Essay Part 2

(This will continue after the first part), (This section still requires abit further depth/input from the sources I've used), (The last part will tie Rodrigo and history together, it will focus on the sources I've used and tie Rodrigo Borgia and historiography).

Rodrigo Borgia led an intriguing life as Pope Alexander VI. There was a vast range of views and opinions concerning his status both from the time of the Italian Renaissance and throughout history up until modern from an array of historians and people alike.

During the Renaissance many have considered Rome as a centre for rumours and gossip. Most will acknowledge this, as Barbara Tuchman famously quotes:

 “In the bubbling stew of Rome's rumors”

 In fact the alleged allegations occurred even when Alexander himself first became Pope in 1492. As stated earlier many accused him of simply buying out the Papacy, with bribes and offers of both wealth and positions in various offices/roles throughout the Church.  However, there was no solid conclusive evidence to suggest this and because of that fact, the allegation is now considered false by most. In fact Mallett writes that Rodrigo was in the lead, voting wise, from the beginning:

 “ … the full details of the first three scrutinies of this conclave had finally been found and published. The implications of these scrutiny lists have been very fully discussed by several historians but have never been fully assimilated into the stream of popular Borgia historiography. These lists reveal that Rodrigo Borgia was one of the leading candidate’s from the first scrutiny onwards” (referring to the election)

He also discredits the allegation of Simony:

 "Finally it seems poor evidence of simony to claim that the votes of such wealthy figures…”,

  “ … simony played no part in their choice” (in reference to various cardinals)

 Another solid example of claims and allegations made against Rodrigo was the allegation of incest, famously claimed by an angered Giovanni Sforza. Sforza had been married to Lucrezia, the Pope’s daughter, as mentioned Rodrigo decided on this to gain political advantages/allies and to strengthen ties with Milan.

There were claims made against Sforza that he was impotent after there was a decision to annul the marriage a few years later. In return, Sforza made allegations that the rest of the family (Rodrigo, Cesare, Juan) had intimate relations with her. These claims were soon dismissed as again there was no evidence to hint at this, but they carried on as many of the Borgia enemies in the future would continue using these incestuous claims against them. In fact, many of the Borgia enemies reportedly created claims or spread them to add to this negative view of the Borgia’s.

Other accusations that the Borgia’s were accused of included murder/poison to suppress their enemies. It’s generally believed this did occur whenever a threat arose. Micheletto Corella was a Borgia bodyguard that was reportedly requested by Cesare to assassinate certain targets/enemies and it’s believed that Cesare/Juan also had a part in certain murders. So the answers to murder more than likely point toward yes, but to what extent cannot be answered. Another example of murder used to suppress enemies is the case of Savonarola, the Dominican Friar, who was executed on Alexander’s orders, after his public speeches attacking the Borgia’s became too much. 

The other allegation was Rodrigo’s mistresses and this was true (Giulia Farnese), but to how many mistresses he had cannot be confirmed.

There have been several allegations/claims all made against the Borgia’s. Most of these however have remained unsubstantiated or unknown due to the lack of evidence present or the fact that the evidence proves the action didn’t occur at all. However, the question further alludes to what brought out these rumours and what influenced these claims. Aside from his power gain and the rumours that went along with it, his offspring has been one factor of interest.

It can be said that Rodrigo’s offspring could have attained further allegations and views of vindictiveness. The best example of this was Cesare’s military campaign in which he instilled fear with the French around 1500; this fear could be an easy connection to Rodrigo and cause a more negative image of himself and the family, however his military position was furthered by Rodrigo himself. So it can be answered that the various positions and influence Rodrigo put his offspring through could have attributed to these further allegations and negativity. Overall Rodrigo’s actions and decisions he made  somewhat furthered this concept. His offspring (namely Cesare and Lucrezia) did spread this ill view of the family and claims were created around them, but the infamy Rodrigo attained in his life through his choices and deeds (including decisions about his offspring) marked the Borgia family more extensively. 

There have been a range of views and thoughts on Rodrigo, with this negative view being the seemingly more popularized one throughout history’s course. It is only in much more modern times where the stance on Rodrigo has been slightly more varied. Many either stayed quite similar in view or slightly differed due to the new stance historians are now taking on his character. Christopher Hibbert, for example, utilises many modern based sources, but throughout his work he aims for complete objectivity. Hibbert neither condemns nor praises Rodrigo, instead he tries to aim for the total truth through what ever official evidence he can extract from his list of contemporary sources and accounts from that time.

The question of, was he really the most controversial is difficult to say. He defiantly was one of the most controversial Renaissance Popes; however, he was not the only one that attracted immense controversy and harsh allegations. There were many other religious figures who attracted similar attention, possibly even more controversy including Stephen VI, John XII, Innocent VIII, Leo X to name a few. Even though he was one of the most controversial it’s difficult to state whether he was the most controversial as there have many religious figures who have been accused in a similar fashion.

While being weighed up as either completely villainous or justified, it should be said a true judgement cannot be fully reached. While, there is insufficient evidence to suggest Rodrigo was completely vindictive he was nowhere near honourable. During his reign as Pope he did achieve some good for Rome and the general society (Patronage of the arts, saved Rome from the French, added strength/made alliances to neighbouring Papal States, brought a new liveliness to Rome). However, the evidence of what he and his family has done and what they were accused of doing has almost negated those few good deeds and their name has become one associated on a darker note. Even though Rodrigo cannot be measured at one end, his name has been seemingly imprinted throughout history as one for corruption; it is only in recent times where Rodrigo has been illustrated on a slightly lighter note