe remarked, 'prince crowns poet, and poet crowns prince, quid pro quo', and all this on a public stage. 77 The letters sent between Prague and Petrarch were also public, although how many, how widely and how lasting their circulation was is unclear. The chancellor reported that Charles shared at least one letter sent by Petrarch with others at court, and Petrarch once sent Charles two letters, expressly for one to be shared and the other kept private, which suggests their habit of publicity. 78 At his end, Petrarch reported showing off Charles' letter and his gift of a golden cup. 79 To act in this way was to the benefit of both parties, as it was one thing to be known to correspond, but vastly better for Petrarch's praises of the intellect and importance of his correspondents to be circulated, and these were enmeshed with his claims that their letters displayed their admiration and friendship with him. His letter to Anne fits this pattern by describing hers as an eloquent mark of her esteem, and it conveyed abundant cultural capital through his choice of subject and flattering comparison of her to the first Roman empress, whom he described as the greatest of women. 80 It was in Anne's interests for her court to know the content of De laudibus feminarum; accordingly, it is likely she had it circulated.
The understanding of the cultural capital of her correspondence prompts a reexamination of its nature, especially as it is likely that Anne understood its valueafter all, she had been Charles' wife for five years, during which time she had seen him and his colleagues in contact with Petrarch. The orthodox interpretation of her letter is that Anne was acting bizarrely for her status by writing to a poet, sharing a 'confidence' and bestowing 'honour.' 81 Instead, her actions may be explained as a successful attempt to establish a personal channel of public communication with Petrarch, in order to highlight the importance of her cultural engagement. This suggests a desire to manipulate her public image, which was not only to her personal benefit: it added to the court's consequence for her to be reputed as cultured. Accordingly, her actions contributed to the efforts of the other Prague correspondents to that effect. However, 78 Saphirei fundamenti by Jan of Středa: 'De quibus Cesar multa replicacione lecture, quo magis intenderat, plus delectari volebat, neque cessat multis ostendere, ut sit aliis in solacium, quo suus animus ymaginacione nobili in gaudio delectatur' ('After having reread the letter many times more than he had intended, Caesar wanted it to bring joy to others and he did not stop showing it to many people, so that the letter, which had given joy to his mind because of the nobility of imagination in it, might also be a comfort for others.') (translation my own); Fam. 23.2 to Charles: 'Hactenus quod mens tulit; nunc restabat ut epystole tue satisfacerem; sed quoniam tu illud vis secretum, ego autem hec nota omnibus velim, dividam res diversas, et quod ex me flagitas seorsum leges' ('Thus far I have written according to the dictates of my heart, now I must reply to your letter; since you wish the response to remain secret, and I wish everyone to know these things, I shall keep the two apart by sending under separate cover what you request of me'). 79 Fam. 23.8 to Charles: 'Habebo illum in delitiis, ostendam mirantibus amicis et gaudentibus, nec minus eque auream epystolam tuam, quam ad tue humanitatis meeque licet immerite glorie certam fidem dum vita comitabitur asservabo, quotiensque quam tu bonus ego felix sim, probare voluero, ad iudicium illa vocabitur' ('I shall keep it among my treasured possessions, I shall show it to admiring and celebrating friends, together with your splendid letter, which I shall save as long as I live as a certain witness of your kindness and of my truly undeserving good fortune. For as often as I shall want to show your kindness and my good fortune, it will be summoned as witness'). 80 Fam. 21.8: 'Ubi quid primum mirer? Tantam ne hac tam iuvenili etate sapientiam an eminentissima hac fortuna tam insolitam et tam raram humanitatem tuam, qua me unum ex pusillis tuis, tot pene orbe disiunctum, facundissimo nuntio et familiarissimis literis gaudii tui participem fieri velle dignata es?' ('What shall I first admire about it [your letter]? Should it be the great wisdom that it contains for such a young person, or the unusual and singular kindness in this moment of extremely good fortune with which you deigned to make me alone, though separated from you by nearly an entire world, a participant in your joy through your eloquent announcement and friendly letter?') The description of Livia in Fam. 21.8: 'Cum altissima omnium et tue sortis femina dimittam, que virtus Livie que maiestas que gloria! Hec apud Cesarem Augustum eum tenuit locum quem tu hodie apud eius successorem Cesarem nostrum tenes, non tori tantum sed consilii totiusque vite particeps; facunda ante omnes et affabilis, et que fide prudentiaque sua meruit integrum atque perpetuum tanti principis amorem, quem ante se coniugum nulla meruerat; quod te quidem iisdem artibus et fecisse et facturam esse confido' ('The loftiest woman holding your rank, what is comparable to Livia's virtue, or to her majesty or glory? She held the same place with Caesar Augustus as you hold today with his successor, our Caesar, sharing not only his bed but his deliberations and his entire life. Eloquent and affable above all others, she deserved the full and continuous love of her great ruler because of her devotion and prudence, which no other wife had previously deserved; I am convinced that you too have achieved this with the same qualities and will continue to do so'). 81 Špička, 'Travelling and Writing to Prague's Court', 38. Also Altmann, 'Francesco Petrarca im Briefwechsel', 49. the impact would have been limited if Anne was only known to have written to Petrarch; a strategy beyond his habit of replying to letters from Prague was needed to guarantee not only a reply, but one of maximal benefit to her. The birth of a daughter, while politically unfortunate (women were unable to inherit Bohemia), provided a suitable occasion: Petrarch would naturally flatter his correspondent (as he had the others at Prague) and likely send praises of womanhood. If, in fact, as is often assumed, Anne decided to confess personal disappointment at her daughter's sex, it increased her likelihood of receiving remarks on female value. 82 This should not be read as proof of actual friendship. Their interactions were limited and Anne may not even have told him her child's name, since he does not name Elizabeth or any illustrious namesakes in his letter.
Anne's strategy was to appeal to Petrarch's desire to establish and flaunt his contact with high-status individuals. It was an honour, a signal of prestigious intimacy, for the empress to inform him personally of an addition to the imperial family, and since he would be expected to reply to her letter (lest he risk offending her, the empress and wife of his patron), she was providing an additional opportunity for him to broadcast that intimacy at home and in Prague. Petrarch recognised this, noting the regard her letter conveyed and by immortalising his response, which presents him in the prestigious role of comforter and educator, by its publication. He even introduces the language of gift-giving, considering his letter thanks her for her 'esteem' while demurring that 'I have nothing to offer you in exchange for so great a gift' (excepting, by implication, his catalogue). 83 Their correspondence should be redefined: this was an exchange of prestige for cultural capital, a gift which demanded a counter-gift, in accordance with the traditions of gift-giving, 84 and both parties understood it as a mutually profitable endeavour.
It could be argued that the amount of profit Petrarch believed he derived increased at pace with the amount of prestige he thought Anne delivered. This was based on her charisma, a trait she embodied and from which she drew authorityand which was successful only when her audience allowed itself to recognise it. 85 This type of situation has been likened to an 'enchantment' into near-veneration on account of 'extraordinary personal presence', and as long as the spell held, she would be perceived as able to confer considerable prestige. 86 As so little is known of Anne's personality, it cannot be used to assess the extent to which it contributed to her charisma; however, she likely relied on the charisma of her office. Petrarch, living his career in the patronage of societal elites and spending years in obsequious correspondence with an emperor, was unlikely to deny an 82 It is unclear if Petrarch was responding to Anne's admission or presumed (although likely accurately) to know her feelings. 83 Fam. 21.8: 'Tibi quoque pro hac tua dignatione, quoniam aliud nichil est michi quod tanto muneri par rependam, in his literulis venerabundus assurgo' ('And I too respectfully rise to the occasion in this letter to thank you for this esteem, since I have nothing to offer you in exchange for so great a gift'). 84 For the idea that her letter was a gift to be reciprocated, I empress her share in the spell. In addition, she derived associative charisma for Petrarch as Charles' wife, since he viewed Charles in a messianic light. 87 That Petrarch acknowledged Anne's charisma is revealed by the publication of De laudibus feminarum, his only published letter to a woman: that he acted extraordinarily suggests his extreme reverence, if not for her, then for her status as queen. Yet she not only employed her charisma as currency in the context of humanist patronage; she used it as a tool for authority, since there was a 'symbiotic relationship between actual practice and perception' that signified that the greater authority she projected, the greater actual power she might wield, which in turn increased potential for power. 88 Accordingly, by acting on his belief in her charisma, and thanks to the public nature of De laudibus feminarum, Petrarch had arguably benefited both the actuality and potential of her authority.
Her power was partially contingent upon her ability (perceived or otherwise) to influence Charles, since her power was informal in natureat times, this might be an asset, especially as a mechanism for the ruler to switch his position: it was not weakness but magnanimity to accede to the wishes of the mother of his children. 89 Anne ruled in a tradition of intercessory queens, and there were prominent fourteenth-century examples, not least her stepdaughter, Anne of Bohemia. 90 Anne of Świdnica's successor, Elizabeth of Pomerania, was reportedly requested to intercede with Charles about his Italian policy, which suggests that his wife could be viewed as influential, even when it came to foreign policy. 91 Furthermore, Anne would have known biblical precedents, like the Virgin and Esther, the Jewish queen who saved her people by pleading with her husband, King Ahaserus of Persia. 92 Petrarch knew or assumed her familiarity with Esther, as he suggests knowledge of her religious education in the catalogue of women by omitting the female martyrs 'since they are well known to you' and by leaving the five Jewish women unnamed, their actions simply alluded to. 93 It is almost certain that Anne, like other contemporary queens, was asked to intercede for various causes.
Petrarch implies Anne's influence over the emperor in his letter through the mention of her access to him, described as extensive, continuous and (although not exclusively) sexual. 94 Anne, newly a mother, had obviously had contact with Charles, but she must maintain it in order to provide a son, which Petrarch is confident she will do, for 'better fortune often follows upon a weak beginning.' 95 He also claims to be 'convinced that you too have achieved … [Charles'] full and continuous love' and that she is 'sharing not only his bed but his deliberations and his entire life'. 96 What Petrarch based this upon is unclear; it might have been mere conjecture or from his observations of the couple in Prague, yet whatever the extent of Anne's real influence, his remarks suggest that she had been able to project an image of her influence and that he thought it worthwhile to remind her of it. 97 Anne's potential influence made her valuable to Petrarch because he was interested in her court not just for the pursuit of personal fame, but for Italy. He aspired to a renovatio imperii: for the restoration of the glory of Rome, Italy and the empire, as he believed they had enjoyed in classical times; he desired peace and the reunification of Italy, for the capital of the empire to be at Rome once more, where he wished the emperor and the pope (currently in Avignon) to reside. 98 It was a tall order, and one that required the military backing of a powerful leader, in which role he had once considered Robert of Naples (dead) and Cola di Rienzo (also dead). 99 Then Petrarch's political eye settled on Charles, a decision that inspired several letters pleading his cause: for it was the emperor's duty; the time was ripe; Italians wished it; it would bring everlasting glory; it would be shameful not to; better to die in the attempt than not risk it; how dare he journey to Rome only to quit the city after his coronation, and return to 'barbarian kingdoms'! 100 For Petrarch, humanism and the renovatio imperii were entwined, with the former used as a strategy to woo Charles into attempting the latter, reminding him of Italian pre-eminence and the glory of its classical leaders (among whose ranks, Petrarch said, Charles would earn his place by the success of the renovatio imperii). 101 If his principally culture-filled letters to the others in Prague helped or inspired them to urge Charles in this affair, so much the better. Although Charles refused to be swayed by his arguments, Petrarch was a determined dreamer, who still had hope of success when he wrote to the empress that Charles might change his mind. This is signalled by the lead up to De laudibus feminarum: Charles left Rome after his coronation, to Petrarch's horror; he pleaded his cause in vain in Prague; he then received as marks of imperial favour the Golden Bull and the title of count palatine, but was perhaps too exasperated with Charles to write to him for two years; he then prepared to re-engage with the court in March 1358, when he sent a letter each to Středa, Pardubice and Charles. 102 The letters were not explicitly political, but Petrarch reminded Charles to 'think of yourself, of us and of the empire'. 103 He had not abandoned his hopes for Charles and the renovatio imperii, as is apparent in his next letter to him, which was among his longest and most persuasive on the topic. 104 It was at the time of Petrarch's re-engagementwhen politics were on his mind, slipped into his letter to the emperorthat Anne wrote to him, and only two months later that he wrote De laudibus feminarum. This suggests a political context for that letter.
From this, it is clear that the orthodox interpretation of their correspondence, of a complaint and comforting congratulations, should be challenged. Anne was a sophisticated consort with an interest in cultivating her public image; for this, her knowledge of Petrarch and the cultural capital he might bring would have been useful. However, their letters belonged to a broader political correspondence and Anne, Petrarch suggests, might have influence over the emperor, which might prove useful to his cause célèbre.

Contemporary politics in De laudibus feminarum
De laudibus feminarum is divided into two parts, the first a response to Anne's letter, the second a catalogue of illustrious women. The response begins with praise of the quality of her letter, consolatory remarks about her daughter Elizabeth's sex, and expressions of reassurance that Anne will soon bear a son. He then asserts that her 'fertility [is] not only for yourself but for the entire empire', and that women have value as mothers; even St Augustine pointed out how Christ 'was born of a woman', as are kings and emperors. 105 Furthermore, 'the female sex is noble not only for child-bearing, but for The outlier is Matilda of Tuscany, the only near contemporary woman in the catalogue, a point drawn attention to by Petrarch himself: 'in our own time'. Matilda is an unusual choiceand truly a choice, not an expectation, as she does not hold a prominent position in the collective humanist repertory of historical women (despite her identification by some as Matelda in Dante's Purgatory) and was absent from such lists of worthies as those of Le livre de la cité des dames, De viris illustribus by Petrarch, and De mulieribus claris, for all Boccaccio knew her wellhe wrote of her in his journals, saw her in the catalogue from which he plucked 26 other women to constitute a third of the initial length of his book (but not Matilda, even when he began a section on contemporary Italian women), and he was from Florence, which had an oral tradition of her memory. 109 This suggests that Matilda had an importance for Petrarch that Boccaccio did not feel, although his work was also written for a queen and her court. There must therefore have been something particular about Matilda that Petrarch wished to communicate to Anne, and this likely had to do with the empire (frequently mentioned in his letter), upon which Petrarch places emphasis in Matilda's description.
Matilda was a powerful woman who brokered a peace for Italy (if temporarily) between Pope Gregory VII and Emperor Henry IV in 1077, and the Road to Canossa was partially the result of her kinship ties and influence on the pair. 110 The example is almost too striking for coincidence, as Petrarch may have hoped that Anne might use her potential influence and relationship with the current emperor to bring about the renovatio imperii, and thereby peace in Italy. She would thus fulfil her traditional peacemaking role, which was a laudable endeavour (note Petrarch's praise of Leonidas' sister), and it would cast her in Esther's role, pleading on behalf of her people. 111 At most, it was a veiled intercessory request; however, the political context is clear and by Matilda's example Petrarch demonstrates to Anne how a powerful woman could use her influence for Italy's sake.
The catalogue does not describe the events at Canossa, perhaps since Petrarch might have considered it poor strategy for publicly convincing Charles to embroil himself in Italy: it was one thing to tell Charles of the shame of his retreat after his coronation or mention the possibility of his dying in the glorious pursuit of Italy, but quite another to spell out how the attempt itself could lead to shame. Anne could have known of those events and of Matilda of Tuscany through the Pantheon, although the text did not attribute her a role in their unfolding, which is unsurprising, as the women involved were swiftly excised from the narrative, lest their 'meddling' reflect poorly upon the male protagonists. 112 Yet her involvement survived in her Life and in the oral traditions, which one of Anne's Italian contacts could have imparted; perhaps Petrarch himself learned them from his Florentine father and then took them to Prague. 113 While Anne's knowledge of Matilda's influence is speculative, the speculation is grounded in the certainty that she had had greater exposure to Italian culture and history than De laudibus feminarum provides, and on the argument that the letter suggests Petrarch knew or assumed her historical knowledge exceeded the catalogue. 114 Although it is possible that he flaunted his learning at the expense of Anne's understanding, the catalogue is unsuited for a novice of history, as Petrarch's allusions to figures and events without naming them (such as the Jewish heroines, Cleopatra's relationship with Caesar and Mark Anthony, or Dido's founding of Carthage) and his decision occasionally to be frustratingly brief (as with 'Cato's Marcia') implies his reliance on the reader's knowledge. This was not limited to women; in fact, Petrarch may even be assuming some knowledge of the works of Cicero, Varro and Augustine, all of whom he mentioned in other letters to the Prague court. It is therefore likely that he assumed Anne would grasp the significance of Matilda's inclusion, and also that the intention of the catalogue was to incentivise her engagement on his behalf for Italy. The text was a parallel to De viris illustribus, in which Petrarch had promised to include Charles once he earned his place through the renovatio imperii. 115 If Anne harnessed her influence, like Matilda, to induce Charles into forcing Italy into peace, then she would earn her place among the greatest of women, many of whom were queens, most of whom were Italians. She was their empress, an honorary Italian and the wife of the new Augustus: it was time to strive for a worthy contribution to 'the glory and accomplishments of the empire'. 116

Conclusions
Ultimately, this was a profitable correspondence for both parties, exchanging gifts in the pursuit of improved public images, within the context of a broader cultural movement with political considerations, if ones not taken seriously by the emperor. Anne's opinion of the renovatio imperii is unrecorded, and if in fact she attempted to influence Charles in this direction, as Petrarch's letter hinted, it came to nothing. Thus, on the political front the letter failed; yet it remains a valuable source for our knowledge of Anne, revealing how she pressed her established connection with Petrarch, sought to benefit from it and this led him to produce a new humanist work. A closer analysis of her educational background, coupled with evidence drawn from her correspondence, shows that she most probably not only understood the humanist interest in Prague, and engaged with it, but was capable of projecting her influence, sufficiently substantially so as to appear capable of affecting international politics, and was therefore someone whose goodwill was worth cultivating. Possibly Petrarch's confidence in her ability to sway Charles into reversing his position was limited, but employing a woman's touch, and enabling Charles to retract his previous refusals in a less awkward manner, was a strategy hitherto unexplored: it was at least worth the trouble to encourage Anne to attempt it. And so the narrative of this correspondence changes: it gains a firmer 113 David Ruzicka, 'Florence and the Gran Contessa', 40-7. 114 Altmann, 'Francesco Petrarca im Briefwechsel', 49. 115 See note 102. 116 See note 107. place in the discussions of the political exchanges between Petrarch and Prague, suggests Anne contributed to enhancing the renown of her marital dynasty, and dispels the notion that she was a frivolous teenager, incapable of calculated and independent use of her agency. A close examination of this letter restores her to her legitimate place among the clever and learned queens of the fourteenth century, and sheds light on the horizons of her agency and by extension those of her contemporaries.