Prispevek prek primerjalne analize biografskih dokumentov, nazorov, literarnih in teoloških del obravnava dva kompleksna renesančna načina za razumevanje humanističnega individuuma, kot se odražata v ...delih svetega Maksima Greka in Eneja Silvija Piccolominija. Primerjava dveh teologov, ki sta precejšen del življenja preživela v stiku z renesančno mislijo, pokaže, kako je slednja zaznamovala tudi njuna teološka sistema ter zaostrila njuno ortodoksnost v nepopuščanju tedaj aktualnemu antropocentrizmu. Obema avtorjema so skupne: osebna raba jezika (idiolekt); odprto in ustvarjalno sprejemanje tako vzhodnega kot tudi zahodnega krščanstva; nasprotovanje krivoverskim ločinam; poudarjen kristološki teocentrizem; zavedanje ogroženosti krščanskega sveta; avtobiografskost njunih del. Prav v združevanju vzhodnih in zahodnih krščanskih elementov ter v izpostavljenem in prepoznavno osebnem interpretiranju svetopisemskega sporočila je mogoče utemeljiti podobnost primerjanih nazorov. Povečana avtobiografskost njunih spisov priča o močni vezi z renesančnim humanizmom.
Ko je rimski polihistor Cenzorin želel svojemu prijatelju Kvintu Kajreliju za rojstni dan podariti primerno darilo, se je znašel v kočljivem položaju: kaj mu lahko kupi iz prazne mošnje? Znašel se je ...z briljantnim darilom, ki bi navdušilo vsakogar, če mu le ne manjka otipljivih dobrin – poklonil mu je knjigo z naslovom De die natali liber – "Rojstnodnevna knjižica". Cenzorin ni bil izviren mislec, vendar je v tem drobnem delu nakopičil množico različnih vsebin, od književnosti do glasbe, zgodovine, matematike, zdravilstva, astronomije in celo embriologije. Pri tem se nikoli ne oddalji od svoje osrednje teme, tj. rojstnega dne.
Rukopis koji zovemo Zadarski kalendar svetog Krševana najstariji je poznati astronomski tekst nastao na hrvatskim područjima tijekom srednjega vijeka. Prvi je pisani dokument u Hrvata koji donosi ...efemeride Sunca i Mjeseca, i prvi tekst u Hrvata u kojem se koriste arapski brojevi, što je rani primjer njihove primjene jer su se u tom razdoblju tek postupno uvodili u zapadnoeuropsku praksu. Rukopis je nastao u skriptoriju benediktinskog samostana sv. Krševana 1322. godine, a danas se čuva u Bodleian Library u Oxfordu. Kalendar donosi astronomske, komputske, efemeridne, liturgijske, astrološke, alkemijske i povijesne podatke. Polazeći od dosadašnjih rezultata istraživanja Zadarskog kalendar svetog Krševana , u ovom se radu prikazuju njegovi raznoliki sadržaji i tumače u kontekstu razvitka znanosti i vremena u kojem su nastali. Osobita se pažnja posvećuje obradi efemeridnih podataka koje kalendar donosi jer njihova analiza daje egzaktan odgovor na ključna pitanja i nedoumice u vezi s mjestom i vremenom nastanka ovog vrijednog kalendara. U odnosu na dosadašnja istraživanja, proširena je obrada efemeridnih podataka koji su vezani uz položaj Sunca na nebeskoj sferi. Na temelju tih novih analiza ne samo da je moguće saznati točnu geografsku širinu mjesta za koje se efemeride odnose, već možemo i prosuditi točnost efemeridnih podataka i provjeriti autentičnost razdoblja njihova nastanka.
The manuscript we call the Zadar Calendar of Saint Krševan is the oldest known astronomical text created in the Croatian territories during the Middle Ages. It is the first written document in Croatian that provides the ephemeris of the Sun and the Moon, and the first text in Croatian that uses Arabic numerals, which is an early example of their application since they were only gradually introduced into Western European practice in that period. The manuscript was created in the scriptorium of the Benedictine monastery of St. Krševan in 1322, and today it is kept in the Bodleian Library in Oxford. The calendar provides astronomical, computer, ephemeris, liturgical, astrological, alchemical, and historical data. Based on the previous research results of the Zadar Calendar of St. Krševan research, this paper presents its various contents and interprets them in the context of the development of science and the time in which they were created. Special attention is paid to the processing of the ephemeris data that the calendar provides, since their analysis provides an exact answer to key questions and doubts regarding the place and time of creation of this valuable calendar. Compared to previous research, the processing of ephemeris data related to the position of the Sun on the celestial sphere has been extended. Based on these new analyses, it is not only possible to find out the exact latitude of the places to which the ephemeris refers, but we can also judge the accuracy of the ephemeris data and verify the authenticity of the period of their creation.
Arapski su mislioci imali veliki utjecaj na razvoj Zapadne filozofije. U posredovanju arapske misli na Zapad važnu su ulogu odigrali prvi prevoditelji s arapskog jezika među kojima je bio i jedan ...hrvatski srednjovjekovni filozof: Herman Dalmatin. Prevoditeljsko djelovanje Hermana Dalmatina odražava se i na njegovu filozofiju, tako što prihvaća ili polemizira s mnogim idejama zastupljenim u tekstovima koje prevodi s arapskog. Astrologiju smo postavili u središte interesa vezano uz recepciju arapske filozofije kod Hermana Dalmatina. Kod popularizacije astrologije na Zapadu možemo istaknuti upravo Hermana Dalmatina i njegov filozofsko-astrološki sustav. Naime, astrologija je u vrijeme Hermana Dalmatina (11. stoljeće) bila poznata na Zapadu, jer se njena prisutnost može pratiti već od Grčke, preko Rima do europskog srednjovjekovlja. Ipak, upravo se s Hermanovim prevoditeljskim radom astrologija ponovno aktualizira. Herman se najprije susreće s astronomskim spisima Sahl Ibn Bishra, te prevodi šestu knjigu njegova astronomskog djela, poznatog kao Prognostica. Autor koji je imao daleko veći utjecaj na Hermana Dalmatina bio je Abu-Ma’shar. Hermanov spis koji je sačuvan u cijelosti, De essentiis – Rasprava o bitima, sažima njegov samostalni pokušaj povezivanja astroloških tumačenja s Platonovom filozofijom i Aristotelovom prirodnom filozofijom.
Grisogono na španjolskom Martinović, Ivica
Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine,
12/2022, Letnik:
48, Številka:
2 (96)
Journal Article, Paper
Odprti dostop
Theatrum mundi et temporis
(1588) Giovannija Paola Galluccija ima iznimno mjesto u sklopu europske recepcije Grisogonove rasprave
Tractatus de occulta causa fluxus et refluxus maris
, jer je Gallucci ...u dvanaesto poglavlje prve knjige svoga djela uvrstio svoju transkripciju petnaest Grisogonovih zaključaka o uzroku morskih mijena, i to 60 godina nakon jedinoga tiskanoga izdanja te rasprave u drugom Grisogonovu zborniku
De modo collegiandi, pronosticandi, et curandi febres, necnon de humana felicitate, ac denique de fluxu et refluxu maris
(1528). U latinskim i španjolskim izdanjima Galluccijeva djela između 1588. i 1617. Grisogonova rasprava o tumačenju morskih mijena, zajedno s instrumentom koji služi za kvantifikaciju elevacije mora, doživjela je osam ili, još preciznije rečeno, bar osam izdanja ili pseudoizdanja: četiri latinska (1588, 1589, 1603, 1605) i četiri španjolska u prijevodu Miguela Péreza (1606, 1611, 1614, 1617). Među tim izdanjima sporna je samo datacija izdanja iz 1611. godine: ono sadrži posvetu potpisanu »u studenom 1614.«, pri čem nije bilo moguće ustanoviti gdje se nalazi pogreška – na naslovnici ili u dataciji posvete. Izdanja Galluccijeva djela objavljivana su pod različitim naslovima pa je i to utjecalo na to da je samo jedno izdanje, prvo iz 1588. godine, bilo dosad uključeno u Grisogonovu bibliografiju. Prva dva latinska izdanja naslovljena su
Theatrum mundi et temporis
, a sljedeća dva svojim su naslovom Coelestium corporum, et rerum ab ipsis pendentium accurata explicatio per instrumenta, rotulas, et figuras upozoravala čitatelja na osobitost Galluccijeva djela: pomične sprave i slike. Privrženost zornom prikazivanju astronomskih i morskih pojava ponukala je Galluccija da u svoje djelo uvrsti Grisogonovu raspravu koja je također na posljednjem listu sadržavala računar za određivanje elevacije mora s tri pomična kruga. Prva dva španjolska izdanja vjerno prenose prvi talijanski naslov
Theatro del mundo y de el tiempo
, u trećem je naslov proširen:
Theatro y descripcion del mundo y del tiempo
, a u četrtvom iznova promijenjen:
Theatro y descripcion universal del mundo
. U svim je tim izdanjima Galluccijeva djela izostavljen Grisogonov uvod, koji prethodi zaključcima, ali je latinskim izdanjima Gallucci pridodao svoj uvod i zaključnu napomenu, a španjolskim izdanjima Pérez i svoj vlastiti zaključak s primjerima. S pomoću osam proučenih izdanja Galluccijeva djela
Theatrum mundi et temporis
i njegova španjolskoga prijevoda
Theatro del mundo y de el tiempo
, pri čem je istraživanje ograničeno samo na izdanja koja je bilo moguće ogledati, Grisogonova se bibliografija, prvi put objavljena u Grmekovoj
Hrvatskoj medicinskoj bibliografiji
(1955), uvećava za sedam bibliografskih jedinica, a područje čitanosti i utjecaja Grisogonove rasprave o uzroku morskih mijena proširuje i na područje španjolskoga jezika u prvim dvama desetljećima 17. stoljeća. Od hrvatskih renesansnih filozofa i prirodoznanstvenika jedino se Grisogonu posrećilo da mu je djelo bilo tiskano na španjolskom jeziku, a to znači da je pola stoljeća nakon njegove smrti ne samo u Italiji nego i u Španjolskoj uočena i priznata kakvoća njegova rješenja za problem morske plime i oseke. Stoga je bilo važno objaviti transkripciju prvoga španjolskoga izdanja Grisogonove rasprave. Gallucci je pri transkripciji Grisogonove zaključke mjestimice kratio i proširivao, čak i prerađivao, a potkrale su mu se i neke pogreške. Tim je izmjenama utjecao na smisao nekih Grisogonovih tvrdnja, što je najočitije u transkripciji desetoga zaključka, ali nije ugrozio Grisogonovo rješenje za problem morske plime i oseke. U svojoj je zaključnoj napomeni Gallucci svoju transkripciju Grisogonovih zaključaka popratio astrološkim komentarom koji odudara od Grisogonova strogoga astronomskoga pristupa u raspravi o morskim mijenama, ali je u skladu s temeljnim pristupom koji prožima drugi Grisogonov zbornik. U španjolskom prijevodu Galluccijeve transkripcije, što ga je sâm nazvao »dopunjenim izdanjem«, Pérez je često posezao za istoznačnicama za temeljne nazivke i to bezrazložno proveo u cijelom svom prijevodu, mučio se sa superlativima latinskih pridjeva i priloga, ponekad propustio prevesti jednu riječ koliko god ona Grisogonu bila važna. Neke od njegovih brojnih amplifikacija pokazale su se uspješnima, tj. doprinijele su boljem razumijevanju Grisogonovih lapidarnih izričaja. Budući da je Grisogonovu raspravu prevodio samo iz Galluccijeve knjige, Pérez je preuzeo gotovo sve pogreške iz Galluccijeve transkripcije. U svom zaključku španjolski je prevoditelj pribjegao naknadnoj aristotelizaciji Grisogonove rasprave, i to u smjeru suprotnom izvornim Grisogonovim nakanama. Ovom je članku priložena transkripcija poglavlja »Del fluxo y refluxo del mar, y quantas oras crece y mengua en cada dia.« iz prvoga španjolskog izdanja Galluccijeva djela
Theatro del mundo y de el tiempo
(1606). Potpuna dokumentacija o osobitostima Galluccijeve transkripcije i Pérezova prijevoda Grisogonove rasprave
Tractatus de occulta causa fluxus et refluxus maris
nalazi se u kritičkom aparatu transkripcije.
Theatrum mundi et temporis
(1588) by Giovanni Paolo Gallucci has earned an exceptional place in the European reception of Federik Grisogono’s
Tractatus de occulta causa fluxus et refluxus maris
, owing to the fact that Gallucci in the twelfth chapter of Book I of his work included his transcription of Grisogono’s fifteen conclusions on the cause of tides, sixty years after the until then only lifetime edition of Grisogono’s treatise in Grisogono’s second book
De modo collegiandi, pronosticandi, et curandi febres, necnon de humana felicitate, ac denique de fluxu et refluxu maris
(1528). In the Latin and Spanish editions of Gallucci’s work published between 1588 and 1617 Grisogono’s treatise on the explanation of sea tides, together with his instrument for determining the elevation of sea, witnessed eight or, to be more precise, at least eight editions or pseudo-editions: four Latin (1588, 1589, 1603, 1605) and four Spanish editions translated by Miguel Pérez (1606, 1611, 1614, 1617). Of the mentioned eight editions only the datation of the 1611 edition is disputable: namely, the edition contains a dedication subscribed “in November of 1614,” whereby it was impossible to locate the misprint – on the title-page or in the datation of the dedication. The editions were published under different titles, which may account for the fact that only one, the first from 1588, was included in Grisogono’s bibliography. The first two Latin editions are titled
Theatrum mundi et temporis
, while the following two entitled Coelestium corporum, et rerum ab ipsis pendentium accurata explicatio per instrumenta, rotulas, et figuras warned the reader about Gallucci’s distinctive approach: inclination to movable instruments and figures. His inclination towards vivid presentation of astronomical and sea phenomena prompted Gallucci to include into his work Grisogono’s treatise, whose last page also contained a calculator for determining elevation of sea with three movable circles. The first two Spanish editions faithfully follow the first Italian title
Theatro del mundo y de el tiempo
, while in the third the title is expanded:
Theatro y descripcion del mundo y del tiempo
, and in the fourth rephrased again:
Theatro y descripcion universal del mundo
. In all the mentioned editions Grisogono’s introduction was omitted, but to the Latin editions Gallucci added his own introduction and final note, and to the Spanish editions Pérez also added his own conclusion with examples. Based on the analysis of eight editions of Gallucci’s work
Theatrum mundi et temporis
and its Spanish translation
Theatro del mundo y de el tiempo
, Grisogono’s bibliography, first published in Grmek’s
Bibliographia medica Croatica
(1955), is being expanded by seven bibliographical items, while the scope of the study and influence of Grisogono’s treatise on the causes of sea tides spread to the Spanish-speaking territories in the first two decades of the seventeenth century. Among Croatian Renaissance philosophers and scientists Grisogono was the only one to have his work printed in Spanish, which implies that half a century after his death the quality of his solution for the problem of the sea tides was acknowledged in Italy and Spain. Despite Gallucci’s efforts to transcribe Grisogono’s conclusions as faitfully as possible, he abridged or amplified them in places, or revised even. By altering Grisogono’s text, Gallucci interfered with the meaning of Grisogono’s conclusions, which is most evident in the transcription of the tenth conclusion. In the Spanish translation of Gallucci’s transcription, which he himself referred to as “appended,” Pérez often used synonyms for Grisogono’s basic terms, employing them ungroundedly throughout his translation, battled with the superlatives of Latin adjectives and adverbs, and occasionally omitted to translate a word or two regardless of its importance to Grisogono the author. Some of his numerous amplifications contributed to a better understanding of Grisogono’s lapidary expressions. Considering that Pérez’s translation of Grisogono’s treatise is based entirely on Gallucci’s book, he thus adopted almost all the errors from Gallucci’s transcription. In his conclusion Pérez resorted to additional Aristotelization of Grisogono’s treatise, in a direction contrary to Grisogono’s original intentions. This article is accompanied by the transcription of chapter »Del fluxo y refluxo del mar, y quantas oras crece y mengua en cada dia.« from the first Spanish edition of
Theatro del mundo y de el tiempo
(1606). Full documentation on the peculiarities of Gallucci’s transcription and Pérez’s translation of Grisogono’s treatise
Tractatus de occulta causa fluxus et refluxus maris
is comprised in the critical apparatus of the transcription.
Astrologija kao tema prisutna je u radovima niza istaknutih hrvatskih autora u razdoblju od srednjovjekovlja pa sve do 19. stoljeća. Javlja se u različitim oblicima, sadržajima i formi, od zapaženih ...djela prožetih egzaktnim znanostima i filozofijom do zabavnih tekstova u literaturi pisanoj za puk. Rad govori o novovjekovnim transformacijama i pristupu astrologiji, nakon njezina isključivanja iz sfere znanstvenih i filozofskih koncepcija, što se odražava i u djelima hrvatskih autora 18. i 19. stoljeća.
The paper discusses the astrological texts of Croatian authors produced after the 17th century when astrology left the field of science and philosophy and entered into other genres which were meant for a broader readership. Various forms of astrological contributions are described which were found in the calendar and related literature and, in particular, a few astrological manuscripts written in the Croatian language are analyzed. It is demonstrated that the shift made by astrology from the sphere of science into the field of folk literature did not diminish interest in astrological content. This can be concluded from the example of 18th and 19th century texts. The paper analyzes their content, templates, and domains with a view to better understand the Croatian astrological tradition and its place and definition in the corpus of the Croatian literary heritage. The texts described were not intended for a narrow intellectual stratum, but rather for a wider circle of readers and do not contain explanations on how horoscopes or theoretical astrology are needed to carry on astrological practice. Croatian manuscripts portray and interpret astrological predictions in the way they appear in folk tales printed from the 16th century onward in Western Europe. In Croatian calendars, astrological contributions have been on the rise since the end of the 17th century, as for example in Vitezović’s calendars, which were printed as a series of calendars dating from the second half of the 18th century. The same can be seen in the second part of the Mathematical Handbook of Mate Zorčić Arithmetic which includes an astrological circle. They were also printed in the first half of the 19th century in annual calendars and especially in a centuries–old Croatian calendar, which, due to their popularity, were published several times, and their astrological contributions were transmitted by younger editors also. The manuscripts described were intended for the leisure and instruction of the common folk, written as manuals for everyday life, determining their content as well as their purview. Although they deal with astrological contributions, the authors emphasize that our world is completely in the hands of God’s providence. Since in the texts described, there is no prophecying of human destiny, it was not unusual for priests and friars to believe in such predictions. The texts provide basic information on the characteristics of particular planets, which are in line with general medieval and Renaissance astrological attitudes and which had been incorporated into Aristotle’s natural philosophy. The fact that they were written in the Croatian language at a time when few works existed in the language of the common people, places these texts into the framework of the effort to enlighten those who are easily manipulated. In addition, they are a valuable asset for the reconstruction of the level of knowledge and attitudes which prevailed at that time. However, that which stands behind the attitudes represented in Croatian astrological texts from the 18th century was already very conservative in relation to the point of view not only of scientists, but also of what they represented in the field of education in Croatia at that time.
Federik Grisogono vs. Duns Škot Martinović, Ivica
Prilozi za istraživanje hrvatske filozofske baštine,
09/2022, Letnik:
48, Številka:
1 (95)
Journal Article, Paper
Odprti dostop
Na temelju provedenih istraživanja moguće je drukčije periodizirati pa i ocijeniti odnos Federica Grisogona prema misaonom nasljeđu Ivana Duns Škota. Prvu fazu određuje sâm četverostih
Ad lectorem
na ...naslovnici Duns Škotovih
Questiones quolibetales
(1506), u kojem Zadranin, student filozofije i medicine u Padovi, upozorava čitatelja na pet Duns Škotovih knjiga koje je irski franjevac Maurice O’Fihely, profesor škotističke teologije Padovanskoga sveučilišta i zaređeni nadbiskup Tuama, priredio za tisak 1506. godine u mletačkih tiskara Andree Torresanija i Simonea de Luere. U poanti četverostiha »Moći ćeš njedra napuniti cvijetom« (
poteris flore implere sinus
) Grisogono se služi Mauricijevim pridjevkom
Flos mundi
da bi pohvalio trud i prinose priređivača pri objavljivanju dvaju povezanih Duns Škotovih djela
Scriptum Oxoniense
i
Questiones quolibetales
. Taj je Grisogonov četverostih otisnut bar još jednom – na dekorativnoj naslovnici pariškoga izdanja Duns Škotovih
Questiones quolibetales
1513. godine.Samo godinu dana nakon prvoga objavljivanja Grisogonova četverostiha
Ad lectorem
, u svom prvom zborniku
Speculum astronomicum
(1507), koji je tiskao 38 dana nakon svoje promocije za doktora filozofije i medicine (
artium et medicinae doctor
) Padovanskoga sveučilišta, Grisogono se poziva na Duns Škota u dvama svojim spisima. U raspravi »o plemenitosti i izvrsnosti astrologije« (
de nobilitate et excellentia astrologiae
), četvrtoj u sastavu spisa
Speculum astronomicum
, Zadranin ističe tri važna Duns Škotova filozofema: ograničenje u Božjem nužnom djelovanju, slobodu čovjekove volje i Božje predznanje. Pri proučavanju aksiomatskoga sustava Euklidove geometrije prema izdanju
Liber elementorum Euclidis
(1482) koje je priredio Campano da Novara, Grisogono upućuje na Duns Škota kad prigovara dvjema Euklidovim definicijama: u dokazu da točka ne postoji i pri logičkom osporavanju definicije kruga. Grisogonova ocjena Duns Škotova umovanja bitno se mijenja u 1520-im uz jednu prirodnofilozofsku temu – tumačenje morskih mijena. U svom drugom zborniku iz 1528 godine, i to u uvodu rasprave
Tractatus de occulta causa fluxus et refluxus maris
, Grisogono se ruga Duns Škotovu opisu morskih mijena u
Secundum scripti Oxoniensis super secundum Sententiarum
(1506) istodobno kad i Plinijevu prikazu u drugoj knjizi
Historia naturalis
(1513): »kao miševi koji skakuću po brašnu« (
ut mures super farinam saltantes
). Zadranin obojici prigovara da su »prešutjeli« rješenja za tri glavna problema u tumačenju morskih mijena, ali time zapravo nudi popis otvorenih problema s kojima će se suočiti u vlastitoj raspravi i za koje će ponuditi valstita rješenja. U svojim ocjenama Plinijeva i Duns Škotova prikaza morskih mijena Grisogono očito pretjeruje, dapače ne priznaje im ni ono što izrijekom stoji u njihovim tekstovima. A kad Grisogono u uvodu u raspravu o morskim mijenama drugi put spominje Plinija i Duns Škota, pristupa im različito. Plinija prikazuje kao okretna kompilatora nedorasla ostvariti sintezu o temi koju obrađuje, a u svojoj konačnoj ocjeni Duns Škota pribjegava alegoriji koja povezuje Škotov redovnički poziv i novozavjetni prizor s Genezaretskoga jezera (Mt 14, 22–36) u kojem je vjera ribara Petra na kušnji. Izričajem »budući da nije imao cipela« Zadranin podsjeća da je Duns Škot bosonogi franjevac. S pomoću metafore »bose noge«, koje mogu i gaziti i osjetiti drače, opisuje dvojaki Duns Škotov odnos prema astrologiji – pokušaj suprotstavljanja astrologiji i odustanak od toga pokušaja. S pomoću metafore »suhom nogom« Zadranin dodjeljuje Duns Škotu neočekivanu novozavjetnu ulogu – ulogu Petra koji hoda površinom Genezaretskoga jezera prema Isusu dok vjeruje, a počinje tonuti čim posumnja, da bi je primijenio, ni manje ni više, nego na teme o moru u Duns Škotovu komentaru drugoga sveska
Sentencija
. Napokon, Grisogono znamenitomu Škotu pridjeljuje nadimak »otac logike« i tako ga odvaja od rimskoga prirodoslovca Plinija. Razdjelnica između Plinija i Duns Škota, kako to shvaća Zadranin školovan u Padovi i poučen o dometima škotizma, leži zapravo u području logike: Plinije je neznalica u logici, a Duns Škot »otac logike«.
The reception of Duns Scotus’s thought, confined to the reception of his two works Scriptum Oxoniense and Quęstiones quodlibetales edited by the Irish Franciscan and Paduan Professor Maurice O’Fihely in 1506, should, on the basis of the conducted research, be placed in the following three years: 1506, 1507 and 1528, which enables a clear periodization of that reception. In addition, Grisogono’s attitude towards the philosophical legacy of Duns Scotus features in three different forms. The first phase is determined alone by tetrastich Ad lectorem on the title page of Duns Scotus’s Quęstiones quodlibetales (1506), in which the Zadar-born student of philosophy and medicine at the University of Padua warns the reader about Duns Scotus’s five books which Maurice O’Fihely, professor of Scotistic theology at the Padua University and already a consecrated archbishop of Tuam, prepared for print in 1506 with the Venice printers Andrea Torresani and Simone de Luere. In the gist of the tetrastich, “You will fulfil the bosom with flowers” (poteris flore implere sinus), Grisogono alludes to O’Fihely’s nickname Flos mundi, in order to commend the endeavour and contributions of the editor. Grisogono’s tetrastich was published at least one more time – on a decorative page of the 1513 Paris edition of Duns Scotus’s Questiones quolibetales. In his first book Speculum astronomicum (1507), published 38 days after his promotion as Doctor of Philosophy and Medicine (artium et medicinae doctor) of the University of Padua, Grisogono refers to Duns Scotus in two of his writings. In the treatise “on the nobility and excellence of astrology” (de nobilitate et excellentia astrologiae), fourth within his Speculum astronomicum, the nobleman of Zadar emphasizes three important philosophemes of Duns Scotus: limitation in God’s necessary action, free will, and God’s preknowledge. While examining the axiomatic system of Euclides’s geometry according to the Liber elementorum Euclidis (1482), edited by Campano of Novara, Grisogono refers to Duns Scotus in his objections to Euclides’s two definitions: in the proof that the point does not exist and in logical disputing of the definition of circle. In the 1520s, Grisogono’s assessment of Duns Scotus’s philosophy changed fundamentally regarding a topic from natural philosophy – explanation of tides. In his second book published in 1528, in the introduction to the Tractatus de occulta causa fluxus et refluxus maris, Grisogono ridicules Duns Scotus’s account of tides expounded in Secundus scripti Oxoniensis super Sententias (1506), at the same time as Pliny’s discussion in Book Two of the Historia naturalis (1513): “like mice jumping in flour” (ut mures super farinam saltantes). The nobleman of Zadar objects that both scholars neglected to focus on the three main problems in the explanation of tides, and in so doing actually offers a catalogue of open problems which he tackled in his own treatise and for which he submitted his own solutions. In his assessments of Pliny’s and Duns Scotus’s accounts of tides, Grisogono evidently exaggerates, as he refuses to acknowledge even what is being explicitly stated in their texts. In the introduction to his treatise on tides, Grisogono once again mentions Pliny and Duns Scotus, but he takes a different approach to each of them. Pliny is unjustly presented as skilful compiler, incompetent to develop a synthetic approach to a relevant topic, and in his final assessment of Duns Scotus he resorts to allegory, which links Scotus’s religious vocation with the New Testament pericope at the Lake of Gennesaret (Mt. 14, 22–36), in which the faith of Peter the fisherman is being tempted. By employing a syntagm “for he had no shoes,” Grisogono reminds that Duns Scotus is a barefoot Franciscan. With the metaphor of “bare foot,” treading and feeling the thorns, Grisogono describes Duns Scotus’s dual relationship towards astrology – an attempt to challenge astrology as opposed to the abandonment of this attempt. With the “dry foot” metaphor, the nobleman of Zadar attributed an unexpected New Testament role to Duns Scotus – the role of Peter who walks on the water of the Lake of Gennesaret towards Jesus, fearless and in faith, and sinks the minute he begins to doubt it, in order to apply it, no more or no less, to the topics on the sea in Duns Scotus’s commentary of the second book of Peter Lombard’s Sentences. Finally, Grisogono nicknames the famous Scot “the father of logic,” and thus separates him from the Roman natural philosopher Pliny. A clear-cut line between Pliny and Duns Scotus, according to the understanding of the Zadar nobleman educated in Padua and taught about Scotism on the lectures of Maurice O’Fihely, apparently lies in the field of logic: Pliny is ignorant in logic, while Duns Scotus is “the father of logic.”
Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- All metadata published by Europeana are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain ...Dedication. However, Europeana requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources including Europeana
Provider: - Institution: - Data provided by Europeana Collections- Extended description:
<!--if gte mso 10>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
...mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
<!endif-->
Oddaja govori o vražah in praznoverju ali vraževerju oziroma »babjeverju«. Pogovor z gosti v studiu: dr. Igor Škamperle docent za sociologijo zavesti na Filozofski fakulteti, dr. Drago Ocvirk, prof. osnovnega bogoslovja in živih verstev na Teološki fakulteti, izjave, posnete na terenu: psiholog Janko Predan, imam Nazif Topuz, dr. Janez Peršič, oddelek za zgodovino Filozofske fakultete, dr. Snežana Večko, prof. Svetega pisma, dr. Bojan Baskar, prof. socialne antropologije.
V izbranem odlomku: športna stavnica, cerkev na Ptujski Gori, oltarna plastika Marija pod plaščem varuje vernike, izjava imam Nazif Topuz (pod.), molitev v muslimanski molilnici, izjava zgodovinar Dr. Janez Peršič o začetkih krščanstva in sprejemanju starih verovanj v novo vero ter nadomeščanje starih praznovanj s krščanskimi svetniki, brani odlomek iz Tobijeve knjige Svetega pisma, prižiganje sveč, kadilo.- Information:- An introduction to a programme about superstitions: old and new false beliefs, the difference between religion and superstition. Statements by Imam Nazif Topuz and Dr. Janez Peršič.- Original language summary:
Uvod v oddajo o praznoverju oziroma vraževerju: stare in nove vraže, razlika med vero in vraževerjem, izjavi imam Nazif Topuz in dr. Janez Peršič.- All metadata published by Europeana are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. However, Europeana requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources including Europeana
PDF
