CHAPTER XXIV. Diversity of opinion respecting the character of Leo X.-Causes of such diversity From his family connexions-From political enmities-From his conduct as head of the church-Inquiry into his real character-His person and manners-His intellectual endowments-His political conduct-His ecclesiastical character-His supposed neglect of sacred literature-Charges of profligacy and irreligion-Aspersions on his moral character-His relaxations and amusements-Encouragement of letters and arts-How far he was rivalled in this respect by the other princes of his time-Conclusion. AMONG all the individuals of ancient or modern times, who, by the circumstances of their lives, by their virtues, or by their talents, have attracted the attention of mankind, there is pernaps no one whose character has stood in so doubtful a light as that of Leo X. From the time of his pontificate to the present day, the applauses so liberally bestowed upon him by some, have been counterbalanced by the accusations and reproaches of others, and numerous causes have concurred in giving rise to erroneous opinions and violent prejudices respecting him, into which it may now be necessary, or at least excusable, to insti tute a dispassionate inquiry. That distinguished excellence, or even superior rank and elevation, is as certainly attended by envy and detraction as the substance is followed by the shadow, has been the standing remark of all ages; but independently of this common ground of attack, Leo X. was, from various circumstances, the peculiar object of censure and of abuse. This liability to misrepresentation commenced with his birth, which occurred in the bosom of a city at all times agitated by internal commotions, and where the pre-eminent station which his family had long occupied, rendered its members obnoxious to the attacks and reproaches of their political opponents. Hence almost all contemporary historians may be considered as partisans, either warmly attached, or decidedly adverse to him; a circumstance highly unfavourable to the impartiality of historical truth, and which has tinged the current of information at its very source with the peculiar colouring of the narrator. Nor did these prejudices cease with the death of Leo X. The exalted rank which its family afterwards acquired by its near connexion with the royal house of France, and the important part which some of its members acted in the affairs of Europe, are circumstances, which, whilst they recalled the ancestors and relations of the Medici to more particular notice, gave occasion to the warmest sentiments of commendation and of flattery on the one hand, and to the most unbounded expressions of contempt and of exccration on the other. 317 Another source of the great diversity of opinion respecting this pontiff, is to be traced to the high office which he filled, and to the manner in which he conducted himself in the political concerns of the times. As many of the Italian potentates, during the wars which desolated Italy, attached themselves to the cause of foreign powers, in like manner several of the Italian historians have espoused in their writings the interests of other nations, and have hence been led to regard the conduct of Leo X. with an unfavourable eye, as the result of an ambitious and restless disposition. This indifference to the independence and common cause of Italy, is observable even in the greatest of the Italian historians, and has led Guicciardini himself unjustly to depreciate, rather than duly to estimate, the merits of the pontiff. The same dereliction of national and patriotic spirit is yet more apparent in Muratori, who has frequently written with too evident a partiality to the cause of the French monarchs; a partiality which is perhaps to be accounted for from the close alliance which subsisted between them and the ancestors of his great patrons, the family of Este. It may further be observed, that Leo frequently exerted his authority, and even employed his arms, against the inferior potentates of Italy, some of whom severely felt the weight of his resentment: and that these princes have also had their annalists and panegyrists, who have not scrupled, on many occasions, to sacrifice the reputation of the pontiff to that of their patrons. To these may be added various other causes of offence, as well of a public as of a private nature, unavoidably given by the pontiff in the course of his pontificate, and which afforded a plausible opportunity to those whom he had offended, of vilifying his private character, and loading his memory with calumny and abuse. But the most fruitful cause of animosity against Leo X. is to be found in the violence of religious zeal and sectarian hatred. That he was chief of the Roman church has frequently been thought a sufficient reason for attacking him with the most illiberal invectives. To aspersions of this nature he was more particularly exposed by the circumstances of the times in which he lived, and by the part which he was obliged to act in opposing the progress of the Reformation. In this kind of warfare, Luther was himself a thorough proficient; nor have his disciples and advocates shown any want of ability in following his example. Still more unfortunate is it for the character of Leo, that whilst, by the measures which he adopted against the reformers, he drew down upon himself their most unlimited abuse, he has not always had the good fortune to escape the severe censure of the adherents of the Romish church; many of whom have accused him of a criminal lenity, in neglecting to suppress the new opinions by more efficacious measures, and of attending to his own aggrandizement or gratification, whilst the church of Christ was suffering for want of that aid which it was in his power alone to afford. 3 318 The difficulties which arise from these various representations respecting the character of Leo X., instead of deterring us from further inquiry, render it a still greater object of speculation and curiosity. What then, we may ask, were his personal and intellectual accomplishments? Was he a man of talents, or a mere favourite of fortune? Will his public and private conduct stand the test of an impartial examination? In what degree is the world indebted to him for the extraordinary proficiency in literature and the arts which took place during his pontificate? Such are some of the questions which naturally arise, and to which it is now reasonable to expect a reply. That the hand of nature has impressed on the external form and features indications of the mind by which they are animated, is an opinion that has of late received considerable support, and which, under certain restrictions, may be admitted to be well founded. From the accounts which have been transmitted to us of the countenance and person of Leo X., and from the authentic portraits of him which yet remain, there is reason to believe that his general appearance bespoke an uncommon character; and the skilful physiognomist might yet, perhaps, delight to trace, in the exquisite picture of him by Raffaello, the expressions of those propensities, qualities, and talents, by which he was more peculiarly distinguished. In stature he was much above the common standard. His person was well formed; his habit rather full than corpulent ;319 but his limbs, although elegantly shaped, appeared somewhat too slender in proportion to his body. Although the size of his head, and the amplitude of his features, approached to an extreme, yet they exhibited a certain degree of dignity which commanded respect. His complexion was florid: his eyes were large, round, and prominent, even to a defect; insomuch, that he could not discern distan+* objects without the aid of a glass, by the assistance of which, it was observed, that in hunting and country sports, to which he was much addicted, he saw to a greater distance than any of his attendants. His hands were peculiarly white and well formed, and he took great pleasure in decorating them with gems. His voice was remarkable for softness and flexibility, which enabled him to express his feelings with great effect. On serious and important occasions no one spoke with more gravity; on common concerns with more facility; on jocular subjects with more hilarity. From his early years he displayed a conciliating urbanity of manner, which seemed perfectly natural to him, but which was probably not less the effect of education than of disposition; no pains having been spared in impressing on his mind the great advantage of those manners and accomplishments which soften animosity and attract esteem. On his first arrival at Rome, he soon obtained the favourable opinion of his fellowcardinals by his uncommon mildness, good temper, and affability, which led him to resist no one with violence, but rather to give way when opposed with any great degree of earnestness. With the old he could be serious, with the young jocose; his visitors he entertained with great attention and kindness, frequently taking them by the hand and addressing them in affectionate terms, and on some occasions embracing them, as the manners of the times allowed. Hence, all who knew him agreed that he possessed the best possible disposition, and behieved themselves to be the objects of his particular friendship an regard; an opinion which, on his part, he endeavoured to promote, not only by the most sedulous and unremitting attention, but by frequent acts of generosity. Nor can it be doubted, that to his uniform perseverance in this conduct he was chiefly indebted for the high dignity which he attained so early in life, 320 In his intellectual endowments Leo X. stood much above the common level of mankind. If he appears not to have been gifted with those creative powers which are properly characterised by the name of genius, he may justly be said to have displayed the highest species of talent, and in general, to have regarded the times in which he lived, and the objects which presented themselves to his notice, with a comprehensive and discriminating eye. His abilities have indeed been uniformly admitted, even by those who have in other respects been sparing in his praise.* That he was not affected by the superstitious notions so prevalent in his own times, is itself a proof of a clear and vigorous mind. 321 The memory of Leo was remarkable ; and as he read with great patience and perseverance, frequently interrupting and prolonging his meals by the pleasure which he took in this employment, so he obtained a very extensive acquaintance with the historical events of former times. In the regulation of his diet he adhered to the strictest rules of temperance, even beyond the usual restraints of the church. Although not perhaps perfectly accomplished as a scholar, yet he was well versed in the Latin language, which he both spoke and wrote with elegance and facility, and had a competent knowledge of the Greek. Nor ought it greatly to diminish our opinion of him in this respect, that Bembo has thought proper to detract from his reputation for learning, when we consider that this ungenerous insinuation was intended merely to flatter the reigning pontiff, Paul III., at the expense of his more illustrious predecessor.3 322 By Jovius we are informed that he wrote verses both in Italian and in Latin. The former have in all probability perished. Of the latter a single specimen only is known, which has already been submitted to the judgment of the reader.† In his political. character, the great objects which Leo appears to have generally pursued, sufficiently evince the Guicciard. lib. 14. + Vide ante, chap. xxii., and App. No. XII. |