1 Erasmus, , Ciceronianus (Basle, Froben, 1528), p. 412 Google Scholar.

2 For a recent survey of contrasting trends in Renaissance historiography see Hornik, H., ‘Three Interpretations of the French Renaissance’, Studies in the Renaissance VII (1960), 43–66 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Particularly important for an authoritative assessment: H. Baron, ‘Burckhardt's Civilization of the Renaissance a Century after its Publication’, Ren. News XIII (1960), 207-222.

3 For the medieval aptitude to disguise classical matter in modern garb, cf. Liebeschütz, H., Medieval Humanism in the Life and Writings of John of Salisbury (London, 1950)Google Scholar.

4 For bibliographical surveys of Politian studies, cf. Maier, Bruno, ‘Angelo Poliziano’ in Binni, W., I Classici italiani nella storia delta critica (Florence, 1954), 1, 232–256 Google Scholar; idem, ‘La critica polizianesca nel Novecento’, La Rassegna delta Lett. It. LVIII (1954), 377-390; idem, ‘Angelo Poliziano’ in Letteratura Italiana. I Maggiori (Milan, 1956), 1, 254-305.

5 After the crisis of the Pazzi conspiracy he left Florence (Dec. 1479) to return in Aug. 1480. He then began his official teaching. Indicative of the high consideration he enjoyed at the studio is the stipend of 250 florins he received in 1485, at the age of 31. In the same year D. Chalcondylas received 200 fl., C. Landino 300. Cf. Prezziner, G., Storia del publico Studio … di Firenze (Florence, 1810), I, 163 Google Scholar, quoted by C. Trinkaus, ‘A Humanist's Image … B. della Fonte’, Studies in the Renaissance VII (1960), 91.

6 Professor A. Perosa's critical, annotated edition of the Miscellanea is forthcoming.

7 Cf. R. Sabbadini, Il Metodo degli umanisti (Florence, 1920), chapters I-IV; Garin, E., L'Educazione in Europa (1400-1600) (Bari, 1957)Google Scholar, passim.

8 Cf. Del Lungo, I., Florentia (Florence, 1897), pp. 175–183 Google Scholar, and Poliziano, , Le Selve e laStrega, ed. Lungo, Del (Florence, 1925), pp. 232 Google Scholar f. It is to be underlined that Politian read various works of Aristotle in each of his last four academic years.

9 Léon Dorez, ‘L'Hellénisme d'Ange Politien', Mélanges d'Archéologie et d'Histoire xv (1895), 3-32. The excerpts from the lectures on the Odyssey are on pp. 24-31.

10 On the medieval tradition of the text, including the Arabic version and especially the newly discovered Latin translation of the Poetics (extant in two MSS), cf. Kristeller's, P. O. bibliographical note in Studies in Renaissance Thought and Letters (Rome, 1956), p. 340 Google Scholar (12). A critical ed. of the Latin tr. is in De arte poetica, ed. E. Valgimigli (Bruges-Paris, 1953, Aristoteles Latinus XXXIII).

The passages here and below quoted from Politian and referred to the original Poetics correspond to p . 248, 8.4; 247, 8.2; 268-269,23 of the ed. by Bekker, I. (Aristotelis Opera, Oxford, 1837, XI)Google Scholar. R. Sabbadini, in Il Metodo degli umanisti, pp. 73-74, indicated the MS of the Greek Poetics possessed by Politian (Laurenziano Pluteo Gr. 60, 14) and added: ‘II primo in quel secolo a possedere la Poetica in greco fu il Poliziano'. But further on: ‘Ma le sue due prelezioni omeriche, sia la prosastica sia la poetica (Ambra) del i486 … non recano nessuna traccia della Poetica’.

Cf. J. E. Spingarn, A History of Literary Criticism in the Renaissance (2d ed. rev., N. Y., 1930). PP. 16-19. 89 f, 108-111, and A. Fusco's tr., La Critica lett. nel Rin. (Bari, 1905), pp. 20-23, 89 f, 106-109. Spingarn did not mention Politian on this issue. Elsewhere he stated: ‘Nowhere does Poliziano exhibit any appreciation of the aesthetic value of poetry … ‘ (p. 14), but this MS, among other things, was not known to Spingarn. (The eminent scholar, however, considered Politian the most complete personification of humanism: cf. p. 18).

On Politian as a critic cf. also Trabalza, C., La Critica letteraria (Milan, 1915), II, 41–45 Google Scholar. Trabalza draws two very pertinent conclusions: first, that Politian definitively brought philology to complete autonomy (‘dando alia filologia un suo proprio fine’), second, that his criticism was not what we want criticism to be today, i.e. a rational, ‘logical’ analysis of aesthetic values, but a vivid expression of a deep feeling for the work of art, whereby the audience was lifted to the level of poetry through a new work of art modeled on the former, the object of study—in other words, a sort of lyrical impressionism, as we might put it.

11 ‘Sed et illud observavi nuper apud Danielem prophetam, ducente me scilicet in recessus illos et sacra studiorum suorum penetralia Ioanne Pico Mirandula’ (Basle ed., 1553, p. 238). Further on, aprecise aim is set for Pico's studies in this field:'...ut idem et comperit et ostendit Ioannes Picus Mirandula meus, unus omnium prorsus ab omni parte beatissimus, in opere singulari atque admirando, quo psalmos a septuaginta versos isto notarum praecipue argumento [the question of the written and unwritten parts of the Hebrew alphabet] docet Hebraicae veritati respondere, ne iam insultare Iudaeus, aut obiicere possit, ea nos in templo singulis canere horis, quae ne ipsi quidem satis versa fideliter existimemus.’ In brief, an apologia in favor of the vulgate texts, a conciliation of ancient and modern tradition, an establishment of'concordia’.

12 ‘Harp’ rather than ‘organ’ was already the commentator Kohlbürger's interpretation of naula used by Politian in his ‘sylva’ Nutricia v. 172. Kohlbürger (‘Brassicanus’, 16th century) had used other authors than Politian's: cf. Le Selve e la Strega, ed. by I. Del Lungo (Florence, 1925), p. 126.

13 The importance of this passage had already been realized by Ruberto, Luigi, ‘Studi sul Poliziano filologo’, Rivista di Filohgia e d'htruzione classka XII (1884), 212–260 Google Scholar, cf. pp. 221 and 231-232. Ruberto is, to my knowledge, the only student who has touched, though succinctly, upon Politian's use of Hebrew for philological purposes. For Ruberto Misc. 83 is ‘clear’ proof that Politian had read the Bible in Hebrew. I may add that Misc. 14 also proves that he could master Aramaic. An apparent lapsus on closer examination turns out to confirm Politian's philological accuracy: in the list of Aramaic terms for musical instruments which he professes to have found in the prophet Daniel under Pico's guidance, every noun is given in the singular and followed by the Latin equivalent also in the singular, except one case, where an Aramaic plural word is given (psanterin, repeated below) with the singular equivalent (psalterium). But it turns out that only the plural occurs in Daniel's text, and not the sing, psanter. Politian certainly was in contact with Hebrew scholars other than Pico, witness the mention of'Gallus Solomon’ in the same passage. I am thankful to Prof. G. M. Schramm of the University of California for his elucidations of some points pertaining to Semitic philology. To Prof. Kristeller I owe, among other valuable suggestions, the indication of U. Cassuto's monograph Gli Ebrei a Firenze nell'età del Rinascimento (Florence, 1918). On p. 281 (especially n. 6) Politian's use of direct Hebrew sources is acknowledged, and certain sources are further identified. On Hebrew scholarship in Florence in the Quattrocento, cf. ch. 3, pp. 273-326. The only Hebrew scholar of importance among Florentine humanists before Politian's time was Giannozzo Manetti (1396-1459), who translated the Psalms and wrote a defense in five books of this translation. Ficino's knowledge of Hebrew was very superficial.

14 Harpoc(h)rates was Hor-the-child, a form of the solar divinity Horus (son of Isis), and was represented with a finger on his mouth as a symbol of childhood. By a misunderstanding of this figurative detail the Greeks and Romans made him the god of silence (Ovid, Met. IX, 691).

15 The King James version (where the psalm is numbered 65, as in the Hebrew editions) applied a slightly different acceptation, which is also found in the text of the Jewish Publication Society: ‘Praise waiteth for thee, o Lord, in Zion.’

16 Cf. the 15th-century MS. 237 of the Bibl. Classense, Ravenna. Fols. III-218^v contain the notes from Politian's lectures on Juvenal, and are described in Mostra del Poliziano, Catalogo a cura di A. Perosa (Florence, 1955), 35-36, and with excerpts in Catalogus translationum et commentariorum (Washington, 1960), 1, 224-226.

17 Cf., for a description of the MS, Mostra del Poliziano, pp. 16-17. I n this precious catalogue are described several more MSS and printed editions which can further substantiate our analysis.

18 Cf. F. Garin, ‘La “Expositio Theocriti” di Angelo Poliziano nello Studio Fiorentino (1482-83?)’, Rivista di Filologia Classka XLII (1914), 275-282. I translate these passages from pp. 277 and 282. Garin concluded the second statement by admitting the expediency of such a method at its time.

19 Cf. Catalogus translationum, p. 224.

20 Cf. ‘Zibaldoni autografi di A. P. inediti e sconosciuti nella R. Bibl. di Monaco’, Giornak St. delta Lett. It. LV (1910), 1-32. R. Sabbadini (under the pseudonym B. de Braminis, ibid., pp. 454-455) corrected some of Di Pierro's readings of these difficult and damaged MSS.

21 All these MSS are now described in Mostra del Poliziano, respectively at the numbers 59 (MS. 807), 62 (766), 70-83 (182, 748, 754, 755, 756), where each section is accurately identified and dated.

22 Cf. G. Pesenti, ‘Diario odeporico-bibliografico ineciito del Poliziano’, Memorie del R. Istituto Lombardo di Sc. e Lett., CI. di Lett, etc., ser. III, XIV (1916), 229-239; Pesenti reexamined parts of the MSS touched upon by Di Pierro.

23 ‘Une page inédite de Politien: La note du Vat. Lat. 3617 sur Démétrius Triclinius commentateur d'Homère', Bibl. d'Hum. et Ren. XVI (1954), 7-17.

24 Bigi denies a true interest of Politian in allegorical interpretation: cf. ‘II Poliziano critico’, cited below, p. 367.

25 Demetrius was a Byzantine philologist of the beginning of the 14th century.

26 ‘[Proclus] redarguit eorum imperitiam, qui negant Homerum aliud omnino quicquam intra sinum condidisse, preter [sic] ea quae prima fronte ostentat’ (Vat. Lat. 3617, fol. 2^v).

27 This aspect of Politian's criticism is analyzed by E. Bigi in the two articles cited below.

28 The place and role of Politian in the history of philology has been summarily but competently assessed by Funaioli, Gino, ‘Lineamenti d'una storia della filologia attraverso i secoli’, in Studi di letteratura antica (Bologna, 1946), 1, 185–356 Google Scholar. Ruberto's article is, despite its age, a praiseworthy and extensive analysis of the Epistolae and Miscellanea. Sabbadini's studies are quoted elsewhere. Among recent studies, cf. M. Serafini, ‘Come lavorava il Poliziano’, Giorn. Ital. di Filologia III (1950), 337-346; E. Bigi, ‘La cultura del Poliziano’, Belfagor IX (1954), 633-653; idem, ‘Il Poliziano critico', La Rass. della Lett. It. tvm (1954), 367-376; and in the centennial volume Il Poliziano e il suo tempo (Florence, 1957), see E. Garin, ‘L'ambiente del Poliziano', pp. 17-39 (reprinted from R.L.I., LVIII (1954), 349-366, where it was entitled ‘Filologia e poesia in Angelo Poliziano’), and A. Mancini, ‘II Poliziano filologo', beside other important contributions on more specific aspects of Politian's philological activities. For the historical meaning of the humanists’ ‘philology', see especially Garin, E., L'Umanesimo italiano (Bari, 1952), pp. 7–15 Google Scholar, 23-26, 73, and Medioevo e Rinascimento (Bari, 1954), pp. 106-107, 318-320. For an assessment of the ‘philological’ view of literature within the framework of the historical development of humanism, see Spingarn, op. cit., whose conclusions on the matter appear on pp. 311- 313 of the 2d English ed. For further studies of particular aspects of Politian's scholarship, cf. the ‘supplemento bibliografico’ in V. Rossi, Il Quattrocento (Milan, 1956).

29 Ruberto, p. 247, had noted the derivation of this passage from A. Gellius, Noctes Atticae, XIII, 16, and recalled Zumbini's attribution of'philanthropia’ to English humanism (Saggi critici, 125).

30 Cf. Miscellanea 4 (Basle ed., p. 229).

31 The notion that the background of the poet's activity must be constituted by a harmonious and well-integrated body of encyclopedic learning was by then traditional in humanism. Cf., for an early example, Boccaccio, Cenealogiae, XIV, 7: ‘Hinc et liberalium aliarum artium et moralium atque naturalium saltern novisse principia necesse est; nee non et vocabulorum valere copia, vidisse monimenta maiorum, ac etiam meminisse et hystorias nationum, et regionum orbis, marium, fluviorum et montium dispositiones.’ Politian systematized this view, and logically extended it to include the literary scholar. The term was already referred to Vittorino: cf. Platina, B., Victorini Feltrensis vita in Vairani, Cremonensium monumenta Romae extantia (Rome, 1778)Google Scholar: ‘Laudabat illam quam Graeci vocant… asserens perfectum virum de natura, de moribus, de motu astrorum, de linearibus formis, de harmonia … disserere pro tempore et utilitate hominum oportere.’ But whereas Vittorino was aiming at the ‘perfect man', Politian wants to form the perfect scholar.

32 For a succinct note on part of this passage, see Garin, ‘L'ambiente del Poliziano’, pp. 32-33. The qualification was far from unusual, and Politian himself was so qualified by Sannazzaro in a venomous epigram where he was said to be the only flea devoted to ‘grammar': ‘Ait nescio quis Pulicianus | ni pulex mage sit vocandus hie, qui | unus grammaticus, sed his minutis] vel longe inferior, minutiorque est etc’ Cf. B. Croce, Conversazioni Critiche, serie v (1951²), p. 9.

33 I use Del Lungo's text, Le Selve e la Strega (Florence, 1925), pp. 220-222, but I correct a few readings on the basis of my collation with the Aldine (1498) and Basle (1553) editions. Here Del Lungo misprints haec against A and B.

34 A. subdititios.

35 Here and below Del Lungo writes litteratus, litterator, against both A and B.

36 For the importance of Politian's studies on legal literature, cf. Bandini, A. M., Ragionamento istorico sopra le collazioni delle fiorentine Pandette, fatte da Angelo Poliziano (Leghorn, 1762)Google Scholar; L. Sighinolfi, ‘Angelo Poliziano, L. Bolognini e le Pandette fiorentine’, Studi e memorie dell'Un. di Bologna VI, 1921; idem, ‘II Poliziano e il Carteromaco dai mss. di L. Bolognini', La Bibliqfilia XXIV (1922), 165-202. For his medical studies cf. Juliana Cotton Hill, ‘Death and Politian', Durham Univ. Jour, XXVI (1954), 96-105, and ‘Materia medica del Poliziano', in Poliziano e il suo tempo (Florence, 1957), 237-245

37 On this and some of the following historical notes cf. Funaioli, ‘Lineamenti’. It is interesting to find an appropriate rapprochement of Politian to Aristarchus in the judgment of a contemporary; cf. Marco Antonio Coccio Sabellico (1436-1506) in a letter to M. A. Danieli Raineri (Ep. X, 17 in Opera, Basle, 1560, III, co. 450): ‘cui [Pol.] si longior vita contigisset, tarn gravis fuisset romanae linguae censor, quam graecae fuit Aristarchus.’ Cited in Del Lungo, Florentia, p. 272.

38 ‘Cum ad hanc eandem lectionem philologus accessit, hoc subnotat: duos Romanos reges esse, quorum alter patrem non habet, alter matrem ...’.

39 ‘Eosdem libros cum grammaticus explicuit, primum verba expressa, reapse dici a Cicerone, id est res ipsa, in commentarium refert, nee minus sese, id est se ipse’, etc.

40 It will not be out of place to remember that Boccaccio's famous defense of poetry in the 14th book of his Genealogiae was ultimately an undisguised polemic against the philosophers’ attempt to deny any validity to literature and literary scholarship as distinct from philosophy. In this sense Boccaccio and Petrarch opened, more with their systematic emphasis upon such an attitude than with the novelty of their arguments taken singly, a movement of which Politian represents the most mature technical development.

41 with the meaning of ‘teacher of spelling and reading’ first appeared in Xenophon's Symposium 4, 27, Plato's Protagoras 312b, 326, Euthydemus 279c, Leges VII 812a, Charmides 159. Less commonly,

42 Consequently, grammatical science resulted in a compromise between the two opposed currents, and as such it could be defined as since the declension paradigms, were fixed, according to the analogists’ demands, but met the anomalists’ views by being varied and numerous. Cf. Funaioli, op. cit., p. 200; also Pauly-Wissowa, R.E. (1912), s. w. Grammatik,

43 ‘In Homeri poesi virtutum omnium vitiorumque exempla, omnium semina disciplinarum, omnium rerum humanarum simulacra effigiesque intueamur …’. See ‘Oratio in expositione Homeri’, in Opera (Basle, 1553), p. 479. This approach was based on the famous pamphlet on Homer attributed to Plutarch. Cf. Finsler, G., Homer in der Neuzeit (Leipzig, 1912), pp. 22 Google Scholar and 25-26; Toffanin, G., ‘L'Omero del Poliziano’, La Rinascita IV (1941), 544–554 Google Scholar

44 Eratosthenes (c. 275-c. 195 B.C.) was the last of the great Alexandrian polymaths, but he was no model for Politian. He fought against the interpretation of poets as chiefly educators and vindicated geography from Homer's fictions.

45 Cf. ‘L'ambiente del Poliziano', p. 22.

46 Cf. R. Sabbadini, , Storia del Ciceronianismo (Torino, 1885), pp. 34–42 Google Scholar, and Il Metodo, p. 63 etpassim, especially chs: IV and V.

47 Cf. Migliorini, B., Che cos'è un Vocabolario (Florence, 1951), p. 54 Google Scholar et passim, but more explicitly Garin, L'Educazione in Europa, chs. IV, 3, 4; VIII, 1, et passim

48 Cf. Lovejoy, A. O., The Great Chain of Being (Cambridge, Mass., 1936), pp. 34 Google Scholar and 37.

49 Cf. Platonis Dialogi, ed. I. Bekker (Berlin, 1818), 3:3, 427-480Google Scholar (with Latin tr.). The relevant passages correspond, in the Stephanus ed., to Epistle VII, 341B-345C; also cf. Phaedrus, 274B-278B. The authenticity of the Seventh Epistle still appears questionable to some; nevertheless its content seems indicative of a fair critical (or autocritical, if authentic) attitude. On the whole question see H. Cherniss's Plato bibliography in Lustrum IV (1959), especially nos. 424-437, 444-454, 1123-1124. At any rate, the problem clearly appears also in the dialogues, e.g. Phaedrus and Republic VI and VII.

As to Politian's general relationship with Platonism in view of his friendship for Ficino, Pico, and their circle, I am far from denying the possibility of Platonist strains and influences in certain areas of his activity (especially his poetic production in the vernacular). I am simply trying to pinpoint the elements of what I consider an unmistakable divergence from general Platonic attitudes in PoUtian's philological method as well as in his philosophical leanings.