The Franco-Prussian War was a conflict between France and Prussia, it happened between the years of 1870-1871. There were two main figures in this war, Otto Von Bismarck (Counselor of Prussia), who was one of the most brilliant and ruthless diplomat and Napoleon III. The thing about Otto is that he refused to let the French people down and refused to have them settle.

 He is the main reason why war break through, he was waiting for the minimum chance to provoke war, and he had one goal in mind to unify Austria, Prussia and all of Germany into one single nation. The thing about Otto is that he planned everything with a lot of detail; he even planned this war two years before it happened and how he would have started it. He knew what he wanted and he knew how to achieve it, so in order to provoke a war he tricked the French, when King William I (Prussia) received a proposal he sent back a telegram to answer them, and Otto was smart enough to completely modify it, then the French got really mad, and then a war started. At the beginning I mention that Otto wanted to convert Austria, Prussia and all of Germany into one single nation but before war Prussia had a fight with Austria, and Prussia won it, so they turned themselves into one nation.

When the French received that letter they were very much mad, and they pressured Napoleon III to declare war and he did. Weapons in this war were very much important and did make a big difference. I believed that Prussia won mainly because of their use of weapons. In the Franco-Prussian war they used all kinds of guns, during this war the Prussians took the initiative to build breech-loading guns since they are more practical and easier to use. It takes more time to use muzzle-loading guns, besides you wouldn’t want to waste time turning your gun to put bullets on it, while you have a very high chance of getting shot. So the Prussians build their needle gun, which was the first ever breech-loading weapon and then the French didn’t want to be left behind so they build the French chassepot, and they also build the “mitrailleuse” but since many French didn’t knew how to use it, that became sort of a disadvantage for them. They were kind of in a race to see who build better weapons; you may consider that war the “Enlightenment of weapons.”

The French then created a revolutionary government and called it the Paris Commune; they started ruling from March-May 1971. Basically what happened was that citizens of Paris, influenced by Karl Marx, rose up against their government and took the city. This time was horrible because there were a lot of people killed (that is never good), and as if the killings weren’t enough, there was a shortage of food and many people lost their jobs. The Commune ended with a fight in the cemetery of Pere-Lachaise, many were wounded or killed.

This video is a video made by the government of Paraguay celebrating their independence; it was kind of hard to understand their accents. What happened was that when Napoleon named his brother Joe Bonaparte as the king of Spain many colonies were outraged so they decided that they no longer wanted to be controlled, they wanted freedom, their independence. 

At that time Paraguay belonged to a viceroyalty, and when that viceroyalty heard that Spain had been invaded they called for a meeting in Buenos Aires, where they revolutionary war of independence began. I understood from the video that Paraguay separated from this viceroyalty and then created their army, but were later defeated. 

Then they fought again with the Spanish on a forest and the Spanish surrender the fight when one of their own killed a child. Then the creoles wanted to fight against the government, and then a civil war broke out. The Paraguayans, had the idea to bring a big canyon and point it at the governor, that way he would surrender, it worked! Governor Velasco led the movement. 

On the military basis or forces the Paraguayans were helped by, Pedro Juan Caballero, Vicente Ignacio, Bautista and Iturbi.

The video was kind of hard to understand at times because  the accents was hard for me at times even though I speak Spanish, but my resume includes what I understood, but I really liked the video, I think it’s a very well done video.

The most common mental idea of the political borders consists of a line that separates the country or the region “A” from the country or the region “B”. Here it ends my country and here it begins that of the neighbor. Nevertheless, the geopolitical reality leaves us, in the whole world there are enclaves and exclaves that may or not provoke a few inconveniences between countries. Today we will revise the enclaves and exclaves that can be in the world.

Enclave is defined as a part of a country surrounded completely by other one, and exclave as a part of a country separated physically from the principal part of this one (including the islands). In the image of the right “C” is exclave of “B”, but not enclave since it is border on the other two territories. In the image of the left side, “C” is exclave of “B”, but in addition it is an enclave in “A”.

Examples

ENCLAVE

Vatican City is an enclave of Rome. Vatican City has its own government, independent from Rome and Italy. It is not bound by the rules of Rome, and in many cases not by the rules of Italy.

EXCLAVE

French Guiana in South America shares political affinity with France but is not physically connected to it. Surinam and Brazil, and also the Atlantic Ocean border it. This gives France a way to access it without necessarily crossing into other countries to do so.

Some Cases

Between India and Bangladesh there are approximately 92 enclaves and exclaves. It is necessary to highlight that Bangladesh separated of the India when the Muslims separated of the Indian government newly freed to form Pakistan; Bangladesh was in this at the time the Oriental Pakistan. For questions of cultures they were in war a lot of time; the zone still is dangerous, a mercy of dealers and rebels, so these enclaves are on a though situation.

Hong Kong and Macao used to be exclaves from Great Britain and Portugal, respectively; both are originally Chinese ports. Still today, already as part of China, their population lives through the European inheritance and live in a capitalist system, which in case of Hong Kong grants many concentrated wealth, for example, in it’s trade and it’s banks. 

Personally I am thinking of declaring war to my neighbor and do an exclave of my house in his bathroom, to receive charge from him to enter it … it would be a profitable business

The 19^th century in Europe consisted in a series of events that created a demand of diplomats who knew how to manage country’s affairs in politics. Two big names that reoccur in History when a talk of politics is occurring are the names of Klemens von Metternich and Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand who did not only influenced their own times, but their political legacy continues to affect the world today.

Truth is that without the actions of either Talleyrand or Metternich in Europe, democracy and representative government might have prevailed in Europe many decades before autocratic kings, were forced to become constitutional monarchs; if they did not desire to do that, they were forced to abdicate.

Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord was born in Paris in February 1754 into a family background of ancient nobility, wealth, and power, and with his father holding a high rank in the French Royal army. Clemens Wenzel Nepomuk Lothar von Metternich-Winneburg was born into an aristocratic family on May 15th, 1773, in Coblenz, Germany. His father Count Francis George was involved in diplomatic circles and, at the time of his son Clemens’ birth, was in the service of the Habsburgs of Austria.

Talleyrand (Rise on his political career)

While Talleyrand showed several brilliant mental talent, he didn’t showed moral or purpose into his “calling” for the church. However even though he did not fondly enjoyed his way towards church, he did obtain several benefits from joining the church. He obtained an abbacy in the year of his ordination. He was appointed agent general for the clergy in the year of 1780, within this job he found a good and lucrative job, which serve him as a connection to the government. That way Talleyrand was able to get a serious apprenticeship in pubic business. The truth is that Talleyrand led a notorious or scandalous life. The thing about Talleyrand is that he owned a certain of unique and personal administrative abilities, which secured him a job as a bishop in Autun (City in France). He was a representative of diocese (remember he did enjoy public business, but he went into church first), in the States-General of 1789. He favored uniting with the Third Estate (The commoners, which were the majority), smart strategy because a mad majority causes great loyal support. That way he won the good will of the popular party. He was one of the commissions to draw up a constitution for the nation. He then looked for was better for him and that idea did not matched the churches’ idea. “The Representatives of the French people, organized in National Assembly, considering that ignorance, forgetfulness, or contempt of the rights of man are the sole causes of public miseries and the corruption of governments, have resolved to set forth in a solemn declaration the natural, inalienable, and sacred rights of man, so that this declaration, being ever present to all the members of the social body, may unceasingly remind them of their rights and duties; in order that the acts of the legislative power, and those of the executive power, may at each moment be compared with the aim and of every political institution and thereby may be more respected; and in order that the demands of the citizens, grounded henceforth upon simple and incontestable principles, may always take the direction of maintaining the constitution and welfare of all”(Kreis, 2014). Talleyrand assisted the framing the Declaration of Rights and proposed the confiscation of Church property as belonging of right to the nation. And then obviously became very popular in publics relation and became President of the National Assembly, but popular and not in good reasons to the church. Excommunicated by the Pope and compelled to resign as a bishop. Later he was sent to London because he was ordered to conciliate with England and was named an émigré. He remained in England a yea and then spent a year in the United States. He argued his returned to France and later returned to Paris. He attached himself to a group of constitutionalists and later was named Minister of Foreign Affairs. Talleyrand who was a smart person saw the significance of the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte attached himself to the young Corsican, and became his ally and confidant in the coup of the 18th Brumaire. When that coup did not work he directed his efforts towards consolidating the power and authority of his master. In diplomatic negotiations following the victories of France under the Consulate he had a principal part and vote in the establishment of the Empire. For that he was named Prince of Benevento. He knew that Napoleon was digging his own grave, and he opposed Napoleon policy regarding England. To keep a low profile he laid down his office as Foreign Minister and after some intriguing retired from active life (1809), residing on his estates and preparing for the situation to calm down. His influence grew with the advance of the allied armies, and after the French and Europe rose against Napoleon.Talleyrand dictated to the Senate the terms of the deposition of Napoleon, and on the restoration of the Bourbons he became Minister of Foreign Affairs in the first government of Louis XVIII. 

Metternich (Rise on his political career)

Metternich is a whole different situation, but quite similar in a way that through intelligence and ambitions they rise up and became very influential people. Metternich came to influence when in 1795 he married the granddaughter of Kaunitz, by doing this he acquired large estates. His career at politics began when he participated at the Congress of Rastadt, representing Westphalian lordly houses. He got to a position of power were he became and Austrian ambassador at Dresden, he later continued on the path of embassy’s and he was appointed ambassador to the Prussian court. There he negotiated an alliance between Austria, Prussia and Russia Vs. France in 1805. He visited his enemy France and went to Paris as an ambassador a year later. 4 years later he climbed in politics’ power and became Minister of Foreign Affairs (both Talleyrand and Metternich were foreign affairs of their own countries).  As a Minister of Foreign Affairs he concluded the Treaty of Schönbrunn with France. He also played an important key into marrying Archduchess Maria Louisa to Napoleon. Both Talleyrand and Metternich decided that Napoleon would only give them trouble and turned down some of their plans. He guided Austria throughout their famous difficulties 1812-13 and he was amicable with France, but later Napoleon seemed obnoxious and very arrogant, which led him to for the Quadruple Alliance and state war against France. The quadruple alliance was “first formed in 1813, during the final phase of the Napoleonic Wars, by Britain, Russia, Austria, and Prussia, for the purpose of defeating Napoleon”( Haglund ,2014).

When Napoleon was defeated and with him France, he exerted himself from the alliance because he thought that with France’s defeat, France and some enemies may try to keep France out of its original limits. After some years and some congress, he went to England and formed a new Quadruple Alliance for the preservation of the peace of Europe. 

Congress of Vienna for both

“The Congress of Vienna was held from September of 1814 to June of 1815. After the downfall of Napoleon Bonaparte, this international conference was called to create a balance among the European powers in such a way so as to prevent future wars and maintain peace and stability on the European continent. The means of achieving this goal would be through a major reshaping of European interior borders.”(Baig,1999). So basically the idea of this whole quote is to let you understand that diplomats were reuniting to redraw the boarders of Europe, yes again.

In here Metternich had way more advantage than Talleyrand because he was the mediator of the Congress of Vienna and Talleyrand was the representative of France a country that just had one of its mayor losses with Napoleon. Both diplomats had to think carefully on what they needed and wanted. Metternich knew the unbalance and disorder that eliminating France would have caused, that’s why he Along with Castlereagh, Metternich opposed the elimination of France. He knew that Russian should be kept from having too much control. He desired for Europe to be peaceful for many years. Talleyrand was at very much whole disadvantage but when Metternich decided that he didn’t want to eliminate France, that sort of gave him a little ground to step on. Besides he fully understand one of the basics of politics persuasion and managed to divide the Allies and to keep France in one piece. He formed and alliance with Britain and Austria; that way these 3 powerful countries managed to keep the land of france untuchoed with the exception that the land conquered by Napoleon retourned to their original owners.

I would say that throughout their whole careers they shared several characteristics; they were both smart men that knew what they wanted. They were diplomats that knew how to persuade people to the point of turning things around for them. They shared and ambition of making a name for themselves and having people respecting that name. I would say that Metternich was a more of a safe player or lets say knowing boundaries, while Talleyrand was a little bolder. They were both masters of persuasion, both made a living out of it and both are founders of what modern politics is all about. 

References:

“Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen” (August1789). (n.d.). “Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen” (August1789). Retrieved March 13, 2014, from

http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/declaration.html

Congress of Vienna – Definition of Congress of Vienna. (n.d.). Congress of Vienna – Definition of Congress of Vienna. Retrieved March 13, 2014, from http://www.yourdictionary.com/congress-of-vienna

Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand 1754-1838. (n.d.). Emerson Kent. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.emersonkent.com/history_notes/charles_maurice_de_talleyrand.htm

Prince Klemens von Metternich . (n.d.). Emerson Kent. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.emersonkent.com/history_notes/klemens_von_metternich.htm

The diplomacy of MetternichThe Congress of Vienna. (n.d.). Metternich & Napoleon diplomacy Congress of Vienna. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/historical/biography/metternich.html

The diplomacy of TalleyrandCongress of Vienna. (n.d.). The diplomacy of Talleyrand Congress of Vienna. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/historical/biography/talleyrand.html

Talleyrand and the Congress of Vienna. (n.d.). Talleyrand and the Congress of Vienna. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://niterose.tersonodesign.com/trand.html

Obnoxious Princes: Talleyrand and Metternich Dominated Early 19th Century Europe But Are Forgotten Today | Frank Sanello | Article/Story/Poem/Essay | Red Room. (n.d.). Obnoxious Princes: Talleyrand and Metternich Dominated Early 19th Century Europe But Are Forgotten Today | Frank Sanello | Article/Story/Poem/Essay | Red Room. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://redroom.com/member/frank-sanello/writing/obnoxious-princes-talleyrand-and-metternich-dominated-early-19th-century-europe-but-are-forgotten-t

PERSONALITIES AT THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA. (n.d.). Staff. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://staff.gps.edu/mines/French%20Revolution-%20CofV%20Personalities.htm

Prince Clemens Wenzel Nepomuck Lothar Metternich biography. (n.d.). Prince Clemens Wenzel Nepomuck Lothar Metternich biography. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.dromo.info/metternichbio.htm

Charles Maurice Talleyrand-Périgord biography. (n.d.). Charles Maurice Talleyrand-Périgord biography. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.dromo.info/talleyrandbio.htm

European History Web Collection. (n.d.). European History Web Collection. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://www.webring.org/l/rd?ring=europeanhist;id=31;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww

Quadruple Alliance. (n.d.). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved March 15, 2014, from http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/485958/Quadruple-Alliance

The Congress of Vienna. (n.d.). Congress of Vienna: 1814-1815. Retrieved March 14, 2014, from http://www.thenagain.info/webchron/remove

King George was the number 52 in line to the throne, but he was the only one that fit in to do the job because there was a succession crisis, which basically means that the succession line order was a mess and everyone was panicking because they did not knew who the heir was going to be. George I was able to become king just for the reason that he was a protestant and had nothing to do with religion. He came from Germany and had 0 knowledge on English or English affairs for that matter. It was a crisis because most of the viable candidates for being kings or queens where catholic, that’s why they went to an extreme of bringing a foreigner to reign and they only did that to fit the expectative. It was a succession crisis, because they did not knew who would’ve reign at that time.

We know that from history many Relations between members of royal families, are not as good as they should be, I mean family is killing and betraying family in order to gain power. In this case since George the first was not very liked by the people because he simply never got the interest to learn more about their culture, his son George the second did, he learned English and how to manage English affairs. His father was extremely jealous of his son’s popularity. Because George ii and his wife Caroline were doing a good impression, and he on the other hand wasn’t. So in normal terms the king was very upset because everyone seemed to like his son better than him. You would say that is not very important, but guess what people killed themselves for less at those times. 

Honestly the main reason of why I like this painting is because this woman is named Saskia and she was painted by her husband Rembrandt, the thing that I love about this painting is that Saskia appears laughing or like hiding a smile, those were not common for the paintings of that time, usually all those people appeared with a serious stern. I like to thing that even with all those elegant rules, this shows us that they were human too, and they laugh and love, if that makes any sense. I know I little about paint because I do appreciate even though I am not gifted with it. But even if I didn’t knew a thing you can see de delicious lighting and hidden color of this paint. 

Now on the more technical side of my investigation. 

Artist: Rembrandt

Completion Date: 1633

Style: Baroque

Genre: Portrait

Technique: Oil

Material: Panel

Dimensions: 53 x 45 cm

This is not the only painting that Rembrandt did of his wife, I like that too, even with the serious and business taste that marriages were done back then, there are investigations and letters that show that they really did love each other. Even when she died, he never painted another portrait of woman that I observed that gave me that feeling. 

It is just ridiculous to think that people at one point actually believe in killing thousands of people because they count recite the word of god or because they sometimes didn’t drown when thrown on water. Its fascinating for me to see how when someone with power dictates that something is wrong, a lot of people will follow willingly and without investigating anything.

Their government and their churches told them that witchcraft existed in such a way and in people that did certain things, that people actually wholeheartedly believe them without giving those people the befit of doubt. The truth is that many people accused others simply because they were labeled as “difficult” and they didn’t wanted to deal with them, or because they were jealous or wanted revenge, either way it was the perfect excuse to get rid of someone you didn’t like because “witchcraft” as it was portrayed in those years was easily proven (but with actions that normal humans do”).

The thing about witchcraft those days, as cruel as it must have been, the church has always done things that were really cruel and blind, and years later the accept their mistakes, but people don’t loose their fait on church.

I must admit witchcraft has given Hollywood an endless amount of material to work it. Anyway, heretics some history about it:

Witchcraft,  sorcery, magic, whatever can only begin to find  its roots  when we go back as far as Mesopotamia.

The Christian community has never been fond in anything that’s goes against its beliefs, that being said witchcraft in old times was one of the worst things that Christians could practice, because they turned themselves to the devil, going against all their religion.  The inquisition first had its focus on Jews and heretics, but later on they focused themselves in eliminating the so-called witches.

In  1484 Pope Innocent VIII issued a bull, where it said that witches existed and that they should be eliminated.  From then on it all went to hell, church authorities tortured the crap out of women for presumed witchcraft,  IT WAS DUMB I mean when I say that they tortured the crap out of women, it mean exactly that the tortures were so bad that they finally admitted being witches (probably because of desperation) and they were hang or burned to their deaths. Most “witches” were woman and there were a few man convicted of this.

I honestly am a girl of many believes and I am not saying that witchcraft never existed in any level, I am just saying that the choice to decide what to do with your life should be free. And the church makes mistakes, we know that by fact and it killed many innocent people just assuming they were witches.

To know a little more about witchcraft. 

      Wiccan Rede

                       Bide ye wiccan laws you must,
                     in perfect love and perfect trust
                       Live ye must and let to live,
                        fairly take and fairly give
                        For the circle thrice about
                       to keep unwelcome spirits out
                     To bind ye spell well every time,
                      let the spell be spake in rhyme
                      Soft of eye and light of touch,
                       speak ye little, listen much
                       Deosil go by the waxing moon,
                       chanting out ye baleful tune
                        When ye Lady's moon is new,
                       kiss ye hand to her times two
                      When ye moon rides at her peak,
                        then ye heart's desire seek
                     Heed the north winds mighty gale,
                      lock the door and trim the sail
                    When the wind comes from the south,
                     love will kiss thee on the mouth
                    When the wind blows from the east,
                     expect the new and set the feast.
                      Nine woods in the cauldron go,
                     burn them fast and burn them slow
                         Elder be ye Lady's tree,
                      burn it not or cursed ye'll be
                      WHen the wheel begins to turn,
                      soon ye Beltane fires will burn
                     When the wheel hath turned a Yule
                    light the log the Horned One rules
                      Heed ye flower, bush and tree,
                          by the Lady blessed be
                       Where the rippling waters go,
                    cast a stone, the truth ye'll know
                       When ye have and hold a need,
                        harken not to others greed
                       With a fool no season spend,
                        or be counted as his friend
                        Merry meet and merry part,
                   bright the cheeks and warm the heart.
                      Mind ye threefold law ye should
                   three times bad and three times good
                         When misfortune is enow,
                        wear the star upon thy brow
                        True in love my ye ever be,
                      lest thy love be false to thee
                These eight words the wiccan rede fulfill;
                     An harm ye none, do what ye will.

You can call this chapter of my life peacefulness.

Is funny how being a women in a house of men of power and thrones can lead to such a life, but life does not give you what you want and you don’t choose family. I guess you can say whatever you want about anyone, everyone chooses what to show and everyone sees what he or she wants. There are always going to be persons in life that are treated quite unfairly, for various reasons. I guess I’m one of them or I am not? Well that’s your decision to make, your point of view to choose. The next words are the story of my life the way I lived it, you can either believe it or not, either way I will not care.  Throughout my life I’ve been accused of poisoner, political instigator and other things that I would rather not mention. You may or not know me, anyway choose what you’ll like to believe and what not; I promise I would not judge you. My name is Lucrezia Borgia.

I was born the 18 of April on the year of 1480, on Subiaco a little town near Rome.  I am the third of 4 children, needed to say I am the only girl. My father is Rodrigo Borgia and my mother is Giovanna Vannozza Cattanei.  My dear brothers are Juan, Caesar and Gioffre; together we composed The Borgia Family.

My childhood was the same as any noble girl from the time being, I was educated in Rome by Adriana de Milà my strict aunt who I love but honestly she was a pain sometimes.  I was taught arts, literature, music, dance and Latin. This I was taught was for my best education as a noble family I must learn this so I could get and honorable husband. During all these time I learned beside my most beloved brother Caesar, these later would bite us on the ass; people say that him and me were having a relation beyond brothers, but enough about that.

As the only girl on the family I was designated to be on on arranged marriages to strengthen the family power and position. When I was 10 I had my very first real scare when my father told me that I was to marry Querubí Joan de Centelles a disgusting friend of the Counts of Olivia, thank god that commitment was to be broke. My father months later gave my hand to Gaspar Pròixida, The Count of Almenara, but my father became Pope in 1492, which ended my engagement and change my life forever. I’m being completely honest with al of you therefore I do need to tell you that my marriages did mark a big part of my life and the reason to the gossip and drama novel which I call life.

This chapter of my life is called a bloody mess.

My father became pope in August 11, 1942 and renamed himself Alejandro VI. My father became greedy with power because he was the head of the Christian church; he knew that he could arrange myself into a powerful marriage due to his position. He went with Giovanni Sforza, Lord of Pesaro and nephew of the Duke of Milan, Ludovico IL Moro. He was 26 and I was 13… thirteen. We got married on June 12 on the year of 1493 on the Vatican. I know they only did it because they wanted to keep Milan the uncle of Giovanni on the circle of the pope’s power. My father told me that if he did not did this, Milan will accept the alliance that the king of France Carlos the VIII offered him, and then my dear home would be invaded, I had no will and no choice. Honestly it wasn’t that bad, I mean he was good with me and I guess you can call him a friend, well I thought he was anyway. The thing is Giovanni liked men, so therefore he was a good person to me and never treated me in a sexualized way. The marriage was never consumed.  I lived 4 relative peaceful years with Giovanni between Rome and Pésaro, but on the year of 1947 Milan the uncle of Giovanni formed an alliance with France, so my marriage I was told, was no longer convenient for my father. So the presence of my then husband was a danger on the Vatican. My brother once told me that my father had Giovanni killed, but I was too afraid to ask or to find out. I told Giovanni this and he left Rome and me and went to Milan to take refuge with his uncle. My father did not expect Giovanni reacting like that and living so soon, so I learned that he made other plans to eliminate him, with the help of my brother Caesar. My father convinced Giovanni’s uncle the cardinal Ascanio Sforza to give his consentient for our divorce, but Giovanni did not accepted that. So my father knowing that the marriage was never consumed. He used this as his weapon and argument to separate the marriage, giving me a full batch as compensation. Giovanni still did not wanted to divorce so the Sforza’s told him that if he did not agree on those terms, they would removed the legal protection from my family so my father could conspire against him, knowing this Giovanni didn’t wanted to take these risks and he signed our divorce saying that we never consumed the marriage a couple of months later.

I’d like to say that Giovanni didn’t do anything to harm me, I would. But he is the one that pushed the snowball down the hill. He said that the reason that the marriage was never consumed to be my father taking me as his lover, creating dysfunctional rumors around the whole Vatican.

I haven’t talked my son I guess I should. During the whole divorce process my father and brother decided that it was best if I was sent to a monastery, in which shortly after my divorce I gave birth to a boy named Giovanni Borgia or as the people call him Infans Romanus. Since I never consumed my marriage with Giovanni I’d like to clear something up my son’s father is Perotto Calderón my father’s messenger, I’m not proud of it, but neither ashamed. My father never really did care how I felt about my reputation this being said he started a tumultuous gossiping that would follow me for life by trying to hide that I gave birth, and by stating that my brother Caesar had a child with and unidentified women. That didn’t stop the people to say that Caesar and me had an incestuous relationship and the result of it was my little Giovanni. During this time I was the seventeen year old whore mother who slept with his brother while I was still married and gave birth to a child. I guess you know the truth now. What you’re about to know, is that any of this stopped my father to arrange me into another marriage just a couple of moths after all of this mess. What a family right?

This chapter of my life I would like to call, happiness perhaps? 

After the disaster that my marriage with Giovanni had turned out to be, my father search for better and more powerful connections. He was ambitious with power and that led me no more or less than to the house of the Aragón. Rulers of Naples and blood relatives of the Catholic Monarchs. My next husband would be Alfonso of Aragon, Duke of Bisceglie. The Naples and me had a lot to do with my family and we shall form a double alliance, my brother Gioffre married the elder sister of my husband Alfonso four years later.

Alfonso did really love me or so I think, he has to be one of the noblest men that I have ever met throughout my life, good looking too. He was a good-hearted man and I was happy, he even won my jealous brother Caesar his friendship. In all honesty it did not end that good as it could have, we were a strange triangle, triangle in friendship and love is not a good combo. During our times keeping an alliance strong and faithful is very difficult if not impossible and my family alliance and the Aragón would not last long. For years my family had been an enemy to the French, but when my brother travelled to France the king welcomed him with open arms and he entitled him as the Duque of Valentinois and even arranged him a French wife Carlota de Albret. Luis the XII wanted to conquered Alfonsos’s reign, The Naples. My brother Caesar arranged my dear Alfonsos’s elimination.

A tragic night of July on the year of 1500, my poor Alfonso was brutally assaulted by some strangers while he was taking a walk by the Vatican Gardens, because he was a strong and robust men he lived. He was taking that night to my quarters, I never thought I’d see men so beaten up; nevertheless my husband, and I nursed him back to health.  Alfonso suspected that my brother had him beat up, so he ordered some of his men to shoot him on the garden, but they failed. Later that week Caesar waited for me and Sancha to leave the room and then one of his men strangled my husband to death. I’d never expected to find an arranged marriage to make me as happy as Alfonso did, but I did and when I lost that I felt like a peace of me was lost. I never forgave Caesar for what he did, I mean I loved him with all my heart but a part of me wanted me hate him.  The rumors began again and the people gossip about how Caesar’s jealousy made him killed Alfonso, I guessed it was a combination of power and jealousy. I must say that I had one child with my dear Alfonso whom I called Rodrigo Aragón.

This chapter of my life I decided to call The Second Alfonso.

On the next months after my husband’s death I had to dealt with grief and the role of taking care and administrate the church and the Vatican. By doing this I was harshly criticized because let’s face it I was a women in charge of big role. Like I didn’t had enough with one Alfonso my father arranged for me to marry Alfonso d’Este, eldest son of Ercole d’Este and Duke of Ferrara. Our wedding plans continue and we got married on February 2th on the year of 1502. They arranged my marriage for powers on the Vatican and once married I left Rome and went to live to Ferrara my new home. I would never see my father or brother alive.

I was never to be as happy as I was on my second marriage but with my third husband I found balance, peace. On the court of Ferrara I found refined educated artists, who I protected and learned to care about.  On that court I met Pietro Bembo a great artist whom which I learned to love and I must admit that I did have an affair with him, but that too I don’t regret.  I also maintained a very good relationship with my sister in law Isabella d’Este, the sister of Alfonso.

My father got poisoned and died on July 18 on the sad year of 1503. This led me to have a delicate situation with my family enemy’s. But I didn’t stopped caring about my family, not at all. I abrogated for my brother’s life several times, which was in prison for a certain time in Italy and Spain.

My dearest brother, my Caesar died on combat on the year of 1507 on the 13 of March on Viana. I cannot explain through words the pain that I felt, when I was told this tragic news, he was only 31. The only thing keeping me together was that I am a mom and for that reason I continue the best way I could with my patronage. My husband continues fighting the Vatican and honestly I don’t know how it is going to end. We already have 7 kids and right now I’m pregnant.

I do not write this so that people change their opinions in me, I’m content with who I turned out to be, I’m not fully happy but that’s fine. I write this to the people that want to know and see the full picture. I do not ask you reader to believe me, is your choice. This is my story and I felt like it needed to be told. I am Lucrezia Borgia.

Anonymous ending.

I am writing anonymously because I am one of those persons who wanted to see the full picture, to understand. I knew Lucrezia and I read her self written story, if you believed her like I do, you may want to know her ending. Eventually, the family d’Este end up losing the Duchy of Ferrara at the hands of the Vatican, although that would be years after the death of Lucrezia Borgia. She did after giving birth to her last daughter Isabella Maria, during the birth when Lucrezia contracted fevers that lead to death, on June 24, 1519. She was only 39. Like Lucrezia said you may choose whatever opinion you feel to have but before you do just let me give you an advice, never judge a book by its cover, much less Lucrezia Borgia.

-THE END-