In Defense of Erasmus’ Critics

IF 0.4 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES Erasmus Studies Pub Date : 2019-09-06 DOI:10.1163/18749275-03902005
John Monfasani
{"title":"In Defense of Erasmus’ Critics","authors":"John Monfasani","doi":"10.1163/18749275-03902005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The article confirms Andrew J. Brown’s thesis that despite carrying colophons with dates in the first decade of the sixteenth century, the four sumptuous manuscripts of Erasmus’ translation of the New Testament produced by the scribe Pieter Meghen could not have been finished until the 1520s and in fact preserve a version of Erasmus’ translation not available until the 1520s. Nonetheless, the article goes on to prove that Erasmus was working on a translation of the New Testament already at the time of the colophons in the Meghen manuscripts. Erasmus’ translation was part of his large-scale culture war against medieval scholasticism that he embarked upon at the end of the fifteenth century and continued until his death in 1536. The world around Erasmus changed radically, however, in those four decades, in significant measure because of his own scholarship and writings, but Erasmus himself changed amazingly little in his basic attitudes. The result was that by the end his critics from the Protestant as much as from the Catholic side were rightly frustrated by his incoherent reaction to the changed situation. Emblematic of his inability to face up to the transformed reality is his annotation to I Timothy1:6, which became an unconscious parody of his incoherent stance on religious doctrine and which is translated in an appendix to the article.","PeriodicalId":40983,"journal":{"name":"Erasmus Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18749275-03902005","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erasmus Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18749275-03902005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article confirms Andrew J. Brown’s thesis that despite carrying colophons with dates in the first decade of the sixteenth century, the four sumptuous manuscripts of Erasmus’ translation of the New Testament produced by the scribe Pieter Meghen could not have been finished until the 1520s and in fact preserve a version of Erasmus’ translation not available until the 1520s. Nonetheless, the article goes on to prove that Erasmus was working on a translation of the New Testament already at the time of the colophons in the Meghen manuscripts. Erasmus’ translation was part of his large-scale culture war against medieval scholasticism that he embarked upon at the end of the fifteenth century and continued until his death in 1536. The world around Erasmus changed radically, however, in those four decades, in significant measure because of his own scholarship and writings, but Erasmus himself changed amazingly little in his basic attitudes. The result was that by the end his critics from the Protestant as much as from the Catholic side were rightly frustrated by his incoherent reaction to the changed situation. Emblematic of his inability to face up to the transformed reality is his annotation to I Timothy1:6, which became an unconscious parody of his incoherent stance on religious doctrine and which is translated in an appendix to the article.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为伊拉斯谟的批评者辩护
这篇文章证实了安德鲁·J·布朗的论点,即尽管有日期为16世纪前十年的colophons,但由抄写员皮特·梅根制作的伊拉斯谟翻译的《新约》的四份豪华手稿直到15世纪20年代才完成,事实上,它保留了伊拉斯谟的翻译版本,直到15世纪50年代才可用。尽管如此,这篇文章继续证明,在梅根手稿中出现colophons的时候,伊拉斯谟就已经在翻译《新约》了。伊拉斯谟的翻译是他在15世纪末开始的反对中世纪经院哲学的大规模文化战争的一部分,并一直持续到1536年去世。然而,在这四十年里,伊拉斯谟周围的世界发生了根本性的变化,这在很大程度上是因为他自己的学术和著作,但伊拉斯谟斯本人在基本态度上几乎没有改变。结果是,到最后,他对形势变化的不连贯反应让新教徒和天主教的批评者都感到沮丧。他无法面对转变后的现实的标志是他对我的诠释 Timoth1:6,这成了对他在宗教教义上不连贯立场的无意识模仿,并在文章的附录中翻译。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Erasmus Studies
Erasmus Studies MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Abbreviations Bibliography of Selected Secondary Sources on Erasmus and Gender “The Place of Speaking for a Speaking That Has No Place” The Feminine Irony of God Editor’s Preface
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1