Marvin B. Becker

Florentine Politics and the Diffusion of Heresy in the Trecento: A Socioeconomic Inquiry

THERE are numerous studies on the nature and influence of the teachings of the Spiritual Franciscans. Florence, in the second half of the Trecento, has been an area of special interest for those researchers who have concerned themselves with the implications of this problem.1 Art historians, as well as those who are interested in communal politics, have demonstrated that the rise of the Fraticelli and the attendant spread of their doctrines played a decisive role in bringing about significant historical changes.2 The purpose of the present inquiry is to examine the underlying political situation that enabled this sect to increase its influence during the decade of the 1340s and to sustain it throughout the third quarter of the fourteenth century. This will also involve an attempt to explain the reasons for its suppression at the end of the Trecento and to elaborate upon the important general discussions of these questions to be found in the works of Tocco and Rodolico.3 The problem pertaining to the spread of heretical ideas is intimately connected with the policies of the Florentine government during this era.4 The survival of

A Comment on “Savonarola, Florence, and the Millenarian Tradition”

It appears to me that the strength of Professor Weinsteins inquiry is predicated upon the concreteness of his approach and his unwillingness to take refuge in those abstractions which are not infrequently found in the realm of Medieval and Renaissance studies. Therefore, the hypothesis that he advances stems from data, rather than from an unverifiable assumption about the nature of man or of thought in the Quattrocento . Another quality which is evident in his paper is his commitment to a type of research which is essentially an adventure. This figure of speech is intended to suggest that he is trying to isolate and then delineate a problem. In this instance, the unknown quantity is the boundary line that separates the historical from the a-historical. As a result of his search, he is compelled to modify the interpretations of Garin and Cantimori. His explanation is based upon the decisive role that historical circumstance and Florentine tradition (possibly two facets of a single entity) played in forging the prophetic message of Savonarola. Therefore, he locates the center of gravity of the Dominicans teachings “in tempore,” rather than in the a-historical “world of ideas.” For Professor Weinstein, the boundaries of Savonarolas prophecies are generated by “the fervor of daily events.” Not only does this view appear to be valid, for the reasons advanced by the speaker, but there are also factors that are peripheral to his central argument which lend it further authenticity.