Petrarch at the Banquet 8i 



in Pavia, a circumstance which filled him with unspeakable 

 sorrow. 



our Donato, who knew her. Your little one has the same aspect 

 that she had who was my Eletta, the same expression, the same light 

 in the eyes, the same laughter there, the same gestures, the same 

 way of walking, the same way of carrying all her little person; only 

 my Eletta was, it is true, a little taller when at the age of five and 

 a half I saw her for the last time. Besides, she talks in the 

 same way, uses the same words, and has the same simplicity. Indeed, 

 indeed, there is no difference save that thy little one is golden-haired, 

 while mine had chestnut tresses ('aurea cesaries tuae est, meae inter 

 nigram rufamque fuit'). Ah me! how many times when I have held 

 thine in my arms, listening to her prattle, the memory of my baby 

 stolen away from me has brought tears to my eyes — which I let no 

 one see.' 

 Hutton proceeds to comment: It is perhaps in that letter we see Boc- 

 caccio better than in any other of his writings ; the greatest man then in 

 Italy playing with a little child, obliged in his poverty to accept assistance 

 from one who was almost a stranger' [Franceschino had pressed upon him 

 a considerable gift at parting]. 



Students of the Middle English poem, The Pearl (see Osgood's edi- 

 tion), will not need to be reminded of Boccaccio's Eclogue XIV (about 

 1360, according to Osgood), with its vision of his little daughter (d. i355; 

 see Hecker, Boccaccio-Funde, p. 84), Violante (there called Olympia, but 

 here, in compliment to Petrarch, designated as 'my Eletta'). 



By February, 1366, another child, this time a son, was born to the pair. 

 This happened at Venice, according to Korting (p. 365), Fracassetti (2. 

 240), and Mezieres (p. T64). His epitaph, however, calls him 'Mediolan- 

 ensis,' and to this there seems no objection, since Petrarch was accustomed 

 to pass the summers of 1363-7 at Pavia (see p. 79), and we know, accord- 

 ing to Sen. 9. 2, that he — and therefore probably his daughter (see p. 

 79) — was in the country near Milan on Nov. i, 1366, and do not know 

 of his presence at Venice {Sen. 6. i) in that year later than Jan. 25, while 

 he had been at Padua {Sen. 5. i) as late as Dec. 14, 1365. The child was 

 christened Francesco, a name suggestive at once of his father, mother, and 

 grandfather. Petrarch's son, Giovanni, who had been a great disappoint- 

 ment to him, had died of the plague in 1361, so that all his domestic 

 affections were concentrated on his daughter's family. This is clear from 

 the letter {Sen. 10. 4) written after the grandson's death. In this he 

 declares that the child was dearer to him than if it had been his own, 

 since it was born of two whom he so greatly loved, and that he doubted 

 whether he had ever loved anything more. Hardly was the babe a year 

 old before friends remarked on its resemblance to Petrarch. It was a 

 melancholy satisfaction to the poet that Galeazzo, who had seen the death 

 of his own infant with dry eyes but a short time before, could scarcely 

 even hear of the death of the little Francesco without tears. Petrarch 



Tr.\ns. Conn. Acad., Vol. XXI 6 1916 



