Chapter One focuses on the role of Jerome’s Vulgate at the intersection of interpretative practice and politics in humanist sixteenth- and seventeenth-century exegesis. Catholic and Protestant reactions to Jerome are represented by those of Donne and Quevedo. Chapter Two discusses the 1575 Tremellius Latin Bible and Martín Antonio Del Río’s 1608 <i>Commentarius litteralis in Threnos. </i>These were major sources respectively for Donne’s and Quevedo’s versions of <i>Lamentations </i>and are representative of the Calvinist mainstream in the English Church and of the Spanish-Jesuit slant in the Catholic Habsburg Empire. Chapter Three reads the implicit political dimension of Donne’s undated metrical paraphrase ‘The Lamentations of <i>Jeremy, </i>for the most part according to <i>Tremellius’, </i>in the context of the explicit political dimensions of his undated sermon on Lam 3.1 and his sermon on Lam 4.20 delivered on November 5<sup>th</sup> 1622. Chapter Four shows how Quevedo applies essential features of the Old Testament text as lessons applicable to Philip Ill’s <i>Pax Hispanica, </i>and sets his verse and prose commentaries in the context of contemporary commentaries on Tacitus, making explicit the political dimension of the text. Quevedo’s self-appropriation of the prophet Jeremiah and his <i>Lamentations </i>is an admonitory <i>lamento patrius </i>in the tradition of <i>ubi sunt </i>and an urgent call against the enemies of Spain and contrasts in form and explicitness with the 1609 version of the Franciscan Andrés de Soto. Chapter Five compares Donne’s and Quevedo’s appropriations of Jeremiah and his <i>Lamentations, </i>emphasising their handling of Jeremiah in the context of the topos of tears and laughter, and their treatment of the historical and allegorical dimensions of Lam 4.20 regarding the figures of the Biblical kings Zedekiah and Josiah. The interpretative and formal flexibility of exegetical practice makes possible a consideration of the similar and diverse ways and ends in which Donne and Quevedo appropriate the Biblical text and reflect the complexities and preoccupations of their age. The Conclusion shows that the task of establishing similarities and differences in exegetical practice is complex and sometimes paradoxical.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:641339 |
| Date | January 2005 |
| Creators | Barreiro-Isabel, E. J. |
| Publisher | University of Edinburgh |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0025 seconds