{"title":"胡安gines de sepulveda的警句。关于安东尼奥·德·内布里亚和胡安·dominguez·德·帕尼扎的赞美归属","authors":"Ramón Gutiérrez","doi":"10.30986/2021.115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During his lifetime, Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda (1490-1573) only published two epigrams: In Stunicam and In Maximilianum archiducem Austriae. On the basis of an eighteenth-century manuscript, preserved at the Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid), Losada ascribed to Sepúlveda two further epigrams: In Aelium Nebrissensem and In Paniza. The former has certainly to be rejected, taking into account chronological and ecdotic arguments. With respect to the latter (which has to be dated between 1514 and 1522), its ascription to Sepúlveda has to be regarded as a hopeful assumption at best: indeed, even if we lack conclusive arguments for denying Sepúlveda’s authorship, conclusive pieces of evidence are missing for supporting such an attribution. A critical edition and translation of the epigrams In Aelium Nebrissensem and In Paniza is also provided.","PeriodicalId":52918,"journal":{"name":"Humanistica Lovaniensia","volume":"340 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Los epigramas de Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda. En torno a la atribución de los elogios de Antonio de Nebrija y de Juan Domínguez de Paniza\",\"authors\":\"Ramón Gutiérrez\",\"doi\":\"10.30986/2021.115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During his lifetime, Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda (1490-1573) only published two epigrams: In Stunicam and In Maximilianum archiducem Austriae. On the basis of an eighteenth-century manuscript, preserved at the Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid), Losada ascribed to Sepúlveda two further epigrams: In Aelium Nebrissensem and In Paniza. The former has certainly to be rejected, taking into account chronological and ecdotic arguments. With respect to the latter (which has to be dated between 1514 and 1522), its ascription to Sepúlveda has to be regarded as a hopeful assumption at best: indeed, even if we lack conclusive arguments for denying Sepúlveda’s authorship, conclusive pieces of evidence are missing for supporting such an attribution. A critical edition and translation of the epigrams In Aelium Nebrissensem and In Paniza is also provided.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52918,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Humanistica Lovaniensia\",\"volume\":\"340 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Humanistica Lovaniensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30986/2021.115\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Humanistica Lovaniensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30986/2021.115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Los epigramas de Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda. En torno a la atribución de los elogios de Antonio de Nebrija y de Juan Domínguez de Paniza
During his lifetime, Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda (1490-1573) only published two epigrams: In Stunicam and In Maximilianum archiducem Austriae. On the basis of an eighteenth-century manuscript, preserved at the Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid), Losada ascribed to Sepúlveda two further epigrams: In Aelium Nebrissensem and In Paniza. The former has certainly to be rejected, taking into account chronological and ecdotic arguments. With respect to the latter (which has to be dated between 1514 and 1522), its ascription to Sepúlveda has to be regarded as a hopeful assumption at best: indeed, even if we lack conclusive arguments for denying Sepúlveda’s authorship, conclusive pieces of evidence are missing for supporting such an attribution. A critical edition and translation of the epigrams In Aelium Nebrissensem and In Paniza is also provided.