h the reports of the Venetian envoys and the
despatches of innumerable other ambassadors which have been used in this
work.

Burchard is absolutely free from malice, making no mention whatever of
Alexander's private conduct. He records only facts--never rumors--and
these he glosses over or cloaks diplomatically. The Venetian ambassador
Polo Capello reports how Caesar Borgia stabbed the chamberlain Perotto
through the Pope's robe, but Burchard makes no mention of the fact. The
same ambassador explicitly states, as does also a Ferrarese agent, that
Caesar killed his brother Gandia; Burchard, however, utters not a word
concerning the subject.[96] Nor does he say anything about the way
Caesar despatched his brother-in-law Alfonso. The relations of the
members of the Borgia family to each other and to strangers, such as the
Farnese, the Pucci, and the Orsini; the intrigues at the papal court;
the long series of crimes; the extortion of money; the selling of the
cardinal's hat; and all the other enormities which fill the despatches
of the ambassadors--regarding all this Burchard is silent. Even Vannozza
he names but once, and then incorrectly. There are two passages in
particular in his diary which have given the greatest offense: the
report of the bacchanal of fifty harlots in the Vatican, and the attack
made on the Borgias in the anonymous letter to Silvio Savelli. These
passages are found in all the manuscripts and doubtless also in the
original of the diary. That the letter to Silvio is a fabrication of
neither Burchard nor of some malicious Protestant is proved by the fact
that Marino Sanuto also reproduces it in his diary. Further, that
neither Burchard nor any subsequent writer concocted the story of the
Vatican bacchanal is proved by the same letter, whose author relates it
as a well-known fact. Matarazzo of Perugia also confirms it; his account
differs from that of Burchard, whose handwriting he could hardly have
seen at that time, but it agrees with reports which he himself had
heard. He remarks that he gave it full credence, "for the thing was
known far and wide, and because my informants were not Romans merely,
but were the Italian people, therefore have I mentioned it."

This remark indicates the source of the scandalous anecdote--it was
common talk. It doubtless was based upon an actual banquet which Caesar
gave in his palace in the Vatican. Some such orgy may have taken place
there, but who will believe that L