Renaissance is particularly seen. His mind was formed by the ancients:
he attended the class of the Greek Argyropulos, sat at Platonic
banquets, took pains to collect codices, sculptures, vases, pictures,
gems and drawings to ornament the gardens of San Marco and to form the
library afterwards called by his name. In the saloons of his Florentine
palace, in his villas at Careggi, Fiesole and Ambra, stood the wonderful
chests painted by Dello with stories from Ovid, the Hercules of
Pollajuolo, the Pallas of Botticelli, the works of Filippino and
Verrocchio. Lorenzo de' Medici lived entirely in the classical world;
and yet if we read his poems we only see the man of his time, the
admirer of Dante and of the old Tuscan poets, who takes inspiration from
the popular muse, and who succeeds in giving to his poetry the colours
of the most pronounced realism as well as of the loftiest idealism, who
passes from the Platonic sonnet to the impassioned triplets of the
_Amori di Venere_, from the grandiosity of the _Salve_ to _Nencia_ and
to _Beoni_, from the _Canto carnascialesco_ to the _Lauda_. The feeling
of nature is strong in him--at one time sweet and melancholy, at another
vigorous and deep, as if an echo of the feelings, the sorrows, the
ambitions of that deeply agitated life. He liked to look into his own
heart with a severe eye, but he was also able to pour himself out with
tumultuous fulness. He described with the art of a sculptor; he
satirized, laughed, prayed, sighed, always elegant, always a Florentine,
but a Florentine who read Anacreon, Ovid and Tibullus, who wished to
enjoy life, but also to taste of the refinements of art.
Poliziano.
Next to Lorenzo comes Poliziano, who also united, and with greater art,
the ancient and the modern, the popular and the classical style. In his
_Rispetti_ and in his _Ballate_ the freshness of imagery and the
plasticity of form are inimitable. He, a great Greek scholar, wrote
Italian verses with dazzling colours; the purest elegance of the Greek
sources pervaded his art in all its varieties, in the _Orfeo_ as well as
the _Stanze per la giostra_.
The Academies.
As a consequence of the intellectual movement towards the Renaissance,
there arose in Italy in the 15th century three academies, those of
Florence, of Naples and of Rome. The Florentine academy was founded by
Cosmo I. de' Medici. Having heard the praises of Platonic philosophy
sung by Gemistus Pletho, who in 1439 was at the council of Florence, he
took such a liking for those opinions that he soon made a plan for a
literary congress which was especially to discuss them. Marsilius
Ficinus has described the occupations and the entertainments of these
academicians. Here, he said, the young men learnt, by way of pastime,
precepts of conduct and the practice of eloquence; here grown-up men
studied the government of the republic and the family; here the aged
consoled themselves with the belief in a future world. The academy was
divided into three classes: that of patrons, who were members of the
Medici family; that of hearers, among whom sat the most famous men of
that age, such as Pico della Mirandola, Angelo Poliziano, Leon Battista
Alberti; that of disciples, who were youths anxious to distinguish
themselves in philosophical pursuits. It is known that the Platonic
academy endeavoured to promote, with regard to art, a second and a more
exalted revival of antiquity. The Roman academy was founded by Giulio
Pomponio Leto, with the object of promoting the discovery and the
investigation of ancient monuments and books. It was a sort of religion
of classicism, mixed with learning and philosophy. Platina, the
celebrated author of the lives of the first hundred popes, belonged to
it. At Naples, the academy known as the Pontaniana was instituted. The
founder of it was Antonio Beccadelli, surnamed Il Panormita, and after
his death the head was Il Pontano, who gave his name to it, and whose
mind animated it.
Romantic poetry.
Romantic poems were the product of the moral scepticism and the artistic
taste of the 15th century. Italy never had any true epic poetry in its
period of literary birth. Still less could it have any in the
Renaissance. It had, however, many poems called _Cantari_, because they
contained stories that were sung to the people; and besides there were
romantic poems, such as the _Buovo d' Antona_, the _Regina Ancroja_ and
others. But the first to introduce elegance and a new life into this
style was Luigi Pulci, who grew up in the house of the Medici, and who
wrote the _Morgante Maggiore_ at the request of Lucrezia Tornabuoni,
mother of Lorenzo the Magnificent. The material of the _Morgante_ is
almost completely taken from an obscure chivalrous poem of the 15th
century recently discovered by Professor Pio Rajna. On this foundation
Pulci erected a structure of his own, often turning the subject into
ridicule, burlesquing the characters, introducing many digressions, now
capricious, now scientific, now theological. Pulci's merit consists in
having been the first to raise the romantic epic which had been for two
centuries in the hands of story-tellers into a work of art, and in
having united the serious and the comic, thus happily depicting the
manners and feelings of the time. With a more serious intention Matteo
Boiardo, count of Scandiano, wrote his _Orlando innamorato_, in which he
seems to have aspired to embrace the whole range of Carlovingian
legends; but he did not complete his task. We find here too a large vein
of humour and burlesque. Still the Ferrarese poet is drawn to the world
of romance by a profound sympathy for chivalrous manners and
feelings--that is to say, for love, courtesy, valour and generosity. A
third romantic poem of the 15th century was the _Mambriano_ by Francesco
Bello (Cieco of Ferrara). He drew from the Carlovingian cycle, from the
romances of the Round Table, from classical antiquity. He was a poet of
no common genius, and of ready imagination. He showed the influence of
Boiardo, especially in something of the fantastic which he introduced
into his work.
Drama.
The development of the drama in the 15th century was very great. This
kind of semi-popular literature was born in Florence, and attached
itself to certain popular festivities that were usually held in honour
of St John the Baptist, patron saint of the city. The _Sacra
Rappresentazione_ is in substance nothing more than the development of
the medieval _Mistero_ ("mystery-play"). Although it belonged to popular
poetry, some of its authors were literary men of much renown. It is
enough to notice Lorenzo de' Medici, who wrote _San Giovanni e Paolo_,
and Feo Belcari, author of the _San Panunzio_, the _Abramo ed Isac_, &c.
From the 15th century, some element of the comic-profane found its way
into the _Sacra Rappresentazione_. From its Biblical and legendary
conventionalism Poliziano emancipated himself in his _Orfeo_, which,
although in its exterior form belonging to the sacred representations,
yet substantially detaches itself from them in its contents and in the
artistic element introduced.
Pastoral poetry.
From Petrarch onwards the eclogue was a kind of literature that much
pleased the Italians. In it, however, the pastoral element is only
apparent, for there is nothing really rural in it. Such is the _Arcadia_
of Jacopo Sannazzaro of Naples, author of a wearisome Latin poem _De
Partu Virginis_, and of some piscatorial eclogues. The _Arcadia_ is
divided into ten eclogues, in which the festivities, the games, the
sacrifices, the manners of a colony of shepherds are described. They are
written in elegant verses, but it would be vain to look in them for the
remotest feeling of country life. On the other hand, even in this style,
Lorenzo de' Medici was superior. His _Nencia da Barberino_, as a modern
writer says, is as it were the new and clear reproduction of the popular
songs of the environs of Florence, melted into one majestic wave of
octave stanzas. Lorenzo threw himself into the spirit of the bare
realism of country life. There is a marked contrast between this work
and the conventional bucolic of Sannazzaro and other writers. A rival of
the Medici in this style, but always inferior to him, was Luigi Pulci in
his _Beca da Dicomano_.
Lyric poetry.
The lyric love poetry of this century was unimportant. In its stead we
see a completely new style arise, the _Canto carnascialesco_. These were
a kind of choral songs, which were accompanied with symbolical
masquerades, common in Florence at the carnival. They were written in a
metre like that of the ballate; and for the most part they were put into
the mouth of a party of workmen and tradesmen, who, with not very chaste
allusions, sang the praises of their art. These triumphs and masquerades
were directed by Lorenzo himself. At eventide there set out into the
city large companies on horseback, playing and singing these songs.
There are some by Lorenzo himself, which surpass all the others in their
mastery of art. That entitled _Bacco ed Arianna_ is the most famous.
Religious reaction. Savonarola.
Girolamo Savonarola, who came to Florence in 1489, arose to fight
against the literary and social movement of the Renaissance. Some have
tried to make out that Savonarola was an apostle of liberty, others that
he was a precursor of the Reformation. In truth, however, he was neither
the one nor the other. In his struggle with Lorenzo de' Medici, he
directed his attack against the promoter of classical studies, the
patron of pagan literature, rather than against the political tyrant.
Animated by mystic zeal, he took the line of a prophet, preaching
against reading voluptuous authors, against the tyranny of the Medici,
and calling for popular government. This, however, was not done from a
desire for civil liberty, but because Savonarola saw in Lorenzo and his
court the greatest obstacle to that return to Catholic doctrine which
was his heart's desire; while he thought this return would be easily
accomplished if, on the fall of the Medici, the Florentine republic
should come into the hands of his supporters. There may be more justice
in looking on Savonarola as the forerunner of the Reformation. If he was
so, it was more than he intended. The friar of Ferrara never thought of
attacking the papal dogma, and always maintained that he wished to
remain within the church of Rome. He had none of the great aspirations
of Luther. He only repeated the complaints and the exhortations of St
Catherine of Siena; he desired a reform of manners, entirely of manners,
not of doctrine. He prepared the ground for the German and English
religious movement of the 16th century, but unconsciously. In the
history of Italian civilization he represents retrogression, that is to
say, the cancelling of the great fact of the Renaissance, and return to
medieval ideas. His attempt to put himself in opposition to his time, to
arrest the course of events, to bring the people back to the faith of
the past, the belief that all the social evils came from a Medici and a
Borgia, his not seeing the historical reality, as it was, his aspiring
to found a republic with Jesus Christ for its king--all these things
show that Savonarola was more of a fanatic than a thinker. Nor has he
any great merit as a writer. He wrote Italian sermons, hymns (laudi),
ascetic and political treatises, but they are roughly executed, and only
important as throwing light on the history of his ideas. The religious
poems of Girolamo Benivieni are better than his, and are drawn from the
same inspirations. In these lyrics, sometimes sweet, always warm with
religious feeling, Benivieni and with him Feo Belcari carry us back to
the literature of the 14th century.
Histories, &c.
History had neither many nor very good students in the 15th century. Its
revival belonged to the following age. It was mostly written in Latin.
Leonardo Bruni of Arezzo wrote the history of Florence, Gioviano Pontano
that of Naples, in Latin. Bernardino Corio wrote the history of Milan in
Italian, but in a rude way.
Leonardo da Vinci wrote a treatise on painting, Leon Battista Alberti
one on sculpture and architecture. But the names of these two men are
important, not so much as authors of these treatises, but as being
embodiments of another characteristic of the age of the
Renaissance--versatility of genius, power of application along many and
varied lines, and of being excellent in all. Leonardo was an architect,
a poet, a painter, an hydraulic engineer and a distinguished
mathematician. Alberti was a musician, studied jurisprudence, was an
architect and a draughtsman, and had great fame in literature. He had a
deep feeling for nature, an almost unique faculty of assimilating all
that he saw and heard. Leonardo and Alberti are representatives and
almost a compendium in themselves of all that intellectual vigour of the
Renaissance age, which in the 16th century took to developing itself in
its individual parts, making way for what has by some been called the
golden age of Italian literature.
4. _Development of the Renaissance._--The fundamental characteristic of
the literary epoch following that of the Renaissance is that it
perfected itself in every kind of art, in particular uniting the
essentially Italian character of its language with classicism of style.
This period lasted from about 1494 to about 1560; and, strange to say,
this very period of greater fruitfulness and literary greatness began
from the year 1494, which with Charles VIII.'s descent into Italy marked
the beginning of its political decadence and of foreign domination over
it. But this is not hard to explain. All the most famous men of the
first half of the 16th had been educated in the preceding century.
Pietro Pomponazzi was born in 1462, Marcello Virgilio Adriani in 1464,
Castiglione in 1468, Machiavelli in 1469, Bembo in 1470, Michelangelo
Buonarroti and Ariosto in 1474, Nardi in 1476, Trissino in 1478,
Guicciardini in 1482. Thus it is easy to understand how the literary
activity which showed itself from the end of the 15th century to the
middle of the following one was the product of the political and social
conditions of the age in which these minds were formed, not of that in
which their powers were displayed.
History.
Niccolo Machiavelli and Francesco Guicciardini were the chief
originators of the science of history. Machiavelli's principal works
are the _Istorie fiorentine_, the _Discorsi sulla prima deca di Tito
Livio_, the _Arte della guerra_ and the _Principe_. His merit consists
in having been the creator of the experimental science of politics--in
having observed facts, studied histories and drawn consequences from
them. His history is sometimes inexact in facts; it is rather a
political than an historical work. The peculiarity of Machiavelli's
genius lay, as has been said, in his artistic feeling for the treatment
and discussion of politics in and for themselves, without regard to an
immediate end--in his power of abstracting himself from the partial
appearances of the transitory present, in order more thoroughly to
possess himself of the eternal and inborn kingdom, and to bring it into
subjection to himself.
Next to Machiavelli both as an historian and a statesman comes Francesco
Guicciardini. Guicciardini was very observant, and endeavoured to reduce
his observations to a science. His _Storia d' Italia_, which extends
from the death of Lorenzo de' Medici to 1534, is full of political
wisdom, is skilfully arranged in its parts, gives a lively picture of
the character of the persons it treats of, and is written in a grand
style. He shows a profound knowledge of the human heart, and depicts
with truth the temperaments, the capabilities and the habits of the
different European nations. Going back to the causes of events, he
looked for the explanation of the divergent interests of princes and of
their reciprocal jealousies. The fact of his having witnessed many of
the events he related, and having taken part in them, adds authority to
his words. The political reflections are always deep; in the _Pensieri_,
as G. Capponi[3] says, he seems to aim at extracting through
self-examination a quintessence, as it were, of the things observed and
done by him--thus endeavouring to form a political doctrine as adequate
as possible in all its parts. Machiavelli and Guicciardini may be
considered, not only as distinguished historians, but as originators of
the science of history founded on observation.
Inferior to them, but still always worthy of note, were Jacopo Nardi (a
just and faithful historian and a virtuous man, who defended the rights
of Florence against the Medici before Charles V.), Benedetto Varchi,
Giambattista Adriani, Bernardo Segni; and, outside Tuscany, Camillo
Porzio, who related the _Congiura de' baroni_ and the history of Italy
from 1547 to 1552, Angelo di Costanza, Pietro Bembo, Paolo Paruta and
others.
Romantic epic. Ariosto (1474-1533).
Ariosto's _Orlando furioso_ was a continuation of Boiardo's
_Innamorato_. His characteristic is that he assimilated the romance of
chivalry to the style and models of classicism. Ariosto was an artist
only for the love of his art; his sole aim was to make a romance that
should please the generation in which he lived. His Orlando has no grave
and serious purpose; on the contrary it creates a fantastic world, in
which the poet rambles, indulging his caprice, and sometimes smiling at
his own work. His great desire is to depict everything with the greatest
possible perfection; the cultivation of style is what occupies him most.
In his hands the style becomes wonderfully plastic to every conception,
whether high or low, serious or sportive. The octave stanza reached in
him the highest perfection of grace, variety and harmony.
Heroic epic.
Meanwhile, side by side with the romantic, there was an attempt at the
historical epic. Gian Giorgio Trissino of Vicenza composed a poem called
_Italia liberata dai Goti_. Full of learning and of the rules of the
ancients, he formed himself on the latter, in order to sing of the
campaigns of Belisarius; he said that he had forced himself to observe
all the rules of Aristotle, and that he had imitated Homer. In this
again, we see one of the products of the Renaissance; and, although
Trissino's work is poor in invention and without any original poetical
colouring, yet it helps one to understand better what were the
conditions of mind in the 16th century.
Lyric poetry.
Lyric poetry was certainly not one of the kinds that rose to any great
height in the 16th century. Originality was entirely wanting, since it
seemed in that century as if nothing better could be done than to copy
Petrarch. Still, even in this style there were some vigorous poets.
Monsignore Giovanni Guidiccioni of Lucca (1500-1541) showed that he had
a generous heart. In fine sonnets he gave expression to his grief for
the sad state to which his country was reduced. Francesco Molza of
Modena (1489-1544), learned in Greek, Latin and Hebrew, wrote in a
graceful style and with spirit. Giovanni della Casa (1503-1556) and
Pietro Bembo (1470-1547), although Petrarchists, were elegant. Even
Michelangelo Buonarroti was at times a Petrarchist, but his poems bear
the stamp of his extraordinary and original genius. And a good many
ladies are to be placed near these poets, such as Vittoria Colonna
(loved by Michelangelo), Veronica Gambara, Tullia d' Aragona, Giulia
Gonzaga, poetesses of great delicacy, and superior in genius to many
literary men of their time.
Tragedy.
The 16th century had not a few tragedies, but they are all weak. The
cause of this was the moral and religious indifference of the Italians,
the lack of strong passions and vigorous characters. The first to occupy
the tragic stage was Trissino with his _Sofonisba_, following the rules
of the art most scrupulously, but written in sickly verses, and without
warmth of feeling. The _Oreste_ and the _Rosmunda_ of Giovanni Rucellai
were no better, nor Luigi Alamanni's _Antigone_. Sperone Speroni in his
Canace and Giraldi Cintio in his _Orbecche_ tried to become innovators
in tragic literature, but they only succeeded in making it grotesque.
Decidedly superior to these was the _Torrismondo_ of Torquato Tasso,
specially remarkable for the choruses, which sometimes remind one of the
chorus of the Greek tragedies.
Comedy.
The Italian comedy of the 16th century was almost entirely modelled on
the Latin comedy. They were almost always alike in the plot, in the
characters of the old man, of the servant, of the waiting-maid; and the
argument was often the same. Thus the _Lucidi_ of Agnolo Firenzuola, and
the _Vecchio amoroso_ of Donato Giannotti were modelled on comedies by
Plautus, as were the _Sporta_ by Gelli, the _Marito_ by Dolce, and
others. There appear to be only three writers who should be
distinguished among the many who wrote comedies--Machiavelli, Ariosto
and Giovan Maria Cecchi. In his _Mandragora_ Machiavelli, unlike all the
others, composed a comedy of character, creating types which seem living
even now, because they were copied from reality seen with a finely
observant eye. Ariosto, on the other hand, was distinguished for his
picture of the habits of his time, and especially of those of the
Ferrarese nobles, rather than for the objective delineation of
character. Lastly, Cecchi left in his comedies a treasure of spoken
language, which nowadays enables us in a wonderful way to make ourselves
acquainted with that age. The notorious Pietro Aretino might also be
included in the list of the best writers of comedy.
Burlesque and satire.
The 15th century was not without humorous poetry; Antonio Cammelli,
surnamed the Pistoian, is specially deserving of notice, because of his
"pungent _bonhomie_," as Sainte-Beuve called it. But it was Francesco
Berni who carried this kind of literature to perfection in the 16th
century. From him the style has been called "bernesque" poetry. In the
"Berneschi" we find nearly the same phenomenon that we already noticed
with regard to _Orlando furioso_. It was art for art's sake that
inspired and moved Berni to write, as well as Anton Francesco Grazzini,
called Il Lasca, and other lesser writers. It may be said that there is
nothing in their poetry; and it is true that they specially delight in
praising low and disgusting things and in jeering at what is noble and
serious. Bernesque poetry is the clearest reflection of that religious
and moral scepticism which was one of the characteristics of Italian
social life in the 16th century, and which showed itself more or less in
all the works of that period, that scepticism which stopped the
religious Reformation in Italy, and which in its turn was an effect of
historical conditions. The Berneschi, and especially Berni himself,
sometimes assumed a satirical tone. But theirs could not be called true
satire. Pure satirists, on the other hand, were Antonio Vinciguerra, a
Venetian, Lodovico Alamanni and Ariosto, the last superior to the others
for the Attic elegance of his style, and for a certain frankness,
passing into malice, which is particularly interesting when the poet
talks of himself.
Didactic works.
In the 16th century there were not a few didactic works. In his poem of
the _Api_ Giovanni Rucellai approaches to the perfection of Virgil. His
style is clear and light, and he adds interest to his book by frequent
allusions to the events of the time. But of the didactic works that
which surpasses all the others in importance is Baldassare Castiglione's
_Cortigiano_, in which he imagines a discussion in the palace of the
dukes of Urbino between knights and ladies as to what are the gifts
required in a perfect courtier. This book is valuable as an illustration
of the intellectual and moral state of the highest Italian society in
the first half of the 16th century.
Fiction.
Of the novelists of the 16th century, the two most important were Anton
Francesco Grazzini and Matteo Bandello--the former as playful and
bizarre as the latter is grave and solemn. As part of the history of the
times, we must not forget that Bandello was a Dominican friar and a
bishop, but that notwithstanding his novels were very loose in subject,
and that he often holds up the ecclesiastics of his time to ridicule.
Translations.
At a time when admiration for qualities of style, the desire for
classical elegance, was so strong as in the 16th century, much attention
was naturally paid to translating Latin and Greek authors. Among the
very numerous translations of the time those of the _Aeneid_ and of the
_Pastorals_ of Longus the Sophist by Annibal Caro are still famous; as
are also the translations of Ovid's _Metamorphoses_ by Giovanni Andrea
dell' Anguillare, of Apuleius's _Golden Ass_ by Firenzuola, and of
Plutarch's _Lives_ and _Moralia_ by Marcello Adriani.
Tasso (1544-1595).
The historians of Italian literature are in doubt whether Tasso should
be placed in the period of the highest development of the Renaissance,
or whether he should form a period by himself, intermediate between that
and the one following. Certainly he was profoundly out of harmony with
the century in which he lived. His religious faith, the seriousness of
his character, the deep melancholy settled in his heart, his continued
aspiration after an ideal perfection, all place him as it were outside
the literary epoch represented by Machiavelli, by Ariosto, by Berni. As
Carducci has well said, Tasso "is the legitimate heir of Dante
Alighieri: he believes, and reasons on his faith by philosophy; he
loves, and comments on his love in a learned style; he is an artist, and
writes dialogues of scholastic speculation that would fain be Platonic."
He was only eighteen years old when, in 1562, he tried his hand at epic
poetry, and wrote _Rinaldo_, in which he said that he had tried to
reconcile the Aristotelian rules with the variety of Ariosto. He
afterwards wrote the _Aminta_, a pastoral drama of exquisite grace. But
the work to which he had long turned his thoughts was an heroic poem,
and that absorbed all his powers. He himself explains what his intention
was in the three _Discorsi_ written whilst he was composing the
_Gerusalemme_: he would choose a great and wonderful subject, not so
ancient as to have lost all interest, nor so recent as to prevent the
poet from embellishing it with invented circumstances; he meant to treat
it rigorously according to the rules of the unity of action observed in
Greek and Latin poems, but with a far greater variety and splendour of
episodes, so that in this point it should not fall short of the romantic
poem; and finally, he would write it in a lofty and ornate style. This
is what Tasso has done in the _Gerusalemme liberata_, the subject of
which is the liberation of the sepulchre of Jesus Christ in the 11th
century by Godfrey of Bouillon. The poet does not follow faithfully all
the historical facts, but sets before us the principal causes of them,
bringing in the supernatural agency of God and Satan. The _Gerusalemme_
is the best heroic poem that Italy can show. It approaches to classical
perfection. Its episodes above all are most beautiful. There is profound
feeling in it, and everything reflects the melancholy soul of the poet.
As regards the style, however, although Tasso studiously endeavoured to
keep close to the classical models, one cannot help noticing that he
makes excessive use of metaphor, of antithesis, of far-fetched conceits;
and it is specially from this point of view that some historians have
placed Tasso in the literary period generally known under the name of
"Secentismo," and that others, more moderate in their criticism, have
said that he prepared the way for it.
The Secentismo.
5. _Period of Decadence._--From about 1559 began a period of decadence
in Italian literature. The Spanish rule oppressed and corrupted the
peninsula. The minds of men were day by day gradually losing their
force; every high aspiration was quenched. No love of country could any
longer be felt when the country was enslaved to a stranger. The
suspicious rulers fettered all freedom of thought and word; they
tortured Campanella, burned Bruno, made every effort to extinguish all
high sentiment, all desire for good. Cesare Balbo says, "if the
happiness of the masses consists in peace without industry, if the
nobility's consists in titles without power, if princes are satisfied by
acquiescence in their rule without real independence, without
sovereignty, if literary men and artists are content to write, paint and
build with the approbation of their contemporaries, but to the contempt
of posterity, if a whole nation is happy in ease without dignity and the
tranquil progress of corruption,--then no period ever was so happy for
Italy as the hundred and forty years from the treaty of Cateau Cambresis
to the war of the Spanish succession." This period is known in the
history of Italian literature as the Secentismo. Its writers, devoid of
sentiment, of passion, of thoughts, resorted to exaggeration; they tried
to produce effect with every kind of affectation, with bombast, with the
strangest metaphors, in fact, with what in art is called mannerism,
"barocchism." The utter poverty of the matter tried to cloak itself
under exuberance of forms. It seemed as if the writers vied with one
another as to who could best burden his art with useless metaphors, with
phrases, with big-sounding words, with affectations, with hyperbole,
with oddities, with everything that could fix attention on the outer
form and draw it off from the substantial element of thought.
Marini.
At the head of the school of the "Secentisti" comes Giovan Battista
Marini of Naples, born in 1569, especially known by a poem called _L'
Adone_. His aim was to excite wonder by novelties; hence the most
extravagant metaphors, the most forced antitheses, the most far-fetched
conceits, are to be found in his book. It was especially by antitheses
that he thought he could produce the greatest effect. Sometimes he
strings them together one after the other, so that they fill up whole
stanzas without a break. Achillini of Bologna followed in Marini's
steps. He had less genius, however, and hence his peculiarities were
more extravagant, becoming indeed absolutely ridiculous. In general, we
may say that all the poets of the 17th century were more or less
infected with "Marinism." Thus Alessandro Guidi, although he does not
attain to the exaggeration of his master, is emptily bombastic,
inflated, turgid, while Fulvio Testi is artificial and affected. Yet
Guidi as well as Testi felt the influence of another poet, Gabriello
Chiabrera, born at Savona in 1552. In him the Secentismo took another
character. Enamoured as he said he was of the Greeks, he made new
metres, especially in imitation of Pindar, treating of religious, moral,
historical and amatory subjects. It is easy to understand that a
Pindaric style of poetry in the 17th century in Italy could not but end
in being altogether artificial, without anything of those qualities
which constitute the greatness of the Greek poet. Chiabrera, though
elegant enough in form, proves empty of matter, and, in his vain attempt
to hide this vacuity, has recourse to poetical ornaments of every kind.
These again, in their turn, become in him a fresh defect. Nevertheless,
Chiabrera's school, in the decadence of the 17th century, marks an
improvement; and sometimes he showed that he had lyrical capacities,
which in better literary surroundings would have brought forth excellent
fruit. When he sings, for example, of the victories of the Tuscan
galleys against the Turks and the pirates of the Mediterranean, he rises
to grand imagery, and seems quite another poet.
Filicaja the Florentine has a certain lyric _elan_, particularly in the
songs about Vienna besieged by the Turks, which seems to raise him more
than the others above the vices of the time; but even in him we see
clearly the rhetorical artifice and the falseness of the conceits. And
in general all the lyric poetry of the 17th century may be said to have
had the same defects, but in different degrees--defects which may be
summed up as absence of feeling and exaggeration of form. There was no
faith; there was no love; and thus art became an exercise, a pastime, a
luxury, for a servile and corrupt people.
The Arcadia.
The belief then arose that it would be sufficient to change the form in
order to restore literature, in forgetfulness that every reform must be
the effect of a change in social and moral conditions. Weary of the
bombastic style of the 17th century, full of conceits and antithesis,
men said--let us follow an entirely different line, let us fight the
turgid style with simplicity. In 1690 the "Academy of Arcadia" was
instituted. Its founders were Giovan Maria Crescimbeni and Gian Vincenzo
Gravina. The Arcadia was so called because its chief aim and intention
were to imitate in literature the simplicity of the ancient shepherds,
who were fabulously supposed to have lived in Arcadia in the golden age.
As the "Secentisti" erred by an overweening desire for novelty, which
made them always go beyond the truth, so the Arcadians proposed to
themselves to return to the fields of truth, always singing of subjects
of pastoral simplicity. This was obviously nothing else than the
substitution of a new artifice for the old one; and they fell from
bombast into effeminacy, from the hyperbolical into the petty, from the
turgid into the over-refined. The Arcadia was a reaction against
Secentismo, but a reaction which, reversing the movement of that earlier
epoch, only succeeded in impoverishing still further and completely
withering up the literature. The poems of the "Arcadians" fill many
volumes, and are made up of sonnets, madrigals, canzonets and blank
verse. The one who most distinguished himself among the sonneteers was
Felice Zappi. Among the authors of songs Paolo Rolli was illustrious.
Innocenzo Frugoni was more famous than all the others, a man of fruitful
imagination but of shallow intellect, whose wordy verses nobody now
reads.
Symptoms of revival. Scientific prose.
Whilst the political and social conditions in Italy in the 17th century
were such as to make it appear that every light of intelligence, all
spirit of liberty, was extinguished, there appeared in the peninsula, by
that law of reaction which in great part governs human events, some
strong and independent thinkers, such as Bernardino Telesio, Giordano
Bruno, Tommaso Campanella, Lucilio Vanini, who turned philosophical
inquiry into fresh channels, and opened the way for the scientific
conquests of Galileo Galilei, the great contemporary of Descartes in
France and of Bacon in England. Galileo was not only a great man of
science, but also occupied a conspicuous place in the history of
letters. A devoted student of Ariosto, he seemed to transfuse into his
prose the qualities of that great poet--a clear and frank freedom of
expression, a wonderful art of knowing how to say everything with
precision and ease, and at the same time with elegance. Galileo's prose
is in perfect antithesis to the poetry of his time. Perhaps it is the
best prose that Italy has ever had; it is clear, goes straight to the
point, is without rhetorical ornaments and without vulgar slips,
artistic without appearing to be so.
Another symptom of revival, a sign of rebellion against the vileness of
Italian social life, is given us in satire and in particular in that of
Salvator Rosa and Alessandro Tassoni. Salvator Rosa, born in 1615, near
Naples, was a painter, a musician and a poet. As a poet he showed that
he felt the sad condition of his country, showed that he mourned over
it, and gave vent to his feeling (as another satire-writer, Giuseppe
Giusti, said) in _generosi rabbuffi_. His exhortation to Italian poets
to turn their thoughts to the miseries of their country as a subject for
their song--their country languishing under the tyrant's hands--certain
passages where he deplores the effeminacy of Italian habits, a strong
apostrophe against Rome, make Salvator Rosa a precursor of the patriotic
literature which inaugurated the revival of the 18th century. Tassoni,
a man really quite exceptional in this century, was superior to Rosa. He
showed independent judgment in the midst of universal servility, and his
_Secchia Rapita_ proved that he was an eminent writer. This is an heroic
comic poem, which is at the same time an epic and a personal satire. He
was bold enough to attack the Spaniards in his _Filippiche_, in which he
urged Duke Carlo Emanuele of Savoy to persist in the war against them.
New Political conditions.
6. _The Revival in the 18th Century._--Having for the most part freed
itself from the Spanish dominion in the 18th century, the political
condition of Italy began to improve. Promoters of this improvement,
which was shown in many civil reforms, were Joseph II., Leopold I. and
Charles I. The work of these princes was copied from the philosophers,
who in their turn felt the influence of a general movement of ideas,
which was quietly working in many parts of Europe, and which came to a
head in the French encyclopedists.
Historical works.
Giambattista Vico was a token of the awakening of historical
consciousness in Italy. In his _Scienza nuova_ he applied himself to the
investigation of the laws governing the progress of the human race, and
according to which events are developed. From the psychological study of
man he endeavoured to infer the "comune natura delle nazioni," i.e. the
universal laws of history, or the laws by which civilizations rise,
flourish and fall.
From the same scientific spirit which animated the philosophical
investigation of Vico, there was born a different kind of investigation,
that of the sources of Italian civil and literary history. Lodovico
Antonio Muratori, after having collected in one entire body (_Rerum
Italicarum scriptores_) the chronicles, the biographies, the letters and
the diaries of Italian history from 500 to 1500, after having discussed
the most obscure historical questions in the _Antiquitates Italicae
medii aevi_, wrote the _Annali d' Italia_, minutely narrating facts
derived from authentic sources. Muratori's associates in his historical
researches were Scipione Maffei of Verona and Apostolo Zeno of Venice.
In his _Verona illustrata_ the former left, not only a treasure of
learning, but an excellent specimen of historical monograph. The latter
added much to the erudition of literary history, both in his
_Dissertazioni Vossiane_ and in his notes to the _Biblioteca dell'
eloquenza italiana_ of Monsignore Giusto Fontanini. Girolamo Tiraboschi
and Count Giovanni Maria Mazzuchelli of Brescia devoted themselves to
literary history.
Social science.
While the new spirit of the times led men to the investigation of
historical sources, it also led them to inquire into the mechanism of
economical and social laws. Francesco Galiani wrote on currency; Gaetano
Filangieri wrote a _Scienza della legislazione_. Cesare Beccaria, in his
treatise _Dei delitti e delle pene_, made a contribution to the reform
of the penal system and promoted the abolition of torture.
Satire: Parini.
The man in whom above all others the literary revival of the 18th
century was most conspicuously embodied was Giuseppe Parini. He was born
in a Lombard village in 1729, was mostly educated at Milan, and as a
youth was known among the Arcadian poets by the name of Darisbo
Elidonio. Even as an Arcadian, however, Parini showed signs of departing
from the common type. In a collection of poems that he published at
twenty-three years of age, under the name of Ripano Eupilino, there are
some pastoral sonnets in which the poet shows that he had the faculty of
taking his scenes from real life, and also some satirical pieces in
which he exhibits a spirit of somewhat rude opposition to his own times.
These poems are perhaps based on reminiscences of Berni, but at any rate
they indicate a resolute determination to assail boldly all the literary
conventionalities that surrounded the author. This, however, was only
the beginning of the battle. Parini lived in times of great social
prostration. The nobles and the rich, all given up to ease and to silly
gallantry, consumed their lives in ridiculous trifles or in shameless
self-indulgence, wasting themselves on immoral "Cicisbeismo," and
offering the most miserable spectacle of feebleness of mind and
character. It was against this social condition that Parini's muse was
directed. Already, improving on the poems of his youth, he had proved
himself an innovator in his lyrics, rejecting at once Petrarchism,
Secentismo and Arcadia, the three maladies that had weakened Italian art
in the centuries preceding his own, and choosing subjects taken from
real life, such as might help in the instruction of his contemporaries.
In the _Odi_ the satirical note is already heard. But it came out more
strongly in the poem _Del giorno_, in which he imagines himself to be
teaching a young Milanese patrician all the habits and ways of gallant
life; he shows up all its ridiculous frivolities, and with delicate
irony unmasks the futilities of aristocratic habits. Dividing the day
into four parts, the Mattino, the Mezzogiorno, the Vespero, the Notte,
by means of each of these he describes the trifles of which they were
made up, and the book thus assumes a social and historical value of the
highest importance. Parini, satirizing his time, fell back upon truth,
and finally made art serve the purpose of civil morality. As an artist,
going straight back to classical forms, aspiring to imitate Virgil and
Dante, he opened the way to the fine school that we shall soon see rise,
that of Alfieri, Foscolo and Monti. As a work of art, the _Giorno_ is
wonderful for the Socratic skill with which that delicate irony is
constantly kept up by which he seems to praise what he effectually
blames. The verse has new harmonies; sometimes it is a little hard and
broken, not by accident, but as a protest against the Arcadian monotony.
Generally it flows majestically, but without that Frugonian droning that
deafens the ears and leaves the heart cold.
Gozzi; Baretti.
Gasparo Gozzi's satire was less elevated, but directed towards the same
end as Parini's. In his _Osservatore_, something like Addison's
_Spectator_, in his _Gazzetta veneta_, in the _Mondo morale_, by means
of allegories and novelties he hit the vices with a delicate touch, and
inculcated a practical moral with much good sense. Gozzi's satire has
some slight resemblance in style to Lucian's. It is smooth and light,
but withal it does not go less straight to its aim, which is to point
out the defects of society and to correct them. Gozzi's prose is very
graceful and lively. It only errs by its overweening affectation of
imitating the writers of the 14th century. Another satirical writer of
the first half of the 18th century was Giuseppe Baretti of Turin. In a
journal called the _Frusta letteraria_ he took to lashing without mercy
the works which were then being published in Italy. He had learnt much
by travelling; and especially his long stay in England had contributed
to give an independent character to his mind, and made him judge of men
and things with much good sense. It is true that his judgments are not
always right, but the _Frusta letteraria_ was the first book of
independent criticism directed particularly against the Arcadians and
the pedants.
Dramatic reform.
Everything tended to improvement, and the character of the reform was to
throw off the conventional, the false, the artificial, and to return to
truth. The drama felt this influence of the times. Apostolo Zeno and
Metastasio (the Arcadian name for Pietro Trapassi, a native of Rome) had
endeavoured to make "melodrama and reason compatible." The latter in
particular succeeded in giving fresh expression to the affections, a
natural turn to the dialogue and some interest to the plot; and if he
had not fallen into constant unnatural over-refinement and unseasonable
mawkishness, and into frequent anachronisms, he might have been
considered as the first dramatic reformer of the 18th century. That
honour belongs to Carlo Goldoni, a Venetian. He found comedy either
entirely devoted to classical imitation or given up to extravagance, to
_coups de theatre_, to the most boisterous succession of unlikely
situations, or else treated by comic actors who recited impromptu on a
given subject, of which they followed the outline. In this old popular
form of comedy, with the masks of pantaloon, of the doctor, of
harlequin, of Brighella, &c., Goldoni found the strongest obstacles to
his reform. But at last he conquered, creating the comedy of character.
No doubt Moliere's example helped him in this. Goldoni's characters are
always true, but often a little superficial. He studied nature, but he
did not plunge into psychological depths. In most of his creations, the
external rather than the internal part is depicted. In this respect he
is much inferior to Moliere. But on the other hand he surpasses him in
the liveliness of the dialogue, and in the facility with which he finds
his dramatic situations. Goldoni wrote much, in fact too much (more than
one hundred and fifty comedies), and had no time to correct, to polish,
to perfect his works, which are all rough cast. But for a comedy of
character we must go straight from Machiavelli's _Mandragora_ to him.
Goldoni's dramatic aptitude is curiously illustrated by the fact that he
took nearly all his types from Venetian society, and yet managed to give
them an inexhaustible variety. A good many of his comedies were written
in Venetian dialect, and these are perhaps the best.
Patriotic literature and return to classicism.
The ideas that were making their way in French society in the 18th
century, and afterwards brought about the Revolution of 1789, gave a
special direction to Italian literature of the second half of the 18th
century. Love of ideal liberty, desire for equality, hatred of tyranny,
created in Italy a literature which aimed at national objects, seeking
to improve the condition of the country by freeing it from the double
yoke of political and religious despotism. But all this was associated
with another tendency. The Italians who aspired to a political
redemption believed that it was inseparable from an intellectual
revival, and it seemed to them that this could only be effected by a
reunion with ancient classicism--in other words, by putting themselves
in more direct communication with ancient Greek and Latin writers. This
was a repetition of what had occurred in the first half of the 15th
century. The 17th century might in fact be considered as a new Italian
Middle Age without the hardness of that iron time, but corrupted,
enervated, overrun by Spaniards and French, an age in which previous
civilization was cancelled. A reaction was necessary against that period
of history, and a construction on its ruins of a new country and a new
civilization. There had already been forerunners of this movement; at
the head of them the revered Parini. Now the work must be completed, and
the necessary force must once more be sought for in the ancient
literature of the two classic nations.
Alfieri (1749-1803).
Patriotism and classicism then were the two principles that inspired the
literature which began with Alfieri. He worshipped the Greek and Roman
idea of popular liberty in arms against the tyrant. He took the subjects
of his tragedies almost invariably from the history of these nations,
made continual apostrophes against the despots, made his ancient
characters talk like revolutionists of his time; he did not trouble
himself with, nor think about, the truth of the characters; it was
enough for him that his hero was Roman in name, that there was a tyrant
to be killed, that liberty should triumph in the end. But even this did
not satisfy Alfieri. Before his time and all about him there was the
Arcadian school, with its foolish verbosity, its empty abundance of
epithets, its nauseous pastoralizing on subjects of no civil importance.
It was necessary to arm the patriotic muse also against all this. If the
Arcadians, not excluding the hated Metastasio, diluted their poetry with
languishing tenderness, if they poured themselves out in so many words,
if they made such set phrases, it behoved the others to do just the
contrary--to be brief, concise, strong, bitter, to aim at the sublime as
opposed to the lowly and pastoral. Having said this, we have told the
good and evil of Alfieri. He desired a political reform by means of
letters; he saved literature from Arcadian vacuities, leading it towards
a national end; he armed himself with patriotism and classicism in order
to drive the profaners out of the temple of art. But in substance he was
rather a patriot than an artist. In any case the results of the new
literary movement were copious.
Foscolo.
Ugo Foscolo was an eager patriot, who carried into life the heat of the
most unbridled passion, and into his art a rather rhetorical manner, but
always one inspired by classical models. The _Lettere di Jacopo Ortis_,
inspired by Goethe's _Werther_, are a love story with a mixture of
patriotism; they contain a violent protest against the treaty of Campo
Formio, and an outburst from Foscolo's own heart about an unhappy
love-affair of his. His passions were sudden and violent; they came to
an end as abruptly as they began; they were whirlwinds that were over in
a quarter of an hour. To one of these passions _Ortis_ owed its origin,
and it is perhaps the best, the most sincere, of all his writings. Even
in it he is sometimes pompous and rhetorical, but much less so than he
is, for example, in the lectures _Dell' origine e dell' ufficio della
letteratura_. On the whole, Foscolo's prose is turgid and affected, and
reflects the character of the man who always tried to pose, even before
himself, in dramatic attitudes. This was indeed the defect of the
Napoleonic epoch; there was a horror of anything common, simple,
natural; everything must be after the model of the hero who made all the
world gaze with wonder at him; everything must assume some heroic shape.
In Foscolo this tendency was excessive; and it not seldom happened that,
in wishing to play the hero, the exceptional man, the little Napoleon of
ladies' drawing-rooms, he became false and bad, false in his art, bad in
his life. The _Sepolcri_, which is his best poem, was prompted by high
feeling, and the mastery of versification shows wonderful art. Perhaps
it is to this mastery more than to anything else that the admiration the
_Sepolcri_ excites is due. There are most obscure passages in it, as to
the meaning of which it would seem as if even the author himself had not
formed a clear idea. He left incomplete three hymns to the Graces, in
which he sang of beauty as the source of courtesy, of all high qualities
and of happiness. Here again what most excites our admiration is the
harmonious and easy versification. Among his prose works a high place
belongs to his translation of the _Sentimental Journey_ of Sterne, a
writer by whom one can easily understand how Foscolo should have been
deeply affected. He went as an exile to England, and died there. He
wrote for English readers some _Essays_ on Petrarch and on the texts of
the _Decamerone_ and of Dante, which are remarkable for the time at
which they were written, and which may be said to have initiated a new
kind of literary criticism in Italy. Foscolo is still greatly admired,
and not without reason. His writings stimulate the love of fatherland,
and the men that made the revolution of 1848 were largely brought up on
them.
Monti.
If in Foscolo patriotism and classicism were united, and formed almost
one passion, so much cannot be said of Vincenzo Monti, in whom the
artist was absolutely predominant. Yet Monti was a patriot too, but in
his own way. He had no one deep feeling that ruled him, or rather the
mobility of his feelings is his characteristic; but each of these was a
new form of patriotism, that took the place of an old one. He saw danger
to his country in the French Revolution, and wrote the _Pellegrino
apostolico_, the _Bassvilliana_ and the _Feroniade_; Napoleon's
victories caused him to write the _Prometeo_ and the _Musagonia_; in his
_Fanatismo_ and his _Superstizione_ he attacked the papacy; afterwards
he sang the praises of the Austrians. Thus every great event made him
change his mind, with a readiness which might seem incredible, but is
yet most easily explained. Monti was above everything an artist; art was
his real, his only passion; everything else in him was liable to change,
that alone was persistent. Fancy was his tyrant, and under its rule he
had no time to reason and to see the miserable aspect of his political
tergiversation. It was an overbearing deity that moved him, and at its
dictation he wrote. Pius VI., Napoleon, Francis II., were to him but
passing shadows, to which he hardly gives the attention of an hour; that
which endures, which is eternal to him, is art alone. It were unjust to
accuse Monti of baseness. If we say that nature in giving him one only
faculty had made the poet rich and the man poor, we shall speak the
truth. But the poet was indeed rich. Knowing little Greek, he succeeded
in making a translation of the _Iliad_ which is remarkable for its
Homeric feeling, and in his _Bassvilliana_ he is on a level with Dante.
In fine, in him classical poetry seemed to revive in all its florid
grandeur.
Niccolini.
Monti was born in 1754, Foscolo in 1778; four years later still was born
another poet of the same school, Giambattista Niccolini. In literature
he was a classicist; in politics he was a Ghibelline, a rare exception
in Guelph Florence, his birthplace. In translating or, if the
expression is preferred, imitating Aeschylus, as well as in writing the
_Discorsi sulla tragedia greca_, and on the _Sublime e Michelangelo_,
Niccolini displayed his passionate devotion to ancient literature. In
his tragedies he set himself free from the excessive rigidity of
Alfieri, and partly approached the English and German tragic authors. He
nearly always chose political subjects, striving to keep alive in his
compatriots the love of liberty. Such are _Nabucco_, _Antonio
Foscarini_, _Giovanni da Procida_, _Lodovico il Moro_, &c. He assailed
papal Rome in _Arnaldo da Brescia_, a long tragic piece, not suited for
acting, and epic rather than dramatic. Niccolini's tragedies show a rich
lyric vein rather than dramatic genius. At any rate he has the merit of
having vindicated liberal ideas, and of having opened a new path to
Italian tragedy.
Historians.
The literary period we are dealing with had three writers who are
examples of the direction taken by historical study. It seems strange
that, after the learned school begun by Muratori, there should have been
a backward movement here, but it is clear that this retrogression was
due to the influence of classicism and patriotism, which, if they
revived poetry, could not but spoil history. Carlo Botta, born in 1766,
was a spectator of French spoliation in Italy and of the overbearing
rule of Napoleon. Hence, excited by indignation, he wrote a _History of
Italy from 1789 to 1814_; and later on he continued Guicciardini's
_History_ up to 1789. He wrote after the manner of the Latin authors,
trying to imitate Livy, putting together long and sonorous periods in a
style that aimed at being like Boccaccio's, caring little about that
which constitutes the critical material of history, only intent on
declaiming his academic prose for his country's benefit. Botta wanted to
be classical in a style that could no longer be so, and hence he failed
completely to attain his literary goal. His fame is only that of a man
of a noble and patriotic heart. Not so bad as the two histories of Italy
is that of the _Guerra dell' indipendenza americana_.
Close to Botta comes Pietro Colletta, a Neapolitan born nine years after
him. He also in his _Storia del reame di Napoli dal 1734 al 1825_ had
the idea of defending the independence and liberty of Italy in a style
borrowed from Tacitus; and he succeeded rather better than Botta. He has
a rapid, brief, nervous style, which makes his book attractive reading.
But it is said that Pietro Giordani and Gino Capponi corrected it for
him. Lazzaro Papi of Lucca, author of the _Commentari della rivoluzione
francese dal 1789 al 1814_, was not altogether unlike Botta and
Colletta. He also was an historian in the classical style, and treats
his subject with patriotic feeling; but as an artist he perhaps excels
the other two.
The Purists.
At first sight it seems unnatural that, whilst the most burning
political passions were raging, and whilst the most brilliant men of
genius in the new classical and patriotic school were at the height of
their influence, a question should have arisen about "purism" of
language. Yet the phenomenon can be easily accounted for. Purism is
another form of classicism and patriotism. In the second half of the
18th century the Italian language was specially full of French
expressions. There was great indifference about fitness, still more
about elegance of style. Prose then was to be restored for the sake of
national dignity, and it was believed that this could not be done except
by going back to the writers of the 14th century, to the "aurei
trecentisti," as they were called, or else to the classics of Italian
literature. One of the promoters of the new school was Antonio Cesari of
Verona, who republished ancient authors, and brought out a new edition,
with additions, of the _Vocabolario della Crusca_. He wrote a
dissertation _Sopra lo stato presente della lingua italiana_, and
endeavoured to establish the supremacy of Tuscan and of the three great
writers Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio. And in accordance with that
principle he wrote several books, taking pains to copy the "trecentisti"
as closely as possible. But patriotism in Italy has always had something
municipal in it; so to this Tuscan supremacy, proclaimed and upheld by
Cesari, there was opposed a Lombard school, which would know nothing of
Tuscan, and with Dante's _De vulgari eloquio_ returned to the idea of
the "lingua illustre." This was an old question, largely and bitterly
argued in the Cinquecento (16th century) by Varchi, Muzio, Castelvetro,
Speroni and others. Now the question came up again quite fresh, as if no
one had ever discussed it before. At the head of the Lombard school were
Monti and his son-in-law Count Giulio Perticari. This gave Monti an
occasion to write _Proposta di alcune correzioni ed aggiunte al
vocabolario della Crusca_, in which he attacked the Tuscanism of the
_Crusca_, but in a graceful and easy style, such in fact as to form a
prose that is one of the most beautiful in Italian literature. Perticari
on the other hand, with a very inferior intellect, narrowed and
exasperated the question in two treatises, _Degli scrittori del
Trecento_ and _Dell' amor patrio di Dante_, in which, often disguising
or altering the facts, he only makes confusion where there was none.
Meantime, however, the impulse was given. The dispute about language
took its place beside literary and political disputes, and all Italy
took part in it--Basilio Puoti at Naples, Paolo Costa in the Romagna,
Marc' Antonio Parenti at Modena, Salvatore Betti at Rome, Giovanni
Gherardini in Lombardy, Luigi Fornaciari at Lucca, Vincenzo Nannucci at
Florence.
Giordani.
A patriot, a classicist and a purist all at once was Pietro Giordani,
born in 1774; he was almost a compendium of the literary movement of the
time. His whole life was a battle fought for liberty. Most learned in
Greek and Latin authors, and in the Italian trecentisti, he only left a
few writings behind him, but they were carefully elaborated in point of
style, and his prose was in his time considered wonderful. Now it is
looked on as too majestic, too much laboured in phrases and conceits,
too far from nature, too artificial. Giordani closes the literary epoch
of the classicists.
Manzoni.
7. _Nineteenth Century and After._--At this point the contemporary
period of literature begins. It has been said that the first impulse was
given to it by the romantic school, which had as its organ the
_Conciliatore_ established in 1818 at Milan, and on the staff of which
were Silvio Pellico, Lodovico di Breme, Giovile Scalvini, Tommaso
Grossi, Giovanni Berchet, Samuele Biava and lastly Alessandro Manzoni.
It need not be denied that all these men were influenced by the ideas
that, especially in Germany, at the beginning of the 19th century
constituted the movement called Romanticism. Nevertheless, in Italy the
course of literary reform took another direction. There is no doubt that
the real head of the reform, or at least its most distinguished man, was
Alessandro Manzoni. He formulated in a letter of his the objects of the
new school, saying that it aspired to try and discover and express "il
vero storico" and "il vero morale," not only as an end, but as the
widest and eternal source of the beautiful. And it is precisely realism
in art that characterizes Italian literature from Manzoni onwards. The
_Promessi Sposi_ is the one of his works that has made him immortal. No
doubt the idea of the historical novel came to him from Sir Walter
Scott, but he succeeded in something more than an historical novel in
the narrow meaning of that word; he created an eminently realistic work
of art. The romance disappears; no one cares for the plot, which
moreover is of very little consequence. The attention is entirely fixed
on the powerful objective creation of the characters. From the greatest
to the least they have a wonderful verisimilitude; they are living
persons standing before us, not with the qualities of one time more than
another, but with the human qualities of all time. Manzoni is able to
unfold a character in all particulars, to display it in all its aspects,
to follow it through its different phases. He is able also to seize one
moment, and from that moment to make us guess all the rest. Don Abbondio
and Renzo are as perfect as Azzeccagarbugli and Il Sarto. Manzoni dives
down into the innermost recesses of the human heart, and draws thence
the most subtle psychological reality. In this his greatness lies, which
was recognized first by his companion in genius, Goethe. As a poet too
he had gleams of genius, especially in the Napoleonic ode, _Il Cinque
Maggio_, and where he describes human affections, as in some stanzas of
the _Inni_ and in the chorus of the _Adelchi_. But it is on the
_Promessi Sposi_ alone that his fame now rests.
Leopardi.
The great poet of the age was Leopardi, born thirteen years after
Manzoni at Recanati, of a patrician family, bigoted and avaricious. He
became so familiar with Greek authors that he used afterwards to say
that the Greek mode of thought was more clear and living to his mind
than the Latin or even the Italian. Solitude, sickness, domestic
tyranny, prepared him for profound melancholy. From this he passed into
complete religious scepticism, from which he sought rest in art.
Everything is terrible and grand in his poems, which are the most
agonizing cry in modern literature, uttered with a solemn quietness that
at once elevates and terrifies us. But besides being the greatest poet
of nature and of sorrow, he was also an admirable prose writer. In his
_Operette morali_--dialogues and discourses marked by a cold and bitter
smile at human destinies which freezes the reader--the clearness of
style, the simplicity of language and the depth of conception are such
that perhaps he is not only the greatest lyrical poet since Dante, but
also one of the most perfect writers of prose that Italian literature
has had.
Political literature.
As realism in art gained ground, the positive method in criticism kept
pace with it. From the manner of Botta and Colletta history returned to
its spirit of learned research, as is shown in such works as the
_Archivio storico italiano_, established at Florence by Giampietro
Vieusseux, the _Storia d' Italia nel medio evo_ by Carlo Troya, a
remarkable treatise by Manzoni himself, _Sopra alcuni punti della storia
longobardica in Italia_, and the very fine history of the _Vespri
siciliani_ by Michele Amari. But alongside of the great artists Leopardi
and Manzoni, alongside of the learned scholars, there was also in the
first half of the 19th century a patriotic literature. To a close
observer it will appear that historical learning itself was inspired by
the love of Italy. Giampietro Vieusseux had a distinct political object
when in 1820 he established the monthly review _Antologia_. And it is
equally well known that his _Archivio storico italiano_ (1842) was,
under a different form, a continuation of the _Antologia_, which was
suppressed in 1833 owing to the action of the Russian government.
Florence was in those days the asylum of all the Italian exiles, and
these exiles met and shook hands in Vieusseux's rooms, where there was
more literary than political talk, but where one thought and one only
animated all minds, the thought of Italy.
The literary movement which preceded and was contemporary with the
political revolution of 1848 may be said to be represented by four
writers--Giuseppe Giusti, Francesco Domenico Guerrazzi, Vincenzo
Gioberti and Cesare Balbo. Giusti wrote epigrammatic satires in popular
language. In incisive phrase he scourged the enemies of Italy; his
manner seemed very original, but it really was partly imitated from
Beranger. He was a telling political writer, but a mediocre poet.
Guerrazzi had a great reputation and great influence, but his historical
novels, though read with ferverish avidity before 1848, are now almost
forgotten. Gioberti, a powerful polemical writer, had a noble heart and
a great mind; his philosophical works are now as good as dead, but the
_Primato morale e civile degli Italiani_ will last as an important
document of the times, and the _Gesuita moderno_ will live as the most
tremendous indictment ever written against the Jesuits. Balbo was an
earnest student of history, and made history useful for politics. Like
Gioberti in his first period, Balbo was zealous for the civil papacy,
and for a federation of the Italian states presided over by it. His
_Sommario della storia d' Italia_ is an excellent epitome. (A. Ba.)
Contemporary literature.
After the year 1850 political literature becomes less important, one of
the last poets distinguished in this _genre_ being Francesco dall'
Ongaro, with his _stornelli politici_. For details as to the works of
recent writers, reference may be made to the separate biographical
articles, and here a summary must suffice. Giovanni Prati and Aleardo
Aleardi continue romantic traditions. The dominating figure of this
later period, however, is Giosue Carducci, the opponent of the Romantics
and restorer of the ancient metres and spirit, who, great as a poet, was
scarcely less distinguished as a literary critic and historian. Other
classical poets are Giuseppe Chiarini, Domenico Guoli, Arturo Graf,
Guido Mazzoni and Giovanni Marradi, of whom the two last named may
perhaps be regarded as special disciples of Carducci, while another,
Giovanni Pascoli, best known by his _Myricae_ and _Poemetti_, only began
as such. Enrico Panzacchi (b. 1842) was at heart still a romantic.
Olindo Guerrini (who wrote under the pseudonym of Lorenzo Stecchetti) is
the chief representative of _veriomo_ in poetry, and, though his early
works obtained a _succes de scandale_, he is the author of many lyrics
of intrinsic value. Alfredo Baccelli and Mario Rapisardi are epic poets
of distinction. Felice Cavallotti is the author of the stirring _Marcia
de Leonida_. Among dialect writers, the great Roman poet Giuseppe
Gioachino Belli has found numerous successors, such as Renato Fucini
(Pisa), Berto Barbarini (Verona) and Cesare Pascarella (Rome). Among the
women poets, Ada Negri, with her socialistic _Fatalita_ and _Tempeste_,
has achieved a great reputation; and others, such as Vittoria Aganoor,
A. Brunacci-Brunamonti and Annie Vivanti, are highly esteemed in Italy.
Among the dramatists, Pietro Cossa in tragedy, Gherardi del Testa,
Ferdinando Martini and Paolo Ferrari in comedy, represent the older
schools. More modern methods were adopted by Giuseppe Giacosa and
Gerolamo Rovetta.
In fiction, the historical romance has fallen into disfavour, though
Emilio de Marchi has written some good examples in this genre. The novel
of intrigue was cultivated by Anton Giulio Barrili and Salvatore Farina,
the psychological novel by Enrico Annibale Butti, the realistic local
tale by Giovanni Verga, the mystic philosophical novel by Antonio
Fogazzaro. Edmondo de Amicis, perhaps the most widely read of all modern
Italians, has written acceptable fiction, though his moral works and
travels are more generally known. Of the women novelists, Matilde Serao
and Grazia Deledda have become deservedly popular.
Gabriele d' Annunzio has produced original work in poetry, drama and
fiction, of extraordinary quality. He began with some lyrics which were
distinguished no less by their exquisite beauty of form than by their
licence, and these characteristics reappeared in a long series of poems,
plays and novels. D' Annunzio's position as a man of the widest literary
and artistic culture is undeniable, and even his sternest critics admit
his mastery of the Italian tongue, based on a thorough knowledge of
Italian literature from the earliest times. But with all his genius, his
thought is unhealthy and his pessimism depressing; the beauty of his
work is the beauty of decadence.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Among the more aesthetic accounts of Italian
literature, those of Emiliano Giudici (Florence, 1855) and Francesco
de Sanctis (Naples, 1870) are still the best. Two histories of real
scientific value were interrupted by the death of the authors: that of
Adolfo Bartoli (Florence, 1879-1899) breaking off in the 14th century,
and that of Gaspary (Berlin, 1884-1889; English version, so far only
down to the death of Dante, London, 1901) breaking off before Tasso (a
completion being undertaken by Wendriner). Bartoli's article in the
9th edition of this encyclopaedia has been reproduced, with some
slight revision, above. Among the many recent Italian works, the most
important is the elaborate series of volumes contributing the _Storia
lett. d' Italia scritta da una societa di professori_ (1900 sqq.):
Giussani, _Lett. romana_; Novati, _Origini della lingua_; Zingarelli,
_Dante_; Volpi, _Il Trecento_; Rossi, _Il Quattrocento_; Flamini, _Il
Cinquecento_; Belloni, _Il Seicento_; Concari, _Il Settecento_;
Mazzoni, _L' Ottocento_. Each volume has a full bibliography.
Important German works, besides Gaspary, are those of Wilse and
Percopo (illustrated; Leipzig, 1899), and of Casini (in Grober's
_Grundr. der rom. Phil._, Strassburg, 1896-1899). English students are
referred to Symonds's _Renaissance in Italy_ (especially, but not
exclusively, vols. iv. and v.; new ed., London, 1902), and to R.
Garnett's _History of Italian Literature_ (London, 1898). (H. O.)