The Ancient Greek Sophists in Emanuele Tesauro’s Il cannocchiale aristotelico (1670): Thrasymachus and Gorgias

Humanities Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.3390/h13010033
Teodoro Katinis
{"title":"The Ancient Greek Sophists in Emanuele Tesauro’s Il cannocchiale aristotelico (1670): Thrasymachus and Gorgias","authors":"Teodoro Katinis","doi":"10.3390/h13010033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Emanuele Tesauro’s Il cannocchiale aristotelico (The Spyglass of Aristotle) is widely considered a masterpiece of the Baroque, mainly because of his theory of metaphor as a cognitive tool. But this work is much more than that. Tesauro presents his volume as the ultimate interpretation of Aristotle’s rhetorical art, which is clearly not the case. Indeed, his work is a polycentric discourse on a revolutionary theory of rhetoric that goes beyond any previous treatise written on the subject, including Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Despite his relevance in the history of rhetorical theories, Tesauro’s work is still waiting for a comprehensive study of its own as well as investigations of some of its specific aspects. Furthermore, the majority of the existing studies of Tesauro are in Italian (with only very few in English), which makes it difficult for this text to reach an international public. This essay explores what seems to be a specific aspect that has so far been almost completely neglected: the role played by the ancient sophists in the Cannocchiale aristotelico and in the history of rhetoric that Tesauro redesigns. Tesauro proclaims his fidelity to Aristotle but actually contradicts Aristotle’s anti-sophistic approach. During this analysis, we will discover even more about Tesauro’s pro-sophistic attitude: he grounds the climax of Latin rhetorical tradition in Greek sophistry. This positive assessment of the ancient sophists, especially Thrasymachus and Gorgias of Leontini, coexists with a critique of Socrates. Except for Sperone Speroni, no other early modern Italian author—or European author—has proposed this radical inversion of the canon established by Plato. This reversal makes Tesauro a relevant case study in the on-going exploration of the legacy of ancient sophists in Western literature.","PeriodicalId":509613,"journal":{"name":"Humanities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/h13010033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Emanuele Tesauro’s Il cannocchiale aristotelico (The Spyglass of Aristotle) is widely considered a masterpiece of the Baroque, mainly because of his theory of metaphor as a cognitive tool. But this work is much more than that. Tesauro presents his volume as the ultimate interpretation of Aristotle’s rhetorical art, which is clearly not the case. Indeed, his work is a polycentric discourse on a revolutionary theory of rhetoric that goes beyond any previous treatise written on the subject, including Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Despite his relevance in the history of rhetorical theories, Tesauro’s work is still waiting for a comprehensive study of its own as well as investigations of some of its specific aspects. Furthermore, the majority of the existing studies of Tesauro are in Italian (with only very few in English), which makes it difficult for this text to reach an international public. This essay explores what seems to be a specific aspect that has so far been almost completely neglected: the role played by the ancient sophists in the Cannocchiale aristotelico and in the history of rhetoric that Tesauro redesigns. Tesauro proclaims his fidelity to Aristotle but actually contradicts Aristotle’s anti-sophistic approach. During this analysis, we will discover even more about Tesauro’s pro-sophistic attitude: he grounds the climax of Latin rhetorical tradition in Greek sophistry. This positive assessment of the ancient sophists, especially Thrasymachus and Gorgias of Leontini, coexists with a critique of Socrates. Except for Sperone Speroni, no other early modern Italian author—or European author—has proposed this radical inversion of the canon established by Plato. This reversal makes Tesauro a relevant case study in the on-going exploration of the legacy of ancient sophists in Western literature.
Emanuele Tesauro 的 Il cannocchiale aristotelico(1670 年)中的古希腊诡辩家:特拉斯马科斯和高尔吉亚
埃马努埃莱-特绍罗的《亚里士多德的望远镜》(Il cannocchiale aristotelico)被公认为巴洛克时期的杰作,主要是因为他提出了隐喻作为认知工具的理论。但这部作品的意义远不止于此。特索罗将他的这部著作视为对亚里士多德修辞艺术的终极诠释,但事实显然并非如此。事实上,他的著作是对修辞学革命性理论的多中心论述,超越了包括亚里士多德的《修辞学》在内的以往任何有关修辞学的论著。尽管特索罗在修辞学理论史上具有重要地位,但他的著作仍有待于对其本身进行全面研究,并对其某些具体方面进行调查。此外,现有的关于特索罗的研究大多是意大利语的(只有极少数是英语的),这使得该著作难以走向国际公众。本文探讨的似乎是迄今为止几乎完全被忽视的一个具体方面:古代诡辩家在《亚里士多德大典》和特绍罗重新设计的修辞学史中所扮演的角色。特索罗宣称他忠于亚里士多德,但实际上却与亚里士多德的反诡辩方法相矛盾。在分析过程中,我们将发现更多关于特索罗支持诡辩的态度:他将拉丁修辞学传统的高潮建立在希腊诡辩之上。他对古代诡辩家,尤其是特拉斯马科斯(Thrasymachus)和莱昂蒂尼(Leontini)的高尔吉亚(Gorgias)的积极评价与对苏格拉底的批判并存。除了斯佩罗尼-斯佩罗尼之外,没有其他早期现代意大利作家或欧洲作家提出过这种对柏拉图建立的正典的彻底颠覆。这种颠倒使特索罗成为西方文学界正在进行的古代诡辩家遗产探索的一个相关案例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信