The Project Gutenberg eBook of The life of Poggio Bracciolini
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The life of Poggio Bracciolini
Author: William R. Shepherd
Release date: December 16, 2023 [eBook #72437]
Language: English
Original publication: Liverpool: Harris Brothers, 1837
Credits: deaurider and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE LIFE OF POGGIO BRACCIOLINI ***
THE LIFE OF POGGIO BRACCIOLINI.
THE
LIFE
OF
POGGIO BRACCIOLINI.
BY
THE REV. WM. SHEPHERD, LL. D.
[Illustration]
LIVERPOOL.
PRINTED BY HARRIS BROTHERS,
FOR LONGMAN, REES, ORME, BROWN, GREEN & LONGMAN, LONDON.
1837.
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
The services rendered to the cause of literature by Poggio Bracciolini,
have been noticed with due applause by Mr. Roscoe in his celebrated Life
of Lorenzo de’ Medici. From the perusal of that elegant publication, I
was led to imagine, that the history of Poggio must contain a rich fund
of information respecting the revival of letters. A cursory examination
of the Basil edition of his works convinced me that I was not mistaken;
and I felt a wish to direct the attention of the public to the merits of
an author, whose productions had afforded me no small degree of pleasure.
Being apprized that Monsieur L’Enfant had given an account of the life
and writings of Poggio, in two 12mo. volumes, entitled “Poggiana,” I at
first bounded my views to a translation of that work. Upon perusing
it, however, I found it so ill arranged, and in many particulars so
erroneous, that I was persuaded it would be a much more pleasant task
to compose a new Life of Poggio, than to correct the mistakes which
deform the Poggiana. In this idea I was fully confirmed by the perusal of
Recanati’s Osservazioni Critiche, in which Monsieur L’Enfant is convicted
of no less than one hundred and twenty-nine capital errors.
I next turned my thoughts to the translation of the Life of Poggio,
written by Recanati, and prefixed by him to his edition of Poggio’s
History of Florence. But finding this biographical memoir, though
scrupulously accurate, too concise to be generally interesting, and
totally destitute of those minute particularities which alone can give
a clear and correct idea of individual character, I was persuaded that
the labours of Recanati by no means superseded any further attempts to
elucidate the history of Poggio. I therefore undertook the task of giving
a detailed account of the life and writings of that eminent reviver
of literature; and being convinced, from a perusal of his epistolary
correspondence, that his connexions with the most accomplished scholars
of his age would impose upon his biographer the duty of giving some
account of his learned contemporaries, whilst his situation in the
Roman chancery in some degree implicated him in the political changes
which, in his days, distracted Italy, I carefully examined such books
as were likely to illustrate the literary, civil, and ecclesiastical
history of the period of which I had to treat. From these books I have
selected whatever appeared to be relevant to my subject; and I have also
introduced into my narrative, such extracts from the writings of Poggio
as tend to illustrate, not only his own character, but also that of the
times in which he lived.
I now submit the result of my inquiries to the public inspection, not
without experiencing considerable anxiety respecting the fate which
awaits my labours; but at the same time, conscious that I have spared
no pains in searching for information, and that I have in no instance
wilfully deviated from the truth of history. The number and minuteness
of my references to authorities will indeed vouch for my industry, and
for my willingness to facilitate that examination which may occasionally
convict me of error. For errors and inadvertencies I could plead an
excuse, which would perhaps tend to mitigate the severity of criticism,
namely, that the life of Poggio was written during the short intervals of
leisure allowed by a laborious occupation. But of this excuse I cannot
conscientiously avail myself; for I have long been persuaded that the
habits of industry, acquired by the recurrence of daily employment, are
much more productive of that exertion of mind which is necessary to
the successful study of literary composition, than the dignified, but
enervating leisure of the dilettante.
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
When I first began to collect materials for the writing of the life
of Poggio Bracciolini, I was much indebted to the kindness of my late
friends Mr. Roscoe and Mr. William Clarke, who liberally allowed me
the free use of the scarce books which they possessed, illustrative of
the revival of letters in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. From
various passages which occur in some of these works, I was convinced that
there existed in the public libraries of the city of Florence several
manuscripts, from which much information might be gathered respecting the
history of the scholar, to whose early exertions for the promotion of
sound learning I wished to do justice. In consequence of this persuasion,
I felt a strong desire to visit the Tuscan capital, for the purpose of
copying and analyzing such documents, suitable to my purpose, as I might
there discover. But my professional engagements not allowing me to be
absent from home for the requisite length of time, I was obliged, however
reluctantly, to give up this project as impracticable, and to proceed
in my task with the aid of such printed books as were accessible to me.
Soon after the publication of the first edition of this work, however,
I found that a very interesting portion of the documents which I wished
to inspect existed in my native country. The late Col. Johnes, of Hafod,
having read my Life of Poggio, wrote to me in the spring of the year
1803, to inform me that he had in his library a manuscript volume of
Letters written by my hero, which he would with pleasure permit me to
examine, on the condition of my coming over to Hafod for that purpose.
So frank an invitation I eagerly accepted, and at my earliest leisure
I repaired to the Colonel’s romantic residence, where I was received
with that elegant hospitality, by the exercise of which Mr. Johnes was
distinguished, even in a country where strangers are generally greeted by
the resident gentry with a hearty welcome. On a cursory examination of
the volume which had thus attracted me to the wilds of Cardiganshire,
and which was beautifully written on the finest vellum, I found that it
contained many letters of Poggio which had not been printed. From these
I immediately commenced making extracts of such passages as tended to
throw new light on the particulars of Poggio’s history; and this task
I resumed at future visits which I paid to Hafod, till, at length, the
intercourse between Mr. Johnes and myself ripening into the confidence
of intimate friendship, my kind host was pleased to present me with the
volume itself, which I keep among the most precious of my few literary
treasures, and which I especially value, as the gift of an accomplished
and warm hearted man, whose memory I shall gratefully cherish to the
close of my mortal existence.
Under the guidance of this manuscript I was enabled to settle various
dates of occurrences in the Life of Poggio, which were not supplied by
any printed record which had fallen into my hands; and also to collect
several traits illustrative of his character, which would naturally be
traced in his epistolary correspondence. Other engagements, however,
for some time prevented me from arranging these memoranda, which I had
originally collected with a view to an improved edition of my work. At a
certain period, also, I deferred this task, in hopes of profiting by the
annotations which I was apprized that the learned Dr. Spiker, librarian
to the King of Prussia, had appended to a translation which he had made
of my Life of Poggio into the German language. To my great mortification,
however, the Doctor’s manuscript, which had been put into the hands
of a printer at Berlin, was irrecoverably lost in the confusion which
followed upon the conquest of Prussia by the Emperor Napoleon after the
battle of Jena. The French version of my work by the Compte de Laubepin,
which was published at Paris in the year 1819, I found to be faithful,
and elegant in its style; but its Appendix threw little new light upon
the subject of my lucubrations. My papers relating to Poggio lay, then,
undisturbed in my portfolio, till the appearance in the year 1825 of
the Cavaliere Tonelli’s translation of my work into Italian once more
drew my attention to them, and revived the wish which I had so long ago
entertained to publish an improved edition of the Life of Poggio. For
the Cavaliere had completely smoothed to me the work of correction.
Having had access, not only to a manuscript copy of Poggio’s letters
deposited in the Riccardi library at Florence, of which the volume given
to me by Colonel Johnes is a duplicate, but also to other collections of
Poggio’s epistles, which he had discovered in various libraries on the
continent of Europe, with the first volume of a selection from which he
favoured the literary world in the year 1832, he was enabled to supply
my deficiencies, as well as to rectify the mistakes into which I had in
some few instances fallen, by relying too much on secondary authorities.
This he has done in the notes appended to his translation, which in
their substance exemplify the industry in research of a zealous lover of
literature; and in their temper and style the urbanity of a gentleman.
With such aid to facilitate my labours I experienced little difficulty in
preparing for the press this second edition of the Life of Poggio, which
I now submit to the public, with that confidence in its accuracy, which
is founded upon the circumstance, of its having been improved by the
suggestions of a critic, who has acquired a knowledge, at once minute and
extensive, of the literary history of the period of which I treat, and
whose opinions I cannot but respect, as the result of varied information
and of enlightened judgment.
CHAP. I.
_Birth of Poggio—His education at Florence—John of Ravenna—Poggio goes to
Rome—Enters into the service of Boniface IX—State of Italy—Schism of the
West—Urban VI—The Antipope Clement VII—Boniface IX—Distracted state of
Italy—The Antipope Benedict XIII—Wars in Italy—Letter of Poggio—Poggio’s
arrival in Rome—Innocent VII—Poggio introduces Leonardo Aretino into
the pontifical chancery—Memoirs of Leonardo—His contest with Jacopo
d’Angelo—Insurrection in Rome—Gregory XII—Alexander V—Distractions of the
Pontificate—Poggio visits Florence—John XXII—Leonardo Aretino elected
chancellor of Florence—His marriage, and letter to Poggio—Convocation of
the council of Constance._
CHAP. I.
Poggio,[1] the son of Guccio Bracciolini, was born on the eleventh day
of February, in the year 1380,[2] at Terranuova, a small town situated
in the territory of the republic of Florence, not far from Arezzo.
He derived his baptismal name from his grandfather,[3] concerning
whose occupation and circumstances, the scanty memorials of the times
in which he lived, do not furnish any satisfactory information.[4]
From his father, Poggio inherited no advantages of rank or fortune.
Guccio Bracciolini, who exercised the office of notary, was once
indeed possessed of considerable property; but being either by his own
imprudence, or by misfortune, involved in difficulties, he had recourse
to the destructive assistance of an usurer, by whose rapacious artifices,
his ruin was speedily completed, and he was compelled to fly from the
pursuit of his creditors.[5]
But whatever might be the disadvantages under which Poggio laboured,
in consequence of the embarrassed state of his father’s fortune, in a
literary point of view the circumstances of his birth were singularly
propitious. At the close of the fourteenth century, the writings of
Petrarca and Bocaccio were read with avidity, and the labours of those
eminent revivers of letters had excited throughout Italy the emulation
of the learned. The day-star had now pierced through the gloom of mental
night, and the dawn of literature was gradually increasing in brilliancy.
The city of Florence was, at this early period, distinguished by the
zeal with which its principal inhabitants cultivated and patronized
the liberal arts. It was consequently the favourite resort of the
ablest scholars of the time, some of whom were induced by the offer of
considerable salaries, to undertake the task of public instruction.
In this celebrated school, Poggio applied himself to the study of the
Latin tongue, under the direction of Giovanni Malpaghino, more commonly
known by the appellation of John of Ravenna. This eminent scholar had,
for a period of nearly fifteen years, been honoured by the friendship,
and benefited by the precepts of Petrarca, under whose auspices he made
considerable progress in the study of morals, history, and poetry.
After the death of his illustrious patron, he delivered public lectures
on polite literature, first at Venice, and afterwards at Florence. At
the latter place, besides Poggio, the following celebrated literary
characters were formed by his instructions—Leonardo Aretino, Pallas
Strozza, Roberto Rossi, Paulo Vergerio the elder, Omnebuono Vicentino,
Guarino Veronese, Carlo Aretino, Ambrogio Traversari, and Francesco
Barbaro.[6]
It has been asserted by most of the writers who have given an account of
the early history of Poggio, that he acquired a knowledge of the Greek
language at the Florentine University under the tuition of the celebrated
Manuel Crysoloras—but it is evident from a letter addressed by him to
Niccolo Niccoli, that he did not commence his Greek studies till the year
1424, when he entered upon them at Rome, trusting for success in this
new pursuit to his own industry, guided by the occasional instructions
of a friend of his of the name of Rinuccio, an accomplished scholar, who
afterwards became secretary to Pope Nicholas V.[7]
When he had attained a competent knowledge of the Latin language,
Poggio quitted Florence, and went to Rome in the year 1403. Soon after
his arrival in that city, on the recommendation of his venerated tutor
Coluccio Salutati, he obtained the appointment of secretary to the
Cardinal Rudulfo Maramori, Bishop of Bari; and in the month of August
or September in the ensuing year, he entered into the service of the
reigning pontiff Boniface IX. in the capacity of writer of the apostolic
letters.[8]
A. D. 1403.—At the time of Poggio’s admission into the pontifical
chancery, Italy was convulsed by war and faction. The kingdom of Naples
was exposed to the horrors of anarchy, consequent upon a disputed
succession to the throne. Many of the cities of Lombardy, now the
unresisting prey of petty tyrants, now struggling to throw off the
yoke, were the miserable theatres of discord and of bloodshed. The
ambition of the Lord of Milan carried fire and sword from the borders of
Venice to the gates of Florence. The ecclesiastical state was exposed
to the predatory incursions of banditti; and the cities over which, as
portions of the patrimony of St. Peter, the pope claimed the exercise
of authority, took advantage of the weakness of the Roman court to free
themselves from its oppression. At the same time, the lustre of the
pontificate was dimmed by the schism, which for the space of more than
twenty years had divided the sentiments, and impaired the spiritual
allegiance of the Christian community.
As this celebrated ecclesiastic feud, which is commonly distinguished by
the name of the Schism of the West, commenced only two years before the
birth of Poggio; as no fewer than five of his patrons were implicated in
its progress and consequences, and as it was terminated by the council
of Constance, which assembly he attended in quality of secretary to John
XXII. it will be necessary to enter a little at large into its history.
The joy experienced by the inhabitants of Rome, on the translation of
the papal court from Avignon to its ancient residence, by Gregory XI.
was suddenly damped by the death of that pontiff, which event took
place on the 28th of March, 1378. The Romans were apprehensive, that
if the choice of the conclave should fall upon a native of France, he
would again remove the holy see beyond the Alps.[9] They sighed for
the restoration of that splendor, with which the pomp of the successors
of St. Peter had formerly graced their city. Their breasts glowed with
indignation, when they saw the states of the church, in consequence
of the absence of its chief, successively falling under the dominion
of usurpers. During the residence of the popes at Avignon, the devout
pilgrimages, once so copious a source of gain to the inhabitants of the
capital of Christendom, had been suspended; the tombs of the martyrs
had been neglected, and the churches were fast hastening to decay.
Dreading the renewal and the aggravation of these evils, the Roman clergy
and populace assembled in a tumultuous manner, and signified to the
cardinals, who happened to be at Rome at the time of the death of Gregory
XI. their earnest wishes, that they would appoint some illustrious
Italian to fill the pontifical chair. Amidst the clamours of the people,
the conclave was held in the Vatican, under the protection of a guard
of soldiers. This assembly was composed of thirteen French and four
Italian cardinals. Notwithstanding this preponderance of ultramontane
suffrages, in consequence, as Platina says, of a disagreement among
the French,[10] or more probably, as was afterwards alleged by the
Gallic ecclesiastics, in consequence of the overawing influence of the
Roman populace, the election was concluded in favor of a Neapolitan,
Bartolomeo, Archbishop of Bari, on whom the conclave conferred the name
of Urban VI.[11] The French cardinals, after protesting against his
nomination to the papal chair, as an act in which they had been obliged
to concur through a dread of rousing the popular indignation, fled from
the city. In the course of a little time, however, they returned to Rome,
and made their peace with Urban by confirming his election, and paying
him the customary homage. But this reconciliation was not lasting. The
manners of Urban were haughty and stern, and his disposition was severe
and revengeful. Disgusted by his pride, and dreading the effects of his
resentment, the foreign cardinals again withdrew, first to Anagni, and
afterwards to Fondi, a town situated in the territories of Naples. Here,
being emboldened by the protection of Joanna, queen of that country,
they renewed their protest against the election of Urban, and proceeding
to form a new conclave, they proclaimed the cardinal of Ginevra, under
the name of Clement VII. the true successor of St. Peter. This was the
beginning of that schism, which for so long a space of time perplexed
the true believers, by the inexplicable phenomenon of the co-existence
of two supreme and infallible heads of the church, each proscribing
his competitor, and fulminating the terrors of damnation against the
adherents of his rival.
In this contest the Gallic cardinals did not restrict themselves to the
use of spiritual weapons. They assembled a body of mercenary soldiers,
whom they employed in making an incursion into the Roman territory.
These troops were at first successful in their operations; but engaging
the pontifical army near Marina, they were defeated with considerable
loss.[12]
The resentful spirit of Urban, stimulated by the hostile conduct of the
rebellious cardinals, prompted him to meditate a severe revenge. He
instantly dispatched an ambassador to Lodovico, king of Hungary, with
instructions to proffer to that monarch his assistance in punishing the
queen of Naples, for the imputed murder of her husband Andrew, brother to
the Hungarian sovereign, who it was alleged had, with her concurrence,
been put to death by Luigi, prince of Taranto.[13] Lodovico, who had long
thirsted for vengeance, eagerly accepted the offers of Urban, and gave
orders to Carlo, son of Luigi di Durazzo, the descendant of Charles II.
and heir apparent to the throne of Naples, to march with the Hungarian
troops, which were then engaged in hostilities against the Venetians, and
to co-operate with the pope in an attack upon the kingdom of Naples.[14]
Carlo, after taking Arezzo, and making peace with the Florentines on the
condition of their lending him forty thousand crowns of gold, repaired
to Rome, where he held a conference with Urban. Thence he directed his
march to Naples, of which city he easily made himself master. Joanna,
after sustaining a short siege in the Castello Nuovo, was taken prisoner,
and, according to the directions of the inexorable king of Hungary,
smothered between two mattresses.[15]
This vindictive deed being perpetrated, Urban repaired to Naples, and,
according to the terms of an agreement which had been concluded before
the departure of the prince of Hungary from Rome, he demanded, on
behalf of his nephew, the possession of the principality of Capua, and
of several other places in the kingdom of Naples. On Carlo’s refusing
to accede to this demand, Urban, with characteristic impetuosity, had
recourse to threats, to which the king answered by putting the pontiff
for some days under an arrest. Urban, dissembling his indignation,
requested, and obtained of the prince, permission to retire to Nocera for
the benefit of his health. The first step which he took on his arrival
at that place, was to strengthen its fortifications, and recruit its
garrison. He then proceeded to the nomination of new cardinals, and
threw seven members of the sacred college into prison, alleging, that
at the instigation of Carlo, and of his rival Clement, they had formed
a conspiracy against his life. Having cited the Neapolitan monarch to
appear and answer to the charges which he had to prefer against him, he
proceeded to his trial. Carlo treated the summons with contempt, and sent
Count Alberico, grand constable of his kingdom, at the head of an army
to lay siege to Nocera. Urban, escaping from that city, embarked with his
prisoners on board some Genoese galleys, which had been prepared to aid
his flight. Exasperated to the highest degree of cruelty, the fugitive
pontiff vented his fury on the captive cardinals, five of whom he caused
to be tied up in sacks, and thrown into the sea.[16]
On the death of Carlo, who, having usurped the throne of Hungary, which
belonged of right to Maria, the daughter of the late monarch, was
murdered by assassins hired by the deposed queen, Urban endeavoured to
make himself master of the kingdom of Naples. Being frustrated in this
attempt, he returned to Rome, where he died on the 15th of October, 1389.
We may easily credit the assertion of Platina, that “few were the persons
who wept at his death.”
Poggio, in a letter to Angelotto, cardinal of St. Mark, ascribes the
violent conduct of Urban to a derangement of intellect, consequent upon
his elevation to the pontifical dignity;[17] and he has recorded in his
Facetiæ an anecdote, which may be quoted as proving the prevalence of an
opinion that he was afflicted with insanity.[18]
A. D. 1389.—Urban was succeeded by Boniface IX. a Neapolitan, of the
family of the Tomacelli, who was raised to the chair of St. Peter
at the early age of thirty years.[19] The distracted state of Italy
required indeed the exertions of a pontiff endowed with the vigour and
activity of the prime of life. That beautiful country was the devoted
prey of war, rapine, and civil discord. The native country of Poggio
did not escape the general calamity. Galeazzo, lord of Milan, having
declared war against Florence and Bologna, sent a powerful body of
forces under the command of Giovanni Ubaldino, with orders to lay waste
the territories of those states. In this extremity, the Florentines
dispatched a considerable army, under the command of their general
Auguto, to make a diversion in the Milanese, and successfully solicited
the assistance of Stephen, duke of Bavaria, and of the count d’Armagnac.
The campaign was opened with brilliancy by the conquest of Padua; but
the duke of Bavaria, having been seduced from his fidelity to his allies
by the tempting offers of the enemy, returned to his own dominions. The
count d’Armagnac, descending into Italy by the way of Turin, with the
intention of co-operating with Auguto, who had advanced to Bergamo, was
also successful in his first operations. But his troops, encountering
the enemy under the walls of Alessandria, were put to the rout, and
the count himself, exhausted by his exertions, was carried a prisoner
into the town, where he soon afterwards expired in consequence, it is
said, of drinking a copious draught of cold water. In these critical
circumstances, the Florentines were greatly indebted to the extraordinary
military talents of Auguto, who with an inferior force, effected a
retreat through the heart of the Milanese, and held in check the army
of Galeazzo, which had made an irruption into the Tuscan territories.
Both parties being at length weary of a contest which was productive
only of mutual injury, they listened to the paternal admonitions of
Boniface, who interposed between them in the quality of mediator; and,
under the auspices of the pontiff and the duke of Genoa, a peace was
concluded between Galeazzo and the Florentines, on the basis of mutual
restitution.[20]
When will a sufficient number of instances have been recorded by the pen
of history, of nations harrassing each other by the outrages of war,
and after years of havock and bloodshed, when exhausted by exertions
beyond their natural strength, agreeing to forget the original subject of
dispute, and mutually to resume the station which they occupied at the
commencement of the contest. “Were subjects wise,” what would be their
reflections, when their rulers, after the most lavish waste of blood,
coolly sit down and propose to each other the _status quo ante bellum_.
Happy would it be, could the _status quo_ be extended to the widow and
the orphan—to the thousands and tens of thousands, who, in consequence
of the hardships and accidents of war, are doomed to languish out the
remnant of their lives in torment and decrepitude.
A. D. 1393.—In the year 1393, the antipope Clement VII. dying at Avignon,
the schismatic cardinals, still persisting in their rebellion against the
Italian pontiff, elected as the legitimate successor of St. Peter, Pietro
da Luna, who assumed the name of Benedict XIII.[21]
For the space of five years after the pacification of Genoa, Florence
enjoyed the blessings of peace; but at the end of that period its
tranquillity was again disturbed by the ambition of Galeazzo, who had
now obtained from the emperor Wenceslaus, the title of duke of Milan.
This turbulent chieftain, being encouraged by the death of Auguto,[22]
the experienced commander of the Florentine forces, sent into Tuscany
a strong body of troops, which made incursions to the very gates of the
capital. Ruin and devastation attended the progress of the Milanese
forces, who laid waste the country with fire and sword, and led a great
number of the inhabitants into captivity. The following letter, addressed
on a similar occasion by Poggio to the chancellor of Siena, is at once a
document of the misery to which the small states of Italy were at this
time exposed in consequence of the wasteful irruptions of their enemies,
and a record of the benevolent dispositions of the writer’s heart.
“I could have wished that our correspondence had commenced on other
grounds than the calamity of a man for whom I have a great regard, and
who has been taken captive, together with his wife and children, whilst
he was engaged in the cultivation of my estate. I am informed that he and
one of his sons are now languishing in the prisons of Siena. Another of
his children, a boy of about five years of age is missing, and it is not
known whether he is dead or alive. What can exceed the misery of this
lamentable destiny? I wish these distresses might fall upon the heads of
their original authors: but alas! the wretched rustics pay the forfeit of
the crimes of others. When I reflect on the situation of those on whose
behalf I now intercede with you, my writing is interrupted by my tears.
For I cannot help contemplating in the eye of imagination the woe-worn
aspect of the father—the pallid countenance of the mother—the exquisite
grief of the unhappy son. They have lost every thing except their life,
which is bereft of all its comforts. For the father, the captors demand,
by way of ransom, ten, for the son, forty florins. These sums it is
impossible for them to raise, as they have been deprived of their all by
the rapacity of the soldiers, and if they do not meet with assistance
from the well-disposed, they must end their days in captivity. I take
the liberty of earnestly pressing this case upon your consideration, and
I entreat you to use your utmost exertions to redeem these unfortunate
people on the lowest terms possible. If you have any regard for my
entreaties, or if you feel that affection which is due from one friend
to another, I beseech you with all possible importunity to undertake the
care of this wretched family, and save them from the misery of perishing
in prison. This you may effect by exerting your interest to get their
ransom fixed at a low rate. Whatever must be paid on this account, must
be advanced by me. I trust my friend Pietro will, if it be necessary,
assist you in this affair. I must request you to give me an answer,
informing me what you can do, or rather what you have done, to serve
me in this matter. I say what you have done, for I know you are able,
and I trust you are willing to assist me. But I must hasten to close my
letter, lest the misery of these unhappy people should be prolonged by my
delay.”[23]
The uneasiness which the Florentines experienced, in consequence of the
hostile incursions of Galeazzo’s forces, was considerably augmented by
the accession of territory and of strength, which that enterprising
warrior at this time obtained by the acquisition of the cities of
Bologna, Pisa, Siena, and several fortresses bordering on the territories
of the republic. Perugia also having thrown off its allegiance to the
pope, had sheltered itself from his indignation under the protection of
the duke of Milan.[24]
The year of the jubilee was now approaching, and the Romans, ever
delighted with the frivolity of magnificent spectacles, sent a deputation
to Boniface, who had studiously withdrawn from Rome, requesting him
to honour his capital with his presence. With this request, Boniface
hesitated to comply, alleging, as the reason of his hesitation, that the
choice of magistrates, which the Roman people had lately made, was by no
means pleasing to him. Unwilling to forego the amusements and profits
of the approaching festival, the compliant citizens of Rome gratified
the pontiff with the selection of the principal officers of state, and
moreover, supplied him with a considerable sum of money. Boniface, in
return for these acts of submission, vouchsafed to make his public
entry into Rome; and employed the money which he had received, as the
price of his condescension, in fortifying the Mole of Adrian, in modern
times better known by the name of the castle of St. Angelo, and other
posts, which gave him the command of the city. Thus had the Romans the
satisfaction of celebrating the jubilee with extraordinary pomp, at the
expense of the remnant of their liberty.[25]
A. D. 1400.—In the mean time the Florentines, being hard pressed by
the duke of Milan, derived a ray of hope from the assistance of the
newly-elected emperor Robert duke of Bavaria, who promised to come to
their aid, with a powerful body of troops. The joy which they felt on
this occasion was however but of short continuance; for soon after his
entrance into Italy, the emperor was totally defeated by the duke of
Milan, and the remnant of his army being driven over the mountains,
was obliged to take shelter in the city of Trent. By the retreat of
the imperial troops, the Florentines were reduced to the utmost
extremity. Abandoned by their allies, and exposed to the inroads of
their neighbours, they implored the assistance of Boniface. The pontiff,
who felt deep resentment against Galeazzo on account of his seizure of
several cities in the ecclesiastical state, readily entered into the
views of the Florentines, and without hesitation concluded a treaty,
by which he engaged to bring into the field an army of five thousand
men, which was to co-operate with the Tuscan forces. But soon after the
commencement of the campaign, the Florentines were happily relieved
from their anxiety, by the death of their inveterate enemy Galeazzo,
whose career of conquest was terminated by a fever, of which he died at
Marignano,[26] on the third of September, 1402. Soon after the death of
this powerful prince, many cities, of which he had at different times
forcibly taken possession, were seized by various petty tyrants, who took
advantage of the odium excited by the vices of his son and successor
Giovanni Maria; and Boniface availed himself of the general confusion
to reduce Bologna and Perugia to their ancient allegiance to the papal
see.[27]
It has been already observed, that Poggio arrived in Rome in the year
1403. He was then in the twenty-fourth year of his age. At this dangerous
season, though animated with a lively fancy, and stimulated by an ardent
constitution, he was not allured into dissipation, by the temptations
of a corrupt and luxurious court. We learn indeed from the introductory
conversation of his dialogue on Avarice, that the appointments of the
pontifical secretaries were not very splendid. Antonio Lusco, one of
the interlocutors in that dialogue, is there represented as declaring,
that their income was scarcely sufficient to maintain the dignity of
their office.[28] It is probable therefore, that the scantiness of
Poggio’s revenues had no unfavorable influence on his moral conduct and
his studies. In the preface to his _Historia disceptativa convivialis_,
he acknowledges, that he frequently had recourse to literary pursuits,
in order to beguile the anxiety which he experienced in consequence of
the narrowness of his circumstances.[29] Poverty is not unfrequently
the parent of knowledge, and the stern, but salutary guardian of virtue.
Whatever might be the cause, certain it is, that Poggio diligently
devoted his leisure hours to study, and cultivated the acquaintance of
those whose conversation might tend to the improvement of his mind. As
literary pursuits had at this æra acquired the currency of fashion,
the character of the scholar was frequently found united with that of
the man of the world. To this circumstance we may ascribe the union of
learning, politeness, and knowledge of the human heart, which shines so
conspicuously in the writings of Poggio.
On the 1st October, 1404, Poggio sustained a considerable loss by the
death of his patron, Boniface IX. “Nothing would have been wanting,” says
Platina, “to complete the glory of this pontiff, had he not tarnished the
lustre of his fame by his excessive partiality towards his relations.
These flocked in crowds to Rome; and the numerous acts of simony of
which they were guilty, greatly impaired the authority of the keys.”[30]
A. D. 1404.—On the death of Boniface, Cosmo, cardinal of Santa Croce, was
elected to the pontificate, and assumed the name of Innocent VII. The
new pontiff was by no means insensible of the merits of Poggio, whom he
continued in the office to which he had been promoted by the favour of
Boniface. He appears indeed to have treated him with particular kindness
and respect. Poggio availed himself of his interest with Innocent, to
testify the sincerity of his friendship for Leonardo Aretino, who during
his residence at Florence, had been the associate of his studies, and
the companion of his festive hours. Leonardo, whose paternal appellation
was Bruni, derived the name of Aretino from Arezzo, in which city he was
born in the year 1370. His parents, though not graced by the honours
of nobility, held a respectable rank in society, and were sufficiently
wealthy to be enabled to bestow on their son a good education.[31]
In his early youth, Leonardo was incited to a love of letters by an
extraordinary accident. A body of French troops, who were marching to
Naples to assist Louis duke of Anjou in maintaining his claim to the
sovereignty of that kingdom, at the solicitation of the partizans of a
faction which had been banished from Arezzo, made an unexpected attack
upon that city; and after committing a great slaughter, carried many of
the inhabitants into captivity; and among the rest the family of Bruni.
Leonardo being confined in a chamber in which was hung a portrait of
Petrarca, by daily contemplating the lineaments of that illustrious
scholar, conceived so strong a desire to signalize himself by literary
acquirements, that immediately upon his enlargement he repaired to
Florence, where he prosecuted his studies with unremitting diligence,
under the direction of John of Ravenna and Manuel Crysoloras.[32]
During his residence at Florence, he contracted a strict intimacy with
Poggio. This intimacy was not interrupted by the separation of the
two friends, which took place upon the removal of the latter to Rome.
On the contrary, Poggio being informed by Leonardo, that he wished to
procure a presentation to some place of honour and emolument in the Roman
chancery, took every opportunity of commending his virtues, and of
bringing his talents into public notice, by communicating his letters
to the literary characters who frequented the pontifical court.[33] In
consequence of Poggio’s address, the fame of Leonardo reached the ears
of Innocent, who was induced, by his extraordinary reputation, to invite
him to Rome, at which city he arrived, March 24, 1405. On this occasion
the interest of Leonardo was powerfully promoted by a letter addressed
to Innocent, by Coluccio Salutati,[34] the chancellor of the city of
Florence, in which he detailed the merits of the young candidate in the
most flattering terms. The reception which Leonardo met with on his first
presentation at the pontifical court, though in some respects flattering,
was on the whole inauspicious. Innocent observed to him in the presence
of his courtiers, that he seemed to be in every other respect well
qualified for the place to which he aspired; but that an office of
great trust required more discretion than could be expected from his
early years. This observation stimulated Jacopo d’Angelo, a scholar of
considerable reputation, who had formerly been a rival of Leonardo in the
Florentine university, to offer himself as a candidate for the office
in question. The age of Jacopo was more mature than that of Leonardo,
and a residence of four years in the pontifical court seemed to give a
decided superiority to his claims over those of the stranger.[35] Poggio
sympathized in the disappointment and anxiety of his friend. Fortunately
however for Leonardo, Innocent having at this time received certain
letters from the duke of Berry, determined to assign to each of the
competitors, the task of drawing up an answer to them. The compositions
of the two candidates being compared, the prize was unanimously adjudged
to Leonardo, who was in consequence of this decision, instantly advanced
to the dignity of apostolic scribe. This transaction was the means of
cementing the friendship of Poggio and Leonardo, which endured, without
interruption till their union was severed by death.[36]
Before his accession to the chair of St. Peter, Innocent was accustomed
to blame the negligence and timidity of the Italian pontiffs, and to
attribute to their incapacity the continuance of the schism which gave
such occasion of triumph to the enemies of the true faith. But when he
was invested with the pontifical purple, he was convinced by mortifying
experience, that it was much easier to find fault with the conduct of his
predecessors, than to redress the grievances of Italy, and to restore
the peace of the church. [A. D. 1405.] He found himself indeed obliged
to exert all his power, to repress the spirit of liberty which prompted
the Roman people to demand the restitution of the capitol, the castle of
St. Angelo, and of the other places of strength which had been wrested
from them by the policy of his predecessors. The animosity excited in
the breasts of the populace, by the refusal of Innocent to accede to
these demands, was exasperated to the highest degree, by the culpable
impetuosity of his nephew Lodovico, who attacking a deputation of the
citizens, who had waited on the pontiff with a view of composing the
differences which subsisted between him and the people, had seized eleven
of their number, and put them to death. Two of these were members of
the council of seven, which presided over the city, and the remaining
nine were citizens of illustrious rank. Irritated by this act of cruel
treachery the populace flew to arms, and revenged the death of their
chiefs by the slaughter of several of the servants of the pontiff.
Innocent, who was unconscious of the treachery of his nephew, was
totally unprepared to resist the fury of the multitude. The pontifical
residence was indeed strongly fortified; but it was not furnished with
sufficient provisions to be enabled to stand a siege; and the troops of
Ladislaus, king of Naples, were said to be hastening to the assistance
of the insurgents. In this extremity, Innocent determined to seek his
safety in flight. He accordingly left the palace, under the escort of a
sufficient guard, at two o’clock in the afternoon of the sixth of August,
and after a hasty march of two days, in the course of which several of
his attendants died of fatigue, arrived at Viterbo.[37] Most of his
servants, and among the rest Poggio and Leonardo, the latter of whom
narrowly escaped falling a victim to the indiscriminate rage of the
insurgents, were the companions of his flight.[38]
The Roman patriots were now masters of almost every part of the city.
They were however soon dispirited, when they saw their territory laid
waste by the pontifical troops, and agreed to terms of pacification with
Innocent, who returned in triumph to his capital, towards the latter end
of March, 1406.[39] [A. D. 1406.] The pontiff did not long enjoy this
favorable reverse of fortune, as he died on the sixth of November, of the
same year.[40]
When the intelligence of the death of Innocent reached France, the dukes
of Berry, of Burgundy, and of Orleans, who, in the quality of regents,
administered the affairs of that kingdom during the mental indisposition
of Charles VI. repaired to Avignon, and conjuring Benedict XIII. to
concur in putting an end to a schism which had been the source of so
much scandal and calamity, proposed, that he should voluntarily divest
himself of the pontificate. With a view of softening the harshness of
this proposal, they engaged, that whosoever should be elected at Rome
as successor to Innocent, should be obliged to take the same step. The
antichristian competition being thus terminated, it was to be hoped,
they said, that the assembled cardinals would agree in the election
of a pontiff, who would be universally acknowledged as the legitimate
head of the church. Invitations to resign dignity, splendour, and
power, are seldom received with complacence. Benedict made many general
protestations of his zeal for the welfare of the church, but peremptorily
refused to quit the pontifical chair. Fearing that the regents would
attempt to enforce their propositions by arms, he strengthened the
fortifications of Avignon, in which city he was in a manner besieged
for the space of some months. Being at length reduced to extremities,
he embarked on the Rhone, and proceeding down that river to the
Mediterranean, he fled into Spain, where he found a refuge from the power
of his enemies in his native province of Catalonia.[41]
In the mean time, each of the cardinals who happened to be at Rome, at
the time of the death of Innocent VII. took a solemn oath, that if in
the ensuing election of a sovereign pontiff, the choice of the conclave
should happen to fall upon himself, he would resign the pontificate,
provided Benedict would follow his example.
This arrangement was proposed in order to appease the mutual jealousy of
the French and Italian cardinals, as neither of these subdivisions of the
ecclesiastical senate would consent to sacrifice their representative
without the concurrence of their antagonists in a similar measure. These
preliminaries being adjusted, on the 30th of November, the conclave
proceeded to fill the vacant chair, by the election of Angelo Corraro,
cardinal of St. Mark, who on his advancement to the pontifical dignity,
adopted the name of Gregory XII.[42]
Though the new pontiff had, immediately after his election, subscribed a
ratification of the oath which bound him to abdicate his newly acquired
honours, yet upon frivolous pretexts, he from time to time deferred the
fulfilment of this sacred engagement. Benedict his competitor, having
repaired to Savona, and afterwards to Porto Venere, with a view, as he
asserted, of settling the peace of the church, by an amicable conference
with Gregory; the latter insisted upon it, that they should meet in some
inland town, where they might jointly comply with the requisition of the
cardinals. Benedict on the contrary asserting, that he could not deem
himself safe in the interior of Italy, demanded that Gregory should for
that purpose, meet him in some sea-port. With this proposal, Gregory,
on pretence of apprehended danger to his person, refused to comply.
Thus as Leonardo Aretino humorously observes, “The one, like an aquatic
animal, was afraid of trusting himself on dry land; and the other, like
a terrestrial animal, had an equal dread of the water.”[43] Scandalized
by the duplicity of the rival pontiffs, and alarmed by the violence of
Gregory, the cardinals quitted Lucca, to which city they had accompanied
him in hopes that he would adopt the requisite steps to put an end to the
schism, and assembled at Pisa. Here, constituting themselves a council of
the church, they deposed both Gregory and Benedict, substituting in their
place, Pietro Filardo, a native of Candia, who assumed the appellation of
Alexander V.[44]
During these distractions of the Roman court, the officers of the
pontifical household, according to their various views of duty, or
considerations of interest, pursued different plans of conduct. Many of
them, with prudent foresight, deserting the falling fortunes of Gregory,
accompanied the cardinals from Lucca to Pisa; others, in the number of
whom was Leonardo Aretino, adhered to their master.[45] In these delicate
circumstances, Poggio seems to have steered a middle course. He removed
indeed from Lucca, but he exchanged the intrigues and dissensions of
the pontifical palace, for the tranquil delights of friendship which he
enjoyed at Florence in the society of his literary acquaintance.[46]
On this occasion he experienced the most seasonable assistance from
the countenance and support of the celebrated Niccolo Niccoli. This
distinguished patron of literature was the son of Bartolomeo de’ Niccoli,
a merchant of Florence, and was born in the year 1363.[47] His father
wished to have trained him up to the mercantile profession; but Niccolo,
preferring the cultivation of the liberal arts to the accumulation of
riches, entered upon his studies, under the instruction of Lodovico
Marsilio,[48] a scholar of considerable reputation. So ardent was his
love of learning, that when he had attained a competent knowledge
of the Latin language, he went to Padua, for the express purpose of
transcribing the compositions of Petrarca. On his return to Florence, he
brought with him a copy of the _Africa_, and of various other works of
that author. He had hardly attained to the period of manhood, when he
conferred a memorable obligation on the learned, by erecting, at his own
expense, a suitable edifice, for the reception of the library which the
celebrated Bocaccio had by his last will bequeathed to the convent of the
Holy Spirit at Florence. His house was the constant resort of scholars
and students, who were freely indulged with the use of his copious
collection of books, and were moreover incited by his example, to make
the most active exertions in the prosecution of their literary labours.
The patronage of this illustrious citizen, who had the discernment to
distinguish, and the inclination and ability to assist the lovers of
learning, Poggio justly valued at a high rate. And on the other hand,
Niccolo was so much pleased with the accomplishments and the amiable
dispositions of Poggio, that he honoured him with his sincere friendship
and cordial esteem.
Gregory, refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of the acts of the
council of Pisa, withdrew to Rimini, where he was honourably entertained
by Carlo Malatesta.[49] Benedict was not more obedient to the decree
which announced his deposition. After holding a council at Perpignan,
he defied his foes, and thundered his anathemas from the walls of the
strong Spanish fortress of Paniscola.[50]
The well known virtues of Alexander V. had inspired the friends of the
church with sanguine expectations of witnessing the speedy revival of the
power and dignity of the holy see. But these flattering hopes were at
once dissipated by his death, which took place in the eighth month of his
pontificate.[51] It was strongly suspected that his days were shortened
by poison, administered to him by Baldassare Cossa, cardinal of St.
Eustachio, who succeeded him in his pontifical honours.[52]
At an early period of his life, Baldassare seems to have aspired to
the highest ecclesiastical dignity. When he had finished his studies
at Bologna, he determined to repair to Rome. Being asked by some of
his friends who saw him making preparations for his journey, whither
he was going, he replied, “to the pontificate.” Soon after his arrival
in the capital of the church, he was advanced by Boniface IX. to the
confidential office of private chamberlain; and in the course of a
little time he obtained, from the favour of the same patron, the dignity
of cardinal of St. Eustachio, and was sent, invested with the office
of legate, on an important mission to Bologna. In the exercise of this
office, he greatly contributed, by the exertion of considerable political
and military talents, to the establishment and extension of the authority
of the holy see. It is said, that the power and the money with which this
situation supplied him, were the principal instruments of his exaltation
to the chair of St. Peter. [A. D. 1410.] However that may be, he was
unanimously elected to the sovereign pontificate, on the 19th of May,
1410, and assumed the name of John XXII.[53]
About this time Leonardo Aretino was, by the concurrent voice of the
people, elected to the chancellorship of the city of Florence. He did
not, however, long retain this office, which he found to be attended
with more labour than profit. In the latter end of the ensuing year,
1411, he abdicated his municipal honours, and entered into the service
of John XXII. The return of his friend to the pontifical chancery was
highly gratifying to Poggio, who during the late storms had retained his
situation, and regulating his conduct by the decrees of the council of
Pisa, had acted as apostolic scribe to Alexander V., and was now, in the
same capacity, a member of the household of that pontiff’s successor.
Shortly after the resumption of his functions in the Roman court,
Leonardo took a journey to Arezzo, where he married a young lady of
considerable distinction in that city. The event was of course very
interesting to the colleagues and friends of the bridegroom; and Poggio
wrote to him on the occasion, informing him of the witticisms to which
his present predicament had given rise, and inquiring what opinion his
short experience had led him to form of the comforts of the conjugal
state. Leonardo replied to Poggio’s letter without delay. By the tenor
of his answer, he seems to have found nothing unpleasant in matrimony,
except its costliness. “It is incredible,” says he, “with what expense
these new fashions are attended. In making provision for my wedding
entertainment, I emptied the market, and exhausted the shops of the
perfumers, oilmen, and poulterers. This however is comparatively a
trivial matter; but of the intolerable expense of female dress and
ornaments, there is no end. In short,” says he, “I have in one night
consummated my marriage, and consumed my patrimony.”[54]
Whilst Poggio and his associates were making themselves merry at the
expense of the new married man, the superior officers of the pontifical
court were engaged in very serious deliberations. Sigismund, who had been
elected to the imperial throne, July 21st, 1411, being earnestly desirous
of the extinction of the schism, demanded of John the convocation of
a general council; which the cardinals who had assembled at Pisa in
the year 1409, had declared to be the only measure which could restore
to Christendom the blessings of peace. But the pontiff inherited the
prejudices of his predecessors, against those dangerous assemblies which
were so apt to trench upon the prerogatives of the head of the church. He
would gladly have evaded complying with the requisition of Sigismund, and
with this view proposed that the intended council should be summoned to
meet at Rome. But danger awaited him in his own capital. Ladislaus, king
of Naples, whom he had endeavoured to secure in his interest, invaded
the territory of the church, made himself master of Rome, and compelled
the pontiff successively to seek refuge in Florence, in Bologna, and in
Mantua. From this latter city, John went to Lodi, where he was met by
Sigismund, who, accompanied by a numerous retinue, attended him on his
return to Mantua. Thus finding himself in the power of the emperor, and
flattered by the magnificent promises of that potentate, who professed
his readiness to assist him in expelling the enemies of the church from
the patrimony of St. Peter, John was persuaded to take the desperate step
of summoning a general council, and to appoint the city of Constance as
the place of its meeting.[55]
CHAP. II.
_John XXII. opens the council of Constance—John Huss arrives at that
city—His imprisonment—Disagreeable proposals made to John XXII.—He
escapes from Constance—His deposition—Death of Manuel Crysoloras—Poggio’s
epitaph on Crysoloras—Trial and execution of John Huss—The pontifical
household dispersed—Poggio remains at Constance—His Hebrew studies—His
visits to the baths of Baden—His description of those baths—Jerome of
Prague—Poggio’s account of Jerome’s trial and execution—Reflections._
CHAP. II.
The reluctance which John XXII. felt at the proposal of his authorizing
the meeting of a general council, was increased by the importunity of
his relations and dependants, who prophetically warned him to take
care, lest, though he went to such an assembly as a pope, he should
return as a private man.[56] The death of his enemy Ladislaus, who was
cut off by a violent distemper as he was on his march to besiege the
pontiff in Bologna, seemed also to relieve him from the necessity of
submitting to the requisitions of Sigismund. But the Christian world was
weary of the schism which had for so long a period tarnished the lustre
of the church. The zeal of Sigismund had accelerated every necessary
preparation for the assembling of the council. Sanguine expectations had
been awakened throughout Europe, of the blessed consequences which were
likely to result from the labours of an assemblage of the most dignified
and learned members of the Catholic community. The intrepidity of John
shrunk from the idea of encountering the obloquy which would be poured
upon his character, should he, by refusing to fulfil the engagements
into which he had entered with Sigismund, disappoint the reasonable
hopes of the friends of union and of peace. Poggio has recorded it to
the praise of Zabarella, cardinal of Florence,[57] who seems to have
enjoyed much of the pontiff’s favour and confidence, that he faithfully
impressed these considerations upon the hesitating mind of the father of
the faithful.[58] Impelled by that prelate’s arguments and in treaties,
John took the decisive step and set out for Constance, in which city he
arrived on the 28th of October, 1414. He was accompanied on his journey
by the greater part of his court, and among the rest by Poggio, whom
he had promoted, from the office of apostolic scribe to the still more
confidential employment of secretary.[59] In the course of a few weeks
after his arrival, Poggio had the pleasure of welcoming his friend
Leonardo, who after a dreary journey over the Alps, of which he has left
an interesting description in a letter to Niccolo Niccoli, embarked on
the lake of Constance, and landed at that city towards the latter end of
December.[60]
Three principal objects demanded the utmost exertion of the wisdom of the
council—the termination of the schism—the reformation of the church—and
the extirpation of heresy. The pontiff earnestly wished to confine the
attention of the assembled fathers to the last of these points. He
accordingly availed himself of the earliest opportunity to engage them in
prosecuting the enemies of the orthodox faith. John Huss, a celebrated
Bohemian reformer, had repaired to Constance with an avowed intention of
vindicating the correctness of his creed, and of retracting any errors,
of which he might be convinced by the learning of his opponents. Aware
of the danger to which he would be exposed in defending his cause in
the midst of his prejudiced adversaries, he had taken the precaution
of procuring from the emperor a safe conduct, by which all princes,
as well ecclesiastical as secular, were strictly enjoined “to let him
freely and securely pass, sojourn, stop, and repass.”[61] But the
unfortunate Bohemian soon found to his cost, that the imperial mandate
was insufficient to protect a reputed heretic. He had not resided at
Constance many days, before he was taken into custody, and imprisoned
in the monastery of the Dominicans. Whilst he was there labouring under
the aggravated evils of severe sickness, and uneasiness of mind, his
enemies were employed in making preparations for his trial, and his
friends in vain protested against the violation of the law of nations,
which had been committed in his imprisonment. In consequence of their
remonstrances, Sigismund had indeed given positive orders for Huss’s
release: but these orders were disobeyed: and when the emperor arrived
at Constance, on Christmas day, sufficient reasons were alleged by the
pope, to induce him to pardon this act of resistance to his authority,
and to resign the too credulous prisoner to the jurisdiction of an
ecclesiastical tribunal.
But though Sigismund consented to sacrifice a defenceless individual to
the religious zeal, or to the crooked policy of the pontifical court, he
entertained designs by no means friendly to the interests of John XXII.
As the jealous suspicion of the partizans of the pontiff had foreseen,
the emperor, with the concurrence of the council, proposed to his
holiness, that, in order to put an end to the schism, he should solemnly
engage to resign the tiara, in case his competitors, Gregory XII. and
Benedict XIII. could be persuaded to concur with him, by taking a similar
step. John with difficulty smothered the indignation which this proposal
excited within his ardent mind. Professing however his readiness to
comply with the wishes of the assembled representatives of the Christian
church, he threw every possible obstacle in the way of their completion.
Being at length pushed to extremity by the importunity of Sigismund, who
had in a manner compelled him to read the instrument of his resignation
in open council, he meditated the desperate design of withdrawing from
Constance. By the assistance of the duke of Austria he was enabled to put
this design into execution. That prince, in order to favour the flight
of the pontiff, instituted a grand tournament on the 20th day of March,
which was the eve of the festival of St. Benedict. While the attention of
all orders of men was absorbed by this magnificent spectacle, John easily
found an opportunity of passing through the city gates in the disguise of
a postillion.
The fugitive pontiff withdrew first to Schaffausen, and afterwards to
Lauffenbourg. Not thinking himself sufficiently secure even in this
latter place, he took shelter in Fribourg. Here he at length deemed
himself beyond the reach of his adversaries; and in the pride of
confidence, he sent to the council certain extravagant demands, which
that assembly treated with contempt. In the mean time the duke of
Austria had been put under the ban of the empire; his territories had
been invaded on all sides; many of his towns had been taken; and he was
given to understand, that nothing less than the most unequivocal acts of
humiliation, and the delivering up of the contumacious pontiff, could
reconcile him to his imperial sovereign. He accordingly repaired to
Constance, and in a most solemn assembly of the council, craved pardon of
Sigismund, and surrendered to him the remnant of his dominions.
The council now proceeded to summon John to appear and answer to divers
articles of impeachment, which had been preferred against him; and on his
refusing to attend, either in person or by proxy, the members of that
assembly proceeded to exercise a memorable act of supremacy, [May 14th,
A. D. 1415.] by first suspending him from the discharge of the pontifical
functions, and afterwards decreeing and proclaiming his deposition. John,
finding himself deserted by the duke of Austria, and at the absolute
disposal of the emperor, submitted to the ordinance of the council. After
the annunciation of his sentence, the officers of his household were
discharged from their customary attendance on his person, and he was sent
a prisoner to the fortress of Gotleben, whence he was soon afterwards
transferred to Heidleberg. The articles of impeachment, declared by the
council to have been proved against John, charged him with the most
atrocious vices incident to the vilest corruption of human nature.
Influenced however by the consideration of the exalted rank which he had
lately held, and perhaps mollified by the meekness of his submission,
his judges were satisfied with the measure of punishment which they had
already inflicted, in degrading him from his dignity, and depriving him
of liberty.
Whilst the council was thus occupied in contention with the head of the
church, it was deprived of an illustrious member by the death of Manuel
Crysoloras. It has been already observed, that this eminent scholar, by
his assiduous labours, diffused a knowledge and admiration of Grecian
literature, amongst a numerous assemblage of pupils in the university
of Florence. After a residence of three years in the Tuscan capital,
Manuel was summoned to Milan by his sovereign, the eastern emperor,
who, in the course of his progress through Italy, was then paying a
visit to Giovanni Galeazzo.[62] Having received advantageous proposals
from the latter prince, and being deterred from returning to Florence,
by the violence of Niccolo Niccoli, who had become his bitter enemy,
he undertook to read lectures on the Greek language in the academy of
Ticino, an institution which had been just founded by the late duke of
Milan, the father of Giovanni.[63] The tumult and anarchy which ensued
after the death of his patron, compelled Manuel to quit the Milanese,
and take shelter in Venice, whence, at the recommendation of his pupil
Leonardo Aretino, he was invited to Rome. In this city his talents and
his virtues raised him to such a degree of respectability, that in 1413
John XXII. empowered him, jointly with Zabarella, cardinal of Florence,
to treat with Sigismund upon the choice of a place proper for the holding
of the approaching council; and it was with his concurrence that the city
of Constance was fixed upon as being well adapted for that purpose.[64]
Having faithfully executed this important commission, he returned to
Constantinople, where he was appointed by the emperor of the east to
attend the council as one of the representatives of the Greek church. He
accordingly repaired to Constance, where the delicacy of his constitution
sinking under the fatigues of business, he died on the 15th of April,
1415.[65] His remains were deposited in the Dominican monastery, and a
monument was erected to his memory, on which was engraven the following
inscription, said to have been composed by his disciple Pietro Paulo
Vergerio.[66]
“Ante aram situs est D. Emanuel Crysoloras, eques Constantinopolitanus,
ex vetusto genere Romanorum, qui cum Constantino Imperatore migrarunt,
Vir doctissimus, prudentissimus, optimus, qui tempore Generalis Concilii
diem obiit, eâ existimatione, ut ab omnibus summo sacerdotio dignus
haberetur, die XV. Aprilis, MCCCCXV.”[67]
Poggio also, availing himself of this last opportunity of testifying his
sense of the merits of Crysoloras, dedicated to his memory the following
epitaph:
“Hic est Emanuel situs
Sermonis decus Attici:
Qui dum quærere opem patriæ
Afflictæ studeret huc iit.
Res belle cecidit tuis
Votis, Italia; hic tibi
Linguæ restituit decus
Atticæ, ante reconditæ.
Res belle cecidit tuis
Votis, Emanuel; solo
Consecutus in Italo
Æternum decus es, tibi
Quale Græcia non dedit,
Bello perdita Græcia.”[68]
In the mildness of the sentence passed by the council upon the delinquent
pontiff, the members of that assembly seem to have exhausted their stock
of leniency. Their mercy was reserved for dignified offenders; and it
appears by their subsequent conduct, that however tender and gentle they
might be in punishing immorality of practice, the unrelenting fury of
their vengeance was excited by errors in matters of opinion. The process
against John Huss was expedited with all the ardour of ecclesiastical
zeal. The unfortunate reformer was at various times brought in chains
before a tribunal, on which his enemies sat in quality of judges; and,
surrounded by a military guard, he was called upon to answer to a long
series of articles of accusation, the greater part of which related to
the most mysterious and subtile points of doctrine. To some of these
articles he pleaded not guilty. Many of the propositions which were
imputed to him as errors in faith, he defended as true; at the same time
declaring his readiness to retract any doctrine, of the erroneousness of
which he should be convinced. His judges having in vain endeavoured to
enlighten his understanding by argument, had recourse to the terrors of
authority. They declared him guilty of heresy, and attempted to overawe
him to a recantation, by the dread of a painful death. But the constancy
of Huss was unshaken. He firmly refused to purchase life at the expence
of truth and honour. After various unsuccessful efforts to persuade him
to make his peace with the church, by timely submission, the council
proceeded to degrade him from his priestly office, and after proclaiming
the awful sentence which condemned him as an obstinate heretic, delivered
him over to the secular power. [July 6th, A. D. 1415.] On the sixth day
of July, 1415, Huss was led to the fatal pile, where he suffered death
with the intrepidity of a resolute mind, supported by the consciousness
of rectitude, and by the firm conviction of sincere religious faith,
which, happily for the oppressed, are not the exclusive privileges of any
sect, but bestow their animating influence on the persecuted advocates of
every varying shade of theological belief.
On the dispersion of the pontifical household, consequent upon the
deposition of John XXII., Leonardo Aretino returned to Italy, where he
resumed his literary pursuits with great assiduity. Poggio remained at
Constance, for the purpose of improving any opportunity which might
there occur, of promoting his own interest, or that of his friend. As
he had now a good deal of leisure, he employed his vacant hours in
studying the Hebrew language, under the direction of a Jew who had been
converted to the Christian faith.[69] His continuance in Germany was
not however productive either of immediate pleasure, or of present
emolument. He was wearied and disgusted by the tedious protraction
of the debates of the council. He regarded the proceedings of that
assembly, with the prejudices which naturally rendered them odious to
the members of the papal court; and the mortifications experienced at
Constance by several of his friends, excited in his breast sentiments
of sorrow and indignation.[70] His hopes of preferment became more and
more faint, as the power of his patrons was diminished by the intrigues
of their adversaries; and in short, wheresoever he turned his eyes, his
prospect was gloomy and discouraging. The study of Hebrew does not seem
to have possessed sufficient charms to beguile the uneasiness which he
experienced, in consequence of these various distresses. The rudiments
of that language are peculiarly intricate; and Poggio was not stimulated
by incentives sufficiently powerful, to induce him to surmount the
difficulties which presented themselves at the commencement of this new
pursuit. For all the purposes of the Christian faith he had been taught,
and in all probability believed, that St. Jerome’s translation of the
Jewish scriptures was amply sufficient. As he was not disposed to call in
question the prevailing creed, he did not wish to make himself master of
the oriental tongues, with a view of providing himself with the weapons
of religious controversy. In the brief and authoritative precepts of
the Israelitish moralists, he looked in vain for the flow of eloquent
argument, which had captivated his attention in the ethic disquisitions
of Cicero. The abrupt transitions, and swelling metaphors of the Hebrew
poets, though, in a variety of individual instances, striking in effect,
generally shrunk from the severe test of the rules of Aristotle and
Quintilian.[71] The Hebrew language was not, like the Latin tongue, of
practical use in the daily affairs of a literary or political life; and
finally, his instructor was a man of no talents or respectability of
character, and soon became the butt of his ridicule, and the object of
his sovereign contempt. These causes concurred to check his progress in
biblical studies, in which he does not appear to have made any great
proficiency.
The amusement which he in vain sought for in the extension of his
literary attainments, he found in a total suspension of his studies.
[A. D. 1416.] In the spring of the year 1416, he took advantage of
the leisure time afforded him, by the termination of his functions as
secretary to the deposed pontiff, to make an excursion to the baths of
Baden.[72] Of these baths he gave a description in the following letter,
which he addressed to Niccolo Niccoli; and which, whilst it exhibits an
interesting picture of a fashionable watering place of the fifteenth
century, displays a sportiveness of fancy, and an expansion of good
humour, which were characteristic and attractive features of Poggio’s
mind.
“I wrote to you from Constance, on the first of March, if my memory
be correct, a letter, which, if it came to hand, I imagine made you
tolerably merry. It was rather long, and pregnant with wit. I gave
you in it a long account of my Hebrew studies, and passed many jokes
upon my tutor, a stupid, unsteady, and illiterate man; which indeed
is the general character of those who are converted from Judaism to
Christianity. But I am inclined to suspect, that this letter, and another
which I addressed to Leonardo Aretino, did not reach their destination.
Had you received my epistle, you would surely have answered it, were it
only with the view of congratulating me on my new course of study, which
you have so frequently exhorted me to undertake. I cannot find that
the study of Hebrew adds to my stock of philosophical knowledge; but
it so far promotes my acquaintance with literature, that I am thereby
enabled to investigate the principles upon which St. Jerome founded his
translation of the scriptures. But I write to you from these baths, (to
which I am come to try whether they can remove an eruption which has
taken place between my fingers) to describe to you the situation of the
place, and the manners of its inhabitants, together with the customs of
the company who resort hither for the benefit of the waters. Much is said
by the ancients of the pleasant baths of Puteoli, which were frequented
by almost all the people of Rome. But in my opinion, those boasted
baths must, in the article of pleasure, yield the palm to the baths of
Baden. For the pleasantness of the baths of Puteoli was founded more
on the beauty of the circumjacent country, and the magnificence of the
neighbouring villas, than on the festive manners of the company by which
they were frequented. The scenery of Baden, on the contrary, has but
few attractions: but every other circumstance relating to its medicinal
springs, is so pregnant with delight, that I frequently imagine that
Venus, and all her attendant joys, have migrated hither from Cyprus. The
frequenters of these waters so faithfully observe her institutes, so
accurately copy her manners, that though they have not read the discourse
of Heliogabalus, they seem to be amply instructed by simple nature. But
I must in the first place give you an account of my journey hither. On
the first day I sailed down the Rhine twenty-four miles to Schaffausen.
Here we were obliged to pass the falls by land; and at the distance of
ten miles from Schaffausen we arrived at a fortress, situated on the
Rhine, and known by the name of Keisterstul, that is, Cæsar’s seat. From
the name of this place, and from its commanding situation, (for it is
built on a high hill overhanging the river, across which is thrown a
small bridge, which effects a communication between France and Germany) I
conjecture it was formerly a Roman station. In this day’s journey we saw
the Rhine precipitating itself from a considerable height, over craggy
rocks, with a sound which seemed to express the indignation of the river
at being thus impeded in its course. When I contemplated this sight, I
recollected the stories which are related concerning the cataracts of
the Nile, and I did not wonder that the people who live in the vicinity
of those waterfalls, were deprived of their hearing by their noise, when
a river of so comparatively small a magnitude, that with respect to the
Nile it may be denominated a torrent, may be heard to the distance of
half a mile. The next town is Baden, which word, in the German language,
signifies a bath. Baden is a place of considerable opulence, situated in
a valley surrounded by mountains, upon a broad and rapid river, which
forms a junction with the Rhine, about six miles from the town. About
half a mile from Baden, and on the bank of the river, there is a very
beautiful range of buildings, constructed for the accommodation of the
bathers. These buildings form a square, composed of lodging houses, in
which a great multitude of guests are commodiously entertained. Each
lodging house has its private bath, appropriated to its tenants. The
baths are altogether thirty in number. Of these, two only are public
baths, which are exposed to view on every side, and are frequented by the
lower orders of people, of all ages, and of each sex. Here the males and
females, entertaining no hostile dispositions towards each other, are
separated only by a simple railing. It is a droll sight to see decrepit
old women and blooming maidens, stepping into the water, and exposing
their charms to the profane eyes of the men. I have often laughed at this
exhibition, which reminded me of the Floral games of Rome. And I have at
the same time admired the simplicity of these people, who take no notice
of these violations of propriety, and are totally unconscious of any
indecorum. The baths belonging to the private houses are very neat. They
too are common to males and females, who are separated by a partition. In
this partition, however, there are low windows, through which they can
see and converse with, and touch each other, and also drink together; all
which circumstances are matters of common occurrence. Above the baths
are a kind of galleries, on which the people stand who wish to see and
converse with the bathers; for every one has free access to all the
baths, to see the company, to talk and joke with them. As the ladies go
in and out of the water, they expose to view a considerable portion of
their persons; yet there are no door-keepers, or even doors, nor do they
entertain the least idea of any thing approaching to indelicacy. Many of
the baths have a common passage for the two sexes, which circumstance
very frequently occasions very curious rencounters. The men wear only a
pair of drawers. The women are clad in linen vests, which are however
slashed in the sides, so that they neither cover the neck, the breast,
nor the arms of the wearer. The ladies frequently give public dinners
in the baths, on a table which floats on the water; and the men often
partake of these entertainments. Our party received several invitations.
I paid my share of the reckoning; but though I was frequently requested
to favour them with my company, I never accepted the summons; not through
modesty—which would, on these occasions, be mistaken for rudeness, and
want of good breeding, but on account of my ignorance of the language.
For it seemed to me an act of folly in an Italian, who could not take
any part in conversation, to spend all the day in the water, employed
in nothing but eating and drinking. But two of my companions were not
so scrupulous. They visited the ladies in the baths, and assisted at
their entertainments. They conversed with them, by the medium of an
interpreter; and when their fair hostesses were incommoded by the heat,
they had the honour of fanning them. On their return they spoke with
great pleasure of the kind reception which they had experienced. When
they thus visited the ladies, they were clothed in linen gowns. From the
gallery which I have mentioned above, I was a witness of this scene;
and I was astonished to behold, with what unsuspecting simplicity they
conducted themselves, and with what full confidence the husbands suffered
their wives to be handed about in their dishabille by strangers. They
were not uneasy; they did not even attend to the circumstance, but saw
every transaction in the most favourable light. They are well prepared
to embrace the doctrine of Plato, who would have all things in common;
for without instruction, they are already in a great measure converts to
his principles. In some of the private baths, the men mix promiscuously
with their female relatives and friends. They go into the water three or
four times in a day; and they spend the greater part of their time in the
baths, where they amuse themselves with singing, drinking and dancing.
In the shallower part of the water they also play upon the harp. It is
a pleasant sight to see young lasses tuning their lyres, like nymphs,
with their scanty robes floating on the surface of the waters. They look
indeed like so many Venuses, emerging from the ocean. The women have a
custom of playfully begging from the men who come to see them bathe. The
latter throw down small pieces of money, which they direct to the fairer
damsels. The ladies below stretch out their hands, and spread their
bathing gowns, to receive these gifts, which frequently give rise to a
general scramble. This scramble, you will easily conceive, occasions
very laughable incidents. Besides money, garlands and crowns of flowers
are thrown down, with which the ladies ornament their heads while they
remain in the water. As I only bathed twice a day, I spent my leisure
time in witnessing this curious spectacle, visiting the other baths,
and causing the girls to scramble for money and nosegays; for there
was no opportunity of reading or studying. The whole place resounded
with songs and musical instruments, so that the mere wish to be wise,
were the height of folly; in me especially, who am not like Menedemus,
in the play, a morose rejecter of pleasure, but one of those who take
a lively interest in every thing which concerns their fellow mortals.
My pleasure was however much less than it would have been, had I been
able to converse with my new acquaintance. Circumstanced as I was, I
could only feast my eyes, wait on the ladies, and attend them to the
rendezvous of amusement. I had also an opportunity of paying my court
to them, as against this there was no prohibitory law. Besides these
various pastimes, there is also another, which is a source of no small
gratification. There is a large meadow behind the village, near the
river. This meadow, which is shaded by abundance of trees, is our usual
place of resort after supper. Here the people engage in various sports.
Some dance, others sing, and others play at ball, but in a manner very
different from the fashion of our country. For the men and women throw,
in different directions, a ball, filled with little bells. When the ball
is thrown, they all run to catch it and whoever lays hold of it is the
conqueror, and again throws it at somebody for whom he wishes to testify
a particular regard. When the thrower is ready to toss the ball, all
the rest stand with outstretched hands, and the former frequently keeps
them in a state of suspense, by pretending to aim, sometimes at one, and
sometimes at another. Many other games are here practised, which it would
be tedious to enumerate. I have related enough to give you an idea what
a numerous school of Epicureans is established at Baden. I think this
must be the place where the first man was created, which the Hebrews call
the garden of pleasure. If pleasure can make a man happy, this place is
certainly possessed of every requisite for the promotion of felicity.
“But you will perhaps wish to know what are the virtues of the waters.
Their virtues are various and manifold; but they have one quality, which
is truly wonderful, and in a manner divine. I believe there are no
baths in the world more efficacious in promoting the propagation of the
human species. This may indeed be in some measure accounted for by the
following circumstance.—An innumerable multitude of persons of all ranks
repair to this place from the distance of two hundred miles; not with a
view of recruiting their health, but of enjoying life. These baths are
the general resort of lovers and their mistresses, of all, in short, who
are fond of pleasure. Many ladies pretend to be sick, merely with a view
of being sent for cure to this watering place. You consequently see
here a great number of handsome females without their husbands, and not
protected by any male relations, but attended by a couple of maids and a
man servant, or some elderly cousin, who is very easily imposed upon. And
they come adorned with such costly apparel, that you would suppose they
were coming to a wedding, rather than to a watering place. Here we find
Vestal, or to speak more correctly, Floral virgins. Here we meet with
abbots, monks, friars, and priests, who live with greater license than
the rest of the company. These ecclesiastics, forgetting the gravity of
their profession, sometimes bathe with the ladies, and adorn their hair
with silken ribbons. For all people here concur in banishing sorrow, and
courting mirth. Their object is, not to divide that which is common,
but to communicate that which is appropriated. It is an astonishing
circumstance, that in so great a multitude (nearly a thousand persons) of
various dispositions, and so much given to riot, no discord or dissension
ever arises. The husbands see their wives gallanted, and even attended
tête à tête by strangers, and yet they are not disturbed or rendered
uneasy. Hence it happens, that the name of jealousy, that plague, which
is elsewhere productive of so much misery, is here unknown. How unlike
are the manners of these people to ours, who always see things on the
dark side, and who are so much given to censoriousness, that in our minds
the slightest suspicion instantly grows into full proof of guilt. I often
envy the apathy of these Germans, and I execrate our perversity, who are
always wishing for what we have not, and are continually exposed to
present calamity by our dread of the future. But these people, content
with little, enjoy their day of life in mirth and merriment; they do
not hanker after wealth; they are not anxious for the morrow; and they
bear adversity with patience. Thus are they rich by the mere disposition
of their minds. Their motto is, “_live while you live_.” But of this
enough—it is not my object to extol my new friends at the expense of my
countrymen. I wish my epistle to consist of unqualified good humour, that
I may impart to you a portion of the pleasure I derived from the baths of
Baden.”
Soon after Poggio’s return from Baden to Constance the Council proceeded
to the trial of Jerome of Prague, an intimate friend and associate of
John Huss. When Jerome was apprized of the arrest and imprisonment of
his brother reformer, he deemed himself bound in honour to repair to
Constance, to administer to him comfort and assistance. He accordingly
arrived in that city on the 24th of April, 1415.[73] But alarmed by
the violence of spirit which seemed to rage against reputed heretics,
he soon fled from Constance, and went to Uberlingen, whence he sent to
the council to demand a safe conduct. Instead of this instrument of
protection, the members of that assembly addressed to him a citation to
appear before them, and answer to a charge of heresy.[74] Justly dreading
the consequences of encountering the prejudices of the ecclesiastical
dignitaries, whose morals and principles he had so often branded with
infamy, he refused to obey this citation, and set off on his return to
Bohemia. He proceeded without molestation as far as Hirsaw; but there
he was arrested by the officers of the duke of Sultzbach, who sent him
in chains to Constance.[75] Immediately after his arrival in that city,
he underwent an examination, after which he was committed to prison.
The severity which he there experienced, the importunity of some of his
prosecutors, and his solitary meditations on the dreadful catastrophe
of Huss, at length shook his constancy, and on the 15th of September,
1415, he read in open Council, a recantation of his errors.[76] At this
price he purchased a relaxation of the rigour of his confinement: but,
notwithstanding the remonstrances of Zabarella, and of three other
cardinals, who contended, that by his renunciation of error, he had
satisfied public justice, he was detained in custody. In the course of
a few months after his recantation, new articles of impeachment were
exhibited against him. To these he pleaded in a solemn assembly of the
council, held for that purpose, on the 26th May, 1416.[77] Poggio,
who was present at this second trial of Jerome, gave the following
interesting account of it to his friend Leonardo Aretino.[78]
“Soon after my return from Baden to Constance, the cause of Jerome of
Prague, who was accused of heresy, came to a public hearing. The purport
of my present letter is to give you an account of this trial, which must
of necessity be a matter of considerable interest, both on account of
the importance of the subject, and the eloquence and learning of the
defendant. I must confess that I never saw any one who in pleading a
cause, especially a cause on the issue of which his own life depended,
approached nearer to that standard of ancient eloquence, which we so
much admire. It was astonishing to witness with what choice of words,
with what closeness of argument, with what confidence of countenance he
replied to his adversaries. So impressive was his peroration, that it is
a subject of great concern, that a man of so noble and excellent a genius
should have deviated into heresy. On this latter point however, I cannot
help entertaining some doubts. But far be it from me to take upon myself
to decide in so important a matter. I shall acquiesce in the opinion of
those who are wiser than myself.
“Do not however imagine that I intend to enter into the particulars of
this cause. I shall only touch upon the more remarkable and interesting
circumstances, which will be sufficient to give you an idea of the
learning of the man.
“Many things having been alleged against the prisoner as proofs of his
entertaining heretical notions, and the council being of opinion, that
the proof was sufficiently strong to warrant further investigation, it
was ordered that he should publicly answer to every particular of the
charge. He was accordingly brought before the council. But when he was
called upon to give in his answers, he for a long time refused so to
do; alleging, that he ought to be permitted to speak generally in his
defence, before he replied to the false imputations of his adversaries.
This indulgence was however denied him. Upon which, standing up in the
midst of the assembly—What gross injustice is this! exclaimed he, that
though for the space of three hundred and forty days, which I have spent
in filth and fetters, deprived of every comfort, in prisons situated at
the most remote distances from each other, you have been continually
listening to my adversaries and slanderers, you will not hear me for a
single hour! The consequence of this is, that while on the one hand,
every one’s ears are open to them, and they have for so long a time been
attempting to persuade you that I am a heretic, an enemy of the true
faith, a persecutor of the clergy; and on the other hand, I am deprived
of every opportunity of defending myself; you have prejudged my cause,
and have in your own minds condemned me, before you could possibly
become acquainted with my principles. But, says he, you are not Gods,
but men, not immortals, but mortals, liable to error, and subject to
imperfection. We are taught to believe that this assembly contains the
light of the world, the prudent men of the earth. You ought therefore
to be unremittingly careful not to do any thing rashly, foolishly or
unjustly. I indeed, who am pleading for my life, am a man of little
consequence; nor do I say what I do say through anxiety for myself (for I
am prepared to submit to the common lot of mortality)—but I am prompted
by an earnest desire, that the collective wisdom of so many eminent men
may not, in my person, violate the laws of justice. As to the injury
done to myself, it is comparatively of trifling consequence; but the
precedent will be pregnant with future mischief. These and many other
observations he made with great eloquence; but he was interrupted by the
murmurs and clamours of several of his auditors. It was decreed, that he
should first answer to the charges exhibited against him, and afterwards
have free liberty of speech. The heads of the accusation were accordingly
read from the desk. When, after they had been proved by testimony, he was
asked whether he had any remarks to make in his defence, it is incredible
with what skill and judgment he put in his answers. He advanced nothing
unbecoming a good man; and if his real sentiments agreed with his
professions, he was so far from deserving to die, that his principles did
not even give just ground for the slightest offence. He denied the whole
impeachment, as a fiction invented by the malice of his enemies. Amongst
others an article was read, which accused him of being a detractor of
the apostolic see, an oppugner of the Roman pontiff, an enemy of the
cardinals, a persecutor of prelates, and an adversary of the Christian
clergy. When this charge was read, he arose, and stretching out his
hands, he said in a pathetic tone of voice, Fathers! to whom shall I
have recourse for succour? Whose assistance shall I implore? Unto whom
shall I appeal, in protestation of my innocence?—Unto you?—But these my
persecutors have prejudiced your minds against me, by declaring that
I entertain hostility against all my judges. Thus have they artfully
endeavoured, if they cannot reach me by their imputations of error, so
to excite your fears, that you may be induced to seize any plausible
pretext to destroy your common enemy, such as they most falsely represent
me to be. Thus, if you give credit to their assertion, all my hopes of
safety are lost. He caused many to smart by the keenness of his wit, and
the bitterness of his reproaches. Melancholy as the occasion was, he
frequently excited laughter, by turning to ridicule the imputations of
his adversaries. When he was asked what were his sentiments concerning
the sacrament, he replied, that it was by nature bread; but that at the
time of consecration, and afterwards, it was the true body of Christ,
&c. according to the strictest orthodoxy. Then someone said, but it
is reported that you have maintained, that there remains bread after
consecration.—True, said Jerome, there remains bread at the baker’s.
When one of the order of preaching friars was railing against him with
uncommon asperity, he said to him—Hold thy peace, hypocrite! When
another swore by his conscience, this, said he, is a very safe mode of
deceiving. One man, who was particularly inveterate against him, he
never addressed but by the title of ass or dog. As, on account of the
number and importance of the articles exhibited against him, the cause
could not be determined at that sitting, the court was adjourned to
another day, on which the proofs of each article of impeachment were read
over, and confirmed by more witnesses. Then he arose and said, since
you have attended so diligently to my adversaries, I have a right to
demand that you should also hear me with patience. Though many violently
objected to this demand, it was at length conceded to him that he should
be heard in his defence. He then began by solemnly praying to God, so
to influence his mind, and so to inspire his speech, that he might be
enabled to plead to the advantage and salvation of his soul. He then
proceeded thus—I know, most learned judges, that many excellent men
have been most unworthily dealt with, overborne by false witnesses, and
condemned by the most unjust judgments. Illustrating this position by
particular instances, he began with Socrates, who was unjustly condemned
by his countrymen, and who could not be persuaded by the dread of the
most formidable evils, imprisonment or death, to avail himself of an
opportunity which was presented to him of escaping out of custody. He
then proceeded to mention the captivity of Plato, the torments endured
by Anaxagoras and Zeno, and the unjust condemnations of many other
gentiles—the banishment of Rutilius, the unmerited death of Boetius,
and of others mentioned in the writings of that author. He then passed
on to the instances which are recorded in the Jewish history—and in the
first place, he observed, that Moses, the deliverer and legislator of
the Jews, was frequently calumniated by his own countrymen, as a seducer
and contemner of the people. He also instanced Joseph, who was sold to
slavery, in consequence of the envy of his brethren, and afterwards
imprisoned under a groundless suspicion of incontinence. Besides
these, he enumerated Isaiah, Daniel, and almost all the prophets, who
were calumniated and persecuted, as despisers of God and sowers of
sedition. He also alluded to the trial of Susannah, and of many others,
who, notwithstanding the integrity of their lives, perished by unjust
sentences. Coming down to the time of John the Baptist and our Saviour,
he observed, that all are agreed that they were unjustly condemned,
upon false charges, supported by false witnesses. He next quoted the
case of Stephen, who was put to death by the priests; and reminded the
assembly that all the apostles were condemned to die, as seditious
movers of the people, contemners of the gods, and workers of iniquity.
He maintained that it was a scandalous thing that one priest should
be unjustly condemned by another; that it was still more scandalous,
that a college of priests should be guilty of this crime; and that it
was most scandalous of all, that it should be perpetrated by a general
council. Nevertheless he proved from history that these circumstances
had actually occurred. Upon these topics he enlarged in so impressive a
manner, that every body listened to him with fixed attention. But as the
weight of every cause rests upon the evidence by which it is supported,
he proved, by various arguments, that no credit was due to the witnesses
who deposed against him, more especially as they were instigated to
give evidence against him by hatred, malevolence, and envy. He then so
satisfactorily detailed the causes of the hatred which he imputed to his
prosecutors, that he almost convinced his judges of the reasonableness
of his objections against their testimony. His observations were so
weighty, that little credit would have been given to the depositions
of the witnesses for the prosecution, in any other cause except in a
trial for heresy. He moreover added, that he had voluntarily come to the
council, in order to defend his injured character; and gave an account
of his life and studies, which had been regulated by the laws of duty
and of virtue. He remarked, that holy men of old were accustomed to
discuss their differences of opinion in matters of belief, not with a
view of impugning the faith, but of investigating the truth—that St.
Augustine and St. Jerome had thus differed in opinion, and had upon some
points even held contrary sentiments, without any suspicion of heresy.
All the audience entertained hopes that he would either clear himself
by retracting the heresies which were objected to him, or supplicate
pardon for his errors. But he maintained that he had not erred, and that
therefore he had nothing to retract. He next began to praise John Huss,
who had been condemned to the flames, calling him a good, just, and holy
man, a man who had suffered death in a righteous cause. He professed that
he himself also was prepared to undergo the severest punishment with an
undaunted and constant mind, declaring that he submitted to his enemies,
and to witnesses who had testified such shameful falsehoods; who would
however, on some future day, give an account of what they had said, to
a God who could not be deceived. When Jerome made these declarations,
the assembly was affected with the greatest sorrow; for every body
wished, that a man of such extraordinary talents should repent of his
errors and be saved. But he persisted in his sentiments, and seemed
to court destruction. Dwelling on the praises of John Huss, he said,
that he entertained no principles hostile to the constitution of the
holy church, and that he only bore testimony against the abuses of the
clergy, and the pride and pomp of prelates: for that since the patrimony
of the church was appropriated first to the poor, then to strangers, and
lastly to the erection of churches, good men thought it highly improper
that it should be lavished on harlots, entertainments, dogs, splendid
garments, and other things unbecoming the religion of Christ. It may be
mentioned as the greatest proof of Jerome’s abilities, that though he was
frequently interrupted by various noises, and was teased by some people
who cavilled at his expressions, he replied to them all, and compelled
them either to blush or to be silent. When the clamour incommoded him, he
ceased speaking, and sometimes reproved those who disturbed him. He then
continued his speech, begging and entreating them to suffer him to speak,
since this was the last time they would hear him. He was never terrified
by the murmurs of his adversaries, but uniformly maintained the firmness
and intrepidity of his mind. It was a wonderful instance of the strength
of his memory, that though he had been confined three hundred and forty
days in a dark dungeon, where it was impossible for him to read, and
where he must have daily suffered from the utmost anxiety of mind, yet he
quoted so many learned writers in defence of his opinions, and supported
his sentiments by the authority of so many doctors of the church, that
any one would have been led to believe, that he had devoted all the time
of his imprisonment to the peaceful and undisturbed study of philosophy.
His voice was sweet, clear and sonorous; his action dignified, and well
adapted either to express indignation, or to excite compassion, which
however he neither asked nor wished for. He stood undaunted and intrepid,
not merely contemning, but like another Cato longing for death. He was
a man worthy to be held in everlasting remembrance. I do not commend
him for entertaining sentiments hostile to the constitution of the
church; but I admire his learning, his extensive knowledge, the suavity
of his eloquence, and his ability in reply. But I am afraid that all
these endowments were bestowed on him by nature, in order to effect his
destruction. As he was allowed two days for repentance, several learned
men, and amongst the rest the cardinal of Florence, visited him, with a
view of persuading him to change his sentiments, and turn from the error
of his ways. But as he pertinaciously persisted in his false notions, he
was condemned as guilty of heresy, and consigned to the flames. No stoic
ever suffered death with such constancy of mind. When he arrived at the
place of execution, he stripped himself of his garments, and knelt down
before the stake, to which he was soon after tied with wet ropes and a
chain. Then great pieces of wood, intermixed with straw, were piled as
high as his breast. When fire was set to the pile, he began to sing a
hymn, which was scarcely interrupted by the smoke and flame. I must not
omit a striking circumstance, which shows the firmness of his mind. When
the executioner was going to apply the fire behind him, in order that he
might not see it, he said, come this way, and kindle it in my sight, for
had I been afraid of it, I should never have come to this place. Thus
perished a man, in every respect exemplary, except in the erroneousness
of his faith. I was a witness of his end, and observed every particular
of its process. He may have been heretical in his notions, and obstinate
in perservering in them, but he certainly died like a philosopher. I have
rehearsed a long story, as I wished to employ my leisure in relating a
transaction which surpasses the events of ancient history. For neither
did Mutius suffer his hand to be burnt so patiently as Jerome endured
the burning of his whole body; nor did Socrates drink the hemlock as
cheerfully as Jerome submitted to the fire.”[79]
They who are admitted within the veil which hides the daily transactions
of the great from the profane eyes of the vulgar, rarely entertain an
excessive reverence for dignities. From a variety of passages which occur
in the works of Poggio, it is evident, that he was by no means insensible
of the corruptions of the pontifical court; and on more occasions than
one, he drew upon himself the severity of reproof, by the freedom with
which he exposed the vices of the clergy.[80] Whether his indignation
against the disgraceful conduct of the teachers of the Catholic doctrine
had shaken his belief in the Catholic creed, his prudence has rendered
it impossible to ascertain. It is certain, that he thought a reformation
of the manners of ecclesiastics absolutely necessary to the credit of
the church; and though he was not inspired by the zeal which prompted
John Huss, and Jerome of Prague, publicly to arraign the conduct of their
ecclesiastical superiors, let it be recorded to his honour, that he did
not, as many have done, reprove and ridicule prevailing corruptions in
private, and at the same time join in the persecution of those who had
sufficient courage to impugn the same corruptions by open hostility.
The feeling manner in which he describes the trial and execution of
Jerome, evinces a heart which daily intercourse with bigoted believers
and licentious hypocrites could not deaden to the impulses of humanity.
Indeed the manifest interest which he took in the fate of a man, who was
held by the church as an object of unqualified abhorrence,[81] awakened
the fears of Leonardo Aretino on his behalf. Leonardo was undoubtedly
apprehensive, lest his admiration of the abilities, and his compassion
for the fate of the heretic, should be attributed to a latent love of
heresy. He therefore thought it requisite to admonish his friend in the
following terms. “I received the day before yesterday, by the medium of
Barbaro, your letter on the subject of the execution of Jerome of Prague.
I very much admire its elegance; but you seem to give a more ample
testimony to the merits of the heretic than I could wish. You take care
indeed frequently to put in proper caveats; but upon the whole, you show
too great an affection for his cause. I must advise you henceforth to
write upon such subjects in a more guarded manner.”[82]
The cold caution of Leonardo may be a quality conducive to the
insurance of personal safety; but the generous warmth of Poggio lays an
irresistible claim to the applause of every ingenuous mind.
CHAP. III.
_Poggio receives a copy of Francesco Barbaro’s treatise De Re
Uxoriâ—Memoirs of Francesco Barbaro—Poggio’s journey in quest of
ancient manuscripts—Account of the ancient authors recovered by
him—Death of Cardinal Zabarella—Poggio’s oration pronounced at
Zabarella’s funeral—Account of Zabarella—Martin V. elected to the
pontificate—Termination of the Schism—Dissolution of the Council—Poggio
attends the pontiff to Mantua—He visits England, at the instance of
Beaufort, bishop of Winchester—He is disappointed—State of literature
in Britain—Several of Cicero’s works recovered in Italy—Quarrel between
Leonardo Aretino and Niccolo Niccoli—Poggio obtains a small benefice—He
is still dissatisfied—He returns to Italy—Notices of the state of society
in Britain which occur in his works._
CHAP. III.
Soon after the execution of Jerome of Prague, Poggio received from
Guarino Veronese,[83] a copy of a treatise, _De Re Uxoriâ_, i. e. on the
duties of a wife, which had been lately published by Francesco Barbaro,
a Venetian scholar, who was now beginning to attain a considerable
degree of celebrity. His opinion of this composition he expressed in the
following terms. “I thank you, my dear Guarino, for the little volume
which you have been so kind as to communicate to me. My obligation
to you would be immense, had I any thoughts of matrimony; but I must
acknowledge, that the perusal of this treatise has done away the little
inclination which I previously felt to enter into the married state; for
how can I expect to find a help-mate who concentrates in her character
all the good qualities, the union of which, in the opinion of wise
judges, constitutes a good wife. But to be serious. As soon as I received
the book, I began to peruse it; and found the subject so novel, the
style so excellent, and the method so clear, that I hastily ran over
the whole in one day. I afterwards read it again more deliberately. The
subject is indeed a pleasant one; and he has illustrated it by numerous
and well arranged examples. I am however most of all captivated by the
gravity of his diction. This dissertation on the duty of a wife, is, in
my opinion, worthy to be classed with Tully’s Offices. You know that I
am no flatterer, but that I always speak from the impulse of the heart.
Barbaro unites with the greatest eloquence a dignity of sentiment, worthy
of a man of consummate gravity. Earnestly exhort him to cultivate those
talents, the first fruits of which are so admirable.”[84]
The warm approbation which Poggio expressed of this treatise _De Re
Uxoriâ_, led the way to an intercourse of mutual good offices between
him and its author, in whose character were united the dignity of the
patrician, and the accomplishments of the scholar.
Francesco Barbaro was descended from a noble Venetian family, which
formerly bore the name of Magadesi, but exchanged that appellation for
the honourable title of Barbaro, or de’ Barbari, which was conferred upon
it in the twelfth century, in consequence of the valorous exertions of
Marco Magadesi, in a battle fought against the Saracens, near Ascalon.
Francesco was born at Venice, in the year 1398. At an early age he
was placed under the tuition of John of Ravenna, and was afterwards
entrusted to the care of Gasperino Barziza.[85] Under the auspices of
these instructors he made a surprisingly rapid progress in the study
of the Latin tongue. In the acquisition of the rudiments of the Greek
language he was assisted by Guarino Veronese, and not, as some have
erroneously supposed, by Manuel Crysoloras. So suddenly did the talents
of Francesco come to maturity, that he made a public exhibition of his
acquirements in the eighteenth year of his age, at which early period
he pronounced the funeral eulogium of Giovanni Corrodino, a physician
of Padua; and also, at the command of the directors of the Paduan
university, delivered an oration on the occasion of the conferring the
degree of doctor of civil and canon law on Alberto Guidalotti, a noble
Perugian. But a more singular instance of the precocity of his mind was
displayed in the course of the same year, in the publication of his
treatise _De Re Uxoriâ_, which was received by the learned with universal
applause.[86] The vacancy of the pontifical throne still affording to
the officers of the Roman chancery a considerable degree of leisure,
Poggio about this time undertook an expedition of no small importance
to the interests of literature. Having received information that
many ancient manuscripts of classic authors were scattered in various
monasteries, and other repositories in the neighbourhood of Constance,
where they were suffered to perish in neglected obscurity, he determined
to rescue these precious relics from the hands of barbarians, who were
so little sensible of their value. He was not deterred from this laudable
design by the inclemency of the season, or by the ruinous state of the
roads; but with an industry and perseverance, which cannot be too highly
applauded, he made several excursions to the places which were said to
contain the objects of his research. These excursions he even extended
to the city of Paris. For the fatigue and trouble which he encountered
in these inquiries he was requited by the most signal success. A great
number of manuscripts, some of which contained portions of classic
authors, which the admirers of ancient learning had hitherto sought for
in vain, were the reward of his literary zeal. The scholars of Italy took
a lively interest in these investigations of their learned countryman.
The noble art of printing has in modern times rendered books so easily
accessible to all ranks of men, that we cannot enter into the feelings
of those whose libraries were scantily furnished with volumes, which
were slowly multiplied by the tedious process of transcription. But
the epistolary correspondence of the studious of the fifteenth century
contains frequent and striking intimations of the value which was then
set upon good modern copies of the works of classic writers. It may
therefore be easily presumed, that the discovery of an ancient manuscript
was a common subject of exultation to all the lovers of the polite arts.
In the following letter from Leonardo Aretino to Poggio, congratulating
him on the success of his expedition, and particularly on his acquisition
of a perfect copy of Quintilian’s treatise on Oratory, the writer speaks
the sentiments of the literary characters of the age.
“I have seen the letter which you wrote to our friend Niccolo, on the
subject of your last journey, and the discovery of some manuscripts. In
my opinion the republic of letters has reason to rejoice, not only on
account of the acquisition of the works which you have already recovered,
but also on account of the hope which I see you entertain of the recovery
of others. It will be your glory to restore to the present age, by your
labour and diligence, the writings of excellent authors, which have
hitherto escaped the researches of the learned. The accomplishment of
your undertaking will confer an obligation, not on us alone, but on the
successors to our studies. The memory of your services will never be
obliterated. It will be recorded to distant ages, that these works, the
loss of which had been for so long a period a subject of lamentation
to the friends of literature, have been recovered by your industry. As
Camillus, on account of his having rebuilt the city of Rome, was stiled
its second founder, so you may be justly denominated the second author
of all those pieces which are restored to the world by your meritorious
exertions. I therefore most earnestly exhort you not to relax in your
endeavours to prosecute this laudable design. Let not the expense which
you are likely to incur discourage you from proceeding. I will take
care to provide the necessary funds. I have the pleasure of informing
you, that from this discovery of yours, we have already derived more
advantage than you seem to be aware of; for by your exertions we are at
length in possession of a perfect copy of Quintilian. I have inspected
the titles of the books. We have now the entire treatise, of which,
before this happy discovery, we had only one half, and that in a very
mutilated state. Oh! what a valuable acquisition! What an unexpected
pleasure! Shall I then behold Quintilian whole and entire, who, even in
his imperfect state, was so rich a source of delight? I entreat you,
my dear Poggio, send me the manuscript as soon as possible, that I may
see it before I die. As to Asconius and Flaccus, I am glad that you
have recovered them, though neither of these authors have conferred any
additional grace on Latin literature. But Quintilian is so consummate
a master of rhetoric and oratory, that when, after having delivered
him from his long imprisonment in the dungeons of the barbarians,
you transmit him to this country, all the nations of Italy ought to
assemble to bid him welcome. I cannot but wonder that you and your
friends did not eagerly take him in hand, and that, employing yourselves
in the transcription of inferior writers, you should have neglected
Quintilian—an author, whose works I will not hesitate to affirm, are
more an object of desire to the learned than any others, excepting only
Cicero’s dissertation _De Republicâ_. I must next admonish you not to
waste your time on the works which we already possess, but to search for
those which we have not, especially the works of Cicero and Varro.”[87]
Poggio was far from being unconscious of the good service which he
had done to the cause of letters, by the successful assiduity of his
researches after the lost writers of antiquity. [A. D. 1416.] On the
sixteenth of December of this year, he wrote to Guarino Veronese an
epistle, in which, after duly extolling the importance and agreeable
nature of the intelligence which he was about to announce, he gave him a
particular account of the treasure which he had lately brought to light.
From this letter it appears,[88] that in consequence of information which
Poggio had received, that a considerable number of books were deposited
in the monastery of St. Gall, he took a journey to that town, accompanied
by some of his friends. There they found a large number of manuscripts,
and among the rest a complete copy of Quintilian, buried in rubbish and
dust. For the books in question were not arranged in a library, but were
thrown into the lowest apartment or dungeon of a tower, “Which,” says
Poggio, “was not even a fit residence for a condemned criminal.” Besides
Quintilian they found in this obscure recess the three first, and one
half of the fourth books of the Argonautics of Valerius Flaccus, and
Asconius Pedianus’s comment on eight of Cicero’s orations. The two latter
manuscripts Poggio himself transcribed, with an intention of sending them
to Leonardo Aretino, who, as appears by his letters quoted above, was so
much elated by the revival of Quintilian, that he speaks of the discovery
of Asconius and Flaccus as a matter of comparatively trifling moment.[89]
Poggio zealously concurred in the wish of his friend Leonardo, to rescue
from obscurity the lost works of Cicero. Nor were his endeavours to
accomplish this valuable object entirely unsuccessful. In a monastery
of the monks of Clugny, in the town of Langres, he found a copy of
Cicero’s Oration for Cæcina, of which he made a transcript for the use
of his Italian friends. In the course of various journeys, which the
vicissitudes of fortune obliged him to take at different periods of his
life, he had the satisfaction to discover the following orations of the
same author, the loss of which had been long deplored by the learned—De
lege Agrariâ contra Rullum liber primus—Ejusdem liber secundus—Contra
legem Agrariam ad populum—In L. Pisonem. A copy of these orations is
preserved in the Abbey of Santa Maria, at Florence, to which is affixed
a memorandum, which records the fact of their having been discovered by
Poggio. This memorandum indeed makes mention of seven orations as having
been found by him in France and Germany; and the catalogue prefixed to
the manuscript, besides the works above mentioned, enumerates the Oration
pro C. Rabirio Pisone—Pro C. Rabirio perduellionis reo—and pro Roscio
Comœdo—but these orations have been torn from the volume in question.[90]
With the assistance of Bartolomeo di Montepulciano, Poggio also restored
to light the poem of Silius Italicus—Lactantius’s treatise de irâ Dei
et opificio hominis—Vegetius de re Militari—Nonius Marcellus—Ammianus
Marcellinus[91]—Lucretius[92]—Columella and Tertullian.[93]
Before the time of Poggio, eight only of the comedies of Plautus were
known to the classical student. But by the industry or good fortune
of one Nicolas of Treves, whom Poggio employed in continuing the
researches in the monasteries of Germany, which he was unable to conduct
in person, twelve more were brought to light. When Poggio had notice
of this discovery, he was highly elated, and strenuously exhorted the
cardinal Ursini to dispatch a trusty messenger to bring these valuable
treasures to Rome. “I was not only solicitous, but importunate with his
eminence,” says Poggio in a letter to Niccolo Niccoli, “to send somebody
for the books.” The cardinal did not however second the impatience of the
Italian literati, who waited nearly two years before the manuscripts in
question arrived in Rome, whither they were brought by Nicolas of Treves
himself.[94]
Besides Plautus’s comedies, Nicolas of Treves brought to Rome a fragment
of Aulus Gellius.
Poggio also found a copy of Julius Frontinus de Aquæductis, and eight
books of Firmicus’s treatise on the mathematics, lying neglected and
forgotten in the archives of the monastery of Monte Cassino; and at the
instance of Niccolo Niccoli he prevailed upon the governors of that
religious house, to allow him to convey these manuscripts to his own
residence, for the purpose of decyphering and copying them. After he
had transcribed Frontinus with his own hand, he returned the original
manuscript to the library where it had been discovered.[95] He also
procured at Cologne a copy of Petronius Arbiter, a small fragment of
which author he had before discovered in Britain. By his exertions
also the entire work of Columella was brought to light, of which only
fragments had been known to the earlier scholars. For the preservation
of Calpurnius’s Bucolic also, the republic of letters is indebted to the
sagacious diligence of Poggio.[96]
In a long and elaborate letter which Poggio received from Francesco
Barbaro, and which bears the date of June 7th, 1417, this learned
patrician congratulates his correspondent on the glory which he had
acquired by his labours in the cause of learning, and ascribes to the
unremitted diligence of his investigations, the recovery of the works
of the following authors, in addition to others which have been already
enumerated; Manilius, Lucius Septimius, Caper, Eutychius, and Probus.
From this letter of Barbaro, it appears, that the republic of letters had
expected that Poggio would have been materially assisted in his inquiries
after the relics of ancient literature by Bartolomeo di Montepulciano,
but that in consequence of the ill state of his associate’s health, he
was under the necessity of taking upon himself almost the entire conduct
and trouble of the research.
The expense occasioned by these literary excursions was a heavy
incumbrance upon Poggio, whose property could by no means bear any
extraordinary diminution: and the fatigue and inconvenience which he
experienced in the course of his travels in quest of manuscripts, induced
him at one time to declare to Niccolo Niccoli that he could not possibly
spend more time in this pursuit.[97] This declaration was however
nothing more than the result of a temporary dejection of spirits. During
the remainder of his life he eagerly took advantage of every opportunity
of recovering the lost works of the writers of antiquity, many of which
he transcribed with his own hand. In several of his letters the zeal
with which he endeavoured to procure good copies of the Latin classics
is strikingly conspicuous. His inquiries were incessantly and anxiously
directed after the ancient compositions which had not yet been rescued
from beneath the ruins of ages. In the course of his investigations, he
once entertained hopes of recovering the lost Decads of Livy. A Swede,
of the name of Nicolaus, had solemnly assured him, that he had seen a
perfect copy of Livy’s Roman history in a monastery of Cistercian monks
in Hungary. On the receipt of this intelligence, he immediately applied
by letter to Niccolo Niccoli, not doubting but that he could persuade
Cosmo de’ Medici to dispatch one Gherardo de’ Buris to the monastery
where the manuscript was said to be deposited. He was also in hopes that
cardinal Ursini would send a confidential agent to procure this valuable
work; but in these expectations he was disappointed.[98] The testimony
of Nicolaus the Swede being a few years afterwards corroborated by
another traveller, Poggio wrote a letter to Leonello d’Este, Marquis of
Ferrara, giving him an account of the information which he had received,
and intimating, that though the authority upon which it rested was
not of the highest nature, still it was worthy of attention. Whether
Leonello was induced by Poggio’s letter to institute any inquiry after
the manuscript in question, cannot perhaps now be ascertained. Certain it
is, that the learned still lament the imperfect state of the history of
Livy.[99]
Poggio had also at one time conceived hopes of obtaining from a German
monk a copy of the works of Tacitus, containing many portions of that
historian’s writings, which had till then lain neglected beneath the
accumulated dust of ages. These hopes were likewise frustrated. By the
course of events, however, it was afterwards proved that they were not
void of foundation: for during the pontificate of Leo. X. an ancient
manuscript containing five books of the history of Tacitus, which had
been long regarded as irrecoverably lost, was found in Germany, and
presented to that pontiff, according to whose directions it was deposited
in the Laurentian library at Florence.[100]
Amongst the literary characters whose applause animated Poggio to
persevere in his researches after the lost writers of antiquity, a
place of distinguished honour is due to Ambrogio Traversari. This
learned ecclesiastic was the son of Bencivenni dei Traversari, and was
born on the 16th of September, 1386, in Portico, a town of Romagna.
His biographers are not agreed whether his family was poor or rich,
plebeian or noble.[101] It appears however from incontestible evidence,
that soon after he had completed his fourteenth year, he was admitted
into the Camaldolese convent _Degli Angioli_, at Florence, and that he
there took the monastic vows, on the sixth day of November, 1401. At
the time of his entrance into this religious seminary, it was governed
by Matteo di Guido, a Florentine, who, happily for the welfare of the
ecclesiastical fraternity committed to his care, tempered the severity,
and beguiled the wearisomeness of the cloistered life, by the study of
polite letters. Kindly desirous of communicating to others the pleasure
which he himself experienced in literary pursuits, he personally
superintended the education of the youths whom puerile enthusiasm, or
parental authority, had secluded from the world within the walls of
his monastery. Under the care of this enlightened superior, Ambrogio
continued his Latin studies, which he had commenced under the guidance
of John of Ravenna. In the Greek language he was instructed by Demetrius
Scaranus, an eminent scholar, whom the alarming inroads of the Turks had
caused to fly from Constantinople, and who was induced by the liberality
of Matteo to read lectures on the Grecian classics, in the cloisters of
this convent.[102] As Ambrogio was actuated by the genuine enthusiasm of
literary zeal, he made a rapid progress in knowledge. In the prosecution
of his studies, indeed, he enjoyed peculiar advantage. The retirement
of the monastic life afforded him considerable leisure. The library of
his convent was well furnished with books, and he had moreover the free
use of the copious collection of Niccolo Niccoli, who regarded him with
parental affection, and assiduously fostered his ripening talents by the
most liberal patronage. Inspired by a profound veneration of the models
of just taste, which are to be found in the writings of antiquity, he
assiduously employed a considerable portion of his time in multiplying
the copies of the classic authors: and his elegant transcripts of the
works which Poggio had rescued from obscurity, at once testified his love
of literature, and the high estimation in which he held the labours of
his friend.[103]
After the deposition of John XXII. Poggio still remained at Constance,
anxiously hoping that the appointment of a successor to that ill-fated
pontiff would enable him once more to establish himself in the Roman
chancery. In the prosecution of his interests, he had great dependance
upon the support and patronage of Zabarella, cardinal of Florence. But
his expectations of preferment from this quarter were unfortunately
destroyed by the death of that illustrious ecclesiastic. [A. D. 1417.]
This event, which occurred on the twenty-sixth of September, 1417,
deprived the council of one of its ablest members, and Poggio of a kind
and zealous friend. The obsequies of Zabarella were celebrated with
extraordinary pomp; and on this occasion, Poggio fulfilled the last
duties of friendship, by commemorating his virtues in a funeral oration.
Impressed by the solemnity of the subject, and the dignity of his
audience, he exerted in the composition of this oration the full powers
of his eloquence and learning. After a modest exordium, he proceeded to
give a brief account of his departed friend—he then entered into the
detail of his good qualities, and concluded by an impassioned burst of
sorrow for the loss which the lovers of union and peace had sustained;
and by an exhortation to the assembled dignitaries to pay to their
deceased brother the honours due to his virtues, and to imitate the moral
graces which they had so much admired in his conduct.
Francesco Zabarella was a native of Padua. His parents, who moved in
the superior circles of society, readily indulged his early love of
literature, and procured him the best instructions which their city
could afford. Having finished his preparatory education, Francesco
applied himself to the study of the civil law, tempering the severity of
this pursuit by the cultivation of polite letters. When he was arrived
at years of maturity, he delivered public lectures on the science of
jurisprudence. In discharging the duty of instruction, he gained the
respect and love of his pupils, by the variety of his knowledge and the
benevolence of his disposition. The celebrity which he acquired by the
ability with which he filled the professor’s chair, attracted the notice
of John XXII., who, without any solicitation on his part, nominated him
to the bishopric of Florence, and afterwards raised him to the dignity of
cardinal. Stimulated by an earnest desire to put an end to the schism,
he successfully exerted his influence with the pontiff to induce him to
assent to the wishes of the emperor of Germany, by summoning a general
council; and being deputed on the part of the pope, to confer with the
representatives of Sigismund, concerning the place where the council
should assemble, he concurred with them in fixing, for that purpose, upon
the city of Constance. He entered with great zeal into the discussion
of the various subjects which engaged the attention of that renowned
synod. The ardour of his mind indeed hastened his end. Engaging with
uncommon warmth in a tumultuous debate, at a time when he was languid
with sickness, he found himself so much exhausted, that making a last
effort, he declared, that the speech which he had just concluded was his
testamentary oration, and that he felt himself dying in defence of the
church. He did not long survive this exertion. After a short residence
at the baths of Baden, which seemed to be of service in recruiting his
constitution, he returned to renew his labours at Constance, where he
soon died, a victim to the ardour of his zeal, and to the unremitting
toil of his exertions.[104]
In the funeral eulogium which Poggio pronounced over the remains of
Zabarella, he asserts, that had the life of his friend been prolonged, he
would in all probability have been invested with the pontifical purple.
All orders of men now began impatiently to demand the election of a
sovereign pontiff. [A. D. 1417.] In compliance with their wishes, the
cardinals assembled in conclave on the tenth of November, and after the
usual vehemence of dissention, they at length agreed in the nomination of
Otto Colonna, who immediately after his election assumed the appellation
of Martin V.[105]
Thus was terminated the famous schism of the west. Gregory XII. had
died on the 18th of October preceding the election of Martin:[106] and
though Benedict XIII., confident in the strength of the fortifications
of Paniscola, refused to submit to the decrees of the council, and
still assumed the style, and pretended to exercise the functions of the
pontificate, his adherents were so few, and the tide of general opinion
ran so strongly in favour of Martin V., that he was henceforth regarded
rather as an object of contempt than of fear.
The council had given an awful admonition to heretics. It had also, by
an extraordinary exertion of authority, effected an union of the true
believers under a legitimate head. But a most important and difficult
matter remained unaccomplished, namely, the reformation of the church.
The newly elected pontiff listened with apparent complacence to the
petitions which were from time to time preferred to him, by the various
subdivisions of the council, beseeching him to prosecute this good work
by all the means in his power; but he contrived by studied delays so to
protract the consideration of the particular heads of reform, that the
members of the assembly, weary of their long residence in Constance, were
eager to embrace the first opportunity of returning to their respective
homes. This opportunity was afforded them on the twenty-second day of
April, 1418, on which day the pope formally dismissed the council.[107]
On the sixteenth of May he left Constance, and passing through
Schaffausen, he proceeded by easy stages to Geneva, where he arrived
on the eleventh of June.[108] At this city he kept his court for some
months. Quitting Germany on the twelfth day of September, he proceeded
to Milan, and afterwards to Mantua. Here he fixed his residence during
the remainder of the year, being prevented from visiting his capital by
the anarchy which the long absence of legitimate authority had occasioned
in the states of the church. As a grateful return for the hospitality
with which he was received by the duke of Milan, he mediated a peace
between that prince and Pandolfo Malatesta, who, after having taken
Bergamo, had directed his march to Brescia, and by the vigour of his
operations had caused the duke to tremble for the safety of the rest of
his dominions.[109]
Though it does not appear that Poggio held any office under the new
pontiff, he travelled in the suite of Martin V. to Mantua. At this city
he suddenly quitted the Roman court with a determination to spend some
time in England, to which country he had been invited by Beaufort, bishop
of Winchester. This prelate, who is well known to all the admirers
of Shakspeare by the title of cardinal Beaufort, was the son of the
celebrated John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, and uncle to the reigning
English monarch Henry V. whose studies he had superintended during his
residence at Oxford. In the year 1397 he was elected bishop of Lincoln.
After having enjoyed this promotion for the space of eight years, he
succeeded William of Wickham in the see of Winchester. He was a man of
boundless ambition, well versed in the crooked policy of court intrigue,
and enormously rich. In the course of a pilgrimage which he undertook to
make to Jerusalem, he visited the council of Constance,[110] where it is
probable he first became acquainted with the merits of Poggio.
Nothing but some suddenly conceived dissatisfaction with his actual
situation, or the prospect of considerable emolument, could have
induced Poggio to fix his residence in Britain, a country regarded by
the Italians as the remotest corner of the globe, and as the abode
of ignorance and barbarity. He was in fact led to entertain great
expectations by the magnificent promises of the bishop of Winchester.
But when he arrived in London, he found himself doomed to the common lot
of those who depend upon the patronage of the great. Beaufort wanted
either leisure or inclination to minister to the wants and wishes of his
guest; and Poggio began to feel all the inconveniences of straightened
circumstances, aggravated by the reflection that he was situated at so
serious a distance from his native land. His communication with his early
friends, and the companions of his youthful years, was interrupted. He
experienced the embarrassments necessarily incident to those who are
thrown into a new circle of society, to the habits of which they are
entirely unaccustomed; and his mind became the prey of discontent and
anxiety. He was also much chagrined on observing the uncultivated state
of the public mind in Britain, when compared with the enthusiastic love
of elegant literature which polished and adorned his native country.[111]
The period of his arrival in England has been justly pronounced by one
of our most accurate historians, to be in a literary point of view one
of the darkest which occur in the whole series of British annals.[112]
Leland indeed and other writers enumerate long lists of scholars, whom
they indiscriminately grace with the title of most learned. These
champions of literature were however nothing more than monks and
astrologers, who were regarded with superstitious admiration by an
ignorant age, but whose works are now deservedly buried in oblivion.
The occult sciences, scholastic philosophy, and the mysteries of
theology, absorbed the attention of the contemptible few who advanced
any pretensions to the cultivation of learning. Of the principles of
composition and the graces of style they were totally ignorant—nay so
imperfect was their knowledge of the Latin tongue, that almost every
sentence of their writings is deformed by the barbarous introduction of
English words, miserably metamorphosed by a Latin termination.[113]
The respectable author, whose opinion of the state of British literature
in the fifteenth century has been quoted above, ascribes the neglect of
learning which disgraces this portion of our history to the following
causes.—The wars in which the English had been so long engaged against
France—The schism of the west—The little encouragement afforded to
learned men—and the scarcity of books.
With respect to the first of these causes, it may be observed, that
a state of warfare by no means in itself precludes the extension of
science, and the cultivation of letters. The most renowned luminaries of
Greece flourished during the devastation of the Peloponnesian war. Julius
Cæsar and Cicero were not diverted from their literary pursuits by the
tumult of faction, and the din of arms. And at the time when literature
was revived in Italy, the provinces of that country were frequently laid
waste by hostile invasions, and its cities were agitated by the discord
of contending parties. As to the second cause, namely, the distraction
occasioned by the schism, it may be remarked, that though this
distraction was felt to a superior degree in Italy, it did not in that
country operate as the slightest check to the progress of learning.—The
want of encouragement to learned men, is rather a consequence than a
cause of the forlorn state of literature. Some degree of knowledge and
taste is requisite to form the character of a patron of the studious.
The neglect of the liberal arts which spread the gloom of barbarism
over our ancestors of the fifteenth century, may perhaps be more justly
ascribed to the operation of the feudal system. This primary cause
prevented that excitation of the public mind, which is necessary to the
successful cultivation of literature. The feudal system was a system of
strict subordination, which prescribed to every member of the political
community his particular rank and place, and surrounded him by a circle,
beyond which he was forbidden to pass. In the spirit of this system, till
the reign of Henry IV., no farmer or mechanic was permitted to send his
children to school; and long after that period, a license from his lord
was necessary to enable a man of this description to educate a son for
the church. Whilst the majority of the people were thus impeded in their
approach to the fountains of knowledge, it was impossible for learning to
raise her drooping head. The feudal superiors, exalted by the accident of
their birth to the enjoyment of power and plenty, had no motive to induce
them to submit to the labour of study. The younger branches of noble
families were early taught to depend upon their swords for subsistence;
and the acquisition of learning was an object far beyond the scope of the
oppressed and humble vassal.
The influence of the feudal system in checking the progress of intellect
will be more plainly visible, if we consider the circumstances of
Italy during the period in question. In that country, the ambition of
adventurers, and the extension of commerce, had broken the fetters of
feudalism; and had enabled the bold and daring in every species of
exertion to rise to the pitch of consequence which their talents could
vindicate. Hence the dormant powers of the human mind were roused,
and the expansion of learning and the liberal arts was promoted. The
equalizing tyranny of the petty princes who usurped the sovereignty
of various cities of Lombardy, whilst it repressed the power of the
aristocracy, called into life the abilities of all the orders of society.
The precarious title by which these chieftains held their exalted
stations induced them to court popularity, by freeing the mass of the
people from invidious restraints. During the residence of the popes
at Avignon, and during the continuance of the schism, the feeble rule
exercised by the pontifical deputies over the ecclesiastical cities
enabled the inhabitants of those cities to defy the authority which
endeavoured to confine their exertions within the limits of slavish
subordination. The factions which disturbed the peace of the Italian
republics tended also in an eminent degree to call forth the full energy
of abilities, which in other circumstances would have been buried in
obscurity. Great talents are too frequently united with turbulence of
spirit. In times when the order of society is inverted by the tumults
of civil broils, while men of peaceful souls retire trembling from the
conflict, he who is endued with the energy of genius, comes forth,
conscious of his strength, and despising every danger, exults in the hope
of vindicating his claim to promotion.
It is evident, that these various stimulants of intellect which occurred
in Italy did not occur in Britain. On this account, whilst the liberal
arts were cultivated and respected in the former country, they were
neglected and despised in the latter.
Another cause of incitement to the study of letters, which operated in
Italy, and was wanting in Britain, arose from the subdivision of the
former country into a variety of petty states. These states maintained
a constant intercourse with each other, by the medium of ambassadors,
who were usually selected from among the most distinguished candidates
for literary fame. Thus one of the most honourable offices in the civil
department of the state was presented to inflame the ambition of the
studious, and the diplomatic profession became the nurse of learning.
When the wish of acquiring knowledge was excited, the numerous copies
of the works of the ancients, which were scattered throughout Italy,
afforded ample means of instruction; while the penury of Britain in this
respect repressed the exertions of inquiry, and excluded the nascent
scholar from the cultivated regions of classic taste.[114]
The vexation which Poggio experienced, when he contemplated the gloomy
contrast which Britain exhibited, when compared with his native land,
was encreased by the receipt of letters from Italy, informing him, that
whilst he was wasting his days in the unprofitable pursuit of preferment,
his late associates were enjoying, with scholastic rapture, the perusal
of some valuable manuscripts, which had been discovered at Lodi by
Gerardo Landriani, bishop of that city. This prelate had rescued from a
heap of rubbish a very ancient copy of various works of Cicero, written
in a character so antique, that few were able to decypher it. The
manuscript in question contained, besides Cicero’s treatise on Rhetoric,
which was already in the hands of collectors of books, the following
works of the same elegant writer, which had till this period escaped
the researches of the learned—The three books De Oratore, entire—Brutus
de claris Oratoribus—and the Orator ad Brutum. Nobody could be found at
Milan who was able to read the character in which these treatises were
written. But Cosmo of Cremona, a scholar of excellent accomplishments,
decyphered and copied the treatise De Oratore; and the celebrated Flavio
Biondo[115] undertook and soon accomplished the task of transcribing
Brutus de claris Oratoribus. From these transcripts copies were speedily
multiplied, and dispersed all over Italy, while Poggio was waiting with
the utmost impatience, till Leonardo Aretino could convey one of these
copies to the distant region in which his friend then resided.[116]
At this inauspicious period, Poggio was filled with anxiety on account of
the destitute condition of his mother, and also by the dissolute conduct
of one of his brothers.[117] In these circumstances his uneasiness and
vexation were greatly aggravated by the receipt of a letter from Niccolo
Niccoli, containing grievous complaints against Leonardo Aretino, and
informing him, that the bond of friendship, by which his correspondent
and Leonardo had for so long a space of time been united, was for ever
sundered.
The quarrel which took place between Leonardo Aretino and Niccolo
Niccoli, originated in a cause, which has, in every age, been productive
of the fiercest and most fatal contentions, namely, the uncontrolled
gratification of the passion, or rather of the appetite, of love. The
following are the principal circumstances which gave rise to this
unfortunate disagreement. Giovanni, the younger brother of Niccolo, kept
a mistress of the name of Benvenuta. As the two brothers resided in the
same house, Niccolo had frequent opportunities of seeing this syren,
whose charms and allurements gained such an ascendancy over his better
principles, that after having for some time carried on an intrigue with
her in private, he at length, in defiance of all decency, openly robbed
his brother of his fair companion, and established Benvenuta in his
own apartments.[118] It may easily be imagined, that Giovanni did not
tamely submit to such an injury. In consequence of his resentment, the
neighbourhood was daily disturbed by the outrages of fraternal discord.
One of the worst effects produced by such disgraceful connections as that
which Niccolo had formed with Benvenuta, is the absolute ascendancy which
artful and wicked women thereby gain over men of weak minds; and which
they uniformly exercise, in setting their lovers at variance with their
relations and friends. The history of Niccolo confirms the truth of this
observation. By the crafty insinuations of his mistress his affections
were alienated from those with whom he had formerly been united by the
bonds of consanguinity and friendship. Influenced by her suggestions,
he dropped all intercourse with his five brothers, and quarrelled with
Lorenzo de’ Medici, whom he had till this unfortunate transaction been
proud to enumerate amongst his dearest associates. In the height of her
insolence, Benvenuta had the audacity to defame the character of the
wife of Jacopo, one of the brothers of Niccolo. Jacopo, for some time,
endured her insolence with patient contempt; but at length exasperated by
her petulance, he asked the advice, and demanded the assistance of his
brothers. They sympathized with him in his resentment, and readily gave
him the aid which he required. Proceeding to the house of Niccolo, they
seized the termagant beauty, and exalting her on the back of one of their
attendants, to the great amusement of the by-standers, they inflicted on
her a species of chastisement, in the administration of which convenience
and severity are consulted much more than modesty. Niccolo was a helpless
witness of the pain and disgrace suffered by Benvenuta. This spectacle
had such an effect on his feelings, that, vowing vengeance against his
brothers, he retired to his house, and delivered himself up to the most
immoderate transports of grief. Hearing that he was thus afflicted,
several of his acquaintance paid him visits of condolence, from which
they returned, ridiculing his folly, and fully persuaded that his
anger had impaired his reason. In this conjuncture, Leonardo Aretino,
being aware that Niccolo was not in a mood to listen with patience to
the remonstrances which he thought it his duty to make to him on the
extravagance of his conduct, cautiously avoided going to his house. This
circumstance did not escape the observation of the mourner, who sent word
to Leonardo, that he was surprised that he had not received from him the
common offices of friendly consolation. To this message Leonardo replied,
that he was surprised that Niccolo should expect consolation from his
friends on so trifling a subject of sorrow as the chastisement of his
cook-maid; and that he thought it was time for him to put an end to his
folly. This message added fuel to the flame of Niccolo’s wrath. He now
kept no measures with Leonardo; but abjured his friendship, and eagerly
embraced every opportunity of inveighing against him with the utmost
bitterness.[119] Leonardo did not submit with patience to the angry
maledictions of his former associate. In a bitter invective which he
published against Niccolo, under the designation of _Nebulo Maleficus_,
he returned railing for railing; and, notwithstanding the mediation of
their common acquaintance, and, amongst the rest of Poggio, the breach of
friendship which had been thus unhappily occasioned by the intemperate
passions of Niccolo, daily became wider.[120]
Whilst the feelings of Poggio were thus wounded by the dissension of his
dearest friends, he earnestly solicited from his patron some recompense
for the long journey which he had undertaken, at his invitation, and in
reliance on his promises of preferment and support. His solicitations
were for a long time entirely fruitless. He found, by mortifying
experience, that men of exalted rank are much more ready to make
promises than to fulfil their engagements. “At length,” to adopt his own
expression, “the mountain laboured, and produced a mouse.” The wealthy
and powerful Bishop of Winchester presented his client with a benefice,
the annual income of which was nominally one hundred and twenty florins;
but in consequence of various deductions, its revenues did not in fact
amount even to that inconsiderable sum. Poggio had always entertained
great objections to the clerical life. His objections were not founded
upon a contempt of the institutions of religion. On the contrary, they
proceeded from the exalted idea which he entertained of the duties of
the clerical office. Sensible, as he himself says in a letter to Niccolo
Niccoli, of the serious charge which they impose upon themselves, who
undertake the cure of souls, he was diffident of his qualifications to
execute the duties of an office, the faithful discharge of which demanded
the most indefatigable industry, and the most scrupulous correctness of
moral conduct.[121] Influenced by these considerations, which certainly
bear very satisfactory testimony to the purity of his principles, though
he was soon promoted to a much richer living, he wished to exchange
it for a benefice without cure of souls. To meet his wishes in this
respect a canonicate was offered him; but it is uncertain whether this
arrangement was perfected.[122] However this may be, he was weary of his
residence in England, and impatiently longed to return to his native
land. At this juncture, he received from Italy two proposals, the one
on the part of Alamano Adimaro, Archbishop of Pisa and Cardinal of St.
Eusebius, who invited him to accept the office of Secretary to the Roman
pontiff; the other from Piero Lamberteschi, who offered him a situation,
the nature of which is not precisely known, but which was probably
that of public professor in one of the Italian universities. Poggio
seems to have received the proposal of Lamberteschi with considerable
satisfaction. On this subject he thus expresses himself in a letter to
Niccolo Niccoli.
“The day before yesterday, I received two letters from you, and one from
Piero Lamberteschi. These letters I have read with great attention. I
am pleased with Piero’s plan, and I think I shall follow your advice.
He says, that he will do his endeavour to procure me five hundred gold
florins for three years’ services. Make them six hundred, and I will
agree to the proposal. He lays before me flattering hopes of future
profitable contingencies, and I am inclined to believe, that these hopes
may probably be realized: yet I think it more prudent to covenant for
something, than to depend upon hope alone. I like the employment to which
he invites me, and I hope I shall produce something worth reading; but
for this purpose, as I have informed him, I must be indulged with leisure
and retirement.”
The invitation of the cardinal of St. Eusebius was not so satisfactory
to the wishes of Poggio. In the letter from which the foregoing extracts
have been made, he thus expresses himself.
“I observe what the cardinal writes on the subject of the secretaryship.
If I had valued that office as highly as some do, I should long ago have
returned to Rome. I have less esteem for the pontificate and its members,
than they imagine; for I wish to be a free man, and not a public slave.
Ratify the offers of Piero, and you shall see that I shall avoid the
Roman court with more diligence than many people would be apt to believe.
I must earnestly request that you will not communicate my plans to any
one, since we are ignorant of what may happen—for man proposes, but God
directs the issues of things.”[123]
The event of these negociations demonstrated the prudence of Poggio, in
not precipitately rejecting the invitation of Adimaro. Some obstacle
intervened to prevent the execution of the plan proposed by Lamberteschi;
and we may estimate the impatience with which Poggio endured his exile
from Italy, by the undoubted fact, that notwithstanding the above
confession of his dislike of the pontifical court, he accepted the
office of Secretary to Martin V. He accordingly quitted England, where
his hopes had been so severely disappointed, and after a journey, of the
incidents of which no record appears in his works, he once more took up
his residence at Rome.
It is very probable, that Poggio communicated to his Italian
correspondents an account of the remarkable circumstances which he
observed in the course of his journey to England, and of his return to
his native land. It is also reasonable to suppose, that some of the
letters which he wrote from this country would contain his opinion of
the manners and customs of our ancestors. If this was the case, we have
reason to lament that these interesting documents are not yet made
public. Though incidental mention is frequently made in the works of
Poggio, of his residence in Britain, he never dwells upon this topic.
A trait of the manners of the English in the fifteenth century occurs
in his dialogue on Nobility, in which he thus notices the English
aristocracy.—“The nobles of England deem it disgraceful to reside in
cities, and prefer living in retirement in the country. They estimate the
degree of a man’s nobility by the extent of his estates. Their time is
occupied in agricultural pursuits, and they trade in wool and sheep, not
thinking it at all derogatory to their dignity to be engaged in the sale
of the produce of their lands. I have known a wealthy merchant, who had
closed his mercantile concerns, vested his money in land, and retired
into the country, become the founder of a noble race; and I have seen
him freely admitted into the society of the most illustrious families.
Many persons also of ignoble blood have been advanced to the honours of
nobility by the favour of their sovereign, which they have merited by
their warlike achievements.”[124]
In his _Historia Disceptativa Convivialis_, he relates another trait
of the manners of our forefathers, which he records as an instance of
their politeness. A splenetic traveller would probably have quoted it as
a proof of their love of good living. “The English,” says he, “if they
meet with any one at whose table they have dined, even if the rencounter
should take place ten days after the feast, thank him for his good
entertainment; and they never omit this ceremony, lest they should be
thought insensible of his kindness.”[125]
From the following story, which Poggio has chronicled in his _Facetiæ_,
we learn, that at this early period the English were addicted to the
practice of diverting themselves at the expense of their brethren on
the other side of St. George’s channel, and that when he visited this
country, an Irishman was already become the common hero of an English
tale of absurdity.
“When I was in England, I heard a curious anecdote of an Irish captain
of a ship. In the midst of a violent storm, when all hands had given
themselves over for lost, he made a vow, that if his ship should be saved
from the imminent danger which threatened to overwhelm her, he would make
an offering at the church of the Virgin Mary of a waxen taper, as large
as the main-mast. One of the crew observing that it would be impossible
to discharge this vow, since all the wax in England would not be
sufficient to make such a taper,—hold your tongue, said the captain, and
do not trouble yourself with calculating whether I can perform my promise
or not, provided we can escape the present peril.”[126]
CHAP. IV.
_State of Italy during Poggio’s residence in England—Martin V. retires to
Florence—Retrospect of the history of that city—Martin is dissatisfied
with the conduct of the Florentines—Baldassare Cossa is liberated from
confinement, and submits to the authority of Martin V.—His death—Martin
V. transfers his court to Rome—A reconciliation is effected between
Leonardo Aretino and Niccolo Niccoli—Poggio’s letter to Leonardo on
this event—Council of Pavia—The council is transferred to Siena,
and there dissolved—Hostility of Alfonso of Arragon against Martin
V.—Unsuccessful attempts to crush the reformers in Germany—Termination of
the schism—Poggio’s dialogue on Avarice—The Fratres Observantiæ satirized
by Poggio—Poggio excites displeasure by curbing the zeal of the Fratres
Observantiæ—His letter on this subject—His opinion of the monastic life
and itinerant preachers—Reflections._
CHAP. IV.
Whilst Poggio was living in a kind of exile in England, the sovereign
pontiff was in a manner banished from his capital. On his arrival in
Italy, Martin V. found the states of the church in the hands of troops
of banditti, who had taken advantage of the disorders of the times, to
spread ruin and devastation through every quarter of the pontifical
dominions. The passes, and places of strength, were so generally occupied
by these adventurers, who were in the pay of a noted chieftain, named
Braccio di Montone, that the pontiff did not dare to expose himself
to their outrages, by attempting to establish himself in Rome. The
inhabitants of Bologna also, espousing the cause of John XXII., had
shut their gates against him. He was therefore reduced to the necessity
of taking refuge in some friendly territory. In this extremity, the
Florentines offered him an asylum, and Martin accordingly removed his
court from Mantua to their city, into which he made his public entry
with extraordinary pomp, on the twenty-sixth of February, 1419.[127]
His residence in Florence did not, however, produce within his mind any
friendly sentiments towards his hosts. The Florentines indeed, by their
behaviour to their illustrious guest, greatly diminished the value of
the favour which they had conferred upon him, in affording him a place
of rest. At this period, they were elated with the self-confidence
occasioned by a long series of almost uninterrupted prosperity. Filippo,
who upon the death of his brother, Giovanni Maria, had succeeded to the
ducal throne of Milan, disclaiming the hostile views of his predecessors,
had lived in a state of friendship with his Tuscan neighbours, and did
not even interpose to prevent them from reducing the district of Pisa
under their dominion. In the year 1408 the repose of the Florentines had
been disturbed by an invasion of their territories by Ladislaus, king
of Naples, who had taken possession of a considerable portion of the
ecclesiastical states; but with the assistance of Louis of Anjou, they
had discomfited the usurper, and had expelled him from the dominions of
the church. By his death, which happened in the year 1414, they had been
freed from all fear of hostile incursions, and for the space of five
years from that event, they had enjoyed the blessing of peace. During
this period they had extended their commerce, and greatly encreased their
opulence and power. In the insolence of their pride, they looked upon the
wandering pontiff with contempt. Insensible to those delicate impulses
which prompt man to regard the unfortunate with respect, they wantonly
published the sentiments of their hearts; and Martin was irritated and
disgusted by hearing his name made the subject of ridicule, and the
burden of contumelious songs.[128] The Florentine populace were betrayed
into these violations of decorum by their attachment to the interests
of Braccio di Montone; and this undisguised partiality to his enemy
exasperated the indignation of the pontiff. Yielding, however, to the
pressure of circumstances, he was persuaded, by the solicitations of the
Florentine government, to agree to terms of pacification with Braccio,
whom he invested, in quality of Vicar of the church, with the government
of the cities of Perugia, Assisi, Jesi, and Todi; in return for which
condescension, the rebellious chieftain gave up to the pontiff the towns
of Narni, Terni, Orvieto, and Orta.[129] Braccio being thus reconciled to
the head of the church, and being encouraged by the promise of an ample
recompense for his services, turned his arms against his late brethren in
rebellion; and reduced the Bolognese to submission to the Roman see.[130]
During these transactions, Cosmo de’ Medici, who had been united by the
strictest ties of friendship to Baldassare Cossa, the deposed pontiff,
was very urgent in his petitions to Martin V. to liberate his unfortunate
predecessor from confinement. Martin at length graciously assented to
Cosmo’s request; and despatched the necessary orders to Heidleberg.
But the impatience of Baldassare, who was weary of seclusion from the
world, had already stimulated him to purchase his freedom from the Count
Palatine, (to whose custody he had been assigned) at the price of thirty
thousand pieces of gold. Having thus obtained his liberty, he crossed
the Alps, and arrived safely in Italy. The well-known turbulence of his
spirit led many to expect that he would reclaim the pontifical honours,
and distract the Christian church by a renewal of the schism. But to
the surprise of every body, he repaired with all convenient speed to
Florence, where he arrived on the 13th of May, 1419, and there, kissing
the feet of Martin, he acknowledged him as the only true and legitimate
successor of St. Peter. The spectators of this extraordinary scene were
melted into tears, and the compassion and generosity of the pontiff were
excited by this unexpected act of submission. Deeply affected by the
serious instance of the instability of human greatness, which was thus
presented before his eyes, Martin received his humble predecessor with
kindness; and endeavoured to alleviate his sense of the degradation which
he had experienced, by creating him cardinal, and bishop of Toscolano.
The haughty spirit of Baldassare did not long undergo the mortification
of witnessing the pomp and splendour of which he had been so rudely
deprived. He died at Florence, on the twenty-second day of December, and
was interred with much pomp in the church of St. John. Cosmo de’ Medici
erected to his honour a magnificent monument, on which he caused to be
engraven the following simple inscription: BALTHASSARIS COSSÆ IOHANNIS
XXII. QUONDAM PAPÆ CORPUS HOC TUMULO CONDITUM.[131] Platina asserts
in his Lives of the Popes, that Baldassare, at the time of his death
was possessed of immense treasures, which were inherited or seized by
the family of the Medici; and in this assertion he has been copied by
subsequent writers. But Muratori maintains, on the contrary, that it
is clearly proved by his last will, that the deposed pontiff died poor
rather than rich.[132]
The territories of the church being restored to peace by the active
exertions of Braccio di Montone, and no obstacle remaining to prevent
the pontiff from visiting his capital, he departed from Florence and
proceeded to Rome, to which city he was welcomed by the enthusiastic joy
of the populace, on the twenty-second of September, 1420.
The Pontifical household being once more regularly established in the
capital of the church, Poggio, as it has been before observed, was
induced, by the invitation of the cardinal of St. Eusebius, to accept
the office of Secretary. The time of his arrival in Rome may be fixed
sometime in the spring of 1423,[133] and it appears that his first care,
after his re-establishment in the sacred chancery, was to renew with his
friends the personal and epistolary communication, which his long absence
from Italy had interrupted. The unfortunate quarrel of Leonardo Aretino
and Niccolo Niccoli also engaged his early attention. Nothing is more
painful to a man of an ingenuous mind, than the occurrence of dissension
between those for whom he entertains an equal degree of friendly regard.
Poggio, therefore, embraced the first opportunity which presented itself,
of exerting his utmost endeavours to effect a reconciliation between
the angry disputants. A long letter, which Leonardo had dispatched to
him during his residence in London, with the view of giving him a full
account of the cause of this disgraceful strife, had never reached him;
but soon after his arrival at Rome, Leonardo supplied this deficiency by
sending him a copy of this letter, which he had kept for the inspection
of his other friends.[134] Poggio soon found, that in his endeavours
to terminate this unhappy difference, he was likely to experience as
serious obstacles in the wounded pride of Leonardo, as in the infatuated
wrath of Niccolo.[135] In this difficult affair, therefore, he thought
it advisable to avail himself of the assistance of the common friends
of both parties. Ambrogio Traversari had already, indeed, interposed
his good offices to bring about the desired reconciliation, but without
effect.[136] Poggio however conceived great hopes, that the mediation
of Francesco Barbaro, for whom Leonardo entertained a high degree
of respect, would have considerable weight; and when that eminent
scholar, being vested with the office of ambassador extraordinary of
the Venetian Republic, paid a visit to Rome,[137] where he was met by
Leonardo, he flattered himself that the reconciliation which he so
ardently wished would be effected. Francesco was equally desirous with
Poggio to discharge the duties of a peace-maker; but he found Leonardo
so determined upon requiring from his antagonist a very ample apology
for his conduct, that he was almost induced to give up the cause in
despair: and Leonardo, being perhaps apprehensive that at the time of
his departure from Rome his friends would renew their efforts to shake
his resolution, withdrew from the city in so sudden and secret a manner,
that Poggio had not an opportunity of taking leave of him. For this
conduct the latter gently reproved his friend in a letter, in which he
stated to him his opinion, that in his affair with Niccolo, it was by no
means advisable to use recrimination, or to demand an apology, and that
nothing was requisite but a mutual oblivion of the past. “Remember,” says
he, “that it is the characteristic of a great mind, to forget and not to
revenge injuries, and that the duties of friendship are paramount to all
other considerations. You seem to me to attach too much importance to
trifles, which it will be more conducive to your glory to despise, than
to make them the subjects of serious concern.”[138] In a second letter
on the same subject he informed Leonardo, that he could not, without
the utmost vexation, witness the interruption of a friendship which had
been established on the best foundation of mutual esteem, and which had
continued for so long a period; and that his concern was much increased,
when he observed that their disagreement was detrimental to the good fame
of both parties.[139] In this letter he grants, that Niccolo has his
failings, but reminds his correspondent, that imperfection is the common
lot of mortality, and that it is our duty, according to the instructions
of the apostle, to bear one another’s burdens.[140]
The obstinacy of Leonardo for some time withstood the solicitations of
his friends. But Francesco Barbaro, proceeding from Rome to Florence,
laboured with such earnestness and prudence to allay the heat of his
resentment, that he at length consented once more to enrol Niccolo in the
number of his friends. The news of this event drew from Poggio a letter
of thanks and congratulation to the mediator, and the following prudent
and friendly admonition to Leonardo.
“I have just received intelligence of an event, the most delightful
which could possibly have occurred at the present time; namely, the
reconciliation which has taken place between you and Niccolo. This
circumstance inspires me with the greatest pleasure, especially because
it proves that you do not belie the promise of your former years; but
that you support the consistency of your excellent character. It must
now be your care to act with such prudence, that this reconciliation
may be improved into a renewal of friendship. It is not enough that
your hatred is at an end. Love and kind affection must succeed in the
place of animosity. These are the indications of an upright, ingenuous,
and virtuous mind. Reassume then I beseech you, that familiar and
friendly intercourse with Niccolo, which I have for so long a space of
time witnessed with so much pleasure. Carefully avoid every thing which
may tend to impair your mutual good will; and act in such a manner that
this reconciliation may appear to have been effected, not merely by the
interposition of your friends, but by your own free will, and with your
hearty concurrence. By your conduct you have obtained the greatest glory,
and I trust you will find it the source of the most exquisite pleasure.
I can assure you that this event has given the utmost satisfaction to
all our friends at Rome—I say _our_ friends; for I have the happiness
of being connected by the bonds of friendship with all your associates
in the pontifical court. The reputation which you have acquired by your
conduct in this affair, you must support by perseverance and firmness
of mind; for your late enmity would soon have injured the reputation
both of yourself and of Niccolo. By your reconciliation however you have
maintained your dignity, and conciliated the esteem of the virtuous and
the learned. I have written a short letter to Niccolo, and am anxious to
receive his answer; for I am surprised that neither you nor he should
have given me the least intimation of this event; especially when you
were both fully sensible how much I was interested in it.”[141]
In the thirty-ninth session of the council of Constance it had been
decreed, that for the suppression and prevention of heresy and schism,
at the end of five years after the dissolution of the existing council,
another should be summoned; a third at the expiration of seven years
from the breaking up of the second; and that after these extraordinary
meetings, general councils should be regularly held once in every ten
years. At the expiration of the prescribed term, therefore, Martin V.
according to the tenor of the first head of this decree, summoned the
representatives of the different nations of Christendom to repair to
Pavia. [A. D. 1423.] Nothing however having lately occurred, particularly
to interest the Christian powers in the proceedings of the Roman
hierarchy, the inconsiderable numbers of this assembly formed a striking
contrast with the multitudes who had a few years before this time flocked
on a similar occasion to the city of Constance. The plague having
made its appearance in Pavia, the council was removed to Siena, where
it began to be more numerously frequented. Alfonso, king of Arragon,
took this opportunity of supporting, in opposition to Martin V., the
pretensions of Piero da Luna, who still assumed the name of Benedict
XIII. and maintained a sort of pontifical splendour in the fortress of
Paniscola. Alfonso was prompted thus to trouble the peace of the church,
by the resentment which he felt against Martin, in consequence of that
pontiff’s refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of his pretensions
to the throne of Naples. On the death of Ladislaus, the crown of that
distracted realm was inherited by his sister, Johanna II.,[142] who soon
after her accession married Jacques, count of La Marche, a prince of
the royal blood of France. The ambition of Jacques, who, not contented
with administering the government in the name of his wife, wished to be
acknowledged as sovereign paramount of the kingdom, occasioned serious
disputes between him and Joanna, which terminated in his being obliged
to quit the territories of Naples, and flee to France. Soon after his
arrival in that country he renounced the pursuit of secular concerns,
and assumed the habit of the Franciscan order. In this conjuncture,
Louis III. of Anjou revived the claims of his house upon the throne of
Naples, and marched into Italy, at the head of a considerable army, with
the intention of prosecuting his rights by the sword.[143] Seeing the
necessity of opposing against this invader an adversary of distinguished
abilities, Joanna adopted as her son, Alfonso, king of Arragon, a prince
of great courage and military skill, by whose active exertions, Louis of
Anjou was soon driven from the Neapolitan territories. The adopted son of
Joanna being unfortunately influenced by the views of her late husband,
and wishing to rule by his own sole authority, that princess was justly
disgusted by his ingratitude, and in the year 1423, she annulled the act
of his adoption, substituting in his place his rival, the duke of Anjou.
This circumstance gave rise to an obstinate war between the two parties,
in the commencement of which Martin entered into an alliance with Louis,
and by bestowing on him the investiture of the kingdom of Naples,
supported his claims, in opposition to those of Alfonso. Prompted by
the spirit of revenge, the Arragonese monarch exerted all his influence
to raise a party against Martin in the council of Siena. The pontiff,
alarmed by the intrigues of Alfonso, hastily dissolved that assembly
early in the year 1424, summoning another to meet at the end of seven
years, in the city of Basil.[144]
But the dissolution of the council did not shelter Martin from the
consequences of Alfonso’s indignation. Braccio di Montone, taking
advantage of the embarrassments of the pontiff, again invaded the states
of the church; and after making himself master of several towns in the
ecclesiastical district, laid siege to Aquila. Alarmed by the loss of
these places, and apprehensive, that should Braccio make himself master
of Aquila, he would in fact keep Rome itself in a state of blockade, the
pontiff applied for succour to Joanna of Naples, and by the assistance
of that princess raised a considerable body of forces, which he sent
to stop the career of the invader. In this expedition the army of the
church was signally successful. Braccio quitting a most advantageous
position, advanced to give battle to the pontifical troops in the open
field, on the second day of June, 1424. The encounter of his cavalry
was fierce and impetuous; but in consequence of his rashness, his army
was defeated, and Braccio himself, being mortally wounded, was carried
prisoner into Aquila, where he died in the course of a few hours after
his arrival. His body was conveyed to Rome, and buried without the walls
in unconsecrated ground. By the death of Braccio, the pontiff recovered
Perugia, Assisi, and the other cities, which the successful rebellion of
that chieftain had compelled him to yield to his dominion. The states
of the church were now restored to tranquillity. The roads were cleared
of the banditti by which they had been so long infested—the traveller
journeyed without molestation or fear—the laws were respected, and peace
and order succeeded to anarchy and rapine.[145] The quiet of the church
was also further secured by the death of Benedict XIII., who in the
beginning of this year closed his earthly career at Paniscola, at the
advanced age of ninety.[146] In the summer of this year, the Pontiff
having retired to Tivoli to avoid the plague, which was raging in Rome,
Poggio went to Rieti, where he remained two months, entirely occupied
with literary pursuits. This appears from a letter addressed by him to
Niccolo Niccoli after his return to Rome, in which he laments the loss
of a brother on whom he had depended as the support of his family, and
especially of his mother, who was then labouring under the evils of old
age and sickness.[147]
About this time Martin had an opportunity of gratifying the animosity
which he entertained against the Florentines, by secretly fomenting
certain disputes which had taken place between the administrators of
their republic and the duke of Milan. Encouraged by the connivance of
the pontiff, that prince declared war against the Tuscan state, the
territories of which he menaced with a considerable army. In the course
of this contest, which was singularly obstinate and bloody, the pontiff
had the satisfaction of retaining in his own hands the balance of power;
and of beholding the supercilious Tuscans, humbled by disasters and
defeats, suing to him for assistance, and entreating his mediation for
the restoration of peace. Martin, though he professed the strictest
impartiality between the hostile parties, not only refused to assist
the Florentines, but still continued secretly to stimulate the ambition
of their adversary. Being thus disappointed in their application to the
pontiff, the Florentines had recourse to the Venetians, whose dread of
the growing power of the duke of Milan induced them readily to enter into
an alliance with his antagonists. Animated by this accession of strength,
the Florentines prosecuted the war with renewed vigour, and with such
success, that the duke was glad to accept of the mediation opportunely
proffered by his friend the pontiff, under whose auspices a peace was
concluded at Ferrara in the year 1428.[148]
When the pontiff had declared his readiness to interpose his good
offices between the contending powers, for the restoration of peace, the
Florentines sent Leonardo Aretino to the Roman court, invested with the
dignity of embassador of the Tuscan republic.[149] In the nomination of
their representative, they gratified the wishes of Martin V. who had long
entertained a great respect for Leonardo, and had in vain attempted,
by the offer of considerable preferment, to induce him to enter into
his service.[150] So highly did Leonardo’s constituents approve of his
conduct in his diplomatic capacity, that immediately after his return
to Florence, in the latter end of the year 1427, they appointed him to
fill the honourable and lucrative office of Secretary or Vice-chancellor
of the Florentine state. If credit may be given to his own assertion in
a letter to Feltrino Boiardo, he accepted this dignity with reluctance,
and lamented the imperious necessity, which compelled him, from a sense
of duty, to relinquish the pleasures of literary retirement, for the
cares incident to a public station.[151] His reluctance is, however,
otherwise accounted for in an epistle which Poggio wrote to him on this
occasion, and from which it appears, that when the office in question
was first offered to his acceptance, it was proposed that the marks of
dignity usually attached to it should be withdrawn; but that on his
refusal to accept it on those conditions, the administrators of the
government agreed to confer upon him the full honours which had been
received by preceding Vice-chancellors, to which terms he acceded. When
Poggio was informed that his friend was established in his new office,
he congratulated him by letter on this accession to his civic honours,
which, however, he observed, was, like matrimony, likely to be attended
with considerable difficulty, trouble, and uneasiness.[152]
The satisfaction which Martin V. experienced in witnessing the peaceful
and happy condition of that portion of Christendom, the civil interests
of which were intrusted to his immediate care, was not a little
lessened by the contumacy and rebellion of the Bohemian reformers.
These high-spirited men had been fired with indignation, when they
were informed of the sad catastrophe of their beloved apostles, John
Huss, and Jerome of Prague. The censures of the church, which were
fulminated against their opinions, they treated with contempt. Taking
advantage of the weakness of Winceslaus, their king, they possessed
themselves of several churches in Prague and its environs, where they
caused the communion to be administered in both kinds, and openly defied
the pope, the emperor, and the council of Constance. Upon the death of
Winceslaus, their confidence in their strength, and the ardour of their
zeal, impelled them to risk a contest with the power of Sigismund, his
successor. Led on by the intrepid Zisca, they encountered danger without
fear; and in the shock of battle, their impetuosity was irresistible.
For the space of four years, the military talents of their favourite
commander discomfited the armies of the emperor, who was at length
reduced to the mortifying necessity of entering into a treaty with a man,
whom he could regard in no other light than as an obstinate infidel,
and a rebellious subject. This treaty was interrupted by the death of
Zisca, who was cut off by the plague, on the sixth of October, 1424, at
the castle of Priscow. After the death of this formidable antagonist,
Sigismund, in hopes that the courage of the Bohemians would expire with
their chieftain, again appealed to arms. But he was disappointed in his
expectation. Great occasions produce great men. The heretics chose as
the successor to Zisca, Procopius, an officer whose valour and skill
they had frequently seen put to the proof. Procopius maintained the
contest with courage, conduct, and success, and worsted the imperial
forces in various engagements. The intelligence of these continued
disasters filled the mind of the pontiff with vexation. Resolving to
aid the emperor with the temporal and spiritual power of the church,
he proclaimed a crusade against the heretics, and sent a commission to
cardinal Beaufort, authorizing him, in quality of legate, to wield the
sword of the church, and chastise her rebellious sons. This commission
was by no means disagreeable to the turbulent spirit of Beaufort. In
pursuance of the instructions which he received from the pontiff, he
appropriated to the purposes of the crusade, a tenth part of the revenues
which accrued from England to the Roman see.[153] With this money he
raised an army of four thousand men, at the head of which he encamped
in the neighbourhood of Dover, waiting for a favourable wind to pass
over to Flanders. [A. D. 1429.] Here he received letters from the duke
of Gloucester, regent of the kingdom, requesting him to transport his
troops into France, and march to the assistance of the duke of Bedford,
who was at that time hard pressed by the Dauphin. In compliance with the
regent’s request, Beaufort repaired with his army to Paris, whence he
soon afterwards proceeded to Bohemia. The terrors of the crusade, thus
aided by the power of the cardinal legate, did not dismay the heretics,
who rushed to the combat with unabated fury, and routed the army of the
church. The pontiff, sensibly mortified by this disaster, and attributing
the ill success of his arms to the imprudence of Beaufort, recalled that
haughty prelate, substituting in his place Bartolomeo da Piacenza. The
new legate was not more fortunate than his predecessor. The orthodox army
still continued to experience a series of defeats. Hoping that a change
of his representative might effect a change in the fortune of his arms,
Martin superseded Bartolomeo da Piacenza, and committed the direction of
the war to Giuliano Cæsarino, Cardinal of St. Angelo.[154]
This was one of the last acts of the pontificate of Martin V., who
died on the 20th of February, 1431. Though this pontiff was unable to
accomplish the extinction of heresy, he had the good fortune to witness
the termination of the famous schism of the West. Benedict XII. dying at
Paniscola in the year 1424, two cardinals who had adhered to him in the
midst of his misfortunes, at the instance of Alfonso of Arragon elected
as his successor the Canonico Egidio of Barcelona, who, accepting the
empty title bestowed upon him by this diminutive conclave, assumed the
appellation of Clement VII. But soon after this transaction, Martin,
having composed his differences with Alfonso, sent a legate into Spain,
who easily persuaded Egidio, in consideration of the gift of the
bishopric of Majorca, to abdicate the vain honours which rendered him
ridiculous, and to renounce all claim to the pontifical dignity. In order
to prevent the cardinals who had placed the tiara on the head of Egidio
from again disturbing the peace of the church by proceeding to a new
election, the Italian legate caused them to be arrested and thrown into
prison.[155]
Thus were the latter days of Martin V. passed in a state of
tranquillity, which was disturbed only by the rumours of the distant war
in Bohemia, and by a transitory revolt of the citizens of Bologna, who,
after a feeble attempt to vindicate their freedom, were soon reduced to
their wonted subjection. The fear of the plague, indeed, which at this
period occasionally manifested itself at Rome, compelled the Pontiff to
fly for safety to the neighbouring villages. When on these hasty removals
his master required his attendance, Poggio devoted himself to a careful
examination of the remains of antiquity, which were to be found in the
places where the Papal court from time to time fixed its temporary
residence. But whenever he was enabled to return to Rome, he took
advantage of this period of domestic quiet to prosecute his studies.[156]
He was now deeply engaged in the composition and correction of various
works, and among the rest, of his dialogue on Avarice, which he submitted
to the inspection of Niccolo Niccoli and others of his literary friends,
in the year 1429. In the prefatory address to Francesco Barbaro, which
is prefixed to this dialogue, he intimates, that he had not yet made a
sufficient progress in the Greek language to be able to present to the
public what was at that time held in the highest estimation—a version of
any of the Græcian classics; but at the same time expresses his hopes,
that this his first essay may be deemed not altogether destitute of
merit. It should seem, however, that when he had given the last polish
to his work, he was induced for a while to suppress it. Martin V. was
impeached of the vice of avarice; and his secretary, whilst he did
ample justice to the kind feelings of his master, was doubtful how far
it would be prudent, by the publication of his dialogue, to run the risk
of the imputation of making his sole failing the object of satirical
comment.[157] Besides this, Niccolo Niccoli, in perusing the work in
question, without reserve declared his opinion that it was by no means
worthy of the known talents of the author.[158] Encouraged however by the
flattering encomiums of Francesco Barbaro, and others of his literary
friends, to whom he had communicated his manuscript, and emboldened by
the consciousness which he felt, that when compared with the productions
of the times, his dialogue was possessed of considerable merit, he
yielded to the suggestions of scholastic ambition; and immediately after
the death of Martin V. by its publication proclaimed himself a candidate
for the laurel of literary fame.[159]
In the introduction to the dialogue on Avarice, Poggio intimates that
Antonio Lusco, Cincio, and others of the pope’s secretaries, paying a
visit to Bartolomeo di Montepulciano, the conversation after supper
turned upon the character of Bernardino,[160] a famous preacher who was
at that time exercising his talents at Rome. After a very favourable
testimony to this preacher’s merits on the part of Lusco, Cincio
observes, “In one respect both Bernardino and other preachers of the same
description seem to me to fall into an error. They do not preach with a
view of doing good, but for the purpose of displaying their eloquence.
They are not so anxious to cure the mental diseases which they profess
to heal, as to obtain the favour and applause of the mob. They learn a
few phrases by heart, and utter them indiscriminately before audiences of
every description. Treating of recondite and obscure matters, they soar
beyond the comprehension of the vulgar, and tickle the ears of women and
fools, whom they dismiss as ignorant as they found them. Some vices they
reprove in such a manner that they seem rather to teach, than to correct
them, and in their thirst for gain, they forget the promotion of the
cause of religion.”
After various other observations have been made on the defects of the
preachers of that time, Bartolomeo remarks, that though luxury and
avarice are the most copious sources of vice, these failings are rarely
reprehended from the pulpit; or if at any time they happen to become the
subject of clerical animadversion, they are treated in a dry, jejune and
ludicrous manner, without dignity of thought or energy of expression.
He therefore proposes that the company then assembled should, in a
friendly conversation, enter into a discussion of the nature of these
vices. To this proposal Lusco assents, expressing, however, his opinion,
that it will be advisable for them to confine themselves to the subject
of Avarice. While they are arranging the order in which they are to
deliver their sentiments, they are joined by Andrew of Constantinople,
a man of great erudition, and the most respectable character. After the
interchange of the customary salutations, the new guest is informed of
the proposed subject of discourse, and Bartolomeo proceeds to utter an
eloquent invective against Avarice. This oration being ended, Lusco
replies in extenuation of that vice, and in the course of his harangue
reprobates the opposite error of luxury and extravagance. Lusco’s
speech displays considerable ingenuity. The most striking passages
which it contains are levelled against the professors of the civil law,
and against the mendicant friars, both which descriptions of men are
treated with great severity. Alluding to the latter, Lusco says, “Look
through the whole city—the market—the streets—the churches—and if you
can find any body who professes that he wishes for no more than a bare
sufficiency, depend upon it you have found a prodigious rarity. Do not
cite as instances in contradiction to my assertion, those slovenly
hypocritical vagabonds, who, under the pretext of religion, get their
living without labour, and make their pretended poverty and contempt of
worldly things a most copious source of gain. A well constituted state
will not encourage these lazy rogues, but it will prefer those citizens
who are willing to work for the benefit of the human race.”[161]
Andrew of Constantinople, in quality of moderator, replies to Lusco, and
points out the distinction which the latter had artfully confounded,
between a desire of the good things of life, and Avarice. This desire,
says he, if moderate, is virtuous; if immoderate, it degenerates into
covetousness, and becomes a vice. He then proceeds to answer the
arguments of Lusco in regular order. In the course of his harangue he
takes occasion to stigmatize the avaricious disposition of sovereign
princes, and of the clergy; and in conclusion he supports his opinion by
various quotations from the fathers and the ancient classic authors. The
remarks of Andrew meeting the approbation of his auditors, the conference
is closed.[162]
In the sentiments of disapprobation with which the good taste of Poggio
led him to regard the harangues of the popular preachers of his time, he
is supported by the weighty suffrage of Tiraboschi. “Some of the sacred
orators of the fifteenth century,” says that judicious critic, “are
mentioned with praise, not merely by vulgar and unpolished, but also by
the most cultivated writers.—On the other hand, we have an opportunity of
inspecting the discourses of these famed orators; and generally speaking,
we cannot see in them the shadow of that eloquence for which they are
so highly commended. Let any one read the sermons of S. Bernardino da
Siena, Fra Roberto da Lecce, B. Alberto da Sarteano, Fra Michele da
Carcano, and of many others, who, as the writers of that age inform us,
attracted whole cities and provinces to hear them: and then judge whether
they deserve the character of eloquent orations. They are generally
nothing more than dry treatises on scholastic points, or on matters of
theological morality, full of quotations of sacred and profane authors,
where we see coupled together St. Augustine and Virgil, Chrysostom and
Juvenal. The force of their eloquence consists in some exclamations, to
which is sometimes joined a description of the vices of the times, which
would now excite the most immoderate laughter, but which then caused the
audience to melt into tears.”[163]
The friars whom Poggio satirizes with such severity in his dialogue on
Avarice, were a branch of the order of Franciscans, who, on account
of the extraordinary strictness with which they professed to exercise
their conventual discipline, were distinguished by the title of _Fratres
Observantiæ_. The founder of this new subdivision of the ecclesiastical
order was the above-mentioned Bernardino, of Siena, who appears by
the testimony of Poggio to have been a man of great virtue and of
considerable talents. Several of his disciples, however, who were not
endued either with his good principles or his abilities, emulous of the
reputation which he had acquired by preaching, began also to harangue the
people from the pulpit.
Of these self-constituted instructors Poggio has drawn the following
striking picture. “Inflated by the pretended inspiration of the Holy
Spirit, they expound the sacred scriptures to the populace with such
gross ignorance, that nothing can exceed their folly. I have often gone
to hear them for the sake of amusement; for they were in the habit
of saying things, which would move to laughter the gravest and most
phlegmatic man on the face of the earth. You might see them throwing
themselves about as if they were ready to leap out of the pulpit;
now raising their voices to the highest pitch of fury—now sinking
into a conciliatory whisper—sometimes they beat the desk with their
hands—sometimes they laughed, and in the course of their babbling they
assumed as many forms as Proteus. Indeed they are more like monkeys than
preachers, and have no qualification for their profession, except an
unwearied pair of lungs.”[164]
Though the impudence of these men, which was equal to their folly,
disgusted people of good sense, they had numerous partizans and admirers
among the populace. Elated by their success, they arrogated to themselves
considerable consequence. Some of them, in the pride of their hearts,
scorned to hold inferior stations in the convents in which they were
established, and solicited the erection of new monasteries, of which
their ambition prompted them to expect to become the superiors.
Scandalized by these irregularities, the assertors of discipline summoned
an assembly of the brothers of the Franciscan order from every province
of Italy, for the purpose of remedying these evils, which were likely to
bring disgrace upon their fraternity. This assembly, which consisted of
eighty members, decreed, that a general chapter of their order should be
held on the ensuing feast of Pentecost—that in the interim, six only of
the friars should be allowed to preach—and that no new convent should
be erected for the accommodation of the Franciscans, till the pleasure
of the above-mentioned general chapter should be known. The task of
drawing up these decrees was assigned to Poggio—a task which it may be
presumed he undertook with pleasure, and executed with fidelity. The
mortified preachers and their partizans, imagining that Poggio was not
only the registrer, but the author of these unwelcome restrictions,
inveighed against his conduct with great bitterness. Soon after the
publication of the above-mentioned decree, Carlo Ricascolo, a devout
citizen of Florence, presented to the _Fratres Observantiæ_ a small
estate pleasantly situated in the neighbourhood of Arezzo. On this estate
the friars immediately began, in defiance of the prohibition so lately
issued by the heads of their order, to lay the foundation of a new
monastery. Poggio thought it his duty to represent this act of contumacy
to the pontiff, who immediately issued orders to the bishop of Fiesole
to put a stop to the prosecution of the building. This circumstance
still farther excited against Poggio the animosity of the indignant
ecclesiastics, who industriously vilified his character, representing
him as an enemy of the Christian faith, and a malignant persecutor of the
true believers. Niccolo Niccoli, with his usual impetuosity, gave credit
to these accusations, and wrote to Poggio a letter of remonstrance. To
this letter Poggio replied, first simply stating the facts of the case,
and then protesting that he was no enemy either to religion or its
professors—“on the contrary,” says he, “I make a point of behaving with
the utmost reverence to those ecclesiastics who adorn their religion with
virtuous conduct. But,” proceeded he, “I have been so often deceived, so
frequently disappointed in the good opinion which I had conceived of men,
that I know not whom or what to believe. There are so many wicked people,
who conceal their vices by the sanctity of their looks, and the humility
of their apparel, that confidence is in a manner destroyed. In the
pontifical court we have too many opportunities of becoming acquainted
with iniquitous transactions, of which people in general are ignorant. I
am not however surprised,” says he in the conclusion of his letter, “that
these friars should complain of their being prevented from establishing
themselves in such a pleasant district. The excellence of our wine is a
powerful allurement, both to strangers and to our own countrymen. Plato,
who was no Christian, chose for the scite of his academy an unhealthy
spot, in order that the mind might gain strength by the infirmity of
the body. But these pretended followers of Christ act upon a different
system. They select pleasant and voluptuous places—they seek not
solitude, but society—they do not wish to promote the cultivation of the
mind, but the pampering of the corporeal appetites.”
These sarcasms were communicated by Niccolo to Alberto da Sarteano,[165]
a brother of the Franciscan order, who was so much displeased by them,
that he expostulated with Poggio on the alleged impropriety of his
conduct, in a long letter, to which the latter replied in a grave strain
of irony, defending and confirming the remarks which had been so copious
a subject of animadversion. Towards the conclusion of his letter, he
bestowed upon his correspondent the following seasonable advice. “Do you
apply yourself to your preaching, and attend to your peculiar province.
Leave the building of religious houses to others, and be assured, that
wheresoever you are, there you may acceptably serve and worship God.”
This letter to Alberto, Poggio enclosed in another, which he addressed
to Ambrogio Traversari. To the learned monk of Camaldoli he could venture
to write, even upon this delicate subject, with all the freedom of
jocularity. “I cannot help thinking,” says he, “that the benevolence of
many persons is too great, who prefer the public good to their private
interest; and who, through their anxiety for the salvation of others,
lose their own souls. I could wish that these men would retire to woods
and deserts, where they might attain to the perfection of holy living,
rather than settle in such pleasant places, in which they run such risk
of falling into temptation. Your favourite St. Jerome says, that it is
better and safer to be in a situation where it is impossible to err, than
even to escape from imminent danger. I am afraid some people have too
much confidence in their own fortitude. But I have done.—Let every one
bear his own burden.—Farewell, and pray that your friend Poggio may amend
his ways.”[166]
The lenient influence of time did not abate the dislike and contempt
which Poggio entertained for those ecclesiastics who adopted the
religious habit as a convenient cloak for the concealment of indolence
or luxury; and who, by the mere appearance of extraordinary sanctity,
endeavoured to attain those worldly honours which they affected to
despise. When he was declined into the vale of years, he attacked those
pests of society in a dialogue on Hypocrisy, a composition which abounds
in the keen sarcasms of polished wit, and in acute observations on the
human character. It is no doubt on account of the boldness with which he
inveighs against the evil practices of pretenders to uncommon strictness
in the observance of religious duties, that the editors of his works have
suppressed this dialogue, which has been preserved and circulated by the
industrious zeal of protestantism.[167] The freedom with which he therein
speaks of the vices, not merely of individuals, but of whole classes of
religious hypocrites, is truly astonishing. The following remonstrance
against the folly and wickedness of the monastic life savours more of the
eighteenth, than of the fifteenth century, and is drawn up in the spirit
of a Gallic _œconomiste_, rather than in the style of a secretary to the
sovereign pontiff. “I do not wish to scrutinize into the secret life of
these cœnobites, which is known only to God. I will not inquire whether
they are sober or otherwise; whether they are chaste or unchaste; whether
they employ their time in study, or waste it in idleness; whether they
are the prey of envy; and whether they are continually hunting after
preferment. It is not sufficient that they keep within doors, oppressed
with a load of garments, and do no public and open mischief. Let me
ask, of what utility are they to the faith, and what advantage do they
confer on the public? I cannot find that they do any thing but sing like
grasshoppers, and I cannot help thinking they are too liberally paid for
the mere exercise of their lungs. But they extol their labours as a kind
of Herculean task, because they rise in the night to chant the praises
of God. This is no doubt an extraordinary proof of merit, that they sit
up to exercise themselves in psalmody. What would they say if they rose
to go to the plough, like farmers, exposed to the wind and rain, with
bare feet, and with their bodies thinly clad? In such a case no doubt the
Deity could not possibly requite them for their toil and sufferings. But
it may be said, there are many worthy men amongst them. I acknowledge it.
It would be a lamentable thing indeed, should there be no good men in so
vast a multitude. But the majority of them are idle, hypocritical, and
destitute of virtue. How many do you think enter upon the religious life
through a desire to amend their morals? You can recount very few who do
not assume the habit on account of some extraneous cause. They dedicate,
not their minds, but their bodies to devotional exercises. Many adopt
the monastic garb on account of the imbecility of their spirits, which
prevents them from exerting themselves to gain an honest livelihood.
Some, when they have spent their property in extravagance, enter into
religious houses, because they think that they shall there find a rich
pasture; others are induced to hide in these abodes the infamy which
they have contracted by their ignorance, and by their dissolute and
abandoned course of life.”
In the same dialogue Poggio recounts several instances of artful priests
abusing the confidence of auricular confession, for the indulgence of
their licentious appetites. He also mentions, with due reprobation, a set
of fanatical profligates, who propagating and acting upon the doctrine,
that those who were in a state of grace were made perfect, and could not
possibly commit sin, had lately debauched a considerable number of women
in the city of Venice.
In modern times, enthusiasts have the audacity, whilst they make a public
acknowledgment of gross violations of the duties of morality, to proclaim
their confidence, that their sins are forgiven, and to declare their
firm persuasion, that whatever may be the complexion of their future
conduct, they cannot forfeit the favour of the Almighty. Though it would
be unjust to charge these men with an imitation of the actions of the
sanctimonious Venetians, whose vile deeds are recorded by Poggio, certain
it is, that their principles, if carried into practice, would grant a
license even to these flagrant acts of wickedness. Thus, in the wide
circle of immorality, there is a point, where the extreme of enthusiasm
and the extreme of libertinism meet together. When reason is shaken from
her throne, the passions make even Religion herself the promoter and the
instrument of vice.
CHAP. V.
_Eugenius IV. raised to the pontificate—His persecution of the
Colonnas—He offends the duke of Milan—Ill success of the pontifical
army in Germany—Poggio foresees the disasters of the papal troops—His
consolatory letter to cardinal Julian—Julian’s answer—Poggio’s
reply—Angelotto, cardinal of St. Mark—Meeting and proceedings of the
council of Basil—Poggio attempts to persuade Julian to desert the
council—Violent proceedings of that assembly against the pontiff—The
ecclesiastical states invaded by Francesco Sforza and Niccolo
Fortebraccio—Poggio again attempts to gain Julian over to the interests
of the pontiff—Eugenius accedes to the wishes of the council—Insurrection
in Rome—Flight of Eugenius—Poggio taken captive, and obliged to ransom
himself by a sum of money—He repairs to Florence._
CHAP. V.
On the death of Martin V., Gabriello de’ Condolmieri, a Venetian, of an
ancient, though not of a noble family, was elevated to the pontifical
dignity. During his residence in his native country, Gabriello had not
obtained any high ecclesiastical honours: but being persuaded to repair
to Rome under the protection of a nephew of his countryman Gregory XII.,
he so skilfully insinuated himself into the good graces of that pontiff,
that by his favour he was promoted to the lucrative office of treasurer
of the holy see; and successively advanced to the episcopal throne of
Siena, and to the dignity of Cardinal of St. Clement. Having conducted
himself with singular spirit and steadiness in the execution of various
important commissions with which he was entrusted by Gregory XII. and
his successors, he daily increased his reputation; and on the vacancy
of the pontifical chair, occasioned by the demise of Martin V., he was
raised, by the vote of the conclave, to the summit of ecclesiastical
preferment. [March 3rd. A. D. 1431.] On this occasion, in compliance with
the established custom, he changed his name, and assumed the appellation
of Eugenius IV.[168]
During the course of the fifteenth century, the peace of most of the
cities of Italy was continually disturbed by the intrigues of rival
families, who disputed with each other the distribution of municipal
honours, and the possession of civic power. On the accession of Eugenius,
the contentions of the Colonnas and the Orsini, who had long presided at
the head of opposite factions, still gave rise to disorder and tumult
in Rome. The new pontiff had no sooner ascended the chair of St. Peter,
than the chiefs of the latter family directed his attention to the
great wealth which their competitors had amassed, in consequence of the
partiality which his predecessor had shewn towards his kinsmen, in the
distribution of the honours and emoluments which were at the disposal of
the head of the church. On an inquiry being made into the conduct of the
Colonnas, it was found that, not contented with the sum which they had
gained from the munificence of their uncle, they had taken possession
of the public treasure, which he had appropriated to the liquidation of
the expenses of an expedition against the Turks, and had also conveyed
away several jewels, and much furniture belonging to the pontifical
palace. Being therefore determined to take legal proceedings against the
principal offenders, Eugenius ordered Stefano Colonna, the general of
the church, to arrest Oddo Piccio, Vice-chamberlain of his predecessor,
but to treat him with civility. These orders were ill obeyed. The guards
sent on this duty sacked the house of Oddo, and ignominiously dragged him
through the streets as a common criminal. The pontiff having threatened
to call Stefano to account for this harsh conduct, the latter fled
from Rome, and joined the rest of his family in a rebellion against
Eugenius. Provoked by this contumacy, the pontiff proceeded with such
unsparing severity against those who had been elevated to places of
honour and profit, by the favour of his predecessor, that more than
two hundred persons employed by Martin V. in various offices, were,
upon being convicted of various offences, put to death by the hand of
the executioner. The sagacity of Poggio, who was a witness of these
cruel transactions, clearly foresaw the evil consequences which were
likely to result from them.[169] The distractions of civil tumult soon
demonstrated the justice of his apprehensions. The Colonnas, flying from
Rome, solicited the assistance of their powerful relatives and friends,
who resided in various parts of Italy. Having collected a sufficient
body of troops, they marched to Rome; and being admitted into the city
through the Appian gate by some of their partizans, they directed their
course to the Piazza Colonna, where they were met by the soldiers of the
pope. After a fierce encounter, the assailants were compelled to retire.
Being thus frustrated in their attempt to make themselves masters of
the city by open force, they endeavoured to accomplish their purpose
by treachery. The vigilance of Eugenius however rendered their designs
abortive. Having received intelligence that the archbishop of Benevento,
the son of Antonio Colonna, and Masio his brother, were meditating some
desperate enterprise, he caused them to be apprehended. Masio being put
to the torture, confessed that they had laid a plan to seize the castle
of St. Angelo, and to banish the pope and the Orsini from Rome. This
treasonable project the unfortunate youth expiated by his death. He
was beheaded in the Campo di Fiore, and his quarters were suspended to
public view in four of the most frequented streets of the city. Soon
after this event, the heart of Eugenius being mollified by a dangerous
sickness, he became weary of the violence and hazard of civil strife;
and by the medium of Angelotto Fosco, a citizen of Rome, he intimated
to the Colonnas, that he was disposed to agree to a pacification. The
terms of this pacification being settled, and solemnly proclaimed on the
twenty-second of September, [A. D. 1471.] Rome once more enjoyed the
blessing of domestic tranquillity.[170]
Thus did the merciless harshness of Eugenius, on his accession to the
chair of St. Peter, expose his capital to the miseries of civil discord.
At the same time he rashly ran the hazard of involving himself in a
war with Filippo Maria, the duke of Milan. After the conclusion of the
peace of Ferrara, that crafty prince, with a view of inducing his most
formidable antagonists to exhaust their strength, had encouraged the
Florentines to attack the territories of the republic of Lucca, which
had incurred the hatred of the Tuscans by the strenuous assistance which
it had afforded to the duke in the late war. But while he professed to
desert his former allies, Filippo secretly ordered the Genoese, over
whom he exercised an almost absolute authority, to march to the relief
of the city of Lucca, which the Florentines had reduced to extremity.
In obedience to his injunctions, the Genoese sent into the Lucchese
territories a considerable body of troops under the command of Piccinino,
who compelled the Tuscan general to raise the siege of the capital, and
entirely routed his army. When the Florentines were apprized of the
secret machinations of the duke of Milan, they renewed their alliance
with the Venetians: and on the other hand, the duke openly declaring
himself in favour of the republic of Lucca, strengthened himself by the
assistance of the Sienese. Such was the state of affairs in the western
districts of Italy, when Eugenius was called to ascend the pontifical
throne. This event was a subject of great joy to the Florentines, who
hoped that the partiality of the new pontiff to his countrymen, their
allies, would induce him to take decisive measures in their favour.
Nor were they disappointed. Soon after his accession, Eugenius sent a
legate to Siena, with instructions to endeavour to prevail upon the
administrators of that republic to desert from the cause of the duke of
Milan. At the same time he sent to the Tuscan army a reinforcement of
one thousand horse, which seasonable accession of strength enabled the
Florentines once more to commence the siege of Lucca.[171]
The duke of Milan did not deem it expedient instantly to resent the
proceedings of the pontiff: but the edge of his anger was not blunted by
time, and when a convenient opportunity presented itself, he convinced
Eugenius to his cost, that it is the height of folly gratuitously to
interfere in the disputes of belligerent states.
The pontificate of Eugenius did not commence with happier omens in the
distant provinces of Christendom. He had confirmed the commission of his
predecessor, which authorised Julian, cardinal of St. Angelo, to exercise
in Germany the office of legate of the holy see; and in pursuance of
this commission, the cardinal had laboured with unremitting activity for
the extinction of heresy. The Bohemian reformers, however, ridiculed his
pastoral admonitions, and despised his menaces. During his residence
in Constance, Poggio had witnessed in the case of two individuals, the
intrepidity with which the human mind is inspired by the operation of
religious zeal; and he seems to have wisely calculated the efforts which
this powerful stimulus was likely to produce, by diffusing its increasing
energy through the breasts of an enthusiastic multitude. On this
account, when he was informed of the important enterprise which had been
undertaken by his friend the cardinal, though he applauded the alacrity
which he manifested in the discharge of his duty to his spiritual
sovereign, he advised him maturely to consider, not the degree of courage
with which he was endowed, but the number of troops which he could bring
into the field; and bade him beware, lest in attempting to subdue the
heretics, he should take a wolf by the ears.[172] The event justified
the fears of Poggio. A vigorous invasion of Bohemia was meditated by
Frederic, marquis of Brandenburg, who had been appointed to the chief
command of the ecclesiastical forces;[173] but as the success of his plan
in a great measure depended on the co-operation of several independent
powers, it experienced the usual fate of enterprizes conducted on that
most hazardous principle. It had been concerted, that whilst the marquis
of Brandenburg made an irruption into the Bohemian territory by the route
of Thopa, Albert duke of Austria should make a diversion on the side of
Moravia. But as some of the confederates had not prepared their forces in
due time, the commander in chief was obliged to defer the opening of the
campaign beyond the appointed period. In the mean time Albert advanced
into Bohemia; but finding himself unsupported by his allies, he thought
it prudent to retire. The duke of Austria had no sooner withdrawn his
forces, than the cardinal, who had at length raised an army, consisting
of forty thousand cavalry, and nearly an equal number of infantry,[174]
appeared on the frontiers of Bohemia, where he took and destroyed
several towns which had been garrisoned by the reformers. The Bohemians
were not, however, discouraged by the number of their foes, but boldly
advanced with a determination to give them battle. The papal forces did
not await the encounter of these formidable antagonists. When they were
apprized of the approach of the enemy, they were seized with a sudden
panic, and in spite of the remonstrances of their general, they fled in
the utmost disorder.[175] Mortified by this defeat, and despairing of
being able to subdue the heretics by means of the forces at present under
his command, the legate determined to apply for assistance in the task
of the extirpation of the impugners of the true faith to the general
council, which, in pursuance of the summons of the late pontiff Martin
V., was soon to be held in the city of Basil.[176]
When Poggio received the intelligence of the discomfiture of the papal
army, he thus addressed the Cardinal legate, in a consolatory epistle.—“I
am truly sorry, my good father, for the ridiculous and disgraceful issue
of this German expedition, which you have planned and prepared with so
much pains and labour. It is astonishing that your troops should have
been so completely destitute of courage, as to fly like hares, terrified
by an empty breeze of wind, even before the enemy was in sight. My grief
is however alleviated by the following consideration, that I not only
foresaw this event, but foretold it when I last had the pleasure of
conversing with you. On that occasion I remember you treated my opinion
lightly, and said, that as prophets of evil were generally justified
by the common course of human things, I prophesied on the safe side
when I foreboded disasters. I did not however hazard a random guess at
the issue of the proposed expedition; but formed a rational conjecture
on the subject, by comparing past with present circumstances, and by
reflecting upon the necessary relation of cause and effect. Impressed by
these ideas, I thought I clearly foresaw an approaching tempest: and the
occurrences of every succeeding day tend to confirm me in my opinion.
There formerly existed Christian kings and princes, by whose assistance
the church defended herself against her enemies; and tempest-tossed as
she has frequently been, she has hitherto always found some haven in
which she could shelter herself from the fury of the storm. But whither
can she now flee without incurring the danger of suffering shipwreck?
A common insanity has persuaded almost all men to rejoice in our
calamities, and to pray for our destruction. Let us however hope for
the best, and patiently bear the worst. For my own part I make it my
study, in all circumstances to be resigned to the will of Providence,
and to become so independent of externals, as not to be distressed by
the capriciousness of fortune. In my present situation, indeed, I am
not very obnoxious to the malice of that goddess, whose wrath, like the
thunderbolt, is directed against the high and the lofty. But whatever
may be her pleasure, it is certainly the truest wisdom not to suffer our
minds to be shaken by her impulse, and not to be too deeply affected in
our private capacity by the distresses of the public. Let us however
entreat the Deity not to put our wisdom to these serious proofs; for we
know not whether we should be able to practise the piety and philosophy
which we recommend. I hear that you have convoked a council, which is
already well attended. I commend your prudence—you did well, on the ill
success of your arms, to have recourse to an assembly of priests, on whom
we cannot but have great reliance, on account of the uprightness of their
lives, and their zeal to extinguish the pest of heresy.
“The Germans were formerly a warlike people.—They are now strenuous only
in their eating and drinking, and they are mighty in proportion to the
wine which they can swallow. When their casks are empty, their courage
must needs be exhausted. On this account I am inclined to think, that
they so shamefully deserted their posts, not through fear of the enemy,
whom it seems they never saw, but because provisions were scarce in
those quarters. You were of opinion, that sobriety constituted a part
of the soldier’s duty. But if this expedition is to be again attempted,
I trust you will change your system, and allow that wine constitutes
the sinews of war. The ancients inform us, that Ennius never undertook
to celebrate warlike achievements till he was mellow; and it must be
acknowledged that, inasmuch as it is a more serious task to fight a
battle than to describe it, flowing cups are absolutely requisite to
enable a man to handle arms, and encounter the dangers of the field. I
am afraid you have fallen into the error of judging of others by your
own dispositions. Beware of repeating this error in the matter of the
council, and remember what I said to you before your departure from
Italy—take care to feed them well—But enough of this levity. We enjoy
the blessing of peace; but the pontifical court is poor, and shorn of
its splendour. This is occasioned by the war in Germany, and by the
sickness of his holiness, which has lasted much longer, and has been much
more severe, than could have been wished. I have written to Angelotto,
cardinal of St. Mark, a letter which I wish you also to read. I therefore
send you a copy of it, not because I flatter myself that there is any
excellence in its style, but because I trust its perusal may divert your
thoughts from the anxious affair of the council.”[177]
A mind irritated by disappointment and disgrace is but ill prepared
to bear with patience the lashes of satiric wit. The cardinal of St.
Angelo was by no means pleased with the jocular style of Poggio’s letter;
and though he affected to answer it in a similar strain of levity, he
appears to have written with the ill grace which generally betrays the
attempt to conceal resentment under the veil of good humour; and in the
course of his epistle, his vexation burst forth in an angry reproof of
the irregular life of his correspondent. Unfortunately the morals of
Poggio were not entirely free from reproach.—Whilst the uncertainty of
his future destination had prevented him from entering into the married
state, his passions had gained the mastery over his principles, and
he had become the father of a spurious offspring. Reminding him of
this circumstance, “you have children,” said the cardinal, “which is
inconsistent with the obligations of an ecclesiastic; and by a mistress,
which is discreditable to the character of a layman.” To these reproaches
Poggio replied in a letter replete with the keenest sarcasm. He pleaded
guilty to the charge which had been exhibited against him, and candidly
confessed, that he had deviated from the paths of virtue. “I might
answer to your accusation,” said he, “that I have children, which is
expedient for the laity; and by a mistress, in conformity to the custom
of the clergy from the foundation of the world. But I will not defend
my errors—you know that I have violated the laws of morality, and I
acknowledge that I have done amiss.” Endeavouring however to palliate
his offence—“do we not,” says he, “every day, and in all countries,
meet with priests, monks, abbots, bishops, and dignitaries of a still
higher order, who have families of children by married women, widows,
and even by virgins consecrated to the service of God? These despisers
of worldly things, as they style themselves, who travel from place to
place, clothed in coarse and vile raiment, with downcast looks, calling
on the name of Jesus, follow the precept of the apostle, and seek after
that which is not their own, to use it as their own, and scorn to hide
their talent in a napkin. I have often laughed at the bold, or rather
impudent profession of a certain Italian abbot, who waited on Martin V.,
accompanied by his son, who was grown up to man’s estate. This audacious
ecclesiastic, being interrogated on the subject, freely and openly
declared, to the great amusement of the pope, and the whole pontifical
court, that he had four other sons able to bear arms, who were all at his
holiness’s service.” After noticing other scandalous enormities, which
brought disgrace upon the character of some ecclesiastics of those times,
Poggio thus concluded—“As to your advice on the subject of my future
plans of life, I am determined not to assume the sacerdotal office; for I
have seen many men whom I have regarded as persons of good character and
liberal dispositions, degenerate into avarice, sloth, and dissipation, in
consequence of their introduction into the priesthood.—Fearing lest this
should be the case with myself, I have resolved to spend the remaining
term of my pilgrimage as a layman; for I have too frequently observed,
that your brethren, at the time of their tonsure, not only part with
their hair, but also with their conscience and their virtue.”[178]
Angelotto, cardinal of St. Mark, whom Poggio mentions at the conclusion
of his consolatory epistle to the cardinal of St. Angelo, was by birth
a Roman, and was promoted by Eugenius, from the bishopric of Cavi, to a
seat in the sacred college, on the nineteenth of September, 1431.[179]
On this addition to his honours, Poggio addressed to him a letter, in
which he exercised the privilege of friendship, in administering to him
much wholesome and seasonable advice. He introduced his admonitions by
observing, that it was customary for the friends of those who had been
exalted to any new dignity, to express their congratulations by the
transmission of magnificent presents; but that being prevented by his
poverty from giving such indications of the satisfaction with which he
had received the intelligence of Angelotto’s promotion, he was determined
to bestow upon him a gift, which he was assured he would value at its
just rate—the gift of friendly council. By a variety of instances,
recorded in the pages of history, he shewed, that he who in compliance
with the dictates of duty gives good advice to the great and powerful,
runs considerable risk of drawing down upon himself the indignation of
those whose welfare he wishes to promote by the free communication of his
opinions. In candidly imparting his sentiments to Angelotto, however, a
man of considerable learning, who had himself been accustomed to indulge
in the most unlimited freedom of speech, he declared that he did not
apprehend that he incurred the least danger of giving offence. He then
proceeded to exhort the newly created cardinal to continue to cultivate,
in his present high station, those virtues which he had exhibited in
the inferior degrees of ecclesiastical preferment; and to act up to
the professions which he had been accustomed to make before the period
of his exaltation. He reminded him of the dangerous temptations which
surround eminence of rank, and assured him, that so far from withdrawing
any restraints to which he had formerly been obliged to submit, his
present promotion imposed upon him additional obligations to be prudent
and circumspect in his conduct; since the splendour of eminence makes
the failings and vices of the great the more conspicuous. Warning his
correspondent against the debasing influence of flattery, he thus
apologized for the boldness with which he offered his advice. “Those who
are not acquainted with me, will perhaps condemn the freedom with which I
inculcate these heads of admonition on one who is more fully instructed
than myself on such topics. But I am induced by my affection for you to
recall to your memory these points of duty, in the discharge of which,
even the well informed have been sometimes known to fail.”
If credit may be given to the opinion of Angelotto’s contemporaries,
Poggio’s attempt to inculcate upon him the lessons of wisdom, was by no
means a superfluous task. In such small estimation was his understanding
held, that on the day of his election to the dignity of cardinal, a
Roman priest of the name of Lorenzo went through the streets of the
city, shewing indications of the most extravagant joy; and being asked
by his neighbours what was the cause of his exultation, he replied, “I
am truly fortunate—Angelotto is created cardinal; and since I find fools
and madmen are promoted to that dignity, I have great hopes of wearing
the red hat myself.”[180] On the same occasion, as the officers of the
pontifical household were conversing about the transactions of the day,
one Niccolo of Anagni, a man of great literary accomplishments, but of
an irregular life, and of a very satirical disposition, complained of
his own ill fortune.—“No person living,” said he, “is more unlucky than
myself; for though this is the reign of folly, and every madman, nay even
Angelotto, gains considerable promotion, I alone am passed over without
notice.”[181] The friendship which Poggio professed to entertain for
the newly created dignitary did not prevent him from indulging at his
expense, his propensity to sarcastic wit. A new cardinal is not permitted
to take any part in the debates of the consistory till he has obtained
the pontiff’s permission to speak, which is granted by the performance
of a short ceremony, entitled the opening of his mouth. Poggio one day
meeting the cardinal of St. Marcellus in the pontifical palace, asked him
what had been done that morning in the sacred college. “We have opened
Angelotto’s mouth,” said the cardinal. “Indeed,” replied Poggio, “you
would have acted more wisely if you had fixed a padlock upon it.”[182]
These anecdotes, which are selected from Poggio’s _Facetiæ_, sufficiently
prove, that the unfortunate cardinal of St. Mark was a fruitful subject
of ridicule to the officers of the Roman court. From the same source of
information it appears, that his churlish moroseness on the following
occasion subjected him to the shame of being put to confusion by the
petulant wit of a child. Some of his friends having introduced to him a
boy of ten years of age, who was remarkable for the brilliancy of his
talents, he asked him a variety of questions, in his answers to which the
boy displayed astonishing knowledge and sagacity. On which Angelotto,
turning to the by-standers, said, “They who manifest such quickness of
parts at this early age, generally decrease in intellect as they increase
in years, and become fools when they have attained to maturity.” Hurt by
the unfeeling rudeness of this remark, the stripling immediately replied,
“If this be the case, most reverend father, you must have been a very
forward youth.”[183]
In congratulating a man of Angelotto’s character on his accession to
high ecclesiastical honours, Poggio may be suspected of practising the
duplicity of a courtier. But it may be alleged in his defence, that
his letter breathes the spirit of freedom; and that though he takes
occasion in general terms to commend the talents and virtues of the new
cardinal, his commendations are so sparingly interspersed in the midst of
a variety of salutary hints of advice, that they are evidently introduced
for no other purpose than to render his admonitions more palatable, and
consequently more useful. We have too much reason to believe that these
admonitions were like good seed sown in an unproductive soil; and that
the conduct of Angelotto, subsequent to his elevation to a seat in the
consistory, reflected disgrace on himself, and on the authors of his
promotion.[184]
In summoning the general council, cardinal Julian had acted in conformity
to the powers which had been conferred on him by the late, and confirmed
by the present pontiff;[185] but Eugenius, though he did not think it
advisable openly to oppose this measure, looked forward to the convening
of this assembly with no small degree of apprehension. The popes had
always regarded general councils with the jealousy which monarchs of
arbitrary principles uniformly entertain of those constitutional bodies,
which, under various denominations, have occasionally attempted to curb
the pride of despotic authority. In the deposition of John XXII. the
council of Constance had established a most dangerous precedent; and when
Eugenius reflected upon the power and activity of his enemies, he dreaded
the consequences which might result from the assembling of a deliberative
body, which claimed a superiority over the head of the church. The
cardinal of St. Angelo, however, either was not acquainted with the views
of the pontiff, or thought it his duty not to sacrifice the interests
of the Christian community to the timidity or ambition of its spiritual
sovereign. In compliance with his injunctions, John de Polmar, auditor
of the sacred palace, and John de Ragusio, doctor in theology of the
university of Paris, repaired to Basil on the nineteenth of July, 1431,
and opened the council in the chapter house of the cathedral church.[186]
On the fourteenth of December the first session was held, at which the
cardinal of St. Angelo presided in person, and delivered to the assembled
ecclesiastics an exhortation to labour diligently, and to watch with
vigilance for the welfare of the Christian religion. Then were read the
decree of the council of Constance, touching the summoning of general
councils; the instrument by which the city of Basil was appointed as a
proper place for the holding of such an assembly, and various other
documents, which establish the legitimacy of the present synod. It was
then publicly declared, that the attention of the council would be
directed to three points—the extirpation of heresy—the prevention of wars
amongst Christians—and the reformation of the church.[187]
After the publication of a bull, which thundered an anathema against all
those who should impede any one in his passage to or from the city of
Basil, on the business of the council, and the recital and adoption of
several rules for the regulation of the proceedings of that assembly, the
first session was closed.[188]
When Eugenius found that he could not prevent the convocation of the
dreaded synod, he began to deliberate upon the best method of preventing
those encroachments upon the pontifical prerogatives, which he had so
much reason to apprehend from its decrees. Upon mature consideration, he
did not think it prudent to risk so bold a step as the dissolution of
the council: but he flattered himself, that by removing it to some city
under his own dominion, he would be enabled to control its proceedings,
and to avert the threatened danger. He therefore issued a bull, whereby
he commanded the cardinal of St. Angelo to transfer the council from
Basil to Bologna.[189] On the receipt of this bull, the cardinal wrote to
Eugenius a long and elaborate letter, in which he endeavoured to persuade
him by every argument which was likely to influence his judgment, and by
every appeal to the principles of virtue which was calculated to make an
impression on his heart, to withdraw his opposition to the proceedings
of the council, and to assist with zeal in its efforts to promote the
welfare of the Christian community.[190] The members of that assembly,
also, sent deputies to his holiness, with instructions to implore and
require him to retract the aforesaid bull, and by his assistance and
advice to support the council in the good work which it had begun. The
assembled fathers did not, however, entirely rely upon the persuasive
eloquence of their embassadors. Confiding in the protection of the
emperor Sigismund, in the second session, which was held on the fifteenth
of April, 1432, they took very decisive measures for the establishment
of their authority. With this view they recited and confirmed a decree
of the council of Constance, wherein it was asserted, that every Synod,
lawfully assembled in the Holy Spirit, constituting a general council,
and representing the church militant, derives its authority immediately
from Christ, to which authority all persons, of what state or dignity
soever, not excepting the pope, are bound to pay obedience in matters
pertaining to the faith, the extirpation of schism, and the general
reformation of the church in its head and members. They also issued
a declaration, that the council then assembled could not legally be
dissolved, prorogued, or transferred to any other place, by any power, no
not even by the pontifical authority, without the consent of its members.
The deputies who had been sent to Eugenius returning without having
effected the object of their mission, the council, by a public decree,
dated April the twenty-ninth, 1432, supplicated, required, and admonished
the pontiff to revoke the bull of dissolution with the same formality
with which it had been published. By the same decree, Eugenius was
summoned to appear in the council in the space of three months, either
in person or by deputies furnished with full powers to act in his name.
He was also duly forewarned, that should he refuse to comply with these
requisitions, the council would, according to the dictates of justice,
and the Holy Spirit, provide for the necessities of the church, and
proceed according to the precepts of divine and human laws.[191] After
these acts of open hostility, prudence dictated to the members of the
council the necessity of abridging the influence and authority of their
adversary as much as possible; and for this purpose, in their fourth
session, which was held on the twentieth of June, [A. D. 1432.] they
decreed, that in case of a vacancy of the holy see, the successor to
Eugenius should be elected in the place where the council should happen
to be sitting; and that during the existence of that assembly, the pope
should be prohibited from creating new cardinals.
The council proceeded to still more daring extremities. On Sunday,
September 6th, after the solemnization of the mass, two procurators
of that assembly presented a petition, which set forth, that whereas
Eugenius, having been regularly summoned to revoke the bull which he had
issued, ordaining the dissolution of the council, and also to appear
in person in the said council, within the space of three months, had
neglected to obey the said summons, and had on the contrary persisted
in his endeavours to put a stop to the proceedings of the legal
representatives of the Christian church, they demanded that the said
Eugenius should be declared contumacious; and that further proceedings
should be had according to law. This petition having been read, the
bishop of Constance, who on that day presided in the assembly, commanded
the bishops of Perigord and Ratisbon, to make inquisition whether the
pope, or any one duly authorised on his behalf were present in the
council. These prelates accordingly made the requisite proclamation
thrice from the steps of the altar, and as many times at the gates of
the church. No one appearing to answer to this summons, a representation
of this fact was made to the president; after which the archbishops of
Tarento and Colossi, and the bishop of Magdalon, and Antonio di Santo
Vito, auditor of the sacred palace, entered the assembly in quality of
deputies of the pope. On inquiry, however, it was found, that they were
not provided with the plenary powers demanded by the decrees of the
council, in consequence of which a protestation was made against their
acts. Being, however, permitted to speak, they exhorted the assembled
dignitaries, as they wished for the good of the church, to drop these
harsh proceedings against the common father of the faithful. After some
deliberation, the president replied in the name of the council, that the
members of that august body would deliberate upon the matters which had
on that day been proposed to their consideration; and that they would
endeavour to act in such a manner as to obtain the concurrence of the
whole Christian world. After thanking the president for this gracious
answer, the deputies of Eugenius withdrew.[192] On the eighteenth of
December the council was pleased to enlarge the term prescribed for the
submission of Eugenius for the space of sixty days; and at the same time
prohibited all ecclesiastics or others from attempting to establish at
Bologna, or elsewhere, any synod in opposition to the council then
sitting at Basil.[193] At the expiration of the above-mentioned term
of sixty days, the procurators of the council, on the nineteenth of
February, 1433, again demanded sentence against the contumacious pontiff,
and were again informed by the president, that this important affair
would be the subject of the future deliberations of the assembly.[194]
The result of these deliberations was, that the council, out of its great
clemency, indulged Eugenius with the still further space of sixty days,
at the same time declaring, that should he not within that time fully
and unreservedly acknowledge and submit to its authority, he should
stand convicted of notorious contumacy, and should be suspended from the
administration of all pontifical functions, both in spirituals and in
temporals.[195]
It may easily be imagined, that these violent proceedings of the council
excited no small degree of uneasiness in the mind of Eugenius. The
pride of the pontiff was wounded by the decree, which pronounced the
subordination of the papal dignity to the mandate of a collective body,
the individual members of which were accustomed to prostrate themselves
before the chair of St. Peter, with the homage of unreserved submission.
His resentment was roused by the denunciation of the punishment which
awaited his refusal to concur in his own humiliation; and when he
considered the popularity which the council had acquired, in consequence
of the general persuasion of the Christian world, that its deliberations
would tend to the benefit of the church, his breast was agitated by a
sense of the danger which he incurred in counteracting its operations.
Poggio entered with dutiful zeal into the feelings of his patron, and
resolved to attempt, by friendly admonition and remonstrance, to persuade
the cardinal of St. Angelo to withdraw his countenance and support from
the rebellious ecclesiastics of Basil. With this view he addressed to him
an elaborate letter, in which he entreated him to consider, that though
in summoning the council he was actuated by the most upright intentions,
and by a sincere desire to promote the good of the church, yet he was in
duty bound to believe, that the pope was influenced by the same motives
in the formation of his opinion, that such an assembly was inexpedient
and dangerous. He reminded him, that he was by no means authorized to set
up his private sentiments in opposition to the decision of the head of
the church. He further observed, that they who began the reformation so
loudly demanded, by manifesting their contempt of the pontifical dignity,
were the most dangerous partizans and promoters of heresy. He then
proceeded solemnly to forewarn his friend, that if he persisted in his
determination, he would forfeit his peace of mind for ever; for he would
have the mortification of seeing the plans which he had meditated for
the benefit of the church converted into the means of her destruction.
After assuring him that the council was likely to become subservient to
the ambition of one sovereign prince, and to the hatred which another
had conceived against Eugenius, who was already doomed to deposition—he
thus proceeded—“You will perhaps say, I know nothing of the intentions of
others; but as to myself, I am conscious that I am prompted by zeal for
the promotion of the general good; and whatever may be the consequences
of the measures which I adopt, the rectitude of my intentions will secure
me from blame. But take care, my good friend, lest you be led astray. I
know that your intentions are excellent: but I also know that you cannot
answer for the integrity of your associates. Affairs may issue in a
manner directly contrary to your expectations. It is a most difficult
task to curb resentment, hatred, and avarice; and it is very certain that
men are corrupted by being freed from salutary restraints. When you take
into consideration the different views by which mankind are actuated, the
hopes of the public benefit which you expect to derive from this council
should not render you insensible of the danger with which it is attended.
You ought therefore to dread incurring a weight of responsibility by
obstinately persevering in your own opinion. In explaining to the
pontiff the reasons which convince you of the expediency of summoning
a council, you have acted as becomes a virtuous and prudent man. His
holiness is, however, of opinion, that the present is not a proper time
for the holding of such an assembly.—Do you think it right to maintain
your sentiments by arms and violence? Plato says that we ought not bear
arms against our native country or our parents—And who is more truly our
parent than the earthly representative of our Father in Heaven; and what
country is more dear to us than the church in which we are saved? You
and the pontiff are aiming at the same end, but by different means—Which
of you ought to give way to the other? Consider, I entreat you, the
dispositions and views of those who countenance this assembly, and you
will be convinced that they entertain the most pernicious designs. If you
do not recede, you will inflict upon the church a wound, which, however
you may wish, you will be unable to heal.”[196]
The doctrine of passive obedience may be seriously maintained by those
who bask in the sunshine of princely favour, and by those who are pleased
or satisfied with the conduct of the powers that be; for men feel no
disposition to resist measures which operate to their own advantage, or
which they themselves approve. But when they are required to do that
which is subversive of their interests, or repugnant to their feelings,
they generally find reasons, to themselves at least satisfactory, for
opposing the dictates even of long established authority. So it was
with the cardinal of St. Angelo. Dazzled by the splendours which beamed
around the presidential throne, he could not see the cogency of the
reasons which urged him to forego his newly acquired honours; and the
arguments of Poggio had no influence upon his conduct. On the contrary,
he deemed it strictly compatible with his duty to the common father
of the faithful still to preside in the rebellious synod, which on the
eleventh day of September again met in solemn assembly. [A. D. 1433.] In
this session, the procurators of the council, after representing, that
notwithstanding the lenity which had been exercised towards Eugenius, in
deferring the process which his obstinacy justly merited, the pontiff
still refused to submit to the ordinances of the august representatives
of the Christian church, demanded, that without any delay, he should be
put upon his trial, as being impeached of contumacious opposition to
the exercise of legitimate authority. To this demand the archbishop of
Spoleto and the bishop of Cervi, in the name of Eugenius, made certain
frivolous objections, which were immediately over-ruled. The pontifical
deputies were then informed by the president, that if they were prepared
to announce the determination of their master to comply with the
requisitions of the assembly in whose presence they stood, this welcome
intelligence would be received with the utmost joy—but that if they were
not authorised so to do, they might rest assured, that the members of the
council would prefer death to the adoption of any measures which were
likely to endanger the church of Christ. The envoys of Eugenius not being
authorised to make the required concessions, withdrew from the assembly,
and it was expected that a legal process would have been instantly
commenced against their refractory constituent.
In this crisis Eugenius was sheltered from the threatened storm by the
friendship of the emperor Sigismund. Towards the latter end of the year
1431, that monarch had come into Italy with the intention of receiving
the imperial crown from the hands of the pope.[197] Eugenius, however,
taking umbrage at his intimate connexion with the duke of Milan, whom
he regarded as a secret enemy to himself, and the avowed foe of his
country, refused to permit him to visit Rome.[198] The emperor being thus
frustrated in the attainment of the object of his journey across the
Alps, quitted Milan, and after visiting Piacenza, Parma, and Lucca, at
length went to Siena, where he fixed his abode for the space of several
months. During his residence in this city he carried on a negociation
with the pontiff, in the course of which he found means to calm the
jealous apprehensions of Eugenius, who at length consented to admit the
imperial petitioner into his capital. Sigismund accordingly made his
triumphant entry into Rome, where he was received on the twenty-first of
May, 1433, by the acclamations of the populace; and on the thirty-first
of the same month he was crowned with all due solemnity in the church
of the Vatican.[199] The festivity which occurred on this occasion
was increased by the joy diffused throughout Italy, on account of the
termination of the war between the duke of Milan and the Florentines,
who had been induced, by the mediation of the marquis of Este, to sign
a treaty of peace at Ferrara about three weeks before Sigismund’s
arrival in Rome.[200] During the emperor’s residence in that city, he
experienced from Eugenius the respectful hospitality which was due to
his exalted rank and the excellence of his character.[201] In return
for the kindness of the pontiff, he determined to promote his interests
by moderating the violence of the council. He accordingly sent by his
ambassadors a letter to that assembly, in which, after recounting the
good services which he had rendered to the council of Constance, which,
he observed, bore sufficient testimony of the zeal which he felt for
the good of the church, he requested that the term appointed for the
probation of Eugenius might be further prolonged for the space of thirty
days. With this request the council immediately complied, and issued a
decree accordingly.[202] Soon after the promulgation of this decree, the
emperor arrived in Basil, and his influence was speedily visible, in the
additional lenity shewn to the pontiff, by the prorogation of further
proceedings against him for the space of ninety days, from the sixth of
November, 1433, on which day Sigismund assisted in person at the sitting
of the council, adorned with all the insignia of imperial authority.
Whilst Sigismund was thus exerting his influence to avert from
Eugenius the evil consequences of his stern refusal to concur in
any act derogatory to the prerogatives of the sovereign pontificate,
the proceedings of the council afforded the enemies of the pontiff a
pretext to gratify their ambition and revenge, by the invasion of his
territories. It has been before observed, that in the course of the late
war which the duke of Milan had waged with various success against the
Florentines, that prince had been greatly irritated by the support given
to his adversaries by the pontiff, on whom he determined to signalize
his vengeance whenever a convenient opportunity should present itself.
When, therefore, the council of Basil had decreed, that the refusal of
the pontiff to concur in its measures should render him liable to the
penalty of suspension from all pontifical functions whatsoever, the duke
aided and abetted Francesco Sforza, who, under pretence of enforcing the
decrees of the council, made an irruption into the states of the church,
and took possession of Jesi, Monte d’Olmo, Osimo, Ascoli, and Ancona.
At the same time, the very centre of the ecclesiastical territories was
invested by three noted Condottieri, Taliano, Furlano, Antonello da
Siena, and Jacopo da Lunato, who, also professing to act on behalf of
the council, invaded the duchy of Spoleto. Nor did the difficulties of
Eugenius end here; for he now found by sad experience, that he who in the
hour of prosperity injures a benefactor, may in the season of adversity
find that benefactor in the number of his most implacable enemies. His
territories were harrassed by the able warrior Niccolò Fortebraccio,
who had formerly commanded the pontifical troops with great courage and
fidelity, and had reduced under the ecclesiastical dominion the towns
of Vetralla and Civita Vecchia; but when he demanded the recompense to
which he justly imagined himself entitled, had indignantly received for
answer, that the booty which he had taken in the expedition in which he
had been engaged was an ample remuneration for his services. Poggio,
who regarded his native country with that proud partiality which has
always been a striking feature in the character of the Italians, was
greatly chagrined when he saw the dominions of the pontiff laid waste by
a war, the flames of which were kindled by a convention of Germans. His
attachment to his master also filled him with the deepest concern, when
he beheld the difficulties and dangers to which Eugenius was exposed by
the incursions of his enemies. His sense of the pontiff’s misfortunes was
the more acute, as he was well aware, that the comforts and emoluments
of the officers of the pontifical household were liable to be materially
diminished by the interruption of business, and the defalcation of
the papal revenues, which must be the inevitable consequence of the
present disturbances. Recollecting the disagreeable situation in which
he had been formerly placed by the deposition of John XXII., he was
fearful lest the council of Basil should dethrone his present lord, by
which circumstance he would be reduced to the disgraceful alternative
of either quitting the line of preferment, in which he had fixed all
his hopes of future subsistence, or of adhering to the fortunes of a
master, whose embarrassments would deprive him of the means of giving
his servants a remuneration at all adequate either to their merits, or
to their necessities. Full of these gloomy presages, he determined once
more to address himself to the cardinal of St. Angelo, whom he regarded
as at least the innocent author of the calamities which affected every
considerate mind with sorrow. He accordingly transmitted to him the
following letter, in which, wisely forbearing to reproach his friend for
his past conduct, or to enforce with importunate energy the necessity of
adopting new measures, he gave him such an account of the state of Italy,
and of his own feelings, as was well calculated to make an impression
upon his heart.
“Being some time ago alarmed by the prospect of impending calamity,
and clearly foreseeing the tempests which have now begun to rage with
the utmost violence, I detailed my apprehensions in a letter which I
intended, most reverend father, to have addressed to you. That letter,
which the nature of its subject caused to be extended to an extraordinary
length, I did not send to you, according to my original design—not
through fear of exciting your displeasure (for I know you too well to
entertain any apprehensions on that subject) but through dread of giving
offence to others. For though I am conscious that I was prompted to write
merely by a wish to promote the public good, I was apprehensive lest my
motives should be misconstrued, and lest it should be thought that my
letter was dictated by flattery. You, however, and many other respectable
characters, can bear witness, that flattery is not by any means among
the number of my failings, and that neither a love of reputation,
nor a regard for my own interest, ever induces me to prostitute my
opinions, or to approve in words, what I disapprove in my heart. On
some occasions indeed I have been materially injured by the freedom with
which I am accustomed to speak my sentiments. But sensible as I was,
that the dissensions of the powerful are always dangerous, and that the
dissensions of ecclesiastics are attended with peculiar peril, inasmuch
as they involve the hazard of immortal souls; having also frequently
read and heard, that trifling disagreements have been inflamed into the
greatest animosity and strife, to the utter ruin of states and empires, I
was afraid lest this new contention amongst the chiefs of the sacerdotal
order, should involve the Christian world in difficulties, which neither
you nor your associates, whatever might be your inclination, would be
able to obviate. When we are called to the task of deliberation, we may
forbear to act if we please. But when we have begun to act, fortune, the
arbitress of human affairs, directs the event; and directs it rather
according to the dictates of her caprice, as Sallust observes, than
according to the principles of reason. When you have once put yourself
in motion, you cannot stop when you please. In perilous seasons it is
the duty of the wise to try to preserve the ship by retaining it in the
harbour. When you have committed yourself to the winds, you are compelled
to obey their impulse. In these circumstances the most skilful pilot
may suffer shipwreck, or at least, despairing of making any effectual
resistance against the fury of the gale, he may be carried into regions
far distant from those to which it was his wish to steer his course. When
I reflected on these topics, I was in a manner irresistibly impelled, by
my affection for our common country, to acquaint you with my sentiments.
After having resided for so many years in the Roman court, I was grieved
to see our affairs reduced to such a state, that we had every thing to
fear, and but little to hope. In these circumstances I had no consolation
for my sorrow: for I have not, like others, been so intent upon amassing
riches, as to be able to lose my sense of the public calamity in the
contemplation of my private prosperity. I could wish to be numbered
amongst those
“Whose walls now rise, who rest in soft repose.”
“Though I am sensibly affected by the distresses of our church, yet I
must confess, that if my own fortunes were not involved in the common
danger, I should feel little compassion for those who have brought
mischief upon their own heads, by the obstinate folly of their councils.
But I am now distressed by a double grief. For as I have two countries,
namely, the land of my nativity and the Roman court, the theatre of my
industrious exertions, the ruin of the latter, which seems to be fast
approaching, cannot but bring calamity upon the former. And certainly,
matters are now brought to such an extremity, that human wisdom seems
incompetent to the healing of the evil. A fire is kindled, which nothing
but the most extensive ruin can extinguish. Much better would it have
been that this unfortunate council had never assembled, than that it
should have occasioned the devastation of Italy. We daily behold the
fortresses and towns of this unhappy country plundered by a lawless
soldiery.—Slaughter, fire, rapine, the violation of helpless females,
swell the catalogue of her woes. Great occasion have we to lament,
that the Holy Spirit (if indeed it now deigns to dwell amongst us) has
changed its nature, and instead of being the author of peace and concord,
is become the exciter of hatred and malevolence. Some people have
entertained an opinion, that Italy has too long enjoyed the blessings
of tranquillity, and they have supplied the ambitious with the means
of disturbing the public peace. By this conduct they attempt to cure a
slight indisposition by the introduction of a dangerous disease. For
though it may be justly said, that the ecclesiastical body was in some
respects out of order, the complaint was not of so serious a nature as to
require the application of such violent remedies as are now resorted to.
It can never be the part of wisdom to correct one error by the commission
of a greater. But let us submit the issues of things to the direction of
Providence. One thing I foresee, that some nations will derive advantage
from our ruin, whilst others will share our afflictions. But I am not
anxious about the destiny of other countries. I mourn over the calamities
which I am well aware will be brought upon Italy by the oppression which
we endure, and by the ambition of a prince who wishes to reign according
to the dictates of his own arbitrary will. You must remember that I
prophesied, that these evils would flow from the convocation of the
council; and I have resolved to address you once more on this subject,
in order to assure you that I was not prompted by resentment thus to
communicate my opinion, and to prognosticate impending mischiefs. I beg
that you will not be displeased either by my former, or by my present
letter. If your conscience acquits you, regard my remarks as referring
to others, and not to yourself. If you have inadvertently fallen into
error, you ought to be grateful to him, who in the honest language of
admonition, lays before you his own sentiments, or the opinions of the
world at large concerning the nature of your conduct. For though your
virtue has raised you to the highest degree of dignity, yet I know that
you are but a man, that many circumstances escape your observation, that
various matters elude your inquiries, and in short, that it is impossible
for you to attain to universal or infallible knowledge.”[203]
It does not appear that this attempt of Poggio to induce the cardinal
of St. Angelo to adopt the views of the Roman court was productive
of any benefit either to himself or the pontiff. Eugenius, indeed,
finding himself involved in the greatest difficulties, had determined
to yield to necessity, and acknowledge the legality of the council.
He accordingly commissioned the archbishop of Taranto, and the bishop
of Cervi, to present to the assembled fathers a letter, in which he
declared, that whereas great dissensions had arisen in consequence of his
having dissolved the council then sitting at Basil, he was willing to
testify his regard for the church by confirming the proceedings of that
assembly, which he acknowledged to have been legally held and continued;
unreservedly revoking the bulls by which its proceedings had been
condemned, and professing that he would henceforth cease from doing any
thing to the prejudice of the council, or of any of its adherents.[204]
This letter, which was publicly read in the cathedral of Basil on the
5th of February 1434, gave considerable satisfaction to the friends
of reformation and peace, who hoped that the happiest consequences
would result from this union of the head and the principal members
of the ecclesiastical body.—Together with his conciliatory epistle,
Eugenius sent a commission, empowering several eminent dignitaries of
the church to act as his representatives, and in his name to preside
at the debates of the council. Such, however, was the jealousy with
which the proceedings of the pontiff were observed, that before these
deputies were permitted in their official capacity to take any part in
the deliberations of the council, they were compelled to take an oath,
whereby they bound themselves to maintain all the ordinances of that
assembly, and particularly that decree which asserted, that the authority
of a general council is paramount to that of the pope.[205]
Though by these acts of concession Eugenius appeared to have made his
peace with the council, his dominions continued to feel the scourge of
war. The freebooters by whom they were infested, in fact despised the
debates of churchmen; and though they pretended that they invaded the
ecclesiastical states in order to compel Eugenius to submit to the power
of the council, they did not manifest any disposition to withdraw their
forces when the pretended object of their expedition was accomplished.
In these circumstances Eugenius endeavoured to diminish the number of
his foes by soliciting Sforza to agree to terms of pacification. In this
instance his efforts were crowned with the desired success. Sforza, on
condition of his being appointed to the government of the Marca d’Ancona,
with the title of apostolic vicar and gonfaloniere of the Roman church,
not only consented to abstain from further hostilities against his
holiness, but promised to defend the pontiff from the attacks of his
other enemies. In pursuance of this promise, he turned his arms against
Fortebraccio, whom he fought and defeated near Tivoli. The duke of Milan
was greatly displeased by the change which had so suddenly taken place
in the politics of Sforza; and still persisting in his determination to
harrass the pontiff, he excited Niccolò Piccinino to attempt the conquest
of his native city Perugia. Piccinino marching into Romagna with this
intention, kept Sforza in check, and thus favoured the operations of
Fortebraccio. The latter chieftain having received a reinforcement of
troops from Viterbo, pushed his light cavalry to the very gates of Rome.
On the approach of his forces, the faction of the Colonnas, who, though
not openly, yet deeply resented the cruelty with which their chiefs had
been treated at the commencement of Eugenius’s pontificate, and had long
been waiting for an opportunity of taking vengeance on their adversaries,
flew to arms, exhorting the populace to assert their liberty. [May 29th,
A. D. 1433.] The insurrection soon became general, and the rebellious
Romans, not contented with imprisoning Francesco Condolmieri, the nephew
of Eugenius, surrounded with guards the residence of the pontiff himself.
Eugenius, however, disguising himself in the habit of a monk, had the
good fortune to elude their vigilance; [June 5th] and, attended by two
only of his domestics, threw himself into a small bark, with an intention
of taking refuge in Ostia. But he had not proceeded far down the Tyber,
before he was recognised by the populace, who, crowding to the banks of
the river, almost overwhelmed him with a shower of stones and arrows. So
fierce was their attack, that it was not without considerable difficulty
that the fugitive pontiff effected his escape, and retired, first to
Leghorn, and afterwards to Florence.[206]
On this occasion the officers of the pontifical household were dispersed,
each providing for his own safety according to the dictates of his
prudence, or his fear. The greater number of them, embarking in some
small coasting vessels, set sail for Pisa; but were met in the course
of their voyage by some Corsican pirates, who plundered them of all
their property. Others, attempting to proceed to Florence by land, were
exposed to various vexations. Poggio had the misfortune to fall into
the hands of the soldiers of Piccinino, who detained him in captivity,
in the expectation of extorting from him a considerable sum of money,
by way of ransom.[207] When the intelligence of this event reached the
Tuscan territory, it excited the deep concern of all his acquaintance,
and particularly of Ambrogio Traversari, who, without delay, earnestly
solicited Francesco, count of Poppio, to exert all his influence to
procure his liberation.
“Since I wrote to you,” says he in his letter to the count, “I have
received information that my most intimate friend, the dear associate
of my studies, Poggio, the papal secretary, is detained in captivity by
the magnificent lord and excellent captain Niccolò Piccinino. Believe
me this intelligence is very painful to my feelings—but the concern
which I experience is much alleviated by the opinion which I have long
entertained of your humanity, and which induces me to hope that I shall
not make a request to you in vain.—I beg and beseech you therefore, my
lord, to use all diligence to effect the liberation of one whom you know
to be most dear to me. I presume that the illustrious chieftain, at whose
disposal he now is, can deny you nothing, especially when you make a
reasonable request on behalf of a friend. I should be more diffuse in
my petition did I think it were needful, and were I not assured, that
fewer words than those which I have already written will be sufficient to
induce Piccinino to restore so learned and so liberally minded a man as
Poggio to liberty.”[208]
The endeavours of Ambrogio to procure the gratuitous release of Poggio
were ineffectual. The rugged soldiers who detained the learned secretary
in captivity, had no sympathy with the feelings of friendship. They
respected not the accomplishments of the scholar; and in all probability
their observation of the esteem in which their prisoner was held by his
friends, served only to enhance the price which they demanded for his
liberation. Finding that he had no other means of deliverance, Poggio
purchased his freedom at the expense of a sum of money, which the
narrowness of his circumstances rendered it very inconvenient for him
to pay; and immediately on his enlargement, he continued his route to
Florence.[209]
CHAP. VI.
_State of parties in Florence—Cosmo de’ Medici at the head of the
faction of the people—His banishment—Poggio’s letter to him on that
occasion—Francesco Filelfo an enemy of the Medici—Poggio’s quarrel with
Filelfo._
CHAP. VI.
At almost any other period than that of the flight of Eugenius from
Rome, the dangers and inconveniences to which Poggio was exposed in
following the fortunes of his master, would have been in a great
measure counterbalanced by the opportunity which the translation of the
pontifical court to Florence afforded him of revisiting the scene of his
youthful studies. He was accustomed to regard the Tuscan capital as a
sure refuge in the season of calamity, as a hospitable retreat, where,
whenever he was oppressed by adverse fortune, he might sooth his cares to
rest in the bosom of friendship. But how frequently do events demonstrate
the fallaciousness of human expectations! When at the termination of his
journey, the stately towers of Florence rose to the view of Poggio, he
experienced a sentiment of deep dejection, in reflecting, that amongst
the friends whose eagerness to congratulate him on his safe arrival,
he anticipated, in pleasing imagination, he should not now behold his
illustrious protector, Cosmo de Medici, whom the intrigues of faction had
lately banished from his native land. This celebrated man had inherited
from his ancestors a considerable property, which he had improved by his
own industry and skill in mercantile affairs. In popular governments,
riches, if they are diffused with a liberal hand, generally become the
means of acquiring power; and if the possessor of wealth unite with
generosity the discernment of prudence and the graces of urbanity,
he almost infallibly secures to himself the permanent favour of the
people. To Cosmo, therefore, in whose character these virtues met in
happy conjunction, the Florentine populace looked up with sentiments of
enthusiastic admiration. Examining the history of his native city with
the eye of a statesman, and meditating upon the civic revolutions which
he himself had witnessed, that sagacious politician had observed, that
in the contentions for power which had frequently taken place between
the aristocracy and the lower orders of the state, the plebeian faction
had almost always failed, through want of a leader whose authority
might restrain their irregularities, and whose judgment might give to
their efforts the consistency and energy of system. In order to supply
this deficiency, he placed himself at the head of the popular party,
presuming no doubt, that whilst he exercised his splendid talents for
the benefit of his adherents, he could at the same time make use of the
favour of the people to promote his own emolument and glory.[210] Acting
with these views, he soon gained a degree of ascendency in the republic,
which enabled him to embarrass the measures of the aristocracy. Cosmo now
found by experience, that he who engages in civil dissensions embarks
on a sea of troubles. The chiefs of the opposite party regarded him
with that hatred, which the privileged orders usually entertain against
those who attempt to restrain their ambition and diminish their power.
At the head of the nobility was Rinaldo degli Albizzi, who watched the
proceedings of Cosmo with all the vigilance of factious jealousy, and
resolved to seize the earliest opportunity to effect his destruction.
With this view Rinaldo procured the appointment of Bernardo Guadagni, a
declared enemy to popular rights, to the office of gonfaloniere, or chief
magistrate of the republic. No sooner was Guadagni invested with his new
honours, than he made the requisite preparations to subdue the faction
of the people. At this time Cosmo was at his country seat at Mugello,
a pleasant valley, situated at a small distance from Florence,[211]
whither he had withdrawn, in order to avoid the confusion of civil
discord; but the proceedings of Guadagni could not be concealed from
his partizans, who immediately sent messengers to inform him that his
adversaries were meditating some enterprise of a hostile nature. On the
receipt of this intelligence Cosmo repaired to Florence, and waiting
on some of the chief magistrates whom he regarded as his personal
friends, he represented to them the reasons which he had to be alarmed
for his safety. Being either ignorant of the designs of Rinaldo, or
eager to secure their victim by the base artifices of treachery, these
men assured him that he had nothing to fear; and in order to lull his
apprehensions to sleep, nominated him as one of a council of eight, by
whose advice, as they said, they wished to be guided in the government
of the state.[212] Cosmo put so much confidence in these demonstrations
of friendship, that he readily obeyed a summons which he soon afterwards
received, requiring him to attend at a council which was to be held on
the seventh of September, 1433, to deliberate upon the best method of
securing the tranquillity of the republic. He was no sooner arrived at
the palace, than the square in front of that edifice was lined with
armed men, commanded by Rinaldo and the other chiefs of the aristocracy.
Under the control of this guard the people were summoned to elect two
hundred deputies, to whom was to be delegated the important business of
deciding upon the reforms which were necessary in the administration
of public affairs. These deputies were no sooner chosen, than their
attention was directed to Cosmo by his enemies, some of whom loudly
demanded his death, as necessary to the preservation of the public
tranquillity; whilst others, more moderate in their views, and more
merciful in their dispositions, insisted upon it, that this desirable
end would be effectually accomplished, by banishing him to a distance
from the territories of the republic. During this awful deliberation,
Cosmo was detained a prisoner in the palace, from the windows of which,
whilst he anxiously endeavoured, by watching the gestures of his judges,
to prognosticate his fate, he heard the din of arms, and observed the
movements of the troops. The fear of some of the deputies, and the secret
attachment of others to the person of Cosmo, preventing the assembly
from coming to any immediate determination of his destiny, he was for
the present committed to the custody of Federigo Malavolti. Finding
himself thus in the power of his enemies, and understanding that they
had not been able to prevail on the deputies to decree his death, he
was apprehensive that they would attempt to take him off by poison.
Powerfully impressed by this idea, for the space of four days he declined
taking any food, except a small portion of bread. The pride of Federigo
was offended by this suspicion of his prisoner, whom he is said to have
addressed in the following terms:—“Through fear of dying by poison,
Cosmo, you are destroying yourself by famine. And have you so little
reliance on my honour as to think that I would be accessary to such
villainy? So numerous are your friends, that I do not think your life
is in any danger; but should your destruction be determined upon, rest
assured, that your adversaries will find other means than my assistance
to effect their purpose. I would not imbrue my hands in any one’s blood,
much less in yours, who have never offended me. Be of good courage—take
your food, and live for your friends and your country; and that you may
take your repast in full confidence, I will partake of whatsoever you
eat.” Overcome by this manly address, Cosmo, with tears in his eyes,
embraced his keeper, and vowed, that if fortune should ever put it in his
power, he would testify his grateful sense of his kindness.
When the adherents of Cosmo were informed of his imprisonment, they
took up arms with a determination to effect his deliverance: but by
the direction of his particular friends, who were justly apprehensive
that Rinaldo would be provoked by any hostile attempt on their part to
signalize his vengeance by the murder of his prisoner, they retired
without accomplishing any thing in his favour. When the news of the
arrest of Cosmo reached Venice, the seigniory of that republic took
such a lively interest in his fate, that they sent to Florence three
ambassadors, who were instructed to exert all their influence in his
favour. At last these plenipotentiaries could obtain from the Florentine
magistracy nothing more than an assurance that the person of Cosmo
should be safe. When he was at length sentenced to be banished to Padua
for ten years, they requested from the magistrates that during the
term of his exile he might be permitted to reside in their city. The
petition of the Venetians was granted; but the triumphant nobles still
detained Cosmo in custody as an hostage, to secure the acquiescence
of his partizans in the new measures which they intended to adopt for
the regulation of the state. They were also prompted to protract his
imprisonment by the malicious hope, that the hazardous nature of his
situation would injure his commercial credit. When Cosmo found himself
thus unexpectedly detained, with the connivance of his keeper he sent
a message to his friends, directing them to purchase the favour of
Guadagni by the timely application of a sum of money. Influenced by this
powerful motive, the mercenary chief magistrate, on the night of the
third of October, liberated his prisoner from custody, and conducting him
through one of the city gates, suffered him without further molestation
to proceed on his route to Padua, from whence he proceeded to Venice.
On his arrival at the latter city, the illustrious exile was met by
the principal citizens, who received him with every mark of honour and
respect; and he had not long resided there, before the administrators of
the Tuscan government were persuaded, by the reiterated instances of the
seigniory, to enlarge the sphere of his liberty to the full extent of the
territories of the Venetian republic.[213]
In the days of his prosperity, Cosmo had been distinguished as the
munificent patron of learned men. To them his doors were constantly
open; and his purse was always ready to assist their efforts to promote
the diffusion of literature. Poggio had long enjoyed the happiness of
being honoured by his particular favour. The pleasing interchange of
beneficence and gratitude, which had at an early period taken place
between the learned secretary and the princely merchant of Florence, had
been matured into the intimacy of the most cordial friendship. Poggio was
not one of those sycophants who reserve their homage for the prosperous;
and who, with the base foresight which is too frequently dignified with
the name of prudence, studiously disengage themselves from the fortunes
of a falling family. When he received information that his benefactor
had been obliged to yield to the fury of his enemies, he experienced
all the emotions of affectionate sympathy; and hastened to testify
his undiminished regard for his persecuted friend in the following
consolatory epistle.
“Though the serious misfortune in which you are involved is too great to
be alleviated by consolation, especially by such consolation as can be
administered by one of my moderate abilities—yet, following the dictates
of my affection for you, I had rather run the hazard of exposing the
feebleness of my genius, than fail in the duty of friendship. It is
said that trifling circumstances sometimes produce considerable effects
in affairs of the greatest moment; and I may be permitted to indulge
the hope, that this epistle may tend, in some small degree, to lighten
the weight of your affliction. You have experienced the capriciousness
of fortune, (for this goddess we may blame with impunity) and you are
fallen from a station of considerable eminence. Now, though I have always
observed that you are endowed with a strength of mind which enables
you to regard with indifference afflictions which would overwhelm the
generality of men, yet when I consider the magnitude of your misfortunes,
I cannot but be apprehensive of the effect which they may have upon your
feelings. If in your present circumstances you rise in the confidence of
courage, superior to the assaults of fortune; if you have placed your
independence upon the security of a pure conscience, rather than upon
external good; and if you value the blessings of the present life at
no higher a rate than is consistent with the dictates of true wisdom—I
congratulate you on the acquisition of that happy constitution of
mind which renders consolation unnecessary. If, on the other hand, in
consequence of the natural frailty incident to humanity, this sudden
change in your circumstances has disturbed the tranquillity of your
temper, (and before this trial the constancy of the most illustrious men
has been found to give way) you must have recourse to the principles of
reason, which will suggest to you, that you have lost nothing which can
be truly called your own. Dignities, authority, and honours, riches,
power, and health, are liable to be impaired by the shocks of fortune,
and the machinations of our enemies. But prudence, magnanimity, probity,
fortitude, and fidelity, are qualities which we obtain by our own
exertions, and which we may retain in defiance of external injury and
distress. These virtues you have cultivated as your firmest defence in
the hour of danger; and whilst you are possessed of this rich endowment,
you should rejoice in the enjoyment of such exquisite blessings, rather
than grieve on account of the wrongs which you suffer from your foes. I
am well assured, that you are not of the number of those who fix their
hopes of happiness on the kindness of fortune. For, notwithstanding
the ample possessions, and the exalted honours which you have formerly
attained, (possessions and honours superior to any which have fallen
to the lot of any other citizen of our state) you have always made it
your study to acquire those good qualities of the heart, which render
a man independent of externals. In public affairs, uniting prudence in
deliberation, with ability in execution, you have always acted with
such good faith and integrity, that you reserved for yourself nothing,
save honour and glory. Would all men follow so worthy an example, our
republic would enjoy much greater tranquillity than falls to her lot
at present. You have given the most ample proof of your dutifulness to
your native country, of liberality to your friends, and benevolence
to all men. You have been the support of the needy, the refuge of the
oppressed, the patron and friend of the learned. You have used the
gifts of fortune with such moderation, modesty, and kindness, that they
appeared to be nothing more than the due reward paid to your virtue and
merits. I forbear to dwell upon the literary pursuits in which you have
been engaged from the days of your youth, and in which you have made
such progress, that you are justly deemed an ornament and an honour to
learning. When the important affairs of a public nature, by which your
time has of late years been occupied, prevented you from dedicating to
study as much time as you wished to have appropriated to that pursuit,
you sought instruction and gratification in the conversation of learned
men, whom you invited to partake of the hospitality of your house. From
these eminent scholars you imbibed the precepts of wisdom, which you
resolved to adopt as the rule of your conduct in all circumstances and
situations.
“The consciousness of innocence, and the remembrance of virtuous deeds,
is the greatest source of consolation in adversity. He who can appeal to
his own heart in proof of the uprightness of his intentions—he who can
truly say that he has acted honourably both in his public and private
capacity, that he has always studied the promotion of the general good,
that he has assisted his friends with wholesome advice, and the poor with
money; that he has hurt no one, not even those who had injured him—this
man must be well prepared to endure the shock of adversity. A course of
conduct, regulated by these principles, confers true and solid dignity.
On this foundation you have established your character as a worthy man
and an excellent citizen. Acting on these principles, you have risen to
immortal glory. Wherever you go, that best of blessings, the testimony of
a good conscience, will attend you; and the memory of your virtues will
survive when you are laid in the grave.
“Now, since the retrospect of your past conduct affords you such a pure
delight, you ought to feel yourself elated by conscious dignity: for on
what can we justly pride ourselves, except on the reputation which we
have acquired by our virtues? Since, then, you have so strong a fortress,
in which you can take refuge in time of trouble, turn your attention to
those things which accompany you in your exile, namely, your liberality,
your prudence, your gravity, your upright intentions, your discernment,
your attachment to your native country, for which you have always
testified the utmost affection; and especially in the late civil broils
to which you have fallen a victim. I need not remind you of your literary
pursuits, which so signally contribute to the alleviation of sorrow, and
to the strengthening of the mind by the examples and precepts of the
most worthy men. For you know that philosophers of old have maintained,
that the mind of the wise man is beyond the reach of the impulses of
fortune, and that it mocks the efforts of external violence—that virtue
is the chief good—and that all other possessions are blessings, or the
contrary, according to the disposition of the possessor. But I do not
require that you should be of the number of those faultless friends of
wisdom, who have, perhaps, never existed, excepting in idea. I only hope
that you will be found worthy to class with those, who, according to
common acceptation, and the general course of human conduct, are reputed
wise.
“And, in the first place, consider how far fortune has exercised her
tyranny in your case. For, if you could divest yourself of the first
impressions of grief, and coolly consider what she has taken away,
and what she has left, you will find that you have sustained little
injury—nay, that you have derived benefit from her caprice. She has
banished you from your native country, which you have often voluntarily
quitted—but she has restored to you your liberty, which you did not enjoy
when you seemed to be the freest man in the state. She has deprived you
of a certain specious appearance of dignity, and of the respect of the
vulgar, who are always mistaken in their estimate of true felicity—but
she has left you your children, your wife, your riches, your good health,
and your excellent brother: and, surely, the pleasures which these
blessings bestow upon you ought far to outweigh the mortification which
you experience in consequence of your losses. She has taken away from you
a kind of civic pomp, and a popularity full of trouble, labour, envy,
anxiety, and continual cares. These honours many men eminent for their
prudence have despised. Their loss may be a matter of sorrow to those who
have endeavoured to convert them into a source of gain; but you, whom
they involved in so much labour and difficulty, ought not to be concerned
at being deprived of them, especially as they never were the objects of
your desire or ambition. For you did not enter upon public offices with
a view of promoting your own interest, or of increasing your importance,
but with an ardent desire of doing good to the public. Fortune has
restored you to real liberty. You were formerly, in fact, a mere slave.
You could not follow your own inclinations, either in sleeping or waking,
in eating or in taking exercise. Frequently were you prevented, by the
imperious claims of public business, from assisting your friends, and
indulging in the delights of retirement. Your time was at the disposal of
others, and you were obliged to attend to every person’s sentiments. Many
favours you were compelled to grant, in direct opposition to your own
wishes, nay, even in opposition to the dictates of equity; and you were
frequently reduced to the disagreeable necessity of practising the art of
dissimulation. This change of fortune has, however, set you at liberty,
for it has certainly restored to you the freedom of your will. It has
also enabled you to put to the test the constancy of those who professed
themselves your friends; and it has, moreover, called into exercise the
steady fortitude of your soul. All your acquaintance had seen with how
great politeness, gentleness, clemency, equity, and moderation, you
conducted yourself in the season of prosperity—a season in which men who
have attained to some eminence in wisdom have frequently been betrayed
into evil. This new species of trial gives you an opportunity of showing
the vigour with which you can struggle against the storms of adversity.
Many can bear prosperity, who shrink before the impulse of misfortune.
Others, who have shone conspicuously in the season of sorrow, have given
way to the emotions of vanity and pride in the hour of their exaltation.
But you we have beheld neither inflated by arrogance in prosperity, nor
sunk into dejection by adversity. In either fortune, you have exhibited
an example of the most unruffled equanimity.
“Let the following consideration support you in the midst of your
trials—that you are not the first, and that you will not be the last
man whose services to his country have been repaid by unmerited exile.
History abounds in instances of excellent men, who have been cruelly
persecuted by their ungrateful fellow citizens. They who cannot bear
the splendour of another’s virtues are unwilling to look upon it. Envy
is commonly the companion of glory—envy which always torments those
who cannot attain to the eminence of honour; and instigates them to
persecute with slander and malevolence the illustrious characters whose
virtues they are unable to imitate. Hence it happens, that very few
men of superlative talents escape the fury of civil tempests. The fear
of giving offence deters me from dwelling upon the instances of this
nature, which have occurred in modern times, and in our own republic. But
whosoever examines the records of antiquity will find, that the odium
excited by civil discord has occasioned the banishment of a considerable
number of excellent citizens—and that, not in our country alone, but in
other states of the greatest eminence. To say nothing of the Greeks and
Barbarians, the Roman republic, even at the time when it is represented
as having attained to the highest pitch of glory, was afflicted with
this infirmity. A few examples will be sufficient to demonstrate the
truth of my assertion. Which of his contemporaries was equal in valour,
probity, and illustrious deeds to Furius Camillus? Yet, in consequence
of the malevolence of the tribunes and the populace, he was compelled
to retire into exile; at a time too when his country stood very much
in need of his assistance. You well remember the important services
rendered to the Roman commonwealth by Scipio Africanus; you recollect
the moderation, continence, and gravity, which shone so conspicuously in
the life of the illustrious conqueror of Hannibal—yet he too was driven
from his native country by the rage of the tribunes. The uprightness and
sanctity of P. Rutilius were the very causes of his banishment. When this
man had an opportunity of returning to his country in consequence of
Sylla’s victory, he had the honest pride to refuse to fix his residence
in a state in which arms were superior to the laws. The villany of
Clodius expelled M. T. Cicero, the saviour of his country, who is said to
have been accustomed to boast, that he was carried back to Rome on the
shoulders of all Italy. History has recorded the names of several other
renowned men who have shared the same fate: but I have only mentioned
these four, the consideration of whose destiny may prevent you from being
surprised at your own misfortunes. I shall not pretend to maintain that
you are equal to these exalted characters in fame and splendour—but this
I will say, that, like them, you have experienced an ungrateful return
for your good services to your fellow citizens; and that in one respect
your glory is not at all inferior to theirs. For, in my opinion, you
deserve to be held in everlasting remembrance for the deference which
you paid to the decree of the magistrates, though you knew the doom
which awaited you. For when, as it is commonly reported, you could have
repelled the meditated injury by the assistance of your partizans, and
the interference of the populace, you thought it better to submit to
wrong, than to avert it by violence.[214] And as civil tumults never end
in good, consulting for the quiet of your country, and the tranquillity
of your fellow citizens, you prudently suffered this sudden storm to
waste its fury on yourself and your connections, rather than endanger the
republic by exciting the flame of war. By this conduct you have attained
to the height—I say not of modern, but of ancient glory. For what is more
laudable than that disposition which prompts a man to expose himself to
the fury of the billows for the sake of the general safety? Under the
influence of that virtue which prefers public to private good, other
states have flourished, and the Roman republic attained to universal
dominion.
“Protected then as you are by the most illustrious virtues, you ought not
to complain. You ought to be thankful to fortune, which has called these
virtues into exercise, and has summoned you to a contest, in which you
will gain the highest commendation on earth, and eternal glory in heaven.
These two things are the objects of the most ardent wishes of good men;
for they are the meed of virtue. During the remainder of your life, then,
enjoy the blessings which you still possess with a tranquil and peaceful
mind; and in whatever land your lot may be cast, think that your country,
the theatre of your dignity—the spot where you are called to exert your
talents for the promotion of the public good.”[215]
Such were the counsels by which Poggio endeavoured to fortify the mind
of his banished patron against the shafts of adverse fortune. His letter
breathes the spirit of enlightened friendship, and his choice of topics
of consolation evinces an accurate knowledge of the human heart. It may
be reasonably conjectured, that Cosmo was highly gratified by this proof
of his sincere attachment, and that he profited by his good advice.
But the administration of wholesome counsel was not the only mode in
which Poggio, on this occasion, testified his zeal in the cause of his
persecuted benefactor. In the intercourses of friendship, his temperament
disposed him strongly to sympathize with the resentment of those whom
he regarded with sentiments of esteem and affection. Consequently the
injuries sustained by Cosmo inspired him with the utmost degree of
animosity against the family of the Albizzi, and all their partizans and
abettors. This animosity against the enemies of his exiled friend, which
he took no pains to disguise, soon involved him in a most violent quarrel
with the celebrated Francesco Filelfo, who had been induced by the
turbulence of his temper, to intermeddle in the political disputes which
had for a long space of time disturbed the tranquillity of Florence, and
to discharge the venom of his spleen against the house of Medici and all
its adherents.
This extraordinary man was born at Tolentino, on the twenty-fifth of
July, 1398. Having given early indications of a love of literature, he
was sent to prosecute his studies in the university of Padua. In this
seminary he made such an uncommon proficiency, that when he had attained
the age of eighteen, he read lectures on eloquence to numerous audiences.
The reputation which he had acquired by this early display of brilliant
talents procured him an invitation to instruct the noble youth of Venice
in polite literature. This invitation he readily accepted; and in the
discharge of his public duties he acquitted himself so much to the
satisfaction of his employers, that he was presented with the freedom of
the state. In the course of a little time after his settlement in Venice,
the seigniory testified their sense of his merits by appointing him to
the office of secretary to the embassy which they usually maintained at
Constantinople. This office he retained for the space of two years, at
the end of which period he entered into the service of the Greek emperor,
John Palæologus, who employed him in affairs of the greatest consequence.
In the character of confidential agent or envoy of that monarch, he
visited the courts of Amurath II. the Turkish sultan, and of Sigismund,
emperor of Germany. During his residence at Constantinople he married
Theodora, the daughter of a noble Greek, the celebrated John Crysoloras.
In the year 1427 he quitted Constantinople and returned to Venice.
As he had assiduously improved the opportunities which he had lately
enjoyed of cultivating the knowledge of Grecian literature, he expected,
on his return to his adopted country, to be hailed as the champion of
science, and the restorer of learning.[216] But in this expectation he
was disappointed. His name no longer possessed the charm of novelty.
The interest which was occasioned on his first visit to Venice, by the
circumstance of his filling the professor’s chair at so early an age,
was naturally weakened by the lapse of nearly eight years; and in all
probability the jealous aristocracy of the Venetian capital resented
his quitting the service of their state for the honours and emoluments
of the Byzantine court. These causes concurred to render his reception
at Venice by no means flattering to his feelings. The mortification
which he experienced on this occasion was heightened by the deplorable
state of his finances, which the expenses of his increasing family had
reduced to a very low ebb. From these circumstances of embarrassment
he was relieved by the liberality of the citizens of Bologna, who
invited him to read lectures on eloquence and moral philosophy in their
university; and engaged to requite his services by an annual stipend of
four hundred and fifty gold crowns. Readily accepting this invitation,
he repaired to Bologna with all convenient speed. Soon after he had
entered upon his new office, that city, which had lately revolted from
Martin V., was doomed to suffer the horrors of a siege, in consequence
of which literary pursuits were entirely suspended. Thus circumstanced,
Filelfo began to feel no small degree of anxiety, not only concerning
the means of his future support, but also for the safety of himself and
his family. His uneasiness was, however, mitigated by the receipt of
very friendly letters from Niccolo Niccoli and Pallas Strozza, urging
him to quit Bologna, and exercise his talents for public instruction in
Florence.[217] After a negociation of some length, he agreed to give
lectures on the Greek and Roman classics, for the consideration of
an annual salary of three hundred gold crowns, to be paid out of the
revenues of the state. But when he had concluded this agreement, he
experienced very considerable difficulties in effecting his departure
from Bologna, which was closely invested by the pontifical army. These
difficulties being at length overcome, he hastened to Florence, where
he was received with every demonstration of respect, and commenced his
labours with the utmost zeal.[218] The following sketch of his first
lectures, which is preserved in the works of Ambrogio Traversari,
demonstrates that in the execution of his engagement he exerted a
most laudable degree of industry. At the dawn of day he explained and
commented upon Cicero’s Tusculan questions, the first decad of Livy,
Cicero’s treatise on Rhetoric, and Homer’s Iliad. After an interval of
a few hours, he delivered extraordinary lectures on Terence, Cicero’s
Epistles and Orations, Thucydides and Xenophon. In addition to this
laborious course of instruction, he also daily read a lecture on
Morals.[219] Such was the arduous task undertaken by Filelfo—a task which
demanded the exertions of a literary Hercules. He was, however, animated
to the endurance of toil by the number and dignity of his audience, which
daily consisted of four hundred persons, many of whom were not less
eminent for their literary acquirements, than for the rank which they
held in the state.[220]
On Filelfo’s arrival in Florence, he found the inhabitants of that city
divided into factions, and was by no means insensible of the difficulties
which he had to encounter in endeavouring to avoid being involved in
their disputes.[221] For the space of two years he seems to have acted
with becoming discretion, and to have pursued his literary occupations
without rendering himself subservient to the views of either party. His
prudence was rewarded by an increase of his salary, which was augmented,
towards the latter end of the year 1432, to the sum of three hundred and
fifty gold crowns.[222] Unfortunately however for his peace of mind,
he had not resided long at Florence, before he began to suspect that
Niccolo Niccoli and Carlo Aretino, the latter of whom was one of the
most accomplished of the Tuscan scholars, moved by envy of his literary
fame, regarded him with sentiments of determined hostility. The irritable
temper of Niccolo was indeed provoked by the supercilious pride of the
new Coryphæus, who, without the least reserve of diffidence, assumed the
high degree of eminence in the scale of importance to which he deemed
himself entitled, and looked down upon the learned Florentines with
undisguised disdain. Well knowing the intimacy which subsisted between
Niccolo Niccoli and Cosmo de’ Medici, Filelfo took it for granted, that
the latter would adopt the quarrels of his friend, and consequently
apprehended that he had much to dread from the effects of his resentment.
In this apprehension he was confirmed by the manifest coolness with which
he was treated by Lorenzo, the brother of Cosmo; and he regarded the
assurances which he received from the latter, that his suspicions with
respect to himself were groundless, as a refinement of malice, intended
to betray him into a fatal security.[223] His dread of the machinations
of his enemies was also increased by a violent attack made upon him in
the streets of Florence, by one Filippo, a noted assassin, by whom he was
severely wounded in the face.[224]
Whilst Filelfo was brooding over his real or imagined wrongs, a contest
arose between the two factions which divided the city of Florence,
in consequence of a quarrel which had occurred between the houses
of Soderini and Guzano.[225] On this occasion he publicly enlisted
himself on the side of the aristocracy, and under the pretext of honest
indignation against injustice, gratified his personal resentment, by
publishing a poetical philippic against the factious disposition of
the Florentine populace, into the commencement of which he introduced
a violent attack upon the family of the Medici.[226] Not contented
with this act of provocation, he afterwards turned the artillery of
his wrath directly against Cosmo, whom he insulted in a satire against
confidence in riches, in which he attempted to disguise the reproaches
of malevolence in the garb of philosophic advice.
The well known liberality of Cosmo’s disposition, the laudable uses to
which he appropriated a considerable portion of his vast wealth, and the
engaging familiarity with which he was accustomed to converse with people
of merit in every class of life, constituted the most convincing proof
of the malignant falsehood of this libel; and the adherents of the house
of Medici would have done well, had they treated it with contempt. But
thirsting for revenge, they endeavoured to expel the offending satirist
from the city, by inducing the assembly of the people considerably to
diminish the salaries allowed to the public instructors maintained by
the state. To this defalcation of their revenues, the other professors
patiently submitted; but Filelfo appealed to the senate, and by the power
of his eloquence persuaded that body to restore their literary servants
to their former footing in point of emolument. He had also the good
fortune to procure the abrogation of a second ordinance obtained by his
enemies, whereby the whole of the sums annually granted for the support
of public education were marked as objects of retrenchment.[227]
Irritated by these hostile measures, Filelfo declared open war against
Cosmo and his friends. He poured forth a torrent of invective in a
series of satires, in which the severity of Juvenal, and his nauseous
delineations of atrocious vices, are much more successfully imitated
than the sublimity of his moral precepts, or the dignity of his style.
The bitterness of Filelfo’s wrath was particularly directed against
Niccolo Niccoli, whom, sometimes under the contemptuous appellation
of Utis, and sometimes under the fanciful designation of Lycolaus, he
charged with envy of the learned—hatred of the virtuous—extravagant
anger—infidelity—blasphemy—and the most disgusting impurities which have
ever swelled the black catalogue of human crimes.[228]
The arrest of Cosmo de’ Medici filled the heart of Filelfo with the
greatest joy, as it not only freed him from the dread of a formidable
adversary, but also gratified his pride, by fulfilling certain prophetic
denunciations with which he had concluded his satire against confidence
in wealth. In the exhilaration of triumph, he exulted over the fallen
demagogue, to whom he gave the fictitious name of Mundus, in a copy of
verses, in the conclusion of which he earnestly exhorted the Florentine
nobility not to endanger the safety of the state, by commuting the
punishment of death, which their prisoner merited, for the lighter
penalty of banishment.[229] Happily for Cosmo, as it has been already
related, the sanguinary counsels of his personal enemies were rejected.
Thus when Poggio arrived in Florence, he found the party of his kindest
friends reduced to a state of irksome humiliation—his most powerful
protector driven into exile; and his most intimate associates daily
annoyed by the rancorous effusions of a libeller, whose malignant
imagination seemed to supply an inexhaustible store of topics of abuse.
In these circumstances, by the fidelity of his attachment to the
persecuted partizans of the Medici, he drew down upon his own head the
lightning of Filelfo’s wrath; and he soon found himself exhibited as a
conspicuous figure in the groups of outrageous caricaturas drawn by the
bold hand of the enraged satirist.[230] During the exile of Cosmo, his
dread of incurring the displeasure of the ruling faction induced him to
submit to obloquy in silence; and Filelfo enjoyed the mean triumph of
those who wantonly malign an adversary whose pen is restrained by the
strong hand of the civil power. But this triumph was of short duration.
The first year of Cosmo’s banishment was not expired, before he was
recalled by the commanding voice of the people. On his approach to the
city his enemies fled; and amongst the rest, Filelfo, conscious of the
provocations by which he had stimulated his resentment, hastily quitted
Florence, and withdrew to Siena.[231]
Poggio expressed his joy on the return of his friend in a long epistle,
in the commencement of which he intimated, that he had chosen that mode
of address in preference to a personal congratulation, in order that
his commendation of his patron might be diffused amongst such of the
learned as felt an interest in the perusal of his compositions. He then
proceeded to dilate at considerable length upon the unanimity with which
the Florentine people passed the decree of the recall of Cosmo, which, he
justly observed, was a most distinguished proof of his merits. “This is,”
said he, “in my opinion, the greatest subject of congratulation in your
case—that all ranks concurred in bearing testimony to your dignity and
virtue. So earnest was the desire of your return, that the inconveniences
resulting to yourself from your exile, must be far overbalanced by the
unprecedented honour and affection with which your fellow citizens have
received you on your return to your native country.” He concluded this
epistle by exhorting his friend to persevere in those virtuous principles
which had been his support in the day of adversity, and which had caused
him to be restored to the exalted rank in the state from which he had
been for a short period displaced by the intrigues of faction.[232]
Poggio had long meditated a signal retaliation of the insults which he
had experienced from Filelfo; and no sooner did the Medici regain their
ascendancy in the republic, than he proceeded to administer to the
acrimonious Tolentine the merciless severity of a literary castigation.
Wisely stepping forward as the indignant friend of the injured Niccolo
Niccoli, rather than as the avenger of his own wrongs, he published
an invective against Filelfo, in which he almost exhausted the Latin
language in the accumulation of epithets of abuse. Noticing the obscenity
of the satire which, as he says, Filelfo “had vomited forth against his
friend, from the feculent stores of his putrid mouth,” he reproved him
for the use of terms and phrases which even a strumpet of any degree of
reputation would be ashamed to utter. The propensity of the satirist
to the adoption of such language, he ascribed to the early taste which
he had acquired for impurity, in consequence of the occupation of
his mother, whom he represented as living at Rimini, engaged in the
most sordid offices.[233] Tracing the history of his antagonist from
his earliest days, he alleged, that he was banished from Padua, in
consequence of his indulgence of the most depraved propensities; and
that, when he had been hospitably entertained at Constantinople by
John Crysoloras, he repaid the kindness of his host by debauching his
daughter. By the perpetration of this crime, if credit may be given to
the assertions of Poggio, Filelfo obtained the hand of a lady, to whom,
if her conduct had been in any degree answerable to the nobility of her
descent, he would never have had the audacity to aspire.[234] Finally,
the enraged secretary accused his adversary of bartering the honour of
his wife for the most vicious gratifications, and concluded his invective
by proposing to ornament his brows—not with a wreath of laurel, but with
a crown more befitting the filthiness of his conversation.[235]
This scurrility, as it might have been naturally expected, served only
to inflame the hostile passions which had so long rankled in the breast
of Filelfo, and to direct his fury against his new assailant. The exiled
professor, accordingly, once more dipping his pen in gall, traduced the
morals, and vilified the talents of Poggio, in a bitter satire of one
hundred verses in length; of the virulence of which the reader may form
some idea from the following translation of its commencement.
Poggio! ere long thy babbling tongue shall feel
The keen impression of the trenchant steel;
That tongue, the herald of malicious lies,
That sheds its venom on the good and wise.
What mighty master in detraction’s school,
Thus into knavery has matured a fool?
Has Niccolo—that scandal of the times,
Taught thee to dare the last extreme of crimes?
Yes! taught by Niccolo, thou spreadst thy rage
O’er the wide area of thy feeble page.
Fain wouldst thou pour the torrent of thine ire
From lips that glow with all a Tully’s fire;
But, thy weak nerves by stale debauch unstrung,
Thy half-formed accents tremble on thy tongue.
Of filth enamoured, like a hideous swine,
Daily thou wallowest in a sea of wine.
Earth, air, and ocean, join their ample store,
To cram thy maw, that ceaseless craves for more;
And, worse than beast! to raise thy deaden’d gust,
In nature’s spite thou satest thy monstrous lust.
Black list of crimes! but not enough to fill
Poggio, thy ample register of ill.
Like some black viper, whose pestiferous breath
Spreads through the ambient air the seeds of death,
Obscure and still thou wind’st thy crooked way,
And unsuspecting virtue falls thy prey.[236]
The publication of this poem again roused the vindictive spirit of
Poggio, who retorted the acrimony of his adversary in a second invective,
in which he accused him of the basest ingratitude to those who had
treated him with the most distinguished kindness. Amongst these he
particularly enumerated Niccolo Niccoli, Ambrogio Traversari, Carlo
and Leonardo Aretino, Francesco Barbaro, Guarino Veronese, and several
others, all of whom, he asserted, being disgusted by the petulance and
scandalous immorality of Filelfo, had found themselves compelled to
withdraw from him their countenance and support. Warmed by his subject,
Poggio concluded this philippic with the following impassioned burst of
scurrility. “Thou stinking he-goat! thou horned monster! thou malevolent
detracter! thou father of lies and author of discord! May the divine
vengeance destroy thee as an enemy of the virtuous, a parricide who
endeavourest to ruin the wise and good by lies and slanders, and the
most false and foul imputations. If thou must be contumelious, write thy
satires against the suitors of thy wife—discharge the putridity of thy
stomach upon those who adorn thy forehead with horns.”
Such was the style in which Poggio and Filelfo, two of the most learned
men of their age, conducted their disputes. In their mutual accusations,
so evidently do they aim at exhausting every topic of obloquy, without
the slightest regard to veracity, that it is impossible for the acutest
judgment, by the most careful examination of the odious mass of their
allegations, to distinguish truth from falsehood. Thus does their
acrimony defeat its own purpose: for who will give credit to those, who,
in the heat of altercation, set decency at defiance; and forgetting what
is due to their own dignity, concentrate all their powers in an endeavour
to overwhelm their adversary by virulent and foul abuse? It may, however,
be observed, that in this unmanly warfare Filelfo had the advantage,
in consequence of his superior sagacity in the choice of his weapons.
In these encounters, a prose invective is like a ponderous mace, the
unmanageable weight of which is the best security of him at whom the blow
is aimed. But he who annoys his antagonist by poetic effusions, assails
him with an instrument, which affords full scope for the exercise of
the most consummate dexterity. The effect of abusive attacks against
character or talents upon him who is the subject of obloquy, is generally
proportionate to the reception which those attacks experience from the
public. And it is obvious to remark, that a dilated oration is almost
uniformly wearisome to the reader, and few of its passages are remembered
after its perusal; but the happy turn of an epigram, or the pointed
numbers of a lengthened satire, captivate the fancy, strongly arrest
the public attention, and make a durable impression on the memory. Thus
do the lashes of poetic wit produce a poignant and a lasting smart;
and truly unfortunate is he who, in consequence of the provocation of
literary wrath, becomes
“The sad burthen of some merry song.”
CHAP. VII.
_The Romans submit to the arms of the pontiff—Severities exercised
upon the revolters by Vitelleschi—Eugenius concludes a peace with his
enemies—He seizes a part of the Neapolitan territories—Proceedings of the
council of Basil—Poggio purchases a villa, in Valdarno—He is exempted
from the payment of taxes—His love of ancient sculptures and monuments
of art—His dispute with Guarino Veronese—His marriage—His dialogue
“An seni sit uxor ducenda”—His letter on his marriage to a learned
ecclesiastic—Poggio accompanies the pontiff to Bologna—His letter to the
cardinal of St. Angelo on the subject of his matrimonial felicity—His
letter to the Marquis of Mantua—His reconciliation with Guarino
Veronese—He publishes a collection of his letters—Death of Niccolo
Niccoli—Poggio’s funeral oration on that occasion—Character of Niccolo
Niccoli._
CHAP. VII.
Soon after the commencement of the late insurrection, which, as it has
been already related, compelled Eugenius to provide for his safety by a
precipitate flight, the Roman populace proceeded to the election of seven
officers, to whom they delegated the most ample authority to enforce the
preservation of the public peace, and to promote the general welfare.
On the departure of the pontiff, these new magistrates found themselves
masters of the whole of the city except the castle of St. Angelo. They
immediately commenced the siege of this fortress; but their efforts
to reduce it were vain. In the mean time the troops of Sforza made
frequent incursions to the very gates of the city, spreading terror and
devastation through the surrounding territory. The garrison of the castle
also harrassed the citizens by daily sallies. Wearied and disheartened
by the inconveniences resulting from this concurrence of external and
internal warfare, the degenerate Romans, at the end of the fifth month
of the enjoyment of their delusive liberty, surrendered their principal
places of strength to Giovanni de’ Vitelleschi, bishop of Recanati, who
took possession of them in the name of the pontiff.[237]
Though the standard of revolt no longer waved defiance against
established government from the walls of Rome, and though the populace
seemed to be desirous of atoning by the humblest submission for the
outrages which they had lately committed, not only against the authority,
but also against the person of their sovereign, Eugenius did not yet
venture to revisit his capital. He wisely dreaded the effects of that
agitation which usually accompanies the subsiding of the stormy sea
of political contention. It was also the opinion of his counsellors,
that it was necessary to punish the ringleaders of the late revolt with
the utmost severity; and he perhaps thought that those princes act
consistently with the dictates of prudence, who, whilst they personally
interpose in the performance of beneficent and merciful actions,
delegate to inferior agents the odious task of inflicting the sanguinary
penalties of political vengeance. He accordingly instructed Vitelleschi
to take such measures as he should deem necessary for the extinction
of the latent sparks of rebellion. For the purposes of severity he
could not have selected a fitter instrument than Vitelleschi, a man of
haughty demeanour, a bigotted assertor of the rights of established
power, whose promptitude in action was guided by the dictates of a cool
head, and an obdurate heart. When the inhabitants of the pontifical
states were informed that their destiny was committed to the disposal
of this merciless ecclesiastic, they were struck dumb with fear;[238]
and suspicion and terror spread a gloom over the whole of the papal
dominions. No long space of time intervened before the threatening cloud
burst upon the heads of the Colonnas and their partizans. Vitelleschi,
personally assuming the command of a body of troops, laid siege to the
fortresses which sheltered the despairing remnant of rebellion. In the
course of a few weeks he took and sacked Castel Gandolfo, Sabello,
Borghetto, Alba, Città Lanuvie, and Zagarola. All the inhabitants of
these places who survived the carnage which occurred at their capture
he carried in chains to Rome. On his return to the capital he proceeded
to level with the ground the houses of the principal insurgents.
Determined by still severer measures to strike terror into the enemies
of the pontiff, he seized one of the ringleaders of the late revolt, and
after publicly exposing him to the horrible torture of having his flesh
torn with red hot pincers, he terminated his sufferings, by causing
him to be hanged in the Campo di Fiore. At the same time, with a view
of ingratiating himself with the populace, who dreaded the horrors of
approaching famine, he imported into the city an abundant supply of
provisions. By this alternate exercise of severity and conciliation,
he at length completely re-established the authority of the pontiff in
Rome.[239]
Fortune now began to dispense her favours to Eugenius with a liberal
hand. In the spring of the year 1435, Fortebraccio, having received
intelligence that Francesco Sforza had marched into Romagna to oppose
Piccinino, who was preparing to invade that district at the head of a
large body of troops, made a forced march, and surprising Leone Sforza,
who had been left at Todi with an army of one thousand horse and five
hundred foot, compelled him and the greater part of his forces to
surrender at discretion. His triumph was, however, but of short duration.
Whilst he was employed in the siege of Capo del Monte, he was attacked
by Alessandro Sforza, and after an obstinate engagement, in which he
received a mortal wound, his troops were entirely defeated. This event,
which rid Eugenius of a formidable and implacable foe, prepared the way
for a treaty of peace between him and his various enemies. The pontiff
derived considerable advantages from the terms of this treaty, in
consequence of which he regained possession of Imola and Bologna, and saw
Romagna freed from the miseries of war.[240]
On the second of February in this year Joanna, queen of Naples, died, by
her last will leaving the inheritance of her kingdom to Regnier of Anjou.
The claim of Regnier was, however, disputed by Alfonso of Arragon, who,
by virtue of the act of adoption which Joanna had annulled, asserted his
title to the Neapolitan crown. Whilst the kingdom of Naples was divided
and harrassed by these contending claimants, Eugenius ordered Vitelleschi
to take possession of certain towns situated on its frontiers, the
sovereignty of which had long been asserted, and occasionally enjoyed,
by the Roman pontiffs. Vitelleschi executed this commission with his
usual good fortune; and by the conquests which he made in the Neapolitan
territories, still farther extended the power of his master.[241]
Whilst the flames of war which had been kindled against Eugenius by the
machinations of the duke of Milan were thus gradually extinguished, the
members of the council of Basil proceeded with considerable diligence
in the execution of the difficult task which they had undertaken—the
reformation of the church in its head and members. After settling some
preliminary arrangements, with a view of facilitating the union of the
Greek and Latin churches, and promoting the conversion of the Jews,[242]
the assembled fathers proceeded to denounce against those priests who
disgraced their profession by keeping concubines, the penalty of the
forfeiture of their ecclesiastical revenues for the space of three
months; and the further penalty of deprivation in case they continued,
after solemn admonition, to persevere in their flagitious conduct.[243]
In a very long and particular decree they laid down wholesome regulations
for the decent solemnization of public worship; and strictly prohibited
the continuance of those sacrilegious buffooneries which it had been
customary in some countries to celebrate in the churches on Innocents’
day, or the feast of fools.[244] Eugenius perhaps felt no repugnance
to give his assent to these articles of reformation. But he could not
consider with complacency a decree of the ninth of June, whereby the
payment of annates, and of the first fruits of benefices, into the
pontifical treasury, was prohibited as an unlawful compliance with
a simoniacal demand.[245] This ordinance he naturally detested, as
tending materially to impair his revenues, and consequently to diminish
his power. The spirit of hostility against the undue influence of the
head of the church, which actuated the deliberations of the council,
was further manifested by a decree of the twenty-fifth of March, 1436,
whereby the pontiff was prohibited from bestowing the government of any
province, city, or territory appertaining to the church, on any of his
relatives, to the third generation inclusive.[246] These proceedings
evidently proved, that whatever benefits the synod of Basil might extend
to the general community of Christians, the successor of St. Peter was
likely to sustain considerable loss in consequence of its labours; and
Eugenius determined to seize the earliest opportunity of throwing off its
yoke.[247]
Whilst the power and activity of the pontiff’s enemies seemed to throw a
considerable degree of uncertainty upon the future destiny of the father
of the faithful, Poggio appears to have made preparations permanently
to fix his own residence in the Tuscan territory. With this view he
purchased a villa in the pleasant district of Valdarno. It appears from a
letter addressed by Beccatelli, of Palermo, to Alphonso, king of Naples,
that Poggio raised a part of the fund necessary for the making of the
purchase by the sale of a manuscript of Livy, written with his own hand,
and for which he obtained the sum of one hundred and twenty florins of
gold.[248] In the choice of the situation of his intended mansion, he was
guided by that love of rural retirement which is generally experienced
by men of contemplative minds, who are compelled by the nature of their
occupation to engage in the active scenes of society. To him who has been
distracted by the bustle and tumult of a court, whose spirits have been
jaded by the empty parade of pomp, and whose ingenuous feelings have been
wounded by the intrigues of ambition, the tranquil pleasures and innocent
occupations of a country life appear to possess a double charm.
Whilst Poggio was thus providing for himself a place of peaceful
retirement, he received from the administrators of the Tuscan government
a testimony of respect, equally honourable to the givers and to the
receiver. By a public act, which was passed in his favour, it was
declared, that whereas he had announced his determination to spend his
old age in his native land, and to dedicate the remainder of his days to
study; and whereas his literary pursuits would not enable him to acquire
the property which accrued to those who were engaged in commerce, he and
his children should from thenceforth be exempted from the payment of all
public taxes.[249]
The fortune of Poggio was, indeed, still very small, and consequently
his villa could not vie in splendour with the palaces of the Tuscan
aristocracy; but he wisely attempted to compensate by taste what he
wanted in magnificence. In pursuance of this design he rendered his
humble mansion an object of attention to the lovers of the liberal arts,
by the treasures of his library, and by a small collection of statues,
which he disposed in such a manner as to constitute a principal ornament
of his garden, and the appropriate furniture of an apartment which he
intended to dedicate to literary conversation.[250]
The study of ancient sculpture had long engaged the attention of Poggio,
who was not less diligent in rescuing its relics from obscurity, than in
searching for the lost writers of antiquity. During his long residence
in Rome, he assiduously visited the monuments of imperial magnificence,
which fill the mind of the traveller with awe, as he traverses the ample
squares and superb streets of the former mistress of the nations. The
ruins of these stupendous edifices he examined with such minute accuracy,
that he became familiarly acquainted with their construction, their use,
and their history.[251] Hence the learned men who had occasion to repair
to the pontifical court were solicitous to obtain his guidance in their
visits to these wonderful specimens of industry and taste.[252] Whenever
the avarice or the curiosity of his contemporaries prompted them to
search into the ruined magnificence of their ancestors, Poggio attended
the investigation, anxious to recover from the superincumbent rubbish
some of those breathing forms, the offspring of Grecian art, which the
refined rapacity of Roman generals had selected from amongst the spoils
of Greece, as ornaments worthy to adorn the temples and palaces of
the capital of the world. Nor did he confine these researches to the
precincts of Rome. The neighbouring district witnessed his zeal for the
restoration of the monuments of ancient sculpture. With this interesting
object in view, he visited Grotta Ferrata, Tusculo, Ferentino, Alba,
Arpino, Alatri, Ostia, and Tivoli.[253] Whilst he was fitting up his
villa, he had the good fortune to pass through Monte Cassino, at the
time when an antique bust of a female was discovered by some workmen,
who were employed in digging up the foundation of a house. This bust he
purchased and added to his collection, which already filled a chamber
in his mansion.[254] His inquiries after specimens of art were also
extended into distant countries. Being informed that one Francesco di
Pistoia was on the eve of embarking for Greece, he requested him with
the utmost earnestness to procure for him any relics of Grecian statuary
which he might be able to obtain in the course of his travels.[255]
At the same time he wrote to a Rhodian, of the name of Suffretus, a
celebrated collector of antique marbles, to inform him that he could not
bestow upon him a greater pleasure, than by transmitting to him one or
more of the pieces of sculpture which he might be able to spare out of
his well furnished gallery.[256] Suffretus, actuated by a noble spirit
of liberality, immediately on Francesco’s arrival in Rhodes, consigned
to his care three marble busts, one of Juno, another of Minerva, and the
third of Bacchus, said to be the works of Polycletus and Praxiteles,
and one statue of the height of two cubits, all which he destined for
Poggio.[257] The annunciation of this intelligence was received by
Poggio with the highest exultation. The names of such eminent artists as
Polycletus and Praxiteles raised, indeed, in his mind a prudent degree
of scepticism; but he dwelt with fond anticipation upon the pleasure
which he should experience on the arrival of the busts; and he instantly
assigned to each of his expected guests their proper stations in his
villa. “Minerva,” says he in a letter to Niccolo Niccoli, “will not, I
trust, think herself improperly situated beneath my roof—I will place
her in my library. I am sure Bacchus will find himself at home in my
house; for if any place is his appropriated residence, that place is my
native district, where he is held in peculiar honour. As to Juno, she
shall retaliate the infidelities of her straying husband by becoming my
mistress.”[258]
The busts in question arrived in safety at the place of their
destination;[259] but Francesco alleged that the statue had been stolen
out of the ship in which he returned from Greece.[260] Poggio strongly
suspected that the plunderer who had deprived him of this portion of his
expected treasure was no other than Francesco himself. In this suspicion
he was confirmed by his subsequent conduct. For this faithless agent
having been afterwards commissioned by Andreolo Giustiniano, a Genoese of
considerable learning, to convey to Poggio some antique busts, disposed
of this valuable deposit to Cosmo de’ Medici. Poggio did not tamely bear
this injury, but inveighed against the dishonesty of the Pistoian with
great bitterness in a letter which he addressed to Giustiniano.[261]
From this letter it appears, that in addition to his groups of ancient
statues, Poggio had adorned his villa by a collection of antique coins
and gems. To these pursuits he was instigated, not merely by the desire
of illustrating the classic authors by a reference to works of ancient
art, but also by an enthusiastic admiration of the sculptured wonders,
the productions of men endowed with superlative talents, who, rising
from individual to general nature, combined in their imaginations,
and embodied with their plastic hands, those finished forms which, as
it were, fill the mind of the spectator, and raise him to the exalted
idea of perfection.[262] On this subject he thus expressed himself in
a letter to Francesco di Pistoia. “I am struck with awe by the genius
of the artist, when I see the powers of nature herself represented in
marble. Different men are visited by different diseases. My infirmity is
an admiration of the works of excellent sculptors: for I cannot but be
affected with astonishment by the skill of the man who gives to inanimate
substance the expression of animation.”[263]
Whilst Poggio was thus occupied in adorning his rural residence, he
received a letter from one of his correspondents named Scipio, of
Ferrara, who requested him to give him his opinion upon the question,
whether Cæsar or Scipio Africanus were the greater man. The discussion of
subjects of this description may give scope to a display of historical
knowledge; but it is seldom productive of much utility. It is, perhaps,
a proper exercise for youth; but it is hardly worthy of the exertion of
talents matured by age. In compliance, however, with the wishes of his
friend, Poggio drew up an elaborate comparison between the two eminent
men in question, in the course of which he entered much in detail
into the history of their respective actions. After this induction of
particulars, he compressed his arguments into a general statement of his
opinion, that the youth of Scipio was distinguished by the purest morals,
whilst the early years of Cæsar were rendered infamous by his vices;
that the former, inspired with the spirit of patriotism, by his splendid
military achievements rescued his country from destruction; and that the
latter, prompted by ambition, too successfully exerted his extraordinary
talents to effect the subversion of the commonwealth—that consequently,
whilst Scipio was by no means inferior to Cæsar in the fame of his
military exploits, he was greatly his superior in virtue, which alone
constitutes the character of a truly great man.[264]
This dissertation on the comparative merits of Cæsar and Scipio is
ingenious and interesting; and in the pronunciation of his decision,
Poggio was certainly guided by the principles of sound morality. It might
reasonably have been expected, that an inquiry into the character of two
illustrious ancients would be productive of nothing but amusement and
instruction; and little did Poggio imagine that any of his contemporaries
would be inflamed with resentment by the freedom of his strictures
upon the accomplished vanquisher of Roman liberty. But his treatise
falling into the hands of Guarino Veronese, who at this time filled the
professor’s chair in the university of Ferrara, that renowned preceptor,
either actuated by intolerant zeal in defence of the reputation of Cæsar,
or influenced by a desire of paying his court to Leonello d’Este, who
had frequently declared himself an admirer of the dictator’s character,
composed a long answer to the inquiry of Poggio. The spirit and style of
this composition were by no means compatible with the friendly sentiments
which Guarino professed to entertain with regard to his antagonist. In
a kind of preface which he prefixed to it, he contemptuously bestowed
upon Poggio the appellation of Cæsaromastix, and asserted, that in
his attack upon the character of Cæsar, he was rather audacious than
brave.[265] Poggio was much displeased by this provocation, and lost no
time in replying to the unexpected strictures of the Ferrarese professor.
In this instance, however, he had the discretion to restrain his anger
within due bounds. Avoiding as much as possible any altercation with
Guarino, he addressed himself to Francesco Barbaro, in a long epistle,
in which he dilated his original arguments, and confirmed them by ample
authorities. In the introduction to this letter, he complained in a manly
strain of dignity of the conduct of Guarino, who had wantonly wounded
his feelings, by intermixing personal reflections in the discussion
of a literary question, on which all scholars were equally entitled
to unlimited freedom of opinion. In this defence of his sentiments,
Poggio exhibited much learning and acuteness, and evinced the skill of a
practised disputant. As Guarino did not prosecute the discussion of this
subject, it may be presumed that he felt due compunction for the breach
of friendship into which he had been inadvertently betrayed, and that,
overpowered by the superior abilities of his opponent, he shrunk from a
renewal of the combat. Guarino was not the only person whose displeasure
was excited by the preference given by Poggio to Scipio over Cæsar.
Another scholar of that age addressed a letter to Leonardo Aretino, in
the course of which, in vindicating the fair fame of the Dictator, he
characterizes his censor as a rash and foolish writer. To this second
antagonist, however, who from his initials C. A. is supposed to have been
Cyriac of Ancona, Poggio did not condescend to make a formal reply, but
contented himself with ridiculing him in a letter addressed to their
common friend Leonardo.[266]
Soon after the termination of this controversy, Poggio happily lost the
remembrance of the uneasiness occasioned by the mutual recrimination
of polemic disquisitions, in the tender assiduities of honourable
courtship. As he was now arrived at the advanced age of fifty-five, the
intemperate heat of his passions was allayed, and the remonstrances of
his friend, the cardinal of St. Angelo, on the subject of his unlicensed
amours, began to make an impression on his mind. He was also weary of
the unsettled state in which he had hitherto lived, and sighed for
the participation of those pure domestic comforts, which heighten the
pleasures, and alleviate the sorrows of human life. He accordingly sought
amongst the Tuscan ladies for a partner of his future fortunes. The
object of his research he found in Vaggia, the daughter of Ghino Manente
de’ Bondelmonti, a lady of a wealthy and honourable family, to whom he
was united in the latter end of the month of December, 1435.[267] From a
memorandum inserted in a diary kept by Manente, it appears, that he gave
Poggio together with his daughter the sum of six hundred florins[268] as
a marriage portion. Pecuniary affairs do not, however, appear to have
occupied much of the attention of the bridegroom, whose gallantry led
him to dwell with happy pride upon the most valuable of all dowries—the
beauty and virtues of his spouse. Previously to his taking the decisive
step of matrimony, Poggio deliberately weighed the probable advantages
and disadvantages which might arise from the disparity of the ages of
himself and Vaggia, who had not yet seen eighteen summers. The result
of his cogitations on this interesting topic he set forth in a Latin
dialogue on the question—“_An seni sit uxor ducenda_,” which he published
soon after his marriage. This dialogue, to which was originally prefixed
a dedicatory epistle from its author to Cosmo de’ Medici, is represented
as having taken place at a dinner given by Poggio, on occasion of his
entering into the holy state, to his friends Niccolo Niccoli and Carlo
Aretino. The former of these guests, in the freedom of conversation
over his wine, declares, with his habitual bluntness, that nothing but
insanity could have induced the founder of the feast, by encumbering
himself with matrimonial duties, to undertake a burden which wisdom
would avoid at any period of life, but which must be particularly
grievous to one, like Poggio, far advanced in years. In reply to this
sally of caustic humour Poggio protests that his experience of matrimony
by no means vindicates Niccolo’s opinion of that state, from which he
has hitherto derived nothing but satisfaction. Niccolo avers that he
hears with pleasure this declaration, to which he politely professes to
give full credence; but he at the same time maintains, that, regarding
the case of his friend as an exception to a general rule, he cannot,
abstractedly speaking, applaud the wisdom of a man, who, at the age of
fifty-five, enters upon a course of life quite alien from his former
habits. He then proceeds, in the style of an advocate arguing on one
side of a question, to enumerate all possible suppositions as to defects
in the character of the object of an old man’s choice as a partner for
the remainder of his life. She may be peevish and morose—She may be
intemperate, immodest, idle and sluttish—If she is a maiden and young, it
will be found on trial that the levity of youth will not harmonize with
the gravity of advanced years—If she be a widow, there is great hazard
lest she should entertain vivid recollections of the pleasures which
she enjoyed in her connexion with her former spouse—recollections which
will by no means operate to the advantage of her present husband. As to
the entering into an union with an aged woman, this would be of course
the feeble propping and sustaining the feeble—it would be a proceeding
productive of nothing but a doubling of infirmity and discomfort. For
a literary man to enter into a connexion which must trespass upon that
time which should be devoted to the cultivation of his mind were folly
indeed—to all which considerations must be added this most important one,
that if a man who marries late in life becomes the father of children,
he cannot expect to live to see the completion of that education which
he hopes may imbue his offspring with that useful knowledge and with
those virtuous dispositions which are requisite to secure their success
in the world. At his death, then, he will be oppressed by the painful
reflection, that he must leave the objects of his fond solicitude to the
discretion of guardians, who have been found in so many instances to be
careless or unfaithful in the discharge of their important trust. “I
am aware,” says Niccolo at the termination of his speech, “that in some
cases circumstances may be different from what I have represented them as
likely to be. You, Poggio, for instance, are fortunate if what you tell
us of your matrimonial experience is true—but yet I always have been, and
still am, of opinion, that safe counsels are to be preferred to hazardous
ones.”
When Poggio, smiling at these remarks of Niccolo, is preparing to reply
to them, he is interrupted by his friend Carlo, who begs from him
permission to undertake the management of the cause of the aged gentlemen
who become the votaries of Hymen; and, this being granted to him, he
begins his speech by making a personal attack upon Niccolo, who, he
alleges, has declined to enter into the married state by an unreasonable
timidity of spirit, and an unaccommodating austerity of temper. But
if all men were to follow his example, they would manifestly act in
disobedience to the first law of nature, which provides for the continued
propagation of the human species, and they would moreover grossly
neglect the duty which they owe to the state to which they belong, which
demands from them that succession of virtuous citizens by whom alone its
rights and liberties can be maintained. As to the cares and avocations
of matrimony breaking in upon literary occupations, Carlo reminds his
adversary that this was not the case with Plato, with Aristotle, with
Theophratus, Cato the elder, Cicero, and many others of the ancients
distinguished by the extent of their learning. Matrimony also, which
Niccolo has vilified as a species of servitude, preserves a man from that
licentiousness of conduct which is the worst kind of slavery in which
he can be enthralled. Moreover, if any elderly man be united to a young
woman, his wisdom will be a guide to her inexperience—his prudence will
teach her to restrain her appetites, and his example will in every case
afford her instruction and encouragement in the regulation of her conduct
in life.
On Niccolo’s appealing with a smile to the experience of Carlo himself,
and asking him whether he has not known old men who have been more
foolish than boys, and whether people of this description are not very
unsafe guides in the discharge of moral and political duties, the latter
replies that he pleads not on the behalf of foolish people of any
age; but that he is ready to assert as a general principle, that the
matrimonial union is singularly well adapted to promote the happiness of
an elderly man. Young folks, he says, are unable to regulate themselves;
much less are they qualified to govern others. What, then, will be
the consequence of an union of two parties, each of which is totally
inexperienced in the management of human affairs, but the pressure of
poverty, and its attendant train of miseries? But the man who is ripe in
years will support the weakness of his wife, and instruct her ignorance
in the ordering of their domestic concerns, and will abate in her the
effervescence of passion by the inculcation of the lessons of virtue.
Enlarging on these ideas, and more particularly analyzing Niccolo’s
objections to the marriage of men advanced in years, Carlo boldly
maintains, that it is expedient for a person of this description not
only to marry, but also to marry a young woman, whom he may mold like
wax to his will. As to sensual indulgences—whilst so many examples are
seen of the total abstinence from them which is practised in convents and
nunneries, why should any doubt be entertained, that a well-instructed
female will cheerfully submit to that restricted enjoyment of them which
circumstances may demand from her? As to the little likelihood of an aged
parent living to see his offspring settled in the world, Carlo demurs to
the fact, and asserts that longevity is fully as likely to follow upon
the temperance of mature age as upon the careless dissoluteness of youth.
“But granting,” says he, “that the remaining years of an old man are few
in number, will he not, nevertheless, derive the greatest pleasure from
his children, whom it will be a gratification to him to train to good
manners, at a period when they are much more disposed to revere their
parent, and to obey him, than they are likely to be when growing strength
and self-confidence shall have rendered them more independent of parental
controul?”
Fortifying his doctrine by the test of facts, Carlo appeals, in proof
of the soundness of the principles which he is maintaining, not only to
the domestic history of Cato the Elder and of Cicero, but still more
especially to that of Galeazzo Malatesta, who, having married a young
wife in the seventy-fourth year of his age, left behind him at his death
four sons, who became the most illustrious men of all Italy, and one of
whom, Carlo, was no less celebrated for his literary accomplishments than
for his prowess in war.—“These illustrious characters,” says he, “were,
indeed, virtuous by nature; but they were not a little indebted for the
renown which they obtained in their maturer years, to the instructions
which they received in their early youth from their father. The wise
exhortations of an aged parent have, in my opinion,” continues he, “great
efficacy in the right training of children—a greater efficacy, indeed,
than if they fell from the lips of persons of unripe years—for it is to
advanced age that we look for gravity and experience.” After enlarging
on this topic, Carlo draws from his reasonings the conclusion, that
both on public and on private grounds, it is expedient that elderly men
should quit the state of celibacy, and that they should marry youthful
wives. “It is,” he observes, “an unspeakable advantage in life, for a
man to have a partner to whom, as to a second self, he may communicate
his counsels and his joys, and who, by sympathizing in, may mitigate
his sorrows. Nor is it to be doubted,” says he, “that a wife of this
description will continue to love her husband as long as he loves her,
and as long as he maintains towards her that fidelity which is too often
violated by the impetuosity of youthful appetite.” He then proceeds to
controvert in their order the other positions of Niccolo, who, however,
is by no means converted from his original opinions on the subject
matter of the debate; but closes the conference, by charging Carlo with
uttering the sentiments which he has propounded merely for the sake of
flattering their host, in return for the good dinner which he has given
to his friends; and by characteristically professing that he will look to
himself, and take care not to suffer by imitating the follies of others.
This dialogue on the question _An seni sit uxor ducenda_ is one of
the most ingenious of Poggio’s compositions. It evinces its author’s
intimate acquaintance with life and manners; and at the same time, in the
lucidness of its arrangement and the dexterity of its argumentation, it
exhibits a specimen of no common rhetorical powers. In the course of the
conversation between the interlocutors Poggio indulges in the liveliness
of fancy; but he never transgresses the bounds of decorum. On the
contrary, though he introduces into the discussion some slippery topics,
he touches upon them with great delicacy; and it may be stated, greatly
to his honour, that, in the character of the advocate of matrimony, he
treats the female sex with marked respect, and represents woman not only
as gifted with great acuteness of intellect, but also as endowed with
dispositions which incline her, as a rational being, to listen with
deference to the lessons of wisdom and virtue. To which may be added,
that the diction of this dialogue is singularly correct, and that it
evinces, on the part of its author, a familiar acquaintance with the
phraseology of Cicero.[269]
Poggio’s resolution to correct the irregularity of his conduct, and to
enter into the state of lawful wedlock, most certainly merited high
commendation. It is to be hoped, however, that he experienced the keenest
remorse of self-accusation for his former licentiousness, when he found
that the commencement of his reformation was to be signalized by an act
of extreme unkindness. In order to prepare the way for his marriage,
he was obliged to dismiss a mistress who had borne him twelve sons and
two daughters. What distressing embarrassments crowd the train of vice;
and how powerfully are the benevolent feelings excited on the side of
virtue, when we see the object of licentious passion, after a connexion
of many years, in circumstances which seem to imply on her part fidelity
to her seducer, at length abandoned by him, and sent forth, perhaps in
poverty—certainly in agonizing mental distress—to encounter the taunts of
public scorn.[270]
If, however, we may give credit to Poggio’s account of the state of his
feelings on his entrance upon his new connexion, his felicity was not
interrupted by any painful reflections on the past, or by any uneasy
forebodings with respect to the future. In a letter to one of his English
friends, Nicholas Bilston, Archdeacon of Winchester, he thus expresses
himself on the subject of his marriage.
“Our epistolary intercourse, my dear father, has by my omission been
too long suspended. Do not, however, impute my silence to forgetfulness
of the obligations which your goodness has conferred upon me; for I
can assure you that a sense of your kindness is impressed upon my mind
in indelible characters. The fact is, that till lately, no event has
occurred in my history of sufficient importance to constitute the subject
of a letter. But I have now to announce to you a most important change
in my situation—a change, of which I hasten to give you the earliest
intelligence, in full confidence that you will participate in my joys.
You know that I have been hitherto uncertain what course of life to
pursue, and that I have long hesitated whether to adopt the secular or
the clerical character. To the ecclesiastical profession, however, I
must confess that I never felt any inclination. In this dubious state
of mind, I arrived at a period when it was absolutely requisite for me
to fix upon some settled plan for the regulation of my future conduct.
Determining, therefore, not to spend the remainder of my days in unsocial
solitude, I resolved to marry; and though now declining into the vale of
years, I have ventured to enter into the matrimonial union with a young
lady of great beauty, and possessed of all the accomplishments which
are proper for her sex. You will perhaps say, that I ought to have taken
this step at an earlier period. I confess it: but, as the old proverb
says, ‘better late than never;’ and you must remember that philosophers
assure us, that ‘_Sera nunquam est ad bonos mores via_.’ I might, indeed,
have changed my condition many years ago; but in that case I should not
have obtained my present spouse, a partner in all respects suited to my
manners and disposition, in whose agreeable converse I find a solace for
all my anxieties and cares. So richly is she endowed with virtues, that
she gratifies my most sanguine wishes. This circumstance is the source
of the greatest comfort to me; and I return thanks to God, who, having
continually been propitious to me, ‘has loved me even to the end,’ and
has bestowed upon me more than I could have wished. Well knowing your
regard for me, and duly sensible of the value of your friendship, I have
thought it my duty to acquaint you with my present circumstances, and to
make you a partaker in my pleasure. Farewell.”
This letter, which bears the date of the sixth of February, 1436, was
written in the course of that halcyon period, during the continuance of
which the fetters of matrimony are usually entwined with flowers, and
unmixed pleasure is supposed to be the almost certain portion of the
newly united pair. In the strictness of investigation, therefore, it
cannot be admitted as evidence of the happiness which Poggio enjoyed in
the married state. Hymeneal transports, however ardent, are proverbially
fleeting; and many a matrimonial union which has commenced in affection,
has been found productive of disgust. From various detached passages,
however, which occur in his future correspondence with his friends,
it appears that Poggio was not disappointed in his hopes of conjugal
felicity, and that his connexion with Vaggia was a source of comfort to
his declining years.
On the eighteenth of April, [A. D. 1436.] Eugenius quitted Florence, and
transferred the pontifical court to Bologna, whither he was accompanied
by Poggio, who soon after his arrival there, detailed his further
experience of the joys of wedded love in the following letter to the
cardinal of St. Angelo.
“You have frequently, most reverend father, exhorted me, both in
conversation and by letter, to adopt some settled course of life.
I have at length followed your advice. Two plans were proposed to
my consideration: to enter into the priesthood, or to pursue some
secular concern—To the ecclesiastical profession I always entertained
an invincible objection—I disliked solitude; and therefore, being
determined to enter upon civil life, I turned my mind to matrimony. I
do not deny that the clerical life is by many esteemed more peaceable
and tranquil than that which I have chosen. It is, indeed, generally
regarded as free from care, and as allowing the greatest scope to ease
and self-indulgence.—The opulence which it promises to confer is also a
powerful motive to impel men to the adoption of it—a much more powerful
one, indeed, than any considerations of a religious or moral nature. For
what numbers are there whose inquiry is directed after wealthy benefices
rather than after the rule of an upright life. It is deemed honourable
amongst mortals to excel others in pomp, to be flattered and courted by
the multitude, to abound in riches, which procure that outward splendour
which is generally thought to constitute dignity. And it is deemed still
more honourable to obtain these advantages without labour, and in a short
time. Hence the clergy, springing like mushrooms in an hour, are rapidly
advanced to the highest dignities. Thus it very frequently happens, that
you are obliged to venerate as a God, a man whom you have been accustomed
to despise as a mean, abject, ignoble, and ill-bred character. By one
word of the pontiff, the ignorant become, in the estimation of the
vulgar, learned; the stupid wise; the uninstructed accomplished—though at
the same time the real character of the men is precisely the same as it
was before.
“In addition to these considerations, I was well aware how important
is the dignified office of an ecclesiastic; and what a weight of
responsibility rests upon those who, by accepting benefices, undertake
the spiritual guidance of their fellow men; and I was deterred from
entering upon the clerical functions by the strictness of the precepts
which are inculcated by the ancient doctors of the church. For when I
was informed by these most holy men, whose works I had perused, to what
uses the wealth of the church ought to be appropriated—that he who does
not work, ought not to eat—and that the labourer in spiritual things
ought to be content with food and raiment; and when I was conscious that
I was unfit for the discharge of clerical duties; and when I knew that I
could obtain food and raiment by other, though certainly more laborious
means; I thought it advisable—not indeed to contemn the former pursuit,
but to adopt the latter, which seemed more suitable to my disposition.
That warfare is, I must confess, better and more illustrious in which men
can attain to a greater pitch of merit, provided they conduct themselves
according to the rules of religion and their office. But after maturely
examining my own strength and ability, I was afraid of engaging in a
field, in which I should incur the almost certain danger of basely
yielding to the adversary, or of falling in the combat, to the hazard of
my soul.
“Being determined therefore to employ myself in secular concerns, in
forming my matrimonial engagement, I adopted those principles which have
obtained the approbation of the wise and learned. For in the choice of
a wife, I was not influenced by riches, which render the generality of
men blind to their true interests—nor was I prompted by a wish to rise
to civil honours, or to strengthen my interest with the great. These are
objects of earnest desire to the multitude at large. But I was influenced
by different motives. In looking out for a partner for life, I looked
for honour, probity, virtue, which the wisest of men have declared to be
the most ample dower which a parent can bestow upon his child. Being,
then, well acquainted with the excellent dispositions, the modesty, and
the other characteristic virtues of a certain young lady of noble family,
who had not yet completed her eighteenth year, on her I fixed my choice.
The exemplariness of this lady’s manners was acknowledged by every body
who was acquainted with her; and the excellence of her character I
esteemed her most striking recommendation. Such indeed is her beauty,
that I cannot but occasionally reflect with seriousness on the disparity
of our years—however, as I knew that from her tender youth, she had
been educated in such a manner, that she had a still greater share of
good principles and of modesty, than of comeliness and grace of person,
I determined to make her my own. Nor have I repented of my resolution.
For so much does she daily rise in my esteem, that I continually give
thanks to God, who, in former times has always blessed me with more than,
on account of my sins, I could possibly deserve; and in bestowing upon
me so excellent a wife, has so bountifully provided for my comfort and
satisfaction, that there is nothing that I can wish for in addition to
his present mercies.
“Our friend Zucharo was accustomed to say, when he wished to commend some
exquisitely dressed dish, that it was so delicately seasoned that the
least alteration in its composition would spoil it. So say I of my wife.
There is nothing which I wish to be added to her character, nor any thing
which I wish to be taken away from it.
“I must now tell you the reason why I have been so late in writing to you
on this subject. It is a common observation, that there are few if any
married men who do not become weary of their wives in the course of a
year. The pontiff has allowed me six months for my period of probation.
The fifth month is now expired; and my wife daily grows upon my esteem,
and is daily more agreeable to me, and more compliant with my wishes.
Forming a conjecture as to the future from my experience of the past,
I am inspired by a confident expectation that I shall never repent of
having formed this connexion. I trust also that God will continue to me
his favour. For if he was propitious to me when I strayed from the path
of moral rectitude, I may reasonably hope, that since I have entered upon
the right way he will shower down his blessings upon me with a still
more liberal hand. But whatever may happen in the course of the changes
which take place in this sublunary world, I shall never repent of having
acted uprightly. I wished to communicate this intelligence to you, my
dear friend, in order that you might rejoice in my joy. I am sensible
that the gravity of your wisdom might claim a more weighty subject of
correspondence: but the wisest of men occasionally indulge themselves
with a little relaxation from serious pursuits. This relaxation I trust
you will experience in the perusal of my present epistle.”[271]
Guarino Veronese embraced the occasion of Poggio’s marriage to renew
the friendly intercourse with him which had been unhappily suspended
in consequence of their late dispute. He addressed him on this joyful
occasion in a congratulatory letter, to which Poggio replied with the
most cordial frankness. “In your epistle,” said he, “which I received
by the kindness of Francesco of Ferrara, I recognize my friend Guarino,
who was formerly inferior to no one in the testimonies of his affection
towards me. I am happy to find, that though your ability in maintaining
the intercourse of friendship may have been suspended, it is not lost.
I also am the same that I ever was—your most faithful friend. Be
assured that my regard for you has not suffered the least diminution.
A difference of opinion can never justify a breach of friendship. Our
late contention, in which we engaged for the purpose of exercising our
abilities in the bestowing of praise and the infliction of censure,
was highly commendable. The great men of antiquity adopted different
sides of the question in the senate and at the bar, without the least
infringement of the duties of friendship. It would indeed redound to
our disgrace, if the similarity of our studies, which is usually the
firmest bond of union, should dissolve that pleasing connection which has
subsisted for so long a space of time. The learned and justly renowned
Francesco Barbaro, during his late visit to Florence, intimated to me
his suspicions, that my friendly regard for you was somewhat diminished.
I told him that his suspicions were entirely groundless; that my esteem
for you was so far from being diminished, that it was increased—I
also promised to write to you. This promise I should certainly have
immediately fulfilled, had I not been prevented by the press of business
occasioned by the departure of the pontiff.
“Accept my thanks for your kind congratulation on the late change in
my condition. I hope I shall find it productive of perpetual comfort
and pleasure. For since, as Flaccus says, the virtue of parents is a
great dowry, I have had this alone in view, and have overlooked riches
and other recommendations, which the generality of men regard as
indispensably requisite to the happiness of the married state. Petronius
Arbiter asserts, that wisdom and beauty are rarely allied—but by the
favour of heaven, I am united to a wife, who, though she has not yet
completed her eighteenth year, and is distinguished by her beauty, is yet
more virtuous than she is fair, and comprehends in her character all the
graces which adorn the female sex. I trust, therefore, that I have made a
provision of comfort for my future years, though some of my friends say
that I am beginning a new art, at the time when I ought to be quitting
it. But it is never too late to do what is right and honest: and as good
poets take especial pains in polishing the last act of their play, I am
resolved to dedicate the remainder of my days to purity of conduct.”[272]
At this time, the Florentines and the Venetians, being at war with the
Duke of Milan, had engaged as their ally Giovan Francesco Gonzaga,
Marquis of Mantua; and whilst hostilities were carrying on between the
above mentioned parties, the eldest son of the Marquis, being an ardent
admirer of the character of Niccolo Piccinino, who held a station of
distinction in the Milanese army, had secretly quitted his father’s
house, and had entered into the service of the Duke for the purpose
of studying the art of war under the auspices of that celebrated
Condottiere. Gonzaga was so much irritated by this conduct of his son,
that he disinherited him, as being, by a species of desertion, guilty of
a capital crime. The young prince, whilst this judgment hung suspended
over his head, having been ordered by Piccinino to guard with a body
of troops the lines by which the town of Barga was beleaguered by the
Milanese forces, was wounded and taken prisoner in a battle which he
fought with Francesco Sforza, one of the commanders in the pay of the
Florentine republic. The repentant run-away having, on his recovery,
taken service under Sforza, and thus rejoined the standard of his native
country, applied to his father for forgiveness of his fault. But he
solicited for pardon in vain. Gonzaga, either indulging the natural
severity of his disposition, or fearing to excite the jealousy of the
Venetians, should he pass over so heinous a crime, turned a deaf ear to
the suit of the youthful warrior, and sternly refused to mitigate the
doom which he had pronounced upon him.
Deeply affected by this incident, Poggio, who was then with the
pontifical court at Bologna, wrote to the Marquis a long and elaborate
letter, in which he pleaded, with a zeal enlightened by the principles
of humanity, for an extension of mercy to the juvenile offender. In
this eloquent composition, after an appropriate introduction, in
which he touched upon the difficulty of the task of regulating human
conduct according to contingent circumstances, and the necessity of due
reflection for the proper discharge of moral duties, Poggio reminded
the Marquis, that, learned and prudent as he was justly accounted, yet
as a sovereign he was liable to be led astray by his passions, which
were likely to be fostered rather than restrained by the applause of
interested flatterers, whose constant object it is to prevent the voice
of reason from approaching the ears of men invested with power. This
remark he aptly illustrated by a reference to the history of Augustus
Cæsar, who, having repented of the severity with which he had treated his
delinquent daughter Julia, exclaimed in the bitterness of his feelings,
that he should not have conducted himself towards her with so much
harshness, had Marcus Agrippa and Mecænas been still living, who alone of
his courtiers dared freely to tell him the truth.
Poggio then proceeds, in the character of an honest adviser, to represent
to the Marquis, that it is the opinion of the most competent judges
of the actions of princes, that the punishment, which he professes to
be determined to inflict on his son, is more severe than just. The
delinquency of the prince involved no stain upon his honour. On the
contrary, it was occasioned by an excess of generous feeling. Why, then,
should he be subjected to a penalty befitting a traitorous conspirator,
or a fratricide? The Marquis may perhaps imagine that the example of
Brutus and that of Manlius Torquatus may be pleaded in defence of his
obduracy, but he begs him to remember that those illustrious Romans
did not avenge with the fatal axe their own wrongs, but those of the
republic. Becoming animated as he proceeds in the discussion of his
subject, Poggio, quitting the apologetic style, pronounces an eulogium
on the young Gonzaga, who, instead of devoting himself like a Sybarite
to the pleasures and the pastimes of a court, had, in pursuit of glory,
encountered the perils and the fatigues of war. Then, relating another
anecdote of the second of the Roman emperors, who, being consulted by
Titus Arrius, as to the punishment which he should inflict on his son,
who had been guilty of plotting against his life, had given it as his
opinion, that the offender should be banished, rather than put to death,
he maintains that the same principle which prompted Augustus to award a
mitigated penalty against a young man convicted of so atrocious a crime
as meditated parricide, should induce the Marquis to treat with lenity
the juvenile indiscretion of his son. Then appealing to the remorse and
penitence of the prince, he urges the offended father to receive the
returning prodigal with kindness; and, descending from the flights of
eloquence to the plain level of prudential consideration, he concludes
his letter by admonishing the Marquis, that if he should persevere in his
design of disinheriting his eldest born son, that son had proved by his
late conduct that he was too high spirited to submit to the threatened
indignity, and that, however submissive he might be during his father’s
life, the death of the Marquis would be the signal of a civil war, which
would lay waste the Mantuan territory, and which would only terminate
with the shameful victory of one of his children over the other, or with
the ruin of both.
When Poggio had finished the composition of this letter, he in the first
instance consigned it to the care of Vittorino da Feltre, a scholar of
high reputation, who then held the confidential office of preceptor to
the sons of Gonzaga, requesting him to watch for some favourable moment
for presenting it to his patron. This very precaution should seem to
intimate, that Poggio felt a latent consciousness that the liberty which
he was taking in assuming the office of a monitor, might possibly not be
very acceptable to the distinguished personage to whom his admonition was
addressed. And yet, such was the pride of scholarship in the fifteenth
century, that when, at the end of two months, his letter was returned to
him by Vittorino, with an intimation that Gonzaga declined receiving it,
Poggio addressed a second letter to the unrelenting father, protesting
that he had been influenced, in requesting his attention to wholesome
lessons of advice, not by any selfish motives, but by his zeal for the
welfare of a sovereign prince, from whom he unequivocally declared that
he thought himself entitled, in consideration of his good offices, to a
return of gratitude rather than of contempt. At the same time he wrote
to Vittorino, expostulating with him for the want of zeal, which he had
evinced with regard to the commission with which he had entrusted him;
and understanding that Carlo Brognolo, an intimate acquaintance of his,
resident at the Mantuan court, had endeavoured to induce the Marquis to
excuse the liberty which he had taken in writing to him, he wrote to him
also, thanking him for his friendly intentions; but at the same time
protesting, that he had only addressed the sovereign of Mantua by letter
in the manner in which, had an opportunity presented itself, he would
have addressed him personally, namely, in a style and tone becoming the
citizen of a free state.
There is reason to believe that the displeasure felt by the Mantuan
prince against the officious scribe was not deeply rooted or of long
duration; for it appears that Gonzaga, having come to Ferrara when the
council was assembled in that city in the year 1438, took occasion, in
the presence of a numerous audience, to speak of Poggio in terms of
respect and praise, for which honour the latter tendered to his Highness,
by letter, his grateful thanks.[273]
The literary reputation of Poggio now began to be very extensively
diffused, and his writings became an object of frequent inquiry among
the learned. Several eminent scholars had been so much gratified by the
perusal of some of his letters, which had accidentally fallen into their
hands, that they earnestly requested him to publish a collection of them.
This request could not but be highly gratifying to his feelings, and
he readily took the requisite steps to comply with it. He accordingly
desired Niccolo Niccoli, with whom, as being his most intimate friend, he
had maintained a constant correspondence, to select from his papers such
of his letters as were likely to reflect lustre on his character; and he
was engaged in arranging and correcting the materials for a small volume,
at the time when the pontifical court was transferred from Florence to
Bologna. On resuming his task in the latter city, he found that Niccolo
had neglected to transmit to him various letters which he had addressed
to him from France and Germany, and which he thought would be peculiarly
interesting to the public, as they contained an account of his successful
exertions in search of the lost writers of antiquity. Niccolo was not so
active as Poggio could have wished in procuring for him these necessary
documents. The letters in question were in all probability dispersed
in the hands of various persons, and of course he would experience
some delay and difficulty in collecting them. In fact they were never
recovered by Poggio, who completed from the materials which he had in
his own possession a volume[274] of his epistles, which he submitted to
the inspection of the public, dedicating it to the Canonico Francesco
Marescalco of Ferrara.[275] A copy of this volume is preserved amongst
the manuscripts of the Riccardi library in Florence.[276]
The transmission of his letters was one of his last acts of friendship
which Poggio requested from Niccolo Niccoli. Soon after the publication
of his epistles, he received the melancholy intelligence of the death of
this his earliest and steadiest friend. He was acutely sensible of the
serious loss which he had sustained by this event, which took place on
the 23rd of January, 1437; and in the ardour of his affection, he waited
with patience for the publication of some tribute of respect to the
memory of the deceased, which he thought might justly be demanded from
the multitude of learned men, on whom the numerous favours which they
had received from the hands of Niccolo imposed an imperious obligation
to celebrate his virtues.[277] In this expectation he was disappointed.
The scholars of Florence were, perhaps, of opinion, that panegyrics on
the living were more productive of profit than encomiums on the dead.
Offended by their tardiness, Poggio resolved, notwithstanding the urgency
and variety of his occupations, to rescue the name of his friend from
oblivion. He accordingly composed and published a funeral eulogium on
Niccolo Niccoli; being determined, as he said in a letter to Feltrino
Boiardo, to merit, at least, the praise which is due to the faithful
discharge of the offices of friendship.[278]
In his funeral oration on Niccolo, Poggio, adopting the character of the
orator appointed to address the public on the occasion of his obsequies,
introduced the eulogy of his deceased friend by the following exordium.
“If, citizens of Florence! it had been consistent with the dignity of
the Latin muses personally to address you on the present occasion, they
would not have delegated this office to another—they would themselves,
in the most copious and ornamented language, have celebrated the virtues
of their most excellent and praise-worthy child. But since those
whose transcendent majesty prevents them from exhibiting themselves to
the eyes of the public, commission their representatives to appear on
their behalf—though I know that there are many in this assembly, whose
learning, whose genius, and whose oratorical abilities are far superior
to mine, I have ventured to claim your attention—not with a view of
precluding the more enlightened efforts of others; but in hopes that,
whilst I thus discharge the imperious duties of friendship, my humble
exertions may lead the way to more splendid specimens of eloquence. And
should my powers fall far short of the merits of the deceased—should
I be unable to pay a tribute of respect in any degree adequate to the
services which I have received from him, you will, I trust, pardon me,
not merely in consideration of the mediocrity of my talents, but also in
consideration of the multitude of the virtues of our departed friend.
Abilities far superior to any which I possess are requisite to execute
the task of enumerating, in the brief space of time which is usually
allotted to these occasions, the numerous excellent qualities of the
deceased.—But why do I say deceased? Niccolo undoubtedly lives, and
will for ever live. He will be held in everlasting remembrance in the
minds of men, and he enjoys that immortality, which alone is deserving
of the name of life. We firmly believe, that his pure soul, freed from
every corporeal stain, no longer obnoxious to the contagion of sin, has
been at once exalted into heaven. For he was a man of the most upright
conduct, endued with singular modesty, during every period of his mortal
existence. Connecting the study of polite learning with that of the
sacred scriptures, he ascended from knowledge to practice, and rendered
his literary pursuits subservient to the regulation of his moral conduct.
In order that you may become more particularly acquainted with his
character, permit me to enter a little at large upon the subject of his
studies and learning, his moral qualities, and the uprightness of his
conversation. For the contemplation of the example of excellent men is a
powerful incitement to an imitation of their virtues.”
Pursuing the method thus pointed out, Poggio proceeded to give an account
of the education and early pursuits of his friend, and made honourable
mention of the good services which he had rendered to the cause of
literature. He next entered into a particular detail of his virtuous
dispositions, celebrating, with appropriate praise, his prudence, his
benevolence, his fortitude, his contempt of wealth, and the gravity of
his manners. At length, mentioning the serenity with which he met his
dissolution, he thus concluded. “Oh fatal day! bitter indeed to us; but
to him the happy termination of evils. At thy destiny, Niccolo, (for I
will once more address our departed friend) at thy destiny I rejoice,
for thou inhabitest the abodes of the pious, and art entered into the
mansions of eternal rest. It is for myself I grieve—on my own account I
lament this fatal day, which has deprived me of thy delightful converse,
of thy tender affection, which has robbed me of the fruit of my studies,
which has torn from me him whom I regarded as my friend and father, to
whom I was accustomed freely to communicate my cares, my thoughts, my
every word and deed. Justly is this day to be lamented by me, in which I
have lost the consolation of my sorrows, the alleviation of my griefs,
and the firmest support of my labours. No longer shall I be permitted
to converse with thee, to ask thy advice, to rely upon thy friendly
exertions. This consolation I will, however, retain; I will recall the
memory of past times, and whilst I imbibe the vital air, I will dwell on
thy sweet remembrance, and embrace thee in idea. The image of my friend
shall be perpetually present to my eyes; and since alas! he is numbered
amongst the silent dead, in the celebration of his virtues I will testify
the gratitude which I feel for the numerous acts of kindness which I have
experienced from him during his life.”[279]
The generality of scholars are not, perhaps, aware of the debt of
gratitude which they owe to Niccolo Niccoli. If, however, they derive
pleasure and improvement from the perusal of the classic authors of
Greece and Rome, they ought to hold him in respectful remembrance;
for to his liberality and to his industry, the recovery and diffusion
of many of the writings of the ancients may be justly ascribed. His
pecuniary assistance enabled Poggio to support the expenses which he
incurred in the course of his researches after neglected manuscripts;
his assiduous diligence in transcribing the works of the luminaries of
Grecian and Roman literature multiplied the copies of those exemplars
of true taste.[280] In the acquisition of books, he set no bounds to
his expenses; and the inconsiderateness of the zeal with which he added
to the stores of his library sometimes reduced him to the verge of
poverty.[281] His researches after the memorials of ancient genius were
not confined to manuscripts. Inspired by a love of the arts, he eagerly
availed himself of every opportunity which occurred, of purchasing
antique statues, coins and gems. So extensive was his collection of
these interesting relics of past magnificence, that Poggio asserts in
his funeral oration, that it exceeded the aggregate amount of all other
collections of the same kind.[282] He did not, like a literary miser,
morosely brood over the treasures of his library and his cabinet in
unsocial selfishness. His doors were always open to the learned, and
to those who entertained a desire to improve their understanding by
study. The ingenuous youths who wished to gain access to the fountains
of knowledge found in Niccolo a protector and a guide. Extending his
patronage of literature beyond the period of his mortal existence, by his
last will he bequeathed his library, which consisted of upwards of eight
hundred volumes, to the use of the public.[283]
It does not appear that he was the author of any literary work, except
a short treatise on the orthography of the Latin language, in which he
attempted to settle various disputed points on this subject, by the
authority of ancient inscriptions.[284] One of his contemporaries[285]
attributes his literary silence to the fastidiousness of his taste, which
led him to form in his own mind a standard of excellence, to which he
despaired of attaining in the practice of Latin composition. Leonardo
Aretino, in the irritation of his mind, occasioned by his unfortunate
quarrel with Niccolo, ascribed his declining to appear in the republic
of letters, in the character of an author, to his utter ignorance of the
Latin language.[286] But this is undoubtedly one of those calumnies in
which the scholars of that age indulged their spleen, without feeling the
slightest compunction of conscience. To say nothing of the commendations
of the literary acquirements of Niccolo, which occur in the writings
of his learned contemporaries, his ample library may be regarded as an
evidence of his scholarship. In modern times, the possession of an
extensive and valuable collection of books is not of itself a certain
proof of learning. But when it is considered that Niccolo had himself
transcribed many of the volumes which adorned the shelves of his library,
and that in the copies which he made of the Roman classics he divided the
respective subjects into chapters, and prefixed to these divisions an
abstract of their contents—what reason can there be to entertain doubts
of his literary abilities? Several of the ancient writings recovered by
Poggio abounded in errors, which Niccolo corrected in his transcripts;
and he was accustomed to settle the text of the Latin authors by the
comparison of various manuscripts. The execution of this task required
considerable learning, and in its performance he appears in the venerable
character of the parent of the useful art of verbal criticism.[287]
Restricting himself to the discharge of the higher duties of
benevolence, in the conferring of important favours, Niccolo
unfortunately neglected those lesser offices of good will, which, though
apparently trifling when considered individually, have in the aggregate
a considerable influence upon the comfort and happiness of human life.
He was prone to anger, quick in finding fault, and prompt in giving
utterance to his resentful feelings.[288] United with such a disposition,
the possession of the dangerous faculty of sarcastic wit was to Niccolo
a most serious misfortune;[289] as it too frequently betrayed him into
that provoking intemperance of speech which called into exercise the
forbearance of his friends, and excited the bitter enmity of those whose
pride or passion would not permit them occasionally to give way to his
sallies of peevishness. In consequence of the indulgence of his ill
humour, the honour which accrued to him from his exertions to induce
Manuel Crysoloras and Guarino Veronese to instruct the ingenuous youth
of Florence in the Greek language, is tarnished by his quarrels with
those eminent scholars, which, it is alleged, caused them to quit the
Tuscan capital in disgust. But if he was impetuous in his passion, he
was open to a conviction of his error, and listened with patience to
the admonitions of friendship. Those who were intimately acquainted
with his character pardoned his occasional fits of moroseness, in
consideration of the intrinsic generosity of his heart. Niccolo was of
a middling stature, inclined to corpulency, and in his countenance
there appeared a happy mixture of cheerfulness and gravity. His bodily
senses were remarkably acute, and he had cultivated them to a degree
of fastidiousness.[290] He was splendid in his dress; but this was the
extent of his luxury. His hall was not crowded by a numerous retinue of
servants. Contented with the ministration of Benvenuta alone, he did
not profess to astonish and gratify his visitors by the magnificence
of sumptuous banquets; but in his instructive conversation, and in the
perusal of the classic volumes which adorned his library, his literary
friends enjoyed that feast of reason which they could not meet with in
more superb abodes.
CHAP. VIII.
_Proceedings of the council of Basil against Eugenius—The pontiff
transfers the council to Florence, and afterwards to Ferrara—Alfonso
of Arragon hostile to Eugenius—Opening of the council of Ferrara—The
deputies of the Greek church repair to that city—Reconciliation of
the Latin and Greek churches—Beccatelli’s Hermaphroditus solemnly
censured—Brief account of Beccatelli—Poggio’s letter of reproof to
Beccatelli on the publication of the Hermaphroditus—Eugenius deposed by
the council of Basil—Amedeus, duke of Savoy, elected as pope by that
synod—Cardinal Julian joins the party of Eugenius—Ambrogio Traversari
friendly to Eugenius—Ambrogio’s death and character—Birth of Poggio’s
eldest son—Letter of Cincio on that occasion—Curious correspondence
between Poggio and the duke of Milan—Continuance of the quarrel between
Poggio and Filelfo—Poggio’s dialogue on Nobility—His correspondence with
Gregorio Corriario in defence of that dialogue—Death of Lorenzo de’
Medici—Poggio’s funeral eulogium on Lorenzo._
CHAP. VIII.
Whilst the pontiff was guarding his interests in Italy, the council of
Basil was studiously employed in driving him to extremity. The decrees
of that assembly, whereby the payment of annates into the pontifical
treasury was prohibited, and the positive restrictions which it had
imposed upon the head of the church in the distribution of the temporal
powers and honours attached to the holy see, compelled Eugenius to
adopt decisive measures. Setting the council at defiance, he continued
to levy the taxes upon ecclesiastical promotions, which had been so
expressly condemned as simoniacal, and deprived of their benefices all
those who, in compliance with its requisitions, refused to pay the
sums which he demanded as his due. In the continuance of his nearest
relatives in places of power and trust, he evinced a similar contempt
of the ordinances of the synod. Irritated by these acts of contumacy,
the assembled fathers, on the thirty-first day of July, 1437, formally
impeached the pontiff as obstinately impeding the desired reformation of
the church—as violating the ecclesiastical constitutions—as guilty of
the scandalous offence of selling benefices to the highest bidder, and
bestowing them on unworthy candidates, in compliance with the desire of
powerful men. After reciting these and various other heads of accusation
against him, they summoned Eugenius to appear and answer for himself
within the space of sixty days, under pain of incurring such penalties
as the council, in case of his refusing to comply with its requisitions,
should think fit to impose upon him.[291]
Far from being intimidated by these menaces, Eugenius, in full consistory
held at Bologna, issued a bull, whereby he transferred the council from
Basil to Florence. On the twenty-sixth day of September, the fathers of
Basil, by a formal act, declared this proceeding of the pontiff null
and void;[292] and on the first of October they again summoned Eugenius
to appear and plead to the charges which had been exhibited against
him; and on his failing to appear, either in person or by proxy, they
pronounced him contumacious, and unanimously decreed that he should be
proceeded against accordingly.[293] The pontiff having issued a second
bull, summoning the representatives of the Christian community to
Ferrara, for the purpose of effecting an union between the Latin and the
Greek churches, the council, on the twelfth of October, prohibited all
ecclesiastics, under pain of excommunication, from yielding obedience to
the mandate of their spiritual sovereign.[294]
In the prosecution of these violent measures, the council was encouraged
by Alfonso of Arragon. This prince was highly incensed against Eugenius,
who had not only refused to bestow upon him the investiture of the
kingdom of Naples, but had supported the claim of his competitor, the
duke of Anjou, by sending Vitelleschi to his assistance at the head of
a considerable army. Though the warlike patriarch did not conduct this
expedition with his wonted success, the pontiff had, by thus imprudently
interfering in the affairs of the kingdom of Naples, given great offence
to the Arragonese monarch, who was naturally impelled to countenance the
proceedings of an assembly which was labouring to repress the power of
his adversary.[295]
The intrigues of Alfonso did not, however, deter Eugenius from
maintaining his spiritual authority. On the eighth day of January,
1438, the council of Ferrara was, according to the tenor of his bull,
opened with the customary solemnities.[296] When a sufficient number
of the ecclesiastics were assembled to give dignity and authority to
the proceedings of this new synod, he left Bologna, and repaired in
person to Ferrara, at which city he arrived on the twenty-seventh day of
January.[297]
The reconciliation of the Latin and Greek churches had, for many
centuries, been a subject of earnest desire to the zealous advocates for
an uniformity of faith amongst Christians. Whilst the Greeks possessed
the shadow of independence, their acuteness in disputation was by no
means inferior to the polemic ability of their antagonists; and they
strenuously persisted in maintaining the dogmas in which they differed
from the creed of their Latin brethren. But terror frequently produces
docility. The emperor John Palæologus II. alarmed by the growing power of
the Turks, which threatened his dominions with devastation and ruin, was
induced to hope, that if he could by a personal conference accommodate
his religious differences with the representatives of the Latin church,
the European powers might be persuaded to lend him effectual assistance
against the hostile attacks of the common enemy of the Christian
name. When the members of the council of Basil were apprised of the
conciliatory disposition of the Grecian monarch, they immediately issued
a decree, whereby they engaged to pay the expenses which he should incur
on his voyage to Italy, and during his residence in that country; and
moreover undertook to maintain seven hundred persons of his retinue,
including the ecclesiastics whom he might select to participate in their
deliberations.[298] When Eugenius had determined to hold a counter synod
at Ferrara, he was well aware that the Greeks would add considerable
weight to the assembly which they should resolve to countenance by their
presence. He accordingly sent a sufficient number of galleys to transport
Palæologus and his attendants, and, at the same time, transmitted to
the Grecian monarch a considerable sum of money to enable him to make
his appearance in Italy with a degree of splendour suitable to his
exalted station. Palæologus, from the prejudices of royalty more disposed
to accept the invitation of the sovereign pontiff than that of an
ecclesiastical senate, embarked in the papal galleys, and arrived on the
eighth day of February, 1438, at Venice, where he was received with the
most flattering testimonies of respect. On the fourth of March ensuing,
he made his public entry into Ferrara.[299] The ceremonials used upon
this occasion were wisely adapted to flatter the pride of the emperor,
and to dissipate the jealousy which he might be presumed to entertain of
the pretensions of the bishop of Rome. When he arrived at the pontifical
residence, Eugenius advanced to meet him at the door of his apartment,
declined receiving from him any mark of distinctive homage, and conducted
him to a seat on his left hand. The same discretion was manifested in
settling the arrangements of the council, where the Greek ecclesiastics
were received with all due honour and respect. The proceedings of that
assembly were by no means rapid. After the first session, it entered
upon no public acts for the space of six months. At the end of that
time, the plague having made its appearance at Ferrara, and the near
approach of the pontiff’s inveterate enemy Piccinino, who had taken the
cities of Bologna, Imola, and Ravenna,[300] exciting the fears of its
leading members, Eugenius transferred the orthodox synod to Florence,
at which city he arrived on the 24th day of January, 1439. His departure
from Ferrara was so precipitate, that it might justly be denominated a
flight; and in order to avoid the soldiers of Piccinino, he was compelled
to take a circuitous route by Modena, and through the passes of the
Pistoian mountains. He was soon followed by Palæologus and the deputies
of the Greek church, together with the other members of the council.[301]
Nothing of importance occurred in the deliberations of that assembly till
the sixth day of July.[302] On this memorable day, the great work of
the union of the Latin and Greek churches was in appearance completed,
by the assent of the Grecian deputies to a decree, whereby the disputed
points, the discussion of which had for so long a space of time excited
discord between the two grand divisions of the Christian community,
were decided by the concurrence of the highest authorities. The points
in question were, 1st. Whether leavened or unleavened bread should be
used in the communion of the body of Christ. 2nd. Whether the souls who
dwelt in purgatory were purified by elemental fire. 3rd. Whether the
bishop of Rome was the supreme head of the church: and 4th. Whether the
Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and the Son, or from the Father
only. On the three first of these questions the Greeks assented without
any pertinacity of opposition to the dogmas of their Latin brethren.
The fourth afforded matter of acute and lengthened disputation, and
the subjugation of the prejudices of the learned ecclesiastics of
Constantinople called forth not only the polemic skill of the most
irrefragable doctors of the Latin church, but also the political talents
of the ablest negotiators of the Roman court. Vanquished by intrigue
rather than by argument, persuaded rather than convinced, the attendants
of Palæologus, with the exception of two obstinate theologians, at
length concurred in the decree which announced to the Christian world,
that the word _filioque_ was legally inserted in the Nicene creed, that
there is a purgatory of fire, and that the body of Christ is to be made
of unleavened bread.[303] This decree having been solemnly promulgated,
the Greeks quitted Florence on the 26th day of August, and returned to
Constantinople.
Whilst the council was sitting at Ferrara, the cause of decency and
morality was vindicated by the passing of a solemn censure upon a
collection of epigrams entitled Hermaphroditus, which was ignominiously
consigned to the flames in the most public part of the city. The author
of this publication, which exceeds the grossest effusions of heathenism
in the rankness of obscenity, was Antonio Beccatelli, a native of
Palermo, from which circumstance he is commonly distinguished by the
appellation of Panormita. Beccatelli was born in the year 1394, of an
ancient and honourable family.[304] When he had finished his studies
in the university of Pavia, he entered into the service of Filippo
Maria, duke of Milan, who studied history under his instructions, for
which he liberally requited him, by the payment of an annual stipend of
eight hundred crowns of gold.[305] Being wearied by the distractions
occasioned by the frequent wars which disturbed the peace of Lombardy,
Beccatelli quitted Milan some time between the years 1432 and 1436, with
the intention of residing in his native city. He did not, however, long
continue in retirement; for the fame of his wit and learning having
reached Alfonso, king of Naples, that liberal prince invited him to his
court, bestowed upon him the honourable office of private secretary, and
treated him with the most distinguished regard. He continued to occupy
stations of the highest eminence under Alfonso and his successors till
the time of his death, which event took place on the 6th of January,
1471.[306]
The Hermaphroditus of Beccatelli is dedicated to Cosmo de’ Medici. A copy
of this work was communicated to Poggio, who was so much scandalized by
its obscenity, that he wrote to Beccatelli a friendly letter, in which
he highly commended the elegance of his style, but exhorted him to be in
future more delicate in the choice of his subjects. “I am bound,” said
he, “by the obligation of mutual affection, which is imposed upon us all,
to admonish you to turn your attention to graver topics.
“The licence which is allowed to youth may be pleaded in excuse of
the indelicacy of your late publication, and you can indeed allege
in your defence the example of Virgil, and of other writers. But it
is now incumbent upon you to have done with lasciviousness, and to
apply yourself to severer studies, lest your moral character should be
estimated by the impurity of your writings. You know, that we who profess
ourselves Christians cannot claim the same indulgences as those who were
ignorant of their duty. But I am in all probability teaching one who is
wiser then myself. I am persuaded, that on this subject you agree with me
in opinion.”[307]
To this salutary admonition Beccatelli replied in a long epistle, in
which he endeavoured to extenuate his fault, by quoting as precedents the
occasional pruriences of composition of a long list of ancient poets and
philosophers. He also attempted to vindicate himself by a few sophistical
arguments.[308] His reasoning was easily confuted by Poggio, who in
a second letter examined with laudable acuteness his precedents and
arguments, and fully demonstrated their insufficiency to vindicate the
licentiousness of imagery which disgusted every modest reader, whose eyes
happened to glance upon the impure pages of the Hermaphroditus.[309]
Whilst Eugenius was thus employed in subduing the heresy of the east,
he laboured under the high displeasure of the synod of Basil. After a
repetition of the various processes which had been issued against him
when he first refused to acknowledge their authority, the rebellious
fathers proceeded on the twenty-fifth of June, 1439, to depose him
from his pontifical honours. In the act of deposition which they
passed against him, they impeached him of contumacy and disobedience
to the commands of the church—they declared that he was a violator of
the canons, a disturber of unity, guilty of simony and perjury. They
furthermore denounced him as an incorrigible schismatic and heretic, and
a destroyer of the rights and possessions of the church.[310] On the
fifth of November, 1439, they filled up the measure of their offences by
electing Amedeus, duke of Savoy, to the pontifical chair.[311] Amedeus,
wearied by the cares of government, had lately resigned the ducal sceptre
to his eldest son, and had withdrawn to the hermitage of Ripaille, a
tranquil spot delightfully situated on the southern side of the lake
of Geneva, where he proposed to dedicate the remainder of his days to
devout meditation and prayer. When the intelligence of his election to
the pontificate was announced to him, he lamented the severity of his
destiny, which summoned him again to mingle in the cares and temptations
of a wicked world: but either seduced by the charms of pontifical
authority, or regarding the voice of the representatives of the Christian
community as the voice of God, he repaired to Basil, where the ceremony
of his coronation was performed with studied magnificence, on the
twenty-fourth of July, 1440.[312]
In the course of this contest between the councils of Ferrara and of
Basil, Eugenius derived considerable assistance from the advice and
support of Cardinal Julian, who, being at length convinced by experience
of the numerous evils arising from the precipitancy of the German synod,
of the probable occurrence of which he had been forewarned by Poggio, had
withdrawn from Basil, and by timely submission had easily made his peace
with his offended master.[313] The conversion of Julian was promoted by
the assiduous endeavours of Ambrogio Traversari. Before his accession to
the pontifical throne, Eugenius had honourably distinguished this learned
ecclesiastic by his friendship, and he did not forget him in the hour of
his exaltation. The general of the order of Camaldoli, who was impeached
of various evil practices, having resigned his office, Ambrogio was, by
the influence of the pontiff, appointed to succeed him on the 26th day of
October, 1431.[314] Inspired with gratitude for this act of friendship,
he readily undertook the office of watching over the interests of his
benefactor at the council of Basil, which he was deputed to attend,
as the representative of the city of Florence.[315] In combating the
enemies of the pontiff in that seditious, but enlightened assembly, he
manifested a high degree both of spirit and ability. His residence at
Basil was however but of short duration. Before the expiration of three
months after his arrival in that city, he was despatched by Eugenius
into Germany, with instructions to use his utmost endeavours to detach
the emperor Sigismund from the interests of the council. Having executed
this important commission with more fidelity than success, in the spring
of the year 1436 he returned to Florence, where he strove to forget
the intrigues of courts and synods in the discharge of the duties of
his office, and in the resumption of his studies. In the year 1438,
he was again summoned from retirement, to engage in the violence of
theological disputation. The pontiff having had sufficient experience
of his skill in conducting affairs of the greatest moment, delegated
to him the important office of opening the council of Ferrara.[316]
In the minute and delicate discussions of doctrinal points which took
place in this assembly he bore a distinguished part. On this occasion
he signalized his knowledge of the Greek language, by frequently acting
as interpreter between the respective representatives of the eastern
and western churches;[317] and it has been asserted, that his skill in
intrigue was not less conducive than his acuteness in disputation to
the settlement of the doctrine of the double procession.[318] Ambrogio
did not long survive the accomplishment of this pious work. When the
reconciliation of the Greek and Latin churches had been effected, he
once more retired to the tranquillity of his monastery, where he died
on the 20th of November, 1439. His remains were first deposited in the
abbey of St. Salvadore in Camaldoli, and were afterwards transferred to
a religious retreat belonging to his order, situated in the district
of Casentino. The writings of more than one of his contemporaries make
mention of a common report, that lilies grew upon his grave in the depth
of winter, and that when these miraculous flowers were with pious wonder
gathered by his surviving brethren, their place was immediately supplied
by the production of successive harvests.[319] Though the testimony of
these witnesses may, in an age of scepticism, be deemed insufficient to
establish the belief of this marvellous tale, the circulation of such a
report evinces the celebrity of Ambrogio’s fame, and the opinion which
was generally entertained of the extraordinary sanctity of his life.
Ambrogio Traversari is justly regarded as one of the literary luminaries
of his age. His knowledge was various and profound. He was well versed in
the Hebrew scriptures. It has been before observed, that the conferences
which took place between the deputies of the Latin and Greek churches
in the council of Ferrara, gave him an opportunity of displaying the
uncommon proficiency which he had made in the Grecian language. Rendering
his literary acquirements subservient to the duties of his profession,
he dedicated a considerable portion of his time to the translation of
the Greek fathers. Diogenes Laertius is the only profane author whose
works he illustrated by a Latin version. His style is flowing, but so
unpolished, that he seems to have fallen into the erroneous opinion, that
an attention to the elegancies of composition is unbecoming those who
are dedicated to sacred offices. His manners appear to have been simple,
and his dispositions benevolent. With his learned contemporaries he
maintained an extensive correspondence. A large collection of his letters
was published by P. Martene in the third volume of his Ancient Monuments.
This collection was afterwards republished, with several additions, by
P. Canetti; and lastly, the Abate Mehus, in two splendid folio volumes,
printed at Florence in the year 1759, has favoured the public with a
very correct impression of Ambrogio’s epistles and orations, to which he
has prefixed a most elaborate history of his life, and of the revival
of literature in Florence. These epistles, and the Hodœporicon, or
journal kept by Traversari of the observations which he made in the
course of several journeys which he took to various parts of Italy,
after his elevation to the generalship of his order, afford much curious
information concerning the manners and customs of the times in which he
lived.
With Poggio, Ambrogio maintained the most familiar intimacy. The
friendship of these industrious revivers of literature originated in
the community of their studies, and was confirmed by mutual acts of
good will. But the jealousy with which Poggio regarded the whole body
of monks led him to suspect, that Ambrogio, after his advancement to
the generalship of his order, divested himself of that simplicity and
singleness of heart which may be reasonably expected from those who
make a profession of extraordinary sanctity, and that he disguised the
selfishness of ambition in the garb of pretended humility.[320] This
suspicion, however, he advanced with becoming doubt; and perhaps justice
to Ambrogio might trace its origin to that superior gravity which he
might think it incumbent upon himself to assume, when he was called to
fill offices of high dignity, and which might sometimes restrain that
familiarity with which he was accustomed to converse with Poggio and his
other friends, when he dwelt, in cloistered seclusion, a simple monk of
Camaldoli.
Whilst Ambrogio was employed at Ferrara in the correction of creeds, and
the conversion of heretics, Poggio was occupied by domestic cares in
the retirement of his Tuscan villa. In the year 1438 his wife presented
him with a son, to whom he gave the name of Pietro Paulo. Amongst the
number of his friends who congratulated him on this event was Cincio,
one of the apostolic secretaries, a descendant of the noble Roman family
of Rustica.[321] Monsieur L’Enfant has published the letter which
Cincio wrote on this occasion, wherein he intimates to Poggio his firm
persuasion, that this child, being the offspring of a man of consummate
learning, and of a mother descended from an honourable family, will be
naturally inclined to every thing excellent and praise-worthy. In the
prospect of his being educated at Florence, also, he finds a presage
of his future attainments in knowledge and in virtue. Anxious for the
welfare of an infant born under such happy auspices, he admonishes his
friend, that should any consideration induce him to prohibit Vaggia
from performing the first duty of a mother, it would be incumbent upon
him to be fastidiously careful in the choice of a nurse. “Let her
be,” says he, “a woman of a robust constitution, of good complexion,
as well as of a good disposition, and also of ingenuous manners; for
nurses have a wonderful influence in forming the habits of children.”
He then exhorts Poggio assiduously to watch over the progress of his
son’s understanding, and to inculcate upon him lessons of the strictest
temperance. After having enlarged upon these topics, he concludes in the
following terms:—“Lastly, I must inform you, that your presence is very
earnestly desired in the Roman court. Come, then, and we will celebrate
the birth of your son in a friendly festival. You shall be the master of
the feast, and you shall have the honour of entertaining as your guests a
number of Latin and Greek philosophers. We will converse upon a variety
of topics, particularly upon the nature of pleasure. The exquisiteness
of the dishes, and the excellence of the wine, will ensure the alluring
goddess abundance of advocates. Even I, who have just been vilifying her,
as not to be tolerated in human society, may possibly on this occasion
once more enter into her good graces.”[322] In reply to this friendly
epistle, Poggio assured Cincio that in the choice of a nurse for his
infant son, he had paid due regard to the qualities enumerated by him,
and that he would spare no pains in his education; but at the same time,
in opposition to the opinion of his correspondent, he maintained by many
arguments, and by examples of great weight, that education is of little
avail in the formation of character, independently of a naturally good
disposition of mind.[323]
During the time when the domestic concerns of Poggio caused him to be
absent from the pontifical court, the list of his correspondents was
enlarged by the name of a sovereign prince, who occupied the foremost
rank amongst the potentates of Italy, namely Filippo Maria, duke of
Milan. This restless chieftain had in the year 1436 renewed hostilities
against the Florentines, in contempt of the pacification which had been
concluded at Ferrara, only three years before that period. This war was
not, however, of long duration. The Florentines, being dissatisfied with
the conduct of the Venetians, their allies, concluded a separate peace
with the duke on very advantageous terms, in the year 1438.
The alliance between the Florentines and the Venetians had always been
a most formidable obstacle to the ambitious projects of Filippo, and
he had nothing more at heart than to create a jealousy between those
two republics. It was probably with a view of engaging the party of
the Medici in his interest, that soon after the conclusion of the
above-mentioned peace, he addressed to Poggio a long epistle, in which
he artfully attempted to gratify his well known enthusiastic love of
his native country, by a studied eulogium on the Florentine state, and
also endeavoured to conciliate his favour, by assuring him that he had
always entertained the highest respect for his personal qualities and
his literary attainments. It appears from the commencement of Filippo’s
letter, that some persons having stigmatized the Florentines as a
short-sighted people, Poggio had remarked that the duke of Milan was
well qualified to prove the contrary.[324] The duke, affecting not to
be sensible of the sarcasm couched in this observation, professed to be
greatly flattered by the high opinion which Poggio appeared to entertain
of his talents; and commending the zeal which he manifested in defending
the reputation of his country, declared, that so far from finding the
Florentines short-sighted, he had always witnessed their skill, their
prudence, and their sagacity. The valour of the Tuscans, he observed, his
ancestors had experienced to their cost. Nor was he himself insensible
of the power of their arms, or of the wisdom of their councils. In
the late war they had so skilfully and courageously frustrated his
hostile attempts, that they had proved themselves truly worthy of the
blessings of freedom. Nor were the Florentines less accomplished in the
arts of peace than in those of war. Their moderation was universally
acknowledged. By their patronage of the liberal sciences they had
acquired an honourable distinction amongst the states of Italy. A people
of this character, Filippo observed, he could not but esteem and love;
and he protested that he would henceforth be as assiduous in cultivating
their friendship, as he had lately been active in troubling their repose.
He advised Poggio to treat the malevolent speeches of calumniators with
contempt; and at the close of his epistle, he assured him that he would
always be ready to exert his power and abilities to promote the welfare
of the Tuscan republic.
In his answer to this extraordinary letter, Poggio expressed the grateful
sense which he entertained of the polite condescension manifested by
the duke, in thus honouring a private and obscure individual with his
unsolicited correspondence. He assured Filippo that he was highly
gratified by the flattering terms in which he had complimented him on
his literary attainments, but yet more by the eulogium which he had
pronounced upon the city of Florence, and by the pledge which he had
given of his friendship for the Tuscan state. He then expressed his
hope, and indeed his confidence, that the pacific professions of the
duke would not be found fallacious, but that his actions would prove the
sincerity of his declarations. Proceeding to remind him of different
conjunctures in which the Florentines had testified their good will
towards him, he observed to his illustrious correspondent, that whenever
the administrators of the Tuscan republic had engaged in hostilities
against him, they had not been prompted to take up arms by the ambitious
hope of extending their territories, but by a determination to defend
their liberties. “And if,” said he, “liberty ought to be dear to any
people, it ought to be dear to the Florentines; for freedom is the very
essence of our constitution. We are not ruled by the arbitrary will of an
individual, nor by a faction of nobles. The mass of the people enjoy an
equality of rights, and the way to civic honours is open to all. Hence
it happens, that the high and the low, the noble and the ignoble, the
rich and the poor, unite in the defence of their common freedom, and that
in so glorious a cause they spare no expense, shrink from no labour,
and dread no danger.” Poggio then proceeded to express his persuasion,
that in the wars in which the duke had engaged against the Florentine
state, he had imagined that he was fighting in defence of his honour and
glory; for it was not to be supposed, that so generous a prince could
for a moment entertain the unworthy desire to oppress a republic, whose
power and splendour, the consequences of its free constitution, were the
pride of Italy. Nothing, he assured the duke, could be more grateful
to his feelings, than the friendly dispositions towards his countrymen
announced in his letter, which he fondly regarded as the herald of a
lasting peace. “Peace,” said he, “I must always regard as preferable
to war—provided it be not the cloak of insidious stratagem. You see,”
continued Poggio, “that your condescension encourages me to express my
sentiments with the utmost freedom. At the same time do not imagine that
I mean to insinuate any doubt of your sincerity. I am confident that your
well known wisdom will prompt you to lay the foundations of a firm and
lasting friendship, which will be mutually advantageous to yourself and
to the Florentine state. Let this be your conduct, and you will find me
a joyful herald of your praise; and inconsiderable as my talents may be,
my efforts will be the means of exciting others, whose abilities will do
ample justice to your merits.”[325]
If it was the intention of the duke of Milan, by thus honouring Poggio
with the offer of his friendship, to make an experiment upon his vanity,
the tenor of the foregoing answer to his condescending epistle must have
convinced him that his experiment had entirely failed. Divesting himself
of the humility of the papal secretary, Poggio addressed his illustrious
correspondent with the firm ingenuousness of a citizen of a free state.
He pleaded the cause of his country with all the energy of liberty; and
though he prudently smoothed the harshness of distrust by the polish of
urbanity, the penetration of Filippo would easily discern, that he was
far from giving implicit credit to his professions of friendship for the
Florentine republic.
Whatever might be the views of the duke in this affair, not many months
had elapsed after the occurrence of this interchange of suspicious
civility, before he found that the privileged walls of the palace of
Milan could not protect a literary delinquent from the rage of scholastic
vengeance; and that the interposition of his patronage could not deter
Poggio from reiterating his attacks upon Francesco Filelfo. It has been
already related, that this wandering professor, when he was compelled
to fly from Florence, withdrew to Siena, where he arrived early in the
year 1435. In this city he commenced a series of lectures on rhetoric,
for which he was remunerated by the payment of an annual salary of three
hundred and fifty gold crowns.[326] His literary labours were however
disturbed by the apprehensions which he entertained of the machinations
of his adversaries. But his fears for his personal safety did not
restrain the intemperance of his pen. On the thirteenth of August, 1437,
he transmitted to one of his friends, named Pietro Pierleoni, a new
satire against Poggio and Cosmo de’ Medici. Soon after the publication
of this satire, he visited the baths of Petriolæ, where he had not long
resided before he received a letter from Siena, informing him that a man
of a very suspicious appearance had been making minute inquiries into
his present situation and habits of life. On the receipt of this letter
Filelfo returned to Siena, where he soon recognized in the person in
question, the ruffian who had formerly made an attack upon him in the
streets of Florence. He immediately gave the necessary information to the
captain of the city guard. This officer without loss of time apprehended
the villain, from whom, according to the barbarous practice of the times,
he endeavoured to extract a declaration of the object of his visit to
Siena by the pains of the rack. By this uncertain mode of investigation,
the prisoner was compelled to confess, that he came to that city for the
purpose of assassinating Filelfo. The captain of the guard did not deem
it necessary to inquire whether any person had suborned him to perpetrate
so execrable a deed; but the ready conjecture of Filelfo fixed upon the
Medici an imputation, which a direct interrogatory ably introduced on a
new distension of his sinews, would have induced the wretched Filippo
to confirm by a judicial declaration. An acknowledgment of guilt having
been thus extorted from the culprit, the captain of the guard proceeded
to condemn him to pay a fine of five hundred pounds of silver. Filelfo,
not satisfied with this penalty, appealed to the governor of the city,
who proceeding upon his recorded confession, punished the offender by
cutting off his right hand. Nothing indeed but the earnest request of
Filelfo would have prevented the chief magistrate from dooming the
wretch to the punishment of death. Filelfo was not, however, prompted
by any emotions of compassion to desire that the life of the assassin
might be prolonged. “I interfered to prevent his execution,” said he,
in a letter to Æneas Sylvius, “because I wished that he should live
mutilated and disgraced, rather than that he should be freed by a speedy
death from the anguish of a suffering mind. For as it is the duty of a
man of a magnanimous spirit to forgive slight offences, so justice and
prudence require us to inflict vengeance on a common enemy of the human
race.”[327] Filelfo was so much alarmed by the appearance of the Tuscan
bravo, that he did not deem himself secure in the precincts of Siena. He
accordingly returned from thence to Bologna.[328] After a short residence
in that place, in the month of May, 1439, he repaired to Milan, to which
city he was attracted by the munificence of the duke.[329] Encouraged
by the protection of this powerful patron, he exulted in his security,
and proudly bade defiance to his enemies. Mistaking the emotions of
wrath for the inspiration of the muse, he poured forth torrent after
torrent of abusive verses. Ringing over and over again the changes of
virulent scurrility, he renewed his attack upon the person and reputation
of Poggio. The vengeance of Poggio was not long dormant. He moved to
the combat with the cumbrous artillery of a long invective, in which
he continued his invidious strictures on the life and conversation of
his adversary. Adverting in the beginning of this composition to the
scandalous imputations which had been aimed at him by Filelfo, he thus
compared his own history with that of his antagonist. “Of myself I shall
only say, that in consequence of these crimes which you impute to me, I
have lived with honour and dignity in the service of seven successive
pontiffs, from whom I have experienced the most satisfactory proofs
of their kind regard; whilst you, adorned as you represent yourself
to be with virtues, have been wandering about like a Scythian flying
from city to city; oppressed with poverty, continually reduced to
the necessity of suing for foreign aid, never able to retain a fixed
habitation for any length of time; but, like a harpy, spreading such a
foul contagion wherever you come, that they who afforded you an asylum
were soon compelled to banish you.”[330]—Upbraiding his antagonist with
the obscurity of his origin, Poggio affirmed that he was the offspring
of an adulterous intercourse between a parish priest and the wife of a
rustic, whose hands, he said, were so rough with continual labour, that
he was accustomed to use them instead of a curry comb in dressing his
horses.[331] Tracing the course of Filelfo’s early life, he noticed his
residence in Padua, and his visit to Venice and Constantinople, from all
which places he affirmed that he was driven by the infamy of his vices.
Narrating his transactions after his return to Italy, he charged him
with fraudulently retaining certain books, in payment for which he had
received sums of money from Leonardo Giustiniano and Guarino Veronese.
He also enumerated many more instances of his alleged dishonesty.
Amongst other imputations of this nature, he asserted, that Filelfo,
being once admitted into Leonardo Aretino’s library, took advantage of
the absence of his host to steal a box of gold rings. He reminded him
of the precipitancy of his flight from Florence, and affirmed that he
left Siena in disgrace, and fled to Milan in circumstances of the utmost
distress. Having exhausted all the topics of obloquy which suggested
themselves to his fertile imagination, Poggio concluded his invective
with the following peroration. “Since you are conscious that these
things are true, I wonder that you do not withdraw from the light,
and fly from the aspect of men into some distant solitudes, where the
villany of Filelfo is unknown. But your mind, delighting in wickedness
and blinded by passion, your obscene manners, your abandoned life, your
secret vices, hurry you headlong to your fate, drive you onward by the
instigation of the furies, prevent you from profiting by wholesome
counsel, and render you insensible of the distinction between right and
wrong. As Hercules traversed the world to benefit mankind by his labours,
so you have visited every country and climate to disgust them by your
vices. Whither would you betake yourself should you be deprived of the
countenance of your present patron? You have now wandered like a common
mendicant through every district of Italy. What will you do if your
present resources fail you? Whose assistance will you implore? To whose
protection will you commend yourself? I know what you will do. You will
enlist into some army; and, such is your ambition, you will have the
vanity to aspire to the chief command. But you will make your exit at the
gallows—an exit well befitting a man of your vicious character. For when
your patron shall perceive that he does not obtain praise, but ignominy
from your ridiculous writings his sentiments will be changed, and he will
drag you from your obscene retreat, and inflict upon you the punishment
due to your crimes.”[332]
The exhibition of a few specimens of the virulence which distinguished
the hostility of these learned gladiators is perhaps necessary to give
a true idea of the character of the combatants, and of the times in
which they lived. It may also be subservient to another useful purpose.
The odious nature of vice, as well as the beauty of virtue, is most
strikingly demonstrated by examples; and perhaps nothing will tend more
to convince men of the folly of evil speaking, lying, and slandering,
than the perusal of the invectives of Poggio, and the satires of Filelfo.
Poggio did not, however, waste the whole of the leisure time which
he enjoyed in the retirement of his Tuscan villa, in the disgraceful
occupation of bestowing a literary garb on the grossest abuse. At the
commencement of the year 1440 he published his dialogue on Nobility,
a work which greatly increased his reputation by the luminousness of
its method, the elegance of its diction, and the learned references
with which it was interspersed. In a short prefatory address, by which
he dedicated this dialogue to Gerardo Landriani, bishop of Como, he
observed, that it was a remarkable circumstance, that this subject, which
opened so wide a field for discussion, had been in a manner neglected
by the learned. He professed his conviction of his own inability to do
justice to it, but expressed his hopes that his example might induce
scholars of more brilliant talents to correct his errors, and to supply
his deficiencies.
The interlocutors of this dialogue are Niccolo Niccoli and Lorenzo de’
Medici, the brother of Cosmo. The scene of the conversation is laid in
the villa of Poggio, which these lovers of the fine arts had visited for
the purpose of inspecting some ancient statues which had been lately
conveyed thither from Rome. The sight of these statues arranged in the
garden of Poggio’s rural retreat reminds Lorenzo of the manners of the
ancient Romans, who, he observes, were accustomed to adorn the halls
of their palaces with the effigies of their ancestors, the lustre of
whose nobility they imagined reflected honour on themselves. This remark
draws from Niccolo a declaration of his opinion, that in founding their
fame on the glory of their progenitors, they were greatly deceived, as
the seat of true nobility is the mind. Lorenzo, granting the position,
that virtue is a source of nobility, affirms that this honour may also
be acquired by the ornaments of wealth and dignity. In proof of his
assertion, he enlarges on the meaning of the word _nobilis_, shewing,
by various quotations from Latin authors, that it is used to signify
in general the quality of being remarkable, without any reference to
the cause of notoriety. He moreover observes, that the common opinion
of men attaches the idea of nobility to eminence of station, splendour
of birth, and other adventitious circumstances of a similar nature.
Niccolo, replying to this observation, that if the opinion of the vulgar
is to be regarded, their ideas are so various upon the subject, that
no certain criterion can be derived from them, is desired to enumerate
the characteristics of nobility which occur in different countries.
In compliance with this request, he thus describes the nobles of his
native land. “To begin with the Italians, who have disseminated amongst
other nations the arts which adorn human life, what a difference there
subsists between the nobility of Naples, of Venice, and of Rome. The
Neapolitans, who pride themselves on their patrician dignity, seem to
imagine, that nobility consists in the indulgence of idleness and sloth;
for they enter into no active pursuits, but live in indolence upon the
revenues of their estates. They deem it unbecoming a nobleman to attend
to agriculture, or to take any cognizance of the state of his affairs.
They spend their time in loitering in the halls of their palaces, or in
equestrian exercises. However bad a man’s moral character may be, or
however mean his talents, if he be descended from an ancient family, he
a ranks amongst the nobility. As to merchandize, they regard it with
contempt; and so ridiculous is their pride, that though they be reduced
to the most abject state of poverty, they would rather starve than suffer
any branch of their family to form a matrimonial alliance with the most
opulent tradesman. Nay, so great is their dislike of traffic, that they
deem it more honourable to support themselves by robbery, than to gain a
livelihood by engaging in any species of commerce. I know a Neapolitan of
a most illustrious family, who was regarded by his brother patricians in
so degrading a light, because he had exposed to sale a quantity of wine,
the produce of his estates, that he experienced the utmost difficulty in
marrying his daughter, though he was able to bestow upon her a very large
fortune.
“To this absurdity the customs of the Venetians afford a striking
contrast. In their state the nobility compose a kind of faction distinct
from the body of the people, and are all engaged in merchandize. All
those who have discharged public offices, and all the members of the
senate, are graced with the honours of nobility. And so vain are they of
this distinction, that the foolish and needy son of a foolish and needy
father, looks down with disdain upon a plebeian, whatever may be his
learning or his worth. The ranks of the Venetian nobility are sometimes
recruited in an extraordinary manner. For he who has done any signal
service to the state, however culpable may have been the means of which
he has made use to promote this end, is immediately enrolled in the list
of the patricians.
“The Roman nobles are taught to regard merchandize as a sordid pursuit,
and they employ themselves in the cultivation of their lands, and in
the breeding of cattle. So far are they from thinking it beneath their
dignity to convert their agricultural knowledge into a source of gain,
that property thus acquired will raise ignoble families to the honour of
noble birth.
“The Florentines seem to have more correct notions of nobility than any
of the above-mentioned communities. For amongst us those are accounted
noble who are descended from ancient families, and whose ancestors have
held distinguished places in the administration of public affairs;
but their nobility is by no means dependant upon the nature of their
occupation. For some of them engage in merchandize; others live upon the
income of their property, and amuse themselves with the rural diversions
of hawking and hunting. The Genoese who live on the coast are all
indiscriminately engaged in commerce, and their nobility depends upon
their origin. The Lombard nobles reside in fortresses built upon the
mountains, and, by their predatory excursions, strike terror into the
traveller. The nobility of the Terra Firma of Venice live on the revenue
of their estates, and spend their time in rural sports. Amongst them,
nobility depends upon high descent, and independence of property. Why
should I mention other nations whose customs differ but little from our
own? The Germans esteem those noble who inherit a patrimony sufficient
for their maintenance; and they bestow this title on those formidable
plunderers who retire from towns and cities to the security of their
castles. Throughout the whole of France the privilege of nobility is
held by one uniform tenure. The Gallic lords live in the country, and
think it a disgrace for a man of exalted birth to reside in a town. They
despise merchants as a vile and abject race of beings. Prodigality and
carelessness with regard to futurity they esteem a certain indication of
a noble spirit. The nobility of France is continually increased by the
accession either of the wealthy, or of the retainers of the great barons.
For the sons of merchants and tradesmen who have inherited large fortunes
from their fathers, by purchasing an estate and living in the country on
its produce, compose an inferior order of nobility, and transmit to their
sons all the honours of the aristocracy: and those who have lived in the
service of the great barons, by receiving from their liege lords a grant
of land, attain to the rank of nobility. The customs of the English are
in this respect very similar to those of the French. In Spain nobility
is attached to the descendants of ancient houses who are possessed of
competent property, whether they reside in cities or in the country.”
Having thus noticed the different ideas of nobility which are entertained
in the European states, Niccolo proceeds slightly to animadvert upon the
notions of the Asiatics upon this subject; and from this induction of
particulars, he draws the general inference, that nobility, in the vulgar
acceptation of the term, cannot be traced to any fixed principles. On
Lorenzo’s intimating that the title of noble should be granted to all
those who are esteemed so by the institutions of their country, Niccolo
refuses his assent to this proposition, and proceeds to argue the matter
at large with much sound reasoning, proving that nobility does not
depend upon externals. Lorenzo in reply to Niccolo adduces the definition
of nobility proposed by Aristotle, who asserts in his dialogue on
Politics, that the virtuous descendants of virtuous and wealthy ancestors
are noble. This definition is examined by Niccolo, who maintains that
it is faulty, because a virtuous man does not lose his nobility, should
he happen to be deprived of his wealth. In opposition to the opinion
of the Stagyrite, he quotes the opinion of Plato and the Stoics, who
assert, that true nobility consists in virtue. Lorenzo acknowledges
that virtue is requisite to true nobility; but still contends that to
complete the idea of this distinction, to virtue must be added those
external advantages which render a man conspicuous. Niccolo grants
that these are desirable adjuncts; but at the same time adheres to his
original position, that purity of moral principle is an indispensable
characteristic of genuine nobility, and concludes the conference by
inviting the company to enjoy the coolness of the evening in walking
along the banks of the river.[333]
Though this dialogue on nobility was received with great applause by
the generality of learned men, the description which it contained of
the Venetian nobles offended the patriotic pride of Gregorio Coriario,
prothonotary of the apostolic see, who remonstrated with Poggio on the
unfavourable light in which he had represented the patricians of his
country, as a kind of faction distinct from the body of the people,
and as being ready to confer the highest civil honours on those who
had served their country, even by dishonourable means. In reply to
the animadversions of Gregorio, Poggio expressed his wish that he had
communicated his dialogue to him previously to its publication, declaring
that he would with the utmost readiness have altered or expunged any
objectionable passage which might have been pointed out to him. At the
same time he endeavoured to palliate the offence which he had committed
against the dignity of the Venetian aristocracy, by observing, that he
had adopted the word _factio_ merely to express the idea of a class
or party of men, in which innocent or indifferent sense it was used
by the best Latin authors. As to the second cause of displeasure, he
protested that he had made the obnoxious assertion in question upon what
he conceived to be good authority, and that he was persuaded that the
Venetians had sometimes conferred the honours of nobility upon men of
equivocal character. “You ask me,” continued he, “to quote some instance
of the occurrence of this circumstance. Believe me, if I recollected
any I would rather acknowledge myself in an error, than defend my cause
at the expense of any one’s good name. I wish my lucubrations to be
favourably received by the public. On this account it is much more my
interest to praise than to condemn. I therefore beg that you will freely
correct my mistakes, and do not fear exciting my displeasure. I esteem
myself greatly indebted to you for that kindness which prompts you
to be watchful over my honour, and zealous to prevent me from giving
unnecessary offence. Nor must I forget to express the sense which I feel
of the modesty and urbanity which render your letter the clear expression
of the mildness and gentleness of your manners. _Florence, April 8th,
1440._”[334]
By introducing Lorenzo de’ Medici as an interlocutor in this dialogue,
Poggio no doubt intended to preserve to distant times the memory of the
familiar terms on which he had lived with one of the most illustrious
citizens of Florence.
Lorenzo did not long survive the publication of this testimony of
esteem. On the twenty-third of September, 1440, he paid the great debt
of nature. In him Poggio was at once deprived of a father, a brother,
and a friend—of one who was always ready to sympathize in his cares, and
to assist him in his distresses.[335] Whilst Lorenzo lived he was free
from anxiety with regard to pecuniary affairs, as in his liberality he
constantly found the most copious resources in the hour of need. By the
death of this generous benefactor, he was deeply affected; and as soon as
his grief would permit him to collect his scattered thoughts, he hastened
to celebrate the virtues of his deceased friend, in an eulogium on his
character, which he addressed to Carlo Aretino. From this effusion of
affectionate esteem, we learn that Lorenzo was endued with the elegance
of taste, the liberality of spirit, and the urbanity of manners, which
for so long a period distinguished all the branches of his renowned
family. His kinsmen no doubt deemed his memory highly honoured by the
respectful attendance of Eugenius IV. at his funeral obsequies.[336]
But they were probably little aware, that the duteous zeal of an humble
secretary would be more conducive to the diffusion and the permanence of
his fame, than the splendour of a pontifical procession, or the grandeur
of monumental memorials.
CHAP. IX.
_War between the Florentines and the duke of Milan—Treachery and death
of Vitelleschi—The duke of Milan makes peace with the Florentines—Death
of Niccolo d’Este—Character of his successor, Lionello—Correspondence
between Lionello and Poggio—Remarks on the price of books—Eugenius
endeavours to drive Sforza from the Marca d’Ancona—He quits
Florence—Death of Nicolao Albergato, cardinal of Santa Croce—Poggio’s
funeral eulogium on the cardinal—Memoirs of Tommaso da Sarzana—Poggio
dedicates to Tommaso his dialogue On the Unhappiness of princes—Analysis
of that dialogue—Death of Leonardo Aretino—Funeral honours paid to
Leonardo—Gianozzo Manetti’s oration on that occasion—Poggio’s eulogium
on Leonardo—Character of Leonardo—Account of Leonardo’s successor, Carlo
Marsuppini—Death of cardinal Julian—Poggio’s eulogium on the cardinal._
CHAP. IX.
It has been already observed, that from the tenor of Poggio’s answer
to the complimentary letter of the duke of Milan, he appears not to
have given implicit credit to that prince’s professions of friendship
for the Florentine republic, and that he evidently expected that
the restless ambition of Filippo would again kindle the flames of
war. Events justified his prognostications. In the year 1439, the
administrators of the Tuscan government were so much alarmed by the
success of Piccinino, who had invaded the Venetian territories at the
head of the Milanese army, that they renewed their alliance with their
ancient friends, to whose assistance they sent a considerable body
of troops, under the command of Francesco Sforza. The duke of Milan,
with the view of compelling the Tuscans to withdraw their forces from
Lombardy, directed Piccinino to make an incursion into the territories
of Florence. Piccinino accordingly marched through Romagna, and made
himself master of several places in the district of Casentino. The duke
of Milan expected to have derived considerable assistance in the invasion
of the Tuscan territories from Vitelleschi, with whom he had for some
time carried on a secret correspondence, and who had, through hatred of
the Florentines, engaged to support Piccinino with a powerful body of
troops. But the secrecy with which this intrigue had been conducted did
not elude the vigilance of the administrators of the Tuscan government.
They fortunately intercepted certain letters addressed by the duke to
Vitelleschi, which revealed the particulars of the conspiracy. These
letters they communicated to the pontiff, who gave immediate orders for
the arrest of the perfidious patriarch. As Vitelleschi was then at Rome,
the execution of this commission was entrusted to Antonio Rido, the
commandant of the castle of St. Angelo. According to the instructions of
Eugenius, Vitelleschi was suddenly surrounded by a troop of horse, as he
was passing the bridge of St. Angelo, on his way to join the forces which
he had destined for the assistance of Piccinino. He was no sooner aware
of his danger, than he boldly drew his sword, and endeavoured to cut his
way through the soldiers who were sent to secure him. In the conflict he
was wounded in the neck, and growing faint with loss of blood, he was
overpowered and carried as a prisoner into the castle. On the twentieth
day of his confinement he died, as some say of his wounds, according to
the report of others, of poison. By whatever means he came to his end, so
atrocious were the cruelties which he had committed during the days of
his power, that his death occasioned universal joy, and was regarded by
thousands as a signal instance of divine retribution.[337]
Piccinino being by this event deprived of all hope of assistance was
obliged to depend upon his own exertions. In these circumstances he
was not dispirited. The successes which he had experienced in the
commencement of the campaign led him to entertain sanguine hopes of
crushing the Tuscan republic. But his confidence prepared the way for
his discomfiture and disgrace. His rash reliance on the valour and
discipline of his troops tempting him to engage the Florentine army under
very disadvantageous circumstances, he experienced a total defeat on the
twenty-ninth of June, 1440.[338] Nor did better success attend the arms
of the duke of Milan in Lombardy. His forces were put to the rout by
Francesco Sforza, on the banks of the river Oglio. Disheartened by these
losses, Filippo was disposed to an accommodation; and by the mediation
of Sforza, peace was again concluded between that prince and his allied
enemies in the autumn of the year 1441.[339]
In the preceding year, Niccolo d’Este, marquis of Ferrara, had
assiduously endeavoured to bring about this desirable event; and though
his mediation was unsuccessful, his friendly interposition served to
confirm the honourable character which he had so long sustained—that
of the promoter of peace. In such estimation did the duke of Milan
hold this virtuous prince, that he invited him to his capital, and
entrusted him with the government of his extensive dominions. This mark
of confidence was universally regarded as a prelude to the nomination of
Niccolo to the ducal throne of Milan; but the hopes which the friends of
virtue entertained of witnessing the happy effects resulting from his
advancement were destroyed by his death, which took place on the 26th of
December, 1441.
The sorrow experienced by the subjects of Niccolo, in consequence
of this event, was considerably alleviated by their observation of
the extraordinary good qualities of Lionello, his successor. In the
contemplation of the purity of morals, the solidity of judgment, and
the benevolence of heart, which adorned the character of this exemplary
youth, they forgot the illegitimacy of his birth; and when, prompted
by an enthusiastic respect for his virtues, they joyfully hailed him
as their sovereign, their choice was approved by the suffrages of all
the scholars of Italy. Lionello was indeed the favourite theme of
the applause of the learned. He not only encouraged the ardour, but
participated in the studies of the cultivators of the liberal arts.
Under the auspices of Guarino Veronese, he had acquired a profound
knowledge of classical literature, which enabled him accurately to
appreciate the merits of the candidates for literary fame. The promotion
of Lionello to the sovereignty of Ferrara was highly gratifying to the
feelings of Poggio. Several years previously to this event, he had
been induced by the fame of the elegance of taste which distinguished
Lionello’s juvenile compositions, to address to him a letter, in which
he highly commended his love of literature, and strenuously exhorted him
diligently to pursue those studies which he had so happily begun.[340]
The request which he made to this illustrious student to prosecute an
inquiry after the lost decads of Livy has been already noticed. The
homage which Poggio paid to the talents of Lionello gave rise to an
epistolary intercourse, the refraining fragments of which afford a
striking specimen of the unreserved friendship and liberal familiarity
which a community of studies sometimes produces between persons who
occupy very distant stations in the ranks of society. The freedom with
which Lionello permitted his learned correspondent to communicate to him
his opinions, is conspicuous in a letter addressed by Poggio to Guarino
Veronese, requesting him to inform their patron of the surprize and
concern which he had experienced on receiving the intelligence of his
having bestowed some distinguished honours on an unworthy candidate.[341]
Of the character of this candidate Poggio gave his sentiments in the
following letter to Lionello himself, which is interesting on account of
the information which it contains with respect to the value of books at
this period.
“A few days ago there occurred in the chamber of his holiness a discourse
on the subject of Jerome’s epistles. Happening to be present on this
occasion, I observed, that I had in my possession two very handsome
volumes of those epistles; on which one of the company remarked, that
he had offered me eighty florins for them, but could not obtain them
at that price. To this I replied, that the cardinal of St. Xystus had
often importuned me to let him have the volumes in question, for which
he would willingly pay me one hundred florins, and think himself obliged
by the bargain; and that I should in all probability have sold the books
at that price, had I not been prevented by Niccolo Niccoli, who with his
accustomed moroseness declared, that by so doing, I should give an a
indication of a sordid and abject mind. On this our friend Aurispa said,
that you very earnestly wished to add these epistles to your collection,
and desired me to sell them to you, assuring me that you would cheerfully
pay any price which I should fix upon them. With some reluctance I
complied with his request, and I write to inform you, that I am willing
to part with the books for the price which has been already offered
for them, namely, one hundred ducats. It remains for you therefore to
determine whether you will purchase them at that price. It is a matter of
indifference to me what your determination may be; for I do not part with
the volumes with a view of raising money, but merely through a desire of
obliging you. This however I will say, that no person in Italy possesses
in the same compass a larger or a more correct collection of epistles
than those which are contained in these two volumes.
“Your friend, the knight of Rieti, when he came to this town some time
ago to gratify his love of ostentation (for he wished his folly to be
known to every body) told a certain citizen of Ferrara, that you had
shewn him the letter which I wrote concerning him to Guarino. I do not
think that this is the fact; but I wish you would inform me whether in
this matter he adheres to his usual practice of lying. On his departure
hence he told some persons that he was going to visit his uncle; to
others he asserted, that you had nominated him your ambassador at
Florence. He would think himself undone were he to utter any thing but
falsehood. He must needs be full of truth; for no truth ever passes
through his lips.”[342]
Lionello transmitted to Poggio the hundred ducats, at which he
appreciated his copy of the epistles of Jerome. He intimated to him,
however, that some of the learned men of Ferrara thought the price an
extravagant one; and he desired that it might be understood, that in
acceding to the terms proposed by his correspondent, he intended to make
him a present of the excess above the real value of the book. In reply to
these observations, Poggio maintained the correctness of his estimation,
in opposition to the judgment of the Ferrarese connoisseurs, which he
treated with great contempt; and humorously observed, that he thankfully
accepted the gift mentioned by Lionello, not on account of its intrinsic
value, but as an earnest of future munificence; “for,” said he, “it is
the custom of worthy princes, such as you are, to persevere in what they
have well begun.”[343]
If the ducat be estimated at ten shillings English money, the epistles
of Jerome were purchased by Lionello at the expense of fifty pounds
sterling.[344] From the history of Filelfo it appeals, that at this
time the salary of a public professor of literature rarely exceeded
four hundred ducats; so that the price of a couple of volumes absorbed
one-fourth of the sum which was deemed an adequate annual recompence for
the services of a man of consummate learning. The exhibition of these
facts will demonstrate the difficulties which obstructed the paths of
learning in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It will also tend to
make the modern scholar sensible of the tribute of gratitude which he
owes to the inventor of the typographic art.
It was not without considerable reluctance that Eugenius had yielded to
Francesco Sforza the dominion of the Marca d’Ancona; and he had long
waited with impatience for the occurrence of some favourable opportunity
to wrest from that chieftain the territory which he had so unwillingly
conceded to him. In the year 1442, he flattered himself that he should
be enabled to accomplish this object of his earnest desire. Regnier of
Anjou being then closely besieged in the city of Naples by Alfonso
of Arragon, had solicited the assistance of Sforza, who dispatched
a body of troops to make a diversion in his favour. Eugenius taking
advantage of this conjuncture, formally deprived Sforza of the office of
Gonfaloniere of the holy see, which he bestowed on his rival Piccinino.
In obedience to the orders of his new sovereign, Piccinino immediately
invaded the Marca, and made himself master of the city of Todi. This
incursion compelled Sforza to withdraw from Naples the forces which
he had destined to the relief of Regnier, who after the loss of his
capital was compelled to quit Italy, and to retire into Provence.[345]
Eugenius seeing Alfonso thus firmly established on the Neapolitan throne,
not only agreed to terms of pacification with him, but endeavoured to
procure his assistance in depriving their common enemy of the dominion
of the Marca. The Florentines, who had constantly entertained very
friendly dispositions towards Sforza, openly interposed to counteract
the measures which Eugenius had adopted to expel their favourite general
from the territories of the church. This political difference gave rise
to a coolness between Eugenius and the administrators of the Tuscan
government, in consequence of which the pontiff determined to quit the
city of Florence, and to repair to Rome. He accordingly set out on
his journey on the seventh of March, 1443, and on the ensuing day he
arrived at Siena, in which city he continued to reside till the month of
September.[346]
Soon after the pontiff’s arrival in Siena, his court was deprived of
an illustrious member, by the death of Nicolao Albergato, cardinal of
Santa Croce.[347] In this event Poggio was deeply interested, as that
eminent ecclesiastic, who was distinguished by his liberal patronage
of learned men, had long honoured him with his affectionate esteem. In
grateful respect for the memory of his deceased friend, Poggio undertook
to record his virtues in a funeral eulogium. From this document it
appears, that Nicolao Albergato was a native of Bologna, the descendant
of an honourable family. At an early age he dedicated himself to the
study of the civil law, in which he made a considerable proficiency. But
when he had attained to years of maturity, his religious zeal induced
him to bid farewell to the cares of the world, and to enter into the
monastic fraternity of the Carthusians. So exemplary was his observance
of the severe rules of this strict order, that, soon after his admission
into it, he was appointed to the office of superior. The fame of his
austerity, his prudence and discretion, having reached his native place,
on the occurrence of a vacancy in the episcopal throne of Bologna, his
fellow citizens unanimously invited him to preside over their spiritual
affairs. It was not without considerable reluctance that he undertook
this arduous office, by the discharge of the duties of which he, however,
confirmed and increased his reputation. Exerting his utmost endeavours
to restrain the licentiousness of the clergy, he studiously set his
brethren an example of the most decorous correctness of manners, and
of the utmost purity of moral conduct. His charity was diffusive, but
discriminating. He assiduously sought for the children of distress, who
were induced by the ingenuous emotions of shame to hide their poverty
in uncomplaining retirement, and he secretly relieved their wants. His
patriarchal virtues attracted the notice of Martin V., who without any
solicitation on his part raised him to the dignity of cardinal. After
his advancement to this high honour, he was employed by that pontiff and
by his successor Eugenius IV. in various negotiations of the greatest
importance, in the conduct of which he evinced a degree of skill in the
transaction of business, which would have done honour to one who had been
from his early youth versed in the active concerns of life. His latter
years were years of pain, occasioned by the pangs of an excruciating
disease, which he bore with the most exemplary patience, and from which
he was relieved by the welcome hand of death, in the sixty-eighth year of
his age.[348]
Had the cardinal of Santa Croce been rendered illustrious by no other
circumstance, his patronage of Tommaso da Sarzana, who under the
appellation of Nicolas V. became one of the brightest ornaments of
the pontificate, would have been in itself sufficient to secure to
him the praises of posterity. Tommaso was the son of Bartolomeo dei
Parentucelli, a professor of arts and of medicine in the city of Pisa.
His mother Andreola was a native of Sarzana. He had scarcely attained to
the age of seven years, when he experienced an irreparable misfortune in
the death of his father. In consequence of this event Andreola removed
from Pisa to Sarzana, where she soon consoled herself for the loss of
Bartolomeo, in the arms of a second husband. This new connexion was
rendered unhappy by the illiberality of her spouse, who looked upon his
step-son with a jealous eye, and embittered the days of the unoffending
youth, by the harshness of his behaviour towards him. This unfortunate
circumstance rendered Andreola very anxious concerning the future
destination of her son, which, however, she flattered herself was at
length fixed by supernatural interposition.—When Tommaso was about ten
years of age he was seized by the plague, by which dreadful malady he was
soon reduced to the last extremity. Exhausted with fatigue, occasioned
by her unremitting attendance upon her favourite child, Andreola sunk
into a disturbed slumber, during the continuance of which an angel
seemed to appear before her, and to promise that the object of her care
should recover from his disease, if she would promise to dedicate to the
priesthood the life which, for this high purpose alone, the mercy of God
would vouchsafe to spare. Waking from her dream, Andreola made a solemn
vow that she would fulfil the direction of the heavenly messenger—and
her child recovered. In pursuance of her sacred engagement, when
Tommaso had attained the age of twelve years, she sent him to commence
his studies at Bologna. The rigid moroseness of her husband, however,
would not permit her to furnish the youthful student with any means of
supporting himself. At this feeble age, therefore, the future pontiff
was banished from an uncomfortable home, and sent forth into the wide
world, with no resources but his genius, his virtues, and the generosity
of the benevolent. These apparently inauspicious circumstances called
into exertion an energy of mind which cannot be too highly applauded.
For the space of six years Tommaso applied himself to his studies with
astonishing diligence, and soon made considerable progress in various
departments of knowledge. When he had attained his eighteenth year, his
literary reputation induced two eminent citizens of Florence to invite
him to undertake the education of their children. This invitation Tommaso
readily accepted; and from his eighteenth to his twenty-second year, he
was engaged in the laborious employment of initiating his pupils in the
rudiments of learning. Having at the end of four years from the time of
his arrival in Florence, by strict economy, accumulated a sum of money,
which he deemed sufficient to enable him to prosecute his studies with
advantage, he returned to Bologna. His literary accomplishments had now
gained him the countenance of several respectable friends, at whose
recommendation he was admitted into the family of Nicolao Albergato, who
was then the bishop of that city. By his prudence and good conduct he
gained the esteem of his patron, who soon promoted him to the stewardship
of his household. In the midst of the multifarious employments which
devolved upon him in consequence of his acceptance of this office,
Tommaso found leisure to fathom the depths of scholastic theology. When
he had attained the age of five-and-twenty, in discharge of his mother’s
vow, he enrolled himself in the priesthood. He continued to live in the
family of Nicolao Albergato for the space of twenty years, at the end
of which period the death of that prelate obliged him to seek a new
patron. His well-known virtues soon obtained for him the countenance and
support of Gerardo d’Andriani, cardinal of Santa Maria Transtevere. In
the suite of this dignitary he accompanied Eugenius to Rome, to which
city the papal court was transferred on the twenty-eight of September,
1443. He had not long resided in the pontifical capital before he was
distinguished by the favour of Eugenius, who on the death of his second
protector took him into his service, and appointed him sub-deacon of the
apostolic see, and soon afterwards promoted him to the honourable office
of vice-chamberlain.[349]
During his attendance upon the pontiff at Bologna Poggio enjoyed frequent
opportunities of becoming thoroughly acquainted with the singular merits
of Tommaso, whose proficiency in literature and ingenuous manners had
some years before engaged his esteem, and conciliated his affection. Nor
was Tommaso insensible of the good qualities of Poggio. A memorial of
the mutual regard which subsisted between these able scholars, exists
in the dedication of a Dialogue _On the Unhappiness of Princes_, which
Poggio published in the year 1440, and which he inscribed to his friend
before his virtues had been brought forward to public observation by
his acquisition of distinguished honour and great emolument. In this
dedication Poggio notices the common error of men, who are so much
struck with the pomp and grandeur of the great, that they take it for
granted, that power and magnificence confer on their possessors the gift
of true felicity. He observes, however, that those who rise above the
level of vulgar intellect ought to be convinced that happiness does not
depend upon the external blessings of fortune, but that it is the meed
of virtuous dispositions. He professes that it is his object to persuade
men of this truth; and remarks that a work which is intended to promote
this happy end, may with the strictest propriety be addressed to an
ecclesiastic, who in the whole course of his conduct has demonstrated,
that he has studied to be virtuous, rather than to be rich or great.[350]
After this preface, Poggio proceeds to state, that in the summer of the
year in which he followed Eugenius IV. to Florence, to which city the
pontiff was banished by the fury of the Roman populace, he happened to
pay a visit to Niccolo Niccoli, whose house was the common resort of the
learned. Here he found Carlo Aretino and Cosmo de’ Medici, with whom
he entered into conversation on the politics of Italy. After having
recounted to his friends the hardships which he had lately suffered when
he was taken captive by the soldiers of Piccinino, he complained of the
unsettled life which he led in consequence of his attendance upon the
Roman court, which in the course of thirty-four years that had elapsed
since his admission into the pontifical chancery, had never continued for
two years together in the same place. On this Carlo Aretino remarked,
that Poggio was discontented with a situation which the generality of
men regard as an object of envy, since the pontiffs and their superior
servants are usually deemed masters of every circumstance necessary
to the insurance of a happy life. In consequence of this observation,
Niccolo Niccoli gave it as his opinion, that whatever advantages the
attendants and courtiers of great potentates may derive from the control
which they acquire over public affairs, princes themselves lead a life
of anxiety and care, and endure all the inconveniences, whilst others
reap all the benefits of empire. Such is the introduction to the Dialogue
_On the Unhappiness of Princes_, in the body of which Niccolo Niccoli is
represented as detailing the miseries of exalted rank. On this copious
subject he dilates at considerable length, proving from history that
the best princes are liable to the bitterest woes incident to human
nature. Gaining courage as he proceeds, he attempts to demonstrate that
eminence of station is unfriendly to virtue. Examining the conduct of
the most renowned chieftains, both monarchs and demagogues, who have
rendered themselves conspicuous in the annals of the world, he impeaches
them of avarice, cruelty, intemperance, pride, and unbridled ambition;
and appeals to his auditors, whether men who are thus enslaved by their
passions, can possibly be deemed happy. Arguing upon the position,
that man is the creature of the circumstances in which he is placed,
he maintains, that the possession of uncontrolled authority betrays
the powerful into vice, inasmuch as it frees them from those salutary
restraints which are necessary to the confirmation of good principles.
Hence, he observes, it frequently happens, that men who have adorned a
private station by their virtues have become the disgrace of human nature
when they have been raised to the summit of power.
From this train of argument Niccolo draws the conclusion, that as
happiness seems to be banished from the palaces of the great, if she
resides any where on earth, she must be found in the abodes of private
individuals, who have the wisdom to set bounds to their desires, and to
dedicate themselves to the cultivation of their intellectual powers.
The conduct of these men he proposes as an object of imitation, and
exhorts his friends to the study of those principles of philosophy which
will render them happy in themselves, and fearless of the power, and
independent of the favours of the great.[351]
Such is the tenor of the Dialogue _On the Unhappiness of Princes_, in
which Poggio dwells with so much energy on the vices of exalted rank,
that it may reasonably be suspected that resentment and indignation
had at least as much influence in its composition as the suggestions
of philosophy. In perusing this work, the reader is perpetually led to
recollect, that its author was a citizen of a proud republic, and a
zealot in the cause of learning. His democratic asperity bursts forth
in copious enumerations of the follies and vices of sovereign princes.
His literary spleen is discernible in the sarcastic observations which
he introduces by the medium of Niccolo Niccoli, on the indifference with
which the rulers of Italy regarded his researches after the lost works
of the writers of antiquity; in the detail which he gives of the neglect
and scorn which Dante, Petrarca, and Bocaccio experienced from the great
men of their times; and in the general observations which he makes upon
the contempt with which mighty potentates too frequently regard the
labours of the learned. The effusions of moroseness which occur in this
dialogue are, however, interspersed with precepts of sound morality, and
the historic details with which it abounds are at once entertaining and
instructive. To which it may be added, that Poggio has exhibited in this
composition a striking, and in all probability a correct delineation of
the temper and manners of the splenetic, but sagacious disputant Niccolo
Niccoli.[352]
This dialogue was not well calculated to conciliate the favour of
sovereign princes. But the patronage of the great was not the object of
its author’s wishes. It was sufficient for Poggio that it was received
with approbation by the learned, and that it secured to him the esteem
of Tommaso da Sarzana, and other private individuals, whose kind regard
might compensate the depredations made amongst his comforts by the
ravages of death. For he was now arrived at that period of life in which
man is generally called to experience the severest of trials, in being
doomed to survive his friends. He had already lamented the death of
Niccolo Niccoli. He had attended, a mournful assistant at the funeral
of Lorenzo de’ Medici. Leonardo Aretino was the only associate of his
early studies, who was left to sympathize with him in the recollection
of their juvenile pleasures. In the strength of Leonardo’s constitution,
Poggio fondly hoped that he had an assurance, that the happiness which
he derived from his friendly attachment would be prolonged to the close
of his own mortal career. But in the commencement of the year 1444, a
violent disease suddenly bereft him of the sole surviving companion
of his youthful years. In Leonardo he lost not only a kind, but also
a powerful friend. Soon after that accomplished scholar had fixed his
residence in Florence, he was called by the favour of the people to
fill some of the most important offices of the state. By his faithful
discharge of the duties of these offices he acquired such a high degree
of popularity, that he was at length promoted to the chief magistracy of
the Florentine republic.
So great was the estimation in which he was held by his fellow-citizens,
that when his death was announced, the administrators of the government
charged three members of the council of ten to conduct his funeral
rites with the most solemn magnificence at the public expense.[353]
In order to express in the most signal manner their respect for the
memory of the deceased, they also determined publicly to decorate his
remains with a laurel crown. The rare occurrence of this testimony of
honour (of the conferring of which only three instances had hitherto
occurred in the long series of the Florentine annals)[354] rendered it
the more illustrious. In pursuance of the orders of the magistrates,
the body of Leonardo arrayed in silken robes was carried in an open
coffin to the public square of the city. On his breast was laid, as a
memorial of his patriotism, his history of the Florentine Republic. The
funeral procession was attended by all the officers of state, except the
Gonfaloniere, by the embassadors of foreign princes who happened at this
time to reside in Florence, by a considerable number of learned men, and
by an immense concourse of the citizens, who were not more attracted
by the novelty of the ceremony, than by their respectful remembrance
of the virtues of Leonardo. In the presence of this august assembly
Gianozzo Manetti advanced to the head of the bier, and there pronounced
a funeral oration in praise of the deceased, towards the conclusion of
which he fulfilled the decree of the magistracy, by crowning him with the
laurel wreath. The friends of Leonardo whose judgment was enlightened
by the principles of true taste, must have lamented that the task of
celebrating his virtues was delegated to Gianozzo Manetti. The speech
which he pronounced on this occasion is a most miserable composition,
abounding in puerilities, vulgar in its style, irrelevant in its topics,
and most tediously diffuse.[355] It is highly probable, that the vexation
experienced by Poggio, on seeing the memory of his beloved friend thus
disgraced by the folly of his panegyrist, induced him to endeavour
to supersede the wretched effusion of Gianozzo by a composition more
worthy of the lamented subject of the public grief. However this may
be, certain it is, that the funeral oration which he published on this
melancholy occasion affords a striking contrast to that which wearied
the ears of the learned men who attended the obsequies of Leonardo. It
is at once dignified and pathetic. Lucid in its arrangement, and well
proportioned in the distribution of its parts, it is a monument of the
sound judgment of its author. The account which it contains of the life
and writings of Leonardo is succinct and clear. In his delineation
of the moral portraiture of that extraordinary man, Poggio evinces a
distinctness of perception, and an accuracy of discrimination, which are
highly honourable to his understanding; whilst the delicacy with which
he softens down the faulty features of Leonardo’s character, attests the
warmth of his affection for the beloved depository of his most secret
thoughts.[356]
Leonardo Aretino was perhaps the ablest scholar of his age. He took the
lead amongst the industrious students who unlocked the secret treasures
of literature by the translation of the works of the Grecian authors.
His Latin style is less encumbered with faults than that of any of
his contemporaries. Æneas Sylvius indeed declared it as his opinion,
that next to Lactantius he approached the nearest of any of the later
writers to the elegance of Cicero. The compositions of that celebrated
orator do not, however, seem to have been adopted by Leonardo as his
model. At least he did not in his writings attain the copious fluency,
or the graceful ease of diction which distinguish the works of Cicero.
But the luminous distinctness of his periods entitles him to no small
commendation. His sentences are never embarrassed or confused. He
conveys his meaning in few words, and does not fatigue his readers by
unreasonably dwelling upon his topics, or by repeating the same idea in
varied forms of expression. Hence, if his language is not polished to an
exquisite smoothness, it is sufficiently precise, and its deficiency in
melody is compensated by its strength.
At his outset in life, Leonardo had to struggle with the embarrassments
incident to a very contracted fortune, and was compelled by necessity
to practise the strictest economy. By the liberality of John XXII.
however, he acquired an increase of property which eventually became
the foundation of a very ample fortune. As man is the slave of habit,
he retained, in the midst of abundance, the attention to the minutiæ
of expence which was a duty imperiously incumbent upon him in the days
of his poverty; and his prudent exactitude sometimes approached the
confines of avarice.[357] He was also impatient in his temper, and too
apt to take offence.[358] The following anecdote however shews, that
if he was easily excited to anger, he had the good sense to be soon
convinced of his error, and the ingenuousness of spirit to confess it.
Having engaged in a literary discussion with Gianozzo Manetti, he was so
exasperated by observing that the bye-standers thought him worsted in
argument, that he vented his spleen in outrageous expressions against
his antagonist. On the following morning, however, by break of day, he
went to the house of Gianozzo, who expressed his surprise, that a person
of Leonardo’s dignity should condescend to honour him so far as to pay
him an unsolicited visit. On this Leonardo requested that Gianozzo would
favour him with a private conference. Gianozzo accordingly attended him
to the banks of the Arno, when Leonardo thus apologized for the warmth
of his temper.—“Yesterday I did you great injustice; but I soon began to
suffer punishment for my offence; for I have not closed my eyes during
the whole night; and I could not rest till I had made you a confession
of my fault.”[359] The man who by the voluntary acknowledgment of an
error could thus frankly throw himself upon the generosity of one whom
he had offended, must have possessed in his own mind a fund of honour
and probity. The failings of Leonardo were indeed amply counterbalanced
by his strict integrity, his guarded temperance, his faithful discharge
of his public duties, and his zeal in the cause of literature. This
being the case, it was with justice that Poggio prided himself upon the
intimate friendship which subsisted between himself and this truly
respectable character—a friendship which was not once interrupted during
the varied transactions of a period of forty-four years.
The remains of Leonardo were interred in the church of Santa Croce. On a
marble monument erected to his memory the following inscription is still
legible.
POSTQVAM LEONARDVS E VITA MIGRAVIT
HISTORIA LVGET ELOQUENTIA MVTA EST
FERTVRQVE MVSAS TVM GRAECAS TVM LATINAS
LACRIMAS TENERE NON POTVISSE.
Leonardo was succeeded in the chancellorship of the Florentine republic
by Carlo Marsuppini, more commonly known by the surname of Aretino,
a scholar no less distinguished by his literary acquirements than by
the dignity of his family. Carlo was the son of Gregorio Marsuppini,
a nobleman of Arezzo, doctor of laws, and secretary to Charles VI.,
king of France, by whom he was appointed to the government of Genoa.
Educated under the auspices of John of Ravenna, he attained to such a
proficiency in learning, that in delivering lectures on rhetoric he
became the successful rival of Filelfo in the university of Florence. His
literary reputation recommended him to the notice of Eugenius IV., who,
in the year 1441, conferred upon him the office of apostolic secretary.
This office he continued to hold till the voice of his fellow-citizens
summoned him to the discharge of more important duties.[360] The
friendly intercourse which had taken place between him and Poggio,
in consequence of their being natives of the same place, had been
strengthened by their common hostility against Francesco Filelfo. Nor
was it interrupted by their separation. Whenever Poggio found leisure
to visit the Tuscan capital, he experienced a welcome reception from
his ancient associate, in whose instructive converse he found the
most pleasing relaxation from the toils of his office, and from the
wearisomeness occasionally attendant upon the diligent prosecution of
literary studies.[361]
Whilst Poggio was lamenting the irreparable loss which he had sustained
by the death of Leonardo Aretino, he received intelligence of the sad
catastrophe of his old friend and correspondent, Julian, cardinal
of St. Angelo. This zealous churchman, who had been dispatched into
Hungary, vested with the office of pontifical legate, had heard with
indignation that Ladislaus VI., king of that country, had concluded a
truce for ten years with Amurath, emperor of the Turks; and strenuously
insisting upon the detestable doctrine, that no faith is to be kept
with infidels, he had persuaded the Hungarian monarch treacherously to
attack the Mussulmans, who, in reliance on the treaty which had been so
lately concluded, had withdrawn their forces into Asia. Justly irritated
by this act of perfidy, the Turks rushed to arms, and gave battle to
the Hungarians at Varna, a town in Bulgaria. The issue of the day was
most disastrous to the Christians. Ladislaus fell in the battle, his
forces were routed, and a body of the fugitives, in the course of their
flight, overtaking the unfortunate Julian, whose pernicious counsels they
considered as the original cause of their present calamities, fell upon
him, and despatched him with a multitude of wounds.[362]
The prejudices which Poggio entertained against the professors of
Mohamedism, or the partiality of his friendship for the cardinal,
rendered him insensible of the atrocity of the crime by which that
turbulent ecclesiastic had provoked his fate. From the fragments of an
oration which he composed on the occasion of the funeral of Julian, and
which are preserved by Mehus in his life of Ambrogio Traversari,[363]
he seems to have considered his character as a subject of unqualified
praise. The birth of Julian was obscure. He prosecuted his studies,
first at Perugia, afterwards at Bologna, and lastly at Padua. When his
education was finished, he entered into the household of the cardinal of
Piacenza, in whose suite he travelled into Bohemia, where he signalized
himself by his acuteness in theological disputation, and by the assiduity
of his labours for the conversion of heretics. On his return to Italy,
Martin V. rewarded his zeal in the defence of the orthodox faith, by
appointing him to the office of auditor of the chamber. He was afterwards
sent in quality of nuncio into France and England. Making mention of
his residence in the latter country, Poggio asserts that he did there
what no one had ever ventured to do before him: in a numerous assembly of
prelates, he uttered a vehement invective against the statutes which had
been enacted in the parliament, with a view of restraining the authority
of the court of Rome, and admonished his auditors to yield obedience to
the pope, rather than to the laws of their country: “a proceeding,” says
Poggio, “attended with great peril in a land the inhabitants of which
were not accustomed to such boldness.” This temerity procured Julian
the gift of a cardinal’s hat, which was bestowed upon him by Martin V.,
immediately on his return from England.[364] His second mission into
Bohemia, his pertinacity in summoning and presiding over the council of
Basil, and his conversion to the interests of Eugenius, have already
passed in review in the course of the present work.
The steady forbearance of Julian in refusing to enrich himself by the
acceptance of presents, which Poggio records with enthusiastic applause,
is a legitimate subject of commendation—but his zeal in the course
of proselytism is an indication of a narrow mind; and the treachery
which signalized the last official act of his life fixes on his memory
an indelible stain. So base indeed was his conduct on this occasion,
that his miserable end may be pointed out as an instance of the signal
vengeance which awaits the perfidious violators of solemn treaties.
CHAP. X.
_Sforza deprived of the Marca d’Ancona—Death of Eugenius IV.—Tommaso da
Sarzana is elected to the pontificate, and assumes the name of Nicolas
V.—State of Italy on the accession of Nicolas V.—Exemplary conduct of
that pontiff—Poggio’s inaugural address to Nicolas V.—His dialogues on
the Vicissitudes of Fortune, and on Hypocrisy—His invective against
the Antipope Felix—His translation of Xenophon’s Cyropædia, and of
Diodorus Siculus—His quarrels with George of Trebisond, and Tommaso da
Rieti—Celebration of the Jubilee—Publication of Poggio’s Facetiæ—Renewal
of hostilities between Poggio and Filelfo—Their reconciliation—Poggio’s
Historia disceptativa convivialis—His letter on the study of Law._
CHAP. X.
It has been already observed, that in the year 1443 Eugenius earnestly
solicited the king of Naples to assist him in expelling Francesco Sforza
from the ecclesiastical territories, the possession of which constituted
such a formidable accession to his power. In compliance with the wishes
of the pontiff, Alfonso advanced at the head of a considerable army
into the Marca d’Ancona, almost the whole of which district he in a
short space of time restored to the dominion of the church.[365] [A. D.
1444.] In the course of the ensuing spring, however, Sforza invaded the
disputed territory with such vigour and military skill, that he once
more compelled the pontiff to confer upon him the feudal sovereignty of
all its cities, except Osimo, Recanati, Fabriano, and Ancona.[366] But
in the year 1445, Eugenius, having secured the assistance of the duke of
Milan and of the king of Naples, again violated his solemn engagements,
and declared war against his vassal. The perfidy of the pontiff was at
length crowned with success; for by the joint efforts of the allied
powers, Sforza was dispossessed of the whole extent of the Marca, except
the city of Jesi.[367] Thus had Eugenius the satisfaction of reducing
all the territories belonging to the church; Jesi and Bologna being the
only cities of the ecclesiastical states which refused to acknowledge his
authority. He did not long enjoy the fruit of his anxious deliberations
and strenuous exertions. In the commencement of the year 1447 he was
seized by a distemper which soon assumed a most serious aspect. In this
extremity he continued to manifest that undaunted resolution which was
a distinguishing feature of his character, and struggled against his
last enemy with all the vigour of an unyielding spirit. His attendants
witnessed his fortitude with the highest admiration, and for a time
flattered themselves that the strength of his constitution would baffle
the power of his disease. When his friends had at length lost all hope
of his recovery, the archbishop of Florence gave him intimation of their
opinion by preparing to administer to him the rites which are appointed
by the Catholic church for the comfort of the dying. But the pontiff
indignantly commanded him to forbear his officious interposition. “I am
not yet,” said he, “reduced to the last extremity—I will apprize you
when my time is come.” This promise he fulfilled, and in a manner which
evinced the intrepidity and even cheerfulness with which he foresaw
his approaching dissolution. “My friends,” said he to the attendant
ecclesiastics, during a pause which occurred in the reading of morning
prayers, “when the holy office is finished I will tell you a story.”
The devotional exercise being ended, he was reminded of his promise,
on which he thus addressed his assembled household.—“A certain Athenian
once came forth into the street, and in the midst of a large concourse
of people made the following proclamation.—If any one wishes to hang
himself on my fig-tree, let him make haste, for I am going to cut it
down. In like manner,” said the pontiff, “if my friends wish to solicit
from me any favours, they must not delay, for I am sensible that the
hour of my departure draws near.” The priest in waiting having informed
him that they were going to offer solemn prayers for his recovery—“Pray
rather,” said he, “that the Lord’s will may be done; for we often
petition for that which is not conducive to our good.” When he was
conscious of the near approach of death, he piously participated in the
customary ceremonies, and then caused himself to be raised from his bed
and conveyed to the chair of St. Peter, where he breathed his last on the
twenty-third day of February, 1447.[368]
The funeral eulogium of the deceased pontiff was pronounced by Tommaso
da Sarzana, who had lately been promoted by his favour to the bishopric
of Bologna, and to the dignity of cardinal. The acquisition of this
honour prepared the way for the exaltation of Tommaso to the summit
of ecclesiastical preferment. On the sixth of March he was by the
unanimous voice of the conclave invested with the pontifical purple,
on which occasion he assumed the name of Nicolas V. His biographer,
Gianozzo Manetti, asserts, that his advancement to this high dignity was
prognosticated to him in the following manner. When the conclave was
assembled for the purpose of filling the vacancy which had just occurred
in the chair of St. Peter, and Tommaso was sleeping at dead of night
in the small chamber allotted to him on that occasion, he dreamt that
Eugenius appeared before him arrayed in his pontifical robes, of which
he divested himself, and commanded him to put them on; and that on his
refusal to comply with this requisition, the deceased pontiff violently
enforced his obedience, and invested him with all the insignia of papal
authority. Gianozzo seems to intimate, that in this dream there was
something præternatural. But a slight acquaintance with the constitution
of the human mind would have convinced him, that there is nothing
miraculous in the circumstance of a cardinal’s dreaming that his brows
are encircled with the tiara.[369]
On his elevation to the chair of St. Peter, Nicolas found the
temporalities of the holy see in a lamentable state of disorder. The
military enterprizes of Eugenius had exhausted the pontifical treasury;
the anarchy to which the long absence of that pontiff from his capital
had given rise in the ecclesiastical territories, had impeded the
collection of the public revenues; and the schism occasioned by the
intemperance of the council of Basil had impaired the spiritual authority
of the church.[370] Whilst the unpropitious circumstances which thus
attended the commencement of his pontificate affected the mind of
Nicolas with well-founded anxiety, his uneasiness was encreased by the
contemplation of the distracted state of Italy. The Venetians and the
duke of Milan were engaged in an obstinate and bloody contest, which
spread devastation through the fertile provinces of Lombardy. Alfonso,
king of Naples, having been instigated by Eugenius to declare war against
the Florentines, had marched on his way to the Tuscan frontier as far
as Tivoli, where his army lay encamped at the time of that pontiff’s
death.[371] Justly apprehensive lest the collision of interests which
occurs in a period of general warfare should disturb the peace of the
pontifical dominions, Nicolas found himself surrounded by difficulties
which called into full exercise the extraordinary abilities which he
had cultivated with such successful industry. His first object was to
remedy the confusion which prevailed in the ecclesiastical states. This
object he speedily accomplished by a prudent choice of magistrates, by
the establishment of a well-regulated system of internal economy, and
by the mildness of a lenient administration of government. At the price
of thirty-five thousand florins of gold he purchased from Francesco
Sforza the possession of the city of Jesi.[372] The inhabitants of
Bologna, influenced by the remembrance of the benevolence which shone
conspicuous in his character, whilst he exercised amongst them the
episcopal functions, sacrificed their independence to their gratitude,
and voluntarily submitted to his authority.[373] The endeavours of
Nicolas to inspire the other potentates of Italy with the ardent desire
of peace which influenced his own actions were not crowned with equally
prompt success. Alfonso proceeded on his march to the Florentine state,
which he continued to harrass for the space of three years, at the end
of which period he agreed to terms of pacification. The death of Filippo
Maria, duke of Milan, which event took place on the thirteenth of August,
1447,[374] exposed his dominions to all the miseries of civil discord.
Whilst the king of Naples asserted his title to the ducal crown by virtue
of a pretended will, said to have been executed by Filippo during his
last illness, Charles, duke of Orleans, maintained his own claim to the
inheritance of the sovereignty of the Milanese, in right of his wife,
Valentina Visconti, daughter of the late duke, who had died without
male issue. As the son-in-law of Filippo, Francesco Sforza also deemed
himself justified in aspiring to the throne of Milan.[375] In the mean
time the inhabitants of that city, rejecting the pretensions of all
the competitors, declared for independence, and instituted a republican
form of government. The infant commonwealth was, however, doomed to
struggle with unconquerable difficulties. Whilst it was harrassed by the
Venetians, its strength was enfeebled by the anarchy of faction. After
suffering a variety of calamities in the course of a protracted siege,
the inhabitants of Milan were, in the year 1450, compelled by famine to
open their gates to Sforza, who on the twenty-fifth of March, solemnly
assumed the ducal diadem.[376]
In the midst of these hostile operations, Nicolas had the prudence and
the skill to observe a strict neutrality, and thus to secure to the
ecclesiastical territories the blessings of public tranquillity. In the
contemplation of the growing prosperity of his subjects the pontiff found
an ample reward for his anxious endeavours to promote their welfare. The
flourishing state of his finances, the consequence of his cultivation
of the arts of peace, was also a source of considerable satisfaction to
him, as it furnished him with the means of gratifying his passion for
the encouragement of learning. Fostered by his patronage, the scholars
of Italy no longer had reason to complain that they were doomed to
obscurity and contempt. Nicolas invited to his court all those who were
distinguished by their proficiency in ancient literature; and whilst he
afforded them full scope for the exertion of their talents, he requited
their labours by liberal remunerations.
Poggio did not neglect to take advantage of the rising tide of fortune.
Eugenius IV. was the seventh pontiff in whose service he had continued
to hold the office of apostolic secretary, without being promoted to any
of the superior departments of the Roman chancery. His objections to the
ecclesiastical life had indeed shut against him one of the avenues to
preferment; and the negligence of his patrons, or the confused state of
the temporalities attached to the holy see, had hitherto prevented him
from receiving any recompense for his labours at all adequate to his
own estimate of their value.[377] But when Nicolas V. had ascended the
pontifical throne, his prospects were brightened by the hope of spending
the remainder of his days in the comforts of independence, if not in
affluence. In order that he might not be wanting to the prosecution of
his own interests, he resolved to testify his respectful attachment
to the newly-created pontiff, by addressing to him a congratulatory
oration. On this occasion, however, he could not but recollect that
not many years had elapsed since he had dedicated to his friend his
dialogue _De Infelicitate Principum_; and he was sensible that it was
absolutely necessary to preserve in his address to Nicolas V. some degree
of consistency with the principles which he had formerly endeavoured
to sanction by the patronage of Tommaso da Sarzana. In the exordium of
this oration, therefore, he professed that he could not conscientiously
congratulate the pontiff on his being summoned to undergo immense
labour of body, and to exert continual activity of mind. “For,” said
he, “if you are determined to guide the vessel of St. Peter properly,
and according to the precepts of God, you will not be able to indulge
yourself in the least relaxation, or to give yourself up, as you have
been accustomed to do, to the joys of friendship and of literature. You
must live according to the pleasure of others, and you must give up your
own ease, in order to promote the welfare of the Christian community.
You are placed as a sentinel to watch for the safety of all, and you are
doomed from henceforth never to know the blessings of repose.” After
enlarging on these topics, Poggio declared that he would not run the
risk of incurring the imputation of flattery, by detailing the virtues
which adorned the character of his holiness. “What then,” continued he,
“can I say? In treating on this subject, upon what circumstances can I
enlarge?—I answer, that they who are raised to the pontifical dignity may
be properly addressed in terms of admonition and exhortation.” Proceeding
in pursuance of this principle to enumerate the good qualities which
ought to confer lustre on the pontifical throne, he reminded the father
of the faithful, that it was incumbent upon him to be just, merciful,
beneficent, courteous, and humble. He warned him to beware of sycophants
and deceitful detractors, who frequently betray the best of princes into
dangerous errors; and finally, he exhorted him never to sell for money
those honours and sources of emolument which ought to be appropriated
as the meed of virtue. Having enlarged as much as prudence would permit
upon the head of admonition, Poggio thus skilfully introduced an eulogium
on the virtues of his patron. “But in this address, most holy father!
I labour under peculiar difficulties; for my knowledge of your singular
and transcendent virtues deprives me of the most copious subjects of
discourse. For what room is there for the administration of exhortation
or admonition to you, who are entitled by your wisdom to admonish
others?” After a long detail of the good qualities of the pontiff, the
orator thus proceeded.—“I may justly, and without imputation of flattery,
call upon you to imitate yourself—to remember by what arts and by what
practices you have reached this high dignity, and to persevere in that
line of conduct which has led you to the attainment of such illustrious
honours. Let me also entreat you, most holy father, not to forget your
ancient friends, of which number I profess myself to be one. You well
know that friendship originates in a similarity of studies, and in the
joint cultivation of virtuous principles. Though the attainment of high
authority by one of the parties is wont to separate those who have been
united by the bonds of mutual affection, yet he ought more especially
to retain his kind regard for his former associates, who does not seek
for friends amongst those who can promote his interests, but amongst the
virtuous. Forget not then to minister to the necessities of your ancient
companions. Become the protector of men of genius, and cause the liberal
arts to raise their drooping heads. You see that literature is neglected,
whilst men apply themselves to those studies which convert strife into a
source of gain. Small is the number of those who are inspired with the
love of science, and in an age in which ambition and wealth are more
highly esteemed than virtue and probity, they are regarded as inglorious
and ignoble. From you alone, most holy father, we expect a remedy for
these evils—for you alone is reserved the honour of restoring the dignity
of literature, and of providing for the welfare of the learned.” After
a brief enumeration of the advantages which would accrue to the pontiff
from his encouragement of men of letters, Poggio adverted to his own
situation and circumstances in the following terms. “I am now a veteran
soldier of the Roman court, in which I have resided for the space of
forty years, and certainly with less emolument than might have been
justly expected by one who is not entirely destitute of virtue and of
learning. It is now time for me to be discharged from the service, and
to dedicate the remainder of my old age to bodily rest and to mental
employment. But if, most holy father, I do not obtain the means of an
honourable retirement from your benevolence, I know not to whose favour
and assistance I can lay a claim.”[378]
So far was Nicolas V. from being offended by the freedom with which
Poggio in this oration reminded him of his duty, that he testified his
esteem for his monitor by conferring upon him very liberal presents. So
noble indeed was the munificence of the pontiff, that Poggio declared,
that in consequence of the generosity of this enlightened Mæcenas, he
regarded himself as at length reconciled to fortune.[379] The genial
warmth of the sunshine of prosperity did not, however, cause Poggio to
relax in his mental exertions. On the contrary, the prospect of honour
and profit, and the spirit of emulation excited by the success of his
learned competitors, stimulated him, notwithstanding the advanced period
of life to which he had now attained, to pursue his studies with renewed
assiduity. He had for a long space of time been occasionally employed in
collecting materials for a Dialogue _On the Vicissitudes of Fortune_.
These materials he now began to arrange, and having finished and
carefully corrected his work, he submitted it to the public inspection,
[A. D. 1447.] under the patronage of the pontiff, to whom he respectfully
inscribed it by a dedicatory epistle. In this address he descanted on the
utility of history, and pointed out the moral tendency of his Dialogue,
which, by demonstrating the instability of human things, would repress
the confidence of pride and the aspiring views of ambition. He remarked,
that the subject of the work which he now presented to his patron was
nearly allied to that of the Dialogue _On the Unhappiness of Princes_,
which he had formerly dedicated to him, and that it consequently had a
peculiar claim to his protection. He moreover reminded his illustrious
friend, that though in his ecclesiastical capacity he might be regarded
as beyond the reach of misfortune, yet as the sovereigns of the temporal
dominions of the church, the pontiffs themselves are not exempted from
the common lot of mortality; and expressed his persuasion, that by
becoming acquainted with the distresses of his predecessors, he would
learn the salutary lesson of caution.[380]
The opening of the Dialogue _On the Vicissitudes of Fortune_ is
singularly grand and interesting. It exhibits Poggio and his confidential
associate, Antonio Lusco, fatigued by the inspection of the remains of
Roman magnificence, reposing themselves amidst the venerable ruins of the
capitol, which building commands a prospect of almost the whole extent
of the city. After Antonio has gazed for a few minutes upon the waste of
years, he exclaims with a sigh, “How unlike, Poggio! is this capitol to
that which Maro sung, as—
“Chang’d from horrid thorn to glittering gold.”
“The gold has now disappeared, and thorns and briers resume their reign.
When I consider our present situation, I cannot but remember how Caius
Marius, the pillar of the Roman republic, when he was banished from
his country, landed in Africa, and seated himself amidst the ruins of
Carthage, where he meditated upon the fate of that city, and could
not determine whether he himself or the rival of Rome afforded a more
striking spectacle of the instability of human things. But with respect
to the devastation of Rome, there is nothing to which it can be compared.
The calamity which has befallen the mistress of the world exceeds in
magnitude every misfortune recorded in the annals of history.—It is a
truly lamentable circumstance, that this city, which formerly produced
so many illustrious heroes and commanders, the parent of such signal
virtues, the nurse of arts, the inventress of military discipline,
the pattern of sanctity, the establisher of laws, the protectress of
good morals, the queen of the nations, should now, by the injustice of
fortune, not only be stripped of her dignity, but should also be doomed
to the most wretched servitude, and should become so deformed and abject,
as to exhibit no traces of her former grandeur, except what are to be
found in her ruins.”[381] These observations lead Poggio to remark,
how wonderfully few are the vestiges of ancient art which remain in
the extensive precincts of Rome. Of these vestiges he gives a complete
and interesting catalogue, which affords a very minute account of the
appearance of the ruins of Rome in the fifteenth century. At the close
of this enumeration, Lusco resumes his reflections on the mutability
of Fortune, on which Poggio inquires of his friend what he means by
that term. In answer to this question, Lusco gives the Aristotelian
definition of Fortune, describing it as an accidental cause, and says,
that those circumstances happen by Fortune which happen to man contrary
to his design and intention. To this definition he observes that Aquinas
accedes. Poggio, remarking that we speak of the good fortune of Alexander
or Cæsar, though they laid plans to accomplish what they effected,
objects to the foregoing definition, in the place of which Antonio
substitutes another, which attributes events that are commonly esteemed
fortuitous to the over-ruling providence of God. After this preliminary
conversation, Poggio proceeds briefly to recount some ancient examples of
the mutability of fortune, and then describes the astonishing success of
the arms of Tamerlane, and the calamities of Bajazet. He then requests
Antonio to detail some of the more modern instances of a calamitous
reverse of circumstances. With this request Lusco complies, and the
instances which he recounts occupy the whole of the second book of the
Dialogue, in which various changes which had taken place in different
parts of Europe, and particularly in Italy, from the year 1377 to the
period of the death of Martin V. are narrated with great perspicuity
and elegance.—The third book comprises an entertaining epitome of the
history of Italy during the pontificate of Eugenius IV. The fourth book
is not strictly relevant to the subject of this dialogue, and ought to
be considered as a separate and detached composition. It contains an
account of Persia and India, which Poggio collected from the narrative
of Niccolo Conti, a Venetian, who in the course of a peregrination of
twenty-five years, had penetrated into the regions situated beyond the
Ganges. This bold adventurer having, during his residence in Arabia, been
obliged to abjure the Christian faith, immediately after his return to
Italy repaired to the pontifical court to solicit from Eugenius IV. the
remission of his sin of apostacy. On this occasion Poggio procured from
him an account of his route, and of his observations on the manners,
customs, and natural history of the eastern nations. This account he
digested into a narrative, which will be found not a little amusing by
the modern inquirer, and must have excited an extraordinary degree of
attention at the time of its publication.
The Dialogue _On the Vicissitudes of Fortune_ is the most interesting
of the works of Poggio. It inculcates maxims of sublime philosophy,
enforced by a detail of splendid and striking events. The account which
it contains of the changes which took place in Italy at the end of the
fourteenth, and at the commencement of the fifteenth centuries, presents
a succinct and clear view of the politics of that period; and the journey
of the Venetian traveller merits the attentive perusal of the curious
inquirer into the history of man.[382]
Soon after the publication of the Dialogue _On the Vicissitudes of
Fortune_, Poggio gave a striking proof of the confidence with which he
relied on the protection of the pontiff, by publishing a Dialogue _On
Hypocrisy_. The astonishing boldness with which he lashes the follies
and vices of the clergy in this composition has been already noticed.
Had he ventured to advance the sentiments which it contains in the days
of Eugenius, he would in all probability have expiated his temerity
by the forfeiture of his life. The predecessor of Nicolas felt little
veneration for learning, and he united in his character the restlessness
of ambition, and the rigour of religious austerity. As the manners of
a court universally take their complexion from those of the sovereign,
the retinue of Eugenius was crowded with ecclesiastics who assiduously
endeavoured to rise to preferment by assuming a sanctity of deportment
which they well knew to be the ready passport to the favour of the
pontiff. These men, who attempted to disguise their pride under the garb
of humility, and who, whilst they made a public profession of excessive
piety, secretly indulged themselves in the grossest debauchery, Poggio
had long regarded with contempt and indignation; and in his Dialogue
_On Hypocrisy_ he attacked them with all the severity of sarcastic
wit. This dialogue he inscribed to one of his friends, named Francesco
Accolti, of Arezzo, a celebrated lawyer, to whom he observed in his
prefatory address, that as he had formerly endeavoured to display the
despicable nature of Avarice, he had lately undertaken to describe, in
its true colours, Hypocrisy, a vice of a much more odious complexion. He
also intimated to Francesco, that he was fully apprized, that by the
publication of the work which he then transmitted to him, he should give
very great offence; but at the same time he sarcastically remarked, that
they who complained of the severity of his animadversions would virtually
acknowledge themselves guilty of the crime which it was his intention to
hold up to general reprobation.
In the introductory part of the dialogue we are informed, that Poggio
was accustomed to take frequent journeys to Florence; on which occasions
his first visit was generally paid to Carlo Aretino: that the last time
he had an opportunity of paying his respects to that eminent scholar, he
found him in his library engaged in reading Plato’s Politia; and that
after the customary interchange of civilities, Carlo, inquiring into the
state of the Roman court, asked him whether it was as much frequented by
hypocrites as it formerly was, during the pontificate of Eugenius. To
this inquiry Poggio answered, that the reign of hypocrites was come to an
end. Carlo rejoicing in this information, uttered a vehement philippic
against hypocrisy, which, he observed, was more severely reproved by
Jesus Christ than any other vice. Displaying its evil consequences, he
remarked, that hypocrisy tends to destroy confidence between man and man,
and to throw suspicion on virtue itself.
After the detail of this conversation, Poggio introduces as a third
interlocutor, Jeronimo Aretino, Abbot of Santa Fiore, an ecclesiastic
of considerable learning and of unblemished manners, who is represented
as unexpectedly paying a visit to Carlo. On the arrival of Jeronimo,
Poggio observes, that as this respectable dignitary had spent so large
a portion of his days amongst the clergy, he must be well qualified to
detail the characteristics of hypocrisy. This task, however, Jeronimo
declines, as being an invidious one, and attended with no small degree
of danger. But at the solicitation of his friends, and under the
assurance of secrecy, he proceeds to advert to the derivation of the
word _hypocrite_, which he defines as a term used to express the idea
of a man who, for the promotion of some evil purpose, pretends to
be what he is not. This definition he observes, includes not merely
pretenders to extraordinary sanctity, but impostors of every species.
Carlo, however, wishes to limit the meaning of the term to religious
deceivers, whom he thus describes.—“They who assume the appearance of
uncommon sanctimoniousness—who walk the street with squalid countenances,
in thread-bare garments, and with naked feet—who affect to despise
money—who are continually talking about Jesus Christ—who wish to be
esteemed virtuous, whilst their deeds do not correspond with their
outward appearance—who seduce foolish women—who quit their cloisters, and
travel up and down the country in quest of fame—who make an ostentatious
display of abstinence—who deceive and defraud—these men, I think may be
justly denominated hypocrites.” After this description of the character
of a hypocrite, Poggio proposes the question, whether men who are thus
guilty of imposture are not less dangerous to society than those who
openly profess to despise the obligations of morality; since whatever
vices hypocrites may privately practise, they inculcate upon others the
principles of virtue, and endeavour to palliate their very crimes by
attributing the commission of them to good motives. This last remark
gives Carlo occasion to detail several scandalous anecdotes of certain
ecclesiastics, who, under the cloak of religious austerity, had indulged
themselves in the most abominable gratification of their appetites.
In the sequel of his speech, Carlo utters an eloquent invective
against the ambition of the clergy who then frequented the Roman
court. Poggio, concurring with him in sentiment, attacks the popular
preachers of that time. He next animadverts upon the begging friars,
the confessors, and the ecclesiastics who pretend to an extraordinary
degree of temperance and maceration of the flesh. In speaking of this
last description of hypocrites, he relates an anecdote of an Augustine
friar, who undertook to subsist for eight days upon the holy wafer
used in the Eucharist, and who actually quitted his cell at the end of
the prescribed term in perfectly good health, and without the least
diminution of his corpulency. This impostor gained great celebrity by
his apparently miraculous abstinence; but after the lapse of some years
it was discovered, that in spite of the vigilance of his guards, he had
conveyed into his apartment a quantity of bread saturated with wine,
which he had injected into his large leathern girdle, and that he had
moreover provided himself with candles composed of sugar, slightly coated
over with wax, which afforded him a plentiful supply of nourishment.
When Poggio has finished his remarks, Carlo attacks the _Fratres
Observantiæ_; and the remainder of the dialogue is occupied by strictures
on the character and conduct of several individuals, who, during the time
of Poggio’s residence in the Roman court, had distinguished themselves by
the gravity of their demeanour, and by the sanctity of their religious
profession.[383]
The talent of sarcastic wit which Poggio displayed in this dialogue, and
in his invectives against Francesco Filelfo, in all probability caused
Nicolas V. to delegate to him the task of drawing up a philippic against
Amedæus of Savoy, who, under the title of Felix, persisted in claiming
the honours of the pontificate. On the death of Eugenius, this antipope
had endeavoured, by proceeding to the election of cardinals, and by the
mission of embassadors to several of the Christian powers, to vindicate
his rights, as the only legitimate successor of St. Peter.[384] Nicolas,
naturally watching the conduct of his competitor with a jealous eye, not
only aimed at his devoted head the thunders of the church, but threatened
to deprive him of the sovereignty of Savoy, which he destined as the
reward of Charles, king of France, whom he solicited to assist him in
the subjugation of the pertinacious schismatic.[385] Eagerly taking
up the quarrel of his master, Poggio attacked the offender in a long
invective. A few extracts from this composition will demonstrate, that in
the impartiality of his acrimony, he did not treat the ducal hermit of
Ripaille with more lenity than he had shewn to the humble professor of
rhetoric.
In his exordium he says, “I cannot suppress the grief which I feel when I
see another Cerberus, whom we thought to have been lulled asleep, newly
roused from the infernal regions to the disturbance of religion, and the
destruction of the church. For what true believer is not deeply affected
with sorrow, when he beholds a rapacious wolf, who was formerly fed on
the blood of the faithful, now putting on the semblance of a lamb, for
the purpose of invading, under the guise of humility, the peace of the
church, which he has in vain attacked by open violence. Who is there that
does not lament that a golden calf, set up by an assembly of abandoned
men, to the disgrace of the faith, in contempt of Christ and his
doctrine, should, under the pretence of peace, endeavour by his envoys
and letters to pervert the minds of faithful and upright princes from
the true belief?—Who would not call upon God to punish such hypocrisy,
such villany, such baseness? Who would not detest the perverter of the
faith, the enemy of religion, the author of schism, the high-priest
of malignity?—This is the issue of his affected sanctity of manners,
his relinquishment of the world, his solitary retirement, in which he
pretended to dedicate himself to the service of God for the purpose of
shamefully demonstrating his infidelity; in which he arrayed himself in
humble apparel, in order that he might afterwards, like a roaring lion
seeking whom he might devour, destroy all religion, excite a schism, and
rend the unseamed garment of Christ.”
Having thus put in a railing accusation against Amedæus, Poggio proceeded
to utter a philippic against the members of the council of Basil, who had
attempted to raise him to the pontificate. “I wonder,” says he, “that any
one is so void of understanding as to believe, that any thing good could
proceed from that sink of iniquity, the synagogue of Basil. Is there any
one so foolish as to imagine, that this conventicle of reprobates could
produce any thing but a monstrous birth, or that it has any authority
to ordain the meanest priest, much less to create a pontiff, except the
authority which it may have derived from the devil and his followers?
For who,” says he, “is ignorant of the character of that tumultuary
band of most debauched men? Who does not know what sort of people, how
nefarious, how abandoned, how wicked, were assembled in that sink of
iniquity?—apostates, fornicators, ravishers, deserters, men convicted
of the most shameful crimes, blasphemers, rebels against God and their
superiors.”
From such an assembly as this, Poggio observed, that nothing salutary
could proceed, since a bad tree can never bring forth wholesome fruit.
After ridiculing the steps which Amedæus had taken to establish his
authority, and charging him with endeavouring to promote his own
interest by the arts of corruption, he reminded him that he was now
deserted by the few partizans who had formerly espoused his cause, and
that all the princes of Christendom had declared themselves in favour
of Nicolas. “Since this is the case,” continued he, “what have you left
but empty hopes? Why then do you trouble kings and princes? why do you
continue to weary their ears, and to tempt them by your evil practices?
why do you call all people your sons, when nobody acknowledges you as a
father? Awake from your long slumber, and consider that you were once a
Christian. Return to that Saviour whom you have renounced. Peter, the
chief of the apostles, once denied his Lord, and obtained pardon by a
confession of his crime. Imitate his contrition, and acknowledge that you
have sinned against the Lord. No longer wish to deceive yourself or the
people of Christ. Confess that you are what you are. Resume your ancient
manners and your former life: enter upon a train of thought worthy of a
good man: return into favour with God, and gain the good will of men:
cast off the burthen of conscience which must of necessity weigh heavy
upon you day and night: begin to be wise in your old age: lay aside
foreign ornaments, and divest yourself with a good grace of the honours
which you have so basely seized: consult for your reputation, your
honour, and the dignity of your hoary hairs. Consider for a moment what
men say and think of you. All the world execrates the schism, and you
the sower and instigator of it. Wash away then this stain, this disgrace
to your family. Suffer not posterity to abhor you as the origin of
strife. If you contemn the judgment of men, if you despise infamy, yet
remember that God suffers no wicked action to pass unpunished. Remember,
that if you do not repent, you will incur the pain of damnation. Other
punishments are comparatively light, because they endure but for a
season. But the soul, when once lost, is lost to all eternity; and unless
you repent, you will be doomed, with other heresiarchs, to sustain the
horrors of everlasting fire.”[386]
These animadversions of Poggio upon the conduct of Amedæus and his
abettors, were calculated to inflame resentment rather than to prepare
the way for conciliation. The pacific spirit of Nicolas suggested
measures much more conducive to the extinction of the schism. By the
grant of a cardinal’s hat, and the privilege of precedence in the
conclave, the antipope was induced to renounce the equivocal honours
which he held by so dubious a title, and to render homage to his rival,
as the true successor of St. Peter. After the fulfilment of these terms
of pacification, which were concluded in the year 1449, Amedæus retired
to his hermitage of Ripaille, where he devoted the remainder of his days
to works of piety, and in the neighbourhood of which he terminated his
mortal career on the seventh of January, 1451.[387]
Nicolas being thus freed from the vexation and apprehension which had
been excited in his mind by the claims of his rival, applied himself
with renewed spirit to the promotion of classical learning. At his
request, and under his patronage, the scholars who frequented his court
applied themselves with the most earnest assiduity to the study of the
Greek tongue. Among the rest, Poggio contributed to the illustration of
Grecian literature, by publishing a Latin version of the work of Diodorus
Siculus,[388] which he dedicated to his revered patron. This was not,
however, his first essay as a translator from the Greek. A little before
the accession of Nicolas to the pontificate he had translated into
Latin the Cyropædia of Xenophon.[389] Having completed this task, he
deliberated for some time on the choice of a patron under whose auspices
he might submit it to the inspection of the learned. At length the fame
of the splendid talents and liberal disposition of Alfonso, king of
Naples, determined him to inscribe his translation to that monarch.[390]
On this occasion some of the Neapolitan scholars, who regarded Poggio
with a considerable degree of animosity, gratified their malevolence,
by vilifying his work to the king, who seems to have lent too ready an
ear to their censures. Poggio highly resented this conduct of Alfonso,
whom he stigmatized in a letter to Bartolomeo Facio, one of the learned
men who enjoyed that monarch’s favour and protection,[391] as a prince
who, in consequence of his own ignorance, gave implicit credit to the
opinions of others, and declared, that he would avail himself of the
earliest opportunity to retract every thing which he had said in his
commendation.[392] It should appear, that these remonstrances of Poggio
produced an effect little to be expected to arise from the threats of an
author against a sovereign prince. In process of time, Alfonso, being
convinced that the strictures of his critics were inspired by personal
hostility rather than by justice, remunerated him for his version, by a
donation which exceeded his first and most sanguine hopes.[393]
The indignant manner in which Poggio commented on the cool reception
which his version of the Cyropædia had experienced at the court of Naples
evinced, that the influence of age had not abated his spirit. Indeed the
unrestrained license of his speech about this time betrayed him into a
contest with one of his fellow-labourers in the field of literature, in
which he appears to have manifested not only the petulance, but also the
prowess of youth. The antagonist whom he encountered on this occasion
was George of Trebisond, a native of the isle of Candia, who adopted
the designation of _Trapezuntius_, or of Trebisond, in reference to the
residence of his ancestors. He was induced to quit the place of his
nativity by the invitation of Francesco Barbaro, who on his arrival in
Italy procured him the honour of being enrolled amongst the citizens
of Venice.[394] Having made a competent progress in the knowledge of
the Latin tongue, he went to Padua, and afterwards to Vicenza, in which
latter city he was employed in the capacity of public tutor.[395] His
residence in Vicenza was however not of long duration. Finding himself
harrassed by the intrigues of Guarino Veronese, who regarded him with
sentiments of determined hostility, he gave up his professorship, and
repaired to Rome, in which city he arrived in the year 1430.[396] His
Venetian friends having recommended him to the protection of Eugenius
IV., that pontiff conferred upon him the office of apostolic secretary.
He continued to hold this office under Nicolas V., who employed him
in translating the works of various Greek authors. When, however,
Nicolas had assembled at his court the most accomplished scholars of
the time, who were able to detect the errors of literary pretenders by
the touchstone of enlightened criticism, the reputation of George of
Trebisond began rapidly to decline.[397] This circumstance probably had
an unhappy effect upon his temper, and by rendering him apt to take
offence, prepared the way for his quarrel with Poggio. This quarrel he
certainly took up on very slight grounds; namely, an opinion expressed by
Poggio in a letter to a friend, that he had without just reason charged
Guarino Veronese with attacking him in an anonymous epistle. This remark
drew from the Trapezuntian an angry written remonstrance, to which Poggio
replied with exemplary forbearance. Here the matter might have rested,
had not a dispute arisen between the two secretaries about a sum of
money which fell to them in common. The discussions to which this affair
gave rise were carried on by Poggio with a praise-worthy frankness and
generosity of spirit; whilst his antagonist, in the bitterness of his
feeling, tried to overwhelm him by an accusation of practising against
his life, which he embodied in a letter to their common master. By this
proceeding George found the mind of the pontiff so much alienated from
him, that he thought it expedient to quit the Roman court. He accordingly
retired to Naples, where he was honourably received by king Alfonso. But
in the year 1453, the good offices of Filelfo restored him to the favour
of Nicolas V., who reinstated him in his ancient situation in the Roman
chancery.[398]
George of Trebisond was not the only member of the court of Nicolas
V. whom Poggio regarded with sentiments of enmity. Tommaso da Rieti, a
man of infamous character, who by his interposition had been refused
admittance into the Roman chancery, and whom, under the designation of
_Eques Reatinus_, he had stigmatized in the letter to Lionello d’Este,
which is quoted in the ninth chapter of this work, having provoked him to
hostility, he composed an invective against him, a copy of which is still
extant in the Laurentian Library.[399]
In the year 1450, the celebration of the Jubilee attracted to Rome a
prodigious concourse of people. As the plague was at this time raging
in various parts of Italy, the multitude of devotees who were assembled
to assist at the splendid solemnities of this festive season rendered
the pontifical capital a focus of infection.[400] As soon therefore as
Nicolas had finished the customary religious exercises, he fled from the
impending danger to Fabriano, a town situated in the Marca d’Ancona.
Poggio availed himself of this opportunity to visit his native place,
where he dedicated his leisure to the prosecution of his studies, and to
the enjoyment of social intercourse with his surviving Tuscan friends.
It was during this season of relaxation from the duties of his office,
that he published what may be called the first edition of his _Liber
Facetiarum_, or Collection of Jocose Tales.[401] In the preface to this
curious miscellany he intimates, that he had engaged in a work of such
levity, with a view of exercising himself in Latin composition.[402] The
recording of these witticisms revived in his recollection the occurrence
of days of pleasure which were past, never to return. From the postscript
to the _Liber Facetiarum_ we learn, that during the pontificate of
Martin V. the officers of the Roman chancery were accustomed to assemble
in a kind of common hall. In this apartment, which from the nature of
the conversation of its frequenters, who were much more studious of
wit than of truth, acquired the name of _Bugiale_;[403] they discussed
the news of the day, and amused themselves by the communication of
entertaining anecdotes. On these occasions they indulged themselves in
the utmost latitude of satiric remark, dealing out their sarcasms with
such impartiality, that they did not spare even the pontiff himself.
The leading orators of the Bugiale were Razello of Bologna, Antonio
Lusco,[404] Cincio, and Poggio; and the pointed jests and humorous
stories which occurred in the course of the unrestrained conversations,
in which these mirthful scribes bore a principal part, furnished the
greater portion of the materials for the _Liber Facetiarum_.[405]
This work is highly interesting on account of the anecdotes which it
contains of several eminent men, who flourished during the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries. In the course of its perusal, we find that
many an humorous tale, which the modern jester narrates as the account
of circumstances that occurred under his own observation, were of the
number of those which caused the walls of the _Bugiale_ to re-echo with
laughter. Like all collections of the kind, the _Liber Facetiarum_
contains, amongst a number of pieces of merit, some stories, in which
we look in vain for the pungency of wit. When, however, we are inclined
to condemn Poggio as guilty of the crime of chronicling a dull joke,
we should remember, that _bons mots_ frequently borrow their interest
from aptness of introduction, and an humorous mode of delivery; and that
though the spirit of a witticism, which enlivened the conversation of a
Lusco or a Cincio, may evaporate when it is committed to paper, yet at
the time when it was recorded by Poggio, it sported in his recollection
with all the hilarity of its concomitant circumstances. But too many
of the _Facetiæ_ are liable to a more serious objection than that of
dulness. It is a striking proof of the licentiousness of the times, that
an apostolic secretary, who enjoyed the friendship and esteem of the
pontiff, should have published a number of stories which outrage the laws
of decency, and put modesty to the blush; and that the dignitaries of the
Roman hierarchy should have tolerated a book, various passages of which
tend not merely to expose the ignorance and hypocrisy of individuals
of the clerical profession, but to throw ridicule on the most sacred
ceremonies of the Catholic church. Recanati indeed endeavours to defend
the fame of Poggio, by suggesting the idea, that many of the most
licentious stories were added to his collection by posterior writers; and
he supports this opinion by asserting, that he has seen two manuscript
copies of the _Facetiæ_, in which many of the obnoxious passages in
question are not to be found.[406] The validity of this defence is,
however, rendered extremely questionable by the consideration of a fact,
of which Recanati was probably ignorant, namely, that Lorenzo Valla,
in the fourth book of his _Antidotus in Poggium_, which was published
about the year 1452, not only impeaches the _Facetiæ_ of blasphemy and
indecency; but recites, by way of holding that work up to reprobation,
the most scandalous stories which are now to be found in the whole
collection.[407]
It has been ascertained by Monsieur le Grand, that a few of the stories
which occur in the _Facetiæ_ are to be found in the _Fabliaux_, or tales
which were circulated in various parts of Europe by the Provençal bards
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, whose sportive effusions of
fancy furnished a rich fund of materials for the poets and novelists of
Italy and of England.[408]
The _Liber Facetiarum_, soon after its publication, acquired a
considerable degree of popularity, and was eagerly read, not only in the
native country of its author, but also in France, in Spain, in Germany,
and in Britain.[409] This is by no means a surprising circumstance.
Wit and humour possess almost irresistible charms. The idle and the
dissipated are pleased with a sally of hilarity, which gives a stimulus
to their fancy; and they who are habituated to study, or who are fatigued
by the more weighty concerns of life, are happy to enjoy an opportunity
of occasional relaxation. As a vehicle of sentiment, a book may be
considered as the representative of its author; and in a world of anxiety
and trouble, he who is endued with the happy talent of causing the
wrinkle of care to give place to the pleasing convulsion of mirth, will
find few circles of society in which he is not a welcome guest.
In the _Facetiæ_ Poggio aimed a most mischievous thrust at his old
antagonist, Filelfo, by making him the hero of a tale, the ridiculous
oddity of which disturbs the steady countenance of gravity itself, and
causes the strictest severity for a moment to smile at the indelicacy
which it condemns.[410] The war between these redoubted champions
was carried on till the year 1453, when they were reconciled by the
interposition of their common friend, Pietro Tommasi.[411]
During Poggio’s temporary residence at Terranuova, he was one day visited
by Benedetto Aretino, a civilian of distinguished reputation; by Niccolo
di Foligni, a physician of considerable eminence;[412] and by Carlo
Aretino, the chancellor of the Florentine republic. These guests Poggio
hospitably entertained in his villa; and from the conversation which
occurred after their repast, he collected materials for a work which he
dedicated, in the year 1451, under the title of _Historia disceptativa
convivialis_, to the cardinal Prospero Colonna. This work consists of
three parts, the subject of the first of which is not a little whimsical,
namely—Whether the master of a feast ought to thank his guests for the
honour of their company, or whether the guests should express their
gratitude to their host for his hospitality. The discussion of this
singular question does not afford any thing very interesting. The second
part contains the detail of a dispute which took place between Niccolo
di Foligni and Benedetto Aretino, on the comparative dignity of their
respective professions. Niccolo, pleading on behalf of the healing
art, observes, that if antiquity can confer honour, the practice of
medicine existed in times so remote, that its first professors are
enrolled amongst the number of the Gods. He also maintains, that the
medical profession must needs be more honourable than the profession of
law, since the doctrines of medicine are built upon the principles of
science, whilst the maxims of law depend upon caprice; and that of course
physicians are obliged to qualify themselves for the discharge of their
duty by diligent researches into the fixed and established course of
nature; whilst those who are esteemed learned in the law confine their
researches to their professional books. With regard to the civil law in
particular, he reminds Benedetto, that there are few states which are
regulated by its dictates; whereas the inhabitants of almost all the
nations in the world pay homage to the professors of the healing art,
by having recourse to their assistance. Niccolo having finished his
arguments, Benedetto undertakes the defence of legal studies, and asserts
the high antiquity of laws, which he maintains must have existed before
the practice of medicine, since medicine could not have been reduced to
a science before the assemblage of men in civil communities, which are
held together by the bonds of law. He also maintains the dignity of laws,
as being the conclusions of reason, and the support of society. Niccolo,
in reply, denies that the civil law is the result of the conclusions of
reason, and vilifies it as a crude collection of regulations, adopted
to suit the exigencies of the moment, without any reference to natural
law, which civilians do not study—as a mass of opinions and not a
collection of truths. Impeaching the general character of the professors
of law, he accuses them of an inordinate thirst for gain, which leads
them to nourish strife, to prolong discord by the tediousness of legal
proceedings, and to pride themselves on their success in patronizing a
bad cause. Benedetto, roused by these pointed reflections, observes,
that it ill becomes a physician to treat with severity the characters
of the professors of law; “for,” says he, “what is more notorious than
the folly of many of your brethren, who kill more than they cure, and
build their art upon experiments made at the risk of their wretched
patients? The errors of lawyers are of trivial consequence, in comparison
with those of physicians. Our unskilfulness empties the purses of our
clients, but your mistakes endanger the lives of those who employ you.
We cause somebody to be the gainer, whilst you both rob a man of his
life, and defraud his surviving relations of the amount of your fees.
Whilst we may possibly occasion the loss of a legacy, or an inheritance,
you disturb the peace of nations by slaying kings and princes. And let
me ask, what dignity is there in your profession? You are called in to
visit a patient—you examine his natural discharges, wrinkle your brows,
and assume a countenance of uncommon gravity, in order to persuade the
bye-standers, that he is in a very critical situation. Then you feel
his pulse, in order to ascertain the powers of nature. After this you
hold a consultation, and write your prescription, in the composition
of which you are not guided by any fixed rules, as is plain from the
different receipts which are in the same case recommended by different
practitioners. If your potion happen by chance to be followed by good
symptoms, you extol the cure as a marvellous effect of art; but if it
does any mischief, all the blame is laid on the poor patient. I will
relate to you a curious circumstance which happened to one Angelo, a
bishop of Arezzo. This ecclesiastic being afflicted by a very dangerous
disorder, was told by his physicians, that if he would not take the
potions which they prescribed, he would run the risk of losing his life.
He for some time positively refused to take their nauseous draughts, but
was at length persuaded by his friends to conform to the instructions
of his doctors. The physicians then sent him a number of phials, all of
which he emptied into a certain utensil, which was deposited under his
bed. In the morning the physicians paid him another visit, and finding
him almost free from his fever, intimated to him, that they hoped he
was convinced of his folly in having so long refused to follow their
prescriptions. To this remark he replied—the effect of your medicines
is indeed marvellous, for by merely putting them under my bed I have
recovered my health. If I had swallowed them, no doubt I should have
become immortal.”[413] After the narration of this anecdote, Benedetto
proceeds to enlarge upon the utility of laws, which he maintains to have
been the foundation of the dignity of states and empires. This position
is denied by Niccolo, who asserts, that the dominions of monarchs
and republics have constantly been extended by power, which is so
incompatible with law, that the powerful and mighty universally despise
all legal obligations, which are binding only on the poor and humble.
In the third part of the _Historia disceptativa convivialis_ Poggio
discusses the question, whether the Latin language was universally spoken
by the Romans, or whether the learned made use of a language different
from that of the vulgar. Poggio maintains, in opposition to the opinion
of his deceased friend, Leonardo Aretino,[414] and others, that the
language used by the well-educated Romans was the vernacular language
of their country, and that it differed from that of the lower classes
in no other respect, than as the language of the well-educated in every
country is more elegant and polished than that of the inferior orders of
the community. In defence of his opinion, he quotes a considerable number
of curious passages from the Roman historians and rhetoricians, which
clearly prove his point, and evince his profound acquaintance with Latin
literature.
The discussion of the comparative dignity of the professions of medicine
and civil law naturally led to satirical remarks on the part of the
respective interlocutors, on the abuse of those two branches of science;
and the perusal of this dialogue will serve to shew that its author
was fully competent to expose the pompous ignorances of empirics, and
to display the detriment which arises to society from those most
mischievous of knaves, the unprincipled practitioners of the law. It must
also be allowed, that the enumeration which Benedetto Aretino and Niccolo
di Foglini set forth of the merits of their respective professions,
forcibly inculcates the benefits which accrue to mankind from the study
of medicine and of jurisprudence, and the true principles upon which
those studies ought to be conducted.[415] The following letter, which
Poggio addressed to his friend Benedetto, in the year 1436, demonstrates,
that the result of his serious meditations had convinced him that
legal practice was not only compatible with moral rectitude, but was
most likely to be productive of gain when regulated by the dictates of
integrity.
“I have been highly gratified, my dear Benedetto, by your kind letter;
and I cannot but admire the versatility of your genius, who have united
to the most profound knowledge of the civil law, an elegance and grace of
expression, which entitles you, in my opinion, to as high a rank in the
school of rhetoric, as you hold among the professors of the science of
jurisprudence. It is indeed a proof of an extraordinary capacity, and of
a wonderful proficiency in letters, to have successfully cultivated two
departments of knowledge, the cultivation of each of which is attended
with no small degree of difficulty. The acquisition of the knowledge of
the civil law is a work of immense labour, on account of the discordance
of sentiments which occurs amongst those who have treated upon this
subject, but still more on account of the almost endless volumes
written by commentators, which distract the minds of their readers by
the difference of opinions which they contain, and weary them by the
prolixity of their style. Far from imbibing the neatness and elegance
of the old lawyers, these commentators, by their perplexity and minute
distinctions, shut up the road to truth. The difficulty of attaining
the graces of eloquence is evinced by the fact, that in all ages truly
eloquent writers are very few in number. When therefore I see you endowed
with both these accomplishments, I congratulate you on your having
bestowed your labour on pursuits which will confer upon you both honour
and emolument. For your knowledge of the law will bestow upon you riches,
which are the necessary support of human life; and the study of polite
letters will be highly ornamental to you, and will tend to improve and
display to the best advantage your legal talents.
“I would wish you to avoid the common error of too many legal
practitioners, who, for the sake of money, wrest the law to the purposes
of injustice. It has, indeed, always happened, that the bad have been
more in number than the good, and the old proverb justly says, that
excellence is of rare occurrence. Almost all law students, when they
enter upon their profession, are stimulated by a love of gain; and by
making gain the object of their unremitted pursuit, they acquire a habit
of appreciating the merits of a cause, not according to the rules of
equity, but according to the probability of profit. When there is no
prospect of emolument, justice is disregarded, and the richer client is
considered as having the better cause. As many tradesmen imagine, that
they can make no profit without telling falsehoods in commendation of
their commodities, so the generality of men learned in the law think they
shall never prosper in the world if they scruple to subvert justice by
perjury, and equity by sophisms. Acting on these principles, they do not
endeavour to investigate the true nature of a cause, but at all hazards
try to promote the views of the party who engages their services by a
fee. But I am persuaded that you, who are by your excellent disposition
instigated no less by a love of virtue than by a passion for literature,
will act upon different principles, and will esteem nothing lawful which
is dishonourable. I would not, however, tie you down by the strictness
of that philosophy which, making happiness to consist in virtue alone,
inculcates a contempt for worldly emoluments; for those who enter upon
civil life will find the want of many comforts. Indeed there have been
more lovers than despisers of riches amongst philosophers themselves;
and the advice of those who exhort us quietly to submit to poverty is
rather to be praised than followed; for it is truly melancholy to depend
upon the assistance of others. But you have no reason to fear that by
being honest you will become poor. On the contrary, by acting up to the
principles of integrity, you will surpass others in wealth as well as
in dignity. It will in the end be found much more profitable to have the
reputation of honesty and justice, than that of skilfulness and craft.
Virtue is valued even by the vicious, and extorts commendation from those
who are unwilling to obey her precepts. It is impossible, in the nature
of things, that he who has established a reputation for uprightness
should not excel others in honour, in authority, and in emoluments.
I would wish you, therefore, in the first place, to persevere in the
practice of virtue, then to apply yourself with all diligence to the
study of the law, and lastly, to add to these accomplishments the graces
of polite learning. If you adopt this plan, you will not be doomed to
struggle against the inconveniences of an humble station, but you will
rise through the intermediate degrees of dignity to the highest stations
of honour.”[416]
CHAP. XI.
_Death of Carlo Aretino—Poggio is chosen chancellor of the Florentine
republic, and one of the Priori degli arti—War between the Florentines
and the king of Naples—Peace of Lodi—Death of Nicolas V.—Quarrel
between Poggio and Lorenzo Valla—Poggio’s dialogue de Miseriâ humanæ
conditionis—Murder of Angelotto, cardinal of St. Mark—Poggio’s
translation of Lucian’s Ass—His history of Florence—His death—His
character—Brief account of his children._
CHAP. XI.
On the twenty-fourth of April, 1453, a vacancy was occasioned in
the chancellorship of the Tuscan republic, by the death of Carlo
Aretino.[417] In this conjuncture the long established literary
reputation of Poggio, and the predominant interest of the house of
Medici, concurred, without any canvassing or intriguing on his part, in
directing to him the choice of his fellow-citizens, and he was elected to
the office which had been in succession so ably filled by two of his most
intimate friends. The prospect of the distinguished honours which awaited
him in his native province did not, however, so entirely occupy his mind,
as to render him insensible of the sacrifice which he made in quitting
the Roman chancery, in which he had held situations of confidence and
dignity for the space of fifty-one years. His heart was depressed with
sorrow when he bade farewell to the pontiff, from whose kindness he
had uniformly experienced the most friendly indulgence. Amongst the
associates of his literary and official labours, there were moreover some
chosen companions of his hours of relaxation, whose pleasing converse
he could not forego without yielding to the emotions of grief. But in
Florence also he had been from his early years accustomed to enjoy the
pleasures of friendship; and the sentiments of patriotism concurred with
the voice of ambition in prompting him to obey the call of his country.
In addition to these motives, he was prompted to accept this lucrative
employment by a sense of the duty which he owed to his family, for whose
welfare, as he himself says, he deemed himself bound to sacrifice his own
ease and liberty. He therefore quitted the city of Rome in the month of
June, 1453; and having removed his family to the Tuscan capital, where
he was received with a welcome which he compares to that experienced
by Cicero on his return from exile, he applied himself with his wonted
diligence to the duties of his new office.[418]
He had not long resided In Florence before he received an additional
testimony of the esteem of his fellow-citizens, in being elected into
the number of the _Priori degli arti_, or presidents of the trading
companies, the establishment of which was happily calculated to secure
the preservation of good order, and to defend from infringement the
political privileges of the people.[419]
On his arrival in Florence, Poggio found his countrymen involved in the
embarrassments and distresses incident to a state of war. Soon after
Francesco Sforza had made himself master of the city of Milan, he had
been attacked by the united forces of the Venetians and the king of
Naples. The Florentines being invited to join in the alliance against
him, had, at the instance of Cosmo de’ Medici, not only refused to take
any share in the confederacy, but had sent a body of troops to his
assistance. Irritated by this conduct, the Venetians and the Neapolitan
king expelled from their respective dominions all the Tuscans who
happened to reside there for the purposes of commerce. This insult was
the forerunner of hostilities, which were commenced in the year 1451 by
the king of Naples, who sent his son Ferdinando, at the head of an army
of twelve thousand men, to invade the Tuscan territories. The Neapolitan
forces made themselves masters of a few unimportant towns, but they were
prevented by the vigilance of their adversaries from gaining any signal
or permanent advantage. The war was for some time carried on in a languid
manner, till the Florentines and the duke of Milan having procured
the assistance of Charles VII., king of France, the Venetians, after
sustaining great reverses of fortune, were inclined to an accommodation;
and without the concurrence of the king of Naples, they entered into a
negotiation with their enemies, which was happily terminated at Lodi on
the ninth of April, 1454, by the signature of a treaty of peace. Alfonso
was greatly irritated by the defection of his allies, and for some time
obstinately persisted in refusing to listen to pacific overtures. But on
the twenty-sixth of January, 1455, he was persuaded to accede to the
treaty of Lodi by the earnest solicitation of Nicolas V.[420]
The intelligence of this happy event diffused a beam of cheerfulness over
the latter days of that benevolent pontiff, who had for a long space of
time struggled with a complication of painful disorders. In the midst of
his sufferings, however, he did not remit his endeavours to promote the
welfare of Christendom. He was busily employed in making preparations
to send succour to the Greeks, who were sinking beneath the power of
the Turks, when he terminated his career of glory on the 24th of March,
1455.[421]
Nicolas V. was one of the brightest ornaments of the pontifical throne.
In the exercise of authority over the ecclesiastical dominions he
exhibited a happy union of the virtues of gentleness and firmness. Purely
disinterested in his views, he did not lavish upon his relatives the
wealth which the prudent administration of his finances poured into his
coffers; but appropriated the revenues of the church to the promotion
of its dignity. The gorgeous solemnity which graced his performance of
religious rites evinced his attention to decorum and the grandeur of his
taste. In the superb edifices which were erected under his auspices,
the admiring spectator beheld the revival of ancient magnificence. As
the founder of the Vatican library he claims the homage of the lovers
of classic literature. His court was the resort of the learned, who
found in him a discriminating patron, and a generous benefactor. It was
the subject of general regret, that the brief term of his pontificate
prevented the maturing of the mighty plans which he had conceived for
the encouragement of the liberal arts. When his lifeless remains were
consigned to the grave, the friends of peace lamented the premature fate
of a pontiff, who had assiduously laboured to secure the tranquillity
of Italy; and they who were sensible of the charms of enlightened piety
regretted the loss of a true father of the faithful, who had dedicated
his splendid talents to the promotion of the temporal as well as the
spiritual welfare of the Christian community.
Had Poggio by his intercourse with Nicolas V. imbibed a portion of the
meekness of spirit which influenced the conduct of that amiable patron of
literature, he would have provided for his present comfort and for his
future fame. But he unfortunately indulged, to the latest period of his
life, that bitterness of resentment, and that intemperance of language,
which disgraced his strictures on Francesco Filelfo. When he quitted
the Roman chancery he did not depart in peace with all his colleagues.
At the time of his removal to Florence he was engaged in the violence
of literary hostility against the celebrated Lorenzo Valla. In Lorenzo
he had to contend with a champion of no inferior fame—a champion whose
dexterity in controversy had been increased by frequent exercise. This
zealous disputant was the son of a doctor of civil law, and was born at
Rome towards the end of the fourteenth century.[422] He was educated
in his native city, and when he had attained the age of twenty-four
years he offered himself as a candidate for the office of apostolic
secretary, which, as he himself asserts, he was prevented from obtaining
by the intrigues of Poggio.[423] Quitting Rome in consequence of his
disappointment, he repaired to Piacenza for the purpose of receiving
an inheritance which had devolved to him on the recent death of his
grandfather and his uncle.[424] From Piacenza he removed to Pavia, in the
university of which city he for some time read lectures on rhetoric.[425]
The history of the transactions in which he was engaged immediately
after his removal from Pavia is involved in considerable obscurity. But
it is clearly ascertained, that about the year 1435 he was honoured
by the patronage of Alfonso, king of Naples, whom he appears to have
accompanied in his warlike expeditions. Soon after the translation of
the pontifical court from Florence to Rome in the year 1443, Valla
returned to his native city. His residence in Rome was not, however, of
long continuance. About the time of the dissolution of the council of
Florence, he had written a treatise to prove the erroneousness of the
commonly received opinion, that the city of Rome had been presented to
the sovereign pontiffs by the emperor Constantine.[426] The officious
malice of some fiery zealots having apprized Eugenius IV. of the nature
and object of this treatise, the wrath of that pontiff was kindled
against its author, who, being obliged to fly from the rage of religious
bigotry, took refuge in Naples, where he was kindly received by his royal
protector.
During his residence in Naples, Valla delivered public lectures on
eloquence, which were attended by crowded audiences. But the imprudence
of his zeal in the correction of vulgar errors in matters of theological
belief again involved him in dangers and difficulties. He appears to have
possessed that superiority of intellect above his contemporaries, which,
when united to a warm temper and a propensity to disputation, never fails
to draw down upon the inquisitive the hatred of fanaticism. In the pride
of superior knowledge, he provoked the indignation of the bishop of
Majorca, by asserting that the pretended letter of Christ to Abgarus was
a forgery.[427] In aggravation of this heresy, he had moreover derided
the assertion of a preaching friar, who had inculcated upon his audience
the commonly received notion, that the formulary of faith, generally
known by the name of the apostles’ creed, was the joint composition
of those first heralds of salvation.[428] The freedom with which he
descanted upon these delicate topics of dispute exposed him to the utmost
peril. His enemies publicly arraigned him before a spiritual tribunal,
where he underwent a strict examination; and it is very probable, that
had not Alfonso interposed the royal authority on his behalf, not even a
recantation of his imputed errors would have saved him from the severe
punishment which the atrocity of religious bigotry has allotted to those
who deviate from the narrow line of orthodox faith.[429]
Theology was not the only subject of investigation which involved
Valla in altercation and strife. Literary jealousy kindled the flame
of hostility between him and Beccatelli, whom he attacked in a violent
invective. With Bartolomeo Facio also he maintained a controversy, in
the course of which he manifested the utmost bitterness of spirit.[430]
When Nicolas V. had ascended the papal throne, Valla received from that
liberally-minded pontiff an invitation to fix his residence in Rome. He
accordingly repaired to the pontifical court, where he was honourably
received, and employed in translating the Greek authors into the Latin
tongue.[431] Soon after his arrival in Rome, the following circumstance
gave rise to the irreconcilable enmity which took place between him
and Poggio. A Catalonian nobleman, a pupil of Valla, happened to be
possessed of a copy of Poggio’s epistles. This book having fallen into
Poggio’s hands, he observed on its margin several annotations, pointing
out alleged barbarisms in his style. Fired with indignation at this
attack upon his Latinity, and precipitately concluding that the author
of these criticisms could be no other than Valla himself, whose _Libri
Elegantiarum Linguæ Latinæ_ had gained him the reputation of an acute
grammarian, he had immediate recourse to his accustomed mode of revenge,
and assailed the supposed delinquent in a fierce invective. In this work
he accused Valla of the most offensive arrogance, which, as he asserted,
was manifested in his animadversions on the style of the best classic
authors. Poggio then proceeded to examine and to defend the passages
which had been noted with reprobation in the young Catalonian’s copy of
his epistles. Collecting courage as he proceeded, he arraigned at the bar
of critical justice several forms of expression which occur in Valla’s
_Elegantiæ_. Alluding to Valla’s transactions in the court of Naples, he
impeached him of heresy both in religion and philosophy, and concluded
his strictures by the sketch of a ridiculous triumphal procession,
which, as he asserted, would well befit the vanity and folly of his
antagonist.[432]
In the course of a little time after the publication of this invective,
Valla addressed to Nicolas V. an answer to it, under the title of
_Antidotus in Poggium_. In the introduction to this defence of himself,
he asserted, that Poggio had been stimulated to attack him by envy of the
favourable reception which his _Elegantiæ_ had received from the public.
Adverting to the advanced age of his opponent, he addressed to him a long
and grave admonition on the acerbity of his language. After a sufficient
quantity of additional preliminary observations, Valla proceeded to
rebut the charge which Poggio had brought against him. He asserted,
that the critic who had given such offence to the irritable secretary
was the above-mentioned Catalonian nobleman, who, taking umbrage at an
expression derogatory to the taste of his countrymen, which occurred
in one of Poggio’s epistles, had avenged himself by making some cursory
strictures on his style.[433] By shewing that the criticisms in question
by no means agreed with the principles inculcated in his _Elegantiæ_,
and by other internal evidence, Valla proved almost to demonstration,
that he himself had no part in the animadversions which had excited so
much animosity. Having thus repelled the imputation of a wanton and
insidious aggression, he proceeded to shew, that he had not abstained
from criticising the works of Poggio on account of their freedom from
faults, by entering upon a most minute and rigid examination of their
phraseology; an examination in which he gave ample proof how acute is the
eye of enmity, and how peculiarly well qualified a rival is to discover
the errors of his competitor.
Had Valla in his _Antidotus_ restrained himself within the limits of
self-defence, he would have gained the praise due to the exercise of
the virtue of forbearance: had he proceeded no farther in offensive
operations than to impugn the style of his opponent, he would have been
justified in the opinion of mankind in general, as exercising the right
of retaliation. But by attacking the moral character of Poggio,[434] he
imprudently roused in the fiery bosom of his adversary the fierceness
of implacable resentment, and provoked him to open wide the flood-gates
of abuse. In a second invective Poggio maintained, that if it were true
that the Catalonian youth wrote the remarks which were the subject of
his complaint, he wrote them under the direction of Valla. Indignantly
repelling the charge of envy, he remarked, that so notorious a fool as
Valla, the object of contempt to all the learned men of Italy, could
not possibly excite that passion. After noticing the imprudence of his
antagonist in provoking an inquiry into his own moral character, he
proceeded circumstantially to relate divers anecdotes, which tended to
fix upon Valla the complicated guilt of forgery,[435] theft, ebriety,
and every species of lewdness. Recurring to the charge of heresy,
he referred to various passages in Valla’s writings, which contained
sentiments contradictory to the orthodox faith. In fine, he arraigned the
supposed infidel before an imaginary tribunal, which he represented as
without mercy condemning him to the infernal regions.
In reply to this second attack, Valla renewed and maintained his
protestation, that he had not been the aggressor in the present contest.
In contradiction to Poggio’s assertion, that he was an object of dislike
to the scholars of Italy, he quoted several complimentary epistles
which he had on various occasions received from men distinguished by
their learning. He also exposed the disingenuousness of his adversary,
who had branded him with the imputation of heresy, on the ground of
certain sentiments, which did indeed occur in his works, but which he
had advanced, not in his own character, but in that of an Epicurean
philosopher, whom he had introduced as an interlocutor in a dialogue. As
to the scandalous stories which Poggio had related to the disparagement
of his good name, he solemnly asserted, that the greater part of them
had not the least foundation in truth, and that the remainder were gross
and wilful misrepresentations of facts;[436] and in the true spirit
of retaliation, he narrated concerning Poggio a number of anecdotes
equally scandalous, and in all probability equally false, as those of
the circulation of which he himself complained. On the publication of
this second part of the _Antidotus_, Poggio, returning to the charge,
annoyed his foe in a third invective, in which, pursuing the idea of
Valla’s having been condemned to the infernal regions, he accounted for
his appearance on earth, by informing his readers, that on the culprit’s
arrival in hell, a council of demons was summoned to decide upon his
case; and that in consideration of the essential wickedness of his
character, they had permitted him, after solemnly swearing allegiance to
Satan, to return to earth for the purpose of gratifying his malevolent
dispositions, by effecting the perdition of others.[437]
Before Valla had seen this narration of his transactions in the kingdom
of darkness, he was provoked, by the account which he had received of
its tenor, to prosecute his criticisms on Poggio’s phraseology. These
criticisms stimulated Poggio to renew hostilities in a fourth and a
fifth invective. The former of these compositions has not yet been
committed to the press. The latter abounds in those flowers of eloquence,
of which specimens perhaps more than sufficiently ample have been already
presented to the reader.
The heat of altercation between Poggio and Valla was inflamed by the
interference of Niccolo Perotti, a pupil of the latter, who attacked
Poggio with great virulence. Poggio was not tardy in replying to this
new antagonist. If we may judge of the nature of his invective against
Perotti, by a short extract from it, which occurs in Bandini’s catalogue
of the manuscripts of the Laurentian library, it was not at all inferior
in acrimony to his other compositions of a similar nature.[438] A
friendly and sensible letter of admonition, which Francesco Filelfo
addressed to the belligerent parties, exhorting them to consult for
their own dignity, by ceasing to persecute each other with obloquy, is a
memorable instance how much easier it is to give wholesome advice than to
set a good example.[439]
The foregoing traits of the history of literature prove, that we must
receive with some grains of allowance the doctrine of the amiable Ovid,
when he asserts that,
—“Ingenuas didicisse fideliter artes
Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros.”
It is indeed a most lamentable truth, that few quarrels are more violent
or implacable than those which are excited by the jealousy of literary
rivalship, and that the bitterest vituperative language on record occurs
in the controversial writings of distinguished scholars. Several causes
concur in producing this unhappy effect. It is of the very essence of
extraordinary talents to advance to extremes. In men whose ardent minds
glow with the temperature of genius, whether the flame be kindled by
the scintillation of love or of enmity, it burns with impetuous fury.
The existence of many scholars, and the happiness of the great majority
of the cultivators of literature, depend upon the estimation in which
they are held by the public. Any assertion or insinuation, therefore,
derogatory to their talents or acquirements, they consider as a dangerous
infringement upon their dearest interests, which the strong principle
of self-preservation urges them to resent. The objects upon which we
employ a considerable portion of our time and labour acquire in our
estimation an undue degree of importance. Hence it happens, that too many
scholars, imagining that all valuable knowledge centers in some single
subject of study to which they have exclusively devoted their attention,
indulge the spirit of pride, and arrogantly claim from the public a
degree of deference, which is by no means due to the most successful
cultivator of any single department of science or of literature. And
in the literary, as well as in the commercial world, undue demands are
resentfully resisted; and amongst scholars, as amongst men of the world,
pride produces discord. Learned men are also too frequently surrounded
by officious friends, whose ignorant enthusiasm of attachment betrays
them into a kind of idolatry, which is productive of the most mischievous
consequences to its object. They who are accustomed to meet with a blind
and ready acquiescence in their opinions, in the obsequious circle of
their partizans, become impatient of contradiction, and give way to
the impulse of anger, when any one presumes to put their dogmas to the
test of unreserved examination. The flame of resentment is fanned by the
foolish partiality by which it was originally kindled; and the noblest
energies of some mighty mind are perverted to the maintenance of strife,
and the infliction of pain. The operation of these causes produces many
striking proofs, that learning and wisdom are by no means identical, and
that the interpreter of the sublimest morals may become the miserable
victim of the meanest passions which rankle in the human breast.
In the inaugural oration which Poggio addressed to Nicolas V. he
intimated, that it was his earnest desire to dedicate his declining years
to literary pursuits. This was not a mere profession. Availing himself
of the considerate kindness of the heads of the Florentine republic,
who, in consideration of the respect due to his advanced age and to his
literary acquirements, excused him from any other task than a general
superintendence of the business of his office, he continued to prosecute
his studies with his accustomed ardour.[440] The first fruits of his
lucubrations after his final settlement in the Tuscan capital appeared
in a dialogue, _De Miseriâ humanæ conditionis_, or, on the wretchedness
incident to humanity, which he dedicated to Sigismundo Malatesta, Lord
of Rimini, and commander in chief of the Florentine forces. In this
dialogue, Poggio proposed to relate the substance of a conversation
which took place between the accomplished Matteo Palmerio,[441] Cosmo
de’ Medici, and himself, in consequence of the serious reflections which
occurred to some of Cosmo’s guests, on the intelligence of the capture
of Constantinople by the Turks. Almost every species of distress which
awaits the sons of men passes in review in the course of this work. Here
the dark side of human life is industriously displayed, and the serious
lessons of humility and self-discipline are inculcated in a feeling
and forcible manner. But even in this grave disquisition, Poggio could
not refrain from exercising his wonted severity upon the ascetics and
cœnobites, who had so often smarted under the merciless lashes of his
satire.[442]
This dialogue contains a record of the miserable end of Angelotto,
cardinal of St. Mark. This avaricious ecclesiastic was murdered by one of
his own domestics, who was tempted to perpetrate this execrable deed by
the hope of plundering his master’s hoarded treasures. When the assassin
imagined that he had accomplished his purpose, he left the chamber,
where the cardinal lay weltering in his blood, and called aloud for
assistance. The relations and servants of Angelotto immediately crowded
into the apartment accompanied by the murderer, who, affecting to be
overwhelmed with grief, took his station at the window. He was, however,
not a little startled on observing, that in his trepidation he had not
completely effected his wicked intentions. The cardinal still breathed,
and, though unable to speak, he pointed to the assassin. The villain
endeavoured to divert the attention of the bye-standers from the true
meaning of this sign, by exclaiming, “See! he intimates that the murderer
came into the house through this window.” This ingenious interpretation
of his dying master’s gestures did not, however, avert from him the
punishment due to his crime. He was arrested and tried, and after having
made a full confession of his guilt, he expiated his offence by the
forfeit of his life.[443]
Soon after the publication of his dialogue _De Miseriâ humanæ
conditionis_, Poggio transmitted to Cosmo de’ Medici a version of
Lucian’s _Ass_, on which he had bestowed a few of his days of leisure.
By the circulation of this version he wished to establish a point of
literary history, which seems to have been till then unknown, namely,
that Apuleius was indebted to Lucian for the stamina of his _Asinus
Aureus_. It is a sufficient proof of the merit of Poggio’s translation of
Lucian’s romance, that Bourdaloue has adopted it in his edition of the
works of that entertaining author.
The last literary production which exercised the talents of Poggio was
the History of Florence, a work for the composition of which he was
peculiarly well qualified, not only by his skill in the Latin language,
but also on account of the means of information which were afforded
to him by the office which he held in the administration of the civil
affairs of the Florentine republic. This history, which is divided
into eight books, comprehends a most important and interesting portion
of the annals of Tuscan independence, embracing the events in which
the Florentines bore a share, from the period of the first war which
they waged with Giovanni Visconti, in the year 1350, to the peace of
Naples, which took place in 1455. It has been justly observed, that in
his _Historia Florentina_, Poggio aims at higher praise than that of
a mere chronicler of facts, and that he enlivens his narrative by the
graces of oratory. In imitation of the ancient historians, he frequently
explains the causes and the secret springs of actions, by the medium of
deliberative speeches, which he imputes to the principal actors in the
scenes which he describes. His statement of facts is clear and precise;
in the delineation of character, which is an important and difficult part
of the duty of the historian, he evinces penetration of judgment and
skill in discrimination. Though the extent of territory to the history
of which his narration is confined be circumscribed by very narrow
limits, his work is by no means destitute of the interest which arises
from the description of protracted sieges, bold achievements, and bloody
encounters. He has been accused of suffering his partiality to his native
country to betray him into occasional palliations of the injustice of
his fellow-citizens, and into false imputations against their enemies.
This accusation has been briefly couched in the following epigram,
written by the celebrated Sannazaro.
“Dum patriam laudat, damnat dum Poggius hostem,
Nec malus est civis, nec bonus historicus.”
It may, however, be remarked, that supposing this accusation to be
supported by unequivocal evidence, the advocate of Poggio might plead in
his excuse the general frailty of human nature, which renders it almost
impossible for a man to divest himself of an overweening affection for
the land of his nativity. But it must be observed, that the impeachment
in question is founded upon a very few passages in the History of
Florence, and that it comes from a suspicious quarter—from the citizens
of those states, the political conduct of which Poggio marks with
disapprobation.
Poggio’s History of Florence was translated into Italian by his son,
Jacopo. This version, being committed to the press, for a long space of
time superseded the original, which was confined to the precincts of the
Medicean library till the year 1715, at which period Giovanni Battista
Recanati, a noble Venetian, published it in a splendid form, and enriched
it with judicious notes, and with a life of Poggio, the accuracy of which
causes the student of literary history to lament its brevity.[444]
The consideration of the great extent of the History of Florence places
in a striking point of view the industry and courage of its author, who,
in defiance of the infirmities of old age, possessed the energy of mind
to meditate, and the diligence to execute, a work of such magnitude.
Before, however, it had received the last polish, the earthly labours
of Poggio were terminated by his death. This event occurred on the 30th
of October, 1459. On the second of November ensuing his remains were
interred with solemn magnificence in the church of Santa Croce, in
Florence.
The respect which the administrators of the Tuscan government entertained
for the virtues of Poggio, induced them readily to comply with the
pious wishes of his sons,[445] who requested permission to deposit his
portrait, painted by Antonio Pollaiuolo, in a public hall denominated the
Proconsolo. His fellow-citizens also testified their grateful sense of
the honour which his great accomplishments had reflected on his country,
by erecting a statue to his memory, on the front of the church of Santa
Maria del Fiore.[446]
It was with justice that the Florentines held the name of Poggio in
respectful remembrance. Inspired by a zealous love of his country, he
had constantly prided himself upon the honour of being a citizen of a
free state, and he neglected no opportunity which presented itself of
increasing and displaying the glory of the Tuscan republic. And this end
he most effectually promoted by the splendour of his own accomplishments.
He so faithfully improved the advantages which he enjoyed in the
course of his education in the Florentine university, that amongst the
multitudes of learned men who adorned his age, he occupied a station of
the highest eminence. His admission into the Roman chancery, and his
continuance in offices of confidence under eight successive pontiffs,
afford an ample proof not only of his ability in business, but also of
his fidelity and integrity. Honoured by the favour of the great, he did
not sacrifice his independence at the shrine of power, but uniformly
maintained the ingenuous sentiments of freedom. The whole tenor of his
writings evinces, that he united to the accomplishments of literature an
intimate knowledge of the world; and many passages might be quoted from
his works to prove that the eye of his mind surveyed a wider intellectual
horizon than fell to the general lot of the age in which he lived. He was
warm and enthusiastic in his friendly attachments, and duteously eager to
diffuse the renown of those whom he loved. But acute sensations are not
productive of signal virtues alone; they too frequently betray mankind
into capital errors. Though Poggio was by no means implacable in his
anger, yet he was as energetic in the expression of his resentment, as
he was enthusiastic in the language in which he testified his esteem for
those to whom he was bound by the ties of friendship. The licentiousness
in which he occasionally indulged in the early part of his life, and
the indecent levity which occurs in some of his writings, are rather
the vices of the times than of the man. We accordingly find that those
circumstances did not deprive him of the countenance of the highest
ecclesiastical dignitaries—they did not cause him to forfeit the favour
of the pious Eugenius, or of the virtuous and accomplished Nicolas V. His
failings, indeed, were fully counterbalanced by several moral qualities
of superior excellence—by his gratitude for benefits received; by his
sincerity in friendship; by his compassion for the unfortunate; and by
his readiness, to the extent of his ability, to succour the distressed.
To which it may be added, that he seems to have recommended himself to
most of those with whom he maintained a personal intercourse, by the
urbanity of his manners, and by the sportiveness of his wit.
As a scholar Poggio is entitled to distinguished praise. By a course of
assiduous study, commenced at an early period of his life and continued
to its close, he became intimately conversant with the works of the
Roman classic authors; and though he was somewhat advanced in age when
he began to direct his attention to Grecian literature, by dint of
methodic industry he made a considerable proficiency in a knowledge
of the writings of the Greek philosophers and historians. From those
enlightened preceptors he imbibed those principles, which in his graver
treatises he applied with fidelity and skill to the investigation of
moral truth. To them, also, he was in no small degree indebted for that
noble spirit of independence, and for that frankness of sentiment, which
gave so much animation to his writings. The pictures of life and manners
which he exhibits in his works are sketched by the decisive hand of a
master, and are vividly coloured. His extensive erudition supplied him
with that abundance of apt illustration with which his compositions are
enriched. His Latin style is singularly unequal. In the letters which he
wrote in haste, and which he addressed to his familiar friends, there
occur frequent specimens of a phraseology in which his native idiom is
thinly covered, as it were, with a transparent Roman robe. But in his
more elaborate compositions he manifested the discernment of true taste,
in selecting as his exemplar the style of Cicero. His spirited endeavours
to imitate this exquisite model were far from being unsuccessful. His
diction is flowing, and his periods are all well balanced; but, by the
occasional admission of barbarous words and unauthorized phraseology, as
well as his evident want of an intimate acquaintance with the philosophy
of grammar, he reminds his reader that at the time when he wrote, the
Iron age of literature was but lately terminated. His most striking fault
is diffuseness—a diffuseness which seems to arise, not so much from the
copiousness of his thoughts, as from the difficulty which he experienced
in clearly expressing his ideas. It must, however, be observed, that he
did not, like many modern authors who are celebrated for their Latinity,
slavishly confine himself to the compilation of centos from the works of
the ancients. In the prosecution of his literary labours he drew from his
own stores; and those frequent allusions to the customs and transactions
of his own times, which render his writings so interesting, must, at
a period when the Latin language was just rescued from the grossest
barbarism, have rendered their composition peculiarly difficult. When
compared with the works of his immediate predecessors, the writings
of Poggio are truly astonishing. Rising to a degree of elegance, to
be sought for in vain in the rugged Latinity of Petrarca and Coluccio
Salutati, he prepared the way for the correctness of Politiano, and of
the other eminent scholars, whose gratitude has reflected such splendid
lustre on the character of Lorenzo de’ Medici.
FOOTNOTES
[1] _Recanati Poggii Vita, p. 1._ _Recanati Osservazioni, p. 34._
[2] _Elogi degli Uomini Illustri Toscani, tom. i. p. 270._ MS. in the
Riccardi Library referred to by the Cavaliere Tonelli, _tom. i. p. 3._ of
his translation of the Life of Poggio, which will be hereafter designated
by the abridgment _Ton. Tr._
[3] _Recanati Poggii Vita, p. 1._
[4] Recanati indeed, on the authority of a letter addressed by an
unknown antiquary to Benedetto de’ Bondelmonti, asserts, that the office
of notary had been for some generations hereditary in the family of
Poggio.—_Recanati ut supr._
[5] See a fragment of a letter from Colucio Salutati to Pietro Turco.
_Apud Mehi Vitam Ambrosii Traversarii, fo. ccclxxix. ccclxxx._
[6] Giovanni, the son of Jacopo Malpaghino, was born at Ravenna. In
his early youth he left his native city, and went to Venice, where he
attended the lectures of Donato Albasano, a celebrated grammarian.
From the instructions of Donato he derived considerable advantage; but
his connexion with that scholar was more eminently fortunate, as it
introduced him to the acquaintance, and procured him the friendship of
Petrarca, who took him into his family, and superintended the prosecution
of his studies. In return for the kindness of his accomplished patron,
Giovanni undertook the improving employment of transcribing his
compositions—a task for which he was well qualified, as he had added to
his other acquirements that of a beautiful hand writing. Petrarca in
a letter to Giovanni Certaldo, which is preserved in Mehus’s life of
Ambrogio Traversari, mentions, with distinguished applause, the industry,
temperance and prudence of his young scribe; and particularly commends
the tenaciousness of his memory, in proof of which, he informs his
correspondent, that Giovanni had, in eleven successive days, qualified
himself to repeat his twelve Bucolic poems. Perhaps the highest eulogium
that can be pronounced upon Giovanni is this, that he continued to reside
in the family of Petrarca for the space of fifteen years, at the end of
which time, by the death of that elegant enthusiast, he was deprived
of an enlightened master and a zealous friend. On this event he went
to Padua, where he for some time gained an honourable livelihood, by
instructing youth in the principles of eloquence. In the year 1397, he
received an invitation to undertake the office of public instructor, in
the city of Florence. This invitation he accepted, and discharged the
duties of his station with great applause, during the course of at least
fifteen years. The time of his death is uncertain. _Mehi Vita Ambrosii
Traversarii, p. cccxlviii.-cccliii._—_Ejusdem præfatio ad Colucii
Salutati Epistolas, p. xli._
[7] _Ton. Tr. tom. i. p. 7._
[8] _Ton. Tr. tom. i. p. 10._
[9] _Platina Vite de’ Pontefici, tom. i. p. 368._
[10] _Platina, tom. i. p. 369._
[11] The conclave gave a name to the new pontiff, because he was absent
from Rome at the time of his election.
[12] _Platina, tom. i. p. 370._
[13] _Voltaire, Essai sur les Mœurs et l’Esprit des Nations, chap. 69._
The Cavaliere Tonelli is of opinion, that Joanna was innocent of this
crime, which is not imputed to her by the best Neapolitan historians,
Costanzo and Giannone. See _Ton. Tr. tom. i. p. 16._
[14] _Platina, tom. i. p. 372._
[15] _Poggius de Varietate Fortunæ, p. 56._ _Ammirato Istorie Fiorentine,
P. I. T. II. p. 752._
[16] _Platina, tom. i. p. 373, 374. Giannone, lib. xxiv. cap. i._
[17] _Vide Poggii Epistolas lvii, a Johanne Oliva Rhodigino vulgatas ad
calcem librorum de Varietate Fortunæ, p. 199._
[18] Alter Urbanum olim summum pontificem leviter perstrinxit. Nam cum
ille nescio quid acrius a pontifice contenderet, “malo capite es” inquit
Urbanus. Tum ille “hoc idem” inquit “et de te vulgi dicunt homines pater
sancte.” _Poggii Opera, edit. Basil. p. 428._
[19] _Platina, tom. i. p. 376._
[20] _Platina, tom. i. p. 376, 377._ _Poggii Historia Florentina, lib.
iii._ _Ammirato Istor. lib. xv._
[21] _Platina, tom. i. p. 378._
[22] The English reader will probably be surprised to recognize in
Giovanni Auguto, his countryman John Hawkewood. John was a soldier of
fortune, and had been engaged in the war which Edward III. king of
England, carried on with so much glory against France. On the conclusion
of peace between those two countries, he led into Italy a band of 3000
adventurers, of restless spirits, and approved courage, who had engaged
to fight under his banners, on behalf of any state which would give
them a suitable remuneration for their services. In the year 1363, this
army of desperadoes was hired by the republic of Pisa, and spread ruin
and devastation through the territories of Florence, with which state
the Pisans were then at war. They afterwards entered into the service
of Bernabò Visconti, lord of Milan, and being again opposed to the
Florentines, they defeated the Tuscan army, and made predatory incursions
to the very gates of Florence. Being defrauded by Bernabò of the
remuneration which his services merited, Hawkewood readily acceded to the
terms proposed to him by the cardinal of Berry, legate of pope Gregory
XI. and heartily engaged on the side of the pontiff in hostilities
against the lord of Milan. Having assisted in the capture of nearly a
hundred towns belonging to that prince, he had the satisfaction of seeing
him reduced to the necessity of suing for peace. In the year 1375 he
entered into the service of the Florentines. In the course of a little
time he was promoted to the chief command of the Tuscan forces, in which
capacity he merited and acquired the confidence of his employers, by the
courage and skill with which he conducted the military operations of
the Republic. He retained the office of Generalissimo of the Florentine
army till the time of his death, which event took place in the latter
end of the year 1393. The gratitude of the Florentines honoured him with
a magnificent funeral, and his fame was perpetuated by an equestrian
statue, erected to his memory at the public expense.
_Poggii Historia Florentina, p. 29, 41, 46, 122, 123. See particularly
note (x) p. 29, which settles the English appellation of Auguto._
In a volume of portraits of illustrious men, engraven on wood, entitled
Musæi Joviani Imagines, and printed at Basil, An. 1577, there is a
portrait of Auguto, who is there denominated IOANNES AVCVTHVS. BRITAN.
Underneath this portrait is printed the following inscription.
“Anglorum egressus patriis Aucuthus ab oris,
Italiæ primum climata lætus adit,
Militiæ fuerat quascunque edoctus et artes,
Ausoniæ exeruit non semel ipse plagæ,
Ut donaretur statuâ defunctus equestri,
Debita nam virtus præmia semper habet.”
Paulus Jovius, in his _Elogia Virorum illustrium_, _p. 105, 106_, gives
a long account of Auguto, who, he asserts, came into Italy in the suite
of the duke of Clarence, when that prince visited Milan, where he married
the daughter of Galeazzo Visconti.
Holingshed, in his Chronicle, has recorded the actions of Hawkewood
in the following terms. “And that valiant knight, Sir John Hawkewood,
whose fame in the parts of Italie shall remain for ever, where, as their
histories make mention, he grew to such estimation for his valiant
achieved enterprises, that happie might that prince or commonwealth
accompt themselves that might have his service; and so living there in
such reputation, sometimes he served the Pope, sometimes the Lords of
Millane, now this prince or commonwealth, now that, and otherwhiles none
at all, but taking one towne or other, would keep the same till some
liking entertainment were offered, and then would he sell such a towne,
where he had thus remained, to them that would give him for it according
to his mind. Barnabe, Lord of Millane, gave unto him one of his base
daughters in marriage, with an honourable portion for her dower.
“This man was born in Essex, (as some write) who at the first became a
tailor in London, and afterwards going to the warres in France, served
in the roome of an archer; but at length he became a Capteine and leader
of men of war, highlie commended, and liked of amongst the souldiers,
insomuch that when by the peace concluded at Bretignie, in the yeare
1360, great numbers of soldiers were discharged out of wages, they got
themselves together in companies, and without commandment of any prince,
by whose authoritie they might make warre, they fell to of themselves,
and sore harried and spoiled diverse countries in the realm of France,
as partlie yee have heard, amongst whome this Sir John Hawkewood was one
of the principall capteines, and at length went into Italie to serve the
Marquis of Montserrato, against the Duke of Millane, although I remember
that some write how he came into that countrie with the Duke of Clarence,
but I thinke the former report to be true; but it may well be that he was
readie to attend the said Duke at his coming into Italie.”—_Holingshed’s
Chronicle, vol. ii. p. 413._
[23] _Poggii Opera, edit. Basil. p. 311._
[24] _Platina, tom. i. p. 378._
[25] _Platina, tom. i. p. 379._
[26] Marignano was a castle, or country residence, to which Galeazzo had
retired to avoid the plague, which had made its appearance in Milan.
Poggio informs us in his history of Florence, that the day and hour of
his departure from his capital was fixed by his astrologers, whom he
was accustomed to consult in all cases of consequence. According to the
observations of these soothsayers, so evidently had the stars determined
the proper season for his journey, and so auspicious was the appearance
of the heavens, that they boldly predicted that their illustrious patron
would return, graced with the title of King of Italy. Poggio also
asserts, that it was generally believed, that the death of Galeazzo was
portended by a comet, which appeared in the month of March preceding
that event. It should seem that the astrologers of the lord of Milan had
forgotten to take this comet into their calculations.
Poggio’s partiality to his native country did not render him blind to the
merits of Galeazzo, on whom he bestows the praise due to his liberality,
magnanimity, and noble manners. He also highly commends him for his
patronage of literature and of learned men. The following anecdote
however, which is recorded in Poggio’s Facetiæ, proves that the lustre of
Galeazzo’s good qualities was tarnished by his excessive indulgence in
the pleasures of the table.
“Pope Martin V. had employed Antonio Lusco in the composition of some
letters, which, after he had perused them, the pontiff ordered him to
submit to the examination of a friend of mine, in whose judgment he
had great confidence. This person, who was a little disordered with
wine at the time when the letters were communicated to him, totally
disapproved of them, and ordered Lusco to re-write them. Then Antonio
said to Bartolomeo de’ Bardi, who happened to be present, I will do
with my letters as the tailor did with Giovanni Galeazzo’s waistcoat.
Upon Bartolomeo’s asking what that was, he replied, Giovanni Galeazzo
was a very corpulent man, and was in the habit of eating and drinking
immoderately at supper. As he was retiring to rest after one of these
copious repasts, he sent for his tailor, and sharply reproved him for
making his waistcoat too tight, and ordered him to widen it. I will take
care said the tailor to execute your highness’s orders, and I trust that
to-morrow it will fit you to your satisfaction. He then took the garment
in question, and without making the least alteration in it, hung it on
a nail. Being asked why he did not make the waistcoat wider, according
to the orders which he had received, he said, to-morrow when the prince
has digested his supper, it will be found large enough. He accordingly
carried it back in the morning, when Galeazzo having put it on, said,
Aye, now it will do—it fits perfectly easy.”
_Platina, tom. i. p. 379, 380. Poggii Historia Florentina, p. 153._
[27] During the state of anarchy into which the Milanese territories
fell, in consequence of the folly and wickedness of the successor of
Galeazzo, Como and Piacenza became the prey of the soldiers, Vercelli and
Novara were seized by the marquis of Montferat. Pandolfo Malatesta made
himself master of Brescia; Ottobuono III. took possession of Piacenza,
Parma, and Reggio. Pavia, Alessandria, Tortona, and several other towns,
submitted to the authority of Facino Cane. This last chieftain was the
captain of one of those bands of adventurers, who at this time subsisted
upon the wages which they received for their military services, and
upon the plunder of the rich towns and fertile provinces of Italy.
The following anecdote may serve to give the reader an idea of the
insolent rapacity with which these disciplined robbers carried on their
depredations.
“A person once complained to Facino Cane that he had been robbed of his
cloak by one of that captain’s soldiers. Facino, observing that the
complainant was clad in a good waistcoat, asked him whether he wore that
at the time when he was robbed. Being answered in the affirmative, Go,
says he—the man who robbed you cannot be one of my soldiers, for none
of my followers would have left you so good a waistcoat.”—_Poggii Hist.
Flor. p. 159, 160._—_Opera, p. 427._
[28] “Mallem tamen dici adversus avaritiam, cum verear no sit necesse nos
fieri avaros, ob tenuitatem lucri quo vix possumus tueri officii nostri
dignitatem.”—_Poggii Opera, edit. Basil. p. 5._
[29] “Ego sane quò me ex eorum vulgo eximerem de quorum ocio parum
constat, nonnulla hac tenus conscripsi, quæ jam inter multos diffusa
longiorem paulo, mihi, post obitum, vitam allatura videantur. Idque eò
feci libentius, quo facilius fugerem eas molestias, quibus hæc fragilis
atque imbecilla ætas plena est. Hæc enim scribendi exercitatio, multum
mihi contulit ad temporum injurias perferendas. Non enim non potui angi
animo et dolere aliquando, cum viderem me natu majorem, ita adhuc tenui
esse censu, ut cogerer quæstui potius operam quam ingenio dare.”—_Poggii
Opera, p. 32._
[30] _Platina, tom. i. p. 380, 381._ The following anecdote, inserted
by Poggio in his Facetiæ, is at once a record of this partiality, and a
curious specimen of the Italian wit of the fourteenth century.
“Bonifacius pontifex nonus, natione fuit Neapolitanus ex familiâ
Tomacellorum. Appellantur autem vulgari sermone Tomacelli cibus factus
ex jecore suillo admodum contrito atque in modum pili involtuto
interiore pinguedine porci. Contulit Bonifacius se Perusiam secundo sui
pontificatûs anno. Aderant autem secum fratres et affines ex eâ domo
permulti, qui ad eum (ut fit) confluxerant, bonorum ac lucri cupiditate.
Ingresso Bonifacio urbem sequebatur turba primorum, inter quos fratres
erant et cæteri ex eâ familiâ. Quidam cupidiores noscendorum hominum
quærebant quinam essent qui sequerentur. Dicebat unus item alter, hic
est Andreas Tomacellos deinde hic Johannes Tomacellus, tum plures deinde
Tomacellos nominatim recensendo. Tum quidam facetus, Hohe! permagnum
nempe fuit jecur istud, inquit, ex quo tot Tomacelli prodierunt et tam
ingentes.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 431._
[31] _Mehi Vita Leonardi Bruni, p. xxiii. xxv._
[32] _Janotii Manetti, Oratio Funebris apud Mehi, edit. Epist. Leonardi
Aretini, tom. i. p. xcii. xciii._
[33] _Mehi Vita Leon. Aret. p. xxxi._
[34] Coluccio Salutati was born in the obscure town of Stignano, about
the year 1330. It appears from a letter which he wrote to Bernardo di
Moglo, that he was destitute of the advantages of early education, and
that he did not apply himself to the cultivation of polite literature,
till he was arrived at man’s estate, and that he then began his
grammatical studies without the aid of a master. When he deemed himself
properly prepared to extend his literary career, he went to Bologna,
where he attended the public lectures of Giovanni di Moglo, the father
of the above-mentioned Bernardo. In compliance with the advice of his
relations and friends, he qualified himself for the profession of
a notary; but when he had acquired a sufficient knowledge of legal
practice, he devoted himself to the Muses, and composed several poems. In
the forty-fifth year of his age, he was elected chancellor of the city of
Florence, which office he held during the remainder of his life. He died
on the fourth of May, 1406, and his remains, after having been decorated
with a crown of laurel, were interred with extraordinary pomp, in the
church of Santa Maria del Fiore. It was a subject of great regret to
Leonardo Aretino, that soon after his arrival in Rome, some unfortunate
misunderstanding deprived him of the affectionate regard of Coluccio,
and that the death of his veteran friend prevented him from effecting a
reconciliation, which he appears to have desired with all the earnestness
of an ingenuous mind.
Coluccio was the author of the following works, MS. copies of most of
which are preserved in the Laurentian library. 1 De Fato et Fortunâ. 2
De sæculo et religione. 3 De nobilitate legum et medicinæ. 4 Tractatus
de Tyranno. 5 Tractatus quod medici eloquentiæ studeant et de Verecundiâ
an sit virtus aut vitium. 6 De laboribus Herculis. 7 Historia de casu
Hominis. 8 De arte dictandi. 9 Certamen Fortunæ. 10 Declamationes. 11
Invectiva in Antonium Luscum. 12 Phyllidis querimoniæ. 13 Eclogæ viii.
14 Carmina ad Jacobum Allegrettum. 15 Sonnetti, and lastly, various
Epistles, a collection of which was published by Mehus in one volume,
small quarto, printed at Florence, A. D. 1741.
We may judge of the zeal which Coluccio manifested for the promotion
of literature by the extent of his library, which consisted of eight
hundred volumes—a magnificent collection in those early times, when good
MSS. were very scarce, and consequently very costly.—_Colluccii Vita à
Philippo Villani, apud Mehi editionem Epistolarum Lini Colucii Pierii
Salutati_—_Leonardi Aretini Epistolæ, lib. i. ep. x. xii._
[35] _Leonardi Aretini Epist. l. i. ep. i._
[36] By gaining the victory in this contest, Leonardo considerably
encreased his reputation, as his competitor was a man of very respectable
talents. Jacopo d’Angelo was a native of Scarparia, and studied the
Latin tongue under the auspices of John of Ravenna. Understanding
that Demetrius Cydonius and Manuel Crysoloras had undertaken to give
public lectures on the Grecian classics in the city of Venice, he
immediately repaired thither for the purpose of availing himself of
their instructions. So great was his zeal in the cause of literature,
that he accompanied Crysoloras to Constantinople, with a view of
collecting manuscripts, and attaining a more accurate and extensive
acquaintance with the Greek language. He translated into Latin Ptolomey’s
Cosmographia, and also Plutarch’s lives of Brutus and Pompey. His
version of the Cosmographia he dedicated to Alexander V. Contemporary
scholars have given ample testimonies to his literary abilities, but
his studies were abruptly terminated by an early death. _Mehi Vita
Ambrosii Traversarii, p. xvi. ccclvi._—_Ejusdem Vita Leonardi Bruni, p.
xxxii._—_Facius de viris illustribus, p. 9._
[37] See an old diary of Gentile d’Urbino, _apud Muratorii Rer. Italic
Scriptor. tom. vi. p. 844._
[38] _Leonardi Aretini Epistolæ, l. i. ep. v._
[39] _Leonardi Aretini Epistolæ, l. i. ep. x._
[40] _Platina, tom. i. p. 383, 384._
[41] _Platina, tom. i. p. 385, 386._
[42] _Leonardi Aretini Epistolæ, l. ii. ep. iii._
[43] _Leonardi Aretini Epistolæ, l. ii. ep. xxi._ The cardinal of
Bourdeaux, conversing with Poggio on the tardiness of Gregory in
fulfilling his engagement, observed, that the conduct of his holiness
reminded him of the wicked wit of the humourist, who imposed upon the
credulity of the populace of Bologna. On Poggio’s asking him to what
circumstance he alluded, he related the following anecdote, which may
bear a comparison with the story of the famous bottle-conjurer. “There
was lately at Bologna,” said the cardinal, “a wag, who proclaimed by
public advertisement, that on a certain day he would fly from the top
of a tower, situated about a mile from the city, near St. Raphael’s
bridge. On the day appointed, almost all the Bolognese assembled
together; and the man kept them waiting during the heat of the day, and
until the evening, all gazing at the tower, and expecting every moment
that he would begin his flight. At length he appeared on the top of the
tower, and waved a pair of wings, on which the multitude gave a shout
of applause. The wag however protracted the expected expedition till
after sunset, when resolving that the good people should not go home
without seeing a sight, he deliberately drew aside the skirts of his
garment, and turned his posteriors to the multitude, who immediately
returned home, exhausted with fatigue and hunger, and chagrined at their
disappointment.” In my opinion, said the cardinal, Gregory has practised
upon the sacred college as complete a delusion, as the wag practised upon
the people of Bologna.—_Poggii Opera, p. 435._
[44] _Platina, tom. i. p. 386, 388._
[45] _Leon. Aret. Epistolæ, l. iii. ep. iii._
[46] _Ibid, ep. iv. vii._
[47] Leonardo Aretino, in his oration against Niccolo Niccoli, asserts,
that Niccolo’s grandfather was a tavern-keeper at Pistoia. “Avi autem
tui caupona Pistorii primum floruit non dignitate aliquà, sed fronde
illâ festivâ quâ ad vinum et popinas meretrices et ganeos invitabat.
Inde nocturnâ ebriorum cæde conterritus Pistorio demigravit, cauponam
et serta Florentiam transtulit. Hic tandem pater tuus cauponâ egressus
vino abstinuit, oleo se ac lanificio perunxit, sedens ad scamnum a
matutino tempore quasi vile mancipium, sordido ac prope miserabili
exercitio defamatus. Profer igitur insignia nobilitatis tuæ, qui alios
tam insolenter contemnis. Habes enim præclarissima: ab avo quidem
frondes et cyathos; a patre vero lanam et pectines.”—_Mehi Vita Ambrosii
Traversarii, p. xxx._
So little regard did the learned men of the fifteenth century pay to
truth in their invectives, that the assertion of Leonardo Aretino is not
sufficient evidence of the history of Niccolo’s progenitors. But this
is indisputably certain, that by endeavouring to throw ridicule upon
his former friend, by a reference to the occupation of his ancestors,
he only disgraces himself. The _frons festiva_, to which he alludes in
the passage quoted above, is the laurel, which it was then customary to
hang by way of a sign over the doors of taverns. From a similar custom is
derived our English proverb, “Good wine needs no bush.”
[48] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. lxxvi._ Lodovico Marsilio was
an ecclesiastic of the Augustine order, of which fraternity he became
the superior in the province of Pisa. His literary reputation caused him
to be employed in the chancery of the republic of Florence, and in the
year 1382 he was appointed of the number of the ambassadors sent by that
state, to negociate a peace between Carlo, the Hungarian prince, and the
duke of Anjou. In so great estimation was he held by the Florentines,
that the administrators of their government applied to Boniface IX.,
requesting his holiness to promote him to the dignity of bishop of their
city. The letter which was written on this occasion, and which details
his various merits in very flattering terms, is preserved by Mehus in
his life of Ambrogio Traversari. Lodovico carried on a correspondence
with Coluccio Salutati; and also with Petrarca, on a few of whose sonnets
he wrote a commentary. Several of his letters occur, but in a mutilated
state, in a collection of the epistles of the Tuscan Saints, published at
Florence, in 4to. A. D. 1736. He died on the 21st of August, 1394.—_Mehi
Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. xxx. cclxxxv. ccxxxix. cclxi._
[49] Gregory was accompanied to Rimini by Leonardo Aretino, who sent
to Niccolo Niccoli an interesting and elegant account of the remains
of antiquity which then existed in that city. Towards the close of his
letter on this subject, Leonardo dilates with great eloquence upon the
praises of Carlo Malatesta. After enlarging upon his merits as a soldier
and a statesman, he thus proceeds.—“So liberal has nature been in her
gifts to him, that he seems to possess an universal genius. He reads with
the utmost grace—he writes verses—he dictates the most elegant prose, and
his hand-writing is so neat, that it is superior to that of professed
scribes. I should not have mentioned this fact, had I not found the
same circumstance recorded with respect to Augustus, and Titus son of
Vespasian.”—_Leonardi Aretini Ep., l. iii. ep. ix._
[50] _Platina ut supra._
[51] _Platina, p. 389._
[52] A manuscript, containing an account of the lives of several of the
pontiffs, which is printed by Muratori, in his magnificent collection
of the writers of Italian history, contains the following encomium on
Alexander V.
“This pontiff, who truly deserved the name of Alexander, would have
surpassed in liberality all his predecessors, to the extent of a distant
period, had he not been embarrassed by the insufficiency of his revenues.
But so great was his poverty, after his accession to the papal chair,
that he was accustomed to say, that when he was a bishop he was rich,
when he became a cardinal he was poor, and when he was elected pontiff he
was a beggar.”
A little while before his death he summoned the cardinals, who were then
attendant on his court, to his bed-side, and after earnestly exhorting
them to adopt such measures after his decease as were likely to secure
the tranquillity of the church, he took leave of them, by repeating the
words of our Saviour, “Peace I give you, my peace I leave unto you.”
In a manuscript volume, which formerly belonged to the house of Este,
there occurs the following epitaph on this pontiff, the two concluding
lines of which are so uncouth and obscure, that we may reasonably suspect
some error on the part of the transcriber.
Divus Alexander, Cretensi oriundus ab orâ
Clauditur hoc saxo, summo venerandus honore.
Antea Petrus erat, sed celsâ sede potitus
Quintus Alexander fit, ceu sol orbe coruscans,
Relligione minor, post ad sublime vocatus.
_Muratori Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, tom. vi. p. 842._
[53] _Platina, tom. i. p. 389, 390._
[54] _Mehi Vita Leonardi Aretini, p. xxxix. xl._ _Leonardi Aretini
Epistolæ, lib. iii. ep. xvii._ Leonardo Aretino was esteemed by his
contemporaries too attentive to the minutiæ of œconomy. From the perusal
of the following letter from Ermolao Barbaro to Pietro Cara, however,
it should seem, that in the fifteenth century, complaints of the
expensiveness of matrimony were by no means destitute of foundation.
“Duxit uxorem, clarus bello et pace vir Trivulcius, Neapolitanam,
prænobili familiâ. Invitatus sum ad convivium, immo ad pontificiam,
et adipalem cænam. At ego ad epulas primas satur, spectator potius
quam conviva fui. Credo gratum fore vel tibi, vel posteris, si fercula
quam brevissime descripsero, non ut Macrobius apud nostros, nec ut
apud Græcos Athenæus justis voluminibus, sed ut occupatus homo, et ad
epistolæ mensuram. Primum aqua manibus data, non ut apud nos, stantibus,
sed accumbentibus, utique rosacea. Tum illati pugillares ex nucleis
pineis, et saccaro pastilli. Item placentæ nucleis amygdalis, et saccaro
confectæ, quos vulgo martios paneis vocamus. Secundum fertum altiles
asparagi. Tertium pulpulæ, ita enim popinæ appellant et jecuscula.
Quartum caro dorcadis tosta. Quintum capitula junicum vitulorumve una
cum pellibus elixa. Sextum capi, gallinarum, columborumque pulli,
bubuleis comitati linguis, et petasonibus, ac sumine omnibus elixis
addito Lymonyacæ pultario, sic enim Cupediarii Mediolanenses vocant,
quam nostri sermiacam. Septimum hedus integer tostus, in singulas
singuli capidas, cum jure quod ex amaris Cerasis sive ut quidam malunt
appellare laurocerasis, condimenti vico fungitur. Octavum turtures,
perdices, phasiani, coturnices, turdi, ficedulæ, et omnino plurimi
generis avitia, molliter et studiose tosta. Colymbades olivæ condimenti
loco appositæ. Nonum gallus gallinaceus saccaro incoctus, et aspergine
rosaceâ madefactus, singulis convivis, singuli patinis argenteis, ut
et cætera quoque vascula. Decimum porcellus integer tostus, in singula
singuli crateria jusculento quodam liquore perfusi. Undecimum pavi
tosti, pro condimento leucopheon jus, immo ferugineum e jocinoribus
pistis, et aromate pretiosi generis, ad portionem et Symmetriam additum;
hyspani ... appellant. Duodecimum tostus orbis ex ovo, lacte, salvia,
polline saccareo, Salviatum vocamus. Tertium decimum Struthea cotonea
ex saccaro. Quartum decimum, Carduus, pinea, Icolymon sive Cynaram
potius appellare convenit. Quintum decimum a lotis manibus, bellaria et
tragemata omnis generis saccarea. Inducti mox histriones, pantomimi,
petauristæ, aretalogi, funambuli, choraulæ, citharædi. Singulis porro
ferculis præibant faces, atque tubæ; sub facibus inclusa caveis altilia,
quadrupedes, aviculæ, omnia viventia generis ejus videlicet, cujus ea quæ
magistri et structores cocta mensis inferebant; mensaæ per atrium abacis
singulæ singulis dispositæ, sed et privi privis ministri. Ante omnia
silentium quale ne pythagorici quidem servare potuissent. Vale Mediolani,
Idibus Maiis, 1488.”—_Politiani Epistolæ, lib. xii._
[55] _Platina, tom. i. p. 390, 391._
[56] _Platina, vol. i. p. 391._
[57] The correct title of Zabarella, was that of cardinal of St. Cosmo
and St. Damien; but he is now generally known by the designation of
cardinal of Florence.
[58] _Poggii Opera, p. 255._
[59] _Poggii Histor. Florent., p. 76._
[60] _Leon. Aret. Epist., lib. iv. ep. iii._
[61] _L’Enfant’s History of the Council of Constance, book i. sect.
xxxix._
[62] _Hodius de Græcis illustribus, p. 14._
[63] _Hodius, p. 15._
[64] _Hodius, p. 15._
[65] _Ibid._
[66] Pietro Paulo Vegerio was a native of Capo d’Istria, a town situated
at the extremity of the Adriatic gulf, not far from Trieste. He was
eminent for his knowledge of the civil law, and made considerable
proficiency in the study of philosophy and the mathematics. Under
the instruction of Manuel Crysoloras, he also attained a respectable
knowledge of the Grecian language. He composed a treatise, _De moribus
ingenuis_, which was received by the literary characters of his time with
considerable applause; and at the request of the emperor Sigismund, he
translated into Latin Arrian’s history of the expedition of Alexander the
Great. In the execution of this translation, he purposely avoided the
cultivation of elegance of style, through an apprehension, as he himself
said, lest his royal reader should stand in need of the assistance of an
interpreter. He testified his zeal for the honour of classical learning,
by publishing an invective against Carlo Malatesta, who, in detestation
of heathens and heathenism, had removed from the market place of Mantua,
a statue of Virgil. In the latter period of his life he lost his reason,
which however returned at intervals before his death, the date of which
event is uncertain.—_Facius de Viris illustribus, p. 8._
[67] _Hodius, p. 23._
[68] _Hodius, p. 23._
[69] _Poggii Opera, p. 297._
[70] _Leonardo Aretini Epist., lib. iv. ep. iv._ This letter is
erroneously dated January 10, 1415. Aretino wrote from Constance a
description of his journey to that city, on the 29th of December, 1414.
It is therefore evidently impossible that he could have returned to
Italy, and have there received letters from Poggio within twelve days
from that date. For 1415, we should certainly read 1416.
[71] Leonardo Aretino, who does not appear to have possessed the
slightest knowledge of Hebrew, in a very curious letter to Giovanni
Cirignano, entered into a long train of argument, to prove the inutility
of the study of that language. Nothing is more disgusting, than the
propensity of men of narrow minds to undervalue those acquisitions in
knowledge, to which they have not themselves attained; and which they
consequently have not the means of appreciating. Excellent indeed is the
precept of the Apulian bard,
“Neu tua plus laudes studia, aut aliena reprendas.”
This letter of Leonardo also shews the unhappy influence of religious
bigotry and sacerdotal tyranny, in checking the progress of science. The
most cogent argument which he advances, to prove the folly of spending
time in the perusal of the Hebrew scriptures, is this, that St. Jerome
having translated the Old Testament into Latin, whosoever presumes to
study that book in the original, manifests a distrust of the fidelity of
Jerome’s version.—_Leonardi Aretini Epist., lib. ix. ep. xii._
[72] In the letter which Poggio wrote from Baden to Niccolo Niccoli, he
says, that he wrote to him from Constance on the 19th of February, 1416;
and in another letter, addressed to Leonardo Aretino, he says, that the
trial of Jerome of Prague took place a few days after his return to the
council. As Jerome’s last hearing, to which Poggio evidently alludes,
took place May 30th, 1416, the date of Poggio’s journey to Baden is fixed
between the above mentioned periods, that is, in the spring of 1416.
[73] _L’Enfant’s History of the Council of Constance, vol. i. p. 167._
[74] _Ibid, p. 188._
[75] _L’Enfant’s History of the Council of Constance, vol. i. p. 204._
[76] _Ibid, p. 512._
[77] _Ibid, p. 584._
[78] In the _Fasciculus Rer. expet. et fugiend._ it is erroneously
asserted that the following letter was addressed to Niccolo Niccoli.
[79] _Poggii Opera, p. 301-305._
[80] See a letter from Poggio to Alberto di Sarteano, which is preserved
in the collection of Ambrogio Traversari’s epistles, edited by Mehus,
(_lib. xxv. ep. xxii._) in which he defends his strictures on the
immoralities of the clergy; his dialogue on Hypocrisy, printed in the
second volume of the _Fasciculus Rerum expetend. et fugiend._; his
treatise on Avarice; and many of his epistles.
[81] The sentence passed by the council upon Jerome concluded with
the following declaration. “Propter quæ eadem sancta synodus eundem
Hieronymum palmitem putridum et aridum, in vite non manentem, foras
mittendum decernit: ipsumque hæreticum, et in hæresim relapsum,
excommunicatum, anathematizatum pronunciat et declarat atque
damnat.”—_Fasciculus Rer. Expet. et Fug., tom. i. p. 303._
[82] _Leon. Aret. Epist., lib. iv. ep. x._
[83] Guarino Veronese, as his surname imports, was a native of Verona,
in which city he was born A. D. 1370. Dedicating himself to study from
his early years, he became a pupil of John of Ravenna. Not contented with
acquiring, under the instructions of this able tutor, a knowledge of the
Latin language, he undertook a voyage to Constantinople for the express
purpose of reading the Greek classics in the school of Manuel Crysoloras.
Ponticio Virunio, who flourished in the beginning of the 16th century,
affirms, that when Guarino had finished his Greek studies, he returned to
Italy with two large chests full of books, which he had collected during
his residence in Constantinople; and that he was so much affected by the
loss of one of these valuable packages, which perished in a shipwreck,
that his hair became grey in the space of a single night. But this story
is generally considered as fabulous. On his return to his native country,
he adopted the profession of a public lecturer on Rhetoric, in which
capacity he visited various cities of Italy. The names of these cities
are thus enumerated by Janus Pannonius, who testified his gratitude
for the benefit which he had derived from Guarino’s instructions, by
composing a poem to his praise.
“Tu mare frænantes Venetōs, tu Antenoris alti
Instituis cives, tua te Verona legentem,
Finis et Italiæ stupuit sublime Tridentum;
Nec jam flumineum referens Florentia nomen,
Ac Phæbo quondam, nunc sacra Bononia Marti;
Tandem mansurum placidâ statione recepit
Pacis et aligeri Ferraria mater amoris.”
Ferrara was the last abode of Guarino. After having resided many years in
that city under the protection of the Marquis d’Este, he there terminated
a life of literary labour, in the year 1460, at the advanced age of
ninety. Bartolomeo Facio, who had been of the number of his pupils, made
mention of him during his lifetime in the following flattering terms.
“Artem Rhetoricam profitetur, quâ in re supra quinque et triginta annos
se exercuit. Ab hoc uno plures docti et eloquentes viri facti sunt quam
a ceteris omnibus hujus ordinis, ut non immerito quidam de eo dixerit
quod de Isocrate dictum ferunt, plures ex ejus scholâ viros eruditos,
quam ex equo Trojano milites prodiisse—Ejus quoque præstantiæ singulare
testimonium est Epigramma hoc nobile Antonii Panormitæ editum ab illo
quum vitâ functum audivisset.”
“Quantum Romulidæ sanctum videre Catonem,
Quantum Cepheni volitantem Persea cœlo,
Alciden Thebe pacantem viribus orbem,
Tantum læta suum vidit Verona Guarinum.”
_Tiraboschi Storia della Letter. Ital., tom. vi. p. 255 & seq._—_Facius
de Viris Illustr., p. 18._
[84] _Poggii Opera, p. 305._
[85] Gasperino Barziza was a native of Bergamo, and was one of that
numerous assemblage of scholars, who were indebted for their knowledge of
the Latin tongue to John of Ravenna. He read lectures on Rhetoric, first
at Padua, and afterwards at Milan. His writings are not numerous: they
consist of a treatise on Orthography; another on Elegance of Composition;
various Orations and Letters; and a commentary on the Epistles of Seneca.
In undertaking to supply the deficiencies which occurred in Cicero’s
treatise de Oratore, in consequence of the mutilated condition of the
ancient copies of that elegant and useful work, he evinced a temerity
of spirit which nothing but the most able execution of his task could
have justified. Happily however for the admirers of ancient eloquence,
the labours of Gasperino were rendered useless, by the discovery of a
complete copy of the work in question, made by the Bishop of Lodi. It
appears however that he had actually enlarged, by supplementary chapters,
the imperfect copies of _Quintilian’s Institutes_. These were also
superseded by the labours of Poggio in search of ancient manuscripts.
Several of Gasperino’s letters were edited by Josepho Alessandro
Furietti, and published at Rome, in 4to. A. D. 1733.—_Mehi Vita Ambros.
Travers., p. xl. xlvi._—_Agostini Scrittori Viniz., tom. i. p. 20, tom.
xi. p. 8. Facius de Viris illus., p. 28._
[86] On the subject of matrimony, Francesco did not confine himself to
theoretical speculations. Trusting that in Maria, daughter of Piero
Loredano, procurator of St. Mark, he had found the union of good
qualities which he had represented in his dissertation, as requisite to
the formation of the character of a good wife, he married that lady in
the year 1419.
So great was the reputation of his eloquence and prudence, that he
had scarcely attained the age of twenty-one, when notwithstanding the
prohibition of the Venetian law, he was admitted by the Concilio Maggiore
into the number of the senators. Three years after his exaltation to
this honour, he was appointed to the government of Como, which office,
however, he did not think proper to accept. It does not appear what were
the motives which induced him to decline this honour. His biographer
Agostini attributes his conduct in this instance to his modesty. If this
amiable virtue, a quality of such rare occurrence in the history of
statesmen, prevented him from undertaking the chief magistracy of the
city of Como, it should seem that it did not long continue to obstruct
him in his way to preferment, since in the same year in which he is
supposed to have been thus diffident of his abilities, he suffered
himself to be invested with the government of Trivigi, in which city
he presided for the space of twelve months. The inhabitants of Trivigi
lamented his departure, and long entertained a respectful remembrance of
the wisdom of his administration. At the expiration of twenty-four years
after the termination of his government, they applied for his advice
in the choice of a public preceptor; and on this occasion, Francesco
assured them, that he should always regard their welfare as an object of
his particular attention. Immediately after his return to the Venetian
capital, he was appointed, in conjunction with Leonardo Giustiniano, to
compliment the eastern emperor Palæologus on his arrival in Venice. In
the execution of this commission, he pronounced a Greek oration with
such elegance and purity of style and diction, that, as a contemporary
writer affirms, “He seemed to have been educated in the school of Homer.”
Early in the year 1424 he was nominated to the præfecture of Vicenza.
On his accession to this office, he found the laws of that city in
such a state of confusion, that he deemed it absolutely necessary to
reduce them to order and consistency. With the assistance of a committee
of Vicentians, appointed for that purpose, and of Antonio Lusco, a
celebrated civilian, he happily accomplished this difficult and delicate
undertaking. Francesco was also the means of conferring upon the citizens
of Vicenza another public benefit, in inducing George of Trebisond,
whom he had invited from his native island Candia, to Italy, to settle
amongst them, in quality of professor of the Greek language. In the year
1426 he was sent by the Venetian seignory to Rome, invested with the
office of embassador extraordinary at the pontifical court. The object
of his mission was to persuade Martin V. to enter into an alliance with
his countrymen against the duke of Milan, with whom the Venetians were
then at war. The pontiff, as became the common father of the faithful,
interposed his good offices between the contending powers; and after
encountering a variety of difficulties, he at length had the satisfaction
of assembling a congress at Ferrara, which terminated April 18th, 1428,
in the signing of a definite treaty of peace between the Venetians and
their adversary. At this congress Francesco assisted as one of the
deputies of his republic.
In the course of the war, the Venetians had taken the city of Bergamo.
Of this newly acquired possession, Francesco Barbaro administered the
government in 1430. On the expiration of this office, he was raised to
the dignity of counsellor, and in the year 1433 he was elected by the
Venetian government as a member of the embassy of honour, which they
deputed to attend the emperor Sigismund, who purposed to travel through
the states of the republic, on his way to the city of Basil, where the
general council was then assembled. On this occasion, the Venetian envoys
received from the emperor the honour of knighthood. So great was the
esteem which Sigismund had conceived of the good qualities of Barbaro,
that, with the permission of the seignory, he dispatched him into Bohemia
upon the difficult errand of soothing the irritation, and abating the
zeal of the confederated heretics. Nor was this the only instance of
the trust reposed in the fidelity of Francesco by foreign princes. On
his return from Germany he was employed by Eugenius IV. in conducting a
negociation with the emperor. His reputation being increased by these
striking testimonies to his merits, in the year 1434 he was appointed
to the important and honourable government of Verona. In this station
he conducted himself with his wonted wisdom, and consequently gained
the esteem and affection of his subjects. Soon after the expiration of
the term of his new government, he was dispatched to Florence, on an
embassy to Eugenius IV. who then held his court in that city. During
this visit to Florence, the following circumstance took place, which
is related by Maffei as a proof of the patience and forbearance of his
temper. The steward of his household having been reproved by his nephew
Daniello Barbaro, was so much irritated, that he drew his sword, and
attacked the youth with an intention of killing him. Daniello complained
of this outrage to his uncle. Francesco sent for the offender, who
vented his rage in the most violent and indecent reproaches against his
master. The by-standers trembled for the life of the steward, when, to
their astonishment, Francesco thus addressed him. “Begone! and act more
prudently in future; I would not wish that your faults should make me
lose that patience, of which, luckily for you, I am now possessed.”
In the year 1437 Francesco was appointed governor of Brescia. In the
discharge of the duties of this office, he was obliged to call into
exercise the full vigour of his abilities. At the time of his appointment
the Venetians were at war with the duke of Milan, whose general,
Piccinino, menaced their western borders with a powerful army; and in
the month of September encamped before Brescia. On Francesco’s arrival
in that city he had found it torn by faction, and scantily supplied with
provisions. But by his prudent exertions he reconciled the contending
families, and used the most strenuous exertions to provide the place
with the necessary supplies. Encouraged by his example, the inhabitants
repelled the attacks of the enemy with great valour, and patiently
endured the evils of famine and pestilence, consequent upon their being
for the space of three months closely confined within the walls of the
town. At length, in the month of December, they had the satisfaction of
seeing the Milanese forces retire. In gratitude for Francesco’s strenuous
exertions in their defence, the inhabitants of Brescia presented him with
a banner ornamented with the armorial bearings of their city; and when
he returned to Venice, to give the seignory an account of the events of
his administration, the Brescian deputies detailed his services to that
august assembly in the most flattering terms.
He was afterwards called to the discharge of various other public
offices, in which he acquitted himself in such a manner as to obtain
universal commendation. A most unequivocal testimony to his honour
and intelligence occurred, A. D. 1444, when he was chosen by the
inhabitants of Verona and Vicenza as umpire to settle a dispute which had
arisen between those communities about the limits of their respective
territories. Having passed through all the inferior offices of the state,
on the 5th of January, 1452, he received what he regarded as an ample
reward of his labours, in being elected procurator of St. Mark. Two years
after his exaltation to this distinguished honour, his earthly career of
glory was terminated by his death, which event took place towards the end
of January, 1454.
His remains were interred in the church of Santa Maria Gloriosa, and the
following inscription marks the spot where his body is deposited.
“Si quis honos, si fas lacrymis decorare sepultos,
Flete super tumulum, mœstisque replete querelis.
Franciscus, cui prisca parem vix secla tulerunt,
Barbarus hic situs est; linguæ decus omne Latinæ.
Fortia facta viri pro libertate Senatûs
Brixia, quam magno tenuit sudore, fatetur.
Hic summi ingenii, scriptis, monumenta reliquit;
Græcaque præterea fecit Romana. Tenet nunc
Spiritus astra; sacros tumulus complectitur artus.”
The life of this illustrious scholar was so much occupied by active
pursuits, that the catalogue of his writings is necessarily short. The
following productions of his pen are still extant.
1. _Francisci Barbari Veneti pro insigni Viro Joannino Conradino Veneto
Physico Epitaphios Logos._ Manuscript copies of this oration were
preserved in the Dominican monastery of S. Nicolò, in Trivigi, and in the
library of Apostolo Zeno.
2. _Francisci Barbari Veneti Laudatio in Albertum Guidalotum cum eum in
Academâ Patavinâ J. V. laureâ decoraret._ This oration was published
by Bernardo Pez, in a collection entitled _Thesarurus novissimus
Anecdotorum_.
3. _Francisci Barbari Veneti ad insignem Laurentium de Medicis
Florentinum de Re Uxoriâ Liber._ The autograph of this treatise is
preserved in the Medicean library at Florence; an early edition of it, of
uncertain date, was printed at Antwerp. In the year 1513 it was printed
at Paris, in 4to. _in œdibus Ascensianis_. In 1533 it was printed at
Hagenau, in 8vo. A duodecimo edition of it was published at Strasbourg,
in 1612; and another in the same form at Amsterdam, by John Janson, in
1639. This treatise was twice translated into the French language, first
by Martin du Pin, and afterwards by Claude Joly. A beautiful MS. copy of
the original Latin is preserved in the Cheetham library, in Manchester.
4. _Eloquentissimi ac Patricii viri Francisci Barbari Veneti Vitæ
Aristidis et Majoris Catonis a Plutarcho conscriptæ, a Græco in Latinum
versæ._ This translation was printed in an edition of Plutarch’s lives,
published at Venice, by Nicolas Jenson, A. D. 1478, in folio; and in the
Basil folio edition of the same work, printed by Bebelius in 1535. In
Jenson’s edition, the version of the life of Aristides is erroneously
ascribed to Leonardo Aretino.
5. _Oratio Clariss. Viri Francisci Barbari ad Sigismundum Cæsarem pro
Republicâ Venetá acta Ferrariæ._ Agostini has printed this oration in his
_Istoria degli Scrittori Viniziani_, after a MS. copy belonging to Marco
Foscarini.
6. _Oratio Francisci Barbari Patricii Veneti, habita, anno 1438, in
templo Sanctorum Faustini et Jovitæ cum civitatis Brixiensis Magistratum
iniret._ This oration is to be found in Pez’s Thesaurus.
7. _Francisci Barbari P. V. Apologia ad Mediolanenses pro populo
Brixiensi, anno 1439._ A MS. copy of this work is preserved in the
Vatican library.
8. _Oratio Francisci Barbari P. V. ad Populum Brixiensem in renunciatione
illius Civitatis._ This is in fact a report of an extempore speech of
Francesco’s, composed from memory by Manelli, in whose Commentaries it is
printed.
9. _Francisci Barbari, et aliorum ad ipsum Epistolæ ab anno Christi 1425,
ad annum 1453, nunc primum editæ ex duplici MS. Cod. Brixiano et Vaticano
uno, &c. Brixiæ excudebat Joannes Maria Rizzardi, 1743, in Quarto magno._
This collection of Francesco’s epistles, which was edited by Cardinal
Quirini, contains 284 of his letters, besides 94 addressed to him by
various correspondents. In the learned dissertation prefixed to this
publication, the cardinal has quoted at length fourteen other epistles of
Barbaro.
10. _Francisci Barbari viri illustris. pro Flavio Forliviensi pro Proemio
descriptionis Italiæ illustratæ. Ad Alphonsum Serenissimum Arragonum
Regem._ Cardinal Quirini, in the above mentioned dissertation, has
printed this præfatory essay, which was written by Barbaro, in the name
of Flavio Biondo.
11. _Epitaphium clarissimi viri Francisci Barbari Veneti in laudem
Gathamelatæ Imperatoris Gentis Venetorum._ This epitaph Agostini has
published in his _Istoria degli Scrittori Viniziani_, from a MS.
preserved in the Guarnerian library in Friuli.
_Agostini Istoria degli Scrittori Viniziani, tom. ii. p. 28-134._
[87] _Leonardi Aretini Epistolæ, l. iv. ep. v._
[88] This letter from Poggio to Guarino Veronese is printed by L’Enfant,
in the supplement to the second volume of his _Poggiana_, from a MS. in
the Wolfenbuttle library. _See Poggiana, tom. ii. p. 309._
[89] Mehus is of opinion that the copy of Quintilian, thus found by
Poggio, is preserved in the Laurentian library.—_Præfatio ad vitam
Ambrosii Traversarii, p. xxxiv._
[90] _Mehi Præfatio ad vitam Ambrosii Traversarii, p. xxxv. xxxvi._
[91] The manuscript of this author was sent by Poggio to Martin V. who
permitted Niccolo Niccoli to transcribe it. Niccolo’s transcript is
preserved in the Marcian library at Florence.—_Mehi Præfat. p. xxxvii.
xxxviii._
[92] Poggio transmitted his newly recovered copy of Lucretius to Niccolo
Niccoli, who, with his usual diligence, made with his own hand a
transcript of it, which is yet extant in the Laurentian library.—_Mehi
Præfat. p. xxxviii._
[93] Poggio found this copy of Tertullian in a monastery of the monks
of Clugny at Rome. By some means the cardinal Ursini got possession of
it, and morosely locked it up from the inspection of the learned. At
the instance of Lorenzo de’ Medici, however, he suffered the manuscript
to be transported to Florence, where it was copied, first by Ambrogio
Traversari, and afterwards by Niccolo Niccoli. The transcript of Niccoli
is lodged in the library of St. Mark.—_Mehi Præfatio, p. xxxix._
[94] The volume which Nicolas of Treves thus conveyed from Germany,
contained, besides four comedies which had been already recovered,
the following twelve, which had been till then unknown, Bacchides,
Mostellaria, Menæchmi, Miles gloriosus, Mercator, Pseudolus Pœnulus,
Persa, Rudens, Stichus, Trinummus, Truculentus—This volume was seized
by cardinal Ursini, who would not permit Poggio to take a copy of it.
Poggio highly resented the illiberality of the cardinal’s conduct. “I
have not been able,” says he, addressing himself to Niccolo Niccoli, “to
get possession of Plautus. Before the cardinal’s departure, I begged him
to send you the book, but he refused to comply with my request. I do
not understand what the man means. He seems to think that he has done
something great, though in fact he has not had the least participation in
the discovery of the book. It was found by another, but it is hidden by
him. I told both him and his people, that I would never again ask him for
the book, and I shall be as good as my word. I had rather unlearn what
I have learnt, than acquire any knowledge by the means of his books.”
By the interposition of Lorenzo de’ Medici, however, the cardinal was
induced to intrust the volume to Niccolo Niccoli, who copied it, and
returned it to the Cardinal. Niccolo’s copy is deposited in the Marcian
library.—_Mehi Præfatio, p. xi-xliii._
[95] Joannes Polenus, who published an elegant edition of Frontinus de
Aquæductis at Padua in the year 1722, procured a transcript of this
manuscript, which was still preserved in the monastery of Monte Cassino,
and which he found to be much more correct than any printed editions of
Frontinus’s treatise. It is in the form of a quarto volume, written on
parchment, and, as appears from a fac simile of the first ten or twelve
lines, in a very legible character. From the form of the letters, Polenus
conjectures that it was written at the end of the thirteenth, or the
beginning of the fourteenth century.—_Prolegomena ad Poleni editionem
Frontini de Aquæductis, p. 19, 20._
Mention is made of this manuscript by Mabillon, in his _Museum Italicum,
tom. i. p. 123._
[96] _Mehi Præfatio, p. xlviii. xlix._
[97] _Ambrosii Traversarii Opera, tom. ii. p. 285._ To the decline of
life Poggio retained a considerable degree of indignation, which was at
this time excited in his mind, by the indifference with which his labours
to recover the lost writers of antiquity were regarded by the great. In
the introduction to his dialogue, _De Infelicitate Principum_, he puts
the following strictures on their conduct into the mouth of Niccolo
Niccoli.—“When many of the ancient classics had been brought to light
by our friend Poggio, and there was a most flattering prospect of the
recovery of others of still greater consequence, no sovereign prince
or pontiff contributed in the least degree to the liberation of those
most excellent authors from the prisons of the barbarians. These exalted
personages spend their days and their money in pleasures, in unworthy
pursuits, in pestiferous and destructive wars. So great is their mental
torpidity, that nothing can rouse them to search after the works of
excellent writers, by whose wisdom and learning mankind are taught the
way to true felicity.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 394._
[98] _Mehi Præfatio, p. xlvi. xlvii._
[99] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. ep. xxx._
[100] _Mehi Præfatio, p. xlvii._
[101] Mehus, on the authority of one Vespasiano di Filippo, says, that
he was born of poor parents. The author of his life, in the _Elogi degli
Illustri uomini Toscani_, maintains, on the contrary, that his family
was graced with the honours of nobility; and he supports his position by
very cogent arguments. These different statements may be reconciled by an
hypothesis by no means devoid of probability, namely, that the father of
Ambrogio was descended of noble blood, but that the fortunes of his house
were fallen to decay.
[102] Demetrius was so much pleased with the respectful attention which
he received from his Camaldolese pupils, that he became a member of their
fraternity in the year 1416.—_Mehi Vita Ambros. Travers. p. ccclxv._
[103] _Elogi degli uomini illus. Toscani, tom. i. p. cccxl. Mehi Vita
Ambros. Travers. p. ccclxiv. & seq. Ejusdem Præfatio ad Colucii Salutati
Epistolas, p. xli._
[104] _Poggii Opera, p. 252-261._
[105] _Muratori Annali d’Italia, tom. ix. p. 84._
[106] _Ibid._
[107] From a MS. which is preserved at Vienna, L’Enfant has given
the following list of the persons who attended this wonderfully
numerous assembly—Knights, 2300—Prelates, Priests, and Presbyters,
18,000—Laymen 80,000. In a more detailed catalogue, the Laymen are thus
enumerated—Goldsmiths, 45—Shopkeepers, 330—Bankers, 242—Shoemakers,
70—Furriers, 48,—Apothecaries, 44—Smiths, 92—Confectioners, 75—Bakers
belonging to the pope, &c. 250—Vintners of Italian wines, 83—Victuallers
for the poorer sort, 43—Florentine Money-changers, 48—Tailors,
228—Heralds at Arms, 65—Jugglers, or Merry Andrews, 346—Barbers,
306—Courtezans, whose habitations were known to the author of the list,
700. It should seem, however, that this industrious chronicler had not
visited all these professional ladies, as the Vienna list estimates their
number at 1500! From a memorandum subjoined to this list, it appears,
that during the sitting of the council, one of these frail fair ones
earned the sum of 800 Florins.—_L’Enfant’s History of the Council of
Constance, vol. ii. p. 415-416._
[108] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 89._
[109] _Ibid._ p. 96.
[110] _L’Enfant’s History of the Council of Constance, vol. ii. p. 143._
[111] See _Tonelli’s Epistolarium Poggii, lib. i. epist. xi._
[112] See _Henry’s History of Great Britain, vol. x. p. 109-128._
[113] Thus William of Wyrcester tells us, that the duke of York returned
from Ireland, “et arrivavit apud Redbank prope Cestriam.”—_Henry’s
History ut supra._
[114] Though Poggio carefully examined the libraries of many of the
English monasteries, he discovered in them only one manuscript which he
esteemed of any value, namely the Chronicle of Sigebert, a monk who lived
in the tenth century. See _Ton.-Tr. vol. i. p. 116._
[115] Flavio Biondo, who was born at Forli, in the year 1388, was a
descendant of the illustrious family of Ravaldini. He has himself
recorded the fact, that he studied Grammar, Rhetoric, and Poetry, under
the instructions of Giovanni Ballistario, of Cremona. At an early age
he was commissioned by his countrymen to conduct some negociations at
the court of Milan; and it was during his visit to that city, that he
executed the task of copying the newly-discovered manuscript of Cicero’s
treatise, _De Claris Oratoribus_. In the year 1430, he was making
preparations for a journey to Rome; but Francesco Barbaro, who held him
in the highest esteem, and who had procured for him the privileges of a
Venetian citizen, having been lately appointed governor of the Bergamese
district, induced him to give up this design, and to accompany him to
Bergamo, invested with the confidential office of chancellor of that
city. He afterwards entered into the Roman chancery, under the patronage
of Eugenius IV., by whom he was employed in the year 1434, in conjunction
with the bishop of Recanati, to solicit, on his behalf, the assistance
of the Florentines and Venetians. He continued to hold the office of
apostolic secretary during the pontificate of Nicholas V., Calixtus III.,
and Pius II. In the year 1459 he attended the last mentioned pontiff
to the council of Mantua. From that city he returned to Rome, where he
died on the 4th of June, 1463, leaving five sons, all well instructed in
literature.
Of his numerous publications the following are the most considerable.
1. _Roma Instaurata_—A work of great erudition, in which he gave a most
exact description of the buildings, gates, temples, and other monuments
of ancient Rome, which still resisted the destructive hand of time.
2. _Roma Triumphans_—This is also a most elaborate treatise, which
contains an account of the laws, constitution, religion, and sacred
ceremonies of the Roman republic, collected from the incidental notices
of these subjects, which are scattered through the wide extent of Latin
literature.
3. Of a similar description is his _Italia Illustrata_, in which he
describes Italy, according to its ancient division into fourteen regions,
and details the origin and history of each province and city. This work
he composed at the request of Alphonso, king of Naples.
4. A treatise, _De Origine et Gestis Venetorum_.
5. He undertook a work of still greater extent than any of those which
have been enumerated above, viz. A General History of the period
extending from the decline of the Roman Empire to his own times. He had
finished three decads and the first book of the fourth of this work, when
its prosecution was interrupted by his death.
“In all these works,” says Tiraboschi, “though Biondo occasionally
deviates into various errors, he displays a singular diligence in
collecting from all authors whatever appertains to his subject; and when
it is considered, that they are the first essays in their kind, they
cannot but give the reader a high idea of the prodigious learning and
unwearied application of their author.”
The historical works of Biondo, translated into Italian by Lucio Fauno,
were printed at Venice by Michel Tramezzino. A general collection of his
writings was also printed in folio, at Basil, by Frobenius, A. D. 1531
and 1539. _Apostolo Zeno Dissertazioni Vossiane, tom. i. p. 229, &c.
Tiraboschi Storia della Let. Ital. tom. vi. p. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7._
[116] _Mehi Præfatio, p. xlvi._
[117] _Ton. Tr. vol. i. p. 117._
[118] It is rather an extraordinary circumstance, that Ambrogio
Traversari, the celebrated superior of the monastery of Camaldoli, in
several of his letters to Niccolo Niccoli, requests his correspondent
to present his compliments to this Benvenuta, whom he distinguishes by
the title of _fœmina fidelissima_. Shall we suppose, that the reverend
ecclesiastic was so little acquainted with the private history of the
Florentine gentry, as to be ignorant of the intercourse which subsisted
between Benvenuta and his friend—or shall we conclude that he did not
regard this intercourse as a breach of moral duty?—_Ambrogii Traversarii
Epistolæ, lib. viii. ep. ii. iii. v. &c._
[119] _Leonardi Aretini Epis. lib. v. ep. iv._
[120] Mehus, in his list of the works of Leonardo Aretino, intimates that
a copy of this invective is preserved in the library of New College,
Oxford. A strict and laborious search, made by direction of the Warden
of New College, in the month of November, 1801, has ascertained the
fact, that it does not now exist there. The catalogue of that valuable
repository of learning does indeed make mention of a MS. volume, as
containing the oration in question. On an accurate examination of this
volume, however, no trace was found of Leonardo’s Invective, nor any
appearances to justify the suspicion, that this or any other work has
been withdrawn from it by the rapacity of literary peculation.
[121] “Nam ut alias ad te seripsi, non ignoro, quam grave sit subire onus
Clerici, et quantâ curâ oporteat eos torqueri, si quâ sint conscientiâ,
qui ex beneficio vivunt. Quum enim præmia non dentur, nisi laboranti, qui
non laborat ut ait Apostolus, non manducet. Hæc tamen dicuntur facilius
quam fiant, et ut vulgo aiunt, satius est in manibus Dei incidere quam
hominis. Sed tamen si opus Petri, hoc est promissio perficeretur,
relinquerem ista sacra, ad quæ nonnisi invitus accedo, non quod
Religionem spernam aliquo modo, sed quia non confido me talem futurum,
qualem describunt esse debere.”—_Ambrosii Traversarii Opera, tom. ii. p.
1123._
These were the sentiments of Poggio, in the season of serious meditation.
On another occasion, when irritated by the sarcasms of Cardinal Julian,
he ascribed his abjuration of the priesthood to a somewhat different
motive. “Nolo esse Sacerdos, nolo Beneficia; vidi enim plurimos, quos
bonos viros censebam, maxime autem liberales, post susceptum sacerdotium
avoras esse et nulli deditos virtuti, sed inertiæ, otio, voluptati. Quod
ne mihi quoque accidat veritus, decrevi procul a vestro ordine consummere
hoc, quidquid superest, temporis perigrinationis meæ; ex hâc enim magnâ
capitis Sacerdotum rasurâ, conspicio non solum pilos abradi, sed etiam
conscientiam et virtutem.”—_Poggii Epistolæ lvii. ep. xxvii._
[122] See Tonelli _Epistolarium Poggii, lib. i. ep. 18._
[123] _Ambrogii Traversarii Opera, tom. ii. p. 1122._
[124] _Poggii Opera, p. 69._
[125] _Ibid, p. 36._
[126] _Poggii Opera, p. 474._
[127] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 93._
[128] _Poggii Historia Flor. lib. iv. v._ Martin was particularly
offended by a ballad, the burthen of which was _Papa Martino non vale un
quattrino_. _Ibid, p. 203. apud notas._—_Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p.
103._
[129] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 97._
[130] Bologna surrendered to Braccio after a short siege, July 15th,
1420. _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 98._
[131] _Platina, p. 398._
[132] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 93._ Baldassare Cossa is generally
distinguished by the pontifical appellation of John XXIII. He was however
in fact only the twenty-second of that name who filled the papal chair.
The mistake in his designation arises from the extraordinary circumstance
of the annalists of the holy see having admitted into the series of
pontiffs the famous pope Joan, who it is asserted, on succeeding Leo IV.
in the pontificate, assumed the name of John VII. This ecclesiastical
Amazon is said to have been an Englishwoman, who went in man’s attire
with her lover to Athens, where she made such a proficiency in her
studies, that she rose through the subordinate degrees of clerical
preferment to the supreme honours of the pontificate. It is further
alleged, that having become pregnant by one of her domestics, she was
seized with the pains of labour, as she was conducting a procession
to the church of St. John Lateran, and expired in the street. This
improbable story is related by Platina, who observes, however, that
though it is commonly believed, it rests upon doubtful authority. He
informs us, that those who maintain the truth of this narration, allege
in proof of its authenticity, two circumstances, namely, that the
pontiffs always avoid passing through the street where this untoward
accident is said to have happened: and that on the installation of a
newly elected pope, he is obliged to undergo a ceremony, which would
infallibly detect any attempt at a repetition of the above-mentioned
imposture. With regard to the first of these allegations, Platina
acknowledges the fact of the pontiff’s avoiding the supposed scene of
Joan’s disgrace; but says, that the reason of this is, that the street
in question is too narrow to admit the passage of a crowded retinue.
With regard to the second, he makes the following truly curious remark.
“De secundâ ita sentio, sedem illam (perforatam sedem scilicet ubi
pontificis genitalia ab ultimo diacono attrectantur) ad id paratam esse,
ut qui in tanto magistratu constuitur sciat se non deum sed hominem esse,
et necessitatibus naturæ, utpote egerendi subjectum esse, unde merito
stercoraria sedes vocatur.”
In the annotations subjoined by Panvinio to the Italian translation
of Platina’s history, published at Venice, A. D. 1744, it is most
satisfactorily proved, that this story of John VII., alias pope Joan, is
a gross falsehood, invented by one Martin, a monk.
[133] _Ton. Tr. vol. i. p. 137._
[134] _Leon. Aret. Epist. lib. iv. ep. xxi._
[135] _Ibid, lib. iv. ep. xxii._
[136] _Ambrogii Traversarii Opera, tom. ii. p. 297._
[137] This embassy occurred in the year, 1426.—_Agostini Istoria degli
Scrittori Viniziani, tom. ii. p. 58, 59, 60._
[138] _Poggii Opera, p. 306._
[139] _Ibid, p. 347._
[140] _Poggii Opera, p. 347._
[141] _Poggii Epist. lvii. p. 161._
[142] Of this great personage Poggio has recorded an anecdote, which
at once commemorates her reputation for gallantry, and her ready wit.
“The Florentines,” says he, “once sent a certain doctor of laws of the
name of Francesco as their embassador to the court of Naples. Francesco
being apprised of the amorous disposition of the reigning queen Joanna,
requested on his second interview with her majesty, that she would
grant him a private audience, as he was instructed by his republic to
communicate certain matters to her majesty alone. The queen accordingly
withdrew with him into an inner apartment, where after a short
preliminary conversation, he abruptly made to her a declaration of love;
on which Joanna looked upon him with a pleasant smile, and said, _Was
this also in your instructions?_”—_Poggii Opera, p. 448._
[143] Whilst Louis II., on whose claim that of Louis III. was founded,
was on his march from Provence to the Neapolitan frontier, he was visited
in his camp by Rodolfo of Camerino, to whom he made an ostentatious
display of a valuable assortment of jewels, which he destined as
ornaments of the regal state, which he flattered himself he should
shortly attain. Rodolfo, unmoved by the brilliant spectacle, asked him
what was the value and use of this collection. Louis answered, that it
was very valuable, but of no utility. “I can show you at my house,”
replied Rodolfo, “a pair of stones which cost only ten florins, and
annually produce me a revenue of two hundred.” The duke was astonished at
this assertion; but Rodolfo soon solved the riddle, by shewing him a mill
which he had lately erected, intimating at the same time, that a wise man
will always prefer utility to finery.—_Poggii Opera, p. 440._
Rodolfo was indeed a man of very phlegmatic humour, as appears by the
advice which he gave to one of his fellow-citizens, who informed him
of his intention of travelling with a view of seeing the curiosities
of different countries. “Go,” said he, “to the neighbouring town of
Macerata, and there you will see hills, valleys, and plains, wood and
water, lands cultivated and uncultivated. This is the world in miniature;
for travel as far as you please, and you will see nothing else.”—_Poggii
Opera, p. 441._
[144] _Platina, p. 399._—_Tiraboschi storia della Letteratura Ital. tom.
vi. p. 8._
[145] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 114, 119, 120, 121._
[146] _Ibid, p. 116._
[147] _Poggii Epist. a Tonel. lib. i. ep. 17._
[148] _Poggii Hist. Florent. p. 253._ In his Facetiæ, Poggio relates the
following instance, which occurred during the course of this contest,
of the freedom of speech in which Filippo Maria permitted one of his
domestics to indulge himself.
“The old duke of Milan, a prince in all respects of singular good taste,
had an excellent cook, whom he had sent to France to learn the art of
dressing nice dishes. In the great war which he carried on against the
Florentines, he one day received some bad news, which gave him a good
deal of uneasiness. Soon after the arrival of this intelligence he sat
down to dinner. The dishes not at all pleasing him, he sent for his
cook, and reproved him severely for his unskilfulness. The cook, who
was accustomed to take great liberties with his master, replied, I can
assure your highness that the dishes are excellently dressed—And if the
Florentines have taken away your appetite, how am I to blame?”—_Poggii
Opera, p. 425._
This anecdote proves that Filippo inherited from his father a fondness
of good living, and also intimates, that even at this early period, our
Gallic neighbours were noted for their skill in cookery.
[149] _Mehi Vita Leonardi Aretini, p. xliv._
[150] _Ibid._
[151] _Mehi Vita Leonardi Aretini, p. xliv._
[152] “Volui satisfacere amori in te meo, et tecum congratulari,
quemadmodum solemus ei, qui uxorem duxit, cum onus subeat grave,
difficile et molestum.”—_Poggii Epistolæ lvii. p. 167._
[153] It should seem that Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, who at this
time governed the kingdom of England in quality of Protector, regarded
this commission of the cardinal’s with a jealous eye. With a view of
preventing the mischiefs which might ensue upon the exercise of foreign
authority in the English dominions, he summoned Beaufort into his
presence; and by a formal and express act, which set forth, that the
legates of the pope had never been permitted to enter into England,
except by summons, invitation, or permission of the king, which summons,
invitation, or permission, Beaufort had not received, protested against
his exercising the authority of legate in the king’s dominions in any
form or manner whatever. To this protest Beaufort put in a formal
answer, that it was not his intention in any thing to derogate from, or
contravene the rights, privileges, liberties, or customs of the king or
kingdom. This protest was made November 11th, 1428. It is printed in the
appendix to Brown’s _Fasciculus Rerum expetendarum et Fugiendarum_, _p.
618_, from an ancient register, formerly in the possession of archbishop
Sancroft.
For the purpose of raising money to defray the expense of the crusade,
boxes emblazoned with the sign of the cross were fixed in the churches,
in which the friends of the true faith were exhorted to deposit their
contributions. To give additional stimulus to the zeal of the pious,
the pontiff issued a bull, whereby he granted an indulgence of one
hundred days to those who should attend the preaching of the crusade—a
full pardon of all their sins, and an assurance of eternal happiness,
to those who took the cross and served against the heretics at their
own expense. The same premium was offered to those, who fully intending
to perform this meritorious service, should happen to die before they
joined the army; and to those who should send a soldier or soldiers to
fight, at their expense, for the propagation of the true faith. This
latter provision was particularly addressed to the women, who were
graciously informed by the cardinal, that those females, who, being
prevented by their poverty from maintaining each a warrior at their own
expense, should enter into joint subscriptions for the purpose, should
be entitled to considerable privileges; and so grateful was his holiness
even for the gift of good wishes, that he granted six days’ indulgence
to those who fasted and prayed in order to promote the success of the
expedition.—_Appendix to Brown’s Fasciculus, p. 621, 625, 630._
[154] _Hollinshead’s Chronicle, vol. ii. p. 602._—_Stowe’s Annals, p.
371._—_Platina, p. 400._
[155] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 136._—_Platina, p. 401._
[156] _Ton. Tr. vol. i. p. 155._
[157] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. p. 173._
[158] _Tonelli Poggii Epist. tom. i. lib. iii. ep. xxxv._
[159] _Poggii Epist. lvii. p. 178. Ambrogii Traversarii Opera, tom. ii.
p. 978._
[160] This Bernardino had for some time preached with uncommon applause
to crowded audiences in the churches of Florence. The talents of a
popular orator generally procure their possessor as many enemies as
friends. Several ecclesiastics, who were envious of the reputation
of Bernardino, took advantage of a daring flight of rhetoric, into
which he was betrayed by the enthusiasm of his zeal, to endeavour to
accomplish his ruin. In order to enforce his eloquence, in describing
some impressive scene, (probably the sufferings of Christ) he exhibited
to the people a picture, in which the transaction to which he alluded was
delineated. Of this exhibition his detractors complained to the pope,
as a kind of profanation of the rites of the church; and Bernardino was
obliged to repair to Rome to vindicate his cause. Though the pontifical
court was inflamed with prejudice against him by the artifices of his
accusers, so captivating was his eloquence, that when he was permitted to
preach in Rome, the ecclesiastics of the highest eminence, as well as the
populace, being attracted by his fame to hear his discourses, listened
to him with enthusiastic admiration. Martin V. commanded him to abstain
for the future from the exhibition of pictures; he readily complied
with this injunction, and by his prompt obedience obtained the favour
of the pontiff, who during the remainder of his life treated him with
distinguished kindness.—_Ambrosii Traversarii Epist. lib. ii. ep. xl.
xli._
[161] _Poggii Opera, p. 13._
[162] In the original sketch of this dialogue, Poggio had attributed
the first part of the attack on Avarice to Cincio, one of the apostolic
secretaries; but on the admonition of Lusco, that as Cincio had the
reputation of being a covetous man, an invective against that vice
would be out of character, if represented as proceeding from him, he
substituted in his place Bartolomeo di Montepulciano. The defence of
Avarice he assigned to Lusco, because Lusco being generous even to
extravagance, there was no reason to fear, lest the imputed patronage of
so selfish a passion, should be supposed to convey an implied impeachment
of his character.—_Ambrosii Traversarii Opera, tom. ii. lib. xxv. epist.
xliii._
[163] _Tiraboschi Storia della Letteratura Italiana, tom. vi. part 2d.
p. 363._ Poggio has recorded a notable story of one of these indiscreet
orators, who in the fervour of a declamation against the vice of
adultery, declared, that he had such a detestation of that offence, that
he had much rather commit the sin of unchastity with ten virgins than
with one married woman.—_Poggii Opera, p. 433._
[164] _Appendix ad Fasciculum Rer. Expet. et Fug. p. 578._ Poggio has
commemorated in his _Facetiæ_ a mortifying explanation which one of
these noisy orators provoked by his overweening vanity. “A monk,” says
he, “preaching to the populace, made a most enormous and uncouth noise,
by which a good woman, one of his auditors, was so much affected, that
she burst into a flood of tears. The preacher, attributing her grief to
remorse of conscience, excited within her by his eloquence, sent for her,
and asked her why she was so piteously affected by his discourse. Holy
father, answered the mourner, I am a poor widow, and was accustomed to
maintain myself by the labour of an ass, which was left me by my late
husband. But alas! my poor beast is dead, and your preaching brought his
braying so strongly to my recollection, that I could not restrain my
grief.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 497._
[165] Alberto derived the designation of Da Sarteano from a small town
in Tuscany, where he was born, A. D. 1385. At an early age he enrolled
himself in the number of the conventuals, and afterwards joined the
stricter order of the _Fratres Observantiæ_. In the year 1424 he went
to Verona, where he studied the Greek language under the instruction of
Guarino Veronese. In the following year he paid a visit to Francesco
Barbaro, who was then governor of Trivigi. Here he met with the famous
preacher Bernardino, at whose instance he undertook the popular
employment of an itinerant preacher. In this capacity he not only
traversed a great part of Italy, but crossing the sea, he went to preach
the true gospel amongst the schismatics and infidels of Greece, Egypt,
Ethiopia, and Armenia. It was in consequence of his representations that
the patriarch of the last-mentioned province attended the council of
Basil, when in the name of his countrymen he submitted to the decisions
of the Latin church. Alberto closed a life of religious labours in
the year 1450, at Milan, where he was interred in the church of St.
Angelo. A collection of his works, consisting principally of sermons and
theological tracts, was published at Rome, A. D. 1688.—_Tiraboschi Storia
della Letter. Ital. tom. vi. p. 214, 215, 216._
[166] _Ambrosii Traversarii Epist. p. 978, 979, 1019, 1125._ _Poggii
Opera. p. 317, 318, 319._
[167] It is printed in the Appendix to the _Fasciculus Rerum Expetendarum
et Fugiendarum_; a collection of fugitive tracts, intended to display the
errors of the church of Rome.
This collection, which was first published at Cologne, A. D. 1535, by
Orthuinus Gratius, of Deventer, was republished, with considerable
additions, by Edward Brown, at London, A. D. 1689, at which period the
avowed predilection of James II. for the Roman Catholic doctrines had
given alarm to the zealous Protestants of England.
[168] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 142._—_Platina, p. 402._
[169] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. ep. xxiii._
[170] _Platina, p. 402, 403._—_Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 143._—_Poggii
Historia de varietate Fortunæ, p. 100._
[171] _Poggii Histor. Flor. lib. vi._
[172] Te fama est peragrare Germaniam ad apparatum belli contra Boemos.
Id quidem laudo; sed considera diligenter, non quantum animi sit tibi ad
pugnam, sed quantum virium armorum, ne magis animatus quam armatus in
aciem accedas; et barbatum nostrum cave, ne auribus lupum teneas.—_Poggii
Epistolæ lvii. ep. xxiii._ This letter is dated May 11th, 1431.
[173] _L’Enfant Histoire de la guerre des Hussites, tom. i. p. 315._
[174] Some writers assert, that the number of the pontifical troops
amounted to ninety, others to one hundred and thirty thousand men. But
the numbers of forces are almost always exaggerated.—_L’Enfant Histoire
de la guerre des Hussites, tom. i. p. 317._
[175] _Voltaire Annales de l’Empire._ We may judge of the precipitancy
of the flight of the pontifical army, from the circumstance of the
cardinal’s losing, with the rest of his baggage, the papal bull which
authorised the crusade, his red hat, and the rest of his dress of
ceremony, his cross and crochet.—_L’Enfant ut supra._
[176] Et cum ex fugâ exercitûs omnes populi Alemaniæ supra modum essent
exterriti et consternati, videns nullum aliud superesse remedium,
animabam et confortabam omnes, ut manerent constantes in fide et
nihil trepidarent; quoniam ego propter hoc accedebam ad Concilium,
ubi convenire debebat universalis ecclesia in quo omnino aliquod
sufficiens remedium ad resistendum hæreticis, et ipsos extirpandos
reperiretur.—_Vide Epistolam Juliani Cardinalis ad Pontificem Eugenium
IV. apud Fasciculum Rerum Expetendarum et Fugiendarum, p. 55._
[177] _Poggii Opera, p. 309, 310._
[178] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. ep. xxvii._
[179] _Muratori Rer. Italic. Script. tom. vi. p. 869._
[180] _Poggii Opera, p. 429._
[181] _Ibid._
[182] _Poggii Opera, p. 481._
[183] _Ibid, p. 475._
[184] Poggio intimates, that the loquacity of this incorrigible
ecclesiastic continually betrayed his folly—that he was given to
detraction; and that his rapacity frequently betrayed him into violent
infringements of the rules of justice. He has also recorded the following
severe, but coarse animadversion, which was made on his character after
his death. “Damnabat quidam multis verbis vitam et mores Angelotti
Cardinalis defuncti. Fuit enim rapax et violentus ut cui nulla esset
conscientia. Tum ex astantibus unus, Opinor, inquit, diabolum jam vorasse
et cacasse cum sæpius ob scelera sua. Alter vir facetissimus, Adeo mala
caro ejus fuit, inquit, ut nullus dæmon quantumvis bono stomacho, illam
præ nauseâ comedere auderet.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 477._
[185] _Fasciculus Rer. Expet. et. Fugiend. p. 55._
[186] _Acta Conciliorum, tom. xxx. p. 25._
[187] This declaration was made in the following florid terms. “Hæc
sancta Synodus necessitates Christianæ religionis sedulâ meditatione
recogitans, maturâ et digestâ deliberatione decernit; ad hæc tria, eo, a
quo cuncta bona procedunt, auctore Deo, toto solicitudinis studio operam
dare, Primo, ut omnium hæresum a Christiani populi finibus tenebris
profugatis, lumen Catholicæ veritatis, Christo verâ luce largiente,
refulgeat. Secundo, ut bellorum rabie, quâ, satore zizaniæ seminante in
diversis partibus mundi affligitur et dissipatur populus Christianus,
congruâ meditatione sedatâ, pacis auctore prostante in statum reducatur
pacificum et tranquillum. Tertio, ut cum multiplicibus vitiorum tribulis
et spinis Christi vinea jam quasi silvescat præ nimiâ densitate, ut
illis debitæ culturæ studio resecatis, evangelico agricolâ cælitus
operante, refloreat, honestatisque fructus et honoris felici ubertate
producat.”—_Concil. tom. p. 39, 40._
[188] _Acta Concil. tom. xxx. p. 24, 49._
[189] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 148._
[190] See a copy of the cardinal’s letter (the good sense and integrity
of which are much more commendable than its Latinity) in the _Fasciculus
Rer. Expet. et Fug. p. 54 et seq._
[191] _Conciliorum. tom. xxx. p. 54._
[192] _Concilior. tom. xxx. p. 77._
[193] _Concilior. tom. xxx. p. 81._
[194] _Ibid, p. 92._
[195] _Concilior. tom. xxx. p. 103._—This decree was passed July 13th,
1433.
[196] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. ep. xxvi._—This letter bears date June 30th,
1433.
[197] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 147._
[198] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 149._
[199] _Ibid, p. 154._
[200] _Ibid, p. 153._ _Poggii Hist. Flor. p. 301._
[201] During his residence in Rome, Sigismund received from the pontiff
six thousand gold crowns per month, to enable him to maintain the state
becoming his exalted rank. Poggio gives a particular account of the
emperor’s coronation in a letter to Niccolo Niccoli, which has not yet
been printed.
_Poggii Historia de Variet. Fort. p. 92, 93._
[202] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 114._
[203] _Poggii Epist. lvii. p. 221, 222, 223._ This letter, which by a
typographical error is dated 1433, was written, Jan. 27th, 1434.
[204] _Concilior. tom. xxx. p. 129._
[205] _Concilior. p. 146._
[206] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 155, 156, 157, 158._—_Platina, p.
405._—_Ambrogii Traversarii Epistolæ, lib. i. ep. vi. apud notas._
[207] _Poggii Histor. de Variet. Fortunæ, p. 92._
[208] _Ambrogii Traversarii Epist. lib. v. ep. x._
[209] _Poggii Hist. de Variet. Fort. p. 92._—_Opera, p. 392._
[210] _Elogi degli Uomini Illustri Toscani, tom. i. p. 367._
[211] Eadem iter facienti ad ortum occurrit amæna vallis, villis et pagis
referta nomine Mugellum quam interfluit flumen Sæva.—_Schotti Itinerarium
Italiæ, p. 189._
[212] _Pignotti Istor. di Toscana, lib. iv. cap. 9_, as referred to by
Tonelli.
[213] _Machiavelli Istorie Fiorentine, p. 209, 210, 211._—_Ricordi di
Cosmo de’ Medici, in the appendix to the 1st vol. of Roscoe’s Life of
Lorenzo de’ Medici, No. ii._
[214] The following extract from Cosmo’s Ricordi proves that he could not
with a safe conscience accept this part of Poggio’s panegyric. “Niccolo
da Tolentino sentito il caso à di 8. venne la mattina con tutta la sua
compagnia alla Lastra, e con animo di fare novità nella Terra, perchè
io fussi lasciato; e così subito che si sentì il caso nell’ Alpi di
Romagna e di più altri luoghi, venne â Lorenzo gran quantità di fanti.
Fu confortato il Capitano, e così Lorenzo à non fare novità, che poteva
esser cagione di farmi fare novità nella persona, e così feciono; e
benchè chi consigliò questo fussino parenti, e amici, e à buon fine, non
fu buono consiglio; perchè se si fussino fatti inanzi, ero libero, e chi
era stato cagione di questo restava disfatto.”—_Ricordi ut supra._
[215] _Poggii Opera, p. 312-317._
[216] In a letter to Ambrogio Traversari, he gives the following
catalogue of the books which he had collected during his residence in
Constantinople.—“Qui mihi nostri in Italiam libri gesti sunt, horum
nomina ad te scribo: alios autem nonnullos per primas ex Byzantio
Venetorum naves opperior. Hi autem sunt Plotinus, Aelianus, Aristides,
Dionysius Halicarnasseus, Strabo Geographus, Hermogenes, Aristotelis
Rhetorice, Dionysius Halicarnasseus de numeris et characteribus,
Thucydides, Plutarchi Moralia, Proelus in Platonem, Philo Judæus,
Herodotus, Dio Chrysostomus, Appollonius Pergæus, Ethica Aristotelis,
Ejus magna Moralia et Eudemia, Oeconomica, et Politica, quædam
Theophrasti Opuscula, Homeri Ilias, Odyssea, Philostrati de vitâ
Appollonii, Orationes Libanii, et aliqui sermones Luciani, Pindarus,
Aratus, Euripidis tragediæ septem, Theocritus, Hesiodus, Suidas;
Phalaridis, Hippocratis, Platonis, et multorum ex veteribus philosophis
Epistolæ, Demosthenes, Æschinis Orationes et Epistolæ, pleraque
Xenophontis Opera, una Lysiæ Oratio, Orphei Argonautica et Hymni,
Callimachus, Aristoteles de historiis animalium, Physica, et Metaphysica,
et de Animâ, de partibus Animalium, et alia quædam, Polybius, nonnulli
sermones Chrysostomi, Dionysiaca, et alii Poetæ plurimi. Habes qui mihi
sint, et his utere æque ac tuis.”—_Ambrosii Traversarii Opera, tom. ii.
p. 1010._
In the collection of this noble store of Grecian literature Filelfo
must have expended a considerable sum of money; and this circumstance
may honourably account for the embarrassed state of his finances on his
arrival in his native country.
[217] _Ambrosii Traversarii Epist. p. 1007._
[218] Filelfo arrived in Florence in the month of May, 1429.—_Philelfi
Epist. p. 9._
[219] _Ambrosii Traversarii Epist. p. 1016._
[220] _Philelfi Epist. p. 9._
[221] _Philelfi Epist. p. 9._
[222] _Ibid, p. 10._
[223] _Philelfi Epist. p. 11._
[224] _Philelfi Epist. p. 17._ In the account which Filelfo gave of this
transaction to Æneas Sylvius, he says, that he had never discovered by
whom Filippo was hired to commit so execrable a deed, but intimates very
strong suspicions of Cosmo de’ Medici. Poggio, however, in his third
invective against Filelfo, asserts, that the assassin was the minister of
the vengeance of one Jeronimo of Imola, whom Filelfo had provoked by the
intemperance of his tongue.—_Poggii Opera, p. 381._
[225] _Ibid._
[226] _Francisci Philelfi Satyræ; primæ decadis hecatosticha secunda._
[227] _Philelfi Epist. p. 12, 13._
[228] _Philelfi Satyræ; primæ decadis, hecatosticha quinta. Ejusdem
hecatosticha sexta—Secundæ decadis, hecatosticha prima, &c._
In a letter of remonstrance to Cosmo de’ Medici, Filelfo inveighed
bitterly against Niccolo Niccoli, whom he asserted Cosmo had himself
acknowledged to be guilty of insolence to the learned, and particularly
of contumelious conduct towards the eminent Manuel Crysoloras.—“Ad ea tu
sane leniter respondisti, ac subridens, non oportere inquiens mirari me
nec æge ferre Nicolai Nicoli detractionem; eo enim esse hominem ingenio
ut neminem doctum virum relinquat intactum mordacitate suà, quique ne
soli quidem ipsi parceret, _upote qui et Manuelem Chrysoloram sapientem
et summum illum virum barbam pediculosam adhuc semper nominet_, et
Ambrosium monachum cui magis affectus est quam propriæ animæ, attonitum
per contumeliam vocet.”—_Philelfi Epistolæ, p. 12._
[229] _Philelfi Satyræ, quartæ decadis, hecatosticha prima._
This satire concludes with the following atrocious address to the judges
of Cosmo.
“En Mundum servat conjectum in vincula carcer,
Qui rebus momenta dabit non parva futuris.
Nunc etiam atque etiam vobiscum volvite curas,
Et lustrate animo quæ sint potiora saluti
Urbis consilia: his castas accommodet aures
Quisque suas. Vobis res coram publica sese
Offeret in medium, referens stragesque necesque
Venturas, ubi forte minus pro lege vel æquo
Supplicium sumptum fuerit de sonte nefando;
Aut etiam officium collatum munere civis.
Namque relegatus, si culpæ nomine mulctam
Pendeat, afficiet magnis vos cladibus omnes.”
[230] The passages in Filelfo’s Satires, in which he has attacked the
character of Poggio, are very numerous. Those who wish to examine these
passages may consult the following references.
_Decad. i. hecat. 5._ _Decad. ii. hecat. 1. 3._ _Decad. iii. hecat. 2.
10._ _Decad. iv. hecat. 7._ _Decad. v. hecat. 8. 9._ _Decad. vi. hecat.
10._ _Decad. viii. hecat. 1, 3, 5._ Such readers as are not possessed
of a copy of _Aureæ Francisci Philelfii Poetæ Oratorisque celeberrimi
Satyræ centum_, printed in octavo at Paris, anno 1518, (a book of rare
occurrence) will probably be contented with the following specimen of
what may be properly termed learned Billingsgate.
“Quæ rapidis natura polis, quæ causa sepulchri
Humano generi, quæ tanta licentia rerum,
Spumantes inter pateras cereremque voracem
Ostensurus erat Codrus; cum grande pepedit,
Rancidulum eructans post longa volumina verbum.
Hunc mox Oenepotes miratus rara profatur.
Rara inter Latias phœnix hæc pervolat urbes:
Hinc vomit et meiens grave cunctis reddit oletum.
Poggius arridet, simili dum peste tenetur.
Nam quascunque dapes affert, ut verna Canopi
Prælambens, rapidus vino sese obruit hospes.
Laudibus hinc miris effert Codrumque, bonumque
Oenepotam Nicolum: mox ne fortasse minoris
Se quisquam reputet, quod foetet olentius addit.”
[231] _Philelfi Epist. p. 12._
[232] _Poggii Opera, p. 339-342._
[233] “Verum nequaquam mirum videri debet, eum cujus mater Arimini
dudum in purgandis ventribus et intestinis sorde diluendis quæstum
fecerit, maternæ artis foetorem redolere. Hæsit naribus filii sagacis
materni exercitii attrectata putredo, et continui stercoris fœtens
halitus.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 165._
[234] The terms in which Poggio mentions this transaction are
superlatively abusive, and whimsically gross. “Itaque Crysoloras moerore
confectus, compulsus precibus, malo coactus, filiam tibi nuptui dedit a
te corruptam, quæ si extitisset integra, ne pilum quidem tibi abrasum
ab illius natibus ostendisset. An tu illam unquam duxisses uxorem si
virginitatem per te servare potuisset? Tibi pater illam dedisset profugo,
ignobili, impuro? Primariis suæ civitatis viris servabatur virgo, non
tibi insulsæ pecudi et asello bipedali quem ille domi alebat tanquam
canem aliquem solent senio et ætate confectum.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 167._
[235] “Sperasti, monstrum infandum hos tuos insulsissimos versus,
in quibus etiam male latine loqueris, allaturos tibi laureolam, quâ
fanaticum caput redimires. At stercoreâ coronâ ornabuntur fœtentes crines
priapæi vatis.”—_Ibid, p. 169._
[236]
Lingua tibi mediâ, Poggi, plus parte secetur
Quâ nunquam lacerare probos et carpere cessas.
Improbe, quis talem tibi tantus tradidit artem
Auctor? An e stulto fatuoque et mentis egente
Te tuus insanum Lycolaus reddidit Utis,
Addictum vitio dirumque per omne volutum
Flagitium et facinus?—Tantum maledicere semper
Edoctus, cunctos decoret quos aurea virtus
Insequeris calamo, nequeas quos fulmine linguæ,
Quam nimius crassam potus vel crapula fecit,
Immanisque Venus. Tibi quæ tam dira voluptas,
Undantis pelago dum vini nocte dieque
Ebrius obrueris; dum tanquam immensa vorago
Quidquid pontus habet, quidquid vel terra vel aër
Vescendum peperit, latus tibi venter et ingens
Excepit; dum fœda Venus patiturque facitque
Omne genus probri: tactus te levius esto
Titillans, vesane, juvat redditque furentem
Et dulci qui tactus agit prurigine linguam:
Ut te communem præstes sapientibus hostem
Omnibus, et nulli parcas velut effera quædam
Vipera tabifero terram cœlumque veneno
Inficiens.
_Philelfi Satyræ. Decad. ii. Hecat. 3._
[237] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 158._—_Platina, tom. i. p. 406._
[238] “Sopravenendo poi Giovanni Vitellesco che chiamavano il Patriarca,
entranono in tanto spavento i Romani, che non avevano pure animo d’aprir
la bocca.”—_Platina, tom. i. p. 405._
[239] _Platina, tom. i. p. 406, 407._
[240] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 162, 163._
[241] _Ibid._—_Platina, tom. i. p. 407._
[242] The decree relative to the conversion of the Jews ordained amongst
other things, that all diocesans should annually commission certain
learned theologians to explain to them the word of God, in so plain
a manner, that they might be convinced of their errors—that the Jews
should be compelled, by the infliction of certain penalties, to attend
the lectures of these theologians—that all infidels should be prohibited
from keeping Christian servants or nurses—that no Christian should
partake of any Jewish festivals—that the Jewish tradesmen should be
strictly forbidden to buy, or take in pawn, any ecclesiastical books,
chalices, crosses, or other church ornaments—that the Jews should be
compelled to wear a distinguishing dress, and that they should live in a
separate quarter of each town, at as great a distance as possible from
any church. With regard to the converted Israelites, it was ordained,
that whereas whatever goods or property they had obtained by usury, or by
defrauding persons who were not to be found, became upon this conversion
the property of the church; the council, in the name of the church,
bestowed upon them all such property as a baptismal present—that the
indigent converts should be relieved by the charitable assistance of the
faithful—that they should be separated as much as possible from their
unbelieving brethren—and that the ordinaries of each diocese should be
directed to do all in their power to cause them to marry persons who had
been born in the Christian faith.
[243] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 162._
[244] “Turpem etiam illum abusum in quibusdam frequentatum ecclesiis,
quo certis anni celebritatibus nonnulli cum mitrâ, baculo, ac vestibus
pontificalibus more episcoporum benedicunt, alii ut reges ac duces
induti, quod festum fatuorum vel innocentium, seu puerorum, in quibusdam
regionibus nuncupatur, alii larvales et theatrales jocos, alii choreas
et tripudia marium ac mulierum facientes, homines ad spectacula et
cachinnationes movent, alii comessationes et convivia ibidem præparant;
hæc sancta Synodus detestans, statuit et jubet tam ordinariis quam
ecclesiarum decanis et rectoribus, sub pœnâ suspensionis omnium
proventuum ecclesiasticorum trium mensium spatio, ne hæc aut similia
ludibria, neque etiam mercantias seu negotiationes nundinarum in
ecclesiis quæ domus orationis esse debent, ac etiam cæmeterio exercere
amplius permittant, transgressoresque, per censuram ecclesiasticam,
aliaque juris remedia punire non negligant, omnes autem consuetudines,
statuta ac privilegia quæ his non concordant circa hæc decretis, nisi
forte majores adjicerent pœnas, irritas esse hæc sancta synodus decernit.”
[245] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 166._
[246] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 180._
[247] On the 15th of October, 1435, the council condemned as heretical
various propositions which had been lately maintained by Agostino di
Roma, archbishop of Nazareth, in three elaborate theological tracts.
Those whose anxiety to preserve the purity of the catholic faith leads
them to wish to know what sentiments it is their duty to reject, and
those who are interested in observing the niceties of theological
distinctions, will perhaps be gratified by the following recital of the
dangerous errors which incurred the severe reprehension and reprobation
of the venerable synod of Basil.
“Et postissime scandalosam illam assertionem, erroneam in fide, in
ipso libello contentam, quam piæ fidelium aures sine horrore audire
non possunt, videlicet: Christus quotidie peccat; ex quo fuit Christus
quotidie peccavit; quamvis de capite ecclesiæ Christo Jesu Salvatore
nostro dicat se non intelligere, sed ad membra sua, quæ cum Christo
capite unum esse Christum asseruit, intelligentiam ejus esse referendam
dicat. Nec non et propositiones istas, et eis in sententiâ similes,
quas in articulos damnatos in sacro Constantiensi Concilio incidere
declarat, videlicet: Non omnes fideles justificati sunt membra Christi,
sed soli electi, finaliter in perpetuum regnaturi cum Christo. Secundum
ineffabilem præscientiam Dei sumuntur membra Christi, ex quibus constat
ecclesia, quæ tamen non constat nisi ex eis qui secundum propositum
electionis vocati sunt. Non sufficit Christo uniri vinculo caritatis, ut
aliqui efficiantur membra Christi, sed requiritur alia unio. Has etiam
quæ sequuntur: Humana natura in Christo, vere est Christus. Humana natura
in Christo, est persona Christi. Ratio suppositalis determinans humanam
naturam in Christo non realiter distinguitur ab ispâ naturâ determinatâ.
Natura humana in Christo procul dubio est persona verbi; et verbum in
Christo naturâ assumpta, est realiter persona assumens. Natura humana
assumpta a verbo ex unione personali, est veraciter Deus naturalis et
proprius. Christus secundum voluntatem creatam tantum diligit naturam
humanam unitam personæ verbi, quantum diligit naturam divinam. Sicut duæ
personæ in divinis sunt æqualiter diligibiles ita duæ naturæ in Christo,
humana et divina, sunt æqualiter diligibiles propter personam communem.
Anima Christi videt Deum tam clare et intense, quantum clare et intense
Deus videt seipsum. Quas quidem propositiones, et alias ex eâdem radice
procedentes, in prædicto libello contentas, tamquam erroneas in fide,
damnat et reprobat hæc sancta Synodus.”—_Concil. tom. xxx. p. 172._
[248] _Panormitani Epist. lib. v. ep. 118_, as referred to by the French
and Italian translators of the life of Poggio.
[249] _Apostolo Zeno Dissertazioni Vossiane, tom. i. p. 37, 38._
[250] _Poggii Opera, p. 65, 67._ _Mehi vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. lii._
[251] The catalogue of reliques of Roman architecture, which Poggio
has inserted in the interesting pröemium to his dialogue _De varietate
Fortunæ_, evinces the diligence and care with which he had surveyed
the ruins of ancient Rome. This catalogue did not escape the extensive
researches of Gibbon, who has introduced it into the 71st chapter of his
_Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire._
[252] “Poggius noster sæpe mecum est; reliquias civitatis probe callens
nos comitatur.”—_Ambrosii Traversarii Epistolæ, p. 407._
In a letter to Bartolomeo Facio, Poggio thus invites him to visit the
ruins of Rome. “Video te cupere urbem visere, et certe nisi incoeptum
opus, ut ais, impediret hortarer te ad inspiciendas reliquias ejus urbis
quæ quondam orbis lumen præclarissimum fuit. Equidem quamvis in eâ jam
pluribus annis ab ipsâ juventute fuerim versatus, tamen quotide tamquam
novus incola tantarum rerum admiratione obstupesco, recreoque persæpe
animum visu eorum ædificiorum, quæ stulti propter ingenii imbecillitatem
a Dæmonibus facta dicunt.”—_Facius de viris Illustribus, p. 97._
[253] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. lii._
[254] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. lii._ _Poggii Epist. citat. a
Ton. tom. i. p. 258._
[255] _Poggii Opera, p. 321._
[256] _Ibid._
[257] _Ibid, p. 329._
[258] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. lii. liii._
[259] From an expression which Poggio uses in a letter on the subject of
Francesco’s conduct, addressed to Andreolo Giustiniano, it should seem,
either that the busts did not answer the expectation which he had formed
concerning the exquisiteness of their workmanship, or that he suspected
that Francesco had substituted inferior pieces of sculpture, in the place
of those destined for him by Suffretus. The following is the expression
in question. “Cum Suffretus quidem Rhodius ei consignasset tria capita
marmorea, et signum integrum duorum fere cubitorum, quæ Franciscus se ad
me allaturum promisit, _capita quædam dedit_, signo autem me fraudavit,”
&c. Perhaps, however, quædam is, by an error of the press, substituted
for quidem.
[260] _Poggii Opera, p. 329._
[261] _Poggii Opera, p. 329._
[262] The admirer of ancient art will find the principles, the
observance of which led to the perfection to which it was carried by the
Greeks, clearly and forcibly explained in the eighteenth, nineteenth,
and twentieth pages of Mr. Fuseli’s _Lectures on Painting_. Of this
work it may be asserted, that hardly any composition in the English
language comprehends an equal quantity of thought in the same compass
of expression. Almost every sentence which it contains is a theme of
reflection, a text, pregnant with the most useful instruction.
[263] _Poggii Epist. lvii. p. 181._
[264] _Poggii Opera, p. 357, & seq._
[265] _Poggii Opera, p. 366._
[266] _See note to Tonelli’s translation, vol. i. p. 264._
[267] _Poggii vita a Recanatio, p. xiv._
[268] _Poggii vita a Recanatio, p. xiv._
[269] This dialogue was, for upwards of three centuries, buried in the
repositories of Manuscripts which are stored up in a few public libraries
on the continent of Europe. In the year 1802, the author of this work
was fortunate enough to find in the then _Bibliothéque Nationale_, now
_Bibliothéque du Roi_, at Paris, a very legible manuscript copy of
it, which he carefully transcribed; and soon after his return home he
printed a very small impression of it for distribution among his literary
friends. A copy of this impression having been sent by him to the late
Dr. Parr, that eminent scholar urged him to reprint and publish it, with
a few necessary corrections. The wish of Parr was complied with, and the
Dialogue was brought out in the year 1807, with a Latin preface and a
Latin dedication to the late Mr. Roscoe. In the year 1823, the Signor
Pecchioli published at Florence a new edition of it, which is enriched
with various readings from a MS. in the Riccardi library.
[270] In the first edition of the work it was stated that Poggio, on
his marriage, not only parted with his mistress, but also deprived four
of his illegitimate children, who were then living, of an inheritance
which he had secured to them by a Bull of legitimacy. This statement,
however, rests only on the authority of Valla, the bitter personal enemy
of Poggio, and it has been satisfactorily proved by the Cavaliere Tonelli
(_Ton. Tr. vol. i. p. 266._) that this imputation is of the number of
those calumnies in which the scholars of the fifteenth century were, in
their contests with each other, so apt to indulge.
[271] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. epist. xxxvii._
[272] _Poggii Opera, p. 355._
[273] The correspondence above referred to, which was first brought into
public notice by the Cavaliere Tonelli, (_Ton. Tr. vol. i. p. 276-283_)
is to be found in the Riccardi and the Hafod manuscripts.
[274] _Ton. Tr. vol. i. p. 284, Note._
[275] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. xxxiii._
[276] Though no literary works of Francesco Marescalco have descended
to posterity, and though from the designation of “Franciscum quendam
Ferrariensem,” by which he is mentioned in a letter from Poggio to
Niccolo Niccoli, it should seem that he was not much known, even to his
contemporaries, the circumstance of Poggio’s inscribing to him a volume
of his compositions affords reasonable grounds for a supposition that he
was a man of learning, and of a respectable character. This supposition
is confirmed by the respectful manner in which Poggio, in the following
letter, thanks him for the offer of his friendship, and the assurance of
his esteem.
“I have long maintained a most pleasant intercourse with my friend
Scipio, of Ferrara, a man, whose learning and liberal manners lay an
irresistible claim to my esteem and love. We often spend our leisure
time in conversing together on various subjects, and particularly on the
characters of learned and eloquent men. Of this number he assures me that
you are one. He informs me, that you are not only devoted to literature,
which circumstance is of itself a great recommendation, but, what is of
the greatest weight, that your manners are most amiable, and that you are
endowed with the most attractive virtues. He moreover says, that you are
very much attached to me. This is a piece of intelligence which, I must
confess, affords me the sincerest pleasure; for there is nothing, my dear
Francesco, which I have more at heart, than to gain the esteem and good
will of my fellow mortals. You are sensible that he who is favoured with
the affection of his acquaintance, especially of those who are dignified
by their virtues, is truly rich, and possesses a source of sincere
enjoyment. I therefore most heartily embrace your proffered friendship,
from which I trust I shall derive both pleasure and honour. Be assured
of this, that I shall do my utmost endeavour to confirm, by my conduct,
those friendly sentiments which you have voluntarily conceived on my
behalf.—Farewell.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 307._
[277] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. p. 273._
[278] _Ibid._
[279] _Poggii Opera, p. 270-277._
[280] See note on chap. iii. of this work.
[281] _Poggii Opera, p. 274._
[282] “Delectabatur admodum tabulis et signis ac variis cœlaturis
priscorum more. Plura enim prope solus atque exquisitiora habebat quam
cæteri fere omnes.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 276._
[283] _Ibid._
[284] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. lxii._
[285] Gianozzo Manetti, who wrote memoirs of Niccolo Niccoli, which
are printed from a Vatican MS. in Mehus’s life of Ambrogio Traversari,
_p. lxvi. et seq._ “Raro tamen,” says Gianozzo, “vel numquam, latine
loquendi, latineve scribendi onus suscipere voluit, eâ de causâ abductus,
ut arbritror, quod quum nihil ab eo nisi plenum et perfectum probaretur,
neque orationes, neque scripta sua sibi ipsi omni ex parte, ceu in aliis
hominibus exigebat, satisfactura videbantur.” The testimony of Poggio
may be adduced in confirmation of Gianozzo’s assertion. “Cum enim nihil
nisi politum ac perfectum probaret, nequaquam sibi ipsi ejus scripta
satisfacere videbantur.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 274._
[286] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. lxi._
[287] “Illud quoque animadvertendum est Nicolaum Nicolum veluti parentem
fuisse artis criticæ, quæ auctores veteres distinguit emendatque. Nam
quum eos auctores ex vetustissimis codicibus exscriberet, qui suo
potissimum consilio, aliorum vero operâ inventi sunt, non solum a
mendis quibus obsiti erant expurgavit, sed etiam distinxit capitibusque
locupletavit. Testis sit Lucretius, qui in Cod. Chart. Bibliothecæ
Mediceo-Laurentianæ adservatur. In hoc enim codice manu Nicolai Niccoli
diligentissime scripto aliquot libris capitula præfixa a Niccolo sunt.
Testes duodecim Comœdiæ Plauti noviter eodem sæculo repertæ, Niccolique
nostri manu in Cod. Chartaceo Bibliothecæ Marcianæ ut supra diximus
exaratæ. Has enim quum descripsisset ex vetustissimo Codice Jordani
Cardinalis Ursini ex Germaniâ Romam advecto, quem mendosissimum judicavit
Poggius, earum tamen exemplum a Niccolo nostro confectum paucis mendis,
iisque levissimis deturpatum est.”—_Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. 1._
[288] _Gianotti Manettii Vita Nicolai Nicoli, apud Mehi Vitam Ambros.
Travers. p. lxxvi._
[289] _Ibid, p. lxxvii._
[290] These and the following particulars are collected from a life
of Niccolo Niccoli, written by Gianozzo Manetti, and composing part
of a volume, _De Illustribus Longævis_, dedicated by him to Lodovico
Gusman, governor of the province of Calatrava. In proof of the delicacy
of Niccolo’s feelings, Gianozzo assures his reader of the wonderful
fact, that he disliked the braying of an ass, the grating of a saw,
and the squeaking of a mouse caught in a trap. “Neque rudentem asinum,
neque secantem serram, neque muscipulam vagientem sentire audireve
poterat.”—_Mehi Vita Ambros. Travers. p. lxxvii._
[291] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 212-217._ The orthodoxy of the editor of the
acts of the councils has induced him to attach the following marginal
observation to the decree which thus levelled the thunder of the rebels
of Basil at the sacred head of the pontiff—“Multa in hac synodo sparsim
habentur quæ pontifici et ejus auctoritati derogant, quæ sunt caute
legenda.”
[292] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 221, 222._
[293] _Ibid, p. 226, et seq._
[294] _Ibid, p. 232, et seq._
[295] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 169, 170._
[296] _Labbe Concil. tom. xiii. p. 876._
[297] _Muratori Rer. Italic. Script. tom. iii. p. 870._
[298] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 189._
[299] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 173._
[300] _Ibid, p. 176, 177._
[301] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. 430._
[302] _Labbei Concilia, tom. xiii. p. 1164._
[303] _Labbei Concilia, tom. xiii. p. 1165-1168._
[304] _Zeno Dissert. Vos. tom. i. p. 307._
[305] _Zeno Dissert. Voss. tom. i. p. 308._
[306] _Ibid, p. 316._
[307] _Poggii Opera, p. 349, 350._
[308] _Poggii Opera, p. 350, 351, 352._
[309] _Ibid, p. 353, 354, 355._ Two manuscript copies of this work are
preserved in the Laurentian, and a third in the Magliabecchian library
at Florence. A fourth is deposited in the Ambrogian collection at Milan.
The disgusting ribaldry of Beccatelli fully justifies the reproof which
he received from Poggio. It is a disgrace to literature, that his work
should have been lately committed to the press under the superintendence
of a French editor.
The Hermaphroditus was openly condemned, not only by Poggio, but also
by Filelfo, Laurentius Valla, and by Mariano da Volterra, who inveighed
against it in a long poem. It was the subject of reprobation in the
sermons of Bernadino da Siena, and of Roberto da Lecce, who caused it to
be burnt in the public squares of Bologna and Milan. The zeal of Valla,
(which, by the way, was kindled as much by personal enmity as by a regard
to morality) prompted him to hope that the same fate awaited its author.
Besides the Hermaphroditus, Beccatelli published a variety of works,
which are thus enumerated by Apostolo Zeno. 1. Alphonsi Regis Triumphus.
2. De Rebus gestis Ferdinandi Regis. 3. In coronatione Friderici III.
Imperatoris Oratio Romæ habita 1452. 4. Ad Alphonsum Siciliæ Regem
Oratio. 6. Oratio ad Caetanos de pace. 7. Oratio ad Venetos de pace.
8. Epistolarum Libri V. 9. Carmina. 10. Epistolæ et Orationes. 11.
Epistolarum & Carminum liber. 12. In Rhodum Poema. 13. Tragediæ. 14.
Commentarius in Plautum. 15. Elegiæ. 16. De dictis et factis Alphonsi
Regis Libri IV. _Vallæ Invectiva secunda in Facium, sub finem._—_Zeno
Diss. Voss. tom. i. p. 315, 316._
[310] _Concil. tom. xxx. p. 271._
[311] _Ibid, p. 298._
[312] In the _Fasciculus Rer. Expet. et Fugiend. tom. i. p. 46-54_,
there is a very entertaining account drawn up by Æneas Sylvius of the
organization and proceedings of the conclave which elected Amedeus to
the pontificate, and of the splendid procession which took place at the
coronation of this Anti-Pope, who assumed the name of Felix.
[313] _Mehi Vita Ambros. Travers. p. ccccxxvii._
[314] _Elogi degli uomini illustri Toscani, tom. i. p. cccxlvi._
[315] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. ccccv._
[316] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. ccccxxvii._
[317] _Ibid, p. ccccxxviii._
[318] _Apostolo Zeno Diss. Vos. tom. i. p. 81._
[319] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. ccccxxxii._ The author of the
life of Ambrogio, in the _Elogi degli uomini illustri Toscani_, mentions
this report in the following terms. “Non manca chi creda, che Iddio
a intercessione di Ambrogio facesse ancor dei prodigi. E certamente,
l’esser dopo la di lui morte, nati spontaneamente gigli ed altri
fiori sopra il suo cadavere, che colti dai Religiosi instantaneamente
rifiorivano per tutto il luogo occupato dalla venerabile di lui spoglia,
sembra cosa più che naturale. Eppure di ciò fanno fede persone che hanno
potuto vedere ocularmente un tal prodigio al sacro Eremo di Camaldoli.”
_p. cccxlviii. cccxlix._
[320] See Poggio’s dialogue on Hypocrisy in the _Fasciculus Rer. Expet.
et fugiend. tom. ii. p. 583._
[321] _Recanati Osservazioni, p. 19._
[322] _Poggiana, tom. ii. p. 322-326._
[323] _Ton. Tr. vol. ii. p. 22._
[324] The short-sightedness of the Florentines seems to have been a
subject of proverbial sarcasm to their neighbours. “Bartolomeo Soccini,
of Siena,” says Mr. Roscoe, in his life of Lorenzo de’ Medici, “having
observed, in allusion to the defect in Lorenzo’s sight, that the air of
Florence was injurious to the eyes—_true_, said Lorenzo, _and that of
Siena to the brain_.” When Leo X. was elected to the pontificate, the
Roman wits thus interpreted a certain date of the year MCCCCXL, which was
inscribed on a tablet in the church of the Vatican: Multi cæci cardinales
creaverunt cæcum decimum Leonem.
_Roscoe’s Life of Lorenzo de’ Medici, vol. ii. p. 119_—_Fabroni Vita
Leonis. X._
[325] _Poggii Opera, p. 333, 339._
[326] _Philelfi Opera, p. 13._
[327] _Philelfi Epistolæ, p. 18._
[328] _Ibid._
[329] _Ibid._
[330] _Poggii Opera, p. 175._
[331] _Poggii Opera, p. 176._
[332] _Poggii Opera, p. 186, 187._
[333] _Poggii Opera, p. 64-83._
[334] _Poggii Opera, p. 225-328._ Besides Gregorio Corriario, two other
Venetian scholars, Pietro Tommasi and Lauro Querini, expressed their
displeasure at the manner in which Poggio had treated the Venetian
patricians in his dialogue _De Nobilitate_; the former in a letter
addressed to Poggio—the latter, not only by a letter, but also in an
express treatise on the same subject. To the former Poggio returned a
civil reply—the latter, who seems to have been an ill-tempered man, he
treated with contempt. _Ton. Tr. vol. ii. p. 42._
[335] _Poggii Opera, p. 278._
[336] _Poggii Opera, p. 285._
[337] _Poggii Historia Flor. p. 339._—_Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p.
185._—Lorenzo Valla, in his _Antidotus_, charges Poggio with the infamous
villany of forging the commission, by virtue of which Vitelleschi was
arrested; and asserts, that he was protected from the punishment due to
his crime, by the power of the statesmen who had bribed him to commit so
atrocious a deed. It is not, however, very probable, that any interest
could have screened from punishment a secretary who stood convicted of so
heinous an offence as counterfeiting the signature of a sovereign prince,
for the purpose of committing murder: still less, that a subordinate
officer who had taken such a wicked liberty, should have been continued
in his place.—_Laurentii Vallæ Antidotus in Poggium, p. 109._
[338] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 186._
[339] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 199._
[340] _Poggii Opera, p. 344._
[341] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. ep. liv._
[342] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. p. 282._
[343] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. p. 284._
[344] According to the tables of the relative value of money at different
periods, the volume above mentioned may be said to have cost Lionello
£250 or £300 sterling.—_Ton. Tr. vol. ii. p. 54._
[345] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 195, 196._
[346] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 198._
[347] _Muratori Rer. Italic. Script. tom. vi. p. 915._
[348] _Poggii Opera, p. 261-269._ The disease of which he died was the
stone. Poggio asserts, that after his death, a calculus of the weight of
a pound was extracted from his bladder.
[349] _Vita Nicolai V. a Jannotio Manetti apud Muratorii Rer. Italic
Script. tom. iii. p. ii. p. 908 et. seq._
[350] _Poggii Opera, p. 390, 391._ The data of the publication of the
dialogue above mentioned is ascertained by an unpublished Epistle of
Poggio, cited by Tonelli, _Tr. vol. ii. p. 62._
[351] _Poggii Opera, p. 392-419._
[352] In the Basil edition of Poggio’s works, the dialogue _De
Infelicitate Principum_ is so incorrectly printed, that it is frequently
difficult to decypher the meaning of the author. An edition of the same
dialogue, printed in 12mo. at Frankfort, by Erasmus Kempffer, in the year
1629, is one of the most incorrect books which ever disgraced a press.
Fortunately, however, the one of these copies is frequently of use in
correcting the errors of the other.
[353] _Janotii Manetti pro Leonardo Aretino Oratio Funebris, Epistolis
Leonardi a Meho editis prœfixa, p. civ._
[354] _Janotii Manetti pro Leonardo Aretino Oratio Funebris, Epistolis
Leonardi a Meho editis prœfixa, p. cxiv._
[355] The following analysis of Gianozzo’s oration will be sufficient
to prove, that the foregoing censure is by no means too severe.—He
began his address by informing his auditors, that if the immortal Muses
(“immortales Musæ divinæquo Camœnæ”) could have deemed it compatible
with their dignity to make an oration, either in the Latin or the
Greek language, or to weep in public, they would not have delegated to
another the task of paying the last honours to Leonardo; but since this
exhibition of their grief was contrary to the usual habits of the Nine,
the administrators of the Tuscan government had determined that the
virtues of the deceased should be celebrated by one of his colleagues. He
then with due modesty declared, that their choice having been directed
to himself, not on account of his talents, but in consequence of his
filling one of the principal offices of the state, he had prepared
himself for the occasion, not to his own satisfaction, but as well as
the brevity of the time allowed him for the purpose would permit.—The
orator then proceeded to give a sketch of the life of Leonardo. When he
arrived at that period of it in which the deceased became one of the
public functionaries of the state, he detailed at some length the history
of the Florentine republic during the time of Leonardo’s possession
of civic and military offices. In the course of his minute detail of
Leonardo’s literary labours, he contrived to introduce brief notices of a
considerable number of Greek and Latin writers, and enlarged particularly
upon the merits of Livy and Cicero, to each of whom he represented
Leonardo as superior, since he not only translated Greek authors into
Latin, after the example of the latter, but also wrote histories, in
emulation of the former, thus uniting the excellencies of both. After
this, preparing to perform the ceremony of coronation, he proved by
historical evidence, that the custom of crowning emperors and poets was
very ancient. Descanting on the various kinds of military crowns, he
informed his auditors, that by the frequent perusal of ancient writers,
he had ascertained, that of these tokens of honour there were eight
different species, namely, the Corona Obsidionalis, Civica, Muralis,
Castrensis, Navalis, Ovalis, quasi Triumphalis, and Triumphalis. The
description of the materials of which these crowns were severally made,
the occasions on which they were bestowed, the enumeration of divers
eminent commanders whose brows they had adorned, led the errant orator
into a further digression, from which he did not return before he
had detailed at great length the reasons why poets should be crowned
with laurel, in preference to ivy, palm, olive, or any other species
of evergreen. This dissertation on crowns occupies the space of five
quarto pages, closely printed in a small type. Having exhausted this
topic, Gianozzo proceeded to prove, that Leonardo was a poet. This led
him to enumerate most of the Greek and Latin poets, and to explain the
derivation of the term _poeta_. In treating on this subject, he announces
the marvellous discovery, that he who wishes to be a poet, must write
excellent poems! “Itaque si quis poeta esse cuperet quædam egregia
poemata scribat oportet.” Having endeavoured by sundry truly original
arguments to vindicate Leonardo’s claim to the poetic wreath, he closed
his harangue by the performance of the prescribed ceremony.
The following list of such of the voluminous works of Leonardo Aretino as
have been committed to the press, is extracted from the enumeration of
his writings, subjoined to his life by Laurentius Mehus.
1. _Historiarum Florentini Populi, Lib. xii. Per Sixtum Brunonem Argent.
1610._ _fol. Ejusdem traductio Italica a Donato Acciajolo Venetiis, 1473,
Florentiæ, 1492._ _Venetiis, 1560._ _Ibidem a Sansovino, 1561._
2. _Leonardi Arretini de Temporibus suis Libri duo._ _Venetiis, 1475 and
1485._ _Lugduni apud Gryphium, 1539._ _Argentorati per Sixtum Brunonem,
1610._ It was reprinted by Muratori, in the 19th vol. of his _Rer.
Italic. Script._
3. _De bello Italico adversus Gothos gesto Libri quatuor._ This work is
founded upon the Greek history of Procopius. It has been edited in the
following places: _Fulginii per Emilianum Fulginatum, 1470._ _Venetiis
per Nicolaum Jenson, 1471._ _Basileæ, 1531._ _Parisiis, 1534._ It was
also printed together with Zosimus, _Basileæ, 1576_, and with Agathias
and Jornandes, _Lugd. 1594_. _Bellovisiis, 1607._
4. _De Bello Punico Libri tres. Brixiæ, 1498._ _Paris, apud Ascensium,
1512._ _Augustæ Vindel. 1537._
5. _Commentarium Rerum Græcarum_ was edited by Gryphius, _Lug. 1539._
_Lipsiæ a Joach. Camerario, 1546._ _Argentorati, 1610, per Sixtum
Brunonem._ It was also reprinted by Gronovius in the 6th volume of his
_Thes. Antiq. Græc._
6. _Isagogicon moralis disciplinæ ad Galeotum Ricasolanum._ This work
also bears the title of _Dialogus de moribus ad Galeottum, &c._ and under
the title of _Aristoteles de moribus ad Eudemum Latine Leonardo Arretino
interprete_, it was printed, _Lovanii, 1475_. _Paris, juxta de la Mare,
1512._ _Ibidem, 1516, per Ascensium._
7. _Ad Petrum Histrium dialogorum Libri._ _Basileæ, 1536, per Henricum
Petri, &c._ _Paris, 1642._
8. _De studiis et litteris ad illustrem Dominam Baptistam de Malatestis.
Argentinæ, 1512._ It was also published by Gabriel Naudæus in 1642,
and it composes part of a book entitled _Hugonis Grotii et aliorum
dissertationes de studiis bene instituendis, Amstelæd. 1645_. It was also
printed by Thomas Crenius in his _Meth. Stud. tom. i. Num. x. Rotterod.
1692_.
9. _Laudatio Cl. V. Johannis Strozæ Equitis Florentini_, was published by
Baluzzi in the third volume of his Miscellanies.
10. _Imperatoris Heliogabali Oratio protreptica, sive adhortatoria
ad Meretrices_, published by Aldus Manutius in his _Historiæ Augustæ
Scriptores Minores, Venetiis, 1519_.
11. _Oratio in Hypocritas_ was printed in the _Fasciculus_ of Ortuinus
Gratius _Coloniæ, 1535_. _Lugd. 1679._ _Londini, 1691._ It was again
published in the year 1699, from a copy in the possession of Antonio
Magliabecchi.
12. _La Vita di Dante e i costumi e studj di Messer Francesco Petrarca._
The life of Petrarca was edited by Philippus Tomasinus in his _Petraca
Redivivus_, printed at Padua, 1650. It was again printed, together with
the life of Dante, an. 1671.
13. _Magni Basilii Liber per Leonardum Arretinum de Græco in Latinum
translatus_—_Brixiæ, 1485, per Boninum de Boninis—Bononiæ, 1497._
_Argentorati, 1507._ _Paris, 1508._ _Romæ, 1594._
14. _Marci Antonii Vita._
15. _Vita Pyrrhi Epirotarum Regis._
16. _Vita Pauli Emilii._
17. _Tiberii et Caii Gracchorum Vitæ._
18. _Q. Sertorii Vita._
19. _Catonis Uticensis Vita._
20. _Vita Demosthenis._ The seven foregoing pieces of biography,
translated by Leonardo, from the Greek of Plutarch, were printed,
_Basileæ apud Isingrinium, 1542_.
21. _Leonardi Arretini Apologia Socratis. Bononiæ, 1502._
22. _Aristotelis Ethicorum Libri decem secundum traductionem Leonardi
Arretini._ _Paris, 1504 & 1510, per Henricum Stephanum_, & _1516, per
Ascensium_.
23. _Aristotelis Politicorum, Libri viii._ per _Leonardum Arretinum in
Latinum traducti. Venetiis, 1504, 1505, 1511, 1517._ _Basil. 1538._
24. _Oeconomicorum Aristotelis libri duo, a Leonardo Arretino in Latinum
conversi. Basileæ, 1538._
25. _Oratio Æschinis in Ctesiphontem a Leonardo Arretino in Latinum
conversa. Basileæ a Cratandro, 1528, 1540._
26. _Oratio Demosthenis contra Aeschinem a Leonardo Arretino in Latinum e
Græco traducta. Basileæ a Cratandro, 1528, 1540._
27. _De crudeli amoris exitu Guisguardi et Sigismundæ Tancredi
Salernitanorum Principis filiæ. Turon, 1467._ This version of Bocaccio’s
well known tale is also printed in the works of Pius II.
28. _Epistolarum Libri viii. ann. 1472, fol. ab Antonio Moreto et
Hieronymo Alexandrino._ A second edition was printed, ann. 1495—a third,
_Augustæ, 1521, apud Knoblochium_—a fourth, _Basileæ, 1535, apud Henricum
Petri_—a fifth, _Basileæ, 1724, apud Albertum Fabricium_—a sixth,
_Florentiæ, 1741, edente Meho_.
29. _Canzone Morale di Messer Lionardo._ This poem is printed in the
third volume of Crescimbeni’s Italian poetry.
The inspection of the foregoing catalogue will evince the diligence
with which Leonardo Aretino prosecuted his studies. The numerous
editions through which many of his works have passed afford a sufficient
indication of the esteem in which they were held by the learned men of
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
[356] Poggio’s funeral oration for Leonardo is prefixed by Mehus to his
edition of Leonardo’s letters.
[357] _Poggii Oratio Funebris in obitu Leonardi Aretini, apud Mehi
editionem Leonardi Epistolarum, tom. i. p. cxxii._
[358] _Ibid._
[359] _Janotii Manetti Vita a Naldo, apud Muratori Rer. Italic. Script.
tom. xxx. p. 533, 534._
[360] _Tiraboschi Storia della Letter. Ital. tom. vi. p. ii. p. 328, 329._
[361] See the introduction to Poggio’s dialogue on Hypocrisy, in the
_Fasciculus Rer. Expet. et. Fug. tom. ii. p. 571._
[362] _L’Enfant Histoire de la guerre des Hussites et du Conseil de
Basle._
[363] _Mehi Vita Ambrosii Traversarii, p. ccccxix. ccccxx. ccccxxi._
[364] _Mehi Vita Ambros. Travers. ut supra._
[365] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 402._
[366] _Ibid, p. 406._
[367] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 410, 412._
[368] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 416._ The foregoing particulars of
the last illness and death of Eugenius were collected partly from a
narrative of those events by Æneas Sylvius, which is preserved in the
third vol. of Muratori’s _Rer. Italic. Script. p. ii. p. 890_, and partly
from the diary of one of the pontiff’s chamberlains, which occurs in _p.
902_ of the same volume.
[369] The unlettered Shakspeare was much better versed in the natural
history of ecclesiastics than the learned Gianozzo.
“Sometimes she cometh with a tythe-pig’s tail,
Tickling the parson as he lies asleep;
Then dreams he of another benefice.”
[370] _Janotii Manetti Vita Nicolai V. apud Muratori Rer. Italic. Script.
tom. iii. p. 921._
[371] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 417._
[372] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 417._
[373] _Ibid, p. 425._
[374] _Ibid, p. 419._
[375] _Ibid, p. 420._
[376] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 441._
[377] _Poggii Opera, p. 32._
[378] _Poggii Opera, p. 287-292._
[379] “Optimi sanctissimique viri Nicolai quinti summi pontificis
beneficentia id effecit, ut jam querelæ temporum sint prætereundæ, utque
in gratiam aliquando cum fortuà videar rediisse.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 32._
[380] _Poggii Hist. de Variet. Fort. p. 1, 2, 3._
[381] _Poggii Hist. de Variet. Fort. p. 6, 7._
[382] Poggio’s narrative of the discoveries made by Niccolo Conti was
translated into the Portuguese language, by the command of Emanuel I.
king of Portugal. From the Portuguese version, an Italian translation
was made by Giambattista Ramusio, who inserted it in the first volume
of his collection of voyages and travels, printed in folio at Venice,
in the year 1588. A small portion of the first book of the dialogue _De
Varietate Fortunæ_ containing the description of the ruins of Rome, is
printed in the Basil edition of the works of Poggio. A manuscript copy of
the entire dialogue was discovered in the library of the cardinal Pietro
Ottoboni, nephew of pope Alexander VIII., by Lionardo Adami da Bolsena,
who began to prepare it for the press. Lionardo having died before he had
finished the transcript of the first book, the execution of his design
was completed by the Abate Domenico Giorgi da Rovigo, who finished the
transcript of the dialogue, illustrated it with notes, and subjoined to
it fifty-seven of Poggio’s epistles, which had not yet seen the light.
Under the superintendence of the Abate Oliva, the work thus prepared was
printed at Paris, in 4to., an. 1723, by Coustellier.
_Zeno Diss. Voss. tom. i. p. 40. Dominici Georgii Prœfatio ad Poggii
Hist. de Variet. Fort._
[383] _Fasciculus Rer. Expet. et Fugiend. tom. ii. p. 570-583._ An
edition of Leonardo Aretino and Poggio’s dialogues on Hypocrisy was
published by Hieronymus Sincerus Lotharingus, _ex typograghiá Anissoniá,
Lugduni, 1679, in 16mo._
[384] _Poggii Opera, p. 159._
[385] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 417._
[386] _Poggii Opera, p. 155-164._
[387] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 431._
[388] This translation of Diodorus Siculus was printed, _Bononiæ, 1472,
in folio_. _Bandini Catalogus Bibliothecæ Laurentianæ, tom. ii. p. 819._
[389] _Poggii Hist. de Variet. Fortunæ, p. 3._ From the prefatory remarks
which Poggio prefixed to his version of the Cyropædia, and which are
quoted by Bandini, in his _Catalogus Bibliothecæ, Laurentianæ, tom. ii.
p. 351_, it should seem, that by omitting many of the dialogues and
speeches, he had considerably abridged the work of Xenophon, whose eight
books he had compressed into six. An Italian translation of Poggio’s
version of the Cyropædia, made by his son Jacopo, was published at
Florence by the Junta, _an._ 1521. It is worthy of remark, that Poggio
was the first literary character who declared his opinion (an opinion
now generally entertained) that the Cyropædia is not a history, but a
political romance. _Ton. Tr. vol. ii. p. 108._
[390] _Facii Opera, p. 98._
[391] Bartolomeo Facio was a native of Spezia, a sea-port in the Genoese
territory. The most curious inquirers into the history of literature
have not yet been able to ascertain the precise period of his birth.
From many passages however which occur in his works it appears, that he
was indebted for instruction in the Latin and Greek languages to Guarino
Veronese, whom he frequently mentions in terms of affectionate esteem.
Facio was one of the numerous assemblage of scholars that rendered
illustrious the court of Alfonso, king of Naples, by whom he was treated
with distinguished honour. During his residence at Naples, the jealousy
of rivalship betrayed him into a violent quarrel with Lorenzo Valla,
against whom he composed four invectives. The following list of his other
works is extracted from his life, prefixed by Mehus to an edition of his
treatise _De Viris illustribus_, published at Florence, _an._ 1745.
1. _De bello Veneto Clodiano ad Joannem Jacobum Spinulam Liber. Lugd.
1568._
2. _Aliud parvi temporis bellum Venetum_ was printed together with the
former.
3. _De humanæ vitæ felicitate ad Alphonsum Arragonum et Siciliæ regem.
Hanoviæ, typis Vechelianis, 1611. Post epitomen Felini Sandei de Regibus
Siciliæ, &c._
4. _De excellentiâ et præstantiâ hominis._ This work, which is
erroneously ascribed to Pius II., was printed together with the preceding
treatise, _Hanoviæ, 1611_.
5. _De rebus gestis ab Alphonso primo Neapolitanorum rege Commentariorum,
Libri x. Lugduni, 1560, apud hæredes Sebastiani Gryphii, in
4to._—_Ibidem, 1562 & 1566._ The seven first books of this work were also
published, _Mantuæ, anno 1563, a Francisco Philopono_. It has also been
reprinted in various collections of Italian history.
6. _Arriani de rebus gestis Alexandri, Libri viii. Latine redditi.
Basileæ, 1539. in fo. a Roberto Winter._ _Pisauri, 1508._ _Lugduni, 1552._
7. _Epistolæ._ Several of Facio’s epistles are subjoined by Mehus to
his edition of the treatise _De Viris illus_. It is justly observed by
Tiraboschi, that Facio’s style is much more elegant than that of any of
his contemporaries. _Mehi vita Bartolomei Facii._—_Tiraboschi Storia
della Letter. Ital. tom. vi. p. ii. p. 80._
[392] _Facii Opera, p. 99, 100, 101._
[393] _Ton. Tr. vol. ii. p. 110._
[394] _Apostolo Zeno Dissert. Voss. tom. ii. p. 2._
[395] _Ibid, p. 4._
[396] _Ibid._
[397] _Hodius de Græcis Illus. p. 104._
[398] Valla, in his _Antidotus_, tells a ridiculous story of a pugilistic
contest which on occasion of this quarrel took place between Poggio and
George of Trebisond in Pompey’s theatre. This story was related as a fact
in the first edition of this work; but, on further reflection, I agree in
opinion with my Italian translator, that it is a fiction. See _Tonelli,
vol. ii. p. 114._
[399] _Bandini Catalogus Biblioth. Laur. tom. iii. p. 438._
[400] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 438._ Muratori informs us, that
the joy occasioned by the celebration of this jubilee experienced only
one interruption, which was occasioned by the following accident. As
an innumerable multitude of people were returning on the nineteenth of
December from receiving the pontifical benediction, they were on a sudden
so much alarmed by the braying of an ass, that they trampled upon each
other in such precipitate disorder, that upwards of two hundred perished
in the throng.
[401] It is properly remarked by the Cavaliere Tonelli, _vol. ii. p.
115_, that the whole of the _Facetiæ_ were not published at this time,
and that they came out at uncertain intervals as Poggio increased his
stock of entertaining anecdotes.
[402] _Poggii Opera, p. 420._
[403] Bugiale is derived from the Italian word _Bugia_, a falsehood, and
is interpreted by Poggio “_mendaciorum officina_;” i. e. the manufactory
of lies.
[404] Antonio Lusco was celebrated for his knowledge of the civil law,
which procured him the honour of being selected as a proper person to
assist Francesco Barbaro in revising the municipal regulations of the
city of Vicenza. In the course of his journey to that place he overtook
a Venetian, in whose company he rode to Siena, where they took up their
lodgings for the night. The inn was crowded with travellers, who, on the
ensuing morning, were busily employed in getting their horses out of the
stable in order to pursue their journey. In the midst of the bustle,
Lusco observed his Venetian friend booted and spurred, but sitting with
great tranquillity at the door of the inn. Surprised at seeing him thus
inactive, he told him, that if he wished to become his fellow traveller
for that day’s journey, he must make haste, as he was just going to
mount; on which the Venetian said, “I should be happy to accompany you,
but I do not recollect which is my horse, and I am waiting till the other
guests are gone, in order that I may take the beast which is left.” This
anecdote Lusco communicated to his fellow secretaries; and Poggio did not
fail to insert it in his _Facetiæ_. The horsemanship of the Venetians
appears to have been a fruitful subject of mirth to the frequenters
of the _Bugiale_. The following story proves what utter ignorance of
equestrian affairs the wits of the pontifical chancery imputed to that
amphibious race of men. “As a Venetian,” says Poggio, “was travelling
to Trivigi on a hired horse, attended by a running footman, the servant
received a kick from the beast, and in the first emotion of pain took up
a stone and threw it at the aggressor; but missing his aim, he hit his
master on the loins. The master looking back, and seeing his attendant
limping after him at some distance, asked him why he did not quicken his
pace. The servant excused himself by saying, that the horse had kicked
him: on which his master replied, I see he is a vicious beast, for he has
just now given me a severe kick on the back.” _Agostini Istoria degli
Scrit. Viniz. tom. ii. p. 53_—_Poggii Opera, p. 444, 464._
[405] _Poggii Opera, p. 491._
[406] _Recanati Vita Poggii, p. xxiii._
[407] _Vallæ Antidotus in Poggium, p. 227, 228, et seq._
[408] _Fabliaux ou Contes du xii. et du xiii. Siecle, Fables et Romans
du xiii. traduits ou extraits d’aprés plusieurs manuscrits du tems; avec
des notes historiques et critiques, et les imitations qui out été faites
de ces contes depuis leur origine jusqu’à nos jours. Nouvelle Edition,
augmentée d’une dissertation sur les Troubadours. Par M. le Grand. En
cinq tom. in 18mo. à Paris, 1781._
For the following enumeration of the _Facetiæ_ of Poggio, which appear
to correspond with some of the _Fabliaux_, I am indebted to the friendly
diligence of the late Rev. John Greswell, for many years master of the
college school at Manchester.
The first occurs in _tom. i. p. 299_ of the _Fabliaux_, entitled
_La Culotte des Cordeliers_, and is, with some variations in the
commencement, the _Braccæ Divi Francisci_ of Poggio, _p. 236_ of the
small edition of 1798. In _vol. iii. p. 107_, _Le Testament de l’Ane_,
is in Poggio’s _Facet._ _p. 45, Canis Testamentum_. Same vol. _p. 197_,
_Du Villain et de sa femme_, is in Poggio, _p. 69_, the _Mulier Demersa_,
whose body is to be sought for as floating against the current, _vol.
iii. p. 201_. _Du pré tondu, alias De la femme contrariante_, is the
_Pertinacia Muliebris_ in the _Facetiæ_, _p. 68_. Again, _vol. iii. p.
292_, _Le Meunier d’Aleus_, is in Poggio the story entitled _Quinque
Ova_, _p. 278_ of the _Facetiæ_. _Vol. iv. p. 192_, _Le Villain de
Baïlleul, alias La femme qui fit croire à son Mari qu’il étoit mort_, is
mentioned as imitated by Poggio, but resembles his _Mortuus loquens_,
_p. 275_, only at the close. In Poggio, the young man persuaded that he
was dead, hearing himself abused during the procession of his corpse
to burial, _erecto capite, si vivus essem, sicut sum mortuus, inquit,
dicerem, furcifer, te per gulam mentiri_. In _le Villain de Baïlleul_,
the husband persuaded by his wife that he is dead, Le Curé lui-méme entre
pour chanter ses _oremus_ aprés quoi il emmene la veuve dan la chambre.
Pendant tout ce tems le Villain convaincu qu’il était mort, restait
toujours sous le drap, sans remuer non plus qu’un cadavre. Mais entendant
un certain bruit dans la chambre, et soulevant son linceul pour regarder:
coquin de Pretre s’ecrie-t-il, tu dois bien remercier Dieu de ce que je
suis mort, car sans cela, mordie, tu perirais ici sous le baton. _Vol.
iii. p. 287_, _De la Bourgeoise d’Orléans, alias De la dame qui fit
battre son Mari_, is said to be imitated in Poggio’s _Fraus Muliebris_,
_p. 20_, but with much variation. _Vol. iv. p. 304_, _De l’Anneau ...
(Par Haisiau)_. All the account of this is as follows: Quoique le grave
President Fauchet ait donné l’extrait de ce _Fabliau_, je n’en parlerais
point si je n’avais à remarquer sur celuici, comme sur le précédent
qu’il a été imité. Ou le trouve dans Vergier sous le titre de _l’Anneau
de Merlin_. This is the _Annulus_ which Poggio (_Facet. p. 141_) gives
Philephus.
In addition to the above, _Le Médecin de Bral, aliàs le Villain dévenu
Médecin_, _tom. ii. p. 366_, from which Moliere has borrowed his _Médecin
malgré lui_, is in some parts imitated in the _Poggiana_, where an
account is given of an expeditious method of clearing the sick list of
an hospital on his estate, by an Italian cardinal. Deguisé en Médecin il
leur declara qu’ on ne pouvait les guerir qu’ avec un onguent de graisse
humaine, mais des qu’il eut proposé de tirer au sort à qui serait mis
dans la chaudiere, tous viderent l’hôpital. _Vol. iii. p. 95_, _Les
deux Parasites_, (une assez mauvaise plaisanterie) in the _Facetiæ_
of Frischlinus is attributed to Poggio, and is in his _Facetiæ_, _p.
67_, _Danthis Faceta Responsio_. When Dante was dining with Canis
Scaliger, the courtiers had privately placed all the _bones_ before
him. Versi omnes in solum Dantem, mirabantur cur ante ipsum solummodo
ossa conspicerentur, tum ille, Minimè inquit mirum, si Canes ossa sua
commederunt; ego autem non sum _Canis_. Le Grand does not notice this as
contained in the _Facetiæ_ of Poggio; but the resemblance is as great as
between most of those that he notices.
[409] _Poggii Opera, p. 219._
The popularity of the _Facetiæ_ is evinced by the number of editions
through which that work has passed; seven different impressions of it are
thus enumerated by De Bure, who erroneously gives to Poggio the prœnomen
of Franciscus.
1. _Francisci Poggii Florentini Facetiarum Liber; editio vetustissima et
originalis absque loci et anni indicatione, sed cujus in fronte apparet
Epistola prœfatoria Bernardi cujusdam in senium deducti ad militem
Raymundum Dominum Castri Ambrosii dicata, in 4to._
De Bure conjectures, that this edition was printed at Rome by George
Laver or Ulric Han, in 1470.
2. _Ejusdem Edito vetus et secunda originalis absque loci et anni
indicatione ulla, sed typis Vindelini Spirensis, aut saltem Nicolai
Jenson Gallici excusa Venetiis circa, an. 1471, in fol._
3. _Ejusdem, Ferrariæ, 1471, 4to._
4. _Ejusdem, Noribergi per Fredericum Creusner, 1475, in fol._
5. _Ejusdem, Mediolani per Christophorum Valdarfer, 1477, 4to._
6. _Ejusdem, Mediolani per Leonardum Pachel, et Uldrericum Scinzinzeller,
1481, in 4to._
7. _Ejusdem, Facetiæ cum Laurentii Vallæ facetiis moralibus et Francisci
Petrarchæ de Salibus viror. illus. ac facetiis libro, Paris, absque anni
et typographi nomine sed circa, annum 1477, aut saltem 1478, excusa, 4to._
8. Poggii _Facetiæ, 1498_, in 4to. sine loci aut typographi nomine. This
edition is not mentioned by De Bure, who closes his list with noticing
the following translations.
_Les Faceties de Pogge translatées de Latin en François. Paris, Bonfons,
1549, 4to._
_Les Comptes facétieux et joyeuses recreations du Poge Florentin, trad.
du Latin en François. Paris, Cousturier, 1605, in 16mo._
A neat and correct Latin edition of the _Facetiæ_ in two small pocket
volumes was published by a French emigrant in the year 1798. Of this
edition the following is the title.
_Poggii Florentini Facetiarum Libellus Unicus notulis Imitatores
indicantibus et nonnullis sive Latinis, sive Gallicis Imitationibus
illustratus, simul ad fidem optimarum editionum emendatus. Mileti, 1798._
[410] _Visio Francisci Philelphi apud Poggii Opera, p. 456._
[411] _Tonelli, vol. ii. p. 122, 123._
[412] An eulogiam of Cosmo de’ Medici, written by Niccolo of Foligni, is
preserved in the Laurentian library. _Mehi Vita Amb. Trav. tom. i. p.
lxxiii._
[413] The reader of Joe Miller will remember that this story has, in its
descent to modern times, received divers improvements.
[414] See a long and elaborate letter of Leonardo’s on this subject in
the collection of epistles published by Mehus, _Lib. vi. ep. x._
[415] It appears from the introduction to the second part of the
_Historia discept. conviv._ (_Poggii Opera, p. 37_) that Poggio wrote two
treatises, the one in commendation of the art of medicine, and the other
in praise of the science of law. A MS. copy of the treatise _in laudem
legum_ is preserved in the Laurentian library. _Bandini Catalogus, tom.
ii. p. 408._
[416] _Poggii Epistolæ lvii. epist. xlvii._
[417] _Tiraboschi Storia della Letter. Ital. tom. vi. part 2d, p. 329._
[418] See _Ton. Tr. tom. ii. p. 138._
[419] _Recanati Vita Poggii, p. xvii.-xix._ The trading companies of
Florence seem to have been constituted in the same manner as those into
which the citizens of London are at this day subdivided.
[420] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 456._
[421] _Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 456._ It may be mentioned as a
striking instance of the liberty which was granted by personages of the
most exalted eminence to scholars of celebrity in the fifteenth century,
that Poggio at various times addressed letters to his patron, cardinal
Beaufort, to prince John Corrinus, Waiwode of Hungary, to the duke of
Viseo, brother to Edward, king of Portugal, and also to Alfonso, king of
Naples, exhorting them to active exertions against the Turks, who at this
time threatened to overrun some of the finest countries of Europe. These
letters still exist in the Riccardi MS. _Ton. Tr. tom. ii. p. 140._
[422] _Tiraboschi Storia della letter. Ital. tom. vi. p. ii. p. 303._
If credit may be given to Valla’s own assertion, his introduction into
the world was announced in a supernatural manner. He boasts in his
_Antidotus_, _p. 191_, that his mother being ignorant that she was
pregnant, was apprized of that circumstance by the interposition of an
oracle, which informed her that she would be brought to bed of a son, and
gave particular directions with respect to her offspring’s name. It might
have been reasonably conjectured that this oracle was some experienced
matron; but by the subsequent part of Valla’s narration, it seems that
the important admonition in question proceeded from one of the saints.
[423] _Valla Antidotus in Poggium, p. 200._
[424] _Ibid, p. 201._
[425] _Vallæ Antidotus in Poggium, p. 201._
[426] This treatise is printed in the first volume of the _Fasciculus
Rer. expet. et fugiend._
[427] _Vallæ Antidotus, p. 210._
[428] _Ibid, p. 211._
[429] See the account given of this transaction by Valla in his
_Antidotus_, _p. 218._ Poggio, towards the conclusion of his third
invective, asserts, that Valla was on this occasion subjected to the
discipline of the scourge, and narrates the manner and form of his
punishment with great minuteness.
[430] Valla’s invective against Beccatelli and Facio is divided into
four books, and occupies fifty-two pages of the edition of his works,
published by Ascensius in folio, an. 1528.
[431] Valla triumphantly boasts, (_Antidotus, p. 167_) that Nicolas
V. presented to him with his own hand five hundred gold crowns as a
remuneration for his Latin version of Thucydides. This version was
printed by Henry Stephens, in his edition of that author, in the preface
to which he complains of Valla’s inaccuracy and inelegance of style.
That this complaint is just, abundant proof may be found in Stephens’s
marginal corrections of Valla’s translation.
[432] _Poggii Opera, p. 188-205._
[433] The passage which thus irritated the feeling of the Catalonian
nobleman occurs in Poggio’s epistle to Andreolo Giustiniano, in which
he remarks, upon the assertion of Francesco di Pistoia, that some
Catalans had stolen a marble statue which he had in charge to deliver to
Poggio: “in quo ut conjicio manifeste mentitus fuit. Non enim marmoria
sculpti Cathalani cupidi sunt, sed auri et servorum quibus ad remigium
utantur.”—_Poggii Opera, p. 329._
[434] This attack on Poggio’s moral character occurs in the proemium
to the _Antidotus_, and is couched in the following atrocious terms.
“Ostendam itaque eum quasi alterum Regulum, malum quidem virum, non
quod libidinosus ac prope libidinis professor, non quod adulter atquo
adeo alienarum uxorum præreptor, non quod vinolentus semper ac potius
temulentus, non quod falsarius et quidem convictus, non quod avarus,
sacrilegus, perjurus, corruptor, spurcus, aliaque quæ extra nostram
causam sunt, sed quatenus ad causam nostram facit, quod manifestarius
calumniator.”—_Antidotus, p. 8._
[435] He asserted, that during Valla’s residence at Pavia, he forged a
receipt in order to evade the payment of a sum of money which he had
borrowed, and that by way of punishment for this offence, he was exposed
to public view with a mitre of paper upon his head. Poggio, in his
relation of this anecdote, made use of the following ironical expression.
“Falsum chirographum cum scripsisses, accusatus, convictus, damnatus,
ante tempus legitimum absque ullâ dispensatione episcopus factus es.”
This witticism of Poggio’s betrayed Monsieur L’Enfant into a very
ridiculous error. “On trouve ici,” says he, in gravely commenting on this
passage, “une particularité assez curieuse de la vie de Laurent Valla.
C’est qu’ayant été ordonné Eveque à Pavie avant l’age et sans dispense,
il quitta de lui même la mitre, et la deposa, en attendant dans le palais
episcopal, où elle étoit encore. Je rapporterai ses paroles en Latin qui
sont fort embrouillées.” _Poggiana, tom. i. p. 212._ On this statement of
L’Enfant, Recanati, in his _Osservazioni_, _p. 111_, makes the following
dry remark. “Non credo però, che l’autore della Poggiana, quando pure
fosse Cattolico, vorrebbe essere fatto _Vescovo_ in questa foggia, come
Poggio dice che il Valla lo sia stato.”
[436] To enter into the particulars of Poggio’s charges and Valla’s
defence would be a most disgusting task. The following circumstance is,
however, too curious to be passed over without notice. Poggio reprobating
the incontinence of his adversary, accused him of debauching his
sister’s maid-servant. In reply to this accusation, Valla did not deny
the fact; but with wonderful ingenuity thus converted it into a proof
of his principled chastity. “Itaque cum nonnulli meorum propinquorum
me virginem, sive frigidioris naturæ, et ob id non idoneum conjugio
arbitrarentur, quorum unus erat vir sororis, quodammodo experiri
cupiebant. Volui itaque eis ostendere, id quod facerem, non vitium esse
corporis, sed animi virtutem.” _Antidotus, p. 222._
[437] _Poggii Opera, p. 234-242._
[438] _Bandini Catalogus._
[439] _Filelfi Opera, p. 75._ On the death of the duke of Milan, Filelfo
had experienced considerable inconvenience, in consequence of the war
between Francesco Sforza and the Milanese. In the course of this contest
he wavered between the two parties; but the success of Sforza at length
attached him to the interests of that enterprising chieftain. Soon after
the elevation of Nicolas V. to the pontificate, Filelfo was invited
by Alfonso, king of Naples, to present to him in person a copy of his
satires. On his way to Naples he passed through Rome, where he paid his
respects to the pontiff, who endeavoured, but in vain, to retain him
in his service by the promise of a liberal stipend. On his arrival at
the Neapolitan capital, he was received with great kindness by Alfonso,
at whose command he was crowned with laurel in the midst of the camp.
From Naples he returned to Milan, where he received the afflicting
intelligence, that at the sack of Constantinople by the Turks, Manfredina
Doria, his mother-in-law, and two of her daughters had been carried
away captives. It is an astonishing instance of the power of song, that
he procured their redemption by an ode addressed to Mahomet II. In the
year 1454, he was reconciled to Cosmo de’ Medici, by whose son Pietro
he was treated with distinguished regard. During the life of Francesco
Sforza, Filelfo was enabled, by the munificence of that prince, to live
in a state of splendor which was very congenial to his dispositions; but
on the death of that generous patron he received from his successor,
Galeazzo Maria, little more than empty promises. In consequence of the
pressure of distress, he undertook at the age of seventy-two to read
lectures on Aristotle. After sustaining a variety of afflictions in
consequence of the distracted state into which Milan was thrown by the
death of Galeazzo, he received from Lorenzo de’ Medici an invitation
to read lectures on the Greek language at Florence. This invitation he
gladly accepted, and at the advanced age of eighty-three he repaired
to the Tuscan capital, for the purpose of resuming the task of public
instruction. The fatigues of his journey however overpowered the strength
of his constitution, and soon after his arrival in Florence he closed a
life of assiduous study, and of almost ceaseless turbulence.
For an elaborate history of Filelfo, see _Memoires de l’Academie des
Inscriptions, tom. x._
[440] _Ton. Tr. tom. ii. p. 161._
[441] Matteo Palmerio was a Florentine citizen, descended from an
illustrious family. Passing through the different gradations of civic
honours, he was at length called to fill the highest offices of the
state. He was an elegant scholar, and composed many works, amongst which
the most distinguished was an Italian poem in terza rima, entitled _Città
di vita_. This poem, in which are recounted the adventures of a human
soul, which the author supposes to have been liberated from the prison
of the body, was condemned by the inquisition as heretical.—_Zeno Diss.
Voss. tom. i. p. 100 et seq._
[442] _Poggii Opera, p. 86-131._
[443] _Poggiana, tom. ii. p. 162._
[444] Poggio’s History of Florence, as edited by Recanati, has been
republished in the magnificent historical collections of Grævius and
Muratori.
[445] By his wife, Poggio had five sons; Pietro Paulo, Giovanni Battista,
Jacopo, Giovanni Francesco, and Filippo. Pietro Paulo was born in the
year 1438. He entered into the fraternity of the Dominicans, and was
promoted to the honourable office of Prior of Santa Maria ad Minervam,
in Rome, which office he held till the time of his death, which happened
September 6th, 1464.
Giovanni Battista, who was born in the year 1439, took the degree of
doctor of civil and canon law, and attained the several dignities of
Canonico of Florence, and of Arezzo, Rector of the Lateran church,
Acolyte of the pontiff, and assistant clerk of the chamber. He composed
in the Latin language the lives of Niccolo Piccinino, and Dominico
Capranica, cardinal of Firmiano. He died anno 1570.
Jacopo, born anno 1441, was the only one of Poggio’s sons who did
not enter into the ecclesiastical profession. He was a scholar of
distinguished accomplishments. His Italian translation of his father’s
History of Florence, and of his Latin version of the Cyropædia, have
already been noticed. He also translated into Italian the lives of four
of the Roman emperors. Nor did he confine his literary exertions to
translations. He composed a commentary on Petrarca’s Triumph of Fame,
which he dedicated to Lorenzo de’ Medici; a treatise on the origin of the
War between the English and the French; and the life of Filippo Scolario,
vulgarly called Pipo Spano. Entering into the service of cardinal Riario,
he was involved in the guilt of the Pazzi conspiracy, and was of the
number of the criminals who were suspended from the windows of the town
hall of Florence, in the year 1478.
Giovanni Francesco, who was born anno 1447, after holding the offices of
Canonico of Florence, and Rector of the Lateran church, went to Rome,
where he became chamberlain of the pontiff, and abbreviator of the
apostolic epistles. He was highly esteemed by Leo X., who appointed him
his secretary, in the enjoyment of which office he died at Rome, July
25th, 1522, and was buried in the church of St. Gregory, where there
still exists a monument erected to his memory.
Filippo was born anno 1450. When he had attained the twentieth year
of his age he was created Canonico of Florence. But quitting the
ecclesiastical life, he married a lady of an illustrious family, by whom
he had three daughters.
Besides these five sons, Poggio had a daughter, named Lucretia, who
married into the family of the Buondelmonti. _Ton. Tr. tom. ii. p. 169._
[446] The fate of this statue was somewhat remarkable. In consequence of
certain alterations made in the façade of the church of Santa Maria, in
the year 1560, by Francesco, Grand duke of Tuscany, it was removed to
another part of that edifice, where it now composes one of the group of
the twelve apostles.—_Recanati Vita Poggii, p. xxxiv._
THE END.
PRINTED BY HARRIS BROTHERS,
CHAPEL-STREET, LIVERPOOL.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE LIFE OF POGGIO BRACCIOLINI ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
