[Back] [Blueprint] [Next]

*****************************************

[Click on the footnote number and you will jump down to the note. Click again on that number and you will jump back up to where you were in the text.]

*****************

From The Life of Poggio Bracciolini, by The Rev. Wm. Shepherd, LL. D.; Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green and Longman; Liverpool; 1837; pp. 349-382.

CHAP. IX.

WAR between the Florentines and the duke of Milan — Treachery and death of Vitelleschi — The duke of Milan makes peace with the Florentines — Death of Niccolo d’Este — Character of his successor, Lionello — Correspondence between Lionello and Poggio — Remarks on the price of books — Eugenius endeavours to drive Sforza from the Marca d’Ancona — He quits Florence — Death of Nicolao Albergato, cardinal of Santa Croce — Poggio’s funeral eulogium on the cardinal — Memoirs of Tommaso da Sarzana — Poggio dedicates to Tommaso his dialogue On the Unhappiness of princes — Analysis of the dialogue — Death of Leonardo Aretino — Funeral honours paid to Leonardo — Gianozzo Manetti’s oration on that occasion — Poggio’s eulogium on Leonardo — Character of Leonardo — Account of Leonardo’s successor, Carlo Marsuppini — Death of cardinal Julian — Poggio’s eulogium on the cardinal.

[blank]

CHAP. IX.

IT has been already observed, that from the tenor of Poggio’s answer to the complimentary letter of the duke of Milan, he appears not to have given implicit credit to that prince’s professions of friendship for the Florentine republic, and that he evidently expected that the restless ambition of Filippo would again kindle the flames of war. Events justified his prognostications. In the year 1439, the administrators of the Tuscan government were so much alarmed by the success of Piccinino, who had invaded the Venetian territories at the head of the Milanese army, that they renewed their alliance with their ancient friends, to whose assistance they sent a considerable body of troops, under the command of Francesco Sforza. The duke of Milan, with the view of compelling the Tuscans to withdraw their forces from Lombardy, directed Piccinino to make an incursion into the territories of Florence. Piccinino accordingly marched through Romagna, and made himself master of several places in the district of Casentino. The duke of Milan expected to have derived considerable assistance in the invasion of the Tuscan territories from Vitelleschi, with whom he had for some time carried on a secret correspondence, and who had, through hatred of the Florentines, engaged to support Piccinino with a powerful 352 body of troops. But the secrecy with which this intrigue had been conducted did not elude the vigilance of the administrators of the Tuscan government. They fortunately intercepted certain letters addressed by the duke to Vitelleschi, which revealed the particulars of the conspiracy. These letters they communicated to the pontiff, who gave immediate orders for the arrest of the perfidious patriarch. As Vitelleschi was then at Rome, the execution of this commission was entrusted to Antonio Rido, the commandant of the castle of St. Angelo. According to the instructions of Eugenius, Vitelleschi was suddenly surrounded by a troop of horse, as he was passing the bridge of St. Angelo, on his way to join the forces which he had destined for the assistance of Piccinino. He was no sooner aware of his danger, than he boldly drew his sword, and endeavoured to cut his way through the soldiers who were sent to secure him. In the conflict he was wounded in the neck, and growing faint with loss of blood, he was overpowered and carried as a prisoner into the castle. On the twentieth day of his confinement he died, as some say of his wounds, according to the report of others, of poison. By whatever means he came to his end, so atrocious were the cruelties which he had committed during the days of his power, that his death occasioned universal joy, and was regarded by thousands as a signal instance of divine retribution.¹

Piccinino being by this event deprived of all hope of assistance was obliged to depend upon his own exertions. In these circumstances he was not dispirited. The successes which he had experienced in the commencement of the campaign led him to entertain sanguine hopes of crushing the Tuscan republic. But his confidence prepared the way for his discomfiture and disgrace. His rash reliance on the valour and discipline of his troops tempting him to engage the Florentine army under very disadvantageous circumstances, he experienced a total defeat on the twenty-ninth of June, 1440.² Nor did better success attend the arms of the duke of Milan in Lombardy.³ His forces were put to the rout by Francesco Sforza, on the banks of the river Oglio. Disheartened by these losses, Filippo was disposed to an accommodation; and by the mediation of Sforza, peace was again concluded between the prince and his allied enemies in the autumn of the year 1441.⁴

In the preceding year, Niccolo d’Este, marquis of Ferrara had assiduously endeavoured to bring about this desirable event; and though his mediation was unsuccessful, 354 his friendly interposition served to confirm the honourable character which he had so long sustained — that of the promoter of peace. In such estimation did the duke of Milan hold this virtuous prince, that he invited him to his capital, and entrusted him with the government of his extensive dominions. This mark of confidence was universally regarded as a prelude to the nomination of Niccolo to the ducal throne of Milan; but the hopes which the friends of virtue entertained of witnessing the happy effects resulting from his advancement were destroyed by his death, which took place on the 26th of December, 1441.

The sorrow experienced by the subjects of Niccolo, in consequence of this event, was considerably alleviated by their observation of the extraordinary good qualities of Lionello, his successor. In the contemplation of the purity of morals, the solidity of judgment, and the benevolence of heart, which adorned the character of this exemplary youth, they forgot the illegitimacy of his birth; and when, prompted by an enthusiastic respect for his virtues, they joyfully hailed him as their sovereign, their choice was approved by the suffrages of all the scholars of Italy. Lionello was indeed the favourite theme of the applause of the learned. He not only encouraged the ardour, but participated in the studies of the cultivators of the liberal arts. Under the auspices of Guarino Veronese, he had acquired a profound knowledge of classical literature, which enabled him accurately to appreciate the merits of the candidates for literary fame. The promotion of Lionello to the sovereignty of Ferrara was highly gratifying to the feelings of Poggio. 355 Several years previously to this event, he had been induced by the fame of the elegance of taste which distinguished Lionello’s juvenile compositions, to address to him a letter, in which he highly commended his love of literature, and strenuously exhorted him diligently to pursue those studies which he had so happily begun.⁵ The request which he made to this illustrious student to prosecute an inquiry after the lost decads of Livy has been already noticed. The homage which Poggio paid to the talents of Lionello gave rise to an epistolary intercourse, the remaining fragments of which afford a striking specimen of the unreserved friendship and liberal familiarity which a community of studies sometimes produces between persons who occupy very distant stations in the ranks of society. The freedom with which Lionello permitted his learned correspondent to communicate to him his opinions, is conspicuous in a letter addressed by Poggio to Guarino Veronese, requesting him to inform their patron of the surprize and concern which he had experienced on receiving the intelligence of his having bestowed some distinguished honours on an unworthy candidate.⁶ Of the character of this candidate Poggio gave his sentiments in the following letter to Lionello himself, which is interesting on account of the information which it contains with respect to the value of books at this period.

“A few days ago there occurred in the chamber of his holiness a discourse on the subject of Jerome’s epistles. 356 Happening to be present on this occasion, I observed, that I had in my possession two very handsome volumes of those epistles; on which one of the company remarked, that he had offered me eighty florins for them, but could not obtain them at that price. To this I replied, that the cardinal of St. Xystus had often importuned me to let him have the volumes in question, for which he would willingly pay me one hundred florins, and think himself obliged by the bargain; and that I should in all probability have sold the books at that price, had I not been prevented by Niccolo Niccoli, who with his accustomed moroseness declared, that by so doing, I should given an indication of a sordid and abject mind. On this our friend Aurispa said, that you very earnestly wished to add these epistles to your collection, and desired me to sell them to you, assuring me that you would cheerfully pay any price which I should fix upon them. With some reluctance I complied with his request, and I write to inform you, that I am willing to part with the books for the price which has been already offered for them, namely, one hundred ducats. It remains for you therefore to determine whether you will purchase them at that price. It is a matter of indifference to me what your determination may be; for I do not part with the volumes with a view of raising money, but merely through a desire of obliging you. This however I will say, that no person in Italy possessed in the same compass a larger or a more correct collection of epistles than those which are contained in these two volumes.

“Your friend, the knight of Rieti, when he came to this town some time ago to gratify his love of ostentation (for he wished his folly to be known to every body) told a certain citizen of Ferrara, that you had shewn him the letter which I wrote concerning him to Guarino. I do not thing that this is the fact; but I wish you would inform me whether in this matter he adheres to his usual practice of lying. On his departure hence he told some persons that he was going to visit his uncle; to others he asserted, that you had nominated him your ambassador at Florence. He would think himself undone were he to utter any thing but falsehood. He must needs be full of truth; for no truth ever passes through his lips.”⁷

Lionello transmitted to Poggio the hundred ducats, at which he appreciated his copy of the epistles of Jerome. He intimated to him, however, that some of the learned men of Ferrara thought the price an extravagant one; and he desired that it might be understood, that in acceding to the terms proposed by his correspondent, he intended to make him a present of the excess above the real value of the book. In reply to these observations, Poggio maintained the correctness of his estimation, in opposition to the judgment of the Ferrarese connoisseurs, which he treated with great contempt; and humorously observed, that he thankfully accepted the gift mentioned by Lionello, not on account of his intrinsic value; but as an earnest of future munificence; “For,” said he, “it is the custom of worthy 358 princes, such as you are, to persevere in what they have well begun.”⁸

If the ducat be estimated at ten shillings English money, the epistles of Jerome were purchased by Lionello at the expense of fifty pounds sterling.⁹ From the history of Filelfo it appears, that at this time the salary of a public professor of literature rarely exceeded four hundred ducats; so that the price of a couple of volumes absorbed one-fourth of the sum which was deemed an adequate annual recompence for the services of a man of consummate learning. The exhibition of these facts will demonstrate the difficulties which obstructed the paths of learning in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It will also tend to make the modern scholar sensible of the tribute of gratitude which he owes to the inventor of the typographic art.

It was not without considerable reluctance that Eugenius had yielded to Francesco Sforza the dominion of the Marca d’Ancona; and he had long waited with impatience for the occurrence of some favourable opportunity to wrest from that chieftain the territory which he had so unwillingly conceded to him. In the year 1442, he flattered himself that he should be enabled to accomplish this object of his earnest desire. Regnier of Anjou being then closely 359 besieged in the city of Naples by Alfonso of Arragon, had solicited the assistance of Sforza, who dispatched a body of troops to make a diversion in his favour. Eugenius taking advantage of this conjuncture, formally deprived Sforza of the office of Gonfalionere of the holy see, which he bestowed on his rival Piccinino. In obedience to the orders of his new sovereign, Piccinino immediately invaded the Marca, and made himself master of the city of Todi. This incursion compelled Sforza to withdraw from Naples the forces which he had destined to the relief of Regnier, who after the loss of his capital was compelled to quit Italy, and to retire into Provence.¹⁰ Eugenius seeing Alfonso thus firmly established on the Neapolitan throne, not only agreed to terms of pacification with him, but endeavoured to procure his assistance in depriving their common enemy of the dominion of the Marca. The Florentines, who had constantly entertained very friendly dispositions towards Sforza, openly interposed to counteract the measures which Eugenius had adopted to expel their favourite general from the territories of the church. This political difference gave rise to a coolness between Eugenius and the administrators of the Tuscan government, in consequence of which the pontiff determined to quit the city of Florence, and to repair to Rome. He accordingly set out on his journey on the seventh of March, 1443, and on the ensuing day he arrived at Siena, in which city he continued to reside till the month of September.¹¹

Soon after the pontiff’s arrival in Siena, his court was deprived of an illustrious member, by the death of Nicolao Albergato, cardinal of Santa Croce.¹² In this event Poggio was deeply interested, as that eminent ecclesiastic, who was distinguished by the liberal patronage of learned men, had long honoured him with his affectionate esteem. In grateful respect for the memory of his deceased friend, Poggio undertook to record his virtues in a funeral eulogium. From this document it appears, that Nicolao Albergato was a native of Bologna, the descendant of an honourable family. At an early age he dedicated himself to the study of civil law, in which he made a considerable proficiency. But when he had attained to years of maturity, his religious zeal induced him to bid farewell to the cares of the world, and to enter into the monastic fraternity of the Carthusians. So exemplary was his observance of the severe rules of this strict order, that, soon after his admission into it, he was appointed to the office of superior. The fame of his austerity, his prudence and discretion, having reached his native place, on the occurrence of a vacancy in the episcopal throne of Bologna, his fellow citizens unanimously invited him to preside over their spiritual affairs. It was not without considerable reluctance that he undertook this arduous office, by the discharge of the duties of which he, however, confirmed and increased his reputation. Exerting his utmost endeavours to restrain the licentiousness of the clergy, he studiously set his brethren an example of the most decorous 361 correctness of manners, and of the utmost purity of moral conduct. His charity was diffusive, but discriminating. He assiduously sought for the children of distress, who were induced by the ingenuous emotions of shame to hide their poverty in uncomplaining retirement, and he secretly relieved their wants. His patriarchal virtues attracted the notice of Martin V., who without any solicitation on his part raised him to the dignity of cardinal. After his advancement to this high honour, he was employed by that pontiff and by his successor Eugenius IV. in various negotiations of the greatest importance, in the conduct of which he evinced a degree of skill in the transaction of business, which would have done honour to one who had been from his early youth versed in the active concerns of life. His latter years were years of pain, occasioned by the pangs of an excruciating disease, which he bore with the most exemplary patience, and from which he was relieved by the welcome hand of death, in the sixty-eighth year of his age.¹³

Had the cardinal of Santa Croce been rendered illustrious by no other circumstance, his patronage of Tommaso da Sarzana, who under the appellation of Nicolas V. became one of the brightest ornaments of the pontificate, would have been in itself sufficient to secure to him the praises of posterity. Tommaso was the son of Bartolomeo dei Parentucelli, 362 a professor of arts and of medicine in the city of Pisa. His mother Andreola was a native of Sarzana. He had scarcely attained to the age of seven years, when he experienced an irreparable misfortune in the death of his father. In consequence of this event Andreola removed from Pisa to Sarzana, where she soon consoled herself for the loss of Bartolomeo, in the arms of a second husband. This new connexion was rendered unhappy by the illiberality of her spouse, who looked upon his step-son with a jealous eye, and embittered the days of the unoffending youth, by the harshness of his behaviour towards him. This unfortunate circumstance rendered Andreola very anxious concerning the future destination of her son, which, however, she flattered herself was at length fixed by supernatural interposition. — When Tommaso was about ten years of age he was seized by the plague, by which dreadful malady he was soon reduced to the last extremity. Exhausted with fatigue, occasioned by her unremitting attendance upon her favourite child, Andreola sunk into a disturbed slumber, during the continuance of which an angel seemed to appear before her, and to promise that the object of her care should recover from his disease, if she would promise to dedicate to the priesthood the life which, for this high purpose alone, the mercy of God would vouchsafe to spare. Waking from her dream, Andreola made a solemn vow that she would fulfil the direction of the heavenly messenger — and her child recovered. In pursuance of her sacred engagement, when Tommaso had attained the age of twelve years, she sent him to commence his studies at Bologna. The rigid moroseness of her husband, however, would not permit her to 363 furnish the youthful student with any means of supporting himself. At this feeble age, therefore, the future pontiff was banished from an uncomfortable home, and sent forth into the wide world, with no resources but his genius, his virtues, and the generosity of the benevolent. These apparently inauspicious circumstances called into exertion an energy of mind which cannot be too highly applauded. For the space of six years Tommaso applied himself to his studies with astonishing diligence, and soon made considerable progress in various departments of knowledge. When he had attained his eighteenth year, his literary reputation induced two eminent citizens of Florence to invite him to undertake the education of their children. This invitation Tommaso readily accepted; and from his eighteenth to his twenty-second year, he was engaged in the laborious employment of initiating his pupils in the rudiments of learning. Having at the end of four years from the time of his arrival in Florence, by strict economy, accumulated a sum of money, which he deemed sufficient to enable him to prosecute his studies with advantage, he returned to Bologna. His literary accomplishments had now gained him the countenance of several respectable friends, at whose recommendation he was admitted into the family of Nicolao Albergato, who was then the bishop of that city. By his prudence and good conduct he gained the esteem of his patron, who soon promoted him to the stewardship of his household. In the midst of the multifarious employments of this office, Tommaso found leisure to fathom the depths of scholastic theology. When he had attained the age of 364 five-and-twenty, in discharge of his mother’s vow, he enrolled himself in the priesthood. He continued to live in the family of Nicolao Albergato for the space of twenty years, at the end of which period the death of that prelate obliged him to seek a new patron. His well-known virtues soon obtained for him the countenance and support of Gerardo d’Andriani, cardinal of Santa Maria Transtevere. In the suite of this dignitary he accompanied Eugenius to Rome, to which city the papal court was transferred on the twenty-eighth of September, 1443. He had not long resided in the pontifical capital before he was distinguished by the favour of Eugenius, who on the death of his second protector took him into his service, and appointed him subdeacon of the apostolic see, and soon afterwards promoted him to the honourable office of vice-chamberlain.

During his attendance upon the pontiff at Bologna Poggio enjoyed frequent opportunities of becoming thoroughly acquainted with the singular merits of Tommaso, whose proficiency in literature and ingenuous manners had some years before engaged his esteem, and conciliated his affection. Nor was Tommaso insensible of the good qualities of Poggio. A memorial of the mutual regard which subsisted between these able scholars, exists in the dedication of a Dialogue On the Unhappiness of Princes, which Poggio published in the year 1440, and which he inscribed to his friend before his virtues had been brought forward to 365 polite observation by his distinguished honour and great emolument. In this dedication Poggio notices the common error of men, who are so much struck with the pomp and grandeur of the great, that they take it for granted, that power and magnificence confer on their possessors the gift of true felicity. He observes, however, that those who rise above the level of vulgar intellect ought to be convinced that happiness does not depend upon the external blessings of fortune, but that it is the meed of virtuous dispositions. He professes that it is his object to persuade men of this truth; and remarks that a work which is intended to promote this happy end, may with the strictest propriety be addressed to an ecclesiastic, who in the whole course of his conduct has demonstrated, that he has studied to be virtuous, rather than to be rich or great.¹⁴

After this preface, Poggio proceeds to state, that in the summer of the year in which he followed Eugenius IV. to Florence, to which city the pontiff was banished by the fury of the Roman populace, he happened to pay a visit to Niccolo Niccoli, whose house was the common resort of the learned. Here he found Carlo Aretino and Cosmo de’ Medici, with whom he entered into conversation on the politics of Italy. After having recounted to his friends the hardships which he had lately suffered when he was taken captive by the soldiers of Piccinino, he complained 366 of the unsettled life which he led in consequence of his attendance upon the Roman court, which in the course of thirty-four years that had elapsed since his admission into the pontifical chancery, had never continued for two years together in the same place. On this Carlo Aretino remarked, that Poggio was discontented with a situation which the generality of men regard as an object of envy, since the pontiffs and their superior servants are usually deemed masters of every circumstance necessary to the insurance of a happy life. In consequence of this observation Niccolo Niccoli gave it as his opinion, that whatever advantages the attendants and courtiers of great potentates may derive from the control which they acquire over public affairs, princes themselves lead a life of anxiety and care, and endure all the inconveniences, whilst others reap all the benefits of empire. Such is the introduction to the Dialogue On the Unhappiness of Princes, in the body of which Niccolo Niccoli is represented as detailing the miseries of exalted rank. On this copious subject he dilates at considerable length, proving from history that the best princes are liable to the bitterest woes incident to human nature. Gaining courage as he proceeds, he attempts to demonstrate that eminence of station is unfriendly to virtue. Examining the conduct of the most renowned chieftains, both monarchs and demagogues, who have rendered themselves conspicuous in the annals of the world, he impeaches them of avarice, cruelty, intemperance, pride, and unbridled ambition; and appeals to his auditors, whether men who are thus enslaved by their passions, can possibly be deemed happy. Arguing upon the position, that man is the creature 367 of the circumstances in which he is placed, he maintains, that the possession of uncontrolled authority betrays the powerful into vice, inasmuch as it frees them from those salutary restraints which are necessary to the confirmation of good principles. Hence, he observes, it frequently happens, that men who have adorned a private station by their virtues have become the disgrace of human nature when they have been raised to the summit of power.

From this train of argument Niccolo draws the conclusion, that as happiness seems to be banished from the palaces of the great, if she resides any where on earth, she must be found in the abodes of private individuals, who have the wisdom to set bounds to their desires, and to dedicate themselves to the cultivation of their intellectual powers. The conduct of these men he proposes as an object of imitation, and exhorts his friends to the study of those principles of philosophy which will render them happy in themselves, and fearless of the power, and independent of the favours of the great.¹⁵

Such is the tenor of the Dialogue On the Unhappiness of Princes, in which Poggio dwells with so much energy on the vices of exalted rank, that it may reasonably be suspected that resentment and indignation had at least as much influence in its composition as the suggestions of philosophy. In perusing this work, the reader is perpetually led to recollect, that its author was a citizen of a 368 proud republic, and a zealot in the cause of learning. His democratic asperity bursts forth in copious enumerations of the follies and vices of sovereign princes. His literary spleen is discernible in the sarcastic observations which he introduces by the medium of Niccolo Niccoli, on the indifference with which the rulers of Italy regarded his researches after the lost works of the writers of antiquity; in the detail which he gives of the neglect and scorn which Dante, Petarca, and Bocaccio experienced from the great men of their times; and in the general observations which he makes upon the contempt with which mighty potentates too frequently regard the labours of the learned. The effusions of moroseness which occur in this dialogue are, however, interspersed with precepts of sound morality, and the historic details with which it abounds are at once entertaining and instructive. To which it may be added, that Poggio has exhibited in this composition a striking, and in all probability a correct delineation of the temper and manners of the splenetic, but sagacious disputant Niccolo Niccoli.¹⁶

This dialogue was not well calculated to conciliate the favour of sovereign princes. But the patronage of the great was not the object of its author’s wishes. It 369 was sufficient for Poggio that it was received with approbation by the learned, and that it secured to him the esteem of Tommaso da Sarzana, and other private individuals, whose kind regard might compensate the depredations made amongst his comforts by the ravages of death. For he was now arrived at that period of life in which man is generally called to experience the severest of trials, in being doomed to survive his friends. He had already lamented the death of Niccolo Niccoli. He had attended, a mournful assistant at the funeral of Lorenzo de’ Medici. Leonardo Aretino was the only associate of his early studies, who was left to sympathize with him in the recollection of their juvenile pleasures. In the strength of Leonardo’s constitution, Poggio fondly hoped that he had an assurance, that the happiness which he derived from his friendly attachment would be prolonged to the close of his own mortal career. But in the commencement of the year 1444, a violent disease suddenly bereft him of the sole surviving companion of his youthful years. In Leonardo he lost not only a kind, but also a powerful friend. Soon after that accomplished scholar had fixed his residence in Florence, he was called by the favour of the people to fill some of the most important offices of the state. By his faithful discharge of the duties of these offices he acquired such a high degree of popularity, that he was at length promoted to the chief magistracy of the Florentine republic.

So great was the estimation in which he was held by his fellow-citizens, that when his death was announced, the administrators of the government charged three members 370 of the council of ten to conduct his funeral rites with the most solemn magnificence at the public expense.¹⁷ In order to express in the most signal manner their respect for the memory of the deceased, they also determined publicly to decorate his remains with a laurel crown. The rare occurrence of this testimony of honour (of the conferring of which only three instances had hitherto occurred in the long series of the Florentine annals)¹⁸ rendered it the more illustrious. In pursuance of the orders of the magistrates, the body of Leonardo arrayed in silken robes was carried in an open coffin to the public square of the city. On his breast was laid, as a memorial of his patriotism, his history of the Florentine Republic. The funeral procession was attended by all the officers of state, except the Gonfaloniere, by the embassadors of foreign princes who happened at this time to reside in Florence, by a considerable number of learned men, and by an immense concourse of the citizens, who were not more attracted by the novelty of the ceremony, than by their respectful remembrance of the virtues of Leonardo. In the presence of this august assembly Gianozzo Manetti advanced to the head of the bier, and there pronounced a funeral oration in praise of the deceased, towards the conclusion of which he fulfilled the decree of the magistracy, by crowning him with the laurel wreath. The friends of Leonardo whose judgment was enlightened by the principles 371 of true taste, must have lamented that the task of celebrating his virtues was delegated to Gianozzo Manetti. The speech which he pronounced on this occasion is a most miserable composition, abounding in puerilities, vulgar in its style, irrelevant in its topics, and most tediously diffuse.¹⁹ It is highly probably, that the vexation experienced by 372 Poggio, on seeing the memory of his beloved friend thus disgraced by the folly of his panegyrist, induced him to 373 endeavour to supersede the wretched effusion of Gianozzo by a composition more worthy of the lamented subject of the 374 public grief. However this may be, certain it is, that the funeral oration which he published on this melancholy occasion 375 affords a striking contrast to that which wearied the ears of the learned men who attended the obsequies of Leonardo. It is at once dignified and pathetic. Lucid in its arrangement, and well proportioned in the distribution of its parts, it is a monument of the sound judgment of its author. The account which it contains of the life and writings of Leonardo is succinct and clear. In his delineation of the moral portraiture of that extraordinary man, Poggio evinces a distinctness of perception, and an accuracy of discrimination, which are highly honourable to his understanding; whilst the delicacy with which he softens down the faulty features of Leonardo’s character, attests to the warmth of his affection for the beloved depository of his most secret thoughts.²⁰

Leonardo Aretino was perhaps the ablest scholar of his age. He took the lead amongst the industrious students who unlocked the secret treasures of literature by the translation of the works of the Grecian authors. His Latin style is less encumbered with faults than that of any of his contemporaries. Æneas Sylvius indeed declared it as his opinion, that next to Lactantius he approached the nearest of any of the later writers to the elegance of Cicero. The 376 compositions of that celebrated orator do not, however, seem to have been adopted by Leonardo as his model. At least he did not in his writings attain the copious fluency, or the graceful ease of diction which distinguish the works of Cicero. But the luminous distinctness of his periods entitles him to no small commendation. His sentences are never embarrassed or confused. He conveys his meaning in few words, and does not fatigue his readers by unreasonably dwelling upon his topics, or by repeating the same idea in varied forms of expression. Hence, if his language is not polished to an exquisite smoothness, it is sufficiently precise, and its deficiency in melody is compensated by its strength.

At his outset in life, Leonardo had to struggle with the embarrassments incident to a very contracted fortune, and was compelled by necessity to practise the strictest economy. By the liberality of John XXII. however, he acquired an increase of property which eventually became the foundation of a very ample fortune. As man is the slave of habit, he retained, in the midst of abundance, the attention to the minutiæ of expence which was a duty imperiously incumbent upon him in the days of his poverty; and his prudent exactitude sometimes approached the confines of avarice.²¹ He was also impatient in his temper, and too apt to take offence.²² The following anecdote however shews, that if 377 he was easily excited to anger, he had the good sense to be soon convinced of his error, and the ingenuousness of spirit to confess it. Having engaged in a literary discussion with Gianozzo Manetti, he was so exasperated by observing that the bye-standers thought him worsted in argument, that he vented his spleen in outrageous expressions against his antagonist. On the following morning, however, by break of day, he went to the house of Gianozzo, who expressed his surprise, that a person of Leonardo’s dignity should condescend to honour him so far as to pay him an unsolicited visit. On this Leonardo requested that Gianozzo would favour him with a private conference. Gianozzo accordingly attended him to the banks of the Arno, when Leonardo thus apologized for the warmth of his temper. — “Yesterday I did you great injustice; but I soon began to suffer punishment for my offence; for I have not closed my eyes during the whole night; and I could not rest till I had made you a confession of my fault.”²³ The man who by the voluntary acknowledgment of an error could thus frankly throw himself upon the generosity of one whom he had offended, must have possessed in his own mind a fund of honour and probity. The failings of Leonardo were indeed amply counterbalanced by his strict integrity, his guarded temperance, his faithful discharge of his public duties, and his zeal in the cause of literature. This being the case, it was with justice that Poggio prided himself upon the intimate friendship which subsisted between 378 himself and this truly respectable character — a friendship which was not once interrupted during the varied transactions of a period of forty-four years.

The remains of Leonardo were interred in the church of Santa Croce. On a marble monument erected to his memory the following inscription is still legible.

POSTQVAM LEONARDVS E VITA MIGRAVIT
HISTORIA LVGET ELOQUENTIA MVTA EST
FERTVRQVE MVSAS TVM GRAECAS TVM LATINAS
LACRIMAS TENERE NON POTVISSE.

Leonardo was succeeded in the chancellorship of the Florentine republic by Carlo Marsuppini, more commonly known by the surname of Aretino, a scholar no less distinguished by his literary acquirements than by the dignity of his family. Carlo was the son of Gregorio Marsuppini, a nobleman of Arezzo, a doctor of laws, and secretary to Charles VI., king of France, by whom he was appointed to the government of Genoa. Educated under the auspices of John of Ravenna, he attained to such a proficiency in learning, that in delivering lectures on rhetoric he became the successful rival of Filelfo in the university of Florence. His literary reputation recommended him to the notice of Eugenius IV., who, in the year 1441, conferred upon him the office of apostolic secretary. This office he continued to hold till the voice of his fellow-citizens summoned him to the discharge of more important duties.²⁴ The friendly 379 intercourse which had taken place between him and Poggio, in consequence of their being natives of the same place, had been strengthened by their common hostility against Francesco Filelfo. Nor was it interrupted by their separation. Whenever Poggio found leisure to visit the Tuscan capital, he experienced a welcome reception from his ancient associate, in whose instructive converse he found the most pleasing relaxation from the toils of his office, and from the wearisomeness occasionally attendant upon the diligent prosecution of literary studies.”²⁵

Whilst Poggio was lamenting the irreparable loss which he had sustained by the death of Leonardo Aretino, he received intelligence of the sad catastrophe of his old friend and correspondent, Julian, cardinal of St. Angelo. This zealous churchman, who had been dispatched into Hungary, vested with the office of pontifical legate, had heard with indignation that Ladislaus VI., king of that country, had concluded a truce for ten years with Amurath, emperor of the Turks; and strenuously insisting upon detestable doctrine, that no faith is to be kept with infidels, he had persuaded the Hungarian monarch treacherously to attack the Mussulmans, who, in reliance on the treaty which had been so lately concluded, had withdrawn their forces into Asia. Justly irritated by this act of perfidy, the Turks rushed to arms, and gave battle to the Hungarians at Varna, a town in Bulgaria. The issue of the 380 day was most disastrous to the Christians. Ladislaus fell in the battle, his forces were routed, and a body of the fugitives, in the course of their flight, overtaking the unfortunate Julian, whose pernicious counsels they considered as the original cause of their present calamities, fell upon him, and despatched him with a multitude of wounds.²⁶

The prejudices which Poggio entertained against the professors of Mohamedism, or the partiality of his friendship for the cardinal, rendered him insensible of the atrocity of the crime by which that turbulent ecclesiastic had provoked his fate. From the fragments of an oration which he composed on the occasion of the funeral of Julian, and which are preserved by Mehus in his life of Ambrogio Traversari,²⁷ he seems to have considered his character as a subject of unqualified praise. The birth of Julian was obscure. He prosecuted his studies, first at Perugia, afterwards at Bologna, and lastly at Padua. When his education was finished, he entered into the household of the cardinal of Piacenza, in whose suite he travelled into Bohemia, where he signalized himself by his acuteness in theological disputation, and by the assiduity of his labours for the conversion of heretics. On his return to Italy, Martin V. rewarded his zeal in the defence of the orthodox faith, by appointing him to the office of auditor of the chamber. He was afterwards sent in quality of nuncio into France 381 and England. Making mention of his residence in the latter country, Poggio asserts that he did there what no one had ever ventured to do before him: in a numerous assembly of prelates, he uttered a vehement invective against the statutes which had been enacted in the parliament, with a view of restraining the authority of the court of Rome, and admonished his auditors to yield obedience to the pope, rather than to the laws of their country: “a proceeding,” says Poggio, “attended with great peril in a land the inhabitants of which were not accustomed to such boldness.” This temerity procured Julian the gift of a cardinal’s hat, which was bestowed upon him by Martin V., immediately on his return from England.²⁸ His second mission into Bohemia, his pertinacity in summoning and presiding over the council of Basil, and his conversion to the interests of Eugenius, have already passed in review in the course of the present work.

The steady forbearance of Julian in refusing to enrich himself by the acceptance of presents, which Poggio records with enthusiastic applause, is a legitimate subject of commendation — but his zeal in the course of proselytism is an indication of a narrow mind; and the treachery which signalized that last official act of his life fixes on his memory an indelible stain. So base indeed was his conduct on this occasion, that his miserable end may be pointed out as an instance of the signal vengeance which awaits the perfidious violators of solemn treaties.

FOOTNOTES

¹  Poggii Historia Flor. p. 339. — Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 185. — Lorenzo Valla, in his Antidotus, charges Poggio with the infamous villainy of forging the commission, by virtue of which Vitelleschi was arrested; and asserts, that he was protected from the punishment due to his crime, by the power of the statesmen who had bribed him to commit so atrocious a deed. It is not, however, very probably, that any interest could have screened from punishment a secretary who stood convicted of so heinous an offence as counterfeiting the signature of a sovereign prince, for the purpose of committing murder: still less, that a subordinate officer who had taken such a wicked liberty, should have been continued in his place. — Laurentii Vallæ Antidotus in Poggium, p. 109.

²  Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 186.

³   Muratori Annali, tom. ix. p. 199.

⁴  Poggii Opera, p. 344.

⁵  Poggii Epistolæ tom. lvii. ep. liv.

¹⁸  Janotii Manetti pro Leonardo Aretino Oratio Funebris, Epistolis Leonardi a Meho editis præfixa, p. cxiv.

¹⁹  The following analysis of Gianozzo’s oration will be sufficient to prove, that the foregoing censure is by no means too severe. — He began his address by informing his auditors, that if the immortal Muses (“immortales Musæ divinæquo Camœnæ) could have deemed it compatible with their dignity to make an oration, either in the Latin or the Greek language, or to weep in public, they would not have delegated to another the task of paying the last honours to Leonardo; but since this exhibition of their grief was contrary to the usual habits of the Nine, the administrators of the Tuscan government had determined that the virtues of the deceased should be celebrated by one of his colleagues. He then with due modesty declared, that their choice having been directed to himself, not on account of his talents, but in consequence of his filling one of the principle offices of the state, he had prepared himself for the occasion, not to his own satisfaction, but as well as the brevity of the time allowed him for the life of Leonardo. When he arrived at that period of it in which the deceased became one of the public functionaries of the state, he detailed at some length the history of the Florentine republic during the time of Leonardo’s possession of civic and military offices. In the course of his minute detail of Leonardo’s literary labours, he contrived to introduce brief notices of a considerable number of Greek and Latin writers, and enlarged particularly upon the merits of Livy and Cicero, to each of whom he represented Leonardo as superior, since he not only translated Greek authors into Latin, after the example of the latter, but also wrote histories, in emulation of the former, thus uniting the excellencies of both. After this, preparing to perform the ceremony of coronation, he proved by historical evidence, that the custom of crowning emperors and poets was very ancient. Descanting on the various kinds of military crowns, he informed his auditors, that by the frequent perusal of ancient writers, he had ascertained that of these tokens of honour there were eight different species, namely, the Corona Obsidionalis, Civica, Muralis, Castrensis, Navalis, Ovalis, quasi Triumphalis, and Triumphalis. The description of the materials of which these crowns were severally made, the occasions on which they were bestowed, the enumeration of divers eminent commanders whose brows they had adorned, led the errant orator into a further digression, from which he did not return before he had detailed at great length the reasons why poets should be crowned with laurel, in preference to ivy, palm, olive, or any other species of evergreen. This dissertation on crowns occupies the space of five quarto pages, closely printed in small type. Having exhausted this topic, Gianozzo proceeded to prove, that Leonardo was a poet, This led him to enumerate most of the Greek and Latin poets, and to explain the derivation of the term poeta. In treating on this subject, he announces the marvellous discovery, that he who wishes to be a poet, must write excellent poems! “Itaque si quis poeta esse cuperet quædam egregia poemata scribat oportet.” Having endeavoured by sundry truly original arguments to vindicate Leonardo’s claim to the poetic wreath, he closed his harangue by the performance of the prescribed ceremony.

The following list of such of the voluminous works of Leonardo Aretino as have been committed to the press, is extracted from the enumeration of his writings, subjoined to his life by Laurentius Mehus.

1.  Historiarum Florentini Populi, Lib. xii. Per Sixtum Brunonem Argent. 1610. fol. Ejusdem traductio Italica a Donato Acciajolo Venetiis, 1473, Florentiæ, 1492. Venetiis, 1560. Ibidem a Sansovino, 1561.

2.  Leonardi Arretini de Temporibus suis Libri duo. Venetiis, 1475 and 1485. Lugduni apud Gryphium, 1539. Argentorati per Sixtum Brunonem, 1610. It was reprinted by Muratori, in the 19th vol. of his Rer. Italic. Script.

3.  De bella Italico adversus Gothos gesto Libri Quatuor. This work is founded upon the Greek history of Procopius. It has ben edited in the following places: Fulginii per Emilianum Fulginatum, 1470. Venetiis per Nicolaum Jenson, 1471. Basileæ, 1531. Parisiis, 1534. It was also printed together with Zosimus, Basileæ, 1576, and with Agathias and Jornandes, Lugd, 1594. Bellovisiis, 1537.

4.  De Bello Punico Libri tres. Brixiæ, 1498. Paris, apud Ascensium, 1512. Augustæ Vindel., 1537.

5.  Commentarium Rerum Græcarum was edited by Gryphius, Lug. 1539. Lipsiæ a Joach. Camerario, 1546. Argentorati, 1610, per Sixtum Brunonem. It was also reprinted by Gronovius in the 6th volume of his Thes. Antiq. Græ.

6.  Isagogicon moralis disciplinæ ad Galeotum Riacasolanum. This work also bears the title of Dialogus de moribus ad Galeotum, &c. and under the title of Aristoteles de moribus ad Eudemum Latine Leonardo Arretino interprete, it was printed, Lovanii, 1475. Paris, justa de la Mare, 1512. Ibidem, 1516. per Ascensium.

7.  Ad Petrum Histrium dialogorum Libri. Basileæ, 1536, per Henricum Petri, &c. Paris, 1642.

8.  De studiis et litteris ad illustrem Dominam Batistam de Malatestis. Argentinæ, 1512. It was also published by Gabriel Naudæus in 1642, and it composes part of a book entitled Hugonis Grotii et aliorum dissertationes de studiis bene instituendis, Amstelœd. 1645. It was also printed by Thomas Crenius in his Meth. Stud. tom. i. Num. x. Rotterod. 1692.

9.  Laudatio l. V. Johannis Strozæ Equitis Florentini, was published by Baluzzi in the third volume of his Miscellanies.

10.  Imperatoris Heliogabali Oratio protreptica, sive adhortatoria ad Meretrices, published by Aldus Manutius in his Historiæ Augustæ Scriptores Minores, Venetiis, 1519.

11.  Oratio in Hypocritas was printed in the Fasciculus of Ortuinus Gratius Coloniæ, 1535. Lugd. 1679. Londini, 1691. It was again published in the year 1699, from a copy in the possession of Antonio Magliabecchi.

12.  La Vita di Dante e i costumi e studj di Messer Francesco Petrarca. The life of Petrarca was edited by Philippus Tomasinus in his Petrarca Redivivus, printed at Padua, 1650. It was again printed, together with the life of Dante, an.

13.  Magni Basilii Liber per Leonardum Arretinum de Græco in Latinum translatus — Brixiæ, 1485, per Boninum de Boninis — Bononiæ, 1497. Argentorati, 1507. Paris, 1508. Romæ, 1594.

14.  Marci Antonii Vita.