Chapter 8

Literature.—K. L. Fernow in the third volume of hisRömische Studien(Zurich, 1806-1808) gave a good survey of the dialects of Italy. The dawn of rigorously scientific methods had not then appeared; but Fernow’s view is wide and genial. Similar praise is due to Biondelli’s workSui dialetti gallo-italici(Milan, 1853), which, however, is still ignorant of Diez. August Fuchs, between Fernow and Biondelli, had made himself so far acquainted with the new methods; but his exploration (Über die sogenannten unregelmässigen Zeitwörter in den romanischen Sprachen, nebst Andeutungen über die wichtigsten romanischen Mundarten, Berlin, 1840), though certainly of utility, was not very successful. Nor can the rapid survey of the Italian dialects given by Friedrich Diez be ranked among the happiest portions of his great masterpiece. Among the followers of Diez who distinguished themselves in this department the first outside of Italy were certainly Mussafia, a cautious and clear continuator of the master, and the singularly acute Hugo Schuchardt. Next came theArchivio glottologico italiano(Turin, 1873 and onwards. Up to 1897 there were published 16 vols.), the lead in which was taken by Ascoli and G. Flechia (d. 1892), who, together with the Dalmatian Adolf Mussafia (d. 1906), may be looked upon as the founders of the study of Italian dialects, and who have applied to their writings a rigidly methodical procedure and a historical and comparative standard, which have borne the best fruit. For historical studies dealing specially with the literary language, Nannucci, with his good judgment and breadth of view, led the way; we need only mention here hisAnalisi critica dei verbi italiani(Florence, 1844). But the new method was to show how much more it was to and did effect. When this movement on the part of the scholars mentioned above became known, other enthusiasts soon joined them, and theArch. glottologicodeveloped into a school, which began to produce many prominent works on language [among the first in order of date and merit may be mentioned “Gli Allotropi italiani,” by U. A. Canello (1887),Arch. glott.iii. 285-419; andLe Origini della lingua poetica italiana, by N. Caix (d. 1882), (Florence, 1880)], and studies on the dialects. We shall here enumerate those of them which appear for one reason or another to have been the most notable. But, so far as works of a more general nature are concerned, we should first state that there have been other theories as to the classification of the Italian dialects (see also above the various notes on B. 1, 2 and C. 2) put forward by W. Meyer-Lübke (Einführung in das Studium der romanischen Sprachwissenschaft, Heidelberg, 1901; pp. 21-22), and M. Bartoli (Altitalienische Chrestomathie, von P. Savj-Lopez und M. Bartoli, Strassburg, 1903, pp. 171 et seq. 193 et seq., and the table at the end of the volume). W. Meyer-Lübke afterwards filled in details of the system which he had sketched in Gröber’sGrundriss der romanischen Philologie, i., 2nd ed. (1904), pp. 696 et seq. And from the same author comes that masterly work, theItalienische Grammatik(Leipzig, 1890), where the language and its dialects are set out in one organic whole, just as they are placed together in the concise chapter devoted to Italian in the above-mentionedGrundriss(pp. 637 et seq.). We will now give the list, from which we omit, however, the works quoted incidentally throughout the text: B. 1a: Parodi,Arch. glott.xiv. 1 sqq., xv. 1 sqq., xvi. 105 sqq. 333 sqq.;Poesie in dial. tabbiese del sec. XVII. illustrate da E. G. Parodi(Spezia, 1904); Schädel,Die Mundart von Ormea(Halle, 1903); Parodi,Studj romanzi, fascic. v.; b: Giacomino,Arch. glott.xv. 403 sqq.; Toppino, ib. xvi. 517 sqq.; Flechia, ib. xiv. 111 sqq.; Nigra,Miscell. Ascoli(Turin, 1901), 247 sqq.; Renier,Il Gelindo(Turin, 1896); Salvioni,Rendiconti Istituto lombardo, s. ii., vol. xxxvii. 522, sqq.; c: Salvioni,Fonetica del dialetto di Milano(Turin, 1884);Studi di filol. romanza, viii. 1 sqq.;Arch. glott.ix. 188 sqq. xiii. 355 sqq.;Rendic. Ist. lomb.s. ii., vol. xxxv. 905 sqq.; xxxix. 477 sqq.; 505 sqq. 569 sqq. 603 sqq., xl. 719 sqq.;Bollettino storico della Svizzera italiana, xvii. and xviii.; Michael,Der Dialekt des Poschiavotals(Halle, 1905); v. Ettmayer,Bergamaskische Alpenmundarten(Leipzig, 1903);Romanische Forschungen, xiii. 321 sqq.;d: Mussafia,Darstellung der romagnolischen Mundart(Vienna, 1871); Gaudenzi,I Suoni ecc. della città di Bologna(Turin, 1889); Ungarelli,Vocab. del dial. bologn. con una introduzione di A. Trauzzi sulla fonetica e sulla morfologia del dialetto(Bologna, 1901); Bertoni,Il Dialetto di Modena(Turin, 1905); Pullé, “Schizzo dei dialetti del Frignano” inL’ Apennino modenese. 673 sqq. (Rocca S. Casciano, 1895); Piagnoli,Fonetica parmigiana(Turin, 1904); Restori,Note fonetiche sui parlari dell’ alta valle di Macra(Leghorn, 1892); Gorra,Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, xvi. 372 sqq.; xiv. 133 sqq.; Nicoli,Studi di filologia romanza, viii. 197 sqq. B. 2: Hofmann,Die logudoresische und campidanesische Mundart(Marburg, 1885); Wagner,Lautlehre der südsardischen Mundarten(Malle a. S., 1907); Campus,Fonetica del dialetto logudorese(Turin, 1901); Guarnerio,Arch. glott.xiii. 125 sqq., xiv. 131 sqq., 385 sqq. C. 1: Rossi,Le Lettere di Messer Andrea Calmo(Turin, 1888); Wendriner,Die paduanische Mundart bei Ruzante(Breslau, 1889);Le Rime di Bartolomeo Cavassico notaio bellunese della prima metà del sec. xvi. con illustraz. e note di v. Cian, e con illustrazioni linguistiche e lessico a cura di C. Salvioni(2 vols., Bologna, 1893-1894); Gartner,Zeitschr. für roman. Philol.xvi. 183 sqq., 306 sqq.; Salvioni,Arch. glott.xvi. 245 sqq.; Vidossich,Studi sul dialetto triestino(Triest, 1901);Zeitschr. für rom. Phil.xxvii. 749 sqq.; Ascoli,Arch. glott.xiv. 325 sqq.; Schneller,Die romanischen Volksmundarten in Südtirol, i. (Gera, 1870); von Slop,Die tridentinische Mundart(Klagenfurt, 1888); Ive,I Dialetti ladino-veneti dell’ Istria(Strassburg, 1900). C. 2: Guarnerio,Arch. glott.xiii. 125 sqq., xiv. 131 sqq., 385 sqq. C. 3a: Wentrup-Pitré, in Pitré,Fiabe, novelle e racconti popolari siciliani, vol. i., pp. cxviii. sqq.; Schneegans,Laute und Lautentwickelung des sicil. Dialektes(Strassburg, 1888); De Gregorio,Saggio di fonetica siciliana(Palermo, 1890); Pirandello,Laute und Lautentwickelung der Mundart von Girgenti(Halle, 1891); Cremona,Fonetica del Caltagironese(Acireale, 1895); Santangelo, Arch. glott. xvi. 479 sqq.; La Rosa,Saggi di morfologia siciliana, i.Sostantivi(Noto, 1901); Salvioni,Rendic. Ist. lomb.s. ii., vol. xl. 1046 sqq., 1106 sqq., 1145 sqq.;b: Scerbo,Sul dialetto calabro(Florence, 1886); Accattati’s,Vocabolario del dial. calabrese(Castrovillari, 1895); Gentili,Fonetica del dialetto cosentino(Milan, 1897); Wentrup,Beiträge zur Kenntniss der neapolitanischen Mundart(Wittenberg, 1855); Subak,Die Konjugation im Neapolitanischen(Vienna, 1897); Morosi,Arch. glott.iv. 117 sqq.; De Noto,Appunti di fonetica sul dial. di Taranto(Trani, 1897); Subak,Das Zeitwort in der Mundart von Tarent(Brünn, 1897); Panareo,Fonetica del dial. di Maglie d’ Otranto(Milan, 1903); Nitti di Vito,Il Dial. di Bari, part 1, “Vocalismo moderno” (Milan, 1896); Abbatescianni,Fonologia del dial. barese(Avellino, 1896); Zingarelli,Arch. glott.xv. 83 sqq., 226 sqq.; Ziccardi,Studi glottologici, iv. 171 sqq.; D’ Ovidio,Arch. glott.iv. 145 sqq., 403 sqq.; Finamore,Vocabolario dell’ uso abruzzese(2nd ed., Città di Castello, 1893); Rollin,Mitteilung XIV. der Gesellschaft zur Förderung deutscher Wissenschaft, Kunst und Literatur in Böhmen(Prague, 1901); De Lollis,Arch. glott.xii. 1 sqq., 187 sqq.;Miscell. Ascoli, 275 sqq.; Savini,La Grammatica e il lessico del dial. teramano(Turin, 1881). C. 4: Merlo,Zeitschr. f. roman. Phil., xxx. 11 sqq., 438 sqq., xxxi. 157 sqq.; E. Monaci (notes on old Roman),Rendic. dei Lincei, Feb. 21st, 1892, p. 94 sqq.; Rossi-Casè,Bollett. di stor. patria degli Abruzzi, vi.; Crocioni,Miscell. Monaci, pp. 429 sqq.; Ceci,Arch. glott.x. 167 sqq.; Parodi,ib.xiii. 299 sqq.; Campanelli,Fonetica del dial. reatino(Turin, 1896); Verga,Sonetti e altre poesie di R. Torelli in dial. perugino(Milan, 1895); Bianchi,Il Dialetto e la etnografia di Città di Castello(Città di Castello, 1888); Neumann-Spallart,Zeitschrift für roman. Phil.xxviii. 273 sqq., 450 sqq.;Weitere Beiträge zur Charakteristik des Dialektes der Marche(Halle a. S., 1907); Crocioni,Studi di fil. rom., ix. 617 sqq.;Studi romanzi, fasc. 3°, 113 sqq.,Il Dial. di Arcevia(Rome, 1906); Lindsstrom,Studi romanzi, fasc. 5°, 237 sqq.; Crocioni, ib. 27 sqq. D.: Parodi,Romania, xviii.; Schwenke,De dialecto quae carminibus popularibus tuscanicis a Tigrio editis continetur(Leipzig, 1872); Pieri,Arch. glott.xii. 107 sqq., 141 sqq., 161 sqq.;Miscell. Caix-Canello, 305 sqq.;Note sul dialetto aretino(Pisa, 1886);Zeitschr. für rom. Philol.xxviii. 161 sqq.; Salvioni,Arch. glott.xvi. 395 sqq.; Hirsch,Zeitschrift f. rom. Philol.ix. 513 sqq., x. 56 sqq., 411 sqq. For researches on the etymology of all the Italian dialects, but chiefly of those of Northern Italy, theBeitrag zur Kunde der norditalienischen Mundarten im XV. Jahrhundertof Ad. Mussafia (Vienna, 1873) and thePostille etimologicheof Giov. Flechia (Arch. glott.ii., iii.) are of the greatest importance. Biondelli’s book is of no small service also for the numerous translations which it contains of the Prodigal Son into Lombard, Piedmontese and Emilian dialects. A dialogue translated into the vernaculars of all parts of Italy will be found in Zuccagni Orlandini’sRaccolta di dialetti italiani con illustrazioni etnologiche(Florence, 1864). And every dialectal division is abundantly represented in a series of versions of a short novel of Boccaccio, which Papanti has published under the titleI Parlari italiani in Certaldo, &c. (Leghorn, 1875).[A very valuable and rich collection of dialectal essays on the most ancient documents for all parts of Italy is to be found in theCrestomazia italiana dei primi secoliof E. Monaci (Città di Castello, 1889-1897); see also in theAltitalienische Chrestomathieof P. Savj-Lopez and M. Bartoli (Strassburg, 1903).]

[A very valuable and rich collection of dialectal essays on the most ancient documents for all parts of Italy is to be found in theCrestomazia italiana dei primi secoliof E. Monaci (Città di Castello, 1889-1897); see also in theAltitalienische Chrestomathieof P. Savj-Lopez and M. Bartoli (Strassburg, 1903).]

(G. I. A.; C. S.*)

1The article by G. I. Ascoli in the 9th edition of theEncyclopaedia Britannica, which has been recognized as a classic account of the Italian language, was reproduced by him, with slight modifications, inArch. glott.viii. 98-128. The author proposed to revise his article for the present edition of theEncyclopaedia, but his death on the 21st of January 1907 prevented his carrying out this work, and the task was undertaken by Professor C. Salvioni. In the circumstances it was considered best to confine the revision to bringing Ascoli’s article up to date, while preserving its form and main ideas, together with the addition of bibliographical notes, and occasional corrections and substitutions, in order that the results of more recent research might be embodied. The new matter is principally in the form of notes or insertions within square brackets.2[In Corsica the present position of Italian as a language of culture is as follows. Italian is only used for preaching in the country churches. In all the other relations of public and civil life (schools, law courts, meetings, newspapers, correspondence, &c.), its place is taken by French. As the elementary schools no longer teach Italian but French, an educated Corsican nowadays knows only his own dialect for everyday use, and French for public occasions.]3[It may be asked whether we ought not to include under this section the Vegliote dialect (Veglioto), since under this form the Dalmatian dialect (Dalmatico) is spoken in Italy. But it should be remembered that in the present generation the Dalmatian dialect has only been heard as a living language at Veglia.]4As a matter of fact the “velar” at the end of a word, when preceded by an accented vowel, is found also in Venetia and Istria. This fact, together with others (v.Kritischer Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der roman. Philol.vii. part i. 130), suggests that we ought to assume an earlier group in which Venetian and Gallo-Italian formed part of one and the same group. In this connexion too should be noted the atonic pronounghe(Ital.ci-a lui, a lei, a loro), which is found in Venetian, Lombard, North-Emilian and Ligurian.5[The latest authorities for the Sardinian dialects are W. Meyer-Lübke and M. Bartoli, in the passages quoted by Guarnerio in his “Il sardo e il côrso in una nuova classificazione delle lingue romanze” (Arch. glott.xvi. 491-516). These scholars entirely dissociate Sardinian from the Italian system, considering it as forming in itself a Romance language, independent of the others; a view in which they are correct. The chief discriminating criterion is supplied by the treatment of the Latin -s, which is preserved in Sardinian, the Latin accusative form prevailing in the declension of the plural, as opposed to the nominative, which prevails in the Italian system. In this respect the Gallo-Italian dialects adhere to the latter system, rejecting the -sand retaining the nominative form. On the other hand, these facts form an important link between Sardinian and the Western Romance dialects, such as the Iberian, Gallic and Ladin; it is not, however, to be identified with any of them, but is distinguished from them by many strongly-marked characteristics peculiar to itself, chief among which is the treatment of the Latin accented vowels, for which see Ascoli in the text. As to the internal classification of the Sardinian dialects, Guarnerio assumes four types, the Campidanese, Logudorese, Gallurese and Sassarese. The separate individuality of the last of these is indicated chiefly by the treatment of the accented vowels (dḛźi, Ital. dieci;tḛla, Ital. tela;pȩlu, Ital. pelo;nǫbu, Ital. nuovo;fiori, Ital. fiore;noźi, Ital. noce, as compared,e.g.with Galluresedḛci,tḛla,pilu,nou,fiǫri,nući). Both Gallura and Sassari, however, reject the -s, and adopt the nominative form in the plural, thus proving that they are not entirely distinct from the Italian system.]6On this point see the chapter, “La terra ferma veneta considerata in ispecie ne’ suoi rapporti con la sezione centrale della zona ladina,” inArch.i. 406-447.7[There are also examples of Istrian variants, such aslaṅna, Ital. lana;kadeṅna, Ital. catena.]8[There have been of late years many different opinions concerning the classification of Corsican. Meyer-Lübke dissociates it from Italian, and connects it with Sardinian, making of the languages of the two islands a unit independent of the Romance system. But even he (in Gröber’sGrundriss, 2nd ed., vol. i. p. 698) recognized that there were a number of characteristics, among them the participle in -utuand the articleillu, closely connecting Sassari and Corsica with the mainland. The matter has since then been put in its true light by Guarnerio (Arch. glott.xvi. 510 et seq.), who points out that there are two varieties of language in Corsica, theUltramontaneor southern, and theCismontane, by far the most widely spread, in the rest of the island. The former is, it is true, connected with Sardinian, but with that variety, precisely, which, as we have already seen, ought to be separated from the general Sardinian type. Here we might legitimately assume a North-Sardinian and South-Corsican type, having practically the same relation to Italian as have the Gallo-Italian dialects. As to the Cismontane, it has the Tuscan accented vowel-system, does not alterllorrn, turnsljintoĩ(Ital.gli), and shares with Tuscan the peculiar pronunciation ofćbetween vowels, while, together with many of the Tuscan and central dialects, it reducesrrto a single consonant. For these reasons, Guarnerio is right in placing the Cismontane, as Ascoli does for all the Corsican dialects, on the same plane as Umbrian, &c.]9The Ultramontane variety has, however,tela,pilu,iḍḍu,boći,gula,furu, corresponding exactly to the Galluresetela,pilu, Ital.pelo,iḍḍu; Ital. “ello,” Lat.illu;bǫci, Ital. voce;gula, Ital. gole.10[Traces are not lacking on the mainland ofnģbecomingnć, not only in Calabria, where at Cosenza are found,e.g.chiáncere, Ital. piangere,manciare, but also in Sannio and Apulia:chiance,monce, Ital. mungere, in the province of Avellino,púnci, Ital. (tu) pungi, at Brindisi. In Sicily, on the other hand, can be traced examples ofnćnkntmpbecomingnģngndmb.]11It should, however, be noticed that there seem to be examples of the é from á in the southern dialects on the Tyrrhenian side; texts of Serrara d’Ischia give:mancete, mangiata,maretete, maritata,manneto, mandato; alsotenno= Neap.tanno, allora. As to the diphthongs, we should not omit to mention that some of them are obviously of comparatively recent formation. Thus, examples from Cerignola, such aslęvǫitę, oliveto, come from*olivítu(cf. Lecc.leítu, &c.), that is to say, they are posterior to the phenomenon of vowel change by which the formulaę-ubecameí-u. And, still in the same dialect, in an example likegréjtę, creta, theejseems perhaps to be recent, for the reason that anotheré, derived from an originalé(Lat.ĕ), is treated in the same way (péjte, piede, &c.). As to examples from Agṇone likepuole, palo, there still exists a pluralpjélewhich points to the phase*palo.12We should here mention thatcalluis also found in theVocabolario Siciliano, and further occurs in Capitanata.13This is derived in reality from the Latin termination-unt, which is reduced phonetically to-u, a phenomenon not confined to the Abruzzi; cf.facciu, Ital. fanno, Lat.faciunt, at Norcia;crisciu, Ital. crescono, Lat.crescunt, &c., at Rieti. And examples are also to be found in ancient Tuscan.14[This resolution of -ć- byš, or by a sound very near toš, is, however, a Roman phenomenon, found in some parts of Apulia (Molfetteselausce, luce, &c.), and also heard in parts of Sicily.]15There is therefore nothing surprising in the fact that, for example, the chronicle of Monaldeschi of Orvieto (14th century) should indicate a form of speech of which Muratori remarks: “Romanis tunc familiaris, nimirum quae in nonnullis accedabat ad Neapolitanam seu vocibus seu pronuntiatione.” Thealtintoait, &c. (aitro,moito), which occur in the well-knownVita di Cola di Rienzo, examples of which can also be found in some corners of the Marches, and of which there are also a few traces in Latium, also shows Abruzzan affinity. The phenomenon occurs also, however, in Emilian and Tuscan.16A distinction between the masculine and the neuter article can also be noticed at Naples and elsewhere in the southern region, where it sometimes occurs that the initial consonant of the substantive is differently determined according as the substantive itself is conceived as masculine or neuter; thus at Naples, neut.lo bero, masc.lo vero, “il vero,” &c.; at Cerignola (Capitanata),u mmȩgghiḛ, “il meglio,” side by side withu mǫisḛ“il mese.” The difference is evidently to be explained by the fact that the neuter article originally ended in a consonant (-dor -c?; see Merlo,Zeitschrift für roman. Philol.xxx. 449), which was then assimilated to the initial letter of the substantive, while the masculine article ended in a vowel.17This second prefix is common to the opposite valley of the Metauro, and appears farther south in the form ofme,—Camerino:me lu pettu, nel petto,me lu Seppurgru, al Sepolcro.18A complete analogy is afforded by the history of the Aryan or Sanskrit language in India, which in space and time shows always more and more strongly the reaction of the oral tendencies of the aboriginal races on whom it has been imposed. Thus the Pali presents the ancient Aryan organism in a condition analogous to that of the oldest French, and the Prakrit of the Dramas, on the other hand, in a condition like that of modern French.

2[In Corsica the present position of Italian as a language of culture is as follows. Italian is only used for preaching in the country churches. In all the other relations of public and civil life (schools, law courts, meetings, newspapers, correspondence, &c.), its place is taken by French. As the elementary schools no longer teach Italian but French, an educated Corsican nowadays knows only his own dialect for everyday use, and French for public occasions.]

3[It may be asked whether we ought not to include under this section the Vegliote dialect (Veglioto), since under this form the Dalmatian dialect (Dalmatico) is spoken in Italy. But it should be remembered that in the present generation the Dalmatian dialect has only been heard as a living language at Veglia.]

4As a matter of fact the “velar” at the end of a word, when preceded by an accented vowel, is found also in Venetia and Istria. This fact, together with others (v.Kritischer Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der roman. Philol.vii. part i. 130), suggests that we ought to assume an earlier group in which Venetian and Gallo-Italian formed part of one and the same group. In this connexion too should be noted the atonic pronounghe(Ital.ci-a lui, a lei, a loro), which is found in Venetian, Lombard, North-Emilian and Ligurian.

5[The latest authorities for the Sardinian dialects are W. Meyer-Lübke and M. Bartoli, in the passages quoted by Guarnerio in his “Il sardo e il côrso in una nuova classificazione delle lingue romanze” (Arch. glott.xvi. 491-516). These scholars entirely dissociate Sardinian from the Italian system, considering it as forming in itself a Romance language, independent of the others; a view in which they are correct. The chief discriminating criterion is supplied by the treatment of the Latin -s, which is preserved in Sardinian, the Latin accusative form prevailing in the declension of the plural, as opposed to the nominative, which prevails in the Italian system. In this respect the Gallo-Italian dialects adhere to the latter system, rejecting the -sand retaining the nominative form. On the other hand, these facts form an important link between Sardinian and the Western Romance dialects, such as the Iberian, Gallic and Ladin; it is not, however, to be identified with any of them, but is distinguished from them by many strongly-marked characteristics peculiar to itself, chief among which is the treatment of the Latin accented vowels, for which see Ascoli in the text. As to the internal classification of the Sardinian dialects, Guarnerio assumes four types, the Campidanese, Logudorese, Gallurese and Sassarese. The separate individuality of the last of these is indicated chiefly by the treatment of the accented vowels (dḛźi, Ital. dieci;tḛla, Ital. tela;pȩlu, Ital. pelo;nǫbu, Ital. nuovo;fiori, Ital. fiore;noźi, Ital. noce, as compared,e.g.with Galluresedḛci,tḛla,pilu,nou,fiǫri,nući). Both Gallura and Sassari, however, reject the -s, and adopt the nominative form in the plural, thus proving that they are not entirely distinct from the Italian system.]

6On this point see the chapter, “La terra ferma veneta considerata in ispecie ne’ suoi rapporti con la sezione centrale della zona ladina,” inArch.i. 406-447.

7[There are also examples of Istrian variants, such aslaṅna, Ital. lana;kadeṅna, Ital. catena.]

8[There have been of late years many different opinions concerning the classification of Corsican. Meyer-Lübke dissociates it from Italian, and connects it with Sardinian, making of the languages of the two islands a unit independent of the Romance system. But even he (in Gröber’sGrundriss, 2nd ed., vol. i. p. 698) recognized that there were a number of characteristics, among them the participle in -utuand the articleillu, closely connecting Sassari and Corsica with the mainland. The matter has since then been put in its true light by Guarnerio (Arch. glott.xvi. 510 et seq.), who points out that there are two varieties of language in Corsica, theUltramontaneor southern, and theCismontane, by far the most widely spread, in the rest of the island. The former is, it is true, connected with Sardinian, but with that variety, precisely, which, as we have already seen, ought to be separated from the general Sardinian type. Here we might legitimately assume a North-Sardinian and South-Corsican type, having practically the same relation to Italian as have the Gallo-Italian dialects. As to the Cismontane, it has the Tuscan accented vowel-system, does not alterllorrn, turnsljintoĩ(Ital.gli), and shares with Tuscan the peculiar pronunciation ofćbetween vowels, while, together with many of the Tuscan and central dialects, it reducesrrto a single consonant. For these reasons, Guarnerio is right in placing the Cismontane, as Ascoli does for all the Corsican dialects, on the same plane as Umbrian, &c.]

9The Ultramontane variety has, however,tela,pilu,iḍḍu,boći,gula,furu, corresponding exactly to the Galluresetela,pilu, Ital.pelo,iḍḍu; Ital. “ello,” Lat.illu;bǫci, Ital. voce;gula, Ital. gole.

10[Traces are not lacking on the mainland ofnģbecomingnć, not only in Calabria, where at Cosenza are found,e.g.chiáncere, Ital. piangere,manciare, but also in Sannio and Apulia:chiance,monce, Ital. mungere, in the province of Avellino,púnci, Ital. (tu) pungi, at Brindisi. In Sicily, on the other hand, can be traced examples ofnćnkntmpbecomingnģngndmb.]

11It should, however, be noticed that there seem to be examples of the é from á in the southern dialects on the Tyrrhenian side; texts of Serrara d’Ischia give:mancete, mangiata,maretete, maritata,manneto, mandato; alsotenno= Neap.tanno, allora. As to the diphthongs, we should not omit to mention that some of them are obviously of comparatively recent formation. Thus, examples from Cerignola, such aslęvǫitę, oliveto, come from*olivítu(cf. Lecc.leítu, &c.), that is to say, they are posterior to the phenomenon of vowel change by which the formulaę-ubecameí-u. And, still in the same dialect, in an example likegréjtę, creta, theejseems perhaps to be recent, for the reason that anotheré, derived from an originalé(Lat.ĕ), is treated in the same way (péjte, piede, &c.). As to examples from Agṇone likepuole, palo, there still exists a pluralpjélewhich points to the phase*palo.

12We should here mention thatcalluis also found in theVocabolario Siciliano, and further occurs in Capitanata.

13This is derived in reality from the Latin termination-unt, which is reduced phonetically to-u, a phenomenon not confined to the Abruzzi; cf.facciu, Ital. fanno, Lat.faciunt, at Norcia;crisciu, Ital. crescono, Lat.crescunt, &c., at Rieti. And examples are also to be found in ancient Tuscan.

14[This resolution of -ć- byš, or by a sound very near toš, is, however, a Roman phenomenon, found in some parts of Apulia (Molfetteselausce, luce, &c.), and also heard in parts of Sicily.]

15There is therefore nothing surprising in the fact that, for example, the chronicle of Monaldeschi of Orvieto (14th century) should indicate a form of speech of which Muratori remarks: “Romanis tunc familiaris, nimirum quae in nonnullis accedabat ad Neapolitanam seu vocibus seu pronuntiatione.” Thealtintoait, &c. (aitro,moito), which occur in the well-knownVita di Cola di Rienzo, examples of which can also be found in some corners of the Marches, and of which there are also a few traces in Latium, also shows Abruzzan affinity. The phenomenon occurs also, however, in Emilian and Tuscan.

16A distinction between the masculine and the neuter article can also be noticed at Naples and elsewhere in the southern region, where it sometimes occurs that the initial consonant of the substantive is differently determined according as the substantive itself is conceived as masculine or neuter; thus at Naples, neut.lo bero, masc.lo vero, “il vero,” &c.; at Cerignola (Capitanata),u mmȩgghiḛ, “il meglio,” side by side withu mǫisḛ“il mese.” The difference is evidently to be explained by the fact that the neuter article originally ended in a consonant (-dor -c?; see Merlo,Zeitschrift für roman. Philol.xxx. 449), which was then assimilated to the initial letter of the substantive, while the masculine article ended in a vowel.

17This second prefix is common to the opposite valley of the Metauro, and appears farther south in the form ofme,—Camerino:me lu pettu, nel petto,me lu Seppurgru, al Sepolcro.

18A complete analogy is afforded by the history of the Aryan or Sanskrit language in India, which in space and time shows always more and more strongly the reaction of the oral tendencies of the aboriginal races on whom it has been imposed. Thus the Pali presents the ancient Aryan organism in a condition analogous to that of the oldest French, and the Prakrit of the Dramas, on the other hand, in a condition like that of modern French.

ITALIAN LITERATURE.1.Origins.—One characteristic fact distinguishes the Italy of the middle ages with regard to its intellectual conditions—the tenacity with which the Latin tradition clung to life (seeLatin). At the end of the 5th century thenorthern conquerors invaded Italy. The Roman world crumbled to pieces. A new kingdom arose at Ravenna under Theodoric, and there learning was not extinguished. The liberal arts flourished, the very Gothic kings surrounded themselves with masters of rhetoric and of grammar. The names of Cassiodorus, of Boetius, of Symmachus, are enough to show how Latin thought maintained its power amidst the political effacement of the Roman empire. And this thought held its ground throughout the subsequent ages and events. Thus, while elsewhere all culture had died out, there still remained in Italy some schools of laymen,1and some really extraordinary men were educated in them, such as Ennodius, a poet more pagan than Christian, Arator, Fortunatus, Venantius Jovannicius, Felix the grammarian, Peter of Pisa, Paulinus of Aquileia and many others, in all of whom we notice a contrast between the barbarous age they lived in and their aspiration towards a culture that should reunite them to the classical literature of Rome. The Italians never had much love for theological studies, and those who were addicted to them preferred Paris to Italy. It was something more practical, more positive, that had attraction for the Italians, and especially the study of Roman law. This zeal for the study of jurisprudence furthered the establishment of the medieval universities of Bologna, Padua, Vicenza, Naples, Salerno, Modena and Parma; and these, in their turn, helped to spread culture, and to prepare the ground in which the new vernacular literature was afterwards to be developed. The tenacity of classical traditions, the affection for the memories of Rome, the preoccupation with political interests, particularly shown in the wars of the Lombard communes against the empire of the Hohenstaufens, a spirit more naturally inclined to practice than to theory—all this had a powerful influence on the fate of Italian literature. Italy was wanting in that combination of conditions from which the spontaneous life of a people springs. This was chiefly owing to the fact that the history of the Italians never underwent interruption,—no foreign nation having come in to change them and make them young again. That childlike state of mind and heart, which in other Latin races, as well as in the Germanic, was such a deep source of poetic inspiration, was almost utterly wanting in the Italians, who were always much drawn to history and very little to nature; so, while legends, tales, epic poems, satires, were appearing and spreading on all sides, Italy was either quite a stranger to this movement or took a peculiar part in it. We know, for example, what the Trojan traditions were in the middle ages; and we should have thought that in Italy—in the country of Rome, retaining the memory of Aeneas and Virgil—they would have been specially developed, for it was from Virgil that the medieval sympathy for the conquered of Troy was derived. In fact, however, it was not so. A strange book made its appearance in Europe, no one quite knows when, theHistoria de excidio Trojae, which purported to have been written by a certain Dares the Phrygian, an eye-witness of the Trojan war. In the middle ages this book was the basis of many literary labours. Benoît de Sainte-More composed an interminable French poem founded on it, which afterwards in its turn became a source for other poets to draw from, such as Herbort of Fritzlar and Conrad of Würzburg. Now for the curious phenomenon displayed by Italy. Whilst Benoît de Sainte-More wrote his poem in French, taking his material from a Latin history, whilst the two German writers, from a French source, made an almost original work in their own language—an Italian, on the other hand, taking Benoît for his model, composed in Latin theHistoria destructionis Trojae; and this Italian was Guido delle Colonne of Messina, one of the vernacular poets of the Sicilian school, who must accordingly have known well how to use his own language. Guido was an imitator of the Provençals; he understood French, and yet wrote his own book in Latin, nay, changed the romance of the Troubadour into serious history. Much the same thing occurred with the other great legends. That of Alexander the Great (q.v.) gave rise to many French, German and Spanish poems,—in Italy, only to the Latin distichs of Qualichino of Arezzo. The whole of Europe was full of the legend of Arthur (q.v.). The Italians contented themselves with translating and with abridging the French romances, without adding anything of their own. The Italian writer could neither appropriate the legend nor colour it with his own tints. Even religious legend, so widely spread in the middle ages, and springing up so naturally as it did from the heart of that society, only put out a few roots in Italy. Jacopo di Voragine, while collecting his lives of the saints, remained only an historian, a man of learning, almost a critic who seemed doubtful about the things he related. Italy had none of those books in which the middle age, whether in its ascetic or its chivalrous character, is so strangely depicted. The intellectual life of Italy showed itself in an altogether special, positive, almost scientific, form, in the study of Roman law, in the chronicles of Farfa, of Marsicano and of many others, in translations from Aristotle, in the precepts of the school of Salerno, in the travels of Marco Polo—in short, in a long series of facts which seem to detach themselves from the surroundings of the middle age, and to be united on the one side with classical Rome and on the other with the Renaissance.

The necessary consequence of all this was that the Latin language was most tenacious in Italy, and that the elaboration of the new vulgar tongue was very slow,—being in fact preceded by two periods of Italian literature in foreignProvençal and French preparatory periods.languages. That is to say, there were many Italians who wrote Provençal poems, such as the Marchese Alberto Malaspina (12th century), Maestro Ferrari of Ferrara, Cigala of Genoa, Zorzi of Venice, Sordello of Mantua, Buvarello of Bologna, Nicoletto of Turin and others, who sang of love and of war, who haunted the courts, or lived in the midst of the people, accustoming them to new sounds and new harmonies. At the same time there was other poetry of an epic kind, written in a mixed language, of which French was the basis, but in which forms and words belonging to the Italian dialects were continually mingling. We find in it hybrid words exhibiting a treatment of sounds according to the rules of both languages,—French words with Italian terminations, a system of vocalization within the words approaching the Italo-Latin usage,—in short, something belonging at once to both tongues, as it were an attempt at interpenetration, at fusion. Such were theChansons de Geste,Macaire, theEntrée en Espagnewritten by Niccola of Padua, thePrise de Pampeluneand some others. All this preceded the appearance of a purely Italian literature.

In the Franco-Italian poems there was, as it were, a clashing, a struggle between the two languages, the French, however, gaining the upper hand. This supremacy became gradually less and less. As the struggle continuedDialect.between French and Italian, the former by degrees lost as much as the latter gained. The hybridism recurred, but it no longer predominated. In theBovo d’ Antonaand theRainardo e Lesengrinothe Venetian dialect makes itself clearly felt, although the language is influenced by French forms. Thus these writings, which G. I. Ascoli has called “miste” (mixed), immediately preceded the appearance of purely Italian works.

It is now an established historical fact that there existed no writing in Italian before the 13th century. It was in the course of that century, and especially from 1250 onwards, that the new literature largely unfolded and developedNorth Italy.itself. This development was simultaneous in the whole peninsula, only there was a difference in the subject-matter of the art. In the north, the poems of Giacomino of Verona and Bonvecino of Riva were specially religious, and were intended to be recited to the people. They were written in a dialect partaking of the Milanese and the Venetian; and in their style they strongly bore the mark of the influence of French narrative poetry. They may be considered as belonging to the popular kind of poetry, taking the word, however, in a broad sense. Perhaps this sort of composition was encouraged by the old custom in the north of Italy of listening in the piazzas and on the highways to the songs of the jongleurs. To the very same crowds who had been delighted with the stories of romance,and who had listened to the story of the wickedness ofMacaireand the misfortunes ofBlanciflor, another jongleur would sing of the terrors of theBabilonia Infernaleand the blessedness of theGerusalemme celeste, and the singers of religious poetry vied with those of theChansons de Geste.

In the south of Italy, on the other hand, the love-song prevailed, of which we have an interesting specimen in the Contrasto attributed to Ciullo d’ Alcamo, about which modern Italian critics have much exercised themselves. ThisSouth Italy.“contrasto” (dispute) between a man and a woman in Sicilian dialect certainly must not be considered as the most ancient or as the only southern poem of a popular kind. It belongs without doubt to the time of the emperor Frederick II., and is important as a proof that there existed a popular poetry independent of literary poetry. TheContrastoof Ciullo d’Alcamo is the most remarkable relic of a kind of poetry that has perished or which perhaps was smothered by the ancient Sicilian literature. Its distinguishing point was its possessing all the opposite qualities to the poetry of the rhymers of what we shall call the Sicilian school. Vigorous in the expression of feelings, it seems to come from a real sentiment. The conceits, which are sometimes most bold and very coarse, show that it proceeded from the lowest grades of society. Everything is original in Ciullo’sContrasto. Conventionality has no place in it. It is marked by the sensuality characteristic of the people of the South.

The reverse of all this happened in the Siculo-Provençal school, at the head of which was Frederick II. Imitation was the fundamental characteristic of this school, to which belonged Enzio, king of Sardinia, Pier delle Vigne,Siculo-Provençal School.Inghilfredi, Guido and Odo delle Colonne, Jacopo d’ Aquino, Rugieri Pugliese, Giacomo da Lentino, Arrigo Testa and others. These rhymers never moved a step beyond the ideas of chivalry; they had no originality; they did not sing of what they felt in their heart; they abhorred the true and the real. They only aimed at copying as closely as they could the poetry of the Provençal troubadours.2The art of the Siculo-Provençal school was born decrepit, and there were many reasons for this—first, because the chivalrous spirit, from which the poetry of the troubadours was derived, was now old and on its death-bed; next, because the Provençal art itself, which the Sicilians took as their model, was in its decadence. It may seem strange, but it is true, that when the emperor Frederick II., a philosopher, a statesman, a very original legislator, took to writing poetry, he could only copy and amuse himself with absolute puerilities. His art, like that of all the other poets of his court, was wholly conventional, mechanical, affected. It was completely wanting in what constitutes poetry—ideality, feeling, sentiment, inspiration. The Italians have had great disputes among themselves about the original form of the poems of the Sicilian school, that is to say, whether they were written in Sicilian dialect, or in that language which Dante called “volgare, illustre, aulico, cortigiano.” But the critics of most authority hold that the primitive form of these poems was the Sicilian dialect, modified for literary purposes with the help of Provençal and Latin; the theory of the “lingua illustre” has been almost entirely rejected, since we cannot say on what rules it could have been founded, when literature was in its infancy trying its feet, and lisping its first words. The Sicilian certainly, in accordance with a tendency common to all dialects, in passing from the spoken to the written form, must have gained in dignity; but this was not enough to create the so-called “lingua illustre,” which was upheld by Perticari and others on grounds rather political than literary.

In the 13th century a mighty religious movement took place in Italy, of which the rise of the two great orders of Saint Francis and Saint Dominic was at once the cause and the effect. Around Francis of Assisi a legend has grownReligious lyric poetry in Umbria.up in which naturally the imaginative element prevails. Yet from some points in it we seem to be able to infer that its hero had a strong feeling for nature, and a heart open to the most lively impressions. Many poems are attributed to him. The legend relates that in the eighteenth year of his penance, when almost rapt in ecstasy, he dictated theCantico del Sole. Even if this hymn be really his, it cannot be considered as a poetical work, being written in a kind of prose simply marked by assonances. As for the other poems, which for a long time were believed to be by Saint Francis, their spuriousness is now generally recognized. The true poet who represented in all its strength and breadth the religious feeling that had made special progress in Umbria was Jacopo dei Benedetti of Todi, known as Jacopone. The story is that sorrow at the sudden death of his wife had disordered his mind, and that, having sold all he possessed and given it to the poor, he covered himself with rags, and took pleasure in being laughed at, and followed by a crowd of people who mocked him and called after him “Jacopone, Jacopone.” We do not know whether this be true. What we do know is that a vehement passion must have stirred his heart and maintained a despotic hold over him, the passion of divine love. Under its influence Jacopone went on raving for years and years, subjecting himself to the severest sufferings, and giving vent to his religious intoxication in his poems. There is no art in him, there is not the slightest indication of deliberate effort; there is only feeling, a feeling that absorbed him, fascinated him, penetrated him through and through. His poetry was all inside him, and burst out, not so much in words as in sighs, in groans, in cries that often seem really to come from a monomaniac. But Jacopone was a mystic, who from his hermit’s cell looked out into the world and specially watched the papacy, scourging with his words Celestine V. and Boniface VIII. He was put in prison and laden with chains, but his spirit lifted itself up to God, and that was enough for him. The same feeling that prompted him to pour out in song ecstasies of divine love, and to despise and trample on himself, moved him to reprove those who forsook the heavenly road, whether they were popes, prelates or monks. In Jacopone there was a strong originality, and in the period of the origins of Italian literature he was one of the most characteristic writers.

The religious movement in Umbria was followed by another literary phenomenon, that of the religious drama. In 1258 an old hermit, Raniero Fasani, leaving the cavern in which he had lived for many years, suddenly appearedThe religious drama.at Perugia. These were very sad times for Italy. The quarrels in the cities, the factions of the Ghibellines and the Guelphs, the interdicts and excommunications issued by the popes, the reprisals of the imperial party, the cruelty and tyranny of the nobles, the plagues and famines, kept the people in constant agitation, and spread abroad mysterious fears. The commotion was increased in Perugia by Fasani, who represented himself as sent by God to disclose mysterious visions, and to announce to the world terrible visitations. Under the influence of fear there were formed “Compagnie di Disciplinanti,” who, for a penance, scourged themselves till they drew blood, and sang “Laudi” in dialogue in their confraternities. These “Laudi,” closely connected with the liturgy, were the first example of the drama in the vulgar tongue of Italy. They were written in the Umbrian dialect, in verses of eight syllables, and of course they have not any artistic value. Their development, however, was rapid. As early as the end of the same 13th century we have theDevozioni del Giovedì e Venerdì Santo, which have some dramatic elements in them, though they are still connected with the liturgical office. Then we have the representationdi un Monaco che andò al servizio di Dio(“of a monk who entered the service of God”), in which there is already an approach to the definite form which this kind of literary work assumed in the following centuries.

In the 13th century Tuscany was peculiarly circumstanced both as regards its literary condition and its political life. The Tuscans spoke a dialect which most closely resembled the mother-tongue, Latin—one which afterwardsTuscan poetry.became almost exclusively the language of literature, and which was already regarded at the end of the 13th century as surpassing the others; “Lingua Tusca magis apta est adliteram sive literaturam”: thus writes Antonio da Tempo of Padua, born about 1275. Being very little or not at all affected by the Germanic invasion, Tuscany was never subjected to the feudal system. It had fierce internal struggles, but they did not weaken its life; on the contrary, they rather gave it fresh vigour and strengthened it, and (especially after the final fall of the Hohenstaufens at the battle of Benevento in 1266) made it the first province of Italy. From 1266 onwards Florence was in a position to begin that movement of political reform which in 1282 resulted in the appointment of the Priori delle Arti, and the establishment of the Arti Minori. This was afterwards copied by Siena with the Magistrato dei Nove, by Lucca, by Pistoia, and by other Guelph cities in Tuscany with similar popular institutions. In this way the gilds had taken the government into their hands, and it was a time of both social and political prosperity. It was no wonder that literature also rose to an unlooked-for height. In Tuscany, too, there was some popular love poetry; there was a school of imitators of the Sicilians, their chief being Dante of Majano; but its literary originality took another line—that of humorous and satirical poetry. The entirely democratic form of government created a style of poetry which stood in the strongest antithesis to the medieval mystic and chivalrous style. Devout invocation of God or of a lady came from the cloister and the castle; in the streets of the cities everything that had gone before was treated with ridicule or biting sarcasm. Folgore of San Gimignano laughs when in his sonnets he tells a party of Sienese youths what are the occupations of every month in the year, or when he teaches a party of Florentine lads the pleasures of every day in the week. Cene della Chitarra laughs when he parodies Folgore’s sonnets. The sonnets of Rustico di Filippo are half fun and half satire; laughing and crying, joking and satire, are all to be found in Cecco Angiolieri of Siena, the oldest “humorist” we know, a far-off precursor of Rabelais, of Montaigne, of Jean Paul Richter, of Sydney Smith. But another kind of poetry also began in Tuscany. Guittone d’ Arezzo made art quit chivalrous for national motives, Provençal forms for Latin. He attempted political poetry, and, although his work is full of the strangest obscurities, he prepared the way for the Bolognese school. In the 13th century Bologna was the city of science, and philosophical poetry appeared there. Guido Guinicelli was the poet after the new fashion of the art. In him the ideas of chivalry are changed and enlarged; he sings of love and, together with it, of the nobility of the mind. The reigning thought in Guinicelli’s Canzoni is nothing external to his own subjectivity. His speculative mind, accustomed to wandering in the field of philosophy, transfuses its lucubrations into his art. Guinicelli’s poetry has some of the faults of the school of Guittone d’Arezzo: he reasons too much; he is wanting in imagination; his poetry is a product of the intellect rather than of the fancy and the heart. Nevertheless he marks a great development in the history of Italian art, especially because of his close connexion with Dante’s lyric poetry.

But before we come to Dante, certain other facts, not, however, unconnected with his history, must be noticed. In the 13th century, there were several poems in the allegorical style. One of these is by Brunetto Latini, who, itAllegorical poetry.is well known, was attached by ties of strong affection to Alighieri. HisTesorettois a short poem, in seven-syllable verses, rhyming in couplets, in which the author professes to be lost in a wilderness and to meet with a lady, who is Nature, from whom he receives much instruction. We see here the vision, the allegory, the instruction with a moral object—three elements which we shall find again in theDivina Commedia. Francesco da Barberino, a learned lawyer who was secretary to bishops, a judge, a notary, wrote two little allegorical poems—theDocumenti d’ amoreandDel reggimento e dei costumi delle donne. Like theTesoretto, these poems are of no value as works of art, but are, on the other hand, of importance in the history of manners. A fourth allegorical work was theIntelligenza, by some attributed to Dino Compagni, but probably not his, and only a version of French poems.

While the production of Italian poetry in the 13th century was abundant and varied, that of prose was scanty. The oldest specimen dates from 1231, and consists of short notices of entries and expenses by Mattasalà diProse in 13th century.Spinello dei Lambertini of Siena. In 1253 and 1260 there are some commercial letters of other Sienese. But there is no sign of literary prose. Before we come to any, we meet with a phenomenon like that we noticed in regard to poetry. Here again we find a period of Italian literature in French. Halfway on in the century a certain Aldobrando or Aldobrandino (it is not known whether he was of Florence or of Siena) wrote a book for Beatrice of Savoy, countess of Provence, calledLe Régime du corps. In 1267 Martino da Canale wrote in the same “langue d’oil” a chronicle of Venice. Rusticiano of Pisa, who was for a long while at the court of Edward I. of England, composed many chivalrous romances, derived from the Arthurian cycle, and subsequently wrote the travels of Marco Polo, which may perhaps have been dictated by the great traveller himself. And finally Brunetto Latini wrote hisTesoroin French.

Next in order to the original compositions in the langue d’oil come the translations or adaptations from the same. There are some moral narratives taken from religious legends; a romance of Julius Caesar; some short histories of ancient knights; theTavola rotonda; translations of theViaggiof Marco Polo and of theTesoroof Latini. At the same time there appeared translations from Latin of moral and ascetic works, of histories and of treatises on rhetoric and oratory. Up to very recent times it was still possible to reckon as the most ancient works in Italian prose theCronacaof Matteo Spinello da Giovenazzo, and theCronacaof Ricordano Malespini. But now both of them have been shown to be forgeries of a much later time. Therefore the oldest prose writing is a scientific book—theComposizione del mondoby Ristoro d’ Arezzo, who lived about the middle of the 13th century. This work is a copious treatise on astronomy and geography. Ristoro was superior to the other writers of the time on these subjects, because he seems to have been a careful observer of natural phenomena, and consequently many of the things he relates were the result of his personal investigations. There is also another short treatise,De regimine rectoris, by Fra Paolino, a Minorite friar of Venice, who was probably bishop of Pozzuoli, and who also wrote a Latin chronicle. His treatise stands in close relation to that of Egidio Colonna,De regimine principum. It is written in the Venetian dialect.

The 13th century was very rich in tales. There is a collection called theCento Novelle antiche, which contains stories drawn from Oriental, Greek and Trojan traditions, from ancient and medieval history, from the legends of Brittany, Provence and Italy, and from the Bible, from the local tradition of Italy as well as from histories of animals and old mythology. This book has a distant resemblance to the Spanish collection known asEl Conde Lucanor. The peculiarity of the Italian book is that the stories are very short, and that they seem to be mere outlines to be filled in by the narrator as he goes along. Other prose novels were inserted by Francesco Barberino in his workDel reggimento e dei costumi delle donne, but they are of much less importance than the others. On the whole the Italian novels of the 13th century have little originality, and are only a faint reflection of the very rich legendary literature of France. Some attention should be paid to theLettereof Fra Guittone d’Arezzo, who wrote many poems and also some letters in prose, the subjects of which are moral and religious. Love of antiquity, of the traditions of Rome and of its language, was so strong in Guittone that he tried to write Italian in a Latin style, and it turned out obscure, involved and altogether barbarous. He took as his special model Seneca, and hence his prose assumed a bombastic style, which, according to his views, was very artistic, but which in fact was alien to the true spirit of art, and resulted in the extravagant and grotesque.

2.The Spontaneous Development of Italian Literature.—In the year 1282, the year in which the new Florentine constitutionof the “Arti minori” was completed, a period of literatureNew Tuscan School of lyric poetry.began that does not belong to the age of first beginnings, but to that of development. With the school of Lapo Gianni, of Guido Cavalcanti, of Cino da Pistoia and Dante Alighieri, lyric poetry became exclusively Tuscan. The whole novelty and poetic power of this school, which really was the beginning of Italian art, consist in what Dante expresses so happily—

“QuandoAmore spira, noto, ed a quel modoCh’ ei detta dentro, vo significando”—

“Quando

Amore spira, noto, ed a quel modo

Ch’ ei detta dentro, vo significando”—

that is to say, in a power of expressing the feelings of the soul in the way in which love inspires them, in an appropriate and graceful manner, fitting form to matter, and by art fusing one with the other. The Tuscan lyric poetry, the first true Italian art, is pre-eminent in this artistic fusion, in the spontaneous and at the same time deliberate action of the mind. In Lapo Gianni the new style is not free from some admixture of the old associations of the Siculo-Provençal school. He wavered as it were between two manners. The empty and involved phraseology of the Sicilians is absent, but the poet does not always rid himself of their influence. Sometimes, however, he draws freely from his own heart, and then the subtleties and obscurities disappear, and his verse becomes clear, flowing and elegant.

Guido Cavalcanti was a learned man with a high conception of his art. He felt the value of it, and adapted his learning to it. Cavalcanti was already a good deal out of sympathy with the medieval spirit; he reflected deeply on hisGuido Cavalcanti.own work, and from this reflection he derived his poetical conception. His poems may be divided into two classes—those which portray the philosopher, “il sottilissimo dialettico,” as Lorenzo the Magnificent called him, and those which are more directly the product of his poetic nature imbued with mysticism and metaphysics. To the first set belongs the famous poemSulla natura d’amore, which in fact is a treatise on amorous metaphysics, and was annotated later in a learned way by the most renowned Platonic philosophers of the 15th century, such as Marsilius Ficinus and others. In other poems of Cavalcanti’s besides this we see a tendency to subtilize and to stifle the poetic imagery under a dead weight of philosophy. But there are many of his sonnets in which the truth of the images and the elegance and simplicity of the style are admirable, and make us feel that we are in quite a new period of art. This is particularly felt in Cavalcanti’sBallate, for in them he pours himself out ingenuously and without affectation, but with an invariable and profound consciousness of his art. Far above all the others for the reality of the sorrow and the love displayed, for the melancholy longing expressed for the distant home, for the calm and solemn yearning of his heart for the lady of his love, for a deep subjectivity which is never troubled by metaphysical subtleties, is the ballata composed by Cavalcanti when he was banished from Florence with the party of the Bianchi in 1300, and took refuge at Sarzana.

The third poet among the followers of the new school was Cino da Pistoia, of the family of the Sinibuldi. His love poemsCino da Pistoia.are so sweet, so mellow and so musical that they are only surpassed by Dante. The pains of love are described by him with vigorous touches; it is easy to see that they are not feigned but real. The psychology of love and of sorrow nearly reaches perfection.

As the author of theVita nuova, the greatest of all Italian poets, Dante also belongs to the same lyric school. In the lyrics of theVita nuova(so called by its author to indicate that his first meeting with Beatrice was the beginningDante (1265-1321).for him of a life entirely different from that he had hitherto led) there is a high idealization of love. It seems as if there were in it nothing earthly or human, and that the poet had his eyes constantly fixed on heaven while singing of his lady. Everything is supersensual, aerial, heavenly, and the real Beatrice is always gradually melting more and more into the symbolical one—passing out of her human nature and into the divine. Several of the lyrics of theCanzonieredeal with the theme of the “new life”; but all the love poems do not refer to Beatrice, while other pieces are philosophical and bridge over to theConvito.

The work which made Dante immortal, and raised him above all other men of genius in Italy, was hisDivina Commedia. An allegorical meaning is hidden under the literal one of this great epic. Dante travelling through Hell, Purgatory and Paradise, is a symbol of mankind aiming at the double object of temporal and eternal happiness. By the forest in which the poet loses himself is meant the civil and religious confusion of society, deprived of its two guides, the emperor and the pope. The mountain illuminated by the sun is universal monarchy. The three beasts are the three vices and the three powers which offered the greatest obstacles to Dante’s designs: envy is Florence, light, fickle and divided by the Bianchi and Neri; pride is the house of France; avarice is the papal court; Virgil represents reason and the empire. Beatrice is the symbol of the supernatural aid without which man cannot attain the supreme end, which is God.

But the merit of the poem does not lie in the allegory, which still connects it with medieval literature. What is new in it is the individual art of the poet, the classic art transfused for the first time into a Romance form. Dante is above all a great artist. Whether he describes nature, analyzes passions, curses the vices or sings hymns to the virtues, he is always wonderful for the grandeur and delicacy of his art. Out of the rude medieval vision he has made the greatest work of art of modern times. He took the materials for his poem from theology, from philosophy, from history, from mythology—but more especially from his own passions, from hatred and love; and he has breathed the breath of genius into all these materials. Under the pen of the poet, the dead come to life again; they become men again, and speak the language of their time, of their passions. Farinata degli Uberti, Boniface VIII., Count Ugolino, Manfred, Sordello, Hugh Capet, St Thomas Aquinas, Cacciaguida, St Benedict, St Peter, are all so many objective creations; they stand before us in all the life of their characters, their feelings, their habits.

Yet this world of fancy in which the poet moves is not only made living by the power of his genius, but it is changed by his consciousness. The real chastizer of the sins, the rewarder of the virtues, is Dante himself. The personal interest which he brings to bear on the historical representation of the three worlds is what most interests us and stirs us. Dante remakes history after his own passions. Thus theDivina Commediacan fairly be called, not only the most life-like drama of the thoughts and feelings that moved men at that time, but also the most clear and spontaneous reflection of the individual feelings of the poet, from the indignation of the citizen and the exile to the faith of the believer and the ardour of the philosopher. TheDivina Commediafixed and clearly defined the destiny of Italian literature, to give artistic lustre, and hence immortality, to all the forms of literature which the middle ages had produced. Dante begins the great era of the Renaissance.

Two facts characterize the literary life of Petrarch—classical research and the new human feeling introduced into his lyric poetry. Nor are these two facts separate; rather is the one the result of the other. The Petrarch whoPetrarch (1304-1374).travelled about unearthing the works of the great Latin writers helps us to understand the Petrarch who, having completely detached himself from the middle ages, loved a real lady with a human love, and celebrated her in her life and after her death in poems full of studied elegance. Petrarch was the first humanist, and he was at the same time the first lyric poet of the modern school. His career was long and tempestuous. He lived for many years at Avignon, cursing the corruption of the papal court; he travelled through nearly the whole of Europe; he corresponded with emperors and popes; he was considered the first man of letters of his time; he had honours and riches; and he always bore about within him discontent, melancholy and incapacity for satisfaction—three characteristics of the modern man.

HisCanzoniereis divided into three parts—the first containingthe poems written during Laura’s lifetime, the second the poems written after her death, the third theTrionfi. The one and only subject of these poems is love; but the treatment is full of variety in conception, in imagery and in sentiment, derived from the most varied impressions of nature. Petrarch’s love is real and deep, and to this is due the merit of his lyric verse, which is quite different, not only from that of the Provençal troubadours and of the Italian poets before him, but also from the lyrics of Dante. Petrarch is a psychological poet, who dives down into his own soul, examines all his feelings, and knows how to render them with an art of exquisite sweetness. The lyrics of Petrarch are no longer transcendental like Dante’s, but on the contrary keep entirely within human limits. In struggles, in doubts, in fears, in disappointments, in griefs, in joys, in fact in everything, the poet finds material for his poetry. The second part of theCanzoniereis the more passionate. TheTrionfiare inferior; it is clear that in them Petrarch tried to imitate theDivina Commedia, but never came near it. TheCanzoniereincludes also a few political poems—a canzone to Italy, one supposed to be addressed to Cola di Rienzi and several sonnets against the court of Avignon. These are remarkable for their vigour of feeling, and also for showing that Petrarch had formed the idea ofItalianitàbetter even than Alighieri. The Italy which he wooed was different from any conceived by the men of the middle ages, and in this also he was a precursor of modern times and of modern aspirations. Petrarch had no decided political idea. He exalted Cola di Rienzi, invoked the emperor Charles IV., praised the Visconti; in fact, his politics were affected more by impressions than by principles; but above all this reigned constantly the love of Italy, his ancient and glorious country, which in his mind is reunited with Rome, the great city of his heroes Cicero and Scipio.

Boccaccio had the same enthusiastic love of antiquity and the same worship for the new Italian literature as Petrarch. He was the first, with the help of a Greek born in Calabria, to put together a Latin translation of theIliadandBoccaccio (1313-1375).theOdyssey. His vast classical learning was shown specially in the workDe genealogia deorum, in which he enumerates the gods according to genealogical trees constructed on the authority of the various authors who wrote about the pagan divinities. This work marked an era in studies preparatory to the revival of classical learning. And at the same time it opened the way for the modern criticism, because Boccaccio in his researches, and in his own judgment was always independent of the authors whom he most esteemed. TheGenealogia deorumis, as A. H. Heeren said, an encyclopaedia of mythological knowledge; and it was the precursor of the great humanistic movement which was developed in the 15th century. Boccaccio was also the first historian of women in hisDe claris mulieribus, and the first to undertake to tell the story of the great unfortunate in hisDe casibus virorum illustrium. He continued and perfected former geographical investigations in his interesting bookDe montibus, silvis, fontibus, lacubus, fluminibus, stagnis, et paludibus, et de nominibus maris, for which he made use of Vibius Sequester, but which contains also many new and valuable observations. Of his Italian works his lyrics do not come anywhere near to the perfection of Petrarch’s. His sonnets, mostly about love, are quite mediocre. His narrative poetry is better. Although now he can no longer claim the distinction long conceded to him of having invented the octave stanza (which afterwards became the metre of the poems of Boiardo, of Ariosto and of Tasso), yet he was certainly the first to use it in a work of some length and written with artistic skill, such as is hisTeseide, the oldest Italian romantic poem. TheFilostratorelates the loves of Troiolo and Griseida (Troilus and Cressida). It may be that Boccaccio knew the French poem of the Trojan war by Benoît de Sainte-More; but the interest of the Italian work lies in the analysis of the passion of love, which is treated with a masterly hand. TheNinfale fiesolanotells the love story of the nymph Mesola and the shepherd Africo. TheAmorosa Visione, a poem in triplets, doubtless owed its origin to theDivina Commedia. TheAmetois a mixture of prose and poetry, and is the first Italian pastoral romance.

TheFilocopotakes the earliest place among prose romances. In it Boccaccio tells in a laborious style, and in the most prolix way, the loves of Florio and Biancafiore. Probably for this work he drew materials from a popular source or from a Byzantine romance, which Leonzio Pilato may have mentioned to him. In theFilocopothere is a remarkable exuberance in the mythological part, which damages the romance as an artistic work, but which contributes to the history of Boccaccio’s mind. TheFiammettais another romance, about the loves of Boccaccio and Maria d’Aquino, a supposed natural daughter of King Robert, whom he always called by this name of Fiammetta.

The Italian work which principally made Boccaccio famous was theDecamerone, a collection of a hundred novels, related by a party of men and women, who had retired to a villa near Florence to escape from the plague in 1348. Novel-writing, so abundant in the preceding centuries, especially in France, now for the first time assumed an artistic shape. The style of Boccaccio tends to the imitation of Latin, but in him prose first took the form of elaborated art. The rudeness of the oldfabliauxgives place to the careful and conscientious work of a mind that has a feeling for what is beautiful, that has studied the classic authors, and that strives to imitate them as much as possible. Over and above this, in theDecamerone, Boccaccio is a delineator of character and an observer of passions. In this lies his novelty. Much has been written about the sources of the novels of theDecamerone. Probably Boccaccio made use both of written and of oral sources. Popular tradition must have furnished him with the materials of many stories, as, for example, that of Griselda.

Unlike Petrarch, who was always discontented, preoccupied, wearied with life, disturbed by disappointments, we find Boccaccio calm, serene, satisfied with himself and with his surroundings. Notwithstanding these fundamental differences in their characters, the two great authors were old and warm friends. But their affection for Dante was not equal. Petrarch, who says that he saw him once in his childhood, did not preserve a pleasant recollection of him, and it would be useless to deny that he was jealous of his renown. TheDivina Commediawas sent him by Boccaccio, when he was an old man, and he confessed that he never read it. On the other hand, Boccaccio felt for Dante something more than love—enthusiasm. He wrote a biography of him, of which the accuracy is now unfairly depreciated by some critics, and he gave public critical lectures on the poem in Santa Maria del Fiore at Florence.

Fazio degli Uberti and Federigo Frezzi were imitators of theDivina Commedia, but only in its external form. The former wrote theDittamondo, a long poem, in which the author supposes that he was taken by the geographerImitators of the Commedia.Solinus into different parts of the world, and that his guide related the history of them. The legends of the rise of the different Italian cities have some importance historically. Frezzi, bishop of his native town Foligno, wrote theQuadriregio, a poem of the four kingdoms—Love, Satan, the Vices and the Virtues. This poem has many points of resemblance with theDivina Commedia. Frezzi pictures the condition of man who rises from a state of vice to one of virtue, and describes hell, the limbo, purgatory and heaven. The poet has Pallas for a companion.

Ser Giovanni Fiorentino wrote, under the title ofPecorone, a collection of tales, which are supposed to have been related by a monk and a nun in the parlour of the monastery of Forlì. He closely imitated Boccaccio, and drewNovelists.on Villani’s chronicle for his historical stories. Franco Sacchetti wrote tales too, for the most part on subjects taken from Florentine history. His book gives a life-like picture of Florentine society at the end of the 14th century. The subjects are almost always improper; but it is evident that Sacchetti collected all these anecdotes in order to draw from them his own conclusions and moral reflections, which are to be found at the end of every story. From this point of view Sacchetti’s work comes near totheMonalisationesof the middle ages. A third novelist was Giovanni Sercambi of Lucca, who after 1374 wrote a book, in imitation of Boccaccio, about a party of people who were supposed to fly from a plague and to go travelling about in different Italian cities, stopping here and there telling stories. Later, but important, names are those of Massuccio Salernitano (Tommaso Guardato), who wrote theNovellino, and Antonio Cornazzano whoseProverbiibecame extremely popular.

It has already been said that the Chronicles formerly believed to have been of the 13th century are now regarded as forgeries of later times. At the end of the 13th century, however, we find achronicleby Dino Compagni, which, notwithstandingThe chroniclers.the unfavourable opinion of it entertained especially by some German writers, is in all probability authentic. Little is known about the life of Compagni. Noble by birth, he was democratic in feeling, and was a supporter of the new ordinances of Giano della Bella. As prior and gonfalonier of justice he always had the public welfare at heart. When Charles of Valois, the nominee of Boniface VIII., was expected in Florence, Compagni, foreseeing the evils of civil discord, assembled a number of citizens in the church of San Giovanni, and tried to quiet their excited spirits. His chronicle relates the events that came under his own notice from 1280 to 1312. It bears the stamp of a strong subjectivity. The narrative is constantly personal. It often rises to the finest dramatic style. A strong patriotic feeling and an exalted desire for what is right pervade the book. Compagni is more an historian than a chronicler, because he looks for the reasons of events, and makes profound reflections on them. According to our judgment he is one of the most important authorities for that period of Florentine history, notwithstanding the not insignificant mistakes in fact which are to be found in his writings. On the contrary, Giovanni Villani, born in 1300, was more of a chronicler than an historian. He relates the events up to 1347. The journeys that he made in Italy and France, and the information thus acquired, account for the fact that his chronicle, called by himIstorie fiorentine, comprises events that occurred all over Europe. What specially distinguishes the work of Villani is that he speaks at length, not only of events in politics and war, but also of the stipends of public officials, of the sums of money used for paying soldiers and for public festivals, and of many other things of which the knowledge is very valuable. With such an abundance of information it is not to be wondered at that Villani’s narrative is often encumbered with fables and errors, particularly when he speaks of things that happened before his own time. Matteo was the brother of Giovanni Villani, and continued the chronicle up to 1363. It was again continued by Filippo Villani. Gino Capponi, author of theCommentari dell’ acquisto di Pisaand of the narration of theTumulto dei ciompi, belonged to both the 14th and the 15th centuries.

TheDivina Commediais ascetic in its conception, and in a good many points of its execution. To a large extent similar is the genius of Petrarch; yet neither Petrarch nor Dante could be classified among the pure ascetics ofAscetic writers.their time. But many other writers come under this head. St Catherine of Siena’s mysticism was political. She was a really extraordinary woman, who aspired to bring back the Church of Rome to evangelical virtue, and who has left a collection of letters written in a high and lofty tone to all kinds of people, including popes. She joins hands on the one side with Jacopone of Todi, on the other with Savonarola. Hers is the strongest, clearest, most exalted religious utterance that made itself heard in Italy in the 14th century. It is not to be thought that precise ideas of reformation entered into her head, but the want of a great moral reform was felt in her heart. And she spoke indeedex abundantia cordis. Anyhow the daughter of Jacopo Benincasa must take her place among those who from afar off prepared the way for the religious movement which took effect, especially in Germany and England, in the 16th century.

Another Sienese, Giovanni Colombini, founder of the order of Jesuati, preached poverty by precept and example, going back to the religious idea of St Francis of Assisi. His letters are among the most remarkable in the category of ascetic works in the 14th century. Passavanti, in hisSpecchio della vera penitenza, attached instruction to narrative. Cavalca translated from the Latin theVite dei santi padri. Rivalta left behind him many sermons, and Franco Sacchetti (the famous novelist) many discourses. On the whole, there is no doubt that one of the most important productions of the Italian spirit of the 14th century was the religious literature.

In direct antithesis with this is a kind of literature which has a strong popular element. Humorous poetry, the poetry of laughter and jest, which as we saw was largely developed in the 13th century, was carried on in the 14th byComic poetry.Bindo Bonichi, Arrigo di Castruccio, Cecco Nuccoli, Andrea Orgagna, Filippo de’ Bardi, Adriano de’ Rossi, Antonio Pucci and other lesser writers. Orgagna was specially comic; Bonichi was comic with a satirical and moral purpose. Antonio Pucci was superior to all of them for the variety of his production. He put into triplets thechronicleof Giovanni Villani (Centiloquio), and wrote many historical poems calledServentesi, many comic poems, and not a few epico-popular compositions on various subjects. A little poem of his in seven cantos treats of the war between the Florentines and the Pisans from 1362 to 1365. Other poems drawn from a legendary source celebrate theReina d’ Oriente,Apollonio di Tiro, theBel Gherardino, &c. These poems, meant to be recited to the people, are the remote ancestors of the romantic epic, which was developed in the 16th century, and the first representatives of which were Boiardo and Ariosto.

Many poets of the 14th century have left us political works. Of these Fazio degli Uberti, the author ofDittamondo, who wrote aServenteseto the lords and people of Italy, a poem on Rome, a fierce invective against Charles IV.Political and amatory poetry.of Luxemburg, deserves notice, and Francesco di Vannozzo, Frate Stoppa and Matteo Frescobaldi. It may be said in general that following the example of Petrarch many writers devoted themselves to patriotic poetry. From this period also dates that literary phenomenon known under the name of Petrarchism. The Petrarchists, or those who sang of love, imitating Petrarch’s manner, were found already in the 14th century. But others treated the same subject with more originality, in a manner that might be called semi-popular. Such were theBallateof Ser Giovanni Fiorentino, of Franco Sacchetti, of Niccolò Soldanieri, of Guido and Bindo Donati.Histories in verse.Ballate were poems sung to dancing, and we have very many songs for music of the 14th century. We have already stated that Antonio Pucci versified Villani’sChronicle. This instance of versified history is not unique, and it is evidently connected with the precisely similar phenomenon offered by the “vulgar Latin” literature. It is enough to notice a chronicle of Arezzo in terza rima by Gorello de’ Sinigardi, and the history, also in terza rima, of the journey of Pope Alexander III. to Venice by Pier de’ Natali. Besides this, every kind of subject, whether history, tragedy or husbandry, was treated in verse. Neri di Landocio wrote a life of St Catherine; Jacopo Gradenigo put the gospels into triplets; Paganino Bonafede in theTesoro dei rusticigave many precepts in agriculture, beginning that kind of Georgic poetry which was fully developed later by Alamanni in hisColtivazione, by Girolamo Baruffaldi in theCanapajo, by Rucellai in theApi, by Bartolommeo Lorenzi in theColtivazione dei monti, by Giambattista Spolverini in theColtivazione del riso, &c.

There cannot have been an entire absence of dramatic literature in Italy in the 14th century, but traces of it are wanting, although we find them again in great abundance in the 15th century. The 14th century had, however, oneDrama.drama unique of its kind. In the sixty years (1250 to 1310) which ran from the death of the emperor Frederick II. to the expedition of Henry VII., no emperor had come into Italy. In the north of Italy, Ezzelino da Romano, with the title of imperial vicar, had taken possession of almost the whole of the March of Treviso, and threatened Lombardy. The popes proclaimed a crusade against him, and, crushed by it, the Ezzelini fell. Padua then began to breathe again, and took to extending its dominion.There was living at Padua Albertino Mussato, born in 1261, a year after the catastrophe of the Ezzelini; he grew up among the survivors of a generation that hated the name of the tyrant. After having written in Latin a history of Henry VII. he devoted himself to a dramatic work on Ezzelino, and wrote it also in Latin. TheEccerinus, which was probably never represented on the stage, has been by some critics compared to the great tragic works of Greece. It would probably be nearer the truth to say that it has nothing in common with the works of Aeschylus; but certainly the dramatic strength, the delineation of certain situations, and the narration of certain events are very original. Mussato’s work stands alone in the history of Italian dramatic literature. Perhaps this would not have been the case if he had written it in Italian.

Back to Index Next