1 Wieruszowski, Helene, Politics and Culture in Medieval Spain and Italy, Storia e letteratura, 12 (Rome, 1971), p. 373 Google Scholar.

2 What Aquinas accomplished for philosophy by defining the limits of natural reason and working out the implications, Petrarch in effect did for rhetoric. Twelfth-century rhetoricians like John of Salisbury and Pierre de Blois were apparently unable to integrate pagan ethical doctrines into a Christian framework. Thus Christian and pagan ideas lay side by side in their writings.

3 Curtius, Ernst R., European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans. Willard R. Trask (New York, 1963), p. 204 Google Scholar, sees Plato's attack on Homer in the Republic as the ‘culmination’ of the quarrel. See also Buck, August, Italienische Dichtungslehren vom Mittelalter bis zum Ausgang der Renaissance, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie, 94 (1952), p. 67 Google Scholar.

4 Metaphysics, I, 3, 983b28-30. For Aristotle's use of the term ‘theologians’ for the poets, see Curtius, European Literature, pp. 217-218.

5 Galletti, Alfredo, ‘La “ragione poetica” di Albertino Mussato ed i poeti-theologi,’ in Scritti varii di erudizione e di critica in onore di Rudolfo Renter (Turin, 1912), pp. 337–341 Google Scholar. Although Augustine, De civ. dei, 6:8, appears to reject allegorical interpretation of the poets, elsewhere he seems to legitimize its use, thereby making the poets’ fictions acceptable: ibid., 7:29. St. Jerome was the severest critic of the poets: Epist., XXI, 13. Yet he did not forbid Christians’ reading them and he himself occasionally interpreted the poets allegorically for his own purposes: Ferdinand Piper, ‘Virgilius als Theolog und Prophet des Heidenthums in der Kirche.’ Evangelischer Kalender, 13 (1862), 45-46, 53. For the attitude of early Christian writers specifically to Virgil's Ecloga IV see Courcelle, P., ‘Les exégèses chrétiennes de la quatrième éclogue,’ Revue des études anciennes, 59 (1957), 294–319 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Comparetti, Domenico, Virgilio nel medio evo (Florence, 1967), pp. 121–124 Google Scholar; and Karl Strecker, ‘ “Jam nova progenies caelo demittitur alto,” ‘ in Virgilio nel Medio Evo: Studi medievali, N.s. 5 (1932), 167fF. Jerome, however, unequivocally denied the validity of seeing Virgil as ‘a Christian without Christ,’ i.e., one who had knowledge of Christian truths before the advent of Christ: Epist., LIII, 7, cited in Comparetti, p. 124, n. 3.

7 Galletti, ‘La “ragione poetica,” ‘ pp. 341-350; Curtius, European Literature, pp. 217-219. For St. Thomas poetry had the least truth content of any of the disciplines: ‘poetica scientia est de his quae propter defectum veritatis non possunt a ratione capi; unde oportet quod quasi quibusdam similtudinibus ratio seducatur … ,’ Scriptum super libros Sententiarum, 1, prol., a.5, ad. 3, Opera omnia, 7 (Paris, 1873), 10; also quoted by Curtius, European Literature, p. 217. For medieval debate on Virgil and other poets see also Comparetti, Virgilio, especially pp. 91-117 and 125-146. On Abelard and Innocent III see Piper, ‘Virgilius als Theolog,’ pp. 66-67 and 70. On the varying fortunes of Boethius’ condemnation of the scenicae meretriculae in the Middle Ages see Klaus Heitmann, ‘Boethius’ Verdammung der Musen in Mittelalter,’ in Renatae Litterae, ed. Klaus Heitmann and Eckhart Schroeder (Frankfurt a. M., 1973), pp. 23-49.

8 On this debate, in addition to Galletti, ‘La “ragione poetica,” ‘ pp. 331-358, and Curtius, European Literature, pp. 214-221, see Buck, Italienische Dichtungslehren, pp. 69-72; Manlio Dazzi, Il Mussato preumanista (1261-1320.); I'ambiente e Vopera (Vicenza, 1964), pp. 108-123; Vinay, Gustavo, ‘Studi sul Mussato. 1: il Mussato e l'estetica medievale,’ Giornale storico della letteratura italiana, 126 (1949), 113–159 Google Scholar; and Vossler, Karl, Poetische Theorien in der italienischen Frührenaissance, Litterarhistorische Forschungen, 12 (Berlin, 1900), pp. 5–12 Google Scholar. The Mussato texts on poetry are published in Albertini Mussati Historia Augusta Henrici VII. Caesaris et alia quae extant opera (Venice, 1636); and in Graevius, Johannes G., Thesaurus antiquitatum et Historiarum Italiae, 9 vols. (Leiden, 1704-23), vi, pt. 2Google Scholar. The letter of fra Giovannino is found in the 1636 edition, pp. 70-73. Dazzi gives an Italian translation of a number of the metric letters of Mussato, pp. 169-195.

9 Epist., IV, 44-48.

10 Quoted by Giovannino from Mussato's first letter (now lost) to him; Opera, p. 71. In his rebuttal the friar attacked this method of applying the words of the poets to things of which they had never dreamed, confirming his own position with the authority of Jerome, above, n. 6. Although St. Jerome may have been instrumental in leading Aquinas to his low estimate of the poetic value of poetry, Giovannino's use of Jerome against the prophetic interpretation of Virgil is the first specific citation of Jerome's opinion in the Middle Ages known to me. Mussato, unwilling to oppose the authority of Jerome on this issue, replies (168-175): ‘Haec data desursum vatem cecinisse putabam / Grata mihi nimium monitus sed corrigor.’ Yet obviously still cherishing belief in the direct inspiration of God working in the ancient poets, he asks provocatively (172): ‘Unde vix ille Deus, quern sic monstraverat?’

11 Epist., VII, 20. Only with qualification, therefore, can one accept the judgment of Saitta, Giuseppe, Il pensiero italiano nell'Umanesimo e nel Rinascimento, 3 vols. (Florence, 1961)Google Scholar, 1, 11, that Mussato's position leads to ‘una commossa esaltazione della potenza creatrice dello spirito umano.’

12 Billanovich, Giuseppe, ‘Pietro Piccolo da Monteforte tra il Petrarca e il Boccaccio,’ Medioevo e Rinascimento, Studi in onore di Bruno Nardi, 2 vols. (Florence, 1955), I, 18–19 Google Scholar. There is no reason, moreover, to question Salutati's knowledge of these texts as well. He expressed admiration for the poetry and histories of Mussato in 1400 and copied Mussato's Somnium and Ecerinis with his own hand: Ullman, Berthold L., The Humanism of Coluccio Salutati, Medioevo e umanesimo, 4 (Padua, 1963), p. 237 Google Scholar.

13 Le familiari, ed. V. Rossi, Edizione nazionale delle opere di Francesco Petrarca, 4 vols. (Florence, 1933-42), II, 301-302. Also see, Inv. I, Invective contra medicum, ed. Pier G. Ricci, Storia e letteratura, 32 (Rome, 1950), p. 36.

14 Inv. in, Invective, p. 59.

15 Hortis, Attilio, Scritti inediti di Francesco Petrarca (Trieste, 1874), pp. 312–313 Google Scholar. Petrarch cites the same passage from Cicero in Inv. 1 but without any comment: Invective, p. 33.

16 Fam. II, 301. He also distinguishes in the same passage between Scripture and ancient poetry: ‘sed subiectum aliud, Quis negat? illic de Deo deque divinis, hie de diis hominibusque tractatur… .'

17 On the prophetic power of the Sibyls see Rerum memorandarum libri, ed. G. Billanovich, Edizione nazionale delle opere di Francesco Petrarca, v, pt. 1 (Florence, 1943), pp. 210-213. Also, De otio religioso, ed. G. Rotondo (finished posthumously by Guido Martellotti), Studi e testi, 195 (Vatican City, 1958), p. 29, and Fam. XXI, 8 (IV, 63).

18 De otio, p. 29. ‘Nobis vero iam, gratias illi qui usqueadeo immeritos nos dilexit, hec omnia sine ullis externis testibus clara sunt et ita se oculis fidelium divine lucis radii infundunt, ut nemo tam cecus sit qui non iustitie solem Christum mente perspiciat.… ‘ As for the Ec., IV:6-7, however, he grants that a ‘religiosus et pius lector’ can refer the passages to Christ if he wishes. Zabughin, Vladimiro, Vergilio net Rinascimento italiano, 2 vols. (Bologna, 1921-23), 1, 27 Google Scholar, characterizes the attitude as ‘timida, conciliante, onde l'interpretazione Christiana della quarta Ecloga, pur non ammessa scientificamente rimane suggerita quale pia anagoge al “religioso lettore” … ‘ For Petrarch's rejection of Virgil as a prophet see also, Nolhac, Pierre de, Petrarque et l'humanisme, 2 vols. (Paris, 1907), 1, 128 Google Scholar; and his ‘Virgile chez Petrarque,’ in Virgilio nel Medio Evo, pp. 220-221. For Nolhac Petrarch took the side ofjerome against Augustine. For a different interpretation see Trinkaus, Charles, In Our Image and Likeness, 2 vols. (London, 1970), II, 693 Google Scholar. Trinkaus cites a passage of Petrarch's Inv. III (Invective, pp. 71-72): ‘Primos nempe theologos apud gentes fuisse poetas et philosophorum maximi testantur, et sanctorum confirmat autoritas, et ipsum, si nescis, poete nomen indicat. In quibus maxime nobilitatus Orpheus, cuius decimoctavo civitatis eterne libro Augustinus meminit. “At nequiverunt quo destinaverant pervenire,” dicet aliquis. Fatebor. Nam perfecta cognitio veri Dei, non humani studii, sed celestis est grade. Laudandus tamen animus studiosissimorum hominum, qui certe quibus poterant viis ad optatam veri celsitudinem anhelabant, adeo ut ipsos quoque philosophos in hac tanta et tam necessaria inquisitione precederent. Credibile est etiam hos ardentissimos inquisitores veri ad id saltern pervenisse, quo humano perveniri poterat ingenio, ut—secundum illud Apostoli supra relatum—per ea que facta sunt, invisibilibus intellectis atque conspectis, prime cause et unius Dei qualemcunque notitam sortirentur; atque ita deinceps omnibus modis id egisse, ut—quod publice non audebant, eo quod nondum viva Veritas terris illuxerat—clam suaderent falsos deos esse, quos illusa plebs coleret.’ Commenting on this passage, Trinkaus writes: ‘Thus the affirmation of the existence of a secret tradition differing from the manifest meaning of their writings, in which the divine truth was known by inspired ancient pagan bards—poets or theologians —was clearly made by Petrarch. It is this theory of the ancient theologia poetica which is again taken up by the Platonists of the late Quattrocento as an essential part of their conception of a theologia platonica.’ I understand the passage cited as specifically denying divine inspiration and maintaining that the poets went ‘as far as they were able to go by human powers’ (Trinkaus’ translation).

19 Fam. IV, 252.

20 Seniles, 4, 5 (Opera quae extant [Basel, 1581], p. 787): ‘… mente inferos adeat, ubi fictionum nullus aut modus aut numerus.’

21 Genealogie deorum gentilium libri, ed. Vincenzo Romano, Scrittori d'ltalia, 200-201 (Bari, 1951), II, 752-753. My translations are based on English translations of Books XIV and XV by Osgood, Charles G., Boccaccio on Poetry (Princeton, 1930)Google Scholar.

22 Ibid., II, 699: ‘Poesis enim, quam negligentes abiciunt et ignari, est fervor quidam exquisite inveniendi atque dicendi, seu scribendi, quod inveneris. Qui, ex sinu dei procedens paucis mentibus, ut arbitror, in creatione conceditur, ex quo, quoniam mirabilis sit, rarissimi semper fuere poete. Huius enim fervoris sunt sublimes effectus, ut puta mentem in desiderium dicendi compellere, peregrinas et inauditas inventiones excogitare, meditatas ordine certo componere, ornare compositum inusitato quodam verborum atque sententiarum contextu, velamento fabuloso atque decenti veritatem contegere.’

23 Ibid., pp. 719-720; Vita di Dante, in Il comento alia divina commedia e gli altri scritti intorno a Dante, ed. Domenico Guerri, Scrittori d'ltalia, 84-86 (Bari, 1918), 1, 41; and Il comento, ibid., pp. 142-143. Therefore, he finds dealing with St. Augustine's prophetic interpretation of Eccles. 4.6-7 an awkward task: ibid., II, 9-10. The extent to which the text of Il comento was actually written by Boccaccio, however, is debatable. See also Il pritno compendio delta vita di Dante, ibid., 1, 90, where Boccaccio draws the distinction between the Scripture and ancient poetry as follows: ‘quella fu dettata dallo Spirito santo, il quale è tutto verità, e questa fu trovata dallo'ngegno degli uomini, li quali di quello Spirito o non ebbono alcuna conoscenza o non l'ebbono tanto piena.’ Admittedly, while the basic distinction is clear, the final clause leaves an ambiguity. The passage was omitted from the second compendio: ibid.

Tateo, Francesco, ‘ Retorica’ e ‘Poetica’ fra Medioevo e Rinascimento (Bari, 1960), pp. 72–73 Google Scholar, writing on Boccaccio's definition of poetry (see above, n. 22), comments: ‘Così è significativo il passaggio da una considerazione teologica del fervor (il furore, l'ispirazione divina), che pur traspare in queste pagine, ad una considerazione di esso meno determinata (un generico impulso, naturale, più che divino), che spinge l'uomo alia poesia, come ad ogni impegnata occupazione della sua anima.’ On the historical problem of priority in the invention of poetry Tateo (p. 80) suggests that ‘secondo la mentalita medievale, il definire la questione non poteva toccare a lui [Boccaccio], ma solo alia testimonianza degli autori….’ Buck, Italienische Dichtungslehren, p. 87, implies that both Petrarch and Boccaccio as well as Salutati believed that the poeta theologus was inspired ‘von einem göttlichen Hauch.’ While Trinkaus interprets Boccaccio as denying the direct influence of the Holy Spirit (In My Image, p. 695), he attenuates this affirmation later by writing (p. 713) that Landino in the next century ‘stresses much more firmly and explicitly than had Boccaccio or Salutati that the poet is divinely inspired.’ The case of Salutati, as we shall see, is complex, but for Boccaccio it seems clear that the pagan poets’ discovery of truth was ‘natural.’

24 Epistolario di Coluccio Salutati, ed. Francesco Novati, Fonti per la storia d'ltalia, 15-18 (Rome, 1891-1911), I, 300. Unless otherwise indicated quotations given in the text for the two letters to Zonarini, the final letter to Giovanni da San Miniato, and the letter to Giovanni Dominici are taken from the English translation of these letters by Emerton, Ephraim, Humanism and Tyranny (Cambridge, 1925), pp. 290–308 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 312-341, and 346-377.

25 Ibid., 1, 301-302.

26 Ibid., p. 302: ‘sanctius plane, fateor, et utilius lectioni sacre pagine sine intermissione temporis insudare; sed hec inventa gentilium ac etiam, quos adeo horres, carmina poetarum, si quis ea alta mente libraverit, non parvum edificant atque prosunt ad ea que fidei sunt et que legenda tuis litteris persuades.’

27 Commentum super Dantis Commediam, ed. J. P. Lacaita, 5 vols. (Florence, 1887), I, 55-56. Salutati was one of Benvenuto's consultants in the preparation of the work: Epist., 11, 76-80.

28 Ibid., I, 325. It would appear from the language of this letter that Zonarini had dispatched a letter entitled Transcursorium in response to the above. We do not know if Salutati answered it. Domenico Silvestri, Salutati's friend, read it in any case and wrote off a bitter attack on Zonarini's position. Irritated by Silvestri's letter and probably suspecting Salutati had encouraged it, the Bolognese chancellor sent an unsigned third letter to Salutati containing Silvestri's letter in its folds. Apparently this third letter of Zonarini on poetry arrived at the beginning of April but was temporarily misplaced. A month later, on May 5, 1379, however, Salutati, having found it, wrote a reply and joined to it a note of apology from Silvestri. Silvestri's attack on Zonarini has been published by my former student Marrone, Steven, ‘Domenico Silvestri's Defense of Poetry,’ Rinascimento, 2nd ser., 13 (1973), 125–132 Google Scholar.

29 Epist., 1, 324: ‘quid sperare possumus de poetarum carminibus, in quibus plerumque videtur aut sub allegoriarum mysterio aut in ipso verborum propatulo certissime veritatis divinus spiritus resonare?’

30 Ibid., pp. 328-329: ‘quod si novam progeniem, ut plerique opinantur, Christum, veram Dei sapientiam incarnatam, velimus accipere, adhuc tamen ab ilia circulationis obiectione in eo quod novam dixit et non redeuntem nonque iterandam facile purgabirur vates noster.’

31 Prima editio, De laboribus Herculis, ed. Berthold L. Ullman, 2 vols. (Zurich, 1951), II, 585-636. On the dating of the work, see Praefatio of this edition, p. vii.

32 Ibid., pp. 585-586.

33 The poets’ search for truth was influenced by Divine Providence (ibid., p. 588): ‘Videntes autem deum, totius mundi architectorem, omnia in sapientia fecisse cunctaque in providentia gubernare, cum tamen sapientia ipsa nichil aliud sit quam ipse deus, et ex deo per providentiam infinitos videntes effectus deum variis nominibus appellaverunt cum tamen unum et eundem esse sentirent.’

34 Ibid., p. 592: ‘Quod quia verissimum est et ita tenendum fideliter, ut scripsi, et tamen non nisi post fidei nostre documenta invenio humano generi revelatum, maxime admirationis est autorem veritatem huius tarn difficilis rei et per philosophos diversis et contrariis disputationibus explicate sub huius fabule involucro reliquisse, ut inter fictionum latebras tarn exquisite veritatis prodeat certitude’

35 Ibid.: ‘ille, inquam, deus et per hunc poetam nostrum hanc veritatem voluit apparere. Quod si poeta sensit, laudemus deum, qui sibi veritatis spiritum inspiravit. Sin autem, ut plures arbitrabuntur, hec nostri vatis non fuerit intentio, sed poema suum ad id quod intendo valeat adaptari, grates ago infinite dei sapientie que hanc veritatem in huius fabule serie dederit deprendisse.’ Salutati believed in the authenticity of Seneca's correspondence with St. Paul (Epist., 1, 150), yet this is never used as evidence in proving the philosopher's knowledge of Christian truth.

36 De laboribus Herculis, II, 612. Ullman, however, ties his dating to the death of Giovanni da Siena: ibid., I, vii.

37 Ibid., p. 76.

38 Epist., IV, 253. It seems clear that the need of four books became apparent as he was writing De laboribus Herculis, 1, 73: ‘Fateor, nee pudet, ingenue me de poetica dicere meditantem nee tot nee talia quot et qualia serie precedentis voluminis explicui cogitasse. Putabam uno vel duobus capitulis totam illam materiam expedire.’ He ascribes the decision to Divine Providence: ibid., p. 76.

39 Ullman, The Humanism, p. 25, n. 1, agrees that ‘most of Book I must have been finished by 1391.’ If this is the terminus ante quern for Book I, the section of the De laboribus Herculis which makes most of the claims found in the book for some sort of divine revelation to the pagan poets, then the position of Martin, Alfred von (Salutati und das humanistische Lebensideal [Berlin, 1916], p. 240, n. 1)Google Scholar and Baron, Hans (The Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance, 2nd ed. [Princeton, 1966], pp. 297–299)Google Scholar that Salutati became ‘more and more extreme in his defense of antiquity’ is open to question. Von Martin's quotations from Salutati's De seculo et religione, ed. Berthold L. Ullman (Florence, 1957), p. 37 —dated 1381-82—and his Defato etfortuna, Bk. II, c. 4 (Urb. Lat. 1184, fol. 13), dated 1396-97, designed to show Salutati's conservative attitude toward the poets before the last decade of his life, do not effectively prove his point. The passage from the De seculo condemns only the comic poets and that from the Defato criticizes merely the ‘poete lascivioris stili,’ who are specifically distinguished from Virgil and Terence (at least in the case of the Eunuch). On the other hand, in the Defato, Bk. II, c. 5, Virgil is referred to as ‘divinissimus’ (ibid., fol. 13^V).

40 Epist., IV, 76. Missing at the time of his death were the following parts of the work: Book I, ch. 14; Book II has no ch. 4; and many subjects supposedly to be treated in Book IV were not written. The letter of February 1, 1405, indicates that he still intended to finish the work ‘si dederit Deus compleri’ but there is no proof that he continued work on the manuscript.

41 Part of Book III, however, had to be written after 1389/90 because there is a reference in it to Salutati's letter to Giovanni da San Miniato composed about this time: Ullman, The Humanism, p. 59, n. 1. From letters dated 1398 (Epist., III, 311) and 1400 (ibid., p. 380) Salutati had not ceased work on the manuscript in these years.

42 De laboribus Herculis, 1, 10.

43 Salutati's account is very confused. On 1, 9, he dates poetry before Moses and discusses it as appearing first with the pagans. He contradicts this, 1, 81-82, when he makes Enoch the first poet. Also see below, n. 51.

44 Ibid., p. 70: ‘Et cum in prima verborum fronte turn vera proferantur, ut semper in divina scriptura, turn falsa, sicut apud litterarum secularium poetas sepius reperitur, id tamen quod sub figmento relinquitur intelligendum omnino sit verum, aut saltern pro vero receptum apud omnes gentes seu quamlibet philosophorum heresim vel hominum nationem. Ut etiam in reconditis sensibus exquisita et prorsus irreprehensibilis Veritas non curetur, salvo quam in sacris litteris, in quibus nefas est non vera secundum litteram scribere et abominabile, imo sacrilegum facinus intellectum qui non sit ipsa Veritas applicare.’ Similarly, ibid., p. 87.

45 Ibid., pp. 13-14. This distinction would not, however, cover prophetic statements of the poets regarding Christian truth.

46 Salutati claims use of his own judgment to interpret myths even when his understanding contradicts the position of previous writers (I, 46):'… cum poetarum figmenta posita sint in medio, nee uni homini, licet doctissimo, sed toti posteritati relicta sint: quis audeat amrmare quod, quisquis ille fuerit qui semel aliquid ipsorum exponens attigerit, reliquos quibus illud idem relictum sit a iure atque facultate expositionis excludat?’ After all, Fulgentius adds his interpretations to those of Anaximander, Xenophanes, Pisander, and others. If interpretations differ, let the reader judge them on their merits (I, 47). Salutati even concedes at certain points that he sometimes gives different interpretations of the same passage (III, 548-549 and 578). The reader should choose the interpretation he wishes.

47 Ibid., II, 461: ‘Quod si verum est infernum esse, quod divina testantur eloquia, certum esse potest divino quodam spiritu poetas inflates non a se solummodo repperisse fingendo sed in hanc veritatem inspiratione divini numinis et vere germaneque veritatis incidisse. Denique sive poete finxerint sive, quod vero similius esse crediderim, tanquam verum aliquod expresserint inferos esse et ad aliud hanc ordinaverint veritatem, certum est divini Christianique dogmatis intentionem esse quod infernus sit… .’

48 On Salutati's emphasis on spelling and textual accuracy see Ullman, The Humanism, pp. 99-106 and 108-111.

49 Letters to Giovanni da San Miniato are found in Epist., III, 221-231, 539-543, and IV, 170-205. For the dating of the letters, see Ullman, Berthold L., Studies in the Italian Renaissance, Storia e letteratura, 51 (Rome, 1955), pp. 229–230 and 249-251Google Scholar; also The Humanism, pp. 59-60. I accept Ullman's dates of circa 1389 for Epist., III, 221-231; 1398/9 for in, 539-543; and 1404/5 for IV, 170-205. On Lucula noctis see Ullman, The Humanism, pp. 63-65, and notes. Salutati also wrote two defenses of Virgil defending him from charges of error and immorality: Epist., III, 246-276, dated by Novati as 1398? and by Ullman about 1378 (The Humanism, p. 55, n. 2); and III, 232-238, dated by Novati 1397? Because these are not defenses of poetry but rather refutations of specific mistakes, they do not concern this discussion. Vergerio's attack on Malatesta is found in Epistolario di Pier Paolo Vergerio, ed. Leonard Smith, Fonti per la storia d'ltalia, 74 (Rome, 1934), pp. 189-202. Another defense by an unidentified writer is published by Robey, D. J. B., ‘Virgil's Statue at Mantua and the Defense of Poetry: An Unpublished Letter of 1397.’ Rinascimento, 2nd ser., 9 (1969), 191–203 Google Scholar.

50 Epist., III, 290-291, 542, and IV, 182.

51 Ibid., IV, 180-181. It should be emphasized here that no ‘secret tradition’ is involved. Salutati sees the poets taking over the poetic form (‘quern morem’) and not the content of Hebrew poetry.

52 Ibid., III, 226. The passage in context reads: ‘et quia tarn arduam rem eloqui, que sensum omnem transcendebat, ut pure intelligerentur, non poterant, figuras quasdam excogitaverunt, quibus illud summe divinitatis arcanum, quod ratione vel potius ante Dei revelationem extimatione perceperant, celebrarent atque referrent, et quanto sublimius loquendi genus etiam excultorum hominum ingenia reperire potuerunt, sive natura sive arte sive quodam usu et exercitatione dicendi, huic mysterio, quo maior adderetur auctoritas, dicaverunt.’

53 Ibid., p. 292. Buck, Italienische Dichtungslehren, p. 87, appears to me to distort Salutati's meaning here when he explicates the passage as meaning ‘Die allegorische Interpretation wird dann auch wieder mit der theologischen Poetik in Verbindung gebracht: Jede Dichtung ist letzten Endes göttlichen Ursprungs: auch aus heidnischen Dichtern, die den chrisdichen Gott nicht kannten, leuchtet oft der Strahl der göttlichen Wahrheit.’

54 Epist., IV, 178-180. Salutati had previously spoken of the figurative language of Scripture without branding it falsehood: see for example, De laboribus Herculis, 1, 8-9 and 15-16.

55 As has been seen, all three fourteenth-century humanists shared with many medieval scholars the belief that the poets knew truths they did not express unveiled to the public. Apart from Salutati in his early maturity, however, none of the three believed in a direct divine inspiration in the pagan poets. In the case of Boccaccio, Trinkaus (In Our Image, II, 695) seems to agree with this. Yet his analysis elsewhere implies that all three, like the Florentine Platonists of the next century, believed that the pagan poets had been divinely inspired: see notes 18 and 23 above. Buck, Italienische Dichtungslehren, pp. 87ff., handles the problem of continuity much as Trinkaus does. Central texts for defining the Neoplatonic theory of theologia platonica are Ficino's discussion in Platonica theologia de immortalitate animomm, lib. xiii, c. 2, in Marsile Ficin. Theologie platonicienne de Vimmortaliti des ames, ed. and trans. Raymond Marcel, 3 vols. (Paris, 1964-70), n, 203-204, and Cristoforo Landino's prologue to his commentary on Dante's Divina Commedia: ‘Laudi della poesia et de poeti,’ in Dante con Vespositione di Cristoforo Landino et di Alessandro Vellutello (Venice, 1564). See also Trinkaus, Charles, “The Unknown Quattrocento Poetics of Bartolommeo della Fonte,’ Studies in the Renaissance, 13 (1966), 42 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, n. 6. For a general characterization of the difference between the early and late Renaissance, see Bouwsma, William, ‘Changing Assumptions in Later Renaissance Culture,’ Viator, 7 (1976), 421–440 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 Cinquino, Joseph, ‘Coluccio Salutati, Defender of Poetry,’ Italica, 26 (1949), 135 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 Epist., IV, 214-215. For a summary of the arguments relating each of these areas to Christian education, see Ullman, The Humanism, pp. 65-68.

58 See my Coluccio Salutati and the Public Letters (Geneva, 1976), p. 84