On the twenty-fourth of April, 1453, a vacancy was occasioned in
the chancellorship of the Tuscan republic, by the death of Carlo
Aretino.[417] In this conjuncture the long established literary
reputation of Poggio, and the predominant interest of the house of
Medici, concurred, without any canvassing or intriguing on his part, in
directing to him the choice of his fellow-citizens, and he was elected to
the office which had been in succession so ably filled by two of his most
intimate friends. The prospect of the distinguished honours which awaited
him in his native province did not, however, so entirely occupy his mind,
as to render him insensible of the sacrifice which he made in quitting
the Roman chancery, in which he had held situations of confidence and
dignity for the space of fifty-one years. His heart was depressed with
sorrow when he bade farewell to the pontiff, from whose kindness he
had uniformly experienced the most friendly indulgence. Amongst the
associates of his literary and official labours, there were moreover some
chosen companions of his hours of relaxation, whose pleasing converse
he could not forego without yielding to the emotions of grief. But in
Florence also he had been from his early years accustomed to enjoy the
pleasures of friendship; and the sentiments of patriotism concurred with
the voice of ambition in prompting him to obey the call of his country.
In addition to these motives, he was prompted to accept this lucrative
employment by a sense of the duty which he owed to his family, for whose
welfare, as he himself says, he deemed himself bound to sacrifice his own
ease and liberty. He therefore quitted the city of Rome in the month of
June, 1453; and having removed his family to the Tuscan capital, where
he was received with a welcome which he compares to that experienced
by Cicero on his return from exile, he applied himself with his wonted
diligence to the duties of his new office.[418]
He had not long resided In Florence before he received an additional
testimony of the esteem of his fellow-citizens, in being elected into
the number of the _Priori degli arti_, or presidents of the trading
companies, the establishment of which was happily calculated to secure
the preservation of good order, and to defend from infringement the
political privileges of the people.[419]
On his arrival in Florence, Poggio found his countrymen involved in the
embarrassments and distresses incident to a state of war. Soon after
Francesco Sforza had made himself master of the city of Milan, he had
been attacked by the united forces of the Venetians and the king of
Naples. The Florentines being invited to join in the alliance against
him, had, at the instance of Cosmo de’ Medici, not only refused to take
any share in the confederacy, but had sent a body of troops to his
assistance. Irritated by this conduct, the Venetians and the Neapolitan
king expelled from their respective dominions all the Tuscans who
happened to reside there for the purposes of commerce. This insult was
the forerunner of hostilities, which were commenced in the year 1451 by
the king of Naples, who sent his son Ferdinando, at the head of an army
of twelve thousand men, to invade the Tuscan territories. The Neapolitan
forces made themselves masters of a few unimportant towns, but they were
prevented by the vigilance of their adversaries from gaining any signal
or permanent advantage. The war was for some time carried on in a languid
manner, till the Florentines and the duke of Milan having procured
the assistance of Charles VII., king of France, the Venetians, after
sustaining great reverses of fortune, were inclined to an accommodation;
and without the concurrence of the king of Naples, they entered into a
negotiation with their enemies, which was happily terminated at Lodi on
the ninth of April, 1454, by the signature of a treaty of peace. Alfonso
was greatly irritated by the defection of his allies, and for some time
obstinately persisted in refusing to listen to pacific overtures. But on
the twenty-sixth of January, 1455, he was persuaded to accede to the
treaty of Lodi by the earnest solicitation of Nicolas V.[420]
The intelligence of this happy event diffused a beam of cheerfulness over
the latter days of that benevolent pontiff, who had for a long space of
time struggled with a complication of painful disorders. In the midst of
his sufferings, however, he did not remit his endeavours to promote the
welfare of Christendom. He was busily employed in making preparations
to send succour to the Greeks, who were sinking beneath the power of
the Turks, when he terminated his career of glory on the 24th of March,
1455.[421]
Nicolas V. was one of the brightest ornaments of the pontifical throne.
In the exercise of authority over the ecclesiastical dominions he
exhibited a happy union of the virtues of gentleness and firmness. Purely
disinterested in his views, he did not lavish upon his relatives the
wealth which the prudent administration of his finances poured into his
coffers; but appropriated the revenues of the church to the promotion
of its dignity. The gorgeous solemnity which graced his performance of
religious rites evinced his attention to decorum and the grandeur of his
taste. In the superb edifices which were erected under his auspices,
the admiring spectator beheld the revival of ancient magnificence. As
the founder of the Vatican library he claims the homage of the lovers
of classic literature. His court was the resort of the learned, who
found in him a discriminating patron, and a generous benefactor. It was
the subject of general regret, that the brief term of his pontificate
prevented the maturing of the mighty plans which he had conceived for
the encouragement of the liberal arts. When his lifeless remains were
consigned to the grave, the friends of peace lamented the premature fate
of a pontiff, who had assiduously laboured to secure the tranquillity
of Italy; and they who were sensible of the charms of enlightened piety
regretted the loss of a true father of the faithful, who had dedicated
his splendid talents to the promotion of the temporal as well as the
spiritual welfare of the Christian community.
Had Poggio by his intercourse with Nicolas V. imbibed a portion of the
meekness of spirit which influenced the conduct of that amiable patron of
literature, he would have provided for his present comfort and for his
future fame. But he unfortunately indulged, to the latest period of his
life, that bitterness of resentment, and that intemperance of language,
which disgraced his strictures on Francesco Filelfo. When he quitted
the Roman chancery he did not depart in peace with all his colleagues.
At the time of his removal to Florence he was engaged in the violence
of literary hostility against the celebrated Lorenzo Valla. In Lorenzo
he had to contend with a champion of no inferior fame—a champion whose
dexterity in controversy had been increased by frequent exercise. This
zealous disputant was the son of a doctor of civil law, and was born at
Rome towards the end of the fourteenth century.[422] He was educated
in his native city, and when he had attained the age of twenty-four
years he offered himself as a candidate for the office of apostolic
secretary, which, as he himself asserts, he was prevented from obtaining
by the intrigues of Poggio.[423] Quitting Rome in consequence of his
disappointment, he repaired to Piacenza for the purpose of receiving
an inheritance which had devolved to him on the recent death of his
grandfather and his uncle.[424] From Piacenza he removed to Pavia, in the
university of which city he for some time read lectures on rhetoric.[425]
The history of the transactions in which he was engaged immediately
after his removal from Pavia is involved in considerable obscurity. But
it is clearly ascertained, that about the year 1435 he was honoured
by the patronage of Alfonso, king of Naples, whom he appears to have
accompanied in his warlike expeditions. Soon after the translation of
the pontifical court from Florence to Rome in the year 1443, Valla
returned to his native city. His residence in Rome was not, however, of
long continuance. About the time of the dissolution of the council of
Florence, he had written a treatise to prove the erroneousness of the
commonly received opinion, that the city of Rome had been presented to
the sovereign pontiffs by the emperor Constantine.[426] The officious
malice of some fiery zealots having apprized Eugenius IV. of the nature
and object of this treatise, the wrath of that pontiff was kindled
against its author, who, being obliged to fly from the rage of religious
bigotry, took refuge in Naples, where he was kindly received by his royal
protector.
During his residence in Naples, Valla delivered public lectures on
eloquence, which were attended by crowded audiences. But the imprudence
of his zeal in the correction of vulgar errors in matters of theological
belief again involved him in dangers and difficulties. He appears to have
possessed that superiority of intellect above his contemporaries, which,
when united to a warm temper and a propensity to disputation, never fails
to draw down upon the inquisitive the hatred of fanaticism. In the pride
of superior knowledge, he provoked the indignation of the bishop of
Majorca, by asserting that the pretended letter of Christ to Abgarus was
a forgery.[427] In aggravation of this heresy, he had moreover derided
the assertion of a preaching friar, who had inculcated upon his audience
the commonly received notion, that the formulary of faith, generally
known by the name of the apostles’ creed, was the joint composition
of those first heralds of salvation.[428] The freedom with which he
descanted upon these delicate topics of dispute exposed him to the utmost
peril. His enemies publicly arraigned him before a spiritual tribunal,
where he underwent a strict examination; and it is very probable, that
had not Alfonso interposed the royal authority on his behalf, not even a
recantation of his imputed errors would have saved him from the severe
punishment which the atrocity of religious bigotry has allotted to those
who deviate from the narrow line of orthodox faith.[429]
Theology was not the only subject of investigation which involved
Valla in altercation and strife. Literary jealousy kindled the flame
of hostility between him and Beccatelli, whom he attacked in a violent
invective. With Bartolomeo Facio also he maintained a controversy, in
the course of which he manifested the utmost bitterness of spirit.[430]
When Nicolas V. had ascended the papal throne, Valla received from that
liberally-minded pontiff an invitation to fix his residence in Rome. He
accordingly repaired to the pontifical court, where he was honourably
received, and employed in translating the Greek authors into the Latin
tongue.[431] Soon after his arrival in Rome, the following circumstance
gave rise to the irreconcilable enmity which took place between him
and Poggio. A Catalonian nobleman, a pupil of Valla, happened to be
possessed of a copy of Poggio’s epistles. This book having fallen into
Poggio’s hands, he observed on its margin several annotations, pointing
out alleged barbarisms in his style. Fired with indignation at this
attack upon his Latinity, and precipitately concluding that the author
of these criticisms could be no other than Valla himself, whose _Libri
Elegantiarum Linguæ Latinæ_ had gained him the reputation of an acute
grammarian, he had immediate recourse to his accustomed mode of revenge,
and assailed the supposed delinquent in a fierce invective. In this work
he accused Valla of the most offensive arrogance, which, as he asserted,
was manifested in his animadversions on the style of the best classic
authors. Poggio then proceeded to examine and to defend the passages
which had been noted with reprobation in the young Catalonian’s copy of
his epistles. Collecting courage as he proceeded, he arraigned at the bar
of critical justice several forms of expression which occur in Valla’s
_Elegantiæ_. Alluding to Valla’s transactions in the court of Naples, he
impeached him of heresy both in religion and philosophy, and concluded
his strictures by the sketch of a ridiculous triumphal procession,
which, as he asserted, would well befit the vanity and folly of his
antagonist.[432]
In the course of a little time after the publication of this invective,
Valla addressed to Nicolas V. an answer to it, under the title of
_Antidotus in Poggium_. In the introduction to this defence of himself,
he asserted, that Poggio had been stimulated to attack him by envy of the
favourable reception which his _Elegantiæ_ had received from the public.
Adverting to the advanced age of his opponent, he addressed to him a long
and grave admonition on the acerbity of his language. After a sufficient
quantity of additional preliminary observations, Valla proceeded to
rebut the charge which Poggio had brought against him. He asserted,
that the critic who had given such offence to the irritable secretary
was the above-mentioned Catalonian nobleman, who, taking umbrage at an
expression derogatory to the taste of his countrymen, which occurred
in one of Poggio’s epistles, had avenged himself by making some cursory
strictures on his style.[433] By shewing that the criticisms in question
by no means agreed with the principles inculcated in his _Elegantiæ_,
and by other internal evidence, Valla proved almost to demonstration,
that he himself had no part in the animadversions which had excited so
much animosity. Having thus repelled the imputation of a wanton and
insidious aggression, he proceeded to shew, that he had not abstained
from criticising the works of Poggio on account of their freedom from
faults, by entering upon a most minute and rigid examination of their
phraseology; an examination in which he gave ample proof how acute is the
eye of enmity, and how peculiarly well qualified a rival is to discover
the errors of his competitor.
Had Valla in his _Antidotus_ restrained himself within the limits of
self-defence, he would have gained the praise due to the exercise of
the virtue of forbearance: had he proceeded no farther in offensive
operations than to impugn the style of his opponent, he would have been
justified in the opinion of mankind in general, as exercising the right
of retaliation. But by attacking the moral character of Poggio,[434] he
imprudently roused in the fiery bosom of his adversary the fierceness
of implacable resentment, and provoked him to open wide the flood-gates
of abuse. In a second invective Poggio maintained, that if it were true
that the Catalonian youth wrote the remarks which were the subject of
his complaint, he wrote them under the direction of Valla. Indignantly
repelling the charge of envy, he remarked, that so notorious a fool as
Valla, the object of contempt to all the learned men of Italy, could
not possibly excite that passion. After noticing the imprudence of his
antagonist in provoking an inquiry into his own moral character, he
proceeded circumstantially to relate divers anecdotes, which tended to
fix upon Valla the complicated guilt of forgery,[435] theft, ebriety,
and every species of lewdness. Recurring to the charge of heresy,
he referred to various passages in Valla’s writings, which contained
sentiments contradictory to the orthodox faith. In fine, he arraigned the
supposed infidel before an imaginary tribunal, which he represented as
without mercy condemning him to the infernal regions.
In reply to this second attack, Valla renewed and maintained his
protestation, that he had not been the aggressor in the present contest.
In contradiction to Poggio’s assertion, that he was an object of dislike
to the scholars of Italy, he quoted several complimentary epistles
which he had on various occasions received from men distinguished by
their learning. He also exposed the disingenuousness of his adversary,
who had branded him with the imputation of heresy, on the ground of
certain sentiments, which did indeed occur in his works, but which he
had advanced, not in his own character, but in that of an Epicurean
philosopher, whom he had introduced as an interlocutor in a dialogue. As
to the scandalous stories which Poggio had related to the disparagement
of his good name, he solemnly asserted, that the greater part of them
had not the least foundation in truth, and that the remainder were gross
and wilful misrepresentations of facts;[436] and in the true spirit
of retaliation, he narrated concerning Poggio a number of anecdotes
equally scandalous, and in all probability equally false, as those of
the circulation of which he himself complained. On the publication of
this second part of the _Antidotus_, Poggio, returning to the charge,
annoyed his foe in a third invective, in which, pursuing the idea of
Valla’s having been condemned to the infernal regions, he accounted for
his appearance on earth, by informing his readers, that on the culprit’s
arrival in hell, a council of demons was summoned to decide upon his
case; and that in consideration of the essential wickedness of his
character, they had permitted him, after solemnly swearing allegiance to
Satan, to return to earth for the purpose of gratifying his malevolent
dispositions, by effecting the perdition of others.[437]
Before Valla had seen this narration of his transactions in the kingdom
of darkness, he was provoked, by the account which he had received of
its tenor, to prosecute his criticisms on Poggio’s phraseology. These
criticisms stimulated Poggio to renew hostilities in a fourth and a
fifth invective. The former of these compositions has not yet been
committed to the press. The latter abounds in those flowers of eloquence,
of which specimens perhaps more than sufficiently ample have been already
presented to the reader.
The heat of altercation between Poggio and Valla was inflamed by the
interference of Niccolo Perotti, a pupil of the latter, who attacked
Poggio with great virulence. Poggio was not tardy in replying to this
new antagonist. If we may judge of the nature of his invective against
Perotti, by a short extract from it, which occurs in Bandini’s catalogue
of the manuscripts of the Laurentian library, it was not at all inferior
in acrimony to his other compositions of a similar nature.[438] A
friendly and sensible letter of admonition, which Francesco Filelfo
addressed to the belligerent parties, exhorting them to consult for
their own dignity, by ceasing to persecute each other with obloquy, is a
memorable instance how much easier it is to give wholesome advice than to
set a good example.[439]
The foregoing traits of the history of literature prove, that we must
receive with some grains of allowance the doctrine of the amiable Ovid,
when he asserts that,
—“Ingenuas didicisse fideliter artes
Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros.”
It is indeed a most lamentable truth, that few quarrels are more violent
or implacable than those which are excited by the jealousy of literary
rivalship, and that the bitterest vituperative language on record occurs
in the controversial writings of distinguished scholars. Several causes
concur in producing this unhappy effect. It is of the very essence of
extraordinary talents to advance to extremes. In men whose ardent minds
glow with the temperature of genius, whether the flame be kindled by
the scintillation of love or of enmity, it burns with impetuous fury.
The existence of many scholars, and the happiness of the great majority
of the cultivators of literature, depend upon the estimation in which
they are held by the public. Any assertion or insinuation, therefore,
derogatory to their talents or acquirements, they consider as a dangerous
infringement upon their dearest interests, which the strong principle
of self-preservation urges them to resent. The objects upon which we
employ a considerable portion of our time and labour acquire in our
estimation an undue degree of importance. Hence it happens, that too many
scholars, imagining that all valuable knowledge centers in some single
subject of study to which they have exclusively devoted their attention,
indulge the spirit of pride, and arrogantly claim from the public a
degree of deference, which is by no means due to the most successful
cultivator of any single department of science or of literature. And
in the literary, as well as in the commercial world, undue demands are
resentfully resisted; and amongst scholars, as amongst men of the world,
pride produces discord. Learned men are also too frequently surrounded
by officious friends, whose ignorant enthusiasm of attachment betrays
them into a kind of idolatry, which is productive of the most mischievous
consequences to its object. They who are accustomed to meet with a blind
and ready acquiescence in their opinions, in the obsequious circle of
their partizans, become impatient of contradiction, and give way to
the impulse of anger, when any one presumes to put their dogmas to the
test of unreserved examination. The flame of resentment is fanned by the
foolish partiality by which it was originally kindled; and the noblest
energies of some mighty mind are perverted to the maintenance of strife,
and the infliction of pain. The operation of these causes produces many
striking proofs, that learning and wisdom are by no means identical, and
that the interpreter of the sublimest morals may become the miserable
victim of the meanest passions which rankle in the human breast.
In the inaugural oration which Poggio addressed to Nicolas V. he
intimated, that it was his earnest desire to dedicate his declining years
to literary pursuits. This was not a mere profession. Availing himself
of the considerate kindness of the heads of the Florentine republic,
who, in consideration of the respect due to his advanced age and to his
literary acquirements, excused him from any other task than a general
superintendence of the business of his office, he continued to prosecute
his studies with his accustomed ardour.[440] The first fruits of his
lucubrations after his final settlement in the Tuscan capital appeared
in a dialogue, _De Miseriâ humanæ conditionis_, or, on the wretchedness
incident to humanity, which he dedicated to Sigismundo Malatesta, Lord
of Rimini, and commander in chief of the Florentine forces. In this
dialogue, Poggio proposed to relate the substance of a conversation
which took place between the accomplished Matteo Palmerio,[441] Cosmo
de’ Medici, and himself, in consequence of the serious reflections which
occurred to some of Cosmo’s guests, on the intelligence of the capture
of Constantinople by the Turks. Almost every species of distress which
awaits the sons of men passes in review in the course of this work. Here
the dark side of human life is industriously displayed, and the serious
lessons of humility and self-discipline are inculcated in a feeling
and forcible manner. But even in this grave disquisition, Poggio could
not refrain from exercising his wonted severity upon the ascetics and
cœnobites, who had so often smarted under the merciless lashes of his
satire.[442]
This dialogue contains a record of the miserable end of Angelotto,
cardinal of St. Mark. This avaricious ecclesiastic was murdered by one of
his own domestics, who was tempted to perpetrate this execrable deed by
the hope of plundering his master’s hoarded treasures. When the assassin
imagined that he had accomplished his purpose, he left the chamber,
where the cardinal lay weltering in his blood, and called aloud for
assistance. The relations and servants of Angelotto immediately crowded
into the apartment accompanied by the murderer, who, affecting to be
overwhelmed with grief, took his station at the window. He was, however,
not a little startled on observing, that in his trepidation he had not
completely effected his wicked intentions. The cardinal still breathed,
and, though unable to speak, he pointed to the assassin. The villain
endeavoured to divert the attention of the bye-standers from the true
meaning of this sign, by exclaiming, “See! he intimates that the murderer
came into the house through this window.” This ingenious interpretation
of his dying master’s gestures did not, however, avert from him the
punishment due to his crime. He was arrested and tried, and after having
made a full confession of his guilt, he expiated his offence by the
forfeit of his life.[443]
Soon after the publication of his dialogue _De Miseriâ humanæ
conditionis_, Poggio transmitted to Cosmo de’ Medici a version of
Lucian’s _Ass_, on which he had bestowed a few of his days of leisure.
By the circulation of this version he wished to establish a point of
literary history, which seems to have been till then unknown, namely,
that Apuleius was indebted to Lucian for the stamina of his _Asinus
Aureus_. It is a sufficient proof of the merit of Poggio’s translation of
Lucian’s romance, that Bourdaloue has adopted it in his edition of the
works of that entertaining author.
The last literary production which exercised the talents of Poggio was
the History of Florence, a work for the composition of which he was
peculiarly well qualified, not only by his skill in the Latin language,
but also on account of the means of information which were afforded
to him by the office which he held in the administration of the civil
affairs of the Florentine republic. This history, which is divided
into eight books, comprehends a most important and interesting portion
of the annals of Tuscan independence, embracing the events in which
the Florentines bore a share, from the period of the first war which
they waged with Giovanni Visconti, in the year 1350, to the peace of
Naples, which took place in 1455. It has been justly observed, that in
his _Historia Florentina_, Poggio aims at higher praise than that of
a mere chronicler of facts, and that he enlivens his narrative by the
graces of oratory. In imitation of the ancient historians, he frequently
explains the causes and the secret springs of actions, by the medium of
deliberative speeches, which he imputes to the principal actors in the
scenes which he describes. His statement of facts is clear and precise;
in the delineation of character, which is an important and difficult part
of the duty of the historian, he evinces penetration of judgment and
skill in discrimination. Though the extent of territory to the history
of which his narration is confined be circumscribed by very narrow
limits, his work is by no means destitute of the interest which arises
from the description of protracted sieges, bold achievements, and bloody
encounters. He has been accused of suffering his partiality to his native
country to betray him into occasional palliations of the injustice of
his fellow-citizens, and into false imputations against their enemies.
This accusation has been briefly couched in the following epigram,
written by the celebrated Sannazaro.
“Dum patriam laudat, damnat dum Poggius hostem,
Nec malus est civis, nec bonus historicus.”
It may, however, be remarked, that supposing this accusation to be
supported by unequivocal evidence, the advocate of Poggio might plead in
his excuse the general frailty of human nature, which renders it almost
impossible for a man to divest himself of an overweening affection for
the land of his nativity. But it must be observed, that the impeachment
in question is founded upon a very few passages in the History of
Florence, and that it comes from a suspicious quarter—from the citizens
of those states, the political conduct of which Poggio marks with
disapprobation.
Poggio’s History of Florence was translated into Italian by his son,
Jacopo. This version, being committed to the press, for a long space of
time superseded the original, which was confined to the precincts of the
Medicean library till the year 1715, at which period Giovanni Battista
Recanati, a noble Venetian, published it in a splendid form, and enriched
it with judicious notes, and with a life of Poggio, the accuracy of which
causes the student of literary history to lament its brevity.[444]
The consideration of the great extent of the History of Florence places
in a striking point of view the industry and courage of its author, who,
in defiance of the infirmities of old age, possessed the energy of mind
to meditate, and the diligence to execute, a work of such magnitude.
Before, however, it had received the last polish, the earthly labours
of Poggio were terminated by his death. This event occurred on the 30th
of October, 1459. On the second of November ensuing his remains were
interred with solemn magnificence in the church of Santa Croce, in
Florence.
The respect which the administrators of the Tuscan government entertained
for the virtues of Poggio, induced them readily to comply with the
pious wishes of his sons,[445] who requested permission to deposit his
portrait, painted by Antonio Pollaiuolo, in a public hall denominated the
Proconsolo. His fellow-citizens also testified their grateful sense of
the honour which his great accomplishments had reflected on his country,
by erecting a statue to his memory, on the front of the church of Santa
Maria del Fiore.[446]
It was with justice that the Florentines held the name of Poggio in
respectful remembrance. Inspired by a zealous love of his country, he
had constantly prided himself upon the honour of being a citizen of a
free state, and he neglected no opportunity which presented itself of
increasing and displaying the glory of the Tuscan republic. And this end
he most effectually promoted by the splendour of his own accomplishments.
He so faithfully improved the advantages which he enjoyed in the
course of his education in the Florentine university, that amongst the
multitudes of learned men who adorned his age, he occupied a station of
the highest eminence. His admission into the Roman chancery, and his
continuance in offices of confidence under eight successive pontiffs,
afford an ample proof not only of his ability in business, but also of
his fidelity and integrity. Honoured by the favour of the great, he did
not sacrifice his independence at the shrine of power, but uniformly
maintained the ingenuous sentiments of freedom. The whole tenor of his
writings evinces, that he united to the accomplishments of literature an
intimate knowledge of the world; and many passages might be quoted from
his works to prove that the eye of his mind surveyed a wider intellectual
horizon than fell to the general lot of the age in which he lived. He was
warm and enthusiastic in his friendly attachments, and duteously eager to
diffuse the renown of those whom he loved. But acute sensations are not
productive of signal virtues alone; they too frequently betray mankind
into capital errors. Though Poggio was by no means implacable in his
anger, yet he was as energetic in the expression of his resentment, as
he was enthusiastic in the language in which he testified his esteem for
those to whom he was bound by the ties of friendship. The licentiousness
in which he occasionally indulged in the early part of his life, and
the indecent levity which occurs in some of his writings, are rather
the vices of the times than of the man. We accordingly find that those
circumstances did not deprive him of the countenance of the highest
ecclesiastical dignitaries—they did not cause him to forfeit the favour
of the pious Eugenius, or of the virtuous and accomplished Nicolas V. His
failings, indeed, were fully counterbalanced by several moral qualities
of superior excellence—by his gratitude for benefits received; by his
sincerity in friendship; by his compassion for the unfortunate; and by
his readiness, to the extent of his ability, to succour the distressed.
To which it may be added, that he seems to have recommended himself to
most of those with whom he maintained a personal intercourse, by the
urbanity of his manners, and by the sportiveness of his wit.
As a scholar Poggio is entitled to distinguished praise. By a course of
assiduous study, commenced at an early period of his life and continued
to its close, he became intimately conversant with the works of the
Roman classic authors; and though he was somewhat advanced in age when
he began to direct his attention to Grecian literature, by dint of
methodic industry he made a considerable proficiency in a knowledge
of the writings of the Greek philosophers and historians. From those
enlightened preceptors he imbibed those principles, which in his graver
treatises he applied with fidelity and skill to the investigation of
moral truth. To them, also, he was in no small degree indebted for that
noble spirit of independence, and for that frankness of sentiment, which
gave so much animation to his writings. The pictures of life and manners
which he exhibits in his works are sketched by the decisive hand of a
master, and are vividly coloured. His extensive erudition supplied him
with that abundance of apt illustration with which his compositions are
enriched. His Latin style is singularly unequal. In the letters which he
wrote in haste, and which he addressed to his familiar friends, there
occur frequent specimens of a phraseology in which his native idiom is
thinly covered, as it were, with a transparent Roman robe. But in his
more elaborate compositions he manifested the discernment of true taste,
in selecting as his exemplar the style of Cicero. His spirited endeavours
to imitate this exquisite model were far from being unsuccessful. His
diction is flowing, and his periods are all well balanced; but, by the
occasional admission of barbarous words and unauthorized phraseology, as
well as his evident want of an intimate acquaintance with the philosophy
of grammar, he reminds his reader that at the time when he wrote, the
Iron age of literature was but lately terminated. His most striking fault
is diffuseness—a diffuseness which seems to arise, not so much from the
copiousness of his thoughts, as from the difficulty which he experienced
in clearly expressing his ideas. It must, however, be observed, that he
did not, like many modern authors who are celebrated for their Latinity,
slavishly confine himself to the compilation of centos from the works of
the ancients. In the prosecution of his literary labours he drew from his
own stores; and those frequent allusions to the customs and transactions
of his own times, which render his writings so interesting, must, at
a period when the Latin language was just rescued from the grossest
barbarism, have rendered their composition peculiarly difficult. When
compared with the works of his immediate predecessors, the writings
of Poggio are truly astonishing. Rising to a degree of elegance, to
be sought for in vain in the rugged Latinity of Petrarca and Coluccio
Salutati, he prepared the way for the correctness of Politiano, and of
the other eminent scholars, whose gratitude has reflected such splendid
lustre on the character of Lorenzo de’ Medici.