oratory. Amid the universal corruption of public
morals, from the depth of sloth and servitude, when
the reality of liberty was lost, when fate and fortune
had combined to render constitutional reconstruction
impossible for the shattered republics of Italy, the
intellect of the Florentines displayed itself with
more than its old vigor in a series of the most brilliant
political writers who have ever illustrated one short
but eventful period in the life of a single nation.
That period is marked by the years 1494 and 1537.
It embraces the two final efforts of the Florentines
to shake off the Medicean yoke, the disastrous siege
at the end of which they fell a prey to the selfishness
of their own party-leaders, the persecution of Savonarola
by Pope Alexander, the Church-rule of Popes Leo and
Clement, the extinction of the elder branch of the
Medici in its two bastards (Ippolito, poisoned by
his brother Alessandro, and Alessandro poignarded by
his cousin Lorenzino), and the final eclipse of liberty
beneath the Spain-appointed dynasty of the younger
Medicean line in Duke Cosimo. The names of the
historians of this period are Niccolo Machiavelli,
Jacopo Nardi, Francesco Guicciardini, Filippo Nerli,
Donato Giannotti, Benedetto Varchi, Bernardo Segni,
and Jacopo Pitti.[1] In these men the mental qualities
which we admire in the Villani, Dante, and Compagni
reappear, combined, indeed, in different proportions,
tempered with the new philosophy and scholarship of
the Renaissance, and permeated with quite another
morality. In the interval of two centuries freedom
has been lost. It is only the desire for freedom
that survives. But that, after the apathy of
the fifteenth century, is still a passion. The
rectitude of instinct and the intense convictions of
the earlier age have been exchanged for a scientific
clairvoyance, a ’stoic-epicurean acceptance’
of the facts of vitiated civilization, which in men
like Guicciardini and Machiavelli is absolutely appalling.
Nearly all the authors of this period bear a double
face. They write one set of memoirs for the public,
and another set for their own delectation. In
their inmost souls they burn with the zeal for liberty:
yet they sell their abilities to the highest bidder—to
Popes whom they despise, and to Dukes whom they revile
in private. What makes the literary labors of
these historians doubly interesting is that they were
carried on for the most part independently; for though
they lived at the same time, and in some cases held
familiar conversation with each other, they gave expression
to different shades of political opinion, and their
histories remained in manuscript till some time after
their death.[2] The student of the Renaissance has,
therefore the advantage of comparing and confronting
a whole band of independent witnesses to the same events.
Beside their own deliberate criticism of the drama
in which all played some part as actors or spectators,
we can use the not less important testimony they afford
unconsciously, according to the bias of private or
political interest by which they are severally swayed.