The Transfiguration of History at the Center of Dante’s “Paradise.” by Jeffrey T. Schnapp (review)

STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER (5.1037-42), and, since we know that artists or their supervisors were capable of reading and interpreting vernacular texts, Krochalis makes the interesting conjecture that the artist gave a new interpretation to the first line of the poem, "The double sorwe of Troylus for to tellen" by showing that the double cause of his sorrow lay in the persons of Criseyde and Diomed. As Krochalis says, "The miniature is so conventional that one cannot be sure, but in view of our increasing awareness of how medieval readers used illustration to comment on a text, the possibility seems worth considering." I myself prefer the idea of a beady-eyed Diomed to a beady­ eyed Troilus, although I am not convinced that it is he. Very intriguing for me, however, is the thought that this is the earliest manuscript portrait we have of Criseyde herself.Alas, her face is a blank, almost completely flaked off, which leaves her beauty still, only in the eyes of the beholder, or rather the response of the reader. THOMAS]. GARB.A.TY University of Michigan JEFFREY T. SCHNAPP. The Transfiguration of History at the Center of Dante's "Paradise. "Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1986. Pp. xiv, 268. $35.00. Like some fine-cut diamond, the depth, brilliance, and clarity of Dante's Commedia are made evident through its seemingly endless facets. Each of us more or less profoundly peers into the work through the facet (or facets) that naturally enthralls us. ForJeffrey Schnapp, that facet is Paradiso 14-18 (the heaven of Mars), which he sees as the structural and thematic "center of Dante's Paradise," where Dante carries out "the transfiguration of history." Once we get fully into his thesis-that is, once past the density of argument of his opening chapters-the breadth and vision of Schnapp's analysis is as exhilarating as it is evident, though we must be awarethat certain assump­ tions are ever present. Thus, Schnapp expands the Mars/Mors, or Marte/ Morte/Martirio, interplay to the point where the god is "virtual lord ofDis" (p. 36), the embodiment of almost every discord (p. 37), and even at times of Fortuna (pp. 54, 57) and death (p. 62); indeed, for Schnapp, this aspect of Mars seems connected with negative forces throughout the Commedia. 194 REVIEWS Against this, and for its transfiguration, Schnapp sets the Cross, which for him is the Commedia's great triumphal image, gathering to itselfall of the poem's positive forces. And here Schnapp's prose and perspective seem to rise andrespondto the universality andsweepofDante'spoeticvision. It is here that Schnapp brings in so profitably his analysis of the breath­ takingly beautiful Ravenna mosaics, especially those of Sant' Apollinare in Classe. (And yet, one wonders why, if Dante wished to develop all that Schnapp so sensitively perceives, the poet put his reference to Classe not here but in Purgatorio 28.) Certainly this discussion ofthe centrality ofthe Cross should be carefully considered by future critics. Almost as effective are Schnapp's analyses ofCacciaguida and ofVirgil. Yet here andelsewherethroughoutthe study'sdiscussionofthe transfigura­ tion of history, there is the assumption that, in effect, Paradiso 14-18 is Dante'sconciserewritingofbook 6 oftheAeneid. So long as we areawareof this assumption, and of its possible dangers in in vacuo analyses, we can greatly profit from the breadth of Schnapp's reading and thinking. Aqui­ nas is, of course, a strong primary source, but so too is Richard of Saint Victor, especially the Benjamin Minor. And the bibliography shows the sweep ofhis secondary reading; but, especially in this discussion ofhistory, one wishes-is it mere campamlismo?-that more use would have been made of Mazzeo and Ferrante, if only to relate the perceptions and approach of this study to theirs. The direct pertinence of this book for Chaucerians is admittedly slight (perhaps pp. 6, 9, 17, 13, 27, 67, e.g.), and yet it serves two other purposes: first, in its delineation of zeitgeist, and secondly (and not facetiously), in being another example of the difference between Dante and Chaucer. As always, one thanks Princeton University Press for a hand­ some, well-illustratedbook, though one wishes...