Talk:1644 papal conclave

Mazarin veto
I’ve removed this: “Mazarin planned to exercise France's jus exclusivae against Pamphili's nomination but the veto arrived too late.” The statement was unreferenced. It appears to be based on Miranda, who is not an altogether reliable source. I’ve found the statement elsewhere in sources that take a high-level view, not specialized.

Rather: “Mazarin was at Fontainebleau with the Court when Pamphili was elected.... In his biographical notes on Mazarin, Salvador Miranda asserts that Mazarin "Arrived too late to the conclave of 1644, which elected Pope Innocent X, to present the French veto against Cardinal Giambattista Pamphilj, who had already been elected pope and taken the name Innocent X." This is false. Mazarin, as his letters indicate, did not go to Rome at all in this year. On November 25, he wrote a blistering letter to his brother, Michele Mazzarini, OP [Lettres du Cardinal Mazarin II, pp. 98-105, no. xlvi], the contents of which require one to think that Mazarin had not been to Rome as of that date—seventeen weeks after the beginning of the Conclave.” Source: John Paul Adams, SEDE VACANTE July 29, 1644—September 15, 1644. Perhaps not the very best source, but it looks directly at the question at issue. A good biography of Mazarin would be useful on this point. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 19:17, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll check in Baumgartner to see what he says later. Thanks for helping with the cleanup of these. I've been busy on the admin end recently, and haven't had the time to continue this century of conclave: hopefully I can do some work on this one over the upcoming holiday in the states. Also, I'm sure you know this, but for anyone else: Adams is self-published as well, though I would take him over Miranda. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)