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, exceptthe 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 wasreminded 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 Marchhe 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 Eugeniushad 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 bythe 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 ofthat 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 dialogueDe 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 thisaddress, 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 andwealth 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 tofortune.[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 DialogueOn 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 DialogueOn 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 thecommon 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 DialogueOn the Vicissitudes of Fortuneis 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.”
“Chang’d from horrid thorn to glittering gold.”
“Chang’d from horrid thorn to glittering gold.”
“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 annalsof 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 substitutesanother, 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 littleamusing by the modern inquirer, and must have excited an extraordinary degree of attention at the time of its publication.
The DialogueOn the Vicissitudes of Fortuneis 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 DialogueOn 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 DialogueOn 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 DialogueOn Hypocrisyhe 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 wasfully 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 unexpectedlypaying 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 wordhypocrite, 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 todespise 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, Carloattacks theFratres 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 serviceof 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, andcharging 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. Suffernot 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 ofthe 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, inconsequence 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 Georgeof Trebisond, a native of the isle of Candia, who adopted the designation ofTrapezuntius, 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 unhappyeffect 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 thecourt 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 ofEques 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 hisLiber 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 theLiber Facetiarumwe 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 ofBugiale;[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 theLiber Facetiarum.[405]
This work is highly interesting on account of the anecdotes which it contains of several eminent men, whoflourished 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 theBugialeto re-echo with laughter. Like all collections of the kind, theLiber Facetiarumcontains, 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, thatbons motsfrequently 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 theFacetiæare 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 mostlicentious stories were added to his collection by posterior writers; and he supports this opinion by asserting, that he has seen two manuscript copies of theFacetiæ, 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 hisAntidotus in Poggium, which was published about the year 1452, not only impeaches theFacetiæof 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 theFacetiæare to be found in theFabliaux, 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]
TheLiber Facetiarum, soon after its publication, acquired a considerable degree of popularity, and waseagerly 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 theFacetiæPoggio 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 itcondemns.[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 ofHistoria 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 thehealing 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 thegeneral 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 extendedby 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 theHistoria disceptativa convivialisPoggio 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 fromthose 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 ofwhich 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, arestimulated 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]