THE NOBILITY.
An Italian has said with pungent irony, "Who knows but that one of
these days a powerful microscope may detect globules of nobility in
the blood?"
I am too national not to applaud a good joke, and yet I must confess
these "globules of nobility" do not positively offend my reason.
There is no doubt that sons take after their fathers. The Barons of
the Middle Ages transmitted to their children a heritage of heroic
qualities. Frederick the Great obtained a race of gigantic grenadiers
by marrying men of six feet to women of five feet six. The children of
a clever man are not fools, provided their mother has not failed in
her duties; and when the Crétins of the Alps intermarry, they produce
Crétins. We know dogs are slow or fast, keen-scented or keen-sighted,
according to their breed, and we buy a two-year-old colt upon the
strength of his pedigree. Can we consistently admit nobility among
horses and dogs, and deny it among men?
Add to this, that the pride of bearing an illustrious name is a
powerful incentive to well-doing. Noblemen have duties to fulfil both
towards their ancestors and their posterity. They must walk uprightly
under the penalty of dishonouring an entire race. Tradition obliges
them to follow a path of honour and virtue, from which they cannot
stray a single step without falling. They never sign their names
without some elevated thought of an hereditary obligation.
I must admit that everything degenerates in the end, and that the
purest blood may occasionally lose its high qualities, as the most
generous wine turns to molasses or vinegar. But we have all of us met
in the world a young man of loftier and prouder bearing, more
high-minded and more courageous, than his fellows; or a woman so
beautiful and simple and chaste, that she seemed made of a finer clay
than the rest of her sex. We may be sure that both one and the other
have in their blood some globules of nobility.
These precious globules, which no microscope will ever be powerful
enough to detect, but which the intelligent observer sees with the
naked eye, are rare enough in Europe, and I am not aware of their
existence out of it. A small collection of them might be brought
together in France, in Spain, in England, in Russia, in Germany, in
Italy. Rome is one of the cities in which the fewest would be found.
And yet the Roman nobility is surrounded with a certain prestige.
Thirty-one princes or dukes; a great number of marquises, counts,
barons, and knights; a multitude of noble families without titles,
sixty of whom were inscribed in the Capitol by Benedict XIV.; a vast
extent of signiorial domains; a thousand palaces; a hundred
picture-galleries, large and small; a considerable revenue; a prodigal
display of horses, carriages, servants, and armorial bearings; some
almost royal entertainments in the course of every winter; the remains
of feudal privileges; and the respect of the lower orders: such are
the more remarkable features which distinguish the Roman nobility, and
expose it to the admiration of all the travelling cockneys of the
universe.
Ignorance, idleness, vanity, servility, and above all incapacity;
these are the pet vices which place it below all the aristocracies in
Europe. Should I meet with any exceptions on my road, I shall consider
it my duty to point them out.
The roots of the Roman nobility are very diverse. The Orsini and the
Colonna families descend from the heroes or brigands of the Middle
Ages. That of Caetani dates from 730. The houses of Massimo,
Santa-Croce, and Muti, go back to Livy in search of their founders.
Prince Massimo bears in his shield the trace of the marchings and
counter-marchings of Fabius Maximus, otherwise called Cunctator. His
motto is, _Cunctando restituit_. Santa-Croce boasts of being an
offshoot of Valerius Publicola. The Muti family counts Mutius Scævola
among its ancestors. This nobility, whether authentic or not, is at
all events very ancient, and is of independent origin. It has not been
hatched under the robes of the Popes.
The second category is of Pontifical origin. Its titles and fortunes
have their origin in nepotism. In the course of the seventeenth
century, Paul V., Urban VIII.; Innocent X., Alexander VII., Clement
IX., and Innocent XI. created the houses of Borghese, Barberini,
Pamphili, Chigi, Rospigliosi, and Odescalchi. They vied with one
another in aggrandising their humble families. The domains of the
Borghese house, which make a tolerably large spot on the map of
Europe, testify that Paul V. was by no means an unnatural uncle. The
Popes have kept up the practice of ennobling their relations, but the
scandal of their liberalities ceases with Pius VI., another of the
Braschi family (1775-1800).
The last batch includes the bankers, such as Torlonia and Kuspoli,
monopolists like Antonelli, millers like the Macchi, bakers like the
Dukes Grazioli, tobacconists like the Marchese Ferraiuoli, and farmers
like the Marchese Calabrini.
I add, by way of memorandum, strangers, noble or not, as may be, who
purchase an estate, get a title thrown into the bargain. A short time
ago a French petty country gentleman, who had a little money, woke up
a Roman Prince one fine morning, the equal of the Dorias, Torlonias,
and of the baker Duke Grazioli.
For they are all equal from the hour when the Holy Father has signed
their parchments. Whatever be the origin of their nobility and the
antiquity of their houses, they go arm in arm, without any disputes as
to precedence. The names of Orsini, Colonna, and Sforza, are jumbled
together in the family of a former _domestique de place_. The son of a
baker marries the daughter of a Lante de La Rovère, granddaughter of a
Prince Colonna, and a Princess of Savoie-Carignan. There is no fear
that the famous quarrel of the princes and dukes, which so roused the
indignation of our stately St. Simon, will ever be repeated among the
Roman aristocracy.
To what purpose should it be, gracious Heavens! Don't they well
know--dukes and princes--that they are all alike inferior to the
shabbiest of the cardinals? The day that a Capuchin receives the red
hat, he acquires the right to splash the mud in their faces as he
rides past in his gilded coach.
In all monarchical States, the king is the natural head of the
nobility. The strongest term that a gentleman can make use of, in
alluding to his house, is that it is as noble as the King. _As noble
as the Pope_ would be simply ludicrous, since a swineherd, the son of
a swineherd, may be elected Pope, and receive the oath of fidelity
from all the Roman princes. They may well then consider themselves
upon an equality among themselves, these poor grandees, seeing that
they are equally looked down upon by a few priests.
They console themselves with the thought that they are superior to all
the laymen in the world. This soothing vanity, neither noisy nor
insolent, but none the less firmly rooted in their hearts, enables
them to swallow the daily affront of conscious inferiority.
I am quite aware of the points in which they are inferior to the
upstarts of the Church, but their affected superiority to other men is
less evident to me.
As to their courage. Some years have elapsed since they had the
opportunity of proving it on the field of battle.[4]
Heaven forbids duelling. The Government inculcates the gentler
virtues.
They are not wanting in a certain ostentatious and theatrical
liberality. A Piombino sent his ambassador to the conference at
Vienna, allowing £4,000 for the expenses of the mission. A Borghese
gave the mob of Rome a banquet that cost £48,000, to celebrate the
return of Pius VII. Almost all the Roman princes open their palaces,
villas, and galleries to the public. To be sure, old Sciarra used to
sell permission to copy his pictures, but he was a notorious miser,
and has found no imitators.
They practise generally the virtue of charity, in a somewhat
indiscriminate manner, from the love of patronage, from pride, habit,
and weakness, because they are ashamed to refuse. They are by no means
badly disposed, they are good--I stop at this word, lest I should go
too far.
They are not wanting in sense or intelligence. Prince Massimo is
quoted for his good sense, and the two Caetani for their puns.
Santa-Croce, though a little cracked, is no ordinary man. But what a
wretched education the Government gives them! When they are not the
children, they are the pupils of priests, whose system principally
consists in teaching them nothing. Get hold of a student of St.
Sulpice, wash him tolerably clean, have him dressed by Alfred or
Poole, and bejewelled by Castellani or Hunt and Roskel, let him learn
to thrum a guitar, and sit upon a horse, and you'll have a Roman
prince as good as the best of them.
You probably think it natural that people brought up at Rome, in the
midst of the finest works of art in the world, should take a little
interest in art, and know something about it. Pray be undeceived. This
man has never entered the Vatican except to pay visits; that one knows
nothing of his own gallery, but through the report of his
house-steward. Another had never visited the Catacombs till he became
Pope. They profess an elegant ignorance, which they think in good
taste, and which will always be fashionable in a Catholic country.
I have said enough about the heart, mind, and education of the Roman
nobility. A few words as to the fortunes of which they dispose.
I have before me a list which I believe to be authentic, as I copied
it myself in a sure quarter. It comprises the net available incomes of
the principal Roman families. I extract the most important:--
Corsini ....... £20,000
Borghese....... 18,000
Ludovisi....... 14,000
Grazioli....... 14,000
Doria.......... 13,000
Rospigliosi.... 10,000
Colonna........ 8,000
Odescalchi..... 8,000
Massimo........ 8,000
Patrizi........ 6,000
Orsini......... 4,000
Strozzi........ 4,000
Torlonia....... Unlimited.
Antonelli....... Ditto.
It is not to be supposed that Grazioli, for instance, has himself
alone nearly as large a gross income as Prince Borghese and his two
brothers Aldobrandini and Salviati together. But the fact is that all
the more ancient families are burdened with heavy hereditary charges,
which enormously reduce their incomes. They are obliged to keep up
chapels, churches, hospitals, and whole chapters of fat canons, while
the nobles of yesterday are not called upon to pay for either the fame
or the sins of their ancestors.
At all events the foregoing list proves the mediocrity as to wealth,
as in everything else, of the Roman nobility. Not only are they unable
to compete with the hard-working middle classes of London, Bâle, or
Amsterdam, but they are infinitely less wealthy than the nobility of
Russia or of England.
Is this because, as with us in France, an equitable law is constantly
subdividing large properties? No. The law of primogeniture is in full
vigour in the kingdom of the Pope, like every other abuse of the good
old times. They provide for their younger sons as they can, and for
their daughters as they please. It is not parental justice that ruins
families. I have even heard it said that the elder brother is not
obliged to put on mourning when the younger dies; which is a clear
saving of so much black cloth.
This being the case, why are not the Roman princes richer than they
are? It is to be accounted for by two excellent reasons,--the love of
show, and bad management.
Ostentation, the Roman disease, requires that every nobleman should
have a palace in the city, and a palace in the country: carriages,
horses, lacqueys and liveries. They can do without mattresses, linen,
and armchairs, but a gallery of pictures is indispensable. It is not
thought necessary to have a decent dinner every Sunday, but it is to
have a terraced garden for the admiration of foreigners. These
imaginary wants swallow up the income, and not unfrequently eat into
the capital.
And yet I could point out half-a-dozen estates which could suffice for
the prodigalities of a sovereign, if they were managed in the English,
or even in the French fashion,--if the owner were to interfere
personally, and see with his own eyes, instead of allowing a host of
middlemen to come between him and his property, who of course enrich
themselves at his expense.
Not that the Roman princes knowingly allow their affairs to go to
ruin. They must by no means be confounded with the _grands seigneurs_
of old France, who laughed over the wreck of their fortunes, and
avenged themselves upon a steward by a _bon mot_ and a kick. The Roman
prince has an office, with shelves, desks, and clerks, and devotes
some hours a day to business, examining accounts, poring over
parchments, and signing papers. But being at once incapable and
uneducated, his zeal serves but to liberate the rogues about him from
responsibility. I heard of a nobleman who had inherited an enormous
fortune, who condemned himself to the labor of a clerk at £50 a year,
who remained faithful to his desk even to extreme old age, and who,
thanks to some blunder or other in management, died insolvent.
Pity them if you please, but cast not the stone at them. They are such
as education has made them. Look at those brats of various ages from
six to ten, walking along the Corso in double file, between a couple
of Jesuits. They are embryo Roman nobles. Handsome as little Cupids,
in spite of their black coats and white neckcloths, they will all grow
up alike, under the shadow of their pedagogue's broad-brimmed hat.
Already are their minds like a well-raked garden, from which ideas
have been carefully rooted out. Their hearts are purged alike of good
and evil passions. Poor little wretches, they will not even have any
vices.
As soon as they shall have passed their last examinations, and
obtained their diplomas of ignorance, they will be dressed in the
latest London fashions, and be turned out into the public promenades.
They will pace for ever the pavement of the Corso, they will wear out
the alleys of the Pincian Hill, the Villa Borghese, and the Villa
Pamphili. They will ride, drive, and walk about, armed with a whip,
eye-glass, or cane, as may be, until they are made to marry. Regular
at Mass, assiduous at the theatre, you may see them smile, gape,
applaud, make the sign of the cross, with an equal absence of emotion.
They are almost all inscribed on the list of some religious fraternity
or other. They belong to no club, play timidly, rarely make a parade
of social irregularities, drink without enthusiasm, and never ruin
themselves by horse-racing. In short, their general conduct is beyond
all praise; and the life of dolls made to say "Papa!" and "Mama!" is
equally irreproachable.
One fine day they attain their twenty-fifth year. At this age, an
American has already tried his hand at a dozen trades, made four
fortunes, and at least one bankruptcy, has gone through a couple of
campaigns, had a lawsuit, established a new religious sect, killed
half-a-dozen men with his revolver, freed a negress, and conquered an
island. An Englishman has passed some stiff examinations, been
attached to an embassy, founded a factory, converted a Catholic, gone
round the world, and read the complete works of Walter Scott. A
Frenchman has rhymed a tragedy, written for two newspapers, been
wounded in three duels, twice attempted suicide, vexed fourteen
husbands, and changed his politics nineteen times. A German has
slashed fifteen of his dearest friends, swallowed sixty hogsheads of
beer and the Philosophy of Hegel, sung eleven thousand couplets,
compromised a tavern waiting-maid, smoked a million of pipes, and been
mixed up with, at least, two revolutions.
The Roman prince has done nothing, seen nothing, learnt nothing, loved
nothing, suffered nothing. His parents or guardians open a cloister
gate, take out a young girl as inexperienced as himself, and the pair
of innocents are bidden to kneel before a priest, who gives them
permission to become parents of another generation of innocents like
themselves.
Probably you expect to find them living unhappily together. Not at
all. And yet the wife is pretty. The monotonous routine of her convent
education has not so frozen her heart that she is incapable of loving;
her uncultivated mind will spontaneously develope itself when it comes
in contact with the world. She will not fail, ere long, to discover
the inferiority of her husband. The more her education has been
neglected, the greater is her chance of remaining womanly, that is to
say, intelligent, tender, and charming. In truth, the harmony of their
household is less likely to be disturbed at Rome than it would be at
Paris or Vienna.
Yes, the huge extinguisher which Heaven holds suspended over the city
of Rome, stifles even the subtle spark of passion. If Vesuvius were
here, it would have been cold for the last forty years. The Roman
princesses were not a little talked of up to the end of the thirteenth
century. Under the French rule their gallantry assumed a military
complexion. They used to go and see their admirers play billiards at
the Cafè Nuovo. But hypocrisy and morality have made immense progress
since the restoration. The few who have afforded matter for the
scandalous chronicles of Rome are sexagenarians, and their adventures
are inscribed on the tablets of history, between Austerlitz and
Waterloo.
The young princess whom we have just seen entering upon her married
life, will begin by presenting her husband with sundry little princes
and princesses; and there is no rampart against illicit affection like
your row of little cradles.
In five or six years, when she might have leisure for evil thoughts,
she will be bound hand and foot by the exigencies of society. You
shall have a specimen of the mode in which she spends her days during
the winter season. Her morning is devoted to dressing, breakfasting,
her children, and her husband. From one to three she returns the
visits she has received, in the exact form in which they were paid to
her. The first act of politeness is to go and see your acquaintance;
the second, to leave your card in person; the third, to send the same
bit of pasteboard by a servant _ad hoc_. At three, all the world
drives to the Villa Borghese, where there is a general salutation of
acquaintances with the tips of the fingers. At four, up the Pincio. At
five, it files backwards and forwards along the Corso. Everybody who
is anybody is condemned to this triple promenade. If a single
woman--who is anybody--were to absent herself, it would be inferred,
as a matter of course, that she was ill, and a general inquiry as to
the nature of her complaint would be instituted.
At close of day all go home. After dinner another toilette, and out
for the evening. Every house has its particular reception-night. And a
pure and simple reception indeed it is, without play, without music,
without conversation; a mere interchange of bows and curtsies, and
cold commonplaces. At rare intervals a ball breaks the ice, and shakes
off the _ennui_ generated by this system. Poor women! In an existence
at once so busy and so void, there is not even room for friendship.
Two who may have been friends from childhood, brought up in the same
convent, married into the same world, may meet one another daily and
at all hours, and yet may not be able to enjoy ten minutes of intimate
conversation in the whole year. The brightest, the best, is known but
by her name, her title, and her fortune. Judgments are passed on her
beauty, her toilet, and her diamonds, but nobody has the opportunity
or the leisure to penetrate into the depths of her mind. A really
distinguished woman once said to me, "I feel that I become stupid when
I enter these drawing-rooms. Vacancy seizes me at the very threshold."
Another, who had lived in France, regretted, with tears, the absence
of those charming friendships, so cheerful and so cordial, that exist
between the young married women of Paris.
When the Carnival arrives, it mingles everything without uniting
anything. In truth, one is never more solitary than in the midst of
noise and crowds. Then comes Lent; and then the grand comedy of
Easter; and after that the family departs for the country, which
means, economizing for some months in a huge half-furnished mansion.
In short, the romance of a Roman Princess is made up of a certain
number of noisy winters, and dull summers, and plenty of children. If
there be, by chance, any more exciting chapters, they are doubtless
known to the confessor.
"Ce ne sont pas là mes affaires."
You must go far from Rome to find any real nobility. Here and there in
the Mediterranean provinces some fallen family may be met with, living
poorly upon the produce of a small estate, and still looked up to with
a certain respect by its wealthier neighbours. The lower orders
respect it because it has been something once, and even because it is
nothing under the present hated government. These little provincial
aristocrats, ignorant, simple, and proud, are a sort of relic of the
Middle Ages left behind in the middle of the nineteenth century. I
only mention them to recall the fact of their existence.
But if you will accompany me over the Apennines, into the glorious
cities of the Romagna, I can show you more than one nobleman of great
name and ancient lineage, who cultivates at once his lands and his
intellect; who knows all that we know; who believes all that we
believe, and nothing more; who takes an active interest in the
misfortunes of Italy, and who, looking to free and happy Europe,
hopes, through the sympathy of nations and the justice of sovereigns,
to obtain the deliverance of his country. I met in certain palaces at
Bologna a brilliant writer, applauded on every stage in Italy; a
learned economist, quoted in the most serious reviews throughout
Europe; a controversialist, dreaded by the priests; and all these
individualities united in the single person of a Marquis of
thirty-four, who may, perhaps, one of these days play an important
part in the Italian revolution.