66

enlighten the world, which he has been called to govern by Him who is Governor of all things, spiritual and temporal." 1 With regard to the fortunes of the De Monarchia, Boccaccio writes: Some years after the author's death, this book was condemned by M. Bertrand, Cardinal du Pojet, papal legate in the parts of Lombardy during the pontificate of John XXII. The reason of this was, that Ludwig, Duke of Bavaria, having been chosen by the Electors of Germany, King of the Romans, and having come to Rome to be crowned, contrary to the pleasure of said Pope John, did, while he was there, contrary to ecclesiastical ordinations, make a minorite friar, named Fra Piero della Corvara, Pope, and also made many cardinals and bishops; and then caused himself to be crowned by this Pope. And, afterwards, when in many instances there arose questions regarding [the legitimacy of] his authority, he and his followers, having found this book, began to use many arguments contained in it in defence of that authority and of themselves, for which reason, the book, which up to that time had hardly been known, became very famous. But, afterwards, when said Ludwig returned to Germany, his followers, and especially the clergy, declined and dispersed; whereupon, said cardinal, when there was no one to oppose him, having obtained the above-named book, publicly condemned it to be burnt, as containing things heretical. And he tried to do the same thing with the author's bones, in order to blast his memory with infamy and confusion, [and would have succeeded], had he not been opposed by a valiant and noble Florentine knight, named Pino della Tosa,

[1 This is a most important passage. I know of none other in all Dante's works in which his entire thought-system, his views of the world, and its purpose, are so clearly and succinctly set forth as in this. Here we see all the largeness and all the littleness, all the freedom and all the prejudice, of his mind. Puerile enough these views of his look now; but they were far in advance of most of the thought of the time.]

who was at that time in Bologna, where this was proposed, and by Messer Ostagio di Polenta, both powerful persons in the eyes of the above-named cardinal.

On the credibility of this story, see

Guerini and Ricci: Studi e Polemiche Dantesche. Bologna, 1880, pp. 71-93.

Scheffer-Boichorst, Paul: Aus Dante's Verbannung. Strassburg, 1882, pp. 220-23.

In opposition to the De Monarchia, a work was written by Vernani (Friar): De Potestate Summi Pontificis et de Reprobatione Monarchiae compositae a Dante Alighierio. Bologna, 1746.

On the subject generally, see

Lanzani, Franc.: La Monarchia di Dante. Historical Studies. Milan, 1864.

Carmignani, Giov.: La Monarchia di Dante. Considerations. Pisa, 1865.

Derichsweiler, Herm.: Dante Alighieri's Monarchia. Muhlhausen, 1873.

[Bryce, James: The Holy Roman Empire. London, 1873, pp. 263 sqq. Cf. p. 256.

Freeman, E. A.: Historical Essays, First Series, pp. 1 sqq. Second Series, pp. 126 sqq.]

§ 6. THE QUAESTIO DE AQUA ET TERRA. — On one occasion, when Dante was in Mantua, there arose a certain question regarding the place and figure of the two elements, water and earth. The point of this question was, whether the water, in its sphere, or in its natural circumference, was in any part higher than the earth emerging from the waters and usually denominated the "habitable quadrant." Some argued in the

affirmative, adducing many grounds in support of their opinion. Whence Dante, "having from his childhood. been continually nurtured in the love of truth, could not bear to leave said question undiscussed." And so, both from love of the truth, and still more from hatred of falsehood, he "resolved to demonstrate the truth regarding that question, and to answer the arguments raised on the opposite side." Having, therefore, repaired to Verona, he there discussed this question, "in the chapel (sacellum) of St. Helena, in the presence of all the clergy at Verona," and, further, "he resolved to leave, written with his own fingers, what had been settled by him, and to put down in black and white the form of the whole dispute."

The order of the inquiry is as follows: In the first place, it is shown to be impossible that the water, in any part of its circumference, should be higher than this land which emerges and is uncovered. In the second place, it is proved that this emerging land is everywhere higher than the total surface of the sea. In the third place, an objection is stated to the things demonstrated, and this objection is met and answered. In the fourth place, the final and efficient cause of this elevation or emergence of the land is shown; and, finally, the contrary arguments are answered.

This work of Dante's has been undeservedly neglected, although it is a most important document for the history of the sciences, and a monument of the vastness of Dante's genius and knowledge.

This treatise was first published in Venice in 1508. In 1576 the Neapolitan Francesco Storella included it in a collection of philosophical and scientific pamphlets. From that time on, it was almost completely forgotten, until Torri republished it, in 1843. The best edition is that of Giuliani, with commentary, translation, and elucidations (see p. 187).

The terms in which Dante speaks of the human intellect and of science in this work, are very different from those which he had used in the period of his development. In section XXII, he exclaims: "Let men cease, therefore; let them cease to inquire into those things which are above them, and inquire only so far as their powers extend, rising to immortal and divine things, as far as they may, and leaving alone the things that are too high for them." These are the words of a man who has learnt, by his own experience, what risks the man runs, who, without having examined the limits of human reason, thinks to transcend them through curiosity and display of vain doctrine.

In regard to the scientific value of the treatise, let us listen to the competent judgment of the celebrated geologist, Antonio Stoppani: "I consider it to be of the utmost importance for the glory of the great Dante and of Italy, as well as for the history of the physical sciences, that this dissertation of Dante's should be made known and appreciated a little better than it has hitherto been. . . . If we consider all the truths (we speak only of those having reference to cosmology) forecast, affirmed, and even demonstrated in these few pages of the great Poet's, they contain more (discounting what is due to Aristotle) than all the writings of the Middle Age put together.... Dante's work is a monument of great value for the history of the physical sciences, and one strong testimony more to the boundless genius of Dante. In it are foreshadowed, affirmed, and partly demonstrated nine cosmological truths, that is, nine of

those fundamental facts from which modern science has derived so much glory and strength, by verifying and demonstrating them, and by drawing from them an infinite number of rational

and practical applications.

They are:

Let me enumerate these truths.

"(1) That the moon is the chief cause of the tides.

"(2) That the sea-level is uniform.

"(3) That there exists a centripetal force.

"(4) That the earth is spherical.

“(5) That the dry lands are simple gibbosities on the earth's

surface.

"(6) That the continents are grouped in the northern hemi

sphere.

"(7) That there is universal attraction.

"(8) That the elasticity of vapors is a motive power. "(9) That continents are gradually elevated.

“As I have some acquaintance with the manner in which, even apart from the scholastic form, questions of cosmological or terrestrial physics were treated in those times, what astonishes me, in this dissertation, as well as in The Divine Comedy, is, that Dante, in dealing with natural laws or facts, does not go in search of proofs to the abstractions of Aristotelian principles, which in those times had been converted into so many dogmas, to the transcendental abstrusities of metaphysics or theology, or to the Cabala, so much in vogue in the Middle Age, but to the laws of nature, ascertained, as well as was then possible, by observation and experience, or demonstrated by mathematics. He does not say, for example, that the earth is round, because the sphere is the most perfect of solid figures, but because it follows from the law of gravitation that a liquid cannot attain a state of equilibrium, unless all the points of its surface are equidistant from the centre of attraction. Making this law