[Transcriber's Note: This e-book was prepared from a 1960 G.P. Putnam's Sons reprint of the 1900 edition of _The Revival of Learning_, originally published by Smith, Elder, & Co., London, as Volume II of John Addington Symonds's _Renaissance in Italy_ series. Obvious printer errors have been corrected without note; other errors are indicated by a [Transcriber's Note]. Older spellings of Italian names (e.g. "Lionardo" for "Leonardo") have been retained as they appear in the original.] _JOHN ADDINGTON SYMONDS_ _The Revival of Learning_ At tibi fortassis, si, quod mens sperat et optat, Es post me victura diu, meliora supersunt Secula; non omnes veniet lethaeus in annos Iste sopor; poterunt, discussis forte tenebris, Ad purum priscumque jubar remeare nepotes. Tunc Helicona novâ revirentem stirpe videbis, Tunc lauros frondere sacras; tunc alta resurgent Ingenia atque animi dociles, quibus ardor honesti Pieridum studii veterem geminabit amorem. PETRARCHÆ _Africa_, _lib. ix_ PREFACE[1] [Footnote 1: To the original edition of this volume.] This volume on the 'Revival of Learning' follows that on the 'Age of the Despots,' published in 1875, and precedes that on the 'Fine Arts,' which is now also offered to the public. In dealing with the 'Revival of Learning' and the 'Fine Arts,' I have tried to remember that I had not so much to write again the history of these subjects, as to treat their relation to the 'Renaissance in Italy.' In other words, I have regarded each section of my theme as subordinate to the general culture of a great historical period. The volume on 'Italian Literature,' still in contemplation, is intended to complete the work. While handling the theme of the Italian Renaissance, I have selected such points, and emphasised such details, as I felt to be important for the biography of a nation at the most brilliant epoch of its intellectual activity. The historian of culture sacrifices much that the historian of politics will judge essential, and calls attention to matters that the general reader may sometimes find superfluous. He must submit to bear the reproach of having done at once too little and too much. He must be content to traverse at one time well-worn ground, and at another to engage in dry or abstruse inquiries. He must not shrink from seeming to affect the fame of a compiler; nor, unless his powers be of the highest, can he hope altogether to avoid repetitions wearisome alike to reader and to writer. His main object is to paint the portrait of national genius identical through all varieties of manifestation; and in proportion as he has preserved this point of view with firmness, he may hope to have succeeded.