Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:27:01.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Three Meditations on the Destruction of Vergil's Statue: The Early Humanist Theory of Poetry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Alan Fisher
Alan Fisher*
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On the last day of August, 1397, Carlo Malatesta, Count of Rimini and commander of the Florentine League, won a battle outside Mantua. He entered the city and shortly afterward ordered the destruction of a statue of Vergil which had stood there “for centuries” upon the poet's tomb. In Bologna and Florence, humanists were alarmed. Carlo was no ordinary military vandal: he was a cultivated man, trained in the virtues of the bonae litterae; members of his family had been friends with Petrarch; the chief men of his league were enthusiastic about the new literary culture. Yet here he was, desecrating the memory of the king of poets. To desecrate Vergil was to desecrate poetry itself—or so the humanists construed it when they responded to the event.

Type
Studies
Information
Renaissance Quarterly , Volume 40 , Issue 4 , Winter 1987 , pp. 607 - 635
Copyright
Copyright © Renaissance Society of America 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Epistolario di Pier Paulo Vergerio, ed. Leonardo Smith (Rome, 1934), pp. 189-202; Robey, D. J. B., “Virgil's Statue at Mantua and the Defence of Poetry,” Rinascimento, Ser. 2, 9 (1969), 183–203 Google Scholar; and Epistolario di Coluccio Salutati, ed. Francesco Novati, 4 vols (Rome, 1891-1911), III, 285-308. All translation from these documents is my own, but see the translation of Salutati's letter by Ronald Witt, G. in The Earthly Republic: Italian Humanists on Government and Society (Philadelphia, 1978), pp. 93–114.Google Scholar

2 Reported in Vergerio's letter, Smith ed., p. 196.

3 For a survey of Roman, patristic, and medieval attitudes toward stage entertainers, see Barish, Jonas, The Antitheatrical Prejudice (Berkeley, 1981), chaps, ii and iii.Google Scholar References to actors are almost universally derogatory, often intensely so, with a violence that Barish describes as close to mad.

4 A free translation. The Latin is “quasi ioculatores res gestas personatis habitibus representantes,” which Witt translates as “players representing actions in appropriate costume” (Earthly Republic, p. 94). I am giving ioculator its literal and more negative meaning, and I take personatis habitibus to be an ablative absolute: “the characteristics of [that action at the time] counterfeited in an assumed character. Witt seems to take the phrase as an ablative of means, where habitus would mean “clothing,” not general character, and personatis would qualify it: “of a counterfeit sort.” The passage is a crux, and it is hard to translate; I offer my translation because I think it reflects more closely what Salutati took to be the dangers in Carlo's opinion.

5 Novati ed., III, 288: “novum profecto detractionis genus, verum si secundum communem acceptionem histriones vult esse poetas, quasi ioculatores res gestas personatis habitibus representantes, supino tenetur errore. poete quidem non gesticulantur, sed gesticulanda componunt; qui non minus ab histrionibus differunt, quam a simiis homines, nam cum simie plurimum hominibus similentur et quadam naturali aptitudine multa que faciunt homines imitentur, taliter attamen ab hominibus differunt, quod, cum homo sit pulcerrimum animantium, simia sit turpius; … ”

6 Novati ed., III, 288: “sin autem forte voluerit quod poete dicendi sint histriones, quoniam in laudando sicut iocularii modum excedant, non minus errare dicendus est, quoniam in hoc laudandi genere nulla prorsus sit inter ipsos de laudatione consensio.”

7 Poetics 1448b25; ed. and trans. Gerald Else (Ann Arbor, 1967; rpt. 1970), p. 21.

8 “Aristotle says: Since imitators and makers of likenesses wished through their art to impel people toward certain choices and discourage them from others, they had to treat subjects that, being represented, would suggest either virtues or vices. All action and character are concerned with one of these two—that is, virtue or vice… . Since all ‘likening’ and representation occurs through showing the proper or the improper or base, it is evident that representation aims at nothing but the encouragement of what is proper and the rejection of what is base. Necessarily, then, there are imitators of virtue—that is, men who naturally incline to representing the more virtuous and better sorts of men—and imitators of evil, who are less perfect and nearer to evil men. From these two kinds of men, praise and blame arose—that is, praise of good men and blame of bad ones.” “The Middle Commentary of Averroes of Cordova on the Poetics of Aristotle,,” Latin trans, by Hermannus Alemannus (1256), English trans. Hardison, O. B. Jr., in Classical and Medieval Literary Criticism: Translations and Interpretations, ed. Preminger, Alex, Hardison, O. B. Jr., and Kerrane, Kevin (New York, 1974), p. 351.Google Scholar

9 Novatied., III, 289: “delectant enim gloria collaudati, quoniam, … nulla tanta sit humilitas, que glorie dulcedine non tangatur. prodest et hec eisdem, non nichil efficacius ad firmandum animos in virtutibus et in rebus bene gestis premio laudationis.”

10 Novati ed., III, 289: “quid enim pudore criminationeque plenius, quam audire de rebus, que non pertineant ad laudatum, aliquem commendari; quam quod ipse sentias de te predicari que tibi noveris non inesse? quid autem maius calcar ad bene vivendum efficaciorque doctrina, quam audire te talem dici, qualem desideres reputari?”

11 Novati ed., III, 289: “quantum enim apud Philosophum honeste, moderate et gratiose ludentes, quos eutrapelos vocat, a vomolicis differunt, qui, scilicet, nimis in iocis abundant; tantum nostri poete ab histrionibus differunt et, velut a vitiis virtus et a vitiosis honestissimi, separantur.” Novati notes that the reference is to Nicomachean Ethics, ii. vii. 13.

12 Aquinas is asking whether it is proper that Scripture use metaphor, and one objection to its so doing is that theology is the “highest” of sciences, whereas poetry is the “lowest.” The ranking of poetry as infima scientia is “the common property of Scholasticism.” Curtius, Ernst Robert, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans Trask, Willard R. (New York, 1953), p. 224.Google Scholar “The Nature and Domain of Sacred Doctrine,” Article 9, “Whether the Holy Scripture should use metaphors,” is quoted from Adams, Hazard, ed. Critical Theory Since Plato (New York, 1971), p. 117.Google Scholar

13 Translation is mine. The standard English translation is that of Osgood, Charles (Boccaccio on Poetry [New York, 1956], pp. 39–40)Google Scholar, which is a good deal smoother and somewhat higher-toned. I bring in my own because I need one a bit more literal; my argument turns on a small point of language. The Latin is as follows (Genealogie, 4th ed [Venice, 1494], fol. 104; facsimile repr [New York, 1976]): “Est fervor quidam exquisite inveniendi: atque dicendi seu scribendi quod inveneris. Qui ex sinu dei procedens paucis mentibus: ut arbitror: in creatione conceditur. Ex quo quoniam mirabilis sit: rarissimi semper fuere poetae. Huius enim fervoris sunt sublimes effectus utputa mentem in desiderium dicendi compellere: peregrinas & inauditas inventiones excogitare: meditatas ordine certo componere: Ornare compositum inusitato quodam verborum atque sententiarum contextu: velamento fabuloso atque decenti veritatem contegere. Praeterea si exquirat inventio: reges armare in bella: deducere navalibus: classes emittere: caelum terras & aequora describere: virgines sertis & floribus insignire: actus hominum pro qualitatibus designare: irritare torpentes: desides animare: temerarios retrahere. sontes vincire: & egregios meritis extollere laudibus & huiusmodi plura. Siquis autem ex his quibus hie infundit fervor haec minus plene fecerit iudicio meo laudabilis poeta non erit. insuper quantumcunque urgeat animos: quibus infusus est perraro impulsus commendible perficit si instrumenta: quibus meditata perfici consuevere defecerint. Utputa grammaticae praecepta atque rhetoricae: quorum plena notitia opportuna est. Esto nonnulli mirabiliter materno sermone iam scripserint & per singula poesis officia pergerint: hinc et liberalium aliarum artium: & moralium atque naturalium saltern novisse principia est necesse: necnon & vocabulorum valere copia: vidisse monimenta maiorum: ac etiam meminisse hystorias nationum: & regionum orbis: marium: fluviorum: & montium dispositiones… . ”

14 Robey, p. 192.

15 This writer is very difficult to translate into decent English, and my translation takes more liberties than I should like. The Latin reads as follows (Robey, p. 193): “Qua ergo parte convenire cum poeta dicetur? Ab effectu forsan? Poetarum effectus brevissimus hic est: peregrinarum inventionum altissimos atque novissimos excogitare modos; excogitatos in seriem distributionibus competentibus ducere; unumquemque locum festivo et digno tam vocum quam sententiarum palliare nitore; maiorum gesta optime noscere, eaque, ut presentes et posteri in frugem melioris vite contemplentur, angelico calamo mandare memorie; et ut magnificorum factorum exemplo omnis etas concurrat in melius, atque ut delectentur quadam fabularum lepiditate rerumque inauditarum compositione, ameno velamine tegere veritatem; inde actus quoscumque hominum pro qualitate nuntiare, ut, si queras res, militem acerbo lumine cruorem hostilem precipitique ense diffundere, et talia multa; insuper hesitantes magnanimitatis ardore contendere, audaces corripere, pestiferam damnare luxuriam, modica laudare, et huiusmodi quam plura sanctissima; et demum unumquemque pro mentis extollere atque insignibus vincire laudibus. Et ut liberalium omnium instructionem, qua carente vix poeta fieri potest, non pretermittat. Qui mentem ab his effictibus alienaverit, rite haberi poeta non debet.”

16 Sidney's phrase appears on p. 14 of Forrest Robinson's edition of An Apologie for Poetry (Indianapolis, 1970) with a long footnote showing how much the idea was shared by his contemporaries and forebears. Petrarch's coronation speech is translated by Wilkins, Ernest H. (PMLA, 68 [1953], 1242-50)Google Scholar, reference here to p. 1249. Milton's notion that poetry, by nature, is “simple, sensuous, and passionate” appears on p. 637 of the Hughes edition (John Milton: Complete Poems and Major Prose [New York, 1957]). And Pope's often-quoted tag is line 297 of his Essay on Criticism; lines 299-300 declare that wit is “Something, whose Truth convinc'd at Sight we find, / That gives us back the Image of our Mind” (The Poems of Alexander Pope, ed. John Butt [New Haven, 1963], p. 153).

17 “One Herostratus,” according to The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature (ed. Sir Paul Harvey [Oxford, 1937], s.v. “Ephesus”), but Vergerio's source would have been Valerius Maximus, VIII. xiv, which records the incident as a bid for fame—and carefully leaves out the perpetrator's name (Factorum et dictorum Memorabilium Libri Nouem, ed. Carolus Kempf [Leipsig, 1888], p. 413).

18 Smithed., p. 192.

19 Smith ed., p. 196: “non sum qui negem et statuas et honorem Sanctis deberi, qui merito vite virtutumque doctrina sunt digni ut celebrentur in terris et in celis beatam sempiternamque vitam agant; poetis vero hisque illustribus non video cur constitui non possint. si enim munus tale in eorum memoriam fieri solet, qui illustres et in vita prestantes fuerint, quid vetat ne vatibus quoque, si qui preter ceteros insignes sint, talium rerum monumenta debeantur? nam et posteris, cum hec vident, magna sunt incitamenta animorum, ingeniisque ad virtutem et vite gloriam ingens calcar ex his additur; quale solebat dicere Scipio, cum illustrium virorum imagines cerneret, magnopere se ad eorum imitationem concitari.”

20 Smith ed., p. 197: “simileque hoc michi videtur eorum rationi, qui, cum in templis Iudeorum gentiliumque imagines vident Christum aut verberantium aut crucifigentium, oculos illis, ut queque iratior videtur, eruunt, truculentasque lictorum fades ex multa religione pietateque deformant, quasi quidem in delendis imaginibus ac non magis in tollendis peccatis compenendisque virtutibus meritum vite consistat.”

21 Smith ed., pp. 195-96: “o facinus indignum, o scelus omni seculo detestandum! una ergo victoria et hostis finibus et Virgilius patria sua pulsus est, idque etiam et princeps urbis et populus patitur! at non ita de se merita urbs ilia fuerat, cuius casum, cum militibus divideretur, quod esset nimium [misere] Cremone vicina, lacrimoso carmine ille questus est. fetidis fortasse paludibus suis et insano aere Mantua clara est, an non magis ex Manto, ilia antiquissima Tiresie filia, que urbem condidit, et magis ex poeta Virgilio, eius urbis alumno? … melior Homeri sors fuit, quern primum poetarum Greci faciunt <et> nostri non negant, si modo Virgilius exceptus sit: melior quidem sors eius fuit, quod, cum qua esset patria ignoraretur, plurime Grecie civitates eum civem suum dixerunt; hunc, quia unde sit constat, civitas sua eicit.”

22 Translation from the Loeb edition of Vergil by H. Rushton Fairclough (Cambridge, Mass. and London, 1932), p. 245.

23 Petrarch's Secret: or the Soul's Conflict with Passion: Three Dialogues between Himself and St. Augustine, trans. William H. Draper (London, 1911), pp. 99-102. Draper's translation of the Vergil passage is altered to Fairclough's in order to match the passage cited above.

24 Quoted from Salutati's long, apologetic letter to Fra Giovanni Dominici (1406), in which he defends poetry and all secular learning, Novati ed., IV, i, 235: “sic etiam poetriam nichil aliud arbitrantur quam fabulas, quam scelera, que profecto commenta sunt honestum aliquid contegentia, et ob id damnant et abhorrent poesirri; non intelligentes quod, ut superius diffinitum est, ipsa sit sermocinalis quedam ars atque facultas bilinguis, unum exterius exhibens, aliud autem intrinseca ratione significans; … ”

25 See his preface (Osgood, p. 11): “I must proceed to tear the hidden significations from their tough sheathing.”

26 See Grafton, A. T. and Jardine, Lisa, “Humanism and the School of Guarino: A Problem of Evaluation,” Past and Present 96 (1982), 51–80; p. 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27 Madeleine Doran discusses the editions of Ovid: “moralized” Ovids still appeared among the early printed editions, but more and more the standard treatment was the “ennaratio,” which covered the text with glosses on vocabulary, explained “periphrasis,” noted elegances of “diction and figure,” and supplied genaeologies, etymologies, and histories. It was clear that the reader was supposed to assemble all this for himself. “Some Renaissance ‘Ovids’,” Literature and Society, ed. Bernice Slote (Lincoln, 1964), pp. 44-62; p. 53.

28 Augustine, , Christian Doctrine, III.Google Scholar ii. 2 calls it the “rule of faith”, and all paths of faith eventually end in the same place (trans. D. W. Robertson, Jr [1958; rpt. Indianapolis, 1978], p. 79.)

29 Weinberg, Bernard, A History of Literary Criticism in the Italian Renaissance, 2 vols. (Chicago, 1961), I, 31 and passim. Google Scholar