#like really i regret buying it chamberlin's bio

[ducavalentinos]

my lovely friend, tell me your favourite books about the borgias books so i can search for them in italy! thank you so much ♡

Thaaa my friend! you ask me a hard question?? b/c as you know, the Borgia historiography is a such a mess lool, but I’ll try my best ok?

Here’s what I’ll do, I’ll make a pros and cons for the books that I loved or found it tolerable overall:

Ivan Cloulas, The Borgias.

Pros: Lovely cover and writing! some interesting theories, good sources and Cloulas is possibly one of the few out there that is not an embarrassing apologist for Rodrigo, and he writes about Lucrezia with some respect. Fully acknowledging how much of a Borgia she was, clever and ambitious, very much involved in the family’s politics and how she was and remained extremely attached and loyal to them.  

Cons: As lovely as his writing is, the english translation at least, can get a little confusing at times. He also is fond of that ol’ historian habit of saying his opinions as facts, and making claims without any source to back it up. Example: when he says that Cesare’s alleged hate for Juan grew bigger after Lucrezia suddenly left for the convent of San Sisto, it’s merely a guess of his, since there’s nothing pointing to that at all. But the way he writes makes it seem like it’s a fact, so know, it should be read with a grain of salt.

José Catalán Deus, El Príncipe del Renacimiento: Vida y Leyenda de César Borgia.

Pros: Almost everything?? I seriously cannot stop gushing over this bio. It’s just so amazing. Deus was/is a journalist and it shows because his work is thorough, and he is simply not interested in perpetuating old Borgia myths, especially about Cesare. He quotes other historians and their different theories, along with primary sources. He never claims things he cannot proof. Wherever he states an opinion of his, he makes it clear is his opinion. He make us questions things too. it’s such an refreshing and captivating read.

Cons: His theories sometimes get a little wild haha, but as I said above, he doesn’t force you to believe them, he merely presents them to you, and why he thinks it’s possible, and it’s up to you to follow it or not. His writing on Lucrezia is rather lacking, but that’s basically it?! it really is a serious and worthy biography about Cesare and I can never thank him enough for it. (I hope you can find it in Italy Tha!)

Rafael Sabatini, The Life of Cesare Borgia.

Pros: His writing and his sense of humour! he is very meticulous with his sources, so at the end of every chapter, there are notes, which it’s what I live for. there are a few misinformation, but it’s rather due to the time that the book was published than glaring, lazy mistakes (like some modern ones). He tends to be fair to both Rodrigo and Cesare, not all the time, but overall it’s fine, even though he is a crazy stan of the former heh. His bio in my opinion focus a lot more on Cesare’s politics than anything else.Cons: It’s not a beginner’s book imo, and If you want to know more about Cesare as a person, you’re not getting it with his bio lol. He tries very little to humanize Cesare, and actually exaggerates on some of his personality traits I think. Again, he is a Rodrigo stan (Borgia scholars in general are and will go to ridiculous lengths to rehabilitate his image) so be aware of that.

The Borgias: The Hidden History, G.J Meyer.

Pros: His chapters about the history of Italy/Vatican really. It’s the only reason he is on this list lol. When trying to understand the Borgia family, I think it helps to understand their times and the institution of the Catholic Church, plus the politics of the major Italian States and how the powerful families such as the Orsini, Colonna, Malatesta, D’Este etc actually achieved their powerful stance. Meyer does a superb job at that. His writing is also pretty good and his sources are ok.

Cons: He’s also an insane Rodrigo stan, and that actually dragged his book to the ground. It could have been great imo, but he just…he doesn’t know when to stop wherever Rodrigo comes into the picture. It is a shame. He gives you crazy theories, that he cannot back it up with proof, and unlike Deus, he is pretty arrogant about it, and lowkey tries to force you into believing them. He is not very kind to women, and pretty much ignores Lucrezia, which honestly it’s not that bad when you consider how she is always posit by Borgia historians lol 😡😡😡.And I think those are the main ones. There are others I’ve read, such as Chamberlin and Hibbert’s bios, along with Woodward’s bio that I’m currently reading, but I wouldn’t say there are worth buying you know? like save your money to buy other stuff and get a PDF copy somewhere lol.

[ducavalentinos]

☕ Borgia historiography nowadays

Hm, it’s pretty messy?? lol.But we should take into consideration that the Borgia family’s name has been vilified for centuries (their enemies created a strong and effective propaganda against them that lives on until today) and a re-evaluation of their lives, and of Alexander VI’s papacy only really begun in the 18th/19th century as far as I’m aware, which it’s relatively new if you think about it. So it’s not exactly suprising that is it the mess it is.I think many of the scholars/historians have good intentions you know, but others just want to sell their books. But in both cases, they do end up repeating the same informations/rumors without any kind of examination of the sources. And they are all very passionate about the subject, which I completely understand. But like if you are writing a book about people that actually lived, you do have a responsability there, and you should at least try to be fair and honest and have a sort of balance with all of them? And in my opinion that seldom happens. They all have their different agendas, different narratives they want the readers to buy into to, and different “ships” ( Bradford is a hardcore Cesare and Lucrezia shipper and Sabatini is a hardcore Cesare and Charlotte shipper for example.) So any kind of a real, serious study gets lost in all of this. They are also particularly keen on saying their opinions as facts, with a tone of how it is the truth, and appealing a lot to how the person felt and it irks me to no ends. For example Chamberlin saying that if there was one person in all of Rome that knew Cesare had killed Juan, that person was Lucrezia??? And that she feared Cesare from that point on??? I mean…what am I supposed to do with this? Should I conclude that he has Lucrezia’s secret journal? Wouldn’t it be easier if he had said: It is our opinion that Lucrezia could have suspected him and feared him for that point on? Even though there is zero evidence for him to make that assumption, I could accept that. At least it would more honest.So all in all, these are some of the problems I notice with Borgia historiography nowdays, don’t get me wrong, it’s definitely better than it was before, but I believe there’s still a long way to go. I think most Borgia scholars are better writers than they are historians, at least with the Borgias. Their writing is engaging and entertaining, yes, but they do seem to lack substance most of the time. Obviously you can and will learn a lot about the family, I did and I don’t regret reading any bios, but you cannot trust their word alone and take everything they say at face value, and google is your friend here. Also a notepad at your side to write things down is always welcoming. It was and it is what saves me from this wild maze of informations Vs.opinions and all the different theories.Send me a ☕️ and a topic and I’ll talk about how I feel about it lol