SOCIAL UPHEAVALS OF THE MIDDLE OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY
[1339-1353 A.D.]
Democracy had not had for the Florentines the disadvantage sometimes attributed to it—that of making great enterprises impossible. It was their ruling spirit; and, being neither an expedient of empiricism nor yet a deduction of theory, it had not limited the advance of their external power which absorbed their former rivals, Arezzo and Pistoia, and reduced Siena to a tributary state. But in the interior of their town itself they had always opposed a weak resistance to those fatal quarrels which so often caused them to fall into a state of anarchy. Nobles deprived of their rights, and finding in persecution that sustenance of life which would soon have failed them had they been left to degenerate in their narrow caste; burghers in possession of the privileges of which they had despoiled the nobles, and which they guarded fiercely, like a new garden of the Hesperides; lastly the people, who climbed to the assault as the burghers had climbed before them—all kept up an agitation with a contrary aim, but incessant, weakening the power of the state. No stability was left to the state; never had Dante’s words been truer with regard to what was woven in October and no longer existed in mid-November. If one day, against their will, the burghers grudgingly consented to the institution of casting lots which meant the ruin of their pretensions to oligarchy, shortly after they withdrew with one hand what they had given with the other; they replaced in the bags of the electoral colleges the names which had been drawn from the priors’ bags, and vice versa, so that the same names could be frequently drawn. But the triumph of their cunning was a short one! The democratic instinct framed a law which made this abuse impossible (December, 1339); henceforth the tickets drawn from the bags were destroyed, and no one who filled one office could receive a second, till the bags had been entirely emptied.
These continual changes in the institutions were not accomplished without disturbances which were a constant cause of alarm, even if they did not lead to taking up arms. Macchiavelli declares that the abasement of the nobles was a cause of prosperity for Florence, because the magistrates were more respected. How can this be believed when the rich burghers are seen reproducing the excesses and abuses of those whom they succeeded in power? A petition of August 27th, 1352, accused them of pride, arrogance, and injustice, and obtained the concession that those accused of misdoing should be punished as nobles. What threat could have been more effective in holding them back on the brink of the precipice? However, they fell to the bottom. The following year their acts of brigandage formed a constant topic. Each night some daring robbery was committed. They forced the tills of the money-changers; carried away clothes and cloth from the tailors—forty-five articles on one occasion—two hundred halves of salted pigs from a pork butcher; from others, beds with mattresses, ticken, and covers. In spite of the traffic, which was great even after the curfew, the robbers were never surprised at work. In vain did the podesta, Paolo Vaiani, a severe Roman eager for justice, put on foot all the men at his disposal, and even himself keep watch. After several nights spent in the open air, he at last discovered certain men carrying bales to the walls and throwing them over; their accomplices loaded a boat with them and took them to Pisa. But they were men of low rank, many of whom believed they were only helping a bankrupt and saving his possessions from confiscation—the least of offences, if it was one at all, according to the ideas of those times. These men received the bastinado; the others were hanged.
The principal criminals were still to be discovered—those who prudently remained in the background undeterred in their shameful exploits by these examples in anima vili. After long investigation and examination it was at last discovered that the thieves were “honourable citizens,” who met with trumpets, lutes, and other musical instruments, as if for the purpose of giving a serenade. Certain young men of good family stood at either end of the street and begged the passers-by to take another road, because the musicians wished to remain unrecognised. The deafening noise made the request appear rational, and so the place was left free for houses and shops to be pillaged in the darkness of the night, without attracting suspicion, without fear of interruption. One of the leaders of the band was Bordone Bordoni, of an old and wealthy burgher family, whose members succeeded each other, almost without interruption, in public offices. Put to torture, he confessed. His brother Gherardo, one of the ambassadors sent the previous year to Charles IV, pleaded his cause with the priors, and they, indulgent towards a criminal of their own rank, opposed the capital sentence which the people demanded and which the podesta wished to pronounce. Finding it impossible to bend this severe Roman to their desire, they disbanded his body-guard. They believed that without these latter he would be forced to submit. But he refused to accept this ridiculous situation, indignantly gave up the rod, emblem of command, and retired to Siena (March 11th, 1353).
[1353-1355 A.D.]
Immediately the town was roused. Men declared that justice was no longer to be had by the humble. The least fault caused them to be slaughtered; if, however, a man of powerful position was banished for a crime, he posed as a victim of political proscription. If the podestas were cashiered when they were anxious to render justice, who would be willing to come to Florence? The walls were covered with angry inscriptions, insulting the priors. Those who succeeded them hastened to disavow a compromising fellowship; yielding to the general sentiment, they sent an envoy to Siena to beg the podesta to return, promising strict obedience. Paolo Vaiani did not yield immediately; he enumerated his grievances: corn had increased in price, and his salary was not sufficient for his expenses. If he returned, it must be with an increase of 2,000 florins—more than was needful, says one of the chroniclers. He had Bordone beheaded, and sent many of his accomplices into exile. By this means he calmed the people, and at last cleansed Florence of these miscreants of high rank. But their relatives were left to rekindle the almost extinguished fire. Gherardo Bordoni accused the Mangioni and the Beccanugi of his brother’s death. To avenge him he took advantage of the disorder in the town caused by the approach of the Grand Company (1354). With his consorti and his followers he pursued his enemies even to their homes, and killed two women who, according to the custom of the time, were enjoying the cool of the evening on the threshold. The troops of the seigniory tried to restore order, but they were powerless. The militia of the suburbs, with their gonfalons, were called out. This time five of the Bordoni and twelve of their accomplices were condemned to confiscation of goods and capital punishment, unless they preferred to go into exile (July, 1354).
Far more serious, and with more disastrous results in this city constantly a prey to the disputes of its families, was the rivalry of the Ricci and the Albizzi. Macchiavelli compares it with that of the Buondelmonti and the Uberti, in which history, not clear-sighted, and misinformed, so long saw the generative act of Florentine annals. A discussion was going on concerning the origin of the Albizzi. According to some, they came from Arezzo, and consequently were Ghibellines. On the contrary, others, their friends, declared that they had been driven thence because they were Guelfs. True or false, the accusation of being Ghibellines was not without danger at a time when the announced approach of Charles IV was awakening former terrors. When minds are agitated, the least incident appears important, and furnishes food for hatred. The Albizzi have servants at Casentino to defend their property? It is a lie! They are there to attack the Ricci. An ass brushed against one of the Ricci at Mercato Vecchio, and the driver was beaten for his negligence? Evidently the Ricci are attacking the Albizzi. And thus two large families took up arms, and with them the entire city. It was not easy to disarm them, and they were always ready to take up arms again. If an occasion for doing so did not soon appear, they would employ ruse instead of force.
The detail of events is wanting; but by the measures taken for or against the great, the fluctuations of public opinion may be seen, or rather the ephemeral preponderance of one or other of the two factions. At one time popular government restores to the nobles, provided they be of the Guelf faction, the right to hold posts of secondary importance, and suppresses the big drum used to issue denunciations against them (April 10th, 1355). Twelve days instead of five, fifteen days instead of ten, as the case may be, are allowed their enemies to bring an action against them, and consequently for them to escape. They are allowed to enter the public palace, and to rebuild their ruined houses. No more bail, no relatives responsible beyond the third degree. At another time (August 21st, 1355), “in order to preserve and defend popular liberty and innocence, especially that of weak and unhappy persons,” it was decreed that nobles condemned for homicide, acts of wounding, robbing, incendiarism, adultery, etc., “shall no longer be allowed, nor yet their descendants, to live in the home of their family.” It was perceived that the burghers were becoming infused with the spirit of the nobles, and in consequence the difficulties of passing from one rank to the other were increased; three-quarters of the votes were required in the ballot, a majority difficult to realise, and it became, moreover, an obstacle to the cancelling of sentences and to the recall of exiles. When the seigniory was merciful to the nobles, it was a sign that the Albizzi were in power; when it was severe to them, it was under the influence of the Ricci.
