Paradiso (The Divine Comedy series Book 3)

by Dante

  Strangely enough, hardly anyone has turned his attention to the Bible as a potential source, since the reference is to it. (It is not surprising that the single exception is Scartazzini [comm. to these vv.], if his two passages in the Psalms [56:5 and 63:4] are not exactly germane.) No one has apparently adduced the Scriptural passage containing one of the Bible’s surprisingly few references to mirrors (as was pointed out by Carolyn Calvert Phipps in a graduate seminar on the Paradiso in 1980): the Epistle of James 1:23–24: “For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like a man beholding his natural face in a glass; for he beholds himself, and goes his way, and straightway forgets what manner of man he was.” That is not a perfect fit, either, but it does at least share the basic context of these verses.

  Carroll (comm. to vv. 121–128) reminds the reader that Thomas (who is, after all, the speaker here) had refuted both these heresies (Sabellius on the Trinity, Arius on the nonconsubstantiality of the Son with the Father). See Summa contra Gentiles IV.5–8. [return to English / Italian]

  130–132. We find a shift in the object of Thomas’s measured scorn, from the schooled (philosophers and theologians) to the unschooled, ordinary folk (Donna Berta e ser Martino), as well as in the subject in which their misprision functions, from thoughts about the nature of things to the afterlife of one’s neighbors. [return to English / Italian]

  133–138. The two examples, in reverse order, reminded John Carroll (comm. to vv. 129–142) of the father and son, Guido and Buonconte da Montefeltro. Guido, according to Dante in Convivio (IV.xxviii.8), was saved, but then was registered as one of the damned in Inferno XXVII, his story presented in both texts as a sea voyage; his son, Buonconte, although suffering a cruel death, in his agony spoke the name of Mary, the “rose,” and was saved (Purg. V). Trucchi (comm. to vv. 139–142) makes the same point, but with less effect. And see Pézard (Peza.1965.1), ad loc., for an attempt to locate both the rose and the ship of this passage in Convivio IV.xxvii.7 and IV.xxviii.8.

  For readers of Convivio, Dante has placed his former writing self among the Berthas and Martins (see verse 139) of the world. Perhaps recognizing ourselves described in vv. 118–120, we may share that sense. [return to English / Italian]

  135. For the phrase “la rosa in su la cima” (the bloom of roses at its tip), see Purgatorio XI.92. [return to English / Italian]

  136–138. For this tercet as referring to Ulysses and his ill-conceived final voyage, see Cahill (Cahi.1996.1), pp. 254–55. Trucchi (comm. to vv. 133–138) seems to have been her only precursor, if his mention of Ulysses (and Manfred) is only in passing. [return to English / Italian]

  139. The foolish “donna Berta e ser Martino” remind Carlo Grabher (comm. to vv. 34–142) of what Dante says in Convivio (IV.v.9) about those vile beasts who desire to know what is known only to God. A woman named Bertha had already enjoyed a role in Dante’s displeasure with less-than-sophisticated writing; see De vulgari eloquentia II.vi.5: “Petrus amat multum dominam Bertam” (Peter loves Mistress Bertha a lot). [return to English / Italian]

  140–142. These verses have made many a reader uncomfortable with Dante’s behavior in them. Is not he one who claims to have knowledge of divine wisdom? Furthermore, the concealed reference to his failed judgment of such things in Convivio (see the note to vv. 133–138) reads back at him in upsetting ways. Bosco/Reggio (comm. to vv. 112–142) point out that this entire passage needs to be read in the context of the medieval dispute over the damnation/salvation of Solomon (see the note to Par. X.109–114). We remember that such great figures as Jerome (who thought Solomon was saved) and Augustine (who thought he was not) disagreed over this matter. It is clear that Dante is willing to risk considerable intellectual capital in the presentation of his case for Solomon. Sarolli has done a great deal to explain the choice of the other Old Testament figure, Nathan, for inclusion here (see the note to Par. XII.136). As a “type” of Dante the prophet, he joins Solomon, the overwhelmingly important figure among twenty-four “stars” of theological and religious importance, as agents of explanation of Dante’s function in his own poem, as prophet, as poet, as supporter of the imperial monarchy. [return to English / Italian]

  142. As a coda to the Solomon theme, present on and off since Paradiso X.109 and that was almost immediately accompanied by its hallmark, the verb surgere (Par. X.114; X.140; XIII.106), the poet marks the conclusion of that thematic unit with its final presence. [return to English / Italian]

  PARADISO XIV

  * * *

  1–9. A simile, with the formal markers of the trope suppressed (e.g., “just as,” “so,” “like”) but with reference to its literary kind embedded in it (similitudine [a hapax, verse 7]), this comparison of the sounds of Thomas’s voice, at the circumference of the smaller circle of saints, and of Beatrice’s, issuing from near Dante at the center of that circle, draws attention to the mind of its maker, a witness of such celestial phenomena. The meaning is clear enough, if some have stumbled over the question of how water in the center of a bowl may be struck (answer: by something falling from above [like the thought that drops into Dante’s mind—see the last part of the note to vv. 7–9]). [return to English / Italian]

  4. The Latinism caso, for “fall,” is used uniquely here; ordinarily in the Commedia the word means either “chance” or “instance.” [return to English / Italian]

  6. The use of the word “vita” to designate the soul of Thomas echoes Paradiso XII.127, describing the living soul (vita) of Bonaventure. See the note to Paradiso IX.7. [return to English / Italian]

  7–9. Just as the previous canto, in order to introduce a new group of saved souls, had begun with two instantaneously coupled links in a chain of events, the first of which is Thomas’s speaking his concluding word (Par. XI.139 and XII.1–3), so now does this one. The utterance of Beatrice here comes hard upon Thomas’s last word. It is probably not accidental that the Latinism caso in verse 4 reflects that particular word, cadere. Thomas says “fall” and it “falls” into Dante’s mind that the discourses of Thomas and Beatrice are similar. That similarity is assumed to be obvious by most of the commentators, who, at any rate, do not trouble to discuss it. However, it is not finally clear what is meant. Thomas has just finished a longish discourse (Par. XIII.112–142) about the limited capacity of human knowledge. Beatrice’s nine verses insist on the same thing: She knows what Dante wants to know even before he does. What these two saved souls share intellectually is the ability common to those who dwell in the Empyrean to know all that is knowable, and to know it in God (including, clearly, as the next tercet demonstrates, the future thoughts of mortals before they think them). [return to English / Italian]

  10–18. These are Beatrice’s first words since Paradiso X.52–54 (her longest silence since she entered the poem in Purgatorio XXX; she will not speak again until Par. XVII.7, and then only briefly), just before Thomas began speaking at X.82. Thomas and Cacciaguida are two of the most voluble characters Dante meets in the afterlife. While they speak less than do the most present and loquacious of the guides, Virgil and Beatrice, not even the more mobile Statius or the presiding figure in the Empyrean, St. Bernard, speaks as much as either of these within their respective heavens. They are allowed to push Beatrice to the periphery of the discourse.

  Dante, Beatrice says, will want to know two related things. She is addressing her request to all the saints in both the circles (all her pronouns are plural; we shall see that she is addressing all twenty-four of them by the plural cerchi [circles] of verse 23). One of them will step forward to deal with Dante’s questions; if we expect Thomas—we would be excused if we did—we will be surprised.

  The questions she attributes to Dante are: (1) Will the light that you give off be yours in eternity? (2) If it will, how will you not be blinded by one another once you get your bodies back (and become all the more resplendent)? [return to English / Italian]

  19–24. As opposed to the first simile in the canto (see the note to vv. 1–9), th
is one is fully expressed in the conventional mode, both tenor and vehicle keyed by the expected terms of comparison (Come … così). As circling dancers here on earth sometimes show greater pleasure by moving more animatedly and singing, so these twenty-four souls revealed (by moving more animatedly and singing) that they were pleased by Beatrice’s request (they obviously take delight in being able to make others feel more joy). [return to English / Italian]

  25–27. Contemporary readers, who think of rain only as an inhibitor of outdoor relaxation or of light chores on a summer’s day, will not see the point in this exaltation of a cooling shower in the sweltering Tuscan (un-air-conditioned) summertime. For the opposite sort of rain, see Inferno VI.7–12. [return to English / Italian]

  28–29. Lombardi (comm. to vv. 28–32) points out that none of the earlier commentators had revealed the plan in the first two lines, which is to set the “one” of the first verse against the “three” of the second, and the “three” of the first against the “one” of the second, thus making dramatic the relations of the Trinity, one-in-three as well as three-in-one. He also discusses the significance of the parallel relation between the two “two”s in the lines, representing the human and divine united in the Second Person of the Trinity. Porena (comm. to these verses) summarizes what is presented here succinctly: “Theological designation of God, who lives and reigns eternally as a single Substance, two Natures, and three Persons.”

  It took a bit longer until the palindromatic structure of these verses was understood as reflecting Joachim of Flora’s structure of history, with its three great Ages: the first, of the Father; the second, of the Son; the third, of the Spirit. See the note to vv. 67–78. And see one of the “additional drawings” in the Liber figurarum (Reev.1972.1) for the three overlapping circles representing the three Ages. See also Dronke (Dron.1975.2), pp. 7–9. [return to English / Italian]

  30. Compare Purgatorio XI.1–2: “Our Father, who are in Heaven, / circumscribed only by the greater love.…” [return to English / Italian]

  31–32. This hymn to the Trinity, like that which it celebrates, blends multiplicity and unity, in this case twenty-four voices heard as one. [return to English / Italian]

  33. The Latinism muno (from the noun munus), a hapax in the poem clearly forced by rhyme, means “gift, reward.” The reader may choose to honor (or not to) the Ottimo’s apparent acceptance of the claim (comm. to Inf. X.85–87) that he says Dante once made to him: Not only did rhyme never force him into saying other than he intended to say, but he was able to make words in the rhyme position mean other than what they had meant in the work of previous poets.

  See the note to Paradiso 1.13–15 for the use of munus in the Epistle to Cangrande. [return to English / Italian]

  34–36. From the earliest commentators on, for example, Jacopo della Lana (comm. to verse 34), writers have identified this unnamed figure as Solomon. In light of Paradiso X.109, which says that his light was the most beautiful in his circle, it is difficult not to. However, Francesco da Buti is the first commentator to hesitate to the point of not naming any one of the twelve in the first circle; perhaps his hesitation, shared by several, as we shall see, accounts for some of the continuing doubt about the identity of this singer. Landino (comm. to this tercet) advocates the candidacy of Peter Lombard; we find Vellutello (comm to vv. 34–39) denying that this is he, and joining those who believe it is Solomon. Both Gabriele (comm. to verse 34) and his pupil, Daniello (comm. to this tercet) abstain. In more modern times a similar profile describes the debate, with almost all thinking it is Solomon to whom reference is made. However, Porena’s uneasiness is perhaps instructive (comm. to vv. 34–35). He suggests that Solomon may be here only because he was seen as the brightest star in his circle in Paradiso X (one would like to ask Porena why Dante has so described him if he did not mean anything by the remark). He goes on to wonder why Solomon is never mentioned by name—a worthy question. It is also clear that he is a bit concerned by the fleshly activities and celebrations of the king. Chiarenza (Chia.2000.1), p. 206, on the other hand, insists on Solomon’s value, in Dante’s eyes, for his heightened sense of the importance of the flesh. She also points out Dante’s practice of not naming him, but always (Purg. XXX.10, Par. X.109, and here) presenting him as a privileged member of a group (pp. 206–7), thus looking at the same phenomenon that makes Porena feel that Dante is uncomfortable with his own treatment of Solomon, while Chiarenza sees, much more steadily, that he is playing off our discomfort. (For an example of that discomfort, see Carroll’s remarks in the note to Paradiso XIII.97–102.)

  It seems clear that this is indeed Solomon, and that Dante values him very highly, ranking him even higher than Thomas, both in the description of his brightness in Canto X and in choosing him to hold the last and privileged position in the heaven of the Sun. If we reflect how surely we expect Thomas to answer Beatrice’s formulations of Dante’s doubts (let the reader start reading again at Canto X and come to this canto innocent of both knowledge and inclination: Will not he or she expect Thomas to take command once more?), we can recapture some of our original surprise at finding not Thomas but Solomon here. And, as Scartazzini (comm. to verse 34) reminds us (Carroll [comm. to vv. 34–60] allows the same point), a passage in Ecclesiastes (3:18–22) reveals Solomon’s skepticism about the destination of the soul after the death of the body. Carroll’s treatment, unlike Scartazzini’s, goes on to argue that an expert of no less authority than Aquinas asserts (ST I, q. 75, a. 6) that in this passage Solomon is speaking “in the character of the foolish” about an error of others that he states in order to refute. Whether Scartazzini or Carroll is right, it does seem that Dante knows that even in asserting that Solomon was saved, he was taking on some pretty estimable adversaries (e.g., Augustine); in making him an authority on the Trinity and the general resurrection, he has, once again, chosen to live dangerously. [return to English / Italian]

  34. The adjective dia can mean (and it has had both meanings in the poem) “divine” or “shining.” We have followed Bosco/Reggio (comm. to vv. 34–35) and many others in believing that here it possesses the latter meaning. [return to English / Italian]

  35. The word modesta sent Tommaseo (comm. to vv. 34–36) in a direction Erich Auerbach would explore more amply in his essay “Sermo humilis” (Auer.1958.1). Tommaseo hears the voice of Beatrice beneath this verse. See Inferno II.56–57, where she is reported by Virgil to have spoken to him on her visit to Limbo “soave e piana, / con angelica voce, in sua favella” (gentle and clear … —/ an angel’s voice was in her speech). And see the note to Inferno II.56–57. See also Nasti (Nast.2001.1), p. 120. [return to English / Italian]

  36. The reference to Gabriel and the Annunciation is a brief, iconographic way to connect this passage to the Song of Solomon, the wedding song of Christ and his Bride (the Church), as it was interpreted by generations of Christian exegetes. [return to English / Italian]

  37–60. Solomon’s hymn, so different in technique from Thomas’s “Scholastic” verses in these cantos, really does seem intended to imitate the warmth and poetic quality of the Canticle of Canticles. He answers Dante’s two questions (vv. 37–57: In the rest of time the saved shall shine as brightly as we do here and now, until, after the general resurrection, the renewed presence of our bodies will make us shine more brightly still; vv. 58–60: Indeed, our restored senses, stronger than they are now, will be capable of looking on this even greater brightness). However, he does so by singing what can only be regarded as a hymn to the general resurrection, to borrow from Momigliano (comm. to vv. 28–33), a passage of critical prose that captures, as well perhaps as any has ever done, the thread uniting this entire canto, a celebration that combines praise of the Trinity and of the Resurrection. In an only human view, these two moments are registered as the birth and death of Jesus. [return to English / Italian]

  37–39. Solomon responds to Beatrice’s question on Dante’s behalf of all the spirits gathered in the Sun (see vv. 13–15), the
answer to which is “we shall be resplendent eternally.” [return to English / Italian]

  40–51. For a discussion of previous notice (that of Umberto Bosco and of Patrick Boyde) of the way in which this passage is complementary to Inferno VI.106–111, where Virgil tells Dante that after the Last Judgment and the recovery of their bodies, the sinners will feel more pain, see Gragnolati (Grag.2005.1), pp. 154–57. Solomon’s words clearly state that the reclad soul will have greater powers of sight, and thus, it would follow, greater joy in seeing both the “soldiery of Paradise” and God Himself.

  For interesting and pertinent remarks about the rhetorical figure chiasmus in this canto, beginning with its first verse and culminating in Solomon’s speech, in these twelve verses, see Sowell (Sowe.1995.1), pp. 201–5. This trope derives its name from the Greek character transliterated as chi and expressed as “X”; thus, like the two major elements in the letter “x” (> <), a mirror image, for example, “apple baby castle … castle baby apple.” Depending on its context, it may also put the reader in mind of the chiasmus-shaped Cross of Christ, as well as of the first letter of His name. [return to English / Italian]

  40–42. In the first of two “interlaced” tercets, Solomon, like Gabriel in verse 35, is modest, more modest than reading him might prepare us to find. The more grace he and his fellow saints experience, the better they see God; the better they see Him, the more they love Him; the more they love Him, the brighter they will shine. The verses run back down the chain of cause and effect. Compare the tercet at vv. 49–51 for a second example of this sort of interlacing. There the order is natural, that is, we move from seeing to loving to shining. [return to English / Italian]