它们是古代还是现代知识的成果?海因里希·萨尔穆斯对吉多·潘西罗里专著《重新纪念》(1602)的评论中的地理发现

Daria Galkova
{"title":"它们是古代还是现代知识的成果?海因里希·萨尔穆斯对吉多·潘西罗里专著《重新纪念》(1602)的评论中的地理发现","authors":"Daria Galkova","doi":"10.31857/s013038640025073-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the 1570s and 1580s, the Italian jurist Guido Panciroli (1523–1599) compiled a collection of brief notes on ancient and new inventions. In one of them, the author put forward the thesis that ancient thinkers knew nothing about the existence of the Americas. In an effort to prove the primacy of the Europeans in the discovery of the New World, Heinrich Salmuth, compiler of the commentary on Panchiroli's notes, made a number of arguments for and against this position. Thus in Panciroli's treatise “New Discoveries, or Two Books of Venerable Things”, first published in 1602, together with a commentary by Salmuth and initiated by the latter, the question of the possibility of discovering America before Columbus was raised. The purpose of this paper is to analyse grounds on which the time and essence of the discovery of the New World were perceived. To this end, the author examines the logic of the two authors' reasoning about European primacy and the differences in the justifications for this claim. On the basis of the research undertaken, it can be concluded that this work revisits not only the corpus of ancient worldviews, but also the exploratory, creative potential of Europeans to discover a new continent. In their work they try to find an explanation for the break with the preceding tradition and thus find themselves at the origins of the dispute over the significance of ancient knowledge for the new European science.","PeriodicalId":82203,"journal":{"name":"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are They Fruits of Ancient or Modern Knowledge? Geographical Discoveries in the Commentary of Heinrich Salmuth to the Treatise of Guido Panciroli “Rerum Memorabilium” (1602)\",\"authors\":\"Daria Galkova\",\"doi\":\"10.31857/s013038640025073-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the 1570s and 1580s, the Italian jurist Guido Panciroli (1523–1599) compiled a collection of brief notes on ancient and new inventions. In one of them, the author put forward the thesis that ancient thinkers knew nothing about the existence of the Americas. In an effort to prove the primacy of the Europeans in the discovery of the New World, Heinrich Salmuth, compiler of the commentary on Panchiroli's notes, made a number of arguments for and against this position. Thus in Panciroli's treatise “New Discoveries, or Two Books of Venerable Things”, first published in 1602, together with a commentary by Salmuth and initiated by the latter, the question of the possibility of discovering America before Columbus was raised. The purpose of this paper is to analyse grounds on which the time and essence of the discovery of the New World were perceived. To this end, the author examines the logic of the two authors' reasoning about European primacy and the differences in the justifications for this claim. On the basis of the research undertaken, it can be concluded that this work revisits not only the corpus of ancient worldviews, but also the exploratory, creative potential of Europeans to discover a new continent. In their work they try to find an explanation for the break with the preceding tradition and thus find themselves at the origins of the dispute over the significance of ancient knowledge for the new European science.\",\"PeriodicalId\":82203,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31857/s013038640025073-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Novaia i noveishaia istoriia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31857/s013038640025073-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在1570年代和1580年代,意大利法学家Guido Panciroli(1523-1599)编写了一本关于古代和新发明的简要笔记集。在其中一篇文章中,作者提出了古代思想家对美洲的存在一无所知的论点。为了证明欧洲人在发现新大陆的过程中发挥了主导作用,潘奇罗里笔记注释的编纂者海因里希·萨尔穆斯(Heinrich Salmuth)提出了许多支持和反对这一立场的论点。因此,在1602年首次出版的Panciroli的论文《新发现,或两本值得纪念的书》中,连同Salmuth的评论(由Salmuth发起),提出了在哥伦布之前发现美洲的可能性的问题。本文的目的是分析人们认识发现新大陆的时间和本质的依据。为此,作者考察了两位作者关于欧洲首要地位的推理逻辑,以及这一主张在正当性方面的差异。根据所进行的研究,可以得出结论,这项工作不仅回顾了古代世界观的语料库,而且还回顾了欧洲人发现新大陆的探索和创造潜力。在他们的工作中,他们试图找到与先前传统的决裂的解释,从而发现自己处于关于古代知识对新的欧洲科学的意义的争论的起源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Are They Fruits of Ancient or Modern Knowledge? Geographical Discoveries in the Commentary of Heinrich Salmuth to the Treatise of Guido Panciroli “Rerum Memorabilium” (1602)
In the 1570s and 1580s, the Italian jurist Guido Panciroli (1523–1599) compiled a collection of brief notes on ancient and new inventions. In one of them, the author put forward the thesis that ancient thinkers knew nothing about the existence of the Americas. In an effort to prove the primacy of the Europeans in the discovery of the New World, Heinrich Salmuth, compiler of the commentary on Panchiroli's notes, made a number of arguments for and against this position. Thus in Panciroli's treatise “New Discoveries, or Two Books of Venerable Things”, first published in 1602, together with a commentary by Salmuth and initiated by the latter, the question of the possibility of discovering America before Columbus was raised. The purpose of this paper is to analyse grounds on which the time and essence of the discovery of the New World were perceived. To this end, the author examines the logic of the two authors' reasoning about European primacy and the differences in the justifications for this claim. On the basis of the research undertaken, it can be concluded that this work revisits not only the corpus of ancient worldviews, but also the exploratory, creative potential of Europeans to discover a new continent. In their work they try to find an explanation for the break with the preceding tradition and thus find themselves at the origins of the dispute over the significance of ancient knowledge for the new European science.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
“Two-Faced Janus”: Was Chancellor Alexey Bestuzhev-Ryumin in the Service of the British? “Germany and the Balkan Feud”: The Russian Press Assessment of German Policy During the Two Balkan Wars of 1912–1913 The Egyptian Campaign and the Middle East Heraldic America The Image of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the Russian Press During the Sanction Pressure on the Country, 1992–1995
×
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