Education and Society in Florentine Tuscany
Education and Society in the Middle Ages and Renaissance Editors
Jürgen Miethke (Heidelberg) William J. Courtenay (Madison) Jeremy Catto (Oxford) Jacques Verger (Paris)
VOLUME 29
Education and Society in Florentine Tuscany Teachers, Pupils and Schools, c. 1250–1500 Volume I
By
Robert Black
LEIDEN • BOSTON 2007
This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Black, Robert, 1946– Education and society in Florentine Tuscany : teachers, pupils and schools, c. 1250–1500 / by Robert Black. p. cm.—(Education and society in the middle ages and renaissance) ISBN 978-90-04-15853-5 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Education—Italy—Florence— History. 2. Education—Italy—Tuscany—History. 3. Educational sociology—Italy— Florence. 4. Educational sociology—Italy—Tuscany. I. Title. II. Series. LA799.F55B58 2007 370.945'51—dc22 2007019979
ISSN 0926-6070 ISBN 978 90 04 15853 5 © Copyright 2007 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands
To John Benjamin Ellis
CONTENTS Preface ......................................................................................... xi Abbreviations .............................................................................. xxv Editorial note regarding citations from manuscripts ................. xxix Chapter One Literacy in Florence, 1427 ................................ Conclusion .............................................................................. Chapter Two The school curriculum in Florentine Tuscany and in the city of Florence .................................................... The shape of the curriculum ................................................. Elementary reading ............................................................ Latin composition ............................................................... Latin literature .................................................................... Stylistics and rhetoric .......................................................... Abacus ................................................................................. Writing ................................................................................ The school curriculum in Florentine Tuscany outside Florence .................................................................. Prato .................................................................................... Arezzo ................................................................................. Colle Valdelsa ..................................................................... Volterra ............................................................................... Pisa ...................................................................................... San Gimignano ................................................................... Poggibonsi ........................................................................... Poppi ................................................................................... Pescia ................................................................................... Pistoia .................................................................................. Sansepolcro ......................................................................... San Miniato and Fucecchio ............................................... Other towns in Florentine Tuscany ................................... The school curriculum in the city of Florence ..................... Pre-school ............................................................................ The reading curriculum in Florence ..................................
1 42
43 44 44 46 48 50 52 54 61 61 67 79 83 87 97 103 104 105 107 112 116 118 121 121 122
viii
contents
The secondary theoretical grammar syllabus in Florence ........................................................ The fourteenth century .................................................. 1400–1450 ....................................................................... 1450–1470 ....................................................................... 1470–1500 ....................................................................... The auctores minores in Florence ........................................... The fourteenth century .................................................. The fteenth century ...................................................... Boethius in Florentine schools ............................................ The auctores maiores in Florence ........................................... Rhetoric and stylistics in Florence ..................................... Abacus and writing in Florence ......................................... Latin drama in Florence .................................................... Humanism at school in Florence and Florentine Tuscany: a comparison ....................................................................... Chapter Three The decline of church education and the rise of lay schools in Tuscany ....................................................... Church schools before 1200 ................................................... The decline of ecclesiastical education in Tuscany during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries ............................. The rise of lay teachers and schools in Tuscany ................... Notaries ............................................................................... Family men ......................................................................... Citizens ................................................................................ Military service ................................................................... Untitled teachers ................................................................. Women ................................................................................ Schools, teachers and lay institutions: universities and guilds ............................................................................... Private teachers in Tuscany outside Florence in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries .................................... Private teachers in Florence during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries ............................................................ Elementary teachers of reading and/or writing ............... Private grammar teachers .................................................. Private tutors ....................................................................... Private abacus teachers and schools in Florence during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries ......................... Conclusion ..............................................................................
126 126 129 136 140 144 145 146 151 154 160 162 164 164
173 173 181 190 191 194 197 199 200 203 203 206 210 211 214 221 226 241
contents Chapter Four The rise of communal schools in Florentine Tuscany: 1262 to 1400 ........................................................... Communal subsidies for rent ................................................. San Gimignano ................................................................... Fucecchio .............................................................................. Pistoia, San Miniato, Castiglion Fiorentino, Castelfranco di Sotto, Arezzo .............................................................. Communal salaries ................................................................. Grammar teachers .............................................................. Elementary teachers ........................................................... Abacus teachers .................................................................. Shortage of teachers outside Florence ................................... Monetary inducements for teachers outside Florence ........... Rising communal salaries for grammar teachers .................. Aims of communal education ................................................ Quality assurance and control in communal teaching .......... Florence and Florentine Tuscany in the fourteenth century: an educational comparison ................................................. Conclusion ..............................................................................
ix
245 245 245 253 256 258 258 268 274 278 282 289 295 306 314 324
Chapter Five Teachers, schools and pupils in Florence during the fteenth century .................................................... Elementary teachers and schools of reading (and writing) ... Elementary teachers before 1427 ....................................... Elementary teachers in the 1427 Catasto .......................... Elementary teachers at or near Orsanmichele in the earlier fteenth century .................................................. Elementary teachers in the mid-fteenth century ............. Elementary teachers in the later fteenth century ............ Abacus teachers and schools .................................................. Grammar (Latin) teachers and schools .................................. Public grammar teachers .................................................... Private grammar teachers .................................................. Private tutors in fteenth-century Florence ........................... Patterns of education in fteenth-century Florence .............. The earlier fteenth century .............................................. The mid-fteenth century .................................................. The late fteenth century ...................................................
338 339 348 362 385 385 401 423 446 446 457 462
Appendix One Education in the Florentine Catasto, 1427 ... Appendix Two Education in the Florentine Catasto, 1458 ...
469 529
327 327 329 331
x
contents
Appendix Three Communal schoolteachers in Florence up to 1500 .................................................................................... Appendix Four Communal schoolteachers in Florentine Tuscany (and Siena) up to 1400 ............................................ Appendix Five Education in unpublished Florentine Ricordanze (up to 1507) ............................................................ Appendix Six Education in the matriculation records of the Florentine Company of the Purication ............................... Appendix Seven Additional documents on education in Arezzo discovered since 1996 ................................................. Appendix Eight Documents on education in Sansepolcro up to 1400 ....................................................................................
537 545 613 725 737 757
Bibliography ................................................................................
779
Index of names ...........................................................................
791
PREFACE Education emerged as a driving force in Italy from the twelfth to the sixteenth century. This was a period which saw both the triumph of urban culture in the form of the city-states and the revival of classicism linked to humanism and the Renaissance. Both these decisive movements were underpinned by educational developments. Civic expansion was dependent on economic growth; commercial, industrial and nancial development required increasing literacy and numeracy to be diffused throughout the urban population for the conduct of business affairs and the keeping of business records. The triumph of lay education and literacy marks a great watershed in European history, and the late-medieval Italian cities were at the forefront of this cultural revolution. It was here that mass literacy reached a majority of the population. Burgeoning classical culture also relied on education to underpin, improve and extend latinity, not only among the professional literary classes but also within the social and political elite who patronised humanism and the Renaissance. Florence and Tuscany were at the heart of Italy’s urban and classical owering. Not only was Florence a great centre of Italy’s commercial revolution beginning in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, but it was also the rst permanent hub of the Renaissance classical revival from the later fourteenth century. Nevertheless, there has never been a comprehensive study of the educational infrastructure which supported the rise of both urbanism and classicism in Florence and Tuscany. Scholarly literature has been dominated by empirical research on schools in individual towns (e.g. Pistoia,1 Lucca2 and Volterra3) or by general syntheses of Italian education (e.g. by Manacorda4 and Grendler5), studies that tend to see a general educational pattern for Italy as a whole; the approach of this work has been different, attempting as it does to discern crucial regional and local variations in Italian education. Indeed, school education in no region of Italy during the 1 2 3 4 5
Zanelli (1900). Barsanti (1905). Battistini (1919). Manacorda (1914). Grendler (1989).
xii
preface
Renaissance period (apart perhaps from Piedmont)6 has ever been the subject of a thorough study. Florence and Tuscany—the hub of the Renaissance—have long deserved such attention, but the vast quantity and extreme dispersal of archival material have discouraged this kind of regional study of education. Within this ourishing lay culture, the city of Florence was doubtless one of the greatest centres of the Renaissance revival of antiquity, but it has always been puzzling why the leading citizens of Florence tended to be patrons rather than active participants in the Renaissance’s new learning; in the earlier fteenth century, amateur humanism was noticeable among the Florentine élite, but there were scarcely any professional humanists from Florence until the end of the century, and few Florentine amateurs wrote extended Latin compositions.7 This idiosyncratic situation needs to be understood in an educational and cultural context. The results of this work’s intensive study of educational structures both inside and outside the city of Florence show, I think conclusively, that, in the earlier Renaissance period, Latin school education was relatively weak in Florence, in comparison with outlying towns of Tuscany; Florentines gave preference to commercial education (abacus schools) over grammar (Latin) schools. The opposite was true in the other towns of Florentine Tuscany, where a traditional preference for Latin (grammar) over abacus remained, even in towns where regular abacus teaching was ultimately provided. The result was the migration of Latin scholars from the provinces to ll the void in Florence, supported by the Florentine élite, increasingly concerned at the overly commercial bias of the wider Florentine population, and anxious to differentiate themselves and their households from the petty-bourgeois attitudes of the middle and lower classes. This study will go some way to answering the question: why the Florentine Renaissance? Because of the quantity of unpublished source material underpinning this study, it has been necessary to publish the text in two volumes. The rst consists of ve chapters and eight appendices; the second will comprise four further chapters and four more appendices. A bibliography will be attached to volume 1, while a further comprehensive bibliography for both volumes will appear at the end of volume 2. A comprehensive general index, as well as an index of manuscripts, will be published at the end of volume 2.
6 7
Gabotto (1895); Nada Patrone (1996). Martines (1963), pp. 105–44, 147–91, 306–50; Black (2004), pp. 29 ff.
preface
xiii
As in my recent book on the history of the Latin school curriculum in medieval and Renaissance Italy,8 I should like to clarify that the subject of this book is pre-university education. The institutions discussed, as well as their teachers and pupils, will be elementary schools of reading and writing, secondary schools of commercial arithmetic (abacus schools), and secondary grammar, i.e. Latin, schools. Humanist teachers ran schools as well, but these establishments catered not only for children but particularly for young adults, often over the age of eighteen. Such teaching frequently ran parallel to university courses, or indeed was sometimes an alternative to university study, and, in this sense, falls outside the scope of this study. Many of the famous humanist teachers in Florence (e.g. Sozomeno, Bernardo Nuti, Giorgio Antonio Vespucci or Poliziano) taught pupils beyond school-age; their activities at this higher level have been excluded here, although their work with younger pupils (e.g. Poliziano’s activity as a tutor to the children of Lorenzo de’ Medici) has been germane. The focus of this study is Florence and Florentine Tuscany from the mid-thirteenth to the end of the fteenth century. Of course, the Florentine territorial state did not exist in the thirteenth century, only gradually emerging in the Trecento, to reach its mature extent in the earlier fteenth century. The term Florentine Tuscany is used to refer to what would become the Florentine subject territories in the fteenth century. This is a comparative study, therefore, of Florence and its dominions in terms of school education, not of Tuscany as a whole. Lucca and Siena have been largely omitted from this work. Siena has been the subject of a particularly comprehensive educational document collection up to 1357.9 For the period after 1357, Peter Denley has been working for many years on the city’s educational institutions, so precluding any research on Sienese schools in this study. Since Siena could not be included, it was logical to exclude the other major independent Tuscan city—Lucca, itself the subject of the best of the early twentieth-century monographs on Tuscan education.10 Barsanti’s research, careful though it is, is not comprehensive, but a complete treatment of Lucca’s schools will have to await a Lucchese specialist. Nevertheless, I have referred to Lucca and Siena for comparisons particularly in the medieval period up to the earlier fourteenth century,
8 9 10
Black (2001). Cecchini and Prunai (1942). Barsanti (1905).
xiv
preface
when there is a general paucity of source material. In following the careers of Tuscan teachers, the exclusion of Siena in particular has caused occasional problems, because a number of important teachers worked not only in Florentine Tuscany but in Siena too. Here I have been able to follow their careers in Siena too, owing to the generosity of Peter Denley, who has provided me with information before the publication of his own important research. Chapter 1 provides an analysis of Florentine male literacy, as revealed by the tax (Catasto) returns submitted by all Florentine citizens and residents in 1427. This unique source, which survives in its entirety and so documents nearly 10,000 households, reveals that at least 69.3% of the adult male population were literate enought to write their own reports to the tax ofcials. The main illiterates or semi-literates were poor workers or artisans; the vast majority of middle- and upper-class male householders wrote for themselves. Many indigent and low-born members of the working classes even wrote their own tax returns. Social expectations tended to preclude women from writing submissions themselves, but the Catasto records disclose more than a few literate women as well. Giovanni Villani renowned statistics from the late 1330s, implying that 67 to 83 percent of males went to school in Florence, have frequently been called into question but they are borne out by the 1427 Catasto. The city of Florence embraced a remarkably literate society. Mass literacy was the product of a highly developed education system and syllabus, and so Chapter 2 opens with an outline of the curriculum of reading and grammar (Latin) education, as reconstructed in my recent book,11 adding a discussion not only of what was taught in commercial arithmetic (abacus) schools but also an analysis of how pupils were taught to write, focusing particularly on when writing was taught and on the idiosyncratic vocabulary used to describe learning to write in documentary sources. I then turn to localizing the school curriculum as a whole (reading, writing, abacus, grammar [Latin]), moving from a generic picture to a discussion of what is known to have been taught in the particular towns of Florentine Tuscany as well as in Florence itself, based on surviving documentary and manuscript sources from the thirteenth to the fteenth century. The chapter ends with a comparison of the curriculum in the city of Florence, on the one hand,
11
Black (2001).
preface
xv
and in the Florentine subject towns, on the other. The evidence points, perhaps surprisingly, to the slow progress of latinity at the school level in Florence, as compared to its precocious development in the subject towns of Florentine Tuscany, so reecting different educational and cultural values. School education in the city of Florence, beginning in the late thirteenth century and then for the next 150 years, was dominated by abacus teaching, which ourished to an extent unmatched elsewhere in Tuscany or indeed Italy. These vernacular, commercially orientated establishments upstaged traditional grammar (Latin) schools at the secondary level. It was only with the increasing penetration of humanism within the Florentine upper classes during the Quattrocento— possibly rst evident in the early fteenth century but unmistakable by the last thirty years of the century—that Latin schools and classical education began effectively to compete with abacus education at the secondary level in the city of Florence. In the subject towns of Florentine Tuscany, abacus teaching was patchy and never supplanted grammar schools as the main form of secondary education. Classical studies developed precociously in Tuscany outside the city of Florence at the school level beginning in the later Duecento and then throughout the fourteenth century. This powerful Latin and classical tradition would prevail in Florentine Tuscany, maintaining the predominance of the subject towns as the hub of classical school education until the later Quattrocento. Chapter 3 treats the decline of church education and the rise of lay schools in Tuscany up to the fourteenth century. Before the Duecento, medieval Italian (including Tuscan) school education was dominated by the church: the Italian lay aristocracy often achieved a notable degree of literacy, acquired, however, under ecclesiastical auspices. Skills provided by formal school instruction for earning a living did not the preoccupy the educated classes—either the clergy or the nobility. The clerical monopoly over school education waned rapidly in the thirteenth century. The triumph of the communes brought in its wake the dominance of lay society with its civic and commercial aims and values. Parents were no longer willing to put up with the long and slow approach to latinity offered by ecclesiastical schools. Pupils now had to be prepared for entry into the professional and business worlds. Rapid results were increasingly delivered by private lay teachers, who would displace clerical masters by the end of the thirteenth century. From the late Duecento, the scope of education extended to the language itself of the laity—the vernacular—especially in the abacus schools,
xvi
preface
themselves geared to furnish future businessmen with the arithmetic skills necessary for the sphere of commerce and industry. In the earlier middle ages, instruction had been a sacred duty, precluding remuneration. After 1300, teachers expected payment for lessons. A competitive ethos now entered the classroom. Masters formed companies to sell education; they even attempted to form cartels to keep up the level of fees. Teachers who did not receive payments due took defaulting parents to court. Masters attempted to undermine competitors, sometimes using less than professional methods. As far as school education is concerned, so weak had the eccesiastical sector become that some Tuscan convents actually brought in lay teachers to teach their novices, paying them just like the private teachers of the laity. The educational world of the earlier middle ages had now been turned on its head: instead of the church instructing the laity, it was now laymen educating clerks. Teachers also entered lay households as private tutors: school instruction had descended from the lofty heights of a holy ofce to the humble status of domestic service. Education was no longer removed from the secular world, as in the earlier middle ages, when the Italian elite took their children, at least temporarily, out of the secular environment of the lay household, placing them in schools in monastic, episcopal or parochial premises; now teachers were physically brought into the midst of the lay ambience of aristocratic or elite households. By the fourteenth century, the proto-capitalistic and laissez-faire world of the communes had recast school education throughout Tuscany in its own image. This was especially true in Florence, where abacus schools—with their thoroughly commercial and secularized ambience—would soon prevail in secondary education to an extent unparalleled anywhere else in Tuscany or, indeed, Italy. Chapter 4 treats the rise of communally funded education in Florentine Tuscany. Civic schools—with teachers receiving salaries and subsidies for rent—became the norm in Florentine Tuscany (except for the city of Florence) during the fourteenth centuries. Public education was an inevitable outgrowth of lay teaching: with the demise of education provided without payment by ecclesiastical institutions, there was nothing to stop secular teachers from taking fees. School education now became subject to market forces: teachers worked wherever they could to earn the most, and so inevitably communes had to begin to offer subsidies and salaries to retain teachers. A further result of the emerging educational marketplace was the steady increase in salaries during the fourteenth century—a trend encouraged by the various economic and
preface
xvii
demographic crises, especially the Black Death. In the end, communal subsidies and the teacher shortage brought about the waning of private schools: teachers were increasingly unwilling to work without public salaries, and it became impossible to rely on private payment to ensure continuity in school education throughout Florentine Tuscany. The dearth of teachers in Florentine Tuscany during the fourteenth century encouraged communes to articulate why they were subsidising school education. City governments and councils had to justify expenditure on education to the wider public and to themselves. Particularly strong was the emphasis on grammar as the essential step to further study and higher education. The Florentine subject territories were emerging as the fount of the learned secular professions—medicine, law, the notariate—and so communal schools had become an essential part of local economies. Even in the fourteenth century, a contrast was developing between the city of Florence and its subject territories as far as school education was concerned. The Florentines themselves placed a high value on basic literacy and commercial education: the city was lled with elementary and abacus teachers and schools, and the demand was so great that it was never necessary to provide subsidies for education at these levels. Most elementary and abacus teachers in the city were native Florentines: these were buoyant occupations, encouraging recruitment from the ranks of the Florentine citizenry themselves. It was a different matter with grammar (Latin). Indigenous Florentine grammar masters were rare in the city and throughout the subject territories. Grammar teaching was a profession evidently hard pressed in the city itself: teachers had to be drawn from the subject territories and beyond. Grammar (Latin) was increasingly becoming a marginal subject in Florence itself, sustained mainly by providing training for the literate lay professions of law, medicine and the notariate—themselves in decline in the city of Florence by the later fourteenth century.12 The hard-headed Florentine elite and populace, preoccupied with money and business, were reluctant to pursue Latin either for its own sake or for higher moral and civic goals: hence the unwillingness of the Florentines to provide regularly for public grammar teaching during the fourteenth century. The contrast between abacus and grammar schools in Florence and its subject territories sums up the story: in Florentine Tuscany, public grammar schools were omnipresent but abacus schools were sporadic;
12
Martines (1968); Park (1985).
xviii
preface
in the city of Florence, the opposite situation prevailed, with abacus teaching thriving but with grammar education in decline. Chapter 5 deals with schools in the city of Florence during the fteenth century. Reading and writing were taught privately there, and it has been possible to identify many such teachers, particularly thanks to the Catasto of 1427, which reveals elementary schools spread throughout the city: these were neighbourhood establishments, parents usually choosing to send their young children to a local school. It was otherwise with the numerous abacus schools, many of which were concentrated in the area near S. Trinita: older pupils were obviously considered able to pursue this form of secondary education regardless of where they lived in the city; what mattered in abacus teaching was whether the teacher suited the children and the parents, not so much where the school was located in the city. The fteenth century represented the zenith of the great Florentine abacus tradition, with numerous schools staffed by prominent and sometimes even famous teachers. It was different with Florentine grammar teaching: the city had only one principal grammar school for most of the century, located near Orsanmichele. The teachers there often coincided with the few publicly funded grammar masters, employed under the auspices of the Florentine university but who, as in other Italian university cities, were simply secondary-level public schoolmasters. As far as the Florentine elite is concerned, there was a tendency to bring private tutors into their households; this extravagant practice allowed the Florentine upper classes to differentiate themselves from the common elements of society, who had to send their children to elementary, abacus or, occasionally, grammar schools outside the family home. Grammar (Latin) remained a weak subject in Florence for at least the rst seventy years of the century: a variety of evidence suggests that the largest sector of school education was elementary reading and writing, followed by the abacus, with grammar running a poor third. This situation changed in the last three decades of the century, when humanism nally found its way into the Florentine elite classroom: not only were avant-garde humanist textbooks now purchased frequently for upper-class pupils, but the numbers attending grammar schools or receiving Latin tuition from private tutors now came close to equalling the children attending abacus schools. The Florentine upper classes had found yet another way to differentiate themselves from the lower orders, whose education was largely limited—in the traditional Florentine manner—to reading, writing and abacus. A grammar (Latin) education had become another badge of social exclusivity for the Florentine elite.
preface
xix
Volume 2 will open with an extended treatment of communal schools in Florentine Tuscany during the fteenth century (chapter 6). The main theme here will be the relative weakness of abacus schools in the Florentine subject towns compared with the city of Florence itself: although several towns had regular abacus teachers in the fteenth century (e.g. Prato and Pistoia), a number provided only intermittent abacus instruction (e.g. Arezzo, S. Gimignano, Colle Valdelsa, Volterra) or none at all (e.g. Pescia, Poggibonsi, S. Miniato). Other topics will include the effect of the nancial crisis in the earlier fteenth century on the provision of school education, the trend towards free education for children of local taxpayers in Florentine subject towns, the role of Florentine patronage (especially the interventions of the Medici family) in communal schools and the growth of charitable institutions in the provision of communal education. There will follow a treatment (chapter 7) of the revival of ecclesiastical schools during the fteenth century, mainly in the city of Florence. The waning of ecclesiastical schools in Italy had not only sometimes meant a weakening of Latin at the expense of the vernacular, but, more signicantly, a decline in the standards of instruction in liturgy and church music; important patrons sought to address the shortage of trained indigenous priests with the foundation of two major ecclesiastical schools in Florence during the fteenth century: the Cathedral School, subsequently known as the Collegio Eugeniano (after its founder Pope Eugenius IV), and the School of San Lorenzo (founded by Cosimo de’ Medici and Pope Pius II). Chapter 8 will be devoted to female education. Although women in the fourteenth and fteenth centuries were rarely given grammar (Latin) instruction, they often learned to read and sometimes to write. Moreover, the education of girls in the city of Florence, like that of their brothers, became ever more elitist in the course of the fteenth century. Not only were girls increasingly given expensive music and dancing lessons, but they were not infrequently sent to live in convents, where they would be educated in the wider sense, acquiring the desired female virtues in addition to basic literacy; this custom of serbanza (monastic seclusion) was extremely expensive, and so served to differentiate elite girls from their more common counterparts. Chapter 9 will offer a comparison between educational developments and the cultural and social context of education in Florence and Florentine Tuscany, on the one hand, and the rest of Italy, on the other. Overall the study is provided with extensive hitherto unpublished documentary appendices. Volume 1 offers educational extracts from the Florentine Catasti of 1427 and 1458, and from family diaries
xx
preface
now found in the Florentine State Archives, as well as lists of publicly funded teachers in Florentine Tuscany up to 1400 and in the city of Florence up to 1500. Volume 2 will provide educational extracts from the Catasto of the Florentine subject territories in 1427–29, as well as lists of publicly appointed teachers in Florence’s dominions during the fteenth century; it will also include a selection of letters written by schoolmasters in the fourteenth and fteenth century. Finally, volume 2 will offer a comprehensive series of bio-bibliographic proles of schoolteachers known to have worked in Florence and Florentine Tuscany from the mid-thirteenth to the end of the fteenth century. An attempt has been made to examine the relevant documents in the signicant public archives of Florentine Tuscany with collections extant for the period before 1500. Unfortunately, this was not possible for Montepulciano, which has a large medieval archive but whose documents have been stored in boxes for the past several years and therefore inaccessible both to the public and to archivists. The most important collections for the period up to 1400 (the subject of this rst volume, as far as Florentine Tuscany is concerned) provide rich documentation for Colle Valdelsa, Fucecchio, Pistoia, Poggibonsi, Prato, San Gimignano and Volterra; there are also signicant holdings for Arezzo, San Miniato, Pescia and Sansepolcro, particularly from the later fourteenth century. With regard to the city of Florence, the principal sources for this study, besides the Catasti of 1427, 1457 and 1480,13 have been Florentine ricordanze preserved mainly in the Archivio di Stato di Firenze (but also occasionally in the Biblioteche Nazionale, Laurenziana and Riccar-diana). I began examining this rich body of material in 1986–87, rst reading the ricordanze from which a few extracts had been published.14 After the reopening of the Archivio di Stato in its new seat at Piazza Beccaria in 1988–89, this work was continued, culminating in a project that I directed in Florence from 1992–94 entitled ‘Patterns of education in Renaissance Florence: the evidence of family diaries’. The research group (comprising Jonathan Davies, Jane Black and myself ) examined, as far as possible,15 all the extant family ricordanze in the Florentine state archives (besides the three libraries mentioned above) up to 1500, running to some 700 registers;
13 14 15
This last published by Verde (1973–95), III. See Anselmi, Pezzarossa and Avellini (1980). In a few cases, catalogued ricordanze could not be located.
preface
xxi
I myself transcribed personally the relevant educational passages in the ricordanze. The result, consisting of extracts from 87 ricordanze, is published for the rst time in Appendix 5 below. It has not been possible to offer translations of the numerous documents cited in this work. To have included English versions would have prohibitively increased the length of text. However, I have attempted to paraphrase documents as far as possible in the narrative. As a further aid to the reader, I have indicated in bold type the names of teachers, especially when rst encountered. The research for this book, begun in the mid 1980s, would have been impossible without generous support for lengthy stays in Florence and for research assistance there. In 1988 and 1990 I beneted from two research grants from the British Academy enabling me to work for several months in Florence and Tuscany. In 1992–93, I enjoyed a fellowship at I Tatti, the Harvard University Center for Renaissance Studies in Florence. From 1992 to 1994 I had a generous grant for research assistance from the Leverhulme Trust. In 1993, I also beneted from a Major Research Grant from the British Academy, also for research assistance. From 1994 to 1997, I enjoyed generous funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities for research assistance and for repeated visits to Florence. In 2004–5, I was fortunate to be awarded a major project grant from the Arts and Humanities Research Board (now Council), enabling me to work for an uninterrupted year in Florence, as well as to employ a full-time research assistant. The Arts and Humanities Research Council also provided me with a further semester’s leave of absence in 2005–6, permitting me to nish the rst draft of the book for the publishers. I am also grateful to the School of History and the Faculty of Arts in University of Leeds for several terms and semesters of research leave over the long period that I have been preparing this work. I should like to express my profound gratitude to all the above grant-awarding institutions and funding bodies. I have numerous personal debts too. I owe most to my dedicated series of research assistants, who unselshly made possible a study of primary sources dispersed throughout Tuscany, too diffused and extensive for one person unaided to examine and transcribe. First, Jonathan Davies, now the author of a signicant study of the University of Florence in the fteenth century,16 worked for me full-time in 1992–93, not only
16
Davies (1998).
xxii
preface
identifying educational material in about 700 unpublished family diaries (ricordanze) in Florence, but also tackling the extensive archival material on schools in Prato as well as working on the Florentine cathedral school in the Archivio dell’Opera di S. Maria del Fiore and on the school of San Lorenzo in the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana. In this work, he was joined part-time by my wife, Jane Black. From 1993 to 1997, the eminent palaeographer, Gabriella Pomaro, worked as my research associate, making it possible for me to analyze, date and localize the school manuscripts now extant in Florence; this collaborative research formed the basis of a previous book,17 but it was also essential for the portrait of the curriculum found in chapter 2 of the present work; we were assisted in this endeavour by my wife, Jane Black, too. In 2004–5, I was extremely fortunate to secure the full-time services of Lorenz Böninger, himself a highly experienced archival researcher and now the author of two important books on Florentine history;18 he not only helped me with one reading of the 1427 Catasto (see below ch. 1 p. 12 n. 1), besides working on other important archival series in Florence, but he also laboured to complete my earlier research in the various local archives of Florentine Tuscany. I should like to emphasize that, without the generous and devoted help of these highly competent and learned individuals, this work could never have been completed. I should also like to thank the directors and staff of the following archives and libraries for permitting my research group to examine materials in their custody: Archivio Capitolare di Arezzo; Archivio Comunale di Buggiano; Archivio della Comunità di Castiglion Fiorentino; Archivio del Comune di Castelfranco di Sotto; Archivio Storico Comunale di Cortona; Archivio Storico del Comune di Montaione; Archivio Comunale di San Gimignano; Archivio Storico della Comunità di San Miniato; Archivio Comunale di Sansepolcro; Archivio di Stato di Arezzo; Archivio di Stato di Pescia; Archivio di Stato di Pisa; Archivio di Stato di Pistoia; Archivio di Stato di Prato; Archivio di Stato di Siena; Archivio Storico del Comune Montaione; Biblioteca della Città di Arezzo; Biblioteca Comunale Indro Montanelli di Fucecchio, Archivio Comunale; Biblioteca Comunale di Santa Croce sull’Arno, Archivio Preunitario del Comune; Biblioteca Guarnacci di Volterra, Archivio Storico Comunale; Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; Biblio-
17 18
Black (2001). Böninger (1995) and (2006).
preface
xxiii
teca Medicea Laurenziana; Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze; Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana; Biblioteca Riccardiana; Biblioteca del Sacro Convento di Assisi; British Library; Columbia University Library. I should like to offer a special expression of gratitude to Florence’s Archivio di Stato, which has been the central fount of this research; without the cooperation and support of the directors and staff of this unique institution over many years, this work could never have been written. I have also been generously pointed to unpublished educational material by fellow scholars. Here I should like to mention Vanna Arrighi, Antoniella Astorri, Rolf Bagemihl, James Banker, Lorenz Böninger, Luca Boschetto, Alison Brown, Niccolò Capponi, Teresa D’Alessandro, Jonathan Davies, Laura De Angelis, Arthur Field, Paul Gehl, James Hankins, John Henderson, Michael Hirst, Megan Holmes, F. W. Kent, Pierluigi Licciardello, Stephen Milner, Reinhold Müller, Jacqueline Musacchio, Oretta Muzzi, John Nadas, Renzo Ninci, W. Keith Percival, Giuliano Pinto, Lorenzo Polizzotto, Brenda Preyer, Elaine Rosenthal, Karl Schlebusch, Marco Spallanzani, Elisabetta Ulivi, Alison Wright and Diane Zervas-Hirst. I want to offer thanks as well to my editors at Brill, Julian Deahl, Marcella Mulder and Caroline van Erp, for their help and support throughout the publication process. I am also grateful to my daughter, Emily Ellis, for having transferred many transcriptions from handwritten to computer format. I should like to dedicate this work on school education in Tuscany from the thirteenth to the fteenth century to someone who is about to embark on the long educational journey in the twenty-rst century: my grandson, John Benjamin Ellis. School of History, University of Leeds 26 November 2006
ABBREVIATIONS a. AAL ACA ACB ACC ACCF ACCS ACF ACM ACSC ACSG ACSM Delib. ACSS ACV AOSMF ASA Provv. ASF AC AdL AGPA Bigallo CB CdB CG Comp.RSGF Comp.RSPL CRSGF
anno/annis (year/years) Lucca Archivio arcivescovile Arezzo Archivio capitolare Buggiano Archivio comunale Cortona Archivio storico comunale Castiglion Fiorentino Archivio della comunità Castelfranco di Sotto Archivio del comune Fucecchio Biblioteca Comunale Indro Montanelli Archivio comunale Montaione Archivio storico del comune Santa Croce sull’Arno Biblioteca Comunale Archivio preunitario del comune San Gimignano Archivio comunale San Miniato Archivio storico Comunità di San Miniato Deliberazioni dei priori e del consiglio Sansepolcro Archivio comunale Volterra Biblioteca Guarnacci Archivio storico comunale Florence Archivio dell’Opera di S. Maria del Fiore Arezzo Archivio di stato Deliberazioni del Consiglio Generale Florence Archivio di stato Archivio Cerchi Arte della Lana Archivio Gherardi-Piccolomini d’Aragona Compagnia poi Magistrato del Bigallo Carte Bardi Carte del Bene Carte Gondi Compagnie religiose soppresse dal governo francese Compagnie religiose soppresse da Pietro Leopoldo Corporazioni religiose soppresse dal governo francese
xxvi CRSPLAM SPM CS Dipl. DPPP MAP MSS NA Pupilli RPALA SCS SG UdN ASP ASPescia Delib. ASPistoia Cam. Provv. ASPrato C CD CN CV ASS Colle Poggibonsi BAV Ottob. Lat. Vat. Lat. BCIS BGV BL Add. BML Ashb. AD CS Pl.
abbreviations Corporazioni religiose soppresse da Pietro Leopoldo e aggregate alle Montalve S. Piero a Monticelli Carte Strozziane Diplomatico Dono Panciatichi Patrimonio Pecori Mediceo avanti il principato Manoscritti Notarile antecosimiano Magistrato dei pupilli avanti il principato Ricasoli, Parte antica, Libri di amministrazione Statuti di comuni soggetti Comune di San Gimignano Ufciali di notte Pisa Archivio di stato Pescia Archivio di stato Deliberazioni Pistoia Archivio di stato Camera del comune Consigli Provvisioni Prato Archivio di stato Comune Comune Diurni Ceppo Nuovo Ceppo Vecchio Siena Archivio di stato Comune di Colle Valdelsa Comune di Poggibonsi Vatican City Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Ottobonianus Latinus Vaticanus Latinus Siena Biblioteca Comunale degli Intronati Volterra Biblioteca Guarnacci London British Library Additional Manuscripts Florence Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana Ashburnham Acquisti e Doni Conventi Soppressi Pluteus
abbreviations BMV BNCF CP CS LF Magl. NA Pal. BRF BSCA CUL DBI . fol. Hain IGI n. NN ob. OBL
xxvii
Venice Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana Florence Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale Carte Passerini Conventi Soppressi Landau Finaly Magliabechiano Nuove Accessioni Palatino Florence Biblioteca Riccardiana Assisi Biblioteca del Sacro Convento New York Columbia University Library Dizionario biograco degli Italiani, Rome 1960– ourished folio/folios Ludwig Hain, Repertorium bibliographicum, Stuttgart 1826–36 Indice generale degli incunaboli delle bibloteche d’Italia, ed. T.M. Guarnaschelli and D. Valenziani, Rome 1943–81 born not numbered died Oxford Bodleian Library
EDITORIAL NOTE REGARDING CITATIONS FROM MANUSCRIPTS 1. All dates have been modernized, except where otherwise indicated. 2. [ ] mean that letters or words enclosed appear in the manuscript but are thought to be erroneous; they are also used to enclose editorial comments such as [sic] [ms.:] [spatium]. [. . .] means an editorial deletion. 3. < > mean that letters or words have been added for the sake of coherence; their omission may have been due to scribal error, or they may no longer be legible. <. . .> means a now illegible series of letters or words. 4. Letters or words enclosed in round brackets ( ) indicate an uncertain expansion of an abbreviation. 5. Question marks immediately following letters or words indicate an uncertain reading. 6. The orthography and latinity of manuscripts have been retained, although the punctuation and capitalization have been modernized. [sic] has been indicated where there is a notable or gross divergence from correct grammatical or classical usage. 7. Latin place names for which it has not been possible to identify a modern Italian equivalent have been italicized.
CHAPTER ONE
LITERACY IN FLORENCE, 14271 Writing at the end of the 1330s, Giovanni Villani provided the following statistics of children attending school in the city of Florence: Troviamo ch’e fanciulli e fanciulle che stanno a leggere, da otto a dieci mila. I fanciulli che stanno ad imparare l’abbaco e algorismo in sei scuole, da mille in milleduegento. E quegli che stanno ad apprendere la grammatica e loica in quattro grandi scuole, da cinquecentocinquanta in seicento.2
According to one interpretation, this estimate suggests that ‘Florence had a male schooling rate of 67 to 83 percent’.3 Although the accuracy of Villani’s gures has been doubted,4 they tally with the picture of literacy disclosed by the Florentine Catasto of 1427. On 10 June 1427 the ten Florentine ofcials, appointed to impose and administer a new universal tax on the population of city of Florence and its subject territories, made the following public order: Fanno bandire, ricordare et noticare i dieci ufciali di catasti nuovamente ordinati per lo commune di Firençe, che ogni et ciascuno cittadino et ogni altra persona la quale nella città di Firençe sopporta o sopportare dovesse prestançe o altre qualunque graveççe di qualunque stato o conditione, 1 The Catasto volumes (see note 9 below) have been read in the original and in their entirety on four separate occasions: 1987–1989, 2004 and 2005 (twice). I am grateful to my research assistant, Dr Lorenz Böninger, for undertaking the 2004 reading; the three others were all undertaken by me exclusively. The two in 2005 were made in order to ensure palaeographical consistency in forming judgements whether certain portate (returns) were or were not autograph: see below pp. 31–35. 2 Villani (1991) 12.94, vol. III, p. 198. 3 Grendler (1989), p. 72. Grendler’s percentage is calculated on the basis of a population of 120,000, as estimated by Herlihy and Klapisch-Zuber (1978), p. 176. ‘These school attendance estimates for 1338 are extrapolated from the distribution of the Florentine population by age and sex in 1427. In that year, boys aged 6 through 15 comprised 11.82 of the total population, and boys and girls combined made up 21.65 percent of the population [Herlihy and Klapisch-Zuber (1978), pp. 660–63]. Imposing these percentages on a Florentine population of 120,000 in 1338, one nds 14,184 boys, and 25,980 boys and girls combined, aged 6 through 15. Hence, the 9,550 to 11,880 boys and girls in school were 36.76 percent to 45.42 percent of the school-age population in 1338. If 90 percent of the students were male, then 8,595 to 10,620 boys aged 6 through 15, or 67,333 percent to 83.19 percent of the male population aged 6 through 15, attended school in 1338.’ (Grendler [1989], p. 72 n. 3) 4 E.g. Grendler (1989), pp. 72–74; Fiumi (1953), pp. 239–241.
2
chapter one si sia etiandio che avesse alcuno spetiale privilegio o inmunità, che ciascuno di loro sieno tenuti et debbano, per di qui a tutto dì dodici del mese di luglio proximo che viene, rapportare per scriptura dinanzi a’ decti ufciali tutti et ciascheduni loro beni inmobili posti ne la città o contado di Firenze o in qualunque altra parte del mondo, et etiandio ogni quantità di pecunia e animali di qualunque ragione degni di preço con la loro stima, et ogni mercatantie et trafchi et altri qualunque beni et crediti, etiandio denari di monte di qualunque ragione o conditione si sia, et tutte ragione et substantie che avessino in qualunque luogo, così dentro al territorio del commune di Firenze come di fuori in qualunque parte del mondo, rapportando per decta loro scriptura i poderi et altri loro beni inmobili co’ loro vocaboli, qualità et conni con le prestançe de’ lavoratori et co’ buoi et altre bestie a lloro pertinenti per rispecto di lavorare essi poderi et beni con la stima d’essi animali, destintamente et chiaramente ciaschuna cosa di per se per modo che ciaschuno di decti beni cognoscere et ritrovare si possa, con la quantità de’ fructi che i decti beni immobili ciaschuno anno rendono, socto questo exempio, cioè: Tale podere o peçço di terra posto in tale luogo, al quale ai etcetera. Et tale quantità la quale tale lavoratore à per prestança, et tali buoi o animali di tanto pregio et la rendita o fructo che cavano overo ricevono d’essi beni anno per anno; et tutti altri loro beni et ragioni, animali degni di preço, crediti mercatantie et trafchi con le stime loro, cioè a ciascuna delle predecte cose con la stima ridocte ad pecunia numerata. Anchora possino et debbino rapportare i loro debiti et incharichi et con cui gli ànno, et oltre a cciò tutte le loro bocche per nome et sopranome et la loro età, excepto fanti, factori, balie, ministri o discepoli maschi o femmine.5
Thus, all Florentine citizens, as well as every resident in the city subject to previous taxation, regardless of any immunities, were ordered to submit, by 12 July 1427, a full report of their real property, together with its location and its income, their business assets, their animals, their shares in the consolidated public debt (monte) and their cash; they were also required to declare all their debts and nancial obligations, as well as the names and age of all members of their household (excluding servants, business employees, apprentices and wet-nurses). The penalties for failure to comply included conscation of half the value of unreported assets,6 which were deemed to be no longer under the 5 ASF Catasto 3, fol. 9r–v. This is a complete version of the later copy of the ban, contained in ASF Catasto 1, and published by Karmin (1906), pp. 52–55, which omits the details the announcement, the herald and his report, as well as the date (10 June) when this announcement was made. 6 ASF Catasto 3, fol. 10v: Noticando a ciaschuno di sopranominati et ne’ sopradetti capituli et bandi et ciaschuno d’essi conpresi che non rapporterà interamente ogni sua substantia come di sopra si dice di facto si intende essere et è tutto ciò che mancasse incorporato et conscato per l’una metà al decto comune di Firençe.
literacy in florence, 1427
3
protection of Florentine courts;7 denunciations of non-submission were to be rewarded by a quarter of the value of unreported assets, and the secrecy of any such denunciations was guaranteed.8 The returns ( portate) of Florentine citizens and residents from the Catasto of 1427 are fully extant.9 With regard to literacy, the key phrases are ‘per scriptura’ and ‘per decta loro scriptura’. It has long been recognized that the majority of the portate were written by the heads of households themselves.10 Most Florentine citizens and residents interpreted the phrase ‘per decta loro scriptura’ as a requirement to write the tax returns themselves. Indeed, many Florentines signed their own portate, explicitly afrming that their returns were autograph documents, e.g.: Queste sono la scrita delle sustanzze di Giovanni e Lorenzo di Ser Falchone iscrita per mano di me Giovanni detto; arecovi alquna chosa di me [e] Lorenzo sopraditto.11 Io Michele di Iacopo di Beninchasa ò fatta [e] arechata la sopradetta scritta a dì 8 di luglio 142712 Io Ser Giovanni [di Ser Guardino d’Andrea] ò facta questa scripta di mia mano.13 E questa scripta ò fata io Bindo di Giovanni [da Ricasoli] pievano di San Giusto in Salci sopradecto.14 Et io Domenicho del Maestro Andrea predicto ò fatta questa predicta portata di mia propria mano, non obstante che di sopra io dica in forma di terza persona.15 Io Brigido Piero [di Ser Monte di Ser Giovanni Pacini da Monteridol] scripsi.16 7 ASF Catasto 38, fol. 703r: per chagione d’uno bando messo per vostra parte per la citta di Firenze [. . .] che qualunche persona della città di Firenze non fusse schritto nella distribuzione del chatasto non potesse essere udito o in una chorte né in defesa né inn ofesa né in civile né in cherminale. 8 ASF Catasto 3, fol. 10v–11r: et ciascuna persona ne può esssere noticatore in secreto et in palese et guadagna la metà di decta metà, come si dispone per decta riformagione, et sarànne tenuto il segreto a chi in segreto vorrà noticare. On the reliability of the 1427 Catasto, see Conti (1966), pp. 31 ff. 9 The portate from the 1427 Catasto constitute 45 volumes: ASF Catasto 15–31, 34–38, 40–62, with one further volume (ASF Catasto 63) of additions and late submissions. 10 Conti (1966), p. 35: ‘La maggior parte delle denunce dei proprietari cittadini sono autografe’. 11 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 720r. 12 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 279r. 13 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 455v. 14 ASF Catasto 17, fol. 333r. 15 ASF Catasto 20, fol. 673r. 16 ASF Catasto 22, fol. 271r.
4
chapter one Io Piero di Ser Francescho [di Ser Piero] notaio ò fatto questa scripta di mia mano.17 Io Bernardo di Cinoço ò fato le prese[nte] ischrita.18 Io Giuliano di Ghoro di Bernardo [sensale] ò fatto la sopradetta portata quessto dì XI di luglio MCCCCoXXVII.19 Io sopradetto Bartolomeo di Beninchasa ò fatta questo iscritta di mia propia mano.20 Io Mariano di Giovanni [legnaiolo] ò scrito questa ischritta.21 Io Lorenzo di Stefano Randegli legnaiuolo ò fatto la sopradetta iscritta di mia propia mano ano e mese e dì detto di sopra.22 17
ASF Catasto 26, fol. 778r. ASF Catasto 30, fol. 173v. 19 ASF Catasto 40, fol. 835r. 20 ASF Catasto 48, fol. 482v. 21 ASF Catasto 62, fol. 271v. 22 ASF Catasto 63, fol. 439r. Other examples: ASF Catasto 15, fol. 76r (Astore di Niccholò di Gherardino Gianni), 153r (Antonio d’Angnolo de’ Bardi), 172v (Andrea di Fruosino pizighangniolo), 226r (Bernardo d’Antonio Danzano), 279r (Bartolomeo d’Andrea de’ Bardi), 293r (Bernardo d’Antonio Paghanegli), 333r (Benedetto di Guido calzolaio), 345r (Bartolomeo d’Aghostino di Cupo), 346r (Bartolo di Filipo di Ser Franciesco), 487r (Ciapo di Matteo ischardasiere), 524v (Ser Domenicho di Tommaso Moschardi), 535r (Domenicho di Tomaso), 762v (Guaspare di Giovanni di Ser Nicholò da Teranuova), 800r (Guaspare di Bino lavorante di calze), 805r (Giovanni di Luigi Canigiani), 820r (Gabriello di Domenicho sarto), 832r (Guelfo d’Anbruogio sensale), 835v (Ser Giovanni di Iachopo di Piero Berardi), 854r (Nanni di Fruosino ottonaio), 905r (Ser Giovanni di Ser Fruosino da Radda); Catasto 16, fol. 30r (Iapocho di Giovanni Charletti), 39r (Giovanni di Iacopo), 102r (Andrea de’ Bardi), 104v (Ilarione di Lippaccio de’ Bardi), 111r (Luigi di Bartolomeo Schali), 146r (Lionardo di Bartolomeo di Giovanni barbiere), 244r (Matteo d’Antonio stamaiuolo), 247r (Pantalione d’Andrea), 255r (Ser Michele d’Antonio dalla Badia di Montemuro di Chianti notaio), 267v (Michele di Francescho orafo), 273v (Miniato di Bertaldo Benci), 316v (Niccolò Danzano), 323v (Bernardo d’Antonio Danzano), 356v (Niccolò di Franciescho di Fedeuccio Falconi), 397r (Nicholò d’Andrea chapelaio), 427v (Nicholaio di Nicholaio Lottini), 489r (Piero di Lionardo di Vanelo fornaio), 568v (Stoldo di Matteo de’ Bardi), 613r (Salvestro di Lionardo di Puccio vinattiere), 637r (Sandro di Bartolo Bencini), 715r (Piero Antononio di Vencenzo da Chamerino); Catasto 17, fol. 21r (Antonio di Michele Velluti), 99v (Matteo di Piero Benizi), 184r (Ser Alberto di Donnino di Luca, coadiutore del notaio alle riformagioni), 197v (Antonio di Iachopo vocato Barberino), 397v (Corso di Lorenzo speziale), 421r (Francescho del Buono di Francescho bechaio), 465r (Cianghio di Lucha orafo), 616v (Filippo d’Andrea di Berto maestro [di murare]), 713r (Giovannozo di Francesco di Neri Pitti), 723r (Giovanni di Micho Capponi), 760v (Guido di Tommaso Deti); Catasto 18, fol. 841r (Nanni di Lorenzo), 915r (Giovanni d’Antonio di Iachopo Martini), 924r (Francesco di Ser Orlando di Giovanni), 990r (Bartolomeo di Berto di Giovencho), 1033r (Lottino d’Andrea di Lottino), 1126r (Tommaso di Boninsegna di Manetto), 1213r (Nuccino di Filippo fornaio), 1219v (Niccholò di Gherardo Piaciti), 1229r (Nicholaio di Gieri di Michele righatiere), 1235v (Nuccio di Piero becchaio), 1418r (Rinieri di Christofano del Pane), 1488v (Salvestro di Seghieri da Certaldo), 1529r (Spinello di Lionardo de’ Rossi), 1535v (Tommaso di Bartolomeo Barbadori); Catasto 19, fol. 19r (Ser Andrea di Ciaperino degli Strozzi), 27r (Antonio di Lionardo di Ceccho), 131r (Antonio di Nicholò vochato la Lido), 169r (Antonio di Bartolo conciatore), 175r (Antonio di Simone becchaio), 232r (Agnolo di Chiricho lavorante di purgho), 250v (Bernardo di Iachopo di Puccio da la Laccia), 18
literacy in florence, 1427
5
Some Florentine heads of households, however, did not write their own portate. The largest such group were women.23 Of the 9677 Florentine 287v (Ser Bindello di Dore da Certaldo), 294r (Bernardo di Tieri di Puccio), 341r (Bernardo di Bernardo di Vanni di Masino), 353r (Bartolomeo di Michele di Rosso sarto), 378r (Bastiano di Sandro di Ciere), 427r (Bartolomeo di Venturino petinnatore), 455r (Bartolomeo di Tommaso schardassiere), 487v (Chiarozo di Piero di Ser Chiaro), 500r (Chimento di Alesso stamaiuolo), 645r (Dato di Bernardo), 715r (Domenicho di Bartalomeo fornaio), 817r (Ser Filippo di Ser Michele da Poggibonsi), 836r (Francesco di Cristofano di Francesco della Mavagia), 839r (Giovanni di Niccholò Mannelli), 905r (Ghirighoro d’Antonio d’Ubaldo di Fetto), 958r (Giovanni di Lando istampatore), 1021r (Giovanni di Brizzi), 1094r (Girolamo di Nicholò Benizi speziale), 1099r (Giovanni di Ser Bindo), 1112r (Giovanni di Iachopo di Ser Vanni); Catasto 21, fol. 50r (Iachopo di Ser Francescho da Charmignano), 55r (Iachopo del Maestro Dando sensale di chanbi minuti i’ merchato nuovo), 65v (Iachopo d’Andrea orciolaio), 72r (Iachopo del Fede divettino), 88v (Lucha di Cino choregiaio), 130r (Lionardo di Piero di Ser Antonio), 166r (Lucha di Christofano Sannini), 180r (Lanbertto d’Antonio del Bugliafo), 201r (Lucha di Nicholò d’Ottolino attore a’ pupilli), 291r (Michele di Manetto vende vino), 314v (Martino di Marchionne di Domenicho Marioncini), 318r (Matteo di Cristofano cimatore), 326r (Matteo di Ser Piero Mucini), 356r (Michele di Christofano chalzoliaio), 360v (Meo di Zanobi), 356r (Michele di Cristofano chalzolaio), 416v (Giovanni di Francescho righattiere), 448v (Nicholò di Piero Martini); Catasto 22, fol. 37v (Niccolaio di Giovannozo Biliotti), 63r (Nicholò di Matteo Chorsini), 114v (Piero di Giovanni vochato Secha tessitore di drappi), 143v (Piero di Giovanni Chardini lanaiuolo), 156r (Antonio di Miniato dipintore), 207v (Piero di Nofri Bonachorsi), 278r (Pippo di Piero lanino), 315r (Salvestro di Tomaxo d’Ugholino), 353v (Simone di Giovanni di Iachopo piliciao), 360r (Stefano di Bartolo Beringhi), 374v (Maso di Goro di Stagio Dati), 391r (Tommaso di Messer Giovanni di Maso Chavalchanti), 411v (Vieri d’Ugholino di Vieri), 422r (Ruberto di Marchione), 426r (Uberto di Giovanni d’Uberto Benvenuti), 432v (Mariotto di Ser Michele del Campana); Catasto 23, fol. 12v (Giovanni di Bartolomeo Seragli), 16r (Antonio d’Antonio di Giovanni galigaio), 19r (Amerigho di Matteo dello Scielto Tinghi), 73r (Antonio di Bartolo lanaiuolo), 92v (Antonio di Benedetto tessitore di drappi), 130r (Angnolo di Bartolomeo di Bertino dalla Tavernella scioperato), 153v (Andrea di Domenicho chalzolaio), 195r (Ser Antonio di Bartolomeo da Empoli), 207v (Antonio di Donato), 216v (Angnolo di Donato d’Ugholino), 245r (Ser Adovardo di Giovanni de’ Nerli), 324r (Bindo di Gherardo Piaciti), 397r (Bernardo di Pegolotto Balducci), 479r (Baldo di Giovanni lavora d’orpegli), 603r (Cristofano di Bernardo di Tura giaiuolo); Catasto 26, fol. 916r (Stefano d’Antonio dipintore); Catasto 29, fol. 94v (Bernardo di Ser Lodovico Dof), 102r (Charlo del Rosso speziale), 106v (Cristofano del Maestro Cristofano), 119v (Duccio di Ghuido Tolosini), 175r (Francesco di Cino Rinuccini, 576r (Iachopo d’Andrea legnaiuolo); Catasto 30, fol. 2r (Agnolo di Piero Benici), 17r (Ser Filippo di Bonetto Biffoli), 46r (Ser Antonio di Ser Lionardo Peruzzi), 51v (Ser Antonio del Berna), 70r (Antonio di Cuovani di Spigliato banderaio), 120r (Bernardo di Giovanni da Meleto), 130r (Bernardo di Piero da Magniale), 133r (Batista di Giovani fue chomandatore), 139v (Anselmo di Snadro Talani), 151v (Bernaba di Giovanni divettino), 195r (Bartolomeo di Duccio malischalcho), 236v (Chorso di Lapo Chorsi), 238v (Cristofano di Piero di Ser Christofano Benucci), 247r (Cristofano d’Antonio di Piero Guidi choreggiaio), 255r (Cipriano di Giovanni di Francesco), 262r (Cienni di Nanni di Ser Salvi di Ser Fracho di Val di Seve riveditori di panni), 293v (Domenicho di Nicholò di Migliorozo Maghaldi), 306r (Messer Domenico di Ser Mino), 327r (Filippo di Ser Nofri di Ser Piero delle Rimformagioni), 331r (Fabrino d’Antonio de’ Tolosini), 337v (Iachopo di Nofri di Giovanni da Chastiglione), 342r (Francescho di Iachopo di Bartolomeo della Gatta chartolaio), 364r (Franciescho di Mariano di Niccholò setaiuolo), 382r (Francesco di Martino lanaiuolo),
6
chapter one
households submitting portate, 1560 (or 16.1%) were headed by women—mainly widows, but also spinsters,24 married women owning property in their own right,25 servants,26 orphans,27 liberated slaves,28 383r (Francescho d’Iachopo ttesitore), 389v (Francesco di Lorenzo che sta allo speziale), 415v (Ser Giovanni di Gherardo Bechi), 420r (Giovanni d’Andrea purghatore), 431v (Giuliano di Chanbinzo Binzi), 450r (Giovanni d’Antonio Chalderini), 463r (Ser Giovanni di Ser Bindo Ciardi), 470r (Guido di Giuliano), 476v (Guaspare di Zanobi di Taldo da Charmignano, 479r (Giovanni di Simone da Panzano); Catasto 31, fol. 55r (Iachopo di Polta detto Bientina), 79v (Iachopo di Piero del Maestro Iachopo da Prato cittadino orentino), 83v (Lorenzo di Giovanni di Lorenzo chorreggiaio, 91r (Lodovicho di Mamerigi cimatore), 100r (Lionardo di Lorenzo Ghucci), 123r (Luca di Matteo da Panzano), 211v (Matteo di Ghuido di Tribaldo da Castiglionchio), 221v (Chele di Lucha del Fatore), 282r (Napolione d’Antonio Franzesi), 311r (Nigi di Giovanni Alfani), 313v (Neri di Nuto righattiere), 316r (Nuccio di Maso pelachane), 322r (Giovanni di Bandino de’ Chalici), 343v (Nanni di Berto chardatore), 362v (Piero di Ser Bruno di Ser Piero delle Riformagioni), Piero di Bartolo Rinaldi), 391r (Papi di Iachopo Lapi), 398r (Piero di Betino), 446r (Simone di Pierozzo istovigliaio), 450r (Salvestro di Lucha Verochi), 465v (Simone di Ser Antonio Fazi, 528v (Zelone di Ser Firenze di Piero Teci); Catasto 35, fol. 970r (Lorenzo di Franciescho senssale di schiave); Catasto 42, fol. 137r (Angiolino di Nicholò della Magna donzello della Mercanzia); Catasto 52, fol. 131r (Agnolo di Istagio merciaio), 391v (Benedeto de Gerolimo sarto). 23 For the few women who did write portate, see below pp. 36–42. 24 ASF Catasto 57, fol. 500r: Dinanzi a voi signori uciali de chatasto del popolo e chomune di Fire[nze], raporto dinazi a voi siniori la Ghostanza gliuola fu d’Ardovino Falivi; non ebi mai marito; sono d’età d’anni trentacinque. Ò 1a chasetta posta nel popolo di Sa’ Piero Magiore in Vie Fiesolana ne la quale isto e 1o pocho di maseriza [. . .] Altro non ò e ò faticha di vivere. 25 ASF Catasto 36, fol. 241r: A voi signori uciali io v’arecho la portata di ciò ched’io possegho di mobile. Io òne chomperato una chasetta dal munistero di Sancto Ambruogio 25 orini. Non è stimata a venderla in trasacto orini 40. È in Via Ghibellina e nel popolo di Sancto Anbruogio ed è a vita di me Mona Benedetta e d’una mia gliuola che à nome Francescha e d’un mio fratello ch’è monacho di Valembrosa. Io non ò né danari né d’entrate e non ò avere né a ddare [. . .] Mona Benedecta donna di Lorenço di Guido purgatore nel popolo di San Piero Maggiore. ASF Catasto 46, fol. 171r: Monna Appolonia gluola fu di Nicholò da Rada e dona di Piero di Francescho legniaiuolo [. . .] Si produce suoi beni che lla detta Monna Appolnia à, de’ quali el detto Piero suo marito non sa nulla [. . .] e quali danari è intentione della detta Mona Apollonia di da[r]gli per l’amor di dio e tene[r]gli per acrescere per la dota d’una sua nipote popilla che à nome Mechera gluola d’una sua gluola e non à padre. ASF Catasto 47, fol. 570r: Monna Salvaticha altramente chiamata Monna Nonna donna di Duccio di Fino cartolaio [. . .] e qua’ beni sono della detta Monna Salvaticha di suo patrimonio e non se n’apartiene frutto niuno a Duccio suo marito. 26 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 116r: Dinançi a vi signiori uciali del catasto vi fo ricordo come io Monna Antonia di Romagnia sono stato [sic] in casa di Giovanni di Lodovicho Banchi e de’ glioli et sto ancora a loro servigi prima per balia et poi per fante circha d’anni venticinque et resto avere da detto Giovanni et da suoe rede per mio salario circha di Fl. centocinquanta et questa et la verità et ò fatto schrivere questa dinaçi alla vostra signoria per mia parte Fl. 150. ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1144r: Mona Margherita istata per fante chon Ser Istefano di Michele Martelli. ASF Catasto 30, fol. 5r: Io Mon’Andrea sopradetta mi trovo instare per fante in chasa Nicholò di Francesco Sachetti e sonvi instata ani dicecci o ccircha per orini dicecci l’ano. Ò mi
literacy in florence, 1427
7
tertiaries of religious orders,29 nuns30 and residents of hospitals.31 Wives deserted by32 or separated from33 their husbands, women who were
avançatti nell tenpo sopradetto orini cinquantaccinque e questa prestai a Ser Lorenzo di Ser Tomaxo da Ghanbasi e a glio suo e questa è la sustança si può trovare di me Mon’Andrea sopradeta. 27 E.g. ASF Catasto 16, fol. 546r (La Piera fu di Iacopo di Gelio Gili [di 8 anni]); fol. 627r (Simona e Elena gliuole furono di Marcho di Lemmo [di 14 e 12 anni]). Orphans in custody (serbanza) also could submit their own portate: ASF Catasto 36, fol. 304r–v (Katerina gluola fu di Salviato Salviati, al presente habitatrice nel munistero di San Piero Maggiore [. . .] è debitore del munistero di San Piero del tempo v’è stata, che sono Fl. 25 per anno, che è ora uno anno Fl. 25. À di charicho la sua persona ch’è d’età d’anni 15 in circha et ogni dì sta per maritarsi). 28 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 722r: Zita fu schiava di Pagholo di Zanobi da Ghiacciato oggi libera. ASF Catasto 50, fol. 355r: Luccia che fu ischiava di Cinozo di Govanni ispeziale [. . .] Io òne avere da Cinozo di Govanni chon chui io stòne in chasa per me salaro e danari ch’io gli ò prestati Fl. 70 d’oro, e tornomi in chasa cho’ lui per Fl. 9 l’anno. Altro non n’ò al mondo. 29 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 472r: Mona Papera pinzochera de l’ordine di San Francesco, e donna che ffu di Nicholò Girolami. ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1038r: Mona Lisa donna fu di Rinieri Moschi e gla fu di Nicholò Bonagi e oggi pinzochera. ASF Catasto 22, fol. 343r: Mona Savia pinzochera moglie che ffu di Giovanni di Giunta Giuntini commessa delle donne di San Giovanni Giersolimtani cioè de’ Frieri. 30 ASF Catasto 23, fol. 398r: Mona Bonda glola di Nicholo Folchi religiosa di Sancto Agostino. ASF Catasto 25, fol. 561r: Le donne povere religiose e mantellate del ordine de’ Frati Heremitani di Santo Agostino, le quali ànno [. . .] Mona Nicholosa gliuola che fu del Bene e Mona Girolama gliuola fu di Nicholò. ASF Catasto 43, fol. 768r: Monna Francia gluola fu d’Ambruogio di Benincasa, religiosa ammantellata di Sancto Augustino. 31 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 386r–v: Mona Nanna gliuola di Ser Pancione da Tignano [di anni 65] commessa a Santa Maria Nuova. ASF Catasto 22, fol. 51r: Mona Nastasia chomessa nello Spedale di Messer Lorenzo Ridol a vita. 32 ASF Catasto 25, fol. 233r: Monna Narda dona di Becio di Filipo, e circha d’anni XXXV no’ ssepe novele del mio suo maritto, no’ sa se s’è vivo o mortto. ASF Catasto 26, fol. 752r: Monna Pippa gliuola che fu d’Alberto di Tano e moglie di Giovanni d’Antonio, il quale è più anni non n’è stato a Firenze. ASF Catasto 40, fol. 660r–v: Mona Francesca donna di Vanuccio soldato da Siena, vecchia e inferma e abandonata. ASF Catasto 44, fol. 266r: Monna Mea donna di Nanni delgli Istrozzi. La detta Monna Mea dice avere anni 9 non avere auto nulla dal marito e a anni sei non se è novelle di lui né mai auto niuno sisidio da lui. ASF Catasto 47, fol. 470r: Mona Papera gliuola di Bartolo di Pagholo cieraiuolo e moglie di Berardo d’Antonio di Ser Francesco, il quale Bernardo è circha di XV anni si partì di qui e il detto tenpo sono rimasa in chasa di Bartolo mio padre. ASF Catasto 56, fol. 153r: Monna Angniesa gluola fu d’Antonio e donna di Simone di Lapo, el quale è ito chon dio già fa anni, el quale abita a Vinegia [. . .] vecchia e inferma e vo achactando. 33 ASF Catasto 41, fol. 525r: Vi noticho e raporto per Monna Piera donna di Bonaiuto di Francesco da Chascia sichome moglie del detto Bonaiuto la schritta sua chon quegli beni ch’ella tiene e posiede, avisando el vostro magnicho ucio chome el detto Bonaiuto chaciò e diè chommiato di chaxa sua alla detta Mona Piera cho’ chondizione di no’ lla volere mai più a chaxa sua. La detta Monna Piera gli diè una petizione per la quale ferono chonpromesso per detti albitri chome albitratori delle detti parti lodorono che lla detta Monna Piera dovesse starxi per se chon quegli beni
8
chapter one
themselves independent earners,34 whose husbands had entered religious orders35 or whose husbands were away from Florence as soldiers,36 workers,37 exiles,38 bankrupts39 or debtors40 also submitted portate in their own names.41 These female portate were written by notaries, husbands, e quali ella aveva dati per sua dota, chon questi patti che, s’ella detta Monna Piera muore innazi a Bonaiuto suo marito, la detta roba rimane al detto Bonaiuto e, s’egli muore innazi a llei, ella possa fare della detta roba quello che le piacie. ASF Catasto 43, fol. 746r: Monna Francescha gluola fu di Ser Guido di Ser Grifo, abita con Ser Pagholo di Ser Guido suo fratello. Questa è donna maritata e non sta col marito né stette già fa 30 anni che si partì dal marito avelentata da llui. ASF Catasto 44, fol. 59r: Questi sono i beni di Monna Isabetta donna di Richovero di Bindo da Sa’ Miniato, presi per sua dota per Antonio di Marcho da Sancto Miniato procuratore della detta Monna Isabetta chome separata dal marito. Gli posiede per suo vivere e per quantità di orini centoventicinque d’oro. ASF Catasto 59, fol. 43r: A vivere la detto Monna Nenci [donna di Giovanni di Bartolo sensale] à in su queste rendite. La rechata dice in Giovanni di Bartolo sensale. El detto Giovanni si sta di per se e tiensi e usufrutta la dota di Mona Nencia detta e no’ lla aiuterebbe d’uno pane. La sopradetta Monna Nencia à vivere in su la sopradetta rendita e vesti’ sene e ogni altro suo bisogno ché no’ lle resta la sopradetta rendita i’ Fl. dieci l’ano. Se ne va chon uno peçço, l’altro chon un’altro. 34 ASF Catasto 45, fol. 642r: Monna Pera donna di Lappo di Guntino da P[r]atto lavaratore, guarda le donne. 35 ASF Catasto 31, fol. 447r: Mona Salvaggia gliuola fu di Bernardo de’ Bardi maritata che fu a Pagolo di Lionardo Lanfredi[ni], che oggi si dice Frate Pagolo de l’ordine terzo di San Francescho. ASF Catasto 53, fol. 222r: Monna Francescha donna fu d’uomo di dio. 36 ASF Catasto 26, fol. 657r: Monna Papera d’Iachopo da Prato donna di Charlo di Domenicho da Firenze provigionato in cittadella d’Arezzo. ASF Catasto 63, fol. 648r: Monna Giovanna di Cristofano da Cholle, wife of ‘Cristofano di Michele, va al soldo’. 37 ASF Catasto 22, fol. 389r: Io Mona Petra donna del detto Tomme di Bartolomeo ò fatta fare questa iscritta a sSerano di Piero perché il detto Tomme mio marito si sta in Siena a cchucire farsetti e me lascia istare sola. 38 ASF Catasto 41, fol. 482r: Monna Piera gliola di Piero Vanucci da Rincine delle tere del Chonte Francescho da Poppi; el marito à nome Lorenzo di Guiducio ed à bando del chapo di quello di Firenze e di quello del Chonte di Popi. ASF Catasto 50, fol. 214r: Monna Lisa, dona d’Orlando d’Antonio di Franncia, il quale è in bando e no’ più istare in Firenze né ‘n chontado né distreto ed è ani sei o circha ch’ebe bando. 39 ASF Catasto 23, fol. 227r: Monna Apolonia donna di Vanni di Fiorino calzolaio, il quale è a Vinegia già più tenpo falito. ASF Catasto 55, fol. 180r–v: Mona Papina donna di Lucha di Ser Chonte [. . .] Lucha di Ser Chonte fallì già anni undici e non à ‘uto mai achordo cho’ sua chreditori ed à bando ed è a Siena. Ebono i sua chreditori e libri ed ogni sua sustanza. ASF Catasto 56, fol. 269r: Monna Agnola donna di Luigi Chovoni, scritta per me Alessandro d’Antonio Chovoni; à il marito fallito et in bando. 40 ASF Catasto 24, fol. 1019r: Monna Filippa donna di Giano di Giovanni per adietro vinattiere in Firençe [. . .] et gliuola che ffu di Sandro Moççichoni [. . .] expone et dicie chome il detto Giano di Giovanni suo marito predetto già sono più anni passati si partì da Firençe et andòssene a Siena per molti danari debiti. ASF Catasto 55, fol. 59r–v: Monna Nastasia gluola fu di Lipo di Lorenzo e donna di Ghaspare di Nicholò di Ghottolo maestro; il marito mio s’è ito chon dio per debito g[i]à è più anni. 41 In a few cases, wives living with their husbands still submitted portate in their own names, possibly because the husband was incapacitated: ASF Catasto 24, fol. 1172r
literacy in florence, 1427
9
sons,42 brothers,43 fathers,44 uncles,45 nephews,46 sons-in-law,47 fathersin-law,48 brothers-in-law,49 grandsons,50 cousins,51 stepsons,52 stepfathers,53 other unspecied relatives,54 guardians,55 domestic employers,56 (Monna Giovanna di Giovanni da Farneto [. . .] va facciendo servigio per la terra e ghuarda le donne, altro nonn à nula [. . .] e deta Monna Giovanna d’anni cinquantaotto e Giovanni suo marito apresso à settanta anni). ASF Catasto 44, fol. 369r: Monna Nana d’Antonio suo marito. La detta Mona Nana d’ettà d’anni 50 istante i’ chasa de lo spedale di San Salvi, pagane di pigione l’anno lire sette [. . .] El marito de la detta Mona Nana d’ettà d’anni 70 ed à la detta Mona Nana 1 gliuolo frate di Santa Crocie d’età d’anni 22 ed à 1 gliuolo ch’à nome Frate Piero del Charmino d’ettà d’ani 15. 42 ASF Catasto 30, fol. 39v: Io Ser Arrigo di Michele notaio da Sa’ Miniato et gluolo della detta Monna Andreuola [vedova donna fu di Michele di Messer Rinaldo da San Miniato] ò prodocto questa scripta. 43 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 9r: Io Sandro d’Agnolo Biliotti fratello della detta Angelicha [gliuola d’Agnolo di Sandrio Biliotti] ò fatta la presente [. . .]. 44 ASF Catasto 20, fol. 798v: Io Nicholò di Bencino Bencini sichome padre de la deta Mona Filippa [vedova donna fu di Iacopo di Novello] ò fata la sopradetta scrita. 45 ASF Catasto 25, fol. 122r: Io Cullo del Bonella sichome zio delle sopradette fanculle [Lionarda gliuola rimase di Draghonetto del Bonella, Piera sua sirochia monacha del munistero di Ripoli] ò fato questa iscrita. 46 ASF Catasto 42, fol. 42r: portata of ‘Mona Antonio donna fu di Piero delle Ceste’, written by ‘Ser Piero di Nofri prete e nipote della detta Mona Antonia’. ASF Catasto 55, fol. 27r: portata of ‘Monna Nanna vedova et donna che fu di Simone choncciatore’, written by Frate Lorenço di Francescho; she is his ‘zia’. 47 ASF Catasto 17, fol. 161v: Io Franciesco di Lorezo gienero da la deta Mona Brogina [donna fu di Nicholò Ambertini] ò fata questa ischrita. 48 ASF Catasto 29, fol. 160r: Io Francho di Nicchol[ò] Sacchetti a pregho della detta Monna Celia [donna di Filippo di Franco Sacchetti] scripsi la detta scripta. 49 ASF Catasto 41, fol. 276r–v: ‘Margherita donna fu di Ser Falchoniere di Francescho et gluola di Guilghlielmo di Piero speziale’, written by her brother-in-law ‘Marcho di Bernardo speziale’. 50 ASF Catasto 23, fol. 249r: Io Bernaba di Franciescho ò fata quaesta scrita perch’è mia avola la sopradeta mona Apolonia [dona fu di Simone]. 51 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 703r: Io Bernardo di Bartolo de’ Bardi ò fatto questo raporto per parte di dette donne [III sirochie gliuole di Iohanni di Messer Bindo de’ Bardi maritate] perché sono mie chugine. 52 ASF Catasto 41, fol. 222r: Monna Margherita dona fu di Sandro di Dato da Palaia e Giuliano suo gliuolo, ista a torciere la setta, ista per lavorante. Io Mariotto di Zanobi òne arechata questa scritta a preghera di loro decti di sopra. La decta Mona Margherita ène mia matrigni[a] e Guliano detto è mio frattello; siamo dovisi. 53 ASF Catasto 61, fol. 997r: Chaterina gliuola d’Iachopo Ghaci da Sa’ Miniato; la detta Chaterina è mia gliastra e tenghola in chasa perch’è abandonata da’ parenti, è d’età d’anni 11, fatta per me Francesco di Filippo de l’Antella. 54 ASF Catasto 25, fol. 333r: Monna Maria dona fu d’Adamao d’Albizo da Petroio, portata written by ‘Giovanni di Guernieri Benci suo parente’. 55 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 147r: ‘Lisa di Ruberto di Luigi Chanigiani popilla [di anni 3½], ghovernata per me Daniello di Luigi Chanigiani tutore suo’, who wrote the portata. The portate of orphans were also written by their attori, who were not legally identical with their guardians: ASF Catasto 31, fol. 412r (Io Bastiano di Ser Manieri attore della detta fanciula [Pippa rede di Ser Filippo di Giovanni da lLaterina (di anni 15)] rechai e scrissi la detta scritta). 56 ASF Catasto 31, fol. 109r: ‘Mona Lisa d’Andrea da Chascia di Valdarno di
10
chapter one
landlords,57 tenants,58 practitioners of the same trade as the dead husbands,59 priests,60 bishops,61 friars,62 monks,63 chaplains,64 physicians,65 procurators,66 manovaldi (legal representatives)67 and schoolmasters.68 In a few cases it was explicitly stated that such women were unable to write: Io Ser Salvestro di Ser Tomaso notaio orentino ò fatta la detta scritta pella detta Mona Ginevra [vedova gliola fu di Baldassare Ubriachi e donna fu di Alamanno di Giovanni Manni e poi di Ruberto di Luigi Chanigiani] e Chosa [sua glia], però non sanno scrivere.69
sopra’, portata written by Nicholò di Nastagio Bucelli (in whose house she had worked ‘più tempo’). 57 ASF Catasto 17, fol. 345r: ‘Mona Benedetta donna che fu di Nicholò di Giovanni’, portata written by Iacopo Belfredelli, in whose house she lives. ASF Catasto 36, fol. 215r: ‘Monna Bartolomea donna fu di Vinci di Villano’, portata written by Iachopo di Matteo Barucci, in whose house she lives. 58 ASF Catasto 56, fol. 237r: portata of ‘Mona Antonia dona che fue di Troccio d’Atenno vedova’, written by Francescho d’Antonio vochato Naccio, her tenant. 59 ASF Catasto 21, fol. 316r: E io Oderigho d’Andrea orafo a preghiera della detta Mona Manetta [donna che fu di Piero del Vagliente orafo] ò fatta questa iscritta. ASF Catasto 38, fol. 43r: ‘Mona Checha donna che ffu di Biagio di Lorenzo ghalighaio’, written by Lorenzo di Achesio ghalighaio. ASF Catasto 56, fol. 676r: ‘Mona Chaterina donna fu di Nofri di Baldo choregiaio’, written by Lucha di Cino choregiaio. 60 ASF Catasto 21, fol. 134v: Io Ser Bindo di Roba Squarciallupi piovano di S. Agnese della lega di Chianti e veschovado di Siena ò ffatta questa schritta di mia propia mano di volontà de la deta Mona Lisa [donna fu di Mani del Chalccia da Monterinaldi de la lega di Chianti]. 61 ASF Catasto 20, fol. 613r: Io Messer Francescho vescovo da chonsentimento della predecta Mona Chaterina [donna fu (di) Iachopo di Neri] e gliuola fu del Pace ò scripta le sopra decte chose. 62 ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1554r: E io Maestro Antonio di Salvi da Marcalla frate di Sancto Spirito di Firenze ò fatta questa scripta a richiesta e priegho della decta Mona Tomassa [donna fu di Gieppo spetiale]. 63 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 514r: Questa scritta ò fatta io Don Piero abate di San Filice per la detta Monna Chaterina [di Piero del Forte]. 64 ASF Catasto 47, fol. 676r–v: Monna Tessa pinçochera di San Domenicho e donna fu d’Antonio d’Arigho [. . .] Io Ser Piero d’Antonio chapellano in San Pagholo ò ffatta questa portata per pregheria di Monna Tessa. 65 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 349r: E io Maestro Bandino del Maestro Giovanni Banducci ò fatta la presente scritta di chonsentimento della detta Mona bBancha [donna fu di Ser Lapo di Piero da Certaldo]. 66 ASF Catasto 38, fol. 371r: ‘Monna Isabetta donna fu d’Andrea di Massio armaiuolo’, written by her procurator ‘Bartolomeo di Berto di Giovencho speziale’. 67 ASF Catasto 59, fol. 511r–512r: portata of Tona gliuola che fu di Niccholò di Francesco de’ Medici, written by Giuliano d’Averardo de’ Medici, suo manovaldo. 68 ASF Catasto 34, fol. 361r: Io Bernardo d’Antonio Falchoni ò fatto la presente scritta a preghiera della decta Mona Betrice [Mona Betrice fu di Rondello, treccha in Vinegia]. On Bernardo Falconi, a reading teacher in Florence, see below pp. 330–31. ASF Catasto 57, fol. 622r: Monna Gilia vedova dona che fu de Lorenzo di Giovanni da Rabatta [. . .] Io Bartolo di Lorenzo ò scritta questa iscrita per Mona Gilia. On Bartolo di Lorenzo Gerini, also a reading teacher in Florence, see below pp. 332–33. 69 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 936r.
literacy in florence, 1427
11
Io Ser Salvestro di Ser Tomaso notaio orentino ò fatta la detta scritta pella detta Salia [di Antonio Ubriachi] però che non sa scrivere.70 Et io Francesco di Ghuidolotto popolo di Santa Filicita ho fatta detta schritta di volontà di detta Mona Cilia [donna fu di Ser Betto di Maestro Giovanni] perché non sa schrivere.71 E io Luigi di Bartolo d’Alinari ò fatta la detta scritta a preghiera della detta monna, Monna Paghola [donna fu di Ser Andrea di Francescho da Radda], perché non sa schrivere.72 Questa scritta ò fatta io Don Piero abate di San Filice per la detta Monna Chaterina [di Piero del Forte], non sa scrivere.73 Io Ser Antonio d’Aringhieri notaio, perché la detta Mona Iacopa [donna fu di Giovanni di Bartolo vocato Ballerini] non sa scrivere, di sua volontà et comandamento ò fatta questa scritta.74 E io Chardino di Piero ò fatta la sopradetta ischritta per preghiere de la detta Mona Lena [d’Arigho da Modigliana e donna d’Alderigho de la Magna], perché non sa ischrivere.75 Io Antonio di Piero barbieri da Choiano ò fatta questa ischritta di mia mano e a prieghi della Piera mia donna perché non sa iscrivere.76 Io Lucha di Bonarlo a sua preghiera s[c]risi questa scrita perché [Mona Agniola dona fu di Nofri di Francesco] no’ sa scrivere.77 Monna Migliore vedova donna fu del Buono, tesse panno lino, scripta per me Lodovicho di Bertino cittadino et notaio in servigio et a preghiera della detta Mona Migliore, perch’ella diceva et disse non sapeva scrivere.78 Io Iachopo d’Antonio vi fòne fede chome io òne fatta questa ischritta perché Mona Marcherita [donna che fue d’Iachopo di Christiano] no’ sa iscritta.79 Io Bartolomeo di Ser Giovanni Amiati notaio orentino ò fatta questa scripta di mia mano di volontà delle detti Monna Piera [vedova donna che fu di Nicholò di Donato] et di Monna Ermelina [sua gliuola] perché non sanno scrivere.80 Io Salvetto di Mastino di Salvetto òne fatto la sopradetta ischritta di mia propia mano perché [Mona Nicola donna che fue di Giovanni di Tigniosaro Belandi] no’ sapeva ischrivere.81 La detta scripta à fatta Ser Antonio di Mafo notaio orentino et nipote della detta Monna Bartolomea [gluola fu di Reghalo Maringhi et donna
70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 21, 23, 23, 25, 25, 31, 38,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
650r. 435r. 1364r. 514r. 52r. 244r. 68r. 164r. 267r. 279r. 367r–v. 477r.
12
chapter one per llo adrieto di Biagio Vespucci] perché la detta Monna Bartolomea non sa scrivere.82 Io Pagholo de Guaspare ò fatta questa iscritta a preghiera della detta Monna Ghilla [donna che ffu di Meo di Lorenzo detto Forname] perch’ella non sa scrivere.83 La detta scritta ò fatta io Ser Piero di Nofri a preghiera della detta Mona Betta [vedova e donna che fu di Bandino di Lorenço stovigliaio] perché lei non sa scrivere.84 Io Brunetto di Domenicho bechaio ò fato questa iscritta perché Monna Chaterina [donna fu di Damiano di Ventura maestro di murare] me ne priegha, ché no’ sa iscrivere.85 Io Michele d’Andrea chalzolario ò fatta questa scritta a preghiera della detta Monna Franciescha [vedova donna che fu di Marchi di Chanbio da Popi] perché diccie che non sa scrivere.86 Io Maretto d’Andrea di Maretto ferovecchio ò ffatta questa iscritta di mia mano a preghiera della sopradetta Monna Filicie [vedova donna che ffu di Iachopo di Stefano legniaiolo] perché non sa iscrivere.87 Io Maso di Franciescho ò fatta questa iscritta a priegho de la detta Mona Lippa [di Giovani vocatto Targa dona fu di Nani di Domenicho Belemaniche vedova] perché non sa iscrivere ela.88 Io Rammolo di Maretto Manelli, fratello della sudetta Monna Pippa [donna fu di Nichola di Neri], di sua voluntà et consentimento ò fatto questa presente scritta perch’ella non sa scrivere.89 Io Francescho di Iacopo Cennamelli [. . .] di Firençe, di licença et volere di decta Monna Andreuola [vedova donna fu di Senni di Iacopo et gliuola fu di Manno di Sennuccio], feci deta scritta perché non sa scrivere.90 Io Tomaxo di Salvestro ò fatta la presente scritta a preghiera de la detta Monna Caterina [donna fu d’Agnolo di Boninsegna] perché lei non sa scrivere.91 Io Bartolo di Lorenzo ò scritta questa iscrita per Mona Gilia [vedova dona che fu de Lorenzo di Giovanni da Rabatta] per chagione ch’ella non sa iscrivere.92 Io Giovanni di Torsellino bottaio ò fatta la presente scritta di mia propia mano a preghiere della detta Monna Betta [vedova donna fu del Domine] perché non sa e non può scrivere.93
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
40, 40, 42, 42, 43, 43, 44, 45, 56, 56, 57, 60,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
318r. 763r. 387v. 537r. 728r. 766r. 195r. 436v. 361r. 680v. 622r. 427r.
literacy in florence, 1427
13
Io Niccholaio di Niccholò Bettini l’ò fatta questa schritta [di Monna Zanobia donna che ffu di Michele di Francesco barbiere] perché non sa schrivere.94
More often, it was taken for granted that a woman would not write her own portata and so, without offering a reason, a substitute was found. Another signicant group of Florentines who did not write their own portate were men away from Florence over the days preceding and following the deadline of 12 July 1427. There were 327 such absentees from home (usually for reasons of business, work or study95 but also sometimes because of debt,96 bankruptcy,97 exile,98 vendetta99 or imprisonment),100 constituting 3.4% of the total number of households and 4% of the 8117 male portate. In their absence, these portate were written and/or submitted by fathers, brothers, uncles,101 nephews,102 sons,103 brothers-in-law,104 cousins,105 other unspecified relatives,106 94
ASF Catasto 62, fol. 730r. ASF Catasto 48, fol. 638r, 639r: Biagio d’Agnolo di Lippo sta a Bolognia col padre che fa le nestre di vetro [. . .] Biagio d’Agnolo studia. 96 ASF Catasto 30, fol. 105r: el detto maesttro [Alesandro di Messer Antonio di Pepo Friani buffone] no’ c’è, a[n]dòsene in U[n]geria. No’ ci potteva isttare per debitto. 97 ASF Catasto 26, fol. 1015r–v: Tomaso di Piero chalzaiuolo [. . .] fallito e nonn è in Firenze. 98 ASF Catasto 26, fol. 589r: el detto Nicholò [di Dello farsettaio] à bando del chapo ed è a Vinegia. 99 ASF Catasto 48, fol. 13v: [Andrea e Francesco di Lorenzo d’Andrea di Benintendi] sono in brigha mortale et abitano fuori di chasa loro e non possono asercitare le loro persone per detta chagione. 100 ASF Catasto 40, fol. 626r: Francesco [d’Attaviano Davizi] si trova inn Inghilterra in chonpangnia chon Pinamo deli Strozi; Antonio [d’Attaviano Davizi] si trova i[n]fermo ne le stinche per più bandi di chomune. ASF Catasto 51, fol. 359r: Lipo [di Giovani el quale fu isatore a chontrati] è ne le isti[n]che [. . .] Io Antonio di Ghugliemo [. . .] ò fata questa iscrita di mia mano [. . .] perché detto Lipo à male e ne le istiche. 101 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 416v: portata of Bartolomeo di Gherardo di Tura Pugliesi, written by his ‘zio e chommessario Piero Kambini Bartoli’. 102 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 123r: scritta fatta per Ristoro di Charlo Chanigiani nipote [di . . .] Antonio di Luigi Canigiani in Avignone. 103 ASF Catasto 24, fol. 1280r: Io Noso di Giovanni di Noso Fantoni sopradeto ò fato la detta rechata di tuto ciò che di sopra si chontiene perché il detto Giovanni [di Noso Fantonni] no’ ci’è et non l’à potuta fare. 104 ASF Catasto 17, fol. 169v: Io Lodovicho di Pino di Lodovicho suo chongniato [di Antonio di Cione Freschobaldi] ò fatta la presente iscrita di mia mano [. . .] la fatta i’ò perché non ci è. 105 ASF Catasto 36, fol. 446r: Io Federigho d’Iachopo chugino del detto Franciescho e a preghiera del detto Franciescho [di Manetto del Cervelliera di Manghona] ò fatta questa iscritta di mia propia mano perché il detto Franciescho non è in Firenze da poterla fare [. . .] ista in bottegha di Ghuasparre di Filippo da cCità di Chastello ispeçiale in Pisa chome per fante, ché llui uscito di Firençe per no’ potere vivere. 106 ASF Catasto 20, fol. 591r–592r: portata of ‘Chiaro e Giovanni d’Angnolo Arcangeli’ 95
14
chapter one
godfathers,107 notaries,108 priests,109 other ecclesiastics,110 procurators,111 or practioners of the same occupation as the absentees;112 wives,113 sisters,114 or mothers-in-law115 often provided the required information but rarely wrote the portate themselves; sometimes other relatives organized the information on behalf of absentees but found other scribes for portata.116
(both at ‘Rodi’) written by ‘Agostino di Tedaldo Benozi e Altobianco Giandonati come parenti’. 107 ASF Catasto 59, fol. 379r: Saladino e Francesco di Zanobi di Guido al soldo in Lombardia [stanno a Brescia]. E più ch’ànno lasciato a ghuardia e a ghoverno la detta chasa a Frate Piero spedalingho dello spedale di Sam Pagholo di Pinti perché detto Frate Piero è chompare del padre e [. . .] fàne queste loro faciende e vanno et venghono alchune volte a Firenze e non ci’ànno tornata niuna né maserizia niuna. Io Franciescho di Salvi di Francesco oliandolo a preghiera e chon volontà dello infrascritto Frate Piero òne fatto la sopradetto scritta perch’e gharzoni sono di fuori. 108 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 442v: Io Ser Uberto di Martino Berti cittadino et notaio orentino ò fatta questa scritta di mia propria mano a prighi e in presenza di detto Bartolomeo [di Grazia scardassiere habitante a San Donato in Poggio]. 109 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 467r: Ed io Prete Antonio di Francescho rectore di S. Lorenzo a Monte Robiolo in quell di Prato ò scritto a priegho di Mona Chosa donna del detto Cristofano [di Giovanni di Chuota di Casentino] perché esso Cristofano era absente. 110 ASF Catasto 47, fol. 410r: Io Stefano di Zanobi di Giovanni priore di Santa Maria in Chanpidoglio in Firenze feci questa schritta di mia mano chon volontà di detto Piero e Antonio [di Gieri choltelinai a Pisa]. 111 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 686r: Io Antonio di Bernardo Ridol ò fatta questa scritta di mia propria mano chome prochuratore del sopradetto Giovanni [di Iacopo Bochacci]. An example of a female procurator: ASF Catasto 40, fol. 132r: Monna Chaterina donna che fu d’Antonio di Berto et gliuola d’Alesandro di Benedetto chome prochuratrice d’Antonio di Domenicho d’Alesandro, il quale Antonio è in Pugla a Trani. 112 ASF Catasto 17, fol. 444r: Io Antonio di Iachopo speziale ò soscritto et fatta questa scritta di mia propria mano per chagione non ci è il detto Cristofano [di Iacopo speziale]. 113 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 122r: Antonio di Nicholò chiamato Frulano tronbeta, va cho’ retori vostri citadini ne le vostre tere [. . .] stanno a chasa in su la chosta di San Giorgio [. . .] e stanvi dentro io e Antonio mio marito quando è a Firençe [. . .] El deto Antonio è di Frigoli e Mona Istefana sua dona è da Vicho chontado di Bolognia. E dicie più la deta Mona Istefana che del mese pasato o pocho prima aveva orini tredici in oro e sesanta grosi in ariento [. . .] This portata was dictated by Stefana in Antonio’s absence: hence, the Tuscan, and not Bolognese, dialect. 114 See the case of Matteo di Pagolo di Francesco Pacini and his sister Mona Pippa, below pp. 40–41. 115 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 587r–v: Francesco di Bartolomeo Cambi abita et sta al salario ne le parti di Dalmazia overo di Schiavonia [. . .] io Francescha gliuola che fu d’Andrea di Francesco Peruzzi [. . .] suocera del sopradetto Francesco di Bartolo ò fatto fare questa presente schritta. 116 ASF Catasto 24, fol. 817r: Ferante di Lorenzo di Bartolomeo [. . .] è sopradetto Feranche in ghalea chon eso Nicholò di Barttolomeo Chorbinegli [. . .] Ed io Giuliano di Piero chalzolaio òne fatta questa ischritta chon chonsettimento e a preghiera di Barttolomeo di Barttolomeo chalzaiuolo suo zio del sopradetto Ferante.
literacy in florence, 1427
15
In many cases, the writer, the informant or their exact relationship to the absentee is not specied. Usually it is unknown whether, if such absentees had been in Florence, they could have written their own portata, although in some cases written information by absent heads of households is mentioned;117 in the latter case, evidence of literacy therefore exists, although an autograph portata is not available. Another group of households whose portate were not autographs were minors under the age of 18 (although now and again orphans continued to have guardians or administrators of their estates as adults).118 There were 276 households of minors in 1427, constituting 2.9% of the total portate and 3.4% of the male portate. Often these minors had no surviving close relatives, but sometimes they lived with their mothers,119 grandmothers,120 uncles,121 aunts,122 unspecied relatives,123 stepfathers,124
117
ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1215r: schriverò io Antonio di Michele Velluti le sustanze di Nofri di Salvestro Velluti, il quale abita a Vinegia chola sua famigla questo dì 6 di settembre 1427 chon suo chonsentimento. Che quello io schriverò qui a piè io mi serbo la chopia di suo [sic] mano ma perché no’ mandò il foglo intero, m’è suto detto ch’io la schriva in su foglo intero e chosì fo. ASF Catasto 21, fol. 78r–v: Io Zanobi di Barone di Tingho fornaio a 4 Paghoni in Firenze òne fatta questa iscritta di mia propia mano chon volontà del detto Iachopo [di Domenicho di Pedone fornaio abita a Pisa], c[i]oè rasenpere(r)la e chopiarla a una scritta fatta di sua propia mano detto dì e nella medesima forma, la quale riscevetti da lui da Pisa a dì 29 di luglio 1427. 118 ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1066r: Io Maestro Bartolo di Lorenzo ò scrita questa iscrita di mia mano perché sono atore del deto Lionardo di Lucha Malici [di 19 anni] e di questo vi fo buona fede ogi questo dì 11 di luglio 1427. 119 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 460r: Damiano di Bartolomeo di Niccholò chiamato il Poggiese, aged 13, and his mother Mona Checcha. 120 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 128r: Andrea di Bruno da Greve, aged 12, together with his ‘avola Mona Antonia d’Agnolo donna fu d’Andrea di Bruno’. 121 ASF Catasto 28, fol. 104r: gliuoli rimas[t]i di Tommaso d’Andrea Campelli, aged 15 to 4 and living with their uncle Niccolò Campelli. 122 ASF Catasto 53, fol. 43r: Chimento di Domenicho di Lorenço di Gianni Buti, il qual Chimenti è d’età d’anni undici e sta a bottegha d’Antonio Borghi e Antonio di Ser Bartolo linaiuoli, e danogli al deto Chimento per suo salario orini nove in due anni inchominciando l’anno a dì 15 di maggio anno sopradetto [1427]. Anchora il detto Chimento si torna in chasa cho’ Mona Ghita donna che fu di Ghirighoro di Chomo e çia del deltto [sic pro del detto] Chimento. E lla detta Mona Ghita gli da le spese e chalçalo e vestelo. 123 ASF Catasto 15 fol. 656r: Francesco d’Aghostino d’Amato di Stinchese [di anni 10 o circha], sorella [di anni 9], ‘per loro non n’ànno persona se non è Iachopo di Giovanni Sachini suo parente e stano in chasa detto Iachopo nel po[po]lo di San Giorgio di Firenze’. 124 ASF Catasto 21, fol. 350r: Martino di Francescho di Giovanni biadaiuolo, pupillo di 4 anni, torna con Pagholo Sovegli tavernaio suo patrigno. ASF Catasto 31, fol. 191r: Data questa iscritta per me Francesco di Pagholo Pichardi perché [Mariotto di Baldo di Giovanni Ghalli, di 4 anni] si torna in chasa cho’ la madre ch’è mia donna.
16
chapter one
masters (as apprentices)125 or foster parents.126 Occasionally such minors submitted portate personally as proprietors in their own right, although their fathers were still alive.127 Their portate were normally written by attori (estate administrators),128 guardians,129 grandfathers,130 uncles,131 cousins,132 practioners of the same trade as their dead fathers,133 masters (of apprenticed orphans)134 or notaries, although occasionally such minors actually wrote their own portate: Questa scripta ò facta io Ricciardo [di Giachinotto Cavalcanti] sopradecto [di 14 anni] di mia propria mano per chagione che Lazero et Francescho sopradecti [suoi fratelli maggiori] stanno a Pisa obrigati a certe gabelle di comune et secondo mio ricordo è la propria verita.135
In some cases, on the other hand, it was stated that these minors could not write or at least had not yet learned to write adequately: Io Zanobi di Ghualtieri sensale di chanbi grossi del popolo di Sa’ Nicholo ò fatta questa ischritta chome preghato e perché il detto Giovanni [gli125 ASF Catasto 42, fol. 302r–303r: Bartolomeo di Mone di Cecho di Porta Travaglio da Prato [di 17 anni] pupillo, ista al malischacho cho’ Nanni di Tincho in Pistoia. Dàgli in tre anni orini nove e lle spese. Il primo ano orini due, il sechondo orini tre, il terzo anno orini quatro. 126 ASF Catasto 52, fol. 30r: Adamo di Lorenço [di 15 anni o circha] tornasi in chasa chon una Mona Petra di Pichio da Siena che llo batteççò, ritiello per lo amore di dio. 127 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 38r–39r: Iacopo di Giovanni di Iacopo [aged 12], and his brothers Piero [aged 10], Nicholò [aged 8] and Francescho [aged 7], written by their father Giovanni. 128 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 489r: ‘Io Nicholò di Simone Feduci vi fòne fede chome loro atore’ for ‘rede di Mona Checha dona fue di Charlo Chanigiani’, boys aged 15 and 13, a girl aged 11. 129 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 54r–59r, 65r–57r, 75r–76r: Ligi [aged 16], Franciesco [aged 14] and Giovanni [aged 11], gli e rede di Giovanni di Ligi Quaratesi, written by their ‘tutore Iacopo di Giovanni Villani’. 130 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 363v: Io Lucha di Cino choregiaio avolo de’ sopradetti Nicholò [di anni 7] e Simone [di anni 4] [glioli di Gianni di Nicholò dalla Felice de’ Bardi] essendo mio debito ò ffatta questa scritta di mia propia mano. 131 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 74v: Ed io Piero di Giovani vo(ca)to Secha ò fatta la presente iscritta per Angnolo sopradetto mio nipote [rede d’Andrea di Giovanni vochato Sella tessitore di drappi, di anni 7]. 132 ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1269r: Io Giovanni di Taccio suo chugino ò fatta la presente ischritta [per Orlando di Nicholò di Nino Orlandi, di 13 anni] di mia propia mano. 133 ASF Catasto 23, fol. 631v: Io Vincenzo di Ghuaspare bilanciaio ò fato chuesta iscripta cho’ chosentimento de’ sopradecti pupili [three sons (aged 5 to 10) of the late] Aghostino di Bencivenni bilanciaio. 134 ASF Catasto 26, fol. 834r–v: Rinaldo di Giovanni Ghini, orphan aged 14, ‘sta in bottegha con Donato di Nicholò [Donatello] et Michelozzo di Bartolomeo intagliatori’, portata written by ‘Michelozzo di Bartolomeo’. 135 ASF Catasto 28, fol. 884–89r. ASF Catasto 16, fol. 247r: 15-year-old son Pantalione wrote the portata for his mother Mona Margherita d’Andrea and himself (a later copy on fol. 469v, where ‘Pantaleone’ now listed himself as aged 16).
literacy in florence, 1427
17
uolo maggiore che fu di Bartolomeo di Nicholò bastiere, di anni 12] non sapeva troppo bene ischrivere.136
Another group who did not write their own portate were incapacitated men, of whom there were 144 in 1427, constituting 1.5% of total returns or 1.8% of the male household heads. Such incapacities included old age,137 blindness,138 muteness (the possible result of a stroke),139 deafness / muteness,140 insanity,141 injury,142 inrmity,143 paralysis,144 apoplexy145 and leprosy.146 136
ASF Catasto 15, fol. 786r. ASF Catasto 17, fol. 454r: Io Giobbo di Iachopo ò fatto questa iscritta a priego e chon volontà de detto Choncio [di Francescho di Choncio, di 85 anni, nello spedale di Santa Maria Nuova)]. ASF Catasto 19, fol. 228r: Agnolo di Lucha Casini, aged 91. ASF Catasto 19, fol. 329r: Truovasi il detto Benino [di Francescho di Benino] d’età d’anni ottantasette sanza donna e sanza gliuoli et con axai più incarichi; no’ dicie secondo quello che io, Bernardo di Benino, comprendo, posto che questo dice pocho. ASF Catasto 21, fol. 452r: [Niccholò di Lucha di Feo Ugholini] sono vechio di più d’ani 81 e sono infermo d’una infermità inchurabile e truovomi solo qui in Firenze ma ò tre gluoli di fuori, l’uno in Inghilterra ch’era chon Salamone deli Strozzi e compagni ma per lo chaso loro rimane sanza aviamento, due ne sono in Ungheria che non so chome si stieno. ASF Catasto 22, fol. 268r: Pagholo di Neri, di 95 anni, rinbanbito, solea stare cho’ gli oliandoli; io Antonio di Giovanni Benci ò fatta questa schritta di mia propria mano. ASF Catasto 46, fol. 643r: ‘per chagione ch’el detto Francesco [d’Agnolo Vernacci, vechio di 90 anni] è vecchio, non può né saprebbe dirvi i suo’ fatti’, his portata was written by his nephew Agnolo di Bindo Vernacci. 138 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 355r: Biagio di Guiducio ciecho; fol. 756r: Io Giovanni detto [di Piero da Chastello Francho di sopra] sono d’età d’anni 76 e sono ciecho a fatto e ghotoso e infermo e sto del chontinovo in chasa e ne’ letto con grande spesa [. . .] Io Simone di Giovanni di Pier’ ò fatto il presente raporto di volontà di Giovanni mio padre. ASF Catasto 20, fol. 685r: Domenicho di Piero torcie al latoio della seta perché è ciecho. ASF Catasto 21, fol. 154v: Ed io Lionardo di Piero Singnorini sopradetto ò fatta fare la presente scritta ad Aringhieri di Iachopo a mia preghiera però che non vegho lume a scrivere di mia mano. ASF Catasto 35, fol. 1050r: Io Bernardo d’Antonio Falchoni [the teacher, see p. 10 above and pp. 330–31 below] ò fatto la presente scritta a preghiera del decto Mariano [d’Andrea lavorante di tinta, vede pocho lume]. 139 ASF Catasto 46, fol. 647v: Franciescho di Bartolo Sanguingni [di 70 anni], è gli chaduta la ghocciola; dice la molgle à debito più di sei orini e non sa il detto Franciescho favellare e non può per detta chagone; io Bartolomeo di Govanni di Charlluzzo lanaiuolo chon volontà e preghiera di Mona Tanora sua donna ò fatta la detta scritta. 140 ASF Catasto 56, fol. 19r: Antonio di Torigiano de’ Cierchi, mutolo e sordo; fol. 20r. Io Bartolomeo di Michele del Choraza actore di detto Antonio di Torigiano ò fatta detta rechata. 141 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 536r: portata di Piero di Giovanni di Bertazza vaiaio et paçço [. . .] arechò detta scritta Chanbio di Domenicho chonciatore e fece fare a Ser Tomaso prete di San Nicholò. ASF Catasto 35, fol. 940r: lui [Lodovicho di Giovanni Gualtieri Cimabue] si truova vesato da malingni e benigni spiriti, istasi chontinuo ogi per li monti e chave di Fiesole, dorme a champo e se alchuna volta al choperto si emancuolì né mai si spogla; portata written by his uncle Ridolfo Peruzzi. ASF Catasto 38, fol. 451r: Meo di Mainardo fu donzelo della parte pazzo d’anni 28, sta a Stia ed è pazzo, tiello uno Cione di Nanuccio suo parente in chasa. ASF Catasto 42, 137
18
chapter one
A large category of men who did not write their own portate in 1427 were potential functional illiterates. Functional illiterates can be dened as individuals whose reading and / or writing skills were insufcient to full the requirements of their own society. In this case, Florentine society imposed the obligation to submit a portata for the Catasto, and so functional illiterates were those residents who could neither read nor write, who could read but not write, or whose writing skills were inadequate to enable the personal completion of a tax return. Of the 8117 male portate in 1427, 254 heads of household (3.1% or 2.6% of the total submissions) were explicitly declared unable to write their own returns owing to their inability to read, write, or read and write. The following table breaks down this group according to occupation:
fol. 248r: per noi Giannotto, Charlo e Pagholo di Iachopo di Giannotto vi si fa fede delle sustanzie di Baldassare nostro fratello non sano della mente. ASF Catasto 47, fol. 8r: Iachopo di Dino di Stefano, d’età d’anni quaranta o circho e ifermo, no’ ha buono sentimento [. . .] iscioccho e non è i’ suo sentimento; his portata written by Iachopo di Piero del Mazza churatore del detto Iachopo. ASF Catasto 59, fol. 387r: Io Mariano di Gioanni legniaiolo ò fatta questa isschritta per sSalvestro di Giutta legnaiulo [. . .] mi sso’ mosso ssichome suo gienero e perch’egli egli [sic] non è i’ ssuo ssenttimentto e fuori d’ogni ssettimento. 142 ASF Catasto 16, fol. 281v: Io Berto di Francescho ò fata la sopradetta iscrita perché Marioto [di Cristofano righattiere] à male: gli chade adoso i’ sul chapo la chaterata de la botegha, speçogli la testo i’ più parti, stava male. 143 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 151r: Io Antonio di Iachopo ò fatto questa iscritta di mia mano a prieghiera del detto Antonio [di Vannozzo fornaciaio], che no’ ll’à potuta fare egli perché infermo. ASF Catasto 20, fol. 910r: Guido d’Ambruogio ischamatino, commesso della Badia di Passignano [Vallombrosa], infermo. ASF Catasto 28, fol. 204v: È infermo il detto Nicholò [Nicholò di Francesco Baroncelli, di 18 anni] istato già sei ani e più con grande ispesa et co’ infermità inchurabile [. . .] Io Bartolomeo di Sandro Baroncielli ho fatta la sopradetta iscritta a preghiera del detto. ASF Catasto 38, fol. 122r: Bernassa di Simone [Cavalcanti] detto d’età d’anni sesanta tanto più quanto da otto di dicenbre in qua sono perduto di golglie; già è una brighata d’anni non posso andare né nulla; portata written by his son Simone. ASF Catasto 54, fol. 160v: Io Giovanni di Pietro di Ser Mino malischalcho perché ‘l detto Lotto [di Charoccio malischalcho, di 40 anni] non può scrivere per sua infermità m’à preghato che scriva per lui ed io cho’ suo chonsentimento l’ò fatta. 144 ASF Catasto 23, fol. 126r: Il detto Antonio di Santi [. . .] è istato a tratto degli anni più di trenta e più di venti che non ucì mai di chasa chon sua pie; portata written by his son Filippo. ASF Catasto 62, fol. 379r: Nicholò di Ligi fabro soleva fare le pianele [. . .] è ne infermo [. . .] perduto de le mani e de’ piedi per ghotte. 145 ASF Catasto 42, fol. 4v: [Antonio di Iachopo del Vignia, di 77 anni] infermo ch’è stato più di mesi 6 in chasa che non è potuto né può ire fuori ed è stato la magiore parte de’ detti 6 mesi apolopesto; portata written by son Iachopo. 146 ASF Catasto 58, fol. 207r, 208r: Lionardo di Filippo Banchini [di 40 anni], il quale è tra per infermità grande e altro non può venire dinanzi da voi, infermo di lebra.
literacy in florence, 1427 tessitori (weavers) pettinatori, pettigannoli (combers) scardassieri (carders) famigli (servants) calzolai (shoemakers) muratori (builders) fornai (bakers) legnaiuoli ( joiners) purgatori (cleaners) tintori (dyers) lavoranti di pillicciaio (fur workers) manovali (labourers) maniscalchi, fabbri (smiths) sarti (tailors) lavoratori (workers) mugnai (millers) hospital or monastery inmates barbieri (barbers) bottai (coopers) riveditori (quality controllers) divettini (wool beaters) messi, corrieri (messengers) trombetti, trombadori (trumpeters) farsettai (doublet makers) segatori (sawyers) cuochi (cooks) apenechino (woollen ball maker) pollaiuoli (poulterers) chiavaiuoli (locksmiths) beccai (butchers) prestatore di ronzini (liveryman) refaiuolo (string maker) fa menagie / menuglie (animal keeper) vergatore (mattress maker) coiaio (leather dresser) cozone (horse-dealer) galley-oarsman (a remo) scappellatore (hood maker?) cimatore (trimmer) esattore alla gabella (collector of gabelles) iscamatino (carpet beater) pescatore (sherman) presta i tavolieri da gughare a ttavole (table maker?) dipintore (painter) bow maker (fa le balestre) barbettaro (barber?) lasagnaio (pasta maker)
19 28 19 15 10 10 8 8 8 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20
chapter one
drappiere (draper) vaiaio (vair-garment worker) linen-worker (linaiuolo) latoio della seta (silk spinner) oste (innkeeper) corregaio (belt maker) fa le nestre (glazier) maestro di tavole di gesso (plaster-tablet maker or sculptor) tavolaccino (waiter) lavoratore di ferravecchio (scrap-metal worker) tiene poderi (farm labourers) lastraiuolo (paviour) brigliaio (bridle makers) no occupation provided
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 37
These functional illiterates included three individuals who could not read: Ed io Giovanni di Piero de Toghagliera ò fata questa iscrita perché detto Simone [Domenicho di Simone detto Batatino ischardassiere] no’ sa legiere.147 Io Giobbo di Iachopo l’ò fatta a priego detto Bartolomeo [di Michele tessitore di drappi] di mia propia mano perché non sa legiere.148 Io Cenni di Francesco alberghatore ò fata la sopradeta ischrita perché e’ sopradeto Piero di Mateo [lavoratore] no’ sa legiere.149
31 who could neither read nor write, e.g.: Io Lucha di Bartolomeo pesatore degl’Uciali de la Charne ò fata questa schrita di mia propia mano a prighiera del deto Lucha [di Ghuglelmo da Todi famiglio de’ Signori] perché non sa legere né scrivere.150 Io Lucha di Bartolomeo ò fata questa questa iscrita di mia propia mano perché deto Bartolo [di Marcho vocato Charonbela] non sa legere e schrivere.151 Questo Giovanni [di Buto] [. . .] è lavorante di purgho e d’età d’anni dicianove e à il dì quando lavora S. XII. Per chagione che ‘l detto Giovanni non sa né llegiere né scrivere a sua preghiera [. . .] io Marcho d’Iachopo ò fatta questa scritta.152
147 148 149 150 151 152
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
22, 23, 51, 18, 19, 20,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
365r. 363r. 151r. 1030r. 449r. 952r.
literacy in florence, 1427
21
and two Germans who could not write Italian: Io Nicholò di Frizi chalzolaro ò facto questa scritta a pregiera del sopradecto Bregoldo [di Giovanni della Magnia chalzolaio], ché non sapeva iscrivere egli italiano.153 Io Chavalchante di Giovanni sellaio ò ischrito [. . .] [di] chonsentimento del detto Giovanni [d’Ormanno della Magna choregiaio di choregie di peltro] perché non sapeva iscrivere taliano ma te[de]scho.154
The remaining 220 could not write, e.g.: Io Domenicho d’Angnolo ò ffatta questa iscritta chon volontà d’Andrea di Nofri [lavorante di tinta] sopradetto perché non sa iscrive[re].155 Io Giovanni Torsellini ò fatta la presente portata a preghiera del sopradetto Niccolò di Ciuto [da Cieticha lavorante di scharpette] perch’egli non sa scrivere di sua mano.156 Io Giovanni di Iachopo li[n]aiuolo ò fatto questa iscritta di mia mano a preghiera detto Simone [lavorante di tinta] chagione non sa scrivere.157
Less explicit were the capacities of semi-literates, that is, individuals who had some ability to write, but not sufcient to enable them to complete a portata personally. There were 153 portate from semi-literates (1.9% of the male returns or 1.6% of the total portate). In the case of twenty, it was explicitly declared that they did not write well enough to complete the return themselves: Io Simone di Francescho ricevetti detta scritta perché [Andrea d’Agnolo di Ser Bondi] non sapea bene o punto scrivere e chosì dise avere fatto fare detta scrita chon suo chonsentimennto.158 Io Pagholo di Bonarcho Chorselini merciaio ò fatta questa scritta di mia mano a preghiera del detto Andrea di Giovani tesitore di drapi perché lui dicie che non sa bene schrivere.159 Io Antonio di Barnaba notaro orentino perché il detto Domenicho di Niccolò Bagloni [pizicagnolo] non sa bene scrivere di sua volontà ò ffata la detta scripta.160 Io Antonio [di Francesco maestro di balestre abita a Pisa] sopra isscrito à lo fato isscrivere perché io no’ ne isscrivo sì bene le sopra iscrite chose mobile e immobile sichome dite di sopra.161 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
48, 49, 15, 16, 62, 17, 17, 20, 27,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
540r. 717r. 160r. 360r. 614v. 153v. 200v. 727v. 55v.
22
chapter one Io Agniolo di Franciescho ispeziale ò fatta questa iscritta i’ nome detto Giovanni [di Ser Piero d’Andrea Franceschi di 15 anni] perché no’ ssa bene iscrivare ed anche me lasciò el padre al ghoverno su[s]o el detto fanciullo.162 Io Torniello di Salvestro ò fatto questa schritta di mia propria mano questo dì XI di luglio 1427 perché [Piero d’Agnolo chardatore] sa male scrivere.163 Io Michele di Primerano de’ Pigli ò fatto questa scritta in servigio del detto Landino perché Landino [di Bernaba farsettaio] iscrive molto male.164 Io Donino di Stefano ò fata questa scritta di chonsentimento di detto Maso [di Stefano lavatore] mio fratelo [. . .] perché deto Maso sa male scrivere.165 Io Lorino di Bartolo [sta all’orafo] sono cho[n]teto a la sopra dedetta [sic] iscritta e però mi sono iscr[i]tto di mia prop[i]a mano perch’io non so tropo bene iscrivere no’ l’ò iscr[i]tta tuta di m[i]a mano.166 Queste quatro face iscrite de le mie sustaze sopra al chatasto ogni chosa è scrito di mia voluntà e i’ò iscirito la verità e per chariza di ciò io Teghia di Pero [Villanuzzi sensale] ò scrito ogi di mia propa mano [. . .] e ò lo fato iscrivere perché io non sono buono iscritore.167 Io Michele d’Antonio Chacci ò fatta questa schritta di mia propia mano perché il detto Christofano [del Pace chalzolaio] non sapeva bene schrivere.168 Io Ghuido [di Guido di Persolatini] sopradetto ò fato fare la sopradeta iscrita al sopradeto Ser Piero perch’io so male scrivere.169 Ugholino di Lenzo vochato Bolognino, isto per fante chon altrui per le s[p]ese e chalzare e vestire [. . .] Io Bolognino ò fato fare la deta iscrita perché scrriise meglio.170 Io Giemira di Schiata [fabro] sopradetto ò fato fare qesta ischrita atrui perché ischrivo male.171 Io Micho di Mat[e]o [chiavaiuolo] sopradeto ò fata fare questa scrita a[l]trui pe[r]ché iscrivo male.172 Piero di Zanobi di Ser Forese [. . .] è d’età d’anni 25 et è sança arte o exercitio alcuno. Io Ferrantino di Niccholaio ò fatta questa scripta a volontà del decto Piero. Io Piero di Zanobi chonfesso che’l detto Ser Ferantino à fatto la detta ischritta di mia voluntà perché io non so bene ischrivere.173
162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
27, 31, 41, 41, 47, 47, 48, 49, 50, 53, 54, 55,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
474r. 377r. 69v. 748r. 158r. 642r. 671v. 588r. 616r. 457v. 377r. 205r.
literacy in florence, 1427
23
Io Manetto d’Andrea di Manetto ferrovecchio ò ffatto questa iscritta a preghiera del detto Reccho [di Cristofano di Reccho da Ghiacceto, che sta cho’ chosoli del Mare,] perché il detto Reccho non sa iscrivere per modo non vi desse tedio.174 E io Antonio di Giovanni [fabro] sono chontento a la sopra detta iscrita perch’è fata di mia volontà per no’ sapere bene ischivere.175 Io Giuliano di Batista ò fato questa iscrita di mia propia mano ché no’ sa’ iscrivere [Giovannozzo e Francescho di Battista] eglino itropo bene.176
Other semi-literates signed their returns in a hand different from that of the text of the portate or else made additions or annotations similarly different from the main body of the return itself; in all these cases, the quality of the handwriting was so poor as to suggest that the individuals could not have written their own portate. The following table breaks down these semi-literates according to occupation: maniscalchi, fabbri (smiths) scardassieri, cardatori (carders) tessitori (weavers) calzolai (shoemakers) muratori (builders) barbieri (barbers) farsettai (doublet makers) bottai (coopers) pettinatori (combers) famigli, fanti (servants) fornai (bakers) divettini (wool beaters) coiai, galigai (leather dressers) lavoranti all’arte della lana (wool workers) forzerinai (safe makers) legnaiuoli ( joiners) purgatori (cleaners) tintori (dyers) messi, corrieri (messengers) chiavaiuoli (locksmiths) dipintori (painters) corregai, corazzai (belt makers) bastieri (saddlers) pizzicagnoli (spice dealers) sensali (brokers)
174 175 176
ASF Catasto 55, fol. 266r. ASF Catasto 56, fol. 382r. ASF Catasto 57, fol. 459r.
7 6 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
24
chapter one
sarto (tailor) lavoratore (worker) hospital or monastery inmate riveditore (quality controller) trombetto, trombadore (trumpeter) cimatore (trimmer) fa le balestre (bow maker) linen worker (linaiuolo) latoio della seta (silk spinner) lavoratore di ferravecchio (scrap-metal worker) pezzaio (sole maker) pelachane (tanner) pesatore (weigher) merciaio (haberdasher) mattonaio (brick maker) linaiuolo (linen worker) mazziere (mace bearer) biadiauolo (grain dealer) mescitore di vino (bartender) al tiratoio (cloth stretcher) cassettaio (box maker) pesciaiuolo (shmonger) banditore (town crier) rigattiere (rag-and-bone man) sovigliaio (potter) sta all’orafo (gold worker) fa le pietre (stonemason) arrotatore (tinker) setaiuolo (silk merchant) orafo (goldsmith) no occupation provided
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 45
The larger number and percentage of possible non-artisans here (45 or 29.4% in contrast to 37 or 14.6%) suggests a higher social level (corresponding to their slightly higher educational achievement) among the semi-literates in comparison with the illiterates. Similarly, it will be seen that the semi-literates included twice the percentage of households with surnames as the illiterates.177 A large group of potential functional illiterates consists of individuals who found another person to write their portate without giving a reason why the head of household did not write himself, e.g.:
177
See p. 29 below.
literacy in florence, 1427
25
Io Bonacchorsso di Piero ò fatto questa scritta di mia propia mano chon volontà del sopradetto Domenicho di Francescho [scarpellatore].178 Io Giovanni di Ser Guarano ò facta questa scripta con voluntà del detto Giovanni [di Corso, che tesse il panno lino].179 E io Lorenzo di Francho sto a linaiuolo ò fatta la sopradetta iscritta sechondoché Iachopo di Simone [tessitore di panni lini] predetto m’à preghato e questa è ne la sustança e verità sua sechondo mi chonfesa.180
This category of portate, numbering 776 returns (8.0% of the total submissions or 9.5% of the male reports), were written by brothers, 181 sons, 182 fathers, 183 nephews, 184 uncles, 185 brothers-inlaw,186 sons-in-law,187 stepfathers,188 unspecied relatives,189 notaries,190 procurators,191 fellow tradesmen,192 colleagues,193 business partners,194 178
ASF Catasto 15, fol. 537r. ASF Catasto 15, fol. 807r. 180 ASF Catasto 62, fol. 35r. 181 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 348r: E io Lottino d’A[n]drea di Lottino fratelo del sopradetto Bernardo [maestro di frusti da basti] ò fatto la sopradetta ischritta a preghiera del detto Bernardo. 182 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 492r: Io Giovanni di Cristofano maestro [di murare] ò fata questa iscrita di mia propia mano a pregiera di Cristofano mio padre. 183 ASF Catasto 56, fol. 347r: Io Antonio d’Andrea suo padre ò fata la sopradetta ischita chon sua volontà [cioè di Andrea d’Antonio lavorante di tinta]. 184 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 410r: Io Antonio di Giovanni Corbizi nipote del detto Betto [di Giovanni Stefani] ò fatta questa scritta di volere e chonsentimento di detto Betto. 185 ASF Catasto 37, fol. 838v: per chiareza io Appolonio di Ser Nicholò Ugholini suo zio ò fatta questa di mia mano perché esso Lodovicho [di Giovanni di Monte di Mugello] non vengha in chontumace della vostra signioria. 186 ASF Catasto 21, fol. 184v: Dise detto Lipo [d’Andrea di Lippo] deta scritta avea fatta Maria[no] di Stagnio suo chognato chon suo chonsentimento. 187 ASF Catasto 31, fol. 74r: Scritta per me Salvestro di Cienni Nini gienero del sopradetto Iachopo [di Lionardo Chapponi istradiere alle porti]. 188 ASF Catasto 30, fol. 345v: portata di Bartolomeo di Michele di Bartolomeo del Ciecie, fata per Bartolomeo di Lorenzo di Chresci, suo patrigno. 189 ASF Catasto 27, fol. 460r: Io Amerigho Chavalchanti ò fatta la detta scritta [per Giannozzo di Vanni di Messer Uberto Chavalchanti]. For two cases of wives writing on behalf of husbands, see p. 37 below. 190 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 421r: Io Niccolaio Pardi notaio ò facta questa scripta a ppreghi di decto Buto [di Stefano da Frenze scardassiere] e di sua volontà. 191 ASF Catasto 55, fol. 197r: Iscritta per me Deo di Deo Bechuti prochuratore del detto Pagholo [di Dono dipintore]. 192 ASF Catasto 17, fol. 648r: Io Mafo di Tomaso orafo ò fatto il sopradetto raporto a preghiera del detto Franciescho di Lucha [orafo] in sua presenza. 193 ASF Catasto 40, fol. 832r: Io Piero di Lorenzo notaio dell’arte de’ fornai ò facta la detta portata di licença del decto Giovanni [di Domenmicho di Lapo fornaio]. ASF Catasto 56, fol. 253r: Io Giovanni di Giovanni d’Andrea famiglo del prochonsolo ò fatto questa scritta di mia propia mano dì VIIII di luglio 1427 di sua volontà [cioè Antonio di Bettino donzello del prochonsolo]. 194 ASF Catasto 25r: Io Federigho di Tommaso Sassetti chon volontà del sopradetto Andrea e Nicholò e Gieri di Giovanni Ghondi [loro compagno] ho fatto la detta ischritta di mia propria mano. 179
26
chapter one
schoolmasters,195 landlords,196 priests,197 friars,198 chaplains,199 monks,200 but in most cases there was no discernible relationship between the head of household and the writer of the portata, nor any apparent reason why a particular scribe was chosen. The follow table gives the distribution of this category of non-writers according to occupation: tessitori (weavers) scardassieri, cardatori (carders) calzolai (shoemakers) famigli, fattori, donzelli, lavoranti (servants, attendants) pettinatori, pettigannoli (combers) purgatori (cleaners) sarti (tailors) tintori (dyers) barbieri (barbers) muratori (builders) esattori alla gabella, stanno a gabella [del vino ecc.], stradieri, cardieri (collectors of gabelles) divettini (wool beaters) legnaiuoli ( joiners) messi, corrieri (messengers) riveditori (quality controllers) fornai (bakers) maniscalchi, fabbri (smiths)
74 52 45 37 29 25 23 20 18 16 15 14 13 11 11 10 9
195 ASF Catasto 15, fol. 533r: Io Bernardo d’Antonio Falchoni ò fatto la decta scritta a preghiera del sopradecto Domenicho di Lorenzo malischalcho oggi questo dì decto di sopra. On Bernardo Falconi, see p. 10 above and below pp. 330–31. For other portate written by him, see p. 336 below. ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1388r: Io Maestro Bartolo di Lorenzo ò iscrita questa iscrita di mia mano a preghiera del deto Piero [di Iachopo mangniano di tompe e chiave]. On Bartolo di Lorenzo Gerini, see p. 10 above and below pp. 332–33. 196 ASF Catasto 19, fol. 98r: Io Giunta di Tugio [il suo padrone di casa] ò iscritto questa ischritta di mia propia mano a prechiera del detto Aricho [di Giovanni della Magna tessitore di panni lini]. 197 ASF Catasto 21, fol. 13r: Io Ser Antonio di Bartolo prete hòne fatto questa portata a preghiera di Iachopo [vochato Bogia ischardassiere]. 198 ASF Catasto 24, fol. 1182r: Io Frate Giovanni del Maestro Bartolo da Firenzze de l’ordine di Santo Iachopo d’Altopascio iscrissi a priegho di deto Farsettino [Giovanni d’Andrea vocato Farsetino famiglio de’ Priori] tuta questa iscritta. 199 ASF Catasto 36, fol. 96r: Io Ser Anselmo prete e capellano in Sancto Piero Maggiore ò scritto questa scritta a preghiera del detto Antonio [d’Avitale apenechino]. 200 ASF Catasto 47, fol. 143r: io Dom Bene(detto) cappellano del monistero di Sancta Anna ò scritta la sopradetta scritta a prego del sopradetto Lorenzo [di Nicholò d’Amadore vocato Chorane legnaiuolo.
literacy in florence, 1427 mugnai, farinaiuoli (millers) dipintori, inbiancatori (painters) pillicciai (furriers) farsettai (doublet makers) manovali (labourers) chiavaiuoli (locksmiths) beccai (butchers) coiai, galigai (leather dressers) scappellatori (hood makers?) cimatori (trimmers) pizzicagnoli (spice dealers) bastieri (saddlers) stanno al tiratoio (cloth stretchers) cuochi (cooks) conciatori, pelachani (tanners) rigattieri (rag-and-bone men) speziali (apothecaries) vinattieri (wine merchants) lavoranti di pianelle, pianellai (tilers) pescatori (shermen) lavoranti alle fornacie (furnace workers) ortolani (greengrocers) portatori (porters) ottonai (brass workers) apenechini (woollen ball makers) bottai (coopers) corregai (belt makers) ferravecchi (scrap-metal dealers) ora (goldsmiths) vetturali (carters) stamaiuoli (wool chandlers) stanno all’orafo (gold workers) carretai (cartwrights) stovigliai (potters) lzaiuoli, latoi (string makers) setaiuoli al minuto (silk workers) sensali (brokers) mescitori di vino (bartenders) borsaio (purse maker) biadaiuoli, vagliatori del grano (grain dealers) lavoranti all’arte della lana (wool workers) vaiaio (vair-garment worker) linaiuolo (linen mechant) latoio della seta (silk-spinner) oste, albergatore (innkeeper) tavolaccino (waiter)
27 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1
28
chapter one
lastraiuolo (paviour) brigliaio (bridle maker) maestro di frusti da basti (master wooden whip maker) topaiuolo (rat catcher) cassettaio (box maker) lanaiuolo (wool merchant) rimendatore (mender) lavoratore (worker) hospital or monastery inmate lanino (linen merchant) vergatore (mattress maker) iscamatino (carpet beater) sta a portare il sale (salt porter) stampatore (engraver) castellano (castellain) pentalaio (pot maker) lavorante d’orcuoli (vase maker) porta vino (wine porter) guarnaio ( guarnello worker [material made of ax and cotton]) forbitore d’arme (pollisher of arms) prestatore di bestie a vettura (liveryman) mazziere (mace bearer) vota pozzi neri (emptier of cesspools) fa le panierizuole (basket maker) portanecha (?) coltellinaio (knife maker) accattatore (beggar) vende pane (bread seller) spadaio (sword maker) sta con mercatanti per riscuotere (collector) bullettaio (grindery maker) soldato (soldier) palaiuolo (pole maker) lavandaio (laundryman) massaio alla camera del comune (steward) forzerinaio d’osso (bone worker) maestro di pietre (stonemason) dadaiuolo (dice player) vende uova (egg seller) scodellaio (crockery maker) calderaio (boiler maker) batte bambagia (cotton beater) staderaio (balance maker) merciaio (haberdasher) no occupation provided
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 154
literacy in florence, 1427
29
The greater number of possible non-artisans here (154 out of 776 or 19.8%) suggests a higher social level for this group than the illiterates; indeed, it is clear that a number of individuals in this category must have been literate, but simply preferred to have persons write on their behalf. This impression is conrmed by comparing surnames in the three groups so far examined. Among the illiterates, there are 7.1% of individuals (18 out of 255) identied by surname;201 three only (Ammirati, Lenzi, Vespucci) are possibly from upper-class202 families. The semi-literates include 15.7% (24 out of 153) identied by surname;203 four (Manovelli, Rucellai, Pucci, Niccolini) are potentially from the upper-classes. The unexplained non-writers include 13.3% (103 out of 776) identied by surname;204 however, 30 (Bardi [3 different
201 Ammirati (ASF Catasto 15, fol. 456r–v), Chellini (ASF Catasto 24, fol. 865r), Chiarucci (ASF Catasto 24, fol. 887r), Buschia (ASF Catasto 25, fol. 210r), Manetti (ASF Catasto 25, fol. 327r), Guglielmi (ASF Catasto 25, fol. 446r), Ridoldi (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 148v), Ghetti (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 501r), Ticci (ASF Catasto 37, fol. 968r), Borsi (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 358r), Serani (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 566v), Vespucci (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 680r), Lenzi (ASF Catasto 41, fol. 488r), Tondini (ASF Catasto 42, fol. 50r), Chelli (ASF Catasto 43, fol. 969r), Narcini (ASF Catasto 49, fol. 639r), Lastra (ASF Catasto 53, fol. 237r), Guntini (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 570r). 202 For the purposes of this analysis, an upper-class Florentine family is dened as one having entered the Signoria before 1400 and having at least twenty appearances there before 1532; see Najemy (1982), pp. 327–331. Magnates have also been included as upper-class, although they were formally barred from the Signoria. 203 Manovelli (ASF Catasto 16, fol. 671v), Fecini (ASF Catasto 19, fol. 76v), Bettini (ASF Catasto, fol.), Alderotti (ASF Catasto 20, fol. 717r), Gianbonegli (ASF Catasto 20, fol.), Giutini (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 357r), Franceschi (ASF Catasto 27, fol. 474r), Casucci (ASF Catasto, fol. 944r), Pini (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 489r–v), Naldini (ASF Catasto 36, fol. 135r), Suchiegli (ASF Catasto 36, fol. 205r–v), Nicholini (ASF Catasto 36, fol. 406r–407v), Boni (ASF Catasto 36, fol. 479r), Benzi (ASF Catasto 37, fol. 4r), Erri (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 100v), Porciellini (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 213r), Rucellai (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 636v), Porcellini (ASF Catasto 43, fol. 637v), Celli (ASF Catasto 46, fol. 295v), Zatti (ASF Catasto 46, fol. 428r), Morachi (ASF Catasto 47, fol. 158r), Villanuzzi (ASF Catasto 47, fol. 642r), Pucci (ASF Catasto 48, fol. 782r–783r), Migliorotti (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 228v). 204 Fini (ASF Catasto 15, fol. 834v), Bardelli (ASF Catasto 15, fol. 914r), Bardi (ASF Catasto 16, fol. 679v), Datti (ASF Catasto 16, fol. 691r), Bardi (ASF Catasto 16, fol. 718r–v), Bardi (ASF Catasto, fol. 724r–725r), Nicholi (ASF Catasto 17, fol. 131r), Doni (ASF Catasto 17, fol. 275r), Manni (ASF Catasto 17, fol. 313r–314r), Rossi (ASF Catasto 18, fol. 927r), Poppiani (ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1339v), Chavalchanti (ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1350r), Stefani (ASF Catasto 19, fol. 410r), Pitti (ASF Catasto 20, fol. 606r), Cirioni (ASF Catasto 20, fol. 884v), Cialdieri (ASF Catasto 20, fol. 1008r), Biliotti (ASF Catasto 20, fol. 1072v), Marini (ASF Catasto 21, fol. 15r), Giamdonati (ASF Catasto 21, fol. 32v), Scharazi (ASF Catasto 21, fol. 352r), Tazzi (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 4r), Del Soldato (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 46r), Serragli (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 297v), Tigliamochi (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 484v), Minuci (ASF Catasto 24, fol. 1178r–v), Rigliamochi (ASF
30
chapter one
households], Serragli, Rossi, Cavalcanti [2 different households], Pitti, Biliotti, Sachetti, Ricasoli, Capponi, Pepi, Peruzzi, Gherardini [2 different households], Busini, Covoni, Altoviti, Spini, Gondi, Vecchietti, Lippi, Girolami, Giraldi, da Filichaia [2 different households], Agli [2 different households]) are possibly from upper-class families. It is clear that the identied but unexplained non-writers included a signicant number of literates. Nevertheless, the predominant number of lowly artisans in this group (weavers, carders, shoemakers, combers, servants, cleaners, tailers, dyers, barbers, pruners, messangers, bakers, smiths, millers, doublet makers, labourers, locksmiths, butchers) corresponds to the occupation distribution among the declared illiterates, thus suggesting that this group of identied but unexplained non-writers was mainly illiterate.
Catasto 25, fol. 61r), Guelfucci (ASF Catasto 25, fol. 187r), Masini (ASF Catasto 26, fol. 600r), Marini (ASF Catasto 21, fol. 15r), Chavaleschi (ASF Catasto 27, fol. 19r), Tigliamochi (ASF Catasto 27, fol. 37v), Chavalchanti (ASF Catasto 27, fol. 460r), Gherardini (ASF Catasto 27, fol. 492v), Michozzi (ASF Catasto 28, fol. 408v), Salterelli (ASF Catasto 28, fol. 487v), Risaliti (ASF Catasto 29, fol. 25v), Tolosini (ASF Catasto 29, fol. 114r), Sachetti (ASF Catasto 29, fol. 134r), Biffoli (ASF Catasto 29, fol. 202v), Schiattesi (ASF Catasto 30, fol. 142r), Maghaldi (ASF Catasto 30, fol. 178r), Villani (ASF Catasto 30, fol. 357r), Ricasoli (ASF Catasto 30, fol. 516r), Chalif (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 45r), Capponi (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 74r), Schiatesi (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 268r), Navazati (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 293v), Soci (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 304r), Mannini (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 88v), Valentini (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 102r), Pepi (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 615r), Peruzzi (ASF Catasto 35, fol. 741v), Busini (ASF Catasto 35, fol. 1116r), Langheri (ASF Catasto 35, fol. 1235r), Ferini (ASF Catasto 25, fol. 524v), Danielli (ASF Catasto 36, fol. 519r), Gherardini (ASF Catasto 36, fol. 578r), Succhielli (ASF Catasto 37, fol. 699v), Chassi (ASF Catasto 37, fol. 856r), Chovoni (ASF Catasto 37, fol. 1201v), Altoviti (ASF Catasto 38, fol. 128v), Curiani (ASF Catasto 38, fol. 593v), Spini (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 195v), Viviano (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 281v), Dragonetti (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 388v), Chanacci (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 819v), Manucci (ASF Catasto 41, fol. 81v), Gruzegli (ASF Catasto 41, fol. 578r), Gondi (ASF Catasto 42, fol. 25r), Nuti (ASF Catasto 42, fol. 99r), Ciachoni (ASF Catasto 43, fol. 590r), Chasini (ASF Catasto 43, fol. 963r), Tayi (ASF Catasto 45, fol. 396v), Benvenuti (ASF Catasto 45, fol. 809r), Vecchietti (ASF Catasto 46, fol. 89v), Bonbeni (ASF Catasto 46, fol. 184r), Salvetti (ASF Catasto 46, fol. 249r), Pasquini (ASF Catasto 47, fol. 293v), Falchucci (ASF Catasto 48, fol. 780v), Quatrocchi (ASF Catasto 49, fol. 541r), Mazuoli (ASF Catasto 49, fol. 715r), Besi (ASF Catasto 51, fol. 122v), Cechi (ASF Catasto 52, fol. 2r), Arrighucci (ASF Catasto 52, fol. 150r), Agli (ASF Catasto 53, fol. 6r), Agli (ASF Catasto 53, fol. 241r), Zanpini (ASF Catasto 53, fol. 467v), Lippi (ASF Catasto 54, fol. 52r), Girolami (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 243r), Pulci (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 257r), Cozano (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 263r), Celli (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 691r), Dello Struffa (ASF Catasto 57, fol. 37v), Giraldi (ASF Catasto 57, fol. 39r), Trevuolsi (ASF Catasto 57, fol. 471r), Ghalletti (ASF Catasto 57, fol. 489r), Bracciesi (ASF Catasto 57, fol. 533r), da Filichaia (ASF Catasto 58, fol. 57r), Perini (ASF Catasto 58, fol. 410r), Borghini (ASF Catasto 58, fol. 426r), Mazuoli (ASF Catasto 61, fol. 901r), Ricci (ASF Catasto 62, fol. 227r), da Filicaia (ASF Catasto 63, fol. 657r).
literacy in florence, 1427
31
The nal category of non-writers among the heads of household submitting portate for the 1427 Catasto has been the most difcult to identify. A signicant number of portate were set out and written professionally or prociently, often by notaries, notarial or Latin copyists, skilled vernacular copyists or able writers of mercantesca (mercantile script), without declaring that they were not the autograph products of heads of household. However, the heads of household corresponding to these particular portate were neither notaries nor professional copyists nor merchants with sufcient business activity to develop a highly practised mercantesca hand. There is in fact an inverse relationship between the economic, social and educational level of the writers of these portate and the quality of their handwriting and presentation: whereas middleand upper-class Florentines—indubitably literate and normally writing their own portate—usually submitted reports of a non-professional quality, this present group consistently presented portate whose writing and layout were well above their humble economic and social station. Such discrepancies have allowed this nal group of non-writers to be identied. It consists of 1076 portate, whose distribution according to occupation is as follows: tessitori (weavers) scardassieri, cardatori, lanini, lavoranti di lana (carders) calzolai (shoemakers) famigli, fattori, donzelli, lavoranti (servants, attendants) pettinatori, pettigannoli (combers) muratori (builders) purgatori (cleaners) tintori (dyers) divettini (wool beaters) esattori alla gabella, stanno a gabella, stradieri, cassieri (gabelle collectors) legnaiuoli ( joiners) barbieri (barbers) sarti (tailors) fornai (bakers) maniscalchi, fabbri, ferraiuoli (smiths) messi, corrieri (messengers) manovali (labourers) mugnai, farinaiuoli (millers) conciatori, pelachani (tanners) farsettai (doublet makers) cuoiai, lavoranti di cuoio, galigai (leather dressers) riveditori (quality controllers)
80 80 52 51 41 33 32 32 30 28 28 26 26 24 20 16 15 12 12 12 12 10
32
chapter one
pillicciai, lavoranti di pilliciaio (furriers) beccai (butchers) soldati, provigionati, conestabili (soldiers) corazzai (cuirass makers) chiavaiuoli (locksmiths) lavoranti di pianelle, pianellai (tilers) corregai (belt makers) stanno al tiratoio cuochi (cooks) bottai (coopers) ferravecchi (scrap-metal dealers) sensali (brokers) mescitori di vino (bartenders) lavoratori (workers) lavoratori di terra (agricultural workers) trombetti (trumpeters) lavoranti alle fornacie (furnace workers) dipintori, imbiancatori (painters) stamaiuoli (wool chandler) stanno all’orafo (gold workers) borsai (purse makers) biadaiuoli, vagliatori del grano (grain dealers) vaiai (vair garment workers) guarnai (guarnello workers [material made of ax and cotton]) osti, albergatori (innkeepers) mazzieri (mace bearers) coltriciai (feather bed makers) cavallai, stanno con cavallaio (livery assistants) pizzicagnoli (spice dealers) vinattieri (wine merchants) ortolani (greengrocers) ottonai (brass workers) stanno al setaiuolo (silk workers) rimendatori (menders) calderai (boiler makers) hospital or monastery inmates vergatori, verghegiattori (mattress makers) comandatori (stewards) cozoni (horse-dealers) vetturali (carters) stovigliai (potters) castellani (castellains) staderai (balance makers) banderai (vestment makers) tornai (turners?)
10 8 8 8 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2
literacy in florence, 1427 ricamatori (embroiderers) becamorti (grave-diggers) forbiciai, forbicini (scissors makers) passeggeri (ferrymen) saponai (soap makers) campanai (bell ringers) sta a speziale (apothecary assistant) linaiuolo (linen merchant) sta al linaiuolo (linen worker) tavolaccino (waiter) lastraiuolo (paviour) cassettaio (box maker) scamatino (carpet beater) stampatore (engraver) prestatore di bestie a vettura, prestatore di ronzi (liveryman) coltellinaio (knife sharpener) spadaio (sword maker) massaio alla camera del comune (steward) merciaio (haberdasher) lavorante di capegli (wig maker?) pezzaio (sole-maker) resaiuolo (= risaiuolo [rice worker] or refaiuolo [string maker]) lavorante alla zecca (mint worker) rivenditore di erbuccie (vegetable and fruit seller) stagnaio (tinsmith) fa i cardi (maker of carding tools) va accattando (beggar) da la lana (a latrici) (wool porter) al tiratoio dell’arte della lana (woollen cloth stretcher) da la biada a’ passigieri (grain porter) segatore (sawyer) ista al refaiuolo (string worker) tenditore di lana (wool stretcher) sta a ritagliatore (second-hand clothes worker) sceglitore (sorter) cuce foderi (lining seamster) acattafanti (domestic service agent?) traversatore d’arme (emblem-maker?) porciaio (pig man) maestro ingeniere (master engineer) lavora d’osso (bone worker) bbiaio (buckle maker) lavorante di drappi (cloth [silk] worker) fa le nestre del vetro (glazier) pollaiuolo (poulterer) banditore (town crier)
33 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
34
chapter one
sacatore (sack maker?) lavorante di mattonaia (brick maker) tavernaio (tavern keeper) taglia il verzino (woodcutter) balestra (bow maker) occupation unspecied
1 1 1 1 1 156
The lower percentage of possible non-artisans (156 out of 1076 or 14.5%) here, as compared with the identied but unexplained nonwriters (19.8%) suggests a lower social level for the unidentied nonwriters—an impression conrmed by a comparison of surnames. The identied but unexplained non-writers included 13.3% of households with a surname; in contrast, the unidentied non-writers included only 57 individuals (5.3%) with a surname.205 Similarly, there are considerably fewer upper-class households in this group of unidentied non-writers (9: Bartoli, Mancini, Pepi, Mellini, Bucelli, Manovelli, dello Scarfa, Popoleschi, Pucci) as compared with the 30 for the identied but unexplained non-writers. The low percentage of possible non-artisans without specied occupations among the unidentifed non-writers cor205 Peroni (ASF Catasto 15, fol. 385r), Corselli (ASF Catasto 16, fol. 629v–630r), Bartoli (ASF Catasto 17, fol. 224v–226r), Bencini (ASF Catasto 17, fol. 343r), Benzivene (ASF Catasto 18, fol. 1040r), Petrini (ASF Catasto 19, fol. 49v–51r), Chamici (ASF Catasto 21, fol. 136r), Delle Vignie (ASF Catasto 21, fol. 398r), Del Soldato (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 45r–46r), Ghocci (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 371r), Betti (ASF Catasto 24, fol. 1035r–1036r), Del Soldato (ASF Catasto 23, fol. 136r), Totti (ASF Catasto 27, fol. 18r), Mancini (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 371r–372r), Chavriuoli (ASF Catasto 30, fol. 47r), Charcherelli (ASF Catasto 30, fol. 203r), Malavolti (ASF Catasto 31, fol. 534r–535r), Pepi (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 82r–v), Ferrini (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 336r–338r), Mellini (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 395r–v), Buccelli (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 529r–v), Benucci (ASF Catasto 34, fol. 611r–612v), Ghaluzi (ASF Catasto 37, fol. 918r–919v), Passerini (ASF Catasto 37, fol. 1057r–v), Manovelli (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 108r), Baldinotti (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 378r), Compagni (ASF Catasto 40, fol. 384r), Chasini (ASF Catasto 43, fol. 958r–963r), Guidi (ASF Catasto 48, fol. 544r), Montini (ASF Catasto 41, fol. 19r), Bossi (ASF Catasto 43, fol. 1149r), Betti (ASF Catasto 45, fol. 588r), dello Scharfa (ASF Catasto 45, fol. 618r–621v), Santilli (ASF Catasto 46, fol. 169r–v), Popoleschi (ASF Catasto 47, fol. 375r–377r), Toni (ASF Catasto 48, fol. 117r), Pucci (ASF Catasto 48, fol. 536r–v), Guidi (ASF Catasto 48, fol. 544r), Giambullari (ASF Catasto 49, fol. 669r), Mazzetti (ASF Catasto 52, fol. 132r), Avedotti (ASF Catasto 52, fol. 137r), Mini (ASF Catasto 54, fol. 162r), Dalla Chasa (ASF Catasto 54, fol. 406r–v), Buattieri (ASF Catasto 55, fol. 164r–v), Amerighi (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 206r–207v), Bocci (ASF Catasto 56, fol. 614r), Schambrilla (ASF Catasto 57, fol. 483r), Pacini (ASF Catasto 58, fol. 345r–v), Chalchagni (ASF Catasto 58, fol. 430r–v), Cassi (ASF Catasto 59, fol. 260r), Chalandri (ASF Catasto 59, fol. 266r), Valduci (ASF Catasto 59, fol. 464r), Bonini (ASF Catasto 62, fol. 127r–128v), Narduci (ASF Catasto 63, fol. 240r), Fini (ASF Catasto 63, fol. 352r), Cieri (ASF Catasto 63, fol. 642r), Tigliamochi (ASF Catasto 63, fol. 757r).
literacy in florence, 1427
35
responds most closely to the declared illiterates (14.6%) and suggests that the category of identied but unexplained non-writers was largely illiterate—a conclusion substantiated by the lowly occupations that this group overwhelmingly pursued: weavers, carders, shoemakers, combers, servants, cleaners, tailors, dyers, barbers, builders, gabelle collectors, pruners, joiners, messengers, bakers, millers, doublet makers, labourers, trimmers, tanners and leather dressers. The overall gures for male literacy in Florence, as disclosed by the Catasto of 1427, are thus as follows: Total portate Women heads of household Male portate Heads of household away from Florence Minors as heads of household Incapacitated heads of household Able-bodied adult male heads of household in Florence Declared illiterate male heads of household Declared semi-literate male heads of household Identied non-writers without reason Non-identied non-writers Potential adult male illiterate heads of household Potential adult male literacy rate
9677 –1560 8117 –327 –276 –144 7370 254 153 776 1076 2259 69.3%
It needs to be emphasized that the gure of 69.4% represents a potential, not a certain rate of literacy. But potentially, the percentage would be higher, not lower. It has been seen that the category of identied non-writers certainly includes a number of literates, who simply did not care to write their own portate.206 The same caveat exists for the non-identied non-writers: these too could have included some literates (although probably fewer, given the signicantly lower numbers of surnames here, as well as the fewer possible upper-class families included). So, the conclusion remains that 69.3% represents the bottom line of adult male literacy in Florence: Giovanni Villani’s gure of 67 to 83% from about ninety years before the Catasto of 1427 looks spot on. There is no doubt that late-medieval and Renaissance Florence was an extraordinarily literate society. Indeed, literacy could extend to the very lowest rung of the populace. An example is the return in 1427 206 See above pp. 29–30. ASF Catasto 16, fol. 709r: Io Vincilao di Mateo de’ Bardi òne fatta fare la sopradetta ischritta per durare meno faticha [. . .].
36
chapter one
of Lorenzo di Domenico dell’Ongorgia, a wool comber aged 54. He was a mere day-labourer, earning 8 soldi a day, and yet he wrote his own portata. His spelling and grammar were basic, his handwriting was crude, and yet he was able to write on his own behalf: A voi signiori uciali de chatasto. Lorenço di Domenicho de l’Ongorgia petinatore i’ via Pentolini di te[m]po [ms.: tepopo] d’ani ciqu[a]ntaquatro. Una chasa di pregio di orini dicioto e una faciulo d’ani cique. Choni Meo di Giovanni Matoni e le rede di Vicho e di Cahvano da Setignano e Sa[n]t’Abruogio. E la dona grosa. Guadagno S. oto i’ dì. Cuatiere Sa’ Giovanni, gofalone de le Chiave.207
Another example is the autograph portata of Lorenzo di Stefano Randegli, an unmarried joiner, who shared quarters with his brother Iacopo in a house owned by Giovanni di Marco Strozzi; in this instance Lorenzo not only wrote but signed his own portata: Al nome di dio a dì 8 di marzo 1428. Dinazi a v[o]i signio[ri] uciali del chatasto della città e chontado di Firenze. Io Lorenzo di Stefano Randegli legniaiuolo, el chuale abito ‘nn ghonfalone de Li[o]ne Roso chuartiere di Santa Maria Novella chon Iachop[o] di Stefano Randegli legniaiuolo mio fratelo ne la chasa di Bernardo di Giovani di Marcho degli Istrozi ne la Via Largha de’ Legniaiuoli, fo raporto di miei beni e incharichi, cioe: Debo avere da Mariotto di Messer Albizo de’ Rosi orini sesanta—Fl. 60. E debo dare a l’abate di Chamaldoli orini tr[e]ntasei, e chuali sodai per uno tto d’Antonio di Stefano da le Ruose, el chuale è morto—Fl. 36. Io Lorenzo di Stefano sono d’età d’anni 32. Io Lorenzo di Stefano Randegli legnaiuolo ò fatto la sopradetta iscritta di mia propia mano, ano e mese e dì detto di sopra.
Literacy in Florence not only extended to the majority of the male population, but was widespread among women too. Social and legal expectations meant that women did not normally write their own portate; nevertheless, there are many instances in the 1427 Catasto of female autographs. Caterina, daughter of Albertacio degli Alberti and widow of Piero di Messer Filippo Corsini, announced to the Catasto ofcials that she herself had written her own portata: Katerina, che fui gluola d’Albertacio degli Albe[r]ti et che fui dopnna di Piero di Messer Philipo Corsini, a voi sopradecti uciali mando questa portata, la quale io oe scrita di mia propia mano.208
207 208
ASF Catasto 58, fol. 113r. ASF Catasto 34, fol. 460r.
literacy in florence, 1427
37
Similarly, Gana, widow of Tommaso di Giovanni Fini, declared that she had personally penned an addition to her earlier return: A dì 31 d’agosto 1428. Questa è una ag[i]unta fatta alla portata di Mona Gana gliuola fu di Filippo di Messer Ruberto e donna fu di Tomaso di Govanni Fini fatta pella detta Mona Gana achatastata ne’ Lione Biancho [S. Maria Novella . . .] Io Gana detta ò fatta la detta agunta di mia propia mano dì detto di sopra.209
Bartolomea, a native of Cortona and the wife of a German tailor, wrote the household’s portata in his place: Io Bartolomea ò scritto questa scritta con volontà del detto Liso [di Nicholò de la Magnia sarto] de mia propria mano.210
While her husband Nanni di Francesco Canbrilla was away as a soldier in Lombardy, his wife Pippa wrote the family’s portata: Nanni di Franciescho Chanbrilla, a chagione che Nani mio marito sopradetto è nel chanpo per la legha in Lanbardia ed è saldato del chomune di Firençe, però io Mona Pippa sua donna fo iscivere il mio nome; in prima dirò qui le nostre sustançe [. . .] E io Mona Pippa abito in chasa una [di] mia madre. El detto Nanni mio marito è d’anni 36 ed io Mona Pippa sono d’età d’anni 26 e abianno una fanciulla, à nome Ermellina d’anni 9.211
Ciglia, widow of Ruggieri di Taddeo Carucci, wrote herself to the Catasto ofcials, stating that she was satised with the portata written by her daughter, Caterina: Io Cilia [donna fu di Rugieri di Taddeo Charucci] sono chontenta che lla Chateria mia ola e donna fu di Bartolomeo di Giovani de’ Rosi abia fatta questa scritta e cho’ mia volotà l’à fatta.212
Simona, widow of Messer Gerardo Buondelmonti and daughter of Simone de’ Bardi, although she herself could not write, nevertheless had her own daughter, Mea, a nun in a Florentine convent, draw up a portata on her behalf: Mona Simona, donna fu di Messere Gierardo Buondelmonti gliuola di Simone de Bardi, gluola cioè Suora Mea di Messer Gherardo Buondelmonti, la quale è d’età d’anni 30 o circha, religiosa [n]el nostro munistero
209 210 211 212
ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
63, 35, 50, 17,
fol. fol. fol. fol.
421r. 962r. 760r. 428v.
38
chapter one di Monte Domini fuori della porta di Sanghallo del populo di Sancto Marco vecchio, e decta scrita io predecta Suora Mea di Messer Gierardo Buondelmonti ò ffacta a prieghi della sopradecta Mona Simona mia madre, perché ella non sa scrivere.213
One woman writer made a condent and matter-of-fact report of her assets: Io Monna Mea [40] donna fu di nNani di Christofano da Parato [= Prato?] raportto dinanzi a vo’ le mie sustanze.214
whereas ‘Mona Lisa dona che fue di Nofri d’Açço Dini lanaiuolo’ had doubts about her capacities to provide a report at all: I’ò fata di mia mano, non ò saputo me[glio] dire. Cristo vi guardi e diavi la sua grazia.215
One woman writer seemed content and well able to live within her means: Al nome di dio amen. Facta a ddì 11 di luglo 1427. A voi signori uciali io v’arecho la portata di ciò che d’io possegho di mobile. Io òne chomperato una chasetta dal munistero di Sancto Ambruogio 25 orini. Non è stimata a venderla in trasacto orini 40. È in Via Ghibellina e nel popolo di Sancto Anbruogio ed è a vita di me Mona Benedetta e d’una mia gliuola che à nome Francescha e d’un mio fratello ch’è monacho di Valembrosa. Io non ò né danari né d’errate e non ò avere né a ddare [. . .] Mona Benedecta donna di Lorenço di Guido purgatore nel popolo di San Piero Maggiore.216
But many such female writers could not resist the temptation to grumble about personal circumstances. ‘Mona Rosa’, a widow aged 80, complained: Di questa pigione io me nne vivo cho lle mia bracuola ladomi un pocho di stame e anche sono sì vechia ch’i’ non posso,217
while a linen-weaver, ‘Mona Biagia vedova donna fu d’Antonio di Niccholo vocato ragionato tesso i pani lini’, scratched a living from day to day, bemoaning her inability to make ends meet, her isolation and her poor health: 213 214 215 216 217
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
38, 16, 18, 36, 22,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
613r. 253r. 1081v. 241r. 300r.
literacy in florence, 1427
39
Non ebbi mai prestanza e non posso vivere perché sono sola e guadagnio di dì in dì la vita mia e sono pocho sana.218
Isabetta, widow of Bartolomeo di Bonifazio da Prato, had a different set of complaints, mainly about her son and daughter-in-law, who had retained her dowry and with whom she was in legal dispute: Io Mona Isabeta dona fu di Bartolomeo di Bonifaçio da Prato ò di dotta Fl. 200 e piatischogli cho’ la Simona dona di Ser Bonifaçio mio gliuolo ed è 5 anni mai non ò auto da lui solo uno granelo di grano. La nuora mia si tiene ongni chossa. Io mi torno chon una mia gliuola e chon uno mio gienero a nome Giovani Chasini in Sa[n]ta Crocie nel Charo. Istiamo a chasa. La detta Mona Isabette è d’ettà d’anni 65 e non à prestança né estimo.219
Another widow similarly deplored her inability to gain access to her dowry: Questi sono i beni di Monna Isota dona che fu di Sere Simone di Gunta da Vi[n]egia [. . .] E più ò avere orini cento d’oro da le rede di Sere Simone detto di sopra e no’ ne poso avere per a[n]chora né rendita né chapitale. Io sono vedova e sola ed ò circha d’ani cinqanta.220
‘Mona Piera donna che ffu di Nicholo di Francescho d’Agnolo pezzaio’, bemoaned her eldest son’s reluctance to do a day’s work: Bernardo gluolo del detto Nicholò non vuole fare nulla né stare a bottegha, d’età d’anni 22.221
‘Mona Chosa, dona di Salvestro di Domenicho’, who lived by looking after incapacitated women, did not know whether her husband was alive or dead: Raporto di me Mona Chosa, dona di Salvestro di Domenicho. Isto a pigione in uno palcho d’una chasa d’Orlandino di Francesco di Ser Orlandino posta ne’ chiaso del forno de’ Vechietti nel popolo di San Donato. Pagho l’anno L. quatordici piccioli di pigione. Ò un pocho di maserizuola. Vo ghardando le donne [. . .] Non so s’e’l marito mio è vivo o morto.222
One woman writer bewailed her diminished status, having been born a gentlewoman and consequently unable to earn her own living: 218 219 220 221 222
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
23, 28, 31, 38, 46,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
497r. 100r. 59r. 106v. 390r.
40
chapter one Mona Albizina vedova, dona fu di Nicholò di Giovanni Bugliafero e gliula fu d’Albizo Belandi, trovomi vechia e [in]ferma e istare a pigione sanza veruno aiuto di persona. Preghovi ch’io vi sia rachomandato ch’i’ò grande faticha di potere vivere e isto sanza fante; epure sono nato [sic] di persona da bene per no’ potere fare altro.223
A spinster declared that she had never had a husband, lamenting her difculties in making ends meet: Dinanzi a voi signori uficiali de chatasto del popolo e chomune di Fire[nze], raporto dina[n]zi a voi siniori la Ghostanza figliuola fu d’Ardovino Falivi. Non ebi mai marito. Sono d’età d’anni trentacinque. Ò 1a chasetta posta nel popolo di Sa’ Piero Magiore in Via Fiesolana, ne la quale isto e 1o pocho di maseriza, che da primo via, ssechondo Govanni di Ser Mateo, a 1/3 non so, 1/4 Marcho d’Antonio Palmieri. Altro non ò e ò faticha di vivere.224
An eighty-year-old widow, ‘Mona Ghostanza vedova glia di Piero di Dinozo [Mazuoli] e donna fu di Francesco di Tatteo’, still managed to write her own portata, pointing out that, ill and impoverished, she had never been taxed by her local district (gonfalone): Io Monna Ghostança ò anni ottanta e sono inferma e per miserabile il gonfalone no’ m’à mai prestantiata.225
Several literate women went no further than to sign portate written for them by men: Io Monna Filippa sopradeta [donna che fu del Maestro Giovanni di Giusto medicho] ò fato iscrivere questa mia portata a Ser Bartolomeo di Ser Giovani, la quale à scrita di mia volontà.226 I[o] Domencha [di Francesco pinçochera di quelle della Vergine Maria] so’ chote[nt]a a la sopradeta iscrita.227 Io Piera [dona che fu di Ser Giovanni Charucci e filolla che fu di Tomaso de’ Figovani] sono chonteta a la sopradetta iscritta fata per mano d’Ugolino [di Tomasso de’ Figovani da Canello, suo fratello] e così cofeso esere vero la sopra detta iscrita e cosegnio e questo è vero.228
But the most interesting female writer in the 1427 Catasto was doubtless Pippa, daughter of Paolo di Francesco Pacini. Her brother, Matteo, had been forced to leave Florence because of a vendetta set in motion 223 224 225 226 227 228
ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF
Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto Catasto
56, 57, 20, 35, 46, 59,
fol. fol. fol. fol. fol. fol.
161r. 500r. 912r. 1220v. 480r. 236v.
literacy in florence, 1427
41
after the death of another Florentine. He had settled in Marseilles and taken a local wife, but when the city was taken by the Catalans, he lost everything there and was forced to live in a hovel. In Florence, his devoted sister looked after his property, sending him his annual income; she managed to update herself on his circumstances via another Florentine, Giovanni Guicciardini, who had himself recently returned to Florence after a long residence in Marseilles and Provence. Matteo di Pagholo di Francescho Pacini abita nella citta di Marsilia cho lla sua famiglia donna e gliuoli [. . .] I’ deto Mateo è d’età d’ani ciquataquatro e la dona sua è d’età d’ani tretasei ed à gliuoli tre: i’ primo à nome Govanni d’età d’ani quatordici; e’ secodo à nome Colino, è d’età d’ani oto. I’ terzo à nome Atonio, è d’età d’ani ci[n]que e la dona de’ deto Mateo è di Marsilia ed ivi abitano co’ questi loro gliuoli in una povera caselina, ché i’ deto Mateo fuor s’à la chasa avev’a Marsilia qua[n]do i Catelani presono la deta cità di Marsilia, che è circha d’ani quatro. E i’ deto Mateo perdè alora c[i]ò ch’egli aveva a mo[n]do ed ogi à gra’ faticha di potere vivere. Ed io Mona Pipa sua sirochia gli ma[n]do ogni ano, ed è dua ani, una nota quelo poso avere qui de suo ò ritrare, come dice i’ questa facia di soto. E più à debito a Marsilia con uno Marsiliese a nome Gaberoseta padro’ di nave, Fl. ceto di muneta di Proveza: Fl. 100 L. S. E più à debito Fl. seta[n]ta con uno Marsilese a nome Govanni Basomini, merchata[n]te de la cità di Marsilia di muneta di Proveza Fl. 70 L. S. E i’ deto Mateo è degli ani tre[n]ta no’ fu a Fireze per una briga àno co’ ge[n]te di Fireze di morte d’uomini. Ed io Mona Pipa sua sirochia che abito i Fire[n]ze so tuto lo stato suo per Giovanni di Fracescho Guicardini, che è istato più ani a Marsila e i’ Proveza ed è circha di mesi quatro è tornato qui a Fireze e dicemi. Questa è la pura verità.229
No less for her capacity to take over family affairs than for her ability to articulate her family’s circumstances and travails in her own words and in her own hand, Pippa’s story shows how the famous Alessandra Macinghi Strozzi230 was not an isolated case in fteenth-century Florence.
229
ASF Catasto 47, fol. 264r–v. (1877) and (1987). Other examples of female literacy in the 1427 Catasto: ASF Catasto 16, fol. 249r (Mona Mea vedova donna fui d’Antonio di Bartolomeo); ASF Catasto 17, fol. 539r (Mona Domenicha di Giovani da Vinci); ASF Catasto 18, fol. 876r (Contessa Gherardescha donna di Gualterotto di Lorenzo Gualterotti), 938r (Giovanna donna fu di Simone da Volterra), 1352r (Monna Chaterina donna che ffu di Bartolomeo de’ Rossi); ASF Catasto 20, fol. 613r (Mona Chaterina vedova gliuola fu del Pace di Nicholò e donna fu di Iachopo di Neri), 618r (Mona Chaterina sirochia di Lionardo donna fu di Mino del Chiaro), 992r (Monna Giovanna donna fu di Salvestro di Franciescho); ASF Catasto 25, fol. 152r (Monna Lena vedova), 299r 230
42
chapter one Conclusion
The city of Florence was a remarkably literate society. The 1427 Catasto (tax) returns, which survive in their entirety, reveal that at least 69.3% of the adult male population were sufcently literate to write their own submissions to the tax commission. The principal illiterates or semi-literates were humble workers or artisans; the vast majority of middle-class and elite male heads of households wrote for themselves. Many poor and low-born members of the working classes even wrote their own tax returns. Social expectations meant that most women did not write themselves, but the Catasto records disclose more than a few literate women as well. Giovanni Villani’s famous statistics from the late 1330s, suggesting that 67 to 83 percent of males went to school in Florence, are borne out by the 1427 Catasto.
(Monna Mattea donna fu di Giovanni di Benozzo linaiuolo); ASF Catasto 26, fol. 966r (Monna Tancia donna che fu di Benedetto calzolaio da Prato e sirochia fu di Ghano), fol. 997r (Mona Tadddea donna fu d’Albiço di Charlo de’ Nerli); ASF Catasto 27, fol. 235r (Bartholomea donna che fui di Messer Michele di Messer Vanni Castellani e gliuola di Messer Iovanni di Messer Gherardo Gambacorta); ASF Catasto 28, fol. 208r (Nanna donna fu di Nicholò Baroncelli e gluola di Durante d’Ughuiccione Giandonati); ASF Catasto 30, fol. 248r (Monna Niccholosa lgluola che fu d’Antonio di Benintendi e dona che fu d’Arrone di Salvestro scodellaio vedova); ASF Catasto 31, fol. 127r (autograph aggiunta by ‘Mona Elena gliuola di Gerardo di Renaldo rettaiuolo e donna fu di Martino choriere’), fol. 179r–v (Mona Madalena donna che fu di Pucio d’Ugholino); ASF Catasto 34, fol. 428bis r (Monna Chatalana vedova e gliuola che fu di Stefano di Vanni Chastelani); ASF Catasto 36, fol. 141r (autograph aggiunta by ‘Monna Lisabetta donna che fu di Bancho di Fruosino da Vereççano’); ASF Catasto 38, fol. 164r (Monna Caterina vedova donna fu d’Antonio da Mino), fol. 165r (Mona Chaterina fue di Nicholaio di Leonardo da Prato); ASF Catasto 42, fol. 320r (Mona Betta delle pinzochera di Sancto Domenicho); ASF Catasto 43, fol. 768r (Monna Francia gluola fu d’Ambruogio di Benincasa, religiosa ammantellata di Sancto Augustino); ASF Catasto 46, fol. 109r (Monna Antonia d’Antonio da Pratto); ASF Catasto 48, fol. 490r (Monna Bartolomea vedova giuola fu di Iacopo di Lapo Brigliai), fol. 750r (Mona Chaterina gluola di Cristofano di Tomaso); ASF Catasto 53, fol. 97r–v (Dionigia donna che fu di Bartolomeo Luchardesi gliuola di Gricio di Bonifçio degli Uba[l]dini da Gaglianno), fol. 226r (Mona Francesca vedova donna fu di Bernardo di Cambio); ASF Catasto 55, fol. 327r (Mona Sandra vedova gluola fu di Bartolomeo degli Agli da Firenze et donna fu d’Aççolino di Geri Bostichi); ASF Catasto 59, fol. 568r (Mona Çanobia donna che fu di Iachopo di Giovanni); ASF Catasto 63, fol. 15r (autograph aggiunta by ‘Monna Checha di Piero di Biagio da Monte Alcino’), fol. 648v (Monna Giovanna di Cristofano da Cholle).
CHAPTER TWO
THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM IN FLORENTINE TUSCANY Mass literacy, as illustrated by the Florentine Catasto of 1427, was the product of a highly developed education system and syllabus. The rst stage of the Italian school curriculum consisted of learning to read; this skill was always acquired through the medium of the Latin language. For pupils who continued to study Latin (grammar was a synonym for Latin), the next step was learning the parts of speech and memorizing the varying forms (morphology) of nouns, verbs, adjectives and participles (regarded, unlike today, as a separate element during antiquity, the middle ages and the Renaissance). Immediately after morphology, pupils were introduced to reading elementary Latin texts, and, at about the same time, they began learning how to write. The next stage for Latin pupils was studying syntax and learning how to write their own phrases, sentences and short compositions; this level was accompanied by reading more Latin texts. At the end of the Latin syllabus, pupils were composing their own letters and reading more advanced texts, including the classical authors. At this nal stage, Latin stylistics, taught by reference to simplied rhetorical treatises, were introduced.1 An alternative syllabus focused on elementary arithmetic, known as the abaco (abbaco), involving not the instrument for calculation now known as the abacus (by the turn of the thirteenth century, abacus was a synonym for arithmetic2), but rather consisting of a course, beginning with elementary arithmetic and culminating in basic commercial knowledge (such as the monetary system) and skills (occasionally for example, double-entry bookkeeping); the abacus was taught entirely in the vernacular, and always followed elementary reading.3 Often it 1
On the reading and grammar curriculum, see Black (2001); Rizzo (2002), pp. 125–217; Grendler (1989), pp. 107 ff; Gehl (1993). 2 Ulivi (1994), p. 33. 3 The leading active scholar of abacus schools is Elisabetta Ulivi. See Ulivi (1993) (1994) (1996) (1998) (2001) (2002a) (2002b) (2004a) (2004b) (2006a) (2006b). See also the important contributions of Warren Van Egmond: Van Egmond (1976) (1977) (1980) (1986). Useful summaries are provided in Franci (1988) (1992) (1993) (1996) (1998). The foundations for study in this eld were laid by Gino Arrighi; see Arrighi (2004) for a convenient anthology of his publications. The rst important article in English
44
chapter two
was an alternative to the Latin curriculum: pupils, having learnt how to read through the medium of Latin, immediately progressed to the vernacular abacus syllabus; many children never learned Latin as such, simply acquiring the skills of reading on the basis of Latin texts and thereafter either leaving formal education or passing to a vernacular abacus school.4 Sometimes, on the other hand, the abacus was learnt in addition to more advanced Latin learning, either before5 or after the study of grammar.6 Pupils normally learned how to write after getting the knack of elementary reading, sometimes while studying the abacus curriculum but before more advanced work in grammar (Latin).7 The Shape of the Curriculum Elementary reading The rst textbooks were usually called tabula or carta, salterium and donatus. Tabula or carta was a sheet of parchment or paper which began with the the alphabet and concluded with syllables to sound out; it was xed on a wooden board and took its name either from the parchment or paper (carta) or from the board (tabula).8 The next stage was reading words and phrases, accomplished on the basis of the salterium, which, in later medieval Italian education, rarely meant the psalter: psalms had been replaced by common prayers and devotional texts, a process which was completed by the fteenth century.9 The nal stages of elementary education in medieval and Renaissance Europe were presided over by Donatus. But it has long been recognized that in Italy during the high and late middle ages the principal textbook in elementary schools was not Aelius Donatus’s Ars minor (4th c. A.D.) but the manual spuriously attributed to Donatus which Sabbadini christened Ianua after the rst word of its verse prologue and which, as a parsing grammar focusing was Goldthwaite (1972–73), which offered a major discovery, besides containing a still useful account of the topic in general. Grendler (1989), pp. 306–19, provides an accessible introduction. 4 E.g. the sons of Antonio Rustici (see below Appendix 5 pp. 632–34) or Guarieri de’ Rossi (see below Appendix 5 pp. 695–705). 5 E.g. Niccolò Machiavelli: see Black (1996c). 6 E.g. Donato Velluti’s son Lamberto (see below ch. 4 p. 323) or Bartolomeo Valori (see below ch. 4 pp. 322–23). 7 See below pp. 56–58. 8 Lucchi (1978), p. 599; Grendler (1989), pp. 142–146. 9 See Black (2001), pp. 35 ff.
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
45
on morphology, dominated the Italian manuscript tradition and early printing.10 The techniques for learning to read were straightforward, if unfamiliar today. First, pupils mastered the names and sounds of the letters of the alphabet with the aid of an alphabet sheet (tabula or carta). Then the sounds of syllables were learned by reading already familiar prayers contained in the psalter. The nal reading skills were attained through a two-staged process. Elementary texts such as Ianua were rst read phonetically without understanding the contents. This was described in contemporary terminology as ‘per lo testo’, ‘a veduta’, ‘testualiter’ or ‘cum textu’. The purpose here was to gain the skill of sounding out the syllables on the page phonetically (compitare in contemporary terminology). The second stage consisted of reading with understanding and memory. Ianua was read again, but now the emphasis was on meaning and particularly on memory: the text was actually memorized at this level. Here the contemporary terminology was ‘per lo senno’, ‘cum sensu’, ‘sensualiter’ or ‘per l’insenno’.11 A curious fact in the history of Italian pre-university education during the thirteenth, fourteenth and fteenth centuries is that the vernacular was not used at what must seem—given widespread literacy in the vernacular—the most obvious point (at least to us) in the curriculum: the elementary stages of learning to read. It may have been educationally problematic, if not impossible, to teach basic reading technique in a language without xed orthography, such as the Italian volgare (vernacular) before the sixteenth century. Indeed, in the middle ages and early Renaissance, Latin was regarded as an articial, created, unchanging language, an ars (discipline) suitable for teaching, whereas the vulgar languages were considered changeable and unstable, regarded literally as forms of babble, learnt naturally but formally unteachable; only with the triumph of the humanist view of Latin as itself a natural, historically changing language in the sixteenth century did it become conceivable to teach fundamental language skills in the vernacular. It is important to remember the close association, even identication, of ars and teaching in the middle ages; Latin was teachable precisely because it was considered an articial language, whereas teaching the 10 Sabbadini (1896), pp. 35, 42–44; Schmitt (1969), pp. 43–80; Grendler (1989), pp. 174–182; Gehl (1993), pp. 82–106; Law (1986), pp. 138–141; Pinborg (1982), pp. 65–67; Black (2001), pp. 44 ff. 11 Black (2001), pp. 34–63.
46
chapter two
vernacular was inconceivable because it was natural, not articial, not an ars.12 The elementary curriculum was often extended to include a late ancient school text: Disticha Catonis. This syllabus—beginning with tabula / carta, progressing to salterium and culminating in Donatus and Cato—was considered distinct from Latin (in contemporary parlance, grammatica). Its purpose was generic reading skill, whereas the grammar syllabus was intended to teach Latin composition and introduce pupils to Latin literature. The division between elementary and grammar education was made clear by an Aretine document of 1396: Cum videatur et sit utile ac necessarium habere in civitate Aretii unum magistrum qui instruat pueros in primis litteris ac etiam doceat Donatum et Catonem et alios libros antequam inttroducantur ad gramaticam [. . .]13
This elementary curriculum remained untouched by humanist educators. Even a renowned humanist pedagogue such as Guarino Veronese relied heavily on Ianua in his school,14 and curriculum outlines throughout Italy (including, as will be seen below, Tuscany) conrm that the traditional syllabus of tabula / carta, salterium and Ianua remained omnipresent in Italy throughout the fteenth century.15 The only signicant change here had been the shortening Ianua’s text in the course of the later thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in order to accelerate the initial reading process, but this was a development antedating the arrival of humanist pedagogues in the fteenth century.16 Latin composition The secondary Latin curriculum in Italy was devoted, at the theoretical level, to learning to write in Latin (lactinare in contemporary terminology). In the earlier middle ages, Latin syntax had been taught by what foreign-language teachers now call ‘total immersion’. Latin was spoken exclusively in the classroom; the texts to be read were all in Latin. Eventually pupils began spontaneously to be able to write in Latin.
12
See Black (2001), pp. 41–44, 378 n. 35 for a more detailed discussion. ASA Provv. 3, fol. 105r. See Appendix 7 p. 737 for the entire text and the context. 14 Sabbadini (1896), pp. 45 ff. 15 For Italy, see Black (2001), p. 36 n. 14; for Tuscany, see below pp. 77–118 passim. 16 Black (2001), pp. 55 ff. 13
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
47
This approach was acceptable as long as pupils and parents were in no hurry to nish secondary education; it was a method admirably suited to monastic and ecclesiastical schools, with their leisurely pace and long duration, prevalent in the earlier middle ages. However, with the rise of the Italian communes in the eleventh and twelfth centuries came greater pressure for rapid literacy. The burgeoning lay professional classes needed Latin to be able to pursue careers as lawyers, notaries and physicians; merchants too needed Latin to be able to read simple legal and business documents; Latin was also necessary for the conduct of civic and public affairs. The pressure for rapid Latinity became even greater with the rise of the universities in the later twelfth and thirteenth centuries: Latin was a prerequisite for professional university courses in law and medicine.17 The possibility of teaching Latin syntax rapidly and methodically was offered by developments in linguistic theory and logic which took place in French schools, and particularly in Paris, during the twelfth century. A philosophical / scientic approach to language was responsible for the emergence of comprehensive theory of Latin composition.18 These concepts and methods rapidly found their way into school-level grammar textbooks, beginning with Alexander of Villedieu’s Doctrinale19 (1199) and Evrard of Béthune’s Graecismus 20 (c. 1210, before 1212), both widely circulated in Italy,21 and soon into indigenous Italian manuals, such as Pietro da Isolella da Cremona’s Summa (1252).22 A major development in teaching Latin composition was the use of the vernacular. To help with vocabulary building, Latin-vernacular wordlists were drawn up; the vernacular was used to explain the meaning of parts of speech; prose composition was taught by translating passages from the vernacular into Latin (so-called thematic composition). The introduction and ever increasing use of the vernacular to teach Latin was an achievement of fourteenth-century Italian grammar teachers, ever responsive to demands for increasing and ever more rapid literacy. Theoretical grammar books before the end of the thirteenth century had been entirely latinate works. But the second half of the thirteenth 17
Black (2001), pp. 64–69. See Black (2001), pp. 69–74. 19 Ed. Reichling (1893). 20 Ed. Wrobel (1887). 21 Black (2001), pp. 82–84. 22 Ed. (anonymously) by Fierville (1886); actual authorship discovered by Novati (1888), p. 72 n. 3. For its date and circulation, see Black (2001), p. 83, nn. 126–127. 18
48
chapter two
century of course saw the rst stages of the great burgeoning of the Italian vernacular—a development that had its effect on the teaching of formal Latin grammar at the secondary level.23 All these simplied terms and methods would become ubiquitous in Italian secondary grammars throughout the fourteenth and fteenth centuries, universally adopted by non-humanist and humanist teachers alike.24 Once again, fundamental change in Italian school education had been accomplished before the advent of the famous humanist pedagogues in the fteenth century. Latin literature The other major task of pre-university schools was teaching Latin literature. Here the syllabus had been divided since the twelfth century into two groups of authors: the auctores minores, a cycle of late-ancient pagan, early Christian and medieval texts (ranging from Disticha Catonis to poems by Prudentius, Theodulus and Henry of Settimello); and the auctores maiores, the Roman classics, mainly poetry (e.g. by Ovid, Lucan, Horace and Vergil) but also some prose texts (e.g. Sallust or Cicero).25 Probably in the thirteenth century, another important text was added to the canon: Boethius’s Consolation of Philosophy, a work normally seen to stand between the shorter texts by the minor authors and the longer Latin classics.26 From the thirteenth century, there were strenuous attempts to make this formidable literary curriculum ever more accessible to pupils. Teachers began to offer vernacular synonyms for Latin words in literary texts to explain their meaning to pupils. This technique, now surviving in interlinear and marginal glosses written by pupils and teachers in manuscript (and eventually printed) schoolbooks, marked the rst attempt to bring the vernacular into the Italian educational system, antedating its use as aid to teach theoretical grammar by as much as a century.27 The development of the theoretical grammar curriculum had offered little room for intervention by the Renaissance humanists; they did, however, ultimately make a greater contribution in the study of Latin literature, although even here it would be inappropriate to speak of a 23 24 25 26 27
Black Black Black Black Black
(2001), pp. 106 ff, 275–281. (2001), pp. 82–172. (2001), pp. 173–4. and Pomaro (2000). (2001), pp. 275–281.
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
49
‘revolution in the classroom’.28 The most radical change in the literary curriculum had already occurred between the twelfth and thirteenth century. Surviving manuscript schoolbooks from eleventh- and twelfthcentury Italian schools show that the Latin classics continued to be read widely in the classroom.29 However, with the thirteenth century, the same kind of evidence indicates that there was a marked decline in school-level reading of the Latin classics.30 This waning of the Roman pagan authors in the thirteenth century provoked a reaction by the turn of the fourteenth century: once again, in the fourteenth century, surviving manuscript school books demonstrate that the Latin classics were once again being read in the pre-university classroom.31 Fourteenth-century Italian schoolmasters deserve credit for restoring the traditional Roman school authors (Horace, Lucan, Ovid, Vergil) to the curriculum, as well as for introducing some new texts (such as Seneca’s Tragedies and Valerius Maximus).32 But here more room was left for humanist pedagogues to inuence the curriculum. Although the classics were already being read widely at the school level by the fteenth century, humanists did make some important adjustments to the literary syllabus: some texts previously at the centre of the literary curriculum were now moved to the sidelines (e.g. Horace’s Ars poetica, Lucan, Seneca’s Tragedies) whereas other authors previously little read (e.g. Terence, Juvenal, Persius) now assumed key positions. Most important here was the changed status of Cicero and Vergil. Cicero’s shorter moral treatises (De amicitia, De senectute, Paradoxa stoicorum, De ofciis and Somnium Scipionis) and Vergil had been read in the twelfth-century Italian classroom, but then dropped out of the syllabus during the thirteenth century. Now in the fteenth century, Cicero’s moral treatises and Vergil’s poetry became the most popular prose and verse classics in the Italian school curriculum.33 Another accomplishment of humanist pedagogues was the eventual elimination of the minor literary authors from schoolroom, although this occurred less rapidly than was once thought. Surviving fteenthcentury schoolbooks show that, throughout the rst half of the fteenth
28 29 30 31 32 33
Grendler (1989), pp. 140–41, 404. Black (2001), pp. 184–191; Black (2006), pp. 40–41, 57–70. Black (2001), pp. 192–198. Black (2001), pp. 204–18. Black (2001), pp. 200 ff. Black (2001), pp. 238–270.
50
chapter two
century, the non-classical minor authors remained dominant at the early stages of the literary school curriculum.34 Thereafter their position became increasingly tenuous, especially following the introduction of the printing press. Humanist editors occupied a central role in the production of schoolbooks, and so it is not entirely surprising to nd that the minor authors gured less and less in the syllabus beginning in the 1470s.35 Time-honoured theoretical grammar texts such as Ianua36 or Alexander’s Doctrinale 37 remained at the heart of the school curriculum in Italy during the age of the press, but traditional minor authors, not to mention Boethius’s Consolation, went into rapid decline in late fteenth-century Italy. Stylistics and rhetoric The Latin school curriculum in medieval and Renaissance Italy was not limited to elementary reading, Latin grammar and Latin literature. Towards the end of the syllabus, attention shifted to stylistics and rhetoric. At rst the dominant textbook was Geoffrey of Vinsauf ’s Poetria nova (1208–1213). Poetria nova’s treatment of style begins with the distinction between natural and articial word order: the former meant the logical order of the natural world (e.g. actor or subject coming before action or verb), as found in the vernacular languages; the latter signied the artful manipulation of word order to achieve literary effect. Although natural word order might have been thought appropriate for purely grammatical study, it was now considered sterile, and the articial approach was regarded as more felicitous. It is clear from Geoffrey’s text that the work at this new, rhetorical / stylistic level of school education involved kinds of exercises similar to the those already encountered at the earlier secondary grammatical stage. Again the key term here is the theme, but this now became the grammatically correct but plain Latin passage to which the pupil had to apply his art; the theme was given in natural Latin order and wording, and it had to be rendered elegant and articial.38
34 35 36 37 38
Black (2001), pp. 225–238. Black (2001), pp. 270–273. Grendler (1989), pp. 413–416. Black (2001), pp. 153–159. Black (2001), pp. 342–349.
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
51
The concept of artical order played a central role in Italian humanist schools too. For example, in Niccolò Perotti’s best-selling Rudimenta grammatices (1468), it is difcult not to be struck by the resemblance between Geoffrey’s discussion of variation in word order to achieve greater elegance and the treatment in Perotti’s epistolography. Just as in Poetria nova, in fact, much of Perotti’s epistolography consists of listing alternative and more elegant ways of phrasing simple Latin statements.39 Similarly, Agostino Dati’s Elegantiolae (1470)40—a work perhaps even more popular than Perotti’s Rudimenta—have a striking overall resemblance to Geoffrey of Vinsauf ’s Poetria nova. Both texts are preoccupied with teaching stylistic elegance. Like Geoffrey with his distinction between natural and articial style, Dati begins by contrasting grammatical and eloquent style. Both start where grammar leaves off: Geoffrey’s point of departure is natural style, whereas Dati’s is the terminology for the parts of the sentence developed by contemporary (medieval) grammarians. Just as the purpose of Geoffrey’s work was to convert natural into articial style, so Dati’s aim was to turn the inelegant language of contemporary grammarians into eloquent prose. Geoffrey, as has been seen, made continual reference to natural and articial language, and Dati too distinguished throughout between grammatical and rhetorical standards. Geoffrey had written from the point of view of the stylist, scofng at the inelegance of so-called natural Latin, and Dati too ridiculed grammatical style, not only calling it, as has already been seen, trite and vulgar, but also referring to the ignorance of grammarians. Moreover, like Geoffrey, Dati began his treatment with word order, suggesting, as in Poetria nova, that it was more elegant to abandon the natural sequence of subject-verb-predicate. As in Poetria nova, variety is paramount, not only in phrases but also in individual words.41 This perspective on the levels of discourse inherited from the middle ages has consequences for evaluating the impact of humanist education at the rhetorical level in Renaissance Italy. Again the impact of humanist educators in Italy was in fact more limited than was once believed. It was universally assumed that language acquisition was a two-staged 39
Black (2001), p. 357 and nn. 143–44. Actually called Isagogicus libellus in the rst edition (Cologne, Ulrich Zell, 1470) and in a second edition (Ferrara, André Belfort, 1471). 41 Black (2001), pp. 360–361. 40
52
chapter two
process, in which the pupil had rst to master natural before proceeding to articial order. The result was that humanist educators in Italy followed traditional methods in the earlier stages of Latin education. It has been seen that associated with natural order was a whole apparatus of methods for learning syntax. This system had been developed as a simple method of teaching Latin syntax to non-native Latin speakers. Hardly any Italian educators of the fteenth century attempted to tamper with this eminently pragmatic system: a few purists may have been repelled by this unclassical approach, but almost every Italian grammar teacher ended up employing the educational practices inherited from the middle ages for teaching natural order.42 It was another matter with articial order. Humanists saw themselves as the successors of Cicero, whose own discipline was not grammar but rhetoric. They may not have known how to replace medieval grammar in the educational syllabus but no such problem existed with rhetoric. The ancient Romans left a series of pragmatic rhetorical textbooks which provided the possibility for radical reform of rhetoric in a way that was lacking in the discipline of grammar. Moreover, just as Geoffrey of Vinsauf had provided a quick route to eloquence and elegance according to medieval standards, so now Niccolò Perotti and Agostino Dati provided a comparable shortcut to Ciceronian prose in the later Quattrocento. The place in the syllabus occupied by simple handbooks of eloquence was the same as in the middle ages, but the contents were different. Ciceronianism replaced Geoffrey of Vinsauf ’s articial system of stylistics. At the grammatical level, Italian Renaissance education might have been ‘old wine in new bottles’, but at the upper stages of school learning, when the preoccupation was more rhetorical than grammatical, it was doubtless ‘new wine in old bottles’.43 Abacus There are numerous literary products associated with the abacus curriculum, known as Libri di abaco (abacus books), of which about three hundred survive.44 Unlike psalters and copies of Ianua, however, these abacus books were not school textbooks: in more than 100 inventories of books owned by orphans in Florentine Tuscany from the period 1471
42 43 44
Black (2001), ch. 3. Black (2001), pp. 357–365. See Van Egmond (1980).
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
53
to 1500, numerous salteri da fanciulli / salteruzzi 45 and especially donadelli 46 (as school psalters and copies of Ianua were known) are indicated, but few libri di abaco.47 Knowledge of what was actually taught in abacus schools comes primarily from two documents: a curriculum outline written in the earlier fteenth century by a Pisan teacher, Cristofano di Gherardo di Dino (b. 1398)48 and placed at the beginning of his Libro d’anbaco49 and a contract entered into by a Florentine abacus teacher, Francesco Galigai and his assistant, Giuliano di Buonaguida in 1519.50 The course was divided into levels called mute. The rst was devoted to multiplication and to learning the multiplication tables (called librettine). The succeeding mute were dedicated to division (known as partire). The next muta concerned fractions (called rotti). In Galigai’s school, the so-called rule of three (regola delle tre cose) came next; this involved nding an unknown fourth quantity when three other quantities are known, in terms of simple proportion or on the basis of the principle that the product of the means equals the product of the extremes. The seventh and last muta in Galigai’s course concerned the Florentine monetary system. In Cristofano’s syllabus, on the other hand, there was greater emphasis on the commercial applications of
45
Verde (1987), pp. 62, 66, 69, 70, 79 (2 copies), 81, 85, 96, 112, 171. Bec (1984) gives the following numbers of salteri for the period from 1413 to 1471: pp. 152, 154, 158, 159 (2 copies), 161 (2 copies), 161, 168 (3 copies), 170 (2 copies), 182. However, it is to be noted that Bec’s research is not entirely reliable. Armando Verde was transcribing the same material from the registers of the Magistrato dei Pupilli, when Bec (1984) was published; see his comments in Verde (1987), p. 8: ‘Il libro del Bec ha suscitato, tuttavia, forti dubbi sull’attendibilità dei documenti pubblicati perché questi non soltanto non sono riprodotti integralmente, cioè con tutti gli elenchi contenuti negli originali, ma risultano anche seriamente compromessi da una moltitudine di omissioni, deformazioni ed errori riguardanti parole o interi righi’. Nevertheless, Bec’s ndings, albeit unsatisfactory and incomplete, do ll out Verde’s more reliable research from the same archival series. 46 Verde (1987), pp. 44, 45 (2 copies), 62, 67, 79 (2 copies), 81, 85 (2 copies), 87, 90, 93, 96, 100, 101, 148, 163 (8 copies), 171 (2 copies), 174. For donadelli in the period from 1413 to 1471, see Bec (1984), p. 151 (3 copies), 152 (4 copies), 153 (6 copies), 154 (2 copies), 155 (2 copies), 158 (2 copies), 159, 161 (2 copies), 162, 163, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177 (2 copies), 183 (3 copies), 184, 185, 187. 47 Verde (1987), pp. 56, 69, 70, 79, 146, 149. There are no libri di abaco in the inventories published by Bec (1984) for the period 1413–1471. In view of the large numbers of Florentine boys who attended abacus schools (see below ch. 5 pp. 446–66), this small number of libri di abaco indicates that these theoretical treatments were not used directly by pupils. 48 Casini (1964), p. 99. 49 Published by Arrighi (1965–67). See Ulivi (2000), pp. 107–109. 50 Published by Goldthwaite (1972–73). See Ulivi (2000), pp. 107–108.
54
chapter two
arithmetic skills at the end of the syllabus: interest, discount, quantities of gold and silver in currency, land measurement. The teaching method used consisted of memorizing rules (regole) and applying them to problems (ragioni).51 A notable feature in both these syllabuses is that there was no level devoted to addition or subtraction; similarly abacus manuscripts usually leave out these fundamental operations.52 It is possible to speculate that these skills were learned in elementary reading schools, although no documentary evidence has emerged to support this hypothesis. Sometimes abacus teachers also taught elementary reading. For example in Colle Valdelsa on 21 April 1364, it was stated: ‘Cum pueri de Colle devientur et nichil discant, provisum est per oftium priorum dicte terre quod Magister Iohannes Naldi de Abaco eligatur [. . .] in magistrum ad docendum legere pueros ac etiam artem arismetrice’.53 On 13 November 1366 the commune elected ‘Magistrum Iohannem Naldi de Colle magistrum del abbacho in magistrum [. . .] ad docendum pueros legere et eos in arte arismetrice instruere’.54 There are similar examples from Arezzo on 22 May 1471 and 11 November 1507.55 However, when reference is made to the textbooks used by these abacus / elementary reading teachers, it is to the standard Latin reading text, carta / tabula, salterium and Donatus: e.g. on 19 March 1420, Pistoia provided for the ‘electio [. . .] Ser Federigi [. . .] qui docet pueros legere tabulam, salterium et donatum ac etiam abbacum’,56 while in Arezzo a teacher was appointed on 11 November 1507 ‘obligandosi insegnare la carta, il salterio ai fanciulli ve andranno, et l’abocho’.57 Even in vernacular abacus schools, elementary reading was taught in Latin and on the basis of Latin texts. Writing Reading, grammar and abacus are well documented phases of education in Italy from the thirteenth to the fteenth centuries, but little has been known hitherto about learning to write. In 1982, Piero Lucchi
51 52 53 54 55 56 57
Van Egmond (1976), p. 130. Van Egmond (1976), p. 127. ASS Colle 105, fol. xlv verso. ASS Colle 107, fol. liii recto. Black (1996a), pp. 564, 749. Zanelli (1900), p. 38 n. 2. Black (1996a), p. 749.
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
55
published a text from a Genoese notarial cartulary with the date March 1311, in which an apparent pupil wrote the following sentence four times: ‘Pero Pumoso de Zoane a fatto cosse inver lo maistro de le quae elo se pentirà’. Lucchi regarded this as a writing exercise in the vernacular, handed out as a less violent punishment than the usual corporal variety,58 but this interpretation is uncertain, especially in view of the grammatical construction in the sentence: if the sentence were translated into Latin, it would involve use of the the impersonal verb ‘p[a]enitet’. The sentence looks more like deriving from an exercise in the translation of an active verb in the vernacular into an impersonal construction in Latin: a favoured topic in translation exercises intended to provide practice in Latin syntax (themata).59 The fact that the sentence was repeated only four times suggests probationes pennae rather than punishment or indeed a writing exercise. The document can perhaps be interpreted more suggestively as associated with the teaching of Latin composition rather than of writing.60 There is no doubt, however, that the vernacular exercises published by Paolo Cherubini in 199661 were connected with learning to write. These consist of ve fragments, including alphabets, simple Latin prayers and standard phrases (‘[. . .] de’ dare’ [. . .], ‘[. . .] de’ avere [. . .]’) from account books; the date 1481 and the locality Foligno are mentioned. Numerous repetitions of the same sentences, phrases and characters indicate that the principal concern was the teaching of writing: one of the alphabet exercises is repeated 13 times, another 17 times, a third 18 times, a fourth 7 times; the two prayers are repeated 16 times each; two of the accounting formulas are repeated 6 times, while the third is repeated 9 times. Because of the inclusion of accounting extracts, Cherubini suggests that the exercises came from an abacus school. This interpretation is supported by gures he summarizes62 on the basis of the educational
58
Lucchi (1982), pp. 106–7. See e.g. Black (1996b), pp. 730, 732, 734–736, 739. 60 Similarly, the other sentence written by ‘Pero’ (cited by Lucchi [1982], p. 107 n. 17) also has the appearance of a syntactical exercise in translation, in view of its reference to a [school] ‘compagno’, its articial sense and its contorted construction. The ‘sgrammatico’ latinum, referring to beatings by the teacher (‘verbera magistri’), is obviously a translation exercise; without the text, it is hard to judge the ctitious letter, but epistolography with the translation of an entire letter from the vernacular into Latin was the ultimate goal of secondary Latin syntactical study. On this evidence and its meaning, see also De Blasi (1993), p. 385. 61 Cherubini (1996). 62 Cherubini (1996), p. 237. 59
56
chapter two
extracts published by Verde from the Florentine 1480 Catasto.63 These indicate that the age of learning to read preceded that of learning the abacus and writing; the latter two skills appear to have been learned at approximately the same age.64 This interpretation is conrmed by a similar table based on Florentine pupils in pre-university education, as revealed by the Florentine Catasto of 1427.65 Again, learning to read is concentrated before the abacus, which seems to have been roughly concurrent with learning to write. All this evidence suggests that, for pupils embarking into the educational stream where reading was followed by abacus, the teaching of writing took place after elementary reading and at the same time as the abacus. For pupils progressing to grammar (Latin) education, curriculum outlines conrm that writing was learnt after elementary reading (tabula / carta, salterium),66 often simultaneously with the donadello or sometimes immediately thereafter; it was always taught before Latin composition (lactinare): Florence (1313): Bettus q. Feduccii dicti pop. promisit . . . Salimbeni Salti pop. S. Mauri, docere . . . Iohannem l. dicti Salimbenis legere et scribere, ita et taliter quod . . . sciat . . . legere[,] et scribere omnes licteras et rationes . . . et quod . . . sit sufciens ad standum in apotecis articis . . .67 Colle Valdelsa (1352): qui magister sic eligendus ultra salarium percipiendum a dicto comuni habeat [. . .] nomine salarii quolibet anno a pueris et scolaribus qui morabuntur cum eo infrascriptas quantitates pecunie, videlicet a scolaribus facientibus latinum maius dimidium orenum, a facientibus latinum mediocre solidos XX, et a facientibus latinum minus solidos XV, ab aliis legentibus donatum libricciolum vel cartam vel scribentibus pro quolibet solidos XII in anno.68
63
Verde (1973–2005), II, pp. 1003–1202. For the table (slightly modied), see chapter 5 pp. 462–63 below. 65 Based on Appendix 1 below. See chapter 5 p. 447 for the table. 66 De Blasi (1993), p. 93: ‘la scrittura [. . .] era insegnata dopo la lettura’. De Blasi (p. 386) gives a perceptive and suggestive analysis of how the phonetic technique of learning to read had an impact on the orthography of unskilled writers, citing the case of one Ghezzo Senese in 1314, whose spelling actually appears to have derived from his crude attempts to sound out (‘compitare’) words. 67 Debenedetti (1906–7), p. 346. The text below from Fucecchio (1484) suggests that a comma should be inserted after the second occurrence of ‘legere’. The terms ‘lettere’, ‘licterae’, ‘litterae’ etc. are normally associated with writing, not reading. The text makes better sense with that punctuation: in order to work in a bottega, the pupil needs to be able to read, and to write all characters and gures; it is unclear what it would mean to read characters and gures. 68 ASS Colle 94, fol. li recto. 64
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
57
Pistoia (1353): pro docendo pueros et adolescentes legere et scribere gramaticam et dictamen et auctores [. . .]69 S. Gimignano (1359): quod ipse Ser Dore [Ser Iohannis de S. Giminiano] doceat [. . .] omnes et singulos pueros ab eo audire et discere volentes legere, videlicet tabulam psalterium donatum, et licteras et scribere pro salario a dictis pueris eidem quolibet mense solvendo, videlicet, ab illis qui legent tabulam et psalterium S. duorum sp. pro quolibet eorum, et ab illis qui legent Donatum, vel licteras et scribere S. duorum et den.sex pro quolibet et quolibet mense.70 Poggibonsi (1373): possit accipere salaria infrascripta, videlicet: pro carta S. II pro mense; pro salterio S. tres pro mense; pro Donato S. quatuor pro mense; pro gramatica S. quinque pro mense; pro hiis qui legunt et scribunt S. quatuor pro mense et non ultra pro quolibet.71 Pescia (1388): Magister Niccholaus Dominici de Decimo comitatus Lucani [. . .] intelligatur electus in magistrum et doctorem puerorum et adoloscentium de Piscia ad docendum legere et scribere ac gramaticam.72 Sansepolcro (1394): Magister Honofrius [de Piro] accipere possit et sibi liceat a quolibet scolari [sic] latinante, habitanti familiariter in dicto burgo, tres bononenos de argento mense quolibet; et a minoribus non latinantibus unum bononenum de argento quolibet mense; et a volente adiscere scribere etiam unum bononenum pro quolibet et quolibet mense.73 Prato (1410): ad docendum pueros hominum dicte tere Prati videlicet eis tabulam salterium donadellum et legere libros et scripturas et scribere.74 Buggiano (1417): magister eligendus ad docendum scientiam habeat pro suo salario, si docet gramaticam, L. quinquaginta secundum formam statutorum, et si docet legere et scribere, habeat L. triginta, et si docet solum legere, habeat L. vigintiquinque.75 Bibbiena (1423): sia condocto uno buono et sofciente maestro di gramatica, il quale continuamente debba habitare a Bibiena et insegniare leggiere, scrivere et gramatica.76 Ripomarance (1476): maestro della schuola debba tenere publicamente la scuola et insegniare leggiere et scrivere et gramaticha.77
69
ASPistoia Provv. 11, fol. 17r. ACSG 123 fol. lxxviiii verso–lxxx recto. 71 ASS Poggibonsi 81, fol. 50v. 72 ASPescia Delib. 10, fol. 163r. 73 ACSS serie II vol. 1, fol. 79v. See below Appendix 8 for the entire text and context. 74 ASPrato CD 82, fol. 41v. 75 ACB 12, fol. 161r. 76 ASF SCS 80, fol. 26v. 77 ASF SCS 718, fol. 38r. 70
58
chapter two Pistoia (1483): ad habendum tres preceptores in civitate Pistorii qui doceant legere scribere grammaticam et poesim pueros et iuvenes [. . .]78 Fucecchio (1484): habeat [. . .] a quolibet puero pro quolibet mense infrascriptum salarium per la tavola S. 2, pel saltero S. 3, per le lettere a scrivere S. 4, el Donadello latini et regole S. 5, regole maggiori S. 8.79 Pescia (1484): Magister Franciscus de Villafranca habitator Camaioris [. . .] sit electus magister scolarum comunis Piscie [. . .] ad docendum pueros legere, scribere et grammaticam. Pistoia (1487): Maestro Giovanphilippo di Maestro Simone [. . .] s’intenda essere conducto a insegnare leggere, scrivere et grammatica.80 Pistoia (1488): Prete Antonio da Castilione di Lunigiana [. . .] s’intenda et sia conducto a insegnare leggere et scrivere et latinare.81
Writing was taught by specialist elementary teachers (often called doctores puerorum),82 abacus teachers83 or grammar teachers;84 on one occasion
78
ASPistoia Provv. 46, fol. 36v–37r. ACF 197, fol. 290v. 80 ASPescia Delib. 38, fol. 53r. ASPistoia Provv. 48, fol. 139v. 81 ASPistoia Provv. 48, fol. 172v. 82 Fucecchio 1319 19 April, 1326 30 June, 1481 (ACF 25 NN, 30 NN, 48 fol. 181v); Florence 1427 (ASF Catasto 17, fol. 341r (see Appendix 1), 1456 (ASF Arte della lana 201, fol. 237r; Colle Valdelsa 1359–60 (ASS Colle 101, fol. xli verso); S. Croce sull’Arno 1390 (ACSC 2, 141r); Volterra 1370 (ACV A nera 21 IV, fol. 5r); Prato 1358 (ASPrato CD 64 parte 8, fol. 32r; 883 parte 7, fol. 3r), 1362 (ASPrato CD 65 parte 4, fol. 3v), 1366 (ASPrato CD 66 parte 1, fol. 32v), 1409–1411 (ASPrato CD 82, fol. 27r, 41v; 83 fol. 38v–39r), 1413 (ASPrato CD 84, fol. 52v–53r); S. Miniato 1371 (ACSM Delib. 2293 fol. 81r), 1378 (ACSM Delib. 2298, fol. 16r), 1379 (ACSM Delib. 2300, fol. 46r); Pistoia 1474 (ASPistoia Provv. 43, fol. 174r–v), 1476 (ASPistoia Provv. 43, fol. 439r–440r; 44, fol. 23r), 1483 (ASPistoia Provv. 47, fol. 30r); S. Gimignano 1359–1361 (ACSG 123, fol. lxxvi recto, lxxviiii verso–lxxx recto). 83 Volterra 1331 (ACV A nera 11, fol. 15v); Colle 1370–71 (ASS Colle 110 fol. 82v), 1373 (ASS Colle 116, fol. 6v); Prato 1362–63 (ASPrato CD 65 parte 4, fol. 3v), 1365 (ASPrato CD 65 parte 10, fol. 4v), 1366–1368 (ASPrato CD 66 parte 2, fol. 10r; parte 4 fol. 3v; parte 6 fol. 19v; parte 7, fol. 42v; parte 8, fol. 39r), 1373–1375 (ASPrato CD 67 parte 11, fol. 7; parte 9, fol. 12r), 1377–78 (ASPrato CD 67 parte 5, fol. 14v), 1481 (ASPrato CD 102, fol. 382v); Pistoia 1461 (ASPistoia Provv. 41, fol. 239r–v). 84 Fucecchio 1318 31 October (ACF 25 NN), 1484 (ACF 197, fol. 290v), 1491(ASF Comune di Fucecchio Reformationes a. 1488–1496 [not yet catalogued], fol. 96v); Buggiano 1385–88 (ACB 9, fol. 205r, 236r, 274v–275r, 331r); Pistoia 1353 (ASPistoia Provv. 11, fol. 17r), 1472 (ASPistoia Provv. 43, fol. 211r–v), 1487 (ASPistoia Provv. 48, fol. 139v), 1488 (ASPistoia Provv. 48, fol. 172v), 1493 (ASPistoia Provv. 50, fol. 30v); Pescia 1388 (ASPescia Delib. 10, fol. 163r), 1391 (ASPescia Delib. 11, fol. 171v), 1484 (ASPescia Delib. 38, fol. 39r); Bibbiena 1423 (ASF SCS 80, fol. 26v); Ripomarance 1476 (ASF SCS 718, fol. 38r); Volterra 1391 (ACV A nera 24, fol. 271v), 1398 (ACV A nera 24, fol. 428v); Poggibonsi 1373 (ASS Poggibonsi 81, fol. 50v); Prato 1372–73 (ASPrato CD 67 parte 13, fol. 26r), 1374–75 (ASPrato CD 67 parte 9, fol. 12r), 1380 (ASPrato CD 78, fol. 118r), 1383 (ASPrato CD 79, fol. 322v); Sansepolcro 1394 (ACSS ser. II, 1, fol. 79v); Colle Valdelsa 1352 (ASS Colle 94, fol. li recto); S. Gimignano 1372 (ACSG 131, fol. cxi verso–cxiiii verso, xcv recto-verso), 1379 (ACSG 136, fol. 34v–36r). 79
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
59
the writing teacher also taught grammar and abacus.85 There are rare instances of specialist writing teachers: Joachim Riß aus Rothenburg (Maestro Giovacchino di Giovanni d’altro Giovanni, Giovacchinus de Gigantibus de Rotenburga), later a famous illuminator,86 was appointed by the Ufciali dello Studio to teach writing in Florence for the academic year 1444–45;87 he was reappointed, probably for the same purpose, in 1451.88 A specialist writing teacher was also mentioned in Pescia in 1497.89 Whoever the teacher in charge, however, the preceding evidence suggests that reading and writing were not taught simultaneously, and that writing followed elementary reading, was roughly concurrent with the abacus90 and / or donatus and preceded Latin composition. The vocabulary for learning to write was idiosyncratic. The key word was littere—lictere—lettere. This is made clear by the ricordi of Tribaldo de’ Fucecchio 1327 26 July (ACF 50 NN: Coram vobis [. . .] pro parte Magistri Iohannis artis gramatice et abbaci [. . .] civitatis Pistorii [. . .] pro parte Ser Iohannis notarii et magistri artismetice sive albaci [. . .] civitatis Pistorii et parte Guelfe, exponitur quod ipse paratus est manere Fucecchii tamquam terr(igin)a guelfa et docere pueros et quoscumque volentes predictam scientiam adiscere et doctrinam scribendi et legendi, tamquam delis et devotus vester tam ratione sanguinitatis quam amore partis prefate que domini vigeat in onore dei, suplicat vobis humiliter ac etiam reverenter quatenus vobis placeat et velitis tenere consilium et in eo facere solempniter reformari quod camerarius comunis de pecunia et avere comunis possit et debeat dare et solvere pro pensione domus quam habitaverit illam pecunie quantitatem que ipso conpsilio videbitur et placuerit, pro docendo et instruendo pueros et alios quoscumque de scientia prelibata, et relevare ipsum ab honeribus. 86 See now Böninger (2006), pp. 286–291. 87 Park (1980), p. 302. 88 Gherardi (1881), pp. 460, 462. He is referred to as ‘magister scolarum’ in an archival document from autumn 1452: Böninger (2006), p. 287. 89 ASPescia Delib. 39, fol. 264r: Item ut supra, obtinuerunt quod Ser Antonius Michaelis Cialdini notarius de Piscia capiat mansionem et stantiam in palatio d. Priorum quam ve[l]let pro retinendis pueris, et similiter magister [. . .] qui docet pueros ad scribendum capiet mansionem et locum in dicto palatio quem ve[l]let. 90 Pupils could learn to write remarkably late. For example, Matteo di Matteo Strozzi, had evidently already learnt to read and been through abacus school, when, at the age of 15 in 1447, he was learning to write, as recorded by Alessandra Macinghi Strozzi: ‘non può esser preso per le gravezze insino a sedici anni ed egli ebbe undici di marzo. Hollo levato dall’abbaco, e appara a scrivere; e porrolo al banco, che vi starà questo verno’. Strozzi (1987), p. 63. Matteo was still not an experienced and uent writer at the age of sixteen, more than a year later, as Alessandra wrote to her son Filippo in 1448: ‘fo iscriverti a Matteo; e si perchè s’avvezzi a dettare un poco le lettere; ché quando iscrive adagio, e che ponga il capo a quello ha fare, iscrive bene: e così dice Antonio Strozzi, e Marco (che ho mostro loro de’ fogli ch’ egli scrive), che ha buona forma di lettera: quando iscrive ratto, diresti che non fussi di suo’ mano; e tal differenza è da l’una a l’altra, quanto il bianco dal nero: e no gli posso tanto dire, che voglia iscrivere adagio.’ Strozzi (1987), p. 66. 85
60
chapter two
Rossi, describing the beginnings of his son Guarieri’s writing instruction in the spring and summer of 1493. Guarieri had already learned to read Ianua (donadello) phonetically (a veduta, al testo): A dì 17 d’aprile 1493 fe’ lasciare el donadelo a Ghuarieri. Aveva lo imparato a veduta.
Now his father wanted him to learn to write, and so he had his son put aside the donadello and begin to learn writing: here, peculiarly, the phrase he used as a synonym for ‘[g]li inparasi le lettere e schrivere’ was leggere le lettere: Voli inparasi le lettere e schrivere; però lo fe’ abandonare el donadelo e detto [dì] chominciò legier le lettere, nel nome di dio.
The educational activity now was centred on writing, since Tribaldo now bought his son his rst pen and inkpot in order to learn how to write soon after the lessons began: choperai lo penaiuolo e’l chalamaio a Ghuarieri, el primo per chominciare a ‘nparare a scrivere. Chostò S. 4. D. 4.91
It seems that the phrase leggere e scrivere could actually mean just writing. Tribaldo de’ Rossi entitled one paragraph of his ricordanza ‘A scrivere di nuovo mando Guerieri’, but the ensuing text referred to imparare a leggere e scrivere, and, since Guarieri had already learned to read the tavola, salterio and donadello al testo, the activity that this phrase described was not learning to read but learning to write: A scrivere di nuovo mando Ghuerieri: [. . .] lo rimando anchora a la schuola a ‘nparare a legiere e scrivere.92
Reading was taught rst by sounding out letters and then syllables (tabula / carta), and then whole words, and apparently the same technique was used to teach writing. This ‘building-block’ approach is described by Alberti in De pictura: Voglio che i giovani, quali ora nuovi si danno a dipingere, così facciano quanto veggo di chi impara a scrivere. Questi in prima separato insegnano tutte le forme delle lettere, quali gli antiqui chiamano elementi; poi insegnano le silabe; poi apresso insegnano comporre tutte le dizione.93
91 92 93
BNCF II.ii.357, fol. 99r. See Appendix 5 below for the full text and context. BNCF II.ii.357, fol. 99r. See Appendix 5 below for the full text and context. Alberti (1960–73), III, p. 94, cited by Avesani (2001), p. 4.
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
61
The School Curriculum in Florentine Tuscany Outside Florence Prato The rst specic information on the school curriculum in what would eventually become Florentine Tuscany is found at Prato in 1248, when Giustamonte del fu Messer Torigno entered into a contract with a private teacher, the notary Bernardo del fu Benvenuto di Piacito, to provide elementary instruction for his brother Bandeluccio. He was to teach him to read the psalter and Donatus, as well as to read (and understand) public documents and the dating system; he was also to learn both to copy and compose private contracts (‘pactiones’): In dei nomine amen. MCCXLVIII VIIII d(ie) martii indictione VIIa. Actum Prati ante domum Domini Bernardi Angiorini, presentibus Benvenuto qui vocatur alionde Gamba Grossa, Parlerio quondam Diotaviti et Pratese lio Aldobrandini testibus rogatis. Giustamonte quondam Domini Toringni posuit Bandelluccium fratrem eius cum Bernardo notario lio quondam Benvenuti Piaciti, cui Bandellucio dictus Bernardus promisit et convenit docere ipsum legere salterium totum et Donatum et calendarium et cartas publicas et annos domini, ita quod ipse sciat et scribere et componere pactiones bene [et] condecenter et dictus Giustamonte promisit et convenit dicto Bernardo pro dicta doctrina solvere et dare XII soldos pisane monete in hunc modum, scilicet VI soldos in contantis et alios VI soldos in ne ipsius doctrine, et ita facere et curare quod dictus Bandeluccius cum eo morabitur ad dictam doctrinam, que omnia una pars alteri parti adinvicem actendere facere et observare promiserunt et convenerunt inter se [. . .]94
The contract reveals that the elementary Italian reading curriculum (salterium, Donatus) was already well in place in Tuscany during the thirteenth century. It also highlights the latinate world in which businessmen and merchants were still operating during the thirteenth century: there is no hint of reading and writing skills transferable to vernacular texts, as would occur in the fourteenth century, when abacus teaching became increasingly disseminated in Tuscany. After reading and grammar teaching began to gain public subsidies at Prato beginning in the late thirteenth century, there is no further documentation of the curriculum until 1336, when two grammar
94 ASPrato Spediali della Misericordia e Dolce 2596, fol. 41v. The contract was discovered and partially published by R. Frantappiè in Storia di Prato (1981), I, p. 279 n. 79.
62
chapter two
masters were appointed: Ser Duccio di Amadore da Prato and the renowned teacher of Petrarch, Maestro Convenevole del fu Ser Acconcio da Prato. Duccio was in charge of Latin composition, divided into two classes, latinum minus and latinum maius; in addition to his communal salary, he was allowed to make charges to his pupils: dictus Ser Duccius pro quolibet qui fecerit latinum minus S. XXV. Item qui fecerit latinum maius S. triginta et pro quolibet dormiente in nocte S. XL pro quolibet et quolibet anno.95
Latinum minus and maius were two common divisions of the secondary theoretical grammar syllabus, found for example in the grammar curriculum of Francesco da Buti; the former rst focused on the syntax of verbs, while the latter ended with syntactical properties of conjunctions and gures of construction.96 Convenevole was in charge of the upper echelons of the Latin curriculum; here he lectured on the pseudo-Ciceronian Rhetorica ad Herennium: dicto Magistro Conveonevoli pro salario lecture nove Tullii pro quolibet orenum auri unum et non ultra.97
The Ad Herennium was normally a rhetorical, not a grammatical textbook, and indeed there was some ambiguity about Convenevole’s appointment; generically the two masters were conated as grammarians, but then the document goes on to describe Convenevole as teaching rhetoric: Qui quidem domini octo defensores populi et vexillifer iustitie [. . .] eligerunt infrascriptos sapientissimos viros in doctores et magistros gramatice, videlicet Magistrum Convonevolem quondam Ser Acchoncii de Prato in magistrum et doctorem in terra Prati in retoricha et Magistrum Duccium quondam ________ [spatium] de Prato in doctorem magistrum gramatice in terra Prati.98
Petrarch himself had learned the entire reading and Latin curriculum, including rhetoric, from Convenevole,99 but now, in view of the reputation he had achieved at the end of his teaching career and life, 95 ASPrato CD 77 (formerly 293), fol. 11r. Previously published (inaccurately) by Giani (1913), p. 78. 96 See Black (2001), pp. 100–101 and below pp. 88–89. 97 ASPrato CD 77 (formerly 293), fol. 11r. Previously published (inaccurately) by Giani (1913), p. 78. 98 ASPrato CD 77 (formerly 293), fol. 11r. Previously published (inaccurately) by Giani (1913), p. 78. 99 Debenedetti (1906–7), p. 328.
the school curriculum in florentine tuscany
63
and particularly given the specic text that he was teaching in Prato, it seems likely that Convenevole was appointed primarily as a rhetorician rather than a grammarian. The rst indication at Prato of medieval and classical literary manuals and authors in the grammar syllabus comes from the generation after Convenevole. Maestro Spigliato di Cenne da Firenze taught grammar in Prato from 1359 to 1364 and again from 1382 to 1384;100 he had been teaching grammar in his native city of Florence up to 1382101 and he returned there in 1388, when he was appointed to teach grammar for a year by the Ufciali dello Studio.102 Two manuscript schoolbooks are associated with Spigliato’s teaching: One is a copy of Geoffrey of Vinsauf ’s Poetria nova (BRF 874), datable to the third quarter of the fourteenth century, with the following ownership note (fol. 39v): Iste liber est Antonii Arnaldi morantis in scholis Magistri Spiliati. Amen.
The words ‘Arnaldi’ and ‘Spigliati’ are written over earlier words; what the former covers is illegible, but the latter is superimposed over ‘ghinensis’, suggesting that a teacher before Spigliato had come from Figline. Given that the manuscript was produced while Spigliato was active as a teacher, it is possible that the contemporaneous marginal commentary (up to fol. 26v) could have had connections with his teaching. The book was associated with school-level use, in view of its occasional simple interlinear glosses and puerile drawing of a crenellated tower (fol. 37v). The fact that the manuscript was used in Spigliato school’s illustrates the role of Poetria nova in teaching Latin stylistics at the end of the grammar syllabus (see above pp. 50–51). The other schoolbook associated with Spigliato’s teaching is a copy of Horace’s Ars poetica and Epistulae (BAV Vat. lat. 2774). The manuscript is datable to the very end of the thirteenth century,103 and it carries the following ownership notes (fol. 35v):
100
See Appendix 4. ASPrato CD 78, fol. 214v: ‘Spigliatus Cennis […] docens gramaticam Florentie die xxiii novembris 1381’. 102 See Chapter 4 below p. 267 and Appendix 3. His last known appointment was as grammar teacher in the Florentine Dominican convent of S. Maria Novella in 1390: Orlandi (1955), II, p. 22, n. 8. 103 It is written under the top ruled line; the ‘t’ is well crossed; the ‘g’ is compressed; the long nal ‘s’ alternates with 5-shaped ‘s’; uses thicker nib characteristic of gothic script: an early gothic, not a late caroline hand. 101
64
chapter two Iste liber est Mariani P
. Iste liber est Mariani morantis in scholis Magistri Spiliati doctoris gramatice. Amen. Amen. Amen.orsi in Pisa. Franceschini (2003), pp. 58, 85 writes, ‘non escluderei però che la nota, molta evanita, si riferisca piuttosto che al possessore all’autore: Queste reghole sono pisane e sono di Francescho Buity di Pisa.’ I have re-examined the manuscript closely under ultraviolet light, and I am certain that this reading is impossible. The initial letter of the third word from last is no longer legible, but there follows a certain ‘o’, an almost certain ‘r’ and a likely ‘si’; thereafter the ‘in’ seems clear. Both ‘Buyti’ and ‘di’ are forced. Moreover, the text, as proposed by Franceschini, would have a clumsy repetition: ‘pisane’ and ‘di Pisa’. 203 On the manuscripts of Francesco’s grammar, now see Franceschini (2003). 204 On Francesco’s status as a secondary grammar text for schoolboys, see Black (2001), pp. 98–99, n. 211.e’; the manuscript was later owned by Papi’s relative Tommaso da Filicaia and by Bastiano di Agostino da S. Godenzo.388 The other Florentine donadello forms part of a school anthology (ASF CB II.179), containing Cato’s Distichs and other minor authors (see below p. 149) and secondary-level grammatical texts (see below p. 136); all the texts were copied by the same hand, probably an anonymous teacher or novitiate in the Florentine convent of S. Salvatore di Settimo, working in about 1463, when one of the texts was completed (fol. 135r).389 The secondary theoretical grammar syllabus in Florence The fourteenth century The secondary theoretical grammar curriculum is rst encountered in Florence through the work of one of the few well known and productive indigenous Florentine grammar teachers who taught in their native city:390 Maestro Filippo di Naddo di Filippo, active in the 1320srizio. 405 Verbs: active, passive, neuter, common, deponent. Participles. Relatives. Interrogatives. Verbal construction and modi signicandi. Conjunctions. Figures. Nouns: partitives and distributives, comparatives, superlatives. est Francisci Ferantin’. The manuscript carries throughout a series of dates progressing from 1413 to 1416, usually placed in the upper margin of each page. Antoniotto Morelli, the second son of the famous diarist, Giovanni di Paolo Morelli, was born on 24 December 1398, which would make him fteen at the time that he began working on BNCF LF 202 in 1413.411 Francesco di Francesco Ferantini, the youngest member losoa in loicha et in gramaticha etc.rio notarii etc. Hic liber est mei Bartolomey supradicti. Completus fuit 1461 die 2 Maiy. The top line was then altered to read: Signum mey Gabrielis Bartolomey de Puccinis de Florentia. The second line was also altered to: Hic liber est mei Gabrielis Bartolomey supradicti. 462 The folios now out of order; correct order written in old numbering in upper right corner: 1 = 1, 2 = 4, 3 = 3, 4 = 5. There is a missing folio/folios between 4 and 5, but the order of topics as treated here seems to be: innitives, gerunds, supines, case governance, adverbs, relatives, interrogatives. 5 does not have an old number, but if the order of material follows that found in Francesco da Buti et al., then 5, which covers deponents and impersonals, should precede all the rest. The treatise seems to be Florentine/Tuscan in origin or redaction, since orins are referred to as the standard currency, and there is a Tuscan geographical reference: (fol. 4r) Serthianum [= Sarteano] distat a Senis triginta quatuor miliaribus.scholis Magistri Bon[i] M<. . .>. Amen dico vobis.524odie 26 die veneris mensis otobris in ora vigesima prima, 1453/1453/1453.547odie, scilicet a dì XVIII februarii ad horas vigesimas in anno supra. populi Sancte Felicitatis ultra Arnum, morantis in scholis Magistri doctoris gramatice. velitis retinere consilium et in eo impositionem facere, si videtur et placet vobis et dicto consilio, quod predicta ant et executioni mandentur, cum ipse sit paratus prestare ydoneam cauptionem dicto comuni de predictis omnibus observandis et faciendis, prout in dicto constituti capitulo per omnia continetur.15minciò andare all’abacho di Chalandro. Bernardo di Benedetto degli Strozzi de’ dare a dì VIII di magio 1454 S. cinque. Sono per una tavola d’abacho e per 1o penaiuolo e 1o chalamaio [. . .] S. 13. E de’ dare a dì 29 di luglio 1454 Fl. uno largo a llui conttanti per dare a Chalandro suo maestro d’abacho per suo salario d’insenia’ gli l’abacho.198i ci de’ dare orini trenta d’oro per resto di orini cinquanta d’oro ebbe del nostro quando morì Salamone nostro padre in serbanza. Àcciene dato l’anno per discretione staia dodici di grano perché siamo molto bisognosi. Antonio di Salamone detto sta alla schuola d’età d’anni sedici. Salvestro di Salamone sta al pianellaio con Pazzino, d’età d’anni tredici. Mona Nencia loro madre et sirochia del detto Ser Tommaso, d’età d’anni quaranta, à avere la dota sua, che sono orini centoventi. Non ci’è da pagharla. [. . .] E siamo molto bisongnosi. Io Antonio di Salamone detto ò scripta questa scripta. fol. 381r: [Portata di] Baldassarri di Ser Piero Çosi d’anni XIII prestanciato nel Lione Rosso insieme con Guasspari suo fratello morto ne la mortalità proxima passata [. . .] À l’infrascripti beni loro asignati nella mancieppazione di loro facta da dicto Ser Piero loro padre. Va a la schuola. fol. 535v [Portata di Monna Chaterinna vedova dona che fu di Beninchasa tintore] [. . .] d’anni 44 o circha [. . .] Berinchasa, suo gliolo d’anni 8, ista a ‘perare a legiere. Vol. 43, Santa Maria Novella, Lion Rosso fol. 879r–v Questi sono e beni di Gano di Ducio di Ser Galdo da Firenze abitatore in Bologna da trentasette anni [. . .] pagha le graveze a Bologna per quello che à sechondo gli altri cittadini [. . .] Gano detto d’età d’anni 52. Monna Appollonia sua donna anni 32. Ducio suo gluolo istudiante anni 20. Govanni suo gluolo istudiante anni 18. di Giovanni di Ser Nigi e cho’ la cha[sa] della chapitani [sic] di Sa[n]ta Maria Novela, e paghane l’ano di pigione lire 25 di picioli. E più ò debito lire tre[n]tadue tra la pigione e a[l]tre tre persone. E più ò avere lire se’ da uno ch’è lengnioiolo [sic] cho’ la sentiençia. E quest’è propia la verita. Pe[n]sate le spese, che siamo dieci in chasa, una fa da marito ogn. Vol. 47, Santa Maria Novella, Lion Bianco fol. 463r: [Portata di Piero di Battolomeo di Lucchino chalçaiuolo] Piero di Battolomeo chalçaiuolo, òne anni quarantaquattro} 44. Mona cCheccha è mia madre ed àne anni 72. Mona Mecchera è mia donna ed àne anni 30. Òne dua giuoli che stanno, l’uno a l’abocho, à nome Meo di Piero, à ne anni 12. Òne l’attro suo frattelo, che à nome Domenicho di Piero, àne anni 6. fol. 532r [Portata di rede di Giovanni di Nanni Nucci speziale] I nomi de’ popili: Abramo di Govanni Nuci, d’anni 14 o circha, ista chon uno abate. Cipriano, d’ettà d’anni 12, ista a legere. Francescho, d’età d’anni 8, ista a legere. fol. 688v [Portata di Ser Tommaso e Antonio di Ser Piero d’Angniolo Cioni]ollene dare Lionardo del Codicho orini XXV d’oro. Vollene dar Messer Nicchola del Disesto orini XIIII d’oro. enderonsi i detti libri, cioè: Messer Nicchola Lapi il Dixesto orini XVIII d’oro. Lionardo di Messer Giovanni iStrozi il Codicho—orini XXVII d’oro. fol. 61r Mandamo a Monpulieri per le mani di Giovanni di Stefano del Migliore fattore di Michele di Vanni di Ser Lotto e compagni dì [sic] di luglio anno MCCCLXXXI l’enfrascritte cose, cioè: 1 leghato di quadernucci d’orazioni in bambagia 1 quaderno in quatro pezi di disengni e biscanto 1 libro di ‘strologia in franciesco in pergamena 1 libro di pistole d’Ovidio con coverte di pechora verde 1 libro di ‘strologia in perghamena coverto d’asse 1 libro chiamato Corbacchio in banbagia coverto d’asse 1 libro di reghole in gramaticha in pergamena coverto d’assi 1 quaderno in perghamena di Cieccho d’Ascoli con alchuno foglio in bambagia iscritto di chose romane.minciò andare all’abacho di Chalandro. fol. 2r Bernardo di Benedetto degli Strozzi de’ dare a dì VIII di magio 1454 S. cinque. Sono per una tavola d’abacho e per 1º penaiuolo e 1º chalamaio. L._____S. 13_____D. E de’ dare a dì 29 di luglio 1454 Fl. uno largo a llui conttanti per dare a Chalandro suo maestro d’abacho per suo salario d’insenia’ gli l’abacho. L. 5 S._____D., grammar pupil (14th c.) 64 Mariano di Nicola da Ceperello, Florentine abacus pupil (15th c.) 524 Mariotto, Don, Camaldolese monk and elementary teacher in Florence (15th c.) 352–58, 383, 695–700 Mariotto di Ser Andrea di Ser Bartolomeo da Bucine, Florentine schoolboy (15th c.) 493 Mariotto di Giovanni di Fruosino, Florentine schoolboy (15th c.) 726 Mariotto di Giovanni di Michele (legnaiuolo), Florentine elementary pupil (15th c.) 448, 506 Mariotto di Iacopo da Bussetto (Arezzo), reading pupil (15th c.) 486 Mariotto di Ser Michele del Campana da S. Godenzo, student in Florence (15th c.) 480 Mariotto di Michele di Sizzi (orafo), Fra, Florentine novitiate (15th c.) 487 Mariotto di Piero di Casentino, elementary pupil (15th c.) 640 Mariscotti, Gaspare di Antonio di Piero da Marradi, Maestro, priest and grammar teacher (15th c.) 400–401, 543 Marsili, Geronimo, copyist and probable schoolboy in S. Gimignano (15th c.) 102 
