HUMANISM AND THE REVIVAL OF LEARNING
Perhaps the most important branch of the revival of learning is that
which is called humanism, or the revival of the study of the
masterpieces of Greek and Latin literature. The promoters of this
movement are called humanists, because they held that the study of the
classics, or _litterae humaniores_, is the best humanizing agent. It
has already been shown how scholasticism developed as one of the
important phases of the renaissance, and how, close upon its track, the
universities rose as powerful aids to the revival of learning, and that
the cathedral and monastic schools were the traditional forerunners of
the great universities.
Primarily, then, were taught in the universities scholastic philosophy,
theology, the Roman and the canon law, with slight attention to Greek
and Hebrew, the real value of the treasures of antiquity being unknown
to the Western world. The Arabic or Saracen schools of Spain had taken
high rank in learning, and through their efforts the scientific works
of Aristotle were presented to the mediaeval world. There were many
men of importance, such as Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus, who were
leaders in universities and who lent their influence to the development
of learning in Europe. The translation of the scientific works of
Aristotle into Latin at the beginning of the thirteenth century by
Thomas Aquinas had its influence. But, after all, scholasticism had
settled down to speculative ideas within the universities and without,
and little attention was paid to the old classical authors.
_The Discovery of Manuscripts_.--The real return to the study of Greek
literature and art finally came through the fortunate discoveries of
ancient sculpture and ancient manuscripts on the occasion of the
turning of the mind of Europe {365} toward the Eastern learning. The
fall of the Eastern Empire accelerated the transfer of learning and
culture to the West. The discovery and use of old manuscripts brought
a survival of classical literature and of the learning of antiquity.
The bringing of this literature to light gave food for thought and
means of study, and turned the mind from its weary round of speculative
philosophy to a large body of literature containing the views of the
ancients respecting the progress and development of man. As has been
heretofore shown, the Greeks, seeking to explain things by the human
reason, although not advanced far in experimental science, had
accomplished much by way of logical thought based upon actual facts.
They had turned from credulity to inquiry.
_Who Were the Humanists?_--Dante was not a humanist, but he may be said
to have been the forerunner of the Italian humanists, for he furnished
inspiration to Petrarch, the so-called founder of humanism. His
magnificent creation of _The Divine Comedy_, his service in the
foundation of the Italian language, and his presentation of the
religious influence of the church in a liberal manner made him a great
factor in the humanizing of Europe. Dante was neither modern nor
ancient. He stood at the parting of the ways controlling the learning
of the past and looking toward the open door of the future, and
directed thought everywhere to the Latin. His masterpiece was well
received through all Italy, and gave an impulse to learning in many
ways.
Petrarch was the natural successor of Dante. The latter immortalized
the past; the former invoked the spirit of the future. He showed great
enthusiasm in the discovery of old manuscripts, and brought into power
more fully the Latin language. He also attempted to introduce Greek
into the Western world, but in this he was only partially successful.
But in his wide search for manuscripts, monasteries and cathedrals were
ransacked and the literary treasures which the monks had copied and
preserved through centuries, the products of the classical writers of
the early times, were brought to {366} light. Petrarch was an
enthusiast, even a sentimentalist. But he was bold in his expression
of the full and free play of the intellect, in his denunciation of
formalism and slavery to tradition. The whole outcome of his life,
too, was a tendency toward moral and aesthetic aggrandizement.
Inconsistent in many things, his life may be summed up as a bold
remonstrance against the binding influences of tradition and an
enthusiasm for something new.
"We are, therefore," says Symonds,[1] "justified in hailing Petrarch as
the Columbus of a new spiritual hemisphere, the discoverer of modern
culture. That he knew no Greek, that his Latin verse was lifeless and
his prose style far from pure, that his contributions to history and
ethics have been superseded, and that his epistles are now read only by
antiquaries, cannot impair his claim to this title. From him the
inspiration needed to quicken curiosity and stimulate zeal for
knowledge proceeded. But for his intervention in the fourteenth
century it is possible that the revival of learning, and all that it
implies, might have been delayed until too late."
His influence was especially felt by those who followed him, and his
enthusiasm made him a successful promoter of the new learning.
But it remained for Boccaccio, who was of a more practical turn of mind
than Petrarch, to systematize the classical knowledge of antiquity. If
Petrarch was an enthusiastic collector, Boccaccio was a practical
worker. With the aid of Petrarch, he was the first to introduce a
professor of Greek language and literature into Italy, and through this
influence he secured a partial translation of Homer. Boccaccio began
at an early age to read the classical authors and to repent the years
he had spent in the study of law and in commercial pursuits. It was
Petrarch's example, more than anything else, which caused Boccaccio to
turn his attention to literature. By persistence and vigor in study,
he was enabled to accomplish much by his own hand in the translation of
the authors, and in middle life {367} he began a persistent and
successful study of Greek. His contributions to learning were great,
and his turn toward naturalism was of immense value in the foundation
of modern literature. He infused a new spirit in the common literature
of the times. He turned away from asceticism, and frankly and openly
sought to justify the pleasures of life. Although his teaching may not
be of the most wholesome kind, it was far-reaching in its influence in
turning the mind toward the importance and desirability of the things
of this life. Stories of "beautiful gardens and sunny skies, fair
women and luxurious lovers" may not have been the most healthful diet
for universal consumption; they introduced a new element into the
literature of the period and turned the thoughts of men from the
speculative to the natural.
A long line of Italian writers followed these three great master
spirits and continued to develop the desire for classical literature.
For such power and force did these men have that they turned the whole
tide of thought toward the masterpieces of the Greeks and Romans.
_Relation of Humanism to Language and Literature_.--When the zeal for
the classical learning declined somewhat, there sprang up in Italy a
group of Italian poets who were the founders of an Italian literature.
They received their impulse from the classical learning, and, turning
their attention to the affairs which surrounded them, developed a new
literature. The inspiration which humanism had given to scholars of
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries had a tendency to develop a
literary spirit among all classes of students. The products of the
Italian literature, however, brought out through the inspiration of
humanistic studies, were not great masterpieces. While the number and
variety were considerable, the quality was inferior when the
intellectual power of the times is considered. The great force of
Italian intellect had been directed toward classical manuscripts, and
hence failed to develop a literature that had real originality.
Perhaps among the few great Italian writers of these times {368} may be
mentioned Guicciardini and Machiavelli. The former wrote a history of
Italy, and the latter is rendered immortal by his _Prince_.
Guicciardini was a native of Florence, who had an important position in
the service of Leo X. As professor of jurisprudence, ambassador to
Spain, and subsequently minister of Leo X, governor of Modena,
lieutenant-general of the pope in the campaign against the French,
president of the Romagna and governor of Bologna, he had abundant
opportunity for the study of the political conditions of Italy. He is
memorable for his admirable history of Italy, as a talented Florentine
and as a member of the Medicean party.
Machiavelli, in his _Prince_, desired to picture the type of rulers
needed to meet the demands of Italy at the time he wrote. It is a
picture of imperialism and, indeed, of despotism. The prince or ruler
was in no way obliged to consider the feelings and rights of
individuals. Machiavelli said it was not necessary that a prince
should be moral, humane, religious, or just; indeed, that if he had
these qualities and displayed them they would harm him, but if he were
new to his place in the principality he might seem to have them. It
would be as useful to him to keep the path of rectitude when this was
not too inconvenient as to know how to deviate from it when
circumstances dictate. In other words, a prudent prince cannot and
ought not really to keep his word except when he can do it without
injury to himself.
Among other Italian writers may be mentioned Boiardo, on account of his
_Orlando Innamorato_, and Ariosto, who wrote _Orlando Furioso_. Upon
the whole, the writings of the period were not worthy of its
intellectual development, although Torquato Tasso, in his _Jerusalem
Delivered_, presents the first crusade as Homer presented the Trojan
War. The small amount of really worthy literature of this age has been
attributed to the lack of moral worth.
_Art and Architecture_.--Perhaps the renaissance art exceeded that
which it replaced in beauty, variety, and naturalness, as well as in
exuberance. There was an attempt to make {369} all things beautiful,
and no attempt to follow the spirit of asceticism in degrading the
human body, but rather to try to delineate every feature as noble in
itself. The movement, life, and grace of the human form, the beauty of
landscape, all were enjoyed and presented by the artists of the
renaissance. The beauty of this life is magnified, and the artists
represented in joyous mood the best qualities that are important in the
world. They turned the attention from asceticism to the importance of
the present life.
Perhaps the Italians reached the highest point of development in
painting, for the Madonnas of Italy have given her celebrity in art
through all succeeding generations. Cimabue was the first to paint the
Madonna as a beautiful woman. Giotto followed next, and a multitude of
succeeding Madonnas have given Italy renown. Raphael excelled all
others in the representation of the Madonna, and was not only the
greatest painter of all Italy, but a master artist of all ages.
Architecture, however, appears to be the first branch of art that
defied the arbitrary power of tradition. It could break away more
readily than any other form of art, because of the great variety which
existed in different parts of the Roman Empire--the Byzantine in the
south of Italy, the Gothic in the north, and Romanesque in Rome and the
provinces. There was no conventional law for architectural style,
hence innovations could be made with very little opposition. In the
search for classical remains, a large number of buildings had already
become known, and many more were uncovered as the searching continued.
These gave types of architecture which had great influence in building
the renaissance art. The changes, beginning with Brunelleschi, were
continued until nearly all buildings were completely Romanized. Then
came Michael Angelo, who excelled in both architecture and sculpture at
Rome, and Palladio, who worked at Venice and Verona. In the larger
buildings the Basilica of Rome became the model, or at least the
principles of its construction became the prevailing element in
architectural design.
{370}
Florence became the centre of art and letters in the Italian
renaissance.[2] Though resembling Athens in many respects, and bearing
the same relations to surrounding cities that Athens did to cities in
the classic times, her scholars were more modern than those of Greece
or Rome, and, indeed, more modern than the scholars who followed after
the Florentines, two centuries later. It was an important city, on the
Arno, surrounded by hills, a city of flowers, interesting to-day to the
modern scholar and student of history. Surrounded by walls, having
magnificent gates, with all the modern improvements of paved streets,
of sewers, gardens, and spacious parks, it represented in this early
period the ideal city life. Even to-day the traveller finds the
Palazzo Vecchio, or ancient official residence of the city fathers, and
very near this the Loggia dei Lanzi, now filled with the works of
precious art, and the Palazzo del Podesta, now used as a national
museum, the great cathedral, planned in 1294 by Arnolfo, ready for
consecration in 1498, and not yet completed, and many other remarkable
relics of this wonderful era.
The typical idea in building the cathedral was to make it so beautiful
that no other in the world could ever surpass it. Opposite the main
door were the gates of Ghiberti, which Michael Angelo, for their great
beauty, thought worthy to be the gates of paradise. They close the
entrance of the temple of Saint John the Baptist, the city's patron
saint. More than a hundred other churches, among them the Santa Croce
and the Santa Maria Novella, the latter the resting-place of the
Medici, were built in this magnificent city. The churches were not
only used for religious worship, but were important for meeting-places
of the Florentines. The Arno was crossed by four bridges, of which the
Ponte Vecchio, built in the middle of the fourteenth century, alone
remains in its original form. Upon it rest two rows of houses, each
three stories high, and over this is the passageway from the Palazzo
Pitti to the Palazzo Vecchio. In addition to the public buildings of
{371} Florence, there were many private residences and palaces of
magnificence and splendor.
_The Effect of Humanism on Social Manners_.--By the intellectual
development of Italy, fresh ideas of culture were infused into common
society. To be a gentleman meant to be conversant with poetry,
painting, and art, intelligent in conversation and refined in manners.
The gentleman must be acquainted with antiquity sufficiently to admire
the great men of the past and to reverence the saints of the church.
He must understand archaeology in order to speak intelligently of the
ancient achievements of the classical people. But this refinement was
to a large extent conventional, for there was a lack of genuine moral
culture throughout the entire renaissance.
These moral defects of Italy in this period have often been the
occasion of dissertations by philosophers, and there is a question as
to whether this moral condition was caused by the revival of classical
learning or the decline of morality in the church. It ought to be
considered, without doubt, as an excessive development of certain lines
of intellectual supremacy without the accustomed moral guide. The
church had for years assumed to be the only moral conservator, indeed
the only one morally responsible for the conduct of the world. Yet its
teachings at this time led to no self-developed morality; helped no one
to walk alone, independent, in the dignity of manhood, for all of its
instructions were superimposed and not vital. At last the church fell
into flagrant discord under the rule of worldly popes, and this gave a
great blow to Italy through the loss of the one great moral control.
But the renaissance had in its day a wide-spread influence throughout
Europe, and gave us as its result a vitalizing influence to the whole
world for centuries to come, although Italy suffered a decline largely
on account of its lack of the stable moral character of society. The
awakening of the mind from lethargy, the turning away from dogmatism to
broader views of life, enlarged duties, and new surroundings causing
{372} the most Intense activity of thought, needed some moral stay to
make the achievements permanent and enduring.
_Relation of Humanism to Science and Philosophy_.--The revival of the
freedom of thought of the Greeks brought an antagonism to the logic and
the materialistic views of the times. It set itself firmly against
tradition of whatsoever sort. The body of man had not been considered
with care until anatomy began to be studied in the period of the
Italian renaissance. The visionary notions of the world which the
people had accepted for a long time began gradually to give way to
careful consideration of the exact facts. Patience and loving
admiration in the study of man and nature yielded immense returns to
the scholars of Italy. It changed the attitude of the thoughtful mind
toward life, and prepared the way for new lines of thought and new
accomplishments in the world of philosophy and science. Through the
scientific discoveries of Galileo and Copernicus and exploration of
Columbus, brought about largely by the influence of humanistic studies,
were wrought far-reaching consequences in the thought of the age. And
finally the scholars of Italy not only threw off scholasticism but also
disengaged themselves from the domineering influence of the classical
studies and laid the foundation of modern freedom of inquiry.
_The Study of the Classics Became Fundamental in Education_.--The
modern classical education received its first impulse from the Italian
renaissance. As before stated, it was customary for the universities
to teach, with some vigor,[3] physics, medicine, law, and philosophy,
largely after the manner of the medieval period, though somewhat
modified and broadened in the process of thought. But in the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries, those who taught the ancient languages and
literature were much celebrated. Under the title of rhetoric we find
progress not only in the study of the Greek and Roman masterpieces, but
in a large number of subjects which had a tendency to widen the views
of students and to change {373} the trend of the education in
universities. It became customary for the towns and cities to have
each a public place, an academy, a university, or a hall, for the means
of studying the humanistic branches. The professors of the classics
passed from town to town, giving instruction where the highest pay was
offered. The direct influence of the renaissance on the Italian
education, and, indeed, on the English classical education, introduced
somewhat later, has continued until this day.
Closely connected with the educational influences of the renaissance
was the introduction of literary criticism. There was a tendency among
the early humanists to be uncritical, but as intelligence advanced and
scholarship developed, we find the critical spirit introduced. Form,
substance, and character of art and letters were carefully examined.
This was the essential outcome of the previous sharp criticism of
dogmatic theology and philosophy.
_General Influence of Humanism_.--The development of new intellectual
ideals was the most important result of this phase of the renaissance.
Nor did this extend in any particular direction. A better thought came
to be held of God and man's relation to him. Instead of being an
arbitrary, domineering creature, he had become in the minds of the
people rational and law-loving; instead of being vindictive and fickle,
as he was wont to be pictured, he had been endowed with benevolence
toward his creatures. The result of all this was that religion itself
became more spiritual and the conscience more operative. There was
less of formality and conventionality in religion and more of real,
devout feeling and consciousness of worthy motive in life, but the
church must have more strenuous lessons before spiritual freedom could
be fulfilled.
Life, too, came to be viewed as something more than merely a temporary
expedient, a thing to be viewed as a necessary evil. It had come to be
regarded as a noble expression worthy of the thought and the best
attention of every individual. This world, too, was meant to be of use
and to make people happy. It was to be enjoyed and used as best it
might be. {374} The old guild classes finally broke down, and where
formerly men thought in groups, a strong individuality developed and
man became an independent, thinking being in himself, bound by neither
religion nor philosophy. He was larger than either philosophy or
religion made him. He was a being of capacity and strength, and
enabled to take the best of this life in order to enhance the delight
of living. There came, also, with this a large belief in the law and
order of the universe. Old beliefs had become obsolete because the
people could no longer depend on them. And when these dogmatic
formulas ceased to give satisfaction to the human mind, it sought for
order in the universe and the laws which controlled it, and the
intellectual world then entered the field of research for truth--the
field of experiment.
SUBJECTS FOR FURTHER STUDY
1. How did the Revival of Learning prepare the way for modern science?
2. What contributions to progress were made by Petrarch, Boccaccio,
Michael Angelo, Justinian, Galileo, Copernicus, Columbus?
3. The nature of Machiavelli's political philosophy.
4. Compare Gothic, Romanesque, and Arabian architecture.
5. The status of morals during the period of the intellectual
development of Europe.
6. The great weakness of the philosophy of this period.
7. What was the state of organized society and what was the "common
man" doing?
[1] _Revival of Learning_.
[2] See Chapter XXI.
[3] See preceding chapter.
{375}