Authors:Jamilah R. George, Timothy I. Michaels, Jae Sevelius and Monnica T. Williams
“ It [psychedelic therapy] really does need to be a collective healing for all of us…If we’re really in the midst of a psychedelic renaissance, who are we leaving behind? ”
– Jae Sevelius, Injustice, Intersectional Trauma, and Psychedelics
nouis codicibus tam impressis quam manu scriptis deest tertius uersus. Quem nos in uetustiore exemplari inuentum suo loco audacter reposuimus . On Palladio see Gaisser, J. H. : Catullus and his Renaissance Readers . Oxford 1993, 97–99; on Petreio ibid
The argument in this article is that we should not make clear-cut
distinctions between humanism and philosophy or theology, and between the
humanists and their contemporary scholastic theologians and philosophers, in
the Florentine context of the second half of the fifteenth century. The
relations between these two groups were complicated and included, beyond
obvious differences, also mutual influences, not always discussed in detail
among modern scholars. Starting from the known controversy between Eugenio
Garin and Paul Oskar Kristeller regarding the nature of the humanist movement
and its relations with philosophy, I then move-on to present four examples: the
first two deal with "scholastic" theologians and preachers, the
Dominicans Giovanni Caroli and Girolamo Savonarola, in whom I emphasize the
humanist bias; the last two deal with humanist philosophers, Marsilio Ficino
and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, in whom I emphasize the importance of
religion and theology for the understanding of their philosophy.
The Story of the Fat Woodcarver, written by Antonio di Tuccio Manetti, probably recalls a popular anecdote about a Florentine artisan who was humiliated by his friend, Filippo di ser Brunellesco. The joke played by the architect has been at the forefront of scholarly interest, while the main protagonist has so far received limited attention. This article aims to reconstruct the life of Manetto di Jacopo Amannatini, that is, the Fat Woodcarver, in the context of his social relationships with the other figures in the story. It argues that Manetti’s account is grounded in concrete historical facts and therefore provides us with a unique picture of the intersections that existed between artisan and merchant networks in and beyond early Renaissance Florence. Manetto’s character may well symbolize those itinerant craftsmen who, by acknowledging their position in their own communities, and thanks to their skills and their courage to migrate to remote places, like the Kingdom of Hungary, managed to improve their social status significantly.
The paper analyses the textual and visual representations of King Matthias Corvinus in the light of Antique physiognomical theories. I intend to focus mainly on those descriptions and portraits which were influenced by the lion's physiognomy. The last chapter deals also with the portraits of Matthias, but with the Attila-faun-like images. The Antique theories of physiognomy have contributed to a more exact interpretation of his images and the physiognomical comparison has resulted a more shaded picture about his iconography, even in the case of the Attila-faun-type portraits where we cannot study such clear-cut intentions. Due to the research we can place plausibly the leonine images of King Matthias among the Renaissance state-portraits after having taken into consideration the king's political intentions as well. The examination of the sources has resulted that the role of Galeotto Marzio must have been crucial in mediating the physiognomical theories towards the Buda court. I have also demonstrated that in his work physiognomy appears as an element of the theoriesrelated to good governance.
The present paper aims at examining the manuscript recorded as ÖNB Suppl. Gr. No. 45 in the Austrian National Library which was attributed to Janus Pannonius until recently. Firstly, the opposing opinions of J. Bick, Cs. Csapodi and I. Kapitánffy are to be presented in connection with the authorship of the
. Secondly, the arrangement of the word list is described with a focus on scribal errors revealing the mechanics of the transcription of the text. Then glossary notes by different Latin and Greek hands are described and classified with an emphasis on the possible identification of two Greek hands. Finally, an attempt is made to reconstruct the history of the codex partially on the basis of its three bookplates attached on each other by subsequent possessors.