scholarly journals Unpublished Manuscripts of Italian Bestiaries

PMLA ◽  
1905 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 380-433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth McKenzie

Before the history of Italian bestiary literature can be satisfactorily written, considerable preliminary work remains to be done. When Lauchert published his Geschichte des Physiologus (Strassburg, 1889), although he devoted a certain amount of space to the poets from the Sicilian school to Ariosto, he was not aware that any bestiaries earlier than that of Leonardo da Vinci existed in Italian prose. Three years later, Goldstaub and Wendriner, Ein Tosco-Venezianischer Bestiarius (Halle, 1892), published the text of a manuscript belonging to the Biblioteca Comunale at Padua, and also an account of seven other manuscripts, all of which are in Florentine libraries. This book (cited hereafter as G-W) is the most comprehensive study of the Italian bestiaries now available, and may safely be taken as the basis for further investigation. The present paper, based in large part on work done in the libraries of Florence, Naples and Paris, is offered as a contribution to the study of the subject, and will, it is hoped, be of value in indicating a large amount of material, including several important manuscripts, which was entirely unknown to Goldstaub and Wendriner. An important phase of the subject, namely, the use of bestiary material by the Italian poets of the thirteenth century, has been investigated by Dr. M. S. Garver, of Yale University, in a dissertation which he hopes to publish soon.

Traditio ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 334-341
Author(s):  
J. N. Hillgarth

In my view it will not be possible to write the detailed history of the Jewish community in Majorca until a great deal more preliminary work has been done on the sources for that history. The following sketch of the subject is limited to the period before 1500, and, except for some references to conversos, to the time before 1391. It seems best to begin with a brief discussion of the context within which the Jewish community of Majorca emerged in the later Middle Ages and of the historical background which gave it its peculiar importance.


2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 486-521
Author(s):  
Thomas Albrecht

Thomas Albrecht, “‘That Free Play of Human Affection’: The Humanist Ethics of Walter Pater’s The Renaissance” (pp. 486–521) This essay aims to refute received, persistent misconceptions of Walter Pater’s Studies in the History of the Renaissance (1873), and of aestheticism generally, as an asocial and amoral sensualism, and as a deliberate separating of art from human lives and the world. Contrary to these misconceptions, it finds a humanist ethical vision in The Renaissance, specifically in the essays Pater devotes to Botticelli, Michelangelo, and Leonardo da Vinci. Drawing on an established post-Enlightenment, post-Romantic tradition of Victorian secular humanism, Pater defines this vision in terms of human sympathies for the feelings and suffering of other persons. And he defines it in aesthetic terms, in terms of art’s unique capacity to depict human feelings and suffering, and thereby to arouse sympathies in the viewer. At the same time, the essay contends that Pater in The Renaissance also defines his ethical vision in a more unprecedented, radical way. Beyond the solicitation of human sympathies, he frames it in terms of a fundamental uncertainty and unpredictability, a fundamental freedom and singularity, of human ethical relationships and responses. For Pater, this uncertainty and freedom are the qualities that make an ethics genuinely ethical. Pater finds these qualities, and this kind of genuine ethics, epitomized in the unpredictability and freedom of human aesthetic responses, including his own, to art and beauty.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Vito Marino ◽  
Galyna Shabat ◽  
Gaspare Gulotta ◽  
Andrzej Lech Komorowski

Purpose. Robotic surgery is currently employed for many surgical procedures, yielding interesting results. Methods. We performed an historical review of robots and robotic surgery evaluating some critical phases of its evolution, analyzing its impact on our life and the steps completed that gave the robotics its current popularity. Results. The origins of robotics can be traced back to Greek mythology. Different aspects of robotics have been explored by some of the greatest inventors like Leonardo da Vinci, Pierre Jaquet-Droz, and Wolfgang Von-Kempelen. Advances in many fields of science made possible the development of advanced surgical robots. Over 3000 da Vinci robotic platforms are installed worldwide, and more than 200 000 robotic procedures are performed every year. Conclusion. Despite some potential adverse events, robotic technology seems safe and feasible. It is strictly linked to our life, leading surgeons to a new concept of surgery and training.


1986 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 381-401 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.F.K. Koerner

RESUME Bien que le terme 'sociolinguistics' n'ait ete introduit dans le vocabulai-re technique de la linguistique qu'en 1952 par Haver Currie et que la socio-linguistique ne soit devenue une sous-discipline importante de la science du langage que depuis les annees soixante (v. Bright 1966), cet article main-tient qu'une telle approche du langage existait depuis longtemps, peut-etre plus de cent ans. En d'autres mots, nous avangons qu'il y avait une sociolin-guistique bien avant la lettre. En effet, on retrouve dans la linguistique generate de Wiliam Dwight Whitney (1827-1894) et de Heymann Steinthal (1823-1899) et dans quel-ques articles de Michel Breal (1832-1915) des annees 60 et 70 du siecle dernier des observations qui mettent en relief la nature sociale du langage. Les dialectologues de la meme periode, surtout en France et dans les pays de langue allemande, etaient tout a fait conscients du fait que l'etude des patois, des parlers et des langues orales en general devait etre guidee par des considerations sociologiques (v. Malkiel 1976). Dans la linguistique compa-ree et historique c'est Antoine Meillet (1866-1936), eleve de Saussure et de Breal et collaborates de la revue d'Emile Durkheim, Vannee sociologique, au debut de notre siecle, qui a insiste sur l'importance de l'aspect social (et sociologique) dans l'etude du changement linguistique (par ex., Meillet 1905). Avec ses eleves de Paris, surtout Joseph Vendryes (1875-1960), Alf Sommerfelt (1892-1965) et Marcel Cohen (1884-1974), Meillet etablit l'ecole sociologique du langage (par ex., Vendryes 1921; Sommerfelt 1932; Cohen 1956). Enfin, il existe — a cote de la dialectologie et de l'histoire des langues — encore une troisieme source de la sociolinguistique: l'etude du bilinguisme (par ex., Max Weinreich 1931; Haugen 1953). Ces trois traditions de la recherche linguistique se trouvent toutes reunis dans l'etude de Uriel Weinreich (1926-1967), Languages in Contact (1953), et puisque l'ouvrage de William Labov de 1966, The Social Stratification of English in New York City, qui est souvent cite (bien a tort) comme point de depart de la sociolo-gie moderne, representait sa these de doctorate ecrite sous la direction de Weinreich, il n'est pas etonnant de voir ces traditions, surtout celles de la linguistique geographique et de la linguistique historique, maintenues dans l'oeuvre de Labov (par ex., 1976, 1982). SUMMARY Although the term 'sociolinguistics' was not introduced into linguistic nomenclature before 1952 (see Currie 1952) and the field became a recognized field of research in the late 1960s only (e.g., Bright 1966), it is clear that the subject did not begin two decades ago. Indeed, an investigation into the sources of 'sociolinguistics' reveals that its beginnings go back at least 100 years, to the work of William Dwight Whitney (1827-1894), Heymann Steinthal (1823-1899), Michel Breal (1832-1915), and others. However, these were the first programmatic statements and a number of developments in the study of language were necessary to converge upon the kind of sociolinguistics which most students of language associate with the name of William Labov (e.g., Labov 1966), at least in North America. Interestingly enough, it is also in the work of Labov (e.g., 1972) that the origins of 'sociolinguistics' (to some extent in contradistinction to the 'sociology of language' approach associated with Basil Bernstein, Joshua A. Fishman, and others) could be traced, although neither Labov nor the prolific Dell Hymes has written anything on the history of sociolinguistics. (Indeed, the only paper that comes close to it was written by an outsider to the field, the great Romance scholar Yakov Malkiel, in 1976.) In my paper, I shall demonstrate that there are essentially three major traditions of investigation that led to 'sociolinguistics', namely, (1) Dialectology, especially the work done in German-speaking lands and in France from the 1870s onwards (e.g., Georg Wenker [1852-1911], Jules Gillieron [1854-1926], and others) — part of which had been undertaken in an effort to verify and possibility to support the neogrammarian 'regularity hypothesis' of sound changes; (2) Historical Linguistics, in particular the kind advocated by Antoine Meillet (1866-1936) and his school (e.g., Meillet 1905; Vendryes 1921), which developed into a 'science sociologique' of linguistics in general (Sommerfelt 1932) and a 'sociologie du langage' (e.g., Cohen 1956) among the younger Meillet disciples, and (3) Bilingualism Studies (e.g., Max Weinreich 1931; Haugen 1953), traditions all of which can be found united in the 1953 study of Uriel Weinreich (1926-1967), who happens to have been Labov's teacher and mentor.


Literary Fact ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 261-277
Author(s):  
Mikhail V. Stroganov

The history of literary associations, including the history of any journal, is primarily the history of people's relationships with each other. In such a history, personal likes and dislikes play the most essential role. This law of personal sympathies and antipathies manifests itself very expressively in a rather short history of the journal “Severny Vestnik”, published by L.Ya. Gurevich (1891–1898). The article offers significant additions to comments to published texts on the history of the journal. A.L. Volynsky and N.K. Mikhailovsky showed equal harshness and indelicacy in their polemics, but their contemporaries almost unanimously sided with Mikhailovsky as an older and deserved writer. Volynsky acquired a reputation as an unscrupulous person and gossip begins to gather around his name. Volynsky demonstrated unacceptable immodesty towards D.S. Merezhkovsky and Z.N. Gippius and allowed himself to use of someone else's material, bordering on plagiarism. But most importantly, in the plot of the book about Leonardo da Vinci, he depicted his personal relationship with Merezhkovsky and Gippius and his interpretation of the relationship between them. In addition, he expelled Merezhkovsky from the journal “Severny Vestnik”, which closed for him the opportunity to publish his novel about Leonardo da Vinci.


Author(s):  
Olena Chumachenko

The purpose of the article consists of exploring visual arts in the context of Renaissance discourse as a form of individualization of collective experience. The methodology consists of the application of analytical method – to determine the theoretical and methodological foundations of the study of visual art as a form of individualization of collective experience in the works of the Renaissance theorists: Alberti, G. Vasari, Marsilio Ficino, Lorenzo Valla, Pietro Pomponazzi; Renaissance artists – Giotto, Masaccio, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael Santi, Titian; formalization method – to clarify visual art within the subject field of art history in the context of the culture of the Renaissance; method of comparative studies – for analyzing approaches to understanding the visual art as a form of individualization of collective experience. The scientific novelty of the work is that for the first time the essence of visual art is a form of individualization of collective experience in the context of the Renaissance discourse. Conclusions. The article explores visual art in the context of the Renaissance discourse as a form of individualization of collective experience. Clarified the meaning of the concept of visual art and painting in the framework of the subject field of art history (concepts of A. Gabrichevsky, M. Kagan, V. Vlasov, A. Hildebrand). In the socio-cultural development of the Renaissance, there is an intensive process of individualization of the artist, and there is also a tendency to intensively turn to samples of ancient art, which testifies to the visual art as the brightest form of individualization of collective experience. In the context of comparative analysis, the concepts of Cennino D'Andrea Cennini, G. Vasari, Alberti, Lorenzo Ghiberti, Filarete, Piero Della Francesco, Leonardo da Vinci, Jean Peleren, Albrecht Dürer, Pietro Aretino, who described all the advantages of painting based on color, are considered; the Venetian artist Paolo Pino, author of Dialogue on Painting; Lodovico Dolci, author of Dialogue on Painting; the Tuscan writer A. Doni, who in his dialogue "About drawing" explained the priority of the Florentine tradition, in which the emphasis was on drawing, and not on coloring. Key words: visual art, renaissance, painting, collective experience, individualization


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document