THE RECOVERY OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE CULTURE OF HUMANISTS AND THE COMMUNICATIVE ORIGINS OF THE REFORMATION

IF 0.4 2区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES
J. Ledo
{"title":"THE RECOVERY OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE CULTURE OF HUMANISTS AND THE COMMUNICATIVE ORIGINS OF THE REFORMATION","authors":"J. Ledo","doi":"10.1017/tdo.2019.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ideas and opinions about communication and intellectual exchange underwent significant changes during the transition from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. The rediscovery of parrhesia by the humanists of the Quattrocento is one of the least studied of these changes, and at the same time, paradoxically, one of the most fascinating. My main argument in these pages is that the recovery of Hellenistic “freedom of speech” was a process that took place from the thirteenth century through the first decade of the sixteenth century; thus it began well before the term παρρησία was common currency among humanists. This is the most important and counterituitive aspect of the present analysis of early modern parrhesia, because it means that the concept did not develop at the expense of classical and biblical tradition so much as at the expense of late-medieval scholastic speculation about the sins of the tongue and the legitimation of anger as an intellectual emotion. To illustrate this longue durée process, I have focused on three stages: (i) the creation, transformation, and assimilation by fourteenth-century humanism of the systems of sins of the tongue, and especially the sin of contentio; (ii) the synthesis carried out by Lorenzo Valla between the scholastic tradition, the communicative presumptions of early humanism, and the classical and New Testament ideas of parrhesia; and (iii) the systematization and transformation of this synthesis in Raffaele Maffei's Commentariorum rerum urbanorum libri XXXVIII. In closing, I propose a hypothesis. The theoretical framework behind Maffei's encyclopaedic approach is not only that he was attempting to synthesize the Quattrocento's heritage through the prism of classical sources; it was also that he was crystallizing the communicative “rules of the game” that all of Christianitas implicitly accepted at the beginning of the sixteenth century. Taking the three ways of manifesting the truth considered by Maffei and fleshing them out in the figures of Erasmus of Rotterdam, Celio Calcagnini, and Martin Luther just before the emergence of the Protestant Reformation could help to explain from a communicative perspective the success and pan-European impact of the Reformation.","PeriodicalId":44907,"journal":{"name":"TRADITIO-STUDIES IN ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL HISTORY THOUGHT AND RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/tdo.2019.15","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TRADITIO-STUDIES IN ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL HISTORY THOUGHT AND RELIGION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/tdo.2019.15","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Ideas and opinions about communication and intellectual exchange underwent significant changes during the transition from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. The rediscovery of parrhesia by the humanists of the Quattrocento is one of the least studied of these changes, and at the same time, paradoxically, one of the most fascinating. My main argument in these pages is that the recovery of Hellenistic “freedom of speech” was a process that took place from the thirteenth century through the first decade of the sixteenth century; thus it began well before the term παρρησία was common currency among humanists. This is the most important and counterituitive aspect of the present analysis of early modern parrhesia, because it means that the concept did not develop at the expense of classical and biblical tradition so much as at the expense of late-medieval scholastic speculation about the sins of the tongue and the legitimation of anger as an intellectual emotion. To illustrate this longue durée process, I have focused on three stages: (i) the creation, transformation, and assimilation by fourteenth-century humanism of the systems of sins of the tongue, and especially the sin of contentio; (ii) the synthesis carried out by Lorenzo Valla between the scholastic tradition, the communicative presumptions of early humanism, and the classical and New Testament ideas of parrhesia; and (iii) the systematization and transformation of this synthesis in Raffaele Maffei's Commentariorum rerum urbanorum libri XXXVIII. In closing, I propose a hypothesis. The theoretical framework behind Maffei's encyclopaedic approach is not only that he was attempting to synthesize the Quattrocento's heritage through the prism of classical sources; it was also that he was crystallizing the communicative “rules of the game” that all of Christianitas implicitly accepted at the beginning of the sixteenth century. Taking the three ways of manifesting the truth considered by Maffei and fleshing them out in the figures of Erasmus of Rotterdam, Celio Calcagnini, and Martin Luther just before the emergence of the Protestant Reformation could help to explain from a communicative perspective the success and pan-European impact of the Reformation.
人文主义文化中言论自由的恢复及其改革的交际根源
在从中世纪到文艺复兴时期的过渡时期,关于沟通和知识交流的观念和观点发生了重大变化。四世纪人文主义者对直言的重新发现是这些变化中研究最少的一个,同时,矛盾的是,也是最迷人的一个。我在这几页的主要论点是,希腊“言论自由”的恢复是一个从13世纪到16世纪头十年的过程;因此,早在πα ̄ ̄ησ ̄ ̄α这个词成为人文主义者的通用货币之前,它就开始了。这是目前对早期现代直言的分析中最重要也是最反命题的方面,因为这意味着这个概念的发展并没有以古典和圣经传统为代价,而是以中世纪晚期学术界对舌头之罪的思考为代价,以及愤怒作为一种智力情感的合法性。为了说明这一漫长的过程,我把重点放在三个阶段:(I) 14世纪人文主义对舌罪系统的创造、改造和同化,尤其是争论罪;(ii)洛伦佐·瓦拉(Lorenzo Valla)对学术传统、早期人文主义的交流假设以及古典和新约直言的思想进行了综合;(iii)拉斐尔·马菲的《城市图书馆评注》(Commentariorum rerum urbanorum libri XXXVIII)对这一综合的系统化和转化。最后,我提出一个假设。马菲百科全书式的方法背后的理论框架不仅是他试图通过古典资料的棱镜综合四世纪的遗产;他还将交际性的“游戏规则”具体化了,这些规则在16世纪初被所有基督教徒所接受。在新教改革出现之前,将马菲所考虑的三种表现真理的方式,在鹿特丹的伊拉斯谟、塞利奥·卡尔卡尼尼和马丁·路德的人物身上加以充实,有助于从交际的角度解释宗教改革的成功及其对泛欧洲的影响。
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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The TRADITIO Network has now been furnishing information about all facets of traditional Roman Catholicism, answering questions both privately and publicly, for over 13 years now, longer than any other traditional site on the Internet. When we started, even the Vatican site didn"t exist! We wish that we could show you all of the personal letters we have received from troubled souls who have found here clear, traditional, and honest answers to their questions, free of organizational bias. Thousands of these have reverted or converted to the traditional Roman Catholic Faith as a result.
×
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