Second of Aragon, on the decease of his brother, from asserting his claim
by arms. His son, Ferdinand the Catholic, had hitherto acquiesced in the
usurpation of the bastard branch of his house only from similar causes. On
the accession of the present monarch, he had made some demonstrations of
vindicating his pretensions to Naples, which, however, the intelligence he
received from that kingdom induced him to defer to a more convenient
season. [18] But it was deferring, not relinquishing, his purpose. In the
mean time, he carefully avoided entering into such engagements, as should
compel him to a different policy by connecting his own interests with
those of Frederic; and with this view, no doubt, rejected the alliance,
strongly solicited by the latter, of the duke of Calabria, heir apparent
to the Neapolitan crown, with his third daughter, the infanta Maria.
Indeed, this disposition of Ferdinand, so far from being dissembled, was
well understood by the court of Naples, as is acknowledged by its own
historians. [19]

It may be thought, that the undisturbed succession of four princes to the
throne of Naples, each of whom had received the solemn recognition of the
people, might have healed any defects in their original title, however
glaring. But it may be remarked, in extenuation of both the French and
Spanish claims, that the principles of monarchical succession were but
imperfectly settled in that day; that oaths of allegiance were tendered
too lightly by the Neapolitans, to carry the same weight as in other
nations; and that the prescriptive right derived from possession,
necessarily indeterminate, was greatly weakened in this case by the
comparatively few years, not more than forty, during which the bastard
line of Aragon had occupied the throne,--a period much shorter than that
after which the house of York had in England, a few years before,
successfully contested the validity of the Lancastrian title. It should be
added, that Ferdinand's views appear to have perfectly corresponded with