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 foregowithout 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 thePriori 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 countrymeninvolved 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 ofJanuary, 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 thechurch 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 thetime 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 engagedimmediately 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 uponthe 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, whoseLibri Elegantiarum Linguæ Latinæhad 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 workhe 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’sElegantiæ. 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 ofAntidotus 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 hisElegantiæhad 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 expressionderogatory 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 hisElegantiæ, 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 hisAntidotusrestrained 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 ofPoggio,[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 misrepresentationsof 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 theAntidotus, 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 stimulatedPoggio 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 artesEmollit mores nec sinit esse feros.â€
—“Ingenuas didicisse fideliter artesEmollit mores nec sinit esse feros.â€
—“Ingenuas didicisse fideliter artesEmollit mores nec sinit esse feros.â€
—“Ingenuas didicisse fideliter artes
Emollit mores nec sinit esse feros.â€
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 concurin 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 whichtook 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 hisblood, 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 dialogueDe Miseriâ humanæ conditionis, Poggio transmitted to Cosmo de’ Medici a version of Lucian’sAss, 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 hisAsinus 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 hisHistoria 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 theinjustice 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.â€
“Dum patriam laudat, damnat dum Poggius hostem,Nec malus est civis, nec bonus historicus.â€
“Dum patriam laudat, damnat dum Poggius hostem,Nec malus est civis, nec bonus historicus.â€
“Dum patriam laudat, damnat dum Poggius hostem,
Nec malus est civis, nec bonus historicus.â€
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 uponthe 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 partof 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 tohis 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 grossestbarbarism, 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.