work, occasionally holds public sessions; but it is an effete institution, that has little more than an archaeological interest.  It was very different, however, in the sixteenth century.  Then, in point of numbers and reputation, it was the outstanding literary academy of Italy, and occupied the commanding position from which the all-powerful humanists of the previous age had been driven by the counter reformation.  It is chiefly, however, by its attacks upon Tasso that it is now known to fame.

No sooner was the Gerusalemme published than comparisons began to be instituted between it and the Orlando Furioso of Ariosto.  This latter poem was then in the zenith of its reputation; it was regarded as the supreme standard of literary excellence, and it was slavishly imitated by all the inferior poets of Italy.  It was inevitable, therefore, that the two works should be compared together.  But as well might the AEneid of Virgil be compared with the Metamorphoses of Ovid.  The Orlando Furioso is a romantic poem in the manner of Ovid, whereas the Gerusalemme Liberata is an epic poem in the manner of Homer and Virgil.  No Italian poet previous to Tasso had written an epic; and Tasso himself distinctly avowed that he had chosen that form of poetry deliberately; not only as being more congenial to his own mind, but also that he might avoid following in the steps of Ariosto, whose work he regarded as, in its own department, incapable of being excelled, or even equalled.  In reply to the generous letter of Ariosto’s nephew, who wrote him a letter of congratulation, he said, “The crown you would honour me with already adorns the head of the poet to whom you are related, from whence it would be as easy to snatch it as to wrest the club from the hand of Hercules.  I would no more receive it from your hand than I would snatch it myself.”

But in spite of the altogether different nature of the two poems, and in spite of the distinct disavowals of Tasso, the critics persisted in accusing him of the presumption of entering the lists with Ariosto.  And in this idea they were strengthened by the injudicious praises of Camillo Pellegrini, who in a dialogue entitled Caraffa or Epic Poetry, likened the Orlando Furioso to a palace, the plan of which is defective, but which contains superb rooms splendidly adorned, and is therefore very captivating to the simple and ignorant; while the Gerusalemme Liberata resembles a smaller palace, whose architecture is perfect, and whose rooms are suitable and elegant without being gaudy, delighting the true masters of art.  This squib was published in Florence, and at once aroused the hostility of the Della Cruscans.  They were already prejudiced against Tasso on account of his connection with the court of Ferrara, between which and the court of Florence there was a bitter rivalry; and that offence was intensified by the unguarded way in which he spoke of the Florentines as being