CHAPTER ONE A Mysterious Friendship
Leonardo da Vinci and Niccolò Machiavelli probably first met in the town of Imola during 1502. Their paths crossed at the court of Cesare Borgia, where--for different reasons--each was in residence from October through the end of the year. Leonardo had taken a position as Borgia’s military architect and engineer. Niccolò, second chancellor of the government of Florence, was on a diplomatic mission to keep an eye on the unscrupulous Cesare. By June of the next year, both were back in Florence, working together on what turned out to be a magnificent failure.
Few know about the mysterious and ill-fated collaboration between these two famous men. Leonardo da Vinci, creator of the Mona Lisa and the Last Supper, is one of the best-known artists in history. Niccolò Machiavelli, whose The Prince has been blamed for immorality and praised for introducing a science of politics, is one of our best-known political thinkers. In the first years of the sixteenth century, they conceived an ambitious project to direct the Arno River through a canal, at some points twenty miles away from its natural course.
A decade before, Leonardo da Vinci had first developed a plan to make the Arno River navigable, turning Florence into a seaport and irrigating the Arno valley. Niccolò Machiavelli, as an administrator responsible for Florentine military and foreign policy, tried to implement the first phase of this project in 1503-4 in order to divert the river from Pisa, deprive the city of water, and thereby win a war that had frustrated his fellow citizens for a decade. Had the diversion at Pisa succeeded, it was hoped to go ahead with Leonardo’s larger scheme of moving the Arno into a canal through Prato and under Mount Serravalle, transforming the economic basis of Florentine power.
Between 1503 and 1506, Niccolò Machiavelli benefited from Leonardo’s assistance on other projects in addition to this plan to divert the Arno. In June 1503, at Machiavelli’s insistence, Florentine troops besieging Pisa captured a fort called La Verruca; Leonardo was immediately sent as a military architect to propose its reconstruction. In fall of 1504, Machiavelli needed to show Florence’s good intentions to Jacopo IV d’Appiano, lord of Piombino; Leonardo was sent on a mission of technical assistance. Because previous attempts to storm the walls of Pisa had failed, Leonardo worked out a complex scheme for blowing up partial sections of the walls in a way that would reduce loss of life among the attacking forces.
For his part, Leonardo da Vinci benefited from Machiavelli’s position in the government. Lacking income on his return to Florence in 1503, Leonardo received the commission to paint an immense fresco--The Battle of Anghiari--in the Great Council Hall of the Palazzo Vecchio. To help plan the work, Machiavelli’s assistant Agostino Vespucci (cousin of the explorer Amerigo Vespucci) wrote a description of the battle scene, which has been found in Leonardo’s Notebooks. When progress on the painting did not satisfy the political leadership, Machiavelli played a role in negotiating a contract that allowed Leonardo to continue receiving his pay. On other matters as well, including Leonardo’s lawsuit over a disputed inheritance, Machiavelli and his assistant Agostino apparently were of assistance.
Most of the projects on which Leonardo and Machiavelli collaborated were failures. The ditches intended to divert the Arno at Pisa collapsed because of a combination of incompetence and bad luck. The project was abandoned amid recrimination and criticism of its cost, ending any hope of implementing Leonardo’s broader plan to make Florence a seaport. The following year, Leonardo had another disaster with his Council Hall fresco. The preliminary drawing for the Battle of Anghiari was the wonder of all who saw it. But because Leonardo used an experimental technique on the wall, paint ran and dripped, work on it was abandoned, and eventually the partially completed fresco was destroyed.
At the time, these setbacks had very serious implications for both Leonardo and Machiavelli, putting into question their reputation, status, and income. This probably explains why neither wrote of their work together. Who likes to bring attention to a disaster that can be attributed to bad judgment or incompetence? Today, however, the story is worth knowing. We see the human side of these two men of genius by appreciating how and why their collaboration failed.
In the five years after the attempt to move the Arno, Niccolò’s fortunes seemed to recover. He organized a popular militia that played an essential role in the defeat of Pisa in 1509, allowing Florence to regain control of the Arno as far as the Ligurian Sea. Three years later, however, Niccolò’s militia was routed by the Spanish. The republican government he served was overturned and Niccolò himself removed from office. Early in 1513 he was arrested and tortured on suspicion of plotting to kill Giuliano de’ Medici, even though Giuliano and Niccolò had been associated years before and Niccolò actively sought to work for the Medici. After over a decade of public service, Niccolò lost his powerful role in Florentine politics, suffering what he called “a great and continuous malignity of fortune.”
In the years after the Arno diversion failed, Leonardo also confronted frustration and loss of power. Abandoning his work in Florence, he moved to Milan in 1506. When his stepbrothers challenged an inheritance, he returned to pursue the legal case through interminable delays; ultimately, the conflict was settled by his agreement to leave disputed wealth to his stepbrothers on his death. Although Leonardo achieved financial security and status while serving the French in Milan between 1508 and 1512, all this was lost when the French armies were defeated and retired from Italy. Leonardo then entered the patronage of Giuliano de’ Medici and moved to Rome, but life in the entourage of the Medici popes was not congenial. In the last years of his life, from 1516 to 1519, Leonardo finally found relatively secure wealth and status in Amboise at the court of Francis I of France, but by then a stroke had limited his artistic abilities.
The unsuccessful collaboration of Leonardo and Niccolò between 1503 and 1506 was ambitious and foresighted. Yet their attempt to move the Arno has been lost in the mists of history. Because their joint projects failed, little is known of their work together. Both men, often attacked by political enemies, had reason to remain silent about the disastrous Arno diversion. Other factors also conspired to hide their friendship.
Leonardo da Vinci and Niccolò Machiavelli were among the most secretive figures in our intellectual tradition. Between 1498 and 1512, Niccolò learned deception the hard way as a government official and diplomat often involved in delicate negotiations in dangerous places. Late in his life, he said of himself that “for some time now I have never said what I believe nor ever believed what I said; and if indeed I do sometimes tell the truth, I hide it behind so many lies that it is hard to find.”
Leonardo also had his reasons for secrecy. Among his works were many practical inventions he sought to keep to himself and scientific inquiries that contradicted orthodox Christian doctrine. Although we know many details of Leonardo’s life from his Notebooks, the entries are mainly jottings in mirror writing (from right to left) for his private use.
Because letters were often intercepted and read by one’s enemies, a written message often had to protect its author and recipient through indirection, silence, and subterfuge. Niccolò Machiavelli, as a powerful public servant, was frequently at the center of situations that called for diplomacy and discretion. Leonardo da Vinci, serving as artist, engineer, and advisor to rulers and governments, found himself in similar circumstances. During the Renaissance, it could be dangerous to put everything in writing. As Niccolò’s friend Francesco Vettori put it, “I wish I could write many things that I know cannot be entrusted to letters.”
What was true of correspondence at the time was true of behavior more generally. Charges of religious heresy or political disloyalty could be a matter of life and death. Assassination of enemies was not infrequent. In 1478 Giuliano di Piero de’ Medici--brother of Lorenzo the Magnificent--was murdered in a conspiracy led by one of the city’s leading aristocratic families. A generation later, Savonarola, the reformist preacher who effectively ruled Florence for four years, was excommunicated after openly challenging the pope, and then arrested, convicted, and burned at the stake outside the Palazzo Vecchio.
Another factor was a Florentine law that allowed anonymous accusations. At different times in their careers, both Leonardo and Niccolò were subject to such accusations: Leonardo in 1476 on a charge of sodomy (legally punishable by death), Niccolò in 1509, when political enemies claimed he was not legally eligible to serve as second chancellor and should be forced to resign. As Niccolò’s assistant wrote him after the accusation of 1509, “your adversaries are numerous and will stop at nothing. The case is public everywhere, even in the whorehouses.” For both Leonardo and Niccolò, the possibility of such challenges remained a constant threat to status and political influence.
To understand the story of these two men, therefore, we have to look behind the usual textbook accounts. Documents exist that reveal private attitudes and remind us that famous men and women of the Renaissance were human beings with familiar passions and foibles. In the letter from Francesco Vettori quoted above, after lamenting the inability to write everything, Niccolò’s correspondent explains why he has fallen in love. Vettori, serving as the Florentine ambassador to the pope, has little to do:
I wrote you that idleness made me fall in love and I reaffirm this to you, because I have practically nothing to do. I cannot read much, by reason of my eyesight, which has been diminished by age. I cannot go out and enjoy myself unless I am accompanied, and this cannot always be done: I do not have so much authority or such resources as to be sought out; if I spend my time in thought, most of them bring me melancholy, which I try my best to flee; of necessity one must endeavor to think of pleasant things, but I know of nothing that gives more delight to think about and to do than fucking. Every man may philosophize all he wants, but this is the utter truth, which many people understand this way but few will say.
Whatever the historical changes over the last five centuries, the protagonists in our story remain very much our contemporaries.
Leonardo and Niccolò were fascinating, amusing, talented men, sometimes tortured by despair and often surrounded by enemies. Both had ideas ahead of their times--and knew it. Both attracted admiring friends, exercised power--and ultimately failed to succeed in some of their most cherished projects. Both could be charming--or exasperating. And at times, both had unbelievably bad luck.
This is the story of two men and a river. Although the two men are well known, the river, beautiful and rich in history, has a role of its own. Rivers are means of transportation and energy, sources of water for crops as well as people--and when they flood, devastating in their destruction. The Arno was all of these. It also provided the principal reason Leonardo da Vinci and Niccolò Machiavelli worked together. The failure of their grandiose plans--and of the other projects they attempted--teaches a great deal about Leonardo, Niccolò, and an extraordinary moment in Western history.
评分
评分
评分
评分
我向来偏爱那种探讨人性复杂面的故事,而这部作品在这方面做得堪称出色。它没有简单地将角色划分为绝对的好人或坏人,每个人物都带着自己厚重的历史和难以言喻的动机。我特别关注那些处于道德灰色地带的角色,他们做出的每一个决定,都充满了痛苦的权衡。作者似乎对人性的弱点和光辉有着深刻的洞察力,能够精准地捕捉到角色在极端压力下的真实反应。比如那个看似冷酷无情的反派,在某个不经意的瞬间流露出的脆弱,瞬间让我对他的看法产生了动摇。这种多维度、非脸谱化的刻画,使得故事的张力得以持久维持,因为你永远无法完全确定下一步会发生什么,或者谁才是真正的赢家。它迫使读者跳出自己的既有框架,去理解那些我们可能不认同的行为背后的逻辑。读完之后,我感觉自己对现实生活中的人际交往也多了一层更具同理心的理解,这可能就是一本好书带给读者的真正价值。
评分从结构上讲,这本书的布局设计得极其精巧,像是一个多层的俄罗斯套娃,每一层都有新的惊喜。它不是那种线性叙事,而是巧妙地穿插了时间线和不同角色的视角,但处理得非常流畅,丝毫没有造成阅读上的混乱感。我特别喜欢作者如何利用这些交错的叙事片段来构建悬念。可能在前一百页,你看到的是一个看似不起眼的小细节,但到了后半部分,这个细节被赋予了至关重要的意义,让你恍然大悟,拍着大腿感叹作者布局之深远。这种“伏笔与回收”的艺术,在这本书里达到了炉火纯青的地步。它要求读者保持高度的注意力,因为任何一个被忽略的对话或者环境描写,都可能成为解开谜题的关键线索。对于热衷于解谜和推理的读者来说,这本书简直是一场智力上的盛宴,每一次的发现都带来了巨大的满足感。
评分哇,这本书真是让人欲罢不能!我得说,作者的叙事功力简直是教科书级别的。故事的开篇就给我一种身临其境的感觉,仿佛我本人就是那个身处漩涡之中的主角。那种细腻入微的心理描写,让我清晰地感受到了角色内心的挣扎与矛盾。特别是关于“选择”与“命运”这两个宏大主题的探讨,作者并没有采取说教式的口吻,而是通过一系列环环相扣的事件和人物的命运轨迹,自然而然地引出了深刻的思考。我尤其欣赏那种留白的处理方式,很多关键情节没有直接点明,而是留给了读者自己去揣摩和解读,这极大地增强了阅读的参与感和回味空间。读完一个章节,我常常会放下书,陷入沉思,回味那些错综复杂的人物关系和那些看似偶然却又充满必然性的情节发展。这本书的节奏把握得极佳,时而紧凑得让人屏息凝神,时而又舒缓得让人得以喘息,这种张弛有度的叙事节奏,让整个阅读体验变得非常流畅和愉悦,完全不会有拖沓感。
评分这本书的文字风格简直像一首精心谱写的交响乐,每一个段落都有其独特的音色和韵律。我不是那种对文学技巧吹毛求疵的人,但这次我真的被作者的遣词造句所折服。很多简单的词汇,在作者的笔下组合在一起,竟然迸发出了惊人的张力和美感。举个不恰当的例子,书中描述某个场景时,用到的比喻和拟人手法,新颖得让人拍案叫绝。它不是那种故作高深的晦涩难懂,而是恰到好处地提升了文本的质感和深度。更难得的是,这种华丽的辞藻并没有掩盖故事的核心——人物的情感流动。相反,它们像是为人物的喜怒哀乐披上了一层精致的外衣,让情感的表达更加立体和深刻。我发现自己时不时会停下来,反复阅读某一句,不是因为没看懂,而是因为太美了,忍不住想细细品味那种文字构建出的意境。对于那些追求阅读美感和文学享受的读者来说,这本书绝对不容错过,它提供了一种沉浸式的、近乎诗意的阅读体验。
评分坦白说,我不是一个轻易会被“氛围感”打动的人,但我必须承认,这本书成功地在我的脑海中构建了一个栩栩如生的世界。这个世界观的设定,虽然没有宏大的奇幻背景,却有着一种扎根于现实的、令人不安的真实感。无论是那些繁忙都市的阴暗角落,还是某个偏僻小镇的压抑氛围,作者都能通过精准的感官细节描写(气味、光线、声音)让你仿佛真的置身其中。这种环境描写不仅仅是背景板,它更像是故事的另一个“角色”,深刻地影响着人物的心理和行动轨迹。这种沉浸式的环境塑造,让整个故事的基调变得非常统一和强烈,带来一种压迫感或者说是宿命感。我感觉自己不是在阅读一个故事,而是在体验一段真实发生过的人生片段,这种感觉非常罕见和珍贵。这本书的“现场感”极强,读完后,那种特有的味道和画面感久久无法散去。
评分 评分 评分 评分 评分本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有