AT the CROSSROADS of SCHOLASTICISM and NORTHERN HUMANISM* the Late Medieval and Early Modem Periods Experienced Change in a Vari
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
JTA ~'s. In this they show them l focused perspective'. 'The MJ.F.M. HOENEN 'Jissance and Renascences in 1 altemately galvanized and AT THE CROSSROADS OF SCHOLASTICISM AND NORTHERN ~ping at its grave and tried to HUMANISM* IüS moment it succeeded. ,44 : to that last conclusion, it is ~onsolatio form an apt illust The late medieval and early modem periods experienced change in a variety f the northem humanists to a I offields: economics, religion, theology, and philosophy. These changes have :}uity'. been studied in many articles and book publications, most recently in the two-volume Handbook ofEuropean History 1400-1600.1 Some of the most interesting studies have shown - if we restrict ourselves to the transition from scholasticism to humanism - that scholasticism already bears humanist elements and that conversely humanism still carries with it scholastic attributes, an observation which mutatis mutandis also applies to many other changing areas of the period? The distinction, then, between scholasticism and humanism is not as strict as some of the standard works of intellectual history would have it. This is hardly surprising. Historical reality is always more complex than human concepts can express. To meet this complexity, the transition from scholasticism to humanism needs to be studied again and again, when new questions suggest themselves, and in the light of newly revealed or neglected scholastic sources. Only then can we begin to understand the complexities of intellectual history as it evolved in the late medieval and early modem period.3 For my part I would like to investigate the similarities and differences between scholasticism and northem humanism based on some interesting scholastic source materials, that in my view deserve closer attention and study. It is my contention that these materials shed new light on the relation ship between scholasticism and humanism. Before starting the investigation, however, the following methodological remark needs to be made, because the structure of the inquiry is guided by it. I consider neither scholasticism nor northem humanism as self-contained units.4 They each embrace a great 1.g • Research for this paper was funded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). I thank Inigo Bocken, Lodi Naula, Harold J. Cook and Faye Getz for their helpful sug gestions. I Handbook of European History, 1400-1600. See also with extensive bibliography Meuthen, Das 15. Jahrhundert. 2 See among others the classic studies of Gilson, La philosophie au Moyen Age, 741-53 (Le re tour des lettres en France), and Kristeller, Medieval Aspects ofRenaissance Learning. 3 Cf. Saccaro, Französischer Humanismus des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts, 7. J 4 On the characteristics of northern humanism, its differences from llalian humanism, especially its focus on religious questions and its penetration into the universities, see Nauert, Humanism and , 132 M.J.F.M. HOENEN AT THE CROSSROADS OF SC many different and sometimes conflicting aspects, which together result in settings and it manifests itself what we call in shortened form 'scholasticism' and 'northem humanism'. of the disputation.? Already j These aspects do not always irnply each other or form a necessary or exclu and commented upon in a regt sive unity.5 Greek commentaries on Platc I will therefore not take scholasticism or northem humanism as a whole, key texts that continued into t but consider only a number of different aspects, which will be studied ac medieval traditions are the , cording to their own separate development. At the end of the investigation, earliest of which dates from tb these different aspects will be brought together, to see whether they still renaissance, as is well-knoWI match the traditional concept of the distinction between scholasticism and new Greek and Arab source~ northem humanism. I have selected the following iterns for study here: 1. the tions, which became part of tl style and format of the treatises, 2. the language used, 3. the sources which glosses and commentaries on are employed, and 4. the subjects under discussion. The emphasis will be on dard works and the flISt cm: 11 the scholastic sources, yet I will single out those developments which, Aristotle appeared. These c though still belonging to the scholastic tradition, already manifest some they were written as part of . characteristics of northem humanism. As will become apparent from this point for discussion and the study, the transition from scholasticism to northem humanism began early passed on to the younger gene and was much more gradual than one is at flISt glance inclined to believe, at It goes without saying tha least if we consider the different aspects separately. The fmal rupture knowledge was developed an, between the two came only then, when the four different aspects of style, mentaries, had an enormous language, sources, and subject matters pointed in one direction and hence thinking. I will single out foUl were able to reinforce each other and to intensify, a constellation which 1. There is a rigorous arraJ happened about the end of the flfteenth century. By then, the dominant subjects under discussion, W intellectual culture changed substantially and urged the historians to speak of itself or by contemporary intl a new period in intellectual history, the humanist era.6 In the commentaries on Pete God are always treated in th beings are discussed in the sei Style andformat ofthe treatises Since the thirteenth century, at the universities and studia of the religious 7 See Kenny and Pinborg, 'Medie' orders, a style of reasoning emerges that has become characteristic of scho 52-102. lasticism and which indeed can be said to have given scholasticism its proper 8 For the Greek commentaries on name. This style is largely determined by the educational and institutional For commentaries on Aristotle, see 1 Aristotle, 1-17 (with a list ofthe conm 9 On these commentaries, see COUI 10 On the twelfth century renaisSll the Culture of Renaissance Europe, 95-163, with an annotated bibliography on 222-6. For a Philosophy; and Aufbruch, Wandel, E description ofscholasticism and its rnethod, see Oe Rijk, La philosophie au Moyen Age, 82-105. 11 The glosses and commentaries ( 5 80th scholasticism and northem humanism, for exarnple, embody the conflict between tradition to the Sentence Commentary'. For in! and renewal, each in its own way. In scholasticism !hat conflict is manifested in the many sophie medievale, 358-67. commentaries on set texts, whereas in humanism it is materialized in the debate over Latinitas, as 12 Not only in the Latin, but also exemplified by the many texts on this issue, such as Erasmus's Ciceronianus (ASD 1-2, 581-710). On taries played an important role in edl the Ciceronian controversy, see Copenhaver and Schmitt, Renaissance Philosophy, 206-9. thius's De consolatione. For arecent 6 This is not to say !hat scholasticism disappears. It remained partially alive at the universities, Philosophy. which by rigidity of their educational programs had a tendency to conservatism and thus impeded 13 An outline of the chapters of th overall humanist influence. tiae in IV libris distinctae, 5-53. On tI AT THE CROSSROADS OF SCHOLASTlCISM AND NORTHERN HUMANISM 133 cts, which together result in settings and it manifests itself in two forms: that of the commentary and that l' and 'northem humanism'. of the disputation.? Already in antiquity, important works were explained Ir form a necessary or exclu and commented upon in a regularized fashion, as is exemplified by the many Greek commentaries on Plato and Aristotle.8 It is this habit of elucidating :them humanism as a whole, key texts that continued into the Middle Ages. A clear example of the early s, which will be studied ac medieval traditions are the commentaries on Boethius's Consolatio, the the end of the investigation, earliest ofwhich dates from the ninth century.9 As part ofthe twelfth-century ~r, to see whether they still renaissance, as is well-known, the Latin West absorbed a great number of 1 between scholasticism and new Greek and Arab sources, thereby stimulating new commentary tradi g items for study here: 1. the tions, which became part of the newly-established university system. 1O Soon e used, 3. the sources which glosses and commentaries on the Sentences of Peter Lombard became stan [on. The emphasis will be on dard works and the first commentaries on the newly recovered works of those developments which, Aristotle appeared. 11 These commentaries were not occasional pieces, but ion, already manifest some they were written as part of the educational system: they were the starting. become apparent from this point for discussion and the means by which intellectual knowledge was hem humanism began early passed on to the younger generation. 12 glance inclined to believe, at It goes without saying that the flurry of commentaries and the fact that parately. The fmal rupture knowledge was developed and transmitted almost exclusively by these com rr different aspects of style, mentaries, had an enormous impact on the formal structure of scholastic in one direction and hence thinking. I will single out four features: lsify, a constellation which 1. There is a rigorous arrangement of and a strict connection between the rry. By then, the dominant subjects under discussion, which is deterntined not by the subject matter ~ed the historians to speak of itself or by contemporary interests, but by the text that is commented upon. 6 era. In the commentaries on Peter Lombard, problems conceming the nature of God are always treated in the frrst book, whereas those conceming human beings are discussed in the second. 13 atises and studia of the religious 7 See Kennyand Pinborg, 'Medieval Philosophical Literature'; Schönberger, Was ist Scholastik, ~ome characteristic of scho 52-102.