This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 02 Oct 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK

The Routledge History of the Renaissance

William Caferro

“By imitating our nurses”

Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 Eugenio Refini Published online on: 30 Mar 2017

How to cite :- Eugenio Refini. 30 Mar 2017, “By imitating our nurses” from: The Routledge History of the Renaissance Routledge Accessed on: 02 Oct 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315226217.ch3

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT

Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms

This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

46

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 ​ Latin andtheEuropean vernaculars – multilingualism, the interactionof of forms society that, period,hasbeenconstantly experiencing from theMiddleAgestomodern debates contemporary onlanguage. Withina ‘nature’ and‘artifice’that is at thecore of between Latin intheRenaissance, andthevernacular particularly thedynamics between of nature was restored. the order ficiency inthe vernacular, asif moved toboarding school, hisallegedly‘natural’ skills in Latin were replacedby anew pro Yet soonasMichel thisexperiment cametolightquickly: as theinevitable anachronism of advantage from thesituation: hisagewould read chivalric vernacular novels, but theentirechildren householdtook of proved rather extraordinary. classical languages –​ were the usual components in the study of “without art,withoutbookes, rules, orgrammar, withoutwhipping orwhining,” –​ hisvery youth. Latin Bylearning knowledge asof totheacquisition of commit himself fortunate conditiontobe“naturally” conversant withLatin, Michel would beready tofully and energy, theancients. thusbeingprevented from equallingtheknowledge of theirtime acquiringLatin asaforeign language, inwhich peopleusuallyspentmostof of child inLatin. Montaigne’s father wishedtospare hissonthestrenuous andlongexperience teacher who didnotspeakanya German French washired speciallyto“naturally” trainthe sixMichel wassolelyexposed toLatin language. children), untiltheageof tion of intheessay the story own version of Latin native speaker. Or, at least, this was his father’s intention. According to Montaigne’s As iswell known, French philosopherMichel deMontaigne(1533–​ nisprdxclotoe h psd lutae h opeiyo therelationship In itsparadoxical outcome, illustrates theepisode the complexity of round aboutushadtheirshare of it. neerest andmostaboutme. To beshort,we were allsoLatinized, that thetownes they heard itspoken,even sodidallthehouseholdservants, namelysuch aswere so muchmy Mother learned Latine, that for a need they it, when could understand It were strangetotellhow every oneinthehouseprofited therein. My Father and “BY IMITATING OURNURSES” Latin intheRenaissance andvernacular 3 Notonlywashe able toenjoy Ovidintheoriginalwhile other De l’institutiondesenfants Eugenio Refini 4 46 3 (ftheinstitutionandeduca (Of Montaigne’s experience 1592) waseducated asa 2 Putinthe 1 Infact, which often - -

47

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 nyLtnaanttevrauas u lohmns ie h eit fclassical Latin) only Latin the vernaculars, but against also humanism (i.e. the rebirth of and irreconcilable views. Particularly, culture: not debates onlanguagedoconvey conflictsof trends, by informed bothoverlaps onlanguagewitnesstoavarietypatterns, discourses of wasconceivedLatin andthevernaculars anddescribed. able that theRenaissance pointintheways marked inwhich aturning therelation between Europe. Within such acomplex process,the multifaceted culturalgeography of itisundeni themany entitiesthat madeup languagesasthenatural vernacular expression of ment of bothreligious andintellectualauthoritiesfacedtheconcurrent develop as thelanguageof ​ conflict – of described interms tionship between Latin andthevernacular, which –​ DanteAlighieri’s far-​ enough, thosewere thesameyears of least intheory, would allow awider participation inthecity’s jurisdictionallife. Interestingly Giamboni’s –​ asomewhat revolutionary linguisticchoice –​ cations of scholars in the universities and the religious schools. ideological and political impli The of readers outsidetheLatinate circles newcommunities of thus fostering thedevelopment of capable of. its roughness –​ vernacular, of the topic in the which –​ of unpacking the subtleness the difficulty thedisciplineinvernacular. with bitsof providingto overcome them this obstacle, he decided to embark on the “painful” project of rhetoric because they were unable toread Latin. Inorderwere excluded from thestudy of fromexcerpts Cicero’s to the translators’ prefaces tothirteenth-​ translating Latin texts intothevernacular, bythe coeval asissuggested several practiceof contrast between the linguisticstructures that madeLatin teachable andallegedlystable through time. The rules, Latin standsoppositethevernaculars, commonlyperceived aslanguagesdevoid of used inthe people who didnothave any Latin inorder toletthemactaccording tothelaws. thecodex, theconstitutionwasmeanttobeavailable tothepoorandthose durability of good quality in order to ensure the easily legible and well shaped, copied on parchment of called theso-​ thecityintoItalianvernacular. Acopy of translated theLatin constitutionof of thecommune In 1309somethingexceptional happenedinSiena,where the officers onalarger,naculars European scale. the oppositionnature–​ Danteandthesixteenthcentury, thechapter focusesshaped inItalybetween on theageof fold phenomenon.However, by exploring theways inwhich onlanguagewas thediscourse other. chapter This willnotbeable toanswer themany questionssolicitedby such amani scholasticismagainst (i.e. theLatin medieval each against tradition),aswell asvernaculars Yet totranslate from Latin meanttoreach intothevernacular outtoawideraudience, Fiore direttorica Costituto volgare Costituto were deployed crucialtothestrategy by theSienese Paving theway turn: Dante’s forthevernacular wasconsidered unable toexpress thesamelinguisticqualitiesthat Latin was grammatica Latin andverna torefer toLatin Asalanguagebuilt is“grammatica.” ongrammatical (lwro rhetoric)–​ of (Flower would always be publicly on display: written in large-​ riiea e oudrtnigteclua eiiaino the ver artifice asakey theculturallegitimation tounderstanding of De inventione and the vulgar tonguewas thetheoretical andthevulgar premise that informed reflection onlanguage poe eysipr il fenquiry. proves fieldof avery slippery Forcenturies Latin andfourteenth-​ –​ BonoGiamboni(1240–​ cular intheRenaissance aloetasaino aloosetranslation of 47 8 Tepifleso theendeavor wasdueto painfulnessof The century century moving from similarpremises –​ implicitinstatements such asBono 5 Yet, farfrom producing univocal volgarizzamenti reaching reflection onthe rela 1292) explained that laymen Costituto Rhetorica adHerennium . 7 Inhisintroduction o 1309,which, at of format letters, format

bcueo because of 6 The term term The would with ------

48

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 Alexandrinorum blossoming of translation is problematic behind the contemporary and challenges the ideology notion of disapproved themeans. Asconvincingly argued by Dante’s AlisonCornish, takeonthevery the city), but he would have almost certainly involving a wider public in the civic life of of Siena’s decisiontotranslate the theCommunethat of informed Hewould have isconcerned. vernacular probably shared thepoliticalandideological end approachestemporary tothetopic, particularly when therelationship between Latin and from con developments inthefield, itishowever undeniable that Dantedistancedhimself thevernacular. and theexpressive potentialof Dante championed intheearly fourteenth naturalness century, particularly thenotionof theirarguments were built onthesameideasthat to legitimate itsstatus anduse. Mostof managed the vernacular lenging common assumptions about its inferiority that advocates of thevernacular. Itwasinfactby chal thevirtuesof to theprogressive acknowledgement of the illiterates). Yet Latinate(labeled asthelanguageof humanismparadoxically contributed Cicero’s language)andthevernacular both medieval Latin (considered of asacorruption the ancients, mosthumanists would criticize harshly sical Latin. Walking in thefootsteps of clas therebirth of intosomethingeven tongueturned moregar controversial at thetimeof Latin that andthevernacular lay behindtheSienese did complicate humanism in the fifteenth century things.The opposition between the rise of called context tothe such asthe so-​ vernacular influencedconcurrentdiscussionsinternal itself between Latin and the vernacular, particularly in the sixteenth century, when the debate the commitmenttoenhanceitsbeauty. guage that we acquire “by imitating ournurses,” deserves bothourfullestappreciation and opposed toLatin –​ by the language. What iscommontobothperspectives, respectively embodied the philosophy of which hewasliving;ontheother hand,hesituated hisanalysiswithinawiderreflection on linguisticchoices withinthehistoricalcontext in discussed theethicalandpoliticalrole of the one hand, he Dante addressed the reflection on language through a double lens: on an insuperable qualitative divide between Latin and the vernacular,on the assumption of of just focusing histime. Instead differedvernacular from themosttypicalapproaches of the relationshipon theculturalandideologicalconflictthat between informed Latin andthe intheRenaissance. linguisticdiscourses played Dante’s akey take role intheelaboration of banquet) (1304–​ vis-​à-vis languages vernacular pave theway for averitable intheways in which turn thestatus of reference toTaddeo Alderotti (1210–​ the reasons why Dantehasdecidedtowritethe how tongue. to usethevulgar abadexample of Alemannus (probably Hermannus completedaround 1260) is sion of Aristotle’s thefamouscompendium of Taddeo’s translation of neshrhciiimo Tde leot’ enclrtasaino the Taddeo Alderotti’sDante’s translation vernacular of criticismof harsh it would be misleading to read If As we shallsee, Dante’s ideasresounded widelyintheRenaissance debate ontherelation Despitetheirinitiallymodestimpactonante’s contemporaries, boththe questione dellalingua Convivio Latin wasconceived andtheorized. inthe andthe volgarizzamenti 1307) andthe thenatural optionfor menandwomen. Convivio De vulgarieloquentia (controversy onlanguage). (literally, translations). vernacular i mlmtco ti on fview. According toDante, thispointof isemblematic of 14 De vulgarieloquentia Gvntelre otx fthepassage, which focuses on Given thelarger context of Eugenio Refini nesrfeto nlnug hog h eso later Dante’s reflection on language through the lens of 25 so particularinterest: in fact,despiteDante’s 1295) isof 10 , istheconsciousclaimthat thevernacular 48 12 Convivio (On vernacular eloquence)(1304–​ (Onvernacular 11 Costituto Infact,oneconflictfedtheother, and inItalianrather thaninLatin, the 9 The vernacular, The that isthelan nesdfneo thevul andDante’s defenseof 13 Ethics Costituto from theLatin ver (namelytheidea Convivio Summa is 1305) (The (The as ​ – ------

49

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 French rather thaninItalian,isacompellingoneandcontributes toabetterunderstanding Dante’s criticismincludeBrunettoLatini’s choice towritethe tion that targets of in the Italian cities. civic discourses that informed Aristotelianethics Taddeo’s compendiumandcontributed spread tothevernacular of of ​ lated from theoriginalFrench intoItalian – the author’s French exile between 1260and1266.Furthermore, the thelater MiddleAges, writtenduring themostsuccessfulencyclopedias of ure), oneof BrunettoLatini’sis well known, thetext reappeared inFrench aspartof thecompendiumwaswidelyread across Europe. versionopinion, thevernacular of identifies histargeted audience as for its own use butlearning only insofar as through it they may money gain or honor,” thework. Aftercriticizingthenumerous scholars who “donot acquire of the understanding theaudiencethat Danteaddresses inthe why thedefinitionof to the‘architectural’ functionthat therulingclassissupposedtoembody insociety. That is volgare language. generic discussion of guages such asLatin. lan “grammatical” tongue, which canbeachieved by seekingthestabilitythat istypical of For hismother allthesereasons, Dantefeelsanatural inclination tofoster thegrowth of knowledge. of for higherforms made hisacquaintancewithLatin, thuspreparinghimself scienceandknowledge –​ downsteps thepath of that thevernacular Dantemoved hisfirst eventually generated him;also, itisby meansof it isthrough theirconversation that inthevernacular Dante’s parents met,interactedand the readers toperceive thisindividualaccountasamodelwhich doesapplytoeverybody: it. –​ the vernacular virtue. tongue willhave awiderimpactonsociety, thusleadingmore peopletowards scienceand knowledge through thevulgar ence thanLatin does, which meansthat thetransmissionof thevernacular. itspeakstoamuch First, larger audi theculturalvalues of reassessment of itself). ship between thetext (which andthecommentary issupposedtobesubordinate tothetext lar songs, tocommentontheminLatin would introduce adisproportion intherelation tongue. thevulgar Sincethe his useof nobility, virtue, of andbeauty,Latin interms Danteprovides aphilosophicallegitimation for to their own. to enhancethevernacular, but healsocriticizes who thoseauthors prefer othervernaculars the nomenon of theauthor’s takeinthe of 20 As shown by, amongothers, GianfrancoFioravanti, Dante’s manifestogoesbeyond a Dante’s argument inthe Speakingfor himself, experience, Danteoutlinesavery personal but hisarguments lead not learned. which there are many inthislanguagewho know andare onlythevernacular of princes, barons, knights, andmany other noble people, notonlymenbut women, who have changed it from alady intoawhore; andthesenoblecomprise persons good have left literature to those the world’s of wicked neglect those who because of 18 i nfc ato a gnata osdr h rnmsino knowledge ascrucial anagendathat thetransmissionof considers isinfactpartof 19 I thisargument isalogicalone, Dante’s following remarks leadtoamore profound If Second–​ the use of the vulgar tongue is justified the vulgar by the natural affection we feel for the use of 23 volgarizzamenti adw e eet nie htwl ekyt h easac ees f andwe gethere toanideathat willbekey totheRenaissance defenseof Latin andverna Convivio Convivio 22 , which, inaway, mimicLatin without areal commitment Tecmimn oraieteepesv oetaso the commitment to realize The the expressive potentials of i uteoe hl cnwegn h ueirt f isasubtleone. Whileacknowledging thesuperiorityof . 17 NotonlydoesDantechallenge thewidespread phe cular intheRenaissance Convivio 49 intermingled withthetextual transmission intermingled is a commentary onDante’s isacommentary own vernacu infact,itisthrough that thevernacular he 16 Within such a frame, Convivio Tresor issoimportantto Cornish’s sugges Tresor ​ – soontrans (The treas (The Tresor Dante 15 As As in in 21 ------

50

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 the author’s discussion has changed. The nobility of the vernacular isinfactgrounded inan thevernacular the author’s discussionhaschanged. nobilityof The argued inthe nobler makes the vernacular than the This a chance tostudy isthelanguagetowhich it,thevernacular we are allnaturally exposed. Whereas the locutio communication skills. Second,andmore importantly, Danteprovides adefinitionof such, eloquencedeserves vernacular tobeenhanced, so that peoplecanbenefitfrom their not onlymen,but alsowomen andchildren strive toacquire it,asfarnature allows.” vernacular, acknowledging toeveryone that is“necessary eloquenceinthevernacular –​ his premise isrevolutionary. eloquence to the heconsciouslyappliesthenotionof First, the ‘ideal’Italianvernacular, Dantemoves quicklybackfrom thenatural totheartificial, locutiones regulatae rules)that thesamestatus anatural that languagecanbegranted theso-​ means of of vernacular. Itisinfactthrough asimilarly stable form for thedefinitionof “grammatical languages”tojustify theneed issue isdifferent, for heusesthe notionof very Latin. later beusedby somehumaniststoprove thehighervalue of Latinoppose grammatical toanon-​ that, a“diglossia” asearly asinRoman times, would As we shallsee, theassumptionof created thenatural ones. inorder tocopewiththeprogressive andunavoidable evolution of languagesisfaulty, particularly theorigin of hisideathat Latin wasanartificiallanguage of thevernacular. chronological priorityof De vulgarieloquentia aqualitative dividebetween Latin andthevernacular,comes, shares thetraditionalideaof quentia entails. thevernacular stressing theperformative functionthat thechoice of Italy, his owntime, thus Danteplaceshisreflection onlanguageinthe decline of reality of beingresponsibleBy focusing onthearistocracy, for theculturalandpolitical accusedof between Latin andthevernacular. cal experience in the Dante’s argument wasindeed aninnovative oneand –​ tongue. the vulgar Yet useof carving the literary as a model to look at in the process of regulated languagessuch as Latin ontological argument, which doesnot affect theideaof From a slightly different perspective, the celebration of the vernacular in the the Fromvernacular a slightly different perspective, the celebration of to us, while theotheris, incontrast, artificial. different pronunciations andusingdifferent words; andthird becauseitis natural used by thehumanrace;second,becausewhole world employs it,though with guage, themore becauseitwasthelanguage originally noble first, isthevernacular: lan thesetwo study. kindsof oped through dedication toalengthy Of of course canonlybe itsrulesandtheory devel complete fluencyinit,sinceknowledge of from us, which theRomans …Few, [grammar] calledgramatica however, achieve language, at oneremove imitating ournurses. Therealsoexists anotherkindof that languageisthat instruction,by vernacular which withoutany we formal learn when they begintodistinguishsounds;or, first toputitmore succinctly, Ideclare language’thatI call‘vernacular which infantsacquire from thosearound them that, initspriorityover Latin, entailstheoppositionbetween nature andart: nesdsuso.I the addsyet anotherlayer toDante’s discussion.If gramatica Convivio hv.Ee f ti reta,b omtighmef oteietfcto f totheidentification of itistruethat, by committinghimself have. Even if reassesses therelationship between thetwo the bynatural and affirming Divine Comedy . The contradiction,however,. The isonlyapparent, for theperspective of is the result of “formal instruction,”hencelimitedtothosewho have “formal istheresult of –​ ddoe e hpe ntehsoyo the relationship did open a new chapter of in the history Eugenio Refini grammatical language,grammatical namelythevernacular, would 24 We know alltoowell that Dante’s reconstruction gramatica 50 27 , which partially contradicts what backedupby theauthor’s own poeti Convivio , despiteitsinnovative out 25 Dante’s takeonthis art De vulgari elo (that isby vulgaris Dante called - - 26 for As - - -

51

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 literary productionliterary paves theway for thehumanistturn. medieval Europe, Petrarch’sembody at societyof itsbestthe‘new’vernacular scholarly and Boccaccio’s writings, the their bilingualismindifferent ways. If However, fullyconversant withbothLatin andItalian,BoccaccioPetrarch approached tongue. thevulgar those who, alongwithDante, laidthefoundations for thelegitimation of identifies purposes literary Petrarch (1304–​ as alanguagesuitable thevernacular for usualnarrativeThe abouttheestablishment of origins of the vulgar tongue. thevulgar origins of the1435debate on the Latin. Similarthoughtsinformed reaching thequalitative heights of the vernacular, perceivedon the other hand, a rather negative as incapable judgement of of ancienteloquence,by itentailed, scholasticism aimedat recovering the intellectualvalue of acrosscurricula Europe. university Aristotle, which constituted the core of the previous Latin translations of of the debate with the Spanish priest Alfonso de the time, namely themostfamouscontroversies of Aristotlegenerated oneof versions of style of newLatin translations. Imitating the toanentire program of Bruni commitshimself that makesthephilosopher’s works unreadable andalmostimpossible tounderstand, Aristotle, responsible for thebarbarous linguistic shape the medieval Latin translations of reveal a new approach tolanguage as a tool for knowledge. Throughcriticism of a harsh ​ Aristotle – tions of emblematically witnessedby hiscommitmentasatranslator. Inparticular, histransla in early-​ Leonardo Bruni(1370–​ this context, theexperience of thevernacular. Within Dante’stum that hadinformed claimtotheenhancementof followed by arenewed interest inGreek), humanismtendedtosetasidethemomen classical languages (Latinplace, inthefirst classicalknowledge through therebirth of of thefollowing century.developments inatenacious fight Byengaging forthe of rebirth thevernacular, hadastrong impactoncultural therole grate andthelegitimacyof from scholasticism. and, tosomeextent, re-​ theancientswithoutappreciating, appropriating,impossible toappropriate theteachings of languages. potentialof newideasabouttheepistemological of eloquence, isinfactaveritable manifesto are farfrom theimportanceof fullyunderstanding represented by university professors who, despitetheirallegedacquaintancewiththeclassics, humanism. intellectual experience of the oppositionbetween medieval Latin andclassicalLatin that would prove crucialtothe theancients, thusintroducing other things, thepoet’s commitment torestore thestyleof Petrarch’s consciouslyhumanistapproach from Dante’s relation totheclassicsis, among the most influential poets ever. of Petrarch’s Latin is surely not given tothepoeticalachievement that,tohisstated contrary plans, would makehimone ​ theLatin title – ing of towards languagesishiswillingnesstoobtainthelaurel wreath asaLatin poet,tosay noth If, ontheonehand, Leonardo Bruni’s the barbarous campaignagainst Latin embodied humanistshift,which,This at least inPetrarch’s wasnotmeanttodeni own terms, Latin humanismandthevernacular: conflict andinteraction cr,btas eiigteitrrtto fsomeAristotelian passages, Bruni’sCicero, but also revising of the interpretation fifteenth-​ century Florence ispivotal. Florence century Latin andverna aogwt i raieo h hoyadpatc ftranslation – alongwithhistreatise andpracticeof onthetheory

ncigterueo language –​ enacting theiruseof Rerum vulgariumfragmenta Rerum 32 33 Whereas inhis thehumanistBiondoFlavio 29 Petrarch’s attitude towards theLatinate culturalelite cular intheRenaissance 1374) andGiovanni Boccaccio(1313–​ 51 Cartagena (1384–​ 31 ​ vulgar/ (Fragments of Bruni’s ideasonclassicallanguagesare anapproach that differentiates him 28 Ebeai fPetrarch’s attitude Emblematic of 1444) andhisfellow humanists 30 Dante’s. What distinguishes According toPetrarch, itis 1456), a strong supporter Decameron ​ things) – vernacular De verbis Romanae De verbis inparticular, 1375) as - - - -

​

52

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 provocative thinker. Hewasalsothefigure gatheredwho the various threads that we have was anacclaimedartist, a renowned writerinbothLatin andItalian,apoetaswell asa what later historiography would label the “Renaissance man,” Alberti, the embodiment of LeonBattista Alberti(1404–​ production isundoubtedlytheliterary the vernacular of nacular culture were. Latin humanismandver shows how intricate andnotmutually exclusive thepaths of philosophy in thevernacular. cessful compendiumthat standsout amongtheworks that contributed tothespread of Aristotle’s ​ now at the Beinecke Library – detailisworthThe mentioningbecausetheoriginalmanuscript senttotheSpaniard – fifteenth-​ the Italian version of Latinate cultures. andvernacular at thecrossroads of a renowned schoolteacher Nuti,whose professional calledBernardo career wasindeed Aristotle’s ist’ version of culture.Latin translation hadoncontemporary vernacular His‘human in thefieldof by theimpactthat otherplaces)isnonethelessconfirmed Bruni’s own work be saidof Latin infifteenth-​ andthevernacular the useof preoccupation withwritinginthevernacular. his lifeandwhich, alongwithother works witnesstothehumanist’s (includingpoetry), Dante, Petrarch, by andBoccacciothatsuggested hewrote lives thevernacular late of in double-​sided. is asanoral language.nacular poetry distinctionbetween The Latin skills. Dante’s lackof Bruni’s dialogue, motivated by theinterlocutors of according toNiccolòNiccoli,oneof theproto-​ target of decisiontowritethe The (Dialogues to Petrus Paulus are more articulate thanhasoftenbeenthought.Inthe tongueasa language suitablethe vulgar for knowledge. humanismmore generally, asimpervioustotheconcurrent developmentBruni, andof of as themainconditionfor engagement. literary trary, classicalLatin Bruniemployed argument the“diglossia” tofocus ontherestoration of the a non-​ that, anoriginal“diglossia” inRome, would Latin opposegrammatical to shared theideaof Latin, Brunias wellasotherhumanists the progressive andhistoricallyjustifiable decline of locutionis eovdaon h oi frevolved around thetopicof ular: the the vernac organized an event that marked in the legitimation another important step of Latin inthe Bruni’s assertive celebration of ism. Atthetimeof human culturalprogram basedonamultilingualoutlined sofarwithinasingle notionof h da xml omninwe icsigtehmns neato fLatin and ideal exampleThe to mention when discussing the humanist interaction of ahumanist such asBruniinthedebate onlanguagesisalso ambiguousposition of The However, asshown by recent scholarship inthefield,it would bemisleadingtothinkof De vulgari eloquentia grammatical vulgar tongue. vulgar grammatical Asmentionedabove, Danteusedasimilarargument in (ntewrso teLtnlnug)asmdta h enclrwstersl f theLatin language)assumedthat wastheresult thevernacular of (Onthewords of century Florence, wascommissionedbycentury a Spanish humanist, Nuño de Guzman. Certame coronario Ethics 37 inlate-​ humanist schoolmaster Giovanni delV to legitimate the notion itself of vernacular eloquence. vernacular On the con of to legitimate the notion itself Ethics fifteenth-​ o 1441. of Ethics 36 Divine Comedy Histrus) (1401), for instance, , which enjoyed asignificantcirculation amonglay inreaders Yti h eodbo fthe Yet inthesecondbookof amicitia 40 played a crucial role in the vernacular dissemination of played acrucialrole dissemination inthevernacular of (1417),for instance, wassoontranslated intoItalianby Tecs f h pns felf fNuti’s translation the Spanishafterlife of case of The etr pi.I a nfc h ansuc fasuc Spain.Itwasinfactthemainsourcecentury of 41 Eugenio Refini (friendship),asignature topicintheclassical tradition, The poeticalcontest,which The tookplaceinFlorence, inItalian(which hadbeenalready thepolemical 52 34 38 The multifaceted The dynamics that inform century Florence (but thesamemight Florence century Dante is both criticized and praised. 35 Dialogi 39 Bruni’s own ideasonlanguage Dialogi adPetrum Paulum Histrum irgilio inDante’s own day) was, lingua Interestingly enough, Nuti’s Dialogi , BrunipraisesDante’s ver and , LeonBattista Alberti sermo , Bruniexplains, 1472). ------​

53

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 hlegsteie htLtnwsa riiillnug n,saigBod’ hoyo the challenges the idea that Latin was an artificial language and, sharing Biondo’s of theory philosophical dialogues his various occasionsonwhich hereflected uponit.Inthepreface tothethird bookof Latinate cultures. andvernacular harmonize Alberti’s withinthehumanistmilieu,itdidnotundermine effortto thevernacular against the participants worthy. the outcome of If Pope EugeniusIV judges,The chosen amongthesecretaries of and wasopentopoetseagerwriteinItalian.Notsurprisingly, theaward wasnotassigned. limited toeruditecircles, printedin1490; wasfirst the the appearanceof century. Dante’s seminalwritingsonlanguagewere notwidelyread either, at leastuntil As noted in the previous Alberti’s paragraph, lowing century’s debate onlanguage. touseinhisownvernacular time, Albertitouches onatopicthat willbecrucialtothefol questionsaboutwhich hishumanisttraining. Also, by askinghimself project inthelightof inordervernacular torealize itscommunicative potentials, Albertiupdates Dante’s linguistic languageaswell asitsethicaldutytoenhancethe theuseof By insistingonthenotionof classicallanguages, asAlbertiargues intheprologue: not inferiortothat of structures. grammatical Its statusvernacular, was likeGreek andLatin, isindeed made of Consistent withtheauthor’s ideasonlanguageuse, Alberti’s work isnotprescriptive. The did notcirculate widely, theItalianlanguage. isaveritable of milestone inthehistory first evergrammar. Italian The socalled thevernacular. of onesoughttocommitthemselves times, totheimprovementpossible thelearned inmodern byaimed tobeunderstood theiraudiences;likewise, inorder tobenefitasmany peopleas tonguesharesthe vulgar withallotherlanguages, classicalLatin included. language that and prioritizes the vernacular the communicative function of the origins of “languageuse,” Albertiexplains historically the otherhand,by introducing thenotionof theancients); on the culturalvalue attributed by hisfellow humanists to thelanguageof (Albertiobviously endorses theempire itself empire issaidtobemuch worsethantheendof theRoman classicalLatin afterthefallof thevernacular. On theonehand,lossof of languages, combineshispassionfor the classicsandlegitimation evolution anddeclineof let isl offered his own contribution. Sometimearound 1440,heauthored the Alberti himself Alberti’s for many years, by assuggested the of projectThe hadbeenamajorconcern in ourlanguage. ​ out makingmistakes – annotations –​ called thiskindof by amongtheGreeks ingenious scholars first andlater among theLatins, andthey project was pursued our language in very short annotations. A similar the use of ours. Init,I have gathered will acknowledge theirfaultby reading thisbookletof only peculiartocertaineruditescholars, aswe finditinonlyafewpeopletoday, I believe that thosewho argue that Latin wasnotcommontoallLatin people, but A fruitfulcompromise: Latin andthe Latin andverna 44 editiones principes Della famiglia ‘grammar.’ Pleasedoread what andunderstand thisartis (ok fthefamily)(1436–​ (Booksof which would allow peopletowriteandspeak with : the cular intheRenaissance Grammatichetta Convivio certame 53 Grammatichetta tells us a lot about the widespread bias h aucittaiino which was , themanuscript traditionof 45 the , which remained inmanuscript and questione della lingua De vulgarieloquentia did not circulate in the fifteenth 1437), for example, Alberti i o idayo the , didnotfindany of 42 Ancient writers Ancientwriters , theoriginal - 43 -

54

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 Greek, theV theancients. Trained asahumanistandwell versedBembo’s inbothLatin and praiseof Bembo does nothesitate tolabel as “non-​ foreign languagesat school, which isthusopposedtothestudy thevernacular of of learning the chronological distancethat separates usfrom Latin makesitforeign tous. natural The proved by thefactthat we withthenurses’ milk.” all“drinkthevernacular menandtongueis womentothevulgar and Latin asanartificialone.The proximity of ment employed by Bemboistheoppositionbetween asanatural thevernacular language the use of theliterary thelegitimacyof humanist Ercole Strozzi, of the interlocutors, the renowned the dialogue is in fact primarily aimed at convincing one of view,Latin. From Bembo’s thispointof will be useful to compare the reflection with the concurrent status on the of vernacular drawing onthevarious Italianvernaculars. Trissino’s constructingasomewhat artificial theory,vernacular by basedontheideaof influences. ClosertoDante, however, openingitto a broadersuggested spectrumof was theTuscan tradition, butCastiglione’s acknowledged “courtly”theory thecentralityof asthebestoption.Lessinclinedtofavorlanguage spokeninFlorence aspecificdialect, Machiavelli’s case of Italian:thiswasthe contemporary criticized by thosewho preferred toprivilegetheuse of andlinguisticcanonfrom imposing aliterary two centuriesearlier was ings. idea of The Boccaccio thetwo modelstoimitate inorder toattain excellent results writ invernacular culturaldictatorship, found inPetrarchproject, which and would soonbecomeasortof thedebate.issues withculturalpoliticsandlinguisticideology, wasat thecore of be identifiedasthe out inthe lingua logue onourlanguage)–​ also recall NiccolòMachiavelli’s bestseller-​ Baldassare Castiglione’s the most influential texts in the European Renaissance. one of lished aCiceronian dialogueentitled eloquentia dialogue inbothhis theItalian vernacular codification of orthographical Aristotle’s of illustrious classicalgenres that hadnewlyentereddebate theliterary viarediscovery tematically. themost Henotonlytriedto“canonize” through thevernacular thelensof 1529. appeared 1577,first inanItaliantranslation by GianGiorgio Trissino (1478–​ of which would notbepublished untilJacopo Corbinelli’s ParisianLatin version edition of nrdcsaprleimbtentelnusi itre fLatin function andItalian.The introduces aparallelism between thelinguistichistories of languagesashistoricallygrounded organisms, Bembo of lar withinawiderunderstanding theItalians to theirvernacu classicallanguages. By situating the relation of same level of the commitment totheenhancement of hl hr sn a oadeshr l h ayfct fthe While there isnoway toaddress here allthemany facetsof . 46 50 I at h rnlto a ato awiderproject that Trissino sys waspursuing Infact,thetranslation waspartof Gvnteeitneo many Italianvernaculars, which –​ Given theexistence of couldnotbemore timely. Onlyfour years earlier, in1525,Pietro Bembohadpub Il Castellano to-​ De vulgarieloquentia be –​ enetian scholar didnotmean todisqualifytheclassicaltradition.Rather, his Poetics wasalsoprintedinV (namelytragedybut andepic), healsoproposed and agrammatical volgare (1529). Discorso are thekey texts inthedebate traditionallyknown as Libro delCortegiano parexcellence? wasthequestionthat, This combiningliterary 47 that, consistentlywithAlberti’s legacy, considered thecurrent –​ Tepbiaino Tisn’ eso fDante’s Trissino’s version of publication The of vr nbt pc n ie htkn f“Italian” should varyinbothspaceandtime, what kindof Discorso o dialogo intorno allanostra lingua Discorso odialogointorno Eugenio Refini Prose lingua dellavolgar enice. volgare Prose natural.” (oko thecourtier)–​ (Bookof 54 49 i atclryisrcie h is oko isparticularly instructive. bookof first The must beread astheattempt to bring ittothe These works These –​ 53 Of course, this does not undermine course, this does notundermine Of (On the vernacular language), (Onthevernacular alongwithwhich we should 48 Between the two, in 1528, Grammatichetta asDantehadpointed volgare anotherRenaissance questione dellalingua iscourse ordia (Discourse . The mainargu. The 52 Furthermore, questione della andinthe 51 De vulgari Bembo’s 1550) in , it ------

55

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 aiaeshlr n nelcul.I at fthe Latinate scholars andintellectuals. Infact, if ist” compromise wasnotable toneutralize theconservative most that informed ideology traditiontobelegitimized.ary authoritative connectionwiththeancients, andonthenecessityfor liter thenewvernacular humanists, primarily based on the a successful compromise between the assumptions of role played inLatin culture by, respectively, V “new” classics, namelyDanteand,even more so, Petrarch andBoccaccio, the who perform Latin context, istakenon,withinthevernacular by the that Cicero hadintheevolution of ture and poetry, thus setting the stage for his later Alessandro followed litera inFrance, theyoung very sooninthestudy Citoliniengaged of GiulioCamilloDelminio, whom language. Asadiscipleof was notnewtothediscussionof tongue. thevulgar the emancipation of tongue), printedin1540withouttheauthor’s knowledge, of isamilestoneinthehistory theconflict. of two terms translation the apossible way toharmonize cultures,vernacular findinginthe notionof the controversy between Latinate and in thorough engaged authors discussions of These works such asthose by Alessandro Citolini,Alessandro Piccolomini,andSperone Speroni. thedebate. Tobetter characterized thevarious thisend,itisusefultoconsider facetsof cannotproperlyvernacular” summarize, itiscrucialtodistinguishthose approaches that atic. the employment of foruse, thevernacular literary itwasthe Bembo didcontribute tothelegitimation of the teenth-​ theculturalrivalry that characterized onlanguageinmid-​ discourses Emblematic of Bembo’s Strozzi bookof inthefirst controversy that proved Ercole even more passionate thantheoneevoked by the portrayal of century, languagethat witnesstoa when several inarticulate engaged discussionsof authors thesixteenth thecentraldecadesof theculturalconflictinformed complexThe nature of that were studiedat theuniversities) would remain acommontrope inlinguisticdiscourses. knowledge (particularly those Latin in many fields of countries), the alleged superiority of (thuspaving theItalianvernacular theway for similardevelopments inotherEuropean of ihu rtczn h te.I at h on fCitolini’s argumentwithout criticizingtheother. isnotto diminishthe Infact,thepointof ing acommonoriginfor Latin andItalian, hemaintainsthat itisimpossible tocriticize one cultural progress. Also, byidentify reflection onlanguagewithinawiderconsideration of knowledge. Asfor point,theauthorsituates thefirst his it atoolfor thedissemination of the idea of it isnobler, richer, andmore ontheotherhand,based commonthanthevernacular; thosewho defendLatin, arguing that inasystematicone hand,Citoliniengages criticismof tongueistwofold: on thevulgar the premise tothemajorwork. Infact,thedefenseof sort of that hadanimportantinfluenceon similar works across Europe. Alessandro Citolini’s thetime, Bembo’s “human Despite itsmassive influenceonthelinguisticculture of volgare 54 Wti ait fconcurrenttrends, which the simplistic“dichotomy Latin versus Within a variety of etr tl a eiso wrsta oue ntelgtmc f h s f theuseof works that focused onthelegitimacyof Italywasaseries of century eiiiigtevraua salnug fknowledge Legitimizing asalanguage of thevernacular frproe te hnltrtr n oty nfc,i itisundeniable otherthanliterature that for andpoetry. purposes Infact,if volgare as a living language, Latin andverna volgare Lettera indifesa delalinguavolgare 55 infieldssuch asscienceorphilosophy that remained problem Prose Citolini focuses on the ethical commitment to make cular intheRenaissance . 56 Whenhewrote theletter, Citolini(1500–​ 55 irgil andCicero himself. Bembointroduces Tipocosmia questione dellalingua (Letter in defense of the vulgar thevulgar (Letterindefenseof (1561), an encyclopedic dialogue 57 Telte f1540isa letterof The didaffectthe evolution 1582) six ------

56

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 access theBible directly. thevernacular, theCatholic Church wasnotmore audiences of inclinedtoletvernacular humanists anduniversity professors were towards infactharsh andscholarly theliterary use classicizing the linguistic conflicts that informed Renaissance culture. If troversial aspect of author, The turn.” the“vernacular known later inhislifeasheterodox, approachesof acon lar, according to Citolini, include such asphilosophy and astronomy. tongue is not only able to “speak about fables and love,” but also about more serious matters, culturevernacular humanist idea that proficiency in Latin ensures knowledge, edgeable. iscrucialtoCitolini’s This argument. Rejecting aconservative approach tothe to refine itself. tion totheancientscomesin.Byimitating theclassics, willindeedbeable thevernacular isnotenoughtomakeiteloquent,andthiswhere thevernacular theproductive rela of course, thenaturalness thevernacular. Of theprogressivecriteria that inform shapingof classicaleloquence–​ of Latin inboth ennoblement of is alsoable todosoinaneloquentway. Byapplyingtothe expressing many that concepts Latin cannotexpress, but it capableonly isthevernacular of sation. created newwords intheirrespective vernaculars, Latin would prove uselesstotheconver weapons about military forinstance, which they shouldanItalianspeaktoaGerman have Latin (anargument oftenemployed by isalsocalledintoquestion:for itsdefenders) of havevarious vernaculars beendiversifying onefrom theother, span the“international” describingthem.Similarly, tongueisablethe vulgar toproduce words capable of sincethe Whereas Latin world, cannotbeusedtonameallthenewthingsthat populate themodern its time: of is dead while is hale andhearty. thevernacular Assuch, tongue isthe expression the vulgar by thevernacular showing that Latin Latin, but simplytolegitimize theuseof importance of potentials. Furthermore, access toknowledge; second,by lookingat the classics, willimprove the vernacular itsstylistic the vernacular, adouble outcomecan beachieved: first, willhave readers vernacular awider that past and present interact. More specifically, by translating from classical languages into translation translation. Itisinfactthrough thepracticeof natural haven inthediscussion of tln’ obnto fthevarious layers involvedCitolini’s inthelinguisticcontroversy combination of findsa However, a specific language that wise or knowl makes the speakers it is not the use of tongue. theliving as theLatin onesare …they are, instead,continuously inthemouthof our life…[E]‌ to thearts:theseare andnumerous sonecessary astoencompassmore thanhalf arise day afterday, includebothnatural ones(that are infinite)andthose related by words, vernacular while lacking in Latin or Greek ones. And such things, which thing comes to light, among the many that every day single appear, it gets clothed thus becomingmore andmore rich andabundant. iswhy This assoonanew tongue]isalive vulgar andgrows,[The generates, creates, produces, gives birth, 59 Furthermore –​ Furthermore 58 e fsuch words are notyet recorded onpaper,ven if they are notlost, per se Citoliniidentifieslanguageuseanddiachronic evolution asthetwo tln neshr h aoiebtlfedo humanists–​ here andCitolinienters the favorite battlefield of 61 . Consistentwiththisargument, healso pointsoutthat thevulgar Citolini argues, since natural languages are better than dead ones Brutus Holy Scripture, a statement that introduces another facet 60 Eugenio Refini The domainsthat The shouldbedealtwithinthevernacu and De oratore 56 –​ too thereference texts inthestudy two of volgare tln tksottevleo Citolini stakes out the value of what Cicero says aboutthe not - - - - -

57

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 eas htmtest i stecmuiaiefnto flanguage. because what matterstohimisthecommunicative function of tongue, thevulgar languages:hedoes notcaresical andvernacular for therefinement of the philosophergoesbeyond thedebate onthealleged qualitative differences between clas knowledge. Eventually,spent instudying usfrom languages keeps theactualacquisition of –​ Furthermore knowledge. readers accessthe sources of than welcome in order toletlarger numbers of translation ismore definitely more importantthan words, andthat is why thepracticeof save knowledge for thefewpeoplewho are able toaccessit.Things, according toPietro, are languagesisjustaway to according tothephilosopher, thepriority assignedtothestudy of hisinterlocutor’ssuitable for all topics. elitistapproach Pomponazzi’s isradical: criticismof conventions, arbitrary which makesalllanguagesequally languageasasetof notion of atthan others communicating specifictopics; Pomponazzi shares instead theAristotelian link between a direct languageare at stakehere: LascarisembodiesthePlatonic idea of of conceptions ancient texts lies in what they say,of and not in the way in which they say it. Two different knowledge, theuniversity professor argues that theimportance path totheacquisitionof texts intheiroriginallanguagesistheonly Whereas thehumanistassertsthat thestudy of pher Pietro Pomponazzi (1462–​ the author)retells aprevious conversation between two iconicfigures, theItalianphiloso of thedialogue, aninterlocutor simplycalled“the scholar” (possibly the voice fiction of Within turn. thevernacular the on languagesandthepotentiallysubversive implications of interest for theway inwhich itstagestheculturalclashbetween thehumanist perspective thevernacular, particular Speroni’sments employed tosupporttheuseof dialogueisof throughout hiscareer,classicalphi primarilydevoted dissemination tothevernacular of the Alessandro Piccolomini’s defenseof the core of argument was at earlier in their lives.would with learning let people engage A similar knowledge asalanguageof thevernacular disciplines, theuseof the real contentof to languagespriortodevoting oneself years andyears spentinthestudy of Instead of learning, for it makes people save time in their studies. in the general advancement of men andwomen. souls of at moving theaudience, willprove thevernacular more effective thanLatin in reaching the Francoyse languages) (1542),which inspired Joachim duBellay’s famous the defenses of knowledge. and dissemination of eloquenceasavehicle for theacquisition learning, they donotdeny theimportanceof of subjectmatterconcern astheprimary Citolini andPiccoloministress thecentralityof familiar withtheclassicsinorder tomakethe being tongue, thevulgar withCitoliniontheimportanceof Piccolominiagrees status of knowledge itself. Yet,postponing theacquisitionof while legitimizingtheintellectual dead languageswhile achievements, itisunfruitfultospendmuch timeinthestudy of the moderns. of knowledge were accessible inthe natural languages allfieldsof only bechallenged if theancientscould for instance, theSienesescholar argued that the alleged superiority of losophy andscience. vnuly h s f h enclrisedo Latin produces a non-​ Eventually,instead of the vernacular the use of Less obliging towards thehumanisttrend embodiedby Citolini’s andPiccolomini’s fneadilsrto f h rnhlnug)o 1549. theFrench language)of (Defenceandillustration of res 64 andPomponazzi develops here thesameargument asCitolini– ​ Sneyuhi h otpoutv ato lf ntrso intellectual of lifeinterms Sinceyouth isthemostproductive partof (things)and volgare Latin andverna 63 was Sperone Speroni’s provocative Inhispreface tothe 62 verba 1525) andtheGreek humanistGianoLascaris(1445–​ (words), which entailsthat certainlanguages are better cular intheRenaissance 57 Filosofia naturale volgare volgare cmeiie ned vni both competitive. Indeed,even if , which wasaveritable Dialogo delle lingue (aua hlspy f1551, (Natural philosophy) of Deffence etIllustration delaLangue 65 Beyond theusualargu negligible benefit (Dialogue on thelongtime Leitmotiv 1535). - - - -

58

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 5 4 3 2 1 thevernacular.a powerful meansfor thedevelopment andenrichment of the genre as such as Alessandro PiccolominiandSperone Speroni fostered the legitimacy of translationsMiddle Agesvernacular tended tobeperceived assecondrate products, authors If duringthe antiquity. themosteffective catalysts of for theearlyreception modern one of translation was the dialecticbetween Latin found andthevernacular inthebroad notionof the two languagesintheperiod).Lastly, despitethedifferences that characterize each case, and Italian,thusactively contributing relation tothemutually that informing characterizes Leon Battista Alberti and Pietro Bembo, who wrote widely in bothLatin its best(just think of the debate were alsothosewho, indifferent ways, embodied Renaissance multilingualism at Second,thosefigures that terms. seemtobemoreboth culturalandgrammatical invested in from Latin, tongueacquired thevulgar anewstatus in byFirst, consciouslydistancingitself linguisticconflict involve productive interactions.dichotomy donotwork. of Infact,forms to reduce therelationship between intheRenaissance Latin andthevernaculars toastrict through the humanist controversies, the examples that we have examined show that attempts theclassics. coexisted withandwasshapedbyvernaculars theweighty of legacy the unavoidable contradictionsentailedby asocietyinwhich legitimation of thegradual few more centuries, thesedebates, aswell asMontaigne’s peculiar experience, embody the of the latter.story ofa that wouldlast fora Fartural affirmation fromrepresenting theend that ledtothecul acontestbetween theancientsandmoderns replicating theideaof theItaliandebate beyond theAlps, thus of language], which literallytranslated theterms successful as mentionedabove, madeitsway through France thankstoJoachim DuBellay’s widely Montaigne’s father. of the Speroneancients, was Speroni’salso a major concern argument, too many years inone’s education, thuspreventing onefrom attaining theknowledge of classicallanguagesabsorbs thischapter, theideathat thestudyAs notedat of theoutsetof 6

del suocostitutoinvolgare del1309–​ thedocumentanditscontext, cf. N. Giordano andG.overview Piccinni(eds.) of et lialtri,e’qualivorranno, possanoessovedere etcopiaindetrarre et avere aloro volontà”; for an in buone cartepecorine…acciocché lepovare et altre persone che persone nonsannogrammatica, domuti di Lazzeri, 1903, Cambridge: ambridge University Press, 2014,pp. 139–​ Campanelli, “Languages,” in M. Wyatt (ed.) Cambridge: thetopic,cf.For P. anoverview of Burke, Ibid Ibid theGreekes andRomanes.” skillandknowledge of that absoluteperfectionof thetongues,imploy which inlearning costthemnothing, istheonelycausewe cannever attaine to our youth, that we then in use; was given while, that to understand the lingring and best part of of theinconveniences teaching, beingadvised standing, tofindamost exquisite and readie way of bestunder meanes andindustriethat ispossible for aman,soughtamongstthewisest,andmenof Ibid pp. 259–​313: 306– ​13. enfants,” des M. deMontaigne, A. Lisini (ed.) From Dante to mid-​ . . . pp. 306–​7. , , p. 307. cf. late father, thepassageinJohn, p. 306; Florio’s translation (1603): “My having, by allthe Deffence etIllustration delaLangue Francoyse Cambridge University Press, 2004; and, with a focus on the Italian case, M. Il costituto del Comune di Siena volgarizzato nel MCCCIX– ​ Il costituto del Comune di Siena volgarizzato Les essais. Livre premier sixteenth century authors such authors as sixteenth century D . I, rub. 134: “In volgare et bene formata, di lettera grossa, bene leggibile 1310 , Pisa: Pacini, 2013. Eugenio Refini , Paris: Librairie GénéraleFrançaise, 2002,“Del’institution Conclusions Notes 58 Languages and Communities in Early Modern Europe andCommunitiesinEarly Modern Languages The CambridgeCompaniontotheItalianRenaissance The fneadilsrto ftheFrench [Defenceandillustration of 63. Citolini, Piccolomini, and Speroni, MCCCX , Siena: Tipografia sor , Siena: Tipografia Siena nellospecchio - - - , ,

59

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 10 31 30 29 28 27 26 23 15 14 13 12 11 25 24 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 7 9 8 c.Grayson, Dante, Dante, danteAlighieri, Cornish, danteAlighieri, Dante, Dante, Cornish, Gentili, . Segre (ed.) c.Segre

o noeve fDante’sFor reflection onlanguage, cf. anoverviewS. of Fortuna, M.Gragnolati, and J. Trabant B. Giamboni, Translation inDante’s Literature Italy: Illiterate G. Folena, menti,” inC.Dionisotti, the of “ LanguagesinEarly Quattrocento​ Florence,” pp. 243– the ShimmeringFacets of Quattrocento andBeyond: An Florence Introduction,” pp. 231–​ I Tatti Studies articles“Latin andV guage, cf. theclusterof withreference Bruniandthehumanistcontext to debates inFlorence onlan discussion of (eds.), W. J. Kennedy, Invective andaManintheMiddle,” inKirkham andMaggi Economy “The of D many others, 1365–​ his own ignoranceandthat of Renaissance Latinity,” Petrarch’sFor Latin humanism, cf. C. a discussion of Chicago University Press, 2013. 2009; V (eds.)A. Maggi Latin inbothPetrarch andvernacular andBoccaccio, seeV of the intersections theVernacular Cavalcanti, andtheAuthorityof il Mulino, 1990.Cf. alsoM.Eisner, thevernacular, seeF.with theuseof Bruni, consciousnessprimarilyconcerned anew literary Boccaccioasthe‘father’ of On therole of Ibid Egloge letteratura italiana the On Taddeo’s translation of andLatinLiteratureAppropriation in theLate Fifteenth Century,” inW.V Italy andEarly Modern Late Medieval A. Mazzocco, and P. Trifone (eds.) For athorough introduction tothe 1996, 1.2. Dante elalinguaitaliana (eds.) mlmtco Petrarch’s positionistheinvectiveEmblematic of M. Tavoni, G. Fioravanti, “Introduzione,” inDanteAlighieri, Ibid Ibid Ibid ‘This Sort of Men’: The V The Men’: Sortof ‘This . Marsh, Cambridge,. Marsh, MA:Harvard University Press, 2004, pp. 222–​ . . . . 1.1.2–​4. , , 1.12. , 1.10. 1.9.2–​5. , , Milan: Mondadori,2014,pp. 5–​ Dante’s Plurilingualism: Authority, Knowledge, Subjectivity Petrarch volgarizzamenti De vulgarieloquentia De vulgarieloquentia Convivio The Convivio The . Kirkham andM.Sherberg (eds.) L’uomo aristotelico Vernacular Translation Vernacular Translation Volgarizzare e tradurre Latino, volgare: storia diunaquestioneumanistica grammatica, , 16(1/​ A Renaissance Controversy: Latin orItalian A RenaissanceControversy: Latin , pp. 263–​ Volgarizzamenti delDueeTrecento Fiore direttorica Linguistic Theories in Dante and the Humanists: Studies of Language and Intellectual History in andIntellectualHistory Language inDanteandtheHumanists: Studies of Linguistic Theories , Rome: Carocci, 2005,pp. 27–​ Latin andverna Petrarch: ACriticalGuidetotheCompleteWorks The Convivio The De vulgarieloquentia 1.9.3–​5. , 1.5.6–​7. , 2), 2013, particularly A. Rizzi and E. 2), 2013, particularly A. Rizzi Storia dellalinguaitaliana , cf. the seminal studies by , Ravenna: Longo, 2013. Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies andEarly Modern Medieval Journal of pp. 41–​9. , 73. Geografia estoriadellaletteraturaGeografia italiana , 1.1.1. 1.9.6–​11. 1.1.1–​3; , , ed.G. Speroni, Pavia: Università StudidiPavia, degli 1994,pp. 3–​ , trans. R.Lansing, New York: Garland, 1990,1.10.10. pp. 126–​57. , , pp. 135ff. , Leiden: Brill,2009,pp. 201–​ , Turin: Einaudi, 1991; and, more recently, A. Summa Alexandrinorum ernacular andtheHumanistMovementernacular inFifteenth-​C entury , Leiden: Brill, 1993;C.elenza,“EndGame: , Leiden: Brill, questione dellalingua , trans. S. Botterill,Cambridge: occi n h neto fItalianLiterature: Dante, Petrarch, of Boccaccio and theInvention 79: 53ff. erbaal, Y. Maes, andJ. Papy (eds.) cular intheRenaissance , Cambridge: ambridgeUniversity Press, 2010. , Cambridge:ambridgeUniversity Press, 2015.On Boccaccio: ACriticalGuidetotheCompleteWorks , Turin: Einaudi, 1993,vol. 1,pp. 231–​ , Turin: UTET, thetradition 1953.For adiscussionof Boccaccio, dellaletteratura l’invenzione mezzana 59 ernacular inQuattrocento andBeyond,”ernacular Florence ornish, 55; Cornish, C. Opere. Volume secondo. Convivio, Monarchia, Epistole, , Oxford: Dionisotti, “Tradizione classica e volgarizza , cf. S. Gentili, , cf. C.Marazzini,“Leteorie,” inL.Serianni , London: Legenda, 2010;M.Tavoni (ed.) De sui ipsius et multorum ignorantia De suiipsiusetmultorum Celenza, “Petrarch, Latin, andItalian Del Soldato, “Latin and 1370): cf. Petrarch, 42. , Chicago:hicagoUniversity Press, Vernacular Translation Clarendon Press, 1960.For arecent , Turin: Einaudi, 1967,pp. 103–​ 42; A. Rizzi, “Leonardo Bruniand , 35,2005,509–​ , Padua: Antenore, 1984. L’uomo aristotelicoalleoriginidella Cambridge University Press, Latinitas Perennis ornish, Cornish, pp. 78–​9. , 36. Invectives Humanist Latin 363. Seealso 56; B. Maxson, 56; B. Maxson, . Kirkham and 329. V ernacular in ernacular , Chicago: , Bologna: Vernacular , trans. , vol. 2, (On 44; 4. - -

60

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 Citolini, Bembo, campanelli,“Languages,” pp. 154– ​ danteAlighieri, danteAlighieri, Tavoni, On Citolini’s culture, influenceon English cf. M. Wyatt, A. Citolini, For anintroduction totranslation intheRenaissance, seeP. Burke andR.Po-​ thetopic,cf.For A.Calzona (ed.) anoverview of N. Machiavelli, B. Castiglione, P. Bembo, nln:AClua oiiso Translation England: A Cultural Politics of Pennsylvania Press, 2015. Philadelphia: University of Europe P. Burke, Cultural Translation Europe inEarly Modern volgare,scientifica in secoliXIII–​ Cinquecento Ibid eral, onthe W. Barberis, Turin: Einaudi, 1998). edition, P. Bembo, Castellano, nelqualesitratta delalinguaitaliana G. G. Trissino, L. B. Alberti, B. Alberti, L. L. Bertolini, J. M. V Refini, ‘ On Bruni’s complex relation tothevernacular, seeJ. Hankins, “HumanismintheV Rizzi, “Leonardo Bruni,”pp. 250–​ L. Bruni, See thereferences in Rizzi, “Leonardo Bruni,”pp. 243–​ G. Griffiths, J. 1577. the Latin text, cf. Dante Alighieri, Ibid Bari: Laterza, 1960. Pisa: ETS, 2014,pp. 253–​ Lines andE.Refini (eds.) RonaldG. Witt Renaissance: Essays inHonorof CelenzaandK.Gouwens (eds.) Leonardo Bruni,”inC. S. Case of in Dante, Dante’s choice towritethe of Bruni’s Dialogues,” the general discussionof University Press, 2004,pp. 53–​ Giannozzo Leonardo Bruni, ManettiandDesideriusErasmus andPractice of Theory 201–​ America, 1987, pp. Society of Medieval &Renaissance Texts &StudiesinconjunctionwiththeRenaissanceBinghamton: Florence Ethics ​ Florence,” pp. 257– . . , prologue (translation by thepresent author). ​ intheQuattrocento,” pp. 311– , Wassenar: NIAS, 2005;K.NewmanandJ. Tylus (eds.) , New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. alero Moreno, “Formas del AristotelismoÉtico-​ Latino, volgare grammatica, “Aristotile inparlare materno,” Prose Lettera ot(n on)i rnlto:AClua itr fTranslatorsLost (andFound) andTranslating inTranslation: A Cultural of History inEarly Modern Opere. Volume secondo Opere letterarie epolitiche diLeonardo Bruni , Florence: LeoS., Florence: Olschki, 2003;R.LibrandiandPiro (eds.) Prose nelle quali si ragiona della volgar lingua Prose dellavolgar nellequalisi ragiona Lettera indifesa delalinguavolgare questione dellalingua De vera amicitia: itestidelprimoCertameCoronario , Book 1. Grammatichetta ealtriscrittisulvolgare , fol. B2r. Il libro delcortegiano Libri dellafamiglia La Grammatichetta Discorso intorno allanostra lingua Discorso intorno Hankins, andD Convivio De lavolgare eloquenzia Prose lingua dellavolgar Renaissance Quarterly 71; E. Refini, “ 71; E. Refini, note 31 , Florence: Francesco Bonaccorsi, 1490. Dialogi 310: 291–​ Aristotele fatto volgare: tradizione aristotelicaecultura volgare nelRinascimento Aristotele fatto volgare: tradizione XVI . pp. 1595–​621. , , cf. Marazzini,“Leteorie.” Divine Comedy ornish, 60; Cornish, , seeD ; Campanelli,“Languages,” pp. 141–​ , , Florence: SISMEL,2006. , Florence: , V ,poou,i . B. Alberti, , 3,prologue, inL. V . Thompson, Thompson, . 1. 6. icenza: Tolomeo Gianicolo, 1529; De vulgari eloquentia libri duo nc:hiso AldoManuzio, editionby 1528(cf. themodern enice: heirs of Eugenio Refini 63. 5. ‘Aristotile inparlare materno’: 8, 213–​ , Cambridge: ambridgeUniversity Press, pp. 203– ​ , V mns n oent:ARcnieaino . Quint, “HumanismandModernity: A Reconsideration of 41. SeealsoB. Maxson, , 38,1985,pp. 423–​ ’ p. 316. , ed.C.V icenza: Tolomeo Gianicolo, 1529;for the , V , V , Leiden: Brill,2006,pp. 11–​ inItalian,seeG. Albanese’s introduction tothe , Cambridge: Vernacular Translation enice: Francesco Marcolini, 1540. 60 17; P. Botley, icenza: Tolomeo Gianicolo, 1529. , ed.by P. Trovato, Padua: Antenore, 1982;ingen , ed.G. Patota, Rome: Salerno, 1996. h uaimo Load rn: SelectedTexts Leonardo Bruni: Humanismof The ela, Bologna: CLUEB, 2001). , V , ed.P. enice: Giovanni Tacuino, 1525(cf. thecritical Il volgare comelinguadicultura dalTrecento al Político enlaCastilladelsiglo V , Modena: Panini, 1993. 45. OnGiovanni delV iti, Turin: UTET, For 1996,p. 110. a Latin Translation in the Renaissance: The The Latin Translation in the Renaissance: Cambridge University Press, 2007; , ed. J. al oenClue fTranslation Cultures of Early Modern pp. 169–​70. , h uaitWrdo Renaissance HumanistWorldThe of The ItalianEncounterwith TudorThe Opere volgari V Corbinelli, Paris: J. 2. Humanism andCreativity inthe Dialogo del Trissino intitulato il raua ednso the Readingsernacular of 29. , Cambridge: Lo scaffaledellabiblioteca , ed.C.Grayson, irgilio’s criticism chia Hsia(eds.) ernacular: The ernacular: The editio princeps xv Cambridge ,” inD Corbon, 54. Egloge . A. o of - , , ,

61

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 22:05 02 Oct 2021; For: 9781315226217, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315226217.ch3 63 62 61 60 59 65 64

Citolini, 1605 at leastG. Fragnito, Scripture, see On thecontroversial relationship between Latin inthefieldof andvernacular Ibid Ibid prn’ etwsoiial ulse spr fhis Speroni’s text wasoriginallypublished aspartof A. Piccolomini, volgare dellaprosaAristotele: la scientificainitaliano,” formazione inLinesand Refini (eds.), “Riscrivere Piccolomini’s ideas on language and translation,For see A. Siekiera, a discussion of andTranslationCommentary intheFifteenthandSixteenthCenturies de lalanguefrançoyse 1999. For edn.,S.cf. themodern Speroni, . . , fol. D2v. , fol. [B3]r–​ , Bologna: il Mulino, 1997;and R. Griffiths (ed.) , Bologna: il pp. 149–​68. , Lettera elyadhsrueo Speroni, cf. the recent edn., J. Du Bellay and his reuse of , fols. D2v–​ [B4]r. La primapartedellafilosofianaturals Latin andverna , ed.E.Buron, Neuilly: Atlande, 2007. La Bibbia al rogo: la censura ecclesiastica dellaScrittura, eivolgarizzamenti 1471–​ La Bibbia alrogo: la [D4]r. Dialogo dellelingue cular intheRenaissance 61 , Rome: V , ed.A.Sorella, Pescara: Libreria dell’Università, Dialogi The Bible in the Renaissance: Essays on Biblical Bible in the Renaissance: Essays The incenzo V , V nc:hiso AldoManuzio, 1542; enice: heirs of , Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001. Du Bellay, algrisi, 1551,prologue.algrisi, La deffence et illustration Aristotele fatto