Skip to main content

Dante Alighieri: On the Road Again


 Someone at Quora asked, "Who Would Dante Alighieri Find in Hell if He Could Write the Divine Comedy Nowadays?" 

I liked my answer to that, so I'll give it again here, with some slight stylistic improvements. It is probably an appropriate subject for the long Thanksgiving weekend. Let us Americans give thanks for our recent rescue from autocracy.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------  

Napoleon Bonaparte would definitely be in one of the lower circles. Perhaps in the lowest.

After all: much of Dante’s work is motivated by the conviction that the Roman Empire (which he saw as continuous with the Holy Roman Empire of his own time) has a special part in salvation history, and thus is the ordained government of this world. Defiance of the Emperor was treason against God. This is why Brutus and Judas are together at the very center of hell, being forever chewed by the teeth of Satan. Brutus, as much as Judas though in a different manner, committed treason against God.

Now, for several reasons, you might think this odd. The Roman Empire (the original one!) earned its blessed place in salvation history by executing the incarnation of God. It seems on its face that Pilate would be a better candidate for the very center of hell than Brutus, more of a co-offender with Judas. Yet Pilate is treated almost generously in Dante’s scheme — in hell, but only barely, and for cowardice rather than malice or treachery. Pilate, and for that matter the Centurions who drove the nails through Jesus' hands, were embodying the Roman Empire — decades after Brutus had treacherously sought to prevent the first Caesar from making it a monarchy. Brutus tried (futilely of course) to put sand in the gears of divine destiny — Judas the same. Pilate (unintentionally of course) WAS one of the gears.

As I say, one might think Dante's severity toward Judas and his lenience toward Pilate rather odd.

Another reason one might think Dante’s political views odd at first blush is that, if one really wanted to look around in 1300 or so for a fitting successor to the Imperial monarchy that Pilate served, one would perhaps more naturally look to Constantinople. Dante certainly knew there was an Emperor there, but was dismissive of that Empire’s claims to be THE Empire, for no reason better than geographical favoritism.

All this brings us back to Bonaparte, and my answer to your question. Bonaparte forced the abdication of the final Holy Roman Emperor, bringing an end to the blessed old institution at last. Dante would have been aghast. Into Satan’s jaw for him.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more