萨罗斯特和让·博丹

Gregor Pobežin
{"title":"萨罗斯特和让·博丹","authors":"Gregor Pobežin","doi":"10.4312/ars.16.1.97-111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the most recognizable thinkers of the 16th century France, Jean Bodin, wrote what is perhaps the first methodological treatise of instructions and guidelines on how to not only read and write but also understand history. With his universal interest in all things human, Bodin predated Marc Bloch’s postulate that historians should ideally be interested in all forms of life if they were to perform their task as dutifully as possible. In 1566 Bodin published one of the most frequently reprinted works, the Methodus ad facilem historiarum cognitionem – “The Method for the Easy Understanding of History”. Although he expressed keen interest and good knowledge of a score of ancient historians, listing them in the fourth chapter of his work (De historicorum delectu – “On the Choice of Historians”), one of them was particularly close to his heart. The Roman historian Gaius Sallustius Crispus who is, according to Bodin, “a most honest author [who] possessed experience of important affairs”, provided Bodin and many of his colleagues with a model (stasis) narrative for discussing a changing world in turmoil – something Bodin was no stranger to in the time of the French religious wars. However, the explanation that it was the rhetorically efficient model narrative that inspired Bodin to copy Sallust’s argument seems unsatisfactory and biographically superficial. Instead, this paper closely analyses the Sallustian chapters that purportedly motivated Bodin’s thinking and proposes that there are little grounds in Sallust for Bodin’s legal and historical framing of absolutist sovereignty.","PeriodicalId":221912,"journal":{"name":"Ars & Humanitas","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sallust and Jean Bodin\",\"authors\":\"Gregor Pobežin\",\"doi\":\"10.4312/ars.16.1.97-111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the most recognizable thinkers of the 16th century France, Jean Bodin, wrote what is perhaps the first methodological treatise of instructions and guidelines on how to not only read and write but also understand history. With his universal interest in all things human, Bodin predated Marc Bloch’s postulate that historians should ideally be interested in all forms of life if they were to perform their task as dutifully as possible. In 1566 Bodin published one of the most frequently reprinted works, the Methodus ad facilem historiarum cognitionem – “The Method for the Easy Understanding of History”. Although he expressed keen interest and good knowledge of a score of ancient historians, listing them in the fourth chapter of his work (De historicorum delectu – “On the Choice of Historians”), one of them was particularly close to his heart. The Roman historian Gaius Sallustius Crispus who is, according to Bodin, “a most honest author [who] possessed experience of important affairs”, provided Bodin and many of his colleagues with a model (stasis) narrative for discussing a changing world in turmoil – something Bodin was no stranger to in the time of the French religious wars. However, the explanation that it was the rhetorically efficient model narrative that inspired Bodin to copy Sallust’s argument seems unsatisfactory and biographically superficial. Instead, this paper closely analyses the Sallustian chapters that purportedly motivated Bodin’s thinking and proposes that there are little grounds in Sallust for Bodin’s legal and historical framing of absolutist sovereignty.\",\"PeriodicalId\":221912,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ars & Humanitas\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ars & Humanitas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4312/ars.16.1.97-111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ars & Humanitas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4312/ars.16.1.97-111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

16世纪法国最知名的思想家之一让·博丹(Jean Bodin)撰写了可能是第一部关于如何阅读和写作以及如何理解历史的指导和指南的方法论论文。博丹对人类的一切事物都有普遍的兴趣,他早于马克·布洛赫的假设,即历史学家如果要尽可能尽职尽责地完成自己的任务,就应该对所有形式的生命都感兴趣。1566年,博丹出版了最常被转载的著作之一,《方法与便利的历史认知》——《易于理解历史的方法》。虽然他对许多古代历史学家表现出浓厚的兴趣和渊博的知识,并将他们列在他著作的第四章(De historicorum delectu——“论历史学家的选择”)中,但其中有一个人特别贴近他的心。罗马历史学家盖乌斯·萨卢斯提乌斯·克里斯普斯(Gaius Sallustius Crispus)——据博丹称,他是“一位最诚实的作家,拥有重大事务的经验”——为博丹和他的许多同事提供了一种模式(停滞)叙事,用于讨论动荡中不断变化的世界——在法国宗教战争时期,博丹对这种叙事并不陌生。然而,解释这是修辞有效的模式叙事启发博丹复制萨罗斯特的论点似乎不令人满意和传记肤浅。相反,本文仔细分析了萨勒斯特的章节,这些章节据称激发了博丹的思想,并提出在萨勒斯特中,博丹对绝对主义主权的法律和历史框架几乎没有根据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sallust and Jean Bodin
One of the most recognizable thinkers of the 16th century France, Jean Bodin, wrote what is perhaps the first methodological treatise of instructions and guidelines on how to not only read and write but also understand history. With his universal interest in all things human, Bodin predated Marc Bloch’s postulate that historians should ideally be interested in all forms of life if they were to perform their task as dutifully as possible. In 1566 Bodin published one of the most frequently reprinted works, the Methodus ad facilem historiarum cognitionem – “The Method for the Easy Understanding of History”. Although he expressed keen interest and good knowledge of a score of ancient historians, listing them in the fourth chapter of his work (De historicorum delectu – “On the Choice of Historians”), one of them was particularly close to his heart. The Roman historian Gaius Sallustius Crispus who is, according to Bodin, “a most honest author [who] possessed experience of important affairs”, provided Bodin and many of his colleagues with a model (stasis) narrative for discussing a changing world in turmoil – something Bodin was no stranger to in the time of the French religious wars. However, the explanation that it was the rhetorically efficient model narrative that inspired Bodin to copy Sallust’s argument seems unsatisfactory and biographically superficial. Instead, this paper closely analyses the Sallustian chapters that purportedly motivated Bodin’s thinking and proposes that there are little grounds in Sallust for Bodin’s legal and historical framing of absolutist sovereignty.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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