negligible. But still men read him, and a change in conditions brought a
change in front. He had in _The Prince_, above all in the _Discorsi_,
accused the Church of having ruined Italy and debauched the world. In
view of the writer's growing popularity, of the Reformation and the
Pagan Renaissance, such charges could no longer be lightly set aside.
The Churchmen opened the main attack. Amongst the leaders was Cardinal
Pole, to whom the practical precepts of _The Prince_ had been
recommended in lieu of the dreams of Plato, by Thomas Cromwell, the
_malleus monachorum_ of Henry VIII. The Catholic attack was purely
theological, but before long the Jesuits joined in the cry. Machiavelli
was burnt in effigy at Ingoldstadt. He was _subdolus diabolicarum
cogitationum faber_, and _irrisor et atheos_ to boot. The Pope himself
gave commissions to unite against him, and his books were placed on the
Index, together, it must be admitted, with those of Boccaccio, Erasmus,
and Savonarola so the company was goodly. But meanwhile, and perhaps in
consequence, editions and translations of _The Prince_ multiplied apace.
The great figures of the world were absorbed by it. Charles V., his son,
and his courtiers studied the book. Catherine de Medici brought it to
France. A copy of _The Prince_ was found on the murdered bodies of Henry
III. and Henry IV. Richelieu praised it. Sextus V. analysed it in his
own handwriting. It was read at the English Court; Bacon was steeped in
it, and quotes or alludes to it constantly. Hobbes and Harrington
studied it.

But now another change. So then, cried Innocent Gentillet, the Huguenot,
the book is a primer of despotism and Rome, and a grammar for bigots and
tyrants. It doubtless is answerable for the Massacre of St. Bartholomew.
The man is a _chien impur_. And in answer to this new huntsman the whole
Protestant pack crashed in pursuit. Within fifty years of his death _The
Prince_ and Machiavelli himself had become a legend and a myth, a