No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Piccola biblioteca pleasure to read, though it hardly gives us an inkling of Petrarch's masterful adapta- tion of Ciceronian style.In the twenty-three pages of commentary plus nine pages of notes that foUw the Latin text and facing page Italian translation, Maura Formica and Michael Jakob deal with the much debated question of truth versus fiction in the interpretation of Familiarium rerum libri IV, 1.After reviewing the different critical stances from Carducci ("Petrarca alpinista") and Burckhardt ("scoperta del paesaggio," "primo uomo moderno") to the more recent and varied exegetical theses about the letter as Augusinian "conversio," and as "allegoria deUa vita umana" (Courcelle, Billanovich, Martinelli), Formica and Jakob launch an extensive and convincing dis- cussion of why this brief letter deserves so much critical attention (33).Starting from the philological proofs given by BiUanovich that Petrarch didn't start planning his literary epistolary until 1345 and that, therefore, the date Petrarch gives to his letter, 26 April 1336, is an "adjusted," fictional one for the real date of compostion that critics now agree to be 1353 (39), the two authors of the commentary show how there are various other elements of the letter whose veracity could and should be ques- tioned.These include the "chance" opening of Augustine's Confessions to the significant passage, the identity of Petrarch's interlocutor(s), the ascent of a real Mt.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.