“Through my heart her eyes’ beamy darts be gone”:  Power of Seeing in Traditions of Courtly Love Poems and Emblems

 

Shigeo Suzuki

 

1. Eye-sight

     The treatment of love varies greatly from one age to another.  In the Renaissance, a large number of theses of love, "trattato d'Amore", were written by humanists.  On the one hand, the idea of the Renaissance love is an extension of Provençal chivalrous love customs.  On the other, it is influenced by some of the newly discovered works of Plato.  The Renaissance idea of love postulated in a unique way some fundamental tenets.  The courtly love tradition in the troubadour recognized two loves different in kind, a scared love of the soul for God and a profane love of the sense for lascivious pleasure.  In the Renaissance the carnal love, defined as the passion uncontrolled by reason, should be shunned, whereas virtuous love or friendship based on the beauty and moral worth of the friends is permitted.  The Renaissance man is allowed to associate himself sensuously with ladies, even though a keen sense of morality is still dominant to curb his sensuality.  He does not have to exert himself to abandon all the sensual feelings related to this world.  In fact, lascivious nude figure of Venus (Goddess of Love), which gained particular popularity in this period, was always accompanied by some moral allegorical meanings.  A Renaissance sensibility for love makes a conditional affirmation of corporal love.

     The revival of Neo-Platonism encouraged a tendency to read into love moral connotation.  The metempsychosis of Neoplatonism explains that souls are originally in the world of the Ideas, but having descended from the immaterial realm of the immutable forms, are now trapped in alien matter.  Degenerated souls, once struck and properly redirected by beauty, would try to pull its body off and take an ascent to the original habitat.  Love is defined as "the desire of enjoying and imitating beauty in the beautiful" or "the desire to have and use and enjoy that which is believed to be beautiful".[1]  While praising the beauty of his lady, a man sees in his lady the immeasurable superiority of ideal beauty rather than her material manifestation.  He does not simply describe each of the distinguished features on her face, but represents every one of these beauties as a spur to lead him into heaven.  The beloved becomes a being of more than earthly perfection who could raise the lover towards the bliss of heaven.  In other words, the love is only justifiable as a step in an upward progress from the earth to the heaven.

     Then, how in the world does he fall in love with his lady?  He gazes at her.  Dante fell in love with Beatrice immediately when he first saw her on a street.  Petrarch loved Laura at first sight in St. Claire Church in Avignon on April 6, 1327.  Boiardo begins to tell of his love for Antonia after he was attracted by her at first glance.  Sidney, whose work Astrophil and Stella was heavily indebted to these poets, loved Lady Stella Rich as soon as he met her.  The old maxim that love is born at first sight holds good among these writers.[2]  In Christian tradition, no particular attention has been paid to the human eye in the creation of Adam, but the classical tradition has it that Aphrodite created eyes: 'Aphrodite having wrought them [=eyes] with rivets of love' (Empedocles).[3]  This myth was revived in the Renaissance.

     While narrating the enchantment of love, these love poets also describe what remarkable bliss they are in while the beloved keeps her eyes on them.  Her constant gaze works as an anti-inflammatory to annihilate burning carnal passion in the lover's mind for sublimation.  Astrophil, who is represented as more sexually demanding with his lady than any other lovers in the love sonnets, deplored:

 

O eyes, which do the spheres of beauty move,

whose beams be joys, whose joys all virtues be,

Who, while they make love conquer, conquer love;

(Astrophil and Stella, 42: 1-3)

 

When her gaze is fixed on him, it persuades him to reject the lascivious desire within him.  Her gaze reaches him in the manner of "beams".  We might take for granted as a metaphor the beams emitting from eye, partly because recent attempts to elucidate the invention and development of the linear perspective in the Renaissance frequently expose us to the geometrical figures of the eye holding straight lines toward objects outside (Fig. 1).  These figures, which are drawn mainly for the purpose of how painters should project objects on the canvas, are concerned with mathematical ground of vision rather than its physical nature.  In the Renaissance, the power inherent in the beams of eye is more indebted to legends in natural history, physical idea of vision, and a literary image of love than we might fist think.

     The Renaissance is an age when science based on observation is still nascent and merges with mythology and magic.  Even Leonard da Vinci, who had learned more by experience and observation than by books, referred to the power of vision in some animals: with the rays emitting from their eyes, wolves strike men dumb, lamias attract nightingales, and linno [a kind of fish] illuminate large quantities of water.[4]  We may add that Medusa is believed to turn others into stone with inscrutable light emitting from her eyes.  Similarly, basilisks and cockatrices, which Renaissance people postulated really existed, were also believed to kill others with their eye-light.  Georgio Stengelio shows in his Ova Pashalia (1635) (Fig. 2) that two men are running away from the basilisk, which he believed would "kill all things with its sight"(vis omnia necat).  The trust in the power finds support in ancient authority of natural history.  Pliny, one of the most influential writers upon the encyclopaediac knowledge about nature in the Renaissance, recounted in his Natural History the emission of light from the eyes of cats, wolves, and wild goats.[5]  Solinus, another equally influential writer, reported that some women in Scythia "have two pupils in each eye and kill people by sight if they happen to look at them when angry."[6]  Even Roger Bacon, who stressed the need for observation and experiment as the true basis of science, approved of the citations from Pliny and Solinus on this subject in his Opus majus.[7]

 

 

2. Three Theories of light

      All of those faiths, some of which merit no credit for us now, press the Renaissance man with cultural and social realities.  There was a scientific backdrop to support the power of eye-beams.  It was a matter of contention throughout the pre-Socratic period to the late seventeenth-century as to how man can see the outside world.  There were at least three different theories of vision in ancient Greek.  (1) Extramission theory: the eye as an agent sends out rays from 'fire' or 'pneuma' inherent within itself to objects outside.  The visual power issues from the eye, and the rays from the eye reach objects, and the objects can be perceived.  (2) Intromission theory: the eye like a mirror receives passively 'effluences' or 'images' emanated from objects.  (3) Simultaneous radiation theory: both the eye and objects work as agents, but the rays sent out from the eye mingle with effluence emitted from the objects in the space between the eye and the objects.

      Empedocles imagined that light of 'fire' issues from the eye.  Aristotle believed that Empedocles supported Alcmaeon's idea of light-emission.  He remarked that "Empedocles seems sometimes to imagine that one sees because light issues from the eye."[8]  What he refers here as light is the 'fire' which he listed as one of the four elements of matter.  This theory was followed by the Stoics, who instead of fire as the medium introduced the concept of 'pnuema', an active agent composed of a mixture of air and fire.[9]  An optical pnemna flows from the seat of consciousness to the eye and excites the air adjacent to the eye, putting the air in state of tension or stress.[10]   Two major figures supported this idea; Galen whose influence on medical theory and practice was dominant in Europe, and Ptolemy whose idea of perspective affords an appropriate foundation for Renaissance mapmaking.[11]  Among the Christian writers, St. Augustine, whom people had after his age often consulted on any matters, accepted this theory.[12]

      Democritus proposed the intromission theory.  He is well known to explain that the universe is made up of atoms, relatively simple and immutable particles too minute to be visible. As for the vision, he argued that aggregates of atoms issue in all directions from all objects and enter the eyes of observers to produce visual sensation.  In the eleventh-century, Alhazen, an Arabian mathematician and physicist, so convincingly established this theory that its reception in the West appeared in the work of Robert Grosseteste, the forerunner of modern Western optical tradition.  Both Roger Bacon and John Pecham deeply relied on Alhazen, though they somewhat modified Alhazen's theory by admitting that rays traveling from the eye also played an essential part of vision.[13]

      In the intromission theory of Bacon and Pecham, light is not a substance that moves from place to place, but an expansion of a disturbance in an elastic medium named species.[14]  The object sends its own image (imago) through the medium of species to the tactile sense inherent in eyes of the seers so that a vision of the image could appear to the seers.  As David Park so precisely puts it, "species do not move but spread by a process called multiplication, just as our shadow on the ground, as we walk along, is not really a moving thing but is continually being re-created in a new place."[15]  This idea of species-intromission is well illustrated in Fra Lippo Lippi's Annunciation (ca. 1455) (Fig. 3).  The dove leaves behind him a series of descending circles, which, rimmed in golden dots, overlap one another.  Wrapped in the circles exuding thinner streams of gilding, the bird of Spirit is now going into the womb of Mary.[16]

      Plato took the third theory of simultaneous radiation in Timaeus, whose Latin version circulated in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance..[17]  He conceived of two forms of emanations, one from the eye and the other from objects outside.  Visual fire emanating from the eye meets and coalesces somewhere with its similar kind from objects within the intervening space.  The encounter of these fires produces visual sensation.  This theory attracted supports from some of the influential writers in the Middle Ages, William of Conches and Albertus Magnus.

      These three theories have been simplified and schematized into two opposites among the Renaissance writers: extramission and intromission.  Alberti points out that "among the ancients there was considerable dispute as to whether these [visual] rays emerge from the surface [i.e. outside plane] or eye.  This truly difficult question, which is quite without value for our purposes, may here be set aside".[18]  The dispute between these eye-radiation (extramission theory) and imago-emanation (intromission theory) was not settled even in the seventeenth century.  Though a number of scholars of science history have insisted that the proof and acceptance of the intromission theory by Kepler confirmed the failure of extramission theory, the theory was not so easily rejected even among the intellects in the seventeenth-century.  Niels Stensen, one of the most leaned naturalists in the mid-seventeenth century, quoted a story of a man from whose eyes emit the rays (1659).[19]  After explaining the mechanism of sight, Andreas Laurentius, a physician attached to French King, pointed out the continuous disagreement among the philosophers and the doctors as to the theories of intromission and extramission.[20]

      Actually, in the love sonnet sequences, as has been shown by Sidney's example, the extramission theory was more in favor than the intromission.  To add a few more examples from other poets, Petrarch compared the light emitting from the beloved's eyes to a guide: "My noble Lady, I see in the moving of your eyes a sweet light that shows me the way that leads to Heaven" (Rime sparse, 72:1-3).[21]  Adam in Milton's Paradise Lost confesses that he feels some energy infused in him when he feels the gaze from his wife: "I from the influence of thy looks receive/ Access in every Virtue, in thy sight/ More wise, more watchful, stronger, if need were/ of outward strength"(IX. 309-312).  He admits that basking in the influence of his beloved makes him physically stronger than usual.

 

 

3. Cupid's arrow and an arrow of eye-beam

      We are not directly concerned here with technical classifications of the light theories or argue each of these theories.  We call them up in order to notice that they get in the Renaissance tradition of love in various modifications and combinations.  We are more interested in the attitude of light toward the conception of love in the Renaissance poems than in any particular ebbs and flows of these theories.

      One of the most popular Renaissance ideas on love is that you will fall in love with someone when you are shot with Cupid's arrow with a golden head (fig. 4).  Some followers of Anacreon depicted Cupid as a winged infant carrying a bow and a quiver of arrows.[22]  This type of representation of Cupid in the Greek lyric leaped into prominence with the revival of classical culture in the Renaissance.  A cupid flying above Venus in Botticelli's Primavera (1477) is a typical example.  He is trying to shoot one of the three Graces, probably Chastity, with an arrow of a burning head.  Even a cold-hearted woman who is not prone to burning love cannot but fall in love by means of Cupid's power.

      In an Illustration from Boiardo's Sonetti e Canzone (Fig. 5), one of the most personal and spontaneous collections of fifteenth-century lyrics in Italy, a young man's heart is pierced with Cupid's arrow.  Like a dog bound around his neck, he is in complete command of his lady with whom he has fallen in love.  The power of the arrow is implied in another illustration (Fig. 6), where a man and a woman who are fiercely quarreling would surely begin to love each other once they are hit by Cupid's arrow.

      Cupid's arrow together with the extramission theory is crystallized into a conceit of an arrow of eye-beam.  A hero falling in love with his own adorable lady is often referred to as a man who is pierced by an arrow of light emitting from her eyes.  Astrophil in Sidney's poem says that he was shot with Cupid's arrow, but on the other hand, he often attributes the cause of his love to some thrusts of arrows emitting from his beloved Stella.  While he was enjoying that she had been keeping her eyes on him, and even entreating her to continue doing so, the agony of her gaze was increasing: "I oft my self of them [Stella's eyes] bemoan,/ That through my heart their beamy darts be gone,/ Whose cureless wounds even now most freshly bleed" (Astrophil and Stella, 48: 9-11).[23]  We encounter the same idea in his admirable two predecessors, Petrarch and Ronsard.  The Italian poet confesses his desire to praise the beauty of Laura's eyes and their power to guide him to virtue.  Just as Cupid is a good at shooting, so Laura is a good archer, who shoots arrows without fail: "You, Lady, felt the shot from your eyes pass straight into my inward parts, wherefore my heart must overflow through the wound with eternal tears" (Rime sparse, 87:5-6).  Wounded, he felt the pang: "those arrows which in my left side make bloody him [my heart] who first felt them."(29:30-32).[24]  He said to himself that there would be no reason to weep for his wound which incurred at his heart.  Despite the pain, he determined that he would not complain of his being shot by her gaze.  Ronsard, on the other hand, compared himself to a frisky fawn fallen down with hunter's arrows.  There he deplored that he was shot on his sides with a thousand arrows emitted from Cassandra (Les Amours, 49:12-14).[25]  The same spirit was taken up by Castiglione, an epitome of courtiers.  He mentioned in his Cortegiano how powerful women's eyes are: "women's eyes wait like soldiers in ambush. ……As soon as he is nearby, the [women's] eyes dart forth and bewitch him like sorcerers, especially when they send their rays into the eye of the beloved person".[26]  When he considers the tremendous magnitude of the eye-power, he had to admit that the beloved is more akin to a witch than a dexterous archer.

      We might take the reference of the eye-arrow as one of those refined metaphors which elegant Renaissance courtiers frequently took advantage of when they wanted to exaggerate the alluring charm of their lady.  We might be content to find in the series of this expression a conventional hyperbole inappropriate to represent the reality of life.  One of the Veen’s emblems (Fig. 7) depicts in a little humorous tone the lady slaughtering her lover with some darts shot from her eyes.  This emblem might possibly make us believe the light-arrow is simply a fanciful metaphor.  Once we take this metaphor within the context of an opposition of the intromission with the extramission theory, we might claim that the literary metaphor of the eye-arrow is in the same camp with the latter scientific explanation.  The fanciful expression establishes itself as a representation of a loving but painful experience of love.  It should entail the extramission theory and the revived idea of Cupid's arrow.

 

 

4. Sublimation of Love:

      It is one thing that the idea of the eye-beam as arrow comprehends those scientific and literary backgrounds, but it is quite another that the writers who make use of the idea are well versed in that particular knowledge.  These sophisticated writers are dexterous in playing the conventional role of tormented lover within the poem.  Chances are that they might pretend to suffer crushing despair with the result of the power of the eye.  They might have adopted one of the frequently used metaphors in literature.  We are tempted to make a futile effort to ascertain whether they are the servile imitator of the customary literary metaphor.  We should be more concerned with what intellectual legitimacy is underlying in their use of this metaphor.  The poets' complaint and dissatisfaction are lurking in the state of being pierced with the eye-beam, even if it were a mere pretence.  Once pierced with the arrow of eye-beam, they noticed how painful love is and realized how unsatisfied their desire is.  Ronsard, for example, who has been enjoying the arrival of Spring, found all of his previous enjoyment surpassed by the ever-increasing love for her.  The pierced hero does not grumble over depreciation of his worldly achievements, but is frustrated in his abortive attempts to attain the ennobled position of the beloved superior to himself.  A source of discontent hidden behind these lovers' torment is his failure to reach the ultimate goal where the power of the eye of the beloved should guide him: sublimation of his sexual desire.  It is imperative for him to burn out deceptive, corrupting, and transient desire with the assistance of the power of her beam.  He must amend his carnal desire into the justifiable religio-philosophical category of contemplation.  The light from her eye demands him to overcome what Panofsky called "an 'active' form of love which finds satisfaction within the visual sphere."[27]  He should adopt "a 'contemplative' form of love, which rises from the visible and particular to the intelligible and universal".  In fact, Castiglione sees within the power of sight in the beloved an incarnation of some vaster power: "purge our eyes of cloudy ignorance with the beams of thy light, so that they may no longer prize mortal beauty, and may know that those things which they formerly seemed to see, are not [true blessedness], and that those which they see not, truly are". [28]  The purification of blind vulgar desire through the eye power would offer him the first step toward a state of divine illumination.

      The Platonic tradition is responsible for the conception of two orders of existence, a higher and a lower, different in kind.  The lower order, the visible world of Becoming, is temporal, material, and imperfect.  The higher order, the realm of Being, is eternal, immaterial, and perfect.  Both Platonism and Neo-Platonism do not embrace a striving of being towards becoming, if ever there were one.  "The super-being and the super-one of Neo-Platonism … stands 'above life'".[29]  In the Renaissance, however, both Ficino and Pico conceived the direction toward becoming.  "Man's striving towards God", said Ficino, "would not be possible without a counter-striving of God towards man."  This reciprocal process, a direction from becoming toward being on Man's side and the other drive from being to becoming on God's part, is continuing as long as love works as an activator.  "Love is the motive power which causes God … to effuse His essence into world, and which, inversely, causes His creatures to seek a reunion with Him".[30]  The supreme stage for an individual in love is to return to the point of his original unity, where he is clothed with a continual flash of divine illumination.  In this stage, he completely gives himself up to the divine light, whose strength makes him blind.  "Many who were rapt to the vision of spiritual beauty," wrote Pico, "were … blinded in their corporal eyes."[31]  The consciousness of the lover is annihilated to become one with the divine light.  An opposition between becoming and being, the higher order and the lower, vanishes away from the enlightened lover in a state of ecstasy.  It is towards the realm of Ideas that the eye-light or the arrow-beam emitting from the beloved triggers the fallen soul of the lover to strive:  "Still on me, O eyes, dart down your rays;/ And if from majesty of sacred lights,/ Oppressing mortal sense, my death proceed,/ Wracks triumphs be, which love …doth breed"(Astrophil and Stella, 42: 11-14).  The light stands as a foreshadowing of divine illumination between the divine and the human, between the intelligible and the sensible world.  Frequent references to the metaphor of the light-arrow in the love poems are not a mere fancy, but a credible conceit resonant with contemporary revived Platonic philosophy.

      Actually, we encounter lovers covered with light all over themselves in devotional love emblem books.  While we see lovers dying to his mundane desire and overcoming his sinful nature, we are reminded of the transience of the world and of the omnipresence of the vigilant God's eye.  A relatively large number of emblems gave both Sacred Love and Profane Love an attribution of a bow and arrow.  In Christoper Harvey's Schola Cordis (Fig. 8), Soul whose heart is pierced with the arrow of Sacred Love with brilliant nimbus says, "let the arrow of thy piercing eye…… /Strike through the darknesse of my mind".[32]  Here again we see the same process of the light-arrow from the beloved giving the lover deep psychic wound.  In the sacred emblems, any attachment to this world is rejected and the ascetic attitude toward it is praised.  The poets in this genre tireless transmuted religious morality into an integral part of the poetic structure.  We can agree and sympathize to a certain extent with the ascetic values exemplified in one emblem after another.  When the poem tells us that the desire to be attracted to this sinful world is transitory human weakness, we imagine ourselves in sympathy with the moral message.  But the modern unpopularity with these divine love poems proves whatever in us is of this world prevents us to accept with triumphant song the complete rejection of the secular values.  What the sacred poets present through emblems is an experience that is cut and fitted to a set of moral doctrines.  The divine emblems charged with religious values fail to entail secular impulses which are equally powerful within us.

      The Renaissance love sonnet heavily indebted to the values of humanist tradition refuses to a mere technical device for conveying religious feelings and doctrines.  It exerts itself to transform various personal feelings into polished artifact of lyrical intensity.  Instead of a simple opposition between obedience to God and attachment to one's feelings, the sonneteers express in the very form of the fourteen-line and the set rhymes opposing impulses and contradictory ideas bustling around within mind.  The shaping force in the creation of these feelings and ways of thinking is grounded upon the Neo-Platonic love and its penchant for the luminous world of pure beauty and love.  That shining world stands in opposition to this tenebrous vile world of the senses.  Light must relate and join the two different orders to each other.  It disabuses us of sensual, irrational desire and ennobles us to rely upon two spiritual senses: sight and hearing.[33]  But Light works as a counterproductive and leads the lover into an uncontrollable negative spiral.  We must remind ourselves of how Astrophil reacts after feeling the beams from his loved: "But ah, desire still cries: 'Give me some food'." (71:14).  The love sonneteer never reaches the goal with the help of the eye-light.  Ironically, the light serves as an incentive to awaken him to the beauty of the beloved and to desire for more corporeal relationship with her.  He is more in turmoil than before to be torn between his carnal desire bound to earth and his heavenly desire to aspire to the celestial.  The lover has been pictured as a man of an ambivalent attitude.  The way to heaven is hard to ascend.

      We must remind ourselves that poems are not a means of propaganda, an attractive exterior designed to establish philosophical and theological tenets.  Unlike theoretical works, literature does not have to answer all questions nor need to offer a key to solve them.  It is permitted to represent quarrel within our heart.  However ephemeral the successive traces of lovers are, literature sticks not to the solution by means of philosophy and morality, but to human agony which cannot be solved within the realm of moral philosophy.


 



[1] Francesco Cattani da Diacceto, De Amore libri tres in Opera (Basle, 1564), Bk. III, Ch. 1, 119 cited from Nesca A. Robb, Neoplatonism of the Italian Renaissance (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1935), 206. Mario Equicola, Libro di Nnatura d'Amore, from Robb, 207.

[2][2] Dante said in his Divina Comedia, "sight is the source of love" (Paradiso, 29: 66).

[3] Empedocles, frg. B. 84 (Diels-Kranz, 1: 341-42) translated by. W. K. C. Guthrie in his A History of Greek Philosophy II: The Presocratic Tradition from Parmenides ot Democritus (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1965), .235-236. Simplicius of Cilicia (c. 530 B. C.), a Greek philosopher who produced learned commentaries on his predecessors, says: "Again when he[Empedocles] is speaking of the making of our bodily eyes he introduces this line (fragment  86): 'Out of which divine Aphrodite formed eyes'," and a little later (fragment  87): 'Aphrodite having wrought them with rivets of love'."(, Simplicius, )  E. H. Gombrich pointed out a Renaissance cliché: Venus enraptured the eye, Apollo hearers, and Mercury eloquence. (SIymbolic Imagescones Symbolicae: Studies in the Art of the Renaissance II (Oxford: Phaidon Press, 1978), , II. 59)

[4] Leonard da Vinci, Notebook

[5] "Those [eyes] of the wild-goat and the wolf gleam and shoot out light" (11. 55. 151) ; "Isogonus addsa there are people os who also bewitch with a glance and who kill those they stare at for a longer time, especially with a look of anger." (7. 2. 16-18).  Both are cited from (Pliny, Natural History trans. H. Rackham, Vol III and Vol. II (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press,1982 and 1942).Loeb)

[6] Gaius Julius Solinus, Collectanea rerum memorabilium  ed., Theodore Mommsen (), 26.

[7] John Henry Bridges, ed., The Opus Majus of Roger Bacon (pt. 5. 2. dis. 1, chap. 3), vol II, p. 91.

[8] Aristotle, De sensu tras. W. S. Hett (Loeb), 437b24-25.

[9] S. XXXS. Sambursky, Physics of the Stoics (London: Routledge, 1954), 1-11.

[10] David C. Lindberg, Theoryi of Vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1976), 9; Sambursky, Stoics.

[11] Samuel Y. Edgerton, Jr., The Renaissance Rediscovery of Linear Perspective (New York: Harper and Row, 1976), 97-113.

[12] "Ssurely the emission of rays from our eyes is an emission of a certain light. And it can be gathered that this [light] is emitted, since when we look into far away."()([Lindberg, 90).]

[13] [àLindberg, 118.]

[14] Vasco Ronchi, The Nature of Light: An Historical Survey, trans. V. Barocas, (London: Heinemann, 1971), 64-69.

[15] David Park, The Fire with the Eye: A Historical Essay on the Nature and Meaning of Light (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1999), 100.

[16] The relevance of the painting to this theory was first pointed out in Samuele Y. Edgerton's, The Heritage of Giotto's Geometry (Cornell:XXX), 98.

[17] Timaeus, 45b-d, trans. Francis M. Cconford, Plato's Cosmology: The Timaeus of Plato (London: , 1937), 152-153; Lindberg, 106.

[18] Lindberg, 154.

[19] August Ziggelaard, ed., Chaos: Niels Stensen's Chaos-manuscript Copenhagen, 1659 (Copenhagen: The Danish National Library of Science and Medicine, 1997), 50.

[20] Discourse of the Preservation of the Sight: of Melancholike Ddiseases; of Rheumes, and of Old Aage  trans. Richard Surphlet (1599: London), 37-46.

[21] Petrarch Harvard Univ. Press,

[22] Greek Lyric (Loeb) "Love shot and I ran; when he had no arrows left, he was distressed" (13); "Love drew it [his bow] and hit me right in the heart."(33).

[23] See other examples in the same poem: Sonnet 29:10,

[24][24] "quelle, che nel mancho/ lato mi bagna chi primier s'accorse,/ quadrella" ( MQuite unfortunately, ostnone of both Renaissance and modern the Petrrarrchan critics have not referred the association of Laura's gaze with the arrow to classical sources, but simplydo not mention the source of this idea of light.  They simply  attributed it mention that to the similar painful effect of the instruments. ill Petrarcha conL'espositione di M. Gio. Andrea Gesvaldo (Venice: 1574), 108, and "Non gli occhi come pens{0'} taluno; ché gli occhi non sentono le frecce d'Amore, ma solo sono via per cui quelle scendono a ferire e a piagare il cuore." (Ezio Chi['o]rbikum, ed., Francesco Petrarcha, Le "Rime Sparse" (Milan: Casa Editrice Trevisini, 1924), no pagination.)

[25] The other example of the arrow-light is found in the same poem 141:1.

[26] Castiglione mentioned in his Cortegiano

[27] Panofsky, 143.

[28] Courtegiano, [Robb, 208; Cian's edition O.c. p.430]

[29] Ernst Cassirer, The Indivisual and the usyka and the Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy, trans., Mario Domandi (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1963Chicago:), 32; ルジュモン.

[30] Erwin Panofsky, Studies in Iconology: Humanitic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance (1939; New York: Harper and Row, 1972)Erwin Panofsky, #Studies in Iconology# (19XXX; New York: Harper and Row, 1968), 141Erwin Panofsky,.

[31] Pico, Commentario, (p. 529), quoted from Edgar Wind, Pagan Mysteries in the Renaissance: An Exploration of Philosophical and Mystical Sources of Iconography in Renaissance Art (New York: W. W. Norton, 1968(), 58.

[32] Schola Cordis(1647: London), 133.

[33] Lauro Martines, Power and Imagination: City-States in Renaissance Italy (Harmondsworth: Penguine, 1979), 460.