Spanish, which was published at Antwerp in 1543. This
translation incurred the displeasure of Charles V because
it was based on the Greek text of Erasmus and because of
Enzinas’s marginalia, which expressed unorthodox opin-
ions. He also printed in capitals the verses of Romans 3
which provided one of the main supports for those who
endorsed JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. Enzinas was therefore
imprisoned (1543) at Brussels but he managed to escape
to Antwerp two years later. He journeyed widely and in
1546 came to England, where he was professor of Greek at
Cambridge until the accession of the Catholic Mary I
forced him to leave. He even traveled as far as Constan-
tinople, founding a Protestant colony there. His works in-
cluded a history of religion in Spain and Spanish
translations of Lucian (1550) and Plutarch (1551). He
also wrote memoirs in Latin which remained in manu-
script until the 19th century.
epic A long narrative poem written in a heightened style
concerning a heroic character whose legendary or histori-
cal actions are central to his culture, race, or nation. “Pri-
mary” or traditional epics, such as the Homeric poems,
derive from an heroic age and celebrate a war or similar
event and the hero’s role in it. “Secondary” or literary epics
are by known individual poets writing in deliberate imita-
tion of “primary” models. VIRGIL’SAeneid is both the out-
standing example of the literary epic and the model, in
turn, for most succeeding European epic poets.
In addition to the great national or cultural signifi-
cance embodied by the epic hero and his actions, there are
a number of other conventional features of both types of
epic. The setting is suitably extensive, often representing
the whole of the known world (as in the Odyssey) and
more, for example, the underworld in classical epics and
the entire Christian cosmos in John Milton’s Paradise Lost
(1667). Divine beings or other supernatural agents take
part, often actively, in the events. The exalted and cere-
monial language appropriate to the action is also charac-
terized by a number of conventions, for example, detailed
catalogues of people, things, and places; set speeches re-
flecting the character of the speaker, who may also bear a
stock epithet (pius Aeneas, fidus Achates in the Aeneid);
and epic similes involving elaborate comparisons. The
poem usually starts in medias res after an invocation of the
Muse and a question put to her, the answer to which is the
narrative itself. The most important early theoretical com-
ments on the epic are contained in ARISTOTLE’s Poetics,
though they have survived only in mutilated form.
In the Renaissance, the nature of the epic was the sub-
ject of intense discussion in 16th-century Italy following
the recovery of Aristotle’s Poetics and the dissemination of
classical literary theory. Previously known mainly through
a commentary by Averroes, the Poetics became available in
much improved translations: into Latin by Giorgio Valla
(1498) and Alessandro Pazzi (1536), and into Italian by
Bernardo Segni (1549). Although Aristotle had ranked
epic second to tragedy in the hierarchy of genres, this
judgment was ignored by Renaissance critics, and epic
was promoted to top place—“the best and most accom-
plished” as Sir Philip SIDNEYcalled it (Defence of Poesie,
1595). The Homeric epics with which Aristotle was con-
cerned were eventually given serious consideration, but
Virgil remained the most significant epic model for Re-
naissance poets and critics. Thus Marco Giralamo VIDAin
De arte poetica (1527) proclaims the epic as the noblest of
all genres and Virgil as the best model. Many other critics
and poets reflect or adapt Aristotelian principles in com-
menting on the epic. Giangiorgio TRISSINOin La poetica
(1529) cites Aristotelian criteria; he modeled his own
blank-verse epic, La Italia liberata da’ Gotthi (1547–48),
on Homer. CINTHIOin Discorsi intorno al comporre dei ro-
manzi (1548) attempted to defend Ariosto and the ro-
mance by categorizing them in a separate slot from the
epic as classically conceived. Minturno (Antonio Sebas-
tiani) argued for an epic having classical unity of action
while taking Christian and romance material as proper
subject matter (L’arte poetica, 1564). CASTELVETRO(Poetica
d’Aristotele vulgarizatta et sposta, 1570) opposed a rigid
application of Aristotelian criteria to later works.
Among Renaissance poems of epic scope, the DIVINE
COMEDYoccupies a special place at the very beginning of
the period, but it lacks an epic hero in any traditional
sense. PETRARCH’s Africa, SANNAZARO’s De partu virginis,
Vida’s Christus, and Trissino’s epic are the best representa-
tives of humanist classicism. Owing more to the medieval
romance and the poetry of chivalry, which included such
“primary” material as the legends of ARTHUR and of
CHARLEMAGNEand the Twelve Peers—though the Chanson
de Roland itself was not known in the Renaissance—are
BOCCACCIO’s Teseida, with its erotic interest, PULCI’s Il mor-
gante, BOIARDO’s Orlando innamorato, ARIOSTO’s Orlando fu-
rioso, and TASSO’s Rinaldo. Tasso’s GERUSALEMME LIBERATA
and, for theory, his Discorsi del poema eroico (1594) form
a final, if inconclusive, attempt in Italy to reconcile neo-
classical ideals of unity and moral purpose with the mar-
vels, love interest, and multiplicity of event of the
romance tradition.
The divergence between the “unified” classical epic
and the “diversified” romantic epic manifested itself in the
literatures of other European countries. In France RON-
SARDattempted a national epic on the theme of the French
monarchy; its feeble plan, ill-advised choice of meter
(decasyllables, as opposed to the more eloquent alexan-
drine), and wooden diction condemned La Franciade
(1572) to abandonment after only four of the projected 24
books had been completed. In England Spenser’s FAERIE
QUEENE, also unfinished, combined grandeur of concep-
tion with poetic power in the execution, but its allegorical
character and multiplicity of action disqualified it as an
epic contender in the classical style. The most successfuleeppiicc 1 16633