Dante: Monarchy (Cambridge Texts in the History of ... (ISBN 0521567815)

Book Description:
Only available in academic libraries until now, this work embodies a political vision of startling originality and power. Illuminating the intellectual interests and achievements of one of the world's great poets, the translation is accompanied by a full introduction and notes.

The Church and the Empire: Dante takes sides...:
Many people have read Dante's "Divine Comedy", but only some know that besides being a wonderful poet he was also a noteworthy political thinker. If you read "Monarchy", a book that he wrote in 1313, you will realize why... Dante Alighieri (1265-1321) was born in Florence, Italy, and he participated actively in the political life of his city, being one of the officials in charge of the government of Florence. As such, he took some decisions that were considered by many anti-papal, but that he deemed not only adequate but essential in order to limit the influence of the Church in politics. As a result, sometime later (when the balance of power changed, and the Church had the upper hand), he was exiled from Florence and told that if he were to return he would be executed. It is rather unsurprising that this event only made him more sure of what he already thought: that the Church shouldn't be involved in politics. The mere idea that the Church wasn't more important than the Empire was rather controversial at the time that this book was written, because some said that the Church had a right to oversee the Empire, to watch over it and direct it if necessary. Others, for example Dante, were vehemently opposed to that idea, and took upon themselves the task of increasing the power of the Emperor. In "Monarchy" he tries to explain what form of political organization is the one that allows human beings to reach their objectives more easily. Dante distinguishes two orders and two authorities (Church and Empire), and says that the basis for that distinction is the two main objectives that men have in their lives: eternal happiness and happiness in this life. He defends the importance of the Empire, and says that it doesn't need to obey the Church. Dante also points out that the authority of the secular prince is not derived from the Church, but comes directly to him from God. On the whole, this book is quite interesting, and it introduces you to a different side of Dante: the political thinker. Moreover, it allows you to know more about the controversy regarding the Church and the Empire, a debate that was very important in the XIVth century. It is also worthwhile pointing out that "Monarchy" is quite short, so you won't lose too much of your time reading it, but you are likely to learn a lot. So, all in all, recommended... Belén Alcat

A great work, from the greatest writer in history:
Quite simply one of the greatest political treatises from the greatest mind of the Middle Ages/Renaissance. Dante displays his views on the need for strong Monarch in a sophisticated, yet easy to follow way. His political views also hint at future revolutions in political thought, e.g. government by consent of the governed. This would be a fascinating read for anyone who is interested in political history, or the Renaissance.

The Satanic Comedy of Dante Alighieri:
Dante Alighieri has the reputation of being one of the world's greatest poets, because of his "Divine Comedy". This book shows that Dante could also be an idiot. Or perhaps even evil. "Monarchy" reads like a message from the Ninth Circle of Hell! "Monarchy" is divided into three parts. In the first part, Dante argues for a world dictatorship or empire, ruled single-handedly by a monarch modelled on the pagan Roman emperors. The arguments are framed in the manner of Aristotelian syllogisms, making them look quite ridiculous to modern readers. Still, most of them look vaguely familiar: just as God is the single ruler of the universe, the emperor should be the single ruler of humanity; since universal peace is good for humanity, and since two or more rulers can wage war against each other, there must be a single ruler of the whole world; there must be a final court of appeal somewhere...and guess who that is? Et cetera. Sometimes, Dante engages in an early version of Orwellian newspeak, as when he "proves" that the world dictator can't be greedy: since he already rules the world, and therefore has everything, greed cannot enter his mind, and he is therefore perfectly just. Yeah, and war is peace, right? Or what about this one: "Therefore since the monarch is the most universal cause among mortals that men should live the good life, it follows that the good of mankind is dear to him above all else". Occasionally, the Supreme Poet sounds more like Pravda or Völkischer Beobachter, as when he declares that humanity is truly free only if subject to an autocratic world ruler: "Thus it must be borne in mind that a thing is free which exists for its own sake and not for the sake of something else, as Aristotle states in the Metaphysics. Mankind exists for its own sake and not for the sake of something else only when it is under the rule of a monarch, for only then are perverted forms of government (i.e. democracies, oligarchies and tyrannies), which force mankind into slavery, set right. Since the monarch loves men most, as we have already noted, he wants all men to become good, and this cannot happen under perverted forms of government." Amen. Sounds like an excellent propaganda speech for Kim Il Sung or Ceausescu! In the second part, Dante attempts to show that the pagan (!) Roman Empire ruled the whole world by the will of God, and that the best form of rule is therefore the re-establishment of said empire. In part, Dante accomplishes this by recounting the heroic deeds of various figures from the Roman Republic, as if there was a direct continuity between the Republic and the later Empire. He further states that the founder of Rome, Aeneas, was the noblest person in the world, and that the kingdom established by him therefore had the right to conquer and subdue its neighbors. Another important "proof" is that a large shield fell from heaven when the Roman king Numa sacrificed to the pagan gods. This miracle shows that Rome had divine favour! To modern readers, these arguments are strained beyond comprehension. However, they must have seemed pretty strained even to Dante's contemporaries: Dante, after all, was a Christian, not a pagan, and yet he sees pagan miracles as proof that a world monarchy is desirable. The most stunning argument offered by Dante Alighieri in this section is that since Jesus was born under Roman rule, and was condemned to die by the Roman authorities, the divine legitimacy of the Roman Empire is proven (!). The plot thickens in the third section, where our poet refutes arguments for *papal* world rule, put forward by people we would today call Ultramontanists. This is the only section that makes any kind of sense: indeed, Dante manages to demolish all the usual arguments for papal supremacy (the two lights, the two swords, etc). Sometimes, this section is actually quite humorous - the "Ultramontane" arguments were *very* weak. But even this section contains a rather stunning statement: Dante rejects the so-called Donation of Constantine, since he believes that Constantine acted without proper authority when he gave the popes temporal power (actually, the Donation is a forgery, but this was unknown in Dante's day). To Dante, Constantine's donation was in effect a division of the empire, something no emperor has the right to do. Thus, Dante is forced into the rather strange position, for a Christian, that the pagan emperors were better than the first Christian emperor! What are we to make of "De Monarchia"? The safest course, perhaps, is to write it off as a zany piece of propaganda, perhaps written to appease the Holy Roman emperor Henry VII, who Dante hoped could unite Italy. Still, in an age such as ours, during which world empires have (almost) become realities, "Monarchy" sounds pretty chilling. Freedom? Goodness? Please come on. To all intents and purposes, this work is Dante's satanic comedy. PS. Lyndon LaRouche takes this book seriously.