o the discovery of the outward world the Renaissance added a still
greater achievement, by first discerning and bringing to light the
full, whole nature of man. This period, as we have seen, first gave the
highest development to individuality, and then led the individual to
the most zealous and thorough study of himself in all forms and under
all conditions. Indeed, the development of personality is essentially
involved in the recognition of it in oneself and in others. Between
these two great processes our narrative has placed the influence of
ancient literature because the mode of conceiving and representing both
the individual and human nature in general was defined and colored by
that influence. But the power of conception and representation lay in
the age and in the people.
The facts which we shall quote in evidence of our thesis will be few in
number. Here, if anywhere in the course of this discussion, the author
is conscious that he is treading on the perilous ground of conjecture,
and that what seems to him a clear, if delicate and gradual, transition
in the intellectual movement of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries,
may not be equally plain to others. The gradual awakening of the soul
of a people is a phenomenon which may produce a different impression on
each spectator. Time will judge which impression is the most faithful.
Happily the study of the intellectual side of human nature began, not
with the search after a theoretical psychology--for that, Aristotle
still sufficed--but with the endeavor to observe and to describe. The
indispensable ballast of theory was limited to the popular doctrine of
the four temperaments, in its then habitual union with the belief in
the influence of the planets. Such conceptions may remain ineradicable
in the minds of individuals, without hindering the general progress of
the age. It certainly makes on us a singular impression, when we meet
them at a time when human nature in its deepest essence and in all its
characteristic expressions was not only known by exact observation, but
represented by an immortal poetry and art. It sounds almost ludicrous
when an otherwise competent observer considers Clement VII to be of a
melancholy temperament, but defers his judgement to that of the
physicians, who declare the Pope of a sanguine-choleric nature; or when
we read that the same Gaston de Foix, the victor of Ravenna, whom
Giorgione painted and Bambaia carved, and whom all the historians
describe, had the saturnine temperament. No doubt those who use these
expressions mean something by them; but the terms in which they tell us
their meaning are strangely out of date in the Italy of the sixteenth
century.
As examples of the free delineation of the human spirit, we shall first
speak of the great poets of the fourteenth century.
If we were to collect the pearls from the courtly and knightly poetry
of all the countries of the West during the two preceding centuries, we
should have a mass of wonderful divinations and single pictures of the
inward life, which at first sight would seem to rival the poetry of the
Italians. Leaving lyrical poetry out of account, Godfrey of Strassburg
gives us, in 'Tristram and Isolt,' a representation of human passion,
some features of which are immortal. But these pearls lie scattered in
the ocean of artificial convention, and they are altogether something
very different from a complete objective picture of the inward man and
his spiritual wealth.
Italy, too, in the thirteenth century had, through the 'Trovatori,' its
share in the poetry of the courts and of chivalry. To them is mainly
due the 'Canzone,' whose construction is as difficult and artificial as
that of the songs of any northern minstrel. Their subject and mode of
thought represents simply the conventional tone of the courts, be the
poet a burgher or a scholar.
But two new paths at length showed themselves, along which Italian
poetry could advance to another and a characteristic future. They are
not the less important for being concerned only with the formal and
external side of the art.
To the same Brunetto Latini--the teacher of Dante--who, in his
'Canzoni,' adopts the customary manner of the 'Trovatori,' we owe the
first-known 'versi sciolti,' or blank hendecasyllabic verses, and in
his apparent absence of form, a true and genuine passion suddenly
showed itself. The same voluntary renunciation of outward effect,
through confidence in the power of the inward conception, can be
observed some years later in fresco-painting, and later still in
painting of all kinds, which began to cease to rely on color for its
effect, using simply a lighter or darker shade. For an age which laid
so much stress on artificial form in poetry, these verses of Brunetto
mark the beginning of a new epoch.84
About the same time, or even in the first half of the thirteenth
century, one of the many strictly balanced forms of mere, in which
Europe was then so fruitful, became a normal and recognized form in
Italy--the sonnet. The order of rhymes and even the number of lines
varied for a whole century, till Petrarch fixed them permanently. In
this form all higher lyrical and meditative subjects, and at a later
time subjects of every possible description, were treated, and the
madrigals, the sestine, and even the 'Canzoni' were reduced to a
subordinate place. Later Italian writers complain, half jestingly, half
resentfully, of this inevitable mould, this Procrustean bed, to which
they were compelled to make their thoughts and feelings fit. Others
were, and still are, quite satisfied with this particular form of
verse, which they freely use to express any personal reminiscence or
idle sing-song without necessity or serious purpose. For which reason
there are many more bad or insignificant sonnets than good ones.
Nevertheless, the sonnet must be held to have been an unspeakable
blessing for Italian poetry. The clearness and beauty of its structure,
the invitation it gave to elevate the thought in the second and more
rapidly moving half, and the ease with which it could be learned by
heart, made it valued even by the greatest masters. In fact, they would
not have kept it in use down to our own century had they not been
penetrated with a sense of its singular worth. These masters could have
given us the same thoughts in other and wholly different forms. But
when once they had made the sonnet the normal type of lyrical poetry,
many other writers of great, if not the highest, gifts, who otherwise
would have lost themselves in a sea of diffusiveness, were forced to
concentrate their feelings. The sonnet became for Italian literature a
condenser of thoughts and emotions such as was possessed by the poetry
of no other modern people.
Thus the world of Italian sentiment comes before us in a series of
pictures, clear, concise, and most effective in their brevity. Had
other nations possessed a form of expression of the same kind, we
should perhaps have known more of their inward life; we might have had
a number of pictures of inward and outward situations--reflexions of
the national character and temper--and should not be dependent for such
knowledge on the so-called lyrical poets of the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries, who can hardly ever be read with any serious
enjoyment. In Italy we can trace an undoubted progress from the time
when the sonnet came into existence. In the second half of the
thirteenth century the 'Trovatori della transizione,' as they have been
recently named, mark the passage from the Troubadours to the
poets--that is, to those who wrote under the influence of antiquity. The
simplicity and strength of their feeling, the vigorous delineation of
fact, the precise expression and rounding off of their sonnets and
other poems, herald the coming of a Dante. Some political sonnets of
the Guelphs and Ghibellines (1260-1270) have about them the ring of his
passion, and others remind us of his sweetest lyrical notes.
Of his own theoretical view of the sonnet, we are unfortunately
ignorant, since the last books of his work, 'De vulgari eloquentia,' in
which he proposed to treat of ballads and sonnets, either remained
unwritten or have been lost. But, as a matter of fact, he has left us
in his Sonnets and 'Canzoni' a treasure of inward experience. And in
what a framework he has set them! The prose of the 'Vita Nuova,' in
which he gives an account of the origin of each poem, is as wonderful
as the verses themselves, and forms with them a uniform whole, inspired
with the deepest glow of passion. With unflinching frankness and
sincerity he lays bare every shade of his joy and his sorrow, and molds
it resolutely into the strictest forms of art. Reading attentively
these Sonnets and 'Canzoni' and the marvelous fragments of the diary of
his youth which lie between them, we fancy that throughout the Middle
Ages the poets have been purposely fleeing from themselves, and that he
was the first to seek his own soul. Before his time we meet with many
an artistic verse; but he is the first artist in the full sense of the
word--the first who consciously cast immortal matter into an immortal
form. Subjective feeling has here a full objective truth and greatness,
and most of it is so set forth that all ages and peoples can make it
their own. Where he writes in a thoroughly objective spirit, and lets
the force of his sentiment be guessed at only by some outward fact, as
in the magnificent sonnets 'Tanto gentile,' etc., and 'Vede
perfettamente,' etc., he seems to feel the need of excusing himself.
The most beautiful of these poems really belongs to this class-- the
'Deh peregrini che pensosi andate,' ('Oh, pilgrims, walking deep in
thoughts,' from Vita Nuova.) Even apart from the 'Divine Comedy,' Dante
would have marked by these youthful poems the boundary between
medievalism and modern times. The human spirit had taken a mighty step
towards the consciousness of its own secret life.
The revelations in this matter which are contained in the 'Divine
Comedy' itself are simply immeasurable; and it would be necessary to go
through the whole poem, one canto after another, in order to do justice
to its value from this point of view. Happily we have no need to do
this, as it has long been a daily food of all the countries of the
West. Its plan, and the ideas on which it is based, belong to the
Middle Ages, and appeal to our interest only historically; but it is
nevertheless the beginning of all modern poetry, through the power and
richness shown in the description of human nature in every shape and
attitude. From this time forward poetry may have experienced unequal
fortunes, and may show, for half a century together, a so-called
relapse. But its nobler and more vital principle was saved for ever;
and whenever in the fourteenth, fifteenth, and in the beginning of the
sixteenth centuries, an original mind devotes himself to it, he
represents a more advanced stage than any poet out of Italy,
given--what is certainly always easy to settle satisfactorily--an equality of
natural gifts to start with.
Here, as in other things in Italy, culture--to which poetry
belongs--precedes the visual arts and, in fact, gives them their chief impulse.
More than a century elapsed before the spiritual element in painting
and sculpture attained a power of expression in any way analogous to
that of the 'Divine Comedy.' How far the same rule holds good for the
artistic development of other nations, and of what importance the whole
question may be, does not concern us here. For Italian civilization it
is of decisive weight.
The position to be assigned to Petrarch in this respect must be settled
by the many readers of the poet. Those who come to him in the spirit of
a cross-examiner, and busy themselves in detecting the contradictions
between the poet and the man, his infidelities in love, and the other
weak sides of his character, may perhaps, after sufficient effort, end
by losing all taste for his poetry. In place, then, of artistic
enjoyment, we may acquire a knowledge of the man in his 'totality.'
What a pity that Petrarch's letters from Avignon contain so little
gossip to take hold of, and that the letters of his acquaintances and
of the friends of these acquaintances have either been lost or never
existed! Instead of Heaven being thanked when we are not forced to
inquire how and through what struggles a poet has rescued something
immortal from his own poor life and lot, a biography has been stitched
together for Petrarch out of these so-called 'remains,' which reads
like an indictment. But the poet may take comfort. If the printing and
editing of the correspondence of celebrated people goes on for another
half-century as it has begun in England and Germany, illustrious
company enough sitting with him on repentance.
Without shutting our eyes to much that is. artificial in his poetry,
where the writer is merely imitating himself and singing on in the old
strain, we cannot fail to admire the marvelous abundance of pictures of
the inmost soul -- descriptions of moments of joy and sorrow which must
have been thoroughly his own, since no one before him gives us anything
of the kind, and on which his significance rests for his country and
for the world. His verse is not in all places equally transparent; by
the side of his most beautiful thoughts stands at times some
allegorical conceit or some sophistical trick of logic, altogether
foreign to our present taste. But the balance is on the side of
excellence.
Boccaccio, too, in his imperfectly-known Sonnets, succeeds sometimes in
giving a most powerful and effective picture of his feeling. The return
to a spot consecrated by love (Son. 22), the melancholy of spring (Son.
33), the sadness of the poet who feels himself growing old (Son. 65),
are admirably treated by him. And in the 'Ameto' he has described the
ennobling and transfiguring power of love in a manner which would
hardly be expected from the author of the 'Decameron.' In the
'Fiammetta' we have another great and minutely-painted picture of the
human soul, full of the keenest observation, though executed with
anything but uniform power, and in parts marred by the passion for
high-sounding language and by an unlucky mixture of mythological
allusions and learned quotations. The 'Fiammetta,' if we are not
mistaken, is a sort of feminine counterpart to the 'Vita Nuova' of
Dante, or at any rate owes its origin to it.
That the ancient poets, particularly the elegists, and Virgil, in the
fourth book of the Aeneid, were not without influence on the Italians
of this and the following generation is beyond a doubt; but the spring
of sentiment within the latter was nevertheless powerful and original.
If we compare them in this respect with their contemporaries in other
countries, we shall find in them the earliest complete expression of
modern European feeling. The question, be it remembered, is not to know
whether eminent men of other nations did not feel as deeply and as
nobly, but who first gave documentary proof of the widest knowledge of
the movements of the human heart.
Why did the Italians of the Renaissance do nothing above the second
rank in tragedy? That was the field on which to display human
character, intellect, and passion, in the thousand forms of their
growth, their struggles, and their decline. In other words: why did
Italy produce no Shakespeare? For with the stage of other northern
countries besides England the Italians of the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries had no reason to fear a comparison; and with the Spaniards
they could not enter into competition, since Italy had long lost all
traces of religious fanaticism, treated the chivalrous code of honour
only as a form, and was both too proud and too intelligent to bow down
before its tyrannical and illegitimate masters. We have therefore only
to consider the English stage in the period of its brief splendor.
It is an obvious reply that all Europe produced but one Shakespeare,
and that such a mind is the rarest of Heaven's gifts. It is further
possible that the Italian stage was on the way to something great when
the Counter-reformation broke in upon it, and, aided by the Spanish
rule over Naples and Milan, and indirectly over almost the whole
peninsula, withered the best flowers of the Italian spirit. It would be
hard to conceive of Shakespeare himself under a Spanish viceroy, or in
the neighbourhood of the Holy Inquisition at Rome, or in his own
country a few decades later, at the time o English Revolution. The
stage, which in its perfection is a product of every civilization, must
wait for its own time and fortune.
We must not, however, quit this subject without mentioning certain
circumstances which were of a character to hinder or retard a high
development of the drama in Italy, till the time for it had gone by.
As the most weighty of these causes we must mention without doubt that
the scenic tastes of the people were occupied elsewhere, and chiefly in
the mysteries and religious processions. Throughout all Europe dramatic
representations of sacred history and legend form the origin of the
secular drama; but Italy, as will be shown more fully in the sequel,
had spent on the mysteries such a wealth of decorative splendor as
could not but be unfavorable to the dramatic element. Out of all the
countless and costly representations, there sprang not even a branch of
poetry like the 'Autos Sagramentales' of Calderon and other Spanish
poets, much less any advantage or foundation for the secular drama.
And when the latter did at length appear, it at once gave itself up to
magnificence of scenic effects, to which the mysteries had already
accustomed the public taste to far too great an extent. We learn with
astonishment how rich and splendid the scenes in Italy were, at a time
when in the North the simplest indication of the place was thought
sufficient. This alone might have had no such unfavorable effect on the
drama, if the attention of the audience had not been drawn away from
the poetical conception of the play partly by the splendor of the
costumes, partly and chiefly by fantastic interludes (Intermezzi).
That in many places, particularly in Rome and Ferrara, Plautus and
Terence, as well as pieces by the old tragedians, were given in Latin
or in Italian, that the academies of which we have already spoken, made
this one of their chief objects, and that the poets of the Renaissance
followed these models too servilely, were all untoward conditions for
the Italian stage at the period in question. Yet I hold them to be of
secondary importance. Had not the Counter-reformation and the rule of
foreigners intervened, these very disadvantages might have been turned
into useful means of transition. At all events, by the year 1520 the
victory of the mother-tongue in tragedy and comedy was, to the great
disgust of the humanists, as good as won. On this side, then, no
obstacle stood in the way of the most developed people in Europe, to
hinder them from raising the drama, in its noblest forms, to be a true
reflection of human life and destiny. It was the Inquisitors and
Spaniards who cowed the Italian spirit, and rendered impossible the
representation of the greatest and most sublime themes, most of all
when they were associated with patriotic memories. At the same time,
there is no doubt that the distracting 'Intermezzi' did serious harm to
the drama. We must now consider them a little more closely.
When the marriage of Alfonso of Ferrara with Lucrezia Borgia was
celebrated, Duke Ercole in person showed his illustrious guests the 110
costumes which were to serve at the representation of five comedies of
Plautus, in order that all might see that not one of them was used
twice. But all this display of silk and camlet was nothing to the
ballets and pantomimes which served as interludes between the acts of
the Plautine dramas. That, in comparison, Plautus himself seemed
mortally dull to a lively young lady like Isabella Gonzaga, and that
while the play was going on everybody was longing for the interludes,
is quite intelligible, when we think of the picturesque brilliancy with
which they were put on the stage. There were to be seen combats of
Roman warriors, who brandished their weapons to the sound of music,
torch-dances executed by Moors, a dance of savages with horns of
plenty, out of which streamed waves of fire-- all as the ballet of a
pantomime in which a maiden was delivered from a dragon. Then came a
dance of fools, got up as Punches, beating one another with pigs'
bladders, with more of the same kind. At the Court of Ferrara they
never gave a comedy without 'its' ballet (Moresca). In what style the
'Amphitruo' of Plautus was there represented (1491) at the first
marriage of Alfonso with Anna Sforza), is doubtful. Possibly it was
given rather as a pantomime with music than as a drama. In any case,
the accessories were more considerable than the play itself. There was
a choral dance of ivy-clad youths, moving in intricate figures, done to
the music of a ringing orchestra; then came Apollo, striking the lyre
with the plectrum, and singing an ode to the praise of the House of
Este; then followed, as an interlude within an interlude, a kind of
rustic farce, after which the stage was again occupied by classical
mythology--Venus, Bacchus and their followers--and by a pantomime
representing the judgement of Paris.
Not till then was the second half of the fable of Amphitruo performed,
with unmistakable references to the future birth of a Hercules of the
House of Este. At a former representation of the same piece in the
courtyard of the palace (1487), 'a paradise with stars and other
wheels,' was constantly burning, by which is probably meant an
illumination with fireworks, that, no doubt, absorbed most of the
attention of the spectators. It was certainly better when such
performances were given separately, as was the case at other courts. We
shall have to speak of the entertainments given by the Cardinal Pietro
Riario, by the Bentivogli at Bologna, and by others, when we come to
treat of the festivals in general.
This scenic magnificence, now become universal, had a disastrous effect
on Italian tragedy. 'In Venice formerly,' writes Francesco Sansovino,
about 1570, 'besides comedies, tragedies by ancient and modern writers
were put on the stage with great pomp. The fame of the scenic
arrangements (apparati) brought spectators from far and near.
Nowadays, performances are given by private individuals in their own
houses, and the custom has long been fixed of passing the carnival in
comedies and other cheerful entertainments.' In other words, scenic
display had helped to kill tragedy.
The various starts or attempts of these modern tragedians, among which
the 'Sofonisba' of Trissino (1515) was the most celebrated, belong in
the history of literature. The same may be said of genteel comedy,
modelled on Plautus and Terence. Even Ariosto could do nothing of the
first order in this style. On the other hand, popular prose-comedy, as
treated by Machiavelli, Bibbiena, and Aretino, might have had a future,
if its matter had not condemned it to destruction. This was, on the one
hand, licentious to the last degree, and on the other, aimed at certain
classes in society, which, after the middle of the sixteenth century,
ceased to afford a ground for public attacks. If in the 'Sofonisba' the
portrayal of character gave place to brilliant declamation, the latter,
with its half-sister, caricature, was used far too freely in comedy
also.
The writing of tragedies and comedies, and the practice of putting both
ancient and modern plays on the stage, continued without intermission;
but they served only as occasions for display. The national genius
turned elsewhere for living interest. When the opera and the pastoral
fable came up, these attempts were at length wholly abandoned.
One form of comedy only was and remained national--the unwritten,
improvised 'Commedia dell' Arte.' It was of no great service in the
delineation of character, since the masks used were few in number and
familiar to everybody. But the talent of the nation had such an
affinity for this style, that often in the middle of written comedies
the actors would throw themselves on their own inspiration, so that a
new mixed form of comedy came into existence in some places. The plays
given in Venice by Burchiello, and afterwards by the company of
Armonio, Val. Zuccato, Lod. Dolce, and others, were perhaps of this
character. Of Burchiello we know expressly that he used to heighten the
comic effect by mixing Greek and Slavonic words with the Venetian
dialect. A complete 'Commedia dell' Arte,' or very nearly so, was
represented by Angelo Beolco, known as 'Il Ruzzante' (1502-42), whose
customary masks were Paduan peasants, with the names Menato, Vezzo,
Billora, etc. He studied their dialect when spending the summer at the
villa of his patron Luigi Cornaro (Aloysius Cornelius) at Codevico.
Gradually all the famous local masks made their appearance, whose
remains still delight the Italian populace in our day: Pantalone, the
Doctor, Brighella, Pulcinella, Arlecchino, and the rest. Most of them
are of great antiquity, and possibly are historically connected with
the masks in the old Roman farces; but it was not till the sixteenth
century that several of them were combined in one piece. At the present
time this is less often the case; but every great city still keeps to
its local mask--Naples to the Pulcinella, Florence to the Stentorello,
Milan to its often so admirable Meneghino.
This is indeed scanty compensation for a people which possessed the
power, perhaps to a greater degree than any other, to reflect and
contemplate its own highest qualities in the mirror of the drama. But
this power was destined to be marred for centuries by hostile forces,
for whose predominance the Italians were only in part responsible. The
universal talent for dramatic representation could not indeed be
uprooted, and in music Italy long made good its claim to supremacy in
Europe. Those who can find in this world of sound a compensation for
the drama, to which all future was denied, have, at all events, no
meagre source of consolation.
But perhaps we can find in epic poetry what the stage fails to offer
us. Yet the chief reproach made against the heroic poetry of Italy is
precisely on the score of the insignificance and imperfect
representation of its characters.
Other merits are allowed to belong to it, among the rest, that for
three centuries it has been actually read and constantly reprinted,
while nearly the whole of the epic poetry of other nations has become a
mere matter of literary or historical curiosity. Does this perhaps lie
in the taste of the readers, who demand something different from what
would satisfy a northern public? Certainly, without the power of
entering to some degree into Italian sentiment, it is impossible to
appreciate the characteristic excellence of these poems, and many
distinguished men declare that they can make nothing of them. And in
truth, if we criticize Pulci, Boiardo, Ariosto, and Berni solely with
an eye to their thought and matter, we shall fail to do them justice.
They are artists of a peculiar kind, who write for a people which is
distinctly and eminently artistic.
The mediaeval legends had lived on after the gradual extinction of the
poetry of chivalry, partly in the form of rhyming adaptations and
collections, and partly of novels in prose. The latter was the case in
Italy during the fourteenth century; but the newly-awakened memories of
antiquity were rapidly growing up to a gigantic size, and soon cast
into the shade all the fantastic creations of the Middle Ages.
Boccaccio, for example, in his 'Visione Amorosa,' names among the
heroes in his enchanted palace Tristram, Arthur, Galeotto, and others,
but briefly, as if he were ashamed to speak of them; and following
writers either do not name them at all, or name them only for purposes
of ridicule. But the people kept them in its memory, and from the
people they passed into the hands of the poets of the fifteenth
century. These were now able to conceive and represent their subjects
in a wholly new manner. But they did more. They introduced into it a
multitude of fresh elements, and in fact recast it from beginning to
end. It must not be expected of them that they should treat such
subjects with the respect once felt for them. All other countries must
envy them the advantage of having a popular interest of this kind to
appeal to; but they could not without hypocrisy treat these myths with
any respect.
Instead of this, they moved with victorious freedom in the new field
which poetry had won. What they chiefly aimed at seems to have been
that their poems, when recited, should produce the most harmonious and
exhilarating effect. These works indeed gain immensely when they are
repeated, not as a whole, but piecemeal, and with a slight touch of
comedy in voice and gesture. A deeper and more detailed portrayal of
character would do little to enhance this effect; though the reader may
desire it, the hearer, who sees the rhapsodist standing before him, and
who hears only one piece at a time, does not think about it at all.
With respect to the figures, which the poet found ready made for him,
his feeling was of a double kind; his humanistic culture protested
against their mediaeval character, and their combats as counterparts of
the battles and tournaments of the poet's own age exercised all his
knowledge and artistic power, while at the same time they called forth
all the highest qualities in the reciter. Even in Pulci, accordingly,
we find no parody, strictly speaking, of chivalry, nearly humour of his
paladins at times approaches it. By their side stands the ideal of
pugnacity--the droll and jovial Morgante--who masters whole armies with
his bellclapper, and who is himself thrown into relief by contrast with
the grotesque and most interesting monster Margutte. Yet Pulci lays no
special stress on these two rough and vigorous characters, and his
story, long after they had disappeared from it, maintains its singular
course. Boiardo treats his characters with the same mastery, using them
for serious or comic purposes as he pleases; he has his fun even out of
supernatural beings, whom he sometimes intentionally depicts as louts.
But there is one artistic aim which he pursues as earnestly as Pulci,
namely, the lively and exact description of all that goes forward.
Pulci recited his poem, as one book after another was finished, before
the society of Lorenzo il Magnifico, and in the same way Boiardo
recited his at the court of Ercole of Ferrara. It may be easily
imagined what sort of excellence such an audience demanded, and how
little thanks a profound exposition of character would have earned for
the poet. Under these circumstances the poems naturally formed no
complete whole, and might just as well be half or twice as long as they
now are. Their composition is not that of a great historical picture,
but rather that of a frieze, or of some rich festoon entwined among
groups of picturesque figures. And precisely as in the figures or
tendrils of a frieze we do not look for minuteness of execution in the
individual forms, or for distant perspectives and different planes, so
we must as little expect anything of the kind from these poems.
The varied richness of invention which continually astonishes us, most
of all in the case of Boiardo, turns to ridicule all our school
definitions as to the essence of epic poetry. For that age, this form
of literature was the most agreeable diversion from archaeological
studies, and, indeed, the only possible means of re-establishing an
independent class of narrative poetry. For the versification of ancient
history could only lead to the false tracks which were trodden by
Petrarch in his 'Africa,' written in Latin hexameters, and a hundred
and fifty years later by Trissino in his 'Italy delivered from the
Goths,' composed in 'versi sciolti'--a never-ending poem of faultless
language and versification, which only makes us doubt whether this
unlucky alliance has been more disastrous to history or to poetry.
And whither did the example of Dante beguile those who imitated him?
The visionary 'Trionfi' of Petrarch were the last of the works written
under this influence which satisfy our taste. The 'Amorosa Visione' of
Boccaccio is at bottom no more than an enumeration of historical or
fabulous characters, arranged under allegorical categories. Others
preface what they have to tell with a baroque imitation of Dante's
first canto, and provide themselves with some allegorical comparison,
to take the place of Virgil. Uberti, for example, chose Solinus for his
geographical poem--the 'Dittamondo'--and Giovanni Santi, Plutarch for
his encomium on Federigo of Urbino. The only salvation of the time from
these false tendencies lay in the new epic poetry which was represented
by Pulci and Boiardo. The admiration and curiosity with which it was
received, and the like of which will perhaps never fall again to the
lot of epic poetry to the end of time, is a brilliant proof of how
great was the need of it. It is idle to ask whether that epic ideal
which our own day has formed from Homer and the 'Nibelungenlied' is or
is not realized in these works; an ideal of their own age certainly
was. By their endless descriptions of combats, which to us are the most
fatiguing part of these poems, they satisfied, as we have already said,
a practical interest of which it is hard for us to form a just
conception--as hard, indeed, as of the esteem in which a lively and
faithful reflection of the passing moment was then held.
Nor can a more inappropriate test be applied to Ariosto than the degree
in which his 'Orlando Furioso' serves for the representation of
character. Characters, indeed, there are, and drawn with an
affectionate care; but the poem does not depend on these for its
effect, and would lose, rather than gain, if more stress were laid upon
them. But the demand for them is part of a wider and more general
desire which Ariosto fails to satisfy as our day would wish it
satisfied. From a poet of such fame and such mighty gifts we would
gladly receive something better than the adventures of Orlando. From
him we might have hoped for a work expressing the deepest conflicts of
the human soul, the highest thoughts of his time on human and divine
things--in a word, one of those supreme syntheses like the 'Divine
Comedy' or 'Faust.' Instead of which he goes to work like the visual
artists of his own day, not caring for originality in our sense of the
word, simply reproducing a familiar circle of figures, and even, when
it suits his purpose, making use of the details left him by his
predecessors. The excellence which, in spite of all this, can
nevertheless be attained, will be the more incomprehensible to people
born without the artistic sense, the more learned and intelligent in
other respects they are. The artistic aim of Ariosto is brilliant,
living action, which he distributes equally through the whole of his
great poem. For this end he needs to be excused, not only from all
deeper expression of character, but also from maintaining any strict
connection in his narrative. He must be allowed to take up lost and
forgotten threads when and where he pleases; his heroes must come and
go, not because their character, but because the story requires it. Yet
in this apparently irrational and arbitrary style of composition he
displays a harmonious beauty, never losing himself in description, but
giving only such a sketch of scenes and persons as does not hinder the
flowing movement of the narrative. Still less does he lose himself in
conversation and monologue, but maintains the lofty privilege of the
true epos, by transforming all into living narrative. His pathos does
not lie in the words, not even in the famous twentythird and following
cantos, where Roland's madness is described. That the love-stories in
the heroic poem are without all lyrical tenderness, must be reckoned a
merit, though from a moral point of view they cannot always be
approved. Yet at times they are of such truth and reality,
notwithstanding all ; and romance which surrounds them, that we might
think them personal affairs of the poet himself. In the full
consciousness of his own genius, he does not scruple to interweave t he
events of his own day into the poem, and to celebrate the fame of the
house of Este in visions and prophecies. The wonderful stream of his
octaves bears it all forward in even and dignified movement.
With Teofilo Folengo, or, as he here calls himself, Limerno Pitocco,
the parody of the whole system of chivalry attained the end it had so
long desired. But here comedy, with its realism, demanded of necessity
a stricter delineation of character. Exposed to all the rough usage of
the half-savage street-lads in a Roman country town, Sutri, the little
Orlando grows up before our eyes into the hero, the priest-hater, and
the disputant. The conventional world which had been recognized since
the time of Pulci and had served as a framework for the epos, here
falls to pieces. The origin and position of the paladins is openly
ridiculed, as in the tournament of donkeys in the second book, where
the knights appear with the most ludicrous armament. The poet utters
his ironical regrets over the inexplicable faithlessness which seems
implanted in the house of Gano of Mainz, over the toilsome acquisition
of the sword Durindana, and so forth. Tradition, in fact, serves him
only as a substratum for episodes, ludicrous fancies, allusions to
events of the time (among which some, like the close of cap. vi. are
exceedingly fine), and indecent jokes. Mixed with all this, a certain
derision of Ariosto is unmistakable, and it was fortunate for the
'Orlando Furioso' that the 'Orlandino,' with its Lutheran heresies, was
soon put out of the way by the Inquisition. The parody is evident when
(cap. vi, 28) the house of Gonzaga is deduced from the paladin Guidone,
since the Colonna claimed Orlando, the Orsini Rinaldo, and the house of
Este--according to Ariosto-- Ruggiero as their ancestors. Perhaps
Ferrante Gonzaga, the patron of the poet, was a party to this sarcasm
on the house of Este.
That in the 'Jerusalem Delivered' of Torquato Tasso the delineation of
character is one of the chief tasks of the poet, proves only how far
his mode of thought differed from that prevalent half a century before.
His admirable work is a true monument of the Counter-reformation which
had meanwhile been accomplished, and of the spirit and tendency of that
movement.