Abstract
Scholarly research has described religious reactions to early modern disasters as ‘providential discourse’, in line with the theological term Divine Providence, and has claimed that the so-described ‘peccatogenic’ perception (from the Latin word ‘peccatum’ or sin) prevails in this discourse. This article reconsiders the concept of providential discourse in two respects. Firstly, its diversity is highlighted. Secondly, it argues that providential discourse, rhetorically charged as it was, often aimed to evoke collective emotions in its audiences, such as compassion with those affected. This reconsideration is based on the analysis of narratively framed responses to the Delft Thunderclap (1654).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
