Ross G Caldwell
repost (in case Yatima missed it in the lengthy barrage that has ensued)
Yatima said:
Ross G Caldwell said:
Interesting comment by Ronald Decker
Ross G Caldwell
repost (in case Yatima missed it - no fault imputed)
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Yatima
I see Tarot as a process of evolution of many braches, of which some may prevail, others may die out…But all aof them exhibit Tarot...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So for you, "Tarot" is not an essence, but an "essenceless essence". You choose to call this "essenceless essence" (which you will note is a paradox) Tarot. This essenceless essence exhibits something, which you call Tarot, but you would not describe Tarot itself as an "essential" idea. Perhaps an archetype? But an archetype without form, number, or "essence". An empty idea. Can you explain to me what an empty idea is? Can you tell me how this helps the historian, or even, how it makes any sense at all?
For you, trionfi cards are merely one branch of the "essenceless essence" that is Tarot. There are other branches, such as Black Death iconography, Nothelfer pictures, etc., and you are willing to call those Tarot as well.
How far back are you willing to follow any given branch, and still call it "Tarot"? (I note you capitalize the word tarot). Can I assume it is as far back as you want it to go?
Without the idea of an *essential* component to your definition, how do you exclude anything from your definition of "Tarot"? Or in fact, do you exclude anything at all?
Is Tarot, for you, just everything?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Yatima
I see Tarot as a process of evolution of many braches, of which some may prevail, others may die out…But all aof them exhibit Tarot...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So for you, "Tarot" is not an essence, but an "essenceless essence". You choose to call this "essenceless essence" (which you will note is a paradox) Tarot. This essenceless essence exhibits something, which you call Tarot, but you would not describe Tarot itself as an "essential" idea. Perhaps an archetype? But an archetype without form, number, or "essence". An empty idea. Can you explain to me what an empty idea is? Can you tell me how this helps the historian, or even, how it makes any sense at all?
For you, trionfi cards are merely one branch of the "essenceless essence" that is Tarot. There are other branches, such as Black Death iconography, Nothelfer pictures, etc., and you are willing to call those Tarot as well.
How far back are you willing to follow any given branch, and still call it "Tarot"? (I note you capitalize the word tarot). Can I assume it is as far back as you want it to go?
Without the idea of an *essential* component to your definition, how do you exclude anything from your definition of "Tarot"? Or in fact, do you exclude anything at all?
Is Tarot, for you, just everything?
Ross G Caldwell
Pythagoras
There's nothing strange about Pythagoras in the middle ages.
He's in Euclid. He's in Isidore. He's in Boethius. He's in Ovid (a lengthy discussion of his philosophy in the last book of the Metamorphoses). Bishop Wibold talks about Pythagoras in the 9th century, and says he got the idea for his dice-game from Rithmomachia, the "Pythagorean numbers game".
Pythagoras is almost a saint for the middle ages, like many respected pre-christians. He was never rediscovered - he was always there. That his thought might be present at any given time, should be taken for granted.
Plato is different - everybody knew his name all the time, but excepting the Phaedo, nobody in the Latin west had read anything by him until starting in the 1350s.
There's nothing strange about Pythagoras in the middle ages.
He's in Euclid. He's in Isidore. He's in Boethius. He's in Ovid (a lengthy discussion of his philosophy in the last book of the Metamorphoses). Bishop Wibold talks about Pythagoras in the 9th century, and says he got the idea for his dice-game from Rithmomachia, the "Pythagorean numbers game".
Pythagoras is almost a saint for the middle ages, like many respected pre-christians. He was never rediscovered - he was always there. That his thought might be present at any given time, should be taken for granted.
Plato is different - everybody knew his name all the time, but excepting the Phaedo, nobody in the Latin west had read anything by him until starting in the 1350s.
Ross G Caldwell
Huck said:
It's not a defense, it's an attack ...
But there is until now no contradiction to the 5x14-theory. And when .... we always like to hear real critique.
It is an attack, but it is against a sleeping enemy, as Huck says. The authorities in print are not interested, really. So what?
Several people have come up with the 5x14 idea on their own - before I knew Lothar, I thought of it. Bembo makes sense in 14 cards. I'm not claiming great insight, just the common sense of an open mind.
A girl called Sheryl thought of it, in a post on TarotL in 2003. What happened to her, I don't know.
Decker thought of it in 1974 (IIRC), but it wasn't quite the same.
Maria Grazia Tolfo thought of it, and told me she is writing something about it.
All independent, as far as I know. It is a plausible solution, on the face of it just as likely as the idea that the six other cards are "replacements." From the independence of the idea, I guess it might be more prevalent, since the only people I know who defend the "original standard 22" idea are Depaulis and Hurst. By the acceptance of it by people as diverse as Alain Bougearel and Yatima, it seems to be easy to understand.
I am willing to be wrong, of course. History is full of surprises. It doesn't matter to me what the truth is, because I don't have an emotional investment in the meaning of one or the other structure. Both are beautiful. Both are artistic, and show the creative spirit at work. Both show a playful, ludic spirit at work. I only want to know - I don't care what I end up knowing.
Yatima
Repost (in case Namadev couldn't see it because of Ross's reposts)
Namadev wrote:
"Was it already influencial in 1451 (when Geroge Trebizond made the translation for Pope Nicolas V : was the intial page of the Almagest of Ptolemyidentical to the later edition : Venice edition of 1515)?
In this case, the VS could have been an attempt towards a 78 structure
Was it influential only at the time of Boïardo (inference from the brotherhood between the two Viti's: Raphael's Protagoras)?"
Now, if Boiardo is the first declared 22-structure but is not exhibiting the Tarot-imaginary, it would be really about the 22 entering the Tarot.
When was this connection between Boiardo and neo-pythagorean knowledge? Was it at 1461 or later, as he wrote his poems?
It really could be considered that the 22 came in even later (although it was thought to be established by Boiardo, it could have other recources adding depth to this structure). And even if it does not say anything about the imaginary itself, its interprets the 22 as an entity in its own right, entering the Tarot with other elements (as the images) to grow to what it was after 1500.
I do like your idea.
Yatima
Namadev wrote:
"Was it already influencial in 1451 (when Geroge Trebizond made the translation for Pope Nicolas V : was the intial page of the Almagest of Ptolemyidentical to the later edition : Venice edition of 1515)?
In this case, the VS could have been an attempt towards a 78 structure
Was it influential only at the time of Boïardo (inference from the brotherhood between the two Viti's: Raphael's Protagoras)?"
Now, if Boiardo is the first declared 22-structure but is not exhibiting the Tarot-imaginary, it would be really about the 22 entering the Tarot.
When was this connection between Boiardo and neo-pythagorean knowledge? Was it at 1461 or later, as he wrote his poems?
It really could be considered that the 22 came in even later (although it was thought to be established by Boiardo, it could have other recources adding depth to this structure). And even if it does not say anything about the imaginary itself, its interprets the 22 as an entity in its own right, entering the Tarot with other elements (as the images) to grow to what it was after 1500.
I do like your idea.
Yatima
Namadev
Hi,
I saw your post.
Thank you for being interested.
Research must go on, may I say.
alain
I saw your post.
Thank you for being interested.
Research must go on, may I say.
alain
Yatima
Look, Ross, this is shadow-boxing.
I was introducing a philosophical note of JMD, relating it to your statement, earlier in the thread. This might be true or not; you may find out for yourself. This statement I interpreted as: “JMD is right in his differentiation of view the Tarot in its development: either as a certain state of this development or as the evolution itself. I also would agree that the first option, to seek a certain fixed phase as "the" Tarot-phase would be the more satisfying, but less interesting one.”
No talk about “essence!” Is there? No “essence” is related to you. Or is there any? So what do you want from me…
Now, in a philosophical note, I added, I stated: “Important is indeed the philosophical basis: Whether one wants a “substance” (sub-stare: standing beneath as unchanging essence or structure)—that is the Aristotelean way (in its reception through Descartes) or “process” (which has “nothing” as its fixed center, but is “empty” and therefore a “living whole”)—as was the way of Plato (via Bergson, Whitehead, Deleuze, Derrida…). I side with the latter.”
Have I related you to “essence” or presupposed that you have this view? It was a philosophical statement.
If you read carefully, you will realize that you have taken up the term first in a follow up in relating it to me, personally! Look again! This was the basis to draw on it further…So, Who has been the one to talk about “essence” in relation to us? I, that I know, was not the one…
You have noted further that you are not interest to get into a philosophical discourse. Fine! So then, don’t do it, but don’t blame me…
This is really quixotic! I have no time for shadow-boxing. I will not proceed on these lines of misunderstanding and misconception.
Yatima
I was introducing a philosophical note of JMD, relating it to your statement, earlier in the thread. This might be true or not; you may find out for yourself. This statement I interpreted as: “JMD is right in his differentiation of view the Tarot in its development: either as a certain state of this development or as the evolution itself. I also would agree that the first option, to seek a certain fixed phase as "the" Tarot-phase would be the more satisfying, but less interesting one.”
No talk about “essence!” Is there? No “essence” is related to you. Or is there any? So what do you want from me…
Now, in a philosophical note, I added, I stated: “Important is indeed the philosophical basis: Whether one wants a “substance” (sub-stare: standing beneath as unchanging essence or structure)—that is the Aristotelean way (in its reception through Descartes) or “process” (which has “nothing” as its fixed center, but is “empty” and therefore a “living whole”)—as was the way of Plato (via Bergson, Whitehead, Deleuze, Derrida…). I side with the latter.”
Have I related you to “essence” or presupposed that you have this view? It was a philosophical statement.
If you read carefully, you will realize that you have taken up the term first in a follow up in relating it to me, personally! Look again! This was the basis to draw on it further…So, Who has been the one to talk about “essence” in relation to us? I, that I know, was not the one…
You have noted further that you are not interest to get into a philosophical discourse. Fine! So then, don’t do it, but don’t blame me…
This is really quixotic! I have no time for shadow-boxing. I will not proceed on these lines of misunderstanding and misconception.
Yatima
Namadev
Renaissance Humanism
Humanism 1: An Outline
Albert Rabil, Jr
A. Renaissance Humanism: What it is not
Umanista was a word used by the humanists themselves and meant a practitioner of the studia humanitatis, the liberal arts. The word humanism was never used by them and in fact was coined only in 1808 in Germany to designate the study of the language and literature of one's own culture (as opposed to the study of the language and literature of classical antiquity). The term subsequently came to mean a non-theistic philosophy (as in "Ethical Humanism"). The word is today used pejoratively in political discourse (generally by the religious right) to stand for the degeneration of the contemporary world. These later meanings, of course, have nothing to do with humanism as it is being presented here.
B. Renaissance Humanism: What it is
Humanists were practitioners of the studia humanitatis. The studia humanitatis or liberal arts were grammar, rhetoric, poetry, history, moral philosophy, and (sometimes) politics. Humanists had nothing to do with the professional disciplines of law, medicine, or theology. Pier Paolo Vergerio is explicit in his treatise (On the Education of Boys) [see Humanism 4] <H4.html> both about what the humanists regarded as their "turf" and what they did not.
C. Humanism: A Time Line
Italy
1350-75: Establishment of humanism as a new ideal through Petrarch and his disciple Boccaccio.
1375-1420: The "heroic age" of humanism, its blossoming into a movement most notably in Florence, under the leadership of Coluccio Salutati, head of the city's bureaucracy until his death in 1406; then under Leonardo Bruni.
1420-1527: Spread of humanism from Florence to other cities and courts throughout Northern Italy, but also to Rome and Naples in the south. The invasion of Charles VIII of France in 1494 and the Sack of Rome in 1527 by troops of Emperor Charles V (1519–55) marked the end of the dominance of humanism as a movement in Italian culture, though humanism continued to thrive through the 16th century, developing theories of literary interpretation and canons of critical scholarship related to restoring ancient texts.
1480-1520: The blossoming of humanism in Germany, France, and England, before the movement was incorporated into the larger struggles related to the Protestant Reformation (1517 ff).
D. The Blossoming of Humanism in Florence
Petrarch (1305-1374) and Boccaccio (1313-1375) were the first generation of humanists to make humanism visible to the cultured world. The second generation was led by Coluccio Salutati (1331-1406), chancellor of Florence 1375-1406 and a disciple of Petrarch. Salutati introduced the teaching of Greek into Florence, encouraged the discovery and copying of manuscripts, and pioneered in writing elegant letters which were copied all over Europe.
The third generation of humanism is represented by a number of important figures.
Poggio Bracciolini (1380-1459) was a notary who came to Florence as a young man with no money. Salutati took Poggio under his wing and employed him copying manuscripts. Poggio devised a new kind of script, Roman script, actually copied from Carolingian manuscripts that Poggio believed were classical in origin; this script became the basis for that used in printed books after 1450. But Poggio's most important work was the discovery of classical texts. We can say that between 1333 when Petrarch made his earliest discovery and 1429 when Poggio made his last, virtually all the texts now known of classical antiquity had been recovered. [see Humanism 3] <H3.html> What flowed from these discoveries? At least two things:
Niccolò Niccoli (1364-1437) was a Florentine contemporary of Poggio's. He was a pure classicist (of Latin only; he never learned Greek). Having been left independently wealthy by his father, a wool merchant, he spent his life collecting manuscripts. He became familiar with the classical contents of libraries all over Europe, and when researchers set out to look for manuscripts Niccoli would provide them with lists of manuscripts to look for (the one Latin writing we have from his hand is a list of manuscripts). He became a channel through whom passed all the information about manuscripts related to classical antiquity. He collected over 800, exhausting his wealth in the process; Cosimo dei Medici finally had to support his work. When he died Niccoli left his library to Cosimo (to pay off his debts) and to the city of Florence, stipulating that the books were to be housed in a library which was to be open to the public for study. He thus became directly responsible for the founding of the first public library. Indeed, at the time of his death over 200 of his manuscripts were out on loan. (His books were placed in the library of San Marco, which Cosimo was then building, and later they were divided between what is now the Laurenziano Library and the Bibliotheca Nationale Centrale, both in Florence, where they can still be seen and studied.) Niccoli developed the italic script, also still used in printed books. [see Humanism 3 <H3.html>]
Poggio not only collected manuscripts but also began to collect classical artifacts and to decipher and record stone inscriptions (some of them badly worn) in Rome and elsewhere. When Donatello, Brunelleschi, and Ghiberti came to Rome to study the artistic remains of the classical city and to make measurements of some of its remains [see Humanism 5] <H5.html>, Poggio probably served as their guide. Thus we can say the humanists gave birth to archaeology
Greek Humanists of the Third Generation
Leonardo Bruni (1370-1444), who served sometime after Salutati as Chancellor of Florence (1427-44), was among the best students of the Greek teacher Manuel Chrysoloras (1350-1415), who was brought to Florence by Salutati and taught Greek there for three years, 1397-1400.
Ambrogio Traversari (1386–1439), a monk in the Camaldulensian Order, came to Florence in 1400 and either studied under or was inspired by Chrysoloras. He translated a number of texts of the Greek church fathers: Basil, Chrysostom, Gregory of Nazianzen, Pseudo-Dionysius. He translated one important non-Christian writer, Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Philosophers.
A number of Greeks came to Italy for the Council of Ferrara-Florence during the 1430s, convened at the request of the Byzantine Church to implore help in the face of the Turkish Moslem threat to the Byzantine Empire that led to its collapse in 1453. The most important consequence for Florence was the introduction of Platonism by some of the Greeks present and the subsequent development of a "Platonic academy" in Florence (see immediately below, 3b).
Subsequent Development of Florentine Humanism
During the second half of the 15th century, humanism in Florence lived in close conjunction with the Medicis who controlled the politics of the city. The most notable humanist among them was Angelo Poliziano (1454–94) who developed principles for the establishment of standard editions of ancient texts. [see Humanism 7] <H7.html>
The most important intellectual movement in Florence was Florentine Neoplatonism, which exercised a wide influence throughout Europe. Its leader was Marsilio Ficino (1433–99) who, in the 1460s and 1470s, translated Plato and Plotinus, among others, from Greek into Latin. His translation of Plato marks the first time in over one thousand years that all the works of Plato were known in Europe. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1462–93) included the Cabala and other esoteric writings believed to belong to the "ancient theology" and had as his ambition to unite all truth and knowledge into one system. [see Humanism 8] <H8.html> Florentine Platonism was as influential as humanism during the following century. Though Ficino was following the lead of the humanists (learning the languages and translating and commenting on the texts of ancient authors), he made out of ancient wisdom a philosophical system, which it was never the ambition of humanists to do.
E. The Spread of Humanism Throughout Italy
Venice: The most learned people in Venice were the patricians (a closed class after 1297) and their civic duties prevented their lifelong productivity as humanists. There were, however, many patricians who pursued humanist studies, especially in their early adulthood. One of the earliest was Francesco Barbaro (1390–1454), whose treatise On Wifely Duties (1415), written on the occasion of the marriage of the Florentine patrician Leonardo de' Medici, expressed patriarchal attitudes toward women. Other notable examples are Leonardo Giustiniani (d. 1446) and Bernardo Giustiniani (1408–89). Two who did manage to pursue lifelong careers as humanists were Gregorio Correr (1409–64) and Ermolao Barbaro (1454–93), but they left Venice. Margaret King has detailed the lives of hundreds of Venetian humanists in the appendix to her Venetian Humanism in an Age of Patrician Dominance (Princeton UP, 1986). John Bessarion (1400–1472) willed his library to the city, which became the foundation for the famous Marciano Library. Venice also produced a number of women who wrote in the vernacular but were influenced by humanism, most notably Gaspara Stampa (1523–54), Veronica Franco (1546–91, subject of the recent movie, Dangerous Beauty), Modesta da Pozzo (Moderata Fonte, 1555–92), Lucrezia Marinella (1571–1653), and Arcangela Tarabotti (1604–52). The last three mentioned are among the most prominent "feminists" of the Renaissance. [see Humanism 9] <H9.html> Humanism also established itself in other free cities in Northern Italy: Padua, Verona, Brescia near Venice; and Siena, Pisa, and Genoa near Florence. Padua was one of the few cities in which humanism was prominent in the university.
Princely Courts and Court Cities: Humanists were also active in court cities.
Milan: The largest court city in Italy, ruled by the Viscontis (1350–1450), then by the Sforzas (1450–1535, with breaks). Gasparino da Barzizza (d. 1424) established a school there which had a long history. Uberto Decembrio served the first dynasty, his son Pier Candido Decembrio (1399–1477) served both. Francesco Filelfo (1398–1481) dominated humanist culture there during both regimes for many years during the 15th century.
One of the most notable humanist schools was at Mantua under the Gonzaga family. Vittorino da Feltre (1378–1446) established a school there in 1420. He was an exemplary person, and the curriculum of his school became the basis for the education of the European elite until very recent times. His curriculum did not include law or medicine or theology, but it did include physical training, Latin and Greek, literature and philosophy.
At Ferrara under the Este family a school was established by Guarino da Verona (1370–1460) in 1430. He was in charge of advanced studies and also had a connection with the university there. He developed classical materials for his students' use, including translations from Greek. Like other humanists (and unlike Vittorino) he wrote a good deal. Ferrara subsequently became a center of Italian literary culture, indebted to humanism but different from it (especially in its use of the vernacular and its development of medieval literary models). Boiardo's (1441–94) Orlando innamorato (bks 1–2, 1483; bk 3, 1495) was published there, as was Ariosto's (1477–1533) more famous Orlando furioso (in 3 versions: 1516, 1521, 1532), and Tasso's (1544–95) Gerusalemme liberata (1581). All three of these epic romances celebrated Este ancestry.
The court at Urbino was presided over by Federigo da Montefeltro (d. 1503) who collected a large library, and then by his son Guidobaldo (1472–1508) and by Guidobaldo's wife, Elisabetta Gonzaga (1471–1526). Out of this court came one of the classics of the Renaissance, The Book of the Courtier by Baldassare Castiglione (1478–1529) which appeared in 1528, describing the perfect gentleman (bk 1) and lady (bk 3).
Rome: Most humanists, like Bruni and Poggio, who served as papal secretaries, came to the city from elsewhere and did not remain there. One who spent his life there was Flavio Biondo (1392–1463) who arrived as a mature scholar in 1433 and remained until his death. He wrote a survey of European history from the 5th to the 15th century, Decades (1437–42), argued against Bruni in Concerning the words of the Roman Speech (1435) that ancient Rome had had a common language, Latin, not two parallel languages, one (Latin) for the learned, and another (Italian) for the unlearned. He also contributed to Roman archaeology and topography in his Rome Restored (1444–46). Rome became a center of humanist culture from the time that Pope Nicholas V (1447–55) became the first humanist pope of the city. The Renaissance papacy lasted through the reign of the second of the two Medici popes, Clement VII (1523–34). Renaissance popes included the patrons of Raphael, Michelangelo, and Leonardo da Vinci, among many others. Humanists congealed around the papacy as well, Valla (see below) among them. Pomponio Leto (1428–98) and Bartolomeo Sacchi (Platina, 1421–81) were prominent in a humanist academy that was suppressed by Pope Paul IV (1464–71) in 1468 for its presumed "paganism," though Platina was restored by Paul's successor, Sixtus IV (1471–84), who made him papal librarian. Platina subsequently wrote Lives of the Popes in which he painted an unflattering picture of Paul IV. The humanist academy in Rome was reconstituted under the following generation of humanists at the papal court under the leadership of Paolo Cortesi (1465–1510).
Naples: Alphonso V, king of Aragon, won possession of Naples in 1442 and ruled it until his death in 1558. It was during his reign that Lorenzo Valla (1407–57) wrote On the Donation of Constantine (1444) [see Humanism 7] <H7.html> to support Alphonso's opposition to the papacy, and revised his On Pleasure or On the True Good (a moral philosophical text pitting Christianity against both Stoicism and Epicureanism) and Elegances of the Latin Language, a text long used to teach Latin. It was also at Alphonso's court that the Florentine humanist, Giannozzo Manetti (1396–1459), wrote On the Dignity of Man (1453). [see Humanism 6] <H6.html> Humanist culture was also encouraged by Alphonso's illegitimate grandson, Ferrante I (1458–94). During this period Giovanni Pontano (1422–1503), the most important humanist in Naples, and Jacopo Sannazaro (1457–1530), its most important pastoral poet, flourished. In 1502 Naples became part of the Spanish kingdom and remained so until the beginning of the 18th century.
F. The Spread of Humanism Beyond Italy
France
The earliest humanists in France, as in England and Germany, became so by traveling to and studying in Italy. Guillaume (William) Fichet (1433–92) returned from Italy in 1470, set up a press in the basement of the Sorbonne for the printing of humanist literature, and lectured on the classical Latin poets. But he returned to Italy in 1472 and remained there until his death. His place was taken by Robert Gaguin (1433–1501), the leader of the classical revival in France for the next 25 years.
Lefèvre d'Etaples (Latin name: Faber Stapulensis, 1455–1536) lived in the Academy at Florence and was much influenced by the Neoplatonism of Marsilio Ficino (1433–99). But after 1500 he turned his attention to the Christian fathers, publishing the works of a number of them. From the fathers he moved back to the Bible. His greatest accomplishment was his translation of the Bible; he published the New Testament in 1523 and the Old Testament in 1528. The entire translation was published together in 1530. After the outbreak of the Protestant Reformation he devoted himself to church reform, but he never broke with the Catholic Church.
A number of humanists helped develop Greek studies in France; one Frenchman, Guillaume Budé (1468–1540) made notable contributions to the study of both Latin and Greek classical antiquity, through his commentary on Roman law, the Pandects; and his study of classical coinage, De Asse (1515). After he wrote The Education of a Prince, the king called him to court where he served as an adviser. He was instrumental in having the Collège de France made trilingual. He also had some contact with John Calvin ; his children became Calvinists.
Germany
Germany followed the same pattern as France: Italian influence mingled with native pietistic traditions, resulting after 1500 in a strong humanist movement. The initiators of German humanism were Rudolf Agricola (1444–85) who studied in Italy for ten years (1469–79), then returned to Germany where he taught; and Conrad Celtis (1459–1508), who traveled to various places, including Italy, between 1487 and 1497, then returned to Germany where he taught until his death.
Johann Reuchlin (1455–1522) was the first humanist to know Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. He studied Hebrew from 1492 and published the first Hebrew grammar in 1506. He published a commentary on the Cabala in 1517. His sympathy for ancient Jewish literature led to conflict with those (especially a converted Jew named Pfefferkorn) who wanted all Jewish books burned, a conflict that involved most leading humanists of the time. His supporters published a defense entitled Letters of Obscure Men, 1517), ridiculing his enemies. The struggle was a precursor of the Protestant Reformation in which humanists would also have to take sides.
England
A small circle of English humanists emerged around 1500: William Grocyn (1446–1519), who taught both scholastic and humanist curricula; and his pupils who followed the humanist path alone, Thomas Linacre (1460–1524), John Colet (1466–1519), and William Latimer (1460–1545), all
References :
http://www.globaled.org/nyworld/materials/humanism/H1.html
Humanism 1: An Outline
Albert Rabil, Jr
A. Renaissance Humanism: What it is not
Umanista was a word used by the humanists themselves and meant a practitioner of the studia humanitatis, the liberal arts. The word humanism was never used by them and in fact was coined only in 1808 in Germany to designate the study of the language and literature of one's own culture (as opposed to the study of the language and literature of classical antiquity). The term subsequently came to mean a non-theistic philosophy (as in "Ethical Humanism"). The word is today used pejoratively in political discourse (generally by the religious right) to stand for the degeneration of the contemporary world. These later meanings, of course, have nothing to do with humanism as it is being presented here.
B. Renaissance Humanism: What it is
Humanists were practitioners of the studia humanitatis. The studia humanitatis or liberal arts were grammar, rhetoric, poetry, history, moral philosophy, and (sometimes) politics. Humanists had nothing to do with the professional disciplines of law, medicine, or theology. Pier Paolo Vergerio is explicit in his treatise (On the Education of Boys) [see Humanism 4] <H4.html> both about what the humanists regarded as their "turf" and what they did not.
C. Humanism: A Time Line
Italy
1350-75: Establishment of humanism as a new ideal through Petrarch and his disciple Boccaccio.
1375-1420: The "heroic age" of humanism, its blossoming into a movement most notably in Florence, under the leadership of Coluccio Salutati, head of the city's bureaucracy until his death in 1406; then under Leonardo Bruni.
1420-1527: Spread of humanism from Florence to other cities and courts throughout Northern Italy, but also to Rome and Naples in the south. The invasion of Charles VIII of France in 1494 and the Sack of Rome in 1527 by troops of Emperor Charles V (1519–55) marked the end of the dominance of humanism as a movement in Italian culture, though humanism continued to thrive through the 16th century, developing theories of literary interpretation and canons of critical scholarship related to restoring ancient texts.
1480-1520: The blossoming of humanism in Germany, France, and England, before the movement was incorporated into the larger struggles related to the Protestant Reformation (1517 ff).
D. The Blossoming of Humanism in Florence
Petrarch (1305-1374) and Boccaccio (1313-1375) were the first generation of humanists to make humanism visible to the cultured world. The second generation was led by Coluccio Salutati (1331-1406), chancellor of Florence 1375-1406 and a disciple of Petrarch. Salutati introduced the teaching of Greek into Florence, encouraged the discovery and copying of manuscripts, and pioneered in writing elegant letters which were copied all over Europe.
The third generation of humanism is represented by a number of important figures.
Poggio Bracciolini (1380-1459) was a notary who came to Florence as a young man with no money. Salutati took Poggio under his wing and employed him copying manuscripts. Poggio devised a new kind of script, Roman script, actually copied from Carolingian manuscripts that Poggio believed were classical in origin; this script became the basis for that used in printed books after 1450. But Poggio's most important work was the discovery of classical texts. We can say that between 1333 when Petrarch made his earliest discovery and 1429 when Poggio made his last, virtually all the texts now known of classical antiquity had been recovered. [see Humanism 3] <H3.html> What flowed from these discoveries? At least two things:
Niccolò Niccoli (1364-1437) was a Florentine contemporary of Poggio's. He was a pure classicist (of Latin only; he never learned Greek). Having been left independently wealthy by his father, a wool merchant, he spent his life collecting manuscripts. He became familiar with the classical contents of libraries all over Europe, and when researchers set out to look for manuscripts Niccoli would provide them with lists of manuscripts to look for (the one Latin writing we have from his hand is a list of manuscripts). He became a channel through whom passed all the information about manuscripts related to classical antiquity. He collected over 800, exhausting his wealth in the process; Cosimo dei Medici finally had to support his work. When he died Niccoli left his library to Cosimo (to pay off his debts) and to the city of Florence, stipulating that the books were to be housed in a library which was to be open to the public for study. He thus became directly responsible for the founding of the first public library. Indeed, at the time of his death over 200 of his manuscripts were out on loan. (His books were placed in the library of San Marco, which Cosimo was then building, and later they were divided between what is now the Laurenziano Library and the Bibliotheca Nationale Centrale, both in Florence, where they can still be seen and studied.) Niccoli developed the italic script, also still used in printed books. [see Humanism 3 <H3.html>]
Poggio not only collected manuscripts but also began to collect classical artifacts and to decipher and record stone inscriptions (some of them badly worn) in Rome and elsewhere. When Donatello, Brunelleschi, and Ghiberti came to Rome to study the artistic remains of the classical city and to make measurements of some of its remains [see Humanism 5] <H5.html>, Poggio probably served as their guide. Thus we can say the humanists gave birth to archaeology
Greek Humanists of the Third Generation
Leonardo Bruni (1370-1444), who served sometime after Salutati as Chancellor of Florence (1427-44), was among the best students of the Greek teacher Manuel Chrysoloras (1350-1415), who was brought to Florence by Salutati and taught Greek there for three years, 1397-1400.
Ambrogio Traversari (1386–1439), a monk in the Camaldulensian Order, came to Florence in 1400 and either studied under or was inspired by Chrysoloras. He translated a number of texts of the Greek church fathers: Basil, Chrysostom, Gregory of Nazianzen, Pseudo-Dionysius. He translated one important non-Christian writer, Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Philosophers.
A number of Greeks came to Italy for the Council of Ferrara-Florence during the 1430s, convened at the request of the Byzantine Church to implore help in the face of the Turkish Moslem threat to the Byzantine Empire that led to its collapse in 1453. The most important consequence for Florence was the introduction of Platonism by some of the Greeks present and the subsequent development of a "Platonic academy" in Florence (see immediately below, 3b).
Subsequent Development of Florentine Humanism
During the second half of the 15th century, humanism in Florence lived in close conjunction with the Medicis who controlled the politics of the city. The most notable humanist among them was Angelo Poliziano (1454–94) who developed principles for the establishment of standard editions of ancient texts. [see Humanism 7] <H7.html>
The most important intellectual movement in Florence was Florentine Neoplatonism, which exercised a wide influence throughout Europe. Its leader was Marsilio Ficino (1433–99) who, in the 1460s and 1470s, translated Plato and Plotinus, among others, from Greek into Latin. His translation of Plato marks the first time in over one thousand years that all the works of Plato were known in Europe. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1462–93) included the Cabala and other esoteric writings believed to belong to the "ancient theology" and had as his ambition to unite all truth and knowledge into one system. [see Humanism 8] <H8.html> Florentine Platonism was as influential as humanism during the following century. Though Ficino was following the lead of the humanists (learning the languages and translating and commenting on the texts of ancient authors), he made out of ancient wisdom a philosophical system, which it was never the ambition of humanists to do.
E. The Spread of Humanism Throughout Italy
Venice: The most learned people in Venice were the patricians (a closed class after 1297) and their civic duties prevented their lifelong productivity as humanists. There were, however, many patricians who pursued humanist studies, especially in their early adulthood. One of the earliest was Francesco Barbaro (1390–1454), whose treatise On Wifely Duties (1415), written on the occasion of the marriage of the Florentine patrician Leonardo de' Medici, expressed patriarchal attitudes toward women. Other notable examples are Leonardo Giustiniani (d. 1446) and Bernardo Giustiniani (1408–89). Two who did manage to pursue lifelong careers as humanists were Gregorio Correr (1409–64) and Ermolao Barbaro (1454–93), but they left Venice. Margaret King has detailed the lives of hundreds of Venetian humanists in the appendix to her Venetian Humanism in an Age of Patrician Dominance (Princeton UP, 1986). John Bessarion (1400–1472) willed his library to the city, which became the foundation for the famous Marciano Library. Venice also produced a number of women who wrote in the vernacular but were influenced by humanism, most notably Gaspara Stampa (1523–54), Veronica Franco (1546–91, subject of the recent movie, Dangerous Beauty), Modesta da Pozzo (Moderata Fonte, 1555–92), Lucrezia Marinella (1571–1653), and Arcangela Tarabotti (1604–52). The last three mentioned are among the most prominent "feminists" of the Renaissance. [see Humanism 9] <H9.html> Humanism also established itself in other free cities in Northern Italy: Padua, Verona, Brescia near Venice; and Siena, Pisa, and Genoa near Florence. Padua was one of the few cities in which humanism was prominent in the university.
Princely Courts and Court Cities: Humanists were also active in court cities.
Milan: The largest court city in Italy, ruled by the Viscontis (1350–1450), then by the Sforzas (1450–1535, with breaks). Gasparino da Barzizza (d. 1424) established a school there which had a long history. Uberto Decembrio served the first dynasty, his son Pier Candido Decembrio (1399–1477) served both. Francesco Filelfo (1398–1481) dominated humanist culture there during both regimes for many years during the 15th century.
One of the most notable humanist schools was at Mantua under the Gonzaga family. Vittorino da Feltre (1378–1446) established a school there in 1420. He was an exemplary person, and the curriculum of his school became the basis for the education of the European elite until very recent times. His curriculum did not include law or medicine or theology, but it did include physical training, Latin and Greek, literature and philosophy.
At Ferrara under the Este family a school was established by Guarino da Verona (1370–1460) in 1430. He was in charge of advanced studies and also had a connection with the university there. He developed classical materials for his students' use, including translations from Greek. Like other humanists (and unlike Vittorino) he wrote a good deal. Ferrara subsequently became a center of Italian literary culture, indebted to humanism but different from it (especially in its use of the vernacular and its development of medieval literary models). Boiardo's (1441–94) Orlando innamorato (bks 1–2, 1483; bk 3, 1495) was published there, as was Ariosto's (1477–1533) more famous Orlando furioso (in 3 versions: 1516, 1521, 1532), and Tasso's (1544–95) Gerusalemme liberata (1581). All three of these epic romances celebrated Este ancestry.
The court at Urbino was presided over by Federigo da Montefeltro (d. 1503) who collected a large library, and then by his son Guidobaldo (1472–1508) and by Guidobaldo's wife, Elisabetta Gonzaga (1471–1526). Out of this court came one of the classics of the Renaissance, The Book of the Courtier by Baldassare Castiglione (1478–1529) which appeared in 1528, describing the perfect gentleman (bk 1) and lady (bk 3).
Rome: Most humanists, like Bruni and Poggio, who served as papal secretaries, came to the city from elsewhere and did not remain there. One who spent his life there was Flavio Biondo (1392–1463) who arrived as a mature scholar in 1433 and remained until his death. He wrote a survey of European history from the 5th to the 15th century, Decades (1437–42), argued against Bruni in Concerning the words of the Roman Speech (1435) that ancient Rome had had a common language, Latin, not two parallel languages, one (Latin) for the learned, and another (Italian) for the unlearned. He also contributed to Roman archaeology and topography in his Rome Restored (1444–46). Rome became a center of humanist culture from the time that Pope Nicholas V (1447–55) became the first humanist pope of the city. The Renaissance papacy lasted through the reign of the second of the two Medici popes, Clement VII (1523–34). Renaissance popes included the patrons of Raphael, Michelangelo, and Leonardo da Vinci, among many others. Humanists congealed around the papacy as well, Valla (see below) among them. Pomponio Leto (1428–98) and Bartolomeo Sacchi (Platina, 1421–81) were prominent in a humanist academy that was suppressed by Pope Paul IV (1464–71) in 1468 for its presumed "paganism," though Platina was restored by Paul's successor, Sixtus IV (1471–84), who made him papal librarian. Platina subsequently wrote Lives of the Popes in which he painted an unflattering picture of Paul IV. The humanist academy in Rome was reconstituted under the following generation of humanists at the papal court under the leadership of Paolo Cortesi (1465–1510).
Naples: Alphonso V, king of Aragon, won possession of Naples in 1442 and ruled it until his death in 1558. It was during his reign that Lorenzo Valla (1407–57) wrote On the Donation of Constantine (1444) [see Humanism 7] <H7.html> to support Alphonso's opposition to the papacy, and revised his On Pleasure or On the True Good (a moral philosophical text pitting Christianity against both Stoicism and Epicureanism) and Elegances of the Latin Language, a text long used to teach Latin. It was also at Alphonso's court that the Florentine humanist, Giannozzo Manetti (1396–1459), wrote On the Dignity of Man (1453). [see Humanism 6] <H6.html> Humanist culture was also encouraged by Alphonso's illegitimate grandson, Ferrante I (1458–94). During this period Giovanni Pontano (1422–1503), the most important humanist in Naples, and Jacopo Sannazaro (1457–1530), its most important pastoral poet, flourished. In 1502 Naples became part of the Spanish kingdom and remained so until the beginning of the 18th century.
F. The Spread of Humanism Beyond Italy
France
The earliest humanists in France, as in England and Germany, became so by traveling to and studying in Italy. Guillaume (William) Fichet (1433–92) returned from Italy in 1470, set up a press in the basement of the Sorbonne for the printing of humanist literature, and lectured on the classical Latin poets. But he returned to Italy in 1472 and remained there until his death. His place was taken by Robert Gaguin (1433–1501), the leader of the classical revival in France for the next 25 years.
Lefèvre d'Etaples (Latin name: Faber Stapulensis, 1455–1536) lived in the Academy at Florence and was much influenced by the Neoplatonism of Marsilio Ficino (1433–99). But after 1500 he turned his attention to the Christian fathers, publishing the works of a number of them. From the fathers he moved back to the Bible. His greatest accomplishment was his translation of the Bible; he published the New Testament in 1523 and the Old Testament in 1528. The entire translation was published together in 1530. After the outbreak of the Protestant Reformation he devoted himself to church reform, but he never broke with the Catholic Church.
A number of humanists helped develop Greek studies in France; one Frenchman, Guillaume Budé (1468–1540) made notable contributions to the study of both Latin and Greek classical antiquity, through his commentary on Roman law, the Pandects; and his study of classical coinage, De Asse (1515). After he wrote The Education of a Prince, the king called him to court where he served as an adviser. He was instrumental in having the Collège de France made trilingual. He also had some contact with John Calvin ; his children became Calvinists.
Germany
Germany followed the same pattern as France: Italian influence mingled with native pietistic traditions, resulting after 1500 in a strong humanist movement. The initiators of German humanism were Rudolf Agricola (1444–85) who studied in Italy for ten years (1469–79), then returned to Germany where he taught; and Conrad Celtis (1459–1508), who traveled to various places, including Italy, between 1487 and 1497, then returned to Germany where he taught until his death.
Johann Reuchlin (1455–1522) was the first humanist to know Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. He studied Hebrew from 1492 and published the first Hebrew grammar in 1506. He published a commentary on the Cabala in 1517. His sympathy for ancient Jewish literature led to conflict with those (especially a converted Jew named Pfefferkorn) who wanted all Jewish books burned, a conflict that involved most leading humanists of the time. His supporters published a defense entitled Letters of Obscure Men, 1517), ridiculing his enemies. The struggle was a precursor of the Protestant Reformation in which humanists would also have to take sides.
England
A small circle of English humanists emerged around 1500: William Grocyn (1446–1519), who taught both scholastic and humanist curricula; and his pupils who followed the humanist path alone, Thomas Linacre (1460–1524), John Colet (1466–1519), and William Latimer (1460–1545), all
References :
http://www.globaled.org/nyworld/materials/humanism/H1.html
le pendu
It seems we are agreeing to call "Tarot" the form of 22+16+40.
Anything other than that form may have been part of it's historical development, but unless we have complete confidence that at it's inception it was intended as a 22+16+40, we are unwilling to call it "Tarot". Therefore, we have no 15th Century Tarot decks, as there is no complete 22+16+40, correct?
So what is the first Tarot deck? Boiardo? Does it matter that we also need to have the same familiar "characters"? The Tarot de Paris? Or do we need the correct "iconography" also? Does Tarot not become Tarot until TdM?
And what happens to Kabbalah and Pythagorean theories without the "22" if we agree that Tarot grew from non-tarot... non 22 trump decks?
thanks!
robert
Anything other than that form may have been part of it's historical development, but unless we have complete confidence that at it's inception it was intended as a 22+16+40, we are unwilling to call it "Tarot". Therefore, we have no 15th Century Tarot decks, as there is no complete 22+16+40, correct?
So what is the first Tarot deck? Boiardo? Does it matter that we also need to have the same familiar "characters"? The Tarot de Paris? Or do we need the correct "iconography" also? Does Tarot not become Tarot until TdM?
And what happens to Kabbalah and Pythagorean theories without the "22" if we agree that Tarot grew from non-tarot... non 22 trump decks?
thanks!
robert
Namadev
Re: Pythagoras
Hi ross,
Do you mean that Renaissance had the same approach of pythagorism and it's ideology platonism that the Middle Ages?
I disagree.
We already know that the Hellenistic tradition of Byzantium had kept the heritage of the Alexandrian civilisation.
We know that the rediscovery of the Greek manuscripts with the arrival of numerous Greek scholars re-actualized the Latin scholastic knowledge.
Some elements of informations ...
1)The Dictionnary of history of ideas
See:
Alphabetical
P
Platonism
RHETORIC AND LITERARY THEORY IN PLATONISM <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-62>
PLATONISM IN PHILOSOPHY AND POETRY <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-63>
PLATONISM IN THE RENAISSANCE <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-64>
PLATONISM SINCE THE ENLIGHTENMENT <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-65>
An interesting time-line relative to "humanism" and Renaissance.
2)The point of view of Umberto Eco :
> XIth - XIIth century :
> Pythagoras figured with his tablet on the ancient cathedral of
> Chartres.
>
> For the Mediaval Scholastic, God has ordered the world "numerus,
> pondus et mensura".
> The neo-pythagorean notion of "proportio" is directly derived from
a
> relecture musicologic of Pythagoras harmonics : for the Middle
> Ages the "proportio" is a fondamental metaphysical principle.
>
> Neo-platonism is Christianised through the "Corpus Dionysianum".
>
> The neo-platonism of the Aeropagite isn't the neo-platonism of the
> Renaissance (the passage from the Middle Ages to Renaissance is be
> the "Corpus Hermeticum". Before, the medieval Scholastic
> had "occulted" the only hermetical writing translated in Latin,
> the "Asclepius").
>
> The Christianized version of the "Corpus Dyonysianum" will
transforme
> the Hellenic platonician idea of emanation (God 's emanations) by
the
> notion of participation preserving in essential the divine
> transcendance.
>
> To the Medieval neo-platonism, Umberto Eco applies the
ajectif "weak"
> in opposition to the Renaissance neo-platonism, qualified
as "strong"
Umberto Eco's "Art et beauté dans
l'esthétique médiévale".
How the Middle Ages individuals saw the symbolic level.
>
> Some icons of the TdM link throughout their imagery to the Middle
> ages religious iconography : Christ in Majesty and World for
example.
>
>
>
> The Middle Ages human "subject" saw his "ojective" reality
> throughout a symbolic vision - kind of an "abecedaire" by which the
> Creator would speak to him..
>
> Things weren't what they seemed to be , but were the SIGN
> of something else.
>
> The world and what "happens" in it was the "discourse" that God
> adressed man..
>
> The Christian symbolic "fabulation" gave a "game" of
comprehensibles
> signes -much easier to understand than doctrinal truths.
>
> (This is inherent to Christiannism : in the primitf Christiannism
the
> first Christians had already used this "cryptocrapthical
> camouflage" : for example the image of the Messiah throughout the
> appearance of a fish.)
>
> Later Honorius d'Autun (1025 : synode d'Arras) called the the art
of
> religious painting : "quae est laicorum litteratura".
>
>
> The iconographical "language" of the Middle Ages refers to
a "code" :
> once admitted that the pelican nourrishes his babies with bits of
his
> own flesh (taken from his chest), the pelicaln becomes the symbol
of
> Christ offering his blood pour the salvation of humanity.
> Same mecanism fixing the "signifiance" of the colours :
> white, red and green are benefical but yellow and black are
negative.
> Etc...
>
> This Middle Ages symbolism is different of the Renaissance where
neo-
> platonism and hermetism will impose the concept of the symbol as
an
> apparition or an expression referring to something "occult", which
> cannot be expressed troughout words, something contradictory,
> insaisissable - kind of a revelation of a sacred power.
>
> Umberto Eco argues in favor of a "closed" corpus in the Middle Ages.
> Yet, in conclusion of his essay, he also insists on the "limit" of
> such a "closed" text.
>
> There has been a typical medieval esthetic theory, but this
> closed "theory" wasn't monolithic and differentiate itself with
time.
>
> The cathedrals are a translation of all these "Summae" where each
> thing find it's place, "God and his legion of angels, the
> Annonciation as well as the Last Judgment, Death, the social
orders, Nature, the Devil..."
>
> The theorisation systemic shall nevertheless remain late behind the
> pratical pulsions, always trying to catch up with these
> spontaneous "ferments" trying to integrate them in an esthetical
> image of an "ordo political and an "ordo" theological - but
> this "Maison - Dieu" is like the Tower of the Tarot -attacked many
> ways : by nationalism, by the developpment of vernacular langages,
by
> a new mystical feeling, by new technologies, by social
> transformations, by theotical flottements
Medieval Closed Scholastic Hermeneutic
>
> The notion of Closed Text is linked to the Medieval Catholic
> Scholastic.
> The Text is the Bible, the Sacred Book : the Liber must have One
> signification and must say one thing : the Divine Verb..
> The Scholastic hermeneutic is confident that behind the
> linguistic "surface" of the Text, the Book has been written "digito
> dei" - so the contradictory significations must be fallaceous.
> How then does the Schlastic deal with the plurality of opinions?
> By the use of the "Lectio", the "questio" and the "disputio"and
> the "determinatio".
> The "lectio" will bannish the "wrong lectures" and legitimate
> the "right" ways of commenting.
> The "questio" will class, inventory and debate the diversity of the
> thesis.
> The "respondeo" to the "questio" has one finality : the answer to a
> question cannot be duelle or plural but singular and unique.
> The "disputio" is the public debate who will finally confer to the
> rhetorician the final "mastership" or label of authority.
> These processus in the Medieval Scholastic reveal a panical fear of
> contradiction.
Renaissance lecture of pythagorism and platonism is different from the lecture of the Middle Ages and can be understood in terms of Humanism.
Alain
Ross G Caldwell said:
Hi ross,
Do you mean that Renaissance had the same approach of pythagorism and it's ideology platonism that the Middle Ages?
I disagree.
We already know that the Hellenistic tradition of Byzantium had kept the heritage of the Alexandrian civilisation.
We know that the rediscovery of the Greek manuscripts with the arrival of numerous Greek scholars re-actualized the Latin scholastic knowledge.
Some elements of informations ...
1)The Dictionnary of history of ideas
See:
Alphabetical
P
Platonism
RHETORIC AND LITERARY THEORY IN PLATONISM <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-62>
PLATONISM IN PHILOSOPHY AND POETRY <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-63>
PLATONISM IN THE RENAISSANCE <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-64>
PLATONISM SINCE THE ENLIGHTENMENT <http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-65>
An interesting time-line relative to "humanism" and Renaissance.
2)The point of view of Umberto Eco :
> XIth - XIIth century :
> Pythagoras figured with his tablet on the ancient cathedral of
> Chartres.
>
> For the Mediaval Scholastic, God has ordered the world "numerus,
> pondus et mensura".
> The neo-pythagorean notion of "proportio" is directly derived from
a
> relecture musicologic of Pythagoras harmonics : for the Middle
> Ages the "proportio" is a fondamental metaphysical principle.
>
> Neo-platonism is Christianised through the "Corpus Dionysianum".
>
> The neo-platonism of the Aeropagite isn't the neo-platonism of the
> Renaissance (the passage from the Middle Ages to Renaissance is be
> the "Corpus Hermeticum". Before, the medieval Scholastic
> had "occulted" the only hermetical writing translated in Latin,
> the "Asclepius").
>
> The Christianized version of the "Corpus Dyonysianum" will
transforme
> the Hellenic platonician idea of emanation (God 's emanations) by
the
> notion of participation preserving in essential the divine
> transcendance.
>
> To the Medieval neo-platonism, Umberto Eco applies the
ajectif "weak"
> in opposition to the Renaissance neo-platonism, qualified
as "strong"
Umberto Eco's "Art et beauté dans
l'esthétique médiévale".
How the Middle Ages individuals saw the symbolic level.
>
> Some icons of the TdM link throughout their imagery to the Middle
> ages religious iconography : Christ in Majesty and World for
example.
>
>
>
> The Middle Ages human "subject" saw his "ojective" reality
> throughout a symbolic vision - kind of an "abecedaire" by which the
> Creator would speak to him..
>
> Things weren't what they seemed to be , but were the SIGN
> of something else.
>
> The world and what "happens" in it was the "discourse" that God
> adressed man..
>
> The Christian symbolic "fabulation" gave a "game" of
comprehensibles
> signes -much easier to understand than doctrinal truths.
>
> (This is inherent to Christiannism : in the primitf Christiannism
the
> first Christians had already used this "cryptocrapthical
> camouflage" : for example the image of the Messiah throughout the
> appearance of a fish.)
>
> Later Honorius d'Autun (1025 : synode d'Arras) called the the art
of
> religious painting : "quae est laicorum litteratura".
>
>
> The iconographical "language" of the Middle Ages refers to
a "code" :
> once admitted that the pelican nourrishes his babies with bits of
his
> own flesh (taken from his chest), the pelicaln becomes the symbol
of
> Christ offering his blood pour the salvation of humanity.
> Same mecanism fixing the "signifiance" of the colours :
> white, red and green are benefical but yellow and black are
negative.
> Etc...
>
> This Middle Ages symbolism is different of the Renaissance where
neo-
> platonism and hermetism will impose the concept of the symbol as
an
> apparition or an expression referring to something "occult", which
> cannot be expressed troughout words, something contradictory,
> insaisissable - kind of a revelation of a sacred power.
>
> Umberto Eco argues in favor of a "closed" corpus in the Middle Ages.
> Yet, in conclusion of his essay, he also insists on the "limit" of
> such a "closed" text.
>
> There has been a typical medieval esthetic theory, but this
> closed "theory" wasn't monolithic and differentiate itself with
time.
>
> The cathedrals are a translation of all these "Summae" where each
> thing find it's place, "God and his legion of angels, the
> Annonciation as well as the Last Judgment, Death, the social
orders, Nature, the Devil..."
>
> The theorisation systemic shall nevertheless remain late behind the
> pratical pulsions, always trying to catch up with these
> spontaneous "ferments" trying to integrate them in an esthetical
> image of an "ordo political and an "ordo" theological - but
> this "Maison - Dieu" is like the Tower of the Tarot -attacked many
> ways : by nationalism, by the developpment of vernacular langages,
by
> a new mystical feeling, by new technologies, by social
> transformations, by theotical flottements
Medieval Closed Scholastic Hermeneutic
>
> The notion of Closed Text is linked to the Medieval Catholic
> Scholastic.
> The Text is the Bible, the Sacred Book : the Liber must have One
> signification and must say one thing : the Divine Verb..
> The Scholastic hermeneutic is confident that behind the
> linguistic "surface" of the Text, the Book has been written "digito
> dei" - so the contradictory significations must be fallaceous.
> How then does the Schlastic deal with the plurality of opinions?
> By the use of the "Lectio", the "questio" and the "disputio"and
> the "determinatio".
> The "lectio" will bannish the "wrong lectures" and legitimate
> the "right" ways of commenting.
> The "questio" will class, inventory and debate the diversity of the
> thesis.
> The "respondeo" to the "questio" has one finality : the answer to a
> question cannot be duelle or plural but singular and unique.
> The "disputio" is the public debate who will finally confer to the
> rhetorician the final "mastership" or label of authority.
> These processus in the Medieval Scholastic reveal a panical fear of
> contradiction.
Renaissance lecture of pythagorism and platonism is different from the lecture of the Middle Ages and can be understood in terms of Humanism.
Alain
