FOR
SISTER LANGUAGE,
of Carla Gambacorta
The fact that Francis wrote the Canticle of the Creatures in the Vulgate is so extraordinary that it demands our attention. Eight centuries ago, in fact, the only language used for literary texts was Latin. Of course, this was no longer Classical Latin. In fact, during the centuries of the High Medieval period, that process of linguistic transformation which had its roots in the Roman Imperial Epoch slowly reached its conclusion. Not just literature, but anything of a documentary nature, was written in Latin, a Latin by now distant from so-called Classical Latin. A Latin, that is, full of vulgarisms, which presupposed on the part of its scribes, who could not really be called learned, a language blended with the language which they spoke, itself derived from Latin, yes, but so profoundly modified that it was felt, finally, to be another language. The transition from Latin to Italian occurred, then, orally, and the first bits of evidence we have of the Vulgate are therefore only fragment, slips of the pen in Latin contexts. We find a conscious attitude to the "new language" only beginning in the 10th century. The first timid attestations of the Vulgate to come down to us are of a religious notary character, though a few poetic, religious and troubadour texts date back to the 12th century. But it is above all in the 13th century -- in a variety of cities and a variety of contexts - that the written vulgate became more widespread, herald of the nascent comune civilization; Latin remained, nonetheless, uniquely, the language of culture, the language of tradition. Indeed, one of the first and most important examples of Vulgate literature that we have is Francis of Assisi's Canticle of the Creatures, the Saint's one Vulgate text, although he did also leave us several Latin texts. Why then the choice of the "new language" in a literary text suffused with intense religiosity, when Francis could have used the language of tradition. Clearly because his purpose was to be understood by everyone, including the country folk and illiterates who, by then, knew no Latin and to exhort his friars, ever more remote from his original and unique desire, to live secundum formam sancti Evangelii (in accordance with the Holy Bible). Tradition has it that the Canticle was dictated in 1224, two years before the saint's death. Francis, far from being the ingenuous jester proposed to us by a certain Italian cinematographer, drafts a work in prose with rhymes and assonances -- anything but improvised -- intended as a Gregorian chant and inspired by the psalms and Latin songs. In this regard, the Canticle has elicited the interest of Italian Philology's best minds, as well as, subsequently, a great deal of theological speculation; the value of the prepositions cum and per have been discussed at great length, as has been the composition's unity of inspiration. The lack of improvisation concealed in this Laudes creaturum (Lauds of the Creatures) is revealed, also, by its Latinate forms of scriptural derivation (iocundo, laude, nubilo, radiante, sanctissime, gloria, etc.) and the rich series of adjectives which refer, not just to God, but, and this is a great innovation, to the creatures as well: the stars, for example, are clear, precious, and beautiful; sister water is useful, humble, precious, and chaste; brother fire is handsome, jocund, robust and strong. Francis, while he chooses to use the Vulgate, eliminates its most egregiously dialectical elements and gives us an example of the "illustrious" Vulgate (which can be understood even today) which remained nonetheless, in Assisi, an isolated experiment, above all because the city did not have a powerful, authoritative role, either culturally or politically, as for example, Florence would, in the next century. Nonetheless, we find in the Canticle several features typical of Medieval Assisian (the dialect spoken in Assisi), as, for example, the conservation of the Latin final -u (from Latin -um, Altissimu, nullu, dignu, etc.) and -o (from the Latin -o, homo, etc.), the development of the Latin DJ into I - in iorno, the form ene for e, the conjunction ka, messor for messere, sostengo "sostengono" without the plural verbal ending, etc. Assisi which, in the Medieval Period, was part of the Umbrian "South-west" linguistic area and had affinities therefore, with the languages spoken in Spello, Foligno, Spoleto, etc., had lost, over the course of the centuries, due to Perugia's political influence, most of those linguistic elements still alive today -- as anyone who cares to may discover for himself - in those places. But in the Canticle's lexicon we meet up with some usages which can still be found today in the local dialect. The form "skappare," for example, which was initially interpreted as an error for "skampare" is, in reality, still alive in Assisi's territory, where it is still used by us spontaneously to mean "to go out, leave home." In the same way, "mentovare" does not mean "memorare" as some commentators have claimed, but "nominare" (to name), as our grandparents well know: if one mentions the Almighty, one of our elders might still warn today: "He is not to be named." The historical continuity of these usages here make the Canticle, although it is of course universal, even more intimate and familiar. No more Latin formulas, then, cryptically repeated from memory by the masses, but the language of the quotidian. Not just spiritual, not just religious, not just moral, not just social: Francis's revolution meant a complete change in direction.