The Renaissance was, above all, a significant new cultural movement that began in 14th century Italy, somewhat before the early modern period in a larger world history. Its innovations included new styles and a new attention to style; an increase in secular interests, as opposed to strictly religious goals; and a major revival of attention to classical Roman and Greek models in writing, art, and philosophy. The Italian Renaissance also included new political developments in competing city-states and a growing level of trade. Some scholars have identified growing delight in individualism and individual achievement as another unifying feature of the Renaissance.As a cultural movement, the Renaissance lasted into the 16th century, by which time it was involving northern Europe as well. The Renaissance contrasted greatly, in religious, stylistic and philosophical terms, with the medieval culture that had preceded it in Western Europe.
The documents that I would like you to read come from letters written by Francesco Petrarch, one of the leading figures in the Italian Renaissance. From 1304 to 1374, Petrarch lived in Florence, a major Renaissance center. Petrarch was a poet, historian, and scholar, known both for his advancement of Latin classics and for his work in Italian. He wrote a number of letters to figures in the classical past, but also to contemporary authors like Boccacio, in order to discuss some of his intellectual and personal concerns. There are four letters of his that I would like you to read (you can read all four of them by clicking here): one simply generally entitled "To Posterity"; another to Boccacio; and two more to the long-dead Roman politician and philosopher Cicero, best known for his writing and for his his talents in the field of rhetoric. The letters were written in Latin and intended for publication.
The letters raise a number of Renaissance themes. The relationship to Roman culture is one that Petrarch deals with directly, in discussing Latin and vernacular Italian. The Renaissance ultimately encouraged the rise of vernacular languages--English and French as well as Italian--in cultural life, but it also promoted esteem for good Latin. The relationship to religion is another key theme: Petrarch writes as a Christian, but suggests a re-balancing of interests between religion and other concerns in intellectual and even ethical life. Petrarch also describes a new sense of himself as an individual, and this invites definition as well, as part of figuring out what the Renaissance was all about.
Petrarch's work can and should be compared with medieval intellectual life, in terms of the different cultural goals and values. It also raises deeper questions about the range of the Renaissance: how much was the Renaissance an elitist movement, and how much did it affect the wider society?
The Italian Renaissance must also be connected to world history. In one sense, it was a very self-contained cultural movement with specifically Italian features. But some scholars have found in the Renaissance a source of wider changes in culture and values that help explain new European initiatives in the world at large. After reading Petrarch's letters, what do you think? Was Petrarch highly individualistic in his presentation and assessment of himself? What were Petrarch's religious views? How do these compare with more traditional Christian values? How does he define the nature and purpose of ethics? What are Petrarch's attitudes toward the classical past? What does he urge his contemporaries to find in classical styles and examples? How does his love of the classics relate to his sense of his own achievements and individuality? Judging by Petrarch's interests, what kinds of changes were involved in the development of the Renaissance culture? How does it compare to medieval culture in Western Europe? What kinds of implications did it have for society at large? Again judging by Petrarch's interests alongside major developments in world history at the time: How would YOU define the significance of the Renaissance in world history? Did Renaissance values play a major role in causing new European global initiatives? How do they compare to other major causes? Your thoughts...
7 comments:
I read how he talked about himself. What was up with that? I bet it was how mr. prill said that the renaissance made people think only about themselves.
I really cant say anything else about this document other than he describes the renaissance real well. also, he sheds light on how life is like back then. I can really see it in his documents how times are evolving from medival ways to new and revivied style of thinking.
Okay so I'm kinda confused about who Francesco Petrarch is writing the letters to but I do understand what he is saying about life back then and how things were. And he explained it fairly well.
Petrarch was saying that his parents were poor, but he on the other hand wanted to live a wealthy lifestyle. He said that he became friends with the higher class people like the Kings so he had certain perks and opportunities because of that. So this also means that they have a class system but they are not trapped in that class they can move around if they choose right?
Petrarch, he starts by humbling himself to the people.
He's trying to make himself look his best to the people. But we all know that now people are self-centered and we know it well because most all of us are like that. He talked about his life and how it was, but that's about it. He describes of his life, childhood, his parents, talked of his experiences. Petrarch talked a little on religion but just a speck of it, and he went rolling on over about his life. Self-centered, yes and it kind of ticks me off how ignorant this guy is.
Reading the first letter about himself, i was kind of surprised how he talked about how his life wasn't perfect and he wasn't the best person in the world. He told the downsides of his life as well as the good sides, not making himself look more superior than he is. Yes he may be a little biased in some parts but not nearly as much as most documents we read.
In the second letter he explains that the renaissance was really based on the outside/figure of te body. I was kind of confused reading this quote, "They have neither skill nor intelligence, but rely entirely upon indolence and chance." I thought the renaissance was more about knowledge, recovering past philosophy, and creating things never created before.
In the third and fourth letter to Marcus Tullius CICERO, Petrarch basically insults some of the things he does, he is basically a well known figure whom was probably big into the Renaissance. It seemed like without him it wouldn't be the same.
I disagree with the person that says Petrarch is unintelligent. From these writings, Petrarch seems vry intelligent.
The first leter gives us background on Petrarch. He is aware of corruption and states he may have been corrupted. He seems to have good morals, or at least strives to have good morals. Petrarch relays the deterioration of the human body.
In the second article he is basically saying: "What is wrong with our world? When will the charecteristics of the classical age return?????"
He is concerned about the unintelligence of the common man. He says the people are obsessed with military. I found this all very ironic as in writing this Petrarch was bringing about what he longed for.
In the third letter Petrarch discovers Cicero's writing. He is amazed, but he critiques Cicero (even though he's dead). And then he apologizes for his harshness.
Petrarch is very secular in his writings. He is writing about a return of the classics rather than ecclesiastical affairs. Though, how much Prtrarch's writings affected the common man seems very little. Petrarch was obviously a catalyst of the Renaissance through his individual thinking and secular writings. Petrarch is obviously very early in the Renaissance, becaues when he is writing the Renaissance is not in full power as he is concerned about the return of the classics.
Post a Comment