De Remediis Research Articles

THE FIRST ENGLISH SONNET AND ITS PARODIC ESSENCE

The article is devoted to the consideration of questions about which sonnet was the first example of a national genre form in English poetry, and about the relationship between its text and previous traditions and specific monuments. The research material was a fragment of the chivalric romance “Amoryus and Cleopes” by John Metham. Topicality of the study is due to the lack of knowledge of this text. The form of graphic organisation of the selected fragment is analysed against the background of comparisons with various ways of setting up classical Italian sonnets, then the meaningful motifs and the integral plot of the fragment are correlated with the content of Francesco Petrarch’s book “De remediis utriusque fortunae” and in more detail with the plot of Geoffrey Chaucer’s early poem “The Book of the Duchess”. The general A.M. Severinus Boethius’s theme of the Wheel of Fortune is noted, and the movement of the plot in Chaucer and Metham and both figures of their complaining knights, as well as the causes of their suffering, are assessed. In the process of analysis, it is possible to establish that a fragment of the novel, designed by the author on the model of Italian sonnets, yet containing an original rhyme scheme, which will become known as the rhyme of an English sonnet, exhibits a parodic character in relation to the texts of Petrarch and Chaucer.

«Слово утешительное инока в темнице» Максима Грека: Первое свидетельство «тюремной литературы» в России

The Consolatory Discourse of the Imprisoned Monk provides an insight into Maximus the Greek’s attitude towards imprisonment, which was already announced in his behaviour during the trials. This work appears strikingly similar to two of Savonarola’s short writings. The resemblance resides not only in the quotations from the Holy Scriptures – featuring the metaphor of spiritual combat – but more particularly in the themes of man’s ingratitude and hope in the just judgement of God. The idea of spiritual combat and the notion of the patience that allows one to endure the prison conditions, are also found in Francesco’s De remediis utriusque fortunae published in Italy at the end of the 15th century. The reasons for Maximus the Greek’s specific attitude towards imprisonment, stemming from unjust persecution, can be reconstructed from the references to the Holy Scriptures, even when their meaning is not explicitly expressed. Biblical quotations often have the function of expanding the meaning of the text. In this work, they instead reflect the writer’s ideas, following the rationale of the unspoken found in the practice of self-censorship that is so crucial to an understanding of modern and contemporary literature.

Petrarch about the Practices of Emperors’ Power, Pope, Signors of the 14th Сentury (the Treatise “De Remediis Utriusque Fortunae”)

Petrarch about the Practices of Emperors’ Power, Pope, Signors of the 14th Сentury (the Treatise “De Remediis Utriusque Fortunae”)

Petrarca a hét főbűnről: De remediis utriusque fortune, II 104-110

Petrarch’s De remediis utriusque fortune, a monumental allegorical dialogue between human passions and Reason, was one of the author’s most influential Latin works since its publication in the second half of the 1360s until the 18–19th centuries. Its popularity is proved by a very large number of manuscripts, printed editions (from the editio princeps of Strasbourg, 1468), and translations into the vernacular. Nevertheless, a modern critical text of the dialogue has not been produced yet: the bilingual French edition by Cristophe Carraud and the Italian one by Ugo Dotti, now commonly used, are based (almost) exclusively on early prints. The aim of this contribution is to offer a new edition of chapters 104–110 of the second book of the dialogue about the seven deadly sins, amending the text provided by Carraud, with the help of a few manuscripts considered authoritative by previous scholarship (Venice, Marc., Lat. Z 475; Paris, BnF, Lat. 6496; Florence, BML, San Marco 340). We are aware, at the same time, of not having established a critical edition. The Latin text is accompanied by its first modern Hungarian translation and by a detailed commentary.

Fiometa's Wrathful Suicide in Juan de Flores's Grimalte y Gradisa

Fiometa's Wrathful Suicide in Juan de Flores's Grimalte y Gradisa Luis F. López González Fiometa's suicide in Juan de Flores's fifteenth-century romance, Grimalte y Gradisa, underscores the dire consequences of allowing unbridled passions to override reason.1 Fiometa's character, as the etymological meaning of her name suggests, embodies the flames of unrestrained passions that separate her from any form of rational behavior and discourse. Fiometa's impulsive fits of rage trigger an ontological alienation that propels her to lose control of her actions, her reactions, and her perception of that which takes place around her. When Fiometa feels that things do not go her way, her natural response, conditioned by her skewed worldview as observed from her oblique prism of an entitled elite, is to revile those who oppose her willful desire and to attempt to blackmail them by threatening self-harm. Although she often uses anger as a defense mechanism to protect herself from the external world, Fiometa responds to (perceived) adverse events by fending off the disappointment through the conduit of rage. When Pánfilo, her former lover, does not respond to her request to visit her, Fiometa reacts with extreme anger rather than sadness or resignation. Her response is both impulsive and unbecoming. As Pamela Waley points out, Fiometa "is beside herself with fury" ("Introduction" xxxiv). Just a few days later, Pánfilo comes to see her, resolving to abandon her. If his lack of compliance with her request to visit her made her furious, his final rejection drives her to a wrathful suicide. The cause of Fiometa's death has been a source of debate among scholars of Juan de Flores, as the author himself never explicitly labels her death a suicide or merely a case of amor hereos. The scholarship falls into one of three categories. The first group grosso modo denies Fiometa's suicide, arguing that her death is a natural effect of the intensity of her lovesick passion for the ungrateful Pánfilo (Barbara Matulka 264, marina S. Brownlee 211, Dorothy S. Severin Religious 41, Robert Folger 177). The second group neither confirms nor denies her suicide, adducing the aura of mystery and ambiguity in which Flores enshrouds her death [End Page 31] (Regula Rohland de Langbehn "Los conversos" 140, Lillian von der Walde moheno 82, Julio Rodríguez Puértolas 121-139, Isabel de sena 341, Valentín Núñez Rivera 115-139). The third group ascertains that Fiometa's death constitutes an active suicide, and they adduce Fiometa's avowal to end her life, the violent imagery, Grimalte's explicit assertion that she killed herself, and her final punishment in Hell in the dénouement of the novel (Waley "Introduction" xxxvii, Patricia Grieve 82, 85, Vera Castro Lingl, Louise Haywood "Gradissa" 85-99, Rina Walthaus 9, Tobias Branderberger 369). My hermeneutic conclusions espouse me with the third group. The scope of this study is not merely to show that Fiometa committed suicide, since Castro Lingl has forcefully argued this thesis. Rather, this paper seeks to demonstrate that Fiometa is led to her death by what María Rosa Lida de Malkiel (169) and Cándido ayllón call: "Ira suicida" (160-4). The interplay between suicide and wrath became a leitmotif in the spanish Middle Ages after the diffusion of the allegorical epic poem Psychomachia, written by the Ibero-Roman poet Prudentius in the fourth century. Prudentius personifies seneca's concept of "ira" into an allegorical character filled with irrational passion, always willing to self-destruct so long as the object of the wrath is also destroyed ("dum alteri noceat sui neglegens").2 In Seneca's tragedy Medea, the eponymous heroine embodies this furious passion willing to destroy herself, provided that she also destroys everything around her.3 Fiometa, true to her name, incarnates flammable passion, irrationality, and irascibility against her true-opposite, Patientia (reason, equanimity and theological virtues). In an agonistic battle between Ira and Patientia, which foreshadows the pseudo-Senecan Stoic treatises (De remediis fortvitorvm), as well as Íñigo López de mendoza, Marqués de Santillana's Bías contra Fortuna and Diego de San Pedro's Desprecio de...

Le De Remediis utriusque Fortunae de Pétrarque dans la traduction de Jean Daudin : entre commentaire et imitation de l’original

Petrarch’s De Remediis utriusque Fortunae in Jean Daudin’s Translation : Commentary on and Imitation of the OriginalThis paper concentrates on the French version of Petrarch’s De Remediis presented to Charles V by Jean Daudin (1378). As evidenced by the prologue to the translation, Daudin had read Petrarch’s epistle to Niccolo Acciaiuoli (Familiares, xii, 2) as well as the De Remediis, and probably the Bucolicum Carmen as well. Admiration of Petrarch inspired Daudin to imitate the original’s style and to limit the amount of commentary and gloss. However, in contradiction to his declarations in the prologue, but in keeping with medieval practice, Daudin introduced words and syntagms into the translation that were not in the original ; in doing so, he was betraying his initial plan not to add anything of his own to Petrarch’s illustrious book. The amount of gloss increased in some manuscripts of the translation, including the edition by Galliot du Pre (1524). This is evidence that Daudin’s original edition of the De Remediis seemed too complex for some readers.

Petrarch and La Celestina anew: The World as a Battlefield between “conscripta remedia” and “laberinth of errors”

From Deyermond (“The name of Petrarch is almost the first thing that catches the eye when one opens La Celestina) to Ruiz Arzalluz (“The work that most often surfaces when reading La Celestina […] is the Latin work of Petrarch”), the subject matter of the relationship between the Spanish tragicomedy and the Latin work of the Aretino occupies a central place in the studies on Rojas’ masterpiece. In the framework represented by this tradition of studies, which goes back to the unfinished La Celestina commented, this contribution focuses on the “extreme case” of the wonderful second prologue of the Tragicomedia with the aim to establish a collation between this text and the written one, which is no less remarkable than the Prefatio of the second book of De remediis, and to point out at some differences in meaning that emerge from their different arrangement with the final and fundamental purpose of pointing out a the consequences that these prologues –with their differences and similarities– produce in their respective textual contexts.

Petrarchan Narratives: Representation and Hermeneutics

Francesco Petrarch wrote narratives of selfhood across the genres and other discursive forms that comprise his vast body of work. These narratives are crucial to the Rerum vulgarium fragmenta and Petrarch's letters, collections chosen and repeatedly revised with an eye toward their shape and impact, and to reflective works such as the Secretum, De vita solitaria, and De remediis utriusque fortunae. Narratives of self- hood underwrite, too, the large developments—the emergence of the Renaissance, Humanism, and modernity—that historians of culture and ideas have associated with Petrarch over the last century and a half. Jacob Burckhardt famously pronounced Petrarch one of the first truly modern men (300), highlighting the account of the ascent of Mont Ventoux written for Dionigi da Borgo San Sepolcro, Petrarch's former confessor (Familiares 4.1). Even in our current view of Petrarch as a divided, fragmented subject who holds together separate worlds, narratives furnish the connections for a dynamic composition of self- hood, in which the subject's contradictions and flux correspond to scattered and unfinished texts arranged in patterns of provisional unity (Mazzotta). These critical and historical understandings collaborate with Petrarch as much as they interpret him and his work, for they take as their starting point the production of the self made immanent through narrative. Whether biographical truth or fiction, Petrarch's

Petrarca De remediis utriusque fortunaejának recepciója a 16–18. századi magyarországi irodalomban

In the 14th–18th centuries Petrarch’s most widely disseminated work was De remediis utriusque fortunae. Petrarch’s Latin works had been known in Hungary since the 15th century and in the 18th century a real cult of De remediis can be traced, proved by the correspondence of contemporary aristocrats, scholars and politicians (e. g. István Brodarics, Farkas Kovacsóczy). His sonnets and the lines of Triumfi were often read, quoted, translated (e. g. by Bálint Balassi, Miklós Zrínyi); the Griselda, Boccaccio’s novel, known mainly in Petrarch’s Latin translation, also got translated into Hungarian (by Pál Istvánfi). His letters written in verse, as well as the Sine nomine collection, the Secretum and the De vita solitaria were certainly being read in Hungary. During the 17th–18th centuries Hungarian readers could get acquainted at first-hand with the name and works of the Italian humanist through the foreign printed editions of Petrarch’s writings. Writers, scholars, ecclesiastical leaders and others read and used these texts for both private and public purposes. In the 18th century De remediis was reedited eight times and its only complete translation so far was prepared between 1760 and 1762. The reception of De remediis is thus a highly important chapter in Hungarian spiritual history.

Worthy but Wise?: Virtuous and Non-Virtuous Forms of Courage in the Later Middle Ages

Worthy but Wise? Virtuous and Non-Virtuous Forms of Courage in the Later Middle Ages S. H. Rigby Aristotelian Ethics in the Aristocratic Culture of the Later Middle Ages In the general prologue to the Canterbury Tales, Chaucer says of the Knight that “though that he were worthy, he was wys.”1 As is well known, when Chaucer uses the term “worthy,” it can have a number of different meanings. In its most general sense, “worthiness” refers to a person’s reputable social standing or admirable moral character or—when used ironically—to the lack of such qualities.2 However, the description of the Knight as “worthy” has often been interpreted in a [End Page 329] more specific sense: as meaning that he is “brave,” “valiant,” or “doughty.”3 Certainly in The Man of Law’s Tale, the “ful wys” Alla, king of Northumberland, is described as having been “worthy of his hond” (i.e., “brave in battle”) against the Scots, whilst the Knight himself is said to have been “Ful worthy” in “his lordes werre” and to have been honored for such “worthynesse,” which again seems to relate to his distinguished record in battle (II.579; I.47, 50). The praise of rulers and warriors such as King Alla for being brave and wise, as possessing both fortitudo and sapientia, was a topos commonly found in ancient, medieval, and renaissance literature.4 As Geoffroi de Charny said in his Book of Chivalry (c. 1352), knights who lacked moral wisdom would be unlikely to achieve “any great perfection” of martial prowess.5 In contrast to this tradition, Chaucer’s portrait of the Knight does not simply present wisdom and bravery as being complementary virtues but rather implies a potential for opposition between them: “though that he were worthy, he was wys.” For this reason, R. M. Lumiansky took this line to mean that Chaucer was contrasting the wisdom of his Knight with the lack of prudence that generally characterized the supposedly “worthy” knights of his day.6 Similarly, Peggy Knapp interprets the line to mean that the Knight has wisdom even though “military worth would not normally imply complex thinking.”7 More usually, however, the line has been read as meaning that although the Knight was brave, [End Page 330] he was “not a mere hothead.”8 If this were the case, then Chaucer’s allusion to the possible tension between worthiness and wisdom can be seen as a reference to the Aristotelian idea that even an admirable quality, such as courage, can, if taken to an extreme, be transformed into a vice. Thus, while a knight would be inevitably criticized if he lacked courage, to display so much bravery that he became foolhardy would also be unfitting, with a virtuous—or wise—degree of courage being located between these two negative extremes. This definition of virtue as a mean between two opposing vices was a commonplace of late medieval poetry and didactic literature, one invoked by authors such as Gower and Hoccleve.9 As Chaucer puts it in The Legend of Good Women, with an explicit mention of the Aristotelian source of this concept of virtue, “Vertu is the mene / As Etick seith.”10 At first sight, this Aristotelian definition of virtue as a mean between two opposing vices may seem to be at odds with an alternative, Christian conception—one familiar from medieval art and pastoral theology—in which each virtue is seen as engaged in a combat with a single contrary vice.11 In practice, however, the Aristotelian definition and the theological one were easily reconciled. Thus, although the thirteenth-century Summa virtutum de remediis anime presents the virtues as the remedy for specific vices, as when humility is the cure for pride, it is also happy to invoke the general conception of virtue as a mean, one that is established by the exercise of prudence. Similarly, whilst Chaucer’s Parson follows the Summa virtutum in seeing the virtue of abstinence as the remedy for [End Page 331] the vice of gluttony, he immediately goes on to praise “attemperaunce, that holdeth the meene in alle thynges.”12 While the learned Clerk in The General Prologue aspires...

INFORTUNIO Y VIRTUD: PETRARCA, VIVES Y EL INCA GARCILASO DE LA VEGA

This essay aims to analyze the relationship between misfortune and virtue in La Florida del Inca (1605) by the mestizo Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, considering its dialogue with the moral philosophy of the Renaissance, in particular with De remediis utriusque fortunae (1366) by Francesco Petrarca and Introductio ad sapientiam (1524) by Juan Luis Vives. The analysis emphasizes the importance of the value of misfortune, the consequences of the corruption of judgment, caused by the governance of passions, and the use of Indian wisdom as examples of virtue to Christian readers of the chronicle. Finally, the essay establishes a relationship between the moral positions of the text and its political and philosophical ideals of concord between the Old and New World.

<em>Sotto le stelle del Petrarca</em>: Vidas cruzadas (un episodio del petrarquismo en España)

I offer a study about the translation of Petrarch’s Triumphi and Illicino’s commentary by Antonio de Obregón (1512). I prove the link between Obregón’s Life of Petrarch and the homonym text by Francisco de Madrid, which was written as a paratext in his translation of Petrarch’s De remediis (1510). I also explain the connection between both translators with the rich and complex editorial and exegetical tradition in Italy. It is thus proved that the knowledge of Petrarchism in Spain, related to Triumphi, is deeper than it was suspected. The intertextual tradition analysis provides facts to the philological discussion about the chronology of Triumphi.

Atoms, Pneuma and Tranquillity: Epicurean and Stoic Themes in European Thought

Introduction Margaret J. Osler and Letizia A. Panizza 1. Ethics and logic in stoicism Gerard Verbeke 2. Medieval connectives, Hellenistic connections: the strange case of propositional logic Calvin G. Normore 3. Stoic psychotherapy in the Middle Ages and Renaissance: Petrarch's De Remediis Letizia A. Panizza 4. Alonso de Cartagena and John Calvin as interpreters of Seneca's De Clementia Nicholas G. Round 5. The Epicurean in Lorenzo Valla's On Pleasure Maristella de P. Lorch 6. Seneca's role in popularizing Epicurus in the Renaissance Louise Fothergill-Payne 7. Stoic contributions to early modern science Peter Barker 8. Fortune, fate, and divination: Gassendi's voluntarist theology and the baptism of Epicureanism Margaret J. Osler 9. Epicureanism and the creation of a privatist ethic in early seventeenth-century France Lisa Tunick Sarasohn 10. Robert Boyle on Epicurean atheism and atomism J. J. Macintosh 11. Stoic and Epicurean doctrines in Newton's system of the world B. J. T. Dobbs 12. Locke, Willis, and the seventeenth-century Epicurean soul John P. Wright 13. The Epicurean way of ideas: Gassendi, Locke, and Berkeley Thomas M. Lennon 14. The stoic legacy in the early Scottish enlightenment M. A. Stewart.

El De remediis utriusque fortunae de Petrarca y Celestina comentada

The present paper discusses the usage of Petrarch’s De remediis utriusque Fortunae by sixteenth-century commentator of La Celestina. Attention is paid to the following aspects: the title given to Petrarch’s work, the form of the quotations, the use of the 1510 translation by Francisco de Madrid and the use of Albrecht van Eyb’s Margarita poetarum as a source of Petrarchan texts. These points result in a very positive evaluation of the work of the anonymous commentator, who does not merely juxtapose quotations, but goes so far as to suggest different sources for a given passage of La Celestina.

Sobre la font d'una font del «Tirant lo Blanch» i la modernitat de la novel·la

Throughout time mankind has resigned himself to the changeability of Fortune. Each cultural expression has approached this topic from a different paint of view. On the basis of the comparison between the concepts of Fortune in Petrarca, Metge and Martorell, the author analyses the progressive modernity which arises at the end of the Middle Ages in both the literary and the ethical fields. Julia Butinya reviews the different episodes of the Tirant lo Blanch, and Petrarca's De Remediis and Metge's Lo somni which confirm the different stages on the concept of Fortune. If Petrarca proposes to rationally control passions in order to counteract the actions of Fortune, Metge contradicts him and exposes the bad predictions expressed in Tirant lo Blanch: Fortune does not respect these who are virtuous either.

Petrarch's Remedies for fortune fair and foul: a modern English translation of De remediis utriusque fortunae, with a commentary

Petrarch's Remedies for fortune fair and foul: a modern English translation of De remediis utriusque fortunae, with a commentary

Wenzel, S. (ed.), <italic>Summa Virtutum de Remediis Anime</italic>. Pp. ix + 373 (The Chaucer Library). Athens, Georgia: The University of Georgia Press, 1984. £35.00

Wenzel, S. (ed.), Summa Virtutum de Remediis Anime. Pp. ix + 373 (The Chaucer Library). Athens, Georgia: The University of Georgia Press, 1984. £35.00 Get access Anne Hudson Anne Hudson Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Notes and Queries, Volume 33, Issue 2, June 1986, Pages 215–217, https://doi.org/10.1093/notesj/33.2.215 Published: 01 June 1986

Petrarch by Nicholas Mann

REVIEWS Anselm's De concordia in The Testament of Love), but the scholarly methods which he has brought to bear on Chaucer's work certainly com­ mand respect. Much credit is due to Machan for having produced the most substantial study yet published of a much-neglected and misrepresented work. Techniques of Translation is a pleasing first book by a highly promising young medievalist. A.J. MINNIS University of Bristol NICHOLAS MANN. Petrarch. Past Masters Series. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1984. Pp. 121. £7.95, $12.95. Petrarch remains for many the least accessible of the "three crowns of Florence." His self-consciousness may be more "modern" than Dante's or Boccaccio's, but it can also seem chillier and more obsessive; and his lack of-indeed, contempt for-the "common touch" in the use of the ver­ nacular also makes him less immediately attractive than either of them. One of the many admirable features of Mann's book is that it does not seek to gloss over such aspects; indeed, it contrives to relate them persuasively to some of the major energies and tensions of the poet's nature. The Petrarch that thus emerges in this brief but incisive introductory portrait is an impressively if elusively paradoxical figure, and, as Mann concludes, "Ifin the end we do not know what kind of a man he was, we can see what kind of a man he wished himself to be." Mann's survey covers a wide range of Petrarch's discursive prose, as well as the vernacular and Latin poetry, to establish a firm sense of three main features of the writer's identity: as scholar, poet, and moralist. Three of the book's seven chapters focus specifically on these features, but we are also made aware of the fluctuating relationship between them-reflected, for instance, in the tensions ofthe Canzoniere and the debate between writer and moralist in the Secretum. Petrarch's acute consciousness ofthe development as well as the tensions in his work is evident in a variety of forms, and some of these may, in passing, remind us of how strikingly unlike Chaucer he was. For instance, the care he took in revising and editing his work (including the letters) amounts almost to "image management" and is certainly far distant from 229 STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER the easygoing attitude of Chaucer, who, as one textual critic was recently moved to complain, "did not look after his papers with the care we might have expected." His obsession with glory and awareness of posterity, moreover, go far beyond the kind of poetic self-consciousness evident in, says, The House ofFame and work through the blending of fiction with fact to create an impression of what Mann in his penultimate chapter heading calls "the life as work of art." The book is generally much more scrupulous in its characterization of Petrarch's "modern" features than the dust-jacket blurb suggestsalthough there are one or two moments when the modern analogies used to describe what Mann calls "the real world of fourteenth-century politics" tend towards oversimplification. It may not, perhaps, be too misleading in this context to call Cola di Rienzo's revival of the Roman Republic in 1347 "strangely proto-Fascist," but it certainly makes no real sense, I think, to identify the Florentine White and Black Guelfs earlier in the century as, respectively, "conservatives" and "radicals." A work of this scale cannot, of course, give much close attention to historical context or even to a poet's more immediate literary inheritance and legacy. Nonetheless, Mann's recognition of Petrarch's ambivalent attitude towards Dante (echoing him, yet fearing to become an imitator) might well have been extended just a little further to consider some salient aspects of the relationship between these two poets, who together domi­ nate the Italian trecento and the later Middle Ages. Thus-to take exam­ ples oftopics Mann himself touches upon-some comparisons might be at least suggested between the Petrarchan and Dantean visions of Italy, the two poets' representations of Fortune (De remediis and Inferno 8), their attitudes toward their main classical masters (Cicero for Petrarch, Virgil for...

Fifteenth-Century Castilian Versions of Boccaccio's Fortune-Poverty Contest

AMONG THE WORKS dealing with the variability of Fortune, four achieved great prominence in fifteenth century Spain-if we are to judge by the frequency of their having been mentioned by other authors. These are Petrarch's De remediis utriusque fortunae,' the PseudoSeneca's De remediis fortuitorum,2 Boethius' De consolatione philosophiae,3 and Boccaccio's De casibus virorum illustrium.4 Although we can be certain of the wide diffusion of these treatises, we must proceed with caution when we speak of influence as Alan Deyermond reminds in his study of Petrarchan influence in the Celestina.5 In at least one text, we find boegio substituted for bocagio, perhaps a mere scribal error or perhaps a sign of a larger confusion.6 In the fifteenth century, a Libro de los remedio, contra fortuna was alternately attributed to Petrarch or to Seneca.7 Since the sentiments are con-

A Dialogue between Reason and Adversity: A Late Middle English Version of Petrarch's De Remediis. F. N. M. Diekstra

<i>A Dialogue between Reason and Adversity: A Late Middle English Version of Petrarch's De Remediis</i>. F. N. M. Diekstra