II

The poets who belong to this time are numerous enough, but those best

known are Vincenzo Monti and Ugo Foscolo. These men were long the

most conspicuous literati in the capital of Lombardy, but neither was

Lombard. Monti was educated in the folds of Arcadia at Rome; Foscolo

was a native of one of the Greek islands dependent on Venice, and

passed his youth and earlier manhood in the lagoons. The accident of

residence at Milan brought the two men together, and made friends

of those who had naturally very little in common. They can only be

considered together as part of the literary history of the time in

which they both happened to be born, and as one of its most striking

contrasts.

In 1802, Napoleon bestowed a republican constitution on Lombardy and

the other provinces of Italy which had been united under the name of

the Cisalpine Republic, and Milan became the capital of the new state.

Thither at once turned all that was patriotic, hopeful, and ambitious

in Italian life; and though one must not judge this phase of Italian

civilization from Vincenzo Monti, it is an interesting comment on its

effervescent, unstable, fictitious, and partial nature that he was its

most conspicuous poet. Few men appear so base as Monti; but it is not

certain that he was of more fickle and truthless soul than many other

contemplative and cultivated men of the poetic temperament who are

never confronted with exigent events, and who therefore never betray

the vast difference that lies between the ideal heroism of the poet's

vision and the actual heroism of occasion. We all have excellent

principles until we are tempted, and it was Monti's misfortune to be

born in an age which put his principles to the test, with a prospect

of more than the usual prosperity in reward for servility and

compliance, and more than the usual want, suffering, and danger in

punishment of candor and constancy.

He was born near Ferrara in 1754; and having early distinguished

himself in poetry, he was conducted to Rome by the Cardinal-Legate

Borghesi. At Rome he entered the Arcadian fold of course, and piped

by rule there with extraordinary acceptance, and might have died a

Shepherd but for the French Revolution, which broke out and gave him

a chance to be a Man. The secretary of the French Legation at Naples,

appearing in Rome with the tri-color of the Republic, was attacked by

the foolish populace, and killed; and Monti, the petted and caressed

of priests, the elegant and tuneful young poet in the train of

Cardinal Borghesi, seized the event of Ugo Bassville's death, and

turned it to epic account. In the moment of dissolution, Bassville,

repenting his republicanism, receives pardon; but, as a condition of

his acceptance into final bliss, he is shown, through several cantos

of _terza rima_, the woes which the Revolution has brought upon France

and the world. The bad people of the poem are naturally the French

Revolutionists; the good people, those who hate them. The most admired

episode is that descriptive of poor Louis XVI.'s ascent into heaven

from the scaffold.

{Illustration: VINCENZO MONTI.}

There is some reason to suppose that Monti was sincerer in this

poem than in any other of political bearing which he wrote; and the

Dantesque plan of the work gave it, with the occasional help of

Dante's own phraseology and many fine turns of expression picked up

in the course of a multifarious reading, a dignity from which the

absurdity of the apotheosis of priests and princes detracted nothing

among its readers. At any rate, it was received by Arcadia with

rapturous acclaim, though its theme was _not_ the Golden Age; and on

the _Bassvilliana_ the little that is solid in Monti's fame rests at

this day. His lyric poetry is seldom quoted; his tragedies are no

longer played, not even his _Galeoto Manfredi_, in which he has stolen

almost enough from Shakespeare to vitalize one of the characters.

After a while the Romans wearied of their idol, and began to attack

him in politics and literature; and in 1797 Monti, after a sojourn of

twenty years in the Papal capital, fled from Rome to Milan. Here he

was assailed in one of the journals by a fanatical Neapolitan, who had

also written a _Bassvilliana_, but with celestial powers, heroes and

martyrs of French politics, and who now accused Monti of enmity to the

rights of man. Monti responded by a letter to this poet, in which

he declared that his _Bassvilliana_ was no expression of his own

feelings, but that he had merely written it to escape the fury of

Bassville's murderers, who were incensed against him as Bassville's

friend! But for all this the _Bassvilliana_ was publicly burnt before

the cathedral in Milan, and Monti was turned out of a government place

he had got, because “he had published books calculated to inspire

hatred of democracy, or predilection for the government of kings, of

theocrats and aristocrats.” The poet was equal to this exigency; and

he now reprinted his works, and made them praise the French and the

revolutionists wherever they had blamed them before; all the bad

systems and characters were depicted as monarchies and kings and

popes, instead of anarchies and demagogues. Bonaparte was exalted,

and poor Louis XVI., sent to heaven with so much ceremony in the

_Bassvilliana_, was abased in a later ode on Superstition.

Monti was amazed that all this did not suffice “to overcome that fatal

combination of circumstances which had caused him to be judged as

the courtier of despotism.” “How gladly,” he writes, “would I have

accepted the destiny which envy could not reach! But this scourge of

honest men clings to my flesh, and I cannot hope to escape it, except

I turn scoundrel to become fortunate!” When the Austrians returned to

Milan, the only honest man unhanged in Italy fled with other democrats

to Paris, whither the fatal combination of circumstances followed him,

and caused him to be looked on with coldness and suspicion by the

republicans. After Bonaparte was made First Consul, Monti invoked his

might against the Germans in Italy, and carried his own injured virtue

back to Milan in the train of the conqueror. When Bonaparte was

crowned emperor, this democrat and patriot was the first to hail and

glorify him; and the emperor rewarded the poet's devotion with a chair

in the University of Pavia, and a pension attached to the place of

Historiographer. Monti accepted the honors and emoluments due to

long-suffering integrity and inalterable virtue, and continued in the

enjoyment of them till the Austrians came back to Milan a second time,

in 1815, when his chaste muse was stirred to a new passion by the

charms of German despotism, and celebrated as “the wise, the just, the

best of kings, Francis Augustus”, who, if one were to believe Monti,

“in war was a whirlwind and in peace a zephyr.” But the heavy

Austrian, who knew he was nothing of the kind, thrust out his surly

under lip at these blandishments, said that this muse's favors were

mercenary, and cut off Monti's pension. Stung by such ingratitude,

the victim of his own honesty retired forever from courts, and

thenceforward sang only the merits of rich persons in private station,

who could afford to pay for spontaneous and incorruptible adulation.

He died in 1826, having probably endured more pain and rungreater

peril in his desire to avoid danger and suffering than the bravest and

truest man in a time when courage and truth seldom went in company.

It is not probable that he thought himself despicable or other than

unjustly wretched.

Perhaps, after all, he was not so greatly to blame. As De Sanctis

subtly observes: “He was always a liberal. How not be liberal in those

days when even the reactionaries shouted for liberty--of course,

_true_ liberty, as they called it? And in that name he glorified all

governments.... And it was not with hypocrisy.... He was a man who

would have liked to reconcile the old and the new ideas, all opinions,

yet, being forced to choose, he clung to the majority, with no desire

to play the martyr. So he became the secretary of the dominant

feeling, the poet of success. Kindly, tolerant, sincere, a good

friend, a courtier more from necessity and weakness than perversity or

wickedness; if he could have retired into his own heart, he might have

come out a poet.” Monti, in fact, was always an _improvvisatore_, and

the subjects which events cast in his way were like the themes which

the improvvisatore receives from his audience. He applied his poetic

faculty to their celebration with marvelous facility, and, doubtless,

regarded the results as rhetorical feats. His poetry was an art, not a

principle; and perhaps he was really surprised when people thought him

in earnest, and held him personally to account for what he wrote. “A

man of sensation, rather than sentiment,” says Arnaud, “Monti cared

only for the objective side of life. He poured out melodies, colors,

and chaff in the service of all causes; he was the poet-advocate, the

Siren of the Italian Parnassus.” Of course such a man instinctively

hated the ideas of the Romantic school, and he contested their

progress in literature with great bitterness. He believed that poetry

meant feigning, not making; and he declared that “the hard truth was

the grave of the beautiful.” The latter years of his life were spent

in futile battle with the “audacious boreal school” and in noxious

revival of the foolish old disputes of the Italian grammarians; and

Emiliani-Giudici condemns him for having done more than any enemy

of his country to turn Italian thought from questions of patriotic

interest to questions of philology, from the unity of Italy to the

unity of the language, from the usurpations and tyranny of Austria to

the assumptions of Della Crusca. But Monti could scarcely help any

cause which he espoused; and it seems to me that he was as well

employed in disputing the claims of the Tuscan dialect to be

considered the Italian language as he would have been in any other

way. The wonderful facility, no less than the unreality, of the

man appears in many things, but in none more remarkably than his

translation of Homer, which is the translation universally accepted

and approved in Italy. He knew little more than the Greek alphabet,

and produced his translation from the preceding versions in Latin and

Italian, submitting the work to the correction of eminent scholars

before he printed it. His poems fill many volumes; and all display the

ease, perspicuity, and obvious beauty of the improvvisatore. From a

fathomless memory, he drew felicities which had clung to it in his

vast reading, and gave them a new excellence by the art with which

he presented them as new. The commonplace Italians long continued to

speak awfully of Monti as a great poet, because the commonplace mind

regards everything established as great. He is a classic of those

classics common to all languages--dead corpses which retain their

forms perfectly in the coffin, but crumble to dust as soon as exposed

to the air.

Modern Italian Poets; Essays and Versions · 第 60 / 127 题