Commentary by Amrin Madhani

Ln. 1-3 “The multitude of people... longed to stay and weep

Robert Hollander notes that the weeping of Dante is similar to that of Isaiah 16:9 and 34:7, showing that there is goodness to be found in Dante for weeping for the sufferers.

Durling and Martinez also note that this is an echo of the passage found in St. Augustine’s Confessions, when Alypius is described as becoming drunk off the blood spilled in the Roman Gladiator games.

Ln. 4-6 “But Virgil said to me ... mutilated shades down there?”

Virgil’s rebuke is interesting because it foreshadows the real reason Dante was staring really hard. Later in the canto, Dante expresses that there is a family member of his in this bolgia. The harshness of the rebuke, followed by the allusion to Alypius, creates a scene of Dante being more fascinated by what he see’s and the guilt upon observing it.

An alternative reading of Virgil’s rebuke can be seen as kindness. The journey is almost over and he needs to move Dante along. There are a lot of horrors to witness and Dante being utterly human can be easily influenced by emotion.

Ln. 13-21 “‘If you had attended’ ... costs so much down there.”

As we delve deeper into the 10th bolgia Dante introduces the family member Geri del Bello, his father’s cousin. Barolini (Digital Dante) has a fascinating commentary she makes about the joining of the previous Canto into this. She says “Dante is developing the theme of family honor and blood feud as a cause of the prolonged civic torment and the ‘seed’ of self-destruction of Florence.” This theme is echoed in Canto 28 of Inferno by Mosca de’ Lamberti’s claim to have sown the “evil seed for the Tuscan people” (Inf.28.108).

Ln. 25-27 “For I saw him... heard him called Geri del Bello”

A relative of Dante, was known to cause discord between the Sacchetti family and was consequently killed by a member of that family. For thirty years that death went unavenged until one of his nephews killed another member of Sacchetti, (Herman Oelsner, Dartmouth Dante Project). Durling and Martinez also note families reconciled in 1342

Ln. 31-35 “‘O my leader, his violent death....compassionate towards him.’”

Vengeance was a socially obligatory practice widely accepted in Italy, even recognized by the law. If a family member was killed by another family it was the right and duty of the victim’s family to avenge the death.

Many commentators have mixed opinions on Dante’s position on the matter. While Dante does feel pity for Geri, I don’t think he condones the act of vengeance. Durling and Martinez note that Dante may have felt a small bit of shame and acknowledges that Feri has all justification for being resentful towards Dante (which is why Geri does not speak to Dante), however, if we understand the whole of the Commedia, then it’s not a reach to claim that Dante does not support the act of vengeance. Vengeance is reserved to God, who is the ultimate judge, and to make those decisions as a human goes against his morals.

Barolini (Digital Dante) also argues that “in the Geri del Bello episode, Dante mounts a moral argument against vendetta: one that he subsequently sustains in later parts of the poem such as Purgatorio 17.” The deeper meaning of this rejection of vendetta ties to Dante’s understanding of this social construction, specifically in terms of male honor and kinship. He doesn’t believe in it, not feel like it should be something families should be burdened with. Dante does not wish to be defined by his family’s shame, and his honor should come from means outside of the family name.

Ln. 52-57 “We climbed to the lask bank...punishes the falsifiers that it registers here”

The transition from the previous bolgia to the final bolgia of the eighth circle is made here. Readers are made aware of the sin being punished here, which is falsifying. The sinners here are being punished for affecting the senses of others, such as showing themselves or substances to be what they are not, thus they spend the rest of eternity yearning for substances that are counterfeit.

Ln. 109-120 “I was from Arezzo...Minos damned me, who may not err”

Griffolino Arezzo was burned at Siena on the charge of Heresy, or in some accounts necromancy. But that was not the real sin he was burned for. The story of Arezzo is that he had boasted to Albert, the reputed son of the Bishop of Siena, that he could fly like Daedalus. Entranced by this claim, Albert wanted Arezzo to teach him the art. Upon not being successful, and out of spite, Albert denounced him to his father who ended up burning Arezzo for heresy or necromancy. But as Arezzo explains on lines 118-120, his real crime was alchemy, and Minos, the judge of hell, corrected the Bishop’s judgment and send him to this bolgia.

Daedalus in Greek mythology was a craftsman and artist. He is most famously known for being the creator of the Labyrinth under the court of King Minos of Crete, where the minotaur dwelt. According to the myth, the king of Athens was forced to pay tribute to King Minos by sending seven men and women to be sacrificed to the Minotaur. Theseus, a legendary hero, was sent to the labyrinth and successfully killed the minotaur assisted by Mino’s daughter Ariadne. Hence Daedalus and his son Icarus were imprisoned in a tower in Crete so that the secret of the Labyrinth would not be spread. In the attempt to escape Daedalus forged wings for himself and his son to escape. He warned his young son not to fly too close to the sun or else the wax wings would melt. Icarus did not listen to his father and consequently died because the wax melted in such close proximity to the sun. (Judith Hamilton, 1942)

Durling and Martinez also note the allusion to Daedalus creates a context stressing fatherly love, they suggest “Griffolino is in some sense parallel to Icarus: his overweening joke flew too high for Albero.” (pg. 461)

Ln. 136-139 “Then you will see ...how good an ape I was of nature.”

Early commentators have said that Capocchio was known to Dante in their early days, both as students of Natural Philosophy (John S. Carroll), and the second alchemist named in this canto. He was known to be an adept “imitator of the words and gestures of others, a talent which he later extended to ‘alchemical’ malfeasance” (Robert Hollander). His involvement in alchemy eventually got him burned in Siena.