he tyrannies, great and small, of the fourteenth century afford
constant proof that examples such as these were not thrown away. Their
misdeeds cried forth loudly and have been circumstantially told by
historians. As States depending for existence on themselves alone, and
scientifically organized with a view to this object, they present to us
a higher interest than that of mere narrative.
The deliberate adaptation of means to ends, of which no prince out of
Italy had at that time a conception, joined to almost absolute power
within the limits of the State, produced among the despots both men and
modes of life of a peculiar character. The chief secret of government
in the hands of the prudent ruler lay in leaving the incidence of
taxation as far as possible where he found it, or as he had first
arranged it. The chief sources of income were: a land tax, based on a
valuation; definite taxes on articles of consumption and duties on
exported and imported goods: together with the private fortune of the
ruling house. The only possible increase was derived from the growth of
business and of general prosperity. Loans, such as we find in the free
cities, were here unknown; a well-planned confiscation was held a
preferable means of raising money, provided only that it left public
credit unshaken--an end attained, for example, by the truly Oriental
practice of deposing and plundering the director of the finances.
Out of this income the expenses of the little court, of the bodyguard,
of the mercenary troops, and of the public buildings were met, as well
as of the buffoons and men of talent who belonged to the personal
attendants of the prince. The illegitimacy of his rule isolated the
tyrant and surrounded him with constant danger, the most honorable
alliance which he could form was with intellectual merit, without
regard to its origin. The liberality of the northern princes of the
thirteenth century was confined to the knights, to the nobility which
served and sang. It was otherwise with the Italian despot. With his
thirst for fame and his passion for monumental works, it was talent,
not birth, which he needed. In the company of the poet and the scholar
he felt himself in a new position, almost, indeed, in possession of a
new legitimacy.
No prince was more famous in this respect than the ruler of Verona, Can
Grande della Scala, who numbered among the illustrious exiles whom he
entertained at his court representatives of the whole of Italy. The men
of letters were not ungrateful. Petrarch, whose visits at the courts of
such men have been so severely censured, sketched an ideal picture of a
prince of the fourteenth century. He demands great things from his
patron, the lord of Padua, but in a manner which shows that he holds
him capable of them. 'Thou must not be the master but the father of thy
subjects, and must love them as thy children; yea, as members of thy
body. Weapons, guards, and soldiers thou mayest employ against the
enemy---with thy subjects goodwill is sufficient. By citizens, of
course, I mean those who love the existing order; for those who daily
desire change are rebels and traitors, and against such a stern justice
may take its course.'
Here follows, worked out in detail, the purely modern fiction of the
omnipotence of the State. The prince is to take everything into his
charge, to maintain and restore churches and public buildings, to keep
up the municipal police, to drain the marshes, to look after the supply
of wine and corn; so to distribute the taxes that the people can
recognize their necessity; he is to support the sick and the helpless,
and to give his protection and society to distinguished scholars, on
whom his fame in after ages will depend.
But whatever might be the brighter sides of the system, and the merits
of individual rulers, yet the men of the fourteenth century were not
without a more or less distinct consciousness of the brief and
uncertain tenure of most of these despotisms. Inasmuch as political
institutions like these are naturally secure in proportion to the size
of the territory in which they exist, the larger principalities were
constantly tempted to swallow up the smaller. Whole hecatombs of petty
rulers were sacrificed at this time to the Visconti alone. As a result
of this outward danger an inward ferment was in ceaseless activity; and
the effect of the situation on the character of the ruler was generally
of the most sinister kind. Absolute power, with its temptations to
luxury and unbridled selfishness, and the perils to which he was
exposed from enemies and conspirators, turned him almost inevitably
into a tyrant in the worst sense of the word. Well for him if he could
trust his nearest relations! But where all was illegitimate, there
could be no regular law of inheritance, either with regard to the
succession or to the division of the ruler's property; and consequently
the heir, if incompetent or a minor, was liable in the interest of the
family itself to be supplanted by an uncle or cousin of more resolute
character. The acknowledgment or exclusion of the bastards was a
fruitful source of contest and most of these families in consequence
were plagued with a crowd of discontented and vindictive kinsmen. This
circumstance gave rise to continual outbreaks of treason and to
frightful scenes of domestic bloodshed. Sometimes the pretenders lived
abroad in exile, like the Visconti, who practiced the fisherman's craft
on the Lake of Garda, viewed the situation with patient indifference.
When asked by a messenger of his rival when and how he thought of
returning to Milan, he gave the reply, 'By the same means as those by
which I was expelled, but not till his crimes have outweighed my own.'
Sometimes, too, the despot was sacrificed by his relations, with the
view of saving the family, to the public conscience which he had too
grossly outraged. In a few cases the government was in the hands of the
whole family, or at least the ruler was bound to take their advice; and
here, too, the distribution of property and influence often led to
bitter disputes.
The whole of this system excited the deep and persistent hatred of the
Florentine writers of that epoch. Even the pomp and display with which
the despot was perhaps less anxious to gratify his own vanity than to
impress the popular imagination, awakened their keenest sarcasm. Woe to
an adventurer if he fell into their hands, like the upstart Doge
Agnello of Pisa (1364), who used to ride out with a golden scepter, and
show himself at the window of his house, 'as relics are shown,'
reclining on embroidered drapery and cushions, served like a pope or
emperor, by kneeling attendants. More often, however, the old
Florentines speak on this subject in a tone of lofty seriousness. Dante
saw and characterized well the vulgarity and commonplace which marked
the ambition of the new princes. 'What else mean their trumpets and
their bells, their horns and their flutes, but "come, hangmen come,
vultures!"' The castle of the tyrant, as pictured by the popular mind,
is lofty and solitary, full of dungeons and listening-tubes, the home
of cruelty and misery. Misfortune is foretold to all who enter the
service of the despot, who even becomes at last himself an object of
pity: he must needs be the enemy of all good and honest men: he can
trust no one and can read in the faces of his subjects the expectation
of his fall. 'As despotisms rise, grow, and are consolidated, so grows
in their midst the hidden element which must produce their dissolution
and ruin.' But the deepest ground of dislike has not been stated;
Florence was then the scene of the richest development of human
individuality, while for the despots no other individuality could be
suffered to live and thrive but their own and that of their nearest
dependents. The control of the individual was rigorously carried out,
even down to the establishment of a system of passports.
The astrological superstitions and the religious unbelief of many of
the tyrants gave, in the minds of their contemporaries, a peculiar
color to this awful and God-forsaken existence. When the last Carrara
could no longer defend the walls and gates of the plague-stricken
Padua, hemmed in on all sides by the Venetians (1405), the soldiers of
the guard heard him cry to the devil 'to come and kill him.'
* * *
The most complete and instructive type of the tyranny of the fourteenth
century is to be found unquestionably among the Visconti of Milan, from
the death of the Archbishop Giovanni onwards (1354). The family
likeness which shows itself between Bernabo and the worst of the Roman
Emperors is unmistakable; the most important public object was the
prince's boar-hunting; whoever interfered with it was put to death with
torture, the terrified people were forced to maintain 5,000 boar
hounds, with strict responsibility for their health and safety. The
taxes were extorted by every conceivable sort of compulsion; seven
daughters of the prince received a dowry of 100,000 gold florins
apiece; and an enormous treasure was collected. On the death of his
wife (1384) an order was issued 'to the subjects' to share his grief,
as once they had shared his joy, and to wear mourning for a year. The
coup de main (1385) by which his nephew Giangaleazzo got him into his
power--one of those brilliant plots which make the heart of even late
historians beat more quickly was strikingly characteristic of the man .
In Giangaleazzo that passion for the colossal which was common to most
of the despots shows itself on the largest scale. He undertook, at the
cost of 300,000 golden florins, the construction of gigantic dikes, to
divert in case of need the Mincio from Mantua and the Brenta from
Padua, and thus to render these cities defenseless. It is not
impossible, indeed, that he thought of draining away the lagoons of
Venice. He founded that most wonderful of all convents, the Certosa of
Pavia and the cathedral of Milan, 'which exceeds in size and splendor
all the churches of Christendom.' The palace in Pavia, which his father
Galeazzo began and which he himself finished, was probably by far the
most magnificent of the princely dwellings of Europe. There he
transferred his famous library, and the great collection of relics of
the saints, in which he placed a peculiar faith. It would have been
strange indeed if a prince of this character had not also cherished the
highest ambitions in political matters. King Wenceslaus made him Duke
(1395); he was hoping for nothing less than the Kingdom of Italy or the
Imperial crown, when (1402) he fell ill and died. His whole territories
are said to have paid him in a single year, besides the regular
contribution of 1,200,000 gold florins, no less than 800,000 more in
extraordinary subsidies. After his death the dominions which he had
brought together by every sort of violence fell to pieces: and for a
time even the original nucleus could with difficulty be maintained by
his successors. What might have become of his sons Giovanni Maria (died
1412) and Filippo Maria (died 1447), had they lived in a different
country and under other traditions, cannot be said. But, as heirs of
their house, they inherited that monstrous capital of cruelty and
cowardice which had been accumulated from generation to generation.
Giovanni Maria, too, is famed for his dogs, which were no longer,
however, used for hunting but for tearing human bodies. Tradition has
preserved their names, like those of the bears of Emperor Valentinian
I. In May, 1409, when war was going on, and the starving populace cried
to him in the streets, Pace! Pace! he let loose his mercenaries upon
them, and 200 lives were sacrificed; under penalty of the gallows it
was forbidden to utter the words pace and guerra, and the priests were
ordered, instead of dona nobis pacem, to say tranquillitatem! At
last a band of conspirators took advantage of the moment when Facino
Cane, the chief Condotierre of the insane ruler, lay in at Pavia, and
cut down Giovanni Maria in the church of San Gottardo at Milan; the
dying Facino on the same day made his officers swear to stand by the
heir Filippo Maria, whom he himself urged his wife to take for a second
husband. His wife, Beatrice di Tenda, followed his advice. We shall
have occasion to speak of Filippo Maria later on.
And in times like these Cola di Rienzi was dreaming of founding on the
rickety enthusiasm of the corrupt population of Rome a new State which
was to comprise all Italy. By the side of rulers such as those whom we
have described, he seems no better than a poor deluded fool.