Bruni And Petrarch Research Paper

Leonardo Bruni and Francis Petrarch were two very eloquent and esteemed authors of their time; however, that is not to say that there was no opposition to their views. In fact, many disapproved of their attitudes toward classical authors and the time period but even then that opposition sometimes served to define their characters and reinforce their eloquence. Bruni and Petrarch revere certain authors for their eloquence, and wisdom while condemn others for their ignorance. Because of their ideas of what defines a well-expressed and articulate author and what defines and unapprised one, their views of classical authors often equal each other and at other times rival each other.
Leonardo Bruni retained a gamut of attitudes toward classical
authors. His views on Cicero, Aristotle, and Dante are readily seen n his work, The Dialogues, Bruni speaks highly and praises both Cicero and Aristotle for their eloquence and knowledge. According to Bruni, illustrated by Niccolo Niccoli, philosophy was once brought from Greece into Italy by Cicero and watered by that golden stream of eloquence. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p. 67) Bruni rebukes the people for preserving authors such as Cassiodorus and Alcidus who wrote nonsense that, "even men of moderate learning never cared to read" instead of preserving the works of Cicero from which, "the muses of the Latin language never produced anything fairer". (Bruni, The Dialogues, p. 67) Bruni places the blame of this mistake on the ignorance of men and states that if they had attained even a superficial acquaintance with them (Cicero's works), they certainly would never have neglected Cicero's works, which were endowed with such eloquence that they would easily avoid being scorned by a not uncultivated reader. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 67) To Bruni, Cicero was so gratifying that even his name was pleasing to him. When speaking of Cicero, Bruni calls him by his full name, Marcus Tullius Cicero, so that, "he will be longer in my mouth". (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 68). That is to say, Bruni believed that just the name of Cicero contained an air of eloquence. To Bruni, Cicero was a man to be revered and praised. Cicero defined what was considered eloquent and was an innovator for the study of philosophy. Another man revered by Bruni is Aristotle. Aristotle, like Cicero was eloquent and knowledgeable, but unlike Cicero his works are less known in the sense that translations have wrongfully transcribed his views. For Bruni, who is to be believed to understand Aristotle's views, Aristotle is a man of elegance. The people, like Bruni, cite Aristotle often for his knowledge. Men often spoke of wisdom but if any one should ask them on whose authority and precepts they rely in this splendid wisdom of theirs, they say, ‘the Philosopher's' by which they mean Aristotle's. And when there is need to confirm something or other they bring forth the sayings in these books which they claim to be Aristotle's – words harsh, awkward, dissonant, which would war out anyone's ears. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 67). Aristotle was a man of great knowledge and when an idea was in question, men would quote the harsh words of Aristotle relying on the dictum that the philosopher said so. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 67). Bruni ridiculed men who only revered Aristotle for his knowledge and believed him to be man without eloquence. Cicero names Aristotle to be a wise, eloquent man, and Bruni, who was such a devout believer in Cicero, believes that this idea of Aristotle to be true. Bruni defends Aristotle when men claim that he should not be revered for his eloquence because all of his works are harsh and dissonant. Bruni believes that the books of Aristotle have suffered such a great transformation that were anyone to bring them to Aristotle himself, he would not recognize them as his own anymore than his own dogs recognized Actaeon. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 69) According the Cicero, Aristotle was devoted to eloquence and wrote with an incredible pleasantness but his translated works are troublesome and harsh to read, entangled in such obscurity that not even Sibyl or Oedipus would call them eloquent. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p. 69) Still, with Cicero's adamant claim that Aristotle was a man of elegance Bruni endeavors to claim this as well.
Even with his strong reverence of Cicero and Aristotle, Bruni leaves room to ridicule some ancient classical authors such as Dante, and Petrarch.
Bruni accuses Dante of having a lack of knowledge with respect to contemporary culture. In his writings, Dante describes Marcus Cato, who perished in the civil wars, as a very old man with a long white beard- an obvious display of ignorance, since he died at Utica in the forty-eighth year of his life. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 73). Bruni believes that Dante's most grievous and ignorant fault is damning Marcus Brutus, a man distinguished for justices, discretion, magnanimity, every virtue, because he slew Caesar and plucked from the robber's jaws the liberty of the Roman people, with the greatest penalty. In comparison Dante places Junius Brutus, a man known for driving out a king in the Elysian Fields. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 73). Dante ridicules Dante for his hypocrisy. While Dante praises Junius for driving out a king who received the kingdom justly, he condemns Marcus for doing away with a king who received the kingdom by force of arms. According to Bruni, Marcus should be exalted in heaven for cutting down a tyrant. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 73). Bruni also rebukes Dante for his lack of Latinity. As per Bruni, a poet is defined by a certain mastery of Latin. Since Dante cannot claim knowledge in that area he cannot be considered a
poet. Bruni also attacks Petrarch for his lack of eloquence and knowledge. Bruni believes that men who profess their knowledge but fail to demonstrate it should not be venerated. He believes that all men who witness such folly should follow in this way. According the Bruni, Petrarch's book, Africa, is an example of such idiocy, To Bruni, there is no friend who does not admit that it would have been preferable to never have written that book or to have it condemned to flames once it was written. Bruni wonders at the value of Petrarch when everyone agrees that what he claims to be his greatest work harms rather than helps is reputation. (Bruni, The Dialogues, p 74) Bruni does not understand how Petrarch when he, who professed great knowledge, wrote such a terrible book and yet still received great respect. He, one who could not demonstrate his knowledge should be treated any different than the poet who professes great knowledge in song yet fails to move an audience. Bruni holds no respect for Petrarch. Like Bruni, Petrarch acknowledges several different authors and has different views of each.
To Petrarch Cicero is an author to be revered, like the view of Bruni, but also ridiculed. To Petrarch, Cicero is a man with whose genius and style has particularly delighted him since his early youth. He finds great eloquence and power in the words of Cicero. (Petrarch, On His Own Ignorance and That of Many Others, p 78). However, even though Petrarch enjoys Cicero's works, he states that his published books about religion and the gods themselves seem to Petrarch more like an empty fable the more eloquently it is presented. This seems strange since Petrarch professes a great respect for Cicero's eloquence yet ridicules him for that eloquence. Bruni, in comparison, does not ever ridicule Cicero for is writings. Petrarch believes Cicero to be ignorant because of his mistakes regarding religion. Cicero sometimes regards Divine Providence as the "gods" and at other times just "god". This capricious idea of Divine Providence to Petrarch, a man of religion, labels Cicero as uneducated and hypocritical, much like Bruni's view of Dante. Petrarch states that Cicero devoted much energy into compiling what, as it seems to him, ought to never have been written or read either unless such futile stories are to be read and become known in order that the love of the True Deity and the Once God be emphasized and made known. ( Petrarch, On His Own Ignorance and Those of Many Others, p 91)
Petrarch does not respect Cicero because of his lack of faith in God. He lacks knowledge of contemporary culture. Unlike Bruni, Petrarch ridicules Aristotle. He writes that the naked name Aristotle, with just its four syllables delights many ignorant people. (Petrarch, On His Own Ignorance, p 64). This suggests that ignorant people are blinded with just the idea of his name, following on false premises, through others' ideas and experiences, that Aristotle was a great man. Petrarch goes on to say that Aristotle was a great man who knew much, but he was human and could well be ignorant of some things, even of a great many things. (Petrarch, On His Own Ignorance, p 74). That is to say, Petrarch believes Aristotle to be an ignorant man who made many mistakes. Petrarch does not revere Aristotle as Bruni does. Many more quotes of Aristotle's ignorance and his ability to be understood only by ignorant people like himself can be seen in his book, On His Own Ignorance. Petrarch and Bruni hold very different opinions of the classical authors of their time. Although some authors are revered, many are in fact criticized. Petrarch a man devoted to religion, ridicules Cicero for his lack of knowledge with respect to Divine Providence. He also criticizes Aristotle for his ignorance. Bruni on the other hand, reveres Cicero and Aristotle for their eloquence and power of words. He, in place, criticizes Dante and Petrarch for their ignorance. Thus, Bruni and Petrarch profess a whole range of views of classical authors.