ABSTRACT
I. Dante lovers of all ages have dwelt admiringly upon the originality shown by the poet in his conception of the architecture of hell. His compatriot Christoforo Landino wrote as follows in the fifteenth century": c« Benche questo poeta in ogni cosa sia maraviglioso, nientedimeno non posso sanza sommo stupore considerare la sua nuova, ne mai da alcuno altro escogitata inventione." And in modern times, Rossi, after showing how feeble were the stereotyped descriptions of hell prior to Dante's and how poor in this respect were the Biblical and classical sources available to him, concludes by saying: tc L'ingegno poderoso e l'alta fantasia del poeta svolsero e rimutarono con piena liberta questa abbozzo, fecondarono quegli elementi e ne trassero un tutto nuovo, originale, grandioso, definito in ogni parte con esatteza quasi matematica.">
The admiration of the critic is justified. But, before the originality of Dante's conception can be regarded as established beyond all doubt, it must be shown that no similar description existed in the literature of other religions. This demonstration has often been attempted. Vossler, for instance, has given a complete summary of the researches made by Dantists in their endeavour to find religious, philosophical and artistic precedents for the Divine Comedy." With wonderful scholarship he has reconstructed what he calls the prehistory of the sublime poem. The myths contained in religions prior to Christianity, as well as the the true friends who loved each other in God; Noah, with a many-coloured banner, the god-fearing; John, with a yellow banner, the martyrs; Jesus will be the standard-bearer of the poor in spirit; Solomon, of the rich; the pre-Islamic poet Imru-I-Qays will be the ensign of the poets in hell; and the traitor will bear a banner of shame. Cf. IBN MAKHLUF, I, 154, and II, 8 and 14.
