Paradiso (The Divine Comedy series Book 3)

by Dante

  97–102. While the militarism of Dominic’s order may be metaphorical, referring to his preaching, that his “career” began with a literal war, the crusade against the Albigensians, certainly colors these lines, whatever Dante’s intention. [return to English / Italian]

  98. Dominic fought against heresy with the support of Pope Honorius III, who had approved his request to found a new order. However, he had also had the approval of Pope Innocent III to subdue the Albigensians and bring them back to the fold (see the note to verse 95). In that effort, the crusaders’ military force was more than metaphoric. [return to English / Italian]

  101–102. The “resistance was most stubborn” in Provence, with the Albigensian Cathars. This detail again tends to erode the distinction between Dominic the Christian debater and Dominic the Christian soldier. See the note to vv. 97–102. [return to English / Italian]

  103–105. Raoul Manselli (Mans.1973.1), p. 118, characterizes this tercet, moving from Dominic’s day into Dante’s, with the order burgeoning with new chapters, as setting a tranquil conclusion to a story that began with military roughness. One might add that it has hardly moderated its tone until now. [return to English / Italian]

  106–111. These verses offer a kind of summary of both saints’ lives. The resulting image, the two wheels of a chariot of war, already deployed in the earthly paradise (introduced at Purg. XXIX.107 and on the scene until Purg. XXXII.147), is perhaps remembered in the final verses of the poem. [return to English / Italian]

  112–113. Here begins the denunciation of the current Franciscan Order (cf. the similar attack on the wayward Dominicans, Par. XI.118–123). Where in the last canto the image of Thomas’s order was a merchant ship, here that founded by Francis is presented as a chariot of war. Bosco/Reggio (comm. to these verses) complain that, after the fresh and convincing images of the last canto, some of those encountered in this one, beginning with these chariot wheels, seem forced. Here Dominic is compared to the rim of a wheel that leaves a clear imprint in the earth, while his followers do no such thing. [return to English / Italian]

  114. Abruptly switching semantic fields, Bonaventure compares the good old days of Francis’s leadership and the current condition of the order to wine casks: Good wine leaves crust in the barrel it was contained in, while bad wine leaves mold. [return to English / Italian]

  115–117. The faltering order is depicted as reversing its track; see the parallel moment in Thomas’s denunciation of the Dominicans (Par. XI.124–132), portrayed as sheep wandering astray, away from the Rule, in search of new nourishment. [return to English / Italian]

  117. There is agreement among the commentators about the difficulty of making exact sense of this verse. We have not attempted to do more than give its obvious general meaning, though it happens that we are in fairly close agreement with the gloss of Daniele Mattalia to this tercet, who takes issue with some of the more strained attempts to make sense of this line, that is, the understanding, begun with Michele Barbi (Barb.1934.1, p. 287), that the Franciscan backsliders retrogress while facing forward, moving their front foot back toward (and then behind?) the other. Even if Dominic has been described as “the holy athlete” (verse 56), that way of retrogression seems to require muscular skills and patience well beyond those of most corrupt barefoot friars. Momigliano (comm. to vv. 115–117) justly complains that this line seems forced and lays some of the blame for that on the verb form gitta (lit. “throws”), forced by rhyme. [return to English / Italian]

  118–120. The obvious Scriptural allusion (to Matthew 13:24–30, the parable of the wheat and the tares) somehow seems to have escaped the earliest commentators. It appears first in Landino (comm. to these verses) and then is repeated in almost all subsequent comments. The reference of the tercet is a cause of some debate. See Manselli, “francescanesimo,” ED III (1971), pp. 115–16; his view is that the word “loglio” (tares) does not refer to the Spiritual Franciscans, as some believe, but to all corrupt members of the order, whatever their leaning in the controversy between Spirituals and Conventuals. [return to English / Italian]

  122. The word volume (volume), occurring first in Inferno I.84 and last in Paradiso XXXIII. 86, literally runs from one end of the poem to the other. It occurs nine times and always either refers to God’s book (the Scriptures) or to his “other book,” the created universe (except in its first use, where it refers to the Aeneid [see the note to Inf. I.84]). Thus, to refer to the slender booklet, the Rule of the Franciscan Order, as a volume is to employ a heavy word. [return to English / Italian]

  124–126. Cosmo (Cosm.1936.1), pp. 149–54, contrasts the inner tension among the Franciscan ranks with the struggles that afflicted Dominic’s order, shaped by external enemies. For a study locating Francis, as Dante does here, in the middle, see Stanislao da Campagnola (Daca.1983.1); and for his indebtedness to Ubertino’s very words for his characterizations of Francis (seraphicus) and Dominic (cherubicus), see p. 182n. See also Manselli (Mans.1982.1) for an overview of Dante’s response to the Spiritual Franciscans, with many bibliographical indications in the notes. Mario Trovato (Trov.1995.1), p. 168, on the additional basis of his interpretation of Paradiso XI.109–114, lends his support to Manselli’s position. And for what has been the standard view of the tension among the Conventual and Spiritual Franciscans themselves (at least after Manselli’s work), see Manselli (Mans.1982.1), pp. 57–58: Matteo d’Acquasparta is criticized for loosening the strictures of the Rule of the order, while Ubertino da Casale is seen as being too rigid in his adherence to the founder’s insistence on the importance of poverty in a true Christian life. [return to English / Italian]

  125. We have translated “la scrittura” in the narrowest sense (“the Rule”). In Dante’s Italian the word has meant both writing in general and, on some occasions, the Bible. Here it is a third form of writing, something more than ordinary words and to be taken as postbiblical, but having a similar authority. (See the note to verse 122 for the similar status of the noun volume.) Aversano (Aver.1984.2), pp. 23–24, points out that Francis was so concerned that his Rule would be fraudulently emended that he encouraged his friars to memorize it. [return to English / Italian]

  127–141. For a helpful discussion of the participants of this second circle of souls found in the heaven of the Sun, see Di Biase (Dibi.1992.1), pp. 71–83. Comparing the two circles, Cosmo (Cosm.1936.1), pp. 106–7, argues that there is no sense of rigid separation between the two, rather, in fact, that there are many similarities between them. [return to English / Italian]

  127–128. “St. Bonaventura was born at Bagnoregio (now Bagnorea) near Orvieto in 1221, the year of St. Dominic’s death. As a child he was attacked by a dangerous disease, which was miraculously cured by St. Francis of Assisi. When the latter heard that the child had recovered he is said to have exclaimed ‘buona ventura,’ whereupon the boy’s mother changed his name to Bonaventura. In 1238 or 1243 he entered the Franciscan order. After studying in Paris under Alexander of Hales, he became successively professor of philosophy and theology, and in 1257 was made doctor. Having risen to be general of the Franciscan order (in 1257), he was offered the archbishopric of Albano by Gregory X, whom he accompanied to the second Council of Lyons, where he died, July 15,1274, ‘his magnificent funeral being attended by a pope, an emperor, and a king.’ St. Bonaventura was canonized in 1482 by Sixtus IV, and placed among the doctors of the Church, with the title of Doctor Seraphicus, by Sixtus V” (T). The word vita, used here by Bonaventure to identify himself as a soul in grace, is used with this sense for the second time in the poem (see the note to Par. IX.7).

  For Dante’s debt to mysticism, as focused for him in the writings of Bonaventure, see Meekins (Meek.1997.1). For the possibility that Dante read the apparent contradictions between the positions of Aquinas and Bonaventure syncretistically, see Mazzotta (Mazz.2003.1) and Gragnolati (Grag.2005.1), pp. 58–77. Di Somma (Diso.1986.1), p. 50n., argues for the central importance of Bonaventure’s Itinerarium mentis in Deum for
all of Dante’s poem, not only for this canto. A survey of Bonaventure’s presence in the Dartmouth Dante Project reveals that the vast majority of references to “Bonaventura” before the end of the nineteenth century occur only in notes to this canto, in which he is a named (and thus inescapable) presence. Thus we realize, after a few minutes of searching, that a serious use of Bonaventure’s texts as a guide to Dante is a fairly recent development. In fact, it is only in Scartazzini’s commentary that one finds a total of more references to him in all the other cantos than one finds to him in this one. After Scartazzini, that situation begins to change. (English readers will find that in this particular, as well as in others, John Carroll outstrips his competitors.) See Hagman (Hagm.1988.1) for a study of Bonaventure’s extensive and overall importance to Dante. But see Sofia Vanni Rovighi, “Bonaventura da Bagnoreggio, santo,” ED I (1970), p. 673, arguing that attempts to show a direct textual dependence of Dante on Bonaventure have had only dubious results; all one can say is that his work (the Itinerarium mentis in Deum in particular) is a generic model for the outline of the Comedy, without being able to make more of a claim for it than that. [return to English / Italian]

  129. The “left-hand care” reflects the traditional link between left- and right-handedness as reflecting, respectively, “sinister” (the Latin word for “left”) and positive purposes. The former here signifies “worldly concerns.” Francesco da Buti (comm. to vv. 127–141) does not attempt to banish cares of the world from the curate’s interest, but does say that he does not (and must not) treat them as having the same importance as issues related to eternal life. [return to English / Italian]

  130. Illuminato and Augustino were among Francis’s earliest followers. The first was a nobleman from Rieti, who accompanied him on his voyage to Egypt. Augustino was a townsman of Francis and eventually became head of a chapter of the order in Terra di Lavoro. Neither one of them is particularly associated with knowledge, which causes Benvenuto (comm. to vv. 130–132) to wonder why these two homines ignorantes were included here. He goes on to admire Dante’s subtlety in doing so, for they, if not great intellects themselves, helped others to become, by their labor and example, more wise.

  It was only in 1960 that a commentator on this verse (Mattalia), responding to a number of Dantists who raised the issue, suggested that a predictable reaction in one who is reading this line might very well be: “But that’s not Saint Augustine of Hippo; where is he in all this?” (And we have to wait for Paradiso XXXII.35 to find that he is indeed among the blessed; see the note to that tercet.) For the last time he was named, see Paradiso X.120, but without mention of his eventual fate. Is it possible that Dante is playing a game with us? He mentions the actual St. Augustine in the last canto, where we might have expected to find him, among other theologians in the Sun; he now mentions a saved soul named “Augustine” who is not he but who is here. Both these gestures lead us to contemplate the possibility that Dante is teasing us. There will be some speculation as to his reasons for doing so in a note to Paradiso XXXII.34–36, a passage that situates Augustine among the inhabitants of the celestial Rose. [return to English / Italian]

  132. See the note to Paradiso XI.87 for the capestro as signal of adherence to the Franciscan Order. [return to English / Italian]

  133. “Hugh of St. Victor, celebrated mystic and theologian of the beginning of cent. xii; he was born near Ypres in Flanders c. 1097 or, as some believe, at Hartingham in Saxony, and was educated during his early years in the monastery of Hammersleben near Halberstadt in Saxony; in 1115 he removed to the abbey of St. Victor near Paris, which had recently been founded by William of Champeaux, the preceptor of Abelard, and which during cent. xii was a centre of mysticism; he became one of the canons-regular of the abbey, and was in 1130 appointed to the chair of theology, which he held until his death in 1141, his reputation being so great that he was known as ‘alter Augustinus’ [a second Augustine] and ‘lingua Augustini’ [Augustine’s tongue]. He was the intimate friend of Bernard of Clairvaux, and among his pupils were Richard of St. Victor and Peter Lombard. His writings, which are very numerous, and are characterized by great learning, are frequently quoted by Thomas Aquinas” (T). [return to English / Italian]

  134. Petrus Comestor (comestor is the Latin word for “eater” and was the nickname that Peter was given by his fellow priests because of his tremendous appetite for books), “priest, and afterwards dean, of the cathedral of Troyes in France, where he was born in the first half of cent. xii; he became canon of St. Victor in 1164, and chancellor of the University of Paris, and died at St. Victor in 1179, leaving all his possessions to the poor. His chief work was the Historia scholastica, which professed to be a history of the Church from the beginning of the world down to the times of the apostles” (T). [return to English / Italian]

  134–135. “Petrus Hispanus (Pedro Juliani), born at Lisbon, c. 1225, where he at first followed his father’s profession of medicine; he studied at Paris, probably under Albertus Magnus; subsequently he was ordained and became (1273) archbishop of Braga; in 1274 he was created cardinal bishop of Tusculum (Frascati) by Gregory X; on Sept. 13, 1276, he was elected pope, under the title of John XXI, at Viterbo, in succession to Adrian V; he died May 20, 1277, after a reign of a little more than eight months, his death being caused by the fall of the ceiling of one of the rooms in his palace at Viterbo” (T). His manual of logic, the Summulae logicales, in twelve books, had a large audience.

  That Dante calls no attention whatsoever to the fact that Peter was a pope (if very briefly) has caught the attention of many commentators. For the “scorecard” of the perhaps twelve popes who, in Dante’s opinion, were saved (and the probably larger number who were damned), see the note to Inferno VII.46–48. John XXI is the last saved pope mentioned in the poem. [return to English / Italian]

  136. “Nathan, the prophet, who was sent by God to reprove David for his sin in causing the death of Uriah the Hittite in order that he might take Bathsheba to wife” (T).

  For Nathan as figura Dantis and the question of why he, a relatively minor prophet, is given such high relief in this poem, see Sarolli (Saro.1971.1), pp. 189–246. [return to English / Italian]

  136–137. “St. John Chrysostom (i.e., in Greek his name means ‘golden-mouthed’), celebrated Greek father of the Church, born at Antioch c. 345, died at Comana in Pontus, 407. He belonged to a noble family, and was first a lawyer; he afterward became a monk, in which capacity he so distinguished himself by his preaching that the Emperor Arcadius appointed him (in 398) patriarch of Constantinople. His severity toward the clergy in his desire for reform made him an object of hatred to them, and led to his deposition (403) at the instance of Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria, and the Empress Eudoxia, whose excesses he had publicly rebuked. Sentence of exile was pronounced against him, but the people, to whom he had endeared himself by his preaching, rose in revolt, and he was reinstated in his office. Shortly afterward, he was again banished (404), and he finally died in exile on the shores of the Black Sea. He left nearly 1,000 sermons or homilies as evidence of his eloquence” (T). [return to English / Italian]

  137. “Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, 1093–1109; he was born at Aosta in Piedmont in 1033, and in 1060, at the age of 27, he became a monk in the abbey of Bec in Normandy, whither he had been attracted by the fame of Lanfranc, at that time prior; in 1063, on the promotion of Lanfranc to the abbacy of Caen, he succeeded him as prior; fifteen years later, in 1078, on the death of Herluin, the founder of the monastery, he was made abbot, which office he held till 1093, in that year he was appointed archbishop of Canterbury by William Rufus, in succession to Lanfranc, after the see had been vacant for four years; in 1097, in consequence of disputes with William on matters of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, he left England for Rome to consult the pope, and remained on the Continent until William’s death in 1100, when he was recalled by Henry I; he died at Canterbury, April 21, 1109; canonized, in 1494, by Alexander VI” (T). [return to English /
Italian]

  137–138. “Aelius Donatus, Roman scholar and rhetorician of cent. iv, said to have been the tutor of Jerome; he was the author of a commentary on Virgil (now lost, but often alluded to by Servius), and of another on Terence, but his most famous work was an elementary Latin grammar, Ars Grammatica in three books; part of this work, the Ars minor, or De octo partibus orationis, served as a model for subsequent similar treatises. Owing to the popularity of this work in the Middle Ages it was one of the earliest books, being printed even before the invention of movable type—the name of its author became a synonym for grammar, just as Euclid for geometry” (T).

  Donatus was the “people’s grammarian” in that his Ars, unlike Priscian’s (see Inf. XV.109), kept grammar as simple as possible. And grammar was itself the “first art” in the sense that it was the first subject taught to children, the first of the seven liberal arts. Thus his “intellectual humility” may have, in Dante’s mind, paralleled that of Illuminato and Augustino. Both the Ottimo (comm. to these verses) and John of Serravalle (comm. to vv. 136–138) cite the incipit of the work: “Ianua sum rudibus” (I am the doorway through which the unlettered may pass [to learning]). [return to English / Italian]

  139. Rabanus Maurus was “born at Mainz of noble parents, c. 776; while quite a youth he entered the monastery at Fulda, where he received deacon’s orders in 801; he shortly after proceeded to Tours to study under Alcuin, who in recognition of his piety and diligence gave him the surname of Maurus, after St. Maurus (d. 565), the favourite disciple of St. Benedict. He was ordained priest in 814, and after a pilgrimage to the Holy Land returned to Fulda in 817, where he became abbot in 822. He held this office for twenty years until 842, when he retired in order to devote himself more completely to religion and literature. Five years later, however, he was appointed to the archbishopric of Mainz, which he held until his death in 856. Rabanus, who was considered one of the most learned men of his time, wrote a voluminous commentary on the greater portion of the Bible, and was the author of numerous theological works …” (T). And see Nicolò Mineo, “Rabano Mauro,” ED IV (1973), pp. 817–18. Most are content with the traditional identification of the ninth-century biblical commentator; however, for the view that this Rabanus is not Maurus but Anglicus, see Lerner (Lern.1988.1), pp. 631–32. [return to English / Italian]