The Vatican Observer
October 1514

A Plethora of Parties

Miei amici, it was a wonderful month for social gatherings in the past month, and the Quirinal resounded to the sounds of gaiety and discourse in no less than three weeks, the first, third and last of the month.

Remarkably, either no-one thought the gustatorial fare of the Quirinal suitable, which your correspondent deems unlikely, or no-one had taken the time to prepare a card of suitable delicacies, for the most that can be said for the food was that is was present, and accounted for. The drink seemed to interest more people, which provided the most promise of entertainments to come.

Before proceeding to an enumeration of the guests at the various proceedings, it will be mentioned that Canon Rinaldo Leonardo Amadeo de Gregori and Francesca attended the Papal Court in the first week of the month, each resplendent in new finery purchased for the occasion. The invitation was one of Canon de Gregori’s prizes for his performance at the Poetry Competition in the preceding month, and despite the fact that dei Gregori neither shone nor embarrassed himself with his knowledge of courtly manner, invitation to such an august gathering cannot but increase his notoriety among the powerful. In any event, one does not refuse an invitation from His Holiness. To anything.

If nothing else, Canon de' Gregori showed presence of mind, or at least a mind for presents, when he presented His Holiness with a thank offering for the invitation, a beautiful little miniature which he had apparently purchased while in France. However, the artist was apparently one of the Dutch or Flemish. His Holiness accepted the gift with his customary grace and seemed pleased.

And so, to the gatherings.

Arturo Negri and Ginevra hosted a party in the first, and Signor Negri did not even turn away factional rivals! One wonders what the Chigi will think. Attending were Alessandro Benedetto Ciampi with Nanna, Bartolomeo Gagliardi with Elena, Guido d'Aosta, Giovanni Speranza with Monica, Guido Vitale, Iacopo di Rossi, and Lucio Malvezzo with Anna. The time passed pleasantly, and no-one committed excess with the fruits of the vine. The spirited exchanges between the host and guest Guido Vitale led the two to arrange a debate for the coming month.

The third and fourth weeks found Baldessare Zamboni and Maria holding court at The Quirinal. He, too, did not scruple against the rivals of his own faction.

To the first gathering came Arturo Negri with Ginevra, Giovanni Speranza with Monica, Guido Vitale, Iacopo di Rossi with Chiara and Ugo Blatti. Both Signori Negri and Vitale will have cause for debate with their host! Now, it is known that Signori Zamboni and Negri are on rather friendly terms--which could cause them no little difficulty if their factions' rivalries ever take on a great seriousness-- but there is no rumour of such an amicable state between the host and Signor Vitale. Well, we will see, in the months to come. Signor Blatti, either due to the pedestrian menu, or simple inclination, tried to find rather a lot of veritas in his vino, but turned out to be a convivial cupster and ordered some bottles of a fine vintage to be poured out for the guests.

The last event attracted many of the same individuals of the month and a few new faces: Alessandro Benedetto Ciampi with Nanna, Arturo Negri with Ginevra, Enzo di Vitelli, Guido d'Aosta, Giovanni Speranza with Monica, and Iacopo di Rossi with Chiara. By the end of the evening, Signori Zamboni and Negri had once again begun to taunt each other about their factional ties! With friends like these...

On a somewhat less friendly note, Alessandro Benedetto Ciampi regrettably turned out to be a less convivial Bacchanalean, for once in the thrall of the grape, he insulted none other than the host of the event himself! Perhaps he was attempting to be humorous, but if so, he apparently failed. It remains to be seen what will result from this unfortunate breach of etiquette.

And so, the month's entertainment seems to have been provided mainly by the attendees, rather than the venue. Meanwhile Arturo Negri may congratulate himself on the extensive opportunities he has created for honing his debating talent. One hopes that his enthusiasm for the noble art of rhetoric will not screw his reputation right into the ground.

Finito

Paragone

Gentlemen of Rome,

Once again the steps and porticos of our fair city have been the forum for learned debate and scholarly dispute. Following a quiet September it has done my heart good to see the more notable members of court society meeting and engaging their intellects in healthy contest.

As regular readers will recall, this month just past Deacon Negri of the Chigi faction did fall into disagreement with the newly arrived Sig. Blatti on the subject of flowers and alpine artistic endeavours, not to mention on the topic of who should have access to the influential and wealthy court confidant Ginevra. In order to settle that which they had not been able to resolve through artistic channels, the two agreed to meet at the base of Trajan's column where by resolution of the vexed question of whether angels are male, female or neither.

Alas this discourse was but short lived, Deacon Negri opened by proposing that angels could not have gender as Matthew 22:28-30 tells us that they do not procreate and are not a race such as we are. Sig. Blatti cleverly agreed with this point but noted that many people of this Earth cannot procreate and that being without race does not mean being without gender. Those present following the debate agreed that both men had fine arguments but judged Deacon Negri's case as yet unproven.

Undaunted, the Deacon then issued forth an amusing jest to the effect that angels could not have gender for they were capable of passing unseen and were without sin, and that he was quite certain that any man capable of passing unseen wherever he went would not remain sinless for long. As the crowd laughed at this witty observation, Sig. Blatti responded with the point that in both Mark and Luke the masculine pronoun is used to describe angels while in Zachariah the female pronoun is used, if we are not to judge that the bible errs it follows there are both male and female angels in existence.

All present, though most amused by Deacon Negri's jest, agreed that this last venture of Sig. Blatti's was well made. This being so, it was held by all that the two gentlemen had each satisfied society's demands and showed their wit and elocution and that accordingly the contest was won equally by both or lost by all.

Later that same month, Deacon di Rossi of the Albani faction met with Subdeacon Magliano, allied to the Aldobrandini. This encounter was born from an earlier engagement between the two esteemed clerics, as they had previously each been discontented to discover the other in attendance at the salon of the influential court companion Costanza, both seemingly intent on forming a closer alliance with that good lady.

As is now known, Subdeacon Magliano later won favour with that most notable of women, through a most remarkable artistic intervention. This being so, Subdeacon Magliano chose to mockingly suggest that the ideal topic for the resulting debate should also be artistic in nature, to which end he proposed settling the question of whether it could fairly be said that to commission a work with pagan myth as its topic was to indicate a moral failing in one’s own character.

Perhaps fittingly, a small bar situated in the Piazza della rotunda and overlooking the Pantheon was the venue selected for this fascinating debate. Deacon di Rossi initiated proceedings with the seemingly irresistible point that since the Pope himself commissioned art which addressed such themes, to criticise them was to criticise the Pope. As those present gasped at the evidently ruinous error Subdeacon Magliani had committed in proposing an argument critical of the papacy, the Subdeacon simply smiled and gently pointed out that as a patron of the arts the Pope was obliged to assist where he might and it was to his credit that he chose not to disgrace those lacking his great piety by showing how unsuitable their selected subject matter truly was.

As applause rippled out in recognition of this clever and apposite response, the Subdeacon pressed his advantage by in turn proposing that given the range of Christian topics available it could truly be said that no artist ever need look beyond the true faith to those born in man’s days of ignorance. Sadly this sally proved less successful, as one individual in the crowd commented that it was hardly surprising that that which had proved sufficient inspiration for the great Homer should still prove inspirational today.

Deacon di Rossi, continuing the classical theme, jested that it was doubtless the case that had Subdeacon Magliani been alive in Homer’s day the Subdeacon would have been as critical of that great man’s tales of Troy as he was of more contemporary artists. Sadly this witticism fell flat as a puzzled onlooker queried whether it could properly be said that Homer had employed historical motifs in his work and by the time this question had been properly resolved any humour present in the Deacon’s observation was quite lost.

Subdeacon Magliani, undeterred by his brief setback, stated that Deacon di Rossi was labouring under a misapprehension. Pausing briefly for effect, he continued by citing the fact that as Homer had lived and died before the birth of our Lord and Saviour it was hardly important what matters he had chosen, the most important matter of all being closed to him. A strong argument, and one which might well have won the day but for the momentary distraction caused by the interruption of a vendor of plainly fraudulent relics the presence of which was taken great exception to by the assembled priests and scholars.

At this Deacon di Rossi returned to the fray noting that were Homer alive today it is certain that he would point out that much in his work had in any event been allegorical, and that allegory was as valid now as it had been in his own day. It was agreed by those observing that, though interesting as a supposition, it was unclear to what degree Homer had considered his work to be other than literal report and that in any event being blind his opinion on matters of portraiture needs must be discounted.

Deacon di Rossi attempted a further jest at this point, saying that if a blind man’s opinion must be set aside so must that of the good Magliani as he was clearly blind himself to matters of artistic consequence. Although some present laughed at this witticism, others felt that it was overly personal and besides seemed a curious accusation when aimed at a man presently famous for his artistic patronage.

Recognising that little further profit would be had through Homeric contemplation the Deacon decided that reference to actual art would benefit his case, referring to the recent fresco depicting the Triumph of Galatea painted by noted artist Raffaello Sanzio da Urbino for Sig. Agostini Chigi. The Chigi, as observant readers will recall, are friendly to the Albani clan to which Deacon di Rossi is linked and doubtless he hoped to gain favour by publicising the works of these friends to his own friends. The Deacon commented that it was inconceivable that a man such as Sig. Chigi could be morally lax, as his goodness was amply evidenced by the generosity with which he made his loans, access to which many of those present had surely enjoyed.

In counter, Subdeacon Magliani merely replied that if wealth were all that was required to show morality the Sultan of the Turks would be a very saint. All present agreed this must surely be correct, and since Deacon di Rossi could think of no immediate response of his own it was held that the victory lay with Subdeacon Magliani and that the debate was his.

Men of the Cloth / Men of Steel

The month in Rome began with a flurry of applications, not all of them successful.

Signor Ciampi, having been judged insufficiently committed to the Chigi cause, was dismissed after a short interview. A similar fate befell Signor d’Aosta, who had renewed his request to join the Swiss Guards. However, the newly arrived Baldessare Zamboni was accepted without hesitation by the Barberini. For the time being, at least, he has been granted the rank of Deacon, whilst Cesare Salieri and Vittorio Magliano were each promoted to that rank by their respective factions. Finally, in an unsurprising development, the distinguished cleric dei Gregori was appointed by the Farnese to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Canon Entoo.

Meanwhile, the Papal Mission to the Court of King Ulaszlo II has suffered an unexpected reversal after a most promising and cordial commencement. The reasons for such disheartening developments appears to have arisen from the internal political situation in the Kingdom of Hungary.

After observing the celebration of the Guardian Angels early in the month, the Papal Delegation and the King's representatives met in Budapest to continue the discussions that Cardinal N. Quintus believed would build upon the good will produced from last month's very favourable session. This, however, was not to be the case. Early in the discussions it became obvious that the Hungarian delegation was seeking a more temporal form of support from the Pope. King Ulaszlo, having become aware that the Pope desired, eventually, to form a new Crusade against the Turk, sought to use this noble, and one may say, Holy ambition to his own benefit. The indiscreet comments of several of the former members of the Mission, all of whom were dismissed, allowed the Hungarians to return to this question in another form.

None of the Hierarchy was prepared for such a debate. The Delegation had neither the instruction to undertake negotiations nor the authority to negotiate these matters independently. No materials had been prepared for presenting the Vatican's position, yet none was prepared to defer the discussion of an undertaking so great.

Cardinal Quintus became so upset by the unforeseen events that he withdrew citing an attack of the palsy. He is to be allowed to return to the Vatican and recover just as soon as Cardinal N. Tertius arrives in Budapest.

Patriarch En Sextus, the Assistant Delegation Leader, and Archbishop N. Tres, the fourth Coalition Leader managed to alleviate the tension created by the unexpected turn of events. Yet several members of the Sforza and Ludovisi factions misinterpreted the solicitous speech of both the Patriarch and Archbishop and their reluctance to chastise the Hungarian Delegation for the impropriety of the subject.

The Sforza faction became so outraged that they began to deride the Hungarians for daring to present a quid pro quo arrangement before representatives of His Holiness. This was contrary to Bishop En Cinco's instruction. Canon En Due was shouted down, as were Deacon En Uno and Deacon EnCinque. Without exception, all three were dismissed for their effronteries. Meanwhile, the more prudent Padre En Seis conformed to the Bishop's instruction and example and Padre N. Fünf, understanding the direction to be adopted, spoke quite convincingly. Deacon Pennaccini delivered a convincing address, citing the need for deliberation, for which he was rewarded with the gift of a fine stallion by the King; high praise indeed, for the Hungarians prize horses greatly. Moreover, Deacon Odetti skilfully argued that the decision to agree to a military action without the assistance of Austria and Poland, and the blessing of the Pope, would serve neither Hungary nor the Vatican. This found favour with the King, who gave him a fine gold goblet, and Bishop En Cinco, who promised to mention him most favourably in his report. If reports are to be believed, the young deacon was even about to be raised to the rank of priest, until the good bishop reviewed the Odetti’s humble wardrobe.

The Ludovisi Faction, which had been depleted last month, reached a state of demoralization rarely seen. Bishop En Trois and Padre En Three were both humiliated by their intemperate remarks. Canon En Phive fared poorly, and Padre En Six managed a feeble response. Even the redoubtable Major de Miteli was tainted by the attitude of his faction. In the wake of such events, voices in Rome are beginning to speculate that the faction may soon be consigned to an ignominious footnote in history.

Bishop N. Quarto of the Missionary Faction saw an opportunity for furthering the mandate of the faction, that is, to spread the Gospel. In conference with the members of the Faction, it was decided to offer King Ulaszlo certain friars and monks to preach to his subjects in order to quell the continuing hostility of the peasantry. Bitterly resenting the suggestion that he might be amongst those ‘loaned’ to the Hungarians, the seminarian D. Malatesta of the Doria-Pamfili spoke vehemently against the proposal. He was roundly criticised for placing his own concerns above those of the Papal State. Unwisely, lay cleric dei Gambetti sought to defend Signor Malatesta. Thus dei Gambetti's standing was diminished by association.

And so it was that the Bishop, ably assisted by Canon En Five, Padre N. Quintari, and Padre N. Six, presented his case to the Hungarians. It was, without doubt, the best received speech of the month. The Hungarians would receive tangible support and the Holy Church would reinforce its presence in the east.

The Papal Scholars, for their part, did not suffer any reproach. They had been well prepared for the pre-agreed topics, but the subsequent track which the discussions followed meant that their research was not germane. The lay clerics J. Finelli and V. Clementi may have been disappointed that their work had not been useful, but each may console himself with in the knowledge that his reputation has survived the month untarnished.

We entreat our readers to pray that the Delegation will fare better next month.

Companionship and Conversation

Ah, persistence. Or was it plain stubbornness? Or perhaps just simply a lack of any sense at all. Call it what you will, but good Subdeacon Cesare Salieri of the Borgia has it in spades. Where friendship, or should I say Friendship, was the byword of last month's column by the regular writer, this month was marred by a failure.

Now, as all know, Alessandro Benedetto Ciampi has been graced with the word of the Court from his dear Companion, the well-connected and well-off Nanna. Unfortunately, this fact either escaped Subdeacon Salieri's notice or he simply chose to ignore it. I favour the latter possibility, in light of his persistence. He started by attempting to visit her at home in the first week, but she was out with Signore Ciampi.. He returned the next week with slightly more success. She was home. However, upon seeing him at the door with a distinct lack of anything to appeal to her finer senses, she let him have it. I'm quite certain that the entire quarter was made quite aware of his identity and his failings.

Not to be put off, he returned the following week for a third attempt, only to discover that she was out again. Indeed, she was discussing with Signore Ciampi how an oaf by the name of Cesare Salieri had attempted to impress her with some awful poems. I'm told by reliable sources that the good Signore became quite incensed.

Ugo Blatti was less of a pest, but equally unimpressive and ultimately unsuccessful when he visited the brilliant and wealthy Laura in the first week. He tried to interest her in some obscure scrolls he'd discovered at a shop, but she recognized them as the English notes of some long forgotten man of the merchant class. He left, quite red faced, saying something about finding that "cheating shopkeeper" and committing some sort of questionable act. I believe he was seen in confession the following Sunday.

Baldessare Zamboni, on the other hand, showed his class and upbringing when he visited Maria late in the first week. He spent the first several days carefully selecting poems and songs certain to appeal to her. He was quite thorough in his research and it paid off handsomely when she invited him in. He appears to have a quite nice tenor voice, or so the neighbours were said to have reported. Perhaps, though, she was simply impressed by his knowledge, which might approach her own. In any case, the two were much seen in each other's company the remainder of the week.

Deacon Iacopo di Rossi purchased a small, but finely detailed sculpture of the Virgin Mary and visited Chiara, another woman of known wit. While his expenditure was not of the greatest, it appears that she loved it anyway. The two were overheard discussing some of the finer points of Court etiquette a few hours later.

I do not know if I shall return next month or if your regular writer will have recover from his affliction by then. In any case, I shall leave you with this thought: Persistence is a virtue, but only until it becomes blind obstinacy and a vice.

Around the Markets

Many of the purveyors of fine food and wine are known to be distraught at the rumours that Padre Gagliardi has gone on a diet. Of course, men must still eat. If those men should be Deacon Salieri, Stefano Zanetti and Domenico Facente, it is only to be expected that they shall eat well, so Alvaro need not fear yet.

Meanwhile, those whose trade is in items collectible have passed a far happier month. Whilst Deacon Negri has commissioned books, Deacon di Vitelli has ordered a golden ring with a gemstone imported from the East and Signor Ciampi appears to have sought distraction in the world of butterflies in order to forget his rejection by the Chigi.

Finally, before departing for the mission, Deacon Odetti was noted to have acquired a range of tunics, undershirts, leggings, boots and a hat. Purchasing items in sombre tones of brown, grey and white, his only indulgence was that of allowing his tailor to supply one shirt with ruffles. Perhaps, had he had the foresight to add some velvet, he might now be Priest Odetti.

Court and Social

The Pope will host the following events at the Lateran Palace
In the first week of October: Spanish Envoy
In the third week of October: Grand Ball

Positions Vacant

School Directors

Upcoming Debates

ABC v BZ (ABC's drunkenness)
ABC v CS (faction rivalries)
AN v BZ (faction rivalries)
AN v GV (faction rivalries)