di Vedran Stojanović, Reviews, Dubrovnik Annals, 20, 2016, pp. 159-162
On the eastern coast of the Adriatic there are very few publications about the Humanist, poet and pedagogue Tideo Acciarini, born in Sant’Elpidio a Mare in the region of Marche between 1427 and 1430, despite the fact that he spent the 1460s and the 1470s in Split and Dubrovnik as a magister humanitatis, where among his students sat the future celebrated poets (Ilija Crijević, Ludovik Crijević Tuberon, Karlo Pucić, Luka and Jakov Bunić, Ivan Gučetić, Marko Marulić and others) who by far surpassed their master.
The proceedings of the conference held on 21 October 2011 in Macerata present an interesting and detailed research conducted by Silvia Fiaschi, Gabriella Albanese and Rosa Marisa Borracini, as well as the review articles by Sante Graciotti, Smiljka Malinar and Rosa Marisa Borracini which highlight the cultural and historical context and provide references to almost all the previous works on Acciarini (in the first place those of Francesco Lo Parco).
Besides a brief overview of all the papers included in the proceedings, in the introductory chapter Silvia Fiaschi points out the need to research the local archives and find as much information and data as possible on Tideo Acciarini who, in her opinion, represents a not so rare type of provincial intellectual recognized even outside his own microspace. According to Silvia Fiaschi, the fact that Acciarini worked in Dalmatia and in Dubrovnik might be particularly relevant when exploring the relations between the two shores of the Adriatic and the phenomenon of diffusion of Humanism to the eastern Adriatic coast.
The author of the first paper titled »Tideo Acciarini nella cornice del Rinascimento adriatico« (Tideo Acciarini in the context of the Adriatic Renaissance) is a prominent Italian Slavist Sante Graciotti. After a comprehensive survey of the features of Humanism and Renaissance and the situation in Croatia, especially in Dalmatia and Dubrovnik in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, Graciotti touches upon a question of interpretation of literary production on the eastern coast of the Adriatic. He remarks that among Italian scholars (e.g. Arturo Cronia) it was very often heard that Croatian literature of that time was devoid of any artistic value, while on the eastern coast of the Adriatic he discovers protectionism trying to deprive Italian literature even of the works that really belonged thereto. As an example, Graciotti cites Vladimir Vratović’s taking Frane Petrić as a Croatian writer, admitting however a high level of originality and artistic perfection of the Croatian literature of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. He gives a brief overview of the activity of the podestà, notaries, church officials, teachers and other intellectuals from Marche (Gargano de Arscindis, Franceso Silvano, Lorenzo Regini, Senofonte and Giovanni Mario Filelfo and others). The author emphasises that Juraj Šišgorić, Marko Marulić and Ilija Crijević, the three greatest Humanist poets of the eastern coast of the Adriatic, are interlinked by their teacher and friend Tideo Acciarini. However, Graciotti is not interested in Šišgorić’s Ad Tydeum Acciarinum poetam but in the tie between Paolo Paladini, poet from the island of Hvar, and Tideo Acciarini. Since the data on Paladini’s birth and death are not known, Graciotti speculates about the nature of that connection, wondering if Paladini might have been Acciarini’s student during his stay in Split. Graciotti puts forward an interesting assumption about the triangular relationship between Paladini, Acciarini and Crijević based on Paladini’s canzoniere, of which he has extensively written. However, a more thorough study of the teacher―students relationship the author leaves to future researchers.
Smiljka Malinar opens her paper »Il contesto culturale dalmata e raguseo« (Dalmatian and Ragusan cultural context) by referring to Dalmatiens als europäischer Kulturraum, a book edited by Wilfried Potthoff and others, which emphasises transcultural characteristics of the Dalmatian area since the end of the twelfth century. An extensive presentation of the cultural and linguistic context of the eastern coast of the Adriatic consists of a long listing of the authors and works that marked the cultural production of the fourteenth through the sixteenth centuries, followed by a language-related question, an example of trilingualism in Dubrovnik, which serves as an introduction into the discussion on the establishment of public schools on the eastern coast of the Adriatic. Malinar argues that by the time Acciarini arrived in Dubrovnik the establishment of public schools was well underway and that these institutions proved to be of vital importance for the expansion of Humanism, as they disseminated secular culture and internationalization which then reflected in the transadriatic cultural and trade exchange. The author lists the years of establishment of public schools together with the names of the teachers. Noting that the spirit of Humanism spread through acquaintances and literary works, Malinar concludes her paper by discussing the influence of Petrarchism on the literary production of Dubrovnik and Dalmatia.
Certainly, the most original papers of these proceedings, which provide an abundance of information on Tideo Acciarini’s work and life on the eastern coast of the Adriatic and in Italy, are those of Silvia Fiaschi and Gabriella Albanese.
In her paper »Acciarini e Poliziano: percorsi umanistici di fine Quattrocento« (Acciarini and Poliziano: paths of Humanism at the end of the fifteenth century), Silvia Fiaschi studies Acciarini’s correspondence with Angelo Poliziano or, more specifically, an Acciarini’s letter relating to Poliziano’s comments on Statius’s collection Silvae. In a detailed research of the correspondence, which, according to the author, dates from the eighties and the nineties of the fifteenth century, Fiaschi traces Acciarini’s movements in Italy upon his return from Dalmatia and Dubrovnik. The fact that Acciarini’s letter contains an incomplete date serves Fiaschi as a starting point for a short philological analysis of the mistakes that led the previous researchers (Francesco Lo Parco, Mario Martelli, Nicola de Blasi and others) to wrong conclusions about the time when the letter had been written. According to them, the letter had been written in 1480, when Acciarini presumably returned from Dalmatia and started working in the public school of Cosenza. The author provides a comprehensive reconstruction of Acciarini’s movements with an emphasis on Naples, Cosenza and Milan, followed by a detailed study of the content of Acciarini’s letter to Poliziano, as well as of the cultural context and of the terms used. Also examined are the available archival sources (documents of the Chancellery of the Aragonese Court at Naples and of the Vatican Library). The first set of documents leads her to a firm conclusion that Acciarini could not have stayed in Cosenza before 1487, for which reason she situates the letter to Poliziano in the same year. The author concludes that Acciarini remained in Calabria very shortly because, according to the data available, in 1488 and 1489 the Comune of Recanati offered him a teacher’s post while he was already teaching in Potenza Picina in the region of Marche. These data, as well as the fact that in the early nineties Acciarini reappears in Naples under the name of Thideo Neapolitano, is grounded by the correspondence. Numerous friendly ties that Acciarini established in Naples lead Silvia Fiaschi to the conclusion that he probably joined the famous Accademia Pontiniana. In the second part of her paper, Silvia Fiaschi meticulously analyses the content of three manuscripts from Acciarini’s personal library (Barberiniano latino 213 and Borgiani latini 413 and 416) kept in the Vatican Library. The Barberiniano latino 213 contains Acciarini’s piece De animorum medicamentis, thoroughly examined by Gabriella Albanese. By sifting the content of the remaining two manuscripts, of the inserted annotations and corrections, Silvia Fiaschi aims to show the “philological aspect” of Acciarini’s “intellectual profile”. Closing with a transcription of Acciarini’s correspondence with Poliziano and Filippo Beroaldo Senior, the paper itself allows an insight into the hitherto unknown testimonials and data about Acciarini’s work upon return to Italy. It will certainly be indispensable for any further research into the life and work of this Humanist although Silvia Fiaschi warns that some of the submitted assumptions related to Acciarini’s whereabouts need to be reconfirmed by the archival sources.
Central paper in terms of volume, content and results is »Il De animorum medicamentis di Tideo Acciarini e la trattatistica “de principe“ nell’Umanesimo« (De animorum medicamentis of Tideo Acciarini and Humanist treatises “de principe”) by Gabriella Albanese. By using an approach similar to that of Silvia Fiaschi, Albanese starts with a critical comment of Lo Parco’s work about Acciarini to which she objects lack of sources and bias. This paper also deals with Acciarini’s days upon return from Dalmatia and Dubrovnik to Italy, marked by unsuccessful attempts to obtain a position at the royal court. According to the author, even Acciarini’s greatest work De animorum medicamentis was written with that purpose, since it is dedicated to John, Prince of Asturias, son of Isabel and Ferdinand II. Acciarini’s juvenile collection Carmina is addressed to Alessandro Sforza, Prince of Pesaro, and his sons. In spite of that, archival sources undoubtedly prove that in neither of the cases the education of children was entrusted to Tideo Acciarini. This Italian Humanist describes his failed projects and career in the letter to Poliziano, central theme of the previous paper. Albanese notes the contemporaries’ total silence with regard to Acciarini, and tries to emend it with a detailed philological analysis of Acciarini’s work within the context of the late fifteenth century. Codicological analysis of the two manuscripts containing Acciarini’s De animorum medicamentis is succeeded by a systematic analysis, departing from direct and indirect sources found in the treaties of that time dealing with the qualities of a good ruler. Acciarini’s work faithfully follows this fashion with an aim to introduce the future rulers to a set of virtues necessary for successful reign. Like other works of this kind, it centres on education (paideia) as a key element of society and state throughout the Humanist world. By drawing a parallel with Nicolò Pontano’s Il principe, a more famous work that inspired Acciarini, Gabriella Albanese also calls attention to some of the differences, primarily reflected in Acciarini’s deficient structure and gaps in exposition. She also argues against the obsolescence of Acciarini’s work and its being based on the sources already rejected in similar treatises of that time, as well as against its too strong bonds with scholastic ethics.
The last paper entitled »Brevi note per la biografia di Tideo Acciarini« (Brief notes for the biography of Tideo Acciarini) by Rosa Marisa Borracini can be used as a sort of compendium of the two central papers, since it provides some new information about Acciarini’s life based on the historical archives of Sant’Elpidio a Mare and Recanati. The author states that numerous researchers have been misled by the lack of reliable data about Acciarini’s life and his whereabouts. Borracini lists the places where Acciarini’s stay has been confirmed, starting from Pesaro, Milan, cities of the eastern coast of the Adriatic, Naples, Cosenza and Montesanto (nowadays Potenza Picina). Commending Silvia Fiaschi for having confirmed with exactitude Acciarini’s service for the two members of Sanseverino family―Girolamo, Prince of Bisignano, and Antonello, Prince of Salerno―the author acquaints the reader with an unknown information, to which, according to her, importance should be attached: decision of the City Council of Recanati of 18 May 1488 concerning Antonio Bonfini’s successor at the position of the public school teacher. Before leaving for the Court of Matthias Corvinus, Bonfini provided the names of three potential successors, one of whom was Acciarini who refused the offer, which, in the author’s opinion, indicates that Acciarini had already been serving at Montesanto at that time. By analysing the decisions of the City Council of Sant’Elpidio a Mare, Borracini concludes that Acciarini never abandoned his native land for good, where he owned substantial real estate and enjoyed his citizen status. At the very end of the paper, Borracini describes heated discussion of the City Council, which despite a majority opposition passed the decision on Acciarini’s arrest. The reasons underlying such a decision remain unknown, and so do many puzzling and obscure details of Acciarini’s life and work awaiting to be explored by future researchers.
The example of Tideo Acciarini best illustrates how a teacher can be eclipsed by his students, at least when it comes to those on the eastern coast of the Adriatic. Marko Marulić and Ilija Crijević are far better known than Acciarini, not only in the Croatian literary scholarship but in that of Italy as well. As recurrently underlined, the best expert on Acciarini’s life and work is Francesco Lo Parco, who performed his research during the 1920s. Lo Parco’s fundamental flaw, and of all the scholars who leaned on him, is the fact that their study is not based on archival sources, as masterfully shown by Silvia Fiaschi and Gabriella Albanese. Their papers are this volume’s most valuable contribution to the understanding of Acciarini’s life and work. In-depth philological and comparative approach paved the way and introduced the methodological apparatus that should be used in future in order to elucidate the fate of this little-known teacher of the famous students. Although Fiaschi and Albanese have pinpointed almost all the relevant places on the map of Acciarini’s movements after his return to Italy, many more questions related to his stay on the eastern coast of the Adriatic still remain open. His days in Zadar, Split and Dubrovnik are known, as well as his students and friends, but a wider cultural context necessary for understanding his work is still lacking. Unfortunately, these proceedings fail to meet this need in full.
Although the title of the proceedings suggests Acciarini’s activity between Italy and Dalmatia and Dubrovnik, modest presence of Croatian literary historians and their lack of interest in the topic strike the eye. Besides Petar Kolendić, Smiljka Malinar and Bratislav Lučin, no one else has tackled this Italian Humanist despite his valuable importance for the formation of some of the greatest intellectuals of the era on the eastern coast of the Adriatic. Therefore, these proceedings provide Croatian literary scholarship with a clear indication of the path towards such research by basing the work on the immensely rich archival material and good knowledge of the fate of Acciarini’s students.
http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=toc&id_broj=13416