E-text prepared by Charlie Howard and the Online Distributed Proofreading
Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images generously made available by
Internet Archive (https://archive.org)
Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this
file which includes the original illustrations.
See 57132-h.htm or 57132-h.zip:
(https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/57132/pg57132-images.html)
or
(https://www.gutenberg.org/files/57132/57132-h.zip)
Images of the original pages are available through
Internet Archive. See
https://archive.org/details/caesarborgiastud00garnuoft
CAESAR BORGIA
[Illustration: CESAR BORGIA
_From an early engraving._
Frontispiece.]
CAESAR BORGIA
A STUDY OF THE
RENAISSANCE
BY
JOHN LESLIE GARNER
WITH 17 ILLUSTRATIONS
T. FISHER UNWIN
LONDON: 1 ADELPHI TERRACE
LEIPSIC: INSELSTRASSE 20
1912
(_All rights reserved._)
PREFACE
Although much has been written regarding the Borgias, no monograph
devoted to Caesar--the most interesting member of the family as a
psychological study--has hitherto appeared in English.
With the passing of the “great man theory,” biography and history have
become completely separated, and a personality such as Caesar Borgia is
interesting now chiefly as a product of the egoism of the age. Vast,
unrestrained selfishness was the predominant characteristic of the men
of the Italian Renaissance. The Peninsula was in the grasp of a number
of petty tyrants who, to advance their own interests and those of their
families, hesitated at no crime.
Never before was love of power so general and carried to such extremes.
Men and women were mere pawns in a stupendous political game. In the
governing families the women especially were regarded as assets to be
used in establishing alliances to increase the power of the clan.
Men of iron played fast and loose with states and principalities; to
them the lives of a city’s population were nothing except so far as
their own projects and power were concerned.
Of this world the Borgias were part, although they were interlopers in
the affairs of the Peninsula; they saw other upstarts securing vast
wealth and dominion, and why should not they? The thing were easy with
Rodrigo Borgia on the throne of St. Peter. Money in unlimited amounts
was at their command and the spiritual weapons of the Church had not
yet been cast on the rubbish-heap--there were still kings and princes
that quaked at the threat of excommunication.
Other men, other families, have played a much more important part than
the Borgias in the drama of history; others have committed as great
crimes; others have surpassed them in every field of human activity--in
fact, no member of the Borgia family ever produced anything of enduring
value to Italy or the human race. We are therefore led to ask why
Alexander VI., Caesar, and Lucretia Borgia have always aroused such
profound interest. Gregorovius ascribes this to the violent contrast
of their mode of living--their morals--with the sacredness of the
Holy Office. An explanation wholly adequate; for, although there were
temporal princes who equalled or surpassed Alexander VI. and Caesar
Borgia in wickedness, the Papacy furnishes no other example, in the
person of Pope or cardinal, of as great moral obliquity. Caesar had
been a cardinal, and in all his projects, after as well as before he
relinquished the purple, he was supported by the Pope, his father.
Drum and trumpet histories are now fortunately fast becoming obsolete,
and it is a truism to say that any man whose claim to fame is based
on acts prompted by unbridled egoism can have little, if any, lasting
effect upon the progress of the human race. A great scientist, scholar,
or inventor may by his discoveries change the mode of living, the
institutions of mankind, and, therefore, the subsequent history of
humanity. The overthrow of the Feudal System has been ascribed to the
invention of gunpowder; and the mariner’s compass, the steam-engine,
and the printing-press have altered the very nature of man; the
discovery of an anæsthetic or an antitoxin may have greater effect upon
the history of mankind than the victories of an Alexander.
Mere men of violence, the so-called conquerors, the military geniuses,
whom little children were once taught to admire, and whom moral
perverts are still wont to exalt--the ferocious egoists, who sigh for
more worlds to conquer--are the most useless creatures produced by
humanity in the painful course of its evolution.
Even had these men never existed the great historic movements with
which they were connected would undoubtedly have run their course and
reached the same goal. The Roman Empire would have come without Caesar,
and without Napoleon France would still have become the Republic.
However interesting Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon
may be as examples of unbridled egoism, they failed to attain the ends
they sought; their conquests did not last; the victories of fraud and
violence never can endure.
Renascent Italy furnished numerous examples of power built up by
these means, and even the beneficiaries knew how unstable was their
dominion. Professor Achille Loria has pointed out that Machiavelli’s
admiration for Caesar Borgia was due to his perfect comprehension of
the true nature of feudal property and to his understanding of the
inherent necessity for the spoliations, extortions, and crimes which
characterised it; and also of the historical justification of the acts
that favoured the preservation of this dominant social form.[1]
The bombastic chronicles of great men are now recognised as of slight
value, for the economic interpretation of history teaches us that the
individual plays but a small part in the march of events, even when his
character is the noblest, his aims the highest; without Washington the
colonies would have become the United States, and the slaves would have
been freed without Lincoln.
A great man, especially in the domain of politics, is the product
of his age. A genius appearing before society is ready for him is a
visionary, but if the times are ripe for him he is a genius; the great
man is he who best discerns the spirit of the age and enters the lists
as the champion of popular ideals. He is essentially the product of his
environment, and is so much a part of it that it is impossible to think
of him as belonging to any other.
Men being products of history, under similar conditions similar men
will be produced; but as they in the aggregate are the makers of
history there is a constant mutation in conditions and therefore
ceaseless change in men.
In every epoch there are men who although in many respects unlike their
prototypes resemble them in others, and bear a close relationship to
them. Unchecked egoism asserts itself in every age, but the mode of its
expression varies according to the institutions of the day.
In Italy from the twelfth to the sixteenth century this egoism was
embodied in the tyrant or despot; it has found expression in the
absolute monarch, and in the present bourgeois epoch it is exemplified
in the captain of industry, the domineering genius of modern finance.
In the fifteenth century Italy was swarming with tyrants great and
small--men of boundless ambition and greed, striving for power,
deterred by no principle, hesitating at no crime. Duplicity, treachery,
murder, had become fine arts.
A host of adventurers, upstarts, brigands, soldiers of fortune, had
managed to secure possession of the domain of St. Peter and were
building up petty principalities for themselves and their kinsmen.
Originally these tyrants were feudatories of the Holy See, which based
its claim to the territory on the donation of the Countess Matilda,
who, dying in 1115, left her vast estates, which extended from Mantua
to Pisa and thence almost to the walls of Rome, to the Pope.
As soon as these vassals of the Holy See felt themselves strong enough
they refused all allegiance and declined to pay their annual tribute.
Alexander VI. was thus afforded an excellent pretext for attempting to
recover St. Peter’s domain--and this he set about doing, ostensibly
for the Church, but in reality to build up a kingdom in central Italy
for the benefit of his family.
CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION
The Renaissance--The Papacy in the fifteenth century--The
Borgia 23
CHAPTER I
Genealogy of the House of Borgia--Vannozza de’ Catanei--Birth
of Caesar Borgia--His youth 68
CHAPTER II
Charles VIII. invades Italy--Caesar a hostage--Caesar leaves
the King’s camp--The League against France--Charles
enters Rome--Caesar appointed Governor of Orvieto--The
Pope conceives the idea of recovering Romagna--He declares
the Romagnol barons rebels--The Pope summons his son, the
Duke of Gandia, from Spain to command the papal troops--
Charles VIII. aids the Romagnol barons--Giuffre Borgia and
his wife, Doña Sancia, of Naples, come to Rome--Caesar
appointed Legate to crown the King of Naples 87
CHAPTER III
The murder of the Duke of Gandia--Caesar departs to crown the
King of Naples--He returns to Rome--The Pope’s projected
matrimonial alliances for his children 107
CHAPTER IV
Louis XII. succeeds to the throne of France--His bargain with
the Pope--Caesar prepares to go to France--He renounces
his cardinalate--He arrives in Avignon, where he meets
Cardinal Giuliano della Rovere--Louis XII. and Caesar
meet--Caesar’s entry into Chinon--Duke of Valentinois--
Caesar’s shrewdness--Charlotte D’Albret--Her marriage
to Caesar--The projected conquest of Milan--Ludovico
il Moro--The French army invades Italy--Caesar leaves
France--He enters Milan with Louis XII. 122
CHAPTER V
The first campaign in Romagna--Imola surrenders--Caterina
Sforza, the type of the virago--Caesar enters Forli--
Death of Cardinal Giovanni Borgia--Return of Ludovico
il Moro to Milan--Caesar goes to Rome--His entrance
into the city--He is invested with the Vicariate of
Romagna--Delegates from Imola and Forli request the Pope
to appoint Caesar Governor--Caesar is made Gonfalonier of
the Church--His oath--Caesar’s physical strength--His
personal appearance 139
CHAPTER VI
Murder of Alfonso of Naples, Duke of Bisceglie--The second
campaign in Romagna--Pesaro surrenders--Caesar’s private
life--Pandolfaccio Malatesta gives up Rimini--Astorre
Manfredi--Faenza’s brave resistance--The Pope threatens
Bologna--Faenza surrenders--Caesar returns to Rome--
Astorre Manfredi flung into prison--Giovanni Bentivoglio--
Giuliano and Piero de’ Medici--Caesar’s agreement with
Florence--Piombino invested--Caesar returns to Rome--
Coalition of the Pope and the King of France for the
destruction of the House of Naples--Yves d’Allegre comes
to Rome--Berault Stuart, commander of the French army,
enters the city 157
CHAPTER VII
The expedition against Naples--The taking of Capua--Naples
surrenders--Caesar returns to Rome--The orgy in his
apartments in the Vatican--The Pope divides the conquered
territory in Romagna among his family--Negotiations for
the marriage of Lucretia Borgia and Alfonso d’Este--Caesar
receives the Ferrarese envoys--Lucretia’s marriage--Her
character--The Pope and Caesar go to Piombino--They visit
Elba--Caesar and Leonardo da Vinci 181
CHAPTER VIII
The third campaign in Romagna--Caesar goes to Spoleto--
The Duke of Urbino flees to Florence--Valentino takes
possession of Urbino--Florence sends envoys to him--
Machiavelli’s first impressions of Caesar--The King of
France warns Valentino not to molest Florence--Caesar
plunders the palace of Urbino--Michael Angelo’s “Cupid”--
Camerino surrenders to Valentino’s lieutenants--Louis XII.
receives Caesar and Alfonso d’Este at Milan--The King and
Valentino enter into an agreement--Caesar goes to Imola--
Affairs of Bologna--Valentino prepares to attack Giovanni
Bentivoglio, of Bologna 194
CHAPTER IX
The conspiracy of Caesar’s captains--Machiavelli and
Valentino--Vacillation of the conspirators--They offer to
return to Caesar--They again take heart--A reconciliation
is effected--Caesar separates the conspirators--He
enters into an alliance with Bentivoglio--The rebels
return to Caesar--Paolo Orsini takes possession of Urbino
in Caesar’s name--Execution of Don Remiro de Lorca--
Caesar goes to Senigaglia, and meets his commanders--The
trap at Senigaglia--Fate of the rebels--Caesar informs
the Italian princes of his act--The Orsini and their
adherents in Rome are seized--Cardinal Orsini’s palace
is plundered--Fermo and Perugia surrender to Valentino--
He puts Paolo and Francesco Orsini to death--Cardinal
Orsini dies in prison--Caesar demands that the Sienese
expel Pandolfo Petrucci--He ravages the country about
Siena--Activity of the Orsini in the neighbourhood of
Rome--Caesar returns to Rome--He lays siege to Ceri--
Contemporary opinions of the Pope and Caesar--Gonsalvo de
Cordova in Naples--The Pope and Caesar are stricken by
the plague--Death of Alexander VI.--Rumours of poison--
Caesar recovers--He takes possession of the dead Pope’s
property 206
CHAPTER X
The enemies of the Borgia pour into Rome--Fears of the
Sacred College--Orsini and Colonna--The Cardinals and
Valentino--Caesar enters into an agreement with France--
The Cardinal d’Amboise--Scheming before the conclave--
Caesar leaves Rome--Return of Giuliano della Rovere--
The conclave--Election of Francesco Piccolomini to the
Papacy--The new Pope supports Caesar--Valentino’s
fortunes ebb--Death of Pius III.--Machinations
preparatory to electing his successor 242
CHAPTER XI
Election of Giuliano della Rovere--Julius II. and Caesar
Borgia--Caesar leaves Rome--Machiavelli and Caesar--
Arrest of Caesar--Victory of Gonsalvo de Cordova at the
Garigliano--Caesar goes to Naples--Gonsalvo seizes
Valentino and sends him to Spain--Caesar imprisoned in
the Castle of Chinchilla--Jeanne la Folle and Philippe le
Beau--Caesar is transferred to the Castle of Medina del
Campo--His escape 266
CHAPTER XII
Caesar arrives at the Court of his brother-in-law, the King of
Navarre--D’Albret’s danger--The Agramont and Beaumont
factions--Beaumont holds Viana--War is declared between
D’Albret and Beaumont--Caesar is appointed commander of
the troops of the King of Navarre--Viana--The chronicler
Moret--Caesar is killed--The body is buried in Santa
Maria de Viana--His epitaph--Removal of the body and
destruction of the tomb--The news of Caesar’s death
reaches Italy--The feeling in the Peninsula--Caesar’s
wife Charlotte D’Albret and their descendants--His
illegitimate children--Death of Caesar’s mother, Vannozza
de’ Catanei--Conclusion 297
INDEX 313
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
CAESAR BORGIA _Frontispiece_
FACING PAGE
POPE CALIXTUS III. 32
POPE ALEXANDER VI. 52
FACSIMILE OF LETTER OF CAESAR BORGIA 80
ORVIETO 98
LOUIS XII. OF FRANCE 122
LUDOVICO SFORZA 136
MAP OF CAESAR’S CAMPAIGNS IN ROMAGNA _Page_ 141
PESARO 166
GIOVANNI BENTIVOGLIO 172
RIMINI 176
FREDERIC II. OF NAPLES 184
LUCRETIA BORGIA 188
URBINO 198
VITELLOZZO VITELLI 220
PROSPERO COLONNA 244
GONSALVO DE CORDOVA 280
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The writer desires to acknowledge his indebtedness to the authorities
named below, especially to Alvisi for the details of the campaigns
in the Romagna, and to Yriarte for genealogical data and particulars
regarding Caesar’s life after his seizure by Gonsalvo de Cordova.
Yriarte appears finally to have settled the mooted question of the
descent of Rodrigo Borgia, Alexander VI.; and to have proved that he
was a Borgia on both the maternal and paternal sides, and not merely on
his mother’s; that he was Borja y Borja and not Llançol y Borja; and
that he never had the name of Lenzo,[2] consequently did not relinquish
it and assume that of his mother’s brother.
The dispatches of Giustinian, Venetian ambassador to the Vatican
from May 27, 1502, to April 26, 1505, edited by the profound scholar
Professor Pasquale Villari, have been of the utmost value. The
ambassador watched every move made by the Vatican as if the very life
of his beloved republic depended on it, and with great perspicacity he
followed the extraordinary political drama that was being enacted in
Rome.
Burchard’s diary is also an inexhaustible mine of information
concerning the pontificate of Alexander VI. and the earlier years of
the reign of Julius II. This Alsatian Master of Ceremonies is a wholly
passionless recording machine, so automatic that one immediately
discovers that he had no moral sense whatever. Only once does he
display any feeling--when the swashbucklers of Charles VIII. placed
some of their horses in “my stable, where they devoured my hay and
oats, so I had them removed to the stable of one of my neighbours”--a
very human act on the part of the Master of Ceremonies.
On account of Burchard’s calm relation of the crimes and scandals
connected with the reign of Alexander VI. efforts have been made to
discredit the _Diarium_. It has been claimed that all the available
manuscripts are not only inexact but also that they are largely
fabrications of the enemies of the Papacy; it has also been maintained
that Burchard’s original manuscript is not in existence.
The diary was published complete for the first time by M. Thuasne
(1883–5) in three octavo volumes. His text is derived from the Paris
manuscript, an almost exact reproduction of that in the Chigi Palace
which was copied from the original in the Vatican by order of Alexander
VII.--Fabio Chigi. M. Thuasne has corroborated the statements of the
diary in innumerable instances with notes from other sources and a
large number of hitherto inedited documents.
Burchard, recording the crimes and scandals of the Vatican under
Alexander VI., has been compared with Procopius flaying the vices
of the Court of Justinian--but the comparison is inapt. Burchard
himself had bought the office of Papal Master of Ceremonies, and he
had no sense of shame. Alexander tolerated him and Caesar evidently
did not think him worth putting to death. As Master of Ceremonies he
was minute, trivial, exact, indispensable; to him the salvation of
a thousand souls was far less important than the proper donning of a
vestment or the swinging of a censer. As a recorder of what was going
on about him he was matchless because he was utterly passionless;
fearless he undoubtedly was--perhaps because of his stupidity;
he was a mere piece of mechanism; his function was to record, to
chronicle everything--fact and rumour--and not to judge, not to
analyse. As complacently as a modern newspaper reporter describes the
reception given by a pork packer, he depicts the banquet of harlots
given by Alexander VI. in the Vatican--and with much less opulence
of adjective. That Christ’s Vicar on earth should go about the
apartment pouring confetti in the bodices of the women, whom he had
just entertained with “certain obscene comedies,” did not seem to the
Master of Ceremonies worthy of any special comment. He merely records;
never does he show surprise, contempt, hate; he never criticises,
never censures. He is entirely different from Infessura, who, as an
Italian and a patriot, betrays his hatred of the Papacy on every page.
Burchard, the Alsatian, apparently had little, if any, personal concern
with Italian politics, and it is precisely his lack of feeling that
renders his diary the most valuable authority extant on the pontificate
of Alexander VI.
Burchard was born about the middle of the fifteenth century; he was
early intended for the priesthood, but soon abandoned his theological
studies to take up the law; he appeared in Rome in 1481 and immediately
secured a position as apostolic prothonotary. He decided to purchase
the office of Master of Ceremonies, when a vacancy should occur, and
with this end in view engaged in a long course of study. In 1483 he
attained his ambition.
* * * * *
Alvisi, E. Cesare Borgia, Duca di Romagna, Imola, 1878.
Auton, Jean d’, Chroniques, Paris, 1834.
Balbo, Cesare, Storia d’Italia, Firenze, 1856.
Baldi, Bernardino, Vita e Fatti di Federigo di Montefeltro, Roma, 1824.
Bembo, Pietro, Opere, Milano, 1808.
Biancardi, Bastian, Le Vite de’ Re di Napoli, Venezia, 1737.
Brantôme, Œuvres Complètes, Paris, 1838.
Brosch, Moritz, Papst Julius II. und die Gründung des Kirschenstaates,
Gotha, 1878.
Bryce, James, The Holy Roman Empire, N.Y., n.d.
Burchard, Johann, Diarium sive Rerum Urbanarum Commentarii (1483–1506),
Ed. by Thuasne, Paris, 1883.
Burckhardt, Jakob, The Civilisation of the Renaissance in Italy,
London, 1892.
Cartwright, Julia, Beatrice d’Este, Duchess of Milan, London, 1903.
Ciaconius, Vitæ et Res Gestæ Pontificum Romanorum et S.R.E. Cardinalium
ab initio nascentis Ecclesiæ usque ad Urbanum VIII., Pont. Max., Rome,
1630.
Commines, Philippe de, Mémoires, Paris, 1836.
Corio, Historia di Milano, Padua, 1646.
Dante, Il Convito, Firenze, 1857.
Donato, Alexandro, Roma Vetus ac recens, Rome, 1639.
Dumesnil, M. A. J., Histoire de Jules II., sa vie et sa pontificat,
Paris, 1873.
Duruy, Victor, Histoire de France, Paris, 1883.
Fumi, Luigi, Alessandro VI. e il Valentino in Orvieto, Siena, 1877.
Gebhart, Emile, Les Borgia, Paris, 1897.
Gebhart, Emile, Les Origines de la Renaissance en Italie, Paris, 1879.
Gibbon, Edward, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, New York, 1860.
Giustinian, Antonio, Dispacci, ed. by Pasquale Villari, Firenze, 1876.
Gordon, Alexander, Vie du Pape Alexandre VI. et de Cesar Borgia,
Amsterdam, 1751.
Gregorovius, Ferdinand, Storia della Città di Roma nel Medio Evo,
Venezia, 1872.
Gregorovius, Ferdinand, Lucrezia Borgia, nach Urkunden und
Correspondenzen ihrer eigenen Zeit, Stuttgart, 1875, English
translation, New York and London, 1903.
Guicciardini, Francesco, Istoria d’Italia, Pisa, 1819.
Infessura, Stefano, Diario della Città di Roma, Rome, 1890.
Le Gendre, Louis, Vie du Cardinal d’Amboise, Rouen, 1724.
Leti, Giorgio, Il Nipotismo di Roma, Amsterdam, 1667.
Machiavelli, Niccolò, Opere, Firenze, 1818.
Marc-Monier, La Renaissance de Dante a Luther, Paris, 1889.
Mariana, Juan de, Historia General de España, Madrid, 1780.
Maricourt, R. de, Le Procès des Borgia, Paris, 1883.
Matarazzo, Chronicles of Perugia, London, 1905.
Medin, Antonio, Il Duca Valentino nella Mente di Niccolò Machiavelli,
Firenze, 1883.
Müntz, Eugène, Les Précurseurs de la Renaissance, Paris, 1882.
Muratori, L. A., Annali d’Italia, Milano, 1818.
Nitti, Francesco, Leone X. e la sua Politica, Firenze, 1892.
Nitti, Francesco, Machiavelli nella Vita e nella Dottrine, Naples, 1876.
Pii Secundi Commentarii, Rome, 1584.
Platina, Bartolomeo, Le Vite de’ Pontefici, Venetia, 1715.
Roscoe, William, Life of Lorenzo de’ Medici, London, 1884.
Roscoe, William, Life and Pontificate of Leo X., London, 1806.
Sannazarii, Poemata, Padua, 1731.
Strozzi Poetæ Pater et Filius, Venice, 1513.
Symonds, John Addington, Renaissance in Italy, New York, 1888.
Tiraboschi, Girolamo, Storia della Letteratura Italiana, Modena,
1787–94.
Tomasi, Tomaso, Vita del Duca Valentino detto il Tiranno di Roma,
Montechiaro, 1670.
Vasari, Giorgio, Le Vite de’ più Eccellenti Pittori, Scultori et
Architetti, Bologna, 1647.
Villari, Pasquale, The Life and Times of Niccolò Machiavelli, London,
n.d.
Villari, Pasquale, The Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola, London,
n.d.
Yriarte, Charles, César Borgia, Sa Vie, sa Captivité, sa Mort, Paris,
1889.
CAESAR BORGIA
INTRODUCTION
The Renaissance--The Papacy in the fifteenth century--The Borgia.
Possessing a mild climate and a fertile soil, Italy from the earliest
times has attracted the invader, the adventurer. Extending out into the
Mediterranean, she has been exposed to attacks on all sides, and when
the Roman Empire, disintegrated by its own corruption and wickedness,
had passed away, no strong central power was left to repel the
marauders who swarmed into the peninsula from all sides.
The rich plains of the north attracted the Teutonic tribes who
established the Lombard Kingdom, and from the south came the Arabs,
bringing their arts and crafts to Sicily. To the Orient the merchants
of Venice went for their perfumes, their spices, their gorgeous stuffs,
their stamped leathers, and with them they brought back much of the
civilisation of the Far East.
Owing to her geographical position, to conditions resulting from her
past history, and the prizes she offered the bold and unscrupulous,
Italy at an early date became the battle-ground of Europe. Human
ambitions and energies now have the entire globe for their field,
but before America was discovered little was known of either Africa
or Asia, consequently civilisation was almost entirely restricted to
Western Europe.
Italy was a seething cauldron of life and activity, and there sprang
into being a race of strong, many-sided individuals. Like Spain, she
became, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, a land of mighty
personalities, of men of varied gifts and vast energy. While Spain gave
the world Cortez, Murillo, Velazquez, Calderon, Charles V., Loyola,
Alva, and Gonsalvo de Cordova, Italy produced Columbus, Michael Angelo,
Raphael, Ariosto, Ludovico il Moro, St. Francis, Prospero Colonna, and
Julius II.
Students have ever been fascinated by those periods in the world’s
history which have been characterised by unusual activity in the
domains of art, letters, science, and politics. The marvellous
flowering in architecture and sculpture in the age of Pericles, in
poetry and the drama in the time of Elizabeth, and in all the arts
during the vaguely defined period of the Italian Renaissance have never
ceased to baffle the historian and the psychologist.
Professor Gebhart, in a work of great erudition[3] has endeavoured to
account for the civilisation of the Italian Renaissance by reference to
“the inherent characteristics of the Italian soul; to certain great and
persistent tendencies in her intellectual life, and to certain facts
in her political career--causes which affect the entire life of the
people; some of which were remote in time, but of lasting effect, while
others were recent and transitory.”
In all fields of worthy human endeavour men in Italy had constantly
before them the inspiration of splendid achievement; but they were also
confronted by examples of evil, vast and successful, reaping material
rewards such as rarely fall to the lot of virtue. Throughout Italy, in
the age of the Borgia, impudent but brave and crafty adventurers were
establishing princely houses, enjoying boundless dominion and
wealth--and could their example have been lost on Alexander VI. and
Caesar Borgia?
The Renaissance in Italy was much more than a revival in literature
and the graphic arts; it was the supreme development of Italian
civilisation as a whole, the most perfect expression of the genius and
intellectual life of the peninsula.
The chief causes of the Italian Renaissance, causes inherent in Italy
herself, were, above all, liberty of the individual mind and social
freedom. The persistence of Latin traditions, and the ever-present
memory of Greece were likewise potent factors; while the language
reached maturity at exactly the right moment. The affluents that came
later to swell the movement and hasten the development of the peninsula
were the foreign civilisations, Byzantine, Arabian, Norman, Provençal
and French.
The Italian spirit has always been essentially practical; abstractions
have never appealed to it as anything more than mental gymnastics; for
pure metaphysics the Italians cared but little; the whole tendency of
their philosophy was utilitarian. In Dante’s “Convito” the question of
pure being, the universals, matter and force are subordinate subjects;
the “Banquet” is chiefly concerned with discussions of manners; the
happiness and welfare of humanity, the government of cities--it is the
work, not of a metaphysician, but of a publicist and moralist--ethics
is placed above metaphysics; its philosophy is wholly practical.
The chosen study of the Italian universities was jurisprudence. Law,
the offspring of pure reason and experience seeking to reconcile
changeable conditions with the immutable principles of justice,
assumed, owing to the importance of the interests it endeavoured to
harmonise--interests upon which rest the government and peace of the
world--the first place in the universities of the peninsula. Roman law
was the favourite discipline of mediaeval Italy.
The Papacy and the Empire; the relations and the limits of the
spiritual power with reference to the temporal and feudal power; the
universal monarchy, and the freedom of the cities--such were the
weighty problems to which Italy devoted her intellect. Jurisprudence
controlled all her mental activities just as absolutely as
scholasticism did those of France. The juristprudents Accorso and his
sons, Jacopo of Arena, Cino da Pistoja, Bartolo and Baldo, were the men
who lent lustre to the Italian universities of the thirteenth century.
Law was the basis of a liberal education. Petrarch had studied it. His
contempt for the scholasticism of “the disputatious city of Paris” is
well known. One of his favourite sayings was: “The object of education
is to teach men to think, and not merely to teach them to argue.” Logic
he regarded simply as a useful tool.
The freedom the Italians displayed in their intellectual life was
manifest also in their religious conscience--and this is one of the
most striking characteristics of their genius. During the Middle
Ages they resembled none of the other members of the great family of
Christian nations. Subtle metaphysics, refined theology, strict regime,
dogmatism, elaborate ritual, restless casuistry, all were repellent
to the Italian genius. The Italian regarded the Church of Italy as
the Universal Church and as largely his handiwork. In St. Peter’s
chair, in the Sacred College, in the great monastical institutions
he sees himself; he knows human passions prevail there as well as
elsewhere--consequently he does not hesitate to enter the Church. This
is why they never found the national religion a too heavy burden, why
they seldom seceded and founded sects. Italy never originated any great
national heresy or beheld any general religious uprisings like the
popular movements initiated by Peter Waldo, Wyclif, Huss, and Luther,
although later numerous heresies from other parts of Europe entered
the peninsula. When other countries were burning witches and heretics
at the stake Italy put Dolcino di Novara and Francesco da Pistoja to
death for advocating the abolition of private property. In 1327 the
poet Cecco d’Ascoli was burned at the stake for practising astrology
and necromancy, but in 1452 the priest Niccolò da Verona, condemned
in Bologna for sorcery, was taken from the stake by the populace and
saved. Savonarola suffered martyrdom, not for his religious theories,
but for his political dreams.[4]
The Italians never spared the Papacy. Dante placed Pope Anastasius
in the red-hot sepulchre of the heresiarchs, and Boniface VIII. in
the circle of the simoniacs with Nicholas III., and to St. Peter in
Paradise he ascribes these ghibelline words: “He who on earth now
usurps my seat before the Son of God, has made of my tomb a sink of
blood and filth.” And Petrarch describes the papal city of Avignon as
“a sewer in which is collected all the filth of the universe.”
Without an appreciation of the Italian character and a knowledge of
conditions in the peninsula before and during the Renaissance it is
impossible to understand how such men as Sixtus IV. and Alexander VI.
could have been chosen to fill the chair of St. Peter.
* * * * *
By the end of the fifteenth century the Papacy had almost entirely lost
its sacred character and had become a political prize for which all the
powerful families contended. It was an office to which any cardinal,
regardless of his fitness, might aspire.
Like Naples, Florence, Milan, Perugia, and all the other petty
despotisms of the peninsula, it was a secular principality with the
sole difference that its head had certain priestly functions to perform
and that he was an elected not an hereditary sovereign. Owing to this
latter fact it was the most corrupt of all at this time, and its
corruption was all the more vile and hideous because of the contrast
between the theoretical sacredness and the actual baseness of its head.
In the course of the centuries the Papacy had evolved the astonishing
and absurd fiction that the occupant of St. Peter’s chair had the right
to make and unmake sovereigns at will; and princes and potentates made
a pretence of yielding to this doctrine, knowing that the Church, being
able to control the thoughts, actions, and conscience of the ignorant
masses, by the terror it inspired, was the strongest ally they could
have to maintain them in their usurped and illegitimate domination over
those whom they called their subjects and whose subjection had always
originated in acts of violence on the part of their masters.
The Papacy was the greatest office in Christendom. It enjoyed a vast
income; the patronage, the benefices at its disposal, were innumerable,
and during the period of the Renaissance they were usually sold to the
highest bidder. Owing to the vast power of the Pope as the arbiter of
the destinies of mankind beyond the grave, as well as in this world,
his friendship and support were sought by all the potentates of Europe.
Being human, it is quite natural that he was always ready to profit
by this circumstance. The humblest priest might aspire to the great
office, and if he was sufficiently astute and corrupt might attain it.
During the fifteenth century in the election of the supreme head of
the Church votes were bought and sold even more brazenly than they are
to-day on the occasion of the election of a United States senator, and
the rabble made bets on the result just as they now do on the outcome
of a political contest. Giustinian records the odds that were given on
the election of Giuliano della Rovere against his rivals.
Just as only a wealthy man, a member of a great family, or a
representative of a powerful interest can now hope to attain a high
political office, so in those days none other could hope to reach
the Papacy, except when the rivalry among the leading aspirants was
so intense that some obscure member of the Sacred College--a “dark
horse”--was selected as a compromise candidate; and it is worthy of
note that the one so selected was generally in such poor health or
so decrepit that he could not hold the office long, and consequently
during the period between his election and his death the rival
candidates would have another opportunity to develop their respective
forces and strengthen their tactics for a new election. It therefore
seems that the Divine influences which were supposed to preside over
the election of a Pope were somewhat uncertain in their operation, or
that the influences of the Borgia, the Piccolomini, the Della Rovere,
the Cibo, and the Medici factions outweighed the supernatural, and
there is ample evidence to show that this was precisely their view.
A story is told of a certain cardinal who, it was noticed during
the conclave, was bowed and bent beneath the weight of years and
infirmities; indeed, he was scarcely able to hold up his head--his
eyes were ever on the ground. “Surely,” said his colleagues, “he
will soon go to his reward--we will make him our Pope.” Immediately
after his election his eyes brightened, his voice grew strong, he
straightened up erect--and the Princes of the Church marvelled
greatly. “Whence this change?” they asked; “to what miracle is it due?
You were bent--your eyes ever on the ground--but now----!”
“Ah! my beloved children, I was only looking for the keys of St.
Peter--and I have found them!”
Any strong candidate for the great honour and the vast emoluments
of the Holy Office could count on the vigorous support of his own
family and in many cases on that also of various princes in Italy and
throughout Europe.
When Nicholas V. succumbed to the gout in 1455 the Sacred College
was composed of twenty cardinals, and in the conclave which followed
the three strongest candidates were Capranica, Bessarion, and Alonzo
Borgia. The contest had reached the acute stage when Alain, Archbishop
of Avignon and Cardinal of Santa Prassede, sprang to his feet and
asked, “Shall we select for Pope, for head of the Latin Church, a
Greek, a mere interloper? Bessarion still wears his beard--and
forsooth, he is to be our Lord!”
Then arose his Eminence the Cardinal-Bishop of Nicæa, graceful as he
was erudite, and, announcing that it would be a mistake to elect him,
cast his vote for Alonzo de Borja, Cardinal of Santi Quattro Coronati,
deciding the election in favour of the Spaniard, who assumed the name
Calixtus III. Thus it was that the Spanish house of Borja entered into
the history of Italy and of the Papacy, April 8, 1455.
Alonzo Borja was born in Xativa, Spain, in 1378; he developed into a
studious boy and became a professor at Lerida; later he was made a
canon by the anti-Pope Benedict XIII. In Alonzo’s youth a prophet,
Vicenzo Ferrerio, had announced that the studious boy would some day
wear the tiara, and shortly after his election Alonzo secured the
canonisation of the prophetic Vicenzo, thus showing that he recognised
merit.
Alonzo was regarded as the leading jurist of his day and as one of the
most astute men who ever occupied the throne of St. Peter. He was the
first of the Borja to come to Italy, having accompanied Alfonso of
Aragon as secretary. By Martin V. he was made Bishop of Valencia and
created cardinal by Eugene IV.
When Bessarion arose and cast his vote--with great tact and perhaps
equal political acumen--in the aged cardinal’s favour, the Curia
remembered that Alonzo was seventy-seven years of age and afflicted
with the gout--and his election was assured.
When Alonzo assumed the tiara he pledged his word to the Sacred College
that he would keep himself free from all nepotism--thus showing that
this was a growing evil--a promise he promptly, broke by bestowing
the purple upon his nephew, Juan Luis de Mila, whom he appointed papal
representative in Bologna, and upon Rodrigo Borgia, whom he made legate
to the Marches and Vice-Chancellor of the Church. He likewise made Juan
Mila, Bishop of Zamora, a cardinal.
The new Pope’s nephews--his sister’s sons--were bad men in a bad age,
but, blinded by his affection for them, he did not foresee to what his
passion would lead.
[Illustration: CALISTVS PAPA-III-HISPANVS
POPE CALIXTUS III.
_From an engraving of 1580._
To face p. 32.]
Rodrigo Borgia, when the cardinalate was bestowed upon him by his
uncle, September 26, 1456, was about twenty-five years of age, handsome
and profligate. Like the Claudian family of Rome, the Borgia of
Valencia possessed great intellectual force and physical beauty.
Rodrigo’s brother, Pier Luigi, who was a year younger than the
cardinal, remained a layman, but the highest temporal honours were
bestowed upon him; he was made Gonfalonier of the Church, Prefect of
the city, and finally Warder of the Castle of St. Angelo--in spite
of the protests of Capranica and Scarampo, who consequently became
the object of the Holy Father’s undying hatred. Pier Luigi has been
described as a handsome and depraved ruffian.
Even as early as this--the first period of the Borgia supremacy--Rome
was teeming with Spaniards; when Alonzo was made cardinal numerous
members of the related Borgia and Mila families flocked thither--their
number and aggressiveness being attested by the general and intense
hatred that was felt for the Catalans. It was through the Borgias and
their followers that Spain secured the strong grip upon the Papacy
which she held for a hundred years--although the way had been prepared
by the establishment of the Spanish power in Naples and Sicily. To the
Eternal City they flocked, kinsmen and retainers, fortune-hunters, and
adventurers of every sort; they secured all the important offices; they
became utterly lawless and, justice being perverted, they robbed and
murdered with impunity.
In July, 1458, Calixtus further advanced Pier Luigi by bestowing upon
him the vicariate of Benevento and Terracina. He became the most
powerful man in Rome, and seemed destined for a great future when his
career was abruptly terminated. The Orsini had risen to expel the
Colonna and the Catalans; and Pier Luigi, having sold the Castle of
St. Angelo to the cardinals, fled to Civitavecchia, where, attacked
by a fever, he died--August, 1458--leaving his vast property to his
brother Rodrigo, who, already wealthy, now became one of the richest of
the cardinals.
August 6, 1458, Calixtus passed away--to the great relief of the
Romans, who expressed their joy at being delivered from the Spanish
yoke by sacking the Borgia palaces. Calixtus was bitterly criticised
for allowing his nephews to rule him and because of the wretched
condition of affairs in Rome during his reign, when robbery, violence,
and murder were of daily occurrence.
Although Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia had found it prudent to betake himself
to Ostia on the death of his uncle, his high position in the Church was
not shaken, and he was soon able to return to his house in the Ponte
Quarter.
Little is known of the private life of Rodrigo when he was created
cardinal, but there is extant a beautiful letter of admonition written
to him by Pius II., the amiable Æneas Sylvius, from the baths of
Petriolo, June 11, 1460, when Rodrigo was about twenty-nine years
of age, which throws a strong light on the personal conduct of the
Cardinal of San Niccolò in Carcere Tulliano.
“DEAR SON,--We have learned that your Worthiness, forgetful of
the high office with which you are invested, was present in the
gardens of Giovanni de Bichis four days ago, from the seventeenth
to the twenty-second hour,[5] with several women of Siena--women
wholly given over to worldliness and vanity. Your companion
was one of your colleagues who, owing to his years, if not on
account of his office, ought to have been mindful of his duty.
We have heard that wanton dances were indulged in; that none of
the allurements of love were wanting; and that you conducted
yourself in a manner altogether worldly. Shame forbids mention
of all that took place, for not only the acts themselves, but
also their very names are unworthy your rank. In order that your
pleasures might be free from all restraint the husbands, fathers,
brothers, and kinsmen of the women were not asked to be present.
You and a few servants were the originators of this orgy. I am
told that in Siena nothing is now talked of but your vanity,
which is generally ridiculed. Here at the baths, where there are
a great many people--Churchmen and laity--your name is on every
one’s lips. Our displeasure is beyond words, for your conduct
has brought the Holy State and Office into disgrace. The people
will say that they make us rich and great, and that instead of
living blameless lives, we use what they give us to gratify our
passions. This is the reason the Princes and the Powers despise
us and the laity mock at us. This is why our own mode of living
is flung in our faces when we reprove others. Contempt falls to
the lot of Christ’s Vicar because he appears to countenance
these doings. You, dear son, have charge of the Bishopric of
Valencia, the most important in Spain; you are Chancellor of the
Church, and what renders your conduct all the more reprehensible
is the fact that you have a seat among the cardinals who are
the Pope’s advisers. We leave it to you to decide whether it is
becoming to your dignity to court young women and to send those
whom you love presents of wine and fruits, and during the whole
day to give thought to nothing but sensual pleasures. On account
of your conduct people blame us, and the memory of your blessed
uncle Calixtus also suffers--and many say he did wrong in
heaping honours upon you. If you seek to excuse yourself on the
ground of your youth, I say to you that you are not so young as
not to know what duties your offices impose upon you. A cardinal
should be above reproach, and an example of right living in the
eyes of all men--and then we should have just grounds for anger
when temporal princes revile us, when they dispute with us for
the possession of our property and force us to submit to their
wills.
“Of a truth we inflict these wounds upon ourselves and of these
troubles we ourselves are the cause, since by our conduct we
constantly diminish the authority of the Church. Our punishment
for it in this world is dishonour, and in the world to come
it will be torment well deserved. May your good sense place a
restraint upon these frivolities, and may you never again lose
sight of your dignity; then people will not regard you as a vain
gallant among men. If this occurs again we shall be compelled
to show that it was in violation of our admonition, and that
it caused us great pain; and our censure will not pass over you
without bringing the blush of shame to your cheek. We have always
loved you and thought you worthy of our protection, as a man of
an earnest and modest character.
“Therefore conduct yourself henceforth in such a way that we may
retain this our good opinion of you and may find in you only the
example of a well-ordered life. Your years, which are not such as
to preclude improvement, permit us to admonish you paternally.”
During the pontificate of Paul II. Gasparino of Verona described
Rodrigo Borgia as “handsome and of a most glad countenance. He is
gifted with a honeyed eloquence. The beautiful women upon whom he casts
his eyes are lured to love him and are moved in a mysterious manner--as
iron is attracted by the magnet.”
In 1476, the year of Caesar’s birth, the Cardinal of Pavia wrote
Rodrigo a letter in the Pope’s name, urging him to change his manner
of living, in which he says: “What I write you will not be long, but
this letter is necessary between you and me. Do not entrust this
communication, which is inspired by affection, to your secretaries, but
keep it with you so that you may read it over occasionally and think of
it at least once a year.”
From this it is evident that Rodrigo had not changed his habits. Love
of pleasure characterised him throughout his life. He had no less than
eight illegitimate children--five sons and three daughters--all of
whom were recognised in official documents. At the time of his death,
when he was seventy-two years of age, he had a mistress, the beautiful
Giulia Farnese, by whom he had had a son, who was then five years old,
Don Giovanni, Infans Romanus, Lord of Camerino, whom he first declared
to be the child of his son Caesar, but later in a bull dated September
1, 1501, acknowledged to be his own.
It has been said that as Alexander VI. was not an ordinary man he
should not be judged by the moral standards of ordinary men. The theory
that the great are not subject to the laws which should regulate
the conduct of lesser persons is as absurd as it is pernicious. It
would be more just to say that the Borgia should be judged, not by
the criterions of a later day, but by those of his own age. There is
evolution in morals; the standard of right living is higher to-day
than it was during the Renaissance, and no man of the character of
Alexander VI., were such possible, could now be elected to the Papacy.
At that time many thrones were occupied by men who, in this age, could
not survive a year. It is, however, exceedingly difficult to judge men
of a past age, because, the sphere of morals being a wide one, there
may be progress in one field but not in others--in fact, there may be
retrogression in some. During the Renaissance there were men who were
bad, judged by the criterions of their own day as well as by those of
the present, but their contemporaries, ignorant of the laws governing
human progress, which include the laws of morality, did not perceive
their true status. Surrounded by men of like character, many of the
personalities of the Renaissance were blind to their own depravity.
Nepotism was the root, if not of all, of most of the evil in Rome, and
it steadily increased from the time of Calixtus III., who was succeeded
by Enea Silvio Piccolomini--Pius II.--who was no less devoted to
the interests of his family than his predecessor had been to those
of his kinsmen. Of the four children of his sister Laudomia, he made
Antonio a duke, Andrea a castellan in Pescara, and Giacomo a noble of
Montemarciano. Niccolò Forteguerra, a kinsman on his mother’s side, he
made cardinal; Alessandro Mirabelli Piccolomini, who in partnership
with Ambrogio Spannochi conducted a bank in Rome, was made Master of
the Palace and Governor of Frascati. Jacopo Ammananti of Siena was made
cardinal and Bishop of Pavia. Lolli, a cousin of the Pope, was given an
office, and so many natives of Siena were provided with places at the
pontifical court that it was a saying that “all Siena had moved over
to Rome.” Even Saint Catherine owed her beatification to Pius II., who
died August 15, 1464.
The conclave for the election of his successor was held August 27th.
The Bishop of Torcello, a famous Venetian scholar and humanist,
addressed the cardinals, deploring the loss of dignity of the Sacred
College and exhorting his colleagues to select a man who would put
a stop to the abuses in the Church. At the first scrutiny it was
found that the Cardinal of San Marco was unanimously elected. The new
Pope, who was born in 1418, was the son of Niccolò Barbo and Polisena
Condulmer, a sister of Eugene IV.
When a youth, as he was about to embark on a ship for the Orient,
he received news of his uncle’s election to the Papacy; promptly
perceiving the opportunities for advancing his fortunes offered him by
this event, he changed his plans, and assiduously devoted himself to
the study of theology, for which he had no aptitude, and in 1440 he was
made Cardinal of San Marco.
His Eminence was a stupid but handsome man, tall of figure, majestic,
and exceedingly vain of his personal appearance in ecclesiastical
pageants. On his election he wanted to assume the name Formoso, the
Handsome, but was dissuaded by the cardinals, who also prevented
him from taking the name San Marco, which was the battle-cry of the
Republic of Venice, consequently Piero Barbo called himself Paul II.
and was duly consecrated September 16, 1464.
During the conclave he had sworn to prosecute the war against the
Turks; to reform the Curia; to summon a council at the end of the year;
to limit the number of cardinals to twenty-four; and not to appoint any
one under thirty years of age, or any one who was ignorant of law and
theology, or any of his nephews, to the cardinalate. These promises
were exacted by the members of the Sacred College for the protection of
their traditional privileges. They also secured his permission to meet
twice a year to assure themselves that the agreement was being observed.
Their efforts, however, to reduce the monarchical Papacy to an
oligarchy failed. The Pope promptly found a way out of the difficulty
by presenting the cardinals for their signature a document which
purported to be a copy of the original agreement, but which was in
fact very different. Out of complaisance some promptly signed it,
Bessarion under the Pope’s coercion, while Carvajal was the only one
who persisted in his refusal. Among the cardinals created by Paul II.
were his kinsmen Marco Barbo, Giovanni Michiel and Battista Zeno.
The Pope himself, according to Corio, was wholly given over to sensual
pleasures; he filled his palace with concubines, says Attilius Alexius,
and turned night into day, so that it was exceedingly difficult to
obtain an audience with him. The licentiousness of his court and the
corruption of his clergy were scandalous. He was noted for a vulgar
love of display and took a childish delight in showing himself to the
Romans on all public occasions. He desired to be thought astute in
all ways, but was merely duplicit. He was wholly unable to retain the
friendship of other potentates. He, however, did much to embellish
the city, in spite of the fact that he was exceedingly avaricious. He
was fond of the table, gluttonous, and a valiant drinker. Although
comparatively young, his life was terminated by apoplexy, July 26,
1471, following a supper consisting of two huge watermelons.
In the conclave which assembled August 6, 1471, for the selection of
his successor Cardinal Bessarion just missed the throne, being defeated
by Francesco della Rovere, who owed his success to Borgia, Orsini, and
Gonzaga, and also to the zeal of his attendant in the conclave, Fra
Pietro Riario. In return for his support Borgia received the commendam
of Subiaco; Gonzaga, the abbey of S. Gregorio; and Orsini, famous and
wealthy, was appointed camerlengo.
Francesco della Rovere, born in Savona in 1414, was the son of a
poor fisherman and a Greek woman, Lucchesina Mugnone. He was created
cardinal in 1467 and assumed the title of San Pietro ad Vincula. He had
been general of the Minorites and was famous for his scholarship and
his skill in controversy. On his election he took the name Sixtus IV.,
and he was crowned by Rodrigo Borgia August 25, 1471.
With Sixtus the head of the Church rapidly lost his priestly character
and became a temporal prince. Thenceforth St. Peter’s successors were
Italian sovereigns, and when they possessed the sacred character it
was wholly accidental. The life they led compelled them to resort
to mundane expedients--the sale of offices and indulgences and the
promotion of the interests of their kinsmen. Never before had such
shameless nepotism been displayed, and it now became the mainspring of
every act of the Pope.
Illegitimate sons of the Popes appeared with every change in the
Papacy; they conducted themselves in the Vatican like princes; they
terrorised Rome and endeavoured by force to obtain possession of
the various Italian principalities. Generally their careers came to
an abrupt end with the death of the Pope to whom they owed their
advancement, and to whom they were frequently valuable aids, the
Pontiff’s desire for temporal supremacy often finding expression
through them. The Popes, in their struggle with the cardinals,
frequently found these satellites highly useful. Their power, however,
did not extend far beyond the boundaries of the States of the Church as
they were bitterly opposed by the older dynasties.
Under Calixtus III. Rome had been a Spanish state, in the reign of Pius
II. a Sienese, and during the papacy of Sixtus IV. it was a Ligurian
monarchy, and the domain of St. Peter had now reached its greatest
territorial expansion. Within its boundaries, however, there still
remained a number of feudal families and republics to be destroyed.
These the papal favourites, anxious to change the States of the Church
into an hereditary monarchy, were eager to crush.
December 15, 1471, Sixtus made Pietro Riario, his putative nephew, but
probably his son, Cardinal of San Sisto, and Giuliano della Rovere,
son of his brother Raffaele, Cardinal of San Pietro ad Vincola, thus
breaking his oath. Both these young men were of low origin and no
education, and the Sacred College little suspected that one of them,
Giuliano, was destined to become the famous Julius II.
Giuliano della Rovere, who was Bishop of Carpentras, was twenty-eight
years old, a libertine and man of the world. Pietro Riario was somewhat
younger and Sixtus made him Bishop of Treviso and bestowed numerous
other honours upon him. Pietro soon entirely dominated the Pope and
from a poor friar became a man of vast wealth. He entered upon an
unchecked career of vice, and in two years had squandered a fortune of
two hundred thousand gold florins and become a physical wreck. He died
in 1472, leaving vast debts which were never paid. Other kinsmen of
Sixtus remained laymen but nevertheless were advanced to positions of
honour through the influence of the Pope.
On the death of Pietro Riario, Sixtus transferred his affections to his
nephew Girolamo, probably also the pontiff’s son, who was called to
Rome and given the title to Imola, which had been purchased from Taddeo
Manfredi. The government of the States of the Church was entrusted
to him, and Galeazzo Sforza conferred upon him the hand of his
illegitimate daughter, Caterina, the heroic virago who defended Forli
against her husband’s murderers and later against Caesar Borgia, and
whom her countrymen styled _la prima donna d’Italia_. In return for the
honour Sixtus made Galeazzo’s son, Ascanio, a cardinal.
Soon after this the Pope succeeded in establishing a matrimonial
alliance between his family and the princes of Urbino; for, in return
for creating Federico di Montefeltre Duke of Urbino, the latter
consented to the marriage of his daughter, Giovanna, to Giovanni della
Rovere, another brother of Giuliano.
Sixtus also conferred the purple on Cristoforo and Domenico della
Rovere; upon his sister’s son, Geronimo Basso, and also on Raffaele
Riario, a nephew of Pietro Riario.
It was stated that the Pope in his eagerness to advance his innumerable
kinsmen and connections frequently bestowed an office on one,
forgetting he had already given it to another. It was even said that
Cardinal Pietro Riario entered into an agreement with Galeazzo Maria
Sforza, of Milan, by which the duke was to furnish him with money and
troops to enable him to seize the papal throne, which Sixtus appears to
have been ready to yield to him; the plan, however, which would have
resulted in the secularisation of the Papal States, failed through the
death of Pietro.
The secularisation of the Papacy, nevertheless, was proceeding
rapidly. The Curia was becoming more and more addicted to the vices
of the age. German travellers who visited Rome in 1475, the year
of the Jubilee--Paul II. having reduced the period intervening
between jubilees to twenty-five years for the sake of the money they
yielded--relate that they saw nothing but nepotism, simony, extortion,
and crime. On every hand was extravagance, pomp, and vulgar love of
display. The populace, as in the days of the Roman Empire, clamoured
for spectacular exhibitions, and these the Popes lavishly furnished.
The success of the political schemes of Sixtus demanded the overthrow
of the Medici, and he consequently, at least, countenanced the Pazzi
conspiracy, which resulted in the murder of Giuliano de’ Medici and
the wounding of Lorenzo, who only saved himself by flight. Three weeks
later the Pope, King Ferdinand of Naples, and the city of Siena formed
a league whose avowed purpose was the expulsion of the Medici from
Florence.
Sixtus was a consummate politician, and Infessura speaks of the day
on which he died as “that most blessed day upon which God delivered
Christendom from the hands of a most impious and iniquitous king.”[6]
He states that Sixtus had no affection for his people; that he
was avaricious, vain, vicious; that he trafficked in offices and
benefices, made a plaything of justice, and that he was cruel and
vindictive.
According to history Sixtus was an evil ruler in an evil age. All his
acts were inspired by a love of power or an exaggerated affection for
his kinsmen. He it was who first completely surrendered the Papacy
and Rome to his relatives. He used all sorts of means to increase
the Church revenues, only to hand them over to his nephews to use in
extending the power of his family. He was, however, not wholly devoid
of virtue, for he possessed great learning. Impatient of contradiction,
he used any means to overcome opposition, and he soon showed that he
was born to rule. Sixtus IV. had none of the priestly characteristics
which the Supreme Pontiff is supposed to possess; in him the priest was
lost in the prince.
From that time forth St. Peter’s successors were temporal sovereigns
who happened to be Popes; the members of their families were everywhere
treated as princes. Many of their putative nephews were in reality
their own illegitimate sons. There was a saying current in Europe
during the reign of Sixtus that there were as many popes in Rome as
he had nephews. With every change in the Papacy a new swarm came into
power, only to fall with their creator’s decease.
The Papacy having become a temporal power, the Pope’s kinsmen were his
chief support; at the same time, the Sacred Office was the greatest
political instrument an ambitious and powerful family could secure to
aid its advancement.
The papal nephews terrorised the domain of the Church and endeavoured
to obtain possession of rival states and cities. Nepotism became a
system, and, as hereditary succession was denied the Pope, it furnished
him the only means by which he could hope to perpetuate his power, but
as we have seen the means were inadequate.
The Italians promptly discovered that the same hopes and fears,
the same ambitions and passions prevailed in St. Peter’s Chair as
ruled elsewhere, and also that the Pope was a very human sovereign
and one who enjoyed the advantage of being unhampered by any feudal
institutions.
The temporal supremacy of the Pope, however, could be exercised only
in the territory about the city of Rome where there were still left a
few powerful feudal families, together with a number of small republics
whose destruction could be compassed only through the agency of the
Pontiff’s favourites or kinsmen. In that way a monarchy might be
established which in size and power would have equalled most of the
Italian states of that age.
Sixtus created no less than thirty-five cardinals. The Pazzi
conspiracy, the war against Ferrara, his treatment of the Colonna and
the names of Pietro and Girolamo Riario show to what depths the Papacy
had fallen in the closing years of the fifteenth century.
Between the nepotism of Sixtus IV. and that of Alexander VI. there was
but little difference. If the nephews of Della Rovere had possessed the
ability of the Borgia, or if political events had occurred to disturb
the concord of the peninsula, Sixtus IV. would have secured the place
in Italy and in the history of Rome which Alexander VI. holds. Sixtus
was the first Pope-king, but he was far surpassed by Alexander VI.
Italy had fallen upon evil days; the peninsula was teeming with
corruption; everywhere there was a mad scramble for office; every
man’s hand was against his neighbour; the Popes engaged in all sorts
of financial operations--the sale of offices, honours, indulgences,
immunities; and, to make matters worse, foreign invasion threatened the
country.
Sixtus died August 12, 1484, and when his opponents learned of his
death they rushed forth and sacked the Riario palaces. The conclave
for the election of his successor was held August 26th, and it was
found that the cardinals were divided into two parties, one comprising
Rodrigo Borgia, the Orsini, and the Aragonese faction; the other,
Colonna, Cibo, Della Rovere, and the Venetians.
Rodrigo Borgia felt so certain of being elected that he had his palace
fortified to preserve it from being sacked. Votes were openly traded
for castles, benefices, and papal offices. Ascanio Sforza and the
Aragonese, unable to force the election of the Borgia, sold their votes
to Cardinal Giambatista Cibo, who was elected August 29, 1484. He
assumed the name Innocent VIII. Giuliano della Rovere had managed his
campaign most skilfully.
Cibo was a handsome and imposing man, but he possessed neither wealth
nor brains. He had numerous progeny by a certain Neapolitan woman.
It was his son, Franceschetto Cibo--reputed to be his nephew--who
married Maddalena, daughter of Lorenzo de’ Medici, January 20, 1488, in
the Vatican amid great pomp, and in return for this honour, Giovanni
de’ Medici, then thirteen years of age--the future Leo X.--was
created cardinal.
To the cardinals Innocent made all sorts of promises which he never
kept--promises made by the man might be broken by the Pope. He was
the first of Christ’s Vicars publicly to acknowledge his children, of
whom he had seven. He was a loathsome individual, avaricious, vicious,
and venal, and completely under the control of his favourites. At Rome
he established an office for the sale of pardons whose revenues went
to himself and his son Franceschetto. During his reign crime held high
carnival throughout the Campagna.
Innocent continued and extended the evil practices of his predecessors.
The traffic in offices was conducted on a scale hitherto unknown, for
he constantly created new ones solely for the profit to be derived
from their sale. He sold the right to collect the customs to certain
individuals and bankrupted the State. Rome was a sink of crime and
corruption, a market where all the world might purchase indulgences.
Innocent’s nepotism was different from that of some of the other Popes.
With him it was based on no political idea or purpose, but simply upon
avarice and vulgar greed. He founded no principalities for his sons
because he himself was entirely devoid of force and political acumen,
and they had neither the ambition nor the ability to make themselves
powerful in the State. The county of Cervetri and Anguillara had been
given to Franceschetto, but on the death of his father he sold it to
Virginio Orsini, and wisely, because he could not have held it.
Infessura tells us that when the wretched Innocent VIII. was on his
death-bed his Jewish leech sought to prolong his life with the blood
of three young boys who were purchased for a ducat apiece, and who
promptly died, whereupon the physician fled and the Pope expired, July
25, 1492.
The conclave for the election of his successor began in the Sistine
chapel, August 6th. Twenty-five cardinals were present. The Sacred
College was dominated by Ascanio Sforza, Lorenzo Cibo, Raffaele Riario,
Giuliano della Rovere, and Rodrigo Borgia. It is said that the King
of France contributed 200,000 ducats and Genoa 100,000 to secure the
election of Della Rovere, whose most dangerous rival was Ascanio
Sforza, for whom Rodrigo Borgia cast his vote, knowing that he could
not be elected.
When Sforza saw that he himself could not win the great prize, he set
about securing--with the help of Riario and Orsini--the election of
the Borgia, and at the proper moment cast his vote for him. Although
Ascanio Sforza was enormously wealthy he had his price and he was
bought. In Rome it was said that before the conclave Rodrigo Borgia had
sent him four mules laden with silver, and also that he had promised
him, in the event of his own election, his palace and its contents,
and also the great office of Vice-Chancellor of the Church. Orsini was
satisfied with Monticelli and Soriano, while Colonna and his family
were pleased to accept Subiaco and its castles in perpetuity. Cardinal
Michiel was promised the Bishopric of Porto; Sclafenati was presented
with Nepi, and Cardinal Savelli with Civita Castellana. Others
preferred cash. The Patriarch of Venice, then ninety-five years of age,
was given 50,000 ducats to provide for him until he should enter into
paradise. The few who could not be bought were Piccolomini, Zeno, Della
Rovere, and Caraffa.
When the Borgia found he was elected he was overcome with joy and
exclaimed: “Now I am Pope, Pontiff, Christ’s Vicar!”--but the youthful
Cardinal de’ Medici leaned over and whispered in Cibo’s ear: “Let us
escape before the wolf gets us into his maw!”
Borgia, fearing that by some mischance the office might still slip
through his fingers, hastily donned the papal robes and directed the
Master of Ceremonies to distribute cards bearing the words, “We have as
Pope, Alexander VI.” Early the next morning the window was thrown open,
the cross put forth, and in the silence of early dawn the name of the
new Pope was announced: Alexander VI.!
Alexander’s dissolute life was known of all men; and when we remember
that this was an age of libertinism, when men expected no more of
the clergy than they did of the laity, the fact that the Borgia’s
conduct excited any comment shows to what depths of immorality he had
descended. He was freely accused of the unmentionable vices which
Tacitus and Suetonius lay to the charge of the earlier Roman emperors.
It cannot be denied, however, that Alexander VI. also possessed great
virtues. His contemporaries describe him as energetic, cultivated,
astute, and prompt to act, and also as ready and vigorous of speech.
Rodrigo Borgia had spent seven years at Bologna studying canon law; and
when his uncle, Calixtus III., in 1456, made him Bishop of Valencia, he
also created him Cardinal-deacon of San Niccolò in Carcere Tulliano,
and shortly afterwards made him Vice-Chancellor of the Church.
During the reign of Sixtus IV. he had been made Bishop of Porto and
sent as legate to Spain. While returning to Italy he was shipwrecked
and rescued only with great difficulty. When he was cardinal he
occupied the Cesarini palace, but it is said that he was miserly and
that, in spite of his vast wealth, he seldom entertained.
The Borgia made a majestic and imposing Pope; he was crowned August 26,
1492, with the greatest pomp and magnificence. Never before since the
days of the Empire had Rome beheld such pageants. When the Pope, half
dead with fatigue, reached the Lateran he fainted; and again when he
took his seat on the throne, he swooned, his head falling on Riario’s
shoulder.
Guicciardini says Italy’s two greatest misfortunes were Lorenzo de’
Medici’s death and Rodrigo Borgia’s accession to the papacy.
* * * * *
The Borgias were vicious, shrewd, intellectual, and perspicacious, and
possessed of indomitable will. They were endowed with the mental and
physical force which wins success and often hatred.
[Illustration: POPE ALEXANDER VI.
_From a fresco by Pinturicchio._
To face p. 52.]
Securing possession of the papal office at a time when all men were
greedy for power; building up principalities and advancing the family
interests and at the same time enhancing the Spanish influence in the
Holy See and throughout Italy, their enemies minimised their virtues
and magnified their vices. They were charged with all sorts of hideous
crimes, some of which they undoubtedly committed, and some, of which
they certainly were innocent. Their hostile contemporaries spread
reports of their evil deeds throughout Christendom, and the charges
made against them in their lifetime have been repeated by historians
down to the present day.
Again, the Borgias have been judged, not in connection with their age
and their contemporaries, but as isolated creatures, or by modern
standards of ethics. Caesar Borgia has been described as a ravening
wolf among a flock of sheep, whereas, as Medin well says,[7] he was
merely a wolf battling with other wolves, with this difference, that
while he possessed the same greediness, ferocity, and ambition,
he surpassed them all in the vastness of his projects and in the
unshakable determination with which he carried them out.
To judge the Borgias by present standards is manifestly unjust. The
character of the Papacy has changed; Alexander VI. was merely a
temporal prince with certain sacerdotal functions. He used his great
office for the advancement of himself, his family, and his followers,
as other Popes of his epoch did, but more consistently, more skilfully.
Like other potentates of the day, he had his mistresses, whom he did
not hesitate to introduce into the Vatican, and his numerous bastards,
whom he publicly acknowledged.
In this connection it might be well to remember that the illegitimate
in the fifteenth century were not regarded with the contempt in which
they are supposed to be held at the present time; in fact, they were
openly recognised and treated exactly the same as the legitimate
children, and when for political or other reasons it became necessary
to legitimatise them, nothing was easier, the Popes often undertaking
to remove the taint by special bulls. Gregorovius calls this the golden
age of bastards and enumerates among the reigning princes of Italy of
illegitimate birth, Sforza of Milan, Ferrante of Calabria, Sigismondo
Malatesta of the Marches, and Borso of Ferrara, who was one of the
eight natural sons of the House of Este who rode forth to meet Pius
II. when he was on his way to the Congress of Mantua in 1459, and
whom he described as “eloquent, generous, and magnificent.”[8] When
the lawful children were minors or lacking in force, bastards were
often admitted to the succession; the fitness of the individual, and
not the fact of pure or impure birth, was the test. In more northern
countries, Burgundy for example, illegitimate children were provided
for by a distinct class of appanages, such as bishoprics. The greatest
of the sons of men did not express an isolated opinion when he made
Gloucester’s illegitimate son, Edmund, exclaim:--
“Who in the lusty stealth of nature take
More composition and fierce quality
Than doth, within a dull, stale, tired bed,
Go to the creating a whole tribe of fops,
Got ’tween asleep and awake.”
History, whose chief concern until recent years has been the recording
of the victories of fraud and force and the perpetuation of the memory
of the morally deformed, from Caesar to Bonaparte, has preserved for
our edification the names of innumerable bastards who dazzled their
contemporaries, and whom little boys and girls are taught to admire,
just as they are taught to admire those monsters who, in the pursuit
of their own aims and ambitions, have destroyed the greatest number of
their fellows--wholesale murder being a glorious achievement; thus we
have Don John of Austria, Vendôme, Dunois, Prince Eugene, the Constable
of Bourbon, and Maurice of Saxony. Not until the sixteenth century did
Italy feel any repugnance for illegitimacy, and then it was due to the
influence of foreign ideas and the counter-revolution.[9]
In addition to illegitimacy of birth another form of illegitimacy
was common in the peninsula, the illegitimate power of a reigning
sovereign--that is, the usurped dominion enjoyed by a political
adventurer. We need not pause to inquire whether he usurped it from an
earlier usurper, either a prince or a faction, or to ask how usurped
power can ever become legitimate. This state of affairs gave birth to
innumerable crimes of violence, and the dagger and the poisoned cup
were the usual instruments of personal political advancement.
The origin of some of these illegitimate powers can be traced back
to the middle of the eleventh century, when the feudal lords found
themselves confronted by a new power in the cities in the form of the
corporation or guild of artisans who had gradually become conscious of
their strength and importance, and had shown their masters that they
were to be counted with in the future.
The development of this new movement was furthered by the Wars of
Investiture, which, while weakening the authority of the bishops,
aroused the minds of the citizens, caused them to take an interest in
public affairs, and gave them a desire for freedom.
In almost every city there were then two bishops, one representing
the Empire, the other the Holy See, and each sought to increase the
number of his followers for the purpose of overcoming and expelling his
rival; hence innumerable concessions, privileges, and franchises were
granted the citizens, until finally, when the struggle was brought to
a close by the Concordat of Worms, in 1122, almost all the sovereign
rights--the regalia--had passed into the hands of the people.
Not only were the bishops forced to yield but the Emperor himself, the
Countess Matilda, and all the great lords were compelled to acquiesce
in the movement which even extended to cities that were independent of
any bishop.
Henceforth the cities governed themselves and elected their own chiefs
or consuls. They, however, did not pretend to be wholly independent
of the Empire but readily acknowledged themselves its feudatories.
The movement spread throughout Italy, and many of the cities became
so powerful that they compelled the feudal lords of the surrounding
country to apply for citizenship and to agree to obey the communal
statutes. These various elements introduced into the city soon
occasioned discord and quarrels, in which bloodshed became frequent;
in addition to this intestine warfare, the rivalry between the
different communes resulted in continual strife among them.
For a time they were left to prey on each other; for, although they
were feudatories of the Empire, the Emperors were unable to devote
any attention to the affairs of Italy, Germany being torn asunder by
the Guelphs, adherents of the house of Bavaria, and the Ghibellines,
supporters of the house of Franconia.
The communal regime was an advance over the Feudal System, but it could
not survive the internal and external quarrels; it soon began to show
signs of weakness, and by the end of the century it was apparent that
it was doomed. The majority of the people, interested in commerce and
manufacturing, grew tired of the strife and were ready to welcome any
strong power that would assume the leadership and put an end to the
internal dissension and protect the city from attacks from without.
As the commune was broken up into innumerable factions it was in a
peculiarly suitable condition to be seized by any strong and daring
adventurer who might aspire to the control, and when this man happened
to be the head of the city government, the podestà or captain of the
people, it was an easy step to the tyranny. During the later years
of the communes the magistrates were usually selected from among the
feudal families of the neighbourhood. They were accustomed to command
and were supplied with arms, and in addition to their supporting
faction in the city they had, in many cases, a large following of
kinsmen and retainers on their neighbouring estates. Consequently
nothing was easier than for them to seize the supreme power in the
city, hold, and transmit it to their descendants.
Among the first families to secure and preserve this illegitimate power
were the Della Scala, who appropriated Verona; the Este, who imposed
themselves on Ferrara; the Medici, who secured the powerful commune of
Florence; and the Gonzaga, who seized Mantua.
The vast multitude which came to Rome for the jubilee of 1300
inspired Boniface VIII. with dreams of empire, and a year later he
published a bull in which he affirmed the absolute power of the Pope
above all princes, kings, and emperors. This view was contested by
Philippe le Bel of France, who was supported by the nobles, clergy,
and people. Boniface retired to his city of Anagni to prepare a bull
of excommunication, whereupon, acting in accord with Sciarra Colonna
and other enemies of the Pope, Nogaret, Philippe’s minister, took
possession of the town of Anagni and seized his Holiness, who was,
however, liberated by the people a few days later. The Holy Father
returned to Rome, where he died shortly afterwards (1303).
Two years later a Frenchman, Bertrand Got, Archbishop of Bordeaux, was
elected Pope. He, however, did not go to Italy, but established the
Papal See at Avignon, and the Popes finally placed themselves under the
protection of the kings of France and their political authority rapidly
declined.
During the succeeding two hundred years the tyrannies established on
the ruins of the communes were growing stronger, and in many cities
powerful dynasties had established themselves, handing the government
down from father to son, or to the member of the clan best fitted to
conserve the power, priority or legitimacy of birth having little to
do with the succession, the possession of _virtu_, the characteristic
most necessary for the preservation of self and family, determining
the descent. Wherever the legitimate heir was found to be inferior,
mentally or physically, to one of the bastards of the family, he was
set aside for the latter.
The companies of paid soldiers now began to appear in Italy. These
bands of mercenaries were captained by the so-called condottieri,
and when the war for which they had been engaged was ended they were
discharged like other wage-workers. Their leaders were bold and
unscrupulous and had no personal interest at stake. This system gave
rise to the gravest dangers to the peninsula; it brought into Italy
swarms of worthless adventurers, who sold their services to any one
able to pay for them and often they turned against their employer. They
overran the country, robbing, murdering, debauching.
The power of the Popes in Romagna, never very strong, had grown
weaker during their absence in Avignon. Bologna had fallen into the
grasp of the Pepoli; the Polentani had secured Ravenna; the Manfredi
owned Faenza; the Ordelaffi enjoyed Forli; the Malatesta held sway
over Rimini; the Varano disposed of the fortunes of Camerino; the
Montefeltre of Urbino and Civitavecchia. The Campagna was harassed
by bands of brigands led by members of these families, and in Rome
complete anarchy obtained, the two great clans of Orsini and Colonna
constantly fighting to secure the control.
The fifteenth century was filled with the contests of the tyrannies
among themselves; the weaker were crushed by the stronger, who absorbed
their territories, and thus the great states were formed and their
heads became princes. Besides the struggles with outside rivals these
princely houses were always at strife with other powerful families
within their own domain; conspiracies and intrigue filled the day;
the princes became more despotic; rivals, pretenders, disobedient or
lukewarm retainers were systematically put to death; cruelty knew no
bounds.
The people were callous or indifferent to the crimes of the lords
because they were committed chiefly against their own rivals--that
is, persons of their own rank. The populace had long since lost all
hope of ruling, and they were dazzled by the splendour of the Court and
the magnificence of the monuments erected by the reigning prince. The
return of a modicum of the spoils, in the form of a monument of some
sort, a library, or a hospital, to commemorate the name and fame of the
brigand has always been found to be the most efficacious way to placate
the despoiled rabble.
The Visconti of Milan was one of the greatest of the princely houses
of Italy, and it reached the height of its power in the person of Gian
Galeazo, who added greatly to the family domains. With the assistance
of the Carrara of Padua he overthrew the Scala of Verona and Vicenza,
and then proceeded to wrest Padua from his late allies, who, however,
soon recovered the city. He put down the Gonzaga of Mantua, the Este
of Ferrara, and the Paleologi of Montferrat, and in 1395 he induced
the Emperor Winzel to confer the title of Duke of Milan on him. Having
defeated a coalition formed against him, he seized Pisa, Siena, Lucca,
Perugia, Assisi, Spoleto, and Bologna, and was preparing to appropriate
Florence and make himself King of Italy when he suddenly died (1402).
On his death his states rapidly fell away; the Pope recovered Bologna,
Perugia, and Assisi, Florence took Pisa, while the Venetians grabbed
Verona and Vicenza. In some of the cities families that had been
despoiled by the Visconti returned to power, and other places fell into
the hands of the condottieri, so that Gian Galeazzo’s sons found their
estates reduced to Milan and Pavia. No better example could be found of
the rise, growth, and extinction of an illegitimate power--that is, a
power based on fraud, usurpation, and tyranny.
Filippo Maria, the last of the Visconti, died in 1447 and a republic
was immediately proclaimed in Milan. Francesco Sforza, not wishing to
assert such rights as he may have had to the succession as the husband
of a natural daughter of Filippo Maria Visconti, placed his services
at the command of the republic in the war against Venice. He, however,
unexpectedly made peace with the enemy and turned his forces against
Milan, and, although there was a party favourable to Sforza, the city
made a brave resistance. Finally an uprising occurred, the republic was
overthrown, and Francesco entered the city and was proclaimed duke in
1450.
Milan in the second half of the fifteenth century was one of the most
powerful of the Italian states; and when Francesco Sforza died in 1466
he was succeeded by his son Galeazzo Maria, a dissolute and cruel man,
who was assassinated in a church by three nobles in 1476. His son,
Gian Galeazzo, at this time was only eight years old, consequently
his mother, Bona of Savoy, assumed the regency. The brothers of the
deceased duke, however, conspired against her, and finally Ludovico il
Moro, the most determined and deceitful of them, succeeded in getting
possession of the government, whereupon he compelled her to leave the
duchy.
* * * * *
Italy had awakened from the long slumber of the Middle Ages, during
which her intellect had been paralysed by the superstitions and terrors
inculcated by an ignorant and mercenary priesthood. She was emerging
from the gloom into the new life which manifested itself, not only
in the revival of learning and the prodigious blossoming of the fine
arts, but also in the expansion of the human personality. Man had again
discovered himself; he had become conscious of his faculties; he had
found that he possessed a will that could carry him on to greatness in
many fields of human activity. Hitherto superstitious, ignorant, and
bigoted, he had been taught that if he ventured to use the intellect
with which he had been endowed he would be eternally damned. Life to
him was merely a painful pilgrimage between two eternities, through one
of which he would be doomed to hell fire if in his mundane existence he
dared to find any of the joy of living.
Finally some perspicacious souls began to doubt, and in the teachings
of the newly discovered heathen philosophy they found a theory of life
more humane, more natural, more charitable.
The arts had been entirely occupied with sacred subjects because
in the Middle Ages the Church was their only patron. The gloom
and superstition of mediaeval Christianity oppressed men’s souls,
consequently the subjects selected were hideous and lugubrious in the
extreme--emaciated saints, representations of the Last Judgment, human
beings writhing in the torment of eternal wrath. The Almighty was not
a god of pity and love, but one of vengeance. The teaching of the
Nazarene was entirely distorted, just as it was by the Presbyterian
divines in Scotland in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when
they proclaimed their mission to be “to thunder out the Lord’s wrath
and to curse,” and endeavoured to frighten their hearers into the
paths of virtue with horrible tales of men “scorched in hell-fire,”
in “boiling oil, burning brimstone, scalding lead,” sufficiently
summarised in one of Binning’s sermons: “You shall go out of one hell
into a worse; eternity is the measure of its continuance, and the
degrees of itself are answerable to its duration.” Such, according to
the Scotch pastors, was the measure of God’s love.
Extremes, however, lead to revolution. A period of great asceticism is
always followed by an era of licentiousness, and in Italy this era was
synchronous with the age of the Borgias.
It is no part of the present writer’s purpose to palliate the crimes
of the Borgia; recent attempts which have been made to show that
Alexander VI. and his son Caesar were gentle and impeccable beings,
maligned and slandered, are inspired chiefly by a love of paradox,
or occasioned by a motive not unlike that which actuates the great
criminal lawyer whose chief victories consist in securing, not the
acquittal of the innocent but of the guilty. These efforts, therefore,
should not be taken too seriously.
Like other princes, the Borgias were human, and the same passions that
prevail among the laity also rule among the priesthood. Theoretically
the cardinals were the Pope’s advisers, an ecclesiastical senate,
charged with the salvation of humanity, but actually they were a body
of powerful and astute politicians, appointed by the Pope on his own
initiative or at the request of some reigning sovereign or great family
whose support his Holiness was anxious to secure. The cardinalate was
bestowed in precisely the same way, and for the same reasons, as a
minister’s portfolio is at the present time--that is, without any
regard to the fitness of the beneficiary, and as a reward for services
rendered or to come, and sometimes for even baser reasons: Alexander
VI. raised Farnese to the purple in return for the complaisance of his
sister, the beautiful Giulia.
Youths were made cardinals at a tender age. Giovanni de’ Medici, a
precocious prelate of eighteen years, on the conclusion of the conclave
that elected Alexander VI. was wise enough to flee from Rome; and
Caesar Borgia was seventeen when his father discovered he had need of
his counsel in conducting the affairs of the Church.
The great houses vied with each other for the honour, prestige, and
power. It was no small matter to sit in the ecclesiastical senate and
have a voice in directing the conscience of civilised humanity, at a
time when the masses did not dare even to think; and to have a vote in
the election of the greatest potentate on earth, who could make and
unmake kings and emperors, and consign them to eternal punishment at
will. The vast emoluments of the great office, the enormous revenues
of the various prebends and livings the cardinals enjoyed need not be
mentioned.
Their power and wealth knew no bounds. Surrounded by their kinsmen and
retainers, they maintained princely courts. They rode about the city
in the garb of condottieri, encased in steel, with swords clanking at
their sides. In their palaces they maintained hundreds of men, whose
number was increased, when occasion demanded, by the addition of gangs
of paid bullies and ruffians. Every palace was a stronghold, and in
addition those of the cardinals possessed the right of sanctuary--a
right, it may be observed, which was not generally respected unless it
was backed by might, as is shown by the frequent murders in churches in
Italy in the period of the Renaissance, one of the most extraordinary
of which was the stabbing to death of Giuliano de’ Medici by Bernardo
Bandini and Francesco de’ Pazzi, assisted by a priest, who “being
accustomed to the place, was less superstitious about its sanctity,”
at the steps of the altar in the duomo of Florence in 1478, under the
very eyes of Cardinal Raffaele Riario, the raising of the Host being
the signal for the attack. The palaces were great stone fortresses
with towers and battlements; the portal was closed with doors barred
and studded with iron, capable of resisting almost any force; within
were vast courts and living quarters for the swarms of retainers. Many
of these strongholds were even supplied with artillery. A criminal
often secured the protection of some cardinal who, with the aid of his
“family,” his armed followers, would rescue and save him from prison.
On one occasion a number of playful young Romans having assaulted
some of Cardinal Ascanio Sforza’s servants, the good prelate’s
“family,” armed to the teeth, sallied forth, fell upon the jokers,
and slashed and hacked about twenty of them. At another time when a
certain Savelli, Captain of the Curia, was about to proceed with an
execution in the vicinity of the palace of Cardinal Balue, that worthy
ecclesiastic called to him from a window and commanded him to stop,
as the place was in his own jurisdiction. On the captain’s refusal to
do as he was commanded the cardinal ordered his “family” to storm the
prison, which they did, liberating all the captives and destroying the
records. That night Cardinals Savelli and Colonna dispatched their own
forces against their colleague. Subsequently all the belligerents were
summoned to appear before the Pope on the charge of contumacy, but the
only notice which Cardinal Balue took of the order was to fill his lair
with armed men.
In a world of rapid change human life, honour, and the higher
sentiments are held in slight esteem; material success is the goal men
strive to reach and few question the means they employ. During the
late Renaissance the despot did not hesitate to remove any obstacle in
the way of his progress, even when that obstacle was a near kinsman;
and the act was generally connived at by the other members of the
family, conscious that in those unsettled days their own position and
safety depended upon the strength and astuteness of their chief.
Italy was then divided into a hundred petty dukedoms and
principalities, each struggling to preserve itself by annihilating its
neighbour. Coalitions were constantly formed for the destruction of a
state whose growing power threatened to disturb the balance, and these
compacts often were broken as soon as made. Deception became a fine
art, and diplomacy and duplicity were synonymous. It was this keen
struggle for existence which made the Italians the most perspicacious
politicians of the day.
Every ruler sought to attract to his court the artist and the literary
man, for he knew that the prestige gained thereby was no slight adjunct
to his power, and this explains why many of the most brutal and
egotistical of the princes became famous as patrons of the arts and
sciences. This protection was repaid with flattery, and to what depths
of sycophancy men will descend is attested by the nauseous dedications
of books of the day. In 1488, when Caesar Borgia was fourteen years of
age, and by the grace of Innocent VIII. a prothonotary of the Apostolic
See, Paolo Pompilio dedicated his “Syllabica,” a work on rhetoric, “to
the ornament and hope of the house of Borgia, the Illustrious Caesar,
whose love of letters foretells the greatness that is to be his.”
CHAPTER I
Genealogy of the house of Borgia--Vannozza de’ Catanei--Birth of
Caesar Borgia--His youth.
The Spanish house of Borja, tracing its line back to 1035, claimed
descent from Don Ramiro Sanchez of Aragon. A certain Don Pedro de Borja
who died in 1152--the year in which Don Ricardo, a representative of
the junior branch, removed to Naples--had a son, Don Ximenes Garcia
de Borja, who was the founder of the senior line. His son, Gonzales
Gil, was the father of Don Raymon de Borja, whose son, Don Juan Domingo
de Borja, Lord of the Torre de Canals--who was living in the city
of Xativa in Valencia in the fourteenth century--had by his wife,
Francina de Borja, several daughters and a son Alonzo, the future
Calixtus III.
As early as 1233 the Borja family had won fame, for in that year eight
of their name had hurried to the support of Don Jaime in his war
with the Moors, and by their bravery had secured a place among the
_Caballeros de la Conquista_.
Numerous positions of honour were held by the Borja from that time
forth, but the height of their glory was attained when Alonzo de Borja,
who had gone to Naples in the train of King Alfonso of Aragon, was
elected to succeed Nicholas V. as Pope in 1455.
Of the several sisters of Alonzo de Borja--who on his election to the
Papacy assumed the name Calixtus III.--Catalina married Juan Mila of
Xativa, by whom she had two sons, Cardinal Juan del Mila and Perot del
Mila, whose daughter Adriana was the wife of Ludovico Orsini and the
kinswoman and confidante of the future Alexander VI., the son of Doña
Isabella de Borja, another of the sisters of Calixtus III.
Ever since the publication of Tomaso Tomasi’s “Duca Valentino”
historians have repeated his statement that Caesar regarded Rodrigo
Lenzuolo, or Lenzol, as his father--_Riconobbe per padre Cesare
Borgia, detto poi il Valentino, Roderigo Lenzolio_.[10]
Gregorovius says that Isabella, the sister of Alonzo, was the wife of
Jofre Lanzol, a wealthy nobleman of Xativa, and that she was the mother
of several daughters, all of whom remained in Spain, and of two sons,
Pedro Luis and Rodrigo; and that Calixtus III., the uncle, adopted
these two nephews and gave them the family name; thus the Lanzol became
Borgia, the Italian form of the Spanish name Borja.
If Tomasi, Panvinio, Mariana, and the later historians are correct in
stating that Isabella’s husband was a Lanzol, their son, following the
Spanish custom of uniting the mother’s family name with that of the
father, would have been Rodrigo Lanzol y Borja and the descent from
the Borja would have been through his mother only. But M. Charles
Yriarte[11] conclusively shows that Rodrigo was Borja y Borja, doubly
a Borgia, his father having been, not Jofre Lanzol, but Don Jofre de
Borja y Doms, who married Isabella de Borja, sister of Calixtus III.
Doms therefore was the name of Rodrigo’s paternal grandmother, and the
shield with the three bands azure, which appears in all the arms of the
Borgia, in all the monuments of the Este family, and in all Italian
works on heraldry, is the escutcheon of the Doms and not of the Lanzol
family, whose arms according to Fabrer were “azure with a sun argent
in the first and or with a crescent argent in the second quarter”--a
device which is never found in connection with the Borgia in either
Spain or Italy.
The Valencian chronicle of the thirteenth century which says that:
“the Borja to the number of eight hastened to Valencia to serve the
king,” adds that “all, without exception, bore on their shields a bull
on a golden ground.” Thus we find the Borgia arms clearly defined
at this early date, and two hundred years later Calixtus III. used
the same arms with a border of gules charged with eight oriflammes;
finally Alexander VI. added to his escutcheon the arms of the Doms, his
paternal grandmother’s family, three bands azure on a field of gold,
which are the arms of Sibilla Doms, of Catalonia, wife of Rodrigo Gil
de Borja, brother of Domingo.
The offspring of this union, Jofre de Borja y Doms, father of Rodrigo
Borgia, therefore had the right to place the three bands azure of the
house of Doms by the side of the Borgia bull, and this he did.
Rodrigo Borgia therefore was the son of Jofre de Borja y Doms and
Isabella de Borja, who were first cousins; and he was the nephew of
Calixtus III., his mother’s brother.
All the descendants of Alexander VI. used the arms which he had
engraved on his pontifical seal and which by his order Pinturicchio
painted in the Appartamento Borgia in the Vatican.
When Lucretia Borgia, through her marriage with Alfonso d’Este, became
Duchess of Ferrara, she added to her arms the eagle of the House of
Este and also the pontifical keys, and when her brother Caesar, on his
marriage with Charlotte d’Albret, was made Duke of Valentinois, he
adopted the lilies of France, although he should have taken the arms of
Navarre.
Now, what connection had the Lanzol with the Borgia, and what caused
the curious mistake regarding the name of Rodrigo Borgia’s father?
Don Rodrigo de Borgia, later Alexander VI., had three sisters, one of
whom, Doña Juana, married P. Guillem Lanzol de Romani and bore him a
son, Don Jofre Lanzol y Borja, who married Doña Juana de Moncada and
by her had a son, Don Rodrigo Lanzol, who, instead of calling himself
Lanzol y Moncada, as he should have done, took the name of Borgia,
which was that of his grandmother as well as of his great-grandmother,
Isabella, the sister of Calixtus III., and it was this Rodrigo Lanzol,
who incorrectly called himself Borgia, whose name finally, in some
unaccountable way, became confused with that of Rodrigo Borja y Borja,
subsequently Alexander VI., and the error has persisted for centuries.
Such is Yriarte’s explanation. The evidence furnished by the arms
is substantiated by the Valencian chronicles and by records in the
archives of Osuna.
The Borgias were Spanish and such they remained throughout their long
and infamous career in Italy, and they were always supported by a
powerful Castillian party.
That Rodrigo Borgia was Caesar’s father there is no doubt. Rodrigo as
cardinal, and later when Pope, always acknowledged and treated him as
his son, lavishing unbounded parental affection on him and striving in
every way to advance his material interests, as he did those of all his
kinsmen and children.
One of the most striking traits of the Borgia family was their
exaggerated affection for each other and their unbounded sense of
family solidarity. Even Pope Calixtus III., who has not been accused
of sacrificing his office wholly to his kinsmen, saw fit to bestow the
cardinalate upon several of them.
If Mariana is correct in stating that Rodrigo’s eldest son Don Pedro
Luis, first Duke of Gandia, who was born in 1467, was the child of
Vannozza de’ Catanei, the cardinal’s relations with this woman, which
lasted about fifteen years, began when he was about thirty-five.
Of Vannozza little is known. She was born in 1441 and was the wife of
Giorgio de Croce when she first succumbed to the magnetic cardinal,
to whom she presented four children, about whose birth and parentage
there is no doubt whatever: Giovanni, born in 1474, married Doña Maria
Enriquez, and was assassinated in 1497; Caesar, born in 1476; Lucretia,
born in 1480, was first married to Giovanni Sforza of Pesaro, then to
Alfonso of Aragon, Duke of Bisceglia, and finally to Alfonso d’Este;
Don Giuffre, the youngest, was born in 1481. Mariana makes no mention
of Rodrigo’s other children--Girolama, who died in 1483; Isabella, the
wife of Pietro Giovanni Matuzzi; and Giovanni Borgia, Lord of Camerino,
who was the son of Giulia Farnese.
Vannozza was simply a nickname for Giovanna, and Catanei was a
common name throughout Italy. In numerous contemporary documents she
is mentioned as Madonna de Casa Catanei. As she was able to hold
the pleasure-loving cardinal so many years and secure from him the
recognition of her children, various writers have seen fit, in the
absence of other grounds for romance, to ascribe to her great physical
beauty, force of character, and intellect. Her name does not appear in
the list of public courtesans of Rome, and numerous guesses have been
made as to her social status and mode of living; they are, however,
neither probable nor illuminating. Her obscurity is proved by the
indifference of the sonneteers and epigrammatists of the day, who, had
she been at all conspicuous, would have made her notorious. Burchard
mentions her only twice, once in January, 1495, when her house was
sacked by the French, and again in connection with the supper that
preceded the murder of the Duke of Gandia in June, 1497.
Although Rodrigo’s relations with Vannozza ceased about 1482 he
continued to interest himself in her material welfare. Her husband,
Giorgio de Croce, died in 1486, whereupon the cardinal, in order that
she might not be without a home and a protector, married her to Carlo
Canale of Mantua, a scholarly, but complaisant, individual who had been
secretary to that great patron of letters Cardinal Francesco Gonzaga,
upon whose death in 1483 Carlo had gone to Rome to enter the service of
Cardinal Sclafenati.
Rodrigo, probably thinking that Carlo’s talents might be useful,
selected him to be the husband of his widowed mistress; and avarice or
ambition induced Carlo to acquiesce in the arrangement.
The nuptial contract was drawn up June 8, 1486, and to her husband
Vannozza brought as marriage portion a thousand gold ducats and an
appointment as _sollicitator bullarum_. The contract describes this
as her second marriage, thus making it doubtful whether she was ever
married to Domenico d’Arignano, who, Burchard says, “had been married
by Rodrigo to a certain woman who had borne the cardinal a son, whom he
had always maintained and recognised as his own, and whom he had made
Bishop of Pamplona.”[12]
With the assistance of her cardinal lover she had amassed a
considerable fortune, a part of which by her will she eventually
devoted to the purchase of her soul’s salvation. She appears to have
been a strong, coarse woman, penurious and avaricious. Records are
extant showing that she was charged with stealing, through the agency
of her paid servants, eleven hundred and sixty sheep from Ludovico
Mattei in 1504, and she was found guilty. In 1502 a complaint was
likewise lodged against Donna Vannozza de’ Catanei by Nardo Antonazzi,
a goldsmith of the Regola Quarter, for refusing to pay for a silver
cross he had made for her in 1500. The jeweller, however, lost his case.
Tomasi says that Vannozza was of ignoble condition and that she
succeeded with the consummate art of the courtesan in dominating any
one she wished to control, and that she was an insatiable harpy.
The same writer states that Cardinal Rodrigo had spent his youth
in cultivating his natural gifts with the aid of all the tricks
and artifices known to the courtier, and that he was a perfidious,
bloodthirsty, and voracious beast of prey, but one who knew how to
insinuate himself into the favour of all men.
Such were the antecedents of Caesar Borgia, and if his parentage was
bad the environment in which he grew up was worse.
Caesar, if we accept his father’s statement, was born in April, 1476,
for in 1501 the Pope, in conversation with the Ferrarese ambassador,
remarked: “The Duchess Lucretia will complete her twenty-second year
next April, and in the same month the Most Illustrious Duke Caesar will
be twenty-six.”
The father’s statement concerning the age of his children, which was
promptly reported to Duke Ercole of Ferrara by the ambassador, is
confirmed by various dispatches and letters, among which are two sent
by Gianandrea Boccaccio to the same person February 5 and March 11,
1493, which are now in the state archives of Modena. These dispatches
give Caesar’s age at that time as “sixteen or seventeen years.” He was,
therefore, somewhat younger than has for a long time been supposed, and
was not as old as his brother Giovanni.
At the time of Caesar’s birth his father was about forty-five and his
mother, Vannozza, thirty-four. Of her four children Caesar is the most
interesting as a psychological and historical study, not on account of
his crimes, for every petty Italian state had its criminal despot at
that time, but because he displayed a calculating cunning, a shrewdness
in statecraft, and a fidelity to purpose which is rarely met with in
men of his years, and which made him pre-eminent among personalities of
his own stamp.
Whether or not Caesar was striving to consolidate the numerous Italian
states and eventually construct a great central kingdom in the
peninsula, as Machiavelli believed, is difficult to determine. Caesar’s
activity, however, reveals something more than the unreasoned efforts
of a ferocious egoist to gratify an unbounded but vague ambition. At
the beginning of the fifteenth century Italy offered great prizes to
the resolute adventurer, and Caesar’s horizons may have been wider than
the domain of St. Peter.
What is known of his boyhood and youth is, in comparison with a
knowledge of the environment in which he grew up, of slight value. A
bull of Sixtus IV., issued in April, 1480, in which he is described as
the “son of a Cardinal-Bishop and a certain married woman,” relieved
him of the necessity of proving himself of legitimate birth; and
an Act signed by Ferdinand the Catholic in 1481 provides for his
legitimation and naturalisation. These steps were necessary before he
could be invested with the various offices his father, the all-powerful
Cardinal of San Niccolò in Carcere Tulliano, was determined he should
enjoy. While still a child privileges of all sorts were bestowed upon
him. July 10, 1482--Caesar was then about six--Sixtus IV. granted
him the revenues of the prebends and canonicates of the cathedral of
Valencia; and by a second bull, dated April 5, 1483, presented him with
another canonicate and a benefice belonging to the archdiaconate of
Xativa; the following year the Pope appointed him provost of Albar, and
finally--September 12, 1484--when according to the bull he was nine
years of age, he was made treasurer of Carthagena.
During his childhood Caesar probably lived with Adriana Mila, his
father’s cousin. A granddaughter of Catalina, sister of Calixtus III.,
she had married Ludovico Orsini, Lord of Bassanello, who died some time
before 1488. She dwelt in the Orsini palace in Rome. Lucretia Borgia
also was placed under her care. Adriana Mila was more than Rodrigo
Borgia’s kinswoman, she was his confidante up to the day of his death.
Her son it was who married the beautiful Giulia Farnese, and Adriana
was the complaisant witness of the adulterous relations of his wife,
“Christ’s Bride,” as the satirists called her, with her cousin, St.
Peter’s successor.
The dedication--already mentioned--of Paolo Pompilio’s treatise on
rhetoric to Caesar in 1488 is the first public notice we have of him.
The following year he was a student of canon law at the Sapienza
of Perugia, where he also had a special preceptor, Juan Vera of
Valencia. At the university he had a number of intimate friends and
companions--all young Spaniards--who were closely associated with his
subsequent fortunes. The most famous of these young men was Francesco
Romolino of Lerida, one of the commissioners sent to Florence in
1498 by Alexander VI. to secure the conviction of Savonarola, and
who remarked to his host, Pandolfo della Luna: “We shall make a fine
bonfire; I bear the sentence with me already prepared.”[13]
From Perugia, where Caesar spent about two years, he went to Pisa--in
1491--to attend the lectures of Filippo Decio, one of the most famous
professors of canon law of that day, and he was still there September
12, 1491, on which date Innocent VIII. conferred the bishopric of
Pamplona on him. Five days later Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia, in his
capacity of Vice-Chancellor of the Church, informed the Chapter
of Pamplona, and the alcaldes and counsellors of the city, of the
appointment; and on the same day Caesar, the dignified bishop of
fifteen years, also brought the fact to the notice of these various
personages and sent them as his representative the venerable Martin
Zapata, Canon-Treasurer of Toledo, provided with a power of attorney,
and the bulls and letters naming him administrator of the province. The
original documents are in the archives of Pamplona.
In the first letter, which is written by Caesar’s father, in Spanish,
he is described as a _persona muy a nos conjunta_--“a person very
closely connected with us.” The cardinal adds: “The Holy Father has
decided to appoint to this bishopric the prothonotary Don Caesar de
Borgia, distinguished for his virtues and his learning.”
Caesar’s letter, written at Soriano, is as follows:--
“TO THE MAGNIFICOS, OUR HONOURABLE AND ESPECIAL FRIENDS,--You
doubtless have already learned from letters of the Reverend
Cardinal, Vice-Chancellor of the Church, that, the Episcopal See
of your city having become vacant in consequence of the death
of the Reverend Señor Don Alfonso Carillo of blessed memory,
his Holiness, the Pope, and the Reverend Seniors constituting
the Sacred College, unanimous in their choice, have promoted
us to this dignity, and have placed in our hands the bulls and
briefs which we hereby tender for your examination. Solicitous
for the future good government of the bishopric, spiritual as
well as temporal, we send to you the venerable Mossen Martin
Zapata, the beloved and esteemed canon and treasurer of Toledo,
as our representative, duly empowered to decide all matters in
our stead. We have specially instructed him to confer with you
regarding a number of matters, and we urge you to trust him in
all things and to show him all confidence. I expect you also of
your own goodwill to aid and serve him. Should anything special
arise affecting your noble city and the general welfare of
yourselves and the community you may rest assured that we will
give it the same attention that we would bestow on any affair of
our own. I have only to add that I pray the Lord to take your
honourable and noble persons under his protection.
“From Soriano the xvii day of September, MDLXXXXI. Ever yours to
command,
“CESAR DE BORGIA,
“_Elector of Pamplona_.”
In the latter half of the fifteenth century, when boys were married at
sixteen, made cardinals at seventeen, and commanded armies at twenty,
children were precocious, and Caesar, a student in Pisa, could not have
been blind to the vast opportunities presented to him by his father’s
elevation to the Papacy in August, 1492.
By the immediate bestowal of high offices on his favourites and kinsmen
Alexander showed that he did not intend to hold himself aloof from
nepotism. His uncle, Calixtus III., having set the example, the evil
had grown, and Alexander was destined to be its supreme exponent.
Caesar did not attend the elaborate fêtes given on the occasion of
his father’s coronation. His Holiness doubtless thought it wise not
to bring his son forth into public gaze thus early in the drama.
Caesar was in Spoleto at the time, and, being a shrewd youth, he must
have appreciated the scandalous means by which his father secured his
election. The coronation took place August 26, 1492, and in honour of
the happy event Alexander made his son, Caesar, Bishop of Valencia, an
office he himself had held, and which carried with it the dignity of
Primate of Spain.
[Illustration: FACSIMILE (REDUCED) OF A LETTER WRITTEN BY CAESAR BORGIA
TO FERDINAND OF SPAIN, ROME, 1497.
To face p. 80.]
The Spaniards were not forgotten by the Borgia; those who already
held office were promoted and places were found for those who had not
yet secured a foothold. The Bishop of Modena states in one of his
letters that ten popes would not be able to satisfy these satellites.
The Pope’s sisters immediately became personages of importance in
Rome, and Vannozza, the mother of four of his children--who, after
the birth of Giuffre, had found herself deserted for the beautiful
Giulia Farnese--gained in both social position and material wealth by
Rodrigo’s election. Thenceforth she appears to have lived the life of a
respectable and influential matron in the papal city.
All were provided for; the Pope’s mistress, his innumerable kinsmen,
the children and grandchildren of his sisters, the hosts of Spaniards
who fastened themselves on the papal treasury, the prebends and
benefices--and who even demanded a share of the lands confiscated
from the Romagnol barons. Prominent among the Spaniards in the
papal palace were: Romolino of Lerida, Juan Vera, Juan Lopez--who
was made Chancellor--Pedro Caranza and Juan Marades, who were
Privy-Chamberlains.
A letter written by Caesar from Spoleto to Piero de’ Medici shows that
he was in that place as late as October, 1492. The youth explains
why he had failed to call on the Florentine before leaving Pisa, and
recommends to his favour the faithful Romolino of Lerida. The letter,
which was delivered by Caesar’s tutor, Juan Vera, concludes with the
formula used by princes: “_Tanquam Frater Vr Cesar de Borgia Elect.
Valent_.”
Not until the spring of 1493 did Caesar go to Rome, where a house in
the Trastevere was furnished him. Here he maintained a numerous Court,
and although he was only seventeen years of age, one of the dispatches
of Gianandrea Boccaccio, the Ferrarese ambassador, shows that he knew
how to play the prince perfectly. The ambassador went to the Vatican
to render homage, and March 19, 1493, in announcing the results of
his interview to his master, Ercole d’Este, he gives the earliest
description we have of the youthful Bishop of Valencia.
“The other day I called on Caesar in his house in the Trastevere. He
was about to set out for the chase and was clad in a costume altogether
worldly; he was clothed in silk and had a sword at his side. We rode
along on horseback, conversing as we went. I am on friendly terms with
him. He is intellectual and cultured--with the manners of a prince. He
has a serene and cheerful disposition, and his gaiety is contagious. He
is very _modest_. His bearing is much better than that of his brother,
the Duke of Gandia, who is by no means devoid of good qualities. The
Archbishop [Caesar] has never had any taste for the priesthood, but it
should be remembered that his benefices annually bring him in more than
sixteen thousand ducats.”
Just what the word “modesty” meant in those days is not apparent, for
it is applied to persons who would seem to have possessed little of
that admirable trait.
Ecclesiastical rules hampered Caesar but little. He was enormously
wealthy, and additional benefices were constantly given him. He was
promptly allotted the income of the churches of Castres and Perpignan,
and thirty thousand gold ducats from San Michele d’Arezzo fell to his
share.
At the time of Alexander’s accession to the papal throne Italy, and
Naples in particular, were threatened by grave dangers arising from
the contests of King Ferdinand of Naples and Ludovico, Duke of Milan,
and in March, 1493, the former endeavoured to secure the friendship of
the Pope by suggesting a marriage of one of his natural daughters with
Giuffre; the suggestion, however, came too late, for in April Lucretia
Borgia was betrothed to Giovanni Sforza, Lord of Pesaro, and kinsman
of Ludovico; and a coalition was formed by Milan, Venice, and the Holy
See, which could only result in disaster to Ferdinand, as Charles
VIII., who had just inherited the crown of France, was beginning to
assert his claims to the throne of Naples.
Irritated by the rejection of his offer, the King of Naples wrote his
orator in Spain that Alexander was detested by every one in spite of
his holy office, and that his only care was to increase the fortunes of
his children by fair means or foul.
Some of the other Italian states joined the coalition, and in April,
1493, the Bishop of Nepi, Bartolomeo Flores, publicly read the articles
of the treaty in St. Peter’s, and although no threat was made against
Ferdinand, every one knew that the purpose of the league was the
destruction of the House of Naples. Lucretia Borgia’s betrothal to
Giovanni Sforza strengthened the alliance. Alexander hated Ferdinand
because he was outspoken in his condemnation of the scandals of the
Vatican and because he was a vigorous supporter of the Neapolitan
party in the Sacred College. The King had opposed the bestowal of the
cardinalate upon Alessandro Farnese, Giulia Bella’s brother, and he had
also allied himself with Giuliano della Rovere and Virginio Orsini,
who, aided by those who had tried to prevent Alexander’s election, were
holding a portion of the territory of the Church by force. Finally the
King openly supported the rebels, furnishing them troops and supplies,
while his own son, who had gone to Ostia with Giuliano della Rovere,
joined Virginio Orsini and Fabrizio Colonna, the Pope’s mortal enemies.
June 12, 1493, Giovanni Sforza, Lord of Pesaro, was married to the
Pope’s daughter, who was then thirteen years of age. She had been
betrothed twice before, and is described as a beautiful, vivacious,
golden-haired girl. The marriage ceremony was performed in the Vatican,
and the festivities which followed caused an uproar throughout the city.
Burchard, the minute Master of Ceremonies, may not have been
present--his diary stops abruptly June 11, 1493, and does not begin
again until January 14, 1494--but Infessura fills in the lacuna.
The Pope invited one hundred and fifty of the prominent women of Rome
and their husbands, and also the ambassadors and city officials, to the
wedding. After being kept waiting for some time in a hall, the women
were allowed to enter, but when their husbands and the ambassadors
and officials were about to follow, the doors were closed and were
not again opened until an hour had elapsed; then the notaries who had
attested the marriage contract appeared and informed the men, who were
then permitted to enter, that the ceremony was over. It was said that
on the conclusion of the ceremony the Pope had produced fifty goblets
filled with confetti which, in the exuberance of his joy, he had poured
into the bodices of the women, “probably the most beautiful ones, and
this,” concludes Infessura, “to the honour and glory of God and the
Roman Church.”
The chronicler proceeds to describe a banquet in the papal palace,
which was attended by Church dignitaries and numerous women, among whom
were the Pope’s daughter and Giulia Bella. The festivities lasted until
the seventh hour of the night, and included the reading of several
comedies--“among them some obscene ones.” Nowhere in connection with
the marriage of Lucretia and Giovanni Sforza is Caesar mentioned,
although he had left Spoleto.
The tension in the affairs of Italy was somewhat relieved by the King
of Spain, and through the intercession of Frederic, son of the King of
Naples, an agreement was reached in July, 1493, between Virginio Orsini
and the Pope. The price of the agreement and of the dissolution of the
league was the hand of Doña Sancia to be given to Giuffre, Caesar’s
younger brother. The contract was formally signed August 15, 1493, and
the league was dissolved. Giuffre’s marriage with Doña Sancia, like all
those arranged by Alexander VI., was purely a political expedient.
Although Caesar had no inclination or fitness for the Church, shortly
after this, September 21, 1493, he was made a cardinal. It was at this
same creation that Giuliano Cesarini--whose brother had married
Girolama Borgia in 1482--and Alessandro Farnese were made cardinals,
and Burchard adds that there were certain others who paid more than a
hundred thousand ducats for the honour. Farnese, brother of the Pope’s
concubine, as the papal Master of Ceremonies describes him with his
usual fondness for exact details, was henceforth known in Rome as “the
cardinal of the petticoat.”
In that grossly immoral age it is not surprising that Farnese took
advantage of the adulterous relations of the head of the Christian
Church with Giulia, “Christ’s Bride” as she was called in derision. The
Farnese family had been of slight importance in the history of Italy up
to the time of Alexander VI., but when he made Alessandro a cardinal he
brought them into the history of Rome and of the world--for this act
led to the pontificate of Paul III., the founder of the Farnese House
of Parma.