ly　symptoms；　but　had　　also　grown　tired　of　the　type　of　the　humanist。　These　men　had　to　pay　both　　for　the　misdeeds　they　had　done；　and　for　the　excess　of　honour　which　had　　hitherto　fallen　to　their　lot。　Their　evil　fate　willed　it　that　the　　greatest　poet　of　the　nation；　Ariosto；　wrote　of　them　in　a　tone　of　calm　　and　sovereign　contempt。
  Of　the　reproaches　which　combined　to　excite　so　much　hatred；　many　were　　only　too　well　founded。　Yet　a　clear　and　unmistakable　tendency　to　　strictness　in　matters　of　religion　and　morality　was　alive　in　many　of　the　　philologists；　and　it　is　a　proof　of　small　knowledge　of　the　period；　if　　the　whole　class　is　condemned。　Yet　many；　and　among　them　the　loudest　　speakers；　were　guilty。
  Three　facts　explain　and　perhaps　diminish　their　guilt：　the　overflowing　　excess　of　fervour　and　fortune；　when　the　luck　was　on　their　side；　the　　uncertainty　of　the　future；　in　which　luxury　or　misery　depended　on　the　　caprice　of　a　patron　or　the　malice　of　an　enemy；　and　finally；　the　　misleading　influence　of　antiquity。　This　undermined　their　morality；　　without　giving　them　its　own　instead；　and　in　religious　matters；　since　　they　could　never　think　of　accepting　the　positive　belief　in　the　old　　gods；　it　affected　them　only　on　the　negative　and　sceptical　side。　Just　　because　they　conceived　of　antiquity　dogmaticallythat　is；　took　it　as　　the　model　or　all　thought　and　actionits　influence　was　here　pernicious。　　But　that　an　age　existed　which　idolized　the　ancient　world　and　its　　products　with　an　exclusive　devotion　was　not　the　fault　of　individuals。　　It　was　the　work　of　an　historical　providence；　and　if　the　culture　of　the　　ages　which　have　followed；　and　of　the　ages　to　come；　rests　upon　the　fact　　that　it　was　so；　and　that　all　the　ends　of　life　but　this　one　were　then　　deliberately　put　aside。
  The　career　of　the　humanists　was；　as　a　rule；　of　such　a　kind　hat　only　the　　strongest　characters　could　pass　through　it　unscathed。　The　first　danger　　came；　in　some　cases；　from　the　parents；　rho　sought　to　turn　a　precocious　　child　into　a　miracle　of　learning；　with　an　eye　to　his　future　position　in　　that　class　which　then　was　supreme。　Youthful　prodigies；　however；　seldom　　rise　above　a　certain　level；　or；　if　they　do；　are　forced　to　achieve　their　　further　progress　and　development　at　the　cost　of　the　bitterest　trials。　　For　an　ambitious　youth；　the　fame　and　the　brilliant　position　of　the　　humanists　were　a　perilous　temptation；　it　seemed　to　him　that　he　too　　'through　inborn　pride　could　no　longer　regard　the　low　and　common　things　　of　life。'　He　was　thus　led　to　plunge　into　a　life　of　excitement　and　　vicissitude；　in　which　exhausting　studies；　tutorships；　secretaryships；　　professorships；　offices　in　princely　households；　mortal　enmities　and　　perils；　luxury　and　beggary；　boundless　admiration　and　boundless　　contempt；　followed　confusedly　one　upon　the　other；　and　in　which　the　most　　solid　worth　and　learning　were　often　pushed　aside　by　superficial　　impudence。　But　the　worst　of　all　was；　that　the　position　of　the　humanist　　was　almost　incompatible　with　a　fixed　home；　since　it　either　made　　frequent　changes　of　dwelling　necessary　for　a　livelihood；　or　so　affected　　the　mind　of　the　individual　that　he　could　never　be　happy　for　long　in　one　　place。　He　grew　tired　of　the　people；　and　had　no　peace　among　the　enmities　　which　he　excited；　while　the　people　themselves　in　their　turn　demanded　　something　new。　Much　as　this　life　reminds　us　of　the　Greek　sophists　of　　the　Empire；　as　described　to　us　by　Philostratus；　yet　the　position　of　the　　sophists　was　more　favourable。　They　often　had　money；　or　could　more　　easily　do　without　it　than　the　humanists；　and　as　professional　teachers　　of　rhetoric；　rather　than　men　of　learning；　their　life　was　freer　and　　simpler。　But　the　scholar　of　the　Renaissance　was　forced　to　combine　great　　learning　with　the　power　of　resisting　the　influence　of　ever…changing　　pursuits　and　situations。　Add　to　this　the　deadening　effect　of　licentious　　excess；　andsince　do　what　he　might；　the　worst　was　believed　of　hima　　total　indifference　to　the　moral　laws　recognized　by　others。　Such　men　can　　hardly　be　conceived　to　exist　without　an　inordinate　pride。　They　needed　　it；　if　only　to　keep　their　heads　above　water；　and　were　confirmed　in　it　　by　the　admiration　which　alternated　with　hatred　in　the　treatment　they　　received　from　the　world。　They　are　the　most　striking　examples　and　　victims　of　an　unbridled　subjectivity。
  The　attacks　and　the　satirical　pictures　began；　as　we　have　said；　at　an　　early　period。　For　all　strongly　marked　individuality；　for　every　kind　of　　distinction；　a　corrective　was　at　hand　in　the　national　taste　for　　ridicule。　And　in　this　case　the　men　themselves　offered　abundant　and　　terrible　materials　which　satire　had　but　to　make　use　of。　In　the　　fifteenth　century；　Battista　Mantovano；　in　discoursing　of　the　seven　　monsters；　includes　the　humanists；　with　any　others；　under　the　head　　'Superbia。'　He　describes　how；　fancying　themselves　children　of　Apollo；　　they　walk　along　with　affected　solemnity　and　with　sullen；　malicious　　looks；　now　gazing　t　their　own　shadow；　now　brooding　over　the　popular　　praise　they　hunted　after；　like　cranes　in　search　of　food。　But　in　the　　sixteenth　century　the　indictment　was　presented　in　full。　Besides　　Ariosto；　their　own　historian　Gyraldus　gives　evidence　of　this；　whose　　treatise；　written　under　Leo　X；　was　probably　revised　about　the　year　　1540。　Warning　examples　from　ancient　and　modern　times　the　moral　disorder　　and　the　wretched　existence　of　the　scholars　meet　us　in　astonishing　　abundance；　and　along　with　these；　accusations　of　the　most　serious　nature　　are　brought　formally　against　them。　Among　these　are　anger；　vanity；　　obstinacy；　self…adoration；　dissolute　private　life；　immorality　of　all　　descriptions；　heresy；　theism；　further；　the　habit　of　speaking　without　　conviction；　a　sinister　influence　on　government；　pedantry　of　speech；　　thanklessness　towards　teachers；　and　abject　flattery　of　the　great；　who　　st　give　the　scholar　a　taste　of　their　favours　and　then　leave　m　to　　starve。　The　description　is　closed　by　a　reference　to　the　den　age；　when　　no　such　thing　as　science　existed　on　the　earth。　these　charges；　that　of　　heresy　soon　became　the　most　dangers；　and　Gyraldus　himself；　when　he　　afterwards　republished　a　perfectly　harmless　youthful　work；　was　　compelled　to　take　refuge　neath　the　mantle　of　Duke　Ercole　II　of　Ferrara；　　since　men　had　the　upper　hand　who　held　that　people　had　better　spend　　their　time　on　Christian　themes　than　on　mythological　researches。　　justifies　himself　on　the　ground　that　the　latter；　on　the　contrary；　were　　at　such　a　time　almost　the　only　harmless　branches　of　study；　as　they　deal　　with　subjects　of　a　perfectly　neutral　character。
  But　if　it　is　the　duty　of　the　historian　to　seek　for　evidence　in　which　　moral　judgement　is　tempered　by　human　sympathy；　he　11　find　no　authority　　comparable　in　value　to　the　work　so　often　quoted　of　Pierio　Valeriano；　　'On　the　Infelicity　of　the　Scholar。'　It　was　written　under　the　gloomy　　impressions　left　by　the　sack　of　Rome；　which　seems　to　the　writer；　not　　only　the　direct　cause　of　untold　misery　to　the　men　of　learning；　but；　as　　it　were；　the　fulfilment　of　an　evil　destiny　which　had　long　pursued　them。　　Pierio　is　here　led　by　a　simple　and；　on　the　whole；　just　feeling。　He　does　　not　introduce　a　special　power；　which　plagued　the　men　of　genius　on　　account　of　their　genius；　but　he　states　facts；　in　which　an　unlucky　　chance　often　wears　the　aspect　of　fatality。　Not　wishing　to　write　a　　tragedy　or　to　refer　events　to　the　conflict　of　higher　powers；　he　is　　content　to　lay　before　us　the　scenes　of　everyday　life。　We　are　introduced　　to　men　who；　in　times　of　trouble；　lose　first　their　incomes　and　then　　their　places；　to　others　who；　in　trying　to　get　two　appointments；　miss　　both；　to　unsociable　misers　who　carry　about　their　money　sewn　into　their　　clothes；　and　die　mad　when　they　are　robbed　of　it；　to　others；　who　accept　　well…paid　offices；　and　then　sicken　with　a　melancholy　longing　for　their　　lost　freedom。　We　read　how　some　died　young　of　a　plague　or　fever；　and　how　　the　writings　which　had　cost　them　so　much　toil　were　burnt　with　their　bed　　and　clothes；　how　others　lived　in　terror　of　the　murderous　threats　of　　their　colleagues；　how　one　was　slain　by　a　covetous　servant；　and　another　　caught　by　highwaymen　on　a　journey；　and　left　to　pine　in　a　dungeon；　　because　unable　to　pay　his　ransom。　Many　died　of　unspoken　grief　from　the　　insults　they　received　and　the　prizes　of　which　they　were　defrauded。　We　　are　told　how　a　Venetian　died　because　of　the　death　of　his　son；　a　　youthful　prodigy；　and　how　mother　and　brothers　followed；　as　if　the　lost　　child　drew　them　all　after　him。　Many；　especially　Florentines；　ended　　their　lives　by　suicide；　others　through　the　secret　justice　of　a　tyrant。　　Who；　after　all；　is　happy？and　by　what　means？　By　blunting　all　feeling　　for　such　misery？　One　of　the　speakers　in　the　dialogue　in　which　Pierio　　clothed　his　argument；　can　give　an　answer　to　these　questions　the　　illustrious　Gasparo　Contarini；　at　the　mention　of　whose　name　we　turn　　with　the　expectation　to　hear　at　least　something　of　the　truest　and　　deepest　which　was　then　thought　on　such　matters。　As　a　type　of　the　happy　　scholar；　he　mentions　Fra　Urbano　Valeriano　of　Belluno；　who　was　for　years　　a　teacher　of　Greek　at　Venice；　who　visited　Greece　and　the　East；　and　　towards　the　close　of　his　life　travelled；　now　through　this　country；　now　　through　that；　without　ever　mounting　a　horse；　who　neve