CANTO

CANTO. – I. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS

In the Church, chant originally had the purpose of rendering public prayer more solemn; it is therefore eminently liturgical, since liturgy arose together with chant. Just as the liturgies vary, so too are the forms of chant different, each having its own special characteristics. In the group of chants from the Western liturgies, there are at least four forms of chant: Ambrosian, Galilean, Visigothic, and Gregorian (for Ambrosian, Gallican, and Visigothic, Byzantine, Armenian chant, etc., see the corresponding entries). The Gregorian may be called decidedly Roman, because it is of Roman origin and, at least from the time of St Gregory, it took on a character of its own, distinct in both text and style of chant from the other Western liturgies. It must still be called Roman for its immediate sources, which are evidently Roman. Roman for the Latin text it presents, with melodic and rhythmic characteristics, one might say, local, and these to such a degree as to constitute the melodic and rhythmic basis of chant: that is, tonic accent, which forms an infinite variety of cadences and even entire melodies; indivisibility of the first time, or rhythmic unity, which gives it a solemn rhythm well suited to prayer; rhythmic freedom, that is, a succession not predetermined, as in Latin prose or discourse, and free from the metrical concerns of the classical age; harmonious cadence in the phrases, especially in the recitatives, which respond to the cursus of rhythmic prose (see CURSUS).

In addition to these genuinely Roman characteristics, Gregorian chant accepts, as the basis of its modulation, diatonicism and modal freedom, which the West, and Rome in particular, had inherited from the ancients. It must still be called Roman because in its general style or expression sobriety and discretion stand out prominently—characteristics that are eminently Roman and which flowed into the personality of St Gregory the Great, to whom its authorship is attributed.

II. ORIGIN

The work of this Pope (590–604) presupposes an entire formative period, to which contributed the repeated and varied prayer in a loud voice (and therefore modulated) by the Pontiff; his dialogues with sacred ministers and the people; the participation of the latter in the chanting of the psalms; the part reserved for soloists in the melodic passages that interspersed the readings and the rest of the prayers; the Supplications or Litany, which gradually became popular and with which prayer was made for all the needs of the Church; the progressive increase in solemnity, which after the persecutions, and through the work of the popes preceding St Gregory, was given to the liturgy; the Stationes, which contributed in a particular way to defining the feasts and solemnities of the Lord and the saints. For all this, and because the accent is undoubtedly Latin and Roman, and also because the various melodic sources either are indigenous—that is, Western—or were assimilated by the Latin genius, this chant is truly Roman. To these various sources are joined traditions imported from the Church of Jerusalem, or which formed the artistic baggage of the new converts and cantors, more or less vulgarized in different churches of the West. Some of these churches, such as that of Milan, present an indissoluble authority; but among them all notable stylistic divergences reign.

III. THE WORK OF ST GREGORY

Today, criticism no longer disputes the authorship of this chant by the Roman Pontiff. He, by reason of his scientific and artistic training, his personal gifts, his monastic life, his contact with great Latin and non-Latin minds, and his duties as archdeacon, which included the care and direction of subdeacons, cubicularii, readers, cantors, as well as his personal service as head of the choir, was more than sufficiently prepared for the systematization of the Roman rite, which he himself directed. This systematization of solemn liturgy, universally attributed to him, was inseparably linked to chant, because at that time, and given the purpose of the former, one could not be realized without the other. His work, which legend even adorns with marvellous episodes, was confirmed, barely forty years after his death, in the epitaph of Pope Honorius (d. 638), which proclaims that in the divine song “you follow the footsteps of so great a Gregory, taking upon yourself his merit.” St Gregory carried out his work principally through the Schola cantorum, a true school of professionals, which, once it had put into effect the “renovavit, compilavit et auxit” (reform, compilation, and augmentation—that is, the work directed by St Gregory, which sums up the renewal, centonization, and new compositions), executed, taught, and propagated it in Rome and throughout Europe.

This is the only way to explain the double fact, both of the homogeneity of style and procedure discovered in the entire ancient Gregorian repertoire, and of its identical dissemination, constant through various notations or neumes, even when these differed from one another, in so many different countries before the 8th century. If musical manuscripts do not go back beyond this age, and are not more abundant than from the 9th and 10th centuries, nevertheless the testimony to their existence through tradition and palimpsests is certain even in earlier times, such as the 6th century. From the 8th century, in the Carolingian era, the work of St Gregory imposed itself in an absolute manner, though it had not been introduced everywhere for prudential and special reasons. Outside the Gregorian reform remained Milan, which has preserved its melodies up to today, and Spain, which only in the 10th century officially abandoned the Visigothic liturgy and adopted the Roman. Two 12th-century manuscripts preserved in Rome show us, rather than a primitive chant anterior to St Gregory, the work of someone who wished to compose a new liturgical repertoire, with a style much less felicitous than that of Ambrosian or Gregorian chant.

IV. MUSICAL NOTATION

Gregorian manuscripts present a twofold general aspect: a) the natural evolution of the signs themselves; b) the different neumes adopted in the various countries of Europe. The evolution of musical signs depends on the fact that, in the beginning, the signs of tonic accentuation proper to oratory and grammar were adapted, as such, to express sounds of different pitch: high sounds (the acute accent, musically called virga), and low sounds (the grave accent, called punctum). At this stage, the entire sign, as in grammar, represented the tonic value. Such is the notation called oratorical or in campo aperto, because the individual sounds do not have in writing a fixed or relative pitch; so much so that certain pages of manuscripts offer the case in which, once the page is finished, the neumes overflow onto the margins. To specify the tonal value, recourse was had to memory, practice, and, in many manuscripts, melodic signs and letters such as s (sursum), a (altus), i (iussum), d (deprimatur), sometimes accompanied by v (valde), m (mediocriter). Toward the 10th and 11th centuries, the neumes began to follow a graduated arrangement, obeying a line, at first imaginary or ideal, then one of those already traced in dry point on the parchment for the text, and finally to various lines, up to four. But the neume

### Chant — Geographical Distribution of Latin Neumes

In the ancient form, when placed on the staff, the neume was imprecise in terms of accent length; thus it gradually shortened, while thickening its ends (lines or dots), which were fixed in position on the line or space of the staff. Thus, from accentuation, notation was born. In neumes or figures of two or three accents, the tonic elements separated, and the connecting line no longer retained the character of a *virga*, but that of a simple connection.

During the period of oratorical notation in open fields or scriptoria, neumes are distinguished by the characteristics of different nations. Today, they have been classified into at least fifteen notations. These are: 1) Primitive, Northern Italy; 2) Nonantola; 3) Novalesa; 4) Milan; 5) Central Italy (Arezzo, Lucca, etc.); 6) Southern Italy (Benevento, Montecassino, Bari); 7) England; 8) St. Gall; 9) German or Gothic; 10) Metz; 11) Primitive and Norman France; 12) Chartres; 13) Aquitanian; 14) Visigothic, in Spain; 15) Catalan, which developed when the Roman liturgy was adopted in that region.

Almost all these notations, especially St. Gall, Metz, Chartres, and Nonantola, use signs and letters called rhythmic to clarify the value of the neumes. The signs are of two kinds: modification of the neume (rendered broader) or the addition of lines and letters, such as *c* (*celeriter*, ordinary tempo), *nl* (*naturaliter*), *t* (*tenete*), *a* (*augete*), increasing the value, or even *x* (*expecta*), accompanied by delay letters with *v* (*valde*) or *m* (*mediocriter*). There are also other letters, such as *p* (*pressionem*), *pl* (*pulchre*), *f* (*fortiter*), which suggest how meticulous not only the execution but also the expression was, anticipating by many centuries (in the 10th) the modern expression marks. Delicate pronunciation nuances are not overlooked, such as the so-called *liquescent* notes or *semivocales* for diphthongs, liquid letters, doubled letters, etc. Many manuscripts of Beneventan, Aquitanian, and Novalesa notations also contain rhythmic elements; traces of melodic and rhythmic signs are found in English manuscripts.

For pedagogical purposes, various alphabetic notations were devised: those of St. Odo, Hermannus Contractus, Hucbald (or dasian), and Montpellier, among others. For the convenience of singers, Gregorian chant can be translated into modern notation, always preserving the grouping of notes forming the neumes and the appropriate pauses; the single note, by convention, takes the form of an eighth note, which better corresponds to the recitative and rhythmic character and the phrasing of Gregorian melody.

V. **Decline.** — The carelessness of singers, the negligence and incompetence of copyists, the new tastes that in the 13th and 14th centuries produced the *Ars nova* with its *discantus* and *organum* (combination of different voices), the proportional value given to neumes for greater concordance of simultaneous voices, the Renaissance with its passion for revising ancient texts, polyphonic art itself, the neglect and ignorance of liturgical piety—all of which led to a preference for private and subjective acts of devotion and the use of musical instruments—all favored the progressive ruin of Gregorian chant. Its manuscripts were relegated (if they survived destruction) to libraries, until the revival of liturgical spirit and the study of monuments. It was through the work and influence of Fr. L. P. Guéranger, restorer of Roman liturgy in France and monastic life, that many scholars began to revive these manuscripts and seek their interpretation.

Meanwhile, various practical editions of corrupted chant were produced in different countries, and one, by the publisher Postet, prepared by Haberl, gained the reputation of being the work of the great Palestrina and achieved quasi-official status. By 1901, studies by the monks of Solesmes and other scholars had advanced to the point that, after the thirty-year privilege for the Regensburg edition expired, the Pope declared absolute freedom for research.

VI. **Restoration.** — From the election of Pius X (1903), it was expected that, following the initiative begun by Leo XIII with *Nos quidem* (May 17, 1901), an official reform would be imposed *ad codicum fidem*. The volumes of *Paléographie musicale*, published by the monastery of Solesmes (seven folio volumes had already appeared from 1889 to 1901), containing reproductions of numerous manuscripts and studies, as well as various practical editions (*Liber Gradualis*, *Antiphonarium*), which presented a substantially authentic version of the chant, and the edition of the *Liber Usualis* published by A. Mocquereau with numerous critical refinements and the addition of rhythmic signs that popularized that edition, had prepared the way for Pius X’s *motu proprio* on sacred music. In this document, restored chant is already mentioned.

However, to avoid editorial exclusivism, it was decided, by a *motu proprio* of April 25, 1904, that the Holy See would publish a typical edition, for the preparation of which an international commission was established. Practical difficulties prevented its work from leading to a truly critical form, so the task was entrusted solely to J. Pothier, who published the *Kyriale* and the *Graduale* in 1908 and the *Antiphonarium* in 1912. Later, the Vatican Commission was dissolved, and the Sacred Congregation of Rites took direct charge of publishing the other books: *Officium Maioris Hebdomadae*, *In Nativitate Domini*, etc., the editing of which was entrusted to the monks of Solesmes.

VII. **The Critical Apparatus for the Study of Manuscripts.** — These monks, guided by the sure method of A. Mocquereau’s work and genius, after new research and photographs of musical manuscripts from all nations, diligently studied, selected, and compared them, arrived—with the help of critical tables—at a demonstrably authentic version and uncovered many unsuspected treasures of Gregorian chant. Although it is impossible to publish the complete apparatus, the detailed studies published in *Paléographie musicale* and *Monographies grégoriennes* have largely recovered Roman chant.

VIII. **The Rhythm of Gregorian Chant.** — Nothing could be established on this point without first interpreting the manuscripts, studying the entire complex of ancient repertoire, examining the development of musical art, establishing the relationship between text and melody, and taking into account the ancient theorists. This patient work, lasting more than fifty years, with the guidance of a true school and careful consideration of scholars’ observations, has made it possible—after another fifty years of daily practice in the choir—to establish the solid principles of Gregorian rhythm, which are especially outlined in Volume VII of *Paléographie musicale* and in the two volumes *Le nombre musical grégorien* by A. Mocquereau. The Gregorian rhythm, which

It also finds its precedents in the results of studies on Greek rhythm; it is based on indivisible time, and therefore it has a free rhythm that succeeds itself calmly with both binary and ternary times.

This rhythm is accompanied by a great number of expressive nuances, specified by very ancient manuscripts from various countries. Today, with its critical edition, the Church has rediscovered its own manner of praying, singing according to the tradition of the centuries of faith, in a way that satisfies collective piety and gives its liturgical functions a musical interest that no other chant can provide. Its rhythm unites and gathers immense crowds of people and can present to science a testimony of its tradition that is more than a thousand years old.

IX. Gregorian modality

Medieval theorists transmitted to us the theory of the octoechos, which has come down to us. Eight modes are distinguished: four authentic and four plagal, grouped by the identity of their tonic in pairs, each having individually a different dominant or modal center. The ascending scale or range, from lower G to upper A, follows the diatonic genus, that is, the succession by natural intervals, unlike the chromatic genus, which subdivides all whole-tone intervals into two semitones. Gregorian chant does not know the modern leading-tone, that is, the semitone below the tonic.

Relatively recent studies began to observe how the supposed rigidity of the dominants was rather theoretical, arising from the fact that fixed dominants were chosen for the psalm tones. The observation was made regarding the changing of the central notes in the different incises or members, which consequently establish different modal relations in relation to different tonics. This modal freedom already weakened the famous invariable theory of the eight modes. Today, studies have advanced much further, reaching very important conclusions not entirely unexpected even by A. Mocquereau himself. For these new investigations, his own system was followed: to study impartially, and if possible in the totality of the repertoire, the modal facts that it presents. In this study of modality, the fact of the different versions or transpositions offered by certain manuscripts was not neglected, nor the discreet observation of how it was possible, in fixing the melodies on the staff, to forget those modal variations or shifts that, due to the lack of means in writing, were previously performed viva voce. This investigation was flanked by the study of Greek harmonic theory, as well as by the analysis of the Ambrosian repertoire (after its critical edition of 1935–39); A. Mocquereau had already advocated the importance of these studies, especially on Ambrosian chant, for the solution of the Gregorian modal question. In this way, we can admire, more than in the scheme of the simple theoretical trope and the hypothetical system of the octoechos, the modal beauty of Gregorian chant, and above all realize how the melodies were constructed, modally. According to these results, we can continue, scholastically and for the convenience of singers, especially for the chant of the psalms, to classify the melodies as of the first, second, third mode, etc. But theoretical and practical analysis shows us that the modal foundation, the constructive principle followed by those monks of the school of St. Gregory, was, as in Greco-Roman music, what is called the first syllable, or the first compact and coherent sonorous nucleus, that is, the tetrachord, the ascending perfect fourth.

Gregorian Chant — Schemes of Gregorian Modes.

Such was the modal theory contemporary with the first Gregorian composers, who accepted it just as they accepted musical rhythm and the tonic accent of Latin, stripped of classical quantity already out of use. Gregorian chant, modally and rhythmically, is a child of its time.

The diatessaron, no longer descending as in the Hellenic period, but ascending as in Greco-Roman music, can be, as a constructive process, extended to the diapente (fifth) or to the hexachord (sixth). This is demonstrated by countless melodies that do not exceed this ambitus and in which in no way enters the theory of the fifth and fourth, or octave, as presented by the system of the octoechos; an octave which, in the modern sense, with its static notes, was not known by Hellenic or Greco-Roman harmony. Everything else, both for the modal freedom of the dominants and for the arrangement of the final notes, which must be one of the two fundamental notes of the three perfect tetrachords of the diatonic scale (C–F; F–B♭; G–C), that is, C, D, F, G, A, is nothing other than a consequence of the constitution of the tetrachord as the foundation of ancient modality.

Gregorian chant thus brings to musical art a contribution of the greatest importance, confirmed by the testimony of Ambrosian melodies, now critically restored.

X. Aesthetics

After the preceding studies on technique, that is, on rhythm and modality, and on the manner in which all the constituent elements are employed in Gregorian chant, it has been possible to establish the aesthetic laws of Gregorian chant, and this in a synthetic and detailed manner such as has not been possible for any other chant. The studies have been able to advance and gather their results (already hinted at in vols. III and IV of *Pédagogie musicale* of Solesmes) especially after the compilation of the thousands of charts (measuring approximately 40 × 20) that served the monk editors to establish the critical text, and the other very numerous special charts directly compiled for these works.

The aesthetic of Gregorian chant can be appreciated from its modality, rhythm, and contact with the liturgical text—elements which, when studied in the concrete facts of melodies, have enabled us to establish its aesthetic characteristics. These can be summarized in the following points: beauty resulting from diatonicism (with "wandering" passages or intervals, and even so-called chromatic ones); rhythmic variety; periodic form; a threefold general style—syllabic, neumatic, and ornate—according to the purpose of each melody and the moment at which it is performed; musical elements; motifs or melodic designs, psalmodic, strophic, or free melodies, original or unique compositions; type compositions, which have served as adaptations, or *nomos* form, and centonate compositions, true melodic mosaics. It represents a most refined art, traditional and yet new at the same time.

The proper and distinctive expression of Gregorian chant appears from this entire complex of constituent elements as a true tradition that unites, contrary to what many had supposed, Hellenic thought with Christian thought. This aesthetic apparatus shows scholars how capricious are the commentaries that have so often been made on Gregorian melodies, and how, depending on the genre of the composition—original, type, or centonate—or the liturgical moment, the correct understanding of Gregorian chant is to be found. Moreover, Gregorian aesthetics reveals to us a multiplicity of forms and resources for modern composers (not only in style); there are melodies with isolated phrases that recall or develop a true *Lied*, or present a certain form of suite, in which the first part leads toward a new modal form while recalling the initial tonality, with true modulations; others play upon the alternation of motifs, like true *rondeaux* with melodic responses, equal or similar, with variations of motifs, as occurs in many sequences that do not follow the Alleluia theme note for note. All are agreed in admiring an art that was thought to be absent from every musical spirit, and yet

Chant — German neumes from a German school.
Pontifical of the 11th century, f. 72 — Acuta, archive of the Cathedral.

21. — *Enciclopedia Cattolica*, III.
it is precisely this art that has inspired so many forms of composition. In the first place, it enables us to recognize, through the study of its elements—centos, formulas, musical words—whether and when the language is truly Gregorian, just as grammar and a dictionary allow us to appreciate the authentic literature of a language and judge foreign or non-classical words. Secondly, through this aesthetic study, it has been possible to compose new offices and incorporate them into the Gregorian repertoire without their clashing alongside the ancient melodies. A refined art, a remarkable skill that only the initiated have been able to achieve. Through studies on Gregorian aesthetics, composers of modern religious music find a way to see in Gregorian chant an inexhaustible source of themes, motifs, forms, as well as modal combinations, so suggestive as to enrich new compositions and artistically rejuvenate religious art, always in consonance with the prescriptions of the Church. A most abundant field which, perhaps for lack of sufficient familiarity, has not been adequately explored, to the detriment of what religious music could and should be, and its greater spiritual efficacy.

XI. Official chant

The Vatican edition containing the Gregorian edition *ad codicum fidem* of the entire liturgical repertoire is obligatory from the date of its publication (namely, the *Graduale* and *Kyriale*, 1907; the *Antiphonarium*, 1919; the *Officium Defunctorum*, 1927; the *Officium Nativitatis Domini*, 1927; the *Officium Majoris Hebdomadae*, 1929). Likewise, the respective new offices, such as those of Christ the King, the Sacred Heart, etc., are official. This obligation imposes the adoption of this version, and in accordance with the free rhythm with which they were conceived. Reproduction is forbidden without the permission of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which grants it on condition that it be absolutely conformed, in melody and in the form of the notes, without any change, to the typical edition produced by the Vatican Press. Rhythmic signs known as *sostenuti*, inspired by ancient manuscripts, are permitted under due conditions, as they facilitate choirs’ artistic and uniform interpretation of the chant. Should any local melody rest upon manuscripts of high authority, the Sacred Congregation of Rites will judge in each particular case whether it may be performed, even if it differs from the Vatican edition. For sacred ministers at the altar and in their office, it is obligatory to use exclusively Gregorian chant, as in dialogues with the people. The people, as such—men and women—from their places, may always respond and alternate in the authorized parts, such as psalmody, antiphons, hymns, and the Ordinary of the Mass, etc. Nuns in their choir and women alone in the absence of clergy and men may, always from their places, sing even the variable parts, or *Proprium* of the Mass and Office in Gregorian chant. Choirs (*Scholae cantorum*) must be equipped with Gregorian chant books, which greatly aids artistic-religious formation and facilitates the dignified preparation that each singer must bring to acts of worship.

XII. Unaccompanied and accompanied chant

Gregorian chant, a pure melody essentially free in both rhythm and modality, resists in a certain way accompaniment, which is harmonization through simultaneous sounds. Yet the practice of accompanying it exists. The difficulty is evident, but if the accompanist knows how to remain within the just limits of discreet harmonization that does not contradict the melodic line or rhythmic flexibility, the result can be not only useful to the singers but artistically valid in itself. Therefore, Gregorian chant may be accompanied, except on Sundays and ferial days of Advent and Lent, and at the Mass for the Dead, under the absolute condition that “*silet organum dum silet cantus*.” It may not be accompanied, not even to support the pitch, in the Office of the Dead or during the Triduum of Holy Week.

### XIII. THE CHARACTERISTICS ASSIGNED BY PIUS X

Pius X wonderfully declared in his *Motu proprio* of 22 November 1903 that the essential conditions of sacred music—“holiness, artistic excellence, and universality”—are eminently fulfilled by Gregorian chant. He therefore added: “The ancient traditional Gregorian chant must be restored widely in liturgical functions everywhere, and it must be held as certain that an ecclesiastical function loses none of its solemnity even if it is accompanied by no other music than this alone.”

### XIV. CANTUS FIRMUS

In *discantus*, the term *cantus firmus* referred to a melody sung either in a heavy, hammered style or because its rhythmically isolated notes served as the foundation for the *discantus* in the second voice, which embellished them with groups of notes on each liturgical pitch. These notes were also treated heavily in the counterpoint that was freely applied to the melodic line. The term *cantus firmus* was also used in polyphony because it served as a thematic basis for composers. If they found a serious Gregorian melody suitable as a theme for their compositions, they would treat it at length, thus stripping it of all aesthetic characteristics. Eventually, even the simple choral chant of the Church was called *cantus firmus* until the reform, which fortunately revived the true Gregorian melody.

### XV. CANTUS FRACTUS

From the Latin *frango*, *cantus fractus* is chant that disrupts the rhythm of Gregorian melody by altering its essence. By subjecting the chant to meter, it subdivides the value of the measure so that singers introduce various pauses and alter the tonal value of the intervals. This new corruption of Gregorian chant arose after the 16th century, primarily in the 17th. Although it may be supposed to originate from polyphony, it must rather be attributed to bad taste and the complete forgetfulness of the melodic and contoured idea of chant. The Gregorian melody is deformed by the addition of other voices performed in the same *fractus* style. The definition of *cantus fractus* as equivalent to “softened, false, feminine voice” has no artistic value whatsoever. It is even inferior in category to *discantus* and *organum*, which, at times, displayed an interesting harmonic development.

There was *cantus fractus* in *brevis*, in *semibrevis*; with perfect time, marked by a circle (O); and imperfect time, marked by a broken circle (C). This established an entire system of pauses that further shattered the ancient Gregorian melody, rendering it altogether unrecognizable.

### XVI. CANTUS SEMIFIGURATUS

This differs from *cantus fractus* only in the greater freedom it employs in treating the liturgical theme. In forms that almost make it a music with all modern values, it permits many harmonic liberties and gives it a character from which, in a certain way, some modern compositions of unison chant have drawn (see INNODIA; LITURGY; SACRED AND RELIGIOUS MUSIC; MUSICAL NOTATION).

**

---

CANTON, ARCHDIOCESE OF

The archdiocese takes its name from the city of the same name, the residence of the archbishop and the capital of the civil province of Kwangtung (southeastern China). The Christian origins of Canton date back to St. Francis Xavier.

Until 1850, the territory of the mission was part of the Diocese of Macao. In that year, the Apostolic Prefecture of Kwangtung and Kwangsi was erected and entrusted to the Paris Foreign Missions Society. In 1875, the two civil provinces were divided into two distinct Apostolic Prefectures: Kwangtung and Kwangsi. The Prefecture of Kwangtung was elevated to an Apostolic Vicariate on 6 April 1914 under the name of Canton, from which various territories were later detached.

On 11 April 1946, with the establishment of the episcopal hierarchy in China, Canton was elevated to an archdiocese and metropolitan see.

The territory covers 43,332 square kilometers. As of 30 June 1947, the total population was approximately 4,600,000, of whom only 17,145 were Catholic. The missionary personnel consisted of 28 foreign priests and 41 Chinese priests. There were 117 sisters, of whom 62 were indigenous. On the aforementioned date, the mission also had 3 orphanages with 220 orphans, 1 hospital with 512 beds, and 1 hospice with 109 residents. There were 35 primary and secondary schools with a total of 3,307 students.

**

---

CANTONI, CARLO

Philosopher, born in Groppello Cairoli (Pavia) on 12 April 1840, died in Pavia on 11 September 1906. He studied in Turin and Germany (Göttingen), where his teachers were Bertini and Lotze, the latter of whom greatly influenced the formation of his thought. He taught theoretical philosophy at the University of Pisa.

Cantoni may be considered the leading figure of Italian Neo-Kantianism, of which the *Rivista filosofica* served as the official organ during his tenure as director (from 1899 until his death). In polemics with both positivism and scientism as well as with transcendental idealism, Cantoni—rejecting every metaphysical construction as beyond the limits of human reason—sought to reconcile, through a renewed Kantianism or “realist criticism,” the Kantian *a priori* with the empirical-psychological exigencies of positivism. On the one hand, “the world cannot be conceived without thought, and thought is an essential element by which the world and the real exist” (E. Kant, I, p. 421), and on the other, our thought presupposes “the existence of an absolute real,” the necessary foundation of every affirmation (ibid., p. 353). This is the central theoretical motif underlying the most notable and extensive work of Cantoni, *E. Kant* (vol. I, Milan 1879; vol. II, 1878; vol. III, 1884; 2nd ed., Florence 1893–1901), whose importance is almost exclusively historical (it is the first complete critical monograph on Kant in Italian). Of little interest are the *Esposizione critica delle dottrine filosofiche del Jouffroy* (Turin 1862) and the essay *G. B. Vico* (1876).

**

---

The name of an illiterate layman who is reputed to have founded a religious sect in Brussels and Flanders between the late 14th and the first half of the 15th century.

The followers called themselves *Hommes intelligents* and, in matters of belief, appear to have been akin to the Brethren of the Free Spirit. Among the most prominent adherents attracted to his group was the Carmelite William of Hindernissen, near Bergen-op-Zoom, who had previously served as prior in Mechelen and Brussels. The members of the sect rejected prayer, Purgatory, the eternity of punishments, and the veneration of images. Instead, they admitted lust as a demand of the flesh and the eternal salvation of all, including Satan himself.

Peter of Ailly, Bishop of Cambrai, took action against the excessive activity of Cantor in 1410, though the means and outcome of this intervention remain unknown.

Cesare Cantù. — Historian, man of letters, patriot, and statesman, was born at Brivio (Como) on 5 December 1804, and died at Milan on 18 March 1895. Of a deeply religious working-class family, he studied under straitened circumstances as a clerical student in the Milanese gymnasium of S. Alessandro, and, abandoning the idea of entering the ecclesiastical state, began teaching at the age of eighteen in the gymnasium of Sondrio, later moving to that of Como, soon turning towards the fertile field of historical research and erudition.

An indefatigable worker, he read, investigated, and wrote as much as he could, always keeping in view the great and noble ideal of religion and of country. So much so that one may truly say of him that he was at once the first and the last of the most convinced among the Neo-Guelphs.

A lover and student of the beautiful medieval Catholic and patriotic tradition in that full and “romantic” sense which was peculiar to his age, after the publication of his polished little poem Algiro (1828), he soon followed it with his Storia della città e della diocesi di Como (History of the City and Diocese of Como, 1829–31), which so delighted Manzoni, and which remains a typical example among our municipal historical monographs. Already implicit in it was the formula that was to characterize all his historiographical work: “A commune and a saint: these are the elements of which Italians have always composed their liberty.” Thus suddenly brought into well-deserved fame, in 1832 he moved to teach in that same Milanese institute where he had spent the decisive years of his formation, entered into Manzonian circles, and, after a collection of sentimental verses, published in the Indicatore a historical commentary on I Promessi Sposi (Ragionamenti sulla storia lombarda del sec. XVIII, Milan 1833). To this commentary rightly belongs the volume on L’abate Parini e la Lombardia nel secolo passato (The Abbé Parini and Lombardy in the Past Century, 1854), likewise the fruit of that familiarity—not always inwardly harmonious or cordial with the great Lombard—which was later to yield the famous and much-debated Reminiscenze su Alessandro Manzoni (Reminiscences of Alessandro Manzoni, 1882), equally rich in precious and penetrating biographical elements that bring into clear relief the most indicative similarities and differences of character and ideological and practical attitude between the two.

Thus began, and did not end until his death, that whirlwind of manuscript folders, printed proofs, volumes, pamphlets, essays, articles, translations, revisions and reworkings of what had already been published, bibliographical researches and archival discoveries of every kind, not without constant transitions from the historical to the literary field, which, to the vexation and disappointment of tardy and lazy rivals and critics, will always constitute the one true satisfaction of C.

The Austrian niece was imprisoned in 1835 and was released only for lack of evidence after ten months of shrewd and resolute silence. But, irrevocably compromised, he suffered long harassment and immediate loss of his position.

Consequently, he had to rely for his livelihood on his inexhaustible pen, interspersing the Notizia di G. D. Romagnosi (1835) and the well-known and widely read historical novel Margherita Pusterla (1838) with various occasional educational works such as Carlambrogio da Montevecchio (1836), Il Galantuomo (1837), Il Buon fanciullo, Il Giovinetto, down to an article Sulle precauzioni nella cultura del pomo di terra (1848), and the widely circulated Buon senso e Buon cuore (1870).

His release from prison coincided with his meeting the bookseller Pomba, who opened to C. the path to fame in Italy and beyond the Alps. From Pomba’s cherished idea of a historical encyclopedia there sprang and immediately imposed itself with extraordinary and lasting success the thirty-five volumes of the Storia universale (1846), in which history is viewed as the constant and perennial work of Providence, which watches over, guides, and judges men, institutions, and which, through Christianity, leads to the work of pacification, fraternization, and cultural and social civilization through the Church and the Papacy. The author’s inner conviction was clearly revealed: trusting in the healthiest demands for freedom, he foresaw a future far less gloomy than was thought, thanks to the promises of Neo-Guelfism, understood as a great, universal return of civil society to Christianity.

In the persuasive and truly powerful effort of the Storia universale lies without doubt the standard by which his entire work and the singular personality of C. must be judged. If he was not always up to the modern demands of critical and scientific historiography, he nevertheless succeeded in framing an enormous mass of facts, institutions, customs, texts, and figures hitherto obscure or unknown. He thus made an immense heritage of the past readily accessible to scholars and educated people and greatly broadened the restricted historical horizon of his time. While the narrative sections may today be considered outdated, the other parts, no less rich and numerous, of the bibliographical and documentary apparatus remain alive and useful.

After the publication of the Storia universale, though the envy of unworthy rivals and the hostility of anticlerical radicalism continued to persecute C., on the other hand he was generously compensated by the admiring esteem of good people, the fame he did not set great store by, and even that prosperity which, strengthening his innate, inner sense of proud independence, made him write in the preface to his most combative study: “Fortunately, to princes, heroes, and ministers I owe no gratitude other than having left me free to speak the truth, even if they made me pay for it.”

From the complex and multifaceted fabric of the Storia universale there derive almost all the very numerous later writings, among which should be mentioned the Storia di cento anni (1851), the Storia degli Italiani (1854–56), Beccaria e il diritto penale (1862), the Histories of literature (Greek, Latin, and Italian, 1863–66), Gli eretici d’Italia (same date), Alcuni Italiani contemporanei (1868), Italiani illustri (1873–74), Il Conciliatore e i Carbonari (1878), Monti e l’età che fu sua (1879), Gli ultimi trent’anni (same date), etc. Volumes and essays, these and the others, in which there are no lack of eloquent pages, rich in precious insights and severe reflections.

A constructive precursor of Neo-Guelfism and a balanced patriot, C. was one of the few, perhaps the only one, among the Neo-Guelfs who did not allow himself to be carried away in spirit and mind by the euphoric dreams and enthusiasms of the tumultuous biennium 1846–48. Drawing on his great historical experience, he intuited beneath the naively rhetorical veneer the inner weaknesses, foresaw the inevitable dark hour of catastrophe and disappointment, and the consequent final unleashing of extreme radicalism and reactionism, which were to open for a long time in the consciousness of Italian Catholics.