Books and their makers during the Middle Ages

by George Haven Putnam

The first name in the list of Florentine scholars whose influence was important in this revival is that of Petrarch. He never himself mastered the Greek language, but he arrived at a realisation of the importance of Greek thought for the world, and he preached to others the value of the studies which were beyond his own grasp. It was at Petrarch’s instance that Boccaccio undertook the translation into Latin of the Iliad. Among Latin authors, Petrarch’s devotion was given particularly to Cicero and Virgil. The fact that during the first century of printing more editions of Cicero were produced than of any other classic author must have been largely due to the emphasis given by the followers of Petrarch to the beauty of Cicero’s latinity and the permanent value of his writings.

Petrarch was a devoted collector of manuscripts, and spared neither labour nor expense to secure for his library codices of texts recommended as authoritative. Notwithstanding his lack of knowledge of Greek, he purchased for his collection all the Greek manuscripts which came within his reach and within his means. Fortunately for these expensive literary tastes, he appears to have possessed what we should call a satisfactory independence. Some of his manuscripts went to Boccaccio, while the rest were, at his death, given to the city of Florence and found place later in the Medicean Library.

Petrarch laid great stress on the importance, for the higher education of the people, of efficient public libraries, and his influence with wealthy nobles served largely to increase the resources of several of the existing libraries. In his scholarly appreciation of the value of such collections, he was helping to educate the community to support the booksellers, while in the collecting of manuscripts he was unwittingly doing valuable service for the coming printer. He died in 1374, ninety years before the first printing-press began its work in Italy. A century later his beautiful script served as a model for the italic or cursive type which was first made by Aldus.

Symonds thinks it very doubtful whether the Italians would have undertaken the labour of recovering the Greek classics if no Petrarch had preached the attractiveness of liberal studies, and if no school of disciples had been formed by him in Florence. Of these disciples, by far the most distinguished was Boccaccio. His actual work in furthering the study of Greek was more important than that of the friend to whom (although there was a difference of but nine years in their ages) he gave the title of “master.” Boccaccio, taking up the study of Greek (at Petrarch’s instance) in middle life, secured a sufficient mastery of the language to be able to render into Latin the Iliad and the Odyssey. This work, completed in 1362, was the first translation of Homer for modern readers. He had for his instructor and assistant an Italian named Leontius Pilatus, who had sojourned some years at Byzantium, but whose knowledge of classic Greek was said to have been very limited. Boccaccio secured for Pilatus an appointment as Greek professor in the University of Florence, the first professorship of Greek instituted in Europe.

The work by which Boccaccio is best known, the Decameron or the Ten Nights’ Entertainment, was published in 1353, a few years before the completion by Chaucer of the Canterbury Tales. It is described as one of the purest specimens of Italian prose and as an inexhaustible repository of wit, beauty, and eloquence; and notwithstanding the fact that the stories are representative of the low standard of moral tone which characterised Italian society of the fourteenth century, the book is one which the world will not willingly let die. It is probably to-day in more continued demand than any book of its century, with the possible exception of the Divine Comedy. The earliest printed edition was that of Valdarfer, issued in Florence in 1471. This was three years before the beginning of Caxton’s work as a printer in Bruges. The Decameron has since been published in innumerable editions and in every language of Europe.

A far larger contribution to Hellenic studies was given some years later by Manuel Chrysoloras, a Greek scholar of Byzantium, who, after visiting Italy as an ambassador from the Court of the Emperor Palæologus, was, in 1396, induced to accept the Chair of Greek in the University of Florence. “This engagement,” says Symonds, “secured the future of Greek erudition in Europe.” Symonds continues: “The scholars who assembled in the lecture-rooms of Chrysoloras felt that the Greek texts, whereof he alone supplied the key, contained those elements of spiritual freedom and intellectual culture without which the civilisation of the modern world would be impossible. Nor were they mistaken in what was then a guess rather than a certainty. The study of Greek implied the birth of criticism, comparison, research. Systems based on ignorance and superstition were destined to give way before it. The study of Greek opened philosophical horizons far beyond the dream world of the churchmen and monks; it stimulated the germs of science, suggested new astronomical hypotheses, and indirectly led to the discovery of America. The study of Greek resuscitated a sense of the beautiful in art and literature. It subjected the creeds of Christianity, the language of the Gospels, the doctrines of St. Paul, to analysis, and commenced a new era of Biblical inquiry. If it be true, as a writer no less sober in his philosophy than eloquent in his language has lately asserted, that except the blind forces of nature, nothing moves in this world which is not Greek in its origin, we are justified in regarding the point of contact between the Greek teacher Chrysoloras and his Florentine pupils as one of the most momentous crises in the history of civilisation. Indirectly the Italian intellect had hitherto felt Hellenic influence through Latin literature. It was now about to receive that influence immediately from actual study of the masterpieces of the Attic writers. The world was no longer to be kept in ignorance of those ‘eternal consolations’ of the human race. No longer could the scribe omit Greek quotations from his Latin text with the dogged snarl of obtuse self-satisfaction, Græca sunt, ergo non legenda. The motto had rather to be changed into a cry of warning for ecclesiastical authority upon the verge of dissolution, Græca sunt, ergo periculosa; since the reawakening faith in human reason, the reawakening belief in the dignity of man, the desire for beauty, the liberty, audacity, and passion of the Renaissance, received from Greek studies their strongest and most vital impulse.”

Symonds might have added that the literary revival, which was so largely due to these Greek studies, made possible, a century later, the utilisation of the printing-press, the invention of which would otherwise have fallen upon comparatively barren ground; while the printing-press alone made possible the diffusion of the new knowledge, outside of the small circles of aristocratic scholars, to whole communities of impecunious students.

Florence had, as we have seen, done more than any other city of Italy, more than any city of Europe, to prepare Italy and Europe for the appreciation and utilisation of the art of printing, but the direct part taken by Florence in the earlier printing undertakings was, curiously enough, much less important than that of Venice, Rome, or Milan. By the year 1500, that is, thirty-six years after the beginning of printing in Italy, there had been printed in Florence 300 works, in Bologna 298, in Milan 629, in Rome 925, and in Venice 2835.

The list of the scholars and men of letters who, during the century following the work of Petrarch and Boccaccio, associated themselves with the brilliant society of Florence, and retained for the city its distinctive pre-eminence in the intellectual life of Europe, is a long one, and includes such names as those of Tommaso da Sarzana, Palla degli Strozzi, Giovanni da Ravenna, Niccolo de’ Niccoli, Filelfo, Marsuppini, Rossi, Bruni, Guicciardini, Poggio, Galileo, Cellini, Plethon, and Machiavelli. It was to Strozzi that was due the beginning of Greek teaching in Florence under Manuel Chrysoloras, while he also devoted large sums of money to the purchase in Greece and in Constantinople of valuable manuscripts. He kept in his house skilled copyists, and was employing these in the work of preparing transcripts for a great public library, when, unfortunately for Florence, he incurred the enmity of Cosimo de’ Medici, who procured his banishment. Strozzi went to Padua, where he continued his Greek studies.

Cosimo, having vanquished his rival in politics, himself continued the work of collecting manuscripts and of furthering the instruction given by the Greek scholars. The chief service rendered by Cosimo to learning and literature was in the organisation of great public libraries. During his exile (1433-1434), he built in Venice the Library of S. Giorgio Maggiore, and after his return to Florence, he completed the hall for the Library of S. Marco. He also formed several large collections of manuscripts. To the Library of S. Marco and to the Medicean Library were bequeathed later by Niccolo de’ Niccoli 800 manuscripts, valued at 600 gold florins. Cosimo also provided a valuable collection of manuscripts for the convent of Fiesole. The oldest portion of the present Laurentian Library is composed of the collections from these two convents, together with a portion of the manuscripts preserved from the Medicean Library.