Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 3.djvu/468

 462

NOTES AND QUERIES. [9* s. m. JUNE 17,

of tastes affected. Very likely, too, the scorn was mutual notwithstanding the implied anachronism.

5. Ibid., x. 100 seg. :

Noi veggiam, come quei che ha mala luce, Le cose, disse, che ne son lontano. What grounds Dante had for endowing the dead lost with an insight, albeit a short- sighted one, into futurity, it is hard to say. It would be easier to account for their reputed ignorance of the present, but more logical to deny them both attributes. The past, of course, could not be excluded. He had certainly no Scripture nor theological warrant for his theory. The assumption is all the more remarkable from the coined fact that Farinata uses the power to some purposes against himself. But the belief is not confined to Dante. Sir Thomas Browne ('Religio Medici,' 'Urne Burial,' chap, iy.) held similar views : " The departed spirits know things past and to come ; yet are ignorant of things present. Agamemnon foretells what should happen unto Ulysses, yet ignorantly inquires what is become of his own son." Was the final judgment amongst the things " che ne son lontano," an object of vision to the departed, according to Dante's view 1 If so, it was decidedly anti-Scriptural. The whole matter is at best or worst but a poet's surmise. Yet whence, I repeat, did he derive his notion ? That the beati mortui may possibly know what passes on earth is more intelligible, albeit the careful distinctions of theologians, though specious, cannot bear any greater weight than a reasonable supposition. Thus Aquinas (' S. T.,' Supplement, Ixxii. i.) lays down the law somewhat dogmatically : "Manifestum est quod in Verbo cognoscant vota

et devotiones, et oration es hpminum Cogitationes

cordium solus Deus per seipsum novit ; sed tamen alii cognoscunt quatenus eis revelatur vel per visionem Verbi vei quocumque alio modo."

6. Ibid., xi. 7-9 :

Vidi una scritta

Che diceva : Anastasio papa guardo Lo qual trapse Fotin delta via dritta.

Is this fiction or history, or a blending of both ? There ought to be no quibbling over the words themselves, though their accuracy may be fairly questioned. Their clearness is indisputable enough to challenge the ana- themasof the' Index LibrorumProhibitorum'; but then their author was only an historian secondarily. The unities were no more sacred to him than they were to Shakespeare. But is Dante's history sound ? The tacts of the case appear to be these : Anastasius II. (Pope, not Emperor) occupied the Roman see, ac-

cording to Platina, from 496 to 498, granted audience to Photinus, a deacon and fol- lower of Acacius, the monotheistic Bishop of Csesarea, and thereby gave umbrage to the clergy of Rome. " Dante," says Scartaz- zini, "segul in questo lupgo la tradizione erronia che ai suoi tempi aveva il valore di storia esatta." And Baronius ('Annales Ecclesiastic*,' ad an. 497, torn, vi., ed. 1596) whitewashes the Pontiff thus :

"Ex his porro habes unde corriges vel quomodo sane intelliges quod in libro de Romania Pon- tificibus habetur in verbis : eodem tempore Ana*- tasii Papce scilicet, multi clerici et presbyteri se a communione ipsius retraxerunt, eo quod communi- casset, sine consilio episcoporum vel presbyterorum, vel cleri cunctse Ecclesiae Catholicse, diacono Thes- salonicensi nomine Photino, qui communionis erat Acacii, et qui a occulte voluit revojare Acasium, et non potuit, qui nutu divino pei'cussus est ; ha j <: ibi, qua; scias contra Anastasium sparsa erant a schismaticis Laurentianis."

Curiously enough, however, Baronius hints lower down at a possible complicity of the Pontiff with error, from which he was only saved by the Divine interposition of death :

" Ceterum si contendiose nimis quis asserere velit, Anastasium propensiorem fuisse in restituendo sublato e Diptychis Acacii nomine, sed morte preventum, id prsestare minime valuisse, in hoc est quidem quo magis magisque admireris Dei providentiam erga Romanam Ecclesiam, cum titu- bantem Apostolicve sedis prcesidentem Pontijicem ex humanis ante subduxent, quam quod meditaretur impleret ; et antea morte prcereptum, quam rel ten tar i posset a Pesto legato de ascribendo Zenonis Enotico."

It is further noteworthy that Baronius's chronology varies from that of Platina by one year ; but this is immaterial to the point under discussion, and for that matter no two authors agree as to either the dates or list of the Popes.

Natalis Alexander accepts the view of Baronius, but Lombardi, following Poggiali, boldly asserts that

" niuno de' quattro Pontefici, i quali portano di Anastagio [sic, following the Delia Crusca] il nome, fu contemporaneo di Fotino, e molto meno infetto degli errori di lui. Arguisce egli (Poggiali) co' piu sensati comentatori, che Dante, gia indisposto verso la Corte di Roma, si lasciasse illudere dalla mal digerita Cronica di Fra Martino da Polonia, che confondendo Anastasio I. Imperadore con uno de' papi Anastagi, attribul ad uno di questi 1' errore, di cui quello fu pur troppo macchiato.'' 1

But this won't dp; the weight of the " Annalium Ecclesiasticorum parens " as Alexander calls Baronius is against such perversions of history. Fazio degli Uberti (' Dittamondo,' ii. 14) also confirms Dante's statement unreservedly :

Anastasio papa in quel tempo era, Di Fotin vago a mal grade de sui.