History Marches On: Difference between revisions

Line 106:

* Machiavelli, author of ''[[The Prince]]'', was a staunch supporter of the concept of a free republic. Unfortunately ''The Prince'' was his only well-known piece for a long time. Now it is known that he was most likely a satirist, because that was his only pro-Medici screed, and after writing it, he went right back to writing pro-republic stories.

** He was also often portrayed as a cynical, somber and shrewd politician. Contemporary data, including his letters and works portray him rather as a very sociable satirist who also happened to be an observant historian and a good rhetor.

* Contemporaries viewed Lucrezia Borgia as a scheming, amoral poisoner who abetted her father and brother (Rodrigo and Cesare Borgia, respectively) in their Machiavellian plans to dominate Europe. This belief became even more prevalent in Victorian times, when the word "borgia" entered the dictionary as a synonym for "sadistic female poisoner". [[Vindicated By History|More recent scholarship has cast doubt on this belief, as there is no historical proof that Lucrezia herself ever harmed a flea, let alone committed multiple murders]]. If anything, Lucrezia's life might have been a lot easier if she ''had'' been a poisoner. It's thought now that Lucrezia was blamed by her contemporaries because unlike her less innocent relatives, she was a safe target.

* Contemporaries viewed Lucrezia Borgia as a scheming, amoral poisoner who abetted her father and brother (Rodrigo and Cesare Borgia, respectively) in their Machiavellian plans to dominate Europe. This belief became even more prevalent in Victorian times, when the word "borgia" entered the dictionary as a synonym for "sadistic female poisoner". [[Vindicated by History|More recent scholarship has cast doubt on this belief, as there is no historical proof that Lucrezia herself ever harmed a flea, let alone committed multiple murders]]. If anything, Lucrezia's life might have been a lot easier if she ''had'' been a poisoner. It's thought now that Lucrezia was blamed by her contemporaries because unlike her less innocent relatives, she was a safe target.

** And then there's the Borgia's supposed poison, ''la cantarella'', a potent yet undetectable brew whose formula could be adjusted so that the victim could die at any time the poisoner wished. Too bad it's not actually possible for such a poison to exist given the limitations of Renaissance science and the unpredictable response every individual will have to a specific toxin. Roderigo probably used plain old arsenic while Cesare and Giovanni disposed with subtlety, strangling their enemies and throwing them in the Tiber.

** Did we mention that the Borgias were no more murderous than [[The Mafia|any other prominent Italian family of the time]]? They got the bad rep because they were [[Ambition is Evil|social climbers]], not because they were especially evil or because their evil was hereditary. Which is a good thing for [[Tom Cruise]], since [[Brooke Shields]] is a descendant of Lucrezia Borgia. Of course, that [[Shout-Out]] in ''[[The Prince]]'' certainly doesn't help...