With the passing of the “great man theory,” biography and history have become completely separated, and a personality such as Caesar Borgia is interesting now chiefly as a product of the egoism of the age. Vast, unrestrained selfishness was the predominant characteristic of the men of the Italian Renaissance4. The Peninsula was in the grasp of a number of petty tyrants5 who, to advance their own interests and those of their families, hesitated at no crime.
Never before was love of power so general and carried to such extremes. Men and women were mere7 pawns8 in a stupendous political game. In the governing families the women especially were regarded as assets to be used in establishing alliances to increase the power of the clan9.
Men of iron played fast and loose with states6 and principalities; to them the lives of a city’s population were nothing except so far as their own projects and power were concerned.
Of this world the Borgias were part, although they were interlopers in the affairs of the Peninsula; they saw other upstarts securing vast wealth and dominion10, and why should not they? The thing were easy with Rodrigo Borgia on the throne of St. Peter. Money in unlimited11 amounts was at their command and the spiritual weapons of the Church had not yet been cast on the rubbish-heap—there were still kings and princes that quaked at the threat of excommunication.
Other men, other families, have played a much more important part than the Borgias in the drama of history; others have committed as great crimes; others have surpassed them in every field of human activity—in fact, no member of the Borgia family ever produced anything of enduring value to Italy or the human race. We are therefore led to ask why Alexander VI., Caesar, and Lucretia Borgia have always aroused such profound interest. Gregorovius ascribes this to the violent contrast of their mode of living—their morals—with the sacredness of the Holy Office. An explanation wholly adequate; for, although there were temporal princes who equalled or surpassed Alexander VI. and Caesar Borgia in wickedness, the Papacy furnishes no other example, in the person of Pope or cardinal12, of as great moral obliquity13. Caesar had been a cardinal, and in all his projects, after as7 well as before he relinquished14 the purple, he was supported by the Pope, his father.
Drum and trumpet15 histories are now fortunately fast becoming obsolete16, and it is a truism to say that any man whose claim to fame is based on acts prompted by unbridled egoism can have little, if any, lasting17 effect upon the progress of the human race. A great scientist, scholar, or inventor may by his discoveries change the mode of living, the institutions of mankind, and, therefore, the subsequent history of humanity. The overthrow18 of the Feudal19 System has been ascribed to the invention of gunpowder20; and the mariner’s compass, the steam-engine, and the printing-press have altered the very nature of man; the discovery of an an?sthetic or an antitoxin may have greater effect upon the history of mankind than the victories of an Alexander.
Mere men of violence, the so-called conquerors21, the military geniuses, whom little children were once taught to admire, and whom moral perverts22 are still wont23 to exalt—the ferocious24 egoists, who sigh for more worlds to conquer—are the most useless creatures produced by humanity in the painful course of its evolution.
Even had these men never existed the great historic movements with which they were connected would undoubtedly25 have run their course and reached the same goal. The Roman Empire would have come without Caesar, and without Napoleon France would still have become the Republic.
8 However interesting Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon may be as examples of unbridled egoism, they failed to attain26 the ends they sought; their conquests did not last; the victories of fraud and violence never can endure.
Renascent27 Italy furnished numerous examples of power built up by these means, and even the beneficiaries knew how unstable28 was their dominion. Professor Achille Loria has pointed29 out that Machiavelli’s admiration30 for Caesar Borgia was due to his perfect comprehension of the true nature of feudal property and to his understanding of the inherent necessity for the spoliations, extortions, and crimes which characterised it; and also of the historical justification31 of the acts that favoured the preservation32 of this dominant3 social form.1
The bombastic33 chronicles of great men are now recognised as of slight value, for the economic interpretation34 of history teaches us that the individual plays but a small part in the march of events, even when his character is the noblest, his aims the highest; without Washington the colonies would have become the United States, and the slaves would have been freed without Lincoln.
A great man, especially in the domain35 of politics, is the product of his age. A genius appearing before society is ready for him is a visionary, but if the times are ripe for him he is a genius; the great man is he who best discerns the spirit of9 the age and enters the lists as the champion of popular ideals. He is essentially36 the product of his environment, and is so much a part of it that it is impossible to think of him as belonging to any other.
Men being products of history, under similar conditions similar men will be produced; but as they in the aggregate37 are the makers38 of history there is a constant mutation39 in conditions and therefore ceaseless change in men.
In every epoch40 there are men who although in many respects unlike their prototypes resemble them in others, and bear a close relationship to them. Unchecked egoism asserts itself in every age, but the mode of its expression varies according to the institutions of the day.
In Italy from the twelfth to the sixteenth century this egoism was embodied41 in the tyrant6 or despot; it has found expression in the absolute monarch42, and in the present bourgeois43 epoch it is exemplified in the captain of industry, the domineering genius of modern finance.
In the fifteenth century Italy was swarming44 with tyrants great and small—men of boundless45 ambition and greed, striving for power, deterred46 by no principle, hesitating at no crime. Duplicity, treachery, murder, had become fine arts.
A host of adventurers, upstarts, brigands47, soldiers of fortune, had managed to secure possession of the domain of St. Peter and were building up petty principalities for themselves and their10 kinsmen48. Originally these tyrants were feudatories of the Holy See, which based its claim to the territory on the donation of the Countess Matilda, who, dying in 1115, left her vast estates, which extended from Mantua to Pisa and thence almost to the walls of Rome, to the Pope.
As soon as these vassals49 of the Holy See felt themselves strong enough they refused all allegiance and declined to pay their annual tribute. Alexander VI. was thus afforded an excellent pretext50 for attempting to recover St. Peter’s domain—and this he set about doing, ostensibly for the Church, but in reality to build up a kingdom in central Italy for the benefit of his family.
点击收听单词发音
1 monograph | |
n.专题文章,专题著作 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 devoted | |
adj.忠诚的,忠实的,热心的,献身于...的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 dominant | |
adj.支配的,统治的;占优势的;显性的;n.主因,要素,主要的人(或物);显性基因 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 renaissance | |
n.复活,复兴,文艺复兴 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 tyrants | |
专制统治者( tyrant的名词复数 ); 暴君似的人; (古希腊的)僭主; 严酷的事物 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 tyrant | |
n.暴君,专制的君主,残暴的人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 mere | |
adj.纯粹的;仅仅,只不过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 pawns | |
n.(国际象棋中的)兵( pawn的名词复数 );卒;被人利用的人;小卒v.典当,抵押( pawn的第三人称单数 );以(某事物)担保 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 clan | |
n.氏族,部落,宗族,家族,宗派 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 dominion | |
n.统治,管辖,支配权;领土,版图 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 unlimited | |
adj.无限的,不受控制的,无条件的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 cardinal | |
n.(天主教的)红衣主教;adj.首要的,基本的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 obliquity | |
n.倾斜度 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 relinquished | |
交出,让给( relinquish的过去式和过去分词 ); 放弃 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 trumpet | |
n.喇叭,喇叭声;v.吹喇叭,吹嘘 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 obsolete | |
adj.已废弃的,过时的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 lasting | |
adj.永久的,永恒的;vbl.持续,维持 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 overthrow | |
v.推翻,打倒,颠覆;n.推翻,瓦解,颠覆 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 feudal | |
adj.封建的,封地的,领地的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 gunpowder | |
n.火药 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 conquerors | |
征服者,占领者( conqueror的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 perverts | |
n.性变态者( pervert的名词复数 )v.滥用( pervert的第三人称单数 );腐蚀;败坏;使堕落 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 wont | |
adj.习惯于;v.习惯;n.习惯 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 ferocious | |
adj.凶猛的,残暴的,极度的,十分强烈的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 undoubtedly | |
adv.确实地,无疑地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26 attain | |
vt.达到,获得,完成 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27 renascent | |
adj.新生的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28 unstable | |
adj.不稳定的,易变的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29 pointed | |
adj.尖的,直截了当的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30 admiration | |
n.钦佩,赞美,羡慕 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31 justification | |
n.正当的理由;辩解的理由 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
32 preservation | |
n.保护,维护,保存,保留,保持 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
33 bombastic | |
adj.夸夸其谈的,言过其实的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
34 interpretation | |
n.解释,说明,描述;艺术处理 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
35 domain | |
n.(活动等)领域,范围;领地,势力范围 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
36 essentially | |
adv.本质上,实质上,基本上 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
37 aggregate | |
adj.总计的,集合的;n.总数;v.合计;集合 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
38 makers | |
n.制造者,制造商(maker的复数形式) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
39 mutation | |
n.变化,变异,转变 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
40 epoch | |
n.(新)时代;历元 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
41 embodied | |
v.表现( embody的过去式和过去分词 );象征;包括;包含 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
42 monarch | |
n.帝王,君主,最高统治者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
43 bourgeois | |
adj./n.追求物质享受的(人);中产阶级分子 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
44 swarming | |
密集( swarm的现在分词 ); 云集; 成群地移动; 蜜蜂或其他飞行昆虫成群地飞来飞去 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
45 boundless | |
adj.无限的;无边无际的;巨大的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
46 deterred | |
v.阻止,制止( deter的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
47 brigands | |
n.土匪,强盗( brigand的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
48 kinsmen | |
n.家属,亲属( kinsman的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
49 vassals | |
n.奴仆( vassal的名词复数 );(封建时代)诸侯;从属者;下属 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
50 pretext | |
n.借口,托词 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |