[55]. Spingarn, p. 102.
[56]. The discussion occupies nearly four quarto pages, ii. 127-130. Trissino, of course, does not neglect Quintilian’s handling of the subject in Inst., vi. 3, and he quotes modern as well as ancient examples.
[57]. Dolce had translated the Ars Poetica of Horace into Italian the year before.
[58]. Mr Spingarn has extracted from MS., and published as an appendix to his book, an interesting review of these commentators and others, by Leonardo Salviati, a successor of theirs in 1586, and too famous in the Tasso controversy.
[59]. Maggi in his commentary. See Spingarn, p. 27.
[61]. Discoveries, sub fin. (iii. 419 of Cunningham’s 3 vol. ed.)
[62]. On him see also note infra, pp. 49, 50.
[63]. M. Breitinger (Les Unités d’Aristote avant Corneille, p. 7) says, “ce livre n’est qu’un commentaire du Canzoniere de Pétrarque.” He can hardly have read it; and most probably confused it with the Spositione by Daniello which accompanies an edition of Petrarch (Venice, 1549), and had been partially published eight years earlier. This is a full but rather wooden commentary, chiefly interesting to contrast with Castelvetro’s, and as showing the Italian tendency to expatiate rather than to appreciate.
[64]. Fracastorii Opera, 2 vols., Lyons, 1591. The Naugerius is at i. 319-365.