PETRARCH THE CRITIC AND READER 



to the charge of indifference towards Dante; the other 

 in reference to a statement made by their mutual 

 friend, Donato, that Boccaccio not merely regretted 

 having written works in the vernacular, but even wished 

 to destroy them. Petrarch writes, dissuading hun from 

 doing so. " I," he says {Sen., v, 2), " have sometimes 

 harbored quite the opposite design, and thought of 

 devoting my whole attention to the vernacular. To be 

 sure, the Latin, in both prose and poetry, is undoubtedly 

 the nobler language, but for that very reason it has been 

 so thoroughly developed by earher writers that neither 

 we nor anyone else may expect to add much to it. The 

 vernacular, on the other hand, has but recently been 

 discovered, and, though it has been ravaged by many, 

 it still remains uncultivated, in spite of a few earnest 

 laborers, and still shows itself capable of much im- 

 provement and enrichment. Stimulated by this 

 thought, and by the enterprise of youth, I began an 

 extensive work in that language. I laid the foundations 

 of the structure, I got together my Hme, and stones, and 

 wood." The two reasons he gives for abandoning the 

 work are substantially these: his dislike of the audience 

 which would be attracted by such writings, and the 

 lack of a proper grace of delivery on the part of those 

 who should recite them. This requires a Httle explana- 

 tion. 



One of the things that characterize the Renaissance, 

 that distinguish it from the Middle Ages, is the fact 

 that it affords a vastly larger number of persons who 



82 



