And the “Divine Comedy”
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LINGUA INDISCIPLINATA. A STUDY OF TRANSGRESSIVE SPEECH IN THE “ROMANCE OF THE ROSE” AND THE “DIVINE COMEDY” by Gabriella Ildiko Baika BA, “Babes-Bolyai-University,” Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 1991 MA, “Babes-Bolyai-University,” Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 1992 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Pittsburgh in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh, 2007 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES This dissertation was presented by Gabriella Ildiko Baika It was defended on December 1, 2006 and approved by Dissertation Advisor: Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski, Department of French and Italian Co-Advisor: Dennis Looney, Associate Professor, Department of French and Italian Diana Mériz, Associate Professor, Department of French and Italian Bruce Venarde, Associate Professor, Department of History ii Copyright © by Gabriella Ildiko Baika 2007 iii LINGUA INDISCIPLINATA. A STUDY OF TRANSGRESSIVE SPEECH IN THE “ROMANCE OF THE ROSE” AND THE “DIVINE COMEDY” Gabriella Baika, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2007 My dissertation is an investigation of the two masterpieces of medieval, allegorical literature from the perspective of the Latin moral tradition of their time. Discussing Jean de Meun and Dante’s obsessive concern with the sinfulness of speech, I relate the numerous verbal transgressions treated in the Romance of the Rose and the Divine Comedy to what historians of moral philosophy have called “the golden age of the sins of the tongue” (1190-1260), a time span during which moralists, theologians and canonists wrote a great number of Latin texts on peccata linguae. I argue that the radical inclusion of the sins of speech among the other classes of sins treated in the Romance of the Rose and the Divine Comedy is to be accounted for in light of the major thirteenth-century treatises on peccata linguae. While Jean de Meun, in the wake of Alain of Lille, treats the sins of the tongue in a dispersed manner, without regard to a classification based on the gravity of the sins, Dante follows a scholastic approach and assigns most of the sins of tongue he is dealing with to the infernal area of Fraud, in a hierarchical order. Taking up elements from William Peraldus's Summa vitiorum and Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica, both very popular at the time, Dante constructs his own micro-system of peccata linguae, a system within a system. Written shortly after the golden age of the sins of the tongue, the Romance of the Rose and the Divine Comedy extend this cultural period and transfer the preoccupation with sinfulness of human speech from the exclusive sphere of Latin moral tracts to the realm of vernacular poetry. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE.................................................................................................................................. VII 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1 2.0 MEDIEVAL AUTHORITIES ON TRANSGRESSIVE SPEECH........................ 15 2.1 PERALDUS’S EIGHTH “CAPITAL” VICE................................................. 17 2.2 LAURENT D’ORLÉANS AND LES PECHIÉS DE LA LANGUE............... 27 2.3 DOMENICO CAVALCA ................................................................................. 33 2.3.1 The Pungilingua (‘The Wounding Tongue’) ........................................... 37 2.4 THOMAS AQUINAS AND THE SINS OF WORD....................................... 45 3.0 FROM JEAN DE MEUN’S MULTIDISCURSIVE DISPERSAL TO DANTE’S SYSTEM OF SINS...................................................................................................................... 54 3.1 ORIGIN, FUNCTIONS AND SINS OF SPEECH IN THE “ROMANCE OF THE ROSE”........................................................................................................................ 55 3.1.1 Lady Reason on speech and its transgressions......................................... 55 3.1.2 Nature on the (verbal) vices of humans .................................................... 71 3.1.3 Genius’s Grievances against Feminine Speech ........................................ 82 3.2 DANTE’S MORAL APPROACH TO SPEECH............................................ 90 4.0 LINGUA DOLOSA (‘THE GUILEFUL TONGUE’): SPEAKING UNDER THE SIGN OF FRAUD ..................................................................................................................... 113 v 4.1 FLATTERY AS FORM OF TRANSGRESSIVE SPEECH........................ 115 4.1.1 The art of losange in the Rose .................................................................. 120 4.1.2 Ornaments of speech: seduction and flattery in Canto XVIII of the Inferno ..................................................................................................................... 128 4.2 EVIL COUNSELING, OR WHAT THE OLD WOMAN AND FRIEND HAVE IN COMMON WITH ULYSSES AND GUIDO DA MONTEFELTRO........ 142 4.2.1 The Lover’s evil counselors...................................................................... 142 4.2.2 The name of the sin: medieval moralists on pravum consilium and Ulysses and Guido’s sin ........................................................................................... 157 4.3 ‘DOUBLE-TALK’ (BILINGUIUM) IN FAUS SEMBLANT’S DISCOURSE ........................................................................................................................... 187 4.4 SOWING OF DISCORD AND FALSIFYING OF WORDS: TWO VERBAL SINS ASSOCIATED WITH FRAUD IN DANTE’S INFERNO.................................. 209 4.4.1 The seminator di scandalo e di scisma...................................................... 210 4.4.2 The verbal falsador ................................................................................... 226 5.0 DISTORTING THE VERTICAL DIMENSION: THE PROBLEM OF BLASPHEMY ........................................................................................................................... 244 5.1 THE “BLASPHEMIES” OF JEAN DE MEUN ........................................... 246 5.2 THE SIN OF BLASPHEMY IN DANTE...................................................... 270 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................... 301 BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................................... 307 vi PREFACE I am first deeply indebted (and grateful) to Professor Yves Citton, our former director of graduate studies, to whom I owe my presence here. His guidance during the first years of my Ph.D. program was invaluable, and I could not think of a more fitting hommage to him than this dissertation. I also owe many sincere thanks to my two dissertation directors, Professor Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski and Professor Dennis Looney, not only for kindly accepting to direct my work, but also for their constant support throughout these five years. I could not be what I am today as a “medievalist” without what they have taught me. Professionally, the things I have learned from two of the finest medievalists in the United States are today my most cherished treasure. On a more personal level, the words fail me when I try to recall all the efforts and dedication Dr. Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski invested in our relationship. Without her, I would not have gotten so far. I am also grateful to my dantisti friends, Dr. Marino Balducci and Dr. Massimo Seriacopi, for my Italian scholarship and our long discussions on Dante hermeneutics, at the Carla Rossi Academy and the Società Dantesca Italiana. Professors Franca Petrucci Nardelli and Armando Petrucci, with whom I had the unique opportunity to work at the Newberry Library in Chicago, have also contributed to this dissertation, by giving me the knowledge and confidence necessary for approaching medieval manuscripts. In terms of scholarships, I have been extremely vii fortunate, as I have benefited from three one-year research fellowships, generously granted by the University of Pittsburgh. The credit for my doctoral work must also go to the Medieval Academy of America, whose grant has represented for me an extraordinary morale booster and has given me the opportunity to finalize my work in European archives. I would also like to thank my wonderful parents, for their unconditional patience, love and support, and last, but not least, to my beautiful daughter Mary-Annick, the true “rationale” behind my work. This Ph.D. dissertation is as much mine as it is theirs. viii 1.0 INTRODUCTION As early as the fifteenth century, critical readers of the Romance of the Rose and the Divine Comedy likened the two poetic narratives, discovering analogies between them and listing a common concern with human vices as first among the poem’s many striking similarities. Christine de Pizan and Laurent de Premierfait were the first to comment upon the two medieval allegorical poems from a comparative point of view, thus pioneering a tradition that would extend to the present day, a tradition of associating the Rose and the Comedy from various viewpoints and using the poems as illustrations of specific aspects related to the Middle Ages.1 The year 1878 marked a turning point in this comparative tradition with the discovery of the Fiore and the Detto d’Amore, two thirteenth-century Italian translations of the Romance of the Rose. Gianfranco Contini and Luigi Vanossi credited Dante Alighieri with penning the Fiore, an authorship that would represent the irrefutable