Authors: Dante
94–96.
Preaching as preening now becomes Beatrice’s subject. Her insistence on the fictitious nature of this sort of public utterance is underlined
by the word
invenzioni
(inventing new ideas) here and
favole
(tales) at verse 104,
ciance
(idle nonsense) at verse 110,
motti
and
iscede
(buffoonery and jokes) at verse 115. Cf. Giovanni Boccaccio’s portrait of a fiction-dealing friar, Fra Cipolla (
Decameron
VI.x), which probably owes more than a certain debt to this passage. (See Longfellow [comm. to verse 115] and Hollander [Holl.1997.2], pp. 41–45).
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
97–102.
For the “darkness at noon” that overspread the world during the Crucifixion of Jesus, see Luke 23:44: “It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.” (See also Matthew 27:45 and Mark 15:33.) And see Grandgent (comm. to these verses): “To explain this darkness at the Crucifixion, some said that the moon left its course to make an eclipse, others that the sun hid its own rays. Dionysius (
Par.
XXVIII.130) favored the first explanation, St. Jerome the second. Both are recorded by St. Thomas in
Summa Theologiae
III, q. 44, a. 2. The second theory has the advantage of accounting for an obscuration ‘over all the land,’ whereas an ordinary eclipse would darken only a part of it.”
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
100.
This line has caused scandal. Does Dante really want to say that those who say that the Moon retroceded six constellations in the Zodiac in order to blot out the Sun (and, according to Scartazzini [comm. to this verse] and Bosco/Reggio [comm. to vv. 97–102], some fairly illustrious authorities, including Dionysius the Areopagite, Albert the Great, and Thomas Aquinas, took this explanation seriously) are
liars
? Those are strong words. Scartazzini was the first to point out that Dante had a precursor in such a harsh view, Petrus Comestor (
PL
CXCVIII.1631), who says that those who uphold such tales “have lied” (
mentiti sunt
). Eventually Nardi (Nard.1944.1), pp. 375–76, would also turn to this source and argue that, despite the commentators’ discomfort, both the manuscript tradition and Petrus’s harsh words underline the fact that Dante meant exactly what he said. We should remember the poet’s harsh treatment of Jerome, specifically mentioned as totally incorrect (Dante could have been less direct!) in this very canto (verses 37–45); on that occasion, concerning the dating of the creation of the angels, St. Thomas was right (if Dante doesn’t say so specifically). And now it is
his
turn to be told off, if indirectly. Bosco/Reggio try to diminish the force of the verb
mentire
in Dante’s day (i.e., rather than lying, it meant something more like “does not tell the truth”). Nonetheless, it is plain enough that Dante is belittling an opinion that is to be thought of as having the same merit as the idle tales told by
not-very-well-educated friars. And if Dionysius, Albert, or Thomas chooses to align himself with such drivel, he gets only what he deserves—that seems to be the poet’s attitude.
Dante disposes of this “scientific” account of the miracle recorded in three Gospels on truly experimental grounds. If it were true, then the resulting eclipse would have been only partial. And so we are forced to follow Jerome, whose miraculous “self-eclipse” of the Sun indeed was visible in all the world, and not merely in the area around Jerusalem.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
103–108.
This picture of religious ceremony in the Florence of Dante’s day has its kinship with that found in the series of (often hilarious) representations of preaching found in the
Decameron
. All over the city, in parish after parish, all through the year, the leaders of the flock trade in “wind,” notions that are clearly estranged from truth. Such intellectual vagrancy, however, does not excuse the individual sheep, who should realize that what they listen to so avidly has nothing to do with the Bible or with the fundamental truths of their religion. In other words, they are not innocent because they are stupid.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
103.
Daniello (comm. to this verse) was the first glossator to identify the source of the nickname
Lapo
as Jacopo. That
Bindo
derived from Ildebrando was first noted by Fanfani (in his
Vocabulary of Tuscan Usage
), according to Andreoli (comm. to this verse).
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
105.
Dante’s verb
gridare
tells all one needs to know about the quality of mind that lies behind these “shouted” sermons.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
106–114.
For a sermon of St. Bernard that may be reflected in this passage, see Payton (Payt.1995.1), pp. 448–49.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
112–114.
Some think that the phrase “le sue guance” (lit. “cheeks” [a choice forced by rhyme?] understood as metonymic for “lips”) refers to the lips of Jesus rather than to those of the apostles. In choosing the latter, we follow Bosco/Reggio (comm. to this tercet) and the large majority of the commentators. However, the estimable Francesco da Buti (comm. to vv. 109–117) begins the tradition of treating the utterances as coming from
Christ’s mouth, and has had a narrow but fairly distinguished band of adherents (Landino, Costa, Tommaseo, Andreoli, etc.).
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
117.
The
cappuccio
(cowl) worn by friars balloons figuratively with their pride. Literally, a large and well-tailored cowl was the sign of wealth of the Order and/or importance of an individual. Bosco/Reggio (comm. to vv. 115–117) point out that the only other
cappuccio
found in this poem is worn by the hypocrites in Malebolge,
Inferno
XXIII.61. They are attired in leaden costume that mimics the garb of Cluniac monks.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
118.
Bosco/Reggio (comm. to this verse) point out that Satan was often, in medieval iconography, represented as a black crow (in contrast to the white dove that represented the Holy Spirit) and that Dante has spoken (
Inf.
XXXIV.47) of Lucifer as an
uccello
(bird).
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
121–123.
Believing in the truthfulness of pardons (and pardoners) is the height of credulity. It is hard to blame the trickster when his victims almost insist on being gulled.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
124–126.
See Tozer’s gloss on this tercet: “ ‘[O]n this (credulity) St. Antony fattens his pig.’ The hog which appears in pictures at the feet of St. Antony, the Egyptian hermit [ca. 250–355], represents the demon of sensuality which he conquered. In the middle ages the swine of the monks of St. Antony were allowed to feed in the streets of cities, and were fed by devout persons (Jameson,
Sacred and Legendary Art
, pp. 750, 751); this is what Dante refers to.” The obvious reversal in the values of the Antonines, who became the representatives of the vice that their founder had conquered, is apparent.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
126.
The friars of Antony’s order are “repaying” the contributions of their foolish flocks with counterfeit coin: meaningless pieces of paper on which is written their forgiven sins.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
127–129.
Beatrice concludes her tirade with an ironic verbal gesture, making it a mere digression. Now let us return, she says, to the true way, the path chosen by the loyal angels, a subject turned aside from in verse 94 for her savage attack upon friars, difficult to accept as a mere digression.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
130–132.
The numbers of the angels increases the higher they are found. Dante’s coinage, the verb
ingradarsi
, is found in slightly altered form (
digradarsi
) in
Paradiso
XXX.125. In both cases it seems to have the meaning
“to increase step-by-step.” Thus, the higher the eyes of an observer mount, the more angels they are able to take in. And that number is beyond both human vocabulary and mortal conception.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
133–135.
Discussing this passage, Ledda (Ledd.2002.1), pp. 297–98, points out that Daniel’s numeration of the angels (Daniel 7:10, “a thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times one hundred thousand stood before him” [according to the Vulgate]), while incalculable for most human beings, was probably a finite number in Dante’s opinion. Similarly, the wording of verse 135, “a particular number lies concealed” (
determinato numero si cela
), would clearly seem to indicate a very large but determinable number. Most commentators think the poet is saying something quite different, namely that the number of angels cannot be represented by
any
finite number. However, Dante’s sense for mathematics may be more sophisticated than that of his commentators; apparently he knows the distinction between “numberless” (i.e., beyond counting because of limited human capacity) and “infinite,” a concept of which he knew at least from the extended discussion in Aristotle’s
Physics
(III.iv–viii).
Behind this passage, according to Mellone (Mell.1974.1), pp. 210–11, there lies a dispute between “Aristotelians” (who propose a limited number of angels) and the Bible (e.g., Daniel 7:10, Apocalypse 5:11). However, see Thomas Aquinas (
ST
I, q. 112, a. 4), as cited by Bosco/Reggio (comm. to verse 135): “The multitude of the angels transcends any material multitude.” It is clear what position Dante does not share, that of the “Aristotelians,” who argue for a strictly limited number (as few as sixty). However, whether he believes that the angels are infinite or numbered is not entirely clear, although verse 135 may be more specific than it is generally understood as being. Aversano (Aver.2000.2), p. 148, supports the second opinion, citing Gregory’s gloss on Job 25:3 from the
Moralia
: “And if the number of angels is finite to the eye of God [Dante’s ‘particular number’?], in the human view it is infinite [Dante’s ‘lies concealed’?]” (
PL
LXXV.542).
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
136–141.
God’s brilliance irradiates the angelic nature in such ways that it is received by these creatures (
splendori
because they reflect the divine light [for Dante’s “light physics” see the note to
Par.
XXIII.82–84]) variously, each in accord with its capacity to absorb and return God’s love.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
142–145.
Seemingly infinite in its application, God’s love for the highest creatures that He made nonetheless still issues from the single entity that made them.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]
1–3.
Tozer’s paraphrase (comm. to verse 1) of this complex tercet runs as follows: “The dawn, instead of being mentioned by name, is here described, by an elaborate periphrasis, as the time when it is about midday 6,000 miles off from us on the earth’s surface. This calculation is arrived at in the following manner. Seven hours are approximately the period of time which the sun takes to pass over 6,000 miles of the earth’s surface; for, according to the computation of Alfraganus (cap. VIII), which Dante accepted (
Conv
. III.v.11—see Toynbee,
Dict.
, p. 522, s.v. “Terra”), the entire circumference of the earth was 20,400 miles, and consequently the amount of that circumference corresponding to seven hours out of the complete revolution of twenty-four hours was 5,950 miles (20,400 x 7/24 = 5,950), or in round numbers 6,000 miles. Hence, when Dante says that the sixth hour is 6,000 miles distant from us, he means that with us it is seven hours before noon, or an hour before sunrise, the sun being regarded as rising at 6 a.m. The word
Forse
intimates that the calculation is made in round numbers.” For an analysis of the entire opening passage (vv. 1–15), see Salsano (Sals.1974.1), pp. 215–24.
[return to
English
/
Italian
]