),
President
of St John's College from ?
Bruno-Cause-Principle-and-Unity
?
?
?
.
Andyet,Teofilo,Iamdistressed,asaremanyothers,thatin our friendly nation you have come up against the kind of people who have so irked you that you vent your complaints by means of a sooty supper,
? ?
Cause, principle and unity
? instead of having met those, much more numerous, who would have shown you how much our country (even if it is presented by your countrymen as penitus toto divisus ab orbe8 [utterly cut off from the whole world]) is dis- posed to all literature, arms, chivalry, humanities and courtesy. We venture with all our strength not to be inferior to our ancestors in those domains, nor to be outclassed by other nations - especially those who believe them- selves naturally endowed with noble manners, science, arms and civility.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Onmyfaith,Armesso,Ineitherwouldnorcouldcontradict anything you say, neither with words, nor with reasonings, nor in con- science. You defend your cause with extreme modesty and keen argument, rather than attacking me out of some sort of barbarous pride. Thus I deplore all the more the fact that the individuals of whom we have been speaking have given me occasion to pain you, and others of honourable and humane temperament. I am beginning to feel sorry that those dialogues were ever published, and, if it will please you, I will see to it that they are circulated as little as possible.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . My pain, like that of other very noble souls, stems so little from the publication of those dialogues that I would willingly undertake to have them translated into our tongue, in order to serve as a lesson for those few among us who are so lacking in education and manners. Maybe, on see- ing with what nerve their impertinent attacks are received and how inap- propriate they are, and with what traits they are described, even if they choose not to change tack and follow the examples and the lessons of the best and brightest men, they might at least amend their ways and imitate them out of the shame of being identified as part of that number. They might learn that honour and courage are not forged by the capacity and the art of molesting but by quite opposite behaviour.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Youshowmuchabilityandshrewdnessindefenceofyour country, and in contrast to the crowd of those poor in arguments and wis- dom, you know how to recognize and appreciate others' merits. But Filoteo does not seem to me as deft in defending himself and protecting his repu- tation. As nobility and rusticity differ, just so opposing effects are to be expected and feared from them. On one hand, a Scythian oaf will manage to look wise and will be celebrated for his success if, leaving the banks of the Danube, he goes away, bearer of audacious reproaches and legitimate complaints, to put to the test the authority and majesty of the Roman
8 Virgil, Bucolics, ? , ? ? : 'et penitus tot divisos orbe Britannos' ('(the Britons) isolated at the end of the world').
? ? ?
First dialogue
? Senate, which, if it finds in his censure and invective occasion to accom- plish an act of high prudence and magnanimity, does its severe critic the honour of a colossal statue. On the other hand, a Roman senator and gen- tleman would demonstrate very scarce wisdom in abandoning the mild banks of the Tiber, even armed with legitimate complaint and completely justified reprimand, to go try the Scythian oafs, who would seize the occa- sion to build, at his expense, towers and Babels of arguments of the utmost baseness, insolence and infamy, unleashing popular fury and stoning him in order to show other nations how much difference there is between deal- ing with human beings and with those who are merely made in their image and likeness.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Let it never come to pass, Teofilo, that I could or should consider it proper for me, or anyone else endowed with even greater judge- ment than myself, to take up the cause of those who are the object of your satire under the pretext that they are of our nation, which some natural law impels us to defend. I will never admit - nor could I ever be anything but the enemy of anyone who makes such a claim - those people as country- men. Our nation is comprised exclusively of people as noble, civil, polite, educated, measured, humane and reasonable as those of any other place. Even if such people exist within our borders, surely they are nothing but filth, scum, dirt and swine; part of the kingdom, or city, only in the sense that the bilge is part of a ship. We should not, therefore, bother ourselves overmuch about such individuals, because in doing so we might grow as injurious as they are. Among their ranks I include numerous priests and doctors, some of whom certainly become gentlemen, thanks to their doc- torates. But most of them, who before did not dare show their rude author- ity, come boldly and arrogantly out into the open, later becoming hardier and more presumptuous when they rise to the titles of literary men and priests. Hence, it is no wonder that you see swarms of those who, despite their priesthood and their doctorate, retain more of the herd, the flock and the stable than actual ploughmen, goatherds and grooms. Thus, I would have preferred you had not attacked our university so harshly, condemn- ing it as a whole, so to speak, without regard for what it once was, and can or will be in future, and is, in part, today.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Have no fear. Although on this occasion we looked primar- ily at your university, it commits no worse errors than others whose mem- bers consider their academy superior, but which produce asses dressed up with diadems and hacks decked with rings under the title of doctors, for the
? ?
Cause, principle and unity
? most part. However, I do not dispute the great value of your university's original statutes, nor the beauty of its programme of studies, nor the majesty of its ceremonies, nor the fine organization of its works, nor the solemnity of its traditions, not to mention other qualities which serve to honour and embellish any university, and for which it must doubtless be considered the finest in Europe and, therefore, the world. And I cannnot deny that, as far as fineness of spirit and sharpness of wit are concerned, both of which Britain produces naturally here and there, your university really is similar to, and may be on par with, the best schools elsewhere. We have not for- gotten, either, that speculative studies first flourished here, before spread- ing to other parts of Europe, nor that its princes of metaphysics (though barbarous of tongue and cowled by profession) have disseminated the splendour of a most rare and noble part of philosophy, in our day nearly extinct, to all the universities of non-barbarous countries. But one thing concerns me that seems annoying and comical at the same time. Although I have not found doctors more Roman and more Attic than these here, still, for the most part, they boast that they are the opposites of their forerun- ners, resembling them in nothing - those predecessors who, caring little for eloquence or grammatical rigour, devoted themselves entirely to spec- ulative research, called by these current doctors 'sophismata'. As for myself, I prize the metaphysics of these latter more, in which they sur- passed their teacher Aristotle - notwithstanding the fact that it is impure, and dirtied with certain empty arguments and theorems that are neither philosophical nor theological, but the products of idle or badly-used intel- lects - than what the others today can bring us, with all their eloquence and Ciceronian declamatory art.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Thoseartsarenottobebelittled.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . True,butifwehavetochoosebetweenthetwo,Isetthecul- ture of the mind, however mean it may be, over that of words and phrases, however eloquent.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . YourcommentbringsFraVenturatomind. Commenting on the Gospel passage 'reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari' 9 [render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's], he cites on that occasion the names of all the coins circulating at the time of the Romans, with their imprints and their weights - names that he had come across in I do not know what damned annals or opuscules, more than a hundred and twenty of them - in order to show us the range of his studies and the power of his memory. At the end
9 Matthew ? ? , ? ? . ? ?
? First dialogue
? of his sermon some fine fellow accosted him and said, 'Reverend father, lend me a carline. ' To which he answered that he belonged to an order of mendicants.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . What'sthepointofthisstory?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . I mean that those who are versed in the science of names and phrases but do not worry about things are astride the same ass as that reverend father of asses.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . I think that, apart from the study of eloquence, in which they outshine all their predecessors and are unsurpassed by their contem- poraries, they are neither destitute in philosophy nor in other speculative disciplines. Without ability in these, they cannot be promoted to any rank, because the university statutes, to which they are bound by oath, resolve that 'Nullus ad philosophiae et Theologiae magisterium et doctoratum pro- moveatur, nisi epotaverit e fonte Aristotelis' [Let no-one who has not drunk of the Aristotelian fountain be promoted to the title of master and doctor of philosophy and theology]. 10
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Ah, but I will tell you what they have done to avoid per- juring themselves. To one of the three fountains of the university they have given the name Fons Aristotelis [Aristotelian fountain], they have called another Fons Pythagorae [Pythagorean fountain], and the third is dubbed Fons Platonis [Platonic fountain]. Since the water to make beer and ale is drawn from these three fountains, as well as the water for horses and cows, it follows that nobody who has spent three or four days in those study rooms or colleges fails to drink, not only of the Aristotelian fountain, but also of the Pythagorean and Platonic.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Tootrue,unfortunately. Soithappens,Teofilo,thatdoctors come as cheaply as sardines, since they are made, found and hooked with little trouble. The herd of doctors today being thus (leaving aside the rep- utation of some of them, such as Tobias Matthew,11 Culpepper,12 and others whose names I have forgotten, distinguished alike for their eloquence, their doctrine and their high courtesy), the result is that the title of doctor, far fromcreditingonewithasupplementarydegreeofnobility,placesoneunder
10 No such formula is found in the Statuta antiqua Universitatis Oxoniensis, ed. Gibson (Oxford, ? ? ? ? ). Aristotelian doctrines are, however, stressed in the statutes.
11 Tobias Matthew (? ? ? ? -? ? ? ?
), President of St John's College from ? ? ? ? to ? ? ? ? , Dean of Christ Church from ? ? ? ? to ? ? ? ? , and Vice-Chancellor of Oxford in ? ? ? ? . Promoted to Dean of Durham in ? ? ? ? and named Bishop of York in ? ? ? ? .
12 Martin Culpepper, Professor of Medicine and Rector of New College from ? ? ? ? to ? ? ? ? , Dean of Chichester from ? ? ? ? , and Vice-Chancellor of Oxford in ? ? ? ? .
? ? ?
Cause, principle and unity
? the suspicion (unless one is known personally) of having a completely opposite nature and character. Hence, it happens that even men noble by birth or by accident, and enriched by the principal part of nobility which is learning, are ashamed to be promoted to the title of doctor, and so con- tent themselves with merely being learned. You will find many more of these in the courts than you will among the pedants at the university.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . You will find both kinds everywhere there are doctors and priests, Armesso, so hold your complaining. Those who are true doctors and true priests, even if of modest origin, can only gain in civility and nobil- ity, because knowledge is the most expedient way of making the human soul heroic. The more those others thunder from on high with divum pater [divine father], like the giant Salmoneus,13 the more clearly they reveal their rudeness, strutting like satyrs or fauns dressed in purple, with that horrendous and imperial majesty, after having determined from the height of their magisterial chair to what declension hic [this, masc. ], haec [this, fem. ] and hoc nihil [this, nothing] belong.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Letuschangethesubject. Whatisthatbookinyourhand? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Somedialogues.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . TheSupper?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . No.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . What,then?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Others where the themes of cause, principle and unity are treated according to our system.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Whoarethespeakers? Arethere,byanychance,someother devils in it like Frulla or Prudenzio, who will land us into trouble again?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Rest assured that, except for one of them, they are all very peaceable, honest subjects.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . So that from what you say we will still have to pick some thorns out of these dialogues?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . No doubt. But you will be scratched where it itches, instead of pricked where it hurts.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Whatelse?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Here you will meet, as first speaker, that erudite, honest, affable, polite and faithful friend Alexander Dicsono, who proposes the subject of the debate, and whom the Nolan loves as his own eyes. He is introduced as the one who furnishes Teofilo with his subject. Then Teofilo (who is myself) comes second, profiting by the occasion to make
13 See Virgil, Aeneid, ? ? ? -? . ? ?
? First dialogue
? distinctions, give definitions and carry out demonstrations concerning the theme proposed. Thirdly, you have Gervasio, not a philosopher by pro- fession, but who likes to pass the time by attending our discussions; a per- son of indifferent odour who finds everything Poliinnio does comic, and from time to time gives him full rein to express his folly. The latter sacrile- gious pedant is the fourth speaker; being one of those stern censors of philosophers, he claims to be a Momus, passionately attached to his flock of students, reputed to be a follower of Socratic love, an eternal enemy of the female sex. He considers himself, therefore, in order not to seem involved with physics, an Orpheus, a Musaeus, a Tityros, an Amphion. He is one of those who, when they have put together a beautiful conceit, com- posed an elegant little epistle or made off with a nice phrase from the Ciceronian kitchen, are at once Demosthenes come back to life, Tullius rejuvenated, Sallust who lives again, or an Argus who makes out every letter, every syllable and every word. He is Rhadamanthus who umbras vocat ille silentum [calls the shadows of the silent], or the Cretan king Minos who urnam movet [shakes the drawing-urn]. 14 He is one of those men who puts every word to the test, and who mounts a debate around every phrase, saying that these are poetic, these sound comic, these are oratic; this is sweet, that is sublime, this other one is humile dicendi genus15 [humble oratory genre]; this harangue is harsh, it would be lighter if composed like this, such and such a writer is not eloquent, he is little read in the ancients, non redolet Arpinatum, desipit Latium16 [he does not smack of Arpinum, he lacks knowledge of Latin]. This word is not Tuscan, neither Boccaccio, nor Petrarch, nor other approved authors use it. One should write 'omo' and not 'homo', not 'honour' but 'onour', 'Poliinnio' instead of 'Polihimnio'. This kind of thing fills him with triumph, self-satisfaction and utmost pleasure with whatever he does. He feels himself a Jove who, from his high perch, gazes down on and contemplates the lives of other men, subject to so many errors, calamities, miseries and vain strivings. He alone is happy, only he lives a heavenly life, when he contem- plates his divinity in the mirror of a Spicilegium,17 a Dictionarium, a
14 See Virgil, Aeneid, ? ?
? ?
Cause, principle and unity
? instead of having met those, much more numerous, who would have shown you how much our country (even if it is presented by your countrymen as penitus toto divisus ab orbe8 [utterly cut off from the whole world]) is dis- posed to all literature, arms, chivalry, humanities and courtesy. We venture with all our strength not to be inferior to our ancestors in those domains, nor to be outclassed by other nations - especially those who believe them- selves naturally endowed with noble manners, science, arms and civility.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Onmyfaith,Armesso,Ineitherwouldnorcouldcontradict anything you say, neither with words, nor with reasonings, nor in con- science. You defend your cause with extreme modesty and keen argument, rather than attacking me out of some sort of barbarous pride. Thus I deplore all the more the fact that the individuals of whom we have been speaking have given me occasion to pain you, and others of honourable and humane temperament. I am beginning to feel sorry that those dialogues were ever published, and, if it will please you, I will see to it that they are circulated as little as possible.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . My pain, like that of other very noble souls, stems so little from the publication of those dialogues that I would willingly undertake to have them translated into our tongue, in order to serve as a lesson for those few among us who are so lacking in education and manners. Maybe, on see- ing with what nerve their impertinent attacks are received and how inap- propriate they are, and with what traits they are described, even if they choose not to change tack and follow the examples and the lessons of the best and brightest men, they might at least amend their ways and imitate them out of the shame of being identified as part of that number. They might learn that honour and courage are not forged by the capacity and the art of molesting but by quite opposite behaviour.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Youshowmuchabilityandshrewdnessindefenceofyour country, and in contrast to the crowd of those poor in arguments and wis- dom, you know how to recognize and appreciate others' merits. But Filoteo does not seem to me as deft in defending himself and protecting his repu- tation. As nobility and rusticity differ, just so opposing effects are to be expected and feared from them. On one hand, a Scythian oaf will manage to look wise and will be celebrated for his success if, leaving the banks of the Danube, he goes away, bearer of audacious reproaches and legitimate complaints, to put to the test the authority and majesty of the Roman
8 Virgil, Bucolics, ? , ? ? : 'et penitus tot divisos orbe Britannos' ('(the Britons) isolated at the end of the world').
? ? ?
First dialogue
? Senate, which, if it finds in his censure and invective occasion to accom- plish an act of high prudence and magnanimity, does its severe critic the honour of a colossal statue. On the other hand, a Roman senator and gen- tleman would demonstrate very scarce wisdom in abandoning the mild banks of the Tiber, even armed with legitimate complaint and completely justified reprimand, to go try the Scythian oafs, who would seize the occa- sion to build, at his expense, towers and Babels of arguments of the utmost baseness, insolence and infamy, unleashing popular fury and stoning him in order to show other nations how much difference there is between deal- ing with human beings and with those who are merely made in their image and likeness.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Let it never come to pass, Teofilo, that I could or should consider it proper for me, or anyone else endowed with even greater judge- ment than myself, to take up the cause of those who are the object of your satire under the pretext that they are of our nation, which some natural law impels us to defend. I will never admit - nor could I ever be anything but the enemy of anyone who makes such a claim - those people as country- men. Our nation is comprised exclusively of people as noble, civil, polite, educated, measured, humane and reasonable as those of any other place. Even if such people exist within our borders, surely they are nothing but filth, scum, dirt and swine; part of the kingdom, or city, only in the sense that the bilge is part of a ship. We should not, therefore, bother ourselves overmuch about such individuals, because in doing so we might grow as injurious as they are. Among their ranks I include numerous priests and doctors, some of whom certainly become gentlemen, thanks to their doc- torates. But most of them, who before did not dare show their rude author- ity, come boldly and arrogantly out into the open, later becoming hardier and more presumptuous when they rise to the titles of literary men and priests. Hence, it is no wonder that you see swarms of those who, despite their priesthood and their doctorate, retain more of the herd, the flock and the stable than actual ploughmen, goatherds and grooms. Thus, I would have preferred you had not attacked our university so harshly, condemn- ing it as a whole, so to speak, without regard for what it once was, and can or will be in future, and is, in part, today.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Have no fear. Although on this occasion we looked primar- ily at your university, it commits no worse errors than others whose mem- bers consider their academy superior, but which produce asses dressed up with diadems and hacks decked with rings under the title of doctors, for the
? ?
Cause, principle and unity
? most part. However, I do not dispute the great value of your university's original statutes, nor the beauty of its programme of studies, nor the majesty of its ceremonies, nor the fine organization of its works, nor the solemnity of its traditions, not to mention other qualities which serve to honour and embellish any university, and for which it must doubtless be considered the finest in Europe and, therefore, the world. And I cannnot deny that, as far as fineness of spirit and sharpness of wit are concerned, both of which Britain produces naturally here and there, your university really is similar to, and may be on par with, the best schools elsewhere. We have not for- gotten, either, that speculative studies first flourished here, before spread- ing to other parts of Europe, nor that its princes of metaphysics (though barbarous of tongue and cowled by profession) have disseminated the splendour of a most rare and noble part of philosophy, in our day nearly extinct, to all the universities of non-barbarous countries. But one thing concerns me that seems annoying and comical at the same time. Although I have not found doctors more Roman and more Attic than these here, still, for the most part, they boast that they are the opposites of their forerun- ners, resembling them in nothing - those predecessors who, caring little for eloquence or grammatical rigour, devoted themselves entirely to spec- ulative research, called by these current doctors 'sophismata'. As for myself, I prize the metaphysics of these latter more, in which they sur- passed their teacher Aristotle - notwithstanding the fact that it is impure, and dirtied with certain empty arguments and theorems that are neither philosophical nor theological, but the products of idle or badly-used intel- lects - than what the others today can bring us, with all their eloquence and Ciceronian declamatory art.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Thoseartsarenottobebelittled.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . True,butifwehavetochoosebetweenthetwo,Isetthecul- ture of the mind, however mean it may be, over that of words and phrases, however eloquent.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . YourcommentbringsFraVenturatomind. Commenting on the Gospel passage 'reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari' 9 [render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's], he cites on that occasion the names of all the coins circulating at the time of the Romans, with their imprints and their weights - names that he had come across in I do not know what damned annals or opuscules, more than a hundred and twenty of them - in order to show us the range of his studies and the power of his memory. At the end
9 Matthew ? ? , ? ? . ? ?
? First dialogue
? of his sermon some fine fellow accosted him and said, 'Reverend father, lend me a carline. ' To which he answered that he belonged to an order of mendicants.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . What'sthepointofthisstory?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . I mean that those who are versed in the science of names and phrases but do not worry about things are astride the same ass as that reverend father of asses.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . I think that, apart from the study of eloquence, in which they outshine all their predecessors and are unsurpassed by their contem- poraries, they are neither destitute in philosophy nor in other speculative disciplines. Without ability in these, they cannot be promoted to any rank, because the university statutes, to which they are bound by oath, resolve that 'Nullus ad philosophiae et Theologiae magisterium et doctoratum pro- moveatur, nisi epotaverit e fonte Aristotelis' [Let no-one who has not drunk of the Aristotelian fountain be promoted to the title of master and doctor of philosophy and theology]. 10
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Ah, but I will tell you what they have done to avoid per- juring themselves. To one of the three fountains of the university they have given the name Fons Aristotelis [Aristotelian fountain], they have called another Fons Pythagorae [Pythagorean fountain], and the third is dubbed Fons Platonis [Platonic fountain]. Since the water to make beer and ale is drawn from these three fountains, as well as the water for horses and cows, it follows that nobody who has spent three or four days in those study rooms or colleges fails to drink, not only of the Aristotelian fountain, but also of the Pythagorean and Platonic.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Tootrue,unfortunately. Soithappens,Teofilo,thatdoctors come as cheaply as sardines, since they are made, found and hooked with little trouble. The herd of doctors today being thus (leaving aside the rep- utation of some of them, such as Tobias Matthew,11 Culpepper,12 and others whose names I have forgotten, distinguished alike for their eloquence, their doctrine and their high courtesy), the result is that the title of doctor, far fromcreditingonewithasupplementarydegreeofnobility,placesoneunder
10 No such formula is found in the Statuta antiqua Universitatis Oxoniensis, ed. Gibson (Oxford, ? ? ? ? ). Aristotelian doctrines are, however, stressed in the statutes.
11 Tobias Matthew (? ? ? ? -? ? ? ?
), President of St John's College from ? ? ? ? to ? ? ? ? , Dean of Christ Church from ? ? ? ? to ? ? ? ? , and Vice-Chancellor of Oxford in ? ? ? ? . Promoted to Dean of Durham in ? ? ? ? and named Bishop of York in ? ? ? ? .
12 Martin Culpepper, Professor of Medicine and Rector of New College from ? ? ? ? to ? ? ? ? , Dean of Chichester from ? ? ? ? , and Vice-Chancellor of Oxford in ? ? ? ? .
? ? ?
Cause, principle and unity
? the suspicion (unless one is known personally) of having a completely opposite nature and character. Hence, it happens that even men noble by birth or by accident, and enriched by the principal part of nobility which is learning, are ashamed to be promoted to the title of doctor, and so con- tent themselves with merely being learned. You will find many more of these in the courts than you will among the pedants at the university.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . You will find both kinds everywhere there are doctors and priests, Armesso, so hold your complaining. Those who are true doctors and true priests, even if of modest origin, can only gain in civility and nobil- ity, because knowledge is the most expedient way of making the human soul heroic. The more those others thunder from on high with divum pater [divine father], like the giant Salmoneus,13 the more clearly they reveal their rudeness, strutting like satyrs or fauns dressed in purple, with that horrendous and imperial majesty, after having determined from the height of their magisterial chair to what declension hic [this, masc. ], haec [this, fem. ] and hoc nihil [this, nothing] belong.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Letuschangethesubject. Whatisthatbookinyourhand? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Somedialogues.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . TheSupper?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . No.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . What,then?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Others where the themes of cause, principle and unity are treated according to our system.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Whoarethespeakers? Arethere,byanychance,someother devils in it like Frulla or Prudenzio, who will land us into trouble again?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Rest assured that, except for one of them, they are all very peaceable, honest subjects.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . So that from what you say we will still have to pick some thorns out of these dialogues?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . No doubt. But you will be scratched where it itches, instead of pricked where it hurts.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Whatelse?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? . Here you will meet, as first speaker, that erudite, honest, affable, polite and faithful friend Alexander Dicsono, who proposes the subject of the debate, and whom the Nolan loves as his own eyes. He is introduced as the one who furnishes Teofilo with his subject. Then Teofilo (who is myself) comes second, profiting by the occasion to make
13 See Virgil, Aeneid, ? ? ? -? . ? ?
? First dialogue
? distinctions, give definitions and carry out demonstrations concerning the theme proposed. Thirdly, you have Gervasio, not a philosopher by pro- fession, but who likes to pass the time by attending our discussions; a per- son of indifferent odour who finds everything Poliinnio does comic, and from time to time gives him full rein to express his folly. The latter sacrile- gious pedant is the fourth speaker; being one of those stern censors of philosophers, he claims to be a Momus, passionately attached to his flock of students, reputed to be a follower of Socratic love, an eternal enemy of the female sex. He considers himself, therefore, in order not to seem involved with physics, an Orpheus, a Musaeus, a Tityros, an Amphion. He is one of those who, when they have put together a beautiful conceit, com- posed an elegant little epistle or made off with a nice phrase from the Ciceronian kitchen, are at once Demosthenes come back to life, Tullius rejuvenated, Sallust who lives again, or an Argus who makes out every letter, every syllable and every word. He is Rhadamanthus who umbras vocat ille silentum [calls the shadows of the silent], or the Cretan king Minos who urnam movet [shakes the drawing-urn]. 14 He is one of those men who puts every word to the test, and who mounts a debate around every phrase, saying that these are poetic, these sound comic, these are oratic; this is sweet, that is sublime, this other one is humile dicendi genus15 [humble oratory genre]; this harangue is harsh, it would be lighter if composed like this, such and such a writer is not eloquent, he is little read in the ancients, non redolet Arpinatum, desipit Latium16 [he does not smack of Arpinum, he lacks knowledge of Latin]. This word is not Tuscan, neither Boccaccio, nor Petrarch, nor other approved authors use it. One should write 'omo' and not 'homo', not 'honour' but 'onour', 'Poliinnio' instead of 'Polihimnio'. This kind of thing fills him with triumph, self-satisfaction and utmost pleasure with whatever he does. He feels himself a Jove who, from his high perch, gazes down on and contemplates the lives of other men, subject to so many errors, calamities, miseries and vain strivings. He alone is happy, only he lives a heavenly life, when he contem- plates his divinity in the mirror of a Spicilegium,17 a Dictionarium, a
14 See Virgil, Aeneid, ? ?
