ModernChivalry.org
Main => The Round Table => Topic started by: Joshua Santana on 2012-03-05, 21:12:46
-
Over the past three months, I have been doing research for SIGMA as well as private research for my own interests.
I have read that in the Renaissance Era, the code of chivalry faded away with the advances of gunpowder weapons. However I am the individual that doesn't give up on what mainstream historians believe. This along with my interests in the teaching of Paulus Hector Mair, rapier fencing and renaissance chivalric literature (yes Don Quixote is included) collided with my ambition to find the answer to this question: "Did the Code of Chivalry truly die away in the Renaissance or did last through the Era in a different perspective?"
This new undertaking has been most fruitful in finding plenty of source material from historical, military and literary perspectives.
But aside from this, I want to ask you this: "Do you think that Chivalry lived on in the Renaissance or did it not?"
-
Yes, chivalry didn't die then from an Caliver, and today it hasn't died from an assault rifle.
Chivalry extends far beyond one's role on the battlefield after all. :)
-
I think it might be worth examining what chivalry was really defined as during the high middle ages as well. We have the book A Knight's Own Book of Chivalry by Geoffroi de Charny, written in the 14th century. But for the most part, real medieval chivalric behavior seemed to extend from the nobility to other nobles, and ended there. Chivalry wasn't a courtesy much extended to the common man-at-arms or peasant soldier by his knightly counterpart on the battlefield.
So, are we talking about the Victorian notion of Chivalry or the more recently accepted 'medieval form of chivalry,' that it appears knights really followed? I'm not trying to say that what we think of as modern day Chivalry is purely the fantasy of Victorian historians (i hate that that rhymes), but I don't think real knightly chivalry of the 13th/14th/15th centuries was quite as poetic as 19th century historians have made it out to be.
My point is, I think it would be wise to have a good understanding of what Chivalry was to the people of Medieval Europe prior to the Renaissance and not paint the Victorian ideal of Chivalry onto a group of people it didn't really apply to before moving forward.
edit for further thoughts:
I think a huge aspect of what made the Chivalric code viable as it applies to battle in the Middle Ages was the fact that a large portion of combat was hand to hand. Extending courtesy to a fellow knight of an opposing army, in a practical sense, required you get close enough to him to recognize his heraldry as someone of standing and then capture him after subduing him. In the age of gunpowder, as the very nature of warfare itself changed, I would think this practice become more and more difficult. As killing becomes more indiscriminate I can see the practice of not killing your knightly counterparts practically more difficult and the battlefield itself more dangerous for you to even try. This could lead to what would ultimately be perceived as a loss of the Chivalric code in battle, so I can see where the notion comes from.
-
Some good points made here so far. I'll briefly add also that as knighthood evolved away from being a combat class, and into a position of minor nobility, the meaning of Chivalry also evolved with it. As the Renaissance got started, this change had pretty much already occurred, and so Chivalry was being equated more with courtly (noble class) behavior.
-
However I am the individual that doesn't give up on what mainstream historians believe.
This is great. Think of the Chinon Parchment. For 700 years, people thought the Templars were heretics. The Chinon Parchment had absolved them of that .... except, it was written in the early 1300s, and discovered in 2001. "History", as it is, can sometimes change substantially ... or rather, it's not history, but what we think we know of it.
-
This is good and exactly what I was looking for, I thank all of you for your input and opinions.
I think it might be worth examining what chivalry was really defined as during the high middle ages as well. We have the book A Knight's Own Book of Chivalry by Geoffroi de Charny, written in the 14th century. But for the most part, real medieval chivalric behavior seemed to extend from the nobility to other nobles, and ended there. Chivalry wasn't a courtesy much extended to the common man-at-arms or peasant soldier by his knightly counterpart on the battlefield.
So, are we talking about the Victorian notion of Chivalry or the more recently accepted 'medieval form of chivalry,' that it appears knights really followed? I'm not trying to say that what we think of as modern day Chivalry is purely the fantasy of Victorian historians (i hate that that rhymes), but I don't think real knightly chivalry of the 13th/14th/15th centuries was quite as poetic as 19th century historians have made it out to be.
My point is, I think it would be wise to have a good understanding of what Chivalry was to the people of Medieval Europe prior to the Renaissance and not paint the Victorian ideal of Chivalry onto a group of people it didn't really apply to before moving forward.
edit for further thoughts:
I think a huge aspect of what made the Chivalric code viable as it applies to battle in the Middle Ages was the fact that a large portion of combat was hand to hand. Extending courtesy to a fellow knight of an opposing army, in a practical sense, required you get close enough to him to recognize his heraldry as someone of standing and then capture him after subduing him. In the age of gunpowder, as the very nature of warfare itself changed, I would think this practice become more and more difficult. As killing becomes more indiscriminate I can see the practice of not killing your knightly counterparts practically more difficult and the battlefield itself more dangerous for you to even try. This could lead to what would ultimately be perceived as a loss of the Chivalric code in battle, so I can see where the notion comes from.
You have a good point here that is worth for consideration. My goal is to find out how was Chivalry viewed in the Renaissance and to answer the question of "Did they respect it? Did they view as a novelty or held it in mockery?" I am seeking the answers to these questions.
Yes, chivalry didn't die then from an Caliver, and today it hasn't died from an assault rifle.
Chivalry extends far beyond one's role on the battlefield after all.
Huzzah Sir Nathan!
Some good points made here so far. I'll briefly add also that as knighthood evolved away from being a combat class, and into a position of minor nobility, the meaning of Chivalry also evolved with it. As the Renaissance got started, this change had pretty much already occurred, and so Chivalry was being equated more with courtly (noble class) behavior.
You made a good point and I am investigating to what extent did the Code become integrated with courtly behavior. I am seeking to find out "Was Chivalry transitioning into a Social Etiquette Standard? Was it becoming an aspect of Courtliness? Or was it a Moral Code that was used in conjunction with Courtly Behavior?" That is one of the many questions I am seeking to answer.
To let all of you know, this research of mine might be turned into an essay (and I am sure it will be a long essay). My goal is to find evidence or respect or honoring of the Code of Chivalry (and I assume I will also find contempt for the Code) in Renaissance History, Military History and Literature. I will be exploring these sides of history and I will let you know what I find. I am confident that I will find something good worth sharing on this forum. (If it goes father, I might turn it into a book).
-
I think you've made your points, Joshua. I'd say that chivalry and courtly behavior went hand in hand...an etiquette standard for the nobility and of course, to be mocked by the commoners for being hogwash since it only applied to nobility. At the time.
Now, the knightly orders are meant to be viewed as upper echelon, limited membership and generally given out to luminaries who espouse this or that ideal.
-
Research Update!
Here is something I found while listening to Cervantes' Don Quixote (translation by John Ormsby) and I quote this passage from the translator's preface:
That this was the task Cervantes set himself, and that he had
ample provocation to urge him to it, will be sufficiently clear to
those who look into the evidence; as it will be also that it was not
chivalry itself that he attacked and swept away. Of all the
absurdities that, thanks to poetry, will be repeated to the end of
time, there is no greater one than saying that "Cervantes smiled
Spain's chivalry away." In the first place there was no chivalry for
him to smile away. Spain's chivalry had been dead for more than a
century. Its work was done when Granada fell, and as chivalry was
essentially republican in its nature, it could not live under the rule
that Ferdinand substituted for the free institutions of mediaeval
Spain. What he did smile away was not chivalry but a degrading mockery
of it.
The true nature of the "right arm" and the "bright array," before
which, according to the poet, "the world gave ground," and which
Cervantes' single laugh demolished, may be gathered from the words
of one of his own countrymen, Don Felix Pacheco, as reported by
Captain George Carleton, in his "Military Memoirs from 1672 to
1713." "Before the appearance in the world of that labour of
Cervantes," he said, "it was next to an impossibility for a man to
walk the streets with any delight or without danger. There were seen
so many cavaliers prancing and curvetting before the windows of
their mistresses, that a stranger would have imagined the whole nation
to have been nothing less than a race of knight-errants. But after the
world became a little acquainted with that notable history, the man
that was seen in that once celebrated drapery was pointed at as a
Don Quixote, and found himself the jest of high and low. And I
verily believe that to this, and this only, we owe that dampness and
poverty of spirit which has run through all our councils for a century
past, so little agreeable to those nobler actions of our famous
ancestors."
I find this of interest in that it dispels the myth of Don Quixote as a satire or a mockery of the Code of Chivalry. Further evidence is found in the first chapter of the book in which the Quixote reads only the Chivalric Romances of his day and nothing else. I couldn't find any reference to Ramon Lull, Geoffri de Charney nor Christine de Pizan who wrote books of Chivalry and Knighthood. I believe the author wanted to show the reader what happen when into many stories enter into the human mind. What I am getting from this is that idealism based on fiction holds no ground when facing reality whereas idealism based on experience and common sense has a solid foundation.
-
Very interesting. I had similar feelings on the matter, that the Don Quixote story has more to it than just being a mockery. You see some real high ideals of Chivalry within it. I felt that the portrayal of it being a "mad man" holding onto archaic ideals was more of a lamentation of the passing of the chivalric age, than a mockery.
-
Sir Edward: That is why most people will say and I have read other sources that explain the moral points and lesson to be learned from Don Quixote. I think the sentiment you described is a product of the musical which became a movie called "Man of La Mancha" which has several parts of the story mixed and certain elements are present (including the theme of never giving up).
What is more curious is that the author of Quixote was a Soldier, a Poet, a Playwright, and a Dramatist who experienced many of life's up's and down's (including his many attempts to escape from a Turkish prison) yet he maintained a positive outlook on life, This is what I gathered from the John Ormsby Preface which mentions the life of Miguel de Cervantes Saveedra.
I will post further findings here and the essay is going well,I have been tackling early English Renaissance History which I know leads me to the Tudor Dynasty.
-
Very interesting. I had similar feelings on the matter, that the Don Quixote story has more to it than just being a mockery. You see some real high ideals of Chivalry within it. I felt that the portrayal of it being a "mad man" holding onto archaic ideals was more of a lamentation of the passing of the chivalric age, than a mockery.
I’m of a similar mindset in regards to the Don Quixote story. For even if ye are mad as a hatter in the opinion of the rest of the world and tilt at windmills believing with all your heart and soul that they be dragons, then lay on says I for your mind and dreams are your very own and none should nay say you. ;)
-
I’m of a similar mindset in regards to the Don Quixote story. For even if ye are mad as a hatter in the opinion of the rest of the world and tilt at windmills believing with all your heart and soul that they be dragons, then lay on says I for your mind and dreams are your very own and none should nay say you.
In that regard Sir Brian you're correct when it comes to Perseverance (or persevering to the Code of Chivalry).
My reason for this post is to show that Don Quixote was a satire on the mockery of Chivalry which to me does justice for those that truly lived by the Code and never gave lip service in the pursuit of vanity.
This a research update and an update on the essay. Firstly, the essay will be out somwhere in mid-May, i will publish it on my facebook (in Notes) and will more likely post it on our facebook group wall. It is coming along well and I have been finding a mountain of knowledge that to me has never been given attention and I have found numerous biographies of real Renaissance Knights that lived by the Code as best they can in a changing world. Their names will be mentioned in the essay. Events and Battles will be included and my goal is to spur the reader to research or to spark interest on the Renaissance in which the Knight fought with both Pistol and Sword (The Military History part of the essay I think will surprise a lot of people). So expect the essay in mid to late May! :D
Secondly, I came across these videos while doing research on three monumental battles that occurred during the Renaissance. This is about the Ottoman Turkish Wars against Europe, these three battles have been covered by two documentaries (both from the History Channel) and a tribute video that the first naval battle in European history. Here they are in chronological order. (I hope you enjoy them!)
1st Siege of Vienna 1529 1/6 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeWmcQJQSiw#)
The last crusaders (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rubruP9p4i8#ws)
TRIBUTE TO THE BATTLE OF LEPANTO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUo1lmPzfuo#)
This event although past the Renaissance, is an interesting battle that brought about the end of the Ottoman Turkish Wars.
The Battle of Vienna - "Deus Vincit" (1683) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yekNDrW25MY#)
As you know me, thoughts, comments, questions and suggestion are always welcome.
I must point out that I am not proclaiming on this forum hatred towards the ethnicity mentioned in these videos. I have done my homework and I present only the facts. I hope that you enjoy the videos in the light of gaining insight about the Renaissance and to show how Chivalry survived on the Battlefield with Gunpowder weapons. I ask that you watch the videos (when you can) in its entirety before responding. Thank you.
-
If the videos are arduous to watch (as in no one has the time to watch all four), I will include a couple of individuals that are Chivalrous individuals that lived during the Renaissance.
I will begin with the Captain of the Holy League at the Battle of Lepanto.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Juan_of_Austria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Juan_of_Austria)
Hope you enjoy it!
Thoughts and comments are welcome.
-
Here is another Renaissance Knight that I came across during my research in Renaissance Italy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_dalle_Bande_Nere (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_dalle_Bande_Nere)
What is interesting about this individual is that he was a Condottiero or Mercenary Knight yet he helped his country in their struggle for Independence.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condottieri (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condottieri) for further info)
His death from infection from a gunshot wound to his leg heralded the end of the Condotteiri. His last words which were recorded by a friend of his is now accessible through Freelance Academy Press here: http://www.freelanceacademypress.com/DeathOfGiovanni.aspx (http://www.freelanceacademypress.com/DeathOfGiovanni.aspx)
-
Here is another Renaissance Knight that doesn't seem to get a lot of attention.
Sir James Scudamore (1568–1619)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_James_Scudamore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_James_Scudamore)
What is interesting about this guy is that he aspired to be a Chivalrous Courtier like Sir Philip Sydney (who I will touch on later). When Sir Philip Sydney died, he carried is arms during his funeral procession, seeing himself as his successor he emulated the Chivalric Ideals to the best of his ability, even becoming a prolific jouster and courtier. It should be noted that he did serve in the army and was involved in the Capture of Cadiz against Spain.
Read the rest of the article, it is a awesome story.
-
Terry Shaibert is just cool! :D
As to chivalry: Sometimes it lasted till it was suicidal to keep to it, or you were a peasant and not following it gave you a good reason to put a hurt on them snobs in steel. Visa vie Agincourt.
-
As to chivalry: Sometimes it lasted till it was suicidal to keep to it, or you were a peasant and not following it gave you a good reason to put a hurt on them snobs in steel. Visa vie Agincourt.
You're correct in that humorous regard ;) In the Renaissance, peasants get the chance of being in a professional army as a musketeer, pikeman or infantryman. Knights on the battlefield were heavy or light cavalry armed with swords and pistol or blunderbusses as an option. The whole war scene dramatically changes where the peasant can use artillery or pikes or keep the Cavalry at bay or push them back. But that didn't mean that Cavalry couldn't maneuver to areas where artillery or pike couldn't be stationed. ;)
Whole point is that even when war changed, the Code of Chivalry didn't change, in fact it went with the flow as seen in the biographies I will be posting here. ;)
-
Here is Sir James Scudamore's inspiration/role model to follow the Code of Chivalry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Philip_Sidney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Philip_Sidney)
His story is an amazing story indeed, he was called "the perfect knight" or courtier by Queen Elizabeth and he was involved with the Spanish War. He was even a jouster, skilled fighter and a poet. He authored Arcadia, Astrophell, Defense of Poesy, Lady May and several poems. He was (to me) the William Marshall of the Renaissance. You can find out more here: http://books.google.com/books?id=yHIKAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=sir+philip+sidney&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JfqfT_uoM8PA0AGkyrX5AQ&sqi=2&ved=0CEUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=sir%20philip%20sidney&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=yHIKAQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=sir+philip+sidney&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JfqfT_uoM8PA0AGkyrX5AQ&sqi=2&ved=0CEUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=sir%20philip%20sidney&f=false)
-
Another Knightly individual in the Renaissance is a lesser known figure who was involved in the naval victories in the English war against Spain.
Enter Sir George Clifford
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clifford,_3rd_Earl_of_Cumberland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clifford,_3rd_Earl_of_Cumberland)
His story is quite amazing in that he was a Knight, Jouster, Naval commander and Buccaneer against the Spanish.
Here is another article which explains his Naval accomplishments in detail.
http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_mow_clifford.html (http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_mow_clifford.html)
Best of all, his armor survives to this day and can be seen at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
-
Another figure in the Renaissance that is deemed both Chivalrous and controversial (by what most historians say).
Sir Walter Raleigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Raleigh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Raleigh)
His story is quite amazing in that he rose from a humble position to being an explorer, commander, soldier, courtier, politician, and captain of the guard. he also participated in jousts and was a favorite of Queen Elizabeth I. His journeys were impressive as they helped the expansion of Europe to the New World. He discovered Orinoco and most of the Caribbean islands. He was on a search to find "El Dorado" the golden city of legend. Though he never found it, his journeys helped future explorers and settlers to find land to settle in the New World. He is associated with Roanoke Island and his famed search for the "Lost Colony" He is what I would call a Chivalrous Explorer. Beheaded several months after his return to England and King James I reigning after Elizabeth's passing for his involvement in political conspiracies against King James (Raleigh never liked King James on the throne) he faced his execution with serenity and grace a Knight would have done in the face of impending death on the battlefield. Here are his last words written to his wife and son which never fail to move its reader, I admit this is proof of his Chivalry.
http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC02477824&id=JlNlWfc2XV4C&pg=PA557&as_brr=1#v=onepage&q&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC02477824&id=JlNlWfc2XV4C&pg=PA557&as_brr=1#v=onepage&q&f=false)
(His instructions to his Son)
http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/raleghfarewell.htm (http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/raleghfarewell.htm)
(His last words to his wife)
-
Sir Francis Drake
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Drake (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Drake)
He is famous for his pirate style raids on the Spanish trading ships and his involvement against the Spanish Armada, even was involved at the siege of Cadiz in 1587. His service to Queen and country is how he earned a Knighthood (with a popular tale that Queen Elizabeth I did the knighting). Drake was also an explorer who made several trips around the Caribbean Islands and circumnavigated around the world. He made an unsuccessful attack at San Juan, Puerto Rico before dying of dysentery. He requested on is death bed to be buried with his armor on and for his coffin to be sent to the sea. The request was honored and divers to this day search for it. An amazing story indeed.
-
The focus of my research turned to Italy where I began to research more into the Condottiere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condottieri (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condottieri)
What I found interesting is that most of these mercenary knights fought for a common goal (the liberation of Italy from the Holy Roman Empire) and they were often governors of the cities they captured. No this in the Italian sense is more chivalric and they honor their names by naming their cruise ships after them or by erecting statues in their memory. This is rather a myth busting moment and how Chivalry can be perceived in a lesser occupation of the mercenary business.
More info on the Italian Wars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Wars)
To start off, I came across an English condotteiri named Sir John Hawkwood.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hawkwood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hawkwood)
Despite being a controversial figure during the late Middle Ages, he manages to become an influential figure in Italian history. The roots of the Italian Wars had their start during the middle to late Middle Ages and Sir John was involved in it. A veteran of the Hundred Years Wars siding with England, he fought in the battles of Crecy, Poitiers and was knighted by the Black Prince himself.
His mercenary career started in Burgundy, from there he rose to commander of a mercenary company called the White Company. He was involved in the Italian factions (which were the root causes of the later Renaissance Italian Wars). His career is a shifting change from fighting against the Papal forces to acting under orders from Pope Gregory XI (the tale surrounding his order is the source of the controversy).
Later on, King Richard III appointed him as ambassador of England and gained a victory at the Battle of Castagnaro six years later.
Lived the remainder of his life in Florence and is honored to this day as a hero for Florence against Milanese expansion. (Remember the factions were caused by region fighting against region for territory, Italy would not become a united nation until the 19th Century). Hope you enjoy!
-
Here is an English Knight Renaissance whose own story is quite remarkable.
Enter Sir Thomas Hoby
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hoby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hoby)
Originally a translator and diplomat, however when he traveled to France, Italy and the other nations in the Holy Roman Empire he did his job well and came across one of the popular books in the Renaissance: "Il Cortegiano" or "The Book of the Courtier" by Baldassare Castiglione. This book describes the mannerisms of the ideal courtier (it addresses to both men and women) and the ideals have it's roots to the Code of Chivalry and Courtly Love. Thomas was responsible for its translation it exploded in England as one of the popular books during the English Renaissance. Thomas Hoby was knighted on March 9, 1566 for this and for doing his job as a diplomat. Sadly, he died three months later and yet leaves behind one of the best translations of a popular book that describes the change of the Medieval Knight to the Renaissance Courtier/Gentleman or Knight.
Here is an online link to the actual book itself and the original work (translated by a different author) for you who are interested. Enjoy!'
http://www.luminarium.org/renascence-editions/courtier/courtier.html (http://www.luminarium.org/renascence-editions/courtier/courtier.html)
http://books.google.com/books?id=E-gtAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+book+of+the+courtier&hl=en&sa=X&ei=E9qrT7yjCefg0QHSnfn6Dw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=the%20book%20of%20the%20courtier&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=E-gtAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+book+of+the+courtier&hl=en&sa=X&ei=E9qrT7yjCefg0QHSnfn6Dw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=the%20book%20of%20the%20courtier&f=false)
-
I just recently ordered an downloaded this document detailing the last few days that Don Giovanni dalle Bande Nere lived. http://www.freelanceacademypress.com/DeathOfGiovanni.aspx (http://www.freelanceacademypress.com/DeathOfGiovanni.aspx)
It is a letter written by his Pietro Aretino who recorded the entire ordeal. What struck me while I read this 7 page document is that Giovanni maintains a strange, positive attitude during his ordeal: "“As in all other matters, I have always fulfilled my duty. I will therefore not fail in this regard either.” (he was wounded in the leg (I suppose the calf area) by a falconet and a arquebus shot (a small cannon).)
In his confession he said these specific words which surprised me (since he happens to be a Condottiere or Mercenary Knight): "....as I am a man-at-arms by profession, I have lived by a soldier’s code, as I would have lived as a man of the cloth had I donned the same robe as you. And if it weren’t something unusual, I would confess myself before the whole world, as I have never committed acts unworthy of me.”
This was the surprise because he mentioned that he lived by "a soldier's code". This to me is hardcore evidence that Giovanni was a chivalric individual who genuinely lived by the code. I have done my research on him and I can profess that the letter is further proof of his Chivalric character.
Giovanni dalle Bande Nere (or Don Giovanni de Medici) died of septicemia as a result of the falconet, cannon shot wound and amputation. Aretino describes his passing as a great loss, he then describes his character in great detail that he was humble in his profession, loved by his men and "The goods that were sold and did not go to his son, but to feed his men, are proof that I laud him for his true worth, not for adulation."
"He was admirable in pacifying quarrels among soldiers, overseeing them by using love, fear, punishment and reward. There was never a better man to employ deception and strength in war. Nor was the audacity that armed his heart lacking; but his natural gallantry caused him to utter sentences frightening to his enemies."
This I find to be true as Giovanni lived up to his reputation. A final note I must add is that Aretino says these famous words concerning the future without men like Giovanni: "And Florence, and Rome (please, God, let me be lying!) will soon get a taste of a world without him. I am already hearing the cries of the Pope, who believes to have gained by the loss of our Lord." This becomes a reality as a few months after Giovanni's death, Rome become sacked by the Imperial forces under the command of Charles IV (I believe) In 1527. Pope Clement VII was a Medici who considered Giovanni to be a bad influence and put obstacles in his way while he lived. He believed to have gained an advantage from Giovanni's death, but he would flee from a burning Rome and he would go down in History for his cowardly infamy.
Consider this, a mercenary knight fighting not for money but rather his country's independence, seriously wounded in the, undregoes amputation (and helps the surgeons by putting candle light to his wounded leg while it is being removed, suffers a few days latter keeping his head high, dies from the wound infection. His death is monumental that the conquest of Italy by the Holy Roman Empire occurred months after his death. Tell me, this does not say that Chivalry was alive and well in the Renaissance.
All I can say is that the letter does not disappoint it's reader and I can tell you it an awesome letter, I recommend any one with an interest to order it. I hope you enjoy this small review of mine.