R. W. Church,
Dante and Other Essays,
pages 27-31.
ALSO IN
C. Balbo,
Life and Times of Dante,
part 1, chapter 6 (volume 1).
FLORENCE: A. D. 1295-1300.
New factions in the city, and Dante's relations to them.
The Bianchi and the Neri (Whites and Blacks).
Among the Nobles "who resisted the oppression of the people,
Corso Donati must have been the chief, but he did not at first
come forward; with one of his usual stratagems, however, he
was the cause of a new revolution [January, 1295], which drove
Giano della Bella, the leader of the people, from the city.
... Notwithstanding the fall of Giano, the Nobles did not
return into power. He was succeeded as a popular leader by one
much his inferior, one Pecora, surnamed, from his trade, the
Butcher. New disputes arose between the nobles and the people,
and between the upper and lower ranks of the people itself.
Villani tells us that, in the year 1295, 'many families, who
were neither tyrannical nor powerful, withdrew from the order
of the nobles, and enrolled themselves among the people,
diminishing the power of the nobles and increasing that of the
people.' Dante must have been precisely one of those nobles 'who
were neither tyrannical nor powerful;' and ... it is certain
that he was among those who passed over from their own order
to that of the Popolani, by being matriculated in one of the
Arts. In a register from 1297 to 1300, of the Art of the
physicians and druggists, the fifth of the seven major Arts,
he is found matriculated in these words: 'Dante d'Aldighiero
degli Aldighieri poeta fiorentino.' ... Dante, by this means,
obtained office under the popular government. ... The new
factions that arose in Florence, in almost all Tuscany, and in
some of the cities in other parts of Italy, were merely
subdivisions of the Guelf party; merely what, in time, happens
to every faction after a period of prosperity, a division of
the ultras and of the moderates, or of those who hold more or
less extravagant views. ... All this happened to the Guelf
party in a very few years, and the Neri and Bianchi, the names
'Of the two divisions of that party, which had arisen in 1300,
were no longer mentioned ten years afterwards, but were again
lost in the primitive appellations of Guelfs and Ghibellines.
Thus this episode would possess little interest, and would be
scarcely mentioned in the history of Italy, or even of
Florence, had not the name of our sublime Poet been involved
in it; and, after his love, it is the most important
circumstance of his life, and the one to which he most
frequently alludes in his Commedia. It thus becomes a subject
worthy of history. ... Florentine historians attribute Corso
Donati's hatred towards Vieri de Cerchi to envy. ... This envy
arose to such a height between Dante's neighbours in Florence
that he has rendered it immortal. 'Through envy,' says
Villani, 'the citizens began to divide into factions, and one
of the principal feuds began in the Sesto dello Scandalo, near
the gate of St. Pietro, between the families of the Cerchi and
the Donati [from which latter family came Dante's wife]. ...
Messer Vieri was the head of the House of the Cerchi, and he
and his house were powerful in affairs, possessing a numerous
kindred; they were very rich merchants, for their company was
one of the greatest in the world.'" The state of animosity
between these two families "was existing in Florence in the
beginning of 1300, when it was increased by another rather
similar family quarrel that had arisen in Pistoia. . . .
'There was in Pistoia a family which amounted to more than 100
men capable of bearing arms; it was not of great antiquity,
but was powerful, wealthy, and numerous; it was descended from
one Cancellieri Notaio, and from him they had preserved
Cancellieri as their family name. From the children of the two
wives of this man were descended the 107 men of arms that have
been enumerated; one of the wives having been named Madonna
Bianca, her descendants were called Cancellieri Bianchi (White
Cancellieri); and the descendants of the other wife, in
opposition, were called Cancellieri Neri (Black
Cancellieri).'" Between these two branches of the family of
the Cancellieri there arose, some time near the end of the
thirteenth century, an implacable feud. "Florence ...
exercised a supremacy over Pistoia ... and fearing that these
internal dissensions might do injury to the Guelf party, she
took upon herself the lordship or supremacy of that city. The
principal Cancellieri, both Bianchi and Neri, were banished to
Florence itself; 'the Neri took up their abode in the house of
the Frescobaldi, beyond the Arno; the Bianchi at the house of
the Cerchi, in the Garbo, from being connected with them by
kindred. But as one sick sheep infects another, and is
injurious to the flock, so this cursed seed of discord, that
had departed from Pistoia and had now entered Florence,
corrupted all the Florentines, and divided them into two
parties.' ... The Cerchi, formerly called the Forest party
(parte selvaggia), now assumed the name of Bianchi; and those
who followed the Donati were now called Neri. ... 'There sided
with [the Bianchi, says Villani] the families of the Popolani
and petty artisans, and all the Ghibellines, whether Nobles or
Popolani.' ... Thus the usual position in which the two
parties stood was altered; for hitherto the Nobles had almost
always been Ghibellines, and the Popolani Guelfs; but now, if
the Popolani were not Ghibellines, they were at least not such
strong Guelfs as the nobles. Sometimes these parties are
referred to as White Guelfs and Black Guelfs."
C. Balbo,
Life and Times of Dante,
chapter 10.
ALSO IN
H. E. Napier,
Florentine History,
book 1, chapter 14 (volume l).
N. Machiavelli,
The Florentine Histories,
book 2.
{1135}
FLORENCE: A. D. 1301-1313.
Triumph of the Neri.
Banishment of Dante and his party.
Downfall and death of Corso Donati.
"In the year 1301, a serious affray took place between the two
parties [the Bianchi and the Neri]; the whole city was in
arms; the law, and the authority of the Signoria, among whom
was the poet Dante Alighieri, was set at naught by the great
men of each side, while the best citizens looked on with fear
and trembling. The Donati, fearing that unaided they would not
be a match for their adversaries, proposed that they should
put themselves under a ruler of the family of the king of
France. Such a direct attack on the independence of the state
was not to be borne by the Signoria, among whom the poet had
great influence. At his instigation they armed the populace,
and with their assistance compelled the heads of the
contending parties to lay down their arms, and sent into exile
Messer Donati and others who had proposed the calling in of
foreigners. A sentence of banishment was also pronounced
against the most violent men of the party of the Bianchi, most
of whom, however, were allowed, under various pretences, to
return to their country. The party of the Donati in their
exile carried on those intrigues which they had commenced
while at home. They derived considerable assistance from the
king of France's brother, Charles of Valois, whom Pope
Boniface had brought into Italy. That prince managed, by means
of promises, which he subsequently violated, to get admission
for himself, together with several of the Neri, and the legate
of the pope, into Florence. He then produced letters,
generally suspected to be forgeries, charging the leaders of
the Bianchi with conspiracy. The popularity of the accused
party had already been on the wane, and after a violent
tumult, the chief men among them, including Dante, were
obliged to leave the city; their goods were confiscated, and
their houses destroyed. ... From this time Corso Donati, the
head of the faction of the Neri, became the chief man at
Florence. The accounts of its state at this period, taken from
the most credible historians, warrant us in thinking that the
severe invectives of Dante are not to be ascribed merely to
indignation or resentment at the harsh treatment he had
received. ... The city was rent by more violent dissensions
than ever. There were now three distinct sources of
contention--the jealousy between the people and the nobles,
the disputes between the Bianchi and the Neri, and those
between the Ghibellines and the Guelfs. It was in vain that
the legate of Pope Benedict, a man of great piety, went
thither for the sake of trying to restore order. The
inhabitants showed how little they respected him by exhibiting
a scandalous representation of hell on the river Arno; and,
after renewing his efforts without success, he cursed the city
and departed [1302]. The reign of Corso Donati ended like that
of most of those who have succeeded to power by popular violence.
Six years after the banishment of his adversaries he was
suspected, not without reason, of endeavouring to make himself
independent of constitutional restraints. The Signori declared
him guilty of rebellion. After a protracted resistance he made
his escape from the city, but was pursued and taken at Rovesca
[1308]. When he was led captive by those among whom his
authority had lately been paramount, he threw himself under
his horse, and, after having been dragged some distance, he
was dispatched by one of the captors. ... The party that had
been raised by Corso Donati continued to hold the chief power
at Florence even after the death of their chief. The exiled
faction, in the words of one of their leaders, ... had not
learned the art of returning to their country as well as their
adversaries. Four years after the events alluded to, the
Emperor, Henry VII., made some negotiations in their favour,
which but imperfectly succeeded. The Florentines, however,
were awed when he approached their city at the head of his
army; and in the extremity of their danger they implored the
assistance of King Robert of Naples, and made him Lord of
their city for the space of five years. The Emperor's
mysterious death [August 24, 1313], at Buonconvento freed them
from their alarm."
W. P. Urquhart,
Life and Times of Francesco Sforza,
book 1, chapter 3 (volume 1).
ALSO IN
Mrs. Oliphant,
The Makers of Florence,
chapter 2.
B. Duffy,
The Tuscan Republics,
chapter 12.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1310-1313.
Resistance to the Emperor, Henry VII.
Siege by the imperial army.
See ITALY: A. D, 1310-1313,
FLORENCE: A. D. 1313-1328.
Wars with Pisa and with Castruccio Castracani, of Lucca.
Disastrous battles of Montecatini and Altopascio.
See ITALY: A. D. 1313-1330.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1336-1338.
Alliance with Venice against Mastino della Scala.
See VERONA: A. D. 1260-1338.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1341-1343.
Defeat by the Pisans before Lucca.
The brief tyranny of the Duke of Athens.
In 1341, Mastino della Scala, of Verona, who had become master
of Lucca in 1335 by treachery, offered to sell that town to
the Florentines. The bargain was concluded; "but it appeared
to the Pisans the signal of their own servitude, for it cut
off all communication between them and the Ghibelines of
Lombardy. They immediately advanced their militia into the
Lucchese states to prevent the Florentines from taking
possession of the town; vanquished them in battle, on the 2d
of October, 1341, under the walls of Lucca; and, on the 6th of
July following, took possession of that city for themselves.
The people of Florence attributed this train of disasters to
the incapacity of their magistrates. ... At this period,
Gauttier [Walter] de Brienne, duke of Athens, a French noble,
but born in Greece, passed through Florence on his way from
Naples to France; The duchy of Athens had remained in his
family from the conquest of Constantinople till it was taken
from his father in 1312. ... It was for this man the
Florentines, after their defeat at Lucca, took a sudden fancy.
... On the 1st of August, 1342, they obliged the signoria to
confer on him the title of captain of justice, and to give him
the command of their militia." A month later, the duke, by his
arts, had worked such a ferment among the lower classes of the
population that they "proclaimed him sovereign lord of
Florence for his life, forced the public palace, drove from it
the gonfalonier and the priori, and installed him there in
their place. ... Happily, Florence was not ripe for slavery:
ten months sufficed for the duke of Athens to draw from it
400,000 golden florins, which he sent either to France or
Naples; but ten months sufficed also to undeceive all parties
who had placed any confidence in him," and by a universal
rising, in July, 1343, he was driven from the city.
J. C. L. de Sismondi,
History of the Italian Republics,
chapter 6.
ALSO IN:
T. A. Trollope,
History of the Commonwealth of Florence,
book 3, chapter 4 (volume 2).
{1136}
FLORENCE: 14th Century.
Industrial Prosperity of the City.
"John Villani has given us an ample and precise account of the
state of Florence in the earlier part of the 14th century. The
revenue of the Republic amounted to 300,000 florins, a sum
which, allowing for the depreciation of the precious metals,
was at least equivalent to 600,000 pounds sterling; a larger
sum than England and Ireland, two centuries ago, yielded
annually to Elizabeth--a larger sum than, according to any
computation which we have seen, the Grand Duke of Tuscany now
derives from a territory of much greater extent. The
manufacture of wool alone employed 200 factories and 30,000
workmen. The cloth annually produced sold, at an average, for
1,200,000 florins; a sum fairly equal, in exchangeable value,
to two millions and a half of our money. Four hundred thousand
florins were annually coined. Eighty banks conducted the
commercial operations, not of Florence only, but of all
Europe. The transactions of these establishments were
sometimes of a magnitude which may surprise even the
contemporaries of the Barings and the Rothschilds. Two houses
advanced to Edward the Third of England upwards of 300,000
marks, at a time when the mark contained more silver than 50
shillings of the present day, and when the value of silver was
more than quadruple of what it now is. The city and its
environs contained 170,000 inhabitants. In the various schools
about 10,000 children were taught to read; 1,200 studied
arithmetic; 600 received a learned education. The progress of
elegant literature and of the fine arts was proportioned to
that of the public prosperity. ... Early in the 14th century
came forth the Divine Comedy, beyond comparison the greatest
work of imagination which had appeared since the poems of
Homer. The following generation produced indeed no second
Dante: but it was eminently distinguished by general
intellectual activity. The study of the Latin writers had
never been wholly neglected in Italy. But Petrarch introduced
a more profound, liberal, and elegant scholarship; and
communicated to his countrymen that enthusiasm for the
literature, the history, and the antiquities of Rome, which
divided his own heart with a frigid mistress and a more frigid
Muse. Boccaccio turned their attention to the more sublime and
graceful models of Greece."
Lord Macaulay,
Machiavelli
(Essays, volume 1).
FLORENCE: A. D. 1348.
The Plague.
"In the year then of our Lord 1348, there happened at
Florence, the finest city in all Italy, a most terrible
plague; which, whether owing to the influence of the planets,
or that it was sent from God as a just punishment for our
sins, had broken out some years before in the Levant, and
after passing from place to place, and making incredible havoc
all the way, had now reached the west. There, spite of all the
means that art and human foresight could suggest, such as
keeping the city clear from filth, the exclusion of all
suspected persons, and the publication of copious instructions
for the preservation of health; and notwithstanding manifold
humble supplications offered to God in processions and
otherwise; it began to show itself in the spring of the
aforesaid year, in a sad and wonderful manner. Unlike what had
been seen in the east, where bleeding from the nose is the
fatal prognostic, here there appeared certain tumours in the
groin or under the armpits, some as big as a small apple,
others as an egg; and afterwards purple spots in most parts of
the body; in some cases large and but few in number, in others
smaller and more numerous--both sorts the usual messengers of
death. To the cure of this malady, neither medical knowledge
nor the power of drugs was of any effect. ... Nearly all died
the third day from the first appearance of the symptoms, some
sooner, some later, without any fever or other accessory
symptoms. What gave the more virulence to this plague, was
that, by being communicated from the sick to the hale, it
spread daily, like fire when it comes in contact with large
masses of combustibles. Nor was it caught only by conversing
with, or coming near the sick, but even by touching their
clothes, or anything that they had before touched. ... These
facts, and others of the like sort, occasioned various fears
and devices amongst those who survived, all tending to the
same uncharitable and cruel end; which was, to avoid the sick,
and everything that had been near them, expecting by that
means to save themselves. And some holding it best to live
temperately, and to avoid excesses of all kinds, made parties,
and shut themselves up from the rest of the world. ... Others
maintained free living to be a better preservative, and would
baulk no passion or appetite they wished to gratify, drinking
and revelling incessantly from tavern to tavern, or in private
houses (which were frequently found deserted by the owners,
and therefore common to everyone), yet strenuously avoiding,
with all this brutal indulgence, to come near the infected.
And such, at that time, was the public distress, that the
laws, human and divine, were no more regarded; for the
officers to put them in force being either dead, sick, or in
want of persons to assist them, everyone did just as he
pleased. ... I pass over the little regard that citizens and
relations showed to each other; for their terror was such that
a brother even fled from a brother, a wife from her husband,
and, what is more uncommon, a parent from his own child. ...
Such was the cruelty of Heaven, and perhaps of men, that
between March and July following, according to authentic
reckonings, upwards of 100,000 souls perished in the city
only; whereas, before that calamity, it was not supposed to
have continued so many inhabitants. What magnificent
dwellings, what noble palaces, were then depopulated to the
last inhabitant!"
G. Boccaccio,
The Decameron,
introd.
See, also, BLACK DEATH.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1358.
The captains of the Guelf Party and the "Ammoniti."
"The magistracy called the 'Capitani di Parte Guelfa,'--the
Captains of the Guelph party,--was instituted in the year
1267; and it was remarked, when the institution of it was
recorded, that the conception of a magistracy avowedly formed
to govern a community, not only by the authority of, but in
the interest of one section only of its members, was an
extraordinary proof of the unfitness of the Florentines for
self-government, and a forewarning of the infallible certainty
that the attempt to rule the Commonwealth on such principles
would come to a bad ending. In the year 1358, a little less
than a century after the first establishment of this strange
magistracy, it began to develop the mischievous capabilities
inherent in the nature of it, in a very alarming manner. ...
{1137}
In 1358 this magistracy consisted of four members. ... These
men, 'born,' says Ammirato, 'for the public ruin, under
pretext of zeal for the Guelph cause' ... caused a law to be
passed, according to which any citizen or Florentine subject
who had ever held, or should thereafter hold, any office in
the Commonwealth, might be either openly or secretly accused
before the tribunal of the Captains of the Guelph Party of
being Ghibelline, or not genuine Guelph. If the accusation was
supported by six witnesses worthy of belief, the accused might
be condemned to death or to fine at the discretion of the
Captains. ... It will be readily conceived that the passing of
such a law, in a city bristling with party hatreds and feuds,
was the signal for the commencement of a reign of terror." The
citizens proscribed were "said to be 'admonished'; and the
condemnations were called 'admonitions'; and henceforward for
many years the 'ammonizioni' [or 'ammoniti'] play a large part
in the domestic history and political struggles of Florence."
T. A. Trollope,
History of the Commonwealth of Florence,
book 3, chapter 7 (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
H. E. Napier,
Florentine History,
chapter 23 (volume 2).
FLORENCE: A. D. 1359-1391.
The Free Company of Sir John Hawkwood and the wars with Pisa,
with Milan, and with the Pope.
See ITALY: A. D. 1343-1393.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1375-1378.
War with the Pope in support of the oppressed States of the
Church.
The Eight Saints of War.
A terrible excommunication.
In 1375, the Florentines became engaged in war with Pope
Gregory XI., supporting a revolt of the States of the Church,
which were heavily oppressed by the representatives of their
papal sovereign
See PAPACY: A. D. 1352-1378.
"Nevertheless, so profoundly reverenced was the church that
even the sound of war against a pope appeared to many little
less than blasphemy: numbers opposed on this pretence, but
really from party motives alone." But "a general council
assembled and declared the cause of liberty paramount to every
other consideration; the war was affirmed to be rather against
the injustice and tyranny of foreign governors than the church
itself. ... All the ecclesiastical cities then groaning under
French oppression were to be invited to revolt and boldly
achieve their independence. These spirited resolutions were
instantly executed, and on the 8th of August 1375 Alessandro
de' Bardi [and seven other citizens] ... were formed into a
supreme council of war called 'Gli Otto della Guerra'; and
afterwards, from their able conduct, 'Gli Otto Santi della
Guerra' [The Eight Saints of War]; armed with the concentrated
power of the whole Florentine nation in what regarded war." A
terrible sentence of excommunication was launched against the
Florentines by the Pope. "Their souls were solemnly condemned
to the pains of hell; fire and water were interdicted; their
persons and property outlawed in every Christian land, and
they were finally declared lawful prey for all who chose to
sell, plunder, or kill them as though they were mere slaves or
infidels."
H. E. Napier,
Florentine History,
book 1, chapter 26 (volume 2).
FLORENCE: A. D. 1378-1427.
Complete democratizing of the commonwealth.
The Tumult of the Ciompi.
First appearance of the Medici in Florentine history.
Though the reign of the Duke of Athens lasted rather less than
a year, "it bore important fruits; for the tyrant, seeking to
support himself upon the favour of the common people, gave
political power to the Lesser Arts at the expense of the
Greater, and confused the old State-system by enlarging the
democracy. The net result of these events for Florence was,
first, that the city became habituated to rancorous
party-strife, involving exiles and proscriptions, and,
secondly, that it lost its primitive social hierarchy of
classes. ... Civil strife now declared itself as a conflict
between labour and capital. The members of the Lesser Arts,
craftsmen who plied trades subordinate to those of the Greater
Arts, rose up against their social and political superiors,
demanding a larger share in the government, a more equal
distribution of profits, higher wages, and privileges that
should place them on an absolute equality with the wealthy
merchants. It was in the year 1378 that the proletariate broke
out into rebellion. Previous events had prepared the way for
this revolt. First of all, the republic had been democratised
through the destruction of the Grandi and through the popular
policy pursued to gain his own ends by the Duke of Athens.
Secondly, society had been shaken to its very foundation by
the great plague of 1348 ... nor had 30 years sufficed to
restore their relative position to grades and ranks confounded
by an overwhelming calamity. ... Rising in a mass to claim
their privileges, the artisans ejected the Signory from the
Public Palace, and for awhile Florence was at the mercy of the
mob. It is worthy of notice that the Medici, whose name is
scarcely known before this epoch, now come for one moment to
the front. Salvestro de' Medici was Gonfalonier of Justice at
the time when the tumult first broke out. He followed the
faction of the handicraftsmen, and became the hero of the day.
I cannot discover that he did more than extend a sort of
passive protection to their cause. Yet there is no doubt that
the attachment of the working classes to the house of Medici
dates from this period. The rebellion of 1378 is known in
Florentine history as the Tumult of the Ciompi. The name
Ciompi strictly means the Wool-Carders. One set of operatives
in the city, and that the largest, gave its title to the whole
body of the labourers. For some months these craftsmen
governed the republic, appointing their own Signory and
passing laws in their own interest; but, as is usual, the
proletariate found itself incapable of sustained government.
The ambition and discontent of the Ciompi foamed themselves
away, and industrious workingmen began to see that trade was
languishing and credit on the wane. By their own act at last
they restored the government to the Priors of the Greater
Arti. Still the movement had not been without grave
consequences. It completed the levelling of classes, which had
been steadily advancing from the first in Florence. After the
Ciompi riot there was no longer not only any distinction
between noble and burgher, but the distinction between greater
and lesser guilds was practically swept away. ... The proper
political conditions had been formed for unscrupulous
adventurers. Florence had become a democracy without social
organisation. ... The time was come for the Albizzi to attempt
an oligarchy, and for the Medici to begin the enslavement of the
State.
{1138}
The Constitution of Florence offered many points of weakness
to the attacks of such intriguers. In the first place it was
in its origin not a political but an industrial
organisation--a simple group of guilds invested with the
sovereign authority. ... It had no permanent head, like the
Doge of Venice, no fixed senate like the Venetian Grand
Council; its chief magistrates, the Signory, were elected for
short periods of two months, and their mode of election was
open to the gravest criticism. Supposed to be chosen by lot,
they were really selected from lists drawn up by the factions
in power from time to time. These factions contrived to
exclude the names of all but their adherents from the bags, or
'borse,' in which the burghers eligible for election had to be
inscribed. Furthermore, it was not possible for this shifting
Signory to conduct affairs requiring sustained effort and
secret deliberation; therefore recourse was being continually
had to dictatorial Commissions. The people, summoned in
parliament upon the Great Square, were asked to confer
plenipotentiary authority upon a committee called Balia [see
BALIA OF FLORENCE], who proceeded to do what they chose in the
State; and who retained power after the emergency for which
they were created passed away. ... It was through these [and
other specified] defects that the democracy merged gradually
into a despotism. The art of the Medici consisted in a
scientific comprehension of these very imperfections, a
methodic use of them for their own purposes, and a steady
opposition to any attempts made to substitute a stricter
system. ... Florence, in the middle of the 14th century, was a
vast beehive of industry. Distinctions of rank among burghers,
qualified to vote and hold office, were theoretically unknown.
Highly educated men, of more than princely wealth, spent their
time in shops and counting-houses, and trained their sons to
follow trades. Military service at this period was abandoned
by the citizens; they preferred to pay mercenary troops for
the conduct of their wars. Nor was there, as in Venice, any
outlet for their energies upon the seas. Florence had no navy,
no great port--she only kept a small fleet for the protection
of her commerce. Thus the vigour of the commonwealth was
concentrated on itself; while the influence of citizens,
through their affiliated trading-houses, correspondents, and
agents, extended like a network over Europe. ... Accordingly
we find that out of the very bosom of the people a new
plutocratic aristocracy begins to rise. ... These nobles of
the purse obtained the name of 'Popolani Nobili'; and it was
they who now began to play at high stakes for the supreme
power. ... The opening of the second half of the 14th century
had been signalised by the feuds of two great houses, both
risen from the people. These were the Albizzi and the Ricci."
The Albizzi triumphed, in the conflict of the two houses, and
became all-powerful for a time in Florence; but the wars with
the Visconti, of Milan, in which they engaged the city, made
necessary a heavy burden of taxation, which they rendered more
grievous by distributing it unfairly. "This imprudent
financial policy began the ruin of the Albizzi. It caused a
clamour in the city for a new system of more just taxation,
which was too powerful to be resisted. The voice of the people
made itself loudly heard; and with the people on this occasion
sided Giovanni de' Medici. This was in 1427. It is here that
the Medici appear upon that memorable scene where in the
future they are to play the first part. Giovanni de' Medici
did not belong to the same branch of his family as the
Salvestro who favoured the people at the time of the Ciompi
Tumult. But he adopted the same popular policy. To his sons
Cosimo and Lorenzo he bequeathed on his death-bed the rule
that they should invariably adhere to the cause of the
multitude, found their influence on that, and avoid the arts
of factious and ambitious leaders."
J. A. Symonds,
Florence and the Medici
(Sketches and Studies in Italy, chapter 5).
ALSO IN:
A. von Reumont,
Lorenzo de' Medici,
book 1, chapter 2 (volume l).
T. A. Trollope,
History of the Commonwealth of Florence,
books 4-5 (volume 2).
FLORENCE: A. D. 1390-1402.
War with Gian Galeazzo Visconti, Duke of Milan.
"Already in 1386, the growing power of Giangaleazzo Visconti,
the tenth duke of Milan of that family, began to give umbrage,
not only to all the sovereign princes: his neighbours, but
also to Florence [see MILAN: A. D. 1277-1447]. ... Florence
... had cause enough to feel uneasy at the progress of such a
man in his career of successful invasion and
usurpation;--Florence, no more specially than other of the
free towns around her, save that Florence seems always to have
thought that she had more to lose from the loss of her liberty
than any of the other cities ... and felt always called upon to
take upon herself the duty of standing forward as the champion
and supporter of the principles of republicanism and free
government. ... The Pope, Urban VI., added another element of
disturbance to the condition of Italy. For in his anxiety to
recover sundry cities mainly in Umbria and Romagna ... he was
exceedingly unscrupulous of means, and might at any moment be
found allying himself with the enemies of free government and
of the old Guelph cause in Italy. Venice, also, having most
improvidently and unwisely allied herself with Visconti,
constituted another element of danger, and an additional cause
of uneasiness and watchfulness to the Florentine government.
In the spring of 1388, therefore, a board of ten, 'Dieci di
Balia,' was elected for the general management of 'all those
measures concerning war and peace which should be adopted by
the entire Florentine people.'" The first war with Visconti
was declared by the republic in May, 1390, and was so
successfully conducted for the Florentines by Sir John
Hawkwood that it terminated in a treaty signed January 26,
1392, which bound the Duke of Milan not to meddle in any way
with the affairs of Tuscany. For ten years this agreement
seems to have been tolerably well adhered to; but in 1402 the
rapacious Duke entered upon new encroachments, which forced
the Florentines to take up arms again. Their only allies were
Bologna and Padua (or Francesco Carrara of Padua), and the
armies of the three states were defeated in a terribly bloody
battle fought near Bologna on the 26th of June. "Bologna fell
into the hands of Visconti. Great was the dismay and terror in
Florence when the news ... reached the city. It was neither
more nor less than the fall, as the historian says, of the
fortress which was the bulwark of Florence. Now she lay
absolutely open to the invader." But the invader did not come.
He was stricken with the plague and died, in September, and
Florence and Italy were saved from the tyranny which he had
seemed able to extend over the whole.
T. A. Trollope,
History of the Commonwealth of Florence,
book 4, chapters 4-5 (volume 2).
{1139}
FLORENCE: 14th-15th Centuries.
Commercial enterprise, industrial energy,
wealth and culture of the city.
"During the 14th and 15th centuries Florentine wealth
increased in an extraordinary degree. Earlier generations had
compelled the powerful barons of the district to live in the
city; and even yet the exercise of the rights of citizenship
was dependent on having a residence there. The influx of
outsiders was, however, much more owing to the attractions
offered by the city, whether in business, profession, or
pleasure, than to compulsion. ... The situation of the city is
not favorable to the natural growth of commerce, especially
under the conditions which preceded the building of railroads.
At a considerable distance from the sea, on a river navigable
only for very small craft, and surrounded by hills which
rendered difficult the construction of good roads,--the fact
that the city did prosper so marvellously is in itself proof
of the remarkable energy and ability of its people. They
needed above all things a sea-port, and to obtain a good one
they waged some of their most exhausting wars. Their principal
wealth, however, came through their financial operations,
which extended throughout Europe, and penetrated even to
Morocco and the Orient. Their manufactures also, especially of
wool and silk, brought in enormous returns, and made not only
the fortunes but also, in one famous case at least, the name
of the families engaged in them. Their superiority over the
rest of Christendom in these pursuits was but one side of that
remarkable, universal talent which is the most astonishing
feature of the Florentine life of that age. With the hardihood
of youth, they were not only ready but eager to engage in new
enterprises, whether at home or abroad. ... As a result of
their energy and ability, riches poured into their coffers,--a
mighty stream of gold, in the use of which they showed so much
judgment, that the after world has feasted to our day, and for
centuries to come, will probably continue to feast without
satiety on the good things which they caused to be made, and
left behind them. Of all the legacies for which we have to
thank Florence, none are so well known and so universally
recognized as the treasures of art created by her sons, many
of which yet remain within her walls, the marvel and delight
of all who behold them. As the Florentines were ready to try
experiments in politics, manufactures, and commerce, so also
in all branches of the fine arts they tried experiments, left
the old, beaten paths of their forefathers, and created
something original, useful, and beautiful for themselves.
Christian art from the time of the Roman Empire to Cimabue had
made comparatively little progress; but a son of the
Florentine fields was to start a revolution which should lead
to the production of some of the most marvellous works which
have proceeded from the hand of man. The idea that the fine
arts are more successfully cultivated under the patronage of
princes than under republican rule is very widespread, and is
occasionally accepted almost as a dogma; but the history of
Athens and of Florence teaches us without any doubt that the
two most artistic epochs in the history of the world have had
their rise in republics. ... Some writers, dazzled by the
splendors of the Medici, entirely lose sight of the fact that
both Dante and Petrarch were dead before the Medici were even
heard of, and that the greatest works, at least in
architecture, were all begun long before they were leaders in
Florentine affairs. That family did much, yes very much, for
the advancement of art and letters; but they did not do all or
nearly all that was done in Florence. ... Though civil discord
and foreign war were very frequent, Florentine life is
nevertheless an illustration rather of what Herbert Spencer
calls the commercial stage of civilization, than of the
war-like period. Her citizens were above all things merchants,
and were generally much more willing to pay to avoid a war than
to conduct one. They strove for glory, not in feats of arms,
but in literary contests and in peaceful emulation in the
encouragement of learning and the fine arts."
W. B. Scaife,
Florentine Life during the Renaissance,
pages 16-19.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1405-1406.
Purchase and conquest of Pisa.
See ITALY: A. D. 1402-1406.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1409-1411.
League against and war with Ladislas, King of Naples.
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1386-1414.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1423-1447.
War with the Duke of Milan.
League with Venice, Naples, and other States.
See ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1433-1464.
The ascendancy of Cosimo de' Medici.
In 1433, Cosmo, or Cosimo de' Medici, the son of Giovanni de'
Medici, was the recognized leader of the opposition to the
oligarchy controlled by Rinaldo de' Albizzi. Cosmo inherited
from his father a large fortune and a business as a merchant
and banker which he maintained and increased. "He lived
splendidly; he was a great supporter of all literary men, and
spent and distributed his great wealth amongst his fellow
citizens. He was courteous and liberal, and was looked upon
with almost unbounded respect and affection by a large party
in the state. Rinaldo was bent upon his ruin, and in 1433,
when he had a Signoria devoted to his party, he cited Cosmo
before the Council, and shut him up in a tower of the Public
Palace. Great excitement was caused by this violent step, and
two days after the Signoria held a parliament of the people.
The great bell of the city was tolled, and the people gathered
round the Palace. Then the gates of the Palace were thrown
open, and the Signoria, the Colleges of Arts, and the
Gonfaloniere came forth, and asked the people if they would
have a Balia. So a Balia was appointed, the names being
proposed by the Signoria, to decide on the fate of Cosmo. At
first it was proposed to kill him, but he was only banished,
much against the will of Rinaldo, who knew that, if he lived,
he would some day come back again. The next year the Signoria
was favourable to him; another Balia was appointed; the party
of the Albizzi was banished, and Cosmo was recalled. He was
received with a greeting such as men give to a conqueror, and
was hailed as the 'Father of his Country.' This triumphant
return gave the Medici a power in the Republic which they
never afterwards lost. The banished party fled to the court of
the Duke of Milan, and stirred him up to war against the city."
W. Hunt,
History of Italy,
chapter 6, section 5.
{1140}
"Cosimo de' Medici did not content himself with rendering his
old opponents harmless; he took care also that none of his
adherents should become too powerful and dangerous to him.
Therefore, remarks Francesco Guicciardini, he retained the
Signoria, as well as the taxes, in his hand, in order to be
able to promote or oppress individuals at will. In other
things the citizens enjoyed greater freedom and acted more
according to their own pleasure than later, in the days of his
grandson, for he let the reins hang loose if he was only sure
of his own position. It was just in this that his great art
lay, to guide things according to his will, and yet to make
his partisans believe that he shared his authority with them.
... 'It is well known' remarks [Guicciardini] ... 'how much
nobility and wealth were destroyed by Cosimo and his
descendants by taxation. The Medici never allowed a fixed
method and legal distribution, but always reserved to
themselves the power of bearing heavily upon individuals
according to their pleasure. ... He [Cosimo] maintained great
reserve in his whole manner of life. For a quarter of a
century he was the almost absolute director of the State, but
he never assumed the show of his dignity. ... The ruler of the
Florentine State remained citizen, agriculturist, and
merchant. In his appearance and bearing there was nothing
which distinguished him from others. ... He ruled the money
market, not only in Italy, but throughout Europe. He had banks
in all the western countries, and his experience and the
excellent memory which never failed him, with his strong love
of order, enabled him to guide everything from Florence, which
he never quitted after 1438." The death of Cosimo occurred on
the 1st day of August, 1464.
A. von Reumont,
Lorenzo de' Medici,
book. 1, chapters 6 and 8 (volume 1).
"The last troubled days of the Florentine democracy had not
proved quite unproductive of art. It was the time of Giotto's
undisputed sway. Many works of which the 15th century gets the
glory because it finished them were ordered and begun amidst
the confusion and terrible agitation of the demagogy. ...
Under the oligarchy, in the relative calm that came with
oppression, a taste for art as well as for letters began to
develop in Florence as elsewhere." But "Cosimo de' Medicis had
rare good fortune. In his time, and under his rule, capricious
chance united at Florence talents as numerous as they were
diverse--the universal Brunelleschi, the polished and elegant
Ghiberti, the rough and powerful Donatello, the suave
Angelico, the masculine Masaccio. ... Cosimo lived long enough
to see the collapse of the admirable talent which flourished
upon the banks of the Arno, and soon spread throughout Italy,
and to feel the void left by it. It is true his grandson saw a
new harvest, but as inferior to that which preceded it, as it
was to that which followed it."
F. T. Perrens,
History of Florence, 1434-1531,
book 1, chapter 6.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1450-1454.
Alliance with Francesco Sforza, of Milan, and war with
Venice, Naples, Savoy, and other States.
See MILAN: A. D. 1447-1454.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1458-1469.
Lucas Pitti, and the building of the Pitti Palace.
Piero de' Medici and the five agents of his tyranny.
Until 1455, Cosmo de' Medici shared the government of Florence
in some degree with Neri Capponi, an able statesman, who had
taken an eminent part in public affairs for many years--during
the domination of the Albizzi, as well as afterwards.
"When Neri Capponi died, the council refused to call a new
parliament to replace the balia, whose power expired on the
1st of July, 1455. ... The election of the signoria was again
made fairly by lot, ... the contributions were again equitably
apportioned,--the tribunals ceased to listen to the
recommendations of those who, till then, had made a traffic of
distributive justice." This recovery of freedom in Florence
was enjoyed for about three years; but when, in 1458, Lucas
Pitti, "rich, powerful, and bold," was named gonfalonier,
Cosmo conspired with him to reimpose the yoke. "Pitti
assembled the parliament; but not till he had filled all the
avenues of the public square with soldiers or armed peasants.
The people, menaced and trembling within this circle,
consented to name a new balia, more violent and tyrannical
than any of the preceding. It was composed of 352 persons, to
whom was delegated all the power of the republic. They exiled
a great number of the citizens who had shown the most
attachment to liberty, and they even put some to death." When,
in 1463, Cosmo's second son, Giovanni, on whom his hopes were
centered, died, Lucas Pitti "looked on himself henceforth as
the only chief of the state. It was about this time that he
undertook the building of that magnificent palace which now
[1832] forms the residence of the grand-dukes. The republican
equality was not only offended by the splendour of this regal
dwelling; but the construction of it afforded Pitti an
occasion for marking his contempt of liberty and the laws. He
made of this building an asylum for all fugitives from
justice, whom no public officer dared pursue when once he
[they?] took part in the labour. At the same time individuals,
as well as communities, who would obtain some favour from the
republic, knew that the only means of being heard was to offer
Lucas Pitti some precious wood or marble to be employed in the
construction of his palace. When Cosmo de' Medici died, at his
country-house of Careggi, on the 1st of August, 1464, Lucas
Pitti felt himself released from the control imposed by the
virtue and moderation of that great citizen. ... His [Cosmo's]
son, Pietro de' Medici, then 48 years of age, supposed that he
should succeed to the administration of the republic, as he
had succeeded to the wealth of his father, by hereditary
right: but the state of his health did not admit of his
attending regularly to business, or of his inspiring his
rivals with much fear. To diminish the weight of affairs which
oppressed him, he resolved on withdrawing a part of his immense
fortune from commerce; recalling all his loans made in
partnership with other merchants; and laying out this money in
land. But this unexpected demand of considerable capital
occasioned a fatal shock to the commerce of Florence; at the
same time that it alienated all the debtors of the house of
Medici, and deprived it of much of its popularity. The death
of Sforza, also, which took place on the 8th of March, 1466,
deprived the Medicean party of its firmest support abroad. ...
The friends of liberty at Florence soon perceived that Lucas
Pitti and Pietro de' Medici no longer agreed together; and
they recovered courage when the latter proposed to the council
the calling of a parliament, in order to renew the balia, the
power of which expired on the 1st of September, 1465; his
proposition was rejected.
{1141}
The magistracy began again to be drawn by lot from among the
members of the party victorious in 1434. This return of
liberty, however, was but of short duration. Pitti and Medici
were reconciled: they agreed to call a parliament, and to
direct it in concert; to intimidate it, they surrounded it
with foreign troops. But Medici, on the nomination of the
balia, on the 2d of September, 1466, found means of admitting
his own partisans only, and excluding all those of Lucas
Pitti. The citizens who had shown any zeal for liberty were
all exiled. ... Lucas Pitti ruined himself in building his
palace. His talents were judged to bear no proportion to his
ambition: the friends of liberty, as well as those of Medici,
equally detested him; and he remained deprived of all power in
a city which he had so largely contributed to enslave. Italy
became filled with Florentine emigrants: every revolution,
even every convocation of parliament, was followed by the
exile of many citizens. ... At Florence, the citizens who
escaped proscription trembled to see despotism established in
their republic; but the lower orders were in general
contented, and made no attempt to second Bartolomeo Coleoni,
when he entered Tuscany, in 1467, at the head of the
Florentine emigrants, who had taken him into their pay.
Commerce prospered; manufactures were carried on with great
activity; high wages supported in comfort all who lived by
their labour; and the Medici entertained them with shows and
festivals, keeping them in a sort of perpetual carnival,
amidst which the people soon lost all thought of liberty.
Pietro de' Medici was always in too bad a state of health to
exercise in person the sovereignty he had usurped over his
country; he left it to five or six citizens, who reigned in
his name. ... They not only transacted all business, but
appropriated to themselves all the profit; they sold their
influence and credit; they gratified their cupidity or their
vengeance; but they took care not to act in their own names,
or to pledge their own responsibility; they left that to the
house of Medici. Pietro, during the latter months of his life,
perceived the disorder and corruption of his agents. He was
afflicted to see his memory thus stained, and he addressed
them the severest reprimands; he even entered into
correspondence with the emigrants, whom he thought of
recalling, when he died, on the 2d of December, 1469. His two
sons, Lorenzo and Giuliano, the elder of whom was not 21 years
of age, ... given up to all the pleasures of their age, had
yet no ambition. The power of the state remained in the hands
of the five citizens who had exercised it under Pietro."
J. C. L. de Sismondi,
History of the Italian Republics,
chapter 11.
FLORENCE: A. D. 1469-1492.
The conspiracy of the Pazzi.
The government of Lorenzo the Magnificent.
The death of liberty.
The golden age of letters and art.
"Lorenzo inherited his grandfather's political sagacity and
far surpassed him in talent and literary culture. In many
respects too he was a very different man. Cosimo never left
his business office; Lorenzo neglected it, and had so little
commercial aptitude that he was obliged to retire from
business, in order not to lose his abundant patrimony. Cosimo
was frugal in his personal expenses and lent freely to others;
Lorenzo loved splendid living, and thus gained the title of
the Magnificent; he spent immoderately for the advancement of
literary men; he gave himself up to dissipation which ruined
his health and shortened his days. His manner of living
reduced him to such straits, that he had to sell some of his
possessions and obtain money from his friends. Nor did this
suffice; for he even meddled with the public money, a thing
that had never happened in Cosimo's time. Very often, in his
greed of unlawful gain, he had the Florentine armies paid by
his own bank; he also appropriated the sums collected in the
Monte Comune or treasury of the public debt, and those in the
Monte delle Fanciulle where were marriage portions accumulated
by private savings--money hitherto held sacred by all.
Stimulated by the same greed, he, in the year 1472 joined the
Florentine contractors for the wealthy alum mines of Volterra,
at the moment in which that city was on the verge of rebellion
in order to free itself from a contract which it deemed
unjust. And Lorenzo, with the weight of his authority, pushed
matters to such a point that war broke out, soon to be
followed by a most cruel sack of the unhappy city, a very
unusual event in Tuscany. For all this he was universally
blamed. But he was excessively haughty and cared for no man;
he would tolerate no equals, would be first in
everything--even in games. He interfered in all matters, even
in private concerns and in marriages: nothing could take place
without his consent. In overthrowing the powerful and exalting
men of low condition, he showed none of the care and
precaution so uniformly observed by Cosimo. It is not then
surprising if his enemies increased so fast that the
formidable conspiracy of the Pazzi broke out on the 26th April
1478. In this plot, hatched in the Vatican itself where Sixtus
IV. was Lorenzo's determined enemy, many of the mightiest
Florentine families took part. In the cathedral, at the moment
of the elevation of the Host, the conspirators' daggers were
unsheathed. Giuliano dei Medici was stabbed to death, but
Lorenzo defended himself with his sword and saved his own
life. The tumult was so great that it seemed as though the
walls of the church were shaken. The populace rose to the cry
of 'Palle! Palle!' the Medici watchword, and the enemies of
the Medici were slaughtered in the streets or hung from the
windows of the Palazzo Veechio. There, among others, were seen
the dangling corpses of Archbishop Salviati and of Francesco
Pazzi, who in their last struggles had gripped each other with
their teeth and remained thus for some time. More than seventy
persons perished on that day, and Lorenzo, taking advantage of
the opportunity, pushed matters to extremity by his
confiscations, banishments, and sentences of death. Thereby
his power would have been infinitely increased if Pope Sixtus
IV., blinded by rage, had not been induced to excommunicate
Florence, and make war against it, in conjunction with
Ferdinand of Aragon. On this Lorenzo, without losing a moment,
went straight to Naples, and made the king understand how much
better it served his interests that Florence should have but
one ruler instead of a republican government, always liable to
change and certainly never friendly to Naples. So he returned
with peace re-established and boundless authority and
popularity. Now indeed he might have called himself lord of
the city, and it must have seemed easy to him to destroy the
republican government altogether.
{1142}
With his pride and ambition it is certain that he had an
intense desire to stand on the same level with the other
princes and tyrants of Italy; the more so as at that moment
success seemed entirely within his grasp. But Lorenzo showed
that his political shrewdness was not to be blinded by