Leo X.

Leo X, elected pope the 11th of March, 1513, was called John de Medicis. He had been honoured with a cardinal’s hat at fourteen years of age by Pope Innocent VIII, and a long time after, with the dignity of legate by pope Julius II. He discharged the functions of it in the army which was beaten by the French near Ravenna, in the year 1512. Here he was taken prisoner; and during his confinement he made a wonderful experiment of the force of superstition, even over the minds of common soldiers. The soldiers who had vanquished him expressed so great a veneration for him, that they humbly begged pardon for their victory, beseeched him to give them absolution, and promised never to bear arms more against the pope: this I learn from Cardinal Palavicino. It is thought that nothing contributed more to his elevation to the popedom, than the wounds he had received

in the combats of Venus. I have so often given the reason why I choose rather to cite Catholic than Protestant writers on such occasions, that without farther preamble, I shall here produce the words of a French historian, and a bitter enemy to the Protestants.— “Three months had not passed since the return of cardinal de Medicis to Florence, when the death of pope Julius II obliged him to leave that town and go to Rome. He was carried in a horse litter by reason of an imposthume in those parts which modesty will not allow us to name, and travelled so slowly that the pope’s obsequies were over, and the conclave sitting, when he arrived there. The conclave had not ended so soon as it did, the young and old cardinals persisting in contrary opinions with equal obstinacy if an odd accident had not brought them to agree. The cardinal de Medicis being extremely hurried by the number of visits he made every night to the cardinals of his faction, his ulcer broke, and the scent proved so offensive that all the cells, which were separated only by slight partitions, were perfectly poisoned by it. The old cardinals, whose constitutions were less capable of bearing the malignancy of a corrupted air, consulted the physicians of the conclave to know what they should do; these physicians, who had seen cardinal de Medicis, and judged of his state more by the ill humours which flowed from his body, than by that strength of nature which drove them out, answered, being first gained by the promises of Bibiana, that cardinal de Medicis had not a month to live. Their passing this sentence of death upon him was the cause of his being chosen pope; the old cardinals, who thought to outwit the young, agreeing to give them a satisfaction which could not, as they presumed, last very long. They waited upon them and let them know that they at last yielded to their obstinacy, on condition they would remember to do the like for them another time. Thus cardinal de Medicis was elected pope, upon a false information, being not full thirty-six years old; and, as joy is one of the most sovereign remedies, he soon recovered so perfect a state of health, that the old cardinals had occasion to repent of their being over credulous.”

Not to conceal any thing, I am obliged to acquaint my reader that Paul Jovius does not place this ulcer in the place where Varillas does, but in the fundament, which would suppose a disgraceful cause: and with the same sincerity I add, that this pope ascended the throne with a great reputation of chastity, if we believe Guicciardini, and was reckoned very continent from his youth, if we credit Paul Jovius. Whence we must conclude that the papal dignity was that which ruined Leo the Tenth’s good morals: he grew vicious, when he should have grown virtuous; and lastly, I observe, that the sense in which I allege Varillas’s words, and which Seckendorf gives them, is gathered only from consequences, and such as do not necessarily follow from them.

His expenses were excessive on the day of his coronation. He would be crowned upon the same day on which he lost the battle of Ravenna and his liberty the year before and rode the same Turkish horse which he rode on the day of that battle; he ransomed him from the French; and, as he loved him mightily, he had him very carefully kept and pampered to an extreme old age. “Vectus est etiam in pompa illo eodem equo Thracio in quo ad Ravennam captus fuerat, quern ab hostibus pecunia redemptum ita adamavit, ut postea usque ad extremam senectutem summa cum indulgentia alendum curarit. Jovius, ubi supra, pag. 129, 130. ¹²⁶ And as his head was filled with the magnificence of ancient Rome, and the triumphant days of the ancient consuls, he endeavoured to revive those fine shows, and was so well served in this design, that since the irruption of the Goths, there never was seen in Rome any thing more

magnificent than his coronation. See the description of it in Paul Jovius, who agrees with Guicciardini, that the expense of it amounted to a hundred thousand ducats. He led a life little suitable to a successor of the apostles, and perfectly voluptuous. He took too much pleasure in hunting, and it is said his eye at this sport was surprisingly quick. He had such a violent passion for it that he understood and observed the laws of it much better than those of the gospel. He could not bear that any one should disturb his sport; and had no mercy on those who, through imprudence or otherwise, occasioned the escape of the game, to whom he gave all manner of ill language. He was so much out of humour when the chace did not succeed, that nobody durst then ask him a favour; but transported with joy, if it ended luckily; and these were the favourable moments for obtaining whatever was desired of him.

As to his sight, here is a passage which I take from a book of the Sieur des Accords. Des Accords Bigarrures, cap. xii, fol. m. 105, verso. ¹²⁷ “Pope Leo from having these numeral letters to be written, to signify the year of his pontificate, they were thus interpreted, MCCCCLX. Multi Cardinales cæci crearunt cæcum Leonem decimum. Now I must say, by the way, that I do not know why he should be called blind since by the help of glasses he could see hawks, vultures, and eagles, at the highest soar; but on the other hand, whenever he read, he clapped the paper to his nose, and even then could hardly distinguish a letter, as Lucius Gauricus informs us, in his Schematibus Celestibus; which puts me in mind of a certain honest curate who cannot read the church books of the fairest character, without spectacles, and yet shall distinguish the smallest dice, and is never to be deceived.” Paul Jovius confirms this but in part; for he says, that Leo read the smallest print with great ease, when he brought the

paper near his eye. Let us cite Gauric, and admire the impertinence of his attributing to the planets the different qualities of the right and left eye of this pope. Lucas Guaricus Geophonensis, Episcopus Civitatensis in tractatu Astrologico. ¹²⁸ “The sun, with nebulous stars, entirely dimmed the sight of his right eye, with many transverse lines. The moon, in the sixth house, in Gemini, applying to the quartil of Mars, impaired likewise the sight of his left eye, insomuch that he could read nothing without a large crystal glass; yet he did not wholly want the sight of it, because the salutary star Jupiter was in trine to the moon; and thus he read letters by bringing them near his nose and eyes; and, by the help of a crystal glass, he distinguished hawks and eagles, in their highest flight, much better than other sportsmen; besides, he often hunted hares, goats, and foxes, and had a clear sight of them, when caught by the hounds or mastives.”

As Leo had been taught by preceptors, who instructed him thoroughly in the Belles Lettres, he loved and protected men of wit and learning. He favoured the poets in a particular manner, and that without always preserving the gravity which his character required. The pleasures he allowed himself with them, sometimes degenerated into buffoonry. Quernus, who had been solemnly crowned, and promoted to the honour of poet Lauréat, was little better than a merry-andrew. He used to come to Leo the tenth’s dinner, and eat at the window, the morsels which were conveyed to him from hand to hand. They gave him the pope’s wine plentifully, but upon condition, that he would make extempore verses on the subjects that were given to him. He was obliged at least to furnish a distich; and if he failed, or if his verses were good for nothing, he was condemned to drink a great deal of water with his wine. Sometimes also the pope made extempore verses with his

arch-poet, which set all the company a laughing. What want of gravity was this! One day a poet presented him with some Latin verses in rhime; the pope, to divert himself, gave him no other recompence than an extempore flight, containing an equal number of verses in the same rhymes. The poet, vexed to see that Leo gave him nothing, returned the following distich:

Si tibi pro numeris numeros fortuna dedisset,
Non esset capiti tanta corona tuo.

Had fortune thus thy verse with verse repaid,
The triple crown had not adorn'd thy head.

Hereupon the pope extended to him his usual liberality, and by this we may see, that he turned every thing to his diversion. But here is a passage that clearly discovers the buffooning spirit, which then reigned in the pope’s palace. A man having something to ask of Leo X, and finding himself amused for several days with ungrateful delays, which made him despair of being introduced, bethought himself of this stratagem. He acquainted Leo’s great chamberlain, that he had the most admirable verses to shew the pope, that ever were made. The chamberlain, transported with joy, goes immediately to the pope, and tells him, he had alighted on the very top of fools, and the fittest thing alive to divert him. It was the way of Leo’s courtiers, to find out such as were half crazy, and complete the disorder of their brains, for the diversion of the head of the church. But they were the dupes of the pretended poet I speak of; for when he was admitted to the pope’s presence, he let him know the true reason which induced him to counterfeit a crack-brained poet, and declared his real business. This spirit appeared even in the privileges which he granted to Ariosto. Was it keeping the decorum of the papacy to expedite a bull so favourable to the poems of Ariosto? “Almost

at the same time, that he thundered his anathemas against Martin Luther, he was not ashamed to publish a bull in favour of the prophane poems of Lewis Ariosto, threatening those with excommunication who found fault with them, or hindered the profit of the printer.” David Blondel’s Examination of pope Innocent the tenth's Bull, pag. 3. ¹²⁹ We shall see elsewhere Article Machiavel. ¹³⁰ that he was a great admirer of burlesque pieces. He had not the same relish for theological studies. Cardinal Palavicino could not deny it; he honestly confesses, that Leo X valued those more, who understood mythology, the ancient poets, and profane learning, than those who understood divinity, and ecclesiastical history. His words which are more frank, and have less of the bias than usual, are these. Palavic. ubi supra, cap. ii, n. 2, pag. 50. ¹³¹ “Father Paul objects, that he was better acquainted with profane letters, than with sacred or religious learning; which I do not deny. God had endowed Leo with a great genius, and a singular industry; and being yet but a youth, he saw himself placed in the supreme senate of the church, but he neglected that part of literature, not only the most noble, but most suitable, to his station; and this neglect increased, when, at the age of thirty-seven years, being appointed head and master of religion, he not only continued to give himself up to the curiosity of profane studies; but for the regulating of the said religion, did rather call to him those who were acquainted with the fables of Greece, and the delights of the poets, than those who knew the history of the church, and the doctrine of the fathers. He nevertheless favoured scholastic divinity, in honouring with the purple Tommaso di Vio, Ægidio da Viterbo, and Adriano Florenzio, his successor, and in appointing Silvester da Prierio, master of the sacred palace; who, by their writings, have acquired an immortal glory, in illustrating that sacred science. But he did not converse with the divines, as he did with the poets; nor encouraged the sacred erudition, as the profane; leaving the church in the same want, he found her, of learned men, who, after the unhappy ignorance of many ages, should revive the former as they did the latter.” It were to be wished, that these two historians always agreed so well.

I will not vouch for this story that he ridiculed the whole Christian doctrine, as a mere fable. The tradition is, that secretary Bembo alleging something from the gospel, he answered him, “it is well known of old, how profitable this fable of Jesus Christ has been to us. Quantum nobis nostrisque ea de Christo fabula profuerit fatis est omnibus seculis notum.” This story is found in the Mystery of Iniquity, and in abundance of other books: but still without being supported by citations, or having any other foundations than the authority of Bale; so that three or four hundred authors, more or less, who have said this, copying one another, ought to be reduced to Bale’s single testimony; a testimony manifestly exceptionable, since he wrote in open war against the pope, and against the whole Romish church. No tribunal in the world would receive the depositions of such a witness, swearing that he has seen or heard so and so, for when once the person appears to be his enemy against whom he deposes, the challenges of the accused party are declared valid. Since books of controversy then are pieces which the parties produce in a suit pleaded before the public, it is certain that the testimony of a Protestant disputant, upon a fact which reflects upon the pope, or the testimony of a popish disputant, on a fact reflecting on the reformers, ought to be reckoned as nothing. The public, which is judge of the process, ought to reject all these testimonies, and have

no more regard to them, than to things which never happened. Private persons are permitted, if once persuaded of the probity of Bale, to believe what he affirms; but they ought to keep their persuasion to themselves, and not produce it to public view, as a juridical proof against their adversaries; which, in my opinion, is a thing not sufficiently observed.

They tell another story, which lies open to the same battery as the former. It is said, that Leo hearing two men dispute, one whereof denied, and the other affirmed, the immortality of the soul, pronounced, that the affirmative seemed true, but that the negative was more proper to give a man a cheerful countenance. Luther is the man who says this. We may, if we please, believe he spoke truth, but we ought not to allege his testimony; he is a person at war with the pope; he is an enemy persecuted and anathematized; the judicial practice requires, that his testimony should be rejected and even his oath not admitted; he ought either to prove what he says, or say nothing. Leo had the industry to ruin the council, which the emperor and the king of France had set up against Julius II, and he made the council of Lateran triumph; for he obtained of Lewis XII all the submissions he could desire. He obtained of Francis I a much more solid advantage by the concordat, concluded between them in the year 1515. This did not make him more favourable to France. He formed leagues against her, and took that affair so much to heart, that having received the news of the misfortunes of the French, he died, it is said, of joy. He did not always behave in a manner agreeable to the emperor Maximilian. “Having rekindled the war between the emperor Charles and the king of France, in order to drive the French out of Italy, the news was brought him, at one of his country seats, called Maliagno, of the taking of Milan and Parma from them, which

gave him such an excess of joy, that he was seized with a slight fever that very night, of which he died a few days after. Du Plessis, Mystere d’iniquité, p. 590. ¹³²” These are Du Plessis’s words. All historians agree, that Leo X received this good news with a wonderful satisfaction, but I do not find many who say, that this pleasure caused his death; and though they should affirm it, I should not believe it; for they who die of joy, die suddenly, oppressed, according to all appearance, by too great an effusion of blood into the ventricles of the heart. If the. first impressions of a violent joy be withstood, as was done by the pope, a man is better afterwards, instead of being seized with a dangerous fever when other reasons do not occasion it. John Crespin’s account seems much more probable, who supposes that Leo the tenth’s death was sudden, but not of that sudden kind which is occasioned by an excess of joy. “Hearing that the French were beaten at Milan by the emperor’s forces, and driven out of Italy, which indeed was not done without his help: as he was drinking and making merry, and wonderfully rejoiced at the news, it is said that he suddenly gave up the ghost, he who believed neither a heaven nor hell after this life.” Sannazar’s distich, alleged by this author, favours the supposition of sudden death; but yet it is certain, that the distemper Leo died of, lasted some days. Strada has given two relations of this pope’s death, one in Livy’s stile, the other after the way of Tacitus. They are fine and well wrought.

I have already said that he did not always please the emperor Maximilian. The latter had conceived good hopes of Leo X, but when he was informed of this pope’s correspondence with the French, he said, “If this pope had not deceived me, he would have been the only pope, whose honesty I should have had

reason to commend.” The sordid traffic to which he reduced the distribution of indulgences, gave birth to Luther’s reformation, as every body knows. They made it a kind of monopoly, and indulgences were let out to farm; the commissioners appointed for the collection of the sums, bought their commissions of the pope, after which they stuck at no kind of exaction, and observed decorum so little, that the powers for releasing souls out of purgatory were played for in the taverns, as we are assured by Guicciardini. The discontent of the people grew greater, when it was known to what use these sums were designed: almost all the money that was raised by them in Germany, being converted to the use of the pope’s sister.

Some say he spoke honourably of Luther in the beginning. This particular had hardly been known, if Colomiés had not mentioned it: Mr de Seckendorf Histor. Lutheran, lib. i. pag. 40, col. 2, littera b. ¹³³ learnt it from him, being told by a counsellor of Spires, that it was to be found in Colomiés’ Opuscula: the passage is this. “When the Lutheran sect began to appear, several gentlemen being in the house of our worthy Scipione Attellano, and discoursing about divers things, some of them very much blamed Pope Leo X, for not having taken timely care, when Silvester Prierio master of the sacred palace, shewed him some heretical doctrines which friar Martin Luther had vented in his book concerning indulgences; but indiscreetly answered that friar Martin had a fine genius, and that these surmises were monkish jealousies. Words which Sleidan would not have failed placing in the front of his history, if he had known them.” Colomiés, Recueil de Particularités, pag. m. 111. ¹³⁴

I do not find that Guicciardini abuses this pope so much as Mr Varillas insinuates. These are Guicciardini’s words.—“A prince who was endowed with

several good and bad qualities, and deceived the expectation they had of him when he was raised to the papal chair; for he showed more wisdom, but less goodness, than was expected by the world.” When this historian speaks of Leo the tenth’s election, he does it in a manner very much to the glory of this pope. He owns he was free from simony, and all other evil suspicions, and that the reputation of the elected cardinal stood very well in point of morality.

Paul Jovius’s apology to me seems trifling. The methods this author takes to justify Leo X may be reduced to four. He pretends that “it was not from a vicious nature, but a gentle, easy, and magnificent temper, that this pope, beset by a voluptuous crew, engaged a little too far in pleasures.” Paul Jovius observes, in the second place, “that if Leo be compared with his predecessors, he will be found very chaste. Si aliqua ex parte eo nomine sugillari inclyta virtus potuit, Leo certe cum superiorum principum fama comparatus æstimatione rectissima continentiæ laudem feret.” This excuse is no better than the former. He says, “that this pope, having a good reputation as to continence, precautioned himself afterwards against the attacks of impurity, by renouncing high food and by regular fastings.” This is better than all the rest. Lastly, he asserts, “that we ought to make a great difference betwixt the vices which belong to a sovereign, as such, and those which belong to him as a man: and he alleges the emperor Trajan so beloved of the Roman people, that it was the height of their wishes that the succeeding emperors should reign as well as he; and yet no one was ignorant of the drunkenness of Trajan.” His meaning is, that Leo the tenth’s vices were not repugnant to the qualities of a good sovereign, but to those of a good Christian only, and therefore the irregularities of his youth ought to be pardoned, since they did not hinder his being a good prince.

Generally speaking, this author’s maxim is true: it is very possible for a prince to be an honest man, and at the same time but a poor king; that is, a king who cannot maintain the vigour of the laws, nor remedy the disorders of the state. On the other hand, it is very possible for a prince to be an ill observer of those rules of morality which prescribe the duties of private persons, and yet be a good king, that is, a king who maintains order in his state, and wisely distributes punishments and rewards, without being burthensome to his people by imposts, and pecuniary edicts. But it is very rare that a voluptuous and prodigal prince, such as Leo X was, is a good prince; to supply his expences, he must be burdensome to his subjects, and commonly he distributes his favours, according to the humour of the ministers of his pleasures, and consequently to unworthy persons, whose evil administration he has not time to punish, being too much taken up with his pleasures to allow the functions of royalty that application which they demand. It were easy to show, that Leo the tenth’s subjects were sufficiently loaded. Besides, it is not considered, that Leo’s principal dignity was of a sacred and ecclesiastical nature. So that, to know whether he discharged his duty, the great question is, not whether he has done what his temporal dignity demanded, it being impossible to justify him, without showing that he diligently acquitted the duties of his other dignity, that is, observed the precepts of the Gospel, and omitted nothing to recommend the practice of them to others. This was his principal function, and here his apologist is forced to forsake him. “As to divine matters, his character has suffered not a little: for he was so lavish of indulgences (those old instruments by which the popes get money) that he seems to have lessened the credit of the holy authority.”

I must upon this occasion say, that this blending

the temporal with the ecclesiastical authority, in the same person, is generally the ruin of the evangelical spirit. This combination had place among the Pagans, and was not unserviceable to the temporal good of religion.

Rex Anius Rex idem hominum Phœbique sacerdos.”
Virgil, Æn. lib. iii, ver. 80.

Anius, at once a king, and Phoebus’ priest.

It has remarkably served the same ends in Christianity; but has produced an extreme corruption of manners. The ecclesiastical character ought to prevail, and be predominant, since the other dignity is only an accessory; and yet it is almost always swallowed up by its colleague. The joining these two together, is like the joining a dead carcase to a living body; a fatal conjunction, where the dead communicates corruption to the living body, and receives no vital influence therefrom.

The author of the Critique Générale, mentioning the distinction, between a pope speaking ex cathedra and the same pope speaking in another manner, has related the witty saying of a peasant in the electorate of Cologne. I had a long time thought that this witty saying was preserved only by tradition, but I was mistaken; it has been printed in grave books for above an age. Duaren has inserted it in one of his books, and copied it from Fulgosius. Here is the whole story; it is true, that an elector of Cologne is not expressly named in it. “There goes a pleasant story of a German husbandman, who being at work in his field, saw his bishop pass by, attended by a train more becoming a prince, than one who calls himself the successor, or deputy of an apostle; being highly scandalized at it, he could not forbear laughing, and laughed so loud, that the reverend gentleman would needs know the reason of it. The husbandman answered in bis natural way, that is, as a true and

plain person; I laugh when I think of St Peter and St Paul, and see you in such an equipage. How is that, said the bishop? Do you ask how, says the clown? Why they were ill advised to walk alone on foot throughout the world, when they were the heads of the Christian church, and lieutenants of Jesus Christ, the king of kings, and thou, who art only our bishop, go so well mounted, and have such warlike attendance, that thou resemblest more a prince, than a pastor of the church. To this his reverence replied, but, my friend, thou dost not consider, that I am both a count and a baron, as well as thy bishop. At which the rustic laughed more than before; and the bishop asking him the reason of it, he answered yea sir, when the count and baron, which you say you are, shall be in hell, where will the bishop be? This confounded the right reverend, who proceeded on his journey without answering a word.”

I shall produce a long passage from Varillas’ Anecdotes, containing in short a pretty just character of Leo X. We find it in the preface of this book, and is as follows. “Guicciardini represents this Pope as an accomplished model of modern policy, and the greatest statesman of his age. He sets him above king Ferdinand the Catholic, and makes him triumph in his youth over all the artifices of this old usurper. It is to him he attributes the secret of getting all his designs seconded by the councils of Spain, whether they would or not. After having established these wonderful principles, there are no shining virtues, but what heighten the picture of Leo X. He forms at twelve years of age, when he was made cardinal, those vast projects, which he executed afterwards, when he was exalted to the chair of St Peter. He negotiates with the states of Venice to save the ruins of his house, which had not power to withstand the fortune of our Charles VIII. He changed not his resolution upon seeing his brother lost in the

passing of a river. He bad no other thoughts than the educating the only son which this brother had left in the cradle; upon which he returns to Rome, where his intrigues recommended him to the favour of pope Julius II, and occasioned his being chosen legate in the army designed to drive the French out of Italy. He is taken prisoner at the battle of Ravenna, but makes his escape in a lucky conjuncture for him, Julius happening just then to die: he enters into the conclave, where he takes such advantage of the caprice of the young cardinals, who were obstinately bent on making a pope of their own age, that he procured their votes in favour of himself. He joins with the Spaniards, and manages their friendship, as long as it is useful towards re-establishing his family in the principal functions of the magistracy of Florence; but as Soon as fortune turns her back upon them, and he finds they are not inclined to see him usurp the duchy of Urbino, and invest his nephew with it, he treats with the French upon that condition; he draws up the famous Concordat, in which he baffles the stratagems and long experience of the chancellor Du Prat; he caresses Francis I, as long as that king is in a condition of doing him service; but no sooner obtains of him all he desired, than he quits him to reconcile himself with Charles V. He projects a new league with him, to re-establish the Sforzas in the duchy of Milan. He succeeds in it better than he expected, and conceives a joy on the news of his success, which occasioned his death.”

Men of letters, of what religion or nation soever, are bound to praise and bless the memory of this pope, for the care he took to recover the manuscripts of the ancients; he spared neither pains nor cost in searching for them, and procuring very good editions. I have two anecdote letters, which are a proof of this, and which the reader will undoubtedly be glad to find here:

Venerabili Fatri Alberto Moguntin. et Magdeburgen. Archi-Episcopo, Administrated Halberstaten. Principi Electori ac Germaniæ Primati.

LEO PP. X.

Venerabilis Frater, Salutem et Apostolicam benedictionem. Mittimus dilectum filium Joannem Heytmers de Zonvelben, Clericum Leodiensis diœceseos, nostrum et Apostolicæ sedis Commissarium ad inclitas Nationes, Germaniæ, Daniæ, Suetiæ, Norvegiæ et Gothiæ, pro inquirendis dignis et antiquis libris qui temporum injuria periere, in qua re nec sumptui nec impensæ alicui parcimus, solum ut sicut usque a nostri Pontificatus initio proposuimus, quod altissimo tantum sit honor et gloria viros quovis virtutum genere insignitos præsertim literates, quantum cum Deo possumus, foveamus, extollamus ac juvemus. Accepimus autem penes Fraternitatem Tuam, seu in locis sub illius ditione positis esse ex dictis antiquis libris, præsertim Romanarum Historiarem non paucos qui nobis cordi non parum forent. Quare cum in animo nobis sit tales libros, quotquot ad manus venire potuerint in lucem redire curare pro communi omnium literatorum utilitate, Fraternitatem Tuam ea demum qua possumus affectione hortamur, monemus et enixius in Domino obtestamur, ut si rem gratam unquam facere animo proponit, vel eorundem librorum omnium exempla fideliter, et accurate scripta, vel quod magis exoptamus ipsosmet libros antiquos ad nos transmittere quanto citius curet, illos statim receptura, cum excripti hic fuerint juxta obligationem per Cameram nostram apostolicam factam, seu quam dictes Joannes Comissarius noster præsentium later ad id mandatum sufficiens habens nomine dictæ Cameræ denuo duxerit faciendam. Et quia dictus Joannes promisit nobis se brevi daturum trigesimum tertium librum Titi Livii de bello Macedonico, illi commisimus ut eum ad manus Tuæ Fraternitatis daret, ut ipse quam primum

posset per fidum nuntium ad nos, vel dilecto Filio Philippo Beroaldo Bibliothecario Palatii nostri Apostolici mittat. Quoniam vero eidem Joanni certain summam pecuniarium hic in urbe enumerari fecimus pro expensis factis et fiendis, et certain quantitatem debemus, volumus, et ita Fraternitati Tuæ committimus et mandamus ut postquam acceperit prædictum librum Titi Livii ipsi Joanni solvat seu solvi faciat centum quadraginta septem ducatos auri de Camera ex pecuniis indulgentiarum concessarum per illius Provincias in favorem fabricæ Basilicæ Principis Apostolorum de urbe; quam quidem pecuniarum summam in computis Tuæ Fraternitatis cum Camera Apostolica admittemus, prout in præsentia per præsentes admittimus et admitti mandamus. Juvet præterea eundem Joannem salvis conductibus litteris et auxiliis, et illi per Provincias suas assistât pro libris extrahendis, et pro illo etiam fide jubeat, si opus est, pro dictus libris intra certum tempus a nobis restituendis et ad sua loca remittendis. Quod si Fraternitas Tua fecerit, ut omnino nobis persuademus, et ingens nomen apud Viros literatos consequetur, et nobis rem gratissimam faciet. Datum Romæ apud S. Petrum sub annulo Piscatoris die XXVI Novembris MDXVII. Pontificatus nostri anno quinto.

Ja. Sadoletus.

To our Venerable Brother, Albert, archbishop of Mentz and Magdeburg, administrator of Halberstadt, electoral prince and primate of Germany.

LEO PP. X.

Venerable Brother, Health and Apostolical Benediction. We send our beloved son John Heytmers de Zonvelben, ecclesiastic of the diocese of Liege, commissary of the Apostolical see to the illustrious nations of Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Gothland, to search for valuable and ancient books that have been lost through the injury of time, in

which business we spare no expence, only that, as we have determined from the very beginning of our Pontificate, solely with a design to promote the honour and glory of the Most High, we may, by God’s assistance, cherish, promote, and serve famous men of all sorts, especially the learned. We have been informed, that, of the said ancient books, there are not a few, in possession of your fraternity, or in the places subject to your jurisdiction, especially relating to the Roman history. Wherefore, intending to procure the publication of as many such books as can come to our hands, for the common good of all learned men, we affectionately exhort your fraternity and earnestly entreat you in the Lord, that, if you ever propose to do a grateful action, you would transmit to us as soon as possible fair and correct copies of all those books, or which we rather wish, the books themselves, which shall be returned to you, as soon as transcribed here, according to an obligation drawn up by our apostolical chamber, or such as the said John our commissary, bearer of these presents, sufficiently instructed for that purpose, shall think fit to be drawn up in the name of the said chamber. And because the said John has promised in a short time to give us the thirty-third book of Livy of the Macedonian war, we have commissioned him to give it into your fraternity’s hands, to be transmitted as soon as possible by a faithful messenger to us, or our beloved son Philip Beroaldus, librarian of our apostolical palace; but because we have ordered to be paid here in the city to the said John, a certain sum of money, and are indebted to him a certain quantity for expenses already made and to be made, we will, and authorize, and command your fraternity, after he shall have received the said book of Livy, to pay, or cause to be paid to the said John, 147 gold ducats of the chamber, out of the money arising from indulgences granted through those provinces in favour of the royal fabric of the prince of the apostles, which sum we will allow in the accounts between your fraternity and the apostolic chamber, as at present we do allow and order to be allowed. You are likewise to assist the said John with safe conducts, letters, and aids, and help him through your provinces in coming at books, and if occasion be, engage your word for him that the books shall be returned within a certain time, and sent back to their places; which if your fraternity shall do, as we are fully persuaded you will, you will acquire a great reputation among learned men, and perform a thing the most acceptable to us. Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, under the fisherman’s ring, November 26, 1517, in the fifth year of our pontificate. Ja. Sadolet.

This is the first of the two letters, here is the second. There is something in it which may incline us to think that the entire history of Livy was then in being. Mr de Seidel has been credibly informed that it is believed that a canon of Magdeburg, who was one of the ministers of state to the marquis Joachim Frederick, administrator of that archbishopric, took an advantage of the confusion things were then in, and carried away several manuscripts out of the public library, particularly this Livy, to enrich his own. His heirs preserved it, but they concealed the manuscripts because they had come unjustly by them. At last the whole was destroyed when the town was pillaged in the year 1631.

Venerabili Fratri nostro Alberto Archiepiscopo Moguntin. Principi Electori et Germanise Primati.

LEO PP. X.

Dilecti filii Mr de Seidet believes that this letter was written to the canons of Magdeburg, since Albert of Brandenburg was archbishop of Mentz as well as of Magdeburg. ¹³⁵ salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Rettulit nobis dilectus filius Joannes Heytmers de

Zonvelben Clericus Leodiensis diœceseos quem nuper pro inquirendis antiquis libris, qui desiderantur ad inclitas nationes Germanise, Daniæ, Norvegiæ, Suetiæ et Gothiæ nostrum et apostolicæ sedis specialem nuncium et commissarium destinavimus, a quodam, quem ipse ad id substituent, accepisse literas, quibus ei significat in vestra Bibliotheca reperisse codicem antiquum, in quo omnes decades Titi Livii sunt descriptæ, impetrasseque a vobis illas posse exscribere cum originalem codicem habere fas non fuerit. Laudamus profecto vestram humanitatem et erga sedem apostolicam obedientiam. Verum dilecti filii, fuit nobis ab ipso usque pontificates nostri initio animus, viros quovis virtutis genere exornatos, præsertim literates, quantum cum Deo possumus, extollere ac juvare. Ea de causa hujuscemodi antiquos et desiderates libros, quotquot recipere possumus, prius per viros doctissimos, quorum copia Dei munere in nostra hodie est curia, corrigi facimus, deinde nostra impensa ad communem eruditorum utilitatem diligentissime imprimi curamus. Sed si ipsos originales libros non habeamus, nostra intentio non plane adimpletur, quia hi libri, visis tantum exemplis, correcti in lucem exire non possunt. Mandavimus in Camera nostra apostolica sufficientem præstare cautionem de restituendis hujuscemodi libris integris et illæsis eorum Dominis, quam primum hic erunt exscripti, et dictes Joannes, quem iterum ad præmissa commissarium deputavimus, habet ad eandem cameram sufficiens mandatum, illam obligandi ad restitutionem præ- dictam, modo et forma quibus ei videbitur. Tantum ad commodum et utilitatem virorum eruditorum tendimus; de quo etiam dilecti filii abbas et conventus monasterii Corviensis ordinis S Benedicti Padebornensis diœceseos nostri locupletissimi possunt esse testes, ex quorum bibliotheca cum primi quinque libri historiæ Augustæ Cornelii Taciti qui desiderabantur, furto subtracti fuissent illique per multas manus ad nostras tandem pervenissent, nos recognitos prius eosdem quinque libres et correctes a viris prædictis literatis in nostra curia exsistentibus, cum aliis Cornelii prædicti operibus, quæ extabant nostro sumptu imprimi fecimus. Deinde vero, re comperta, unum ex voluminibus dicti Cornelii, ut præmittitur, correctum et impressum, ac etiam non inordinate ligatum, ad dictes Abbatem et Conventum Monasterii Corwiensis remisimus, quod in eorum bibliotheca loco subtracti reponere possent. Et ut cognoscerent ex ea subtraction potins eis commodum quam incommodum ortum, misimus eisdem pro ecclesia Monasterii eorum indulgentiam perpetuam. Quocirca vos et vestrum quemlibet, ea demum qua possumus affectione in virtute sanctæ obedientiæ monemus, hortamur, et sincera in Domino caritate requirimus, ut si nobis rem gratam facere unquam animo proponitis, eundem Joannem in dictam vestram bibliothecam intromittatis, et exinde tarn dictum codicem Livii, quam alios qui ei videbuntur per eum ad nos transmitti permittatis, illos eosdem omnino recepturi, reportaturique a nobis prœmia non vulgaria. Datum Romæ apud S. Petrum, sub annulo piscatoris, die prima Decembris MDXVII Pontificates nostri anno quinte.

Ja. Sadoletus.

To our venerable brother Albert, archbishop of Mentz, electoral prince and primate of Germany.

LEO PP. X.

Beloved sons, health and apostolical benediction. Our beloved son John Heytmers de Zonvelben, ecclesiastic of the diocese of Liege, whom we lately appointed special nuncio and commissary from us and the apostolical see, to the illustrious nations of Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Gothland, to search after ancient books, has informed us that he has received letters from a certain person whom he had appointed for that purpose, in which he acquaints him

that he had found in your library an ancient book containing all the decads of Livy, and that he had obtained your leave to transcribe them, not being allowed to have the original book. We commend your humanity and obedience to the apostolical see; but my beloved sons we resolved from the very beginning of our pontificate, to promote and favour, with God’s assistance, all men of merit, especially learned men. With this view we procure this kind of ancient books so much wanted, as many as can come to our hands, to be first corrected by very learned men, of which there are many, by the gift of God, in our court, and afterwards to be carefully printed for the common benefit of the learned; but if we have not the original books themselves, our design will not be fully answered, because these books, the copies only being seen, cannot be published correctly. We have given orders in our apostolical chamber, that a sufficient security be given that these books shall be restored whole and uninjured to their owners, as soon as they shall have been here transcribed; and the said John whom we have again deputed as commissary for the aforesaid purpose, has a sufficient order to the same chamber to oblige it to the said restitution in the manner and form he shall think proper. We only aim at the benefit and advantage of learned men, of which our beloved sons the abbot and convent of the monastery of Corvey, of the order of St Benedict of Paderborn, are ample witnesses; out of whose library when the five first books of the Roman history of Cornelius Tacitus were stolen, and through many hands came at last into ours, we took care to have them first corrected by the aforesaid learned men residing in our court, and were at the expense of printing them with the rest of the works which were extant of the said Tacitus. Afterwards, the matter being discovered, we sent one of the volumes of the said Tacitus corrected, printed, and handsomely bound, to the said abbot and monastery of Corvey, to be placed in their library in the room of that which was stolen; and that they might know that this theft turned rather to their advantage than disadvantage, we sent them a perpetual indulgence for the church of their monastery. Wherefore with the utmost affection, and in virtue of holy obedience, we exhort and with sincere charity in the Lord, require you and any of you, that if you ever intend to oblige us, ye would admit the said John into your library, and suffer him to transmit to us from thence, both the said book of Livy and others that he shall think proper, which shall be returned to you by us, together with no common reward. Given at Rome, at St Peter’s, under the Fisherman’s ring, Dec. 1, 1517, in the fifth year of our pontificate. Ja. Sadolet. Art. Leo X.