[763] Li Tresors, ed. Chabaille, Paris, 1863, pp. 179-180. Comp. ibid. p. 577 (lib. iii. p. ii. c. 1).
[764] On Paris, which was a much more important place to the mediæval Italian than to his successor a hundred years later, see Dittamondo, iv. cap. 18. The contrast between France and Italy is accentuated by Petrarch in his Invectivae contra Gallum.
[765] Savonarola, in Murat. xxiv. col. 1186 (above, p. 145). On Venice, see above, p. 62 sqq. The oldest description of Rome, by Signorili (MS.), was written in the pontificate of Martin V. (1417); see Gregorovius, vii. 569; the oldest by a German is that of H. Muffel (middle of fifteenth century), ed. by Voigt, Tübingen, 1876.
[766] The character of the restless and energetic Bergamasque, full of curiosity and suspicion, is charmingly described in Bandello, parte i. nov. 34.
[767] E.g. Varchi, in the ninth book of the Storie Fiorentine (vol. iii. p. 56 sqq.).
[768] Vasari, xii. p. 158. V. di Michelangelo, at the beginning. At other times mother nature is praised loudly enough, as in the sonnet of Alfons de’ Pazzi to the non-Tuscan Annibal Caro (in Trucchi, l. c. iii. p. 187):
‘Misero il Varchi! e più infelici noi,
Se a vostri virtudi accidentali
Aggiunto fosse ‘l natural, ch’è in noi!’
[769] Forcianae Quaestiones, in quibus varia Italorum ingenia explicantur multaque alia scitu non indigna. Autore Philalette Polytopiensi cive. Among them, Mauritii Scaevae Carmen.
‘Quos hominum mores varios quas denique mentes
Diverso profert Itala terra solo,
Quisve vinis animus, mulierum et strenua virtus
Pulchre hoc exili codice lector habes.’
Neapoli excudebat Martinus de Ragusia, Anno MDXXXVI. This little work, made use of by Ranke, Päpste, i. 385, passes as being from the hand of Ortensio Landi (comp. Tiraboschi, vii. 800 to 812), although in the work itself no hint is given of the author. The title is explained by the circumstance that conversations are reported which were held at Forcium, a bath near Lucca, by a large company of men and women, on the question whence it comes that there are such great differences among mankind. The question receives no answer, but many of the differences among the Italians of that day are noticed—in studies, trade, warlike skill (the point quoted by Ranke), the manufacture of warlike implements, modes of life, distinctions in costume, in language, in intellect, in loving and hating, in the way of winning affection, in the manner of receiving guests, and in eating. At the close, come some reflections on the differences among philosophical systems. A large part of the work is devoted to women—their differences in general, the power of their beauty, and especially the question whether women are equal or inferior to men. The work has been made use of in various passages below. The following extract may serve as an example (fol. 7 b sqq.):—‘Aperiam nunc quæ sint in consilio aut dando aut accipiendo dissimilitudo. Præstant consilio Mediolanenses, sed aliorum gratia potius quam sua. Sunt nullo consilio Genuenses. Rumor est Venetos abundare. Sunt perutili consilio Lucenses, idque aperte indicarunt, cum in tanto totius Italiæ ardore, tot hostibus circumsepti suam libertatem, ad quam nati videntur semper tutati sint, nulla, quidem, aut capitis aut fortunarum ratione habita. Quis porro non vehementer admiretur? Quis callida consilia non stupeat? Equidem quotiescunque cogito, quanta prudentia ingruentes procellas evitarint, quanta solertia impendentia pericula effugerint, adducor in stuporem. Lucanis vero summum est studium, eos deludere qui consilii captandi gratia adeunt, ipsi vero omnia inconsulte ac temere faciunt. Brutii optimo sunt consilio, sed ut incommodent, aut perniciem afferant, in rebus quæ magnæ deliberationis dictu mirum quam stupidi sint, eisdem plane dotibus instructi sunt Volsci quod ad cædes et furta paulo propensiores sint. Pisani bono quidem sunt consilio, sed parum constanti, si quis diversum ab eis senserit, mox acquiescunt, rursus si aliter suadeas, mutabunt consilium, illud in caussa fuit quod tam duram ac diutinam obsidionem ad extremum usque non pertulerint. Placentini utrisque abundant consiliis, scilicet salutaribus ac pernitiosis, non facile tamen ab iis impetres pestilens consilium, apud Regienses neque consilii copiam invenies. Si sequare Mutinensium consilia, raro cedet infeliciter, sunt enim peracutissimo consilio, et voluntate plane bona. Providi sunt Florentini (si unumquemque seorsum accipias) si vero simul conjuncti sint, non admodum mihi consilia eorum probabuntur; feliciter cedunt Senensium consilia, subita sunt Perusinorum; salutaria Ferrariensium, fideli sunt consilio Veronenses, semper ambigui sunt in consiliis aut dandis aut accipiendis Patavini. Sunt pertinaces in eo quod cœperint consilio Bergomates, respuunt omnium consilia Neapolitani, sunt consultissimi Bononienses.’