of CangrandeCangrande della Scala,6 had already been established for the figurative exposition of the Bible by AugustineAugustinus, De Doctrina Christiana 3, 25 et seq., and the later commentators almost always give for difficult passages several typological interpretationsFiguraldeutung, sometimes alternative, more often cumulative,7 on condition that they do not contradict the faith (sententia …, quae fidei rectae non refragatur, Augustine, loc. cit., 3, 27). Nor is it altogether certain that everything which applies to the eagle applies also to Lucia; I am inclined to think that the prophetic dream has a wider implication than Lucia’s intervention. At any rate the imperial-political meaning which is certainly present at least in the dream,8 is not touched by our exposition; nor have we dealt with the problem why the eagle of Jove seizes its prey only from Mount Ida. But now we will add some hints on this subject. Mount Ida, where Ganymede was stolen, is the divine mountain of Troy, the origin dell’alma Roma e di suo impero (Inf. 2, 20); it stands here for the valley of the princes on the slopes of the mountain of the Purgatorio, a place of diletto and bel soggiorno (Purg. 7, 45; 48; 63; 73 et seq.), covered with flowers like the earthly Paradise or Elysium; but it is also vallis lacrimarum, still subject to timores nocturni,9 where among the princes dwells Rudolf von HabsburgRudolf v. Habsburg, che più siede alto e fa sembiante d’aver negletto ciò che far dovea (Purg. 7, 91–92); both Mount Ida and the valley of the princes10 obviously represent the Saturnian age, peaceful, imperial, golden, but lost. And only from that place does the eagle take his prey to carry it towards the unio mystica! Corresponding to this is DanteDante’s mystical sleep in the earthly Paradise which immediately precedes the vision of the nova Beatrice (Purg. 32, 64 et seq.) explicitly connected with the vision in LukeLukas (Evangelist) 9, 28–36;11 corresponding to this above all is Jacob’s ladder which also signifies contemplation leading to the highest vision,12 and which rises from the heaven of Saturn, immediately after the following description:
… cristallo che ’l vocabol porta,
cerchiando il mondo, del suo caro duce,
sotto cui giacque ogni malizia morta. (Par. 21, 25–27)
II. Humilis psalmista
The dance of David before the Ark of the Covenant and the following scene with Saul’s daughter Michal (II Sam. 6, 1–23 and I Parai. 13–16), which DanteDante uses as a second example of humility (Purg. 10, 55–69), had a considerable influence upon the mediaeval idea of David; the interpretationFiguraldeutung of this episode led, or at least greatly contributed, to the fact that David was principally praised for his humilitashumilitas. The self-humiliation of the great king and hero offered a welcome opportunity for developing the basic Christian antithesisAntithese humilitas – sublimitassublimitas, fundamental for the redemption through Christ’s incarnation; in this way David easily became figura Christi (just as the Ark was figura Ecclesiae). Gregory the GreatGregor d. Große (Moral., Patr. Lat., LXXV, 444) writes on this theme: Coram Deo egit vilia et extrema, ut illa ex humilitate solidaret quae coram hominibus gesserat fortia. Quid de eius factis ab aliis sentiatur ignoro; ego David plus saltantem stupeo quam pugnantem … He compares his dancing with that of a buffoon (scurra); and he explains the verse 11 Sam. 6, 22 (et vilior fiam plus quam factus sum, et humilis ero in oculis meis) with regard to the voluntary self-humiliation of Christ.13
The mention of David in the eye of the eagle (Par. 20, 37–41) also contains the theme of humilitashumilitas: because the migration of the Ark from place to place was considered as the humility of the Church during the epoch of persecution. I have found the motif di villa in villa in Honorius of AutunHonorius v. Autun (Patr. Lat., CLXXIII, 369): Ecclesia siquidem olim a contribulis suis tanto odio est habita, ut nullus ei locus manendi tutus esset, sed semper de civitate in civitatem fugiens migraret, unde multi scandalizati sunt, qui Christianos miserabiliores omnibus hominibus reputaverunt.
III. Veni sponsa de libano
Shortly before Beatrice’s appearance in the earthly Paradise (Purg. 30) the procession of the Church stops; the 24 seniori symbolizing the books of the Old TestamentAltes Testament turn towards the chariot ‘as to their peace’:14
e un di loro, quasi dal ciel messo
‘Veni sponsa de Libano’ cantando
gridò tre volte, e tutti li altri appresso.
Quali i beati al novissimo bando
surgeran presti ognun di sua caverna,
la revestita carne alleluiando,
cotali in su la divina basterna
si levar cento, ad vocem tanti senis,
ministri e messaggier di vita eterna.
Tutti dicean: ‘Benedictus qui venis!’,
e fior gittando di sopra e dintorno,
‘Manibus o date lilia plenis!’
Io vidi già nel cominciar del giorno
la parte oriental tutta rosata
e l’altro ciel di bel sereno adorno;
e la faccia del sol nascere ombrata,
si che per temperanza di vapori
l’occhio la sostenea lunga fiata:
così dentro una nuvola di fiori
che da le mani angeliche saliva
e ricadeva in giù dentro e di fòri
sovra candido vel cinta d’uliva
donna m’apparve. …
Almost without exception – and of course correctly – the commentators have recognized the ‘senior’ who shouts as Solomon, that is, as a symbol of the Canticles; he shouts three times, just as in the text (Cant. 4, 8) it is three times repeated: Veni de Libano sponsa mea, veni de Libano, veni, coronaberis … The shout itself has been understood, so far as I can see, by all modern interpreters as an invitation to Beatrice to appear; their argument is as follows: since DanteDante interprets the beloved of the Canticles in his Convivio II, 14, in the often quoted passage concerning the hierarchy of the sciences, as the scienza divinascienza divina15 and since Beatrice is, once for all, scienza divina – the invitation is addressed to her.
The ancient commentators were more cautious, Benvenuto da ImolaBenvenuto da Imola writes:16
… et primo quidem introducit unum senem cantantem laudes ipsius ecclesiae. Et ad intelligentiam litterae debes scire, quod hic erat Salomon qui inter alios fecit librum qui intitulatur Canticum Canticorum, in quo sub typo describit statura ecclesiae introducens sponsum et sponsam, id est Christum et ecclesiam, ad loquendum mutuo. … Ista verba scripta in praedicto libro Canticorum sunt verba sponsi, id est Christi, qui dicit ad sponsam idest ecclesiam: Veni sponsa mea odorifera. Libanum enim est mons Arabiae, ubi nascitur thus quod etiam dicitur olibanum, sicut patet per Bernardum, qui pulcre scripsit super istum librum …
This passage is a precious testimony for two reasons: Bernard of ClairvauxBernhard v. Clairvaux, whom it mentions, had a deep, lasting and widespread influence, particularly through his cycle of Sermons on the Canticles; above all, it shows the spontaneous reaction of every mediaeval Christian to the words sponsus and sponsa: they meant for him Christ and the Church; for the Church you may sometimes put Christianity or every faithful soul.17 These meanings had become current and familiar from thousands of sermons, from liturgical and ‘semiliturgical’ representations. In view of the great liberty of interpretation which I have already mentioned, it was certainly possible occasionally to use one of these words in another sense; but then it was indispensable to say so explicitly, as DanteDante did in the above quoted passage of the Convivio. Otherwise the words sponsus and sponsa were just as fixed as the words President and Congress are now in the United States. In the same way it would have seemed very strange and astonishing to the mediaeval