However, as regards questions 2 and 3, Contini seems
to go too far by loosening the connection between
Bonagiunta and Guittone in an attempt to establish,
instead, a more direct link between Bonagiunta and the
poets of the stil novo; according to Contini, beneath the
cumbersome superstructure of Guittone’s trobar clus
(hermetic style), Bonagiunta elaborated the Sicilian
tradition and channeled it toward the results fi nally
achieved by the Florentine stil novo. Marti (1973) has
toned down this interpretation. Bonagiuntismo may
have been the state of affairs to which Guittone was
reacting in developing his own innovative, pithy writing;
but Bonagiunta was no doubt attracted by the younger,
more authoritative, and more charismatic Giuttone. Al-
though Bonagiunta’s own tendency was comparatively
archaic and leu (free, open), he considered himself a
staunch supporter of Guittone. This is revealed in the
sonnet directed to Guinizzelli (Voi, ch’avete mutata la
mainera, “You who have changed the manner”), where
he harshly chides Guinizzelli for changing the style
then gloriously in force: that is, Guittone’s. In addition,
Dante perceived—and condemned—Bonagiunta as a
Guittonian, in De vulgari eloquentia (l.xiii.l) and also in
a famous episode in Purgatory, 24 (although, we should
note, lato sensu, i.e., without the benefi t of a detailed
stylistic analysis).
An even thornier question is whether Bonagiunta
might be considered a forerunner or incubator of the stil
novo (a problem which also arises, for instance, in trying
to place Chiaro Davanzati). This question is especially
diffi cult because we do not know when Bonagiunta
died or, more important, when he stopped writing. He
probably outlived Guinizzelli, but we have no idea how
long he remained active as a poet in the last twenty years
of the century. However, it is not very likely, given his
advanced age, that the features of the stil novo which
some readers discern in his verses were due to any
infl uence exerted on him by the new school (especially
Cavalcanti), as Francesco Novati was inclined to believe.
Considering the continuity and the constraints of the
lyrical tradition, one should be cautious in retrospec-
tively applying the term stil novo, or even “stilnovistic,”
to lexical and metric combinations in the work of earlier
poets. In such cases the real signifi cance is to be found
in the context, both literal and cultural.
For the episode in Purgatory 24, then, Dante would
have thought of Bonagiunta for several reasons. For one
thing, only through Bonagiunta could the lyrical remi-
niscence of Gentucca be introduced; for another, Dante
certainly held Bonagiunta responsible for having blindly
exalted Guittone’s reputation (Purgatory, 26.124–126)
over that of Guinizzelli, whom Dante considered his own
poetic father. Bonagiunta had resented and objected to
the novelty of Guinizzelli’s “sweet style”; let him now
joyfully acknowledge, in the unescapable dialectics of
contrappasso, the messianic renewal that Dante was
bringing about.
See also Dante Alighieri; Guinizzelli, GuidoFurther Reading
Barolini, Teodolinda. Dante’s Poets: Textuality and Truth in
the “Comedy.” Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
1984.
Contini, Gianfranco, ed. Poeti del Duecento, 2 vols. Milan-
Naples: Ricciardi, 1960, Vol. 1, pp. 257–282; Vol. 2, p. 825.
De Sanctis, Francesco, and Gerolamo Lazzeri, eds. Storia della
letteratura italiana dai primi secoli agli albori del Trecento.
Milan: Hoepli, 1950, pp. 376, 396, 520–529.
Marti, Mario. “Orbicciani, Bonagiunta.” In Enciclopedia dant-
esca. Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, 1973, Vol.
4, pp. 181–182.
Quaglio, Antonio Enzo. “I poeti siculo-toscani.” In La letteratura
italiana: Storia e testi, ed. Carlo Muscetta. Bari: Laterza,
1970, pp. 241–258.
Tartaro, Achille. “Guittone e i rimatori siculo-toscani.” In Storia
della letteratura italiana, ed. Emilio Cecchi and Natalino
Sapegno. Milan: Garzanti, 1965, Vol. 1, pp. 381–389.
Zaccagnini, Guido, and Amos Parducci, eds. Rimatori siculo-
toscani del Dugento. Series 1a: Pistoiesi, Lucchesi, Pisani.
Bari: Laterza, 1915, pp. 47–93, 112–118.
Ruggero StefaniniBONAVENTURA BERLINGHIERI
(fl. 1235–1244)
Bonaventura Berlinghieri painted a gabled altarpiece at
Pescia depicting Saint Francis fl anked by six scenes of
Francis’s life and miracles. This work, unusual because
it is both signed and dated (1235), is a linchpin in the
chronology of Italian painting: it clarifi es develop-
ments in style as well as in Franciscan iconography;
and current analyses have been aided by its restoration
in 1982.
The format and style of this work suggest that Bo-
naventura was the most innovative of the three sons
of the Lucchese painter Berlinghiero di Milanese.
Documents place the activity of Berlinghiero and his
sons—Bonaventura, Barone, and Marco—between 1228
and 1282, primarily at Lucca; a relatively recent attempt
by Caleca (1981) to associate the Berlinghieri of Lucca
with Volterra has not changed that localization. Although
Marco was commissioned to illuminate manuscripts and
both Marco and Bonaventura received commissions for
frescoes, most of the extant works associated with the
Berlinghieri are images of the Virgin and Child and the
Passion painted on wooden panels. These works are in a
distinctive style, in which the linear Italian Romanesque
tradition is transformed by a new and intense familiarity
with Byzantine images produced shortly before 1200.
On the basis of the resulting angular, expressive facialBONAGIUNTA ORBICCIANI DEGLI AVERARDI