condition of the Church—which the Pisan Council did not help by the
choice of a third Pope—had excited in Florence a movement which was
only terminated by the restoration of unity. He was born on February 4,
1410, and belonged to a respectable family extinct before the sixteenth
century. He filled many public offices, sat in the magistracy of the
priors in the summer of 1454, was secretary in the office of the Public
Debt, and died on August 16, 1484. He is the best representative of
the tendency, intellect, and feeling which we are now considering.
Feo Belcari was no dreamer, but a man of active life, a sharer in
the cheerful society, principally composed of artists, which was a
characteristic element of the social condition of the time. All that
we possess of him belongs to devotional literature. His book on the
founders of the Jesuates, dedicated to Giovanni de’ Medici, describes
times and circumstances which he knew from oral tradition, being in the
most intimate connection with the orders that had acquired importance
in Florence. His letters—one of which on humility, addressed to
his daughter Orsola, gives a clear view of his opinions—are moral
philosophical treatises, in which the familiarity with the Fathers
of the Church and Christian authors of the Middle Ages would make
us take them for the work of a theologian, had not the knowledge of
this literature been so widely disseminated among a portion of the
laity. His dramatic works are among the most important of the kind
which introduced Sacred History into the circle of festivals, half
ecclesiastical half secular, and claimed the equal attention of high
and low. In 1449 his mystery of the ‘Sacrifice of Abraham’ was acted in
the church of Cestello. But more than all, his _laudi_ have made him a
name. The number of them is very great, for many are only variations
of the same theme—that of Divine love and the powerlessness of human
nature without grace. But the different turns and shades of meaning
are remarkable, and the ease with which the metre harmonises with the
hymn is astonishing, whilst there is no want of reality. In 1455, when
the author was at the height of his powers and activity, a collection
of this poetry had been arranged for the Compagnia de’ Battuti di San
Zanobi, and the plays were kept in use till far into the following
century. The style is mostly simple, as befits popular productions, but
it is not entirely free from Latinisms and affectation in his prose
writings.
The death of Feo Belcari, the ‘Christian Poet,’ was sung by Girolamo
Benivieni[419] in _terza rima_, where we read among other things:
The darkened world has now long missed the star
Which, while the shade still hung before my eyes,
Shone like a guide unto my steps afar.
Ne’er will the sweet and heavenly tones resound,
Silent the harmonies of that sweet lyre,
Now only in the angels’ bright world found.
Girolamo Benivieni, as his own words suggest, was in a measure the
successor of Belcari. But while the latter wrote entirely under the
influence of strictly orthodox Christianity, Benivieni sought to impart
to his work the spirit of Greek philosophy which ruled the age in which
he had grown up. While Belcari, again, united public activity with the
contemplative life in which he loved to indulge, we are not informed
that Benivieni, however deeply the events in his native country might
move him, had any share in them beyond that of an author and a friend
of many of the actors. Born in 1453, he survived friends and foes
and the Republic itself. Intellectually active up to his last years,
he kept true to the recollections of his most active years, and to
the convictions he had then formed. Feo Belcari had been his leader
in youth; Fra Girolamo Savonarola was the guiding star of his ripe
manhood. Between the two, the representative of the contemplative man
and the strenuous ascetic, stands a grave, beautiful figure, Pico of
Mirandola, who had no less influence on Benivieni than the others. Only
from its intimate connection with these three has Benivieni’s life—of
which nothing else is known—a significance and importance, that cannot
otherwise be explained. As he sang Belcari’s death, and defended the
truth of Savonarola’s doctrines and predictions—more than thirty years
after his death—before Pope Clement VII.,[420] so did he choose his
last resting-place beside Pico,[421] whose death preceded his own by
half a century. Benivieni illustrated his friend’s canzonets on Divine
Love with a detailed commentary which proved how their minds accorded
with one another.
Benivieni attempted the most various kinds of poetry—eclogues,
canticles, canzonets, sonnets—which give him a place beside the two
men whom we shall soon see taking the first places in poetry, Poliziano
and Lorenzo de’ Medici; while in popular songs, the _Frottole_, he
retained the tradition which, whatever the learned might say, still
represented the popular element in literature. He translated the
Psalms and the ‘Dies Iræ’ into the _terza rima_, remodelled a novel of
Boccaccio’s into stanzas, and made poetic translations from the Greek
and Latin. His poems on religious philosophical subjects show him to
have been in form and meaning one of those who aspired to mediate
between Christianity and Platonism, a tendency also evinced by the
commentary accompanying the poems we have mentioned, and addressed
to Pico’s nephew, Giovan Francesco. Benivieni’s principal historical
importance, so to say, consists in the sympathy he showed for the
movement commenced by Savonarola, which found its especial poetical
expression through him. His lauds, which, in their mysticism tinged
with sensuousness, remind us at times of Fra Jacopone’s sentimentality,
were sung by the people in the streets of the city, by high and low
members of the Dominican order, in places where shortly before Medicean
carnival-songs had resounded, and where piles of worldly vanity were
heaped up to be followed soon by other forms of terrible ruin.
In the style which gives importance to Belcari’s and Benivieni’s poetry
when the former still lived and the latter was in youthful manhood, a
woman appeared who claims peculiar attention, because she exercised
a decided influence on the personage who has given to this epoch the
special stamp of his individuality. Lucrezia Tornabuoni de’ Medici was
eminently gifted; we have seen her in several positions in life which
display her clear understanding, caution, affection for her family,
and care for their welfare, without arrogance or forgetfulness of her
station. Her productions as a poet belong to the intellectual class.
The six lauds[422] which remain of her poetry have this peculiarity,
that they include the ecclesiastical year; and if their poetical
value does not exceed others of the kind, they produce a favourable
impression by avoiding the endless repetitions of similar poems. The
Birth of Christ, the Adoration of the Shepherds, the Passion, the
Resurrection, the Descent of the Holy Spirit, the Life of Christ on
earth, these are the themes of her hymns, some of which were sung to
sacred, and some to profane airs. Beside these processional songs,
Lucrezia wrote various Biblical histories in _terza rima_ or in
eight-lined stanzas: _e.g._, the ‘Lives of the Virgin and John the
Baptist,’ the ‘History of Esther, Judith, and Tobias.’ Angelo Poliziano
revised her poems, and her grandsons learned them by heart. Another
poetess of the time, whose family was intimately acquainted with
Lucrezia’s, Antonia Giannotti Pulci, attempted sacred dramas, in which
her husband Bernardo made himself a name.
Besides poetry another branch of literature deserves attention,
although the humanistic school diminished its powers, and restricted
its influence without entirely depriving it of importance. It will be
easily understood that, in the native country of Dino Compagni and the
Villani, there could be no lack of such as continued to note down what
they felt and heard, and what they had themselves a personal share in.
Nowhere, perhaps, were such notices, either in the form of annals or
chronicles, or as narratives of personal experience with a predominance
of character drawing, so frequent and so valuable as here. In the last
decades of the fourteenth century several writers had followed in
the steps of the Villani with far more talent than they had. Donato
Velluti, Marchionne Stefani, Gino Capponi wrote a description of the
popular insurrections of 1378, in the course of which the reader
is in danger of losing the thread if he does not keep the separate
elements apart. The following century was active in this department,
but however important in many cases the material may have been, the
form and language betray the lowly position to which the humanistic
literature had condemned this despised sister. Buonaccorso Pitti,
Jacopo Salviati, and Neri Capponi wrote histories and commentaries
which are partly personal memoirs, and all the more instructive because
the epoch was one which claimed so fully the active participation
of capable citizens at home and abroad. We may, perhaps, blame the
weakness of the last-mentioned writer for placing his own deeds and
those of his father, relations, and friends, in the foremost rank in
commentaries, which extend nearly to his death in 1456; but where men
like Gino and Neri Capponi have laboured in such a conspicuous manner,
the circumstantial style is willingly accepted, as the inner life of
a people can only be recognised and understood by a closer view of
important persons. Other chroniclers, like Domenico Buoninsegni and
Goro Dati, from whom less is to be gained for political history, are
the more readily pardoned for their gossiping patriotism because the
subject of their preference is a deserving one, and they furnish us
with a quantity of information that is important for the history of
civilisation.
A special place belongs to Giovanni Cavalcanti, the principal authority
for the time from 1420 to 1440. The humanistic school had exercised
more influence on him than on any of the historians of his day who
wrote in the vulgar tongue, but in a manner which imprints the
strangest character on his history. For we find here, grafted on the
passionate description of a partisan who had fallen out with his own
faction in the course of his work, a rhetorical wordiness and elegant
would-be eloquence which clothes the strife of faction, with its
loves and hatreds, in antiquated speeches and moralising sentences.
The personality of the author in and for itself, as it meets us in
his writings (we know nothing else of him), is characteristic; a
nobleman of one of the oldest families, poor, oppressed, without any
share in the administration, and with a full consciousness of the old
conservative claims of the patricians, with a fierce contemptuous
hatred of the lower classes, and a bitter grudge against the heads
of the State, which leads him to charge Cosimo de’ Medici whom he so
often praises with a diabolical design to destroy freedom. To all these
annalists and historians we may add others, whose works are mostly
printed, and include the times of Lorenzo or later, namely, Benedetto
Dei, Bartolommeo Cerretani, Pietro Parenti, Giovanni Cambi. Similar to
this branch of history, biography placed her achievements in the vulgar
tongue beside those of the humanists, who, rivalling the Greeks and
Romans, created much that was important and permanently valuable in a
higher sense than their great historical works. Most unassuming, and,
in spite of all solecisms and defects of form, most pleasing is the
popular form of biography, in the hundred characteristic portraits by
Vespasiano da Bisticci, to whom we owe innumerable deep views into the
inner life for which we vainly seek among the learned historians.
END OF THE FIRST VOLUME.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Vasari, in Michelozzo’s Life (_Vite_, Lemonnier’s edition, Flor.
1846, ff., iii. p. 271); and in Brunelleschi’s Life, a. a. O., p. 228.
Michelozzo was born about the year 1391. It is generally understood
that the building of the Palace took place before Cosimo’s exile, and
they quote from Migliore (_Firenze Illustrata_, Flor. 1684, p. 198
ff.), which specifies ‘circa all’Anno 1430.’ There is no foundation for
this statement. Moreover, Michelozzo was not in Florence in the year
supposed (Fantozzi, _Guida di Firenze_, Flor. 1842, p. 457).
[2] Vasari in the Life of Lorenzo di Bicci, a. a. O., ii. p. 225. The
house came afterwards to the Ughi family. At present it is all built
round, even the adjoining Lorenzi Palace, which up to our day preserved
its ancient, solemn aspect.
[3] _Ordinamenta justitiæ communis et populi Florentiæ anni_ 1293,
a Francisco Bonainio edita, in Archivio Storico Italiano, serie ii.
i. p. 1-93 [1855]. C. Hegel, _Die Ordnungen der Gerechtigkeit in der
Florentinischen Republik_, Erlangen 1867. Compare P. Capei, Arch. Stor.
Ital. ser. iii. vii. p. 132.
[4] Fr. Bonaini, _Della Parte Guelfa in Firenze_, in Giornale Storico
degli Archivi Toscani (Flor. 1857), ii. p. 171, 257; iii. p. 77, 167;
iv. p. 3. Unfortunately this laborious work remains incomplete. The
oldest constitution of the Capitani and the Guelf party was in 1335,
and is printed in Bonaini, i. p. 1-41. The office was in existence up
to the year 1769.
[5] Gio. Villani, xi. chap. 92, 93.
[6] G. Canestrini, _La Scienza e l’Arte di Stato desunta dagli Atti
Officiali della Repubblica Florentina e dei Medici_. Parte 1, L’imposta
sulla ricchezza mobile e immobile. Florenz. 1862. No more has appeared
of this work, which was to be the economical and administrative history
of the Republic and of the first Medici period. The first part treats
of the _Estimo_, of the _Cadastre_, and of the _Decima_ of 1494. Cf.
L. Banchi in the Archivio Stor. Ital., serie iii. i. p. 90 (G. F.
Pagnini). _Della Decima e delle altre gravezze imposte dal Commune
di Firenze_ (Lucca, 1763) has in its first volume, p. 10, a short
account of Florentine taxation, up to the introduction of the _decima_
(p. 214-231.—Provision of May 22, 1427, for the formation of the
_cadastre_).
[7] The Peruzzi in 1325 were an instance of this. _Storia del Commercio
e dei Banchieri di Firenze._ Flor. 1868, p. 197.
[8] Varchi, _Storia Fiorentina_, at the end of book xiii. (Edit. Arbib.
Flor. 1844, iii. p. 36.)
[9] ‘Ipse quidem nescit si fructus sequetur, vel non; sed, auditis
aliis civibus, idem secutus est.’ ‘Consulta’ of May 12, 1427, by P.
Berti, Nuovi documenti intorno al Catasto florentino, in the _Giorn.
Stor. degli archivi Toscani_, iv. 32. Giovanni Cavalcanti (_Storia
Fiorentina_, Flor. 1838, i. 196.)—a contemporary, who has left us
the most lifelike description of that period, but who must be used
with great caution on account of his decided and enthusiastic party
views—has been followed by all later writers in his opinion of the
Medici. At the head of these is Machiavelli, who took him as the
principal source of information for those times.
[10] Gio. Cavalcanti, l. c. p. 262.
[11] Domenico Moreni, _Continuazione delle Memorie della Basilica di S.
Lorenzo_. Flor. 1816, i. p. 27.
[12] _Monuments Sépulcraux de Toscane_, Flor. 1821. Table xiii. The
inscription is as follows:
‘Cosmus et Laurentius de Medicis v. d. Joanni Averardi f. et Picardæ
Adovardi f. carissimis parentibus hoc Sepulchrū faciendum curarunt.
Obiit autem Johannes x. Kl. Martias MCCCCXXVIII. Picarda vero xiii. Kl.
Maias quinquennio post e vita migravit.
Si merita in patriam, si gloria, sanguis et omni Larga manus nigra
libera morte forent, Viveret heu patriæ casta cum coniuge felix
Auxilium miseris portus et aura suis; Omnia sed quando superantur
morte, Johannes, Hoc mausoleo tuque Picarda iaces, Ergo senex mœret,
invenis, puer, omnis et ætas, Orba parente suo patria mœsta gemit.
[13] G. Cavalcanti, l. c. p. 269.
[14] The xv. and xvi. cantos of _Il Paradiso_ contain eloquent
descriptions of historical importance, to the explanation of which the
translation of Philalethes has contributed valuable materials.
[15] G. F. Berti, _Cenni storico-artistici di S. Miniato al Monte_,
Flor. 1850. The MSS. of Bishop Hildebrand of the year 1013 show that
the reconstruction of the church had already begun at that time.
[16] V. Marchese, _Memorie dei più insigni pittori, scultori, e
architetti Domenicani_. Flor. 1845. I. p. 44 ff. F. Moisè, _Santa Croce
di Firenze_, Flor. 1845. I. p. 42 _et seq._
[17] L. Passerini, _La Loggia di Or San Michele_, l. c. p. 113 ff.
[18] _Regesta florentina internam Reipublicæ historiam spectantia ab
a._ MCCXXV, _ad a._ MD., by Gaye, Carteggio inedito d’Artisti, i. 413
_et seq._
[19] M. Rastrelli, _Illustrazione istorica del Palazzo della Signoria_.
Flor. 1792. F. Moisè, _Illustrazione storico-artistica del Palazzo de’
Priori_. Flor. 1843.
[20] Fr. Becchi, _Sulle Stinche di Firenze, in Illustratore
fiorentino_. Flor. 1840.
[21] Inferno xix. 17 (‘in my beautiful San Giovanni’). Purgatory xii.
100. Even with the present transformation of the hillside a great
flight of steps is to be seen hard by.
[22] Concerning the various kinds of the _macigni_ (Dante uses the
expression, _Inferno_ xv. 63, speaking of the obdurate nature of the
Florentines of his time), the _pietra forte_, _pietra fina_, _serena_,
_bigia_, see Targioni, _Viaggi per la Toscana_, i. p. 18 _et seq._
[23] The opinion expressed in the book of the Carmelite, P. Fr. M.
Soldini—_Delle eccellenze e grandezze della nazione fiorentina_
(Flor. 1780),—respecting the palace Tosinghi on the old market-place,
destroyed, according to Gio. Villani, in the party wars of the middle
of the 13th century, is, no doubt, a modern conjecture.
[24] Gaye, l. c. p. 498 (Anno 1344).
[25] Baldinucci, Professori del disegno (D. M. Manni’s Ausg.), vol. i.
p. 24, Gaye l. c. p. 483.
[26] G. Masselli and G. P. Lasinio, _Il Tabernacolo della Madonna
d’Orsanmichele_: Flor. 1851.
[27] L. Passerini, _La Loggetta del Bigallo_, l. c. p. 89 _et seq._
[28] Benedetto Dei, in Varchi, _Storia Fiorentina_, book ix. (ii. p.
116), names twenty-one loggias on private houses in the latter half of
the 15th century. Lastro, _Osservatore Fiorentino_ (published Flor.
1821), iii. p. 203 _et seq._
[29] _Cronaca di Matteo Villani_, book vii. chap. 41.
[30] L. Passerini, _La Loggia della Signoria_ l. c. p. 99. Gaye l. c.
p. 527.
[31] Passerini l. c.; after him Il. Semper in A. v. Zahn’s _Fine
Arts Annals_, iii. p. 35-37. The tradition respecting Orcagna is in
Lemonnier’s _Vasari_, ii. p. 130.
[32] G. Aiazzi ‘Illustrazione della Capella gentilizia della _Famiglia
Rinuccini_,’ in the _Ricordi di Filippo Rinuccini_: Flor. 1840, p.
304-327.
[33] Gaye l. c. p. 536.
[34] C. Guasti, _La Cupola di Sta. Maria del Fiore_: Flor. 1857, p. 9,
37, 89.
[35] Plan and sketch in the _Osservatore Fiorentino_, ii. p. 167.
[36] _Book of Statutes_, part vii. book 4.
[37] Inscription on the back: ‘Clarissimi viri Cosmas et Laurentius
fratres neglectas diu Sanctorum reliquias martyrum religioso studio ac
fidelissima pietate suis sumptibus æneis loculis condendas colendasque
curarunt.’ Figured in the _Monuments Sépulcraux_, Table XX. In the time
of the French invasion broken up and destined to be melted down, but
rescued and restored, and now in the National Museum in the Palace of
the Podestà.
[38] Pagnini, _Della decima_, etc., ii. p. 80. S. L. Peruzzi, p. 61.
_Osservatore fiorentino_, iii. p. 185, vi. p. 157.
[39] Gio. Villani, xi. chap. 93.
[40] P. Berti, _Documenti riguardanti il commercio dei Fiorentini in
Francia nei secoli xiii. e xiv._ in the _Giornale storico degli Arch.
Tosc._ i. pp. 163, 217. The most abundant material is contained in
Francesco Balducci Pegolotti’s _Pratica della Mercatura_, 14th century,
and Pagnini, iii.
[41] _Osservatore fiorentino_, iv. p. 124. F. Fantozzi, _Notizie
biografiche di Bernardo Cennini_, Flor. 1839, p. 33. Fantozzi regards
the Calimaruzza as the former Via Francesca, where the magazines of
foreign cloth were, and the Calimala as the place for the sale of the
native fabrics.
[42] G. Gargioli, _L’Arte della Seta in Firenze trattato del secolo_
xv., Flor. 1868. The lists from 1225 to 1337 are printed p. 282-290.
L. Venturi, _Filippo Matteoni_ (the biography of one of the most
intelligent silk-weavers of our time), in verse and prose, Flor. 1871,
p. 321. S. Bongi, _Della Mercatura dei Lucchesi nei sec._ xiii. e xiv.
_Osservatore fior._ iv. p. 103; vi. p. 36. Peruzzi, p. 36, where there
are also the portraits of a crimson-dyer and a silk-spinner, after a
MS. in the Laurentiana.
[43] _L’Inferno_, xvii. 43. Compare E. Morpurgo, _I prestatori di
denaro al tempo di Dante_, in _Dante e Padua, Studj storico-critici_,
Padua, 1865, p. 193.
[44] _Divine Comedy_, ‘Paradise,’ xix. 119.
[45] Kervyn de Lettenhove, _Les Argentiers Florentins_, in the
_Bulletins de l’Académie r. de Belgique_, 1861, pp. 295-312. Compare
also his treatise, _Recherches sur la part que l’ordre de Citeaux et le
Comte de Flandre prirent à la lutte de Boniface VIII. et de Philippe le
Bel_, in the _Mémoires_ of the same Academy, xxviii. On the Franzesi
family see Repetti, _Dizionario della Toscana_, article ‘Figline,
Staggia.’
[46] Vol. x. chap. 88.
[47] Fr. Balducci Pegolotti, in Pagnini, p. 198.
[48] Bartolommeo Cerretani, in Fabroni _M. Cosmi Med. Vita_, ii. 63.
Concerning this still unprinted chronicler, see Moreni, _Bibliografia
della Toscana_, i. 249.
[49] Del Migliore, p. 6. See Gaye, p. 424.
[50] Extracts in Gaye, in the registers.
[51] _Paradiso_ xv. 97. _Purgat._ xvi. 117.
[52] L. Mehus: _Ambrosii Traversarii Epistolæ et Orationes_. Flor.
1759, ccclxxiv.
[53] On the Bardi see Ademollo, _Marietta de Ricci_, 2nd edit. by L.
Passerini, Flor, 1815, iii. 1135.
[54] ‘Io confesso—che il concilio non è per me. Ma che debbo fare,
se haggio uno fato che mi ci tira?’—Luca della Robbia, _Vita di
Bartolommeo Valori_, in the _Arch. Stor. Ital._ iv. part i. 262.
[55] _Documenti relativi alla liberazione dalla prigionia di Giovanni
XXIII._, in the _Arch. Stor. Ital._ 429. Writings of Averardo di Medici
to Michele Cossa, Flor. Dec. 31, 1419. Fabroni as above, ii. 11.
[56] Ciacconio: _Historia Pontificum_, etc., Rome, 1677, ii. 795, and
the _Monuments sépulcraux_, plate xi., give an illustration. From
Michelozzo’s Survey-Declaration in Gaye, as above, 117, we see that the
monument was still unfinished in 1427, and the price agreed upon had
been 800 florins.
[57] L. Passerini: _Gli Alberti di Firenze_, Flor. 1870, i. 118; ii.
227.
[58] _Commissioni di Rinaldo degli Albizzi per il comune di Firenze dal
1399 al 1433_. Edited by Cesare Guasti. 3 vols. Flor. 1867-73.
[59] _Gio. Cavalcanti_, 319: _Albizzi Family_. See Ademollo, as above,
ii. 695. _Genealogij_, by Gius. Ajazzi, MS. in possession of the author.
[60] Niccolò’s conversation with Niccolò Barbadoro, in Cavalcanti as
above, p. 380 (copied, with alterations, by Machiavelli in the 4th book
of the _Florentine Hist._), gives the best insight into the feelings of
the party.
[61] Vasari: _Life of Lorenzo di Bicci_, ii. p. 229. The building of
the Sapienza already begun, served later as a cage for lions, and is
now employed as an educational institution.
[62] Vasari: Life of Masaccio, vol. iii. p. 160.
[63] _Vitæ CIII. Virorum Illustrium qui sæculo xv. extiterunt_, auctore
coævo Vespasiano Florentino. (In the _Spicilegium Romanum_, edited by
Cardinal Angelo Mai.) Rome, 1839, reprint. _Vite di nomini illustri del
secolo xv._ scritte da Vespasiano da Bisticci, stampate nuovamente da
Adolfo Bartoli. Flor. 1859. _Palla di Noferi Strozzi_, p. 271. Messer
Leonardo is Leonardo Bruni.
[64] Vespasiano da Bisticci as above, 278.
[65] _Commissioni di Rinaldo degli Albizzi_, iii. 507.
[66] Gio. Cavalcanti as above, 320-327.
[67] Fabroni as above, i. 27; ii. 31, 58.
[68] L. Passerini: _Genealogia e storia della famiglia Guadagni_, Flor.
1874, p. 52.
[69] Cosimo’s own memoranda, Fabroni as above, ii. 96, which give no
information as to the grounds and form of the action, must be compared
with Cavalcanti’s relation, 507, which supplied Machiavelli with his
materials. The protocols of the Signory give no information as to these
proceedings.
[70] Gio. Cavalcanti as above, 558, 610.
[71] _Storia Fiorentina dai tempi di Cosimo de’ Medici a quelli del
gonfaloniere Soderini._ Flor. 1859. Vol. i. of the _Opere inedite di
Fr. Guicciardini, illustrate da G. Canestrini_, p. 4.
[72] ‘Fermare lo Stato’—to give a settled form to a Government,
introduced by the sovereign or a political party. ‘Stato’ means in this
case the rule with which they exercise it.
[73] _I Capitoli del Comune di Firenze Inventario e Regesto_, i. Flor.
1866.
[74] Published by D. M. Manni, Flor. 1720. Constantine Höfler has in
his history of King Rupert (Freiburg, 1861) placed the activity of
Buonaccorso Pitti in its right light.
[75] Printed by D. M. Manni Cronachette Antiche, Florence, 1733. The
history of the conquest of Pisa, printed there likewise, is probably by
his son Neri.
[76] _Storia Fiorentina_, chap. i.
[77] P. Litta: _Genealogy of the Acciaiuoli_. L. Taufani: _Nicola
Acciaiuoli_, Florence, 1863. Gaye has published in the _Carteggio
inedita d’Artisti_, i. 57-69, the remarkable letters of the seneschal
for the years 1355-56, on the building of the Certosa. Vespasiano da
Bisticci as above, 351 (on Agnolo Acciaiuoli).
[78] Vespasiano da Bisticci as above, 332. Angiolo Segni: _Vita di
Donato Acciaiuoli_, edited by Tommaso Tonelli, Florence, 1841.
[79] Franc. Guicciardini: _Recordi di Famiglia_, in his _Opere
inedite_, x.
[80] Description and narrative which Vespasiano da Bisticci, 525, gives
of Alessandra de Bardi Strozzi and her sad fate, give a deep insight
into the miseries of this time.
[81] _Commissioni di Rinaldo degli Albizzi_, iii. 651, 669.
[82] _Commissioni_, iii. 672, 677.
[83] _Idem_, 680.
[84] Vespasiano de Bisticci as above, 417.
[85] L. Basserini: _Baldaccio da Anghiari_, in the _Arch. Stor. Ital._,
3, iii. 131, 166. The author is of the opinion that the connections of
Baldaccio to the Pope Gregory IV., still residing in Florence, were the
cause of the Medicean party wishing to get rid of him.
[86] Gio. Cavalcanti, I. c. ii. 195.
[87] Register of 1458, Canestrini, as above, 168. Progressive scale,
_id._ 213.
[88] Gio. Cavalcanti as above, ii. 210.
[89] Etiam nobis esset reputatio et utilitas si Papa hic veniret.
Rinaldo degli Albizzi, _Commissioni_, iii. 589.
[90] C. Milanesi, ‘Osservazioni intorno agli esemplari del decreto
d’unione della chiesa Greca con la Latina che si conservano nella
biblioteca Mediceo-Laurenziana o nell’Archivio di Stato,’ with Greek
and Latin text of the decree of union, in the _Giorn. stor. degli
Arch. tosc._ i. 196-225. This is not the place to refer to the newest
historico-critical literature on this subject.
[91] Fabroni as above, ii. 163.
[92] _Life of Eugenius IV._ as above, 16.
[93] _Life of Agnolo Acciaiuoli_ as above, p. 357.
[94] Giannone, _Storia civile del Regno di Napoli_, book xxvi. chap. 2.
[95] _Ricordi storici di Filippo di Cino Rinuccini dal 1282 al 1460,
colla continuazione di Alamanno e Neri suoi figli fino al 1506 per cura
di G. Aiazzi_, Flor. 1840, lxxxix.
[96] Letter of Pius II., and his answer, in Fabroni, ii. 254.
[97] Document of the purchase of the ‘sclava,’ twenty-two years old,
for the price of 60 ducats, Fabroni, ii. 214.
[98] Fabroni as above, ii. 251.
[99] _Idem_, 253.
[100] The list of the masses ordered by Piero de’ Medici after his
father’s death, and the grants for mourning habits to the members and
servants of his family, among them five chamber-women and four maids
(_schiave_), are given by Fabroni, ii. 254.
[101] M. Ficino, _Epistol._ i. 85.
[102] Fabroni, ii. 257.
[103] Litta, ‘Family Tornabuoni,’ in the _Famiglie celebri Ital._,
Ademollo as above, iv. 1200. The Tornabuoni became extinct in 1635, and
the name and inheritance of the Tornaquinci, extinct in 1790, passed to
the branch of the Medici which is still flourishing in Florence.
[104] January 1, 1448, after Florentine style (annus ab incarnatione,
_i.e._ from March 25), is the same day 1449.
[105] _Laurentii Medicis Vita_, per Nicolaum Valorium edita ad Leonem
X.P.M. First printed by L. Mehus after a Laurentian MS., Flor. 1749;
more recently in Philippi Villani _Liber de civitatis Florentiæ famosis
civibus et de Florentinorum litteratura principes fere synchroni
scriptores_. Ed. G. C. Galletti. Flor. 1847, p. 161. An Italian
translation had already appeared, Flor. 1568. Niccolò Valori was a
pupil of Marsilio Ficino, and a member of the Platonic Academy.
[106] On Gentile of Urbino, as he was commonly called, see A. M.
Bandini, _Specimen literaturæ Florentinæ_, sæc. xv., Flor. 1752, i.
182; ii. 111. Desjardins-Canestrini, _Négotiations diplomatiques de la
France avec la Toscane_, Paris 1859, i. 317. _Embassy of Becchi and
Piero Soderini to King Charles VIII._, 1493, _idem_, 321-365. _Address
to Pope Innocent VIII. on occasion of the Neapolitan war of the
Barons_, 1485, p. 205-214. Gentile, bishop of Arezzo 1473, died April
19, 1497.
[107] Fabroni, _Laur. Med. Magnif. Vita_, Pisa, 1784, ii. 9.
[108] N. Valori as above, 166.
[109] Politian, _Conjuratio Pactiana_, at the end.
[110] Litta, _Family Pazzi_, Ademollo, as above, iv. 1228.
[111] As above, 372.
[112] For documents referring to the embassy, see Desjardins, as above,
109, 135.
[113] Vespasiano, as above, 375.
[114] L. Passerini, _Genealogia e storia della famiglia Rucellai_,
Flor. 1861.
[115] L. Passerini, _Genealogy of the Soderini_, continuation of
Litta’s _Famiglie celebri_.
[116] Vasari, _Life of Donatello_, iii. 250. For illustration see Litta.
[117] _Cronica di Napoli di Notar Giacomo_, pubbl. da P. Garzilli,
Naples, 1845, p. 100. Giovan. Pietro Cagnola, _Storia di Milano_
(‘Cronache Milanesi,’ in the _Arch. stor. ital._ iii. Flor. 1842),
informs us (p. 170) of Don Federigo’s arrival and the causes of the
delay of the wedding, which was connected with Jacopo Piccinino’s
affairs (see below, p. 219). Ippolita arrived on September 14 at
Naples, after having waited two months in Siena, till her father
permitted her to proceed. (_Cronica di Notar Giacomo_, 112; Cagnola,
171.)
[118] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, xcv.
[119] Luigi Pulci’s letter, see Roscoe, App. ix., but more correct in
the _Lettere di Luigi Pulci a Lorenzo il Magnifico e ad altri_ (edited
by Salvatore Bongi), Lucca, 1868, p. 1. There are various notices of
the writer here, but unfortunately no notes to the letters, which are
often unintelligible, and will probably remain so, in spite of all
notes, with regard to various persons mentioned.
[120] Fabroni, l. e., ii. 51 _seq._
[121] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, xcvi.
[122] Fabroni as above, ii. 47; letter of March 22, _idem_, 49.
[123] Desjardins as above, 136-141.
[124] Guicciardini, in whom the traditions of grandfather and
granduncle are united in cap. ii. of the _Storia fiorentina_, p. 18;
Machiavelli, who, in consequence of the death of Girolamo, his ancestor
in Cosimo’s time, could not be very favourable to Luca Pitti and his
adherents, in book vii. of his history. G. M. Bruto, _Florentinæ
historiæ_, book ii.
[125] On this affair, which has never been fully cleared up, see
Ricotti, _Storia delle Compagnie di Ventura_, iii. 191, where the
judgment of contemporaries is referred to; and Canestrini, _Documenti
per servire alla storia della Milizia italiana_, Flor. 1851 (_Arch.
stor. ital._ xv.), series lxxviii. 179-184, where the letters of
Francesco Sforza and the King are to be found.
[126] Vespasiano da Bisticci as above, p. 360.
[127] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, xcix.
[128] _Lettera di Jacopo Acciaiuoli ad Agnolo_, Naples, September 6,
1466. See Fabroni as above, ii. 28. The time of Lorenzo’s journey
cannot be precisely fixed, but it must have taken place before or
towards the middle of August, for the later events leave no time.
Jacopo writes: ‘Lorenzo di Piero fu quà. Il S. Rè li fece carezze
assai.’
[129] _Paradiso_, xv. 109.
[130] Francis Joseph Sloane, who died in 1871. The villa passed by
inheritance to the Russian family Boutourlin.
[131] The name Camaldoli, which is borne in Florence by two districts
of the city inhabited by the poorer classes—that of San Frediano and
that behind San Lorenzo—is derived from the Camaldulensian church of
San Salvatore, pulled down in 1529, which stood near the city walls on
the left bank of the Arno. To the district of San Lorenzo the name was
transferred from the other behind Sta. Croce, and at Porta San Niccolò
there are other districts so named.
[132] The prevailing opinion among the opponents of the Medici of
the events of 1466 is expressed decidedly in the notices of Alamanno
Rinuccini, who continued those of his father Filippo from the year
1460, as above, coll. xcix.
[133] _Cronachetta Volterrana di autore anomino del 1362 al 1478_,
given by M. Tabarrini in the _Arch. Stor. Ital._ App. iii. 317.
[134] The history of the conspiracy, in Machiavelli, b. vii., entirely
reverses the chronology of the occurrences, excepting the speeches
and letters, which correspond but little to the reality. Jacopo Pitti
_Istoria fiorentina_, p. 19, _seq._, gives a clear narrative of the
proceedings. G. M. Banto, in his third book, is diffuse and tedious
with his imaginary speeches. The version of Cardinal Ammanati in
the _Rerum suo tempore gestarum Commentarii_, Milan, 1506, is to be
consulted. Scipione Ammirato gives in his twenty-third book, as usual,
a useful but very dry relation. The remarkable letters and other
writings of the Acciaiuoli and Neroni, as well as the letters of King
Ferrante’s private secretary, Antonello Petrucci, to Lorenzo, November
10, 1466 (see Fabroni as above, ii. 28-38), reveal the persons and
circumstances better than the declamations of antiquated historians.
The conspiracy in itself would scarcely justify a detailed account if
it did not afford so clear a view of the manœuvres of the political
parties in Florence at that time.
[135] Fabroni as above, ii. 38.
[136] Both letters, see Desjardins as above, p. 141 _seq._
[137] Fabroni as above.
[138] Letter of January 10, 1467, to the ambassadors Antonio Ridolfi
and Giovanni Canigiani; see Desjardins, as above, p. 144.
[139] Instruction for Fr. Nori, do. p. 147.
[140] Diotisalvi to Pigello, Malpaga, October 8, 1466; see Fabroni as
above, ii. 38.
[141] _Inferno_, xxvii. 37. The translation of Philalethe gives in the
historical sketch appended to this canto a careful view of the confused
condition of the Romagna in Dante’s days. We have in the continuation
of Litta’s work by L. Passerini the genealogies of most of the great
families of Romagna, the Malatesta, Ordelaffi, Manfredi, and Da Polenta.
[142] Instead of the exceedingly numerous works on the history of
Ferrara, only Litta’s _Genealogy_ will be quoted here.
[143] R. Reposati _Della Zecca di Gubbio_, Bologna, 1772. James
Dennistoun, _Memoirs of the Dukes of Urbino_, London, 1851. F. Ugolino
_Storia dei Conti e Duchi d’Urbino_, Flor. 1859.
[144] N. Ratti _Della Famiglia Sforza_, i. 144 _seq._; Litta, _Sforza
Family_.
[145] Fabroni, _Cosm. Med. Vita_, ii. 169.
[146] Giovanni Gozzadini, _Memorie per la Vita di Giovanni II.
Bentivoglio_, Bologna, 1839.
[147] The most abundant material for the history of the war and peace
of 1467-68 is afforded by Fr. Trinchera, _Codice Aragonese_, i. (Naples
1866), which contains King Ferrante’s correspondence. S. Romanin,
_Storia di Venezia_, b. xi. (vol. iv.) gives the account, having used
D. Malipiero’s _Annali, Veneti_ i.
[148] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, s. cv.
[149] Malipiero as above, p. 215.
[150] Compiègne, September 18, 1468; see Desjardins as above, p. 151.
[151] Guichenon in his _Histoire de la maison de Savoye_ rather doubts
the strange fact, contrary to Corio. See Muratori, _Annali_, 1468.
[152] Vespasiano da Bisticci as above, p. 228.
[153] The inscription reads:
‘Detisalvio . Neronis . f . equiti. floren. viro. integerr. qui.
domi. forisq. multa. pro. rep. optime. gessit. patriae. libertatem.
vehementer. amavit. demum. inter. fortunæ. procellas. summa. cum.
laude. vixit. ann. LXXXI. mens. VI. dies XII. filii. unanimes. patri.
pient se. et. b. m. pos. obiit. anno Christi MCCCCLXXXIIIIII. kl. Aug.’
In an elegy to Lorenzo de’ Medici, probably written after the end of
the Colleonic war, Angelo Poliziano (_Prose volgari inedite_, &c., p.
219) refers to this man’s fate:
‘Diotisalvi left in hasty flight his home; Pining in exile now, he
mourns the slow-footed time.’
[154] Cronachetta Volterrana as above, p. 326. Pecori, _Storia di San
Gemignano_, Flor. 1853, p. 242.
[155] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, s. cviii.
[156] L. Pulci, _Lettere_, p. 31.
[157] See A. Cappelli, _Lettere di Lorenzo de’ Medici conservate
nell’Archivio palatino di Modena in Atti e Memorie delle R. R.
Deputationi di storia pratria per le provincie Modenesi Parmensi_, i.
249.
[158] Purgatorio xxv. 13. Par. iii. 46.
[159] _Ricordi d’una giostra fatta a Firenze a dì 7 Febbraio_ 1481
(1469), after a Magliabechi MS. printed by P. Fanfani in _Il Borghini_,
vol. ii. (Flor. 1864) pp. 473-483, 533-542. Tournaments were also
publicly proclaimed, as at the carnival, 1467, at Perugia. See
_Giornale d’erudizione artistica_, ii. 208.
[160] In the elegy to Lorenzo mentioned above (p. 260), Politian
alludes to the tournament, which is also sung by Ugolino Vieri (Verino).
[161] See Litta, _Fam. Orsini_, table ix. xxiii. In San Salvator in
lauro at Rome, where Latino Orsini lies buried (his monument belongs
to the seventeenth century) the beautiful monument of Clarice’s mother
is to be seen, with a statue of her reposing in death, and beneath,
Magdalena Ursina pudicitiæ exemplum; in the niches, statuettes of the
Madonna, St. Benedict (missing), and St. Scholastica; above, the Orsini
arms, with the inscription:
Ranaldus. Vrsin. archiepus. florent. parenti. b. m. pientiss. p.
For illustration see Litta.
[162] _Tre lettere di Lucrezia Tornabuoni a Piero de’ Medici ed altre
lettere di vari concernenti al matrimonio di Lorenzo il Magnifico con
Clarice Orsini._ (After the MSS. of the Flor. Archives edited by Cesare
Gnasti), Florence, 1859.
[163] The persons named in the letter are: Giovanni Tornabuoni;
Cardinal Latino Orsini, also called Monsignore, the title
(Illustrissimo e Reverendissimo Monsignore) which the cardinals bore
to the times of Urban VIII.; Clarice’s two brothers—Orso (called
Organtino, who married a Savelli), and Rinaldo (afterwards Archbishop
of Florence); Clarice’s uncle Lorenzo, lord of Monterotondo; her uncles
Latino, Giovanni, Archbishop of Irani and Abbot of Farsa, Napoleon,
lord of Bracciano, and Roberto, mentioned above. Of the three young
girls mentioned, Maria can only be Piero’s natural daughter, the wife
of Leonetto de Rossi and mother of Luigi de Rossi, created a cardinal
by Leo X.; Bianca is the wife of Guglielmo de’ Pazzi. Who Lucrezia is,
is obscure. Guasti (as above, p. 10) is mistaken in thinking all three
to be daughters of Piero and Lucrezia. In the _Ricordo_ quoted by him
(Fabroni, _Laur. Med. Vita_, ii. 9), Lorenzo only mentions Bianca and
Nannina Rucellai.
[164] Guasti, as above, 12.
[165] Guasti, as above, p. 12.
[166] Fabroni, as above, ii. 39.
[167] The different letters, see Guasti, as above, pp. 14-16.
[168] The description of the marriage in _Delle Nozze di Lorenzo de’
Medici con Clarice Orsini nel_ 1469 _informazione di Piero Parenti
Fiorentino_, Flor. 1870. The writer says at the beginning that he
has the details from Cosimo Bartoli, one of the speakers at the
festivities. The Magliabechi MS., from which the writing is taken
(Strozzi MSS. xxv. cod. 574), mentions no author; the list of the
MSS., however, gives Piero, the son of Marco Parenti, the author of a
chronicle which has remained in MS., which will again be mentioned. A
similarity between the writings of the latter and this ‘Information’
would be hard to discover, however. The opinion of the unmentioned
editor, that the report was addressed to Filippo Strozzi the elder then
in Naples, has slight foundation.
[169] This valuable little book is enumerated as No. 27 in the
inventory of valuables found in Lorenzo’s house after his death.
[170] A letter written from Careggi on July 13 by Piero to his wife,
who was in town, and which is difficult to understand on account of
allusions to unknown circumstances, arouses the suspicion that Piero
was not quite pleased with this embassy. ‘Tu sai che mal volentieri
decti licentia a Lorenzo per molti rispecti et maxime per non fare
dimostratione di questa mandata. Di a Lorenzo che non esca dello ordine
in cosa alcuna e non faccia tante melarancie non essendo imbasciadore
ch’io non determino che paperi menino a bere l’oche’ (_Med. Arch._).
[171] Fabroni, as above, ii. 53.
[172] As above, p. 56.
[173] Vasari in Verrocchio’s _Life_, as above, v. 142. _Monuments
sépulcraux_, Plate XIV.
[174] Fabroni, as above, ii. 42.
[175] _Storia Fiorentina_, chap. ii.
[176] ‘Discorso di Alessandro de’ Pazzi al cardinale Giulio de’ Medici’
(Pope Clement VII.) anno 1522 in the supplement to Jacopo Pitti’s
_Istoria Fiorentina_ (_Arch. stor. Ital._ i. Flor. 1842), p. 420
_seq._, and Introduction to the same by Gino Capponi, 413 _seq._
[177] Del Reggimento di Firenze, libri ii. In the _Opere inedite_, ii.
Flor. 1858, 1-234.
[178] Beside Machiavelli, Gio. Mich. Bruto has this story in his book,
and according to custom made Piero deliver a speech to his partisans,
filling many pages (‘Ita ad illos loquutus fertur,’ i. 380 _seq._).
But this author cannot be considered as an authority. A better one is
Vespasiano da Bisticci, who, however, limits the project of recall to
Agnolo Acciaiuoli. The Neapolitan ambassador, Marino Tomacelli, is said
to have been present at Piero’s interview with the heads of the party.
[179] Despatch of King Ferrante to Antonio Cicinello and Marino
Tomacelli, February 26, 1467; see Trinchera (as above), 65.
[180] Despatch of August 14: Trinchera, 209.
[181] Del Reggimento di Firenze, as above, 34, 64, 97.
[182] Niccolo Roberti to Duke Borso, Florence, December 4, 1469;
see Cappelli, as above, i. 250. ‘I quali due ultime (i.e. Pitti
and Martelli) soggiunsero che si aveva a riconoscere uno signore e
superiore che avesse unanime a trattare tutte le cose occorrenti
concernenti lo Stato di questa eccelsa Signoria.’
[183] Guicciardini, _Storia Fiorentina_, chap. ii. Machiavelli has
embellished the story in his fashion, and spoken of Lorenzo and
Giuliano as being present at the consultation, which is very unlikely.
Roscoe, chap, iii., has been led by this incongruous statement and
Lorenzo’s notices to believe the whole affair to be fictitious. On the
day after the consultation they went to the Medici.
[184] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, s. cxiii. cxiv. cxviii.; Guicciardini,
_Storia Fiorentina_, chap. iii.
[185] Fabroni, as above, ii. 47.
[186] _The Medicean Archives_ (divisione avanti il principato), contain
an endless series of letters from princes and great men, which afford a
proof of the widely-spread and intimate connections of Lorenzo and his
family.
[187] Luigi Pulci, _Lettere_, p. 38, and later.
[188] Bern, _Corio_, b. vi. chap. ii. Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, s. cxv.
cxvi. L. Pulci, _Lettere_, p. 51 (Letter from Naples, March 19). G.
Tommasi, _Sommario della Storia di Lucca_, Flor. 1847 (vol. x. of the
_Arch. Stor. Ital_.) 336.
[189] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, s. cxxii. The king is called ‘Re di Dacia o
signore di Norvecia.’ Beneath the arch of the Porta San Gallo, we read
on a marble tablet a remembrance of a successor of Christiern, King
Frederick IV., who visited Venice and Florence in 1708, and had great
pleasure in contemplating the treasures of art. The Medici, whom his
predecessors had seen rise so brilliantly, were then almost extinct.
[190] L. Pulci, _Lettere_, p. 96 (Letter of June 16, 1475).
[191] Fabroni, as above, ii. 66 _seq._ Desjardins, 161 _seq._ The
Dauphin, afterwards King Charles VIII. was born in 1470, Beatrice of
Aragon in 1457. In 1476 she married Mathias Corvinus, King of Hungary.
[192] L. Pulci, as above, p. 63 (Fuligno, May 20, 1472).
[193] _Med. Arch. Filza_, 34.
[194] Cosimo Rucellai, Bernardo’s son and Lucrezia’s grandson; born
1468, died 1495. The marriage with Madonna Argentina, daughter of
Gabriel Malaspina, Marchesa of Fosdinovo, took place only in 1492.
(The widow married Piero Soderini, later Gonfaloniere for life.) The
expression ‘nuova di zecca,’ or ‘zecca al gitto’ for unexpected news,
is still used in Tuscany at the present day.
[195] L. Pulci, as above, p. 83.
[196] When Muratori, in vol. xxiii. of the _Scriptores rer. Ital._,
printed the Commentariolus de bello Volaterrano, a. 1472, by Antonio
Ivano (Hyvaniss) of Sarzana, then Chancellor of Volterra, he remarks
with his usual insight how cautiously one must proceed in employing
this apologetic official account, evidently ordered in Florence, of
a man not well spoken of. (Ivano came to Florence in March, 1473, as
ambassador from Sarzana; see Gaye, _Carteggio inedito_, vol. i. p. 251.
There is a description by him of the ruins of Luni.) The anonymous
‘Cronachetta Volterrana’ already quoted, which M. Tabarrini gives in
the _Arch. Stor. Ital._, App. vol. iii., is also favourable to the
Florentines. Machiavelli and G. M. Bruto, who copied from him, have an
account not only insufficient but incorrect, in respect to the causes
which led to the quarrel; Alamanno Rinuccini, as above, s. cxx., has
only short notices of the war; Scipione Ammirato has no desire of
agreeing with Machiavelli. How Raffael Maffei (Volterranus) regarded
the matter is shown by his ‘Comment. Urb.’ and the whole of his
proceedings towards the Medici. Stan. Gatteschi has in his translation
of Bruto (vol. ii. p. 90, _seq._) investigated the origin of the whole
conflict with the help of documents. The name of Lorenzo de’ Medici
is not to be found in the contract which mentions the members of
the trading company, but in the contemporary ‘Ricordi’ of Zaccharia
Zucchi (see Fabroni, as above, vol. ii. p. 62). Francesco Guicciardini
(_Stor. Fior._ chap, iii.), who had the traditions of his own house at
his disposal, although he remarks that the fact was unknown to him,
also speaks of Lorenzo’s selfish intentions in the affair, and how
he oppressed the Volterrans, because he feared a diminution of their
general respect if he did not succeed in his purpose. Louis XI.’s
letter to the Florentines of June 3O, wherein he complains of the
silence of the Republic about the Volterran affairs, is in Desjardins,
as above, p. 157; the letter from the Signori of July 1, p. 58; and the
answer to the first of July 30, p. 160.
[197] Fabroni, as above, vol ii. p. 63.
[198] Lorenzo to Sixtus IV., November 21, 1472. See Fabroni, vol. ii.
p. 61 (Quello che essa ha a me tanto liberalmente in questa causa
promessa). The letters of Cardinal Ammanati from 1473, idem. pp. 58-61.
[199] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, s. cxxi., cxxii.; _Cronaca di Notar.
Giacomo_, p. 126. Angelo Politiano refers to the presence of Eleonore
in his beautiful elegy on the death of Albiera degli Albizzi—_Prose
volgari inedite_, &c., p. 140. (‘Cum celebres linquens Sirenum nomine
muros—Herculeumque petens regia nata torum,’ &c.)
[200] _Med. Arch._
[201] See Cappelli, as above, p. 251.
[202] L. Passerini, _Manfredi Family_. Ratti, _Della Famiglia Sforza_,
vol. ii. p. 35, _seq._
[203] Litta, _Vitelli Family_. A. Fabretti, _Capitani venturieri
dell’Umbria_, vol. iii. p. 37, _seq._ Roberto Orsi, _De obsidione
Tifernatum Città di Castello_, 1538, reprinted by D. M. Manni in vol.
ii. of J. M. Tartini’s Supplements to the Muratori Collection.
[204] June 28, 1474: Fabroni, as above, vol. ii. p. 105.
[205] Florence, December 25, 1475. See D. Moreni, _Lettere di Lorenzo
il Magnifico al S. P. Innocenzo VIII._ Flor., 1830, p. 1, _seq._ The
letter addressed to Sixtus IV. is here incomprehensibly referred to his
successor.
[206] _Ricordi_, s. cxxiii. cxxiv.
[207] _Chronicle of Piero di Marco Parenti_, MS. of the Magliabechiana;
_Letter of Angelo Poliziano to Madonna Lucrezia de’ Medici_ of May 31,
1477, in Poliziano’s _Prose Volgari Inedite_, &c. p. 49.
[208] _Cronaca di Notar Giacomo_, pp. 134-137.
[209] The date results from Morelli’s _Chronicle_. See T. Dellungo in
G. Carducci’s edition of Poliziano’s _Italian Poems_, Flor. 1863, p.
xxvii. Piero de’ Medici mentions the desire of his younger son in a
letter to Lorenzo, then at Milan, Fabroni, _l.c._ vol. ii. p. 52.
[210] Vasari, vol. x. p. 293. C. Quarti, _Le Ville Bandinelli a
Pizzidimonte, in Belle Arti Opuscoli descritivi e biografici_, Florence
1874, p. 345, &c.
[211] _Ricordi_, s. cxxv.
[212] L. Pulci, l. c. p. 99.
[213] Rinuccini, _Ricordi_, s. cxxvi.
[214] Rome, Oct. 15, 1474, _Med. Arch._
[215] ‘Ad Franciscum Salviatum,’ 1473, in the _Prose Volgari_, &c. p.
113. He calls him ‘dulcis Salviate,’ and says ‘Parva peto, dare magna
soles; da parva petenti.’
[216] Niccolò Bendedei to Ercole d’Este. See A. Cappelli. l. c. p. 252.
[217] _Chronicles_ of Giovanni di Juzzo, in the _Cronache e Statuti
della Città di Viterbo_, ed. Ignazio Ciampi, Flor. 1872, p. 414.
Fabretti, _Capitani dell’Umbria_, vol. ii. p. 307.
[218] Sixtus IV. to Federigo di Montefeltro, Rome, June 9, 1477.
(_Arch. of Urbino_, in the Tuscan Central Arch., Cl. I. Div. G., Filza,
104.)
[219] Malavolti, _Historia di Siena_, part iii. book 4, p. 71.
[220] _Med. Arch._, Filza 34.
[221] Fabroni, 1. c. vol. ii. p. 106.
[222] A 1. c. p. 160.
[223] Guicciardini, _Storia Fior._, p. 34, and _Ricordi di Famiglia_.
Jacopo de’ Pazzi’s letters to Lorenzo, Fabroni, 1. cit. vol. ii. p. 104.
[224] Fabroni, 1. c. vol. ii. p. 105.
[225] The confession of Giovan Batista da Montesecco, in the _Excusatio
Florentinorum_, drawn up by the Chancellor Bartolommeo Scala in
Fabroni, vol. ii. p. 167, gives the clearest insight into the course
of the conspiracy, and the measure of Pope Sixtus IV’s. share in it.
We have not the least ground to doubt the truth of the statements
contained in this document. The best-known contemporary account of
the occurrences is Angelo Poliziano’s _De Coniuratione Pactiana
Commentarius_, printed in the year of the conspiracy, and extremely
rare, reprinted in the edition of Poliziano’s works which appeared at
Bâle, 1553, and then carefully re-edited, with many valuable additions
by Giovanni Adimari. A translation made, as it seems, after the middle
of the sixteenth century, was printed in the _Prose Volgari inedite_,
&c., di Angelo Poliziano, Flor. 1867, pp. 87-105. There was no lack of
later translation. The relation of the facts is undoubtedly correct;
the opinions regarding the acting persons are those of a partizan. The
later ones follow that of Poliziano in all essentials, whom, however,
G. M. Bruto rightly accuses of partizanship. The best and most reliable
representation, according to the documents, is that in Scipione
Ammirato, in the twenty-fourth book of his Florentine History, printed
separately with remarks, Flor. 1826. Fabroni, as usual, has selected
the most important from the documentary materials, as far as they were
at his disposal in Florence.
[226] _Med. Archiv._
[227] Rome, January 15, 1478. (The delivery of the letter followed on
the 22nd, according to Lorenzo.) _Med. Arch._
[228] _Med. Archiv._
[229] List of Filippo Strozzi after a Riccardi MS. in _Vita di Filippo
Strozzi il vecchio, scritta da Lorenzo suo figlio, per cura di Giuseppe
Bini e Pietro Bigazzi_. Flor. 1851, p. 55, _seq._
[230] Piero di Marco Parenti, _Flor. Hist._ MS. of the Magliabechiana.
See above, p. 277.
[231] Filippo Strozzi relates that Nori was slain by the side of
Giuliano.
[232] Concerning the different sentences pronounced on command of
the Magnifici Octoviri from April 28 to May 18 and August 3rd, 1478,
see _Sententiæ Dni. Matthæi de Toscanis de Mediolano Potestatis_,
Florentiæ, 1477-1478, from the Strozzi MSS. G. Adimari, l. c. pp.
136-155. A less correct list of those executed and killed after a
Magliabechian MS. in the Appendix to the separate imprint of Scip.
Ammirato’s Report, pp. 86-88. On June 9, 1478, Sforza degli Oddi wrote
to Lorenzo to recommend to him Madonna Andrea, widow of Messer Gentile
de Graziani, a Peruginese emigrant, who had perished in the tumult
(_Med. Arch._, Filza 36, see _Cronache di Perugia_, vol. ii. p. 589).
[233] Letter of May 22, 1478, _Med. Arch._
[234] Fabroni, p. 111. (Ex cod. 170, _Provision. Reip. Flor._).
[235] See book v. The palace in the Borgo degli Albizzi, belonging to a
branch of the family in the present day, with the large garden, whose
portal in the Via dell’Orinolo was ascribed to Donatello, has lately
disappeared in building the National Bank.
[236] Vasari’s assertion that these libellous pictures are by the hand
of Andrea del Castagno arises from an anachronism.
[237] Vasari, in the _Life of Verrocchio_, vol. v. p. 152. According
to this description, one might suppose that the figures were still
existing at Vasari’s time. Other Medicean portraits (Voti), in the
Annunziata were destroyed after the revolution of 1527.
[238] Letter to Gio. Lanfredini of August 18, 1487, _Med. Archiv._ The
priorate of Capua came later to Leone Strozzi, the son of Filippo and
Clarice de’ Medici, Lorenzo’s granddaughter.
[239] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p.
[240] Fabroni, l. c., ii. 116.
[241] Romanin, iv. 389.
[242] In the document, _Synodus florentina_, cap. ix.
[243] Allegretto Allegretti, _Diarj Senesi_; Muratori, _R. It. Scr._,
xxiii. col. 784.
[244] Bull, see Rainaldi, _Annales Eccl._, x. 582 _et seq._, and
Fabroni, l. c. ii. 121 _et seq._
[245] Rome, June 1478, _Med. Arch._
[246] _Instructio pro. R. Card. Mantuano_, &c. Copy without date. MSS.
Capponi, cod. xxii. cat. no. 1230.
[247] Letter of the Doge Andrea Vendramin. Capponi MSS. cod. cccxiii.
[248] Romanin, l. c., iv. 390.
[249] _Cronaca di Notar Giacomo_, pp. 128-132. The statement of Barante
(_Histoire des ducs de Bourgogne_, ‘Charles the Bold,’ b. iv.), that
Campobasso came to France with the Anjou prince, is erroneous according
to this. The condottiere belonged to the Aragonese party. In Naples the
defeat at Nancy was ascribed to his treason, _Cronaca_, 1. c. p. 133.
[250] _Idem_, p. 129.
[251] See first, Fabroni, p. 119; also Desjardins, p. 171; French,
in Kervyn de Lettenhove, _Lettres et Négociations de Philippe de
Commines_, i. 173.
[252] The documents relative to Commines’ mission. See Kervyn de
Lettenhove, i. 173-182.
[253] Florence, June 19, 1478. See Fabroni, p. 132.
[254] Kervyn de Lettenhove, iii. 11.
[255] _Mémoires_, vi. chap. v.
[256] _Archives of Urbino (Tuscan. Central Arch.)_, class i. div. iv.
104.
[257] Brief of Sixtus IV. to the parish of Perugia, Rome, June 10,
1478, in the _Cronache e Storie di Perugia_, ii. 580.
[258] _Divine Comedy_, Purg. xiv. 48.
[259] _Divine Comedy, Inferno_, xxix. 46.
[260] The best details of the campaign of 1478-9 are given in
Allegretti’s _Diarj Senesi Sanesi_, 1. c., 784-797.
[261] Rainaldi, _Ann. Eccl._, 1. c., p. 585.
[262] Roscoe, _Illustrations_, Doc. v., Heidelberg edit., iv. 199.
[263] Fabroni, ii. 136-166. See above, p. 387.
[264] Letter of July 25, 1478, in Fabroni, ii. 130.
[265] G. M. Canale, _Nuova Istoria della Republica di Genova_, iv. 212.
[266] Rosmini, _Istoria di Gian Jacopo Trivulzio_, Mil. 1815, i. 31
_seq._; ii. 31 _seq._
[267] Rainaldi, _Ann. Eccl._, 1. c., p. 591; Kervyn de Lettenhove, 1.
c., iii. 12.
[268] Kervyn de Lettenhove, l. c., i. 185.
[269] _Mémoires_, 1, vi. chap. 5.
[270] Warrant of Louis XI. for Lorenzo de’ Medici and Commines, July
13, 1478. Warrant for Commines to grant the investiture of the same
date, in Kervyn de Lettenhove, i. 185-188. Despatches of the Milanese
ambassadors at Florence, &c., ib. iii. 13-29.
[271] Ib., 1. c., pp. 190, 191.
[272] Letter of the Signoria, August 23, 1478; Desjardins, 1. c.,
p. 172; Kervyn de Lettenhove (French), i. 190; Letter of Lorenzo in
Kervyn, p. 191. When Commines says in his memoirs, ‘Je demourai au dit
lieu de Florence un an, ou dans leurs territoires,’ this is incorrect.
He did not arrive at Turin much before the middle of June; went from
thence to Milan, Florence, and Rome; and at the beginning of October
was again in Lyons.
[273] Letter of Louis XI. to Lorenzo de’ Medici, November 1, 1478, and
instructions for the ambassadors, from the Medici Archives, Desjardins,
1. c., vol. i. pp. 174-184.
[274] Rainaldi, _Ann. Eccl._, l. c., pp. 588-590.
[275] Malipiero, _Annali Veniti_, i. 247; Romanin, l. c., iv. 391
[276] The demand that the caricature of the Archbishop of Pisa should
be erased is dated February 9, 1479. Gaye, 1. c., p. 574.
[277] Romanin, 1. c., iv. 382.
[278] Notices of the treaties in Rome from the documents of the
Medicean Archives, Desjardins, 1. c., i. 184-186; Scip. Ammirato, 1.
c., pp. 131-136; Rainaldi, _Ann. Eccl._ x. 587 _seq._
[279] _Cronache Ec._ di Viterbo, p. 420 _seq._
[280] Scipione Ammirato, book xxiv. Pezzana, _Storia di Parma_, iv.
86-128.
[281] Vincenzo Acciaiuoli, _Vita di Piero Capponi_, in the _Arch. Stor.
Ital._, iv. pt. 2, p. 17. Tommasi, _Storia di Lucca_, p. 338.
[282] Rosmini, _Storia di Milano_, iii. 82. Pezzana, 1. c. p. 144 _seq_.
[283] Despatches of December 30, 1478, January 13, and July 18, 1479,
in _Kervyn de Lettenhore_, l. c. i. 232, 239, 271.
[284] Despatches of Visconti and Cagnola, Orleans, September 1, 1479,
l. c. p. 283 _seq._
[285] Letter of Antonio Pucci to Lorenzo de’ Medici, Flor. June 18,
1479; see Fabroni, l. c. p. 199.
[286] _Med. Arch._
[287] D. Malipiero, l. c. i. 482.
[288] _Mémoires_, 1. vii. c. 2.
[289] _Cronache Milanesi_, pp. 186, 187.
[290] Molini (G. Capponi), _Documenti di Storia Italiana_, Flor. 1836,
i. 297.
[291] _Instructio D. Nicolai Martelli ituri ad Laur. Medicem_, see
Fabroni, l. c. ii. 189 seq. ‘Inter os et offam multa accidere
possent.’ ‘Jactet aleam.’
[292] Pier Filippo Pandolfini to the Magistracy of Ten, Milan, November
22, 1479. Fabroni, pp. 196-199.
[293] See above, Bk. 3, ch. i. Filippo says: ‘Che totalmentegli si
rimetteva nelle braccia e che in quello modo Sua Maestà lo volessi o
grande o basso dentro o fuori, era contento, di modo che S. M. rendesse
pacie alla città e le terre tolte.’—_Idem._ l. c. p. 58.
[294] Guicciardini, _Storia Fiorentina_, cap. vi.
[295] The danger which Lorenzo de’ Medici exposed himself to has been
made much greater in later times than it really was. Jacopo Pitti (l.
c. p. 25) says clearly that safety had been promised him both by the
king and the pope (?); but it was believed that he gave himself into
Ferrante’s power unconditionally (liberamente), in order to increase
the fame of the latter and the splendour of his own patriotism. The
danger lay less in what might happen at Naples than what might occur
at Florence from a longer absence. Guicciardini hints at this (p.
59). Confidence shown in a man like the king was never without danger
however.
[296] _Lettere de’ Principi_ (Venet. edit. 1581), i. 3. Translated by
Roscoe, i. 221.
[297] _Lettere di Lorenzo de’ Medici_ from the Modena Archives, edited
by A. Cappelli. _Atti e Memorie della R. Diputazione di Storia patria
per le prov. Modenesi e Parmensi_, i. 230.
[298] Malavotti, _Historia di Sienna_, part iii. p. 176.
[299] B. Scala’s Letter (see Fabroni, p. 205) has the date of December
5, which must be a mistake, as the Signoria was first informed on the
7th.
[300] Lorenzo de’ Medici to the Ferrarese ambassador Antonio
Montecatino, Pisa, December 10; see Cappelli, l. c. p. 240.
[301] _Cronaca di Notar Giacomo_, p. 145.
[302] Fabroni, i. 103 _seq._, has an address to the king spoken by
Lorenzo, evidently a later oratorical production.
[303] Guicciardini, l. c. chap. vi. p. 58.
[304] Fabroni, l. c. ii. 201, 202. Agnolo della Stufa to Lorenzo de’
Medici, January 4, 1480; _Idem._ pp. 207-210.
[305] Carlo Visconti to the regency at Milan, Tours, January 30, 1480;
see Kervyn de Lettenhove, i. 318.
[306] Guicciardini, l. c.
[307] Bart. Scala to Lorenzo de’ Medici, January 12, 1480; see Fabroni,
l. c. ii. 202-204.
[308] Lorenzo de’ Medici to the Ten, Naples, January 3, 1480; Fabroni,
l. c. ii. 206.
[309] Capponi MSS. xxii. p. 68 _seq._ (_Catalogo_, No. 1212). The date
is wanting in the copy; but the instruction must be of 1459, as this
year is spoken of as the present one.
[310] Fabroni, l. c. ii. 207-210.
[311] Letter of Ippolita Maria, Castel Capuano, July 3, 1480; Fabroni,
1. c. ii. 223.
[312] (Ratti) _Della Famiglia Sforza_, ii. 11. See above, p. x.
Lascaris’ Greek grammar, dedicated to Ippolita, appeared at Milan 1476.
[313] Diarium Parmense, see Muratori, _R. It. Scr._ vol. xxiii. col.
335.
[314] Alamanno Rinuccini, l. c. s. cxxxi.
[315] Agnolo della Stufa, l. c.
[316] Ercole d’Este to Ant. Montecatini, March 19, 1480; see Cappelli,
l. c. p. 253.
[317] Jacobi Volaterrani, _Diarium Rom._, ad. a. 1479 (1480); see
Muratori, _R. It. Scr._ vol. xxiii. col. 100.
[318] Ferrante to Lorenzo, Castelnuovo, March 1, 1480; Fabroni, ii.
213-216.
[319] Jacobi Volat. _Diar._, 1. c.
[320] Ercole d’Este to Ant. Montecatini, April 20, 1480; Cappelli, 1.
c. p. 253.
[321] _Cronaca di Notar. Giacomo_, p. 146.
[322] Angelo di Costanzo mentions the suspicion in his History of
Naples; but an author of the second half of the sixteenth century is no
authority. That Lorenzo, in a letter to Albino, the Duke of Calabria’s
secretary, who entertained the same suspicion (see Fabroni, l. c. ii.
216), rejoices over Alfonso’s success and speaks of _cani Turchi_,
proves as little on the other side.
[323] See Fabroni, l. c. ii. 217.
[324] Jac. Volaterr, l. c. pp. 113, 118.
[325] _Regola del Governo di Cura Familiare del B. Giovanni Dominici_,
pubbl. da Donato Salvi, Flor., 1860.
[326] L. Mehus, _Epistola di M. Lapo da Castiglionchio_, Bologna, 1653.
Fr. Bocchi, _Elogia_, in G. E. Galletti’s edit. of Philippi Villani,
_Liber de civitatis Florentiæ famosis civibus, et de Florentinorum
Litteratura principes fere synchroni Scriptores_, Flor. 1847, pp. 9, 12.
[327] In the decree of August 27 (Gaye, l. c. i. 573) we read:
‘Cogitantes magnifici viri priores artium et vexillifer virtutem
supremam, vitam sinceram, mores honestos et in omnibus exemplares,
religionis integritatem, doctrinam sanctam utilem et decoram, ac vere
sancte et summæ eloquentiæ vas habundans venerabilis et omni tempore
cum laude memorandi magistri Loysii de Marsiliis de Florentiæ’, &c.
[328] The students were then placed on an equal footing with the
burghers by law, ‘tractentur ut cives populares.’ See Gaye, l. c. i.
461; Prezziner, _Storia del Pubblico Studio di Firenze_, Flor. 1810, i.
3; Fabroni, _Historia Academiæ Pisanæ_, i. 46.
[329] Extract of the decree of August 7, 1348, _apud_ Gaye, 1.c. p. 499.
[330] L. Mehus, _Ambrosii Traversarii_, &c.; _Latinæ Epistolæ accedit
eiusdem Ambrosii vita_, &c., Flor. 1759, i. 356.
[331] G. Shepherd, _Vita di Poggio Bracciolini, trad. da T. Tonelli_,
Flor. 1825. The numerous corrections and additions made by the
translator of the English work which appeared in 1802 are based on
careful investigation. Tonelli arranged later a complete edition of
Poggio’s letters, the first volume of which appeared at Florence in
1831 (_Poggii Epistolæ ed. a Th. Tonellio_), the second long after the
editor’s death, while the third is still wanting.
[332] Mehus, _Ambr. Travers. Epist._ i. 178.
[333] Savigny, _History of Roman Law_, &c., iii. 583 and elsewhere. A.
Kirchhoff, the manuscript collector of the Middle Ages, in Naumann’s
_Serapeum_, 1852, p. 17 _seq._ Fr. Bonaini, _I libri, gli Stazionari, i
Peciari, i Copisti_, &c., in the _Giornale Stor. degli Archiv. Tosc_.
iv. 97 _seq._ The price of the _Corpus Juris_, from the legacy _quondam
Cristofani judicis_, amounted to 112 Sienese liri.
[334] _Lettere della B. Chiara Gambacorta Pisana_ (edited by Cesare
Guasti), Pisa, 1871.
[335] _Commissioni_, i. 86.
[336] _Lettere della B. Chiara Gambacorta_, p. 59.
[337] Marco Foscarini, _Dei Veneziani raccoglitori di Codici_, in the
Appendix to his _Storia Arcana_, Flor. 1843, vol. v. of the _Archiv.
Storico Italiano_.
[338] Gayo, l. c. i. 533.
[339] Information respecting Leonardo Bruni has been collected by C.
Monzani: _Leonardo Bruni Aretino_, in the _Archivio Stor. Ital._,
series ii. vol. v. (reprinted in _Istoria Fiorentina di Leon. Aretino,
tradotta in volgare da Donato Acciaiuoli_, Flor. 1861). L. Mehus’
edition of the letters appeared at Flor. 1741. The literary Academy of
Arezzo planned (Flor. 1856) a reprint of the Florentine history which
had first appeared in 1610, with Acciaiuoli’s version opposite, which,
completed in 1473, had been published at Venice three years later,
while the original remained so long inedited.
[340] With a Latin translation by B. Moneta, Flor. 1755; German by C.
F. Neumann, Frankfort, 1822; and new revision of the text by L. W.
Hasper, Leipsig, 1841.
[341] Gaye, 1. c. i. 545, 554, 560.
[342] Fabroni, _Magni Cosmi Med. Vita_, ii. 217.
[343] L. Mehus, _Ambrosii Traversarii_, &c.; _Latinæ Epistolæ_, &c.
[344] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 240.
[345] Vespasiano da Bisticci, 1. c. p. 439. Letters of Nicholas V. to
Marsuppini and the Signoria, October 24, 1452, p. 441.
[346] Detailed Latin biography by Naldo Naldi, Muratori, _Scr. r.
Ital._ vol. xx.; Vespasiano da Bisticci, 1. c. p. 444 _seq._ For the
introduction to the latter by Bernardo del Nero, with a short outline
and list of Manetti’s writings, as well as an Italian extract from
Naldi by one of the Ricci family, see Galletti, 1. c. p. 129 _seq._
Compare _Apostolo Zeno Dissertaz._, Voss, i. 170 _seq._
[347] The original of the _Statuta Populi et Communis Florentiæ_ is to
be found, with the MSS. of numerous other statutes, in the Florentine
archives; printed in three volumes, said to be at Freiburg, 1778-83.
See Lami, _Antichità Toscane_, i. 522, and N. Salvetti, _Antiquitates
Florentinæ jurisprudentiam Etruriæ illustrantes_, Flor. 1777.
[348] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 283.
[349] _Tractatus quo concluditur: Nullam Gentilium scientiam chatolicæ
fidei christianæ esse contrariam_, addressed to Malatesta de’ Malatesti
by Pesaro as umpire, Rinaldo is termed therein, ‘Nobilis florentinus
juvenis Rainaldus domini Masii de Albicis de Florentia.’ There is a
tract by the same author, _De electione medici ad nobilem florentinum
juvenem Cosmum Johannis Bitii de Medicis_; see _Commissioni di R. d.
A_. iii. 601 _seq._; Mehus, 1. c. p. 394.
[350] On the sonnet generally ascribed to Burchiello, ‘O umil popol
mio, tu non ti avvedi,’ see _Commissioni_, iii. 647.
[351] Rosmini, _Vita di Francesco Filelfo da Tolentino_, Milan, 1808,
i. 35.
[352] Fabroni, l. c. ii. 69.
[353] Phil. _Sat._ ii. 3; iv. 1; Shepherd, l. c. i. 238. Rosmini, p.
75, has no desire to dwell on revolting subjects.
[354] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 246.
[355] L. Mehus, l. c. p. 18; Poggio, _Opera_, p. 278.
[356] _Epist. I._ iii. 29 (in Tonelli’s edit. i. 269).
[357] _Idem._, iv. 16, 17 (i. 333, 339).
[358] Shepherd, l. c. i. 155, 222.
[359] Tiraboschi, _Stor._ lett. vi. 1 (vol. vii.), p. 263. A. Peruzzi,
in Hercolani’s _Biografie d’illustri Piceni_, i. 27, very superficial.
L. Mehus’ edition of _Kyriaci Anconitani Itinerarium_, Flor. 1742, is
insufficient; information about him has been carefully collected in
the preface and in Traversari’s life. For the opinion of Alberto degli
Alberti respecting the state of Rome in Pope Eugenius IV.’s time in a
letter to Giovanni de’ Medici, Cosimo’s son, see Fabroni, 1. c. ii. 165.
[360] Vespasiano da Bisticci, 1. c. p. 511; G. Cantalamessa, Hercolani,
i. 117 _seq._
[361] G. Voigt, _Die Wiederbelebung des classischen Alterthums_, p. 361.
[362] Mehus, 1. c. ii. 335.
[363] Apostolo Zeno, 1. c. i. 318; Fabroni, 1. c. i. 136, ii. 223.
[364] _Histor. de var. Fort._ p.92; Traversari, _Epist._ v. 10 (ii.
245).
[365] Fr. Schulze, _Geschichte der Philosophie der Renaissance_, i.
Jena, 1874.
[366] Gio. Corsi, _Marsilii Ficini Vita_, with introduction and notes
by A. M. Bandini, Pisa, 1771; reprinted by Galletti Philippi Villani,
_Liber_, &c., pp. 183-214. L. Galeotti, _Saggio intorno alla vita e
agli scritti di M. F._ in the _Arch. Stor. Ital._, series ii., ix. 2,
25 _seq._ (A careful collection of Ficino’s opinions, especially on
religion and particularly from his letters.) Edit. of the Works, Basle,
1576, with twelve books of letters in vol. i. There is an Italian
translation of the letters, _Lettere di M. F., tradotte per M. Felice,
Figliucci Senese_, Venice, 1556. Ficino composed his commentary to
Plato’s Banquet and his book on the Christian religion in Italian also.
Edit. of the first, Flor. 1544; the second, Flor. 1568 (Gamba, _Testi
di Lingua_, 1097, 1098).
[367] M. Ficino, _Epistolæ_, book i.; see vol. i. p. 192; vol. ii. p.
29 _seq._
[368] In Lord Vernon’s illustrated edition of the _Inferno_ there is a
representation of Landino’s grave and the body.
[369] A. M. Bandini, _Specimen literaturæ Florentinæ sæculi XV._ Flor.
1748 (_History and Monuments of the Florentine Literature of the second
half of the Fifteenth Century_, in the form of a biography of Landino);
see vol. ii. p. 40 _seq._
[370] _Ad Jacobum Salvettum de laudibus M. Cosmi_, Bandini, i. 102.
[371] _Lettere di Sant’Antonino_, Flor. 1859, pp. 126, 193. On the
embassies to Rome entrusted to the Archbishop in the years 1455 and
1458: _Due Legazioni al Sommo Pontefice per il Comune di Firenze,
presedute da Sant’Antonino arcivescovo_ (edited by Cesare Guasti),
Flor. 1857. Of the works of the Saint, for which see Brunet’s _Manuel
bibliographique_, i. 330, we need only mention here, _Opera a ben
vivere di S. A., messa a luce con altri suoi ammaestramenti e una
giunta di antiche orazioni Toscane, da Fr. Palermo_, Flor. 1858.
[372] L. c. p. 193.
[373] Fabroni, l. c.
[374] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 291.
[375] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 482.
[376] Gaye, l. c. i. 545; see above, p. 528.
[377] Shepherd, l. c. i. 255.
[378] _Idem._ p. 261.
[379] Vespasiano da Bisticci, pp. 210, 213, 402.
[380] ‘Protonotaio apostolico inghilese,’ ‘Messer Andrea Ols,’ l. c. p.
238.
[381] See vol. ii. pp. 141, 142.
[382] Inscription:
SOCIETATI MEDICEÆ APUD DEUM FRATRES ET STUDIOSI OMNES LINGUIS ANIMISQUE
FAVERE TENEMUR QUOD SUA IMPENSA LOCUM BIBLIOTHECÆ OMNI CULTU ET ORNATU
JOANNE LANFREDINO SOCIO FACIUNDUM CURAVIT.
The bitter words in the sonnet mentioned on page 451, after the recall
of the decree of 1434, ‘del tuo gran tesoro—ti vota sempre, e empie a
Marco il seno,’ refer to Cosimo’s munificence at Venice.
[383] Plan of San Marco in (Aurelio Gotti’s) _le Gallerie de Firenze_.
[384] Mehus, _Ambr. Trav. Epist._ i. 63.
[385] ‘Ex hereditate doctissimi viri Nicolai de Nicolis de Florentia.’
These and similar words we read in the MSS. also.
[386] ‘Inventarium Nicolai p. v. quod ipso composuit ad instantiam
Cosmæ de Medicis ut ab ipso Cosma audivi die xii Nov. 1463. Ego frater
Leonardus Ser. Uberti de Florentia ord. præd.’ &c. MSS. of the same
library. See Mehus, _Traversari_, i. 65, where are a number of details
respecting the history of the Collection partly from Fra Roberto
Ubaldini’s _Annales Marciani_.
[387] ‘Liber Colucii Pierii de Salutatis cancellarii florentini Liber
Cosmæ Johannis de Medicis de Florentia.’ Such is the inscription on
such Codices.
[388] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 382.
[389] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 252.
[390] (N. Anziani) _Della Biblioteca Mediceo-Laurenziana in Firenze_,
Flor. 1872, pp. 4, 6, 22, 24.
[391] In a MS. of the Epistles of St. Paul (Codd. Fiesolani Laur. cod.
v.) we read the following inscription: Magnifici viri Cosmae de Medicis
ingens liberalitas, eximia virtus et charitas prope singularis ex
omni parte sese ostendit. Sacras has ædificavit ædes, his religiosis
viris canonicis regularibus quæ ad usum vitæ necessaria erant paravit,
postremo illis has epistolas Pauli dono dedit ut nihil relinqueretur
quod esset ab illis ulterius expetendum. Adsit igitur clementissimus
Deus et benedicat ei omnibus diebus vitæ suæ. Ex hereditate Joannis
filii sui.’
In a MS. of the works of the Fathers of the Church (cod. lv.) we
find: ‘Has Sanctorum Patrum Collationes quas Joannes Cassianus
luculentissime edidit Magnificus Cosmus Medices viginti aureis emit et
huic Divi Bartholomæi fesulano monasterio quod a fundamentis erexit
sua pietate dedit anno MCCCCLXII. Inter orandum eius animæ memores
estote. Timotheus Veronensis.’ In the Cod. lxxii.: ‘In hoc volumine
quisquis legendo profecerit Petro Mediceo Cosmi filio acceptum referri
debebit qui eximiam patris pietatem atque religionem prosequutus hoc
ipso multisque aliis præclarissimis libris bibliothecam istam ornavit,
cui æternum munus cumulatamque mercedem reddat Deus opt. max.’ In
the cod. clvii.: ‘Laurentius Medices Petri filius eiusque virtutis
et gloriæ æmulator felicissimus codicem hunc illustri suo nomine ab
auctore dicatum huic preciosæ librorum supellectili avita paternaque
magnificentia ac liberalitate institutæ addendum merito duxit ut et
eam hoc munere locupletiorem ornatioremque redderet et opus eius
scriptorisque nomine insigne ipsa quoque sede illustrius fieret ac
multorum ingeniis deserviret. Orato itaque lector ut gloria et divitiæ
sint in domo eius justitia eius et maneat in sæculum sæculi.’
[392] _Descrizione del palazzo d’Urbino in versi e prose di Bernardino
Baldi_, Flor. 1859.
[393] Vespasiano da Bisticci in the _Life of Federigo_, l. c. 94 _seq._
The inventory of the library of Urbino by Federigo Veterano in the
_Giornale stor. degli Arch. tosc._ vi. and vii.
[394] _Giorn. stor. degli Arch. tosc._ ii. 240.
[395] _Med. Arch._ _passim_.
[396] _Vite di illustri Italiani_ (_Arch. stor. Ital._ iv.) i.
305. Many portions of Vespasiano’s Correspondence are found in the
Laurentian library.
[397] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l.c. p. 99.
[398] Poliziano, _Prose volgari inedite_, &c. p. 83. ‘Recentes enim
mendosique sunt libri.’
[399] Mehus, _Traversari_, p. 67.
[400] See A. Bartoli in his preface to the Florentine edition of the
_Biographies_, where an extract is given from the registers of the
heirs of Filippo di Leonardo da Bisticci (Vespasiano’s father) of the
year 1430, which answers Mehus’ and Cardinal Mai’s doubts regarding the
name.
[401] Colomb de Batines, _Bibliografia Dantesca_, ii. 62; (L.
Passerini) _Cenni storico-bibliografici della R. Biblioteca nazionale
di Firenze_, Flor. 1872, p. 23.
[402] Batines, l. c. ii. 41, 42; Mehus, _Traversari_, p. 180.
[403] Mehus, l. c. p. 320.
[404] Shepherd, l. c. ii. 45.
[405] _Vite di illustri Italiani_, i. 306.
[406] The Medicean Archives, filza xlvi., contains the following letter
of Bessarion (B. episcopus Sabin. card. patr. Constant. Nicænus sedis
apost. legatus) to Lorenzo de’ Medici: ‘Illustrious and noble lord,
dear friend,—The bookseller, Vespasiano di Filippo, whom we mentioned
shortly before at the close of a letter addressed to you, has now sent
us information about the works of Augustine that he had written for us,
with an estimate of the expense with which we are entirely satisfied.
He writes us he has divided the work in question into nine volumes,
with miniatures, bindings, and all that belongs to it. One volume is
wanting to complete the collection, respecting which he writes that
he will hasten to finish it, which we also desire. For payment he has
still to receive eighty-seven ducats, besides the four hundred which
your bank has accredited to him in our name. We request you to pay
him this remainder and to place it to our account. Take the books to
yourself and keep them in a suitable place till we write to you about
them. May it be well with your Magnificence! Frascati, May 23, 1472.’
The learned ecclesiastic perhaps never saw the books, for he died on
November 19 of the same year. The copy is in the Marciana, where,
however, only seven volumes are found. It is decorated with Bessarion’s
arms, and in the fourth volume we find the name of the copyist,
Francesco degli Ugolini, Fiorentino, 1471. G. Valentinelli speaks of
this manuscript in his catalogue of the MSS. of the Marciana, ii. 30.
[407] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. pp. 113, 217, 403. See above, p.
469, ii. Bk. iv. pt. 3. c. 6.
[408] ‘Vespasiano cartolare’ was buried in Sta. Croce on July 27, 1498.
_Giornale Sior. degli Arch. Tosc._ ii. 241. On the first Florentine
printers see ii. 133 _seq._
[409] Vespasiano da Bisticci, l. c. p. 99.
[410] L. Passerini, _Gli Alberti di Firenze_, i. 87 _seq._ Madonna
Bartolommea, the daughter of Tommaso degli Obizzi, of a distinguished
family of Northern Italy, a general of Pope Urban V. and the King of
Italy, and first Italian knight of the Garter, married Antonio degli
Alberti in 1390, and died about 1426.
[411] _Opere volgari di Leon Bat. Alberti, pubbl. da Anicio Bonucci_,
vol. ii. Flor. 1844. A portion of this work has been repeatedly printed
under the title _Trattato del Governo della Famiglia_, as a work of
Agnolo Pandolfini, of which we have spoken above (p. 467; see Gamba’s
_Testi di Lingua,_ 700, 701) a question of authorship, the discussion
of which can have no place here, and which was lately revived in the
introduction to _Il Padre di Famiglia, dialogo di L. B. Alberti rimesso
in luce sopra un nuovo codice palatino da Fr. Palermo_, Florence 1871.
[412] _Orazione facta per Cristoforo Landino da Pratovecchio, ec._; see
Fr. Corrazzini, _Miscellanea di cose inedite o rare_. Flor. 1853, p.
125 _seq._
[413] L. B. Alberti, _Opere volgari_, i. pp. xvii.-xix.,
clvii.-ccxxxiv., where these sorry productions are given.
[414] A. M. Biscioni has collected a considerable number of these
writings in the _Lettere di Santi e Beati Fiorentini_, Flor. 1736. C.
Guasti’s edition of the _Lettere della B. Chiara Gambacorti_ has been
mentioned above. He also printed in his _Miscellanea Pratese_, No. 5,
the touching letter of Sister Costanza Ciaparelli on the death of Feo
Belcari’s daughter (Prato, 1861). For more on Feo. Belcari’s letters,
see back. The letters of the two St. Caterinas of Siena and de’ Ricci
lie beyond the scope of the present work.
[415] D. M. Manni, _Sigilli antichi_, xix. 127; xx. 39. Poccianti:
_Chronicon rerum s. ord. Servorum B. M. Virginis_, Flor. 1569, p. 3.
In Florence there are still a few memorials of the Laudesi. On the
Cathedral (formerly Sta. Reparata) is an inscription on the side turned
towards the Campanile: ‘S. Societatis Laudensium B. M. Virginis qui
congregantur in ecclesia Ste. Reparate, anno Dom. MCCCX. de mense
Novemb.’ (see _Firenze, antica e moderna illustrata_, ii. 112). In Via
dello Pappe, now Via Folco Portinari: ‘Questa casa è de la compagnia de
Laudesi di Sancta Maria che si raguna in Sancta Liperata.’ The chapel
of the Laudesi of Sta. Croce was where the splendid Niccolini chapel
began to be built in 1585 (F. Moisè, _Santa Croce di Firenze_ p. 198).
In the _Decameron_ (Giorn. vii. Nov. 1) the Laudesi of Sta. Maria
Novella and their good-natured superintendent, Gianni Lottaringhi,
is mentioned (D. M. Manni, _Istoria del Decamerone_, p. 460; Fr.
Sansovino, in his edition of the _Decameron_, Ven. 1549); see Fr.
Cionacci, _Rime sacre di Lorenzo de’ Medici_, 2nd edit. Bergamo, 1760,
p. xxi.
[416] _Laudi spirituali del Bianco da Siena povero Gesuato del sec.
XIV._ (edited by Telesforo Bini), Lucca, 1851. Feo Belcari’s _Vita del
B. Giovanni Columbini et di alcuni Jesuati_, composed in 1448, but
first printed towards 1480 (Gamba, _Testi di lingua_, 100 _seq._). On
the Jesuates, G. B. Uccelli, _I Convento di S. Giusto alla mura e i
Gesuati_, Flor. 1865; see ii. 163. The order was dissolved in 1668 by
Pope Clement IX.
[417] The most perfect collection of Lauds, especially of the
fourteenth century, including Belcari, Lorenzo de’ Medici and his
mother, &c., is called _Laude spirituali di Feo Belcari, di Lorenzo
de’ Medici, di Francesco d’Albizzo, di Castellano Castellani, e di
altri, comprese nelle quattro più antiche raccolte, con alcune inedite
e con nuove illustrazioni_ (by G. C. Galletti), Florence 1863, with
woodcuts. On the older editions, see Gamba, _Testi di Lingua_, 105
_seq._, 576 _seq._ The hymns of Ugo Panziera were printed by P. Fanfani
in the translation of Ozanam’s _Poëtes Franciscains_, Prato, 1854,
and C. Guasti, _I Cantici spirituali del B. Ugo Panziera da Prato de’
Frati Minori_, Prato 1861 (_Miscellanea Pratese_, No. iii.). Another
collection of hymns to the Virgin and the Saints, edited by Eug.
Cecconi: _Laudi di una Compagnia fiorentina del secolo XIV_, Florence
1870.
[418] D. Moreni, _Lettere di Feo Belcari_, Flor. 1825. The most
complete account of the mysteries, in the literature of which Feo
Belcari takes an important place, is given by Colombs de Batines,
_Bibliografia delle antiche rappresentazioni italiane sacre e profane
stampate nei secoli XV e XIV_ in P. Fanfani’s _Etruria_, ii. (Flor.
1852), 193. A copious collection of these mysteries was published by
Alessandro d’Ancona: _Sacre Rappresentazioni dei secoli XIV, XV, XVI_,
Flor. 1872, three vols.; see J. L. Klein, _Geschichte der Drama_, iv.
Leipsig, 1866.
[419] See Mazzuchelli, _Scrittori d’Italia_, vol. ii. div. ii. p. 860
_seq._ for list of his writings.
[420] Florence, November 1, 1530, in G. Milanesi’s edition of the
_Varchi_.
[421] In _San Marco_. Inscription of the two graves:—
JOANNES IACET HIC MIRANDULA CETERA NORUNT ET TAGUS ET GANGES FORSAN ET
ANTIPODES. OBITT AN. SAL. MCCCCLXXXXIV. VIXIT AN. XXXIII. HIERONYMUS
BENIVENIUS NE DISIUNCTUS POST MORTEM LOCUS OSSA TENERET QUORUM IN
VITA ANIMOS CONJUNXIT AMOR HAC HUMO SUPPOSITA PONENDUM CUR. OBIIT AN.
MDILII. VIXIT AN. LXXXIX.
[422] See the oldest edition of the _Laudi di Feo Belcari_, Florence
1485, printed three years after Lucrezia’s death, and Fr. Cionacci’s
_Rime sacre di Lorenzo de’ Medici unitamente a quelle di Madonna
Lucrezia sua madre_, Flor. 1680 and Bergamo 1760, as well as the
Galletti collection before mentioned. Crescimbeni (_Della volgar
poesia_, ii. 277) is inclined to place Lucrezia above most, if not all,
poets of her time; but Crescimbeni is a weak critic. The _Lauds_ begin:
(I.) ‘Ecco ’l Messia’ (resembling the ‘Venite adoremus’ of the Church);
(II.) ‘Venite pastori’; (III.) ‘Contempla le mie pene o peccatore;’
(IV.) ‘Ecco il Re forte;’ (V.) ‘Vien il messagio;’ (VI.) ‘Ben venga
Osanna.’
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE:
—Obvious print and punctuation errors were corrected.