the civilization of the renaissance in italy-第48章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


　of　the　fifteenth　century；　　the　heaping　up　of　learned　quotations；　as　in　the　case　of　the　orators；　is　　the　main　business　of　most　of　these　writers。　Subsequently　the　whole　　style；　especially　in　Italian；　was　purified；　until；　in　the　'Asolani'　of　　Bembo；　and　the　'Vita　Sobria'　of　Luigi　Cornaro；　a　classical　perfection　　was　reached。　Here　too　the　decisive　fact　was　this；　that　antiquarian　　matter　of　every　kind　had　meantime　begun　to　be　deposited　in　encyclopedic　　works　（now　printed）；　and　no　longer　stood　in　the　way　of　the　essayist。

It　was　inevitable　too　that　the　humanistic　spirit　should　control　the　　writing　of　history。　A　superficial　comparison　of　the　histories　of　this　　period　with　the　earlier　chronicles；　especially　with　works　so　full　of　　life；　color；　and　brilliancy　as　those　of　the　Villani；　will　lead　us　　loudly　to　deplore　the　change。　How　insipid　and　conventional　appear　by　　their　side　the　best　of　the　humanists；　and　particularly　their　immediate　　and　most　famous　successors　among　the　historians　of　Florence；　Leonardo　　Aretino　and　Poggio！　The　enjoyment　of　the　reader　is　incessantly　marred　　by　the　sense　that；　in　the　classical　phrases　of　Fazio；　Sabellico；　　Foglietta；　Senarega；　Platina　in　the　chronicles　of　Mantua；　Bembo　in　the　　annals　of　Venice；　and　even　of　Giovio　in　his　histories；　the　best　local　　and　individual　coloring　and　the　full　sincerity　of　interest　in　the　truth　　of　events　have　been　lost。　Our　mistrust　is　increased　when　we　hear　that　　Livy；　the　pattern　of　this　school　of　writers；　was　copied　just　where　he　　is　least　worthy　of　imitationon　the　ground；　namely；　'that　he　turned　a　　dry　and　walled　tradition　into　grace　and　richness。'　In　the　same　place　we　　meet　with　the　suspicious　declaration　that　it　is　the　function　of　the　　historian　just　as　if　he　were　one　with　the　poetto　excite；　charm；　or　　overwhelm　the　reader。　We　ask　ourselves　finally；　whether　the　contempt　　for　modern　things；　which　these　same　humanists　sometimes　avowed　openly；　　must　not　necessarily　have　had　an　unfortunate　influence　on　their　　treatment　of　them。　Unconsciously　the　reader　finds　himself　looking　with　　more　interest　and　confidence　on　the　unpretending　Latin　and　Italian　　annalists；　like　those　of　Bologna　and　Ferrara；　who　remained　true　to　the　　old　style；　and　still　more　grateful　does　he　feel　to　the　best　of　the　　genuine　chroniclers　who　wrote　in　Italianto　Marino　Sanuto；　Corio；　and　　Infessurawho　were　followed　at　the　beginning　of　the　sixteenth　century　　by　that　new　and　illustrious　band　of　great　national　historians　who　wrote　　in　their　mother　tongue。

Contemporary　history；　no　doubt；　was　written　far　better　in　the　language　　of　the　day　than　when　forced　into　Latin。　Whether　Italian　was　also　more　　suitable　for　the　narrative　of　events　long　past；　or　for　historical　　research；　is　a　question　which　admits；　for　that　period；　of　more　answers　　than　one。　Latin　was；　at　that　time；　the　'Lingua　franca'　of　instructed　　people；　not　only　in　an　international　sense；　as　a　means　of　intercourse　　between　Englishmen；　Frenchmen；　and　Italians；　but　also　in　an　　interprovincial　sense。　The　Lombard；　the　Venetian；　and　the　Neapolitan　　modes　of　writing；　though　long　modelled　on　the　Tuscan；　and　bearing　but　　slight　traces　of　the　dialect　were　still　not　recognized　by　the　　Florentines。　This　was　of　less　consequence　in　local　contemporary　　histories；　which　were　sure　of　readers　at　the　place　where　they　were　　written；　than　in　the　narratives　of　the　past；　for　which　a　larger　public　　was　desired。　In　these　the　local　interests　of　the　people　had　to　be　　sacrificed　to　the　general　interests　of　the　learned。　How　far　would　the　　influence　of　a　man　like　Biondo　of　Forli　have　reached　if　he　had　written　　his　great　monuments　of　learning　in　the　dialect　of　the　Romagna？　They　　would　have　assuredly　sunk　into　neglect；　if　only　through　the　contempt　of　　the　Florentines；　while　written　in　Latin　they　exercised　the　profoundest　　influence　on　the　whole　European　world　of　learning。　And　even　the　　Florentines　in　the　fifteenth　century　wrote　Latin；　not　only　because　　their　minds　were　imbued　with　humanism；　but　in　order　to　be　more　widely　　read。

Finally；　there　exist　certain　Latin　essays　in　contemporary　history　which　　stand　on　a　level　with　the　best　Italian　works　of　the　kind。　When　the　　continuous　narrative　after　the　manner　of　Livythat　Procrustean　bed　of　　so　many　writers　is　abandoned；　the　change　is　marvelous。　The　same　Platina　　and　Giovio；　whose　great　histories　we　only　read　because　and　so　far　as　we　　must；　suddenly　come　forward　as　masters　in　the　biographical　style。　We　　have　already　spoken　of　Tristano　Caracciolo；　of　the　biographical　works　　of　Fazio　and　of　the　Venetian　topography　of　Sabellico；　and　others　will　　be　mentioned　in　the　sequel。

The　Latin　treatises　on　past　history　were　naturally　concerned；　for　the　　most　part；　with　classical　antiquity。　What　we　are　most　surprised　to　find　　among　these　humanists　are　some　considerable　works　on　the　history　of　the　　Middle　Ages。　The　first　of　this　kind　was　the　chronicle　of　Matteo　　Palmieri　（449…1449）；　beginning　where　Prosper　Accedence　ceases。　On　　opening　the　'Decades'　of　Biondo　of　Forli；　we　are　surprised　to　find　a　　universal　history；　'ab　inclinatione　Romanorum　imperii；'　as　in　Gibbon；　　full　of　original　studies　on　the　authors　of　each　century；　and　occupied；　　through　the　first　300　folio　pages；　with　early　mediaeval　history　down　to　　the　death　of　Frederick　II。　And　this　when　in　Northern　countries　nothing　　more　was　current　than　chronicles　of　the　popes　and　emperors；　and　the　　'Fasciculus　temporum。'　We　cannot　here　stay　to　show　what　writings　Biondo　　made　use　of；　and　where　he　found　his　materials；　though　this　justice　will　　some　day　be　done　to　him　by　the　historians　of　literature。　This　book　　alone　would　entitle　us　to　say　that　it　was　the　study　of　antiquity　which　　made　the　study　of　the　Middle　Ages　possible；　by　first　training　the　mind　　to　habits　of　impartial　historical　criticism。　To　this　must　be　added；　　that　the　Middle　Ages　were　now　over　for　Italy；　and　that　the　Italian　mind　　could　the　better　appreciate　them；　because　it　stood　outside　them。　It　　cannot；　nevertheless；　be　said　that　it　at　once　judged　them　fairly；　let　　alone　with　piety。　In　the　arts　a　strong　prejudice　established　itself　　against　all　that　those　centuries　had　created；　and　the　humanists　date　　the　new　era　from　the　time　of　their　own　appearance。　'I　begin；'　says　　Boccaccio；　'to　hope　and　believe　that　God　has　had　mercy　on　the　Italian　　name；　since　I　see　that　His　infinite　goodness　puts　souls　into　the　　breasts　of　the　Italians　like　those　of　the　ancients　souls　which　seek　　fame　by　other　means　than　robbery　and　violence；　but　rather　on　the　path　　of　poetry；　which　makes　men　immortal。'　But　this　narrow　and　unjust　temper　　did　not　preclude　investigation　in　the　minds　of　the　more　gifted　men；　at　　a　time；　too；　when　elsewhere　in　Europe　any　such　investigation　would　have　　been　out　of　the　question。　A　historical　criticism　of　the　Middle　Ages　was　　practicable；　just　because　the　rational　treatment　of　all　subjects　by　the　　humanists　had　trained　the　historical　spirit。　In　the　fifteenth　century　　this　spirit　had　so　far　penetrated　the　history　even　of　the　individual　　cities　of　Italy　that　the　stupid　fairy　tales　about　the　origin　of　　Florence；　Venice；　and　Milan　vanished；　while　at　the　same　time；　and　long　　after；　the　chronicles　of　the　North　were　stuffed　with　this　fantastic　　rubbish；　destitute　for　the　most　part　of　all　poetical　value；　and　　invented　as　late　as　the　fourteenth　century。

The　close　connection　between　local　history　and　the　sentiment　of　glory　　has　already　been　touched　on　in　reference　to　Florence。　Venice　would　not　　be　behindhand。　Just　as　a　great　rhetorical　triumph　of　the　Florentines　　would　cause　a　Venetian　embassy　to　write　home　posthaste　for　an　orator　to　　be　sent　after　them；　so　too　the　Venetians　felt　the　need　of　a　history　　which　would　bear　comparison　with　those　of　Leonardo　Aretino　and　Poggio。　　And　it　was　to　satisfy　this　feeling　that；　in　the　fifteenth　century；　the　　'Decades'　of　Sabellico　appeared；　and　in　the　sixteenth　the　'Historia　　rerum　Venetarum'　of　Pietro　Bembo；　both　written　at　the　express　charge　of　　the　republic；　the　latter　a　continuation　of　the　former。

The　great　Florentine　historians　at　the　beginning　of　the　sixteenth　　century　were　men　of　a　wholly　different　kind　from　the　Latinists　Bembo　　and　Giovio。　They　wrote　Italian；　not　only　because　they　could　not　vie　　with　the　Ciceroni