February 22, 1498, Pigna, the Ferrarese ambassador in Venice, reported
that he had heard that Caesar had caused the Duke of Gandia’s death.
This was more than eight months after the crime; it was the first time
the charge had definitely been made; several of the Orsini were then
in Venice, and they would undoubtedly have spread the rumour, as the
Pope had endeavoured to cast suspicion on them. If they, however, had
brought about the Duke’s destruction, they would probably have gloried
in the deed.
The accusation once made against Caesar, it was repeated by Paolo
Capello in a relation of September 25, 1500, and also in the famous
letter to Silvio Savelli of November 15, 1501. This same Capello,
Venetian ambassador, wrote: “Every night the bodies of four or five
murdered men, bishops, prelates, and so forth, are found in Rome.”
Under Alexander VI. crime held high carnival in the Eternal City, as it
had under his predecessors.
The Pope did not receive Caesar--at least, publicly--for five weeks,
and the cardinal busied himself with preparations for his journey to
Naples to crown the King.
His Holiness seemed to have changed; he was constantly at work with
the six cardinals he had appointed to draw up plans for the reform
of the Church, and he declared in consistory that henceforth family
considerations and projects would have no weight with him.
At last he gave up trying to discover the murderer, and the conviction
became general that he, better than all others, knew who the guilty one
was. Alessandro Braccio, the Florentine orator in Rome, said in one
of his dispatches: “Whoever managed the affair had a good head, and
courage--and every one admits that he was a ‘master.’” This peculiar
attitude toward crime, which is merely a form of the unreasoned and
immoral admiration for success regardless of means still everywhere
prevalent, was especially noticeable in Italy during the Renaissance.
Machiavelli well illustrates it in his remarks on Giovanpagolo Baglioni
in connection with the expedition of Pope Julius II. to Perugia in
1505, for the express purpose of driving the Baglioni from their
domain. Although the Pope had a considerable army he entered the city
with only a small guard, in spite of the fact that Giovanpagolo had a
large force--and the “prudent men who were with the Pope commented on
his rashness and on the cowardice of Giovanpagolo, who might have won
eternal glory and at the same time have destroyed his enemy and secured
vast spoils, for the Pope was accompanied by all the cardinals with
their rich belongings. His restraint was not due to any goodness or
conscience, for he was a man who, in order to reign, had murdered many
of his kinsmen; and it was concluded that there are men who do not know
how to be great criminals or perfectly good--for a crime may possess
greatness and be to some extent glorious [_generosa_]. Therefore
Giovanpagolo did not know how--or better, did not dare--when he had
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account