That Piero’s relation to the distinguished and influential members of his party was not that of his father is evident. If his character had been different, his health stronger, and his action prompter, he would still have not attained to Cosimo’s authority, the fruit of many years’ experience and unusually favourable circumstances. It had even been difficult for Cosimo, with all his skill and activity, to attach permanently to him men who only acknowledged his supremacy because it was for their interest to do so. ‘In Florence,’ says Francesco Guicciardini,[177] ‘the citizens love equality by nature, and yield unwillingly when they should acknowledge anyone as their superior. Besides this, our head men are restless and active, so that the few who guide affairs do not understand each other; and in the desire to surpass each other, one draws in one direction and one in the other, whence it naturally follows that the guidance is uncertain. This disinclination to the preponderance of others has for its result, that on the slightest occasion the existing government falls into ruin. For as the greatness of others displeases all who do not belong to their circle, so it cannot exist if it has not a sure foundation. But where shall this sure foundation be, when they who have the power in their hands at this minute are disunited?’ If we could give full credit to Machiavelli, Piero de’ Medici, uneasy at the increasing arbitrariness of his own partisans, after the failure of the conspiracy of 1466, and urged by his conscience, was only prevented by his death from attempting to neutralise the influence of his overpowerful friends. In order to cover his responsibility, as he was no longer able to restrain their ambition and covetousness, he had called them to him in order to represent to them into what danger they brought the commonwealth by their appropriation of all offices and honourable positions, as well as by the heavy pressure exercised on all the citizens. As his representations availed nothing, he determined to put himself into communication with the moderate among the opponents who were living in exile, and Messer Agnolo Acciaiuoli, the calmest and most reasonable of all, was secretly summoned to his country-seat, Cafaggiuolo, in order to consult with him. Had he lived longer, he would have recalled the exiles in order to put an end to the system of plunder of the prevailing party. It is as doubtful whether this information be correct as it is uncertain, in the peculiar position of the political parties, whether a measure of this kind, the carrying out of which would have dissolved the prevailing Medicean faction, would have been possible without a deep and dangerous convulsion. The Medici were too firmly united to their party to separate from it so easily, and to ally themselves with those who had just threatened to ruin them by conspiracy and war.[178]
Placed between a celebrated father and a more celebrated son, Piero de’ Medici, who did not guide the State much above five years, stands necessarily in the shade. But it would be a mistake to believe that he was despised. The respect which so practised a politician as King Ferrante constantly showed him was not caused by interested motives only. In the Colleonic war, only Naples and Florence were united, and Piero had actively influenced this good understanding: but for him the distrust awakened in the councils by the backward preparations of the Neapolitans would have prevailed.[179] The king attached great importance to Piero’s approval, and repeatedly commissioned his ambassador as well as his son never to act otherwise than according to his opinion and sensible advice. When Alfonso of Calabria joined the army in August 1467 (when there was nothing more to do), he wrote to him as follows: ‘If it appear fitting to the illustrious Piero that you go to Florence, we would remind you that you have to employ all industry and zeal, and to take all pains to do honour to yourself, and to appear a son worthy of us. Set all your ingenuity to work by means of expressions of kindness and politeness, such as are due to the friendship which the illustrious Florentine people has concluded with us.’[180] Beside Piero, the Duke was especially to consult Messer Tommaso Soderini and Antonio Ridolfi, and adapt himself so to the wishes of the Florentine government as if they were the commands of his royal father.
CHAPTER V.
HOME AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS IN THE EARLY YEARS OF LORENZO’S GOVERNMENT.
‘On the second day after my father’s death,’ so we read in Lorenzo de’ Medici’s memoirs, ‘the most distinguished men of the State and of the ruling party came to our house to express their condolence, and at the same time to request me to undertake the conduct of affairs in the city and government, as my father and grandfather had done. As such a responsibility seemed too great for my inexperience (I was only twenty-one), and involved so much labour and so many dangers, I accepted it unwillingly and only for the sake of our friends and fortune, for those who are shut out from political influence have a bad position in Florence. Hitherto (the beginning of 1471) all has succeeded to the general honour and satisfaction, not in consequence of my wisdom, but by God’s grace and by reason of the wise measures of my predecessors.’
These words show clearly how the matter stood, and justify the opinion which Francesco Guicciardini[181] puts into the mouth of one of his interlocutors. ‘The government of the Medici,’ says Bernardo del Nero, ‘was a party government, usurped by the party, preserved by tyranny, neither violent nor cruel, except in a few cases in which they were constrained by necessity, but founded upon the policy of favouring the lower classes, uniting the interests of the stronger with their own interests, and suppressing all who seemed inclined to go their own way. As the power passed from father to son, the memory of ancient rivalry and enmity lived on. The Medici had always more their private advantage at heart than the general good. But as they had neither any position nor Signoria abroad, their interest was generally one with that of the commonwealth, whose glory and fame were likewise theirs. But even with so keen-sighted a man as Lorenzo, such a position might easily lead to errors, and we shall see what mistakes he did make in important cases to the great disadvantage of the State, either by allowing himself to be carried away by passion or by regarding only his personal position and advantage, always under the pretext that his greatness and that of his family was necessary to the common good.
Lorenzo had taken so large a share in the conduct of affairs in his father’s last years, and displayed such capabilities, that we need not be surprised if, after the authority of the Medici had been acknowledged now for two generations, all eyes should have been directed towards him, notwithstanding his youth, which excluded him from offices of State. Without an understanding between the heads of the party, however, he could not have been offered the responsible position of which he has told us. Piero had, on his death-bed, recommended his two sons to his brother-in-law, Tommaso Soderini, on whose prudence and attachment he placed great reliance. Since Tommaso had essentially contributed to save the cause of the Medici in the conspiracy of 1466, he had been in constant activity. He had not been able to persuade the Venetians to hinder Colleone’s proceedings, but, as member of the magistracy of war, and during the fourth year that he was elected Gonfaloniere in 1467, he had exercised a favourable influence on the conduct of affairs, and honestly exerted himself for the restoration of peace with Borso d’Este, first in Venice and afterwards in Milan. The opinion of him was so high in Florence that he could easily have raised himself to the leadership of the ruling party. But whether it was that he would not betray the confidence reposed in him, or that he was of opinion that the preservation of this family in the position they had held now for thirty-five years was at the same time the preservation of the peace and safety of the State at home, as well as of its connections with foreign states, he abstained from following Diotisalvi Neroni’s example. Immediately after Piero’s death, on the evening of the day when he had been interred, Soderini summoned to him all the distinguished citizens attached to the existing government. More than six hundred, ‘the flower of the city,’ assembled in the convent of Sant’Antonio, in the neighbourhood of Porta Faenza. It was here determined to preserve unity and the present state of affairs, and to leave Piero’s sons in their father’s position. ‘Messer Tommaso Soderini,’ writes the Ferrarese ambassador, ‘took the word as eldest, and explained how Piero had left his sons already grown up and gifted with good judgment and intellect. Out of regard for their predecessors, and especially Cosimo and Piero, who had always been friends, protectors, and preservers of the commonwealth and benefactors of the State, for which reason they had taken the first rank and borne the whole weight of government wisely and with dignity, always displaying courage and mature judgment, it seemed to him that they should leave to Piero’s family and sons, notwithstanding their youth, the honourable position which he himself and Cosimo had enjoyed. He added that he saw the two no less considerate and desirous of winning the good opinion of the commune, and of all the Florentine citizens, than their grandfather and father. This was confirmed by three or four of those present, by Messer Manno, son-in-law of Messer Luca Pitti, who was not himself present, by Messer Giannozzo Pitti, and Domenico Martelli. The last two remarked that a master and a head was needed to give the casting-vote in public affairs.[182] The whole city,’ adds Guicciardini, ‘agreed to this, chiefly through the exertions of Messer Tommaso Soderini, who at that time enjoyed more authority than any other citizen, and was, perhaps, the wisest of all. He thought that Lorenzo, on account of his youth, and because he owed his position to him, so to speak, would allow himself to be guided by him; in this, however, he was mistaken.’[183]
That Lorenzo considered the favourable opinion of himself as by no means sufficient to secure his authority, shows on the one hand how he, young as he was, had sounded the unsteady basis on which the whole fabric of the State rests in a commonwealth of this kind, and on the other hand, how his thoughts were immediately directed to gaining a position no longer dependent upon internal agitation, such as had disturbed his grandfather’s administration and endangered the life of his father. A report of the Ferrarese ambassador plainly shows how the heads of the ruling party hoped to conduct affairs after Piero’s death. ‘They are agreed that the private affairs of the Signoria shall pass through Lorenzo’s hands in the same manner as previously through those of his father, for which purpose his friends will take care to procure him credit and reputation from the beginning. They can easily do so, for they have the government in their hands, and the ballot-boxes at their disposal. Others with whom I have spoken are of a different opinion, and think that within a few days all affairs will again be disposed of in the palace (i.e. by the magistrates themselves). If, however, they guide the bark rightly at the beginning, and while they can influence the election of the magistrates, I believe they will reach the desired haven, for the philosopher says, “Principium est plus quam dimidium totius.”’ The ambassador was right; he could not, however, foresee the measure of Lorenzo’s personal share in this gradual change of a republican constitution into one that was guided by the will of a single man. He had scarcely attained the head of the State when he began the work which he brought to a termination ten years later, after the violent storm which had threatened his life.