^{Note 1 in page 168} See, for instance, Allan H. Gilbert, “Can Dante's Inferno Be Exactly Charted?” PMLA, lx (June 1945), 302–304. Gilbert quite rightly objects to those who prefer “drawing” to poetry, and to “the refinements of geometric structure” produced “by the zeal of literal-minded commentators.” At the same time, however, he seems to object to the search for allegorical meaning in the directions taken by the pilgrim (p. 304). It would appear from his article that the directions given by the poet neither convey a precise visual image, nor contribute to the “meaning” of the journey. One is left wondering why they are there.

^{Note 2 in page 168} As Dante and Virgil wheel downward close to the bank, the poet says “Io sentîa già dalla man destra il gorgo / Far sotto di noi un orribile scroscio” (Inf. xvii. 118). See H. D. Austin, “Clockwise or Counter-clockwise?—A Dante Study,” Italica, xxiv (March 1947), 201–205. If the pilgrim continually hears the pool beneath him at the right hand, this would seem to indicate that his left is close to the bank and his right is always toward the center in his downward flight. Gino L. Rizzo of Tu lane Univ., who objected to this point when the substance of this paper was presented at the MLA convention in December 1959, has promised a refutation. It is his contention that Geryon's flight is counter-clockwise.

^{Note 3 in page 168} See Purg, xix. 79: “Se voi venite dal giacer sicuri, / E volete trovar la via più tosto, / Le vostre destre sien sempre di furi.” and xxii. 121: “Io credo ch'a lo stremo / Le destre spalle volger ne convegna, / girando il monte come far solemo.”

^{Note 4 in page 168} P. 203. According to Austin, it is now believed that this shift was due to the confusion of the prepositions a(b) and ad. As we shall see, there is no reason to hazard such a guess. Austin's discussion failed to take into account the fact that already in Attic Greek motion which we would normally describe as “from the right” was designated “to the right.” See Alice F. Braunlich, “ ‘To the Right’ in Homer and Attic Greek,” Amer. Journal of Philology, LVII (1936), 245–260. It is obvious that in archetypal circular motion, movement is both to and from the point of origin. Aristotle calls rightward circular movement (De caelo, 285b20). Dante was following the Aristotelian tradition when he used a sinistra rather than da (de+ab) sinistra, thus designating the movement by its final, rather than initial phase.

^{Note 5 in page 168} One must distinguish between circular movement along the ever-decreasing circumferences of hell's structure and movement toward the center, approximately at right angles, from circle to circle. Since the pilgrim moves in a clockwise direction throughout most of hell (i.e., with the left closest to the wall), in order to go down into the cavity toward the center he must generally turn to the right. See Inf. xviii. 71: “E volti a destra… da quelle cerchie etterne ci partimmo.” This is not the case with Inf. ix. 132, where the pilgrim moves circularly “alia man destra,” after having entered the city of Dis. On the contrary, in this circle he must descend to the left, in order to move to the center: “Appresso volse a man sinistra il piede; / lasciammo il muro, e gimmo inver lo mezzo.” Cf. G. Agnelli, Giornale dantesco, vi (1898), 401.

^{Note 6 in page 169} N. Sapegno remarks “nonostante le ingegnose elucubrazioni degli allegoristi, rimane per noi inesplicabile l'intendimento simbolico.” Divina Commedia, a cura di N.S. (Firenze, 1955), i, 111.

^{Note 7 in page 169} The pilgrim and his guide have been walking along a dike toward the edge of the precipice which is the inner border of the seventh circle. They descend the bank by turning to the right (Inf. xvii.31): “Però scendemmo a la destra mammella.” They then walk a little further on to avoid the burning sand: “diece passi femmo in su lo stremo, / per ben cessar la rena e la fiammella.” Virgil stops to talk to Geryon, but the pilgrim moves further on along the edge (this could only be “to the right”), to see the usurers. He then returns by retracing his steps back to the monster (“to the left”). Thus he has moved to fraud with his usual motion, in spite of the fact that Geryon was originally on the right side of the river, and the movement to fraud is continued in the same direction, clockwise, by the flight. Gino Rizzo (see above, n. 2) was the first to point out to me the need for an explanation of this right turn, and I am grateful for his observation, although he would have it that the rightward movement is toward Geryon itself.

^{Note 8 in page 169} Apart from this critical commonplace, there exist excellent historical reasons for suspecting that these details are not unimportant. The distinction between right and left turns was a familiar element of pagan as well as Christian topographies of the Otherworld. The bivium of choice, the “Pythagorean Y,” is the most famous example of distinctions of this kind. See Aeneid vi.136, comm. Servius, ed. Thilo (Leipzig, 1888), p. 30; F. Cumont, Lux perpetua (Paris, 1949), p. 287; V. Zabughin, L'Oltretomba classico medievale dantesco nel rinascimento (Rome, 1922), p. 27; L. Spitzer, “Er hat einen Sparren (Span),” Essays in Historical Semantics (New York, n.d.), p. 80. The longest and most complete study of the theme is E. Panofsky, Herkules am Scheidewege, Studien der Bibliothek Warburg (Leipzig, 1930), p. 62. In mystic visions of eastern origin, right and left, and their cosmic equivalents, East and West, are also given symbolic meaning. From the history of religious or philosophical visions, it is safe to conclude that Dante's vision would have been an extraordinary exception if the poet had used such details gratuitously. For additional bibliography, see J. Freccero, “Dante's Firm Foot and the Journey without a Guide,” Harvard Theological Review, LIT (October 1959), 256–257, n. 26.

^{Note 9 in page 169} De caelo, n, 2, 285b. We would nevertheless call such a movement “to the left,” for even granting Aristotle's definition of the right as the East, we would consider only the visible 180° arc of the heavens' motion, from dawn (the right) to sunset (the left). The philosopher, on the contrary, was faced with a double exigency: in the first place, there was his own definition of the right as the point from which motion begins, and in the second place, there was the Pythagorean convention, founded upon the symbolic importance of both the sun and “the right,” according to which the heavens moved to the right. Aristotle was forced to consider the full circuit, from dawn (the right) to sunset (the left) and thence around the other hemisphere to dawn (the right) once more: motion from the right and back to the right. It was also in keeping with his metaphysical concern for finality and completion that he described a motion in terms of its terminus.

^{Note 10 in page 170} Aristotle, loc. cit.: “Of the poles, the one which we see above us is the lowest part, and the one which is invisible to us the uppermost. For we give the name of righthand to that side of a thing whence its motion through space starts. Now the beginning of the heaven's revolution is the side from which the stars rise, so that must be its right, and where they set must be its left. If this is true, that it begins from the right and moves around lo the right again, its upper pole must be the invisible one, since if it were the visible, the motion would be leftward, which we deny. Clearly therefore the invisible pole is the upper, and those who live in the region of it are in the upper hemisphere and to the right, whereas we are in the lower and to the left.” Trans. W. K. C. Guthrie, Loeb Classical Library (London, 1939), p. 147.

^{Note 11 in page 170} The argument is unclear because Aristotle does not supply a vantage point when he says that if north were “up” the movement of the heavens would be . A. E. Taylor imagines a man “looking to our visible pole” (Commentary on the Timaeus, Oxford, 1928, p. 150 f.); T. Heath imagines a man lying face down along the earth's axis (quoted by Guthrie, De caelo, p. 137); A. Braunlich disagrees with both and maintains that Aristotle considers the movement “from the standpoint of the heaven itself.” She cites Simplicius De caelo, ad loc, in support (op. cit., p. 247). Braunlich suggests that Aristotle did not take the argument too seriously.

^{Note 12 in page 170} Thomas' explanation is clearer than that of many modern commentators: “Imaginemus enim hominem cujus caput sit in polo arctico, et pedes in polo antarctico: manus ejus dextra erit in occidente, et manu sinistra in oriente, si lamen facies ejus sit versus hemisphaerium superius quod est nobis apparens.” De caelo et mundo ii, lect. Ill (Opera omnia, Parma, 1864, xix, 85).

^{Note 15 in page 171} Confessions, iv, xii. Cf. Ephesians iv. 7: “He also descended first into the lower parts of the earth.”

^{Note 14 in page 171} Inf. xxxiv.121–126. Unfortunately Bruno Nardi's complete study of the problem and its relationship to the De caelo (La cadula di Lucifero, Lectura dantis romana, Roma, 1959, pp. 3–14) had not yet appeared when this article was written; see my forthcoming review, “The Fall of Satan and the ‘Quaestio de aqua el terra’, ” Ilalica.

^{Note 15 in page 171} Dante says of the outermost sphere that “tutto quanto rape… seco” (Par. xxviii. 70–71). In the Convivio (ii, xiv, 16), he discusses the movement at length, and imagines what the movement of the other heavens would be if this movement were to cease. See M. A. Orr, Dante and the Early Astronomers (London, 1913), pp. 435–438, for a discussion of the passage.

^{Note 16 in page 171} Mrs. Orr (p. 18) describes these two apparent movements: “The daily revolution of the entire heavens, carrying with it every visible celestial body, in a little less than 24 hours [and] the revolutions of sun, moon, and five naked-eye planets, in seven different periods. The 6rst of these is from east to west…. All the others are in the main from west to east, though the progress of the planets is complicated by periodical retrograde movements.” Alfraganus, in the fifth chapter of the work which Dante refers to as “II libro del-l'aggregazione delle stelle” (Conv., ii, v, 16), discusses “de duobus primis motibus coeli quorum unus est motus totius, quo fiunt nox et dies ab oriente ad occidentem, et alius est motus stellarum quae hac re videntur in orbe ab occidente ad orientem.” (Ed. R. Campani, Collezione di opus, dant., vol. 87–90 [Citta di Castello, 1910], p. 53). See also Ristoro d'Arezzo: “… s'egli e uno movemento del cielo, lo quale muove tutto da oriente a occidente, lo quale e chiamato primo, e' e mestieri per forza di ragione, per maggiore operazione, ch'egli sia un altro movimento, lo quale sia suo opposito, e vada per opposito d'occidente ad oriente.” Composizione del mondo, ed. E. Narducci (Rome, 1859), v, ii, p. 74. It would be well to notice that the belief in the existence of these two apparent movements remained basically the same, in spite of the differences between ancient and medieval cosmologies.

^{Note 17 in page 171} De caelo, ii, 2; 285b28; “Nevertheless in relation to the secondary revolution, i.e., that of the planets, we are in the upper and right-hand part…”

^{Note 18 in page 172} Op. cit., ii, 3; 286b.

^{Note 19 in page 172} Par. xxxiii. 142: “All' alta fantasia qui mancò possa; / ma già volgeva il mio disio e '1 velle, / si come rota ch'igualmente è mossa, / l'Amor che move il sole e l'altre stelle.”

^{Note 20 in page 172} Cf. Conv., iii, xii, 9, where it is said of God that “suo ‘girare’ è suo ‘intendere’,” and the lengthy note of Busnelli ad loc. The latter notes that in the Liber de causis the “girare” is attributed to all intellect.

^{Note 21 in page 172} Par. ii. 21 f: “Questi organi del mondo così vanno, / come tu vedi omai, di grado in grado, / che di su prendono e di sotto fanno.” Cf. Liber de causis, vii, ed. Orth (Rome, 1938), 28. In this passage one recognizes immediately the hierarchical continuity of the chain of being. See A. O. Love-joy, The Great Chain of Being, p. 67 f. Lovejoy notices that Dante came close to asserting “that the actual exercise of the creative potency extends of necessity through the entire range of possibility” (p. 70). For the influence of the Liber de causis on Dante see B. Nardi, “Le citazioni dantesche del L. de c, in Saggi difilos. dantesca (Città de Castello, 1930), pp. 89–120.

^{Note 22 in page 172} Purg. xxv. 70 ff. : “lo motor primo a lui si volge lieto / sovra tant'arte di natura, e spira / spirito novo, di vertù repleto, / che ciò che trova attivo quivi, tira / in sua sustanzia, e fassi un'alma sola, / che vive e sente e sè in sè rigira.”

^{Note 23 in page 172} Timaeus 36d (trans. Jowett). See the remarks on this passage by R. Allers, “Microcosmus—from Anaximandros to Paracelsus,” Tradilio, ii (1944), esp. 352, 354, 361. For a more detailed treatment, see A. Olerud, L'Idée de macrocosmos et de microcosmos dans le Timée de Platon (Uppsala, 1951), pp. 32 ff. For the idea of anima mundi in the Middle Ages, see T. Gregory, Anima mundi: Lafilosofia di Guglielmo di Conches e la scuola di Chartres (Firenze, 1955), p. 157, where it is suggested that by understanding the world-soul as the Holy Ghost the idea was made acceptable to orthodox Christians.

^{Note 24 in page 173} See A. Schneider, “Der Gedanke der Erkenntnis des Gleichen durch Gleiches in antiker und patristischer Zeit,” Beitr. z. Geschichte der Phil. d. M.A., Suppl. ii, (1923), p. 68, quoted by Allers, p. 352 n. 84. Adelard of Bath entitled a tract De eodem el diverso (ed. Willner, Beitr., iv, 1 [1903], p. 3): “quoniam videlicet maximam orationis partem duabus personis, philosophiae scilicet atque philocosmiae, attribui, una quarum eadem, altera vero diversa a principe philoso-phorum appellatur.” This distinction is based upon one logically prior: God = unity, matter (hyle) = multiplicity. See Bernardus Silvestris: “Unitas deus. Diversum non aliud quam hyle eaque indigens forma.” De mundi universitate… sive Megacosmos et Microcosmos, ed. Barach and Wrobel (Innsbruck, 1876), p. 61.

^{Note 25 in page 173} In Platonis Timaeum Comment., 95, ed. Wrobel (Leipzig, 1876), p. 167.

^{Note 26 in page 173} Timaeus 44c-d. Cf. R. Grosseteste, Quod homo sit minor mundus in L. Baur, Die Phil. des. R. Grosseteste (Beitr. z. Gesch. d. Phil. d. M.A. 1912, vol. 9), p. 59. Quoted by R. Allers, Microcosmus, p. 348. See also Bernardus Sylvestris, op. cit., p. 64.

^{Note 27 in page 173} Timaeus 44c. Cf. Chalcidius, ix, 211; p. 250 (ed. cit.). For a typical use of the passage by a medieval writer, see John of Salisbury, Metalogicus, iv, 17; PL, cxcix, 926.

^{Note 28 in page 173} Freccero, “Dante's Firm Foot…” pp. 254–267. It is uncertain whether Dante knew the Timaeus directly, in spite of the fact that he mentions it in Par. iv. 49. E. Moore (Studies in Dante I, Oxford, 1896, pp. 156–164) discusses the problem without definite conclusion. G. Fraccaroli, in an appendix to his translation of the Timaeus devoted to the problem (“Dante e il Timeo” in Il Timeo, Torino, 1906, pp. 391–424), adds to Moore's observations and concludes: “mentre da una parte sembra certo aver Dante veduta la traduzione di Calcidio, se non forse anche il commenta, non si può dall'altra affermare che questo fosse uno dei testi ch'egli più studiasse e intendesse, e tanto meno ch'egli possedesse” (p. 422).

^{Note 29 in page 174} For a typical statement, see Plutarch, de virtuie morali ni, Moralia 441. I am indebted to A. B. Chambers of Johns Hopkins for this reference.

^{Note 30 in page 174} Philo Judaeus, “Quis rerum divinarum heres,” 48; Works (ed. F. H. Colson [Loeb]) iv, 399.

^{Note 31 in page 174} Consult B. Switalski, Des Chalcidius Kommenlar zu Plalos Timaeus (Miinster, 1903), Beitr. in, 6 for the establishment of the Neoplatonic current; E. Garin, Sludi sul Platonismo médiévale (Firenze, 1958), p. 46 ff. for the 12th century; J. M. Parent, La Doctrine de la création dans l'école de Chartres, Publ. de l'Inst. d'études médiévales d'Ottawa, viii (Paris-Ottawa, 1938), 139–142, 163–166, for texts and comments relative to Chartres. For a commentary from the early 13th century, T. Schmid, “Ein Timaeos-kommentar in Sigtuna,” Classica el Medievalia, x (1949), 221–266; p. 249 in particular. See also pseud. Rabanus Maurus, Alleg. in S. Script., PL, cxii, 929 (on Gen. i, 6); Godfrey of St. Victor, Microcosmos, i, 34, ed. P. Delhaye (Lille, 1951), p. 57, and comment of Delhaye, Le ‘Microcosmus’ de G. de S.V. (Lille, 1951), p. 113. Among the scholastics, Albertus Magnus discusses the passage most frequently: Summa, ii, 72, m.4, a.3; Metaphysics, i, 4, 12; De natura et origine animae, ii, 7, 31; Physics, 8, 2, 8; etc.

^{Note 32 in page 174} A. B. Chambers' dissertation in progress (Johns Hopkins Univ.) on John Donne will show the relevance of the Timaeus theme to the interpretation of Donne's poetry. I am indebted to him for sharing with me the results of his long research into the tradition which is our common interest, and for reading this article in rough draft.

^{Note 33 in page 174} Lib. de planclu naturae, PL, ccx, 443. See also Distinctions (s.v. mundus), PL, ccx, 866.

^{Note 34 in page 174} Consolation, iii, m9: “Tu triplicis mediam naturae cuncta moventem / Conectens animam per consona membra resolvis. / Quae cum secta duos motum glomeravit in orbes, / In semet reditura meat mentemque profundam / Circuit et simili convertit imagine caelum.” Trans. Richard H. Green, The Consolation of Philosophy (forthcoming, New York, 1961). I wish to thank Professor Green, my colleague at Johns Hopkins, for permission to quote from the manuscript of his excellent translation. For the relationship of this text to that of the Timaeus and for the diffusion of both, see Garin, pp. 29–33,46, 70 ff.

^{Note 35 in page 175} Sapegno (ed. cit., iii, 31) annotates Par. ii. 130 ff. with the quotation from Boethius: “I versi di Dante, sebbene esprimano un concetto sostanzialmente diverso, riecheggiano da vicino, e talora in modo letterale, un passo di Boezio, dove parla dell'anima del mondo secondo la dottrina dei neoplatonici.”

^{Note 36 in page 175} Boezio e VArrighelto nette versioni del trecento, ed. S. Battaglia, Coll. di classici italiani, 2nd ser., vol. xiv (Torino, 1929), p. 110.

^{Note 37 in page 175} The comparison between the movements of the heavens and those of the mind was so popular that it was often mentioned even in scientific contexts. Sacrobosco interrupts his description of the celestial circles with this statement: “Be it understood that the ‘first movement’… also is called ‘rational motion’ from resemblance to the rational motion in the microcosm, that is, in man, when thought goes from the Creator through creatures to the Creator and there rests. The second movement is of the firmament and planets contrary to this, from west through east back to west again, which movement is called ‘irrational’ or ‘sensual’ from resemblance to the movement of the microcosm from things corruptible to the Creator and back again to things corruptible.” The Sphere of Sacrobosco, ii, ed. and trans. Lynn Thorndike (Chicago, 1949), 123. See the comments on the passage by Robertus Anglicus (p. 163); Michael Scot (?), where Plato is cited (pp. 303–304); and Cecco d'Ascoli (pp. 377–378). Cf. Pseudo-Johannes Scotus, In Boeth. De cons., iii, m. ix, ed. E. T. Silk, Paper and Monographs of Amer. Acad, in Rome, x (1935), 160–190.

^{Note 38 in page 175} Timaeus 40A; Thomas Aquinas(?), Comm. super lib. Boetii, iii, m. ix; Opera, xxiv, 82.

^{Note 39 in page 175} Pseudo-Dionysius, De div. nom., iv, 8; PG, iii, 703.

^{Note 40 in page 175} Ibid., iv, 9; PG, iii, 705. Cf. Thomas, Com. in div. nom., Opus, vu, 1. vii, par. 509; Opera, xv, 310. Dante knew the idea very well. In the Convivio (iv, xxi, 9) he attributes the three operations to the “anima nobile”: “però è scritto nel libro de le Cagioni: ‘Ogni anima nobile ha tre operazioni, cioè animale [linear], intellettuale [spiral] e divina’ [circular].” See Busnelli-Vandelli, notes ad loc, and Nardi, op. cit., pp. 102–103. For a Renaissance version see M. Ficino, Theologia Platonica, iv, ii (Paris, 1559), f: 57'.

^{Note 41 in page 175} Ilinerarium mentis in Deum, i, 2, in Tria Opuscula (Quaracchi, 1938), p. 295. Also operative is the Neoplatonic theme of the downward movement of Love from God to creatures and its return from creatures to God, throughout the chain of being. See pseudo-Dionysius, iv, 9; PG, iii, 705. Cf. Dante, Par. ii. 21–23 and above, n. 21. The creative potency comes from above, is transmitted below, and is shared by members of the same hierarchy in the chain. Thus the intelligences can convert to God (supra nos), communicate (intra nos), or distribute goodness to the world below (extra nos). Dante outlines the doctrine in Conv., iii, vi, 4–5. Proclus described the movement of cosmic love as one of Progression and Reversion (In Alrib., ed. Cousin, ii, 153; Elements of Theol. 31, ed. Dodds, pp. 35–37 and Dodds's note, p. 218), and hence as the archetype of all movement. The idea of the circulalio rcrum was transmitted to the later Middle Ages via Dionysius (De div. nom., iv, 15) and the Liber de causis, vn. For a typical statement see St. Thomas, In IV Sent., 49, q. I, a.3, sol. i.

^{Note 42 in page 176} Monarchia, iii, xvi, 3, where Dante echoes Liber de causis ii to show that man is the horizon between time and eternity. Bruno Nardi (pp. 100–101) has shown that this is originally a notion applied to the anima mundi, transposed by Dante to apply to the soul of man. The comparison between man and the planets is originally Aristotelian. See Aristotle, De caelo, ii, xii (292b).

^{Note 43 in page 176} Chalcidius, commenting on Tim. 39A (p. 182), gives a minute description of the path followed by Venus, for example: “Quos quidem gyros Gracei helicas adpellant, quorum incrementa ab inminutionibus, inminutiones porro ab incrementis notantur.” The sketch used to describe the movement could be used equally well to illustrate the pilgrim's path (see descriplio xxvi, p. 410). Cf. Dante, Conn., iii, v, 13–14: “a guisa d'una vite dintorno,” and Ristoro, i, 23, p. 28 ff.

^{Note 41 in page 176} De anima, iii, 11 (434a), trans. Foster and Humphries, Aristotle's “De anima” in the Version of William of Moerbeke and the Commentary of St. Thomas Aquinas (New Haven, 1951), p. 478.1 have used this translation because of William of Moerbeke's influential mistranslation of àupaola as con-linenlia. See Foster-Humphries' note.

^{Note 45 in page 176} See, for instance, Themistius De anima, iii, xi, trans. Wm. Moerbeke; ed. G. Verbeke, Corpus lat. comment, in Arisl. Craec, i (Louvain, 1957), 271. Averroes, Comment, magnum in Arisl. de anima 50, ed. F. S. Crawford (Cambridge, 1953), p. 72. Averroes describes the parallelism between the movement of the heavens and the movement of the soul in paragraph 46 (p. 63). Albertus Magnus, De anima, iii, tr. iv, c. ix, com. 57; Opera omnia (Lugduni, 1651), iii, 180; Thomas Aquinas(?) De motibus corporum caelestium, Opera xxiv, 218.

^{Note 46 in page 176} Aquinas, loc. cit.; Foster-Humphries, p. 481.

^{Note 47 in page 177} Par. vra. 127. Cf. Conv., iii, ii, 5.

^{Note 48 in page 177} Plato, Republic, iv, 440a fi; Aristotle, i Polit. 2, ii, 1254b5; Thomas, Summa Theol., i-ii, 17, 7; all describe justice in the soul and compare it to right order in the state. The music of the spheres is often compared to the “music” of the soul in medieval discussions of the microcosm (e.g., Honorius d'Autun, De imagine mundi, i, 82; PL, 172, 140). Chalcidius calls the soul's harmony “Justice”: “optima porro symphonia est in moribus nostris iustitia…” (Com. 267; ed. cit., p. 298). In the school of Chartres, the Republic was thought of as a treatise concerned with justice in the state, whereas the Timaeus treated “de naturali justitia, id est rerum omnium concordia.” (William of Conches, Paris mss. 16579, fol. 55, quoted by Parent, La doctrine de la création…, p. 139. He says that the school was “unanime à dire que le Timée traite de la justice naturelle… ”) Cf. Bonaventure, Quaest. disp. de perf. evangelica, iv, iii: “Requirebat enim hoc ordo universalis iuslitiae et quantum ad iustitiam naturalem et quantum ad civilem et quantem ad caelestem sive spiritualem” (Opera omnia, Quaracchi, 1891, v, 194). For the theological concept of Justice and its relevance to Dante's poem, see C. S. Singleton, Journey to Beatrice, Dante Studies 2 (Cambridge, 1958), pp. 57–71.

^{Note 49 in page 177} For “right” in the cosmos, De caelo, ii, 2, 285a, and De anima, iii, x, 433b 24; for human motion, De motu animalium 8, 702a21 and De hist, animal., ii, ii, 498b. See also Freccero, “Dante's Firm Foot…,” pp. 252–255.

^{Note 50 in page 177} See the remarks of the Casini-Barbi commentary on this passage: “Alcuni commentatori, Lana, Ott[imo], Cass[inese], Benv[enuto], ecc. credono che i cerchi accennino allegoricamente le virtù cardinali e le croci le teologiche, a significare che la grazia divina risplende più viva e propizia là ove sono insieme congiunte le virtù” (La Div. comm., Florence, 1938, p. 691).

^{Note 51 in page 178} Par. x. 7–15: “Leva dunque, lettore, all'alte ruote / meco la vista, dritto a quella parte / dove l'un moto e l'altro si percuote…”

^{Note 52 in page 178} Aristotle uses a similar comparison in Nich. Ethics i, xiii, 10 (1102^b).

^{Note 53 in page 178} Augustine, In psalm., cxviii, serm. viii, quoted by Thomas, In IV Sent. d. xvii, q. i, a.3, sol. 3. Dante, Par. xiii. 120, although the poet is using the expression in a different context.

^{Note 54 in page 178} Liber de contritione cordis, vii, PL, 40, 947–948. See also cap. x: “Obvolvere, aerumnose, iterum volens horridis in tenebris inconsolabilis luctus, qui volens provulutus [sic] es in voragine tam sordidi fluctus. Volutere in gurgite amaritudinis, qui delectatus es in volutabro turpitudinis.” Dante's spiral dramatizes this type of “involvement.” For the Latin use of “wind-unwind” as metaphorically applied to moral behavior, see the examples given by the Thesaurus Linguae Lalinae, v, 871 (s.v. devolvo C²).

^{Note 55 in page 178} St. Paul gave the most famous expression of the situation in Rom. vii. 18–19. Cf. Aristotle, Nich. Ethics, vii, 2 (1145b).

^{Note 56 in page 178} De caelo, ii, 3, 286b; Paradiso, x. 14–15.

^{Note 57 in page 179} Cf. Paradiso, xi. 37–39. The warmth and light of the sun serve to symbolize the ardor and splendor of the Spiriti Sapienti in the Paradiso, and at the same time are associated with the Seraphim and Cherubim. See J. B. Fletcher, “Dante's ‘Image’ in the Sun,” Romanic Rev., xxiv (April-June 1933), 99–128; esp. p. 106.

^{Note 58 in page 179} According to Thomas, heresy is a species of infidelitas: “falsitas veritati opponitur. Sed haereticus est qui falsas vel novas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur. Ergo opponitur veritati, cui fides innititur. Ergo sub infidelitate continetur” (Summa Theol., ii-nae, q. 11, a. 1 contra). Infidelity, and its various species, resides “in intellectu sicut in subiecto” (Ibid., q. 10, a.2).

^{Note 59 in page 179} W. H. V. Reade says of the sin of heresy “… Aristotle and the moral philosophers had never conceived of a sin residing in the intellectus speculativus.” He continues: “… the sixth circle owes its unexplained position to the fact that moral philosophy, which Virgil represents, makes no provision for any sin which is in intellectu speculative sicut in subiecto.” Given Dante's moral system, “with heresy there were only two alternatives, (1) to omit it altogether, (2) to make it isolated and, in a sense, extraneous to the moral scheme of the Inferno. The former course was impossible for a good Catholic: the latter is actually adopted, and is embodied in the circle of the Heresiarchs” (The Moral System of Dante's Inferno, Oxford, 1909, pp. 374–375). Reade's ch. xxii is devoted to an analysis of “The Circle of Heresy,” pp. 367–381.

^{Note 60 in page 179} Reade, p. 429: “St. Thomas always teaches that in Usury an art is put to an unnatural purpose, and when proving that Justice is thus outraged, he alludes to the Politics (i, 10): ‘et Philosophus naturali ratione ductus dicit quod ‘usuraria acquisitio pecuniarum est maxime praeter na-turam’ (S. 2. 2. lxxviii. I ad 3).”

^{Note 61 in page 180} Conv., ii, xii, 2: “Dico che per delo io intendo la scienza e per cieli le scienze, per tre similitudini che h cieli hanno con le scienze massimamente; e per l'ordine e numéro in che paiono convenire, sì come trattando quello vocabulo, cioè ‘terzo,‘ si vedrà.” See Busnelli's excellent note ad loc. André Pézard has seen the importance of the Convivio metaphor for the interpretation of Canto xi's exposition, but finds it impossible to believe that Dante had chosen usury as the sole example of violence against art (Dante sous la pluie de feu, Paris, 1950, p. 229).

^{Note 62 in page 180} In the state of continence, reason dominates sense appetite, against the force of the latter, whereas in the virtue of lemperantia, the two are in harmony. See Thomas, Summa Theol., ii-ii, 155, 4 and Foster-Humphries, p. 481.

^{Note 63 in page 181} Timaeus, 40A; cf. Plotinus, Enneads, ii, ii, 2.

^{Note 64 in page 181} Cf. Paradiso, xiv. 1–3; for basic discussions of the theme and necessary bibliography, see Georges Poulet, “Le Symbole du cercle infini dans la littérature et la philosophie,” Revue de métaphysique et de morale, ni (1959), esp. pp. 259264; H. R. Patch, “The Last Line of the Commedia,” Speculum, xiv (1939), 56–65; B. Nardi, “Sî come rota ch'igual-mente è mossa” in Nel mondo di Dante, Storia e letteratura 5 (Rome, 1944), pp. 337–350.