Raucous Royal of the Month: Lucrezia Borgia and her many Loves

When you hear the name Lucrezia Borgia, many can’t help but think of the woman popularized in operas and fiction novels as the most infamous femme fatale in history. Rumors abound of the poisons, like La Cantarella, that Lucrezia was quick to dust upon her guest’s foods. In one colorful tale, Lucrezia had a poisoned ring with a hidden needle which she used to prick her enemies and secretly murder them.

Today, we know that the tales of poisoning are complete rubbish, but her family cannot be forgiven so easily. Born the bastard daughter of Pope Alexander VI (Rodrigo Borgia), Lucrezia was surrounded by intrigue and decadence during the height of the church’s corruption. The year she was born, 1480, marked the flowering of Renaissance art and literature, but also a time where it was commonplace for Popes to have concubines and poisoning one’s enemies was considered a gentleman’s way of removing political obstacles. Machiavelli wrote of Alexander VI that he, 'never did or thought of anything but deceiving people. ' Machiavelli was especially fond of Lucrezia's diabolical brother, Cesare Borgia who would later become his role model for political ambition along with the poster child for syphilis.

Even by Renaissance standards, growing up a Borgia was like living a life straight out of the Godfather. Dinner guests had a habit of winding up dead and late night antics often involved a few debauched orgies. And just like true Renaissance godfathers, they epitomized Don Vito Corlione's mantra of “keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.” At the time, Italy was broken up into a bunch of warring city states where the Pope had to form outside alliances quickly and deftly to stay in control. In the heart of these shifting alliances, Lucrezia became a valuable bargaining chip in the marital market. Unfortunately, Lucrezia’s husbands also came with expiration dates. Her family would hitch her to one man, but when the political alliance ceased to serve its purpose, they would find another match more suitable. This left Lucrezia with the helpless title of “pawn” and also made her a few enemies quick to spread rumors.

Bachelor #1
Though careful bribes, Alexander bought himself a pope’s hat in 1492 and soon began looking for a suitable match for his beloved daughter. Lucky bachelor #1 was Giovanni Sforza, a man twice Lucrezia’s age and a bit too dull to inspire much passion in his new wife. But Giovanni came with an alliance to the powerful Milanese family so Alexander threw enough ducats at him to help him forget Lucrezia's illegitimate status. A few years later, the doting father came to the conclusion that his daughter could do better and decided to divorce Lucrezia and Giovanni on the grounds that Giovanni was impotent. Although non-consummation, was commonly used to dissolve marriages, something about the title of "impotent" just rubbed Giovanni the wrong way. That’s when the mud slinging began. Right about this time, a nasty rumor began circulating that Alexander was sleeping with his daughter. No one can prove the rumor today but my guess is that being a veteran soldier, Giovanni might have been fighting his divorce with words instead of weapons.

No one could seem to come up with a solution to the mess until Giovanni’s buddy, Ludovico Sforza (il Moro) suggested that they hold a public performance where a few qualified men could judge Giovanni’s…ahh performance. We don’t know exactly what Lucrezia thought of this suggestion, but she did decide to run away to a nunnery. Eventually, Giovanni figured out that fighting the divorce was a worthless cause that would only end up with him broke or swimming with the fishes in the Tiber River. He conceded to the charge of impotence and let his next wife prove the contrary. (He went on to father a child by her).

Bachelor #2
Alexander next decided to form and alliance with Alfonso of Aragon. Although a bastard too, Alfonso came with the backing of his father, the King of Naples and the boyish good looks that made all the ladies swoon. Lucrezia did her fair share of swooning too and was soon expecting her first child with Alfonso. All would have ended happily if Alexander had not changed his mind yet again and decided that an alliance with King Louis XII of France would suit him better. He began negotiating with Louis to marry Lucrezia's brother, Cesare to a french princess—an alliance that was in direct opposition to Lucrezia’s marriage with Alfonso. At the time, Louis was attempting to gobble up Naples which made him no friend to Alfonso's Arogonese family.

In fear of his life, Alfonso headed for the hills leaving a 6 months pregnant Lucrezia behind. Lucrezia begged her father to assure Alfonso that he would not be harmed and the runaway newlywed returned to see the birth of his first son. But if Alfonso believed a promise from a Borgia, then he was a bit of a fool. One night, he was stabbed from behind on the steps of St. Peters. His half-dead body was dragged home to a distraught Lucrezia who nursed him back to health. While Alfonso was recuperating, Alexander appointed a guard to watch him, but the guard must have taken a coffee break because someone crept in and strangled Alfonso. Suspicious? Certainly. Many people assumed that Cesare ordered the killing with the blessing of Alexander. Lucrezia was so heart-broken that her father and brother had to send her away because they could not stand to hear her weeping while they were trying to whoop it up during all those lavish banquets.

Bachelor #3
Lucrezia's third marriage alliance was quite a coup considering that Alfonso d’Este, Duke of Ferrara (shown here), came with a pedigree that was well out of her league. Alfonso was the son of Ercole d’Este and had enough legitimacy to snub his blue blood nose at his new bride. At first, he was downright disgusted to marry Lucrezia and sent his spies to Rome to dig up some dirt. Unfortunately, his spies couldn't come up with much and Alfonso was forced to marry Lucrezia. Over time, Alfonso seemed to care deeply for Lucrezia despite the fact that their marriage was not exactly the paradigm of marital fidelity. He was rather fond of his prostitutes and Lucrezia had her share of dalliances while Alfonso was out cavorting with lowlifes.

Lucrezia's affairs
Lucrezia may have had an affair with the great poet Pietro Bembo (shown here). It is possible that Pietro’s love for Lucrezia was more of the chivalrous kind where he would never tarnish the object of his affection with base actions. It's also possible that he restrained himself because he didn't want to end up hanging from the rafters. Whether chivalry or true passion, their love letters would certainly make even the biggest cynic blush. Here is one of my favorites:

Bembo to Lucrezia:
The supreme cause which at the start did give
Things created their measure and their state
Willed me to love you and accept my fate
To manifest the faith whereby we live.
As virtues from that principle derive,
Ruler, moderator, sole joy innate
Whose face the fortunate may contemplate
Who seeling peace by grace abounding strive,
Yours is the radiance which makes me burn,
And growing with each act and gracious word
My joy in seeing you is never done.
Nor for my restlessness is there reward
Higher than yourself, wherefore I turn
To you, as heliotrope looks to the sun.

Lucrezia was also linked with Francesco Gonzaga (shown here), husband of one of her greatest rivals, Isabella d’Este. This affair seems more plausible given his over-sexual nature, but again cannot be proven. Francesco had a fondness for young boys, horses, and prostitutes that eventually ended with him having a bad itch in his nether regions. He broke off his affair with Lucrezia when the syphilitic pustules became a turn off.

Lucrezia Borgia: Dumb Blond or Savvy Entrepreneur?
Because her family was so notorious for debauchery and violence (I have barely touched the surface of all the scandals), much of what we know of Lucrezia is seen only through the eyes of the men that manipulated her. But was she just an abused pawn in her family’s political gain? Recent research shows that Lucrezia had many entrepreneurial talents and amassed her wealth through many careful investments in land reclamation. Using her persuasive nature, she settled border disputes and unlike other women of her day, held the titled to her investments. Sure, she spent an inordinately long time washing her hair, but she also spoke 5 languages, was trusted to handle her father affairs while he was absent, became a great patron of the arts and supported many charities.

In 1519, Lucrezia Borgia died giving birth to her eighth child. Alfonso was so grieved that he fainted at her funeral. Lucrezia and Alfonso did come to share a mutual respect and understanding, but her greatest love may have been the family she obeyed despite her own heart.

Sources and Further Reading:
Bradford, Sarah. Lucrezia Borgia - Life, Love And Death In Renaissance Italy, New York:NY, Viking 2004
Bellonci, Maria. Lucrezia Borgia, New York:NY, Phoenix 2002.
Translated by: Shankland, Hugh. The Prettiest Love Letters in the World, Boston:MA, David R. Godine, 1987.
Diane Yvonne Ghirardo, “Lucrezia Borgia as Entrepreneur.” Renaissance Quarterly 61 (2008): 53-91.

Book giveaway

Just a reminder that I will be picking a winner for for the Midwife's Apprentice on Thursday. Only newsletter subscribers are entered to win. Each drawing is open to US and International subscribers. If you are not a subscriber, then you can subscribe here.

I am doing my best to get this month's newsletter out by tomorrow, but I am having trouble getting oxygen to my brain lately. It might be a bit late this month...

The History of Cesarean Sections

Its Origins
Contrary to the popular myth, there is no proof that Julius Caesar was born through c-section or that the operation was named after him. My guess is that the myth became so widespread because many ancient gods were believed to be cut from the wombs of their mothers. Julius Caesar would have certainly preferred a godlike birth, but it is highly unlikely given the fact that his mom survived his delivery. Some historians believe that the c-section’s origins can be traced back to a royal decree issued by Numa Pompilius in 700 BC called Lex Caesare. Lex Caesar stated that if a mother was dead or dying that the baby should be cut from her womb. Another theory states that the origin of the word is derived from the Latin verb caedere which means “to cut.”

Surviving a C-section
Today, c-sections rarely lead to the death of the mother, but before the 1900s, the odds of a woman surviving an infection and the hemorrhaging were slim to none. Often, a cesarean came down to a painful decision of who should live – the mother or the child. The Catholic church favored the child reasoning that a baby needed to be baptized. Even as late as 1930, Pope Pius XI decreed that doctors could not take a baby’s life to save the mother. We can imagine what a painful decision it would have been for a Catholic father forced to choose his unborn child over his wife.

The cesareans of the past also would not have involved the small “bikini cut” that we see today. Surgeons of the past carved a woman up like the Christmas turkey often making vertical cuts that extended as high as the ribs and resulted in the intestines spilling out. Some doctors cut diagonally. Others surgeons just made multiple cuts until they were able to pull the baby out by its feet.

Post-op procedures were not for the faint of heart either. During the Renaissance, a woman inserted a linen pessary of rose oil and egg yolk into her vagina three times a day. Rose oil does have healing properties, but it wouldn’t have done much to fight an infection. Another common procedure was to attach leeches to where a woman was cut or if she had given birth naturally to her perineum. And the popular panacea of bloodletting was also commonly used to reduce fever. (a subject for another day).

The other option
All of this may sound pretty horrific until you consider what was done in place of cesareans. When a baby was in breech and could not be delivered, doctors would perform an embryotomy in which they would take a long hook and tear out the baby piecemeal. Sometimes tiny shoulders and limbs were broken to get the baby out. When Catherine de Medici gave birth to twin girls, one of her baby’s legs had to be broken in order to get her out. (Both babies died.) Even more disturbing, if the baby was stuck with his head down then a craniotomy was performed in which the surgeon would drill into the fetal skull.

I am still terrified of c-sections, but I may not have the option if my recent ultrasound is correct. My doctor is predicting a 10 pound baby if I go full term and unfortunately I was cursed with those boyish tiny hips.

I am off to find a really bumpy road instead…

Sources and Further Reading:
Cassidy, Tina. Birth: The Surprising History of How we are Born, New York, NY: Altantic Monthly Press, 2006.Gelis, Jacques. History of Childbirth: Fertility, Pregnancy and Birth in Early Modern Europe, Polity Press, 1996
Images from the Wellcome Library

Battling hormones with good news

I have been so cranky this week and crying over everything. Yesterday, I was convinced that when my supply of chocolate milk ran out (a pregnancy craving) that the world was a desolate and bleak place which no sane person would want to inhabit. But then look what I found....good news!

First off, Scandalous Women is soon to become a book. (said in my announcer voice) That's right...by 2011, history lovers can enjoy Elizabeth Kerri Mahon's site in a book store near you. So head over to Scandalous Women and congratulate one raucous writer of history.

Next, Kris Waldherr's beautifully illustrated tarot card deck has officially gone digital. So if you are wondering if you will find true love or financial success, just whip out your iphone and ask your personal psychic.

Lastly, and not quite as exciting...Enchanted by Josephine is having a drawing to win a free copy of The Raucous Royals. And if that doesn't make your heart skip a beat, then you should check out her historical fiction fest.

Fortune not on your side? No worries. Use your smarts instead. Head on over to Everything Tudor for another....yes another chance to win a copy of The Raucous Royals. Just write a short paragraph on your favorite royal.

A Women’s Curse

On November 1, 1661, Spanish actors and musicians could be heard dancing a sweet and melodious ballet below Queen Marie Theresa’s window. Unfortunately, her husband Louis XIV and many of the courtiers could hardly appreciate the serenade while Marie Theresa was screaming, “I don’t want to give birth, I want to die! (1). Without much to dull the pain, many women of the time probably related to her plea. Throughout history, midwives and doctors have used various strange and sometimes lethal concoctions to ease the pain of child birth. Here are just a few of my favorite:

The Plant of Joy
The ancient Egyptians drug of choice was opium otherwise known as the “plant of joy.” Opium was derived from the sleep inducing poppy plant and with the correct dosage could pretty much knock a pregnant horse out. 16th century doctor, Paraclesis later combined opium with his own secret ingredients of crushed pearls, henbane and frog spawn and named it laudanum. By the 19th century, laudanum could be found in every major pharmacy packaged in its pretty glass bottle for dainty ladies to sip with their brandy. Today, opium is a derivative of the highly addictive painkiller, morphine. It’s typically given to patients in extreme pain, but would never be administered to a woman in labor unless she wanted her newborn baby to get an early start on drug addiction.

Willow Bark
The Greeks favored willow bark to ease child birth pain and although certainly not as powerful as opium, willow bark did relieve some pain. By the 19th century, chemists figured out that the Greeks were on to something and were able to distract the pain relieving component of willow bark called salicylic acid, known today as Aspirin. Most doctors today advise pregnant women not to take aspirin because it can cause placental abruptions and might actually delay labor.

The gift of myrrh
You have probably heard the Christmas story of the three wise men who visited the baby Jesus bringing gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. What is still up for debate is whether the myrrh was a gift for Jesus or Mary. Myrrh has long been used as a pain killer because of its soothing effects on inflamed tissues.

Grease the Wheel
Medieval midwives probably win the award for wacky pain killers. They often used oily substance like the grease of a duck or hen to ease the mother's pain and speed the baby’s passage into the world. Sometimes they even injected olive oil into the pregnant woman’s rectum. If baby’s first medieval slip n’ slide didn’t work than they would try screaming into the women’s vagina to coax the baby out.

The veil of pain
Things got a little dicey by the 14th – 17th period for midwives who were often accused of witchcraft when trying to ease a new mother’s pain. In 1591, James VI ordered a new mom and her midwife executed for witchcraft because they had taken a pain relieving concoction. (Granted, the concoction happened to contain dug up remains of various corpses...but ease up James!) At the time, the Church taught that childbirth was part of the sins of women blaming it on Eve and her forbidden fruit. bla bla bla. Women were expected to endure the pain and accept their lot in life. For this reason, the stoic Isabella I gave birth under a veil because she didn’t want the midwife to see her in pain. If you have ever been in labor than you probably know that by the end you don’t care if you are half-naked.


Chloroform a’ la reine
By the 1800s, James Young Simpson was the first to use diethyl ether during child birth. Simpson then experimented with chloroform and found that just knocking the woman out cold was the way to go. Women would inhale the fumes, drift into la la land and then wake up to find a baby in their arms. Sounds ideal, right? Maybe for the mom. Both ether and chloroform passed to the baby so there must have been some groggy babies being born.

Queen Victoria was the first royal to give her official stamp of approval to chloroform assisted births. Soon, taking chloroform during labor became so fashionable with the upper class that it was named Chloroform a’ la reine.

Today, many women choose natural child birth and experience the same gut wrenching agony as women of the past. I have a lot of respect for these women, but I am just not that brave. If all goes well, I will be thanking modern science and my beloved epidural in a few weeks. But it does make me wonder….what will we use 100 years from now to ease child birth pain. Will we laugh at epidurals as archaic? Maybe by then, men can give birth instead?

Notes:
(1) Fraser, Love and Louis XIV, 77

Sources and Further Reading:
Cassidy, Tina. Birth: The Surprising History of How we are Born, New York, NY: Altantic Monthly Press, 2006.
Gelis, Jacques. History of Childbirth: Fertility, Pregnancy and Birth in Early Modern Europe, Polity Press, 1996

Going Back to School - Renaissance Style

It’s that time of year when we kiss our little ones goodbye in front of that big, yellow school bus armed with new clothes, books, and hopes of higher education. Many parents are thrilled. The teachers have their work cut out for them. 400 years ago, minister and educator, Hezekiah Woodward complained, ‘now the parent doth just nothing, the master must do all, look to the child’s books and manners both.’ (1) Teachers today might argue that not much has changed. Education and manners may start at home, but our teachers are responsible for turning our offspring into model citizens.

In honor of the teachers that work so hard, here are just a few of history's peculiarities on educating children.


School Supplies
500 years ago, children didn’t trek off to school with piles of books, but they did have their handy hornbooks (shown above). Originating in the 15th century, a hornbook consisted of a wooden or metal paddle with a piece of parchment paper pasted on it demonstrating the alphabet or a lesson. They sometimes had a hole in the handle so they could hang from a child’s belt. It may seem counter-intuitive to arm a child with a learning device that doubles as a weapon-like paddle. Wouldn’t they just start smacking each other over the head during breaks? Probably not. It is a proven fact that Renaissance kids were far more behaved probably because they feared things like eternal damnation instead of being picked last for kick ball.

D is for Death
Pictorial alphabets created by Hans Holbein are a perfect example of how children might be taught their letters. One such pictorial alphabet was the Alphabet of Death where young children could learn their letters in the company of ghouls and skeletons. The message was clear: better learn your alphabet kids because death might be just around the corner. Cheery stuff.

If the death alphabet wasn’t your thing then you might be lucky enough to own a copy of the "The New English tutor...to which is added Milk for Babes" featuring illustrated poems ‘On Judgement’ or 'On Hell'. The book even included extra bonus illustrations of a naked Pope with each of his body parts marked as a vice. These were some of the first info graphics of their day. It’s no wonder that most affluent children were reading by the age of 4.

Discipline: Forget the time outs
Children were not given much credit to behave like little angels because it was believed that most of them were inherently evil.

Erasmus wrote;
“Nature has given small children as a special gift the ability to imitate; but the urge to imitate evil is considerable stronger that the urge to imitate the good.” (2)


The solution to keep them on a godly path was simple. Whack em' silly! In 16th century Cambridge, most schoolmasters would not be caught dead without their hymn book and birch rod. Teachers also had a funny way of warming up for the school year. Often, a poor boy was brought in from the village so that the teacher could beat him to prove that he was ready to handle his real students. Other 16th century forms of punishment included boxing the boy’s ears, forcing them to kneel on sharp wood, or the perennial favorite of wearing a fool’s cap.

Yet although beatings and humiliation were common, many schoolmasters rebelled against the stereotypical monster out of a Dickens novel. Many 16th century scholars believed that gentle admonishing was more effective than the rod. In The Education of young Gentlewomen, the author recommended that discipline be done with, ‘mildness than with vigour’ and further labeled beatings as “beastly.”

The royal whipping boy
But what if you were lucky enough to be royalty? Were you still punished with the rod? In 17th century England, a tutor was never allowed to spank a royal derriere because royalty was anointed by god and therefore could not be touched by mere mortals. Instead tutors had to find a substitute bottom to take the licks. Enter the whipping boy, an occupation long forgotten although the term still survives today. The whipping boy’s main job was to sit next to the royal pupil and take a few thumps every time the royal prince or king screwed up. Close friend and whipping boy, Will Murray got a beat down every time Charles I messed up his lessons. Sometimes whipping boys were even used by grown men. Henry IV’s ambassadors, D’Ossat and Du Perron served as his whipping boys when he adjured his Catholic faith. D’Ossat and Du Perron were forced to kneel before pope Clement VIII and be beaten over the shoulders with a switch in lieu of their king. But don’t feel too bad for the whipping boys because they often landed in cushiony jobs. Will Murray later became the Earl of Dysart. (1) D’Ossat and Du Perron later became cardinals.

So if your kids come home from school today complaining about homework and boring history (gasp!) remind them that at least they don't have to look at naked pictures of the pope all day or wear a fool's cap when they get an answer wrong.

Notes:
(1) Charlton, p. 192
(2) Charlton, p. 101
(3) 'Parishes: Petersham', A History of the County of Surrey: Volume 3 (1911), pp. 525-532.

Sources and Further Reading:
Hornbooks
Charlton, Kenneth. Women, religion and education in early modern England, Routledge, 1999.
Holbein's Alphabet
Robinson, Tony, The Worst Children's Job in History, Macmillian Children's Book, 2004.

The sexiest drink in history: Coffee

Satan’s drink
Take away my morning coffee and I start to resemble Nick Nolte after his drug arrest.  It is undeniably addictive. Still controversial. And oh so delicious. Coffee originated in Ethiopia in the 9th century, but it didn’t become popular in Europe until 1600. That's when the trouble started. Believing it to be "Satan's drink", Pope Clement VIII’s priests petitioned him to ban coffee, but Clement took one sip and declared, “Why, this Satan’s drink is so delicious.” (1) Thereafter, Clement christened coffee as the drink of choice and Europeans fell in love with their java.


Coffee Contraceptives
But despite the pope’s endorsement, coffee continued to have its detractors. A German scholar visited Persia in 1637 and found that the people used it as a contraceptive. He concluded that they couldn’t possibly be wrong and preached against the consumption of coffee.

By the late 17th century, coffee houses in England had become increasingly popular places for men to gather amongst fellow coffee lovers and debate the hottest issues. Now, instead of spending their time whoring about in their local tavern, men were gossiping, reading, daintily sipping and acting like…well, girls. Their wives decided to put a stop to these effeminate, caffeine-induced gatherings. In 1674, they petitioned Charles II to close coffee houses down arguing that it caused impotence. In a pamphlet titled The Women’s Petition against Coffee they presented their case against the “Excessive use of that Newfangled, Abominable, Heathenish Liquor called COFFEE.” King Charles II (who had never been a coffee lover) agreed and closed them down. But you know what happens when people suddenly don't get thier coffee....they get positively rabid. Soon, an outcry from the public forced Charles to reopen the coffee houses and coffee drinking continued.

By the 18th century, the coffee debate swung to the opposite end of the sexual debate. In 1771, a French doctor named Bienville preached that coffee caused nymphomania. He further argued that coffee paired with romantic novels was a recipe for hysteria. A typical scene at Starbucks would have been a breeding ground for the crazies.*

So who was right? Does coffee rev up your sex drive and ability to conceive or does it squelch a man’s fertility faster than wearing a tight pair of briefs on a long bike ride?

Scroll down for answer....






This really never gets old...





at least not for me....





a few more scrolls....





It turns out that those desperate housewives and the Persians were not as crazy as we might think. Although coffee won’t necessarily make a man love needlepoint or cry over Beaches, recent research does show that coffee, wine and nuts contain chemical called phytoestrogens which lowers male fertility and mimics the female sex hormone oestrogen. So if you are trying to conceive then I guess you might want to lay off the bean.

*Actually, come to think about it...there are a lot of crazy, homeless people at Starbucks. Why don't they go home and drink their coffee?

(1) Pendergrast p. 8

Sources and Further Reading:Pendergrast, Mark. Uncommon Grounds, The History of Coffee and How it Transformed Our World, Jackson, TN: Basic Books, 2000.
Lee Allen, Stewart. The Devil's Cup: A History of the World According to Coffee, New York, NY: Ballantine Books, 2003.
The Women’s Petition against Coffee
How beer, wine, coffee and nuts can ALL 'lower a man's fertility'