ANOTHER MARRIAGE PLANNED FOR LUCRETIA
During this time Lucretia, with her child Rodrigo, was living in the
palace of S. Peter's. If she was inclined to grieve for her husband, her
father left her little time to give way to her feelings. He had recourse
to her thoughtlessness and vanity, for the dead Alfonso was to be
replaced by another and greater Alfonso. Scarcely was the Duke of
Biselli interred before a new alliance was planned. As early as
November, 1500, there was talk of Lucretia's marrying the hereditary
Prince of Ferrara, who, since 1497, had been a widower; he was
childless, and was just twenty-four years of age. Marino Zorzi, the new
Venetian ambassador, first mentioned the project to his signory November
26th. This union, however, had been considered in the Vatican much
earlier--in fact while Lucretia's husband was still living. At the
Christmas holidays of 1500 it was publicly stated that she was to marry
the Duke of Gravina, an Orsini who, undeterred by the fate of Lucretia's
former husbands, came to Rome in December to sue for her hand. Some hope
was held out to him, probably with a view to retaining the friendship of
his family.
Alexander himself conceived the plan of marrying Lucretia to Alfonso of
Ferrara. He desired this alliance both on his beloved daughter's account
and because it could not fail to prove advantageous to Cæsar; it would
not only assure to him the possession of Romagna, which Venice might
try to wrest from him, but it would also increase his chances of
consummating his plans regarding Bologna and Florence. At the same time
it would bring to him the support of the dynasties of Mantua and Urbino,
which were connected by marriage with the house of Ferrara. It would be
the nucleus of a great league, including France, the Papacy, Cæsar's
States, Ferrara, Mantua, and Urbino, which would be sufficiently strong
to defend Alexander and his house against all enemies.
If the King of France was to maintain his position in Italy he would
require, above all else, the help of the Pope. He already occupied
Milan, and he wished to seize half of the kingdom of Naples and hold it
as a vassal of the Church; for France and Spain had already agreed upon
the wicked partition of Naples, to which Alexander had thus far neither
refused nor given his consent.
In order to win over the Duke of Ferrara to his bold scheme, Alexander
availed himself, first of all, of Giambattista Ferrari of Modena, an old
retainer of Ercole, who was wholly devoted to the Pope, and whom he had
made datarius and subsequently a cardinal. Ferrari ventured to suggest
the marriage to the duke, "on account," so he wrote him, "of the great
advantage which would accrue to his State from it."[84] This proposal
caused Ercole no less embarrassment than King Federico of Naples had
felt when he was placed in a similar position. His pride rebelled. His
daughter, the noble Marchioness Isabella of Mantua, and her
sister-in-law Elisabetta of Urbino, were literally beside themselves.
The youthful Alfonso objected most vigorously. Moreover, there was a
plan afoot to marry the hereditary duke to a princess of the royal
house of France, Louise, widow of the Duke of Angoulême.[85] Ercole
rejected the offer absolutely.
Alexander had foreseen his opposition, but he felt sure he could
overcome it. He had the advantages of the alliance pointed out more
clearly, and also the disadvantages which might result from a refusal;
on one hand was Ferrara's safety and advancement, and on the other the
hostility of Cæsar and the Pope, and perhaps also that of France.[86]
Alexander was so certain of his victory that he made no secret of the
projected marriage, and he even spoke of it with satisfaction in the
consistory, as if it were an accomplished fact.[87] He succeeded in
winning the support of the French court, which, however, was not
difficult, as Louis XII was then very anxious for the Pope to allow him
to lead his army out of Tuscany, through the States of the Church, into
Naples, which he could not do without the secret consent of his
Holiness. Above all, the Pope counted on the help of Cardinal Amboise,
to whom Cæsar had taken the red hat when he went to France, and whose
ambitious glances were directed toward the papal throne, which, with the
aid of his friend Cæsar and of the Spanish cardinals, he hoped to reach
on the death of Alexander.
It is, nevertheless, a fact that Louis XII at first was opposed to the
match, and even endeavored to prevent it. He himself was not only
determinedly set against everything which would increase the power of
Cæsar and the Pope, but he was also anxious to enhance his own influence
with Ferrara by bringing about the marriage of Alfonso and some French
princess. In May Alexander sent a secretary to France to induce the king
to use his influence to effect the alliance, but this Louis declined to
do.[88] On the other hand, he was anxious to bring about the marriage of
Don Ferrante, Alfonso's brother, with Lucretia, and secure for her, as
portion, the territory of Piombino.[89] He had also placed a check on
Cæsar's operations in Central Italy, in consequence of which the
latter's attempts against Bologna and Florence had miscarried.
The whole scheme for the marriage would have fallen through if the
subject of the French expedition against Naples had not just then come
up. There is ground for believing that the Pope's consent was made
contingent upon the King's agreeing to the marriage.
June 13, 1501, Cæsar himself, now created Duke of Romagna by his father,
came secretly to Rome, where he remained three weeks, exerting all his
efforts to further the plan. After this, he and his men at arms followed
the French Marshal Aubigny, who had set out from near Rome for Naples,
to engage in a nefarious war of conquest, whose horrors, in the briefest
of time, overwhelmed the house of Aragon.
As early as June the King of France yielded to the Pope's solicitations,
and exerted his influence in Ferrara, as appears from a despatch of the
Ferrarese ambassador to France, dated June 22d. He reported to Ercole
that he had stated to the king that the Pope threatened to deprive the
duke of his domain if he did not consent to the marriage; whereupon the
king replied that Ferrara was under his protection and could fall only
when France fell. The envoy feared that the Pope might avail himself of
the question of the investiture of Naples--upon which the king was
determined--to win him over to his side. He finally wrote the duke that
Monsignor de Trans, the most influential person at the king's court, had
advised him to agree to the marriage upon the conditional payment of two
hundred thousand ducats, the remission of Ferrara's annual dues, and
certain benefices for the house of Este.[90]
Amboise sent the Archbishop of Narbonne and other agents to Ferrara to
win over the duke; the King of France himself wrote and urged him to
give his consent, and he now refused Don Alfonso the hand of the French
princess. While the French ambassador was presenting his case to the
duke, the Pope's messengers and Cæsar's agents were also endeavoring to
secure his consent. Caught in a network of intrigue, fear at last forced
Ercole to yield.
July 8th he had Louis XII notified that he would do as he wished, if he
and the Pope could agree upon the conditions.[91] He yielded only to the
demand of the king, who advised the marriage solely because he himself
had need of the Pope. All the while he was urging Ercole to give his
consent, he was also counselling him not to be in too great haste to
send his son Don Ferrante to Rome to conclude the matter, but to hold
him back as long as possible--until he himself should reach Lombardy,
which would be in September. He even had Ercole informed that he would
keep his promise to bestow the hand of Madonna d'Angoulême on Don
Alfonso, and he made no effort to conceal the displeasure he felt on
account of the projected alliance with Lucretia.[92] To the Ferrarese
ambassador he remarked that he would consider the duke unwise if he
allowed his son to marry the daughter of the Pope, for, on Alexander's
death, he would no longer know with whom he had concluded the alliance,
and Alfonso's position would become very uncertain.[93]
The duke did not hurry; it is true he sent his secretary, Hector
Bellingeri, to Rome, but only for the purpose of telling the Pope that
he had yielded to the king's wishes upon the condition that his own
demands would be satisfied. The Pope and Cæsar, however, urged that the
marriage contract be executed at once, and they requested the Cardinal
of Rouen, who was then in Milan, to induce Ercole to send his son
Alfonso there (to Milan), so that the transaction might be concluded in
the cardinal's presence. This the duke refused to do until the Pope
agreed to the conditions upon which he had based his consent.[94]
While these shameful negotiations regarding Lucretia were dragging on,
Cæsar was in Naples, and was the instrument and witness of the sudden
overthrow of the hated house of Aragon, whose throne, however, was not
to fall to his portion. Alexander used this opportunity to appropriate
the property of the barons of Latium, especially that of the Colonna,
the Savelli, and Estouteville, all of which, owing to the Neapolitan
war, had been left without protection. The confiscation of this property
was, as we shall soon see, part of the scheme which included the
marriage. As early as June, 1501, he had taken possession of a number
of cities belonging to these families. Alexander, accompanied by troops,
horse and foot-soldiers, went to Sermoneta July 27th.
This was the time that--just before his departure--he made Lucretia his
representative in the Vatican. Following are Burchard's words: "Before
his Holiness, our Master, left the city, he turned over the palace and
all the business affairs to his daughter Lucretia, authorizing her to
open all letters which should come addressed to him. In important
matters she was to ask advice of the Cardinal of Lisbon.
"When a certain matter came up--I do not know just what it was--it is
said Lucretia went to the above-named cardinal and informed him of the
Pope's instructions, and laid the matter before him. Thereupon he said
to her, that whenever the Pope had anything to submit to the consistory,
the vice-chancellor, or some other cardinal in his stead, would write it
down together with the opinions of those present; therefore some one
should now record what is said. Lucretia replied, 'I can write very
well.' 'Where is your pen?' asked the cardinal. Lucretia saw that he was
joking, and she laughed, and thus their conference had a fit ending."
What a scene for the Vatican! A young and beautiful woman, the Pope's
own daughter, presiding over the cardinals in consistory. This one scene
is sufficient to show to what depths the Church of Rome had sunk; it is
more convincing than a thousand satires, than a thousand official
reports. The affairs which the Pope entrusted to his daughter were--at
least so we assume--wholly secular and not ecclesiastical; but this bold
proceeding was entirely unprecedented. The prominence given Lucretia,
the highest proof of favor her father could show her, was due to
special reasons. Alexander had just been assured of the consent of
Alfonso d'Este to the marriage with Lucretia, and in his joy he made her
regent in the Vatican. This was to show that he recognized in her, the
prospective Duchess of Ferrara, a person of weight in the politics of
the peninsula. In doing this he was simply imitating the example of
Ercole and other princes, who were accustomed, when absent from their
domains, to confide state business to the women of their families.
The duke had found it difficult to overcome his son's objections, for
nothing could offend the young prince so deeply as the determination to
compel him to marry Lucretia; not because she was an illegitimate child,
for this blot signified little in that age when bastards flourished in
all Latin countries. Many of the ruling dynasties of Italy bore this
stain--the Sforza, the Malatesta, the Bentivoglio, and the Aragonese of
Naples; even the brilliant Borso, the first Duke of Ferrara, was the
illegitimate brother of his successor, Ercole. Lucretia, however, was
the daughter of a Pope, the child of a priest, and this, in the eyes of
the Este, constituted her disgrace. Neither her father's licentiousness
nor Cæsar's crimes could have greatly affected the moral sense of the
court of Ferrara, but not one of the princely houses of that age was so
depraved that it was indifferent to the reputation of a woman destined
to become one of its prominent members.
Alfonso was the prospective husband of a young woman whose career,
although she was only twenty-one years of age, had been most
extraordinary. Twice had Lucretia been legally betrothed, twice had she
been married, and twice had she been made a widow by the wickedness or
crimes of others. Her reputation, consequently, was bad, therefore
Alfonso, himself a man of the world, never could feel sure of this
young woman's virtue, even if he did not believe all the reports which
were circulated regarding her. The scandalous gossip about everything
which takes place at court passed from city to city just as quickly then
as it does now. The duke and his son were informed by their agents of
everything which actually occurred in the Borgia family, as well as of
every story which was started concerning its members. The frightful
reasons which the disgraced Sforza had given Lucretia's father in
writing as grounds for the annulment of his marriage were at once
communicated to the duke in Ferrara. The following year his agent in
Venice informed him that "a report had come from Rome that the Pope's
daughter had given birth to an illegitimate child."[95] Moreover, all
the satires with which the enemies of the Borgias persecuted
them--including Lucretia--were well known at the court of Ferrara, and
doubtless maliciously enjoyed. Are we warranted in assuming that the
Este considered these reports and satires as really well founded, and
yet overcame their scruples sufficiently to receive a Thais into their
house when they would have incurred much less danger by following the
example of Federico of Naples, who had persisted in refusing his
daughter's hand to Cæsar Borgia?
It is now time to investigate the charges which were made against
Lucretia; and, in view of what Roscoe and others have already proved,
this will not occupy us long. The number of accusers among her
contemporaries certainly is not small. The following--to name only the
most important--charged her explicitly or by implication with incest:
the poets Sannazzaro and Pontanus, and the historians and statesmen
Matarazzo, Marcus Attilius Alexis, Petrus Martyr, Priuli, Macchiavelli,
and Guicciardini, and their opinions have been constantly reiterated
down to the present time. On the other side we have her eulogists among
her contemporaries and their successors.
Here it should be noted that Lucretia's accusers and their charges can
refer only to the Roman period of her life, while her admirers appear
only in the second epoch, when she was Duchess of Ferrara. Among the
latter are men who are no less famous than her accusers: Tito and Ercole
Strozzi, Bembo, Aldo Manuzio, Tebaldeo, Ariosto, all the chroniclers of
Ferrara, and the French biographer Bayard. All these bore witness to the
uprightness of her life while in Ferrara, but of her career in Rome they
knew nothing. Lucretia's advocate, therefore, can offer only negative
proofs of her virtue. Even making allowance for the courtier's flattery,
we are warranted in assuming that upright men like Aldo, Bembo, and
Ariosto could never have been so shameless as to pronounce a woman the
ideal character of her day if they had believed her guilty, or even
capable, of the hideous crimes with which she had been charged only a
short time before.
Among Lucretia's accusers only those who were actual witnesses of her
life in Rome are worthy of attention; and Guicciardini, her bitterest
enemy, is not of this number. The verdicts of all later writers,
however, have been based upon his opinion of Lucretia, because of his
fame as a statesman and historian. He himself made up his estimate from
current gossip or from the satires of Pontanus and Sannazzaro--two poets
who lived in Naples and not in Rome. Their epigrams merely show that
they were inspired by a deep-seated hatred of Alexander and Cæsar, who
had wrought the overthrow of the Aragonese dynasty, and further with
what crimes men were ready to credit evil-doers.
[Illustration: GUICCIARDINI.
From an engraving by Blanchard.]
The words of Burchard, who was a daily witness of everything that
occurred in the Vatican, must be considered as of much greater weight.
Against him in particular has the spleen of the papists been directed,
for by them his writings are regarded as the poisonous source from which
the enemies of the papacy, especially the Protestants, have derived
material for their slanders regarding Alexander VI. Their anger may
readily be explained, for Burchard's diary is the only work written in
Rome--with the exception of that of Infessura, which breaks off abruptly
at the beginning of 1494--which treats of Alexander's court; moreover,
it possesses an official character. Those, however, who attempt to
palliate the doings of the papacy would feel less hatred for Burchard if
they were acquainted with the reports of the Venetian envoys and the
despatches of innumerable other ambassadors which have been used in this
work.
Burchard is absolutely free from malice, making no mention whatever of
Alexander's private conduct. He records only facts--never rumors--and
these he glosses over or cloaks diplomatically. The Venetian ambassador
Polo Capello reports how Cæsar Borgia stabbed the chamberlain Perotto
through the Pope's robe, but Burchard makes no mention of the fact. The
same ambassador explicitly states, as does also a Ferrarese agent, that
Cæsar killed his brother Gandia; Burchard, however, utters not a word
concerning the subject.[96] Nor does he say anything about the way
Cæsar despatched his brother-in-law Alfonso. The relations of the
members of the Borgia family to each other and to strangers, such as the
Farnese, the Pucci, and the Orsini; the intrigues at the papal court;
the long series of crimes; the extortion of money; the selling of the
cardinal's hat; and all the other enormities which fill the despatches
of the ambassadors--regarding all this Burchard is silent. Even Vannozza
he names but once, and then incorrectly. There are two passages in
particular in his diary which have given the greatest offense: the
report of the bacchanal of fifty harlots in the Vatican, and the attack
made on the Borgias in the anonymous letter to Silvio Savelli. These
passages are found in all the manuscripts and doubtless also in the
original of the diary. That the letter to Silvio is a fabrication of
neither Burchard nor of some malicious Protestant is proved by the fact
that Marino Sanuto also reproduces it in his diary. Further, that
neither Burchard nor any subsequent writer concocted the story of the
Vatican bacchanal is proved by the same letter, whose author relates it
as a well-known fact. Matarazzo of Perugia also confirms it; his account
differs from that of Burchard, whose handwriting he could hardly have
seen at that time, but it agrees with reports which he himself had
heard. He remarks that he gave it full credence, "for the thing was
known far and wide, and because my informants were not Romans merely,
but were the Italian people, therefore have I mentioned it."
This remark indicates the source of the scandalous anecdote--it was
common talk. It doubtless was based upon an actual banquet which Cæsar
gave in his palace in the Vatican. Some such orgy may have taken place
there, but who will believe that Lucretia, now the legally recognized
bride of Alfonso d'Este and about to set out for Ferrara, was an amused
spectator of it?
This is the only passage in Burchard's diary where Lucretia appears in
an unfavorable light; nowhere else has he recorded anything
discreditable to her. The accusations of the Neopolitans and of
Guicciardini are not substantiated by anything in his diary. In fact we
find corroboration nowhere unless we regard Matarazzo as an authority,
which he certainly was not. He states that Giovanni Sforza had
discovered that criminal relations existed between his wife and Cæsar
and Don Giovanni, to which a still more terrible suspicion was added.
Sforza, therefore, had murdered Gandia and fled from Rome, and in
consequence Alexander had dissolved his marriage. Setting aside the
monstrous idea that the young woman was guilty at one and the same time
of threefold incest, Matarazzo's account contains an anachronism: Sforza
left Rome two months before the murder of Gandia.
An authentic despatch of the Ferrarese ambassador in Milan, dated June
23, 1497, makes it clear that Lucretia's worthless consort was the one
who started these rumors about her. Certainly no one could have known
Lucretia's character and mode of life better than her husband.
Nevertheless Sforza, before the tribunals of every age, would be
precisely the one whose testimony would receive the least credit.
Consuming with hate and a desire for revenge, this was the reason he
ascribed to the evil-minded Pope for dissolving the marriage. Thus the
suspicion he let drop became a rumor, and the rumor ultimately
crystallized into a belief. In this connection, however, it is worthy of
note that Guido Posthumus, Sforza's faithful retainer, who in epigrams
revenged himself on Alexander for his master's disgrace, neither
mentions this suspicion nor anywhere refers to Lucretia.[97]
In none of the numerous despatches of the day is this suspicion
mentioned, although in a private letter of Malipiero's, dated Rome, June
17, 1497, and in one of Polo Capello's reports, allusion is made to the
"rumor" regarding the criminal relations of Don Giovanni and his
sister.[98] Could the fact that Lucretia never engaged in any love
intrigue--at least she is not charged with having done so--with anyone
else, when there were in Rome so many courtiers, young nobles, and great
cardinals who were her daily companions, have given rise to these
reports? It is a fact that nothing has been discovered which would
indicate that this beautiful young woman ever did engage in any love
affair. Even the report of the ambassador, who, writing to Ferrara, not
from Rome but from Venice, states that Lucretia had given birth to a
child stands alone. She had at that time been separated from her husband
Sforza a whole year. But even if we admit that this rumor was well
founded, and that Lucretia did engage in some illicit love affair, are
not these relations and slips frequent enough in all societies and at
all times? Even now nothing is more readily glossed over in the polite
world.
It is difficult to believe that Lucretia, in the midst of the depravity
of Rome, and in the environment in which she was placed, could have kept
herself spotless; but just as little will any unprejudiced person
believe that she was really guilty of that unmentionable crime. If it
were possible to conceive that a young woman could have the strength--a
strength beyond that of the most depraved and hardened man--to hide
behind a joyous exterior the moral perturbation which the most loathsome
crime in the world would certainly cause the subject, we should be
forced to admit that Lucretia Borgia possessed a power of dissimulation
which passed all human bounds. Nothing, however, charmed the Ferrarese
so much as the never failing, graceful joyousness of Alfonso's young
wife. Any woman of feeling can decide correctly whether--if Lucretia
were guilty of the crimes with which she was charged--she could have
appeared as she did, and whether the countenance which we behold in the
portrait of the bride of Alfonso d'Este in 1502 could be the face of the
inhuman fury described in Sannazzaro's epigram.
FOOTNOTES:
[84] Compare Sannazzaro's epitaph on Alexander VI with the epigram of
Guido Posthumus: In Tumulum Sexti.
[85] Cardinal Ferrari to Ercole, Rome, February 18, 1501. This is the
first of the letters regarding this subject in the archives of Modena.
[86] Ercole's letter to his ambassador in Florence, Manfredo Manfredi,
April 25, 1501. Archives of Modena.
[87] Ferrari to Ercole, May 1, 1501.
[88] Girolamo Saerati to Ercole, Rome, May 8, 1501.
[89] Bartolomeo de' Cavallieri, Ferrarese ambassador to France, to
Ercole, Chalons, May 26, 1501.
[90] At least such was the plan advocated by Monsignor de Trans, French
ambassador in Rome. Letter of Aldovrandus de Guidonibus to Duke Ercole,
Lugo, April 25, 1501. State archives of Modena.
[91] Bartolomeo de' Cavallieri to Ercole, Lyons, June 22, 1501.
[92] Ercole to Giovanni Valla, July 8, 1501. Ercole to the Cardinal of
Rouen, July 8, 1501.
[93] Despatches of Bartolomeo de'Cavallieri, Ferrarese ambassador at the
court of France, to Ercole, July 10, 14, and 21, 1501.
[94] Despatch of the same, undated.
[95] Ercole to Giovanni Valla, his special envoy to the Cardinal of
Rouen, in Milan, July 21 and 26, 1501.
[96] Da Roma accertasi, che la figliola del papa ha partorito.... Giov.
Alberto della Pigna to the duke, Venice, March 15, 1498. Archives of
Modena.
[97] One of the first statements that Cæsar was his brother's murderer
is found in a despatch of the Ferrarese ambassador at Venice. De novo ho
inteso, como de la morte del Duca di Candia fo causa el Cardinale suo
fratello. Pigna's despatch to Ercole, Venice, February 22, 1498.
[98] The Malipiero letter (Archiv. Stor. It. VII, i, 490) contains the
following: Si dice, que il sig. Giovanni Sforza ha fatto questo effetto
(the murder of Gandia) perchè il Duca (di Gandia) usava con la sorella,
sua consorte, la qual è fiola del Papa, ma d'un altra madre (which was
incorrect). The Venetian ambassador, Polo Capello, refers to this rumor
(si dice) in his well known Relation of September, 1500.