Cesanicco stuff from the past few moths ( Kodansha manga + OG design)
I'm mostly active on twitter ( @F_xV1rtur3 )more but i seen many csnc shipper here so i would like to practicipate aswell

oozey mess
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Claire Keane

Product Placement
Jules of Nature
Show & Tell
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

Kiana Khansmith

JBB: An Artblog!
Acquired Stardust
NASA

★

No title available
Today's Document
tumblr dot com
No title available

祝日 / Permanent Vacation
Peter Solarz
we're not kids anymore.
sheepfilms

seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands

seen from Malaysia
seen from Türkiye
seen from Türkiye

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Germany
seen from United States

seen from Japan

seen from Mexico

seen from France
@mostlyknownforkrk
Cesanicco stuff from the past few moths ( Kodansha manga + OG design)
I'm mostly active on twitter ( @F_xV1rtur3 )more but i seen many csnc shipper here so i would like to practicipate aswell
This is for me and the Cesare x Machiavelli shippers
YES I TWINKIFIED MACHIAVELLI DONT FUCKING COMMENT ON THAT THATS WHY MY WHOLE NAME IS LIKE THAT.
One of your ask you say that marucho has technically had crushes on a bunch of people.I was like wtf? When? What I’m missing? What about Ren?
asjhjashkas well some of them are just based on my interpretation of canon but either way, marucho having a couple of brief crushes doesn't erase his feelings for ren.
going through them in no particular order:
B99 stranger thing AU where instead of NYPD the 99squad are Hawkins local police that working on the case of the upside down
Oh, the things I would do for a Napoleonic themed fighting game...
Feel free to suggest some more characters in case I ever finish this. I was kinda running out of ideas 😅
Cover for my diploma script
In the near future, I plan to rewrite the script into a full-fledged fiction text so that it can be read like a novel.
I try not to idealize even my favorite historical figures. Especially if these figures are military men.
Ney punished the Spanish guerrillas very cruelly during the Peninsular Wars, and this cannot be denied. So I wanted to draw this.
This does not mean that I do not like the historical figure I have chosen. Ney is a very important person for me, who has seriously influenced my life, but I try not to idealize him.
Ney’s first grave
Ney's grave lies in Père-Lachaise Cemetery, though the current monument was erected only in the 20th century. Initially, a simple headstone stood in the cemetery's temporary burial ground.
(1816 September)
The grave was perpetually adorned with wreaths and flowers, attracting visitors who treated it as a place of pilgrimage.
Consequently, the authorities deemed it necessary to remove the grave. The remains were secretly relocated to another part of the cemetery, and rumours spread that the family had moved the body far away. This secret was soon discovered, but... the name of the Marshal was carved a thousand times onto the fence surrounding the new burial site by the curious.
source: https://perelachaisehistoire.fr/deux-tombes-de-michel-ney/
Le 7 décembre 1815, le maréchal de Michel Ney est fusillé vers 9 heures du matin place de l’observatoire à Paris pour avoir “attenté à la s
Michel Ney was walking in the very end behind everyone. He symbolically wanted to cross the river [Niemen] as a last soldier of Grande Armée on it’s retreat. When he crossed the river, he turned, raised his arm with a pistol defiantly and shot his last bullet to Russia.
(…)
There entered a man in a coat of cinnamon color, with long beard, red fierce eyes. “You don’t recognize me?” he asked. “No, who are you?”, “Marshal Ney.” “And where is the rearguard?” “I am the rearguard! No-one is behind me.”
- from Memoirs of Mathieu Dumas
I couldn’t get the scene out of my head so I at least sketched it and poorly colored. I wish I could do proper painting of the last picture, maybe someday… And sorry for my poor english/french, I don’t have english version of the text, but you get the idea, right?
Also Ney with curly beard, mmm~ ?
Need more rpf of niche historical figures
"I am not a tyrant, as my enemies are saying everywhere, and I do not want other witness than the cities of Romagna, which under my government have begun to discover the tranquility and peace that they had not even dreamed of, nor enjoyed, in the past times." — Cesare Borgia to Guidobaldo da Montefeltro
HAPPY BIRTHDAY CESARE BORGIA (13 September 1475)
Ladislao Reti, an eminent Leonardo scholar, acknowledged that historians of the past have struggled with how to reconcile their exalted reputation of Leonardo and the fact he worked for Cesare Borgia. This is true for both past and contemporary writers. Paolo Giovio (1483-1552), bishop of Nocera, wrote Life of Leonardo da Vinci and intentionally excluded Cesare entirely from the work, to rid Leonardo of an association that Giovio saw as a tamish on the artist's reputation. Vasari also redacts any mention of Cesare Borgia from his Vita di Leonardo. The writings on Leonardo's life by Gian Paolo Lomazzo, a friend of Francesco Melzi who was Leonardo's student and the individual to whom he bequeathed his notebooks, also offer no reference to the artist's time with Borgia. Even Martin Kemp and Kenneth Clark, both well respected leading minds in the circle of Leonardo studies, minimize the association, customarily dedicating only a surface analysis to the intensive, complicated, and formative period in Leonardo's life.The perpetual disassociation is a disservice to both the artist and his patron-the historical importance of each individual only heightens the value in understanding their relationship and its outcomes. Leonardo and Cesare probably met for the first time when Borgia entered Milan with the French army in 1499. Leonardo arrived in Milan around 1482 and quickly began his association with the court of Ludovico Sforza and in 1489-90 he began earning an official salary. Leonardo's employment in the court of Milan was very different from the time he spent with Cesare. It would be narrow to assume that Leonardo never executed for Cesare the duties traditionally held by court artists like the entertainments staged in Milan. It will in fact be argued that he did, but Cesare's treatment and utilization of Leonardo was different from Ludovico's. The Borgia ruler valued Leonardo for divergent reasons and gave him extraordinary latitude in his work. Cesare treated him as an equal, not as a possession but an asset to honor, as someone from whom he had great respect, and as a familiar. With Cesare Leonardo was given freedom, and although he was given projects, they were self-propelled and stimulating to his curiosity which had struggled to thrive in Milan. He was given the title of military or ducal engineer, one of the most sought after court positions for which an artist could earn a salary. We know from his letter of introduction to Ludovico Sforza in 1489-90 that Leonardo wanted this position. [...]With Borgia he finally held the position that he desired.
At the Court of the Prince: The Patronage and Art Historical Legacy of Cesare Borgia, 1492-1503. Elizabeth H. Bemis
What is your personal Top Ten of Borgia nonfiction books, and why would you choose them?
Ohh, ok, I don’t think I have a top ten??? but let’s see how this goes! lol I'll separate it in two sections: non-fiction books about the Borgia family as a whole and non-fiction books about individual members of the family (tbh just Rodrigo and Cesare), I’ll focus on secondary sources, but let me know if you also meant/want primary sources :))
Non-Fiction Books about the Borgia Family:
The Borgias: The Hidden History, G.J Meyer
His book has some flaws, which I’ve talked about here in the past so I won’t get into it again haha, but overall I do think it is a decent bio about the Borgia family. He did made an effort to present something new, and he does have at least a little bit of critical thinking about the sources which created the history of the Borgias as we know today, and also like I said before, I adore the structure of his book, how he intertwined the chapters about the Borgias with chapters about papal history/other noble families, it’s an engaging and interesting read.
The Borgias, Ivan Cloulas
Ok so, although his book reads like a gossip magazine with many unsubstantial claims, I feel I have to include him on this list only because his book begins with the Borgias from València and it goes back to Spain, with Juan’s son, arriving at Francisco de Borja, most commonly known as St. Francis Borgia. It’s one of the few books about the Borgia family where you have a more detailed account about these family members, and I like some of his thoughts about the descendants of Rodrigo Borgia and their shared similarities, being employed in different ways. It also has a cool chapter analysing the history of the Borgias through the centuries, I don’t agree with some of his conclusions, but I really enjoyed reading that chapter, so yeah.
The Borgia Chronicles: 1414-1572, Mary Hollingsworth
The reason I like her book is maybe precisely why some people don’t, I suppose, it is dry and it mainly sticks to presenting the information available about the family, instead of sensationalistic writing with a high dose of personal judgments and claims/narratives which don’t have enough (or any) evidence to back it up. That within the Borgia historical literature is a rare thing to find, overall Borgia authors seems more interested/concerned about showing the reader what they think about the family, and the many mysteries surrounding them, than actually laying out in an objective manner the historical material available, andletting the reader reach their own judgments and conclusions about it, you know. Hollingsworth, for the most part, tends to do the former in her book and refrains from doing the latter, so yeah there might be some mistakes iirc, and it’s not a book for everyone, but I do like it, and I find it a decent source to check/compare info about the Borgia family in the english language.
Non-Fiction books about Rodrigo Borgia, (Pope Alexander VI)
Material for a History of Pope Alexander VI, his relatives and his times, Peter de Roo.
The reason this one is on my list is because no matter how much we may agree or disagree with his presentation of Rodrigo, his life and his papacy, there is no denying he gathered an extensive, if not the most extensive, historical material about Rodrigo/his family and it’s amazing to read it. I also think he lays out his arguments in a very coherent way, attaching his evidence alongside it. His thought process is not all over the place, which is something I appreciate a lot when reading historical bios. He also does not throw Cesare under the bus in order to defend Rodrigo or explain his actions, De Roo is as just with Rodrigo as he is with Cesare, which it’s another rare thing to find with Borgia authors, especially Rodrigo’s authors.
Non-fiction books about Cesare Borgia
Cesare Borgia: Duca di Romagna, notizie e documenti raccolti e pubblicati, Edoard Alvisi.
I don’t even know what else to say about this biography without fangirling all over again lol, I’ll leave some of my thoughts while reading his bio that I posted here and here :)) and I will complement by saying it is my one and only favorite Borgia biography as well as the best one made about Cesare imo. Every time I remember Cesare has such a high quality historical work about his life, it warms my heart and I feel so grateful to il signore Alvisi, God bless his soul for the necessary, honest, historical work he did there.
Cesare Borgia: La Sua Vita, La Sua Famiglia, I Suoi Tempi, Gustavo Sacerdote.
The reason I include him is mostly because of his research, like it happens with de Roo, it is impossible to deny his excellent research about Cesare. Combined with Alvisi’s, you really do have all the available historical material about Cesare’s life, and it was great to be able to absorb so much information in an in-deepth way. I don’t have a good opinion about him as an historian, or as Cesare’s biographer, but as a researcher he is one of the best I’ve read, and the way in which he exposes his research should be the standard for any historical work imo. He was incredibly meticulous and made it a point to present as much of the official documents in their integrity as possible, instead of just selective bits. His bibliography is also a thing of beauty, super organized and thorough.
The Life of Cesare Borgia, Rafael Sabatini
The reason is, really, that I love his writing and his sense of humour. He is dramatic, but my kind of dramatic perhaps lol, and he rightly addresses the big double standards when it comes to the Borgia family (while they lived and even more so after their deaths, until Sabatini’s own day), as well as points out the flaws within the main primary sources about them, most of all: Cappello, Guicciardini and Sanuto, with a justified wave of indignation + amazing sarcasm which for me is satisfying to read. His examination of Gregorovius’ view and claims about Cesare, for example, it’s truly one of his best moments, so yeah, I have a fondness for his bio, even though I am aware of its flaws, and I mostly disagree with his personal view about Cesare as a man and his politics.
El Princípe del Renacimiento: Vida y Leyenda de César Borgia, José Catalán Deus
So, putting aside that I love reading in spanish and I find the spanish section of the Borgia historical literature quite interesting, actually, the reason I included this one is because, as far as I know, I think it is the best one in the spanish language about Cesare, it carries much of the flaws and vices of his historical literature, yes, but I do think it a decent bio. Also it was an important book for me when I read it at the time, because it made me re-think much of the claims and presentations made about the Borgia family by the previous authors I had read, and go deeper into the historical material to see if there was any evidence for it. I think much like Meyer, Catalán Deus also attempted to deliver something new, and advance in a way the way Cesare’s historical figure has been studied and presented, and I appreciate that effort, it’s one of the books I check info from time to time, too. Ps: it’s not on my top 10, I don’t like the book as a whole, but I can’t help but to add on this list Marion Johnson’s The Borgias, for one simple and superficial reason: the artwork is soooo pretty 💖 it’s hardcover with quality pages and beautiful coloured images, and to this day it is the most beautiful bio I own about the Borgias, so I had to say something djsdjsdjs, excuse me here. Andd I think those are it, anon?? it’s possible I might be forgetting some, I spent such a long time reading about them, it’s hard for me to remember all of the books, especially with my bad memory lol, but if I remember other ones later, I’ll reblog this and add to this list! Thank you for sending this ask, and I’m so sorry for the time I took to answer it! :( I hope you still see this <33
Hi ! Cesare What was your favorite painter? Thank you.
Hi! :) So, not much is known, or at least presented, about César’s relationship with art and the artists of his time, which I think was what you meant? it’s frustrating for me to say this because it's another theme about his life I am always very much interested in knowing more about, but it’s another one where we don’t have secure and extensive information on. Many documents and iconography of the Borgia family were destroyed during the papacy of Julius II and others, and/or were simply destroyed by time, and my impression is that this theme doesn’t spark much interest by scholars in general. César’s biographers, with some exceptions, seem convinced by the idea that César cared little for art, all he cared about 24/7, in their eyes, was warfare and power~~ lol, so their approach to this theme ends up being pretty basic and brief, I don’t think they see any reason to explore it further, or to present a more in-depth analysis. Then, there’s the great artists of the Renaissance, who were in the court of the Borgias, and their biographers. The situation is even more poor on this side, because there’s a discomfort on their part I'd say, to accept and acknowledge the association between César and their artist, even though these artists did had "worse" associations in their careers tbh, it's kinda bizarre to me, but anyways it is something they struggle to present in their works. I believe it is caused by the superficial knowledge they seem to have about the historical figure of César Borgia, and of taking the general history about him at face value. They see and present his legend, that being: as a terrible, evil tyrant of history, which puts them into a dilemma of sorts, of how to present the association between César and their artist? without tarnishing said artist’s exalted reputation? which leads to curious narratives, and with them usually trying to stay as little as possible on this subject, they avoid it like the plague basically dsjdjsdjs. César and his connection to their artist is either briefly mentioned, on a negative light of course, or it’s just not mentioned at all. As a result of these historical and academic obstacles, it is impossible to know who César’s favorite painter was, only he could tell us that, that’s the honest answer, I’m afraid. However, if you gather and connect all the historical material available about César and the artists from 1496 to 1503, it can lead to interesting possibilities. César grew up during the amazing Early Renaissance period, and he later actively interacted with the best artists and intellectuals of the equally amazing so-called High Renaissance period: Bramante, Sangallo, il Pinturicchio, il Perugino, Michelangelo, Raphael Sanzio, Leonardo da Vinci, Piermatteo d’Amelia, Copernicus, and many others. There is no doubt these surroundings and acquaintances had an effect on his life and his artistic preferences. As a man of his time, he seemed to have had the typical, genuine appreciation for the arts, and like any other nobles (both men and women), he was aware art was also a good tool to exert diplomacy, cultivating relationships, or to promote oneself and its court, and as a form of visual communication about their personality and power. The artists mentioned above gravitated towards pope Alexander VI's court in Rome, and later on César court as well, they all had a relationship with him, of different kinds, and one way I found of trying to have a better picture of his artistic preferences, or his role as a patron of the arts, was to look through his choice of artists, the number of commissions he gave them, the places, the favors he granted etc, and I think that can be helpful to indicate the most likely “candidates” to have occupied the role of his favorite(s), I selected a few of them here: I'll start with Antonio Sangallo and Donato Bramante, who tecnically were not painters, well, Bramante was too, but both of them are known for their architecture and it was in this role that they worked for Alexander and César for the most part, but at least in some projects it seems they were also encharged of the artistic decorations, and they did interacted with the other artists of this list.
- Sangallo first started working for César's father, a notable work is his involvement at the rebuilding of the University of Rome, la Sapienza, one of the projects Alexander patronized early in his papacy. He is also associated with two fortresses, the Forte Nettuno and the Forte Sangallo at Civita Castellena, these commissions started under the direction of Alexander, but it seems to have shifted to being partly or solely under César's direction in 1501, so here we have a likely date of when Sangallo started working for him, he was employed to work on yet another re-construction and re-decorations of the fortresses, alongside Bramante (as it is suggested by some scholars), Jacopo Ripanda, and Piermatteo d'Amelia.
- Donato Bramante, just like Sangallo, seems to have started to work for César around 1501, at the fortresses mentioned above, but according to Alvisi, César's best biographer, some churches in the Romagna were built by him: the Church of S. Maria a Monte, a little outside of Cesena, and the Church of S. Stefano (although it is uncertain if it was under César’s patronage) both of which he says it exhibits a bramantesche style in their architecture. Still at Faenza, Alvisi posits the possibility of the design of the Faenza's Cathedral having been another work of Bramante, adding that even if he truly wasn’t involved in the execution, at least its general proportions can be credited to be his. More interestingly is a document from July 15, 1502, bearing César's title as Duke of Urbino, where he grants some privileges to the men at Castel Durante, today's Urbania, which Alvisi remarks it might have been a grant that happened through the intercession of Bramante, who was already working for César at the time, and whose place of birth was in Urbania. Now, going the the artists/painters:
- Bernardino di Betti, known as il Pinturicchio, is one artist I think it’s the most associated with the Borgia family, his relationship with them goes back as early as 1492, when pope Alexander VI commissioned him to work on his private rooms at the Vatican, today known as the Borgia apartments. It’s hard to know when Pinturicchio started working for César, there’s a letter written by César on October 1500, to Cardinal Alfani, Vice-Treasurer of Perugia, to secure a personal favor Pinturicchio had requested of him in person at Diruta, where he writes that:
“Bernardino Pintoricchio da Perosa, qual sempre avemo amato per le virtù sue e l’havemo nuovamente riducto a li servizi nostri. Per la qual cosa desideramo sia in ogni sua facenda riconosciuto per nostro familiare.”
“Bernardino Pinturicchio of Perugia, whom we have always loved for his virtues, and whom we have taken again to our service, for which we desire that he be recognized in all of his affairs as our familiar.”
This letter is important because it informs us of two things, one being that Pinturicchio had worked for César prior to 1500, most likely in Rome, and it’s sad there’s apparentely nothing more about these commissions, and that César clearly regarded him as his courtier and his familiar. In 1501, he granted Pinturicchio an annual payment as his personal painter, although again, there is nothing more about this commission either, as far as I’ve read. - Leonardo da Vinci is another artist who worked for César, they must have met not at Alexander’s court in Rome, but at the court of Milan in 1499. There’s actually a lot of material, direct and indirect, about their association. César was an important patron for Leonardo, more than that, the evidence suggests they had a genuine friendship, both of them had a high intellect, curious minds, and an innovative spirit. On a document César wrote on August 18, 1502, we see him referring to Da Vinci as his “Most Beloved familiar” a term similar to the one he referred to Pinturicchio. During the years of 1500-1501 it seems they were in contact with each other, so it is possible Da Vinci was already working for him then, but officially César employed him in 1502, as his military and ducal engineer, a position Da Vinci himself seems to have wanted from his previous patron. César also valued his talent as an artist because he commissioned some artistic projects from him. Between September and December of 1502 iirc, Da Vinci made various sketches, and began the painting of an altarpiece at the Santuario della Beata Vergine del Piratello, outside of Imola. And there is a drawing commonly known as Three Views of a Bearded Head, that is generally accepted to have been a preparation for a portrait of Cesare by Da Vinci, either for said altarpiece, or for some other project entirely. - Raphael Sanzio and Michelangelo: the documentation for these two is a little more scarce, Sabatini, one of César’s biographers, mentions Michelangelo was in César’s court alongside Bramante in 1500, unfortunately he doesn’t give a source for this information, but it is likely he was correct, Michelangelo was working in Rome during the papacy of Alexander VI, and he and César seemed to have met around 1496, when César purchased the Sleeping Cupid from him, which supports the claim Sabatini and Sacerdote make about Cesare’s deep admiration for Michelangelo, how he was “ever held in the hightest esteem by the Duke.” Another interesting thing is that in 1498-99 Michelangelo’s Pietà statue was made for the St. Peter’s Basilica, and some scholars, Anna Maria Voci being one of them, links the statue to the Borgia family, as of being a reference to the murder of Juan Borgia, and his family’s grief. Whether this is correct or not, César certainly saw this particular work when it was finally exposed in the Chapel of Santa Petronilla, and he might had employed Michelangelo for his court afterwards, if he hadn’t already, in the following year of 1500, matching the date given by Sabatini. As for Raphael, a likely date for them meeting could have been around 1501/1502, in Rome, possibly through Pinturicchio or Pietro Vannucci, il Perugino. Raphael was good friends with the former, and had been the pupil of the latter, and both of these artists, Pinturicchio and il Perugino, were familiar and a part of Alexander’s court in Rome, and by extension César’s. It is recorded Perugino worked on the decorations of Alexander’s coronation, as well as the decorations of the Borgia Tower alongside Pinturicchio, he also seems to have done some work on César’s apartments in the Vatican, so Raphael was def. within the Borgia circle of artists. There are also some small hints suggesting César’s influence at the choice of Raphael for the Oddi Altarpiece in Perugia by the Oddi family, a known ally of his, and there was once a painting attributed as of being a portrait of César made by Raphael, but Yriarte, Cesár’s French biographer, dismissed the painting being a portrait of César, and other scholars have dismiss the painting having anything to do with Raphael or César. As a bonus, I thought I should include Luca Signorelli, I wasn’t going to initially, but given there is some evidence indicating a good relationship between him and the Borgia family, and more to the point of this question, of a connection between him and César, so I decided to add him on this list. There is no information about where and when they actually met, but it was probably in Orvieto, around 1499 because Signorelli was appointed this year to work in the Cathedral of Orvieto, in the Chapel of San Brizio, the planning of his frescoes dates from 1499 to 1502, and it is probable this appointement had the influence of César himself, Alexander had named him Protector of the Orvieto in 1494, and in 1495 he made him Governor of the city. As it was charactericially of César, he took this responsibility seriously, defending the city from their enemies in 1497 and 1500 (and for this Orvieto was loyal to the Borgia family until their downfall), but more interestingly here it’s that César also directed the chapter of the administration of the Duomo of Orvieto, which gave him the right to determine its decorations and possibly the artists involved, if this is correct, his choosing of Signorelli increases and it is significant. It can be further corroborated if César is indeed depicted in one of Signorelli’s frescoes, in his Predicazione e fatti dell’Anticristo, scholars have claimed César is the figure in the central foreground group, next to Vitellozzo Vitelli. Pinturicchio, who also made some work for this Cathedral in 1492, it’s also said to be depicted there. Additionally, Menotti, in his work I Borgia, mentions a painting, that as far as I know, cannot be found anywhere today, where he says the face of the main figure has the likeness of Cesare’s face, and he attributes authorship of this painting to an artist of either Siena or Orvieto, so maybe Pinturrichio or il Perugino, since there are clear connections between these men and César, but a scholar whose name I forget rn has also laid out the possibility of the authorship as of being Signorelli, if true, then it would reinforce even more their relationship. I think César’s favorite or favorites are there, you know, we can never know for sure, the info is fragmented, and I tried to only include here what was relevant to the question, and it is a lot of connecting and speculating, but I think these are plausible speculations, and for me at the least it did formed a broader picture of that side of César and his life, his choice of sitting for Pinturicchio (as well as making him his personal painter), Da Vinci, maybe Signorelli and Sanzio, his likely using his influence towards certain artists in the choice of commissions, his purchase of Michelangelo’s Sleeping Cupid, after all the drama attached to it involving Cardinal Sforza-Riario and one Baldassare lol, which seems to me he clearly saw something in the statue, he recognized the value of it, and the talent of young Michelangelo, it did not mattered to him if it was a proper antique or not, he appreciated the beauty of it, and he bought it, I find that super interesting. All of this subtly indicates his artistic preferences, the styles he might have liked more, in paintings, statues, building designs, and of the personal relations he had with these artists. I hope somewhere in all this i was able to answered your question somehow, feel free to ask anything else if you want, and I apologize for taking so long to post this.
I don't know if this is ever really talked about, maybe because of the consensus that Cesare was an Ambitious Robot™ with absolutely no feelings, but (given that I don't think he killed Juan), how upset he must have been when people blamed him? If I'm not wrong, he wasn't accused until about a year after the event, so he was probably just getting over his initial grief, and suddenly people think that he killed his brother whom, however insufferable Juan was, their letters at least make it seem as if they really loved one another? Idk, there just seems to be a sort of cruelty to the accusations that i don't think is often mentioned
”Cesare the Ambitious Robot™" Loool, oh yes, that consensus 😴😴😴 This is an interesting thought, anon! And no, it doesn't get talked about, at least I have never encountered in my readings about the Borgia family, and I think it might be precisely because of the idea of Cesare as a cold, cynic man who was so ambitious and power-hungry, he was incapable of having genuine emotions or emotional bonds with people. Then I think many scholars still hold on tight to the dramatic narrative of Cesare hating and being envious of Juan, or of both of them hating each other. In the past it was a narrative used by biographers who had a passionate antipathy for Cesare (hi Bellonci, hi Gregorovius dsjjssjds) as a basis, a kind of prelude if you will, to insert the Fratricide tale as a truth in their books, even if, as you say, their letters to each other, historical documents, shows there was a brotherly affection between them, and an absence of rivalry, too. With all that going on, there is never a pause to consider some things, or any reflections on how Cesare might have felt about the murder of his brother, and then of being accused himself as the perpetrator. He is always either being treated as the guilty one, or it is just assumed it didn't affected him at all, because well, nothing ever did, and he never liked Juan in the first place. I think these ideas are severely misguided, for starters, I actually think the usual presentation of Juan is a bit extreme and unfair, given the little material there is about him. The few historical records about his character should be taken with as much grain of salt as the ones about his father and his brother, and even if we follow the idea he was insufferable, maybe he was only so with strangers and enemies, with his family it seems he had a different behavior, and qualities that made him dear to them. Then the fratricide accusation, which it's one of the most nonsensical ones attached to Cesare's name, the more you are familiar with the Borgia family and Cesare's historical material, the more ridiculous it becomes, in order to insist on it, one of the particular traits about their family has to be overlooked or misunderstood, that one being: Borgias did not attack other Borgias. In all of their history, from Borja to Borgia, there isn't one mention of them ever attacking each other, that was not their way, it seems. They had a strong sense of loyalty and utter commitment to themselves and the advancement of their house. Rodrigo was brought up in this way, and there's a lot indicating he later raised his own children like that, it was something well ingrained in them, So even if we follow the narrative Cesare hated Juan, it is reasonable to say it would still not have been to the point of him acting against his own blood, no matter Juan’s flaws, he was still a Borgia, and he had an important role within the family’s plans. He was his family’s link to their ancestral home in Spain, to perpetuate their legacy there, maintaining what had already been gained and possibly try to gain more. In a nutshell: he fulfilled the role of Pedro Luis de Borja, his older half-brother, and when he himself died, this role was left empty, which was a considerable loss for the Borgias at the time, and they had to rethink their strategy. Another thing that has to be overlooked, it's the political context of both the murder and when the fratricide rumour came forward. The Murder: It happened as Rodrigo was investing many titles upon Juan, the most important one that of duchy of Benevento, and making him Gonfalonier of the Church. It was also known at this time he was determined to subdue the Roman barons, to diminish their power in the city (it was plausibly a source of trouble for almost all popes, and therefore it was one of their goals to get rid of them, Rodrigo remained passionately committed to this until the end of his life, in fact, it seems it was the only point where he and Cesare openly disagreed on), he also wanted to have full control over the Papal States, and restore papal authority, which clashed with the noble families who held power in these city-States. Moreover, the significance of attacking a kin of the pope is not stressed enough imo. The pope was regarded as both an ecclesiastic leader and a secular one, like a prince or a monarch, to attack one of his kin was to attack his own person, and that was a serious affront. It was the equivalent of spitting in the pope's face in public, God's vicar on earth. It was a bold and open declaration of war against Alexander's papacy and papal authority, the message was crystal clear: You may be pope, but you and your family are not safe. Back down from your policies. A threat meant to hurt and intimidate the Borgia family, to make them look weak and to make them feel scared. The Fratricide Rumour: Also happened when Rodrigo, instead of giving in to threats, which was not like him at all, he gave his enemies another checkmate by his decision to release Cesare from his cardinalate, which of course meant Cesare, as a layman, would then act as the enforcer of his father's policies. That took them all by surprise, they thought they had neutralized the biggest threat to their power by murdering Juan, and ironically they only made things worst for themselves, not only that, but since the plan to intimidate Rodrigo had failed, and although some of the Orsinis in Venice apparently were boasting about having murdered Juan, they all tried hard to remove any trace of guilt from them, directing at someone else, landing it on Cesare once the news of him leaving his cardinalate was known. The rumour started in Venice, reached the ears of an orator at Ferrara, and made its way to Rome, and eventually the rest of Italy. It was one year after the murder, you're right, and it was exactly as things look positive for the Borgias again, and bad for their enemies, right at the moment where Cesare begun being regarded as a potential political threat. When these things are fully and properly recognized, and that's not including other factors, too, such as Cesare's own religious and moral beliefs**, that he did had and seems to have followed, alongside the complete lack of evidence, the guilt and suspicion directed at him defies logic, and I am baffled wherever I occasionally still find this in academic works today, using the exact same lines of argumentation as scholars in the 18th century, and of which other scholars since then have already re-visited and pointed out the obvious flaws in them. Closing this slight detour, and focusing now on how Cesare must have felt about this imputation of guilt to his name, how upset he was, well...it's hard to say because the Borgia family was so private about their family affairs and lives, but in my view, there are hints suggesting Juan's murder was already a difficult, stressful** moment for him, and it did affected him in some ways**, so hearing this rumor a year after the whole thing happened, like I said above, just as things were looking more positive for them, it had to be hard. I don't suppose he was surprised at the low level his enemies could sink to, in order to attack him and his family,(the gross inc*st rumour was already a thing by then), but I do think he felt a strong indignation about it, but there are no mentions of any retaliations on his part to those who were behind this defamatory rumour, and he surely knew who they were, and here's a thing I find curious: Cesare is described, even by his father, as a man who couldn't take insults, and who was hard on vengeance, but there's an incongruity with this description, because since he was a teenager Cesare received plenty of insults, some pretty vile ones regarding his birth, legitimacy and his origins, and serious accusations: Inc*st with his sister, the murder of his brother, the murder of his cousin, Giovanni, to whom he seemed genuinely attached to, r*pe, more baseless murders, the abduction of noblewomen lol, I mean, are you kidding? No person who's sensitive to insults and has a vengeful nature would ever have let this go without some violent retaliations, even if they were true, (and there's no evidence to support it,) blood was spilled for less tbqh, yet there's a demonstrably lack of bodycount when it comes to Cesare, his material shows a remarkable self-restraint, and an almost peculiar lack of bloodthristness, lack of vengefulness towards his enemies and defamators. Indeed to a foolish, unwise degree, given the position he occupied and the type of enemies he had, but that was his behavior through most of his life, and then the one time he decided he had had enough, and he took action against the men responsible for spreading the Savelli Letter** as well as other slanderous pamphlets about him and his family, which was within the laws and norms of his times, this event is then used as proof he was a cruel tyrant who couldn’t take insults djsdjsds, that’s extraordinary. And regarding the cruelty component to the accusations, yeah, I agree. There is this pattern I keep noticing it in which the cruelty of the accusations and the insults levered at the Borgia family, more specifically the Borgia men, are not often, if at all, mentioned as they should. However, the one time one of them took action against it, that action never fails to be remarked upon as a clear illustration of cruelty. That's an interesting double standard to explore imo, but to be fair, one of the reasons why the cruelty in the accusations may not be mentioned very much could be because the accusations themselves were pretty common within the political stage, and the way of doing politics, of the past. The inc*st accusation, for example, had been a thing every since ancient Rome, it really was the darling of accusations political rivals threw at each other. Same with the accusations of fratricide, murders and sexual crimes, these were popular during the Renaissance among political rivals, some of the accusations do have credible grounds (although they were used for political purposes, not morals) but more often these accusations are either incorrect, or exaggerated and distorted. It was simply nobles prefered way of smearing the reputations of men they disliked (for different kind of reasons, politics being at the heart of it, though), and therefore their families, it wasn't just the honor of women that was tied to their families, but also the reputation of the men, if a man had a dishonorable reputation, it followed his whole family did, too. And these types of crimes were the best ones to do that, because it stuck easily to a man's name. So, there's nothing novel in the accusations in connection to the Borgia family, the novelty lies more in the ways and in how methodically they were imputed at Rodrigo and his family, at a pope and his family. I still haven't encountered something quite the same, esp. not with the so-called Renaissance popes, sure, they were accused of simony, nepotism, sodomy and such, but inc*st with their own daughter? which then resulted in her pregnancy? or inc*st between the pope’s daughter and her siblings, which also resulted in her pregnancy? Fratricide? Nightly org*es in the Vatican? Poison being freely administered every day for whatever reason? The insinuations of Rodrigo being the devil, or of having a pact with the devil, and of Cesare being the son of the antichrist? yeah, no, that's a very specific characteristic of the propaganda created about the Borgia family, during their times and afterwards. The words of their detractors contains a high level of anti-Spaniard, anti-papal feelings. It also expresses pretty eloquently the general hostility aristocrats felt towards the parvenus in their circles, it carries a constant malice and a heavy sexual, depraved element to them. This wasn't limited to noble Italians, but it extended to the French, Spanish sides. There's quite a few malicious, slanderous remarks about Cesare and his father. One quick example is the remark made by one Spaniard ambassador, who quite tactlessly is recorded as saying to Rodrigo's face, the pope's face, that Juan's murder had been God's punishment to him. That's just so low and needlessly cruel, and it wasn't a remark made by religious sentiment, (not that it would have been an acceptable thing to say to a parent who had just lost their child in such a brutal way), but one made out of Rodrigo's decision to make Cesare a layman and marry him to France, which of course went against the interests of Spain and their monarchs, who seemed to have been under the notion that Rodrigo's papacy had to follow their interests first and foremost, even at his and his family's own expense lol, a notion Rodrigo was quick to correct, and one they didn't seem to have taken well, to say the least. So the political struggle was fierce and vicious between the Borgias and other families, italians or not, Rodrigo and Cesare made such a powerful duo, it seems they were seen as a real threat to those around them, a terrible block to their ambitions. They try to hide that behind moral/religious outrage, but the outrage at the papacy of Alexander and the actions of Cesare, were entirely political. They tried to kill them, more than once, and failed, so they opted to use words instead of daggers and poison, to hurt them, yes, but most of all, to kill their reputation, and if we can't know for sure how successful the first one was, we can for sure say the second one was incredibly successful. **It's often forgotten or ignored, but Cesare was raised and lived in a religious environment, and as such I don't believe he was a stranger, or indifferent to the severity of killing one's brother, and the condemnation it brought to a man's soul. Like his father, his sister, and most people of his time, Cesare had his own piety, he was by no means the proto-atheist guy, nor a man who was above morality or of having religious beliefs, these ideas about him came later, prompted by his black Legend than by anything substancial in his historical material. ** It fell to Cesare, who was about 21, 22-years-old then, to keep everything together during those days and weeks. There is one anecdote saying he tried to console Rodrigo, who had collapsed with grief, while keeping a careful watch so that their situation didn't deteriorate further, with the many enemies they had in Rome, who would have took this opportunity to attack them. Another one says Cesare and his retinue were all dressed in black when they left Rome for Naples, a trip that couldn't be cancelled because many of the Borgias interests had to be secured and settled. Unlike the rest of his family, Cesare seems to have been conscious that no matter how he felt, he couldn't give in to it, and he had to be the strong one at that time, otherwise who would look after their interests and safety? It was a completely different kind of crisis than the previous ones he had encountered, this one was more personal, and he didn't had Rodrigo in sound mind to share the responsibilities, the crisis was put entirely into his hands, and he showed he was capable of handling it of course, he did a great job, but still it couldn't have been an easy situation for him. ** Apart from the stress, the grief that seems to have affected him, another aspect of this, that never gets discussed, is how this event must have changed, shook his sense of security. As far as it is known, Cesare had never really come face to face with the common reality of the bloodfeuds between noble families. Rodrigo was able to shelter his children from these cycles of violence, Cesare and his siblings by all means had a pretty stable, safe and comfortable childhood and adolescence. He must have heard stories of acquaintances or friends of friends being murdered here or there, by this or that faction of this or that family, but it had never reached him personally, until Juan’s murder. His brother, someone close to him, was brutally murdered and had his body throw at the Tiber, and the men who did that were out there, and they would come after him too, eventually, as he became a political threat to them. If he wasn’t careful, he would end up exactly like Juan, and I think that was a constant reminder on the back of his mind, and you can notice his cautioness or fear when dealing with certain men at certain events. It's also no wonder he is recorded as having said to some of his friends he knew he would have a premature and violent death, like his brother it can be implied, it was what his astrologer, Beheim had predicted. But given the position he occupied, the enemies he had, and the events that had thus far happened in his life, it’s not exactly something hard to predict and be right about, or something hard to believe in, as it seems he did. **The Savelli Letter was far from being just harmless gossip material to entertain the people, it was the culmination of the years of the slanderous campaign the enemies of the Borgia family had dedicated their efforts to. This letter deserves to be more studied because it is really a crafty, creative piece of political propaganda. Rodrigo doesn’t seem to have understood that, but it is possible Cesare did, hence the real reason behind his action against those men and the others who were circulating other equally slanderous and politically dangerous pamphlets.