{"title":"《胜利者的黄金时代》:伊利奇诺评论的三个欧洲译本之比较。","authors":"Leonardo Francalanci","doi":"10.7203/mclm.7.17565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the last part of the fifteenth and the first decades of the sixteenth centuries, the dissemination of Petrarch’s Trionfi – the so-called ‘second wave’ of Petrarchism – was characterized by the extraordinary editorial success, in Italy as well as in the rest of Western Europe, of Bernardo Ilicino’s Commento on the Trionfi. By promoting an erudite, encyclopedic, and moralizing reading of Petrarch’s poem, Ilicino’s commentary effectively became a lens through which generations of European readers approached the text. Nonetheless, the dissemination of the commentary proved not to be immune from the influence of sixteenth-century lyrical Petrarchism, which started developing almost at the same time but would not reach peak until few years later. A comparative study of the three known translations of Ilicino’s Commento in Catalan, French and Spanish – even more so, vis à vis the translation of the poem without the commentary – allows us to identify similarities among these translations, as well as important differences. Some of these differences reveal that while the commentary was still sought after by early sixteenth-century readers of Petrarch’s poem, the general approach towards the poem was already starting to shift in the direction of Petrarchism. The three European translations of Ilicino’s Commentary, when organized chronologically, help shed light on how much the reception of the Triumphs was influenced at the time by the parallel development of European Petrarchism, which promoted a more direct, literary approach towards the poem.","PeriodicalId":40390,"journal":{"name":"Magnificat Cultura i Literatura Medievals","volume":"7 1","pages":"165-185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Triumphs’ Golden Age: a comparison between three European translations of Ilicino’s Commentary.\",\"authors\":\"Leonardo Francalanci\",\"doi\":\"10.7203/mclm.7.17565\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During the last part of the fifteenth and the first decades of the sixteenth centuries, the dissemination of Petrarch’s Trionfi – the so-called ‘second wave’ of Petrarchism – was characterized by the extraordinary editorial success, in Italy as well as in the rest of Western Europe, of Bernardo Ilicino’s Commento on the Trionfi. By promoting an erudite, encyclopedic, and moralizing reading of Petrarch’s poem, Ilicino’s commentary effectively became a lens through which generations of European readers approached the text. Nonetheless, the dissemination of the commentary proved not to be immune from the influence of sixteenth-century lyrical Petrarchism, which started developing almost at the same time but would not reach peak until few years later. A comparative study of the three known translations of Ilicino’s Commento in Catalan, French and Spanish – even more so, vis à vis the translation of the poem without the commentary – allows us to identify similarities among these translations, as well as important differences. Some of these differences reveal that while the commentary was still sought after by early sixteenth-century readers of Petrarch’s poem, the general approach towards the poem was already starting to shift in the direction of Petrarchism. The three European translations of Ilicino’s Commentary, when organized chronologically, help shed light on how much the reception of the Triumphs was influenced at the time by the parallel development of European Petrarchism, which promoted a more direct, literary approach towards the poem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Magnificat Cultura i Literatura Medievals\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"165-185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Magnificat Cultura i Literatura Medievals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7203/mclm.7.17565\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Magnificat Cultura i Literatura Medievals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7203/mclm.7.17565","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Triumphs’ Golden Age: a comparison between three European translations of Ilicino’s Commentary.
During the last part of the fifteenth and the first decades of the sixteenth centuries, the dissemination of Petrarch’s Trionfi – the so-called ‘second wave’ of Petrarchism – was characterized by the extraordinary editorial success, in Italy as well as in the rest of Western Europe, of Bernardo Ilicino’s Commento on the Trionfi. By promoting an erudite, encyclopedic, and moralizing reading of Petrarch’s poem, Ilicino’s commentary effectively became a lens through which generations of European readers approached the text. Nonetheless, the dissemination of the commentary proved not to be immune from the influence of sixteenth-century lyrical Petrarchism, which started developing almost at the same time but would not reach peak until few years later. A comparative study of the three known translations of Ilicino’s Commento in Catalan, French and Spanish – even more so, vis à vis the translation of the poem without the commentary – allows us to identify similarities among these translations, as well as important differences. Some of these differences reveal that while the commentary was still sought after by early sixteenth-century readers of Petrarch’s poem, the general approach towards the poem was already starting to shift in the direction of Petrarchism. The three European translations of Ilicino’s Commentary, when organized chronologically, help shed light on how much the reception of the Triumphs was influenced at the time by the parallel development of European Petrarchism, which promoted a more direct, literary approach towards the poem.
期刊介绍:
Its coverage is threefold: (1) Cultural subjects for the Romance area, in the medieval and post-medieval era (up to 1600). (2) Literature, linguistics and cultural issues in general, concerning the Crown of Aragon and Occitania (and other related areas such as Naples and Navarre). (3) Digital humanities or otherwise methodological studies, provided that they may be of service to the medievalist. This annual publication has been created with the intention of serving as a platform for works that exceed the conventional length of journal articles. Therefore Magnificat CLM will preferably publish long articles, but articles of medium length are not excluded. Magnificat CLM is aimed at an audience of researchers and specialists in medieval studies, especially Romance philology, as well as of specialists in digital humanities. Magnificat CLM consists of a single section of articles, occasionally including a monographic dossier on particular subjects. All articles are indexed. Magnificat CLM published its first volume in 2014.