Count Marescotti, the Red count (the marchesa had said sans-culotte; Trenta had spoken of him as an atheist), was, unhappily, something of all this, but he was much more.  He was a poet, an orator, and a patriot.  Nature had gifted him with qualities for each vocation.  He had a rich, melodious voice, with soft inflections; large dark eyes, that kindled with the impress of every emotion; finely-cut features, and a pale, bloodless face, that tells of a passionate nature.  His manners were gracious, and he had a commanding presence.  He was born to be a leader among men.  Not only did he converse with ease and readiness on every conceivable topic—­not only did strophe after strophe of musical verse flow from his lips with the facility of an improvisatore, but he possessed the supreme art of moving the multitude by an eloquence born of his own impassioned soul.  While that suave voice rung in men’s ears, it was impossible not to be convinced by his arguments.  As a patriot, he worshiped Italy.  His fervid imagination reveled in her natural beauties—­art, music, history, poetry.  He worshiped Italy, and he devoted his whole life to what he conceived to be her good.

Marescotti was no atheist; he was a religious reformer, sincerely and profoundly pious, and conscientious to the point of honor.  Indeed, his conscience was so sensitive, that he had been known to confess two and three times on the same day.  The cavaliere called him an atheist because he was a believer in Savonarola, and because he positively refused to bind himself to any priestly dogma, or special form of worship whatever.  But he had never renounced the creed of his ancestors.  The precepts of Savonarola did, indeed, afford him infinite consolation; they were to him a via media between Protestant latitude and dogmatic belief.

The republican simplicity, stern morals, and sweeping reforms both in Church and state preached by Savonarola (reforms, indeed, as radical as were consistent with Catholicism), were the objects of his special reverence.  Savonarola had died at the stake for practising and for teaching them; Marescotti declared, with characteristic enthusiasm, that he was ready to do likewise.  Wrong or right, he believed that, if Savonarola had lived in the nineteenth century, he would have acted as he himself had done.  In the same manner, although an avowed republican, he was no sans-culotte. His strong sense of personal independence and of freedom, political and religious, caused him to revolt against what he conceived tyranny or coercion of any kind.  Even constitutional monarchy was not sufficiently free for him.  A king and a court, the royal prerogative of ministers, patent places, pensions, favors, the unacknowledged influence of a reigning house—­represented to his mind a modified system of tyranny—­therefore of corruption.  Constant appeals to the sovereign people, a form of government where the few yielded to the many, and the rich divided their riches voluntarily with the poor—­was in theory what he advocated.