In three volumes. Edited by Academician S. D. Skazkin (executive editor), L. A. Kotelnikova, and V. I. Rutenburg. 1970. 579 pp. The print run is 19250. Price 2 rubles. 50 kopecks.

The history of medieval Italy aroused considerable interest among Russian pre-revolutionary scholars, but it increased especially during the Soviet period1 . Now our literature is being updated with a new generalizing work prepared by the Institute of General History of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR - "History of Italy", the first volume of which, covering the period from the fifth to the eighteenth century, has already been published. The authors ' team * took into account both Soviet and foreign, mainly Italian, studies, and used data from many sources. Unlike the bourgeois historians, the authors did not limit themselves to the framework of political history or small excursions into the field of socio-economic development, but drew a comprehensive picture of the history of medieval Italy. The peculiarity of this country - the lack of straightforwardness and uniformity of its development-determined the features of the presentation of the material: the authors do not so much strive to give a consistent description of events as to reveal in each of the chapters the core problem of a particular era (p. 7). Adhering to this principle, the editors entrusted the writing of individual chapters to those scientists who specifically deal with this problem, by preserving the overall proofs and conclusions of each of them. Therefore, as the preface points out, "in some cases, different points of view may clash" (p.7).

The leading problems of Italian history include, first of all, the transition from antiquity to the Middle Ages. In its treatment of this question, modern bourgeois medieval studies, as a rule, adheres to the "theory of continuity" - the continuity of development from ancient or ancient Germanic orders to feudal ones. This theory is strongly opposed by Soviet Medievalists .2 The book is convincing so far-

1 See I. Rutenburg. The history of medieval Italy in the works of scientists of the XIX-early XX centuries "The Middle Ages". Issue 25, 1964; L. M. Bragina. Review of the book" Essays on the history of Italy (476-1918)". "The Middle Ages". Issue 21, 1962; O. L. Weinstein. Soviet Medieval Studies, L. 1968.

* M. L. Abramson, L. M. Batkin, E. V. Vernadskaya, L. M. Bragina, L. G. Katushkina, L. A. Kotelnikova, A. I. Neusykhin, A.D. Rolova, V. I. Rutenburg, V. V. Samarkin, S. D. Skaakin.

2 See materials of the scientific session " Results and tasks of studying the genesis of feudalism in Western Europe "(May 30-June 3, 1966)."Middle Ages". Issue 31, 1968, page 12, 19, 31, 37, 88 - 109, 110 - 111; E. V. Gutnova. The main stages of development of Soviet medieval studies. "Questions of History", 1969, N 1, p. 88; Z. V. Udaltsova.

page 172

It is shown that in Italy the transition from a slave-owning formation to a feudal one was not the result of a continuum of ancient or barbarian institutions, but was a consequence of their synthesis, which took place in the process of the Ostrogothic and Lombard conquests, as well as the evolution of the social system on the territory of Italy itself.

The specificity of the development of feudal relations in Italy, which has long been noted by researchers, is clearly traced in the book based on materials related to the history of the northern and central part of the country. Much attention is paid by the authors to rural communities and communes. The opinion of Italian bourgeois historians that communities did not exist as economic and administrative organizations before the founding of rural communes is rejected with good reason. In fact, there was a community in the IX - XII centuries, although it was very different from the one described by F. A. Kropotkin. Engels of the German mark, being weaker than it. This was due to the long existence of Roman private property. In addition to rural communes, the authors rightly attribute the specific feudal development of Northern and Central Italy to the appearance of transitional elements of a semi - capitalist nature (medzadria, hired workers) in the countryside at the end of the XIII-XIX centuries, which was due to a number of factors, the most important of which was the presence of a large number of cities.

The problem of the peculiarity of the development of the South is solved in a different way in the book. Its specificity, the authors write, consisted primarily in the slow pace of the feudalization process, which was largely determined by strong Romanization. The main way of feudal subjugation of the peasants was here the sale of their allotments. An acute shortage of labor prompted feudal lords to attach peasants to the land. Not having the means of extra-economic coercion, numerous small and medium-sized feudal lords were interested in assistance from the centralized state that developed in the XII century. The development of the feudal mode of production was completed in the South only by the end of the XIII century. The book notes that the centralization of the state that took place in the first half of this century was fragile, since it was not based on the creation of an internal market and on an alliance with cities.

When analyzing the history of feudal cities, bourgeois historians are also known to adhere to the "continuum theory" 3 . The book rightly emphasizes that "continuity of development" is a myth, if we mean by this the absence of a qualitative change and the immutability of historical essence" (p. 201). As noted by F. Engels, the few cities that the Middle Ages inherited from antiquity, were dilapidated and lost their former civilization4 . They were essentially large villages. Characteristically, they retained only a 20th or 30th part of their population (p. 201). Famous in the VIII-IX centuries. Italian cities emerged on a completely new basis and were fundamentally different from the ancient ones. These were already feudal cities. One of the most important problems of their history is the nature of commodity production, which has reached great development in Italy. The book emphasizes that it was an integral part of the feudal economy. In the 13th century, the medieval urban economy in its "classical form" not only reached the peak of its development, but also began to disintegrate. This, as the authors note, was "the eve of a qualitative leap, which, undoubtedly, can be noted in the XIV century, when for the first time in history, manufacturing appeared within the walls of an Italian city, the first cell of early capitalism" (p. 274).

The authors argue with bourgeois historians "(A. Schulte, A. Sapori, P. Bonfante, F. T. Perran, A. Fanfani) 5, who saw in early capitalism in Italy the triumph of the capitalist mode of production. In fact, as Karl Marx noted, these were only "the first rudiments of capitalist production." 6 The book reveals the progressive nature of capitalist relations in Russia.

2 A. V. Gutnova. Genesis of feudalism in the countries of Europe (Report at the XIII International Congress of Historical Sciences). Moscow: Y70, pp. 5, 10, 17, 18.

3 See A.D. Lyublinskaya and O. L. Vainshtein. Problems of Medieval Studies at the XII International Congress of Historians in Vienna. "The Middle Ages". Issue 30, 1967, p. 267.

4 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 7, p. 3 " 60.

5 See V. I. Rutenburg. An essay from the history of early capitalism in Italy. Florentine Companies of the XIV century. Moscow-L. 1951, pp. 7-8.

6 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. Vol. 23, p. 728.

page 173

Italy of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the development of which indicates that "there can be no question of any complete decline of the Italian economy in the sixteenth century" (p. 477), since such a decline occurred only in the seventeenth century. The authors note that "early capitalist relations led to new methods of exploitation, more productive in their results, but also more cruel to the workers" (p. 287). This is especially true in a city that had long before become the scene of intense class struggle. The book describes the specifics of the struggle of the Italian pre-proletariat: the inconsistency of its program due to the lack of prospects for the struggle, the inevitability of a departure from the hired workers of their artisan allies, the influence of the entire situation of immaturity of capitalist relations and the rule of feudalism (p. 294).

Under these circumstances, the authors write, it was inevitable that the class struggle would take the form of heretical movements. Unlike bourgeois historians, who most often reduce the reasons for the emergence of the latter to the filiation of ideas, 7 and strive, as was clearly shown in the report of the West German researcher G. Grundmavn at the X International Congress of Historians (1955), to deny the class essence of heretical doctrines, 8 the book convincingly proves that heretical movements were a form of opposition to the feudal system, that they get a special boost with the development of cities, the increase in the economic role and the growth of socio-political activity of various strata of the urban population - both "burghers and Plebeian lower classes" (p. 347). The authors clearly reveal the essence of the teaching of the Apostolic brothers sect as a peasant-Plebeian heresy, which had "exclusively revolutionary views" (p. 349), and give a picture of the peasant uprising of 1304-1307 led by Dolcino. Objectively anti-feudal, historically progressive actions of the Italian peasantry in the XIV-XV centuries are quite reasonably characterized in the book as "a new natural stage in the class struggle of the peasantry, caused by new conditions of socio-economic development of society" (p.374).

In contrast to bourgeois scholars who identify the Renaissance with the cultures of the Middle Ages, the authors of the "History of Italy" naturally interpret this era as a progressive process of an anti-feudal nature, which goes back to antiquity and especially in its initial stage is characterized by nationality and humanitarian universality. The Renaissance is considered in the book not only as a certain stage in the development of art, philosophy and science, but also as "the interaction of all factors of the epoch, including economic, political and related phenomena of acute class struggle" (p. 381). It is of fundamental importance that the authors point out that the first creators of the Renaissance were townspeople and peasants (p.375). Here, too, Marxist historians are resolutely opposed to bourgeois science, which denies the decisive role of the masses in history. A vivid example of this is the report of the French scientist J. Delumo at the XIII International Congress of Historical Sciences, where the" humanist society "of the Renaissance, consisting, according to the author," of technical specialists, artists, merchants, lawyers, intellectuals", is considered as a thin film "on the surface of all Western humanity" 9 .

The authors emphasize that "the ideology of the Renaissance was created by the young, emerging bourgeoisie, although it was not devoid of a chivalrous, noble and popular stream" (p. 383). At the same time, the book notes that "among artists and sculptors we see quite a few representatives of the people", and correctly states that "they were the creators not of the medieval culture of artisans, but of the early bourgeois culture of the Renaissance with all its contradictions" (ibid.). The book deals with questions about the chronological boundaries of the Italian Renaissance (the beginning of the XIII or XIV century, the end of the XVI or the beginning of the XVII century), its identity and role in the development of European cultures" The authors reveal the content of the term "humanism", which does not express the whole complex of cultural phenomena, but only a worldview

7 See, for example, S. Runciman. The Medieval Manichee. Cambridge. 1947.

8 G. Grundmann. Eresie e nuovi ordini religiosi nel secolo XII. "Comitato Internazionale di Scienze Storiche. X Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche. ReLazioni". Vol. HI. Firenze. 1955.

9 Zh. Delumo. The development of organizational consciousness and methodological thought in Western European Renaissance thinking. Moscow, 1970, p. 1.

page 174

It was a combination of the old and the new, although it largely reflected early capitalist tendencies and played a progressive social role (p. 425).

The book shows the class shifts in Italian society in the 16th and 17th centuries, the growth of the feudal nobility and its specific weight, the plight of the masses and their struggle during the period of feudal reaction and the decline of Italy. The greatest decline, the authors conclude, occurs in the eighteenth century, and at the same time a new upsurge begins, associated with the disintegration of feudal relations and the development of capitalism, a process that is to some extent facilitated by the policy of "enlightened absolutism".

While appreciating the overall work of the author's team, it is impossible not to note the gaps and stiff judgments that exist in the book. When describing the development of feudalism in Northern and Central Italy in the XX-XIII centuries, virtually nothing is said about the class struggle of the peasants, although it is known that in the XI - XII centuries even their armed actions took place .10 The reader may get the impression that one of the features of the development of feudalism in these regions of the country was the long absence of class struggle in the countryside. It seems inaccurate to say that in Northern and Central Italy a large number of cities survived from the Roman era, which were significantly modified during the Middle Ages " (p. 127). It is hardly correct to refer to the "semi - capitalist elements" of those permanent rural wage-earners who in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries worked in the fields, orchards, and vineyards of urban merchants and industrialists (p.123) for wages and sometimes for food. Such workers were always available in medieval cities, even, as noted by F. P. Blavatsky. Engels, at the lowest stages of their development ." This wage labor was associated with the semi-agrarian character of the feudal city of the XI-XIV centuries, and not with the origin and development of capitalist relations.

The chapter "Southern Italy of the 9th-13th centuries" does not mention the most brutal methods used by the Hohenstaufens in the person of Henry VI to establish their power in the Kingdom of Sicily (1194). Describing these methods, Karl Marx noted that Henry VI behaved like a barbarian in Sicily 12 . When discussing the foreign policy of Charles I of Anjou (1268-1285), the authors did not take into account his close ties with Rome, which were of exceptional importance for him as an ally of the pope. Charles I twice held the highest office in the Roman commune, the first time in a full decade. He maintained financial connections not only with Florentine and Sienese banks, as the book states, but also with Roman bankers, from whom he received loans, often very large, from 1258 to 1271 .13 The chapter "The Period of Urban Communes" re-evaluates the role of the Valvassor knights: they are called "the leading military and political force" in the struggle to liberate cities such as Milan, Rome, Florence and Genoa from the power of the seigneurs (p.224). As for Milan, the Soviet historian V. V. Stoklitskaya-Tereshkovich proved the inconsistency of this view back in 195414, and regarding Rome, the authors themselves write that in the revolt of 1143, which led to the creation of the commune, "not only the Popolans took part, but also the knights" (p.227), that is, they actually recognize the primacy of the masses of the people. It can be assumed that they played the same role in Florence, Genoa and other Italian cities. It seems to us that the authors do not clearly distinguish between the two circumstances here: kto " grad played a crucial role in the communal movement and who managed to seize power in the communes. The content of the chapter " Humanism "focuses on the totality of" properly humanistic ideas " (p.421), which creates a certain discrepancy with the previous chapter, in which the Renaissance is considered as a versatile process. The authors do not fully disclose the views of individual humanists, and not always

10 See L. A. Kotelnikov a. The situation and class struggle of the dependent peasantry in Northern and Central Italy in the XI-XIII centuries. Issue VI. 1955, p. " 8-121.

11 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch. " 7, p. 354.

12 See The Archive of Marx and Engels, vol. V, p. 176.

13 "I registri della cancelteria angioina". Ricostruiti di Riccardo Filangieri con la collaborazione degli archivisti Napoletani I - X Napoli. 1950 - 1957, I, pp. 181 - 185- VII pp. 93, 107 - 108.

14 See V. V. Stoklitskaya-Tereshkovich. Class struggle in Milan in the XI century and the birth of the Milan Commune. "The Middle Ages". Issue V. 1954.

page 175

the inconsistency of these views is shown. The book does not mention, for example, Petrarch's patriotism (although it was combined with nationalism and even chauvinism), nor does it mention his scathing criticism of the papal court and, at the same time, the poet's negative attitude towards the masses. The authors confine themselves to stating the inconsistency of Petrarch's views (p. 395), without revealing their essence. From the essay on Machiavelli (pp. 416-418), it is impossible to get the idea that he "was a statesman, historian, poet and, moreover, the first military writer worthy of mention in modern times." 15 However, some other prominent figures in the book are also not given due attention. This applies, in particular, to the chapter "Feudal reaction and the decline of Italy", where only a few lines are devoted to Tommaso Campanella - a martyr, a fighter for the freedom of his homeland, one of the first representatives of utopian socialism.

N. A. Bortnik

15 K. Marx and F. Engels. Op. 20, p. 346

page 176

Permanent link to this publication: