This thesis contains an edition of the Swedish Hebraist Andreas Norrelius’ (1679-1749) Latin translation, Illuminatio oculorum (1749), of the converted rabbi Johan Kemper’s (1670-1716) Hebrew commentary on Matthew, Me’irat ‘Enayim (1703). The dissertation is divided into three parts. The focus lies on the introduction, which concentrates on issues of language and style. Andreas Norrelius’ Latin usage is elucidated on its orthographical, morphological, syntactic, lexical and stylistic levels. The features are demonstrated to be typical of scholarly Neo-Latin: Through a broad comparative synchronic approach, conspicuous linguistic phenomena are taken as points of departure for the exploration of scholarly Latin prose in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, especially the vocabulary and phraseology of philological, theological, and exegetical discourse. An intellectual historical background is outlined that places the ambitions and the achievements of the author and the translator as well as the texts used for comparison in their scholarly and cultural setting against a general European and specific Swedish background. Furthermore, the introduction deals with various questions relating to translation techniques and strategies. In particular, the method for the translation of biblical passages is analysed and put in relation to the humanistic Latin Bible translations. Moreover, the life and work of Johan Kemper is described in the light of all historical sources available. The life of Andreas Norrelius is also portrayed, and the questions about the date and authorship of the Latin translation are thoroughly addressed. The second part contains the editio princeps of the Latin translation. Andreas Norrelius’ own prolegomena about Kemper’s early life has been made accessible as well. The third part provides a philological commentary focused on the explanation of specific linguistic and exegetical questions in the text edited.

Thesis advisor: Franco Mormando / Tra il 1410 e 1411, di ritorno dal suo viaggio di formazione in Grecia, il giovane Guarino tradusse in latino il Περὶ παιδῶν αγογὴς, opuscolo contenuto nel corpus dei Moralia e attribuito ad un maestro del circolo di Plutarco. Il testo greco riassumeva concetti educativi fondamentali nell’antichità, suggerendo un modello di educazione che mirava a formare un uomo laico, cittadino consapevole dei suoi doveri familiari, civili e religiosi. Questo concetto educativo, consono alla sensibilità umanistica di Guarino, spiega la sua scelta di tradurre in latino l’opera greca. Il De liberis educandis rappresenta, dunque, dal punto di vista del contenuto, un importante divulgatore di principi educativi per i secoli a venire e, dal punto di vista linguistico, una preziosa fucina di quel nuovo latino che andava formandosi all’inizio del XV secolo e di cui Guarino è uno dei primi artefici. Questo studio si propone di sottrarre il De liberis educandis dall’ombra e di aggiungere osservazioni sulla controversa attività di Guarino come traduttore. Sulla base di un dettagliato confronto linguistico tra l’originale greco e la versione latina di età umanistica, si può concludere che Guarino traduceva il testo greco con precisione, pur permettendosi qualche libertà dal punto di vista linguistico e culturale, come si dimostrerà con precisi riferimenti testuali. Il raffronto con l’originale greco rappresenta anche la base per avviare un’edizione critica dell’opuscolo latino che, assieme ad una traduzione in italiano, non è mai stata affrontata prima d’ora. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2016. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Romance Languages and Literatures.

Marcus Antonius Muretus, qui inde ab anno 1526o usque ad 1585m vixit, modo Latine scribendi optimo insignis et apud aequales et apud posteriores, annis 1573o et 1574o duas in Platonis Rem Publicam habuit orationes. Quarum contextus in hoc opusculo editur commentariisque instruitur, quo facilius a lectoribus hodiernis sententiae Mureti legantur ac intellegantur. In praefatione quam huic opusculo adiunximus tractantur etiam res nonnullae quae ad Muretum et ad has orationes de Platone habitas pertinent: videlicet Mureti vita, sententiae eius ad artem rhetoricam pertinentes, controversiae Ciceronianae, studia Graeca, philosophia Platonica, denique ratio quam ad hanc editionem perficiendam adhibuimus. Marc-Antoine Muret (1526-1585), known for his excellent Latin style both in his own time and afterwards, gave two inaugural speeches on Plato's Republic in 1573 and 1574. This thesis contains an edition of these speeches together with a commentary aimed at readers comfortable in classical Latin but perhaps new to Muret and to Renaissance studies. In a preface to this edition and commentary, several subjects are discussed that are essential for understanding Muret and the context of these speeches: Muret's life; his views on rhetoric and the imitation of Cicero; Greek studies in the Renaissance; Platonic philosophy; and finally the text of the speeches and other matters specific to this edition.

Opus cui titulus est "Carthago Indiarum obsessa sed non expugnata" est carmen divulgatum sine nomine auctoris saeculo duodevicesimo ad celebrandam vic- toriam quam Hispani a Britannis Carthagenae Indiarum anno 1741 in bello auris illius Ienkins (vulgo, the War of Jenkins’ Ear) reportaverunt. In hac thesi tractantur modo satis compendiario res gestae huius proelii quo melius lectores carmen ipsum possint intellegere. Necnon hic inveniuntur ea quae spectant ad huius opusculi genus, indolem et momentum litterarium. Postremo, praebetur hic editio critica, paraphra- sis Latina, commentarius in hoc carmen scriptus. Ex hoc carmine potest conspici quomodo litterarum Latinarum patrimonium pertineat ad omnes aetates, ad omnes gentes, ad omnes patrias. The work Carthago Indiarum obsessa, sed non expugnata ("Cartagena de Indias, Assailed but not Captured") is an eighteenth century anonymous poem that celebrates the Spanish victory over the English at Cartagena de Indias during the War of Jenkins’ Ear in 1741. This thesis presents a summary of the battle in order to contextualize the significance of the poem. It further presents a literary analysis of the poem’s genre, characteristics, and literary importance, as well as a critical edi-tion, a paraphrase in Latin prose, and a commentary. From analyzing this poem, one can see some ways in which the Latin literary patrimony brought from the ancients pertains to all ages, peoples, and nations.

C'est en 1767 que Jean-François Marmontel (1723-1799) publie son Bélisaire. Plus un traité socio-philosophique, miroir de son siècle, qu'un roman d'aventure, le Bélisaire de Marmontel retentira immédiatement dans la société de son temps et connaîtra une postérité fructueuse. En regroupant les idées clés de l'époque telles liberté de la pensée religieuse, tolérance civile (son point le plus vivement contesté par la critique et le plus ardemment défendu par son auteur), étendue de l’autorité royale, réforme souhaitée des systèmes fiscaux ainsi que des institutions de la vie civile…, l'ouvrage de Marmontel s'acquiert une importante popularité, son auteur ayant en plus remporté la victoire contre la Faculté de théologie de Paris. Il faut signaler également que le thème historique du vieux général byzantin n’est pas étranger à la littérature européenne antérieure à l’époque des Lumières françaises mais, là, ce sujet reste plutôt historique, sans l’attirail de la pensée novatrice dont Marmontel va le doter. Ainsi, parmi de tels ouvrages l’on range également le drame du Ragusain Antun Gledjević « Bélisaire ou Elpidie ». Cependant, c’est la trame idéologique du roman de Marmontel qui conduit le croate Michael Horvath (1733-1810), prêtre originaire de la région autrichienne de Burgenland, à publier à Vienne - très probablement en 1772 - une adaptation en langue latine du roman français. Une autre version latine (remaniement de la première édition) verra le jour en 1806 par les soins du libraire viennois, Aloysius Doll. / In 1767 Jean-François Marmontel (1723-1799) published a “novel” which he intitled Bélisaire. Much more a socio-philosophical treaty well anchored in its century’s philosophy than an adventure novel, Marmontel’s Bélisaire was an immediate success in his time and inspired many a literary follower in decades to come. Summing up the key ideas of its time, namely freedom of thought in religious matters, civil toleration (the novel’s strongest point, the most criticized by its opponents as well as the most fiercely defended by its author), extension of the royal authority, a most wished for reform of the tax system and, on a larger scale, of various social institutions…, Marmontel’s work quickly gained popularity, which was largely due to his author’s triumph over the Sorbonne theological party. The leitmotiv of Justinian’s old general, whose conduct was synonym of nothing but impeccable righteousness, was not unknown to the European literary pre-Enlightenment production, though back then the traditional plot lacked the novelty elements with which Marmontel endowed his Bélisaire. In this lineage we can place a play intitled « Belisarius or Elpidia » by the Ragusan poet Antun Gledjević. But it was primarily the ideological filament of Marmontel's novel that inspired the Croatian priest Michael Horvath (1733-1810) to publish a Latin version of Marmontel's text (most probably in 1772). A second Latin version of the text (published by a Vienna typographer Aloysius Doll) appeared in 1806.

Latiniste disciple d’Érasme et docteur en droit civil, Barthélemy Latomus est une figure emblématique d’une époque marquée par les mouvements transversaux de l’Humanisme et de la Réforme. Sa carrière connut deux périodes asymétriques, comme professeur de rhétorique latine et conseiller juridique d’un archevêque électeur de l’empire. Il enseigna à Trèves, Cologne, Louvain et Paris, où il fut choisi le premier comme lecteur en rhétorique latine au Collège fondé par François Ier. Ses recherches sur les fondamentaux de l’art oratoire, conjuguées à celles de Melanchthon dans le sillage de Rodolphe Agricola et de Georges de Trébizonde, aboutirent à l’avènement d’une rhétorique de type humaniste alliant étroitement logique et éloquence. L’objectif premier est de répondre aux besoins concrets des enseignants et des orateurs responsables. Dans ce but, il mit au point une méthode originale en analysant les discours classiques, surtout de Cicéron, non par intérêt archéologique ni en vue d’une vaine imitation, mais pour acquérir les outils d’un savoir-faire personnel. Dans un grand discours sur les « studia humanitatis » il expose le fond de sa pensée : un humanisme civique, reflet d’une anthropologie qui envisage l’homme en tant que membre actif de la société, où la rhétorique tient une place capitale. À Paris, il est l’un des représentants très prisés de l’humanisme du nord qui avait tant contribué à la réforme des programmes d’études universitaires. Devenu conseiller à Trèves après un voyage en Italie, il est amené à approfondir la théologie en vue du dialogue interreligieux. Dans ses controverses, il relaye la doctrine officielle en la fondant sur l’étude des sources bibliques et patristiques; il prône le débat d’idées face aux disputes stériles. À Paris, Latomus était proche du mouvement évangélique français; il maintint des contacts avec des amis luthériens, tels Jean Sturm et Jean Sleidan, et leur fit des ouvertures hardies concernant la structure hiérarchique de l’Église en vue d’un Concile libre. / A pupil of Erasmus, a Latin scholar, and a doctor of civil law, B. Latomus was an emblematic figure of a period marked by the cross-currents of humanism and reformation. His career spanned two asymmetrical periods: starting out as a professor of Latin literature, he ended up as a legal adviser to the Archbishop-Elector of Trier. He taught at Trier, Cologne, Louvain and Paris, where he was the first appointed lecturer of Latin eloquence at the College founded by François Ier. His research into the foundations underlying the art of oratory, together with those of Melanchthon and following upon those of Agricola and George of Trebizond, led to the development of a specifically humanist rhetoric, combining dialectics with eloquence, whose main goal was to cater to the practical needs of teachers and orators holding a post of responsibility. His analysis of classical speeches, above all by Cicero, was more than a mere archeological interest or an empty striving after imitation: Latomus developed an original method allowing him to forge for himself the tools of a highly personal savoir-faire. The essentials of his thoughts are developed in a great speech devoted to the ‘studia humanitatis’: a civic humanism, which is the reflection of an anthropology seeing man as an active member of society, in which rhetoric played a central role. During his Paris years, Latomus was seen as one of the foremost representatives of that brand of Northern humanism that had contributed so much to the shaping of university curricula. After becoming a counselor in Trier on his return from an iter Italicum, he delved into theology. In his controversies, he sided with the official doctrine by firmly basing it on biblical and patristic sources; he preferred the clash of ideas over sterile disputations. Latomus was close to the French evangelical movement; he kept contact with Lutheran friends such as Sturm and Sleidan, to whom he submitted courageous proposals regarding the hierarchical structures of the church, in the hope of having them discussed at a free council.

For the first time, the reception of the poetic legacy of the Latin poet Horace (65 B.C.-8 B.C.) in the poetics courses taught at the Kyiv Mohyla Academy (17th-first half of the 18th century) has become the subject of a wide-ranging research project presented in this dissertation. Quotations from Horace and references to his oeuvre have been divided according to the function they perform in the poetics manuals, the aim of which was to teach pupils how to compose Latin poetry. Three main aspects have been identified: the first consists of theoretical recommendations useful to the would-be poets, which are taken mainly from Horace's Ars poetica. The second aspect is the use of Horace's poetry as a model of word usage, tropes, rhetorical figures, and metrical schemes. Finally, the last important aspect of the reception of Horace is how his works could be imitated and his words or dicta borrowed in the composition of poetry, in which students were expected to exercise as part of the poetics course. The research draws the conclusion that Horace's legacy was of paramount importance in the manuals analyzed: on the one hand the Mohylanian poetics teachers' tendency (after Renaissance literary theorists and critics) to consider poetry within rhetorical categories rendered Horace's Ars Poetica extremely congenial to them. On the other, Horace's ideas were extrapolated from their original context and at times modified to serve a moralistic and "utilitarian" conception of poetry, which considered the latter as an instrumental science that served the ends of moral philosophy. With its metrical virtuosity and brilliant verbal craftsmanship, Horace's poetry provided an excellent model for the introduction of Christian content. The analysis of the way pagan authors (Horace first and foremost) were elaborated in a Christian key in the poetry composed by Mohylanian teachers and pupils indicates that education (and with it the assimilation of the Classics) at the KMA was not extraneous to the integration of ancient learning in Christian thinking as it took place in the different confessional schools of contemporary Western Europe. / Slavic Languages and Literatures

This is a collection of essays that works to illustrate the cultural force of Neo-Latin and the humanists who wrote them.

Research into the luxury debate in 18th century Sweden has focused on poetry and literature, the wording of decrees and the minutes of the Swedish riksdag. One source material largely left unexplored is the body of dissertations published by Swedish universities of the time. Not only is this an unfortunate omission as the universities were important intellectual centres, but also because they had a distinct culture, heavily influenced by Latin and the classics, in which luxury condemnations played a pivotal role. Building on the notion that ideas are best studied as arguments in debates, this master’s thesis examines twelve dissertations published in Sweden in the years 1722–1779 using models of conceptual change and argumentation analysis as theoretical approaches. The results indicate that the academic debate on luxury, through its focus on classical antiquity and conceptual definition, distinguished itself from other contemporary Swedish contributions to the debate, and that the interpretation of its characteristics must proceed from both the dissertation genre and the learned culture of university. The investigation furthermore stresses the importance of the university as a venue for reception of ideas in the latter part of the Early Modern Period and emphasises the dissertations as a central medium in this process.

No description available.