Now if an author should propound such an unpalatable theory openly, and add to it a proposal to remove and exclude from the Church all of its temporal power now and in the future, we have a book that’s fit for burning, with an author not far removed. Such indeed was to be the fate, so far as possible, of Dante’s last treatise, De Monarchia. Written in Latin, and hence worthy of official notice, in the last years before its author’s death in 1321, it contained the conclusions of Dante’s many years of study and meditation concerning God’s plan for the proper governing of the world. It not only argued the divine authorization of the Empire, the advantages of such a system, its duties in providing civil peace and education; it denied and denounced in strongest terms the official dogma published by Innocent III, which likened the emperor to the moon, deriving all authority from the pope as the sun. Instead, it maintained that emperor and pope represented two suns, each receiving light—and authority—directly from God. The world would thus have “the Supreme Pontiff to lead the human race by means of revelation, and the Emperor to guide it to temporal felicity by means of philosophic education.” Since the emperor would be the supreme civil authority and power, there would exist in the world no one for him to envy, no one with greater possessions for him to covet. With nothing to arouse cupiditas, “root of all evils,” he would himself be just, and would stamp out injustice in his subjects. Mankind would thus be able freely to develop its full potential for the enjoyment of this life in which Dante firmly believed. More important sub specie aeternitatis would be the inability of the clergy and the church to acquire wealth, property, and any but spiritual power. In these circumstances its example would encourage men to follow its preachings of the unimportance of worldly goods, and would not have the opposite effect, as under actual conditions.

As Dante no doubt foresaw, the De Monarchia was not popular with ecclesiastical authorities. As a matter of fact, they destroyed every manuscript they could get their hands on, and later included it in the first Index librorum prohibitorum. As for the author, many persons believe there to be a connection between this attitude and the mystery which long surrounded the whereabouts of his remains.

It is a curious fact that in the Purgatorio the reasons for unhappy world conditions are much more outspoken in form than is the principle of interaction between the two sets of virtues. Here are some examples:

What does it matter that Justinian came
to trim the bit, if no one sits the saddle?
Without him you [Italy] would have less cause for shamel

 

You priests who, if you heed what God decreed,
should most seek after holiness and leave
to Caesar Caesar’s saddle and his steed-

 

see how the beast grows wild now none restrains
its temper, nor corrects it with the spur
since you set meddling hands upon its reinsl [VI, 9-91]

And again, speaking of the causes of injustice and discord:

Men, therefore, need restraint by law, and need
a monarch over them who sees at least
the towers of The True City. Laws, indeed,

 

there are, but who puts nations to their proof?
No one. The shepherd who now leads mankind
can chew the cud, but lacks the cloven hoof.

 

The people, then, seeing their guide devour
those worldly things to which their hunger turns
graze where he grazes, and ask nothing more.

The bad state of the modern world is due—
as you may see, then—to bad leadership;
and not to natural corruption in you.

 

Rome used to thine in two suns when her rod
made the world good, and each showed her its way:
one to the ordered world, and one to God.

 

Now one declining sun puts out the other.
The sword and crook are one, and only evil
can follow from them when they are together;

 

for neither fears the other, being one. [XVI, 94-112]

The reason why such passages have not incurred official wrath lies probably in their being sporadic outbursts ; they need not be interpreted as part of a systematic presentation, as in the case of the scheme for education.

In addition to such matters—and let it be said without wishing to lessen their very real importance—there was other material of much more crucial significance to be presented. In the Comedy’s imitation of the Holy Trinity, this second cántica represents the Second Person, and one of His chief attributes is Wisdom; this is the logical division in which to offer intellectual wisdom. Furthermore, in a poem dedicated to the demonstration of how, by their merits or demerits, men make themselves subject to reward or punishment, there is one central, all-important question to be treated—that of Free Will and the individual’s responsibility for his actions. In introducing the Inferno, I had occasion to point out the care with which it had been constructed so as to give maximum expression to the Trinity, the Perfect Number, and so on. Now I must ask the forbearance of those readers intolerant of all such antic devices while I call attention to the way in which Dante arranged the present discussions. He begins the explanation of responsibility in Canto XVI, continues it in Canto XVII, and concludes it in Canto XVIIL Since there are 33 cantos in the Purgatorio, these are respectively, the last of the first 16, the 17th or middle, and the first of the second 16. But added significance can be had by looking at the three cántiche. or the main body of the poem, less the introductory first canto. What has been said of the Purgatorio then becomes true for the whole; the discussion begins in Canto 49, continues in Canto 50, and concludes in Canto 51, the first of the remaining 49. The subject of the middle canto, either way, is Love as the moving force behind every action of mankind, whether good or evil.

For such instruction as was offered in the Inferno, Aristotle was much the preferred authority. In the presentations of metaphysics, psychology, and physiology which comprise most of the instruction that Dante was making available in the Purgatorio to readers of the vernacular, Aquinas is absolute and unchallenged. This does not mean, naturally, that much of the material was not originally Aristotelian, but rather that in form it is the version, reading, or interpretation chosen or elaborated by St. Thomas.

The first lesson, having established man’s freedom from predestination, shows the need of the free will for discipline administered by an independent civil authority which will curb and direct his inclinations from childhood on. Since a child turns instinctively to anything pleasant, knowing no better, it will pursue valueless pleasures excessively and exclusively unless properly schooled. It is characteristic of Dante’s method that the reader, now halfway through the book, suddenly realizes that he has already had an object lesson back in Canto II. There, among a boatload of souls arrived just after the two poets, Dante meets a dear friend, the musician Casella. All the souls are essentially childlike in their lack of sophistication and experience of the new environment ; instead of pursuing their arduous upward path, they sit and indulge in the most innocent of pleasures by listening to the singing of one of Dante’s best lyrics.