CHAPTER III

FIRST PERIOD OF HUMANISM

Condition of the Universities in Italy -- Bologna -- High

Schools founded from it -- Naples under Frederick II. --

Under the House of Anjou -- Ferrara -- Piacenza -- Perugia

-- Rome -- Pisa -- Florence -- Imperial and Papal Charters

-- Foreign Students -- Professorial Staff -- Subjects taught

in the High Schools -- Place assigned to Humanism -- Pay of

the Professors of Eloquence -- Francesco Filelfo -- The

Humanists less powerful at the Universities -- Method of

Humanistic Teaching -- The Book Market before Printing --

Mediæval Libraries -- Cost of Manuscripts -- _Stationarii_

and _Peciarii_ -- Negligence of Copyists -- Discovery of

Classical Codices -- Boccaccio at Monte Cassino -- Poggio at

Constance -- Convent of S. Gallen -- Bruni's Letter to

Poggio -- Manuscripts discovered by Poggio -- Nicholas of

Treves -- Collection of Greek Manuscripts -- Aurispa,

Filelfo, and Guarino -- The Ruins of Rome -- Their Influence

on Humanism -- Dante and Villani -- Rienzi -- His Idealistic

Patriotism -- Vanity -- Political Incompetence -- Petrarch's

Relations with Rienzi -- Injury to Monuments in Rome --

Poggio's Roman Topography -- Sentimental Feeling for the

Ruins of Antiquity -- Ciriac of Ancona.

Having so far traced the quickening of a new sense for antiquity among

the Italians, it will be well at this point to consider the external

resources of Humanism before continuing the history of the Revival in

the fifteenth century. The condition of the universities, the state of

the book trade before the invention of printing, and the discovery of

manuscripts claim separate attention; nor may it be out of place to

inquire what stimulus the enthusiasm for classical studies received

from the ruins of Rome. A review of these topics will help to explain

the circumstances under which the pioneers of culture had to labour,

and the nature of the crusade they instituted against ignorance in

every part of Europe.

The oldest and most frequented university in Italy, that of Bologna,

is represented as having flourished in the twelfth century.[73] Its

prosperity in early times depended greatly on the personal conduct of

the principal professors, who, when they were not satisfied with their

entertainment, were in the habit of seceding with their pupils to

other cities. Thus high schools were opened from time to time in

Modena, Reggio, and elsewhere by teachers who broke the oaths that

bound them to reside in Bologna, and fixed their centre of education

in a rival town. To make such temporary changes was not difficult in

an age when what we have to call an university, consisted of masters

and scholars, without college buildings, without libraries, without

endowments, and without scientific apparatus. The technical name for

such institutions seems to have been _studium scholarium_, Italianised

into _studio_ or _studio pubblico_.[74] Among the more permanent

results of these secessions may be mentioned the establishment of the

high school at Vicenza by translation from Bologna in 1204, and the

opening of a school at Arezzo under similar circumstances in 1215; the

great University of Padua first saw the light in consequence of

political discords forcing the professors to quit Bologna for a

season.[75]

[Footnote 73: Tiraboschi, _Storia della Letteratura Italiana_, vol.

iv. p. 42 _et seq._, vol. v. p. 60 _et seq._ Large quarto, Modena,

1787.]

[Footnote 74: See Muratori, vol. viii. 15, 75, 372. Matteo Villani,

lib. i. cap. 8.]

[Footnote 75: 'Hoc anno translatum est Studium Scholarium de Bononiâ

Paduam.' Mur. viii. 372.]

The first half of the thirteenth century witnessed the foundation of

these _studi_ in considerable numbers. That of Vercelli was opened in

1228, the municipality providing two certified copyists for the

convenience of students who might wish to purchase text-books.[76] In

1224 the Emperor Frederick II., to whom the south of Italy owed a

precocious eminence in literature, established the University of

Naples by an Imperial diploma.[77] With a view to rendering it the

chief seat of learning in his dominions, he forbade the subjects of

the Regno to frequent other schools, and suppressed the University of

Bologna by letters general. Thereupon Bologna joined the Lombard

League, defied the emperor, and refused to close the schools, which

numbered at that period about ten thousand students of various

nationalities. In 1227 Frederick revoked his edict, and Bologna

remained thenceforward unmolested. Political and internal

vicissitudes, affecting all the Italian universities at this period,

interrupted the prosperity of that of Naples. In the middle of the

thirteenth century Salerno proved a dangerous rival; but when the

House of Anjou was established in the kingdom of the Sicilies, special

privileges were granted, restoring the high school of the capital to

the first rank. Charles I. created a separate court of jurisdiction

for its management. This consisted of a judge and three assessors, one

for the control of foreigners, another for the subjects of the Regno,

and the third for Italians from other states.

[Footnote 76: They were called 'Exemplatores.' See Tiraboschi, vol.

iv. lib. i cap. 2.]

[Footnote 77: Muratori, vii. p. 997. Amari, _Storia dei Mussulmani di

Sicilia_, vol. iii. p. 706.]

In 1264 we find a public school in operation at Ferrara. By its

charter the professors were exempt from military service. The

University of Piacenza came into existence a little earlier. Innocent

IV. established it in 1248, with privileges similar to those of Paris

and Bologna. An important group of _studi pubblici_ owed their origin

to Papal or Imperial charters in the first half of the fourteenth

century. That of Perugia was founded in 1307 by a Bull of Clement V.

That of Rome dated from 1303, in which year Boniface VIII. gave it a

constitution by a special edict; but the translation of the Papal See

to Avignon caused it to fall into premature decadence. The University

of Pisa had already existed for some years, when it received a charter

in 1343 from Clement VI. That of Florence was first founded in

1321.[78] In 1348 a place for its public buildings was assigned

between the Duomo and the Palazzo Pubblico, on the site of what was

afterwards known as the Collegium Eugenianum. A council of eight

burghers was appointed for its management, and a yearly sum was set

apart for its maintenance. In 1349 Clement VI. gave it the same

privileges as the University of Bologna, while in 1364 it received an

Imperial diploma from Charles IV. The same emperor granted charters to

Siena in 1357, to Arezzo in 1356, and to Lucca in 1369. In 1362

Galeazzo Visconti obtained a charter for his University of Pavia from

Charles IV., with the privileges of Paris, Oxford, and Bologna.

[Footnote 78: See Von Reumont, _Lorenzo de' Medici_, vol. i. p. 521.]

It will be observed that the majority of the _studi pubblici_ obtained

charters either from the Pope or the emperor, or from both, less for

the sake of any immediate benefit to be derived from Papal or Imperial

patronage, than because supreme authority in Italy was still referred

to one or other of these heads. It was a great object with each city

to increase its wealth by attracting foreigners as residents, and to

retain the native youth within its precincts. The municipalities,

therefore, accorded immunities from taxation and military service to

_bona fide_ students, prohibited their burghers from seeking rival

places of learning, and in some cases allowed the university

authorities to exercise a special jurisdiction over the motley

multitude of scholars from all countries. How miscellaneous the

concourse in some of the high schools used to be, may be gathered from

the reports extracted by Tiraboschi from their registers. At Vicenza,

for example, in 1209 we find the names of Bohemians, Poles,

Frenchmen, Burgundians, Germans, and Spaniards, as well as of Italians

of divers towns. The rectors of this _studio_ in 1205 included an

Englishman, a Provençal, a German, and a Cremonese. The list of

illustrious students at Bologna between 1265 and 1294 show men of all

the European nationalities, proving that the foreigners attracted by

the university must have formed no inconsiderable element in the whole

population.[79] This will account for the prominent part played by the

students from time to time in the political history of Bologna.[80]

[Footnote 79: In 1320 there were at least 15,000 students in Bologna.]

[Footnote 80: See Sismondi, vol. iii. p. 349.]

The importance attached by great cities to their universities as a

source of strength, may be gathered from the chapter in Matteo

Villani's Chronicle describing the foundation of the _studio pubblico_

in Florence.[81] He expressly mentions that the Signory were induced

to take this step in consequence of the depopulation inflicted by the

Black Death of 1348. By drawing residents to Florence from other

States, they hoped to increase the number of the inhabitants, and to

restore the decayed fame and splendour of the commonwealth.[82] At the

same time they thought that serious studies might put an end to the

demoralisation produced in all classes by the plague. With this object

in view, they engaged the best teachers, and did not hesitate to

devote a yearly sum of 2,500 golden florins to the maintenance of

their high school. Bologna, which owed even more than Florence to its

university, is said to have lavished as much as half of its revenue,

about 20,000 ducats, on the pay of professors and other incidental

expenses. The actual cost incurred by cities through their schools

cannot, however, be accurately estimated, since it varied from year to

year according to the engagements made with special teachers. At

Pavia, for example, in 1400, the university supported in Canon Law

several eminent doctors, in Civil Law thirteen, in Medicine five, in

Philosophy three, in Astrology one, in Greek one, and in Eloquence

one.[83] Whether this staff was maintained after the lapse of another

twenty years we do not know for certain.

[Footnote 81: Lib. i. cap. 8.]

[Footnote 82: 'Volendo attrarre gente alla nostra città, e dilatarla

in onore, e dare materia a' suoi cittadini d'essere scienziati e

virtudiosi.']

[Footnote 83: Cf. Corio, p. 290. He gives the names of the professors

who attended at the funeral of Gian Galeazzo Visconti.]

The subjects taught in the high schools were Canon and Civil Law,

Medicine, and Theology. These faculties, important for the

professional education of the public, formed the staple of the

academical curriculum. Chairs of Rhetoric, Philosophy, and Astronomy

were added according to occasion, the last sometimes including the

study of judicial astrology. If we inquire how the humanists or

professors of classic literature were related to the universities, we

find that, at first at any rate, they always occupied a second rank.

The permanent teaching remained in the hands of jurists, who enjoyed

life engagements at a high rate of pay, while the Latinists and

Grecians could only aspire to the temporary occupation of the Chair of

Rhetoric, with salaries considerably lower than those of lawyers or

physicians. The cause of this inferiority is easily explained. It was

natural that important and remunerative branches of learning like law

and medicine should attract a greater number of students than pure

literature, and that their professors should be better paid than the

teachers of eloquence. Padua, Bologna, and Pavia in particular

retained their legal speciality throughout the period of the

Renaissance, and remained but little open to humanistic influences. At

Padua we find from Sanudo's Diary[84] that an eminent jurist received

a stipend of 1,000 ducats. A Doctor of Medicine at the same

university, in 1491, received a similar stipend, together with the

right of private practice. At Bologna the famous jurist Abbas Siculus

(Niccolo de' Tudeschi) drew 800 scudi yearly; at Padua Giovanni da

Imola in 1406, and Paolo da Castro in 1430, drew a sum of 600

ducats.[85] About the same time (1453) Lauro Quirino, who professed

rhetoric at Padua, was paid at the rate of only forty ducats yearly,

while Lorenzo Valla, at Pavia, filled the Chair of Eloquence with an

annual stipend of fifty sequins. The disparity between the

remuneration of jurists and that of humanists was not so great at all

the universities. Florence in especial formed a notable exception.

From the date of its commencement the Florentine _studio_ was partial

to literature; and it is worth remarking that when Lorenzo de' Medici

transferred the high school to Pisa, he retained at Florence the

professors of the liberal sciences and _belles-lettres_. The great

reputation of eminent rhetoricians, again, often secured for them

temporary engagements at a high rate. Thus we gather from Rosmini's

'Life of Filelfo' that this humanist received from Venice the offer of

500 sequins yearly as remuneration for his professorial services.

Bologna proposed an annual stipend of 450 sequins when he undertook to

lecture upon eloquence and moral philosophy. At Florence his income

amounted to 350 golden florins, secured for three years, and

subsequently raised to 450. With Siena he stipulated for 350 golden

florins for two years. At Milan his Chair of Eloquence was endowed

with 500 golden florins, and this salary was afterwards increased to

700. Nicholas V. offered him an annual income of 600 ducats if he

would devote himself to the translation of Greek books into Latin,

while Sixtus IV. tried to bring him to Rome by proposing 600 Roman

florins as the stipend of the Chair of Rhetoric.

[Footnote 84: Mur. xxii. 990.]

[Footnote 85: See Voigt, p. 447.]

The fact, however, remains that while the special study of antiquity

preoccupied the minds of the Italians, and attracted all the finer

intellects among the youth ambitious of distinction, its professors

never succeeded in taking complete possession of the universities.

Their position there was always that of wandering stars and resident

aliens. This accounts in some measure for the bitter hostility and

scorn which they displayed against the teachers of theology and law

and medicine. The real home of the humanists was in the Courts of

princes, the palaces of the cultivated burghers, the Roman Curia, and

the chanceries of the republics. As secretaries, house tutors,

readers, Court poets, historiographers, public orators, and companions

they were indispensable. We shall therefore find that the private

academies formed by the literati and their patrons, the schools of

princes established at Mantua and Ferrara, and the residences of great

nobles play a more important part in the history of humanism than do

the universities. At the same time the spirit of the new culture

diffused by the humanists so thoroughly permeated the whole

intellectual activity of the Italians, that in course of time the

special studies of the high schools assumed a more literary and

liberal form. The classics then supplied the starting-point for

juristic and medical disquisitions. Poliziano was seen lecturing upon

the Pandects of Justinian, while Pomponazzi made the Chair of

Philosophy at Padua subservient to the exposition of materialism. This

triumph of humanism, like its triumph in the Church, was effected less

by immediate working on the universities than by a gradual and

indirect determination of the whole race towards the study of

antiquity.

In picturing to ourselves the method pursued by the humanists in the

instruction of their classes, we must divest our minds of all

associations with the practice of modern professors. Very few of the

students whom the master saw before him, possessed more than meagre

portions of the text of Virgil or of Cicero; they had no notes,

grammars, lexicons, or dictionaries of antiquities and mythology, to

help them. It was therefore necessary for the lecturer to dictate

quotations, to repeat parallel passages at full length, to explain

geographical and historical allusions, to analyse the structure of

sentences in detail, to provide copious illustrations of grammatical

usage, to trace the stages by which a word acquired its meaning in a

special context, to command a full vocabulary of synonyms, to give

rules for orthography, and to have the whole Pantheon at his fingers'

ends. In addition to this he was expected to comment upon the meaning

of his author, to interpret his philosophy, to point out the beauties

of his style, to introduce appropriate moral disquisition on his

doctrine, to sketch his biography, and to give some account of his

relation to the history of his country and to his predecessors in the

field of letters. In short, the professor of rhetoric had to be a

grammarian, a philologer, an historian, a stylist, and a sage in one.

He was obliged to pretend at least to an encyclopædic knowledge of the

classics, and to retain whole volumes in his memory. All these

requirements, which seem to have been satisfied by such men as Filelfo

and Poliziano, made the profession of eloquence--for so the varied

subject matter of humanism was often called--a very different business

from that which occupies a lecturer of the present century. Scores of

students, old and young, with nothing but pen and paper on the desks

before them, sat patiently recording what the lecturer said. At the

end of his discourses on the 'Georgics' or the 'Verrines,' each of

them carried away a compendious volume, containing a transcript of the

author's text, together with a miscellaneous mass of notes, critical,

explanatory, ethical, æsthetical, historical, and biographical. In

other words, a book had been dictated, and as many scores of copies as

there were attentive pupils had been made.[86] The language used was

Latin. No dialect of Italian could have been intelligible to the

students of different nationalities who crowded the lecture-rooms. The

elementary education in grammar requisite for following a professorial

course of lectures had been previously provided by the teachers of the

Latin schools, which depended for maintenance partly on the State[87]

and partly on private enterprise. The Church does not seem to have

undertaken the management of these primary boys' schools.

[Footnote 86: Many of the earliest printed editions of the Latin poets

give an exact notion of what such lectures must have been. The text is

embedded in an all-embracing commentary.]

[Footnote 87: Cf. Villani's Statistics of Florence, and Corio's of

Milan.]

Since this was the nature of academical instruction in the humanities

before the age of printing, it followed that the professor had a

direct interest in frequently shifting his scene of operations. More

than a certain number of such books as I have just attempted to

describe could not be carried in his head. After he had dictated his

work on the 'Georgics' at Florence, he was naturally anxious to move

to Milan and to do the same. A new audience gave new value to his

lectures, and another edition, as it were, of his book was put in

circulation. In the correspondence which passed between professors and

the rectors of the high schools previously to an engagement, we

sometimes find that the former undertake to explain particular authors

during their proposed residence. On these authors they had no doubt

bestowed the best years of their lives, making them the vehicle for

all the miscellaneous learning they possessed, and grounding their

fame upon the beauty, clearness, and copiousness of their

exposition.[88]

[Footnote 88: For humorous but vivid pictures of a professor's

lecture-room, see the macaronic poems of Odassi and Fossa quoted by me

in vol. v. of this work.]

Having described the conditions under which professorial teaching was

conducted in the fifteenth century, it is now of some importance to

form a notion of the state of the book market and the diffusion of

MSS. before the invention of printing. Difficult as it is to speak

with accuracy on these topics some facts must be collected, seeing

that the high price and comparative rarity of books contributed in a

very important degree to determine the character of the instruction

provided by the humanists.

Scarcity of books was at first a chief impediment to the study of

antiquity. Popes and princes and even great religious institutions

possessed far fewer books than many farmers of the present age. The

library belonging to the Cathedral Church of S. Martino at Lucca in

the ninth century contained only nineteen volumes of abridgments from

ecclesiastical commentaries. The Cathedral of Novara in 1212 could

boast copies of Boethius, Priscian, the 'Code of Justinian,' the

'Decretals,' and the 'Etymology' of Isidorus, besides a Bible and some

devotional treatises.[89] This slender stock passed for great riches.

Each of the precious volumes in such a collection was an epitome of

mediæval art. Its pages were composed of fine vellum adorned with

pictures.[90] The initial letters displayed elaborate flourishes and

exquisitely illuminated groups of figures. The scribe took pains to

render his caligraphy perfect, and to ornament the margins with

crimson, gold, and blue. Then he handed the parchment sheets to the

binder, who encased them in rich settings of velvet or carved ivory

and wood, embossed with gold and precious stones. The edges were gilt

and stamped with patterns. The clasps were of wrought silver, chased

with niello. The price of such masterpieces was enormous. Borso

d'Este, in 1464, gave eight gold ducats to Gherardo Ghislieri of

Bologna for an illuminated Lancellotto, and in 1469 he bought a

Josephus and Quintus Curtius for forty ducats.[91] His great Bible in

two volumes is said to have cost 1,375 sequins. Rinaldo degli Albizzi

notes in his Memoirs that he paid eleven golden florins for a Bible at

Arezzo in 1406. Of these MSS. the greater part were manufactured in

the cloisters, and it was here too that the martyrdom of ancient

authors took place. Lucretius and Livy gave place to chronicles,

antiphonaries, and homilies. Parchment was extremely dear, and the

scrolls which nobody could read might be scraped and washed.

Accordingly, the copyist erased the learning of the ancients, and

filled the fair blank space he gained with litanies. At the same time

it is but just to the monks to add that palimpsests have occasionally

been found in which ecclesiastical works have yielded place to copies

of the Latin poets used in elementary education.[92]

[Footnote 89: See Cantù, _Storia della Letteratura Italiana_, p. 105,

note.]

[Footnote 90: 'Hodie Scriptores non sunt Scriptores sed Pictores,'

quoted by Tiraboschi, vol. iv. lib. i. cap. 4.]

[Footnote 91: See Cantù, loc. cit. p. 104.]

[Footnote 92: See Comparetti, vol. i. p. 114.]

Another obstacle to the diffusion of learning was the incompetence of

the copyists. It is true that at the great universities _stationarii_,

who supplied the text-books in use to students, were certified and

subjected to the control of special censors called _peciarii_. Yet

their number was not large, and when they quitted the routine to which

they were accustomed their incapacity betrayed itself by numerous

errors.[93] Petrarch's invective against the professional copyists

shows the depth to which the art had sunk. 'Who,' he exclaims, 'will

discover a cure for the ignorance and vile sloth of these copyists,

who spoil everything and turn it to nonsense? If Cicero, Livy, and

other illustrious ancients were to return to life, do you think they

would understand their own works? There is no check upon these

copyists, selected without examination or test of their capacity.

Workmen, husbandmen, weavers, artisans, are not indulged in the same

liberty.'[94] Coluccio Salutato repeats the same complaint, averring

that the copies of Dante and Petrarch no more correspond to the

originals than bad statues to the men they pretend to represent. At

the same time the copyists formed a necessary and flourishing class of

craftsmen. They were well paid. Ambrogio Traversari told his friend

Giustiniani in 1430 that he could recommend him a good scribe at the

pay of thirty golden florins a year and his keep. Under these

circumstances it was usual for even the most eminent scholars, like

Petrarch, Boccaccio, and Poggio, to make their own copies of MSS.

Niccolo de' Niccoli transcribed nearly the whole of the codices that

formed the nucleus of the Library of the Mark. Sometimes they sold

them or made advantageous changes. Poggio, for example, sold two

volumes of S. Jerome's 'Letters' to Lionello d'Este for 100 golden

florins. Beccadelli bought a Livy from him for 120 golden florins,

having parted with a farm to defray the expense. It is clear that the

first step toward the revival of learning implied three things:

first, the collection of MSS. wherever they could be saved from the

indolence of the monks; secondly, the formation of libraries for their

preservation; and, thirdly, the invention of an art whereby they might

be multiplied cheaply, conveniently, and accurately.

[Footnote 93: In Milan, in the fourteenth century, when the population

was estimated at about 200,000, the town could boast of only fifty

copyists. Tirab. loc. cit. cap. 4.]

[Footnote 94: _De Remediis utriusque Fortunæ_, lib. i. dial. 43, p.

42. The passage condensed above is so valuable for a right

understanding of the humanistic feeling about manuscripts that I shall

transcribe portions of the original:--'Libri innumerabiles sunt mihi.

Et errores innumeri, quidam ab impiis, alii ab indoctis editi. Illi

quidem religioni ac pietati et divinis literis, hi naturæ ac justitiæ

moribusque et liberalibus disciplinis seu historiæ rerumque gestarum

fidei, omnes autem vero adversi; inque omnibus, et præsertim primis

ubi majoribus agitur de rebus, et vera falsis immixta sunt,

perdifficilis ac periculosa discretio est ... scriptorum inscitiæ

inertiæque, corrumpenti omnia miscentique ... ignavissima ætas hæc

culinæ solicita, literarum negligens, et coquos examinans non

scriptores. Quisquis itaque pingere aliquid in membranis, manuque

calamum versare didicerit, scriptor habebitur, doctrinæ omnis ignarus,

expers ingenii, artis egens ... nunc confusis exemplaribus et

exemplis, unum scribere polliciti, sic aliud scribunt ut quod ipse

dictaveris, non agnoscas ... accedunt et scriptores nullâ frenati

lege, nullo probati examine, nullo judicio electi; non fabris, non

agricolis, non textoribus, non ulli fere artium tanta licentia est,

cum sit in aliis leve periculum, in hâc grave; sine delectu tamen

scribendum ruunt omnes, et cuncta vastantibus certa sunt pretia.']

The labour involved in the collection of classical manuscripts had to

be performed by a few enthusiastic scholars, who received no help from

the universities and their academical scribes, and who met with no

sympathy in the monasteries they were bent on ransacking. The new

culture demanded wholly new machinery; and new runners in the

torch-race of civilisation sprang into existence. The high schools

were contented with their summaries and glosses. The monks performed

at best the work of earthworms, who unwittingly preserve fragments of

Greek architecture from corrosion by heaping mounds of mould and

rubbish round them. Meanwhile the humanists went forth with the

instinct of explorers to release the captives and awake the dead. From

the convent libraries of Italy, from the museums of Constantinople,

from the abbeys of Germany and Switzerland and France, the slumbering

spirits of the ancients had to be evoked. The chivalry of learning,

banded together for this service, might be likened to Crusaders. As

the Franks deemed themselves thrice blest if they returned with relics

from Jerusalem, so these new Knights of the Holy Ghost, seeking not

the sepulchre of a risen God, but the tombs wherein the genius of the

ancient world awaited resurrection, felt holy transports when a brown,

begrimed, and crabbed copy of some Greek or Latin author rewarded

their patient quest. Days and nights they spent in carefully

transcribing it, comparing their own MS. with the original,

multiplying facsimiles, and sending them abroad with free hands to

students who in their turn took copies, till the treasure-trove became

the common property of all who could appreciate its value. This work

of discovery began with Petrarch. I have already alluded to the

journeys he undertook in the hope of collecting the lost MSS. of

Cicero. It was carried on by Boccaccio. The account given by Benvenuto

da Imola of Boccaccio's visit to Monte Cassino brings vividly before

us both the ardour of these first explorers and the apathy of the

Benedictines (who have sometimes been called the saviours of learning)

with regard to the treasures of their own libraries:[95]--'With a view

to the clearer understanding of this text ('Paradiso,' xxii. 74), I

will relate what my revered teacher, Boccaccio of Certaldo, humorously

told me. He said that when he was in Apulia, attracted by the

celebrity of the convent, he paid a visit to Monte Cassino, whereof

Dante speaks. Desirous of seeing the collection of books, which he

understood to be a very choice one, he modestly asked a monk--for he

was always most courteous in manners--to open the library, as a

favour, for him. The monk answered stiffly, pointing to a steep

staircase, "Go up; it is open." Boccaccio went up gladly; but he found

that the place which held so great a treasure, was without or

[Transcriber's Note: should be 'a'] door or key. He entered, and saw

grass sprouting on the windows, and all the books and benches thick

with dust. In his astonishment he began to open and turn the leaves of

first one tome and then another, and found many and divers volumes of

ancient and foreign works. Some of them had lost several sheets;

others were snipped and pared all round the text, and mutilated in

various ways. At length, lamenting that the toil and study of so many

illustrious men should have passed into the hands of most abandoned

wretches, he departed with tears and sighs. Coming to the cloister, he

asked a monk whom he met, why those valuable books had been so

disgracefully mangled. He answered that the monks, seeking to gain a

few _soldi_, were in the habit of cutting off sheets and making

psalters, which they sold to boys. The margins too they manufactured

into charms, and sold to women. So then, O man of study, go to and

rack your brains; make books that you may come to this!'

[Footnote 95: 'Commentary on the _Divine Comedy_,' ap. Muratori,

_Antiq. Ital._ vol. i. p. 1296.]

What Italy contained of ancient codices soon saw the light. The visit

of Poggio Bracciolini to Constance (1414) opened up for Italian

scholars the stores that lay neglected in transalpine monasteries.

Poggio's office of Apostolic Secretary obliged him to attend the

Council of Constance for the purpose of framing reports and composing

diplomatic documents. At the same time he had ample leisure on his

hands, and this he spent in exploring the libraries of Swiss and

Suabian convents. The treasures he unearthed at Reichenau, Weingarten,

and above all S. Gallen, restored to Italy many lost masterpieces of

Latin literature, and supplied students with full texts of authors who

had hitherto been known in mutilated copies. The account he gave of

his visit to S. Gallen in a Latin letter to a friend is justly

celebrated.[96] After describing the wretched state in which the

'Institutions' of Quintilian had previously existed,[97] he proceeds

as follows:--'I verily believe that, if we had not come to the rescue,

he [Quintilian] must speedily have perished; for it cannot be imagined

that a man magnificent, polished, elegant, urbane, and witty could

much longer have endured the squalor of the prison-house in which I

found him, the savagery of his jailers, the forlorn filth of the

place. He was indeed right sad to look upon, and ragged, like a

condemned criminal, with rough beard and matted hair, protesting by

his countenance and garb against the injustice of his sentence. He

seemed to be stretching out his hands, calling upon the Romans,

demanding to be saved from so unmerited a doom. Hard indeed it was

for him to bear, that he who had preserved the lives of many by his

eloquence and aid, should now find no redresser of his wrongs, no

saviour from the unjust punishment awaiting him. But as it often

happens, to quote Terence, that what you dare not wish for comes to

you by chance, so a good fortune for him, but far more for ourselves,

led us, while wasting our time in idleness at Constance, to take a

fancy for visiting the place where he was held in prison. The

monastery of S. Gallen lies at the distance of some twenty miles from

that city. Thither, then, partly for the sake of amusement and partly

of finding books, whereof we heard there was a large collection in the

convent, we directed our steps. In the middle of a well-stocked

library, too large to catalogue at present, we discovered Quintilian,

safe as yet and sound, though covered with dust and filthy with

neglect and age. The books, you must know, were not housed according

to their worth, but were lying in a most foul and obscure dungeon at

the very bottom of a tower, a place into which condemned criminals

would hardly have been thrust; and I am firmly persuaded that if

anyone would but explore those _ergastula_ of the barbarians wherein

they incarcerate such men, we should meet with like good fortune in

the case of many whose funeral orations have long ago been pronounced.

Besides Quintilian, we exhumed the three first books and a half of the

fourth book of the "Argonautica" of Flaccus, and the "Commentaries" of

Asconius Pedianus upon eight orations of Cicero.' Poggio, immediately

after this discovery, set himself to work at transcribing the

Quintilian, a labour accomplished in the brief space of thirty-two

days. The MS. was then despatched to Lionardo Bruni, who received it

with ecstatic welcome, as appears from this congratulatory epistle

addressed to Poggio:--

'The republic of letters has reason to rejoice not only in the works

you have discovered, but also in those you have still to find. What a

glory for you it is to have brought to light by your exertions the

writings of the most distinguished authors! Posterity will not forget

that MSS. which were bewailed as lost beyond the possibility of

restoration, have been recovered, thanks to you. As Camillus was

called the second founder of Rome, so may you receive the title of the

second author of the works you have restored to the world. Through you

we now possess Quintilian entire; before we only boasted of the half

of him, and that defective and corrupt in text. O precious

acquisition! O unexpected joy! And shall I, then, in truth be able to

read the whole of that Quintilian which, mutilated and deformed as it

has hitherto appeared, has formed my solace? I conjure you send it me

at once, that at least I may set eyes on it before I die.'

[Footnote 96: Mur. xx. 160.]

[Footnote 97: Petrarch in 1350 found a bad copy at Florence. Poggio

describes it thus:--'Is vero apud nos antea, Italos dico, ita

laceratus erat, ita circumcisus culpâ, ut opinor, temporum, ut nulla

forma, nullus habitus hominis in eo recognosceretur.']

In addition to the authors named above, Poggio discovered and copied

with his own hand MSS. of Lucretius and Columella. Silius Italicus,

Manillas, and Vitruvius owed their resurrection to his industry. At

Langres he found a copy of Cicero's oration for Cæcina; at Monte

Cassino a MS. of Frontinus. Ammianus Marcellinus, Nonius Marcellus,

Probus, Flavius Caper, and Eutyches are also to be ranked among the

captives freed by him from slavery. In exploring foreign convents

where he suspected that ancient authors might lie buried, he spared

neither trouble nor expense. 'No severity of winter cold, no snow, no

length of journey, no roughness of roads, prevented him from bringing

the monuments of literature to light,' wrote Francesco Barbaro.[98]

Nor did he recoil from theft, if theft seemed necessary to secure a

precious codex. In a letter to Ambrogio Traversari he relates his

negotiations with a monk for the fraudulent abduction of an Ammianus

and a Livy from a convent library in Hersfeld.[99] Not unfrequently

his most golden anticipations with regard to literary treasures were

deceived, as when a Dane appeared at the Court of Martin V. bragging

of a complete Livy to be found in a Cistercian convent near Röskilde.

This man protested he had seen the MS., and described the characters

in which it was written with some minuteness. At Poggio's instance the

Cardinal Orsini sent off a special messenger to seek for this, which

would have been the very phoenix of MSS. to the Latinists of that

period, while Cosimo de' Medici put his agents at Lübeck to work for

the same purpose. All their efforts were in vain, however. The Livy

could not be discovered, and the Dane passed for a liar, in spite of

the corroboration his story received from another traveller.[100]

Poggio himself, who would willingly have ransacked Europe for a MS.,

was jealous of money spent on any other object. In his treatise 'De

Infelicitate Principum' he complains that 'these exalted personages

[popes and princes] spend their days and their wealth in pleasure, in

unworthy pursuits, in pestiferous and destructive wars. So great is

their mental torpor that nothing can rouse them to search after the

works of excellent writers, by whose wisdom and learning mankind are

taught the way to true happiness.' This lamentation, written probably

under the unfavourable impression produced upon his mind by the Papal

Court, where as yet the spirit of humanism had hardly penetrated, must

not be taken in any strict sense. Never was there a time in the

world's history when money was spent more freely upon the collection

and preservation of MSS., and when a more complete machinery was put

in motion for the sake of securing literary treasures. Prince vied

with prince, and eminent burgher with burgher, in buying books. The

commercial correspondents of the Medici and other great Florentine

houses, whose banks and discount offices extended over Europe and the

Levant, were instructed to purchase relics of antiquity without

regard for cost, and to forward them to Florence. The most acceptable

present that could be sent to a king was a copy of a Roman historian.

The best credentials which a young Greek arriving from Byzantium could

use to gain the patronage of men like Palla degli Strozzi was a

fragment of some ancient; the merchandise ensuring the largest profit

to a speculator who had special knowledge in such matters was old

parchment covered with crabbed characters.

[Footnote 98: Mur. xx. 169. Cf. the Elegy of Landino quoted in the

notes to Roscoe's _Lorenzo_, p. 388.]

[Footnote 99: Voigt, p. 138.]

[Footnote 100: See Voigt, p. 139, for this story.]

The history of the foundation of libraries will form part of the next

chapter. For the present it is requisite to mention some of Poggio's

fellow-workmen in the labour of collection. Among these a certain

Nicholas of Treves, employed to receive monies due to the Papal Curia

in Germany, deserves a place, seeing that in 1429 he sent the most

complete extant copy of Plautus to Rome. Bartolommeo da Montepulciano,

following the lead of Poggio, pursued investigations while at

Constance, and discovered the lost writings of Vegetius and Pompeius

Festus. In 1409 Lionardo Bruni chanced upon a good MS. of Cicero's

letters at Pistoja, and about the year 1425 a magnificent capture of

Cicero's rhetorical treatises was made at Lodi in the Duomo by

Gherardo Landriani. The extant works of Tacitus, so ardently desired,

were not collected earlier than the reign of Leo.

While Poggio was releasing the Latin authors from their northern

prisons, and sending them to walk like princes through the Courts and

capitals of Italy, three other scholars devoted no less energy to the

collection of Greek MSS. Giovanni Aurispa, on his return from

Byzantium in 1423, brought with him 238 codices, while Guarino of

Verona and Francesco Filelfo both arrived in Italy heavily laden.

There is an old story that Guarino lost a part of his cargo at sea,

and landed with hair whitened by the grief this misfortune cost him.

Considering the special advantages enjoyed by these three scholars,

who were pupils of the learned Manuel Chrysoloras, and before whose

eager curiosity the libraries of Byzantium remained open through

nearly half a century previous to the fall of the Greek Empire, we

have good reason to believe that the greater part of Attic and

Alexandrian literature known to the later Greeks was transferred to

Italy. The avidity shown by the Florentines for codices and copies,

the opportunities afforded by their mercantile connection with

Constantinople, and the obvious interest which the Court of Byzantium

at that crisis had in gratifying their taste for such acquisitions,

contribute to render it unlikely that any of the more important and

illustrious authors were destroyed in the taking of the city by the

Turk.[101] It is probable that causes similar to those which slowly

wrought the ruin of Latin literature in the West--the apathy of an

uncultured public, the rancorous animosity of a superstitious clergy,

and the decay of students as a class--had long before the age of the

Renaissance ruined beyond the possibility of recovery those

masterpieces whereof we still deplore the loss.[102] The preservation

of Neoplatonic and Patristic literature in comparative completeness,

while so much that was more valuable perished, may be ascribed to the

theological content of these writings.

[Footnote 101: See the emphatic language about Palla degli Strozzi,

Cosimo de' Medici, and Niccolo de' Niccoli, in Vespasiano's _Lives_.

Islam, moreover, as is proved by Pletho's Life, was at that period

more erudite than Hellas.]

[Footnote 102: I have touched upon this subject elsewhere. See

_Studies of Greek Poets_, second series, pp. 304-307. In order to form

a conception of the utter decline of Byzantine learning after Photius,

it is needful to read the passages in Petrarch's letters, where even

Calabria is compared favourably with Constantinople. In a state of

ignorance so absolute as he describes, it is possible that treasures

existed unknown to professed students, and therefore undiscovered by

Filelfo and his fellow-workers. The testimony of Demetrius

Chalcondylas, quoted by Didot, _Alde Manuce_, p. xiv., goes to show

that the Greeks attributed their losses in large measure to the malice

of the priests.]

Not to render some account of the effect produced upon the minds of

scholars in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries by the sight of

Roman ruins in decay, would be to omit an important branch of the

subject I have undertaken. Yet this part of the inquiry leads us into

a region somewhat different from that hitherto traversed in the

present chapter, since it properly belongs to the history of

enthusiasm. No small portion of the motive impulse that determined the

Revival was derived from the admiration, curiosity, and awe excited by

the very stones of ancient Rome. During the Middle Ages the right

point of view for studying the architectural works of the Romans had

been lost. History yielded ever more and more to legend, until at last

it was believed that demons and magicians had suspended those gigantic

vaults in air. Telesmatic virtues were attributed to figures carved on

temple-fronts and friezes, while the great name of Virgil attached

itself to what remained unhurt of Latin art in Rome and Naples.[103]

The Rome of the _Mirabilia_ was supposed to be the handiwork of fiends

constrained by poets of the bygone age with spells of power to move

hell from its centre. This transference of interest from the real to

the fanciful, from the substantial to the visionary, was

characteristic of the whole attitude assumed by the mind in the Middle

Ages. History, literature, and art alike submitted to the alchemy of

the imagination.[104] At the same time the very grossness of these

fables testified to the profound impression produced by the ruins of

the Eternal City, and to the haunting magic of a memory surviving

degradation and decay. When the Anglo-Saxon pilgrims returned from

Rome in the eighth century, the fascination of the great works they

had seen expressed itself in a memorable prophecy.[105] 'As long as

the Coliseum stands, Rome shall stand; when the Coliseum falls, Rome

will fall; when Rome falls, the world will fall.'

[Footnote 103: The details of Virgil's romance occupy the first half

of Comparetti's second volume on _Virgil in the Middle Ages_. For the

English version of this legend see Thoms.]

[Footnote 104: See above, pp. 38-49.]

[Footnote 105: Gibbon, ch. lxxi.]

About the year 1300 a new historic sense appears to have arisen in

Italy. Instead of dreams and legends, the positive facts of the past

began to have once more their value. This change might be compared to

the discovery we make upon the borderland of sleep and waking, when

what we fancied was a figure draped in white by our bedside turns out

to be the wall with moonlight shining on it. Giovanni Villani, when he

gazed upon the baths and amphitheatres of Rome, was not moved to think

of the fiends who raised them, but of the buried grandeur of the Roman

commonwealth.[106] What Rome once was, Florence may one day become,

was the reflection that impelled him to write the chronicle of his

native town. Dante, who with Villani witnessed the Jubilee of 1300,

cried that the very stones of Rome were sacred. 'Whoso robs her, or

despoils her, with blasphemy of act offendeth God, who only for His

own use made her holy.'[107] The city was to him the outward symbol

and terrestrial station of that God-appointed Monarchy for ruling all

the peoples of the earth in peace. His most enthusiastic speculations,

as well as the practical policy set forth in his epistles, attached

themselves to Rome as a reality; nor did he ever tire of bidding

German emperors return and fix their throne upon the bank of Tiber. We

know now that this idealism was a delusion, no less incapable of

realisation than it was pernicious to the liberties of the Italians.

It haunted the imagination of the race, however, until at last, as I

have said above, the proper vent was found in humanism.

[Footnote 106: Vol. I., _Age of the Despots_, p. 200.]

[Footnote 107: _Purg._ xxxiii. 58.]

The same passion for Rome took different form in the mind of another

and less noble patriot. It impelled Rienzi to conceive the plan of

rehabilitating the Republic. The Popes were far away at Avignon. The

emperors seemed to have forgotten Italy. Yet Rome remained, and the

mere name of Rome was Empire. Why should not the _Senatus Populusque

Romanus_, whose initials still survived in uncial letters upon blocks

of travertine and marble, be restored to place and power? Wandering

among those spacious vaults, and lingering beneath the triumphal

arches, where the marks of chariot-wheels were traced upon the massive

paved work of the Roman ways, the young enthusiast conceived that even

he might live to be the Tribune of that people, born invincible, and

called by destiny to rule the world. With what energy he devoted

himself to studying the histories of Livy, Sallust, and Valerius

Maximus; how he strove to master the meaning of inscriptions found

among the wrecks of Rome; with what eloquence he moved his

fellow-citizens to sympathy--are familiar matters not only to

scholars, but to readers of romance. His vision of the restored

Republic seemed for a moment destined to become reality. The Romans

placed the power of life and death, of revenues and armies, in the

hands of the seer, who had stirred them by his rhetoric. Rienzi took

rank among the potentates of Italy. Even the Papal Court acknowledged

him.

What followed proved the political incapacity of the new dictator, his

want of critical insight into the ideal he had set before himself.

There is something both pathetic and ridiculous in the vanity

displayed by this barber's son exalted to a place among the princes. Not

satisfied with calling himself Tribune and Knight, the style he affected

in his correspondence with Clement VI. ran as follows:--'Candidatus,

Spiritus Sancti Miles, Nicolaus Severus et Clemens, Liberator Urbis,

Zelator Italiæ, Amator Orbis, et Tribunus Augustus.' Like Icarus, he

spread these waxen wings to the sun's noontide blaze. The same

extravagant confusion of things sacred and profane, classical and

mediæval, marked the pageantry of his State ceremonials in Rome. On

August 15, 1347, in celebration of his election to the Tribunate, he

assumed six crowns--of ivy, myrtle, laurel, oak, olive, and gilt

silver. His arms were blazoned with the keys of Peter and the letters

S.P.Q.R. His senatorial sceptre was surmounted, not with the eagle or

the wolf of Romulus, but with a golden ball and cross enclosing the

relic of a saint. The poetic fancy could not have suggested a more

striking allegory to illustrate an undiscriminating reverence for the

Imperial and Pontifical prestige of Rome, than was presented in this

tragic farce of actual history. Not in this way, by a mixture of

Christian and Pagan titles, by emblematic pomp, by heraldry and

declamation, could the old Republic be brought to life again. The very

attempt to do so proved how far the mind of man, awaking from the long

sleep of the Middle Ages, was removed from the severe simplicity that

gave its strength to ancient Rome. Along those giddy parapets of fame

we watch Rienzi walking through his months of glory like a somnambule

sustained by an internal dream. That he should fall was inevitable.

With him expired the Utopia of a Roman commonwealth, to be from time

to time revived as an ineffectual fancy in the brains of a few

visionaries.[108]

[Footnote 108: Stefano Porcari, for example. See Vol. I., _Age of the

Despots_, pp. 296, 302.]

The relations of Petrarch to Rienzi offer matter for curious

reflection, while they illustrate the part played by the enthusiasm

for ancient Rome in the early history of humanism. Petrarch and Rienzi

had been friends and correspondents before the emergence of the latter

into public notice; and when the Tribune seemed about to satisfy the

dearest desire of the poet's heart by re-establishing the Roman

commonwealth, Petrarch addressed him with an animated letter of

congratulation and encouragement.[109] In his charmed eyes he seemed

a hero, _vir magnanimus_, worthy of the ancient world, a new Romulus,

a third Brutus, a Camillus. The Roman burghers, that scum and sediment

of countless races, barbarised by the lingering miseries of the Middle

Ages, needed nothing, it appeared, but words and wishes to make them

once again _cives Romani_, no longer clamorous for bread and games,

but ready to reconquer all their ancestors had lost.[110] 'Where,'

cried Petrarch, 'can the empire of the world be found, except in Rome?

Who can dispute the Roman right? What force can stand against the name

of Romans?' Neither the patriot nor the scholar discerned that the

revival they were destined to inaugurate was intellectual. Though the

spirit of the times refused a political Renaissance, refused to Italy

the maintenance of even such freedom as she then possessed, far more

refused a resuscitation of ancient Rome's imperial sway, yet both

Rienzi and Petrarch persisted in believing that, because they glowed

with fervour for the past, because they could read inscriptions,

because they expressed their desires eloquently, the world's great age

was certain to begin anew. It was a capital fault of the Renaissance

to imagine that words could work wonders, that a rhetorician's

_stylus_ might become the wand of Prospero. Seeming passed for being

in morals, politics, and all affairs of life. I have already touched

on this as a capital defect in Petrarch's character; but it was a

weakness inherent not only in him and in the age he inaugurated, but

one, moreover, that has influenced the whole history of the Italians

for evil. Sounding phrases like the _barbaros expellere_ of Julius

II., like the _va fuori d'Italia_ of Garibaldian hymns, from time to

time have roused the nation to feverish enthusiasm, too soon succeeded

by dejected apathy. When the inefficiency of Rienzi was proved, all

that remained for Petrarch was to warn and scold.

[Footnote 109: _De Capessendâ Libertate_, _Hortatoria_, p. 535.]

[Footnote 110: See Petrarch's _Epistle to the Roman People_, p. 712.]

The interest excited in Petrarch by the sight of Rome's ruins was

important for his humanistic ideal. They stirred him as a moralist, an

antiquarian, and a man who owed his mental vigour to the past. He

tells how often he used to climb above the huge vaults of the Baths of

Diocletian in company with his friend Giovanni Colonna.[111] Seated

there among the flowering shrubs and scented herbs that clothed decay

with loveliness, they held discourse concerning the great men of old,

and deplored the mutability of all things human. Whatever the poet had

read of Roman grandeur was brought back to his mind with vivid meaning

during his long solitary walks. He never doubted that he knew for

certain where Evander's palace stood, and where the cave of Cacus

opened on the Tiber. The difficulties of modern antiquarian research

had not been yet suggested, and his fancy was free to map out the

topography of the seven hills as pleased him best. Yet he complained

that nowhere was less known about Rome than in Rome itself.[112] This

ignorance he judged the most fatal obstacle to the resurrection of the

city.[113] The palaces where dwelt those heroes of the past, had

fallen into ruins; the temples of the gods were desecrated; the

triumphal arches were crumbling; the very walls had yielded to decay.

None of the Romans cared to arrest destruction; they even robbed the

marble columns and entablatures in order to deck Naples with the

spoils.[114] The last remnants of the city would soon, he exclaimed,

be levelled with the ground. Time has been unable to destroy them; but

man was ruining what Time had spared.[115]

[Footnote 111: _Epist. Fam._ lib. ii. 14, p. 605; lib. vi. 2, p. 657.]

[Footnote 112: 'Qui enim hodie magis ignari rerum Romanarum sunt, quam

Romani Cives? Invitus dico, nusquam minus Roma cognoscitur quam Romæ.'

_Epist. Fam._ lib. ii. 14, p. 658.]

[Footnote 113: 'Quis enim dubitare potest, quin illico surrectura sit

si coeperit se Roma cognoscere?' _Ibid._]

[Footnote 114: 'Vi vel senio collapsa palatia, quæ quondam ingentes

tenuere viri, diruptos arcus triumphales ... indignum de vestris

marmoreis columnis, de liminibus templorum, ad quæ nuper ex toto orbe

concursus devotissimus fiebat, de imaginibus sepulchrorum, sub quibus

patrum vestrorum venerabilis cinis erat, ut reliquas sileam, desidiosa

Neapolis adornatur.' _Ibid._ p. 536.]

[Footnote 115:

'Quanta quod integræ fuit olim gloria Romæ,

Reliquiæ testantur adhuc, quas longior ætas

Frangere non valuit, non vis, aut ira cruenti

Hostis, ab egregiis franguntur civibus heu, heu.'

Petr. _Epist. Metr._ lib. ii. p. 98.]

There is no doubt that, shortly before the date of Petrarch's visits

to Rome, the city had suffered grievously in its monuments. We know,

for instance, that the best preserved of the theatres, baths, and

tombs formed the residences and fortresses of nobles in the Middle

Ages; and when we read that in 1258 the senator Brancaleone found it

necessary to destroy one hundred and forty of these fortified

dwellings, we obtain a standard for measuring the injury that must

have ensued to precious works of classic architecture. The ruins,

moreover, as Petrarch hinted, had been used as quarries. What was

worse, the burghers burned the marbles, rich, perhaps, with

inscriptions and carved bas-reliefs, for lime. We shall shortly see

what Poggio relates upon this topic. For the present it will suffice

to quote an epigram of Pius II., written some time after the revival

of enthusiasm for antiquity:--

Oblectat me, Roma, tuas spectare ruinas,

Ex cujus lapsu gloria prisca patet.

Sed tuus hic populus muris defossa vetustis

Calcis in obsequium marmora dura coquit.

Impia ter centum si sic gens egerit annos,

Nullum hic indicium nobilitatis erit.[116]

[Footnote 116: It delights me to contemplate thy ruins, Rome, the

witness amid desolation to thy pristine grandeur. But thy people burn

thy marbles for lime, and three centuries of this sacrilege will

destroy all sign of thy nobleness.' Compare a letter from Alberto

degli Alberti to Giovanni de' Medici, quoted by Fabroni, _Cosmi Vita_,

Adnot. 86. The real pride of Rome was still her ruins. Nicolo and Ugo

da Este journeyed in 1396 to Rome, 'per vedere quelle magnificenze

antiche che al presente si possono vedere in Roma.' Murat. xxiv.

845.]

Poggio Bracciolini opens a new epoch in Roman topography. The ruins

that had moved the superstitious wonder of the Middle Ages, that had

excited Rienzi to patriotic enthusiasm, and Petrarch to reflections on

the instability of human things, were now for the first time studied

in a truly antiquarian spirit. Poggio read them like a book, comparing

the testimony they rendered with that of Livy, Vitruvius, and

Frontinus, and seeking to compile a catalogue of the existing

fragments of old Rome. The first section of his treatise 'De Varietate

Fortunæ,' forms by far the most important source of information we

possess relating to the state of Rome in the fifteenth century.[117]

It appears that the Baths of Caracalla and Diocletian could still

boast of columns and marble incrustations, but that within Poggio's

own recollection the marbles had been stripped from Cæcilia Metella's

tomb, and the so-called Temple of Concord had been pillaged.[118]

Among the ruins ascribed to the period of the Republic are mentioned a

bridge, an arch, a tomb, a temple, a building on the Capitol, and the

pyramid of Cestius.[119] Besides these, Poggio enumerates, as

referable chiefly to the Imperial age, eleven temples, seven _thermæ_,

the Arches of Titus, Severus, and Constantine, parts of the Arches of

Trajan, Faustina, and Gallienus, the Coliseum, the Theatres of Pompey

and Marcellus, the Circus Agonalis and Circus Maximus, the Columns of

Trajan and Antonine, the two horses ascribed to Pheidias and

Praxiteles, together with other marble statues, one bronze equestrian

statue, and the mausoleums of Augustus and Hadrian.

[Footnote 117: My references are made to the Paris edition of 1723.

The first book is sometimes cited under the title of _Urbis Romæ

Descriptio_.]

[Footnote 118: 'Juxta viam Appiam, ad secundum lapidem, integrum vidi

sepulchrum L. Cæciliæ Metellæ, opus egregium, et id ipsum tot sæculis

intactum, ad calcem postea majori ex parte exterminatum' (p. 19).

'Capitolio contigua forum versus superest porticus ædis Concordiæ,

quam, cum primum ad urbem accessi, vidi fere integram, opere marmoreo

admodum specioso; Romani postmodum, ad calcem ædem totam et porticûs

partem, disjectis columnis, sunt demoliti.' _Ibid._]

[Footnote 119: Pp. 8, 9.]

We have to regret that Poggio's description was subservient and

introductory to a rhetorical dissertation. Had he applied himself to

the task of tabulating more minutely what he had observed, his work

would have been infinitely precious to the archæologist. No one knew

more about the Roman buildings than he did. No one felt the impression

of their majesty in desolation more profoundly. The mighty city

appeared to him, he said, like the corpse of a giant, like a queen in

slavery. The sight of her magnificence, despoiled and shorn of

ornaments as she had been, moved him daily to deeper admiration. It

was his custom to lead strangers from point to point among the ruins,

in order to enjoy the effect produced upon fresh minds by their

stupendous evidence of strength and greatness in decay.

The pathos of this former empress of the world exposed to insult and

indignity had not been first felt by Poggio. Petrarch described her as

an aged matron with grey hair and pale cheeks, whose torn and sordid

raiment ill accorded with the nobleness of her demeanour.[120] Fazio

degli Uberti personified her as a majestic woman, wrapped around with

rags, who pointed out to him the ruins of her city, 'to the end that

he might understand how fair she was in years of old.'[121]

[Footnote 120: _De Pacificandâ Italiâ, Ad Carolum Quartum_, p. 531.]

[Footnote 121: In the _Dittamondo_, about 1360.]

In this way a sentimental feeling for the relics of the past grew up

and flourished side by side with the archæological interest they

excited. The literature of the Renaissance abounds in matter that

might be used in illustration of this remark,[122] while nothing was

commoner in art than to paint for backgrounds broken arches and

decayed buildings, 'whose ruins are even pitied.' The double impulse

of romantic sentiment and antiquarian curiosity, set going in this age

of the Revival, contributed no little to the development of

architecture, sculpture, and painting. In the section of my work which

deals with the fine arts in Italy will be found the proper sequel to

this subject. Meanwhile the history of antiquarian research in Rome

itself will be resumed in another chapter of this volume.

[Footnote 122: Such, for example, as Boccaccio's description of the

ruins of Baiæ in the _Fiammetta_, Sannazzaro's lines on the ruins of

Cumæ, Æneas Sylvius Piccolomini's notes on ancient sites in Italy.]

Among the representative men of the first period of the Revival must

be mentioned an enthusiast who devoted his whole life to topographical

studies and to the copying of classical inscriptions. Ciriaco de'

Pizzicolli was born about 1404 at Ancona, and from this town he took

the name he bears among the learned. Like many other pioneers of

erudition, he was educated for commerce, and had slender opportunities

for acquiring the dead languages in his youth. His manhood was spent

in restless journeying, at first undertaken for the purposes of trade,

but afterwards for the sole object of discovery. Smitten with the zeal

for classical antiquity, he made himself a tolerable Latin scholar,

and gained a fair knowledge of Greek. In the course of his long

wanderings he ransacked every part of Italy, Greece, and the Greek

islands, collecting medals, gems, and fragments of sculpture, buying

manuscripts, transcribing records, and amassing a miscellaneous store

of archæological information. The enthusiasm that possessed him was so

untempered by sobriety that it excited the suspicion of

contemporaries. Some regarded him as a man of genuine learning; others

spoke of him as a flighty, boastful, and untrustworthy fanatic.[123]

The mistakes he made in copying inscriptions depreciated the general

value of his labours, while he was even accused of having passed off

fabrications on the credulity of the public. The question of his

alleged forgeries has been discussed at length by Tiraboschi.[124] To

settle it at this distance of time is both unimportant and impossible.

While we may well believe that Ciriac was a conceited enthusiast,

accepting as genuine what he ought to have rejected, and interpreting

according to his fancy rather than the letter of his text, his life

retains real value for the student of the Revival. In him the

curiosity of the new age reached its acme of expansiveness. The

passion for discovery pursued him from shore to shore, and the vision

of the past, to be reconquered by the energy of the present, haunted

his imagination till the moment of his death. When asked what object

he had set his heart upon in those perpetual journeyings, he answered,

'I go to awake the dead.' That word, the motto for the first age of

the Revival, explains the fanaticism of Ciriac, and is a sufficient

title to fame.

[Footnote 123: Filippo Maria Visconti is said to have denounced him as

an impostor. Ambrogio Traversari mentions his coins and gems with

mistrust. Poggio describes him as a conceited fellow with no claim to

erudition. On the other hand, he gained the confidence of Eugenius

IV., and received the panegyrics of Filelfo, Barbaro, Bruni, and

others. See Tiraboschi, vol. vi. lib. i. cap. 5.]

[Footnote 124: In the place just cited. The temptation, at this epoch

of discovery, when criticism was at a low ebb, and curiosity was

frantic, to pass off forgeries upon the learned world must have been

very great. The most curious example of this literary deception is

afforded by Annius of Viterbo, who, in 1498, published seventeen books

of spurious histories, pretending to be the lost works of Manetho,

Berosus, Fabius Pictor, Archilochus, Cato, &c. Whether he was himself

an impostor or a dupe is doubtful. A few of his contemporaries

denounced the histories as patent fabrications. The majority accepted

them as genuine. Their worthlessness has long been undisputed. See

Tiraboschi, vol. vi. lib. iii. cap. 1.]

Renaissance in Italy, Volume 2 (of 7) The Revival of Learning · 第 3 / 11 章