[354] Cf. G. Villani, Lib. XII, cap. 84. After the horrible slaughters and wars in Florence, and indeed in all Tuscany, the disgraceful state of affairs in Naples, it is not wonderful that pestilence broke out and found a congenial soil.
[355] G. Morelli, Cronica, p. 280. Cf. G. Biagi, La vita privata dei Fiorentini (Milano, 1899), pp. 77-9.
[356] W. Heywood, The Ensamples of Fra Filippo (Torrini Siena, 1901), p. 80 et seq.
[357] In the Commentary on the Divine Comedy (Moutier, Vol. XI, p. 105) he says: "E se io ho il vero inteso, perciocchè in que' tempi io non ci era, io odo, che in questa città avvenne a molti nell' anno pestifero del MCCCXLVIII, che essendo soprappresi gli uomini dalla peste, e vicini alla morte, ne furon più e più, i quali de' loro amici, chi uno e chi due, e chi più ne chiamò, dicendo, vienne tale e tale; de' quali chiamati e nominati assai, secondo l' ordine tenuto dal chiamatore, s' eran morti, e andatine appresso al chiamatore...." This might seem evidence enough that Boccaccio was not in Florence in 1348, for he expressly says so. There is a passage, however, in the Decameron Introduction where he seems to say that he was in Florence; but as we shall see, we misunderstand him. He says: "So marvellous is that which I have now to relate that had not many, and I among them, observed it with their own eyes I had hardly dared to credit it...." He then goes on to tell us (assuring us again that he had seen it himself) that one day two hogs came nosing among the rags of a poor wretch who had died of the disease, and immediately they "gave a few turns and fell down dead as if from poison...." But this might have happened in Naples or Forlì quite as well as in Florence. It is only right to add that the Moutier edition of the Comento sopra Dante notes that the MS. from which it is printed reads 1340 instead of 1348 in the passage already quoted. This may or may not be an error. There was a plague in Florence in 1340. See Villani, op. cit., Lib. XII, cap. lxxiii.
[358] See the letter in Corazzini, op. cit., p. 23. It is written in the Neapolitan dialect, and in all the versions I have been able to see bears the date of no year at all. It is signed thus: "In Napoli, lo juorno de sant' Anniello—Delli toi Jannetto di Parisse dalla Ruoccia."
[359] Cf. Manni, Istoria del Decamerone (Firenze, 1742), p. 21. See also Koerting, op. cit., p. 179, and especially Crescini, op. cit., p. 257 et seq.
[360] Cf. Manni, u.s.
[361] Cf. Antona Traversi, Della realtà e della vera natura dell' amore di Messer Gio. Boccaccio (Livorno, 1883), and Ibid., Della verità dell' amore di Gio. Boccaccio (Bologna, 1884); also Renier, Di una nuova opinione sull' amore del B. in Rassegna Settimanale, Vol. VI, No. 145, pp. 236-8.
[362] Villani says B. wrote in the vulgar tongue in verse and prose "in quibus lascivientis iuventutis ingenio paullo liberius evagavit." Bandino says almost as little; but see Crescini, op. cit., p. 164, n. 3. Manetti says: "in amores usque ad maturam fere ætatem vel paulo proclivior." Squarciafico speaks of the various opinions current on the love of B. for Fiammetta, but does not give an opinion himself; he seems doubtful, however, whether the daughter of so great a king could be induced to forget her honour by mere verses and letters. Sansovino, however, thinks B. was a successful lover of Fiammetta. Betussi came to think the same, so did Nicoletti, and so did Zilioli. Mazzuchelli, however, does not believe it. Tiraboschi does not believe the so-called confessions of B. Baldelli, however, does believe them (op. cit., p. 364 et seq.).
[363] I confess that the dissenters seem to me to be merely absurd. They are not worth any fuller answer than that given above. Of course, in speaking of Fiammetta, I mean Maria d'Aquino. It would seem to be impossible to doubt her identity after the acrostic of the Amorosa Visione. I do not hope to convert the dissenters by abusing them. I would not convert them if I could. They are too dangerous to any cause.