But he was also connected with many other crowned heads and princes of Europe. Robert, King of Naples, was one of his earliest friends, and Petrarch's connection with him is of a literary, not of a political character. When the laurel crown of the poet was offered to Petrarch by the citizens of Rome, he first went to Naples (1341), to the court "of the great and most learned King Robert, who was distinguished not only for his wise government, but also for his great learning," in order to be examined by the King if he were deserving of the coveted honour. After an examination of three days, he was proclaimed worthy. In further proof of his esteem, the King made him his almoner, and took off his own royal robe, which he put upon him, and sent him with two ambassadors to Rome to be crowned. At the death of King Robert, two years later, Petrarch was sent by Pope Clement VI. as ambassador to Giovanna, Queen of Naples, who had succeeded to her father's throne. The young Queen, who inherited her father's taste for learning, was anxious to become better acquainted with Petrarch, and made him her chaplain.

In 1360 he was sent by Galeazzo Visconti to Paris, to congratulate King John of France upon his deliverance from captivity in England since the battle of Poitiers. He was also employed several times as ambassador in his native country. He was the intimate friend of Andrea Dandolo, and negotiated a treaty between the two famous republics of Genoa and Venice. The harangue which he delivered on this occasion is preserved as a marvel of eloquence in the library at Venice. Once again in this year, before his death (1373), he went to Venice to arrange the terms of a peace between that republic and his friends the Carraresi of Padua. It was the last service that he rendered his country, whose civil wars he had striven all his life to appease.

In the life of Petrarch, as in the lives of other great men, there are some strange contradictions, and his conduct 1 Epist. ad Post.

with respect to the Roman Tribune Rienzo presents a curious contrast to the rest of his political career. In the nineteenth century, when the universal cry is for liberty and freedom from all restraint, no apology is needed for the enthusiasm which the enterprise of Rienzo awakened in Petrarch's breast, and which poured itself forth in the well-known immortal Canzone, "Spirto gentil."1

The mind of Petrarch was imbued with classical studies; he was the fervent admirer of the ancient heroic deeds of his native country, and his affection for her increased the more she was oppressed and torn asunder by civil dis cords of which he was both the eyewitness and the victim, being through their means deprived of his patrimony and an exile. Proud, moreover, of the citizenship of Rome, which had been accorded to him on the Campidoglio the same day as his laurel wreath, we cannot wonder if, when he heard proclaimed from the summit of that famous hill the restoration of liberty, the destruction of tyrants, the reign of peace and justice-the "buono stato," as Rienzo himself called his new government-he felt so full of hope as to shut his eyes to the uncertainty and peril of the enterprise, and gave himself up, with all the power of his genius and the influence of his name, to bring about its accomplishment. Such revolutions were then comparatively new to the modern world; their dangerous character, the fearful jeopardy in which they place the lives of the thousands which they profess to benefit, had not then been experienced, as they have been over and over again since; a good result being the rare exception, and not the general rule. It is impossible, therefore, to blame Petrarch for believing Rienzo to be as highminded, as disinterested in the love of his country, as he was himself; for thinking him to be as incapable of abusing as he appeared to be capable of using his power. On the contrary, there is much to admire in the disinterestedness which led Petrarch to 1 Canz. ii.

risk, by his chivalrous defence of the Roman Tribune, the favours and benefits which he had so long enjoyed from the noble and powerful Roman family of the Colonna, whose political views were diametrically opposite to those entertained by Rienzo. Some biographers aver that Petrarch carried this disinterestedness too far, and, forgetting his obligations to the family who had been his benefactors, he wished them sacrificed, in common with the other great Roman families whom Rienzo attacked, to the general good of the cause. In one of his letters there seems to be some foundation for this statement. He writes:

"As to the two families who are at the head of the present tumult, the first (the Orsini) are no personal enemies of mine; the other (the Colonna) are, it is well known, not only my friends but the objects of my deep affection and veneration; nor does there exist any princely family in this world more dear to me. Yet the Republic is dearer to me than they are, and dearer still do I hold the peace and future welfare of Rome and Italy." 1

Petrarch, as has been already mentioned, had formed a friendship with Rienzo, when both, belonging to the same embassy, had used their utmost endeavours to induce the Pope to return to Avignon. When, five years later, the news reached him of what Rienzo had accomplished in Rome-that he had driven out the quarrelling nobles, had re-established liberty, had been given a dictatorship by the Roman people, and was ruling wisely and prudently-he thought his fervent longings for the prosperity and grandeur of Rome were about to be fulfilled. He wrote to Rienzo a letter of congratulation, and defended him, at some personal risk, before the Papal Court. Even when the Tribune, intoxicated with success and power, exhibited failings quite unworthy of the principles by which he pretended to be guided, and lost partisans while he gained enemies, Petrarch ignored his follies and continued to cor

1 Lettere di F. Petrarca, vol. ii. p. 192.

respond with him, imploring him not to betray the cause of liberty and justice. After the fall of Rienzo in 1348, when, driven from Rome, he had wandered about from Court to Court, and had finally been delivered up to the Pope by the Emperor, Petrarch again espoused his cause. He besought the Romans to come to the assistance of their Tribune, and on their refusing to help him he finally saved the life of Rienzo by spreading the rumour that he was a poet, as it was then considered sacrilege to take the life of anyone belonging to the "profession sacrée." Despite the failures of Rienzo and his miserable end, Petrarch never lost the enthusiasm which he had once felt for him. The charm, however, of his liberal politics. seems to have been dispelled from Petrarch's mind and to have been succeeded by totally opposite ideas, which are shown in his entreaties to the Emperor to descend into Italy. "A democracy," says Mr. Burke, in his "Reflections on the French Revolution," "has many striking points of resemblance with a tyranny."

It now only remains to speak of the literary influence exercised by Petrarch over his country, and how far he contributed to the revival of literature. He was, in fact, the first real restorer of polite letters. His fine taste led him to appreciate the beauties of Cicero and Virgil, and his ardent enthusiasm for them inspired his country with a thirst for classical knowledge. With the exception of Boccaccio, no one else had so keenly at heart the disinterring and bringing to the light the long-neglected Latin and Greek classics. In order to accomplish this, he wrote to all the learned men of the day, and sought among the ancient archives of cities and monasteries. By these means he discovered, in Venice, some of Cicero's letters, in Arezzo the oratorical institutions of Quintilian, in Liège two of Cicero's harangues, which he copied with his own hand (although he tell us the ink was as yellow as saffron)

1 Burke on the French Revolution, p. 144. 2 Lett. Sen. xv. 1.

because his indignation was so great against the amanuensi of the time, whose carelessness led them to commit the grossest errors in transcribing. Had it not been for Petrarch's unwearied efforts, many manuscripts would have perished, as several had done no long time before, forgotten and abandoned to dust and vermin in the monasteries.

The Greek classics were also destined to revive in the fourteenth century, and the glory of re-awakening in the minds of men the love of Greek poets and orators fell also to the lot of Petrarch and Boccaccio. The Greek friar Barlaam, a Calabrian by birth, but long resident in Greece, and considered one of the most learned men of that age, was entrusted by the Greek Emperor Cantacuzene with a mission to Italy. In the course of his travels, perhaps in pursuit of the Papal Court, he came to Avignon, where he met Petrarch, who, having heard of his fame, begged to be instructed by him in Greek. Petrarch afterwards pursued the study of the language with Leonzio Pilato, a disciple of Barlaam; but notwithstanding the assistance of two such great masters, he does not seem to have made much progress, and it was a source of some disappoint

ment to him not to be able to read with ease a copy of Homer, a most rare book in Italy at that time, which had been presented to him by Nicola Sigeros, Prætor of Romania. Still, although the attempts of Petrarch and Boccaccio were not attended with any immediate success, yet they excited a desire for learning, and prepared the way for the real revival of Greek literature a few years later. It may be that Petrarch was hindered from attaining to any perfection in Greek by the careful and lifelong study which he bestowed upon the Latin classics. Cicero and Virgil were his models both in prose and in verse, and he strove to form his style upon them in the folio volume of twelve hundred pages which contains his Latin works. This style, although far above the common order of Latin then employed in the schools, is considered

inferior to that of the scholars of the sixteenth century, and the fastidious taste of Erasmus was offended by the incorrectness and harshness of his style. Erasmus complains that Petrarch's writings, although full of thought, are defective in expression, and display the marks of labour without the polish of elegance. Nevertheless, whatever may be their demerits, there is no doubt that Petrarch rendered an incalculable service to literature in pointing out the road to good Latinity. If the great writers of the sixteenth century surpassed him in Latin prose and verse, still the glory must remain with him of being the first of the moderns who discovered the track of the ancients, and pointed out the road by which it was to be followed. The effect of his influence was like that ascribed by Dante to Virgil, the high moral tone of whose writings prepared men's minds for Christianity.

"Thou didst" (says Dante,' addressing Virgil),

"As one

Who journeying through the darkness bears a light

Behind that profits not himself, but makes his followers wise."

(the whole are too numerous to be cited The principal Latin works of Petrarch in this paper) may be classed under the following heads:-Philosophical Treatises; Historical Works; Dialogues; his Secret, entitled "De contemptu Mundi"-containing various clues to the events of his life, his tastes and character, and his most secret thoughts, but never intended to be made public; twelve Eclogues, which are covert satires upon the Court at Avighe formed a habit of writing to his non; his Letters. In imitation of Cicero, friends upon every subject, and although he burnt chests full of letters, seventeen books remain and have been published, making about three hundred letters in number. In these are to be found the whole mind of Petrarch; they partake more of the nature of treatises than of 1 Cary's Transl. See Purg. xxii. :"Facesti come quei che va di notte," &c.

letters, and they are full of interesting details.1 They are also most important as a history of the events and manners of his age; it is, however, to be hoped that the portraits of the Papal Court are overcharged. But whether he writes to the potentates of Italy, the Colonna family, Rienzo, for an instant master of Rome, the Prelates and Cardinals, the Emperor of Germany, or the Popes who succeeded each other upon their thrones at Avignon-he still maintains noble candour, and that quiet dignity belonging to philosophy and literature, the influence of which is felt and recognized even by the rulers of the earth.

His letters to his intimate friends prove that he was as steady in friendship as he was constant in love. The "Lettere delle Cose Familiari," which extended over a period of thirty-five years, he dedicates to his friend Luigi di Campinia,2 because "cominciai col tuo nome," he says in the last of these letters, "finisco con quello ;" and his friendship for "Lello," the "Lelio" of his letters, lasted equally long. Both these friendships were formed at the same time, at the house of Giacomo Colonna, Bishop of Lombez, the news of whose death reached Petrarch the same day as that of Laura, and to whom he paid the high compliment of coupling the two names together in one sonnet"My Pillar's fallen, my green Laurel dead." 3 He also addressed to him the beautiful Canzone, "O aspettata in ciel." 4

Philip, Bishop of Cabassoles, and Patriarch of Jerusalem, was another intimate friend. Valchiusa, where Petrarch spent so many years of his life, was in his diocese, and not far from it the Bishop had a country house. He was distinguished more by his talents and the variety of his

1 These letters have been translated into Italian by Giuseppe Fracassetti. They were published at Florence in 1866, with the addition of many interesting notes relative to Petrarch's life and times.

2 Luigi di Campinia was the "Socrate" of Petrarch's letters.

"Rotta è l'alta Colonna, e 'l verde Lauro." 4 Sonn. ii. Seconde Parte.

learning than by the careful performance of his episcopal functions, and Petrarch himself writes to him as

parvo Episcopo et magno Viro." Passing over many other friends, who cannot be mentioned for want of space, in 1349 Petrarch became acquainted with Boccaccio, who made a visit to Milan on purpose to see his illustrious fellow-citizen. On this occasion Petrarch presented him with a copy of his Latin Eclogues written in his own hand, and Boccaccio in return sent Petrarch from Florence a copy of the "Divina Commedia," which he had himself transcribed. The reply of Petrarch to Boccaccio on the receipt of this present is worth reading.1 He positively denies the charge of envy imputed to him, and reproves Boccaccio for supposing that to praise Dante would make him jealous; while he excuses himself for not having read the works of Dante, because he feared such a study would interfere with his own project of writing in the vulgar tongue, and that acquaintance with the "Divina Commedia" would makehim either an imitator or a plagiarist. The citizens of Florence, in the year 1351, entrusted Boccaccio with the pleasing task of recalling Petrarch from exile, in letters couched in the most flattering terms, imploring him to return to his native city, and restoring to him his confiscated patrimony. The intimacy between the two friends continued up to the time of Petrarch's death, and some affirm that Petrarch's last hours were spent in translating the "Decamerone," with which he was much delighted, into Latin-the purest Italian into indifferent Latin.

His poem called "Africa" is the last on the list of Petrarch's Latin works, although it was one of his earliest productions. It is a narrative in verse of the exploits of Scipio Africanus. The faults of this poem are said to predominate over its merits, and it is scarcely ever heard of or mentioned now. Petrarch was himself aware of its imperfections; it was painful to him to 1 See Lett. Fam. xxi. 15.

The

hear it spoken of, and in his old age he even wished to destroy it. Yet the fame acquired in the world by the first book (dedicated to King Robert of Naples) of this poem procured for Petrarch that crown of "caduchi allori", of which at one time he was so desirous. In the year 1340, on the same day, he received, in his peaceful retreat at Valchiusa, the simultaneous offer of the poet's wreath, from the Chancellor of the University of Paris and from the citizens of Rome. He gave the preference, not unnaturally, to his native country, and was crowned in the Capitol. The Roman Senate revived the custom for Petrarch after many years' disuse. ceremony was a curious one: the poet walked, surrounded by six of the principal citizens, and preceded by twelve youths of the noblest families of Rome, clothed in scarlet, to the Capitol. After his coronation there, accompanied by the same pompous attendance, he proceeded to St. Peter's, where he consecrated his laurel wreath, by causing it to be hung up in the dome of the church. But now the poem which obtained for Petrarch this extraordinary mark of honour lies forgotten and unread, while his Italian poetry, which he held in such little esteem that he wrote it on the spare eighty-four pages which remained at the end of his Latin works, has been the delight of Italy and of the scholars of other nations for the last five centuries. In truth

"The noise Of worldly fame is but a blast of wind That blows from divers points and shifts its

and solitude. We read of his peaceful retreats at Valchiusa, at Linterno, and, finally, at Arqua. finally, at Arqua. And yet, according to Tiraboschi, this did not prevent him from being the perfect model of a good traveller" because, in the descriptions which he has left behind him of the countries which he saw, he shows us what should be the plan and the observations of a learned traveller. He describes all the memorable things which are to be seen in Paris, in Ghent, in Liège, in Aix-la-Chapelle, Cologne, and Lyons, the manners and customs which he observed there, their progress in learning, and all the common traditions in vogue."

He has left behind him a beautiful account of his journey through the kingdom of Naples, and the reflections to which it gave rise.2 He intended also to visit the Holy Land, but was deterred by the perils of a long sea-voyage; nevertheless, he wrote-for the friend who was going there, and who had asked him to accompany him-the "Itinerarium Syriacum," which describes minutely the places he would pass through on his way, and the things which he ought particularly to observe. It was a book which shed much light on the obscure condition of history and geography of those times. Petrarch even went so far as to make a present of the library of books, which he had collected with so much care, to the Republic of Venice, because he found them such an impediment when he travelled, for they were

SO

numerous that he was obliged to hire several mules to carry them, and he could not bear to leave any behind. In return, the Venetian Senate issued a decree that the public money should be spent in buying and maintaining, with all the necessary expenses, a suitable house for Petrarch's sole use, and this house was "Il Palazzo delle due Torri nel sestiere di Castello."

It has been seen that Petrarch was zealous and earnest patriot, with his the father of Italian lyrical poetry; a country's best interests always at heart;