Brenda Deen SchildgenDantes Utopian Political Vision, the.docx

Brenda Deen Schildgen
Dante's Utopian Political Vision, the Roman Empire,
and the Salvation of Pagans
^^ "'[•••] velut in ultimum finem, omnia nostra opera
ordinantur, quia est pax
universalis [...]."
{Monarchia I. lv.5)'
"Ethics," writes Giorgio Agamben, "begins only when the good
is revealed to
consist in nothing other than a grasping of evil [...] truth is
revealed only by
giving a place to non-truth — that is, as a taking-place of the
false, as an
exposure of its own innermost impropriety" (Coming
Community IV). The
premise that truth cannot be understood except by showing the
false drives both
the ethical and poetic rhythms in the Commedia. Starting with
the false, the
poem consistently exposes its contrasting truth. However,
because of the
apparently moral standing of the virtuous pagans, one of the
more perplexing

and elusive aspects of this dichotomy between false and true is
the ethical
conundrum Dante poses about the judgment that condemns the
pagans to Limbo.
This essay argues that Dante's Utopian politics based on
Orosius's
historiographical legacy is precisely what directs him to exile
his Latin poets —
Virgil, Ovid, Horace, and Lucan — to Limbo. Their appearance
in the poem in
contrast to those pagans Dante selects for salvation suggests
that Dante believed
his ancient poets lacked the vision to see the Empire as the
instrument of
providential history.
In Inferno 4, Dante the author exalts himself ("m'essalto" 120)^
in the
company of the ancient poets, even while he seems to be
arguing that despite
their literary gifts, the poets deserved Limbo, the "verde
smalto" (118). Dante
returns to the issue of the virtuous excluded from salvation
throughout the poem,
but Paradiso 19 and 20 particularly address the problem. Indeed,
scholars have

argued that Par. 19: 70-78, where Dante raises the issue of the
salvation of non-
Christians, perhaps suggests Dante's doubts about the
condemnation of the
virtuous pagans in Limbo (Padoan 120-22; Foster; Sanguineti
235-54; Casella,
"Figurazione"). Of course, Dante does select certain figures
ft^om the ancient
' "[...] all our human actions are directed as to their Una! end.
That means is universal
peace."
^ Throughout this essay. I refer to the Giorgio Petrocchi critical
edition of The Divine
Comedy used by Singleton.
Annali d 'Italianistica 1 9 (200 1
)
52 Brenda Deen Schildgen
world as redeemed pagans — Statius, {Purg. 21 and 22), Cato
(Purg. 1), Trajan
(Par. 20; 44), and Ripheus (Par. 20: 68). Therefore, his decision
to exile the

ancient poets emphasizes that Dante chooses to distinguish
pagans he deemed
worthy of salvation from those he assigned to Limbo. Also, the
tantalizing void
created by the absence of Livy and "M buono Augusto" {/nf. 1:
71), and Virgil's
strong presence in Inferno and Purgatorio (along with the great
poets of his
century, Ovid, Horace, and Lucan) emphasizes Dante's
distinction between his
condemned Latin poets and other pagans he chose to save. The
ethics of
salvation is thus revealed by one "non-truth" giving way to an
absolute truth, but
the latter cannot be seen without also understanding and
knowing the other, as
Agamben argues.
Taking into consideration Dante's commitment to the Roman
imperial
model of government, the cultural legacy of Virgil, and the
status of the salvation
of pagans as an intellectual and theological issue from the
twelfth century
onwards, this essay examines the ethical criteria Dante adopts
for the salvation
of pagans.

Salvation of Pagans
The salvation of pagans is not nearly the unorthodox position
that many believe
it to be (Caperan; Sullivan). There were strong arguments from
the twelfth
century on reaching back to Pauline and Augustinian statements
that moral Jews
and pagans who had lived before the coming of Christ had equal
access to
salvation. For if all mankind had the same roots and the same
creator God, they
all had to have access to the same possibility of salvation. This
is the argument
that Augustine made on several occasions: "All together we are
members of
Christ and are his body; and not just we who are in this place
only, but
throughout the world; and not at this time only, but — what
shall I say — from
Abel the just man until the end of time, as long as man begets
and is begotten,
whoever among the just made his passage through this life,
whether now, that is,
not in this place, but in the present life, or in generations to
come, all the just are
this one body of Christ, and individually his members" (Serm.
341:9.11 Col.

1499-1500). Note here Augustine's emphasis on the Roman
virtue of "justice,"
which makes mankind members of the body of Christ. Similarly
in De Vera
Religione^ he wrote that in his time Christianity was the one
true religion
(XXV.46) but in the Retractationes^ pointing out that
Christianity did not exist in
antiquity, he contended that Christ's salvation had to be open to
all mankind
from the beginning of time because God's purpose in creating
the universe was
the salvation of humanity (I.xiii.3). Here there is no stipulation
about baptism or
"knowing" Christ intellectually.
The rediscovery of Aristotle in the twelfth century likewise
gave rise to
persuasive arguments, particularly presented by Peter Abelard,
among others,
that the Greeks — Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates — as well as
the great Latin
writers must have access to heaven under the same rules as the
Hebrew

Dante 's Political Values, the Roman Empire, and the Salvation
ofPagans 53
patriarchs {Introd. ad Theol. PL 178. I. 25. Col. 1034 C-D;
Theol. Christ II.
Col. 1 179C and Expositio ad. Rom.'" I Col. 802 D). But even
more important, as
argued by Hugh of St. Victor (De Sacram. 11. pt. Vl.vii), Albert
the Great
(Commentarii in tertium libri sententiarum, dist. XXV, B, art.
II, Ad. 6),
Thomas Aquinas {Summa Theologica. Secunda Secundae,
Quest. 1; art. VII),
and Bonaventure (!n tertium librum sententiarum. d. 25, a. 1,
q.2, ad. 6), for
those who had not received the sacrament of baptism, a
conversion of heart
might be sufficient, for the providence of God was deemed most
merciful
(Caperan 170-200). Thus there was widespread belief in the
possibility of
salvation, particularly for those who had lived before Christ, or
for those who
had never encountered Christianity but were nonetheless just.
Furthermore and
more importantly in a sense, from the twelfth century on, the
salvation of pagans
was a topic open to theological discussion without any absolute
convictions
regulating the conclusions except that those people who were
eligible for

salvation had to be virtuous.
Dante's Political Ideas
"Romanae spatium est urbis et orbis idem" ('The space of
Rome's city is the
same as the world" Fasti 2.684). Ovid's proclamation equates
the orbis terrarum
with the Roman Empire and with the city of Rome as its center.
This legacy of
the ancient Roman imperial hegemony shaped Dante's geo-
political imagination
because for him, the peace of the political world was
coterminous with the space
of the Roman Empire (Mazzotta 1-13). The birth of Christ
during the reign of
Augustus Caesar, first Roman Emperor, was, as for Orosius and
in contrast to
Augustine (Fortin vii-xxvi), too fortuitous for Dante to dismiss
as mere
coincidence. Dante, in fourteenth-century Italy plagued by civil
strife, whether
inter-city or intra-city, looked back to an unproblematic peace
he imaginatively
created out of the memories of the ancient Roman Empire, the
model for the time
of peace he desired for the present. Dante's desire is a desperate
attempt to

restore Rome as the world's center and to reinstate Roman civic
virtue
(Hollander and Rossi 74). In his own time, their value had been
shattered by
Italy's inter-city squabbling, the relocation of the Pope to
Avignon, and the
rejection of Henry VII, whom, in his Letters V, VI, and VII,
Dante had
welcomed to Italy to be crowned emperor-elect (1310-1312).
Dante's views on the Roman Empire are, of course, well known
to scholars
of his work.-^ Memory of the Roman imperium as a structure of
civic power
formed Dante's desire for a restored Roman Empire. In this
political vision, the
^ For works on Dante's idea of Rome, his politics, and ihe roles
of pope and emperor, see
Nardi. "11 concetto" 2 1 5-75 and 'intorno" 1 5 1 -3 1 3;
Silverstein 1 87-2 1 8; d'Entreves 311-
50; Barbi 49-68; Kantorowicz; Davis. Dante and the Idea
ofRome and "Dante's Vision"
23-41; De Angelis; Limentani 113-37; Mazzoni, "Teoresi" 9-
111; Mazzotta 66-106;
DuBois 28-51. 52-70; Ferrante 3-131; Schnapp 14-35; Sistrunk;
Armour; Scott 29-59.

virtues with which he characterized the Romans, justice in
particular, would rule,
and the Church would lose all temporal power. But in the
Monarchia, the
Commedia, Convivio, and the political letters, there is no
imperial infrastructure,
no concrete political program; only Utopian political visions
based on nostalgia
and desire. Davis sums up Dante's theory of history and
politics: "It rests on
memory and desire, memory of an alleged golden age under
Augustus, a
universal peace that Dante believed existed only once in human
history, and
desire for a savior, evidently a new Augustus, who would
restore this unique and
vanished order to the modern world" ("Dante and the Empire"
73).
To eliminate wars and their cause, as Dante proposed in the
Convivio, it is
necessary that "tutta la Terra, e quanto all'umana generazione a
possedere e

dato, esser Monarcia, cioe uno solo Principato e uno Principe
avere, il quale,
tutto possedendo e piu desiderare non possendo, li re tenga
contenti nelli termini
delli regni, sicche pace intra loro sia, nella quale si posino le
cittadi, e in questa
posa le vicinanze s'amino, in questo amore le case prendano
ogni loro bisogno,
il quale preso, Tuomo viva felicemente; ch'e quello per che
Tuomo e nato" (4. 4.
4). Dante's political vision incorporates the whole earth under a
single rule and a
single ruler! This grand poetic project, like his later prophetic
utterances in the
Paradiso, expresses his Utopian desire for peace in the world.
As Justinian says
in Paradiso 6, "Poi, presso al tempo che tutto 'I ciel vole / redur
lo mondo a suo
modo sereno, / Cesare per voler di Roma il tolle" (55-57).
Dante probably developed his political ideas under the influence
of Remigio
dei Girolami who was a lettore at the studium at the Dominican
Santa Maria
Novella in Florence (Davis, "The Florentine Studio"' 347-61).
Remigio, a

Florentine born in 1247, was a disciple of Thomas Aquinas in
Paris in 1269, and
died in 1319 in Florence. He gave courses at the studium that
lay people could
attend, and among his many sermons are De bono pads, De
iustitia, and De
peccato usurae, all of which are themes in Dante's poetry.
Remigio, in contrast
to Dante, however, developed a philosophy of community closer
to Thomistic,
Augustinian, and Aristotelian social-political thought, which
emphasized the idea
of social collectivism and civitas, both of which would affect a
general political
theory (Davis "Remigio de' Girolami"; De Matteis; Capitani, "II
De Peccato
Usure'';). Two other sources of inspiration for Dante's political
ideas,
particularly in terms of church-state relationships, are John of
Salisbury and
Bernard of Clairvaux. John's Policraticus discussed at length the
respective
roles of king and emperor (Pezard 163-91); likewise, Bernard's
De

Consideratione addressed the limits of papal power in the
secular domain
(Botterill 13). Unlike Remigio's more practical, although
visionary politics,
Dante's empire, emperor, and pope as conceived in the
Monorchia are Utopian
ideals (Capitani, "Spigolatura" 81), for he has constructed the
myth of the pax
romano as a radical critique of his own age of political turmoil
and fratricidal
conflict. The Monorchia is clearly in dialogue with the
documents issued by the
offices of the Emperor, the Pope, the King of France and the
King of Naples, but
ofPagans 55
Dante's politics nonetheless remain a project of his desires and
do not conclude
in a specific political action (Limentani 133; Davis, "Dante and
the Empire").
Whether the poet's idea of the empire was in support of Henry
V!l or
another emperor, hope fuelled his commitment to the possibility

of a world
unified by justice and liberty. This was the point made by
Giovanni Gentile in a
lecture titled "La profezia di Dante," delivered Feb. 17, 1918
{Studi di Dante
69). As a literary undertaking, Dante's political Utopia was a
mimesis of the
Roman Empire as ruled ideally by Justinian {Par. 6), according
to Law, not the
military-political project of Constantine or the political-
monarchical aspirations
of the French kings who had initiated the crusades (Schildgen,
"Dante and the
Crusades"). Dante was the first to advocate the idea of a
"universal temporal
community," which would demand the "collaboration of a
completely unified
human race" (Gilson 165-66).
Although Convivio (4. 5) and Monarchia (I. 16) recall the
historical time of
peace when Augustus Caesar reigned, by providence
contemporaneously with
the birth of Christ, to prove why Rome should be the center of
his Utopian plans,

Dante also turned to the legendary story of Aeneas and the
Virgilian text. He
features Aeneas's miscegenated family history and Rome's
hybrid culture to
support his argument for Rome as the heir to universal
government. In other
words, Rome's and the Romans' intrinsic superiority, in addition
to being
divinely supported {Convivio 4. 4), he argued, was earned by
virtue and by
hereditary right {Monarchia 2-3) (Silverstein). Rome was
uniquely situated to
take on leadership of the world because its exemplary "nobility"
was its "hybrid"
inheritance. Dante argued that through Aeneas Rome combined
all three
continents (Asia, Europe, and Africa), thus moving the center of
the world, in
Dante's view, to Italy through hereditary rights and
miscegenation. Dante
rereads history through poeta noster, Virgil, and he adopts the
Roman poets'
imperium as his literary project, even though some of these
poets were clearly

less optimistic about these universal ideals than Dante. Thus
Dante adopts the
idea of the Roman Empire of his Roman forbears, but his
attitude towards it
differs. While the Roman poets proclaim it, they simultaneously
veil their
proclamations with unresolved tensions about its goals and
achievements,
whereas Dante uses it as his symbolic geo-political Utopia that
he wishes his own
world to imitate.
The Legacy of Virgil
Critics generally agree that the Roman poets share a common
pessimism about
human behavior, particularly in the political sphere, which
called into question
the goals of the Empire."* This pessimism in his poetic
forebears may indeed lie
'^ Those who have taken up these tensions in the Roman poets
include Leach 191;
Johnson, Darkness 'isible, whose thesis is the visible darkness
in Virgil's poem; Conte

behind Dante's confinement of "le gente di molto valore" {Inf.
4, 44) to Limbo.
Virgil himself tells Dante that he and the others are there for no
other fault ("non
per altro rio" Inf. 4, 40) than that they did not adore God
properly. Now they live
in desire without hope, a fitting contrapasso for those who lived
without hope
but with desire in life:
E s' e' furon dinanzi al crislianesmo
non adorar debitamente a Dio;
e di questi cotai son io medesmo.
Per tai difetti. non per altro rio,
semo perduti, e sol di tanto otTesi
che sanza spemc vivemo in disio.
{Inferno 4, 37-42)
Because Christian political optimism and hope in Orosian
historiography was
linked to the Roman imperiunu this living without hope
distances the Roman

poets from Dante's idea of a redeemed history. It is true that the
added pathos of
Dante's parting from his maestro in Purgatorio 27 provides a
substantial
aesthetic reason for assigning Virgil to Limbo. But the tragic, or
hopeless, and
ultimately Stoic view of history that Virgil reveals in his poem
might also help
explain why Dante's Virgil ends up in Limbo along with all the
other Roman
poets who concomitantly shared Virgil's misgivings about the
Empire.
Dante deviates from medieval writers who allegorized Virgil
and made him
a hidden Christian. This reading habit was based on Eclogue 4,
which seemed to
prophesy the coming of the savior and also on allegorical
readings of the .Aeneid
that heralded a triumphant Christian Rome.'' Hollander and
others are correct in
141-84; Segal; Galinsky 210-61; DuBois 28-51; Armstrong 93-
116; Quint 21-96; and
.lohnson. Momentary Monsters.
^ The range of readings of Virgil in the long millennium called
the Middle Ages is

expansive. Besides the interpretation that he was a prophet of
Christianity, those readings
also include allegorizations of the Aeneid, as for example, by
Fulgentius, the fourth
century Macrobius. followed later by the twelfth century
Bernardus Silvestris. both of
whom advance neo-platonic readings. Servius's fourth-century
commentary adopted a
more literal approach, whereas the twelfth-century .lohn of
Salisbury's discussion of the
.Aeneid in Policralici I and II, as Augustine's earlier use and
reference to Virgil, reveal an
intense appreciation of his poetry, which could prove
philosophically useful. One might
also include here Dante's Monorchia, which, while interpreting
Virgil's poem, makes it a
political allegory for the founding of Rome as part of God's
providential plan. For a
recent and thorough summary work on these readings, see
Courcelle and Pierre and
Jeanne Courcelle. For readings of Virgil in the Middle Ages,
see Comparer's still
outstanding survey; for Servius's commentary, see Thomas; de
Lubac 233-62. Hollander

surveys the late classical and later traditions for reading Virgil,
which included
literal/historical, allegorical, and moral (Donatus. Servius.
Macrobius. Fulgentius.
Prudentius. Augustine, .lerome, Isidore of Seville, and
Bernardus Silvestris) in .lacoff and
ofPagans 57
arguing that Dante's Virgil is "first and foremost the Virgil of
the Aeneid ?ind not
the Virgil of the commentators" {Allegory 96). Particularly in
the Commedia
where he quotes the Aeneid frequently, the acuity of Dante's
reading habits
makes it very evident that he has moved beyond the
commentaries circulating in
his times. His reading is not the literal Virgil of Servius, nor the
allegorical
reading of Fulgentius, nor the neo-platonist allegory of
Bernardus Silvestris,
although hints of all of these can be seen in the Commedia.^
Dante's reading of
Virgil shares with Saint Augustine's a great appreciation for the
lyric power of

Virgil's poetry (Hagendahl):
"Or se' tu quel Virgilio e quella fonte
che spandi di parlar si largo fiume?"
"Tu se' lo mio maestro e '1 mio autore.
tu se' solo colui da cu' io lolsi
lo bello stilo che m'ha fatto onore"
(Inf. 1.79-80. 85-87)
Dante has in common with Augustine also a similar habit of
reading the
Aeneid as history. In the Monarchia, Dante freely uses Virgil's
story of Aeneas's
conquest of Latium to establish the superior nobility of the
Roman people and
their right to rule the world. In the Commedia, he continues his
imperial polemic,
but he sets the story of the founding of Rome against the poet
who sang its
glories. Having Virgil label his own poem a "tragedy" ("I'alta
mia tragedia" Inf.
20, 1 13), Dante presents his ancient friend as blind to the
providential history of
Rome. Virgil is "de li altri poeti onore e lume" (Inf. 1, 82); he
is Dante's guide
through "la citta dolente"; he is "il lume" (Purg. 22, 68) to

whom Statius could
say, "Per te poeta fui, per te cristiano" (Purg. 22, 73). However,
he is confined
to a permanent "esilio," rhymed with "Virgilio" {Par. 26, 116,
118), to where, as
Adam says, Dante's lady moved him ("mosse tua donna" Par.
26, 1 18), perhaps
an ironic use of the word, since Virgil can never move
(Barolini, Dante's Poets
253; Allan: Barolini, "Q.").
Schnapp 96-103. Of Dante's reading he writes, "the major
impulse behind Dante's sense
of Virgil springs from his reading Virgil as Virgil "read'
himself; treating the literal sense
as the record of actual events" (103). See also Mazzoni,
"Saggio" 29-206; Hollander.
"Dante's Misreadings" 79-93; 265-270; Padoan; lannucci 69-
128; DuBois 28-51;
Barolini, The Vndivine Comedy 76-80; see also Hollander, "II
Virgilio dantesco." For the
role of tensions between Augustine's critique of Virgil's poem
and Dante's undermining
of Virgil, see Mazzotta, Dante, Poet of the Desert 147-91;
Paratore; Pasquazi 45-69;
Hollander. "The Tragedy" 131-218.

^ Hollander, Allegory 92-103; see also Ronconi, who concludes
that "Dante sa che
scrittori cristiani. da Lattanzio a Prudenzio a Abelardo, intesero
I'ecloga come profetica;
ma il pari di S. Girolamo non crede a un Virgilio "cristiano
senza cristo'" (570).
Dante's Redeemed Pagans
The criterion for the salvation of the pagans in Dante's poem
provides an
important clue to his own theology of salvation for the ancient
world. In
Paradiso 19 and 20, Dante takes up his own concern about
whether there is
salvation outside of Christianity (Jacomuzzi). Canto 20, with
the appearance of
Ripheus, a pre-Christian pagan character (68) from Virgil's
Aeneid {U. 339, 394,
and 426-27), and Trajan, a post-Christian pagan (44-45),
introduces a question
about salvation outside of Christian time (Foster; Russo;
Schildgen, "Dante and
the Indus"). Likewise, the appearance of Cato, a pagan suicide
and supporter of

the Roman Republic in Purgatorio 1 and 2, unsettles any
convictions that the
poem conforms to a narrow version of Christianity. The
presence of these figures
on the way to salvation, or already saved souls, disrupts the
claims to an
exclusively Judeo-Christian heaven. When we consider both
whom among the
pagans Dante chose to save and whom he praised while leaving
in silence their
places in the afterlife, we can see an interesting pattern. In fact,
Caperan suggests
that Dante is more restrictive on the salvation of pagans than
the theology of his
own time gave him license to be (206-12). Therefore, we have
to look for some
special reasons for his choices. In Paradiso 20, Dante hints at
what
characteristics single out the saved pagans. Speaking of Trajan,
Dante has the
Eagle say,
"Che Tuna de lo 'nferno, u' non si ricdc
gia mai a buon voler. torno a I'ossa;
e cio di viva spene fu mercede:
di viva spene, che mise la possa
nc' prieghi fatti a Dio per suscitarla.

si che potesse sua voglia esser mossa."
(Par. 20. 106-111)
The other, Ripheus, "tutto suo amor la giu pose a drittura" (20,
121). Thus,
the first, Dante doubly emphasizes, possessed living hope,
whereas the second,
also given over to righteousness, possessed hope and love. What
made these
figures unique was their openness and commitment to hope and
to love. His
emphasis on love and hope (rather than the Roman cardinal
virtues alone) points
to the criteria Dante has elected to decide which pagans to save
and which to
leave in Limbo; their selection reflects this dispensation.
Dante sends Statius, who stands in poetic opposition to Virgil,
who is not
saved, to heaven. Like Ripheus, Cato, and Trajan, Statius was
deeply committed
to the good of the state, and, with Domitian's patronage, he was
a strong

ofPagans 59
supporter of the Empire.^ While claiming that Virgil's poetry
made him both a
poet and a Christian, Statius nonetheless is very different from
Virgil. But
although his poetry, like Virgil's, condemns Greek violence and
treachery, in
focusing on Greek failures Statius's poetry lacks Virgil's
pessimistic concern
with the generalized human incapacity to control impulses, an
emotional
handicap that Virgil places at the heart of history's blindness in
the Aeneid.
Virgil's position follows from the Stoic legacy that informs the
poetry of all his
Roman poetic companions in Limbo.
Although Stoicism in particular experienced a rebirth in the
Renaissance,
and Seneca's importance in the later period is well established
(Pena; Daraki;
Colish; Verbeke 1-19), it has not been generally recognized how
widespread
both Stoic and Epicurean ideas were in the Middle Ages. Cicero
and Seneca
were the two most important sources of Stoic ideas throughout
the Middle Ages,

but Ovid, Lucan, Horace, and Virgil all show interest in one or
the other
philosophy. Virgil's hint about the transmigration of souls in
Book VI of the
Aeneid (724-51) links him with Platonism and Stoic ethics, and
his sense of
ineluctable and destructive forces, whether of human passions
or of divine
origin, likewise links him with Stoicism. In the tradition of the
Stoic critique of
Roman and Macedonian imperial aggrandizement, Lucan's Book
10 of the
Pharsalia reflects this Stoic conviction. The Pythagorean
discourse of Book 15
in the Metamorphoses exposes Epicureanism as Ovid contrasts
Pythagorean
philosophy's Stoic ethic to Epicurean pleasure (15, 59-478).
Padoan had argued
that Dante used Fulgentius to develop an allegorical reading of
Statius's
Thebaid, whereby Theseus as hero became a figure for Christ.
More convincing
is Barolini's argument that Statius identifies himself with
providential history
because he says, echoing Virgil's "buon Augusto" {Inf. 1, 71),

that he was born
under '"1 buon Tito" {Purg. 21, 82; on this issue see: Barolini,
Dante's Poets
263; Di Scipio 85-86). Dante identifies Titus as one of the
critical emperors in
Justinian's providential history of Rome (Par. 6, 92). Thus one
dimension of
Dante's decision to save Statius is not merely his support of the
Empire, but
recognition that he represents an optimistic view of history,
which saw the
founding of Rome and the pacification of the Mediterranean
basin by Romans as
central moments in salvation history.
Ripheus — "Cadit et Ripheus, iustissimus unus / qui fuit in
Teucris et
servantissimus aequi" ("Ripheus, too, falls, foremost in justice
among the
' This fact was known in the Middle Ages because all medieval
Statius manuscripts
identified him with the reign of Domitian. For discussions of
Statius and his Christianity,
see Brugnoli. "Stazio in Dante" who argued that Statius's
Christianity was an invention
of Dante's. But in a more recent article he argues that, though

he believes that Dante had
special reasons for making Statius Christian, it was not his
invention ("Lo Stazio"). See
also Barolini, Dante's Poets 256-69; Heilbron; Padoan argues
that for Dante, Statius's
hero Theseus was a type of Christ figure (134-36).
Trojans, and most zealous for the right" Aeneid II, 426-27) — is
among the just
rulers in Paradiso (20, 68). As a Trojan noted, according to
Virgil, for justice,
Ripheus belongs to a select group of moral pre-Christian pagans
whose people
would participate in the providential founding of Rome. On the
other hand,
Dante recalls the emperor Trajan (b. 53, d. 117; reigned 98-1
17) who lived after
Christ's birth as the emperor "il cui valore / mosse Gregorio e la
sua gran
vittoria" ("whose worth moved Gregory to his great victory"
Purg. 10, 74-75).
Trajan's story was actually a celebrated exemplum of the
possibility of the
salvation of pagans in the period, because believing that Trajan

could be saved,
even after death, left open the possibility that any model pagan
could also be
saved (Caperan 167-68). A medieval tradition recorded in
Vincent of Beauvais's
Speculum Historiale (XI. 46; XXIII. 22) and told in the Vita S.
Gregorii Magni
of Paulus Diaconus, held that Pope Gregory the Great (590-
604), seeing the
famous story of a widow's appeal on Trajan's column, was so
"moved" that he
prayed that Trajan be released from hell (Vickers). John of
Salisbury's
Policraticus refers to Trajan as "Gloriam tamen militarem
moderatione
superavit, Romae et per provincias omnibus se aequalem
exhibens" ("By
moderation he has risen above military glory both at Rome and
throughout the
provinces, showing himself fair to all" Policraticus I.V.8).
Thomas Aquinas
praises him in the same way {Summa III, suppl.71.5). Tradition
…
Googlepedia: Turning Information

Behaviors into Research Skills
by Randall McClure
This essay is a chapter in Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing,
Volume 2, a
peer-reviewed open textbook series for the writing classroom.
Download the full volume and individual chapters from:
• Writing Spaces: http://writingspaces.org/essays
• Parlor Press: http://parlorpress.com/writingspaces
• WAC Clearinghouse: http://wac.colostate.edu/books/
Print versions of the volume are available for purchase directly
from Parlor
Press and through other booksellers.
This essay is available under a Creative Commons License
subject to the Writing Spaces'
Terms of Use. More information, such as the specific license
being used, is available at the
bottom of the first page of the chapter.
© 2011 by the respective author(s). For reprint rights and other
permissions, contact the
original author(s).
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Writing spaces : readings on writing. Volume 1 / edited by
Charles Lowe and Pavel
Zemliansky.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-60235-184-4 (pbk. : alk. paper) -- ISBN 978-1-
60235-185-1 (adobe ebook)
1. College readers. 2. English language--Rhetoric. I. Lowe,
Charles, 1965- II. Zemliansky,

Pavel.
PE1417.W735 2010
808’.0427--dc22
2010019487
http://writingspaces.org/essays
http://wac.colostate.edu/books/
http://parlorpress.com/writingspaces
221
Googlepedia: Turning Information
Behaviors into Research Skills
Randall McClure
Introduction
The ways in which most writers find, evaluate, and use
information
have changed significantly over the past ten years.* A recent
study, for
example, has shown that as many as nine out of every ten
students
begin the process of searching for information on the Web,
either us-
ing a search engine, particularly Google, or an online
encyclopedia,
notably Wikipedia (Nicholas, Rowlands and Huntington 7). I
believe
this finding is true of most writers, not just students like you;
the Web
is our research home.
To illustrate for you how the Web has changed the nature of re-

search and, as a result, the shape of research-based writing, I
trace in
this chapter the early research decisions of two first year
composition
students, Susan and Edward, one who begins research in Google
and
another who starts in Wikipedia. Part narrative, part analysis,
part
reflection, and part instruction, this chapter blends the voices of
the
student researchers with me, in the process of seeking a new
way to
research.
Please understand that I do not plan to dismiss the use of what I
call “Googlepedia” in seeking information. As James P. Purdy
writes
* This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-
Noncommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License and is
subject to the
Writing Spaces’ Terms of Use. To view a copy of this license,
visit http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter
to Creative
Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco,
California, 94105,
USA. To view the Writing Spaces’ Terms of Use, visit
http://writingspaces.
org/terms-of-use.
Randall McClure222

in his essay on Wikipedia in Volume 1 of Writing Spaces,
“[Y]ou are
going to use [Google and] Wikipedia as a source for writing
assign-
ments regardless of cautions against [them], so it is more
helpful to ad-
dress ways to use [them] than to ignore [them]” (205).
Therefore, my
goal in this chapter is to suggest a blended research process that
begins
with the initial tendency to use Google and Wikipedia and ends
in the
university library. While Susan and Edward find Googlepedia to
be
“good enough” for conducting research, this chapter shows you
why
that’s not true and why the resources provided by your school
library
are still much more effective for conducting research. In doing
so, I
include comments from Susan and Edward on developing their
exist-
ing information behaviors into academic research skills, and I
offer
questions to help you consider your own information behaviors
and
research skills.
Understanding Information Literacy
Before I work with you to move your information behaviors
inside the
online academic library, you need to understand the concept of
in-
formation literacy. The American Library Association (ALA)
and the

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) define
informa-
tion literacy “a set of abilities requiring individuals to
recognize when
information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate,
and use
effectively the needed information” (American Library
Association).
The ACRL further acknowledges that information literacy is
“increas-
ingly important in the contemporary environment of rapid
techno-
logical change and proliferating information resources. Because
of the
escalating complexity of this environment, individuals are faced
with
diverse, abundant information choices” (Association of College
and
Research Libraries). In short, information literacy is a set of
skills you
need to understand, find, and use information.
I am certain that you are already familiar with conducting
research
on the Web, and I admit that finding information quickly and
effort-
lessly is certainly alluring. But what about the reliability of the
infor-
mation you find? Do you ever question if the information you
find is
really accurate or true? If you have, then please know that you
are not
alone in your questions. You might even find some comfort in
my be-
lief that conducting sound academic research is more
challenging now

than at any other time in the history of the modern university.
Turning Information Behaviors into Research Skills 223
Writing in a Googlepedia World
Teachers Tiffany J. Hunt and Bud Hunt explain that the web-
based
encyclopedia Wikipedia is not just a collection of web pages
built on
wiki technology1, it is a web-based community of readers and
writers,
and a trusted one at that. Whereas most student users of
Wikipedia
trust the community of writers that contribute to the
development
of its pages of information, many teachers still criticize or
disregard
Wikipedia because of its open participation in the writing
process,
possible unreliability, and at times shallow coverage (Purdy
209), since
“anyone, at any time, can modify by simply clicking on an ‘edit
this
page’ button found at the top of every Web entry” (Hunt and
Hunt
91). However, the disregard for Wikipedia appears to be on the
de-
cline, and more and more users each day believe the
“information is
trustworthy and useful because, over time, many, many people
have
contributed their ideas, thoughts, passions, and the facts they
learned

both in school and in the world” (91). Wikipedia and Google are
so
much a part of the research process for writers today that to
ignore
their role and refuse to work with these tools seems ludicrous.
Still, the accuracy and verifiability of information are not as
clear
and consistent in many sources identified through Wikipedia
and
Google as they are with sources found in most libraries. For this
rea-
son, I am sure you have been steered away at least once from
informa-
tion obtained from search engines like Yahoo and Google as
well as
online encyclopedias like Answers.com and Wikipedia. Despite
the
resistance that’s out there, Alison J. Head and Michael
Eisenberg from
Project Information Literacy report from their interviews with
groups
of students on six college campuses that “Wikipedia was a
unique
and indispensible research source for students . . . there was a
strong
consensus among students that their research process began with
[it]”
(11). The suggestion by Head and Eisenberg that many students
go
to Google and Wikipedia first, and that many of them go to
these
websites in order to get a sense of the big picture (11), is
confirmed
in the advice offered by Purdy when he writes that Wikipedia
allows

you to “get a sense of the multiple aspects or angles” on a topic
(209).
Wikipedia brings ideas together on a single page as well as
provides an
accompanying narrative or summary that writers are often
looking for
during their research, particularly in the early stages of it. Head
and
Eisenberg term this Googlepedia-based information behavior
“pre-
Randall McClure224
search,” specifically pre-researching a topic before moving onto
more
focused, serious, and often library-based research.
The concept of presearch is an important one for this chapter;
Ed-
ward’s reliance on Wikipedia and Susan’s reliance on Google
are not
research crutches, but useful presearch tools. However, Edward
and
Susan admit they would not have made the research move into
the
virtual library to conduct database-oriented research without my
in-
tervention in the research process. Both students originally
viewed this
move like many students do, as simply unnecessary for most
writing
situations.
Talkin’ Bout This Generation

Wikipedia might be the starting point for some writers;
however,
Google remains the starting point for most students I know. In
fact,
one group of researchers believes this information behavior—
students’
affinity for all things “search engine”—is so prominent that it
has
dubbed the current generation of students “the Google
Generation.”
Citing not only a 2006 article from EDUCAUSE Review but
also,
interestingly enough, the Wikipedia discussion of the term, a
group
of researchers from University College London (UCL) note the
“first
port of call for knowledge [for the Google Generation] is the
[I]nter-
net and a search engine, Google being the most popular”
(Nicholas,
Rowlands and Huntington 7). In other words, the UCL
researchers
argue that “students have already developed an ingrained coping
be-
havior: they have learned to ‘get by’ with Google” (23). I
believe we
all are immersed and comfortable in the information world
created by
Googlepedia, yet there is much more to research than this.
Despite the fact that it would be easy and understandable to dis-
miss your information behaviors or to just tell you never to use
Google
or Wikipedia, I agree with teacher and author Troy Swanson
when he

argues, “We [teachers] need to recognize that our students enter
our
[college] classrooms with their own experiences as users of
informa-
tion” (265). In my attempt though to show you that research is
more
than just a five-minute stroll through Googlepedia, I first
acknowl-
edge what you already do when conducting research. I then use
these
behaviors as part of a process that is still quick, but much more
effi-
cient. By mirroring what writers do with Googlepedia and
building on
that process, this essay will significantly improve your research
skills
and assist you with writing projects in college and your
professional
career.
The Wikipedia Hoax
At this point in the chapter, let me pause to provide an example
of
why learning to be information literate and research savvy is so
im-
portant. In his discussion of the “Wikipedia Hoax,” Associated
Press
writer Shawn Pogatchnik tells the story of University College
Dublin
student Shane Fitzgerald who “posted a poetic but phony” quote

sup-
posedly by French composer Maurice Jarre in order to test how
the
“Internet-dependent media was upholding accuracy and
accountabil-
ity.” Fitzgerald posted his fake quote on Wikipedia within hours
of the
composer’s death, and later found that several newspaper
outlets had
picked up and published the quote, even though the
administrators of
Wikipedia recognized and removed the bogus post. The
administra-
tors removed it quickly, “but not quickly enough to keep some
journal-
ists from cutting and pasting it first.”
It can safely be assumed these journalists exhibited nearly all of
the
information behaviors that most teachers and librarians find
discon-
certing:
• searching in Wikipedia or Google
• power browsing quickly through websites for ideas and
quotes
• cutting-and-pasting information from the Web into one’s own
writing without providing proper attribution for it
• viewing information as free, accurate, and trustworthy
• treating online information as equal to print information
Of course, it is impossible to actually prove the journalists used
these
behaviors without direct observation of their research processes,
but it

seems likely. In the end, their Googlepedia research hurt not
only their
writing, but also their credibility as journalists.
Edward, Susan, and Googlepedia
Edward and Susan are two students comfortable in the world of
Googlepedia, beginning and, in most cases, ending their
research
with a search engine (both students claimed to use Google over
any
other search engine) or online encyclopedia (both were only
aware
Randall McClure226
of Wikipedia). Interestingly, Edward and Susan often move
between
Google and Wikipedia in the process of conducting their
research,
switching back and forth between the two sources of
information
when they believe the need exists.
For an upcoming research writing project on the topic of
outsourc-
ing American jobs, Susan chooses to begin her preliminary
research
with Google while Edward chooses to start with Wikipedia. The
stu-
dents engage in preliminary research, research at the beginning
of the
research writing process; yet, they work with a limited amount
of in-

formation about the assignment, a situation still common in
many
college courses. The students know they have to write an
argumenta-
tive essay of several pages and use at least five sources of
information,
sources they are required to find on their own. The students
know the
research-based essay is a major assignment for a college course,
and
they begin their searches in Googlepedia despite the sources
available
to them through the university library.
Edward
Edward begins his research in Wikipedia, spending less than
one min-
ute to find and skim the summary paragraph on the main page
for
“outsourcing.” After reading the summary paragraph2 to, in
Edward’s
words, “make sure I had a good understanding of the topic,” and
scanning the rest of the main page (interestingly) from bottom
to
top, Edward focuses his reading on the page section titled
“criticism.”
Edward explains his focus,
Since I am writing an argumentative paper, I first skimmed
the whole page for ideas that stood out. I then looked at the
references for a clearly opinionated essay to see what other
people are talking about and to compare my ideas [on the
subject] to theirs,’ preferably if they have an opposing view.
This search for public opinion leads Edward to examine polls as

well
as skim related web pages linked to the Wikipedia page on
outsourc-
ing, and Edward quickly settles on the “reasons for
outsourcing” in
the criticism section of the Wikipedia page. Edward explains, “I
am
examining the pros of outsourcing as I am against it, and it
seems that
companies do not want to take responsibility for [outsourcing].”
It is at this point, barely fifteen minutes into his research, that
Edward returns to the top of the Wikipedia main page on
outsourc-
ing to re-read the opening summary on the topic, as I stop him
to
discuss the thesis he is developing on corporate responsibility
for the
outsourcing problem. We discuss what I make of Edward’s early
re-
search; Edward relies on Wikipedia for a broad overview, to
verify his
understanding on a subject.
Presearch into Research
Analysis: Some teachers and librarians might argue against it,
but I believe starting a search for information in Wikipedia has
its benefits. It is difficult enough to write a college-level argu-
mentative essay on a topic you know well. For a topic you know
little about, you need to first learn more about it. Getting a
basic understanding of the topic or issue through an encyclope-

dia, even an online one, has been a recommended practice for
decades. Some librarians and teachers question the reliability of
online encyclopedias like Wikipedia, but this is not the point
of the instruction I am offering to you. I want you to keep go-
ing, to not stop your search after consulting Wikipedia. To use
it as a starting point, not a final destination.
Recommendation: Deepen your understanding. Formulate a
working thesis. Reread the pages as Edward has done here.
This is recursive preliminary research, a process that will
strengthen your research and your writing.
After our brief discussion to flush out his process in conducting
research for an argumentative essay, I ask Edward to continue
his re-
search. Though he seems to identify a research focus, corporate
re-
sponsibility, and working thesis—that American corporations
should
be held responsible for jobs they ship overseas—Edward still
chooses
to stay on the outsourcing page in Wikipedia to search for
additional
information.
He then searches the Wikipedia page for what he believes are
links
to expert opinions along with more specific sources that interest
him
and, in his approach to argumentative writing, contradict his
opinion
on the subject. Unlike Susan who later chooses to side with the
major-
ity opinion, Edward wants to turn his essay into a debate,
regardless of
where his ideas fall on the spectrum of public opinion.

Randall McClure228
Research and Critical/Creative Thinking
Analysis: Edward’s reliance on Wikipedia at this point is still
not a concern. He is starting to link out to other resources, just
as you should do. I, however, suggest that you spend more time
at this point in your research to build your knowledge founda-
tion. Your position on the issue should become clearer with the
more you read, the more you talk to teachers and peers, and the
more you explore the library and the open Web.
Recommendation: Keep exploring and branching out. Don’t
focus your research at this point. Let your research help focus
your thinking.
Staying in Wikipedia leads Edward to texts such as “Outsourc-
ing Bogeyman” and “Outsourcing Job Killer.” Edward explains
that
his choices are largely based on the titles of the texts (clearly
evident
from these examples), not the authors, their credentials, the
websites
or sources that contain the texts, the URLs, or perhaps their
domain
names (e.g. .org, .edu, .net, .com)—characteristics of Web-
based
sources that most academic researchers consider. Even though
Edward
acknowledges that the source of the “Bogeyman” text is the
journal
Business Week, for example, he admits selecting the text based
on the
title alone, claiming “I don’t read [Business Week], so I can’t

judge the
source’s quality.”
Research and Credibility
Analysis: Understanding the credentials of the author or source
is particularly important in conducting sound academic re-
search and especially during the age of the open Web. We live
a world where most anyone with an Internet connection can
post ideas and information to the Web. Therefore, it is always
a good idea to understand and verify the sources of the infor-
mation you use in your writing. Would you want to use, even
unintentionally, incorrect information for a report you were
writing at your job? Of course not. Understanding the cred-
ibility of a source is a habit of mind that should be practiced in
your first year composition course and has value way beyond it.
Recommendation: Take a few minutes to establish the cred-
ibility of your sources. Knowing who said or wrote it, what
credentials he or she has, what respect the publication, website,
or source has where you found the ideas and information, and
discussing these concepts with your peers, librarian, and writ-
ing teacher should dramatically improve the essays and reports
that result from your research.
What Edward trusts are the ideas contained in the text, believ-
ing the writer uses trustworthy information, thereby deferring
source
evaluation to the author of the text. For example, Edward
comments
of the “Job Killer” text, “After reading the first three
paragraphs, I

knew I was going to use this source.” Edward adds that the
convinc-
ing factor is the author’s apparent reliance on two studies
conducted
at Duke University, each attempting to validate a different side
of the
outsourcing debate and the roles of corporations in it. From
Edward’s
statement, it is clear he needs help to better understand the
criteria
most scholars use for evaluating and selecting Web-based
sources:
• Check the purpose of the website (the extension “.edu,”
“.org,”
“.gov,” “.com” can often indicate the orientation or purpose of
the site).
• Locate and consider the author’s credentials to establish cred-
ibility.
• Look for recent updates to establish currency or relevancy.
• Examine the visual elements of the site such as links to estab-
lish relationships with other sources of information. (Clines
and Cobb 2)
A Text’s Credibility Is Your Credibility
Analysis: Viewed one way, Edward is trying to establish the
credibility of his source. However, he doesn’t dig deep enough
or perhaps is too easily convinced. What if the studies at Duke,
for instance, were conducted by undergraduate students and
not faculty members? Would that influence the quality of the
research projects and their findings?
Recommendation: Know as much as you can about your source

and do your best to present his or her credentials in your writ-
ing. As I tell my own students, give “props” to your sources
when and where you can in the text of your essays and reports
that incorporate source material. Lead-ins such as “Joe Smith,
Professor of Art at Syracuse University, writes that . . .” are
Randall McClure230
especially helpful in giving props. Ask your teacher for more
strategies to acknowledge your sources.
Edward’s next step in his research process reveals more under-
standing than you might think. Interested in the Duke
University
studies cited in the “Job Killer” text, Edward moves from
Wikipedia
to Google in an attempt to find, in his words, “the original
source
and all its facts.” This research move is not for the reason that I
would
have searched for the original text (I would be looking to verify
the
studies and validate their findings); still, Edward indicates that
he
always searches for and uses the original texts, what many
teachers
would agree is a wise decision. Finding the original studies in
his ini-
tial Google query, Edward’s research move here also reminds us
of a
new research reality: many original sources previously, and
often only,
available through campus libraries are now available through
search

engines like Google and Google Scholar.
After only thirty minutes into his preliminary research, it’s the
ap-
propriate time for Edward to move his Googlepedia-based
approach
significantly into the academic world, specifically to the online
library.
Before working with Edward to bring his Googlepedia-based re-
search process together with a more traditional academic one, I
ask
Edward about library-based sources, particularly online
databases. His
response is the following: “I am more familiar with the Internet,
so
there is no reason [to use the library databases]. It is not that
the library
and databases are a hassle or the library is an uncomfortable
space, but
I can get this research done in bed.” Edward’s response is
interesting
here as it conflicts with the many reports that students often
find the
college library to be an intimidating place. Edward doesn’t find
the
library to be overwhelming or intimidating; he finds the
information
in it unnecessary given the amount of information available via
Google-
pedia.
But what if researching in the online library could be a more
reli-
able and more efficient way to do research?

Susan
Susan begins her research where most students do, on Google.
Interestingly, Susan does not start with the general topic of
outsourc-
ing, opting instead to let the search engine recommend related
search
terms. As Susan types in the term “outsourcing,” Google as a
search
engine builds on character recognition software providing
several
“suggestions” or related search terms, terms that Susan expects
to be
provided for her, and one—“outsourcing pros and cons”—
quickly
catches her attention. Commenting on this choice instead of
searching
by the general concept of outsourcing, Susan notes, “I would
have to
sort through too much stuff [on Google] before deciding what to
do.”
She selects “pros and cons” from the many related and limiting
search
terms suggested to her; Susan states, “I want both sides of the
story
because I don’t know much about it.”
Susan next moves into examining the top ten returns provided
on the first page of her Google search for outsourcing pros and
cons.
Doing what is now common practice for most Web users, Susan

im-
mediately selects the link for the first item returned in the
query. I be-
lieve most search engine users are wired this way, even though
they are
likely familiar with the emphasis given to commercial sites on
Google
and other search engines. Quickly unsatisfied with this source,
Susan
jumps around on the first page of returns, stopping on the first
visual
she encounters on a linked page: a table illustrating pros and
cons.
Fig. 1. Outsourcing suggestions from Google.
Randall McClure232
Asked why she likes the visual, Susan responds that she is
trying to
find out how many arguments exist for and against outsourcing.
On
this page, Susan notes the author provides seven pros and four
cons for
outsourcing. This finding leads Susan to believe that more pros
likely
exist and that her essay should be in support of outsourcing.
“Visual” Research
Analysis: There are at least two points worthy of your attention
here. First, Susan’s information behavior shows how attract-
ed we all are to visuals (maps, charts, tables, diagrams, pho-
tos, images, etc.), particularly when they appear on a printed
page or screen. Second, she fails to acknowledge a basic fact

of research—that visual information of most any kind can be
misleading. In the above example, Susan quickly deduces that
more (7 pros vs. 4 cons) means more important or more con-
vincing. Couldn’t it be possible that all or even any one of the
cons is more significant than all of the pros taken together?
Recommendation: Consider using visuals as both researching
and writing aids. However, analyze them as closely as you
would a printed source. Also, examine the data for more than
just the numbers. It might be a truism that numbers don’t lie,
but it is up to you, as a writer, to explain what the numbers
really mean.
Like Edward, Susan is not (initially) concerned about the
credibil-
ity of the text (author’s credentials, source, sponsoring/hosting
website,
URL or domain, etc.); she appears only concerned with the
informa-
tion itself. When prodded, Susan mentions the text appears to be
some
form of press release, the URL seems legitimate, and the site
appears
credible. She fails to mention that the author’s information is
not in-
cluded on the text, but Susan quickly dismisses this: “The lack
of au-
thor doesn’t bother me. It would only be a name anyway.”
Susan adds
that her goal is to get the research done “the easiest and fastest
way I
can.” These attitudes—there is so much information available in
the
Googlepedia world that the information stands on its own and
the
research process itself doesn’t need to take much time—appear

to be a
common misconception among students today, and the
behaviors that
result from them could possibly lead to flimsy arguments based
on the
multiplicity rather than the quality of information.
Research and CRAAP
Analysis: I have referenced criteria for evaluating sources
throughout this chapter. If you do not fully understand them,
you should consult the resources below and talk with your
teacher or a reference librarian.
Recommendation: Learn to put your sources to the CR AAP test
(easy to remember, huh?):
• “Currency: The timeliness of the information.”
• “Relevance: The importance of the information for your
needs.”
• “Authority: The source of the information.”
• “Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of
the
informational content.”
• “Purpose: The reason the information exists.”
(Meriam Library)
• For specific questions to pose of your sources to evaluate
each
of these, visit …

Sin City: Augustine and Machiavelli’s Reordering of Rome
Author(s): John M. Warner and John T. Scott
Source: The Journal of Politics, Vol. 73, No. 3 (Aug. 3, 2011),
pp. 857-871
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the
Southern Political Science
Association
Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1017/s002238161100051x
Accessed: 15-05-2017 17:44 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars,
researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to
increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about
JSTOR, please contact [email protected]
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the
Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Southern Political Science Association, The University of
Chicago Press are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Journal of Politics

This content downloaded from 128.193.152.0 on Mon, 15 May
2017 17:44:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Sin City: Augustine and Machiavelli’s Reordering
of Rome
John M. Warner University of California-Davis
John T. Scott University of California-Davis
We examine Machiavelli’s critical appropriation of Augustine’s
analysis of Rome’s decline and fall in order to
understand his own interpretation of Rome and the lessons it
offers for a successful republic. If Machiavelli’s
departure from Augustine is obvious, as seen for example in his
exculpation of Romulus for the fratricide Augustine
condemns, equally illuminating is what Machiavelli borrows
from him. For Augustine, Romulus’ fratricide
discloses the limits of pagan virtue and politics and reveals that
the civic republican view of an early virtuous
republic is nostalgic if not impossible. Machiavelli agrees with
Augustine about the character of Rome, yet embraces
the ambitious and acquisitive politics Augustine rebuffs.
Machiavelli not only excuses Romulus’ fratricide in
‘‘ordering’’ Rome, but makes it the archetypal act that must be
repeated through ‘‘reordering’’ to sustain the state
against the perennial problem of corruption. We thereby address
two of the primary issues in Machiavelli
scholarship—the character of his republicanism and the nature
and extent of his innovation with regard to his
ancient sources—and suggest that the ‘‘civic republican’’ or
‘‘neo-Roman’’ interpretation of Machiavelli is
incorrect in its conclusions concerning his republicanism as
well as his relationship to his ancient sources.

T
he success and then ultimate decline and fall of
Rome have attracted attention from at least
the Renaissance to the present day. Recent
domestic and international politics have reanimated
interest in the republic turned empire. Are We Rome?
is the title of a recent work that begins by noting that
Americans have looked to Rome since the beginnings
of the nation, when Publius, Brutus, and other ancient
shades were conjured in the battle over the character of
the regime (Murphy 2008; see also Chua 2007;
Ferguson 2004). In examining the relationship be-
tween republic and empire today and two millennia
ago, scholars have often recurred to the Renaissance,
when philosophers, poets, and politicians thought of
imitating the art and politics of a past appreciated
anew. ‘‘Machiavelli, looking back at the conception of
the ancients and anticipating that of the moderns, is
really the one who offers the most adequate illus-
tration of the paradox of empire,’’ argue Hardt and
Negri (2001, 372). Machiavelli’s own critical appro-
priation of ancient Rome serves as a touchstone for
both recovering the past and applying its lessons to
whatever present in which we may find ourselves.
Machiavelli himself begins his Discourses on Livy
by complaining about an obstacle to a correct com-
prehension of Rome and of ancient history more
generally. He laments that whereas his contemporaries
honor antiquity by imitating its arts, they admire
rather than imitate the political deeds of the ancients.
This lamentable situation, Machiavelli explains, arises
from ‘‘not having a true knowledge of histories,

through not getting from reading them that sense
nor tasting that flavor that they have in themselves.’’
His contemporaries have learned to behold the deeds
described and the possibilities envisaged in the ancient
histories as fantastic, unearthly, and even inhuman;
they appear so remote from Renaissance Florence that
it is ‘‘as if heaven [il cielo], sun, elements, men had
varied in motion, order, and power from what they
were in antiquity’’ (DL I.Preface.2).1 The question
thus arises: if the readers of Machiavelli’s day mis-
understand Roman history and the ancient histories
The Journal of Politics, Vol. 73, No. 3, July 2011, Pp. 857–871
doi:10.1017/S002238161100051X
� Southern Political Science Association, 2011 ISSN 0022-
3816
1All citations to Machiavelli’s Discourses on Livy are to
Machiavelli (1996) and will be by book, chapter, and paragraph.
References to the
Italian are to Machiavelli (1976). References to Augustine’s
City of God are to Augustine (1950) and will be by book and
chapter.
References to the Latin are to Augustine (1877). We follow the
divisions by book and chapter in the Latin version.
857
2017 17:44:33 UTC
more generally, and thereby did not consider imi-

tating the ancients, who or what is responsible for
this misunderstanding?
Standing between his contemporaries and ancient
Rome is a figure who passionately believed that
‘‘heaven’’ had indeed varied from what it was in
antiquity: Augustine. Augustine’s City of God was the
most influential interpretation of Rome available to
the Middle Ages, and his scathing critique of Roman
virtue remained influential in the Renaissance era. As
Davis explains of Augustine and Orosius, the Bishop
of Hippo’s fellow apologist for Christianity upon the
fall of Rome: ‘‘Both Augustine and Orosius presented
a rather unsympathetic picture of Roman republican
heroes, while furnishing the medieval world with
most of its information about them.... The influence
of Orosius and St. Augustine tended to inhibit
medieval sympathy for the Roman Republic’’ (1974,
32; see Pocock 2003, chap. 5). Augustine continued to
exert considerable intellectual influence in Renaissance
Florence (see Fitzgerald 2003; Gill 2005). This influ-
ence is witnessed by Machiavelli’s predecessor in the
Florentine chancery and the central figure in Baron’s
(1955) influential work on ‘‘civic humanism,’’ Coluc-
cio Salutati, whose initial enthusiasm for republican
Rome was reversed under Augustine’s influence (see
Skinner 1978, 72 ff.). If Machiavelli is to persuade his
readers that imitation of ancient politics—that is, the
creative imitation made possible through the proper
interpretation of ancient sources—is possible and
desirable, he must overcome the understanding of
Rome decisively shaped by Augustine.
Although Machiavelli never directly mentions
Augustine in his works, it is clear that his narrative
about the importance of libido dominandi in ancient

Rome exists within a conceptual world erected in
large part by Augustine. Indeed, scholars who seem
unable to agree on anything else appear quite
unanimous in believing that Augustine served as an
important intellectual signpost for Machiavelli. Some
see Augustine as an influence for Machiavelli’s con-
ception of politics in a fallen world (Colish 1999;
Deane 1963, 56, 117–18; De Grazia 1989; Prezzolini
1954), while others claim that he helped create the
intellectual framework concerning time and fortune
within which Machiavelli is working and against
which he is struggling (Pocock 1975). Still others
view Augustine as an adversary to whom Machiavelli
is responding in his revival of pagan politics (Fontana
1999, esp. 655–58; Hulliung 1983), his defense of
tumult and imperialism against Rome’s detractors
(Sasso 1986, 490–99), and his treatment of Christian-
ity itself (Parel 1992, esp. 154; Sullivan 1996a, esp. 37,
52–53). Finally, despite the absence of clear direct
evidence for Machiavelli’s familiarity with Augustine,
a number of scholars seem to agree with Sasso’s judg-
ment that the learned Florentine ‘‘certainly knew’’
the City of God (1986, 157–58; see also 490–99). In
this light, numerous editors of the Discourses cite
Augustine as a probable source for various passages,
most notably the exculpation of Romulus’ fratricide
against the ‘‘many’’ who judge it to be a ‘‘bad example’’
(DL I.9.1).2 In sum, even if Machiavelli’s reinterpre-
tation of Roman history cannot be definitely said
to be specifically intended to reverse or undermine
Augustine’s account, the great bishop can be said to
be responsible for constructing much of the theoret-
ical framework in which Machiavelli is operating and
against which he is struggling.

We examine Machiavelli’s analysis of Rome in
the Discourses in light of Augustine’s treatment of
Rome in the City of God in order to address two of
the primary issues in scholarship on Machiavelli: the
character of his republicanism and, related, the
nature and extent of his innovation with regard to
his ancient sources. If Machiavelli’s departure from
Augustine’s condemnation of pagan politics is per-
haps obvious, as seen for example in his exculpation
of Romulus for the fratricide Augustine condemns,
equally illuminating is what Machiavelli borrows
from Augustine. Machiavelli and Augustine both
trace Rome’s particular ‘‘virtue’’ to its founding by
Romulus, and they both view Romulus’ fratricide as
paradigmatic of the Roman regime as a whole. For
Augustine, Romulus’ act is paradigmatic of the sinful
character of the acquisitiveness and prideful virtue
that gives the lie to the nostalgia voiced by Livy,
Sallust, Cicero, and others for the ‘‘true way’’—in
Sallust’s phrase—of a virtuous early Rome. Romulus’
fratricide discloses the limits of pagan virtue and
politics for Augustine. For Machiavelli no less than
for Augustine, the ‘‘true way’’ of a polity that seeks
peace within and without is not possible given the
nature of human things. Yet Machiavelli embraces
what Augustine rebuffs. The Florentine secretary
counsels adopting the inevitable—and profitable—
course of internal discord and external expansion
whereas the Bishop of Hippo laments the modes and
orders of the city of man. While joining Augustine in
rejecting the nostalgic view of old Rome, Machiavelli
not only excuses Romulus’ fratricide in ‘‘ordering’’
2
See, e.g., the editions by Inglese (Machiavelli 1984), Mansfield

and Tarcov (Machiavelli 1996), Vivanti (Machiavelli 1997), and
Atkinson and Sices (2002).
858 john m. warner and john t. scott
2017 17:44:33 UTC
Rome, but makes it the archetypal act that must be
repeated through ‘‘reordering’’ to sustain the republic.
Our reading of Machiavelli in light of Augustine
makes a unique contribution to the central debate
among scholars over the character of Machiavelli’s
republicanism and extent of his innovation with
regard to his ancient sources by revealing Machia-
velli’s critical view of the classical ‘‘civic republican’’
tradition that many interpreters have held him to be
following. Most prominently, Skinner (1990, 2002,
esp. 171), building on his earlier (1977) examination
of Machiavelli in terms of a Quattrocento civic repub-
lican thought, sees the Florentine as a ‘‘neo-Roman’’
thinker who was decisively influenced by Sallust and
Cicero (see also Fontana 2003; Viroli 1998). We agree
that Sallust’s ‘‘true way’’ is Machiavelli’s target, but
our reading Machiavelli in light of Augustine reveals
that he rejects this ‘‘true way.’’ This finding confirms
other criticisms of the civic republican interpretation
of Machiavelli (e.g., Connell 2000; McCormick 2003;
Rahe 2004, 2008; see also Sullivan 1996b), but we
approach the question by analyzing Machiavelli’s
critical appropriation of his ancient sources. Finally,
while we come to similar conclusions regarding

Machiavelli’s embrace of the tumultuous, acquisitive,
and expansionist Rome as Strauss (1958) and others
(e.g., Hulliung 1983; Lefort 1972; Mansfield 1979,
1996; Sullivan 1996a), we do so not by placing him
in the high philosophic tradition of Plato and others,
but rather by situating him in the largely historical
discourse in which he—at least initially—situates
himself (cf. Strauss 1958 to Lefort 1972, 259–305).
We read the Discourses in light of Augustine’s inter-
pretation of Rome, which is itself in part a response to
the same historians read by Machiavelli.
Finally, a quick word about our enabling assump-
tions will clarify what we are—and are not—arguing.
First, we have already noted that the evidence con-
cerning Machiavelli’s familiarity with Augustine is
circumstantial (if strong), and while we will provide
further evidence that makes the case even stronger, we
need not and do not assume any direct influence.
Second, although we examine Machiavelli’s thought in
light of the conceptual world decisively shaped by
Augustine, we focus on the concrete question of
Machiavelli’s interpretation of Rome, namely on how
his solution to the problem of corruption through
‘‘ordering’’ and ‘‘reordering’’ critically appropriates
elements of Augustine’s treatment of Roman politics.
Our analysis does, of course, bear on broader ques-
tions concerning Machiavelli and Augustine’s respec-
tive visions of politics, and we will briefly address them
in the conclusion.
The Sins of the Fathers:
Augustine on Pagan Rome
Augustine wrote the City of God against the Pagans in
order to answer the charge that Christianity had led

to the fall of Rome, but in taking up this task he
offers a broad and influential examination of the
character of the Roman polity from the perspective of
Christianity. Augustine’s ultimate assessment of
Rome, pagan politics in general, and the civitas
terrena—politics itself—is the central question in
scholarship on his thought. Scholars locate them-
selves on a continuum that stretches all the way from
the extreme view that Augustine rejects Rome, pagan
politics, and politics itself as essentially and irredeem-
ably corrupt through a series of more intermediary
interpretations to the opposite extreme of the view
that Augustine sees Rome at its best as exhibiting
virtuous, if ultimately tragic examples of pagan politics
and envisions an essential role for the moral states-
manship of the Christian politician in the earthly city
(e.g., Cornish 2010; Deane 1963; Markus 1970; Von
Heyking 2001, esp. 157–71; Wolin 1960, chap. 4).
Despite such varying and inconsistent interpre-
tations of Augustine’s qualified admiration (or lack
thereof) for certain examples of pagan virtue and his
hopes (or lack thereof) for earthly politics, these
scholars agree that Augustine offers a searching
criticism of the Roman polity. Since we are interested
here less in current interpretations of Augustine’s
political thought than his reception among Machia-
velli and his contemporaries, we again note Davis’
(1974, 32) characterization of that influence as
presenting an unsympathetic picture of the Roman
republic and thereby inhibiting sympathy for Rome.
With this in mind, we emphasize two aspects of
Augustine’s political theory on which there is broad
agreement in preparation for our examination of
Machiavelli’s critical appropriation of Augustine.
First, scholars agree that Augustine condemns the

ambition and acquisitiveness that generally (if per-
haps not universally) characterized Rome from its
founding in Romulus’ fratricide and that Augustine
treats Romulus as a paradigmatic case of such
ambition. As we shall see, Machiavelli agrees with
Augustine on Romulus as an exemplar but embraces
what the bishop rejects. Second, and related, scholars
broadly agree that Augustine rejects the romanticized
view of early Rome advanced by Sallust and others and
instead argues that the ‘‘true way’’ of civic republican-
ism regretted by Sallust at best only fleetingly charac-
terized Rome. In other words, even if Augustine
sin city 859
2017 17:44:33 UTC
accepts Cicero’s definition of a ‘‘republic’’ and admires
Sallust’s vision of the ‘‘true way’’ of a virtuous republic,
Augustine does not believe that Rome ever lived up to
such ideals. As we shall see, Machiavelli accepts
Augustine’s characterization of Roman politics while
rejecting the civil republican ideal admired by Cicero,
Sallust, and perhaps Augustine as well.
Founding Sin City:
Romulus’ Fratricide and the
Character of Rome
In order to make his case about the true character of
Rome, Augustine confronts the most formidable of

the theorists and historians of the Roman republic.
Augustine first engages Cicero, accepting Tully’s
definition of a republic but then using it to deny
that Rome was ever (or rarely) truly such a republic.
Augustine quotes an important passage from Cicero’s
De Republica—one of the most substantial extant
fragments from the work available to Machiavelli and
his contemporaries (see Sasso 1986, 151, for Machia-
velli’s debt to Augustine on this point). In this
passage, Cicero has Scipio define a ‘‘republic’’ after
first rejecting the position that a republic must
sometimes necessarily be governed with injustice, a
position familiar to readers of Machiavelli, in favor of
the argument ‘‘that it cannot be governed without the
most absolute justice.’’ According to Scipio, a republic
(rei publica) is ‘‘the weal of the people’’ (rem populi)
(CG II.21 quoting Cicero De Republica I.25). In the
context of Cicero’s work this definition is doubly
nostalgic, for it constitutes not only a lament by
Scipio over the loss of virtue that had already begun
after the destruction of Carthage, the dramatic setting
of the dialogue, but also an indictment of the final
collapse of the republic at the time Cicero is writing.
Augustine accepts Cicero’s definition of a repub-
lic and agrees with Cicero and Sallust that the
republic ‘‘had altogether ceased to exist’’ by their
time after having steadily declined since the conclu-
sion of the Punic Wars. But the bishop goes much
further. He bluntly declares: ‘‘Rome never was a
republic, because true justice had never a place in
it’’ (CG II.21). As he famously asks with reference to
Rome’s growing empire: ‘‘Justice being taken away,
then, what are kingdoms but great robberies?’’ (IV.4).
Nonetheless, Augustine does grant there was once ‘‘a
republic of a certain kind’’ in ancient Rome (II.21),

and he grants that the early republic was better
governed (V.19). When he returns to the subject in
Book XIX as promised, then, Augustine relaxes the
Ciceronian standard: ‘‘But if we discard this defini-
tion of a people, and, assuming another, say that a
people is an assemblage of reasonable beings bound
together by a common agreement as to the objects of
their love, then, in order to discover the character of
any people, we have only to observe what they love’’
(XIX.23–24; see Wolin 1960, 126–27). Pagan Rome
fails to meet even this compromised standard of a
‘‘people’’: though the ancient Romans doubtlessly
performed awesome acts of virtue, their motive was
not love of God or even love of country, but love of
‘‘glory.’’ The object of their ‘‘love’’ was so flawed as to
prevent the most virtuous incarnation of Rome from
meeting even the relaxed standard of justice.
More significantly, for Augustine this libido
dominandi characterized Rome and animated the city
since its archetypal founding by Romulus. Indeed
Romulus’ crime is paradigmatic of Rome, and perhaps
of pagan politics as a whole and earthly politics in its
entirety. If Romulus was guilty, then the whole of
Rome shares culpability: ‘‘the whole city is chargeable
with [the crime], because it did not see to its punish-
ment, and thus committed, not fratricide, but parricide,
which is worse’’ (CG III.6). Rome bears something like
the mark of Cain for Romulus’ fratricide. The founding
fratricide of Rome becomes emblematic of Augustine’s
general distinction between the city of man and the city
of God. ‘‘Thus the founder of the earthly city was a
fratricide,’’ and Augustine writes of Cain: ‘‘Overcome
with envy, he slew his own brother, a citizen of the
eternal city, and a sojourner on earth. So that we

cannot be surprised that this first specimen, or, as the
Greeks say, archetype of crime, should, long afterwards,
find a corresponding crime at the foundation of that
city which was destined to reign over so many nations,
and be the head of this earthly city of which we speak’’
(XV.5). Motivated by envy and by ‘‘the glory of ruling,’’
Romulus’ fratricide thus imitates the archetype of Cain
and Abel:
And thus there is no difference between the founda-
tion of this city and of the earthly city, unless it be
that Romulus and Remus were both citizens of the
earthly city. Both desired to have the glory of
founding the Roman republic, but both could not
have as much glory as if one only [unus esset] had
claimed it . . . . In order, therefore, that the whole
glory might be enjoyed by one [Ut ergo totam
dominationem haberet unus], his consort was re-
moved; and by this crime the empire was made
larger indeed, but inferior, while otherwise it would
have been less, but better. (XV.5)
Driven by the love of dominion and glory, Romulus
had to be alone. Machiavelli too will focus in his
analysis of Romulus’ actions on the need to be ‘‘one
alone’’ in ordering.
860 john m. warner and john t. scott
2017 17:44:33 UTC
For Augustine, then, Romulus’ fratricide reveals

the prevailing character of Rome from its very begin-
nings. While he gives a number of other historical
examples to counter the view of a virtuous early
Roman republic, the case of Junius Brutus is partic-
ularly important to Augustine for assessing Rome, as it
will be for Machiavelli as well. The Bishop of Hippo
discusses two of Brutus’ actions in overthrowing the
kings and establishing the republic: his role in the
execution of his own sons for their part in a conspiracy
to bring back the Tarquins and his role in the expulsion
of his fellow liberator and consul, L. Tarquinius
Collatinus. Augustine’s attitude toward the execution
of the sons of Brutus is conflicted because of his
uncertainty about the ‘‘ends’’ Brutus had in mind. The
ambiguity is captured in the lines from Virgil quoted
by Augustine: ‘‘His country’s love shall all o’erbear/And
unextinguished thirst of praise’’ (CG III.16, quoting
Aeneid VI.822–23).3 Insofar as Brutus’ act was moti-
vated by love of country and freedom, Augustine
considers it tragic: a noble if regrettable action required
by the city of man. However, insofar as Brutus acted
for praise and glory, Augustine condemns him. The
glory-seeking Brutus is revealed for Augustine in the
expulsion of his fellow consul, which he condemns
unreservedly. ‘‘Is this, then, the glory of Brutus—this
injustice, alike detestable and profitless to the republic.
Was it to this that he was driven by ‘his country’s love,
and unextinguished thirst of praise’? . . . How unjustly
Brutus acted, in depriving of honor and country his
colleague in that new office . . . . Such were the ills, such
the disasters, which fell out when the government was
‘ordered with justice and moderation’’’ (III.16, quoting
Sallust Catilinae Coniuratio 9). Note that Augustine
emphasizes that Brutus’ action stripped his colleague of
‘‘honor,’’ thereby suggesting that Brutus, like Romulus,
wanted to be ‘‘alone’’ in the glory of reordering Rome.

Augustine’s mockery of Sallust’s depiction of the early
Roman republic here brings us to Augustine’s view of
the impossibility of Sallust’s ‘‘true way.’’
Sallust Days:
Augustine and the ‘‘True Way’’
In order to link Rome’s corruption to its expansion,
Augustine engages throughout his treatment of
Rome’s history with Sallust, accepting much of
Sallust’s praise of a virtuous republic of civic-minded
citizens but denying that Rome rarely or ever met
such a standard, even in the early republic about
which Sallust rhapsodizes. Augustine draws upon
Sallust’s Catilinae Coniuratio, in which the Roman
historian recounts the conspiracy of Cataline on the
cusp of the fall of the republic as a culminating
example of the deterioration of Roman virtue. In
order to make his larger point, Sallust begins his work
with an account of the early Roman republic, which
he suggests was characterized by justice and virtue,
and its deterioration after the Punic wars when it no
longer faced the external threat of Carthage. In this
context, Sallust laments that Rome’s citizens were no
longer animated by an ambition allied to virtue and
pursued by the ‘‘true path’’ (vera via) but were
instead motivated by an ambition allied to avarice
and pursued by the false ways of ‘‘craft and decep-
tion’’ (Sallust Catilinae Coniurato 11). Sallust’s anal-
ysis of the virtuous republicanism of Rome and its
decay after the defeat of Carthage is similar to
Cicero’s, and the two writers were Augustine’s chief
sources for the understanding of lost Roman virtue.4
Augustine first raises Sallust in Book II of the City

of God to provide evidence for his conclusion that
Rome never met Cicero’s definition of a republic. He
mocks Sallust’s praise of a supposed virtuous age
before the Punic Wars of ‘‘natural equity and virtue’’
by raising the examples of the rape of the Sabine
women, Junius Brutus’ inequitable treatment of his
colleague Collatinus, and the Romans’ ingratitude
toward Camillus, the savior of their city (CG II.17–
18). The only exception Augustine allows to the
nostalgic view of a virtuous Rome is the reign of
Numa, who introduced religious orders into Rome
and led the city during its longest period of peace
(III.9). Augustine avers that ‘‘a long continuance of
peace’’ should have been Rome’s ‘‘perpetual policy’’
and argues that it erred in attempting to extend
herself beyond due proportion: ‘‘Why must a king-
dom be distracted in order to be great? In this little
world of man’s body, it is it not better to have a
moderate stature, and health with it, than to attain
the huge dimensions of a giant by unnatural tor-
ments, and when you attain it to find not rest’’
(III.10). For Augustine, the closing of the gates of the
temple of Janus under Numa was a fleeting interlude
for a city impelled by the same ambition to rule as
3Plutarch, another probable source for Machiavelli’s discussion
of
Junius Brutus, is extraordinarily ambivalent about Brutus’
action:
‘‘An action truly open alike to the highest commendation and
the
strongest sanction; for either the greatness of his virtue raised
him above the impressions of sorrow, or the extravagance of his
misery took away all sense of it; but neither seemed common, or
the result of humanity, but either divine or brutish’’ (‘‘Life of
Poplicola,’’ 1864, 208).

4
Livy could be added, but Augustine does not refer to him in the
City of God (although see IV.26 for a possible allusion). …
Machiavelli's Dante & the Sources of Machiavellianism
Author(s): Larry I. Peterman
Source: Polity, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Winter, 1987), pp. 247-272
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3234782
Accessed: 15-05-2017 18:17 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3234782?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked
references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars,
researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to
increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about
JSTOR, please contact [email protected]

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the
Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to
Polity
2017 18:17:57 UTC
Machiavelli's Dante
& the Sources of
Machiavellianism
Larry I. Peterman
University of California-Davis
Machiavelli is generally seen as the first "truly modern"
political
thinker. This article asks how and why he was different and
explores
Machiavelli's use and occasional abuse of Dante in search of an
answer. The author notes that Dante speaks to many of the
same
thinkers and much of the same experience as Machiavelli, yet
his
thought does not move in the same direction. A comparison of
the
two Florentines, he argues, yields insights into how and why
Machiavelli remade political philosophy as he did.

Larry I. Peterman is Professor of Political Science at the
University of
California-Davis. He has published a number of essays dealing
with
the political thought of Dante and Machiavelli in journals
ranging
from the American Political Science Review to Studies in
Medieval
and Renaissance History.
There is widespread agreement that Machiavelli is the first
truly modern
political thinker, but much less agreement about what
constitutes his
novelty or about what leads him to abandon prior ways of
political
thinking.' Despite various attempts to trace his intellectual
paternity, we
remain uncertain about how his arguments relate to those of his
prede-
cessors. It follows that we are also uncertain about why he
refuses to be
bound by the political inheritance left him by classical and
medieval
thinkers and, ultimately, about his political intention.2
1. For Machiavelli's modernity, see, e.g., Sheldon Wolin,
Politics and Vision (Boston:
Little, Brown, 1960), p. 199; Isiah Berlin, "The Originality of
Machiavelli," in Studies on
Machiavelli, ed. Myron Gilmore (Florence: Sansoni, 1972);
Anthony Parel, "Machiavelli's
Method and His Interpreters," in The Political Calculus, ed.
Panel (Toronto: University of
Toronto Press, 1972); J. G. A. Pocock, The Machiavellian
Moment (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 1975); Leo Strauss, Thoughts on Machiavelli
(Glencoe, IL: The Free
Press, 1958).
2. See, e.g., J. H. Whitfield, "Savonarola and the Purpose of
The Prince, " The
Modern Language Review, LXIV (1949); Donald Weinstein,
"Machiavelli and
2017 18:17:57 UTC
248 Machiavelli's Dante
With this in mind, we shall explore both general and specific
points of
contact between Machiavelli and Dante, who is at least
arguably among
the many former writers and thinkers from whom Machiavelli
explicitly
departs in such places as the Prince and the Discourses. We
know that
Machiavelli admired and studied Dante closely. Yet we also
know that he
found Dante's thought deficient in ways that touch upon
politics, e.g.,
Dante's failure to recognize that "a man is under no greater
obligation
than to his country." Thus, Machiavelli's reminiscences about
and
references to Dante, despite their relative infrequency, are an
entrance to

his larger rejection of prior political thought.3 By the same
token, they
provide access to the foundations of Machiavellianism and,
thereby, to
the foundations of modern thought.
Savonarola," in Studies on Machiavelli; Felix Gilbert, "The
Humanist Concept of the
Prince and The Prince of Machiavelli," The Journal of Modern
History, XI (1939); Allan
Gilbert, Machiavelli's 'Prince' and Its Forerunners (New York:
Barnes and Noble, 1968).
Machiavelli's puzzling relationship to his predecessors is nicely
expressed by Leo Strauss. In
one place Strauss says that "antitheological passion induced"
Machiavelli to produce a new
kind of political philosophy. In another place he indicates that
a new sense of scientific in-
ventiveness is the basis for Machiavelli's criticism of earlier
ways of political thought. Thus,
we are led to ask whether it was something present in
Machiavelli's age or lacking in prior
ages, or both, that moved him politically to emulate Columbus.
Cf. History of Political
Philosophy, 2nd Ed., ed. Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey
(Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1972), p. 269; Thoughts, p. 299.
3. Unless otherwise noted, Machiavelli references, in square
brackets, will be to the sec-
ond edition of the two volume Opere edited by Francesco Flora
and Carlo Cordie (Milan:
Mondadori, 1968). For Machiavelli's references and allusions
to Dante, see, e.g., Prince
XV [1.48], hereafter PR.; Discourses I.lviii, II.i, II.xvii [1.217,
231, 274], hereafter DISC;

Dialogue on Language, ed. Bartolo Sozzi (Turin: Einaudi,
1976), 770b-771a; History
of Florence II.xviii [11.81]; "Letter to Vettori," in Allan
Gilbert, The Chief Works
(Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1965), 11.927-31;
Golden Ass, in Gilbert, Works,
11.753; Francesco Ercole, "Dante e Machiavelli," Quaderni Di
Politica, 2 (1922), 44; Larry
Peterman, "Dante and the Setting for Machiavellianism,"
American Political Science
Review, 76 (1982); Peterman, "Machiavelli versus Dante:
Language and Politics in the
Dialogue on Language,." Interpretation, 10 (1982), 201-21. Cf.
DISC. I.xix, xiv [1.147,
192]; Dialogue 772b43-49; Florence VI.xxix [11.314]. The Life
of Castruccio Castracani
[1.669-73] provides another sort of evidence of Machiavelli's
respect for Dante. It con-
cludes with a series of "wonderful" sayings for which
Castruccio was supposedly re-
nowned, most of which arise in Diogenes Laertius. In three
cases Castrucci repeats
something he hears from others. Only once, in his thirty-third
saying, does he repeat advice
which he explicitly requested of another. This advice stems
from the Inferno. Thus Dante is
the only source of information whom Castruccio, Machiavelli's
hero, actively pursues. See
Strauss, Thoughts, pp. 223-5.
2017 18:17:57 UTC

Larry I. Peterman 249
I.
A good place to begin assessing the relationship between Dante
and
Machiavelli is with their positions on a question that dominated
Euro-
pean political thought for the better part of a millenium, the
status of the
Roman Empire, and especially its relation to the well-being of
Christian-
ity. At the outset, the two agree on the events that bound the
history of
the Empire, its origins under Augustus and the final serious
attempts to
revive it during the thirteenth century Franciscan-Dominican
religious
revitalization.4 They disagree, however, about the character of
these
events. For Dante, the Empire and Christianity waxed and
waned
together, thereby demonstrating that the political and religious
orders
could be attuned and providing a model for future attempts to
fashion
political-religious harmony. For Machiavelli, on the other
hand, the Em-
pire and Christianity seem always to have been at odds, with
the result
that he rejects Dante's proposals for balancing or
accommodating
politics and religion.
In Dante's version of imperial history, Augustus's "perfect
monarchy" is a secular-indeed, the secular-expression of

Scripture's
"fullness of time." Its claim to such eminence is supported by,
among
other things, Christ's choice to be born during Augustus's
reign, a fact
which many medieval thinkers found impressive. For Dante, it
follows,
Augustan Rome represents the mutual high points of the
Empire and of
Christianity, the moment when there was perfect peace
throughout the
world and when the "Son of God [became] mortal for the
salvation of
men," i.e., the moment when the highest promises of politics
and pro-
vidence came together.' By the same token, Augustan Rome
testifies to
the interrelated well-being, at least potentially, of Christianity
and the
political world. This is part of a greater Dantean argument,
shown most
clearly in the discussion of the integrated heavenly spheres in
the Banquet
and in the Divine Comedy, for the correspondence of temporal
and ex-
tratemporal affairs and, by extension, for the harmony of the
secular
and the spiritual, or the political and the religious. Indeed,
Dante's
political and religious goods are sufficiently intertwined to
permit him
both to employ imperial imagery to describe the heavenly end-
to be
4. Cf. Monarchy, ed. Pier Ricci (Milan: Mondadori, 1965),
I.xvi. 1-3, hereafter MON.;

Paradise XI-XII, references to the Divine Comedy will be to
the John Sinclair text and
translation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1961); Art of
War II [1.508]; DISC. III.i
[1.330]. PR. XV; DISC. I.xliii [1.48, 216].
5. Cf. MON. I.xvi.1-3, II.x.4-9. On the importance to medieval
writers of Christ's
Roman citizenship, see Ernst Kantorowicz, The King's Two
Bodies (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1957), p. 156.
2017 18:17:57 UTC
250 Machiavelli's Dante
"forever citizens of that Rome of which Christ is Roman"-and
to
employ parallel Scriptural imagery to indicate the character of
the
original empire. As Christ's birth into the register of Augustan
Rome
demonstrated the perfection of the best regime "in those
matters which
are subject to time," so too his citizenship in heavenly Rome
testifies to
its final perfection.6
Such a correspondence also prevails in Dante's description of
condi-
tions at the time of the Franciscan-Dominican revival. The

portion of the
Divine Comedy devoted to the saints only indirectly deals with
politics,
but the Banquet identifies Frederick II, under whom their
orders
originated and initially flourished, as "the last emperor of the
Romans."
As the birth of Jesus occurs under and validates the reign of the
first of
the emperors, so too the penultimate Christian revival occurs
under and
validates the reign of the last of the historical emperors.7
Conversely, in
the wake of Frederick and as the influence of St. Francis and
St. Dominic
wanes, the health of both the political and religious worlds
deteriorates.
Dante likens contemporary Italian politics to life in a brothel
and is
similarly outspoken on the state of Christianity under the
corrupt and in-
effectual direction of the Church and Popes of his lifetime.
However, he
holds out hope for his fellows. The deterioration of politics and
the
spiritual order may be reversed by a new world monarchy,
which repre-
sents a secularized version of the respublica Christiana of the
Church.
Here, a new Emperor-the Divine Comedy's veltro or DX V-
together
with a Supreme Pontiff will lead men to temporal happiness
and eternal
life.8 Political and spiritual revitalization are, in short, to occur
together.

The political and religious orders will be rejoined and the
conditions that
existed at the time of Augustan Rome will be recreated, or even
improved
upon.
With this, Dante's arguments come full circle. The final empire
rees-
tablishes the integration of political and religious well-being
that had in-
itially been manifested in Augustus's Rome. This harmony
between
politics and religion has an added feature which must also be
noted. It
represents an accommodation between the forces of reason and
of revel-
ation. Philosophy, of which politics is an extension, and
theology, of
which religion is an extension, will henceforth be able to
coexist comfort-
ably. In the Monarchy, Dante says the Emperor will use
philosophical
6. PURG. XXXII.102. See, also, Kantorowicz, Two Bodies, p.
466; Charles Davis,
Dante and the Idea of Rome (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957).
7. Cf. PARA. XI, XII; Convivio, ed. G. Busnelli and G.
Vandelli (Florence: Le Mon-
nier, 1964), IV.iii.6, hereafter CONV.
8. PURG. VI.76-79; INF. 1.101, PURG. XXXIII.43, MON.
III.xv.7-15.
2017 18:17:57 UTC

Brenda Deen SchildgenDantes Utopian Political Vision, the.docx

Brenda Deen SchildgenDantes Utopian Political Vision, the.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Brenda Deen SchildgenDantes Utopian Political Vision, the.docx

Similar to Brenda Deen SchildgenDantes Utopian Political Vision, the.docx (10)

More from jackiewalcutt

More from jackiewalcutt (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Brenda Deen SchildgenDantes Utopian Political Vision, the.docx