RIMINI. Vedi Ginevra, Isotta e l'altre amanti, E la coppia d' Arimino. PETRARCA. Heu, miser, exagitans immiti corde furores, Qualibus incensam jactastis mente puellam CATULLUS. RIMINI, or Arimino, the Ariminum of the Romans, is a place of great antiquity. Tradition has even assigned its origin to the times of Hercules. Here terminated the Via Flaminia, being joined to the Via Emilia. The labours of Augustus, the great road-maker of Italy, are still visible in the magnificent bridge over which the traveller enters the town. This bridge, which consists of three arches, built entirely of solid blocks of white marble, is one of the most perfect monuments extant of the Augustan age. The proportions of the arches are said to be the same as those recommended by Palladio. From the inscriptions still legible upon the marble, it appears that the work was not completed until the time of Tiberius. Rimini also exhibits other remains of antiquity, inviting the attention of the traveller: a triumphal gate with one arch, raised in honour of Augustus; and the ruins of an amphitheatre, in the garden of the Capuchins. In the square, or market-place, stands an antique pedestal of marble, which, according to a modern inscription upon it, was the suggestum from which Cæsar harangued his army after passing the Rubicon. It is to be regretted that so classical an association is not supported by better evidence than that of mere tradition. At the distance of about twelve miles from Rimini is situated the little republic of San Marino, whose singular fortune it has been, in the midst of despotic governments, to maintain its independence for upwards of twelve hundred years. The traveller who passes through Rimini, from which place alone the territories of the republic can be entered, ought not to omit to visit this little state, celebrated, as it has been, in the prose of Addison and in the verse of Collins. But Rimini is more interesting to the lovers of Italian literature, on account of its being connected with the tragical deaths of Francesca da Polenta and Paolo Malatesta, which form the subject of one of the finest episodes in Dante's poem.-(Inferno, c. v.) Here it will be only necessary to remind the reader that Gianciotto Malatesta, married to Francesca da Polenta, killed her and his own brother Paolo, under suspicion that an unlawful attachment existed between them. A few words in illustration of that passage of Dante will not, perhaps, prove unacceptable to our readers. The house of Malatesta were lords of Verucchio, a small castle near Rimini, which was bestowed upon them by that city, as a reward for services performed by that family on behalf of the people of Rimini. This added great consideration to the Malatestas, whose head, Mala testa il Vecchio, displayed great talents, and was acknowledged as chief of the Guelphs in that part of Italy. He commanded the Guelphic League when they were defeated by Guido da Montefeltro, the leader of the Ghibellines; and eventually succeeded, after several vain attempts, in making himself lord of Rimini, by treacherously seizing and murdering Montagna de' Parcità, the head of the Ghibellines of that city. Malatesta the old was thrice married. By his first wife he had Malatesta dall' Occhio, so named because he had only one eye; by the second were born Giovanni and Paolo; by the third he had one Ramberto, of whom we have no need farther to speak. Giovanni was lame; hence he was surnamed Ciotto, a word which being united with his christian name, pronounced in dialect Zan or Gian, the name Zanciotto or Gianciotto was formed, sometimes changed into Lanciotto. Paolo, on the contrary, must have been a fine-looking man, he being surnamed Paul the Beautiful, or Paolo Bello. Giovanni was the father of three sons, probably by his wife Francesca; and it is to be concluded that Paolo was married, since from him descended the counts of Ghiazzolo. Guido da Polenta, the father of Francesca, was Lord of Ravenna, and a Guelph. He contrived to render himself master of that city, by driving from it the two powerful Ghibelline families, Traversari and Atanagi. He succeeded, chiefly by the assistance of the Malatestas, with whom he was strictly allied. After the murder of Francesca, the two houses continued to support each other, but the persons more nearly connected with the two victims seem never to have been afterwards on friendly terms. The history of these two families is an uninterrupted narrative of treachery and murder, particularly in that of the Malatestas; of whom Villani says, that "it seems the curse of that race, of that province, and of Romagna, that the members of the same family are traitors to each other." The Count of Ghiazzolo attempted to murder Malatestino dall' Occhio, who had become Lord of Rimini after Malatesta il Vecchio. The Malatestas of Rimini assisted the relations of Guido and Rinaldo da Polenta in seizing upon Ravenna, and murdering Rinaldo, who was then its archbishop. Hence Dante, although a Ghibelline, was well received by Guido da Polenta, whose hatred for the Malatestas found a kindred feeling in the breast of the poet, who never omits an occasion of branding them with infamy. Thus, he first speaks of the two Malatestas, il Vecchio and dall' Occhio, as "two mastiffs eating Rimini" (Inf. xxvii. 46); and then he records the treachery of that felon," who sees but with one eye," who murdered the two best persons of Fano (Inf. xxviii. 81). The poet's dislike for the Malatestas, who were Guelphs, and particularly for Malatestino dall' Occhio, is easily accounted for. Of this tyrant, a contemporary chronicler says, that he was "bold, wise, and honest as ever man He had only one fault-he would neither see nor hear a Ghibelline; he persecuted them fiercely." Dante, placed between his political principles and his gratitude for Guido, does not abuse him, but praises highly the Atanagi and the Traversari, and weeps over their misfortunes; which was an indirect, but bitter and decisive condemnation of Guido's conduct towards them. was. The history of the Polentas and Malatestas, as well as that of the love of Francesca and Paolo, has been sadly confused, and turned into a mere romance, by Dante's commentators. There is but one old chronicler who incidentally mentions the tragical death of the two relations in the following few words: "It happened that Zanne Sciancato (that is, John the Lame, Zanciotto) found his lady with his brother Paolo and killed them both." Their guilt is not even hinted at, and seems to be implicitly denied by Dante himself, who says that Zanciotto is destined to fall into hell's pit as a murderer of his relations. Boccaccio, who was not likely to extenuate their guilt, admits that Francesca and Paolo were partial to each other, but adds: "I never heard them accused of a criminal act, and I rather think the supposition a fiction founded on what was likely to have happened, than on what actually took place." Even the partiality of Francesca for Paolo might be excused, were it true that she was deceived in her marriage, either by being induced to consent to the match, believing that her hand was to be bestowed on Paolo, or by being in fact betrothed to Paolo, from whom Gianciotto tyrannically separated her. Both these versions are to be found in old, although not contemporary, writers; but neither story is founded on good authority, any more than the enmity of the Malatestas against the Polentas, their wars, the rank of Zanciotto, and other circumstances, which originated only in the fancy of commentators. Dante supposes that Paolo and Francesca fell in love on reading how Sir Lancelot's passion was returned by Genevre; a circumstance purely imaginary, as we may easily guess, but which has nevertheless been received as a fact |