take this step, since he preferred a residence in Spain to one in France,
but could not with decency appear to act in opposition to his father's
wishes on the subject. If such a letter, however, were really obtained
from the prince, his tender years would entitle it to little weight, and
of course it would afford no substantial ground for justification. Another
explanation is offered by Paolo Giovio, who states that the Great Captain,
undetermined what course to adopt, took the opinion of certain learned
jurists. This sage body decided, that Gonsalvo was not bound by his oath,
since it was repugnant to his paramount obligations to his master; and
that the latter was not bound by it, since it was made without his
privity! [44] The man who trusts his honor to the tampering of casuists,
has parted with it already. [45]

The only palliation of the act must be sought in the prevalent laxity and
corruption of the period, which is rife with examples of the most flagrant
violation of both public and private faith. Had this been the act of a
Sforza, indeed, or a Borgia, it could not reasonably have excited
surprise. But coming from one of a noble, magnanimous nature, like
Gonsalvo, exemplary in his private life, and unstained with any of the
grosser vices of the age, it excited general astonishment and reprobation,
even among his contemporaries. It has left a reproach on his name, which
the historian may regret, but cannot wipe away.


FOOTNOTES

[1] Guicciardini, Istoria, tom. i. lib. 4, p. 214, ed. 1645.--Flassan,
Diplomatie Francaise, tom. i. pp. 275, 277.

[2] Dumont, Corps Diplomatique, tom. iii. pp. 397-400.--Flassan,