CHAPTER XI.

Personality and Manner of Life of Leo X. —HIS Finances and Court.

 

The outward appearance of the Pope who gave his name to the age of the Renaissance, with its worship of the beautiful, was far from attractive in itself. Leo X was of more than middle height, broad-shouldered and very fat, though, as Giovio declares he was rather bloated than actually stout His unusually large head and full face, set on a short neck, were out of proportion with the rest of his body. His legs were in themselves well shaped, but too short for the frame they supported. The only beautiful things about him were his well-cared-for and snow-white hands, which he took pleasure in adorning with costly rings. The want of charm of his flabby, fat face was increased by his weak and prominent eyes, and their unusually short sight, which was an inherited family defect. This, in spite of his efforts to dispense with it, compelled him to make frequent use of a magnifying glass. A drawing in the possession of the Duke of Devonshire, attributed to Sebastiano del Piombo, reproduces the coarse features of Leo X.with lifelike faithfulness.

The unpleasant impression at first produced by his exterior almost entirely disappeared after further inter course. The Pope’s musical and pleasant voice, his intelligent way of expressing himself, and his manner, which, for all its majesty, was friendly and full of charm, his lively interest in science and art, and his unaffected delight with the creations laid at his feet by the highly-cultivated men of the age, could not fail to captivate all who came in contact with him. Raphael has reproduced this side of his character in his famous portrait of his patron in the Pitti Gallery. This wonderful portrait, in spite of Raphael has represented the Pope in his simple morning dress with the full red cape (mozetta), and the cap on his head which is known as the camauro. He is sitting at ease in an elbow-chair before a table, on the red damask cover of which there stands a richly-chased bell, with an open manuscript illuminated with miniatures. In his left hand,  the intellectual friend of literature and art holds a magnifying glass, through which he has been examining the paintings, and seems anxious to have the opinion of Cardinals Medici and Rossi, who are standing beside him. By just these few touches—the glass, the illuminated book, and the beautiful bell—the Pope's characteristics as a lover of beauty and patron of art are placed on the canvas. The head, large out of proportion, the heavy expression, the flabby, beardless face, the furrowed forehead and the double-chin, are all truthfully reproduced. The expression of the countenance is pre-eminently that of gentleness and kindliness, united to the quiet dignity of a self-conscious ruler and shrewd, calculating diplomatist. The expression of the persuasive mouth, round which there plays a smile, is inimitable, and illustrates to a marvellous degree what Giovio says about the refined and pleasant way of speaking peculiar to Leo X, and which could be quite as serious in important matters as it was full of a delightful ease, a gay humour, and the greatest courtesy imaginable in the ordinary affairs of life.

Leo’s cheerfulness of temper, which never failed him, even when suffering from his constitutional ailments, and especially the fistula trouble, is extolled by all contemporary writers; though, added to his infirmities, it no doubt increased the dilatoriness and slowness of action which were such characteristic features of the Medici Pope. The discomforts suffered by Leo, especially during long ecclesiastical functions, by reason of his corpulence, have been testified by his Master of Ceremonies, who describes how, on such occasions, he saw him keep wiping the perspiration from his face and hands.

The observant Venetian Ambassador, Marino Giorgi, has drawn Leo’s character most admirably with a few strokes of the pen. “The Pope”, he says in his final report of March, 1517, “is a very good-tempered and generous man, who shrinks from severe exertion and desires peace. He would never be drawn into war unless entangled in it by his adherents. He loves the sciences and is well versed in literature and canon law; but above all else he is an excellent musician”. “He is learned and the friend of literature”, is Marco Minio’s account, written some three years later ; “he fulfils his religious duties conscientiously, but he will live and enjoy life. He takes especial pleasure in the chase”.

Marino Giorgi’s narrative also contains the report of Leo having said to his brother Giuliano, soon after his election, “Let us enjoy the Papacy, since God has given it to us”. These words have been too readily repeated and accepted by authors who aspire after what is sensational ; but they rest on no authentic tradition. The Ambassador who records them did not take up his post in Rome till two years after the election; therefore he is not a contemporary witness: furthermore, as a Venetian, he was by no means likely to speak impartially of Leo X. Evidently Giorgi is merely repeating an anecdote of the ante-chamber. Other writers, who could speak with even less authority, give a different version of the words ; on the other hand, Giovio and also Guicciardini scorn to take up or spread the reported words. However questionable it may be whether Leo X ever did say those words, there is no doubt that they are descriptive of his desire for pleasure, and of the aspect in which he regarded his great position. Without suspecting the dangers which menaced the Papacy from within, he regarded himself only as the fortunate heir of the achievements of his powerful predecessor and as secure in his inheritance. He was zealously determined to maintain the strong position of the Holy See as he found it ; but, for the rest, he gave himself without reserve to the intellectual enjoyments which the newly-opened world of the ancients, and the highly-developed culture of his own age, offered to him with such bountiful fulness.

The masterpieces of antiquity and the marvellous creations of contemporary artists interested him no less than did the thrilling accounts which reached him from the newly-discovered countries, ”he elegant discourses and poems of the humanists, the frivolous comedies of a Bibbiena or an Ariosto, the bewitching compositions of distinguished musicians, the witty sallies of his improvisatori and the coarse jests of the buffoons, who were at that time the welcome entertainment of almost every court. Everything unpleasant was removed as far as possible from him, for an insatiable search for pleasure was a leading principle in his existence. This was a family characteristic, and with him it took shape from the surroundings in which he found himself.

Music and the drama, art and poetry, the intellectual, witty, and often coarse conversation of the courtiers, were enjoyed by the Pope with the unembarrassed light-hearted­ness of a spoilt child of the world. In all this he was a true son of that age of ferment, in which good and evil were mingled in the most extraordinary manner. His character reveals a peculiar combination of glorious and inglorious qualities, but what was light, gay, and infinitely versatile was far from being balanced by earnestness, depth, and originality. The rays of the Renaissance were focussed on him, and from them he borrowed glory, and by them irresistibly attracted to himself men of the most diverse nationalities and characters.

The range of the finer qualities of Leo X is so evident that no one can doubt them. To these belong his high culture, his receptivity of all that was beautiful, his great gift of eloquence, the ease and gracefulness of his epistolary style, Latin as well as Italian, his happy memory, his good judgment, and, finally, the dignity, majesty, and piety which were conspicuous on all occasions in which he took part in the public worship of God.

That Leo X, in spite of the cheerful worldliness which seemed to be part of him, was conscientious in the fulfilment of all his religious duties—such as saying his Office, attending at divine worship, and observing the fasts—and that he manifested his piety on many occasions, is testified especially by his Master of Ceremonies, and also by others who by no means shrank from reporting things which were unfavourable to their master. Even the Venetian Ambassadors, who were but little inclined to be partial towards Leo, while often relating instances of his love of pleasure, are emphatic on the subject of his un­doubted piety. It was this piety which led the busy Pope to hear Mass daily in the Chapel of S. Lorenzo, painted by Fra Angelico, and made him rigidly exact in reciting his daily office. Whenever the Pope said Mass, he went first to confession. The reproach made against Leo X, that he took no interest in the more serious sciences, especially in theology, is as unfounded as the accusation that he gave utterance to infidel and free-thinking opinions. Leo X was but too often very worldly, but most certainly he was no unbeliever, even though he was not a man of deep interior religion. If he was not so ready as most of his contemporaries to consider extraordinary occurrences as miraculous, in the strict sense of the term, such sobriety of judgment on his part is only worthy of commendation.

As to the purity of the morals of Leo X, it can only be said that as a Cardinal his reputation in this respect was absolutely spotless; there is no proof that as Pope he was in any way different.

One of the most pleasing aspects of the character of Leo X is his great benevolence. There was scarcely a work of Christian charity to which he did not give his support. Monasteries and hospitals, not only in Rome but further afield, were the objects of his especial care. Disabled soldiers, poor students, pilgrims, exiles, the blind, cripples and unfortunates of every description were generously helped by him. No less than 6000 ducats were set aside annually to be spent on alms. No wonder that, whenever the Pope went out, the poor from all quarters pressed round him to receive of his bounty. These unfortunates often placed themselves in the corridor leading to the Belvedere; but it was especially when he made excursions into the country that the poor thronged his steps. He was as active in redeeming poor Christian slaves as he was in maintaining those whom the Turks in their lust of conquest had driven from their homes. The books of accounts kept during his Pontificate are full of notes of his expenditure in cases of this kind. Among those who received regular pensions, we find alongside the entries of quite simple people many names of well-known and proudly titled persons. For instance, together with the members of the unfortunate house of Aragon, we find a Catacuzeno, a Tocco di Arta, a Duke of Achaia and prince of Macedonia, and “two sons of the King of Cyprus”.

In his intercourse with others nothing could surpass Leo’s tact and amiability. He knew how to adapt the tone of his voice, the expression of his countenance, and even his attitude to the circumstances of the interview. Even when compelled to refuse a request, which he disliked doing above all things, he knew how to soften the hardness of the blow by gentle excuses and by holding out a hope that some other opportunity of meeting might arise to efface any unfavourable impression. He was indeed always too apt to promise a great deal more than he could do ; and one of his biographers attributes to this the revulsion of feeling against him which took place after his death. But whatever he had he gave away joyfully and freely, and he often said that he would gladly do more if it were in his power to do so.

And yet this same man could be very hard, especially in political matters. As in other respects, so in this, the character of Leo seems to reveal simultaneously a dual personality; two souls dwelt within him. He was quite inexorable in his rejection of all intercession on behalf of Duke Francesco Maria della Rovere. He proceeded relentlessly against Giampaolo Baglioni and the tyrants of the Marches. Even Cardinal Petrucci had to pay for his crime with his life, though the Pope showed more forbearance towards the other Cardinals who were implicated in the plot. There is no doubt that under Julius II these would not have come out of the affair with their lives.

Guicciardini’s judgment on Leo X as a politician is that he showed less good-nature and more shrewdness than had been anticipated. The old Lorenzo had early recognized this quality in him, when he remarked of his three sons, Piero, Giuliano, and Giovanni, that the first was a fool, the second good, and the third prudent.

As Pope he showed this quality to a marked degree when, at a most critical moment, and against the advice of his counsellors, he decided, in the autumn of 1515, on holding a personal interview with the victor of Marignano. It took him indeed weeks, and even months, before he could make up his mind, during which time he ceaselessly turned the matter over and over, weighed all human possibilities, and struggled with himself without being able to come to a decision. When we compare his slow, cautious, anxious premeditation, his great indecision and frequent hesitations, with the fresh, bold, grand features which marked all the dealings of the genial Julius II. a doubly unfavourable impression is produced by the methods of the Medici Pope.

More revolting are the want of straightforwardness, nay, the falseness, the double-dealing by which the policy of Leo X, as a true statesman of the Renaissance, was almost always actuated. The plan of “steering by two compasses” became the more readily a second nature to him, as he was constitutionally averse to making a final decision. Quite unabashed, he acted on the principle that, for the sake of being ready for every event, the conclusion of a treaty with one party need offer no obstacle to the conclusion of another in an opposite sense with his opponent. By a double game, unique of its kind, he succeeded in making secret treaties simultaneously with rivals such as Francis I and Charles V, the objects of which were at least quite irreconcilable with the intentions of these two princes.

In order to explain and offer some excuse for such conduct, stress has been laid with reason on the unusually difficult position in which Leo X found himself, as head of the States of the Church, between the two great powers of France and the Spanish-Hapsburg. Being much weaker than they, he tried to effect by craft what he was unable to accomplish by force. A further excuse for the Pope is to be found in the fact that double-dealing was the general mark of the policy of the age, and that French diplomacy especially worked against him by the worst methods. Nevertheless, neither the difficulties of his position, nor the circumstance that his contemporaries held everything allowable in the diplomatic warfare, could justify Leo as Pope in acting in the same way as temporal princes, to whom the most solemn engagements and most sacred protestations were no better than empty words.

The peculiar pleasure taken by Leo X in misleading, and in following crooked paths, as well as the indifference with which he made promises which could not possibly be kept, were closely connected with his desire to conceal from all alike the ultimate ends of his political dealings, so that in the after event, whatever the result, his policy could not be called in question. This quality was born and bred in him during the exile of the Medici from Florence, during which time he was taking eager part in all the plots for the restoration of his family to power. Those years of mental development had a very unfortunate in fluence on his whole character. The habit of insincerity grew on him after he was Pope, when he found himself placed between the two great European antagonistic powers, who, if the States of the Church were to be maintained as an independent middle power, had to be balanced the one against the other.

Seldom has any statesman kept his thoughts, plans, and intentions so hidden from even his most intimate friends and relatives as did Leo X, who spoke but little, and usually replied by a smile. Many years later, Aleander said that he had never met a man who understood as well as Leo did how to keep his plans secret. At first there was only one man, Cardinal Bibbiena, who was the Pope's confidant in all matters of political secrecy ; but later, Giulio de' Medici filled the same position when he was made Vice-Chancellor in March, 1517. It is very interesting to see throughout the reports of the Venetian Ambassadors, how the influence of the relative grew year by year, and drove into the background that of Bibbiena, which had at the beginning been all-powerful. Earnest, capable, moderate, and indefatigable in his work, Cardinal Giulio undertook an increasing portion of business, having as coadjutors Giberti and Nicholas von Schonberg. Cardinal Medici often acted as a salutary counterweight to the frivolity, precipitation, and love of pleasure in his master. In very important matters, such as the process against Luther, he was the real ruling spirit. The influence he exercised is shown by the immediate effect of his temporary absences from the Papal Court. It appears that Cardinal Medici was always unwilling to leave Rome ; reference is repeatedly made to his annoyance at being compelled, by urgent business, to go to Florence, or—as in 1521—to join the army as Legate. Often, as was the case in the summer of 1519, he had himself represented by his relative Cardinal Cibo.

Giulio de' Medici got on excellently with the Pope in spite of the many differences in their characters. When Leo, having lost by death nearly all his relatives, made his will in January, 1521, he made Cardinal Medici heir of all he possessed.

Those who stood at a distance from public affairs were under the impression that Leo X, being absorbed in a variety of other interests, left the actual management of his political business to Giulio. But, as a matter of fact, although, after 1517, the Cardinal held, in a certain sense, the position of Prime Minister and carried on nearly all the correspondence with the Nuncios, he had to take the Pope’s opinion on all matters of even secondary importance before despatch of business. This had been the case also with Bibbiena. Any important business with the Ambassadors of the great powers was, as a rule, carried on by the Pope in person. He would converse with them for hours together, cleverly concealing his own views while, by apparently agreeing with them, he drew out the opinions and intentions of the diplomatists with whom he was treating.

The lavish generosity of the Pope had a fateful effect on the political aims which he pursued with so much clever ness, dissimulation, and acumen ; for it soon deprived him of those means without which the most skilful statesman cannot possibly attain his object at the critical moment.

The Pope's entourage, his Court, above all his Florentine compatriots, and the whole swarm of literati, were naturally enchanted by the showers of gold which rained on them, and they exalted Leo to the skies. Being benevolent by nature, the Pope liked to make others happy as far as it lay in his power. Without troubling himself whether the recipients of his bounty were deserving and necessitous, he squandered on them the resources at his disposal. “By his pleasure in giving he showed real greatness, for all ostentation and artificial display were far from him”, as was proved by his indifference to outward ceremonial. His kind and generous nature often led him to relax the strictness of canonical precepts: but, in order to satisfy his suppliants, and not without inward protest, he granted petitions which went too far. So reluctant was he to grant some of these extravagant requests, that he appealed to the experienced but certainly not over-conscientious Cardinal Pucci to protect him against making mistakes of this sort through want of caution. Giovio, who relates this, adds that, driven by the necessities of war, and moved by his enthusiasm for art and learning, and caring more for the enrichment of others than of himself, Leo X reluctantly neglected much in the way of financial business. This, however, cannot excuse his unscrupulous and wanton extravagance.

Julius II had been an economical and skilful financier. Without burdening his subjects with new taxes, and in spite of his many wars, he had contrived to leave to his successor a considerable sum in his treasury. Leo X seems to have looked on this as inexhaustible, and with open hand squandered that which his predecessor had been at such pains to accumulate. Natural generosity, nepotism, a passionate love of art and literature together with that of magnificence and luxury, combined to devour the savings of Julius II in the short space of two years. Bibbiena, who had general charge of the finances at the beginning of Leo’s Pontificate, ought to have considered it his duty to warn and check the Pope in his expenditure; but that light-hearted Tuscan proved to be as careless about money matters as his master. Although the parsimonius Ferdinando Ponzetti, who succeeded Bibbiena as treasurer as early as the autumn of 1513, was very ingenious in devising new sources of income, he could not restore the balance in the Papal exchequer, for Leo continued to give on every side with a free hand. For instance, he gave a wedding present to his brother Giuliano to the amount of 16,000 ducats. In the spring of 1515 the Papal treasury had reached low water mark, and never after this time was Leo X freed from his financial difficulties.

The most varied methods were tried to procure money. Very early the Pope had recourse to the plan of creating new places and offices; and later on, doubtful and even reprehensible measures were resorted to. But all the devices which were tried to improve the finances were of no avail : neither ordinary nor extraordinary income sufficed in the remotest degree to meet the need. This deficiency was increased considerably by the war of Urbino, which, from the beginning, devoured enormous sums. The consequence of that unfortunate undertaking was complete financial ruin, from which the Pope tried to extricate himself by raising loans, not only from bankers, but also from private individuals, Cardinals, and members of the Curia. But all this was of as little avail as were the financial devices which the ingenious Cardinals Armellini and Pucci openly employed to procure money.

The sources upon which we can draw to ascertain the exact state of Leo’s balance-sheet are very scanty. The register of receipts and expenditure of the Apostolic Ex­chequer does not in any way suffice for an accurate statement, partly because it was imperfectly kept, and partly because there were also other financial departments. The most important of these was the Pope’s private treasury, under the control of the influential private chamberlain Giovanni Lazzaro Serapica. There exist three volumes—extending from July, 1516, to November, 1521—of accounts kept by Serapica of the privy expenditure ; all others are missing. The loss of these important account-books, to which Serapica’s register often refers, is deplorable.

Amid this debris of official sources we have to rely for essentials on the statements of the Venetian Ambassadors, which must always be accepted with reserve, and, in places, certainly set the figures too high. But, taken as a whole, the representatives of the great mercantile state were well-informed about financial matters. Their final reports for the years 1517, 1520, 1523 give a most interesting insight into the Pope’s money affairs.

Marino Giorgi, in March, 1517, reckons the state income of Leo X to have been about 420,000 ducats. Of this, 60,000 ducats came from the river tax in Rome (Ripa grande), about 33,000 from the land tax, and 8000 from the tax on wine. Spoleto, the Marches of Ancona, and the Romagna contributed about 180,000. The alum works at Tolfa, according to Giorgi's apparently exaggerated statement, brought in 40,000. The salt marshes of Cervia, in con junction with the revenues of Ravenna, brought in from 60,000 to 100,000 ducats. To these were to be added the spiritual revenues, which by their nature were subject to great fluctuations. The returns of the annates have been generally estimated at 100,000 ducats, though half of these (the first-fruits of bishoprics and abbeys) belonged to the Sacred College. The new tax of “compositions”, introduced by Sixtus IV, brought in an equal sum, but sometimes only 60,000 ducats. To this must be added the returns of saleable offices, which were considerably increased by Leo X. He added no fewer than six hundred and twelve new members to the College of the one hundred and forty-one Porzionari di Ripa founded by Julius II, whereby he gained 286,000 ducats. He added sixty members to the College of the Cubiculari and a hundred and forty to that of the Scudieri. The former paid a gross sum of 90,000 and the latter 112,000 ducats. Finally, in 1520, by the advice of Cardinal Pucci, and for the express purpose of making money to clear the debt consequent on the war of Urbino, he founded the new College of the Cavalieri di S. Pietro. Each of its four hundred and one members paid down a sum of 1000 ducats. Hereby a capital sum of 401,000 ducats was raised, bringing in interest at more than 10 per cent., which was assigned for different purposes. Besides this the Cavalieri received a number of privileges, such as enrolment in the Roman nobility, the title of Count Palatine, and the right to inspect the accounts of the Exchequer. J Purchase was invited by the bait of these privileges, though the essential importance of the office of Cavaliere consisted in the enjoyment of the interest. Like most other saleable (vacabili) offices, this institution was in reality nothing but a system of raising loans by life annuities. According to the Venetian Ambassador Gradenigo, the number of saleable offices amounted at the death of Leo X to two thousand one hundred and fifty, representing a capital of nearly three million ducats, and an annual income of 328,000 ducats for the possessors, who on an average received more than 10 per cent, for the sums they had paid to the State-

Apart from tithes, jubilees and indulgences, the number of which were multiplied to excess for this purpose, supplied huge sources of revenue. As these had sunk almost entirely into a mere financial jobbery, they caused great and justifiable scandal. The monetary stress, however, continued much as before, since the greater part of these sums did not go straight into the Papal Exchequer ; for both princes and bankers first of all assured themselves of their own very considerable share. Moreover, indulgences did not now bring in so much money as they had done formerly.

In 1517 Leo X made use of the punishment of the Cardinals implicated in Petrucci's conspiracy, to gather in enormous sums from them. He also turned to the same account the unprecedentedly numerous creation of Cardinals soon afterwards. In spite of these expedients, the need of money remained a standing evil ; for the Pope never dreamed of making economics. When his nephew Lorenzo went to France in 1518, he was fitted out in the most extravagant way. The Pope shrank from no method of gaining money, and even the highest offices were sold. The office of Camerlengo, like that of Cardinal, became a matter of purchase. Innocenzo Cibo paid 30,000, or, according to other accounts, 35,000 or 40,000 ducats for the former post, which he held for only a few months. His successor, Francesco Armellini, is said to have paid 60,000 or 70,000 ducats for the succession. But all these sums melted away as soon as they had been paid in. How could it have been otherwise with a Pope of whom Vettori says that a stone could more easily fly up into the air of itself than Leo could keep possession of a thousand ducats!

If the Venetian Ambassador, Marino Giorgi, is to be believed, 8000 ducats were spent monthly on gifts and card­playing. Forty-eight thousand ducats covered the expenses of the Papal household under Julius II; but, according to credible accounts, this sum was doubled under his successor. If we bear in mind that the whole of the Papal income was not more than from 50x3,000 to 600,000 ducats, we can see how out of proportion was the expenditure mentioned. To this there was added after 1516 the cost of the Urbino war, which devoured altogether 800,000. After this Cardinal Armellini advised the Pope to raise the price of salt; but this attempt was frustrated by the determined resistance of the inhabitants of the Romagna. Nothing more of the kind was again attempted ; in fact, taxes remained so low in the States of the Church that they really did not do more than cover the cost of their administration. Money, however, had to be procured, and loans were raised for which sometimes no less than 40 per cent, was paid.

In this way the state of finances went down-hill with ever-increasing rapidity. Debt was heaped upon debt until the tapestries of the palace, the silver plate off the table, the jewels of the tiara, and the valuable statues of the Apostles in the Papal chapel were pledged, and yet nothing could stop up the Danaids’ sieve. The troops had to wait for their pay, the University professors and artists, even of the rank of Raphael and Giuliano di Sangallo, for their stipends. “The yellow-green brass doors of the Pantheon are said to contain the weight of many coins”, remarks a contemporary with just irony; “but were this so, Leo X would not leave them in their place”.  It was only by the greatest exertion and by paying an enormous rate of interest that money could be raised for the war against France in 1521. During the course of this war the financial need increased to such an extent that Leo and his confidants, especially Pucci and Armellini, contemplated measures which can only be called desperate. New offices were to be created, court places and prelacies were to be taxed, the Lake of Trasimene was to be sold. A tax on corn was again spoken of, and there was to be another  great nomination of Cardinals, the names of whom were already being circulated. There was, furthermore, a talk of selling Terracina to the Gaetani for 100,000 ducats. Lastly, an expedient was discussed of requiring all the Pope’s relatives and confidants to pledge their collective benefices. When, therefore, Leo X died suddenly, his creditors, who had, by reason of his youth, counted on a longer reign, stood on the brink of financial ruin. A Roman report given in Sanuto (December 5, 1521) contains further particulars of the financial crisis, which was such as had never before been experienced in Rome. The Bini bank was hardest hit, with claims of 200,000 ducats; this house, like that of Strozzi, was threatened with failure. The Gaddi had lent 32,000, the Ricasoli 10,000, the datary Turini 16,000, and the trusted chamberlain Serapica 18,000 ducats. Cardinal Salviati’s claim amounted to 80,000 ducats; and he, with his colleagues Ridolfi and Rangoni, had renounced all their benefices in order to raise money for the Pope; ruin therefore stared them in the face, as it did Cardinals Pucci and Armellini. The former had lent Leo 150,000 ducats and the latter his whole fortune. In short, says the informant, all the Pope’s favourites and servants are ruined: yet, though they lament their misfortune, they do not blame him who is dead, but rather bewail the loss of so kind a master. How far the figures given above are individually correct is uncertain. The statements of the Venetian Ambassador Gradenigo are more trustworthy, as he expressly refers to the estimate submitted by the Cardinal Camerlengo, Armellini. According to this Leo X expended during his Pontificate four and a half million ducats, and died owing four hundred thousand more. A pasquinade puts into words the common, and probably correct, opinion current in Rome; “Leo has eaten up three Pontificates : the treasury of Julius II, the revenues of his own Pontificate, and those of his successor”.

In citing the enormous expenditure in the Pope’s household, Marino Giorgi laconically remarks : “The cause of this is to be found in the number of Florentines who allow themselves to be supported by the good-nature of the Pope”. “The treasury of the Pope is empty”, writes Marco Minio in 1520, “because he is so generous that he does not know how to keep back any money ; and the Florentines do not leave him a soldo”.

In former times the fellow-countrymen of the reigning Pontiff had often made their home in Rome. Under Callixtus III and Alexander VI it had been the Spaniards; under Pius II the Sienese ; under Sixtus IV the Ligurians, who had come in flocks to the Papal Court. But an inundation such as the Eternal City now experienced at the hands of the Florentines had never been known before. In vain did Leo X, who knew but too well what his fellow-country men were, try to check the inflow, which was enormous, even in the first days of his Pontificate. The greediness of these people was boundless; they believed that all benefices and offices existed for them alone. With a truly mercantile spirit they tried to draw from the position of Leo X every possible advantage for themselves. Soon no fewer than thirty Florentine banks had been opened in Rome.

Ariosto, in his witty satire to Annibale Maleguccio, describes how “the gentlemen from Florence” exhausted the fountains of Papal favour :—

I nipoti e i parenti, che son tanti,

             Prima anno a ber ; poi quei che l'ajutaro

             A vestirsi il più bel di tutti i manti.

Bevuto ch" abbian questi, gli sia caro

             Che beano quei che contra il Soderino

             Per tornarlo in Firenze si levaro.

L'un dice : io fui con Pietro in Casentino,

     E d' esser preso e morto a risco venni :

      Lo gli prestai denar,' grida Brandino.

Dice un altro ; a mie spese il frate tenni

           Un anno, e lo rimessi in veste e in arme ;

          Di cavallo e d' argento gli sovvenni.

With increasing displeasure the Romans saw how the Florentines squeezed themselves into every post, and especially into financial offices. Quite in the early days of Leo's Pontificate, Filippo Strozzi was appointed Receiver­ General of the Papal Exchequer, and gathered together under him many of his fellow-countrymen. The office of Treasurer-General was first given to the Tuscan, Bibbiena, and after him to his compatriot Ferdinando Ponzetti; relatives of both obtained lucrative subordinate posts. The treasurership of the county of Venaissin was confided to Pietro de’ Pazzi in 1514. The management of the Datary was in the hands of Tuscans—first Pucci, and after him Passerini, Benassao and Turini da Pescia

The number of the Pope’s fellow-countrymen in his personal court was unusually large. There were to be found representatives of nearly all the great families of Florence: the Albizzi, Passerini, Michelozzi, Ricasoli, Gaddi, Capponi, Alamanni, Tornabuoni, and others. The Majordomo Alessandro Neroni was also a Florentine. There is in his department an official list of the Papal Court and household, dated the 1st of May 1514, which with little alteration would hold good for at least two years and a half. It shows the enormous number of the household staff (famiglia) of the Medici Pope. According to this document the total number of these was originally six hundred and eighty-three ; namely, two hundred and forty four “gentlemen” or occupants of the higher court places, a hundred and seventy-four special officials, and two hundred and sixty-five servants—in all about four times as many as the members of the “famiglia” of Pius II. The first class, “gentlemen”, which was again subdivided into five divisions, included the domestic prelates (praelati domestici), twenty-seven in number, among them being two Archbishops and six Bishops. The humanists Bembo, Sadoleto, Filippo Beroaldo, Giovanni Poggio, and Zaccaria Ferreri belonged to this highest class. Then came sixty-four chamberlains, of whom the best known are Serapica, Ercole Rangoni, and Baldassare Turini da Pescia, besides two physicians and a surgeon. In this class also the majority were Italians and mostly compatriots of the Pope ; but there were also some Spaniards, and among the chamberlains, one German. Numerous Florentines were also in the third section, the cubiculari, sixty-eight in number, but among these were two Germans, and a well-known personality, the blind improvisatore, Raffaello Brandolini. The next section, the scudieri, were numbered at ninety-four; among them were several musicians; to this class belonged the poetaster Baraballo and the keeper of the famous elephant. The fifth and last class com prised the chaplains, under which honourable title were comprised most various offices. Among others were the two clerici capella, two forieri, the plumbator, the penitentiary, the custodians of the Library, of the Belvedere, of petitions, and also the keeper of the Vatican vineyard. The real household officials (officiales) were rigorously separated from these higher court officials; and they too were subdivided into two classes.

Florentines or Tuscans were in the pay of the Pope as men of letters, artists, and rhetoricians: even the well-known court fools came thence. Among the administrative officials Guicciardini is the most celebrated. While he, by his severe measures against banditti, showed how order could be maintained, other officials oppressed those over whom they were set to such a degree that the most bitter hatred was aroused against them. The Pope's compatriots also held many military appointments, and were much employed on diplomatic service. What has been already said shows the important part played by Cardinal Bibbiena together with Giulio de' Medici. An elder brother of the Cardinal, Pietro Bibbiena, was Nuncio at Venice from 1513 to 1514. Pietro Ardinghello, a member of a noble Florentine family, was the Pope’s secretary for his private correspondence.

Among the Swiss Nuncios, Goro Gherio came from Pistoia and Antonio Pucci from Florence. Quite a new phenomenon is the fact that the resident Ambassadors of the Republic of Florence in France, Roberto Acciaiuoli, Francesco Vettori, and Francesco Pandolfini, acted provisionally for the Pope in conjunction with the ordinary Nuncios. In Spain also, the Florentine Ambassadors, Giovanni Corsi and Giovanni Vespucci, were employed by the Holy See. On certain important occasions the Pope employed some of his relatives on diplomatic missions ; thus Roberto Orsini was sent first to Hungary, and then to treat with the German Electors about the imperial election; and Raffaello de' Medici was Nuncio to Charles V from October, 1516, until the spring of 1517, and again from August, 1519, until April, 1521.

The relatives of the Pope were very numerous. Of those nearest to him, his nephew Lorenzo, the son of his brother Giuliano, and his cousin Giulio, there is only too much to be told in the history of his Pontificate. Lorenzo’s ambitious mother, Alfonsina Orsini, must also be frequently mentioned. Giuliano died in 1516, Lorenzo in 1519, and Alfonsina in 1520. The only daughter of the latter married Filippo Strozzi, and devoted herself to the care of Lorenzo's orphan child, the little Duchess Caterina de' Medici.

Leo X had many relatives through his three sisters, Maddalena, Lucrezia, and Contessina. Maddalena had married the wealthy Franceschetto Cibo, Count of Anguiliara, who died in 1519, having been made by the Pope Governor of Spoleto. She had six children by her marriage. The eldest son, Innocenzo (born 1491), was made a Cardinal in 1513: he led a completely worldly life, and left a bad reputation behind him. Maddalena’s second son, Lorenzo, married, in 1515, Ricciarda Malaspina, the heiress of Massa and Carrara. The third son, Giovanni Battista, was made Bishop of Marseilles by Clement VII when his brother Innocenzo resigned the see. Maddalena’s daughter, Caterina (born 1501), married Giovan Maria da Varano of Camerino. Leo created him Duke in 1515, gave him Sinigaglia in 1520, and, after the death of Lorenzo de' Medici, made him Prefect of Rome. Roberto di Sanseverino, Count of Cajazzo, the husband of Maddalena’s second daughter Ippolita, received from the Pope, Colorno, in the territory of Parma. A third daughter, Eleonora, entered a cloister in Genoa.

Lucrezia de' Medici had married Jacopo Salviati, who tried to come to the aid of Leo X in his financial difficulties without neglecting his own interests. Their son Giovanni was made protonotary at an early age, Bishop of Fermo in 1516, and Cardinal in 1517. The red hat was also given to Niccolo Ridolfi, the son of the Pope’s third sister Contessina, who died in 1515, and of Piero Ridolfi, who was made Governor of Spoleto from 1514 to 1516; at the same time as the Pope’s two nephews, Luigi de Rossi received the purple. He was related to Leo through his mother, who was a natural sister of Lorenzo the Magnificent, and had been brought up with Leo. His early death was a great grief to the Pope.

Leo’s friendship with Cardinal Bibbiena was unusually close. This highly-gifted man was second to no member of the Court in amiability, gaiety, wit, and high spirits; while frequent mention has been made of the part he played as an astute politician and—for a time—chief adviser to the Pope. Even later, when Cardinal Medici had taken his place, his friendship remained most valuable to Leo, who entrusted him with many secrets of state policy. He lived in the Vatican, so as to be near his master. In the spring of 1516 Bibbiena was selected to be Legate to the Emperor, and two years later he was sent in the same capacity to the Court of Francis I. During his tenure of this last office his relations with Francis I were such that it was evident that he had more regard for the interests of France than befitted his position. Consequently, his friendship with the Pope became strained, and he was recalled to Rome in 1520; he died there on the 9th of November of the same year. The rumour that he had been poisoned, which was spread about, was entirely without foundation ; for the Cardinal had been in failing health for years.

It is not easy to form a just estimate of Bibbiena’s personality, so mixed are good and evil in him. The author ship of the comedy “Calandria”, which is full of indecent jokes, is not compatible with his position as a prince of the Church. Moreover, the erotic painting in his bathroom, and many of his letters prove that Bibbiena was more worldly-minded than beseemed his position. Leo X, like many of his contemporaries, took no notice of Bibbiena’s lax manner of life. In fact the bewitching amiability of the clever and refined Tuscan, his intellectual tastes, his knowledge of classical literature, his ability as a statesman and companion, and his skill as an organizer of festivities and entertainments, made this friend of his youth quite indispensable to the Medici Pope. No less useful was Bibbiena to his master in matters of art; for the Cardinal was a good connoisseur in such things. His ardent appreciation of art, and especially the terms of friendship on which he was with Raphael, weighs in the balance in his favour. Moreover, in spite of his frivolity, Bibbiena had a worthier and more serious side. This is shown, among other things, by his intimate friendship with such excellent men as Castiglione, Giulio Sadoleto, and Giovanni Battista Sanga, as well as by his last testament.

Next to Bibbiena, the Pope made his friends among the younger Cardinals to whom he owed his elevation, his friendship being given especially to Luigi d'Aragona, Alfonso Petrucci, Soderini, Sauli, Ippolito d'Este, Sigismondo Gonzaga, and Marco Cornaro. To them were joined the newly-made Cardinals, Cibo and Pucci. Most of those mentioned were lovers and promoters of art and literature, and some few among them were learned; but they were all thoroughly worldly-minded, and many of them—true children of a corrupt age—led scandalous lives. Their days were spent in wild sport, luxurious carouses, frivolous dramas, and other worse things. Intercourse with these extravagant young men could not fail to have a bad effect on one so inclined to pleasure as Leo X.

In the catastrophe of 1517 the Pope’s friendship with Petrucci, Soderini, and Sauli came to a terrible end. Luigi d'Aragona, who was without cause suspected of a share in Petrucci's conspiracy, thought it advisable to absent himself from the Court for some time under pretext of a visit to Charles V; however, after his return to Rome in the spring of 1518, his former relations with the Pope were restored. Luigi d'Aragona, who was perhaps the best among the younger Cardinals, died in January, 1519. Ippolito d'Este, the patron of Ariosto, retired to Ferrara, where he died in September, 1520. Cornaro, who also had unjustly fallen under suspicion, continued, together with Pucci, to enjoy the confidence of the Pope ; but how much further the Pope’s good-will extended is shown by the large creation of Cardinals on the 1st of July, 1517. Among those who were then raised to the purple, Ponzetti, Armellini, Passerini, Pandolfini, Orsini, Salviati, Ridolfi, Rangoni, and, above all others, Luigi de' Rossi, were the intimate friends of Leo X.

Literature and art were patronized to no less a degree by a number of other prelates, among whom may be distinguished Baldassare Turini da Pescia, Gian Maria Giberti, Giovanni Battista Branconio dell' Aquila, and Giannozzo Pandolfini, both of whom were friends of Raphael’s; the Frenchmen, Ferry de Carondolet, and Thomas le Roy, who built the exquisite Farnesina at Baullari ; and also the German-Luxemburger, Goritz. Turini’s villa, now the Villa Lante, decorated by Giulio Romano, and situated on the Janiculum with the finest panoramic view of Rome, was, together with the vineyard belonging to the affable old Goritz, the central resort of the humanists inhabiting Rome. Turini, who like Giberti and Pandolfini was the confidant of the Medici, was intimate with Francia, Leonardo da Vinci, and especially with Raphael, and was one of his executors. His correspondence with Lorenzo de' Medici and Lorenzo Gheri shows him to us as a connoisseur of art and patron of artists.

Whereas the Roman nobles were, with few exceptions, distinguished neither socially nor as patrons of learning, the great bankers, the monied aristocracy, brought a remarkable and new element into Roman society. Their most brilliant representative was Agostino Chigi, the Rothschild of his time. His intimacy with Julius II had been troubled during the latter years of the impetuous Rovere; but, on the other hand, his relations with Leo X remained to the end the very best possible.

By his extensive financial operations, Chigi, whose bank was in the Via de' Banchi, had amassed an almost fabulous fortune. Well-informed contemporaries estimated his annual income at 70,000 ducats. He left 800,000 behind him when he died. He himself once told the Pope that he possessed a hundred houses and as many ships, and that he employed 20,000 men. But this was not the only test of his fortune, for the mere word of such a Croesus was as good as solid money. The sovereigns of Spain, France, Germany, and even the Sultan, laid themselves out to win the favour of Chigi by their gifts. The proud Venetians, to whom he lent 125,000 ducats in 1511, gave him the place of honour next to the Doge when he visited their city. Leo treated this prince of bankers, whose assistance he so often sought, like a crowned head. Chigi often had the honour of receiving the Pope as his guest in his famous country-house, the Farnesina, which was full of every kind of work of art. The luxury of the merchant prince, who used nothing but silver plate in his house, to the exclusion of earthenware, reminds us of that of the ancient Roman Emperors. At one of his extravagant banquets, which was spread in the loggia overlooking the Tiber, the gold and silver dishes which had been used were thrown after each course into the river—whence, no doubt, they were drawn up afterwards in hidden nets. At another banquet, given in honour of Chigi’s birthday, each guest found the plate laid in front of him engraved with his own arms.

When, by the persuasion of the Pope, Chigi decided to marry his mistress, a great feast was held at the Farnesina. The Pope himself—which is characteristic of the moral tone of the time —took part in it with thirteen Cardinals. He even held the finger of the bride while the marriage ring was being placed on it. On this occasion Chigi, at terrific expense, sent to all parts of the world for the choicest viands. Among other luxuries he had live fish sent from France and Spain, and even from the coasts of the Bosphorus. Such extravagance, which bears the mark of the parvenu, has something repulsive about it.

Chigi has better claims to remembrance on account of his great benevolence and generous patronage of art and literature; the name of “il magnifico” was given to him on account of his generosity in regard to these. Though not himself a man of any great culture, he gladly promoted learning of every kind. For this purpose he had a printing-press set up in one of his houses, at which was produced an edition of Pindar, the first Greek book to appear in print in Rome. Among the learned and literati, Giovio, Bembo, Cornelio Benigno, and Aretino were closely connected by friendship with the wealthy merchant. As a patron of art Chigi vied even with Leo X. That this is no exaggeration is shown by a glance at the Farnesina, that “ideal dwelling-place, half town-mansion and half country-house”. The dwelling-rooms on the upper floor are decorated with architectural paintings by Baldassare Peruzzi. In the sleeping-chamber Soddoma painted the Marriage of Alexander with Roxana, and the family of Darius before the conqueror of the world. On the ground­floor in the great hall, which was originally open, Chigi had painted the fable of Psyche and Cupid, after the popular narrative of Apuleius. Raphael designed the decorations of the ceiling, beams, and cornices, which were carried out by Giulio Romano and G. Francesco Penni. The beautiful encircling wreaths are the work of Giovanni da Udine. In the adjoining hall Baldassare Peruzzi painted the starry heavens on the ceiling, while in the lunettes are subjects from Ovid's “Metamorphoses”, by Sebastiano del Piombo. On the entrance wall Raphael himself painted the Triumph of Galatea, which furnishes a proof of how well he could adapt himself to the reproduction of the sensuous world of the antique. But in the case of this work of art, as in that of the story of Psyche, the Christian critic can give only a qualified admiration to the prevalent “divine nudity”.

From these works he will turn with alacrity to others for which Chigi is equally responsible, in the Church of S. Maria della Pace and the chapel in S. Maria del Popolo. For the first Raphael painted his incomparable Sybils. In the mortuary chapel of the Chigi in S. Maria del Popolo, Sebastiano del Piombo painted the Nativity of Mary as an altar-piece, and Raphael sketched the architectural designs for the chapel, the bronze-relief of Christ and the woman of Samaria, the statue of Jonas, and the mosaic paintings for the cupola. In this last are represented the gods of the planets and the heaven of the fixed stars, watched over and guided by angels, while from above they are blessed by God the Father. Chigi, who was very generous in ecclesiastical matters, gave the commission for the decoration of another church. In the Church of the Guardian Angels, belonging to the Sienese confraternity of S. Caterina, he had the altar-piece, our Lord's Resurrection, painted by Genga. At Tolfa he built a church for the hermits of St. Augustine.

Chigi survived his friend Raphael by only a few days. He died on the loth of April, 1520, at the comparatively early age of fifty-five, and was buried with regal splendour in the chapel which he had prepared for himself in S. Maria del Popolo.

The other bankers in Rome, the Spannochi, Strozzi, Altoviti, Gaddi, and Bini, could not compare with Chigi either in riches or generosity, any more than could the agents of the houses of Fugger and Welser; nevertheless, they were his rivals in the patronage of art. The young Bindo Altoviti came first in this; his portrait in the Pinacoteca at Munich was for a long time described as a portrait of Raphael by himself, in spite of the blue eyes and fair, curly hair. As well as this wonderful portrait, Raphael painted for Altoviti the Madonna dell' Impannata, now in the Pitti Gallery. The grave Michael Angelo, who kept aloof from the worldly Chigi, held Altoviti in such friendship that he gave him a cartoon of his Sistine frescoes, and commemorated his noble friend by a medal. His bust was made by Benvenuto Cellini. These and other works of art, combined with choice antique specimens, were the glory of the Palazzo Altoviti, which stood close to the banks of the Tiber, to the left of the Ponte S. Angelo. The palace disappeared in 1888, while the offices of the mercantile house of Chigi, which stood close by, are used at present as a wood magazine. Nowhere is the transitoriness of human things brought home more forcibly than in the Eternal City.

Another banker, Lorenzo Strozzi—the brother of Filippo, so well-known for his epicureanism—tried to outrival Chigi in extravagance. A banquet given by him during the Carnival of 1519 caused him to be much talked about. His shuddering guests were first led up a step to a black door, through which they entered a hall draped in black. In the middle of this stood a black table on which were flasks of wine and two deaths’-heads containing the choicest viands. After this whimsical introduction the guests adjourned to a brilliantly-lighted hall and sat down to table. The food was served up by means of an under ground contrivance : first there were handed dainties, and after them uneatable food. Suddenly the lights went out, and there entered two actors dressed like jesters, who led a dance. The meal was so plentiful that the guests had eaten to surfeit before a third course was offered to them. Fourteen persons took part in this banquet, including Cardinals Rossi, Cibo, Salviati, and Ridolfi, the two buffoons Mariano and Brandino, and three ladies of the demi-monde.

Such a banquet takes us back to a time when wealth and luxury, extravagance and laxity of morals, had reached an ominous height. The fact that Strozzi dared to invite such company to meet the Cardinals, is most significant. But such a thing was nothing new in Rome. Even in the time of the rugged Julius II, to say nothing of the reign of Alexander VI, a well-known prostitute, the beautiful and highly-cultivated Imperia, played a part in high Roman society.

There is but too much evidence as to the immorality which prevailed in Rome in the time of Leo X. It extended to every branch of society, spiritual and secular, and reached its greatest development among the most highly educated. Yet the Rome of that time was not more corrupt than Venice or the other cities of Italy. The indifference with which even the highest spiritual authorities regarded the state of society at that time, and for some time after, is truly scandalous. The Popes of the time of the Catholic reformation were the first to combat with severity and decision an evil which caused such grave scandal, especially in the capital of the Christian world. The immorality in Rome was connected with her vast intercourse with foreigners;  with the idleness of many of her prelates, who spent the large incomes arising from their benefices in the metropolis of the world; with the increase of luxury; with the enormous influx of money; with the settlement of so many foreigners in Rome; and especially with the growth of population.

Rome still maintained her pre-eminently cosmopolitan character. There existed no court which was composed, racially and socially, of such heterogeneous elements; elements which formed to some extent rather ominous combinations. The facility with which persons could obtain money at the Curia as negotiators or go-betweens, and the rapidity with which promotion to spiritual offices could lead to power and wealth, were bound to attract place-hunters, adventurers, and idlers. No doubt the influx of the humanists had a bad effect on the machinery of government; still the humanists were by no means the only persons to pursue the love of gain at the expense of others, and to the neglect of their own duties. A deep-rooted corruption had taken possession of nearly all the officials, and a host of abuses had become common among them. The truly Italian art of procrastination in matters of business, the inordinate number of gratuities and exactions, had passed all bounds. Moreover, on all sides deeds were dishonestly manipulated, and even falsified, by the officials.

No wonder that there arose from all parts of Christendom the loudest complaints about the corruption and financial extortions of the Papal officials. It was even said that in Rome everything had its price. With biting irony, the satirist Ariosto describes the restless doings of the avaricious members of the secularized Curia: —

Quando la ruota, che non pur castiga

Ision rio, si volge in mezzo a Roma

L'anime a cruciar con lunga briga.

Their insatiable avarice was ready to sacrifice peace, happiness, and liberty for benefices and dignities. What signify five mitres on the head or a hundred followers on the way to the Vatican? That they call mere luck:

Io lo stimo miseria ; e son si pazzo,

Ch'io penso e dico, che in Roma famosa

Il signor è più servo, che'l ragazzo.

 

CHAPTER XII

MEDICEAN ROME.