{"title":"19世纪中期至20世纪后期英俄研究对但丁神秘主义的解读","authors":"M. Medovarov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2022.1.086-102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This contribution has a historiographical nature and is devoted to the interpretations of the esoteric content of Dante's works made by British and Russian scholars from the middle of the nineteenth to the second half of the twentieth century. In particular, the meaning of the British tradition of interpreting Dante's esotericism – from George MacDonald to C.S. Lewis, with a special focus on Charles Williams – is here explored. The neo-Romantic theology of Williams is analyzed along with its rigid connection between the metaphysics of love and the doctrine of Empire. This connection, in fact, makes it possible to compare Williams' achievements with the later works of Guido de Giorgio and Romano Guardini. In this regard, Williams' interpretation of Beatrice image appears to be close to Sophiology. The main achievements of Western European studies of Dante’s esoteric heritage are then compared with the contributions of the Russian specialists. The role of Rev. Georgy Florovsky, who was interested in Dante’s metaphysics of the Empire and was the first to introduce Williams' works among Russian authors, is highlighted. Particular attention is paid to Rev. Pavel Florensky’s “Imaginary Numbers in Geometry” – a work that was ahead of its times both in approaching the “Divine Comedy” from a cosmological point of view and in making a unique attempt of interpreting its physical and mathematical structure. Finally, this article considers the works of the late Soviet (1960s – 80s) and post-Soviet academic scholars, who reexamined a number of esoteric issues in Dante’s output. The author concludes that – unlike what happened in Italy and in France – both in Great Britain and in Russia it is not possible to speak of a historiographical continuity within the studies on Dante’s esotericism. However, this fact does not prevent from emphasizing the outstanding achievements of some individual Russian, English, and Scottish scholars.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interpretations of Dante’s Esotericism in British and Russian Studies from the Mid-19th to the Late 20th Century\",\"authors\":\"M. Medovarov\",\"doi\":\"10.17588/2076-9210.2022.1.086-102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This contribution has a historiographical nature and is devoted to the interpretations of the esoteric content of Dante's works made by British and Russian scholars from the middle of the nineteenth to the second half of the twentieth century. In particular, the meaning of the British tradition of interpreting Dante's esotericism – from George MacDonald to C.S. Lewis, with a special focus on Charles Williams – is here explored. The neo-Romantic theology of Williams is analyzed along with its rigid connection between the metaphysics of love and the doctrine of Empire. This connection, in fact, makes it possible to compare Williams' achievements with the later works of Guido de Giorgio and Romano Guardini. In this regard, Williams' interpretation of Beatrice image appears to be close to Sophiology. The main achievements of Western European studies of Dante’s esoteric heritage are then compared with the contributions of the Russian specialists. The role of Rev. Georgy Florovsky, who was interested in Dante’s metaphysics of the Empire and was the first to introduce Williams' works among Russian authors, is highlighted. Particular attention is paid to Rev. Pavel Florensky’s “Imaginary Numbers in Geometry” – a work that was ahead of its times both in approaching the “Divine Comedy” from a cosmological point of view and in making a unique attempt of interpreting its physical and mathematical structure. Finally, this article considers the works of the late Soviet (1960s – 80s) and post-Soviet academic scholars, who reexamined a number of esoteric issues in Dante’s output. The author concludes that – unlike what happened in Italy and in France – both in Great Britain and in Russia it is not possible to speak of a historiographical continuity within the studies on Dante’s esotericism. However, this fact does not prevent from emphasizing the outstanding achievements of some individual Russian, English, and Scottish scholars.\",\"PeriodicalId\":445879,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Solov’evskie issledovaniya\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Solov’evskie issledovaniya\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2022.1.086-102\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2022.1.086-102","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
这篇文章具有史学性质,致力于对19世纪中期到20世纪下半叶英国和俄罗斯学者对但丁作品中深奥内容的解释。特别地,从乔治·麦克唐纳到c·s·刘易斯,特别是查尔斯·威廉姆斯,英国传统解读但丁的神秘主义的意义在这里进行了探讨。本文分析了威廉斯的新浪漫主义神学,并分析了他将爱情形而上学与帝国主义紧密联系在一起的观点。事实上,这种联系使得将威廉姆斯的成就与Guido de Giorgio和Romano Guardini的后期作品进行比较成为可能。在这一点上,威廉姆斯对比阿特丽斯形象的解读似乎接近于诡辩。西欧研究但丁深奥遗产的主要成就,然后与俄罗斯专家的贡献进行比较。对但丁的帝国形而上学感兴趣的乔治·弗洛夫斯基牧师(Rev. Georgy Florovsky)是第一个在俄罗斯作家中介绍威廉姆斯作品的人。特别值得注意的是帕维尔·弗洛伦斯基牧师的《几何学中的虚数》——这部作品在从宇宙学的角度接近“神曲”以及在解释其物理和数学结构方面做出了独特的尝试方面都走在了时代的前面。最后,本文考虑了苏联后期(20世纪60年代至80年代)和后苏联学术学者的作品,他们重新审视了但丁作品中一些深奥的问题。作者的结论是,不像在意大利和法国发生的那样,在英国和俄罗斯,在但丁的神秘主义研究中,不可能有历史上的连续性。然而,这一事实并不妨碍我们强调一些俄罗斯、英国和苏格兰学者的杰出成就。
Interpretations of Dante’s Esotericism in British and Russian Studies from the Mid-19th to the Late 20th Century
This contribution has a historiographical nature and is devoted to the interpretations of the esoteric content of Dante's works made by British and Russian scholars from the middle of the nineteenth to the second half of the twentieth century. In particular, the meaning of the British tradition of interpreting Dante's esotericism – from George MacDonald to C.S. Lewis, with a special focus on Charles Williams – is here explored. The neo-Romantic theology of Williams is analyzed along with its rigid connection between the metaphysics of love and the doctrine of Empire. This connection, in fact, makes it possible to compare Williams' achievements with the later works of Guido de Giorgio and Romano Guardini. In this regard, Williams' interpretation of Beatrice image appears to be close to Sophiology. The main achievements of Western European studies of Dante’s esoteric heritage are then compared with the contributions of the Russian specialists. The role of Rev. Georgy Florovsky, who was interested in Dante’s metaphysics of the Empire and was the first to introduce Williams' works among Russian authors, is highlighted. Particular attention is paid to Rev. Pavel Florensky’s “Imaginary Numbers in Geometry” – a work that was ahead of its times both in approaching the “Divine Comedy” from a cosmological point of view and in making a unique attempt of interpreting its physical and mathematical structure. Finally, this article considers the works of the late Soviet (1960s – 80s) and post-Soviet academic scholars, who reexamined a number of esoteric issues in Dante’s output. The author concludes that – unlike what happened in Italy and in France – both in Great Britain and in Russia it is not possible to speak of a historiographical continuity within the studies on Dante’s esotericism. However, this fact does not prevent from emphasizing the outstanding achievements of some individual Russian, English, and Scottish scholars.