By the peace of Paris (1814) it passed with Belgium to Holland; but it took an active part in the movement for the separation of the two kingdoms, and after the separation was accomplished (1830) continued to be the headquarters of the agitation of the Orange party. On the recommendation of the duke of 1Vellington, who visited the town in 1821 to give his opinion on the plans, a new citadel was erected according to the designs of M. Gey van l’ittius (15:22—18:50).
See Jean de 'l‘hielrode, ('lu‘onique de St Baron; Snndcrus, l'erhcarlykl l'lacnderen; De .lnnghe. (Izmllsche Gtsrhiedmissm, 17-16: Diericx. Topographic (1e l'ancimne ville dc (laud (Ghent, 1808), Me'moires sur la ville dc (lam! (Ghent, 1814—15. 5 vols), .lle'm. sur les lois. dc, des Ganlois (Ghent, 1317—15), Me'm. sur le Ill-oil j-ublic de la I'flle do Gand (Ghent. 1819), and He! Gentsch (,‘Iml'lcrboerlye (Ghent, 1326); Gachnrd, Relations des troubles dc (land sous Charles Quint (Brussels, 18-14—5, 3 vols.); 1’. C. Van dcr Meersch, Memorienboek der Slat! Ghmt (Ghent. 15-32:); and “ )léinoire sur la ville de Gnnd conside’rée comme place dc guerrc," in .lle'moires L'ouronne's dc l‘aaul, royale d! Belgique, tom. xxv, 15:71—53 _1h'usscls, 18-34); C. L. Gyselynck, Guide de (a rifle de Gum! pre'cc'de' June notice historlque, (Ghent, n. (1.).
GHENT, Jodocus, or Justus, of (1465–75). The public records of the city of Ghent have been diligently searched, but in vain, for a clue to the history of Justus or Jodocus, whom Vasari and Guicciardini called Giusto da Guanto. Flemish annalists of the 16th century have enlarged upon the scanty statements of Vasari, and described Jodocus as a pupil of Hubert Van Eyck. But there is no source to which this fable can be traced. The registers of St Luke’s guild at Ghent comprise six masters of the name of Joos or Jodocus who practised at Ghent in the 15th century. But none of the works of these masters have been preserved, and it is impossible to compare their style with that of Giusto. It was between 1465 and 1474 that this artist executed the Communion of the Apostles which Vasari has described, and modern critics now see to the best advantage in the museum of Urbino. It was painted for the brotherhood of Corpus Christi at the bidding of Frederick of Montefeltro, who was introduced into the picture as the companion of Caterino Zeno, a Persian envoy at that time on a mission to the court of Urbino. From this curious production it may be seen that Giusto, far from being a pupil of Hubert Van Eyck, was merely a disciple of a later and less gifted master, who took to Italy some of the peculiarities of his native schools, and forthwith commingled them with those of his adopted country. As a composer and draughtsman Giusto compares unfavourably with the better known painters of Flanders; though his portraits are good, his ideal figures are not remarkable for elevation of type or for subtlety of character and expression. His work is technically on a level with that of Gerard of St John, whose pictures are preserved in the Belvedere at Vienna. Vespasian, a Florentine bookseller who contributed much to form the antiquarian taste of Frederick of Montefeltro, states that this duke sent to the Netherlands for a capable artist to paint a series of “ ancient worthies ” for a library recently erected in the palace of Urbino. It has been conjectured that the author of these “worthies,” which are still in existence at the Louvre and in the Barberini palace at Rome, was Giusto. Yet there are notable divergences between these pictures and the Communion of the Apostles. Still, it is not beyond the range of probability that Giusto should have been able, after a certain time, to temper his Flemish style by studying the masterpieces of Santi and Melozzo, and so to acquire the mixed manner of the Flemings and Italians which these portraits of worthies display. Such an assimilation, if it really took place, might justify the Flemings in the indulgence of a certain pride, considering that Raphael not only admired these worthies, but copied them in the sketch book which is now the ornament of the Venetian Academy. There is no ground for presuming that Giusto da Guanto is identical with Justus d’Allamagna who painted the Annunication (1451) in the cloisters of Santa Maria di Castello at Genoa. The drawing and colouring of this wall painting shows that Justus d’Allamagna was as surely a native of South Germanv as his homonym at Urbino was a born N etherlander.
GHERARDESCA, Ugolino Della (c. 1220–1289), count of Donoratico and head of the Gherardeschi, one of the leading Ghibelline houses of Pisa, began to take part in public affairs about the time when the dissensions which had arisen about the partition of Sardinia had resulted in sending over the entire clan of the Pisan Visconti to the Guelphs. For having given his sister in marriage to one. of these—Giovanni Visconti of Gallura—he was banished from Pisa by his own party, who seem to have had good reason otherwise for suspecting his loyalty ,' but he was permitted to return in terms of the peace of 1267. Notwithstanding the ambiguous character of his politics, he soon succeeded in gaining a high place in the public service of his native city; and in the battle of Meloria (6th August 1284), which terminated the long war with Genoa, he was one of the three Pisan admirals. It was by his cowardly or traitorous flight at a critical moment, it is said, that the contest was decided in favour of the Genoese; but, be this as it may, whether by means of his treachery, or in spite of it, he almost immediately afterwards (October 1284) was nominated by the citizens who remained to the twofold office of capitano and podesta for one year; and some months afterwards (February 1285) this term was extended to ten years. In this capacity of virtual dictator he, by the banishment of ten leading Ghibelline citizens of Pisa, secured peace with the Florentines; he also endeavoured to propitiate the Genoese by the offer of Castro in Sardinia, and the Lucchese by the actual surrender of Ripafratta and Viarreggio, but unsuccessfully. Meanwhile, though thoroughly alienated from the Ghibellines, he had not succeeded in gaining the confidence of the Guelphs; and in 1287 he was by them compelled to associate with himself in the government Nino Visconti, a nephew by the marriage already referred to, who had now reached manhood. But this arrangement was rendered nugatory by the disagreements of the two colleagues, and Ugolino found it necessary to resign his office in December of the same year. In his unscrupulous ambition after personal ascendency he now turned for support to the party he had so long deserted, and entered into an alliance with the Gualandi, Sismondi, Lanfranchi, and other uncompromising Ghibellines, who looked upon the archbishop Ruggiero degli Ubaldini as their head. But this unnatural combination soon terminated in an open rupture, the immediate occasion of which was the violence of Ugolino, who, on some sudden provocation, had killed a nephew of the archbishop. In August 1288 he was beset in the Palazzo del Popolo by the Ghibellines, and, after fire had been set to the building, taken prisoner, along with his sons Gaddo and Ugoccione, and his grand- sons Nino (surnamed Brigatto) and Anselmuccio. (Some accounts mention a third grandson, named Henry.) After having been confined for twenty days in the Palazzo del Comune, they were removed to the Gualandi’s Tower, Alle Sette Vie, afterwards called the Torre della Fame. Here they were kept till March 1289, when, by order of the archbishop, the door was locked and the keys thrown into the Arno. Nine days afterwards the tower was re-entered and the bodies removed to the church of San Francisco.
The story of Ugolino, though it is to be met with in other contemporary writers (see Villani, vii. CC. 120, 127), owes all its fame to Dante, who has placed him above Ruggiero on the inner margin of the second division (Antenora) of the ninth and lowest circle of his Inferno. Dante’s powerful narrative, which includes “thirty lines unequalled by any other thirty in the whole dominions of poetry” (Landor), has been paraphrased, or rather almost translated, by Chaucer, in the Monk’s Talc, and has also been reproduced in modern times by Shelley. It ought to be Observed, however, with reference to l'golino’s alleged treachery, that the baser ex- planation of his conduct at Meloria is not to be met with in any doemnent earlier than the 16th century; while with regard to the accusation of having sold the fortresses of Pisa to the Lucchese and Florentines, Dante, though evidently himself believing it, does not say more than that he “ was alleged ” (aveva voee) to have done so.
