Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2016
In face of the uncompromising condemnation of divination in Inferno 20 some disquiet may be felt that Dante should have allowed himself any unfulfilled prophecies in the Comedy. If Dante began the Comedy in 1307–8, as is widely held, and penned the prophecy of the ‘515,’ referring to Henry VII, in Purg. 33 before Henry VII's failure became obvious, as it did after July 1312 at latest, the prophecy of Clement V's death in Inf. 19.79–84—that he would be dead before 1323 — must have been made ante eventum, before April 1314. But, it is argued, it was a safe bet for Dante to venture on, in view of Clement's poor health and the average length of recent papal reigns. But in the world of politics as well as in poetry Dante allowed himself about this time (31 March 1311) a confident prophecy which was very soon utterly falsified. In Epistle 6 to the Florentine ‘Scoundrels within the city’ he forecast the imminent fall of the city to Henry, § 4: ‘et si praesaga mens mea non fallitur, sic signis veridicis sicut inexpugnabilibus argumentis instructa praenuntians, etc. (cf. § 6 ‘infusa praesagia’). What then was Dante thinking of prophecy in real life or in poetry, when in Purg. 23.109 he put into the mouth of Forese Donati an Italian counterpart of his phrase in Epistle 6,
se l'anteveder qui non m'inganna?
1 But if Dante took the idea of a saving Veltro from the Chanson de Roland, he found there that from the beginning the Veltres, seen by Charlemagne in a dream, forecast the final man, Thierry, who was to overthrow Pinabel, Ganelon's champion, and so Ganelon himself. The poet of the Chanson knew exactly whom he meant by the Veltres, which, in fact, he introduced twice in successive dreams. Google Scholar
2 Petrarch, , Rer. memorab. 2.83, has an anecdote which suggests that Dante and Cangrande eventually got on each other's nerves.Google Scholar
3 La Divina Commedia commentata (Florence 1926) 810.Google Scholar
4 Andreoli, R., La Divina Commedia di Dante Alighieri col commento (Florence 1870) 279, on Par. 17. 71–2.Google Scholar
5 Μ. Barbi, Introduction to Il Convivio commentato da Busnelli, G. e Vandelli, G. (Firenze 1934) xviii, lvii.Google Scholar
6 For the much-disputed date of Dante's going to Ravenna, see Corrado Ricci, L'ultimo rifugio di Dante Alighieri (Milan 1891) 47. Guido Novelli succeeded to the signory in October 1316. Google Scholar
7 Realismo dantesco e altri studi (Milan 1961) 9.Google Scholar
8 See Porena, M., La Divina Commedia di Dante Alighieri commentata II (Bologna 1953) 148, on Purg. 16.46.Google Scholar
9 Preparazione istorica e critica alla nuova edizione di Dante Alighieri (Verona 1806) II 138.Google Scholar
10 For the repetition of ‘colui’ Dionisi quotes Inf. 19.62 ‘non son colui, non son colui che credi’ and Par. 27. 22–3 ‘il luogo mio (three times); and Virgil, Aen, 6.791 ‘hic vir hic est’ in the prophecy (post eventum) of Augustus. Google Scholar
11 Venturi, Pompeo, La Commedia di Dante Alighieri col commento (I have used the Venice edition of 1751) III 194, on Par. 17. 52. [The Turin volume, La Divina Commedia nella figurazione artistica e nel secolare commento (1939) in its list of sources dates Pompeo Venturi's commentary to 1727; but the edition of 1751 refers to the Lucca edition of 1732 as the first to put Venturi's name to the commentary published anonymously in 1727. The edition of 1821 (Florence) reprints the preface of the Lucca edition of 1732; but of the Lucca edition there is no copy at Oxford.]Google Scholar
12 Hist. Cort. 4.9, ed. Pagnin, B. in RIS2 12. 5 (Bologna 1941) p. 58 line 21.Google Scholar
13 Historia rerum in Italia gestorum. in Le opere di Ferreto de’ Ferreti ed. Cipolla, C. (Fonti per la storia d'Italia 42–43bis; Rome 1908–20) I 199 line 11.Google Scholar
14 Le opere III (1920). On Book 3 line 75, Cipolla (pp. 44–7) discusses the whole question with full bibliography.Google Scholar
15 ‘Quando nacque Cangrande 1o della Scala,’ Rendic. Istit. Lombardo ser. 2, 39 (1906) 392–405. I am indebted to Mr. Gerald Toomer, Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, for a re-examination of Ferreto's astronomical indications of Cangrande's conception. They prove to be too imprecise for any indisputable decision: they would suit hundreds of different configurations. If the choice is to be made between 1288 and 1290, 1290 in fact seems to fit better.Google Scholar
16 Review of Benini's article, in Bullettino della Società dantesca 13 (1906) 161–70.Google Scholar
17 Solerti's edition, Vite di Dante Alighieri (Milan 1904) 16. Google Scholar
18 Cf. Orr, A.M., Dante and the Early Astronomers (Edinburgh 1913 and London 1956) 275–86 (1956); Walter e Teresa Parri, Anno del viaggio e giorno iniziale della Commedia (Florence 1956) passim. Google Scholar
19 Sampaolesi, Roma 1919. Google Scholar
20 Croce, B., Poesia di Dante (Bari 1920; 7th ed. 1952) 192 n. 1 (1952).Google Scholar
21 Ateneo, Roma 1952. Google Scholar
22 Il pensiero umanistico di Dante dalla Vita Nuova alla Divina Commedia (Milan 1953) 191.Google Scholar
23 Oltre l'enigma dantesco del Veltro (Turin 1945) 90.Google Scholar
24 [For a different, recent interpretation, see Kaske, R., ‘Dante's “DXV” and “Veltro”,’ Traditio 17 (1961) 185–254. Ed.]Google Scholar
25 Tommaseo, N., Commedia di Dante Alighieri con ragionamenti e note Milan 1865) III 336–7.Google Scholar
26 Op. cit., (n. 4 supra) 280, on Par. 17.82.Google Scholar
27 ‘ Clement V and the Emperor Elect,’ Medievalia et Humanistica 12 (1958) 52–69.Google Scholar
28 Geschichte von Florenz III (Berlin 1912) 469.Google Scholar
29 Cf. Vallone, A., La critica dantesca contemporanea (Pisa 1953); p. 116 against Ferretti's idea that Ciacco's prophecy was written before January 1302, emphasizing Dante's artistic purpose.Google Scholar
30 Purg. 6.147; 8.133; 11.141; 14.56; 24.43.Google Scholar
31 Nardi, B., Dal ‘Convivio’ alla ‘Commedia’(Rome 1960) 118.Google Scholar
32 Pagliaro, With A., Saggi di critica semantica (Messina-Florence 1952) 357-79 and Lucidi, M. ‘Ancora sul disdegno di Guido,’ Cultura neolatina 14 (1954) 203–16. But see now Singleton, C. S., ‘Inferno X: Guido's Disdain’ Modern Language Notes 77 (1962) 49–65.Google Scholar
33 Cf. Santangelo, S., ‘Sole nuovo e sole usato, Dante e Guittone,’ Saggi danteschi (Padua 1959) 93–129.Google Scholar
34 Note on the ‘Argomento Barberiniano’. —The earliest evidence for the Comedy is Francesco da Barberino's Latin gloss on his Italian poem, the Documenti d'Amore. It occurs on p. 63c; on p. 50 Franceso refers to the siege of Florence by Henry VII and to a sally of the people of Lucca against Uguccione della Faggiola on 18 November 1313. On p. 91c he refers to Pope Clement V as still alive, and he died on 14 April 1314—news of a pope's death would be quickly diffused and reach Mantua, where Francesco says he was, in perhaps three weeks or so. How much of the Comedy did Francesco know? Certainly its title, and that it dealt with Hell and many other things. He gets the author's name Dante Arighieri slightly wrong, and he quotes (or misquotes) two lines from the first canto of Inferno: 85: Tu sei lo mio maestro e il mio autore 83: valiami il lungo studio e il grande amore But he refers to 83 as if ‘o,’ not ‘e’ were the reading: ‘videre poterit Dantem super ipsum Virgilium vel longo tempore studuisse vel in parvo tempore plurimum profecisse.’ Francesco need not have heard or heard of more than this first canto. It seems pretty clear that he had not read it; otherwise he would not have thought the reading to be ‘o’, which makes no sense. But if he had heard the isolated line, he might easily make the mistake. He speaks, it is true, as if he knew the Comedy well: ‘si quis opus illud bene conspiciat, videre poterit ipsum Dantem’ etc.; but when he has just heard the latest literary gossip, he tries to give the impression of being in the know. Francesco da Barberino afterwards became a devoted student and copyist of the Comedy. In the winter of 1313–4 he first got wind of what was to mean so much to him. Now this reference has been used, and rightly enough to argue that the Comedy cannot be dated after Henry VII's death, in August 1313, unless the Comedy is to be thought of as an extemporization of a few weeks or months. Pietrobono, and Zingarelli, proponents of the late date, have not been effective in trying to upset this argument. But they have missed the chance to turn the tables on their opponents. The Comedy begun in 1307–8, publishes in batches of cantos, and in 1313–4 Francesco da Barberino in Mantua, just over 20 km. from Verona, has heard only a garbled version of Inf. 1 (and perhaps a few others; but even 1 by itself would justify ‘de infernalibus inter cetera multa’)! Most of the early daters would put Purg. 33 before Henry VII's death. This five-year old story Francesco is hoodwinked into taking for the latest literary news in Italy, after his absence in France, and into calling it ‘quoddam opus.’ It is unnecessary to point out how exactly Francesco's reference fits in with my dating ‘pria che il Guasco l'alto Arrigo inganni.’Google Scholar
35 Hist. Cort. 4.9 (RIS2 12.5 p. 58 line 14).Google Scholar
36 Op. cit. (n. 8 supra) III (1955) 102: ‘Il San Francesco di Dante’ (excursus to Par. 11).Google Scholar
37 Dante ‘Poeta Veltro’ (Florence 1953).Google Scholar
38 But see the criticism of Porena, M. in Rendiconti Accad. Lincei 8 (1953) 230–7, and Schneider, F., Deutsches Dante-Jahrbuch 31 (1953) 216–9, 223.Google Scholar
39 Op. cit. (n. 19 supra) 102.Google Scholar
40 (n. 31 supra) 118. Google Scholar
