Dante et la Philosophie by Étienne GilsonReview by: J. H. WhitfieldThe Modern Language Review, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Jul., 1946), pp. 334-335Published by: Modern Humanities Research AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3717074 .

Accessed: 28/06/2014 10:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Modern Humanities Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend accessto The Modern Language Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 46.243.173.26 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 10:14:39 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

334 334 Reviews Reviews

controversialist, and as a layman, constantly appealing to 'the truth'. This indeed would seem to be a commanding concept in his mind and it is never discussed or defined. Similarly 'the Church' in these fragments would seem to have a different tone and connotation from what one finds, say, in Bossuet. Will not some student elucidate these and other problems in the field of Pascalian studies ?

W. G. MOORE OXFORD

Dante et la Philosophie. By ETIENNE GILSON. (Jtudes de Philosophie Mdievale

xxvIIi.) Paris: Librairie Philosophique, J. Vrin. 1939. x+341 pp. Learning and urbanity go together in a book which comes to correct an impression current here, though deriving perhaps from Croce: that Dante, because a poet, is therefore not an independent thinker. The elements of Dante's thought existed, his arrangement of them is his own. He is 'inclassable'; in particular, he is not bound to Thomism. This is the root of the book, and is responsible for a slight dispro- portion. M. Gilson is reacting (very sanely and courteously) against the theories of Pere Mandonnet, who, himself a Dominican, came to the conclusion that Dante also must have been one, or as good as one. This need for refutation drives M. Gilson to begin his book with the Vita Nuova. He remarks that his subject would seem to allow casual treatment only of this: but Mandonnet based his Thomist interpreta- tion on a whole symbolism of the Vita Nuova, and Gilson had to demolish this before he can proceed. No one can fail to admire the skill with which Pere Mandonnet is removed from any claim to speak for Dante; and it is only very rarely that Gilson has recourse to the arbitrary explanations which formed the staple of his adversary. Perhaps in the treatment of the donna gentile M. Gilson is too leste:

On peut bien dire, en verite, que Dante n'a pas de chance. S'il affirme que Beatrice est une femme, le P. Mandonnet et E. Aroux disent qu'elle n'est qu'un symbole; s'il affirme que la donna gentile n'est qu'un symbole, M. M. Barbi soutient qu'elle est une realite. En somme, il n'y a que Dante qui ne sache jamais de quoi il parle (p. 91).

That is a trifle irresponsible. If Dante is to be always right, he must be right both when he writes of the donna gentile as real (in the Vita Nuova), and when he makes her a symbol (in the Convivio), and not just in whichever the critic chooses to prefer. She becomes a symbol as Dante rearranges his own past; she will become real again when he repents of it under Beatrice's accusation in Purg. xxx.

But that is an exception, and will not break in on the feeling of exhilaration which the reader will experience from this refutation of Mandonnet. This, though long, is a clearing of the ground for the statement of Dante's position from the maturer works. Here Mandonnet is less in evidence, though he recurs, to be dis- proved, at the crucial points. M. Gilson does not re-evaluate Dante, he shows instead how Dante diverges from, or repudiates, Thomas Aquinas. Dante's co-ordination of authorities is no longer a subordination: to remove the emperor from the jurisdiction of the pope, Dante removes philosophy from tutelage to theology. His world is one of absolute authorities competent within a rigidly delimited sphere, with at their head Aristotle, Pope, Etnperor. M. Gilson is especially brilliant in his demonstration that the puzzle of Siger de Brabant is solved in this context. He cannot be in Paradise for something Dante did not know of him, or as a repentant Averroist; the line

sillogizzo invidiosi veri

shows that Dante knew, and approved, what others had disliked. Siger is there as the representative of the independence of natural philosophy, because Aristotle

controversialist, and as a layman, constantly appealing to 'the truth'. This indeed would seem to be a commanding concept in his mind and it is never discussed or defined. Similarly 'the Church' in these fragments would seem to have a different tone and connotation from what one finds, say, in Bossuet. Will not some student elucidate these and other problems in the field of Pascalian studies ?

W. G. MOORE OXFORD

Dante et la Philosophie. By ETIENNE GILSON. (Jtudes de Philosophie Mdievale

xxvIIi.) Paris: Librairie Philosophique, J. Vrin. 1939. x+341 pp. Learning and urbanity go together in a book which comes to correct an impression current here, though deriving perhaps from Croce: that Dante, because a poet, is therefore not an independent thinker. The elements of Dante's thought existed, his arrangement of them is his own. He is 'inclassable'; in particular, he is not bound to Thomism. This is the root of the book, and is responsible for a slight dispro- portion. M. Gilson is reacting (very sanely and courteously) against the theories of Pere Mandonnet, who, himself a Dominican, came to the conclusion that Dante also must have been one, or as good as one. This need for refutation drives M. Gilson to begin his book with the Vita Nuova. He remarks that his subject would seem to allow casual treatment only of this: but Mandonnet based his Thomist interpreta- tion on a whole symbolism of the Vita Nuova, and Gilson had to demolish this before he can proceed. No one can fail to admire the skill with which Pere Mandonnet is removed from any claim to speak for Dante; and it is only very rarely that Gilson has recourse to the arbitrary explanations which formed the staple of his adversary. Perhaps in the treatment of the donna gentile M. Gilson is too leste:

On peut bien dire, en verite, que Dante n'a pas de chance. S'il affirme que Beatrice est une femme, le P. Mandonnet et E. Aroux disent qu'elle n'est qu'un symbole; s'il affirme que la donna gentile n'est qu'un symbole, M. M. Barbi soutient qu'elle est une realite. En somme, il n'y a que Dante qui ne sache jamais de quoi il parle (p. 91).

That is a trifle irresponsible. If Dante is to be always right, he must be right both when he writes of the donna gentile as real (in the Vita Nuova), and when he makes her a symbol (in the Convivio), and not just in whichever the critic chooses to prefer. She becomes a symbol as Dante rearranges his own past; she will become real again when he repents of it under Beatrice's accusation in Purg. xxx.

But that is an exception, and will not break in on the feeling of exhilaration which the reader will experience from this refutation of Mandonnet. This, though long, is a clearing of the ground for the statement of Dante's position from the maturer works. Here Mandonnet is less in evidence, though he recurs, to be dis- proved, at the crucial points. M. Gilson does not re-evaluate Dante, he shows instead how Dante diverges from, or repudiates, Thomas Aquinas. Dante's co-ordination of authorities is no longer a subordination: to remove the emperor from the jurisdiction of the pope, Dante removes philosophy from tutelage to theology. His world is one of absolute authorities competent within a rigidly delimited sphere, with at their head Aristotle, Pope, Etnperor. M. Gilson is especially brilliant in his demonstration that the puzzle of Siger de Brabant is solved in this context. He cannot be in Paradise for something Dante did not know of him, or as a repentant Averroist; the line

sillogizzo invidiosi veri

shows that Dante knew, and approved, what others had disliked. Siger is there as the representative of the independence of natural philosophy, because Aristotle

This content downloaded from 46.243.173.26 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 10:14:39 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews Reviews 335 335

could not be there himself. This does not make Dante an Averroist, for he does not envisage any occasions when philosophy will come into conflict with theology. Each will be intact in their own sphere, but by virtue of this the pope's authority is no longer of this world. 'I1 le domine sans s'y meler.' That is why Dante reproves the Dominicans for justifying papal claims to superiority over the Empire. That is also why St Bonaventure praises Joachim of Flora, whom he had condemned in his own lifetime: are they not both detemporalizers of the Church?

Naturally, it is impossible here to discuss all the points of importance in this work, and my chief purpose must be that of drawing the attention of the English public to a book whose moment of appearance may have been against it. Dante's classification of the sciences, with the extraordinary (it is Gilson's word) demotion of metaphysics from its primacy, as being best, but not best pour nous, is admirably expressed. I do not feel quite so happy when he goes on to discuss the failure of Dante to follow on to the primacy, for us, of the active over the contemplative life. Dante here is traditional, even illogical, and I do not find the subtleties over the roles of Martha and Mary quite convincing (p. 132). Nor, perhaps, is the conclusion on Dante's advocacy of the Empire right, though it is right that he has broken from Aquinas (who does not mention an imperator). This advocacy came when the Empire's humiliation was so great that it seemed about to disappear. C'est bien la d'ailleurs ce qui rend si grande la position de Dante. Ecrivant en un temps oh il n'y a plus du tout d'empereur, il ne se bat pas pour un homme, mais pour une idee (p. 173). Is that defensible ? And if Dante is all the greater by virtue of the impossibility of achievement of the goal chosen, what should be our assessment of a champion of the Universal Emperor appearing now? In reality, these rigid authorities without which the world goes wrong attach Dante to his time: as with the purely theoretic claim that the way to prevent this same monarch suffering from cupidity is to give him everything, so as to elevate him above it. Alas! I'appetit vient en mangeant, and he who has all power will end a Hitler, whichever way he may begin. But it would be too much to expect any one book on Dante to solve all the problems connected with him, or for Dante himself to prove wholly acceptable at every point. At least, M. Gilson has earned the gratitude of all Dante scholars by a contribution as distinguished and authoritative as anything that has appeared this century.

J. H. WHITFIELD OXFORD

Cronica del Rey Dom Affomso Hamrriquez. Por DUARTE GALVXO. Partial critical edition with introduction and notes by A. R. NYKL. Cambridge, Mass. 1942. xlvi+56 pp. No price stated.

Troubadour Studies: a critical survey of recent books published in this field. By A. R. NYKL. Cambridge, Mass. 1944. 20 pp.

Poor communications, warlike preoccupations and other hindrances have delayed notice of these two works by Professor Nykl, the first an important contribution to a branch of science which never seems to make a definite advance, the latter a convenient summary of recent work affecting Galician and Provengal lyrics.

The Portuguese chroniclers are ripe for the honour of respectful edition. Since their works began to be maltreated in the seventeenth century, they have continued to appear at intervals in editions based on defective originals and indifferent to historical and textual accuracy. It is not a matter to be done outside Portugal; least of all now that war and increasing impoverishment tend to recreate medieval conditions of isolation. The greater number of manuscripts lie in Lisbon, in the

could not be there himself. This does not make Dante an Averroist, for he does not envisage any occasions when philosophy will come into conflict with theology. Each will be intact in their own sphere, but by virtue of this the pope's authority is no longer of this world. 'I1 le domine sans s'y meler.' That is why Dante reproves the Dominicans for justifying papal claims to superiority over the Empire. That is also why St Bonaventure praises Joachim of Flora, whom he had condemned in his own lifetime: are they not both detemporalizers of the Church?

Naturally, it is impossible here to discuss all the points of importance in this work, and my chief purpose must be that of drawing the attention of the English public to a book whose moment of appearance may have been against it. Dante's classification of the sciences, with the extraordinary (it is Gilson's word) demotion of metaphysics from its primacy, as being best, but not best pour nous, is admirably expressed. I do not feel quite so happy when he goes on to discuss the failure of Dante to follow on to the primacy, for us, of the active over the contemplative life. Dante here is traditional, even illogical, and I do not find the subtleties over the roles of Martha and Mary quite convincing (p. 132). Nor, perhaps, is the conclusion on Dante's advocacy of the Empire right, though it is right that he has broken from Aquinas (who does not mention an imperator). This advocacy came when the Empire's humiliation was so great that it seemed about to disappear. C'est bien la d'ailleurs ce qui rend si grande la position de Dante. Ecrivant en un temps oh il n'y a plus du tout d'empereur, il ne se bat pas pour un homme, mais pour une idee (p. 173). Is that defensible ? And if Dante is all the greater by virtue of the impossibility of achievement of the goal chosen, what should be our assessment of a champion of the Universal Emperor appearing now? In reality, these rigid authorities without which the world goes wrong attach Dante to his time: as with the purely theoretic claim that the way to prevent this same monarch suffering from cupidity is to give him everything, so as to elevate him above it. Alas! I'appetit vient en mangeant, and he who has all power will end a Hitler, whichever way he may begin. But it would be too much to expect any one book on Dante to solve all the problems connected with him, or for Dante himself to prove wholly acceptable at every point. At least, M. Gilson has earned the gratitude of all Dante scholars by a contribution as distinguished and authoritative as anything that has appeared this century.

J. H. WHITFIELD OXFORD

Cronica del Rey Dom Affomso Hamrriquez. Por DUARTE GALVXO. Partial critical edition with introduction and notes by A. R. NYKL. Cambridge, Mass. 1942. xlvi+56 pp. No price stated.

Troubadour Studies: a critical survey of recent books published in this field. By A. R. NYKL. Cambridge, Mass. 1944. 20 pp.

Poor communications, warlike preoccupations and other hindrances have delayed notice of these two works by Professor Nykl, the first an important contribution to a branch of science which never seems to make a definite advance, the latter a convenient summary of recent work affecting Galician and Provengal lyrics.

The Portuguese chroniclers are ripe for the honour of respectful edition. Since their works began to be maltreated in the seventeenth century, they have continued to appear at intervals in editions based on defective originals and indifferent to historical and textual accuracy. It is not a matter to be done outside Portugal; least of all now that war and increasing impoverishment tend to recreate medieval conditions of isolation. The greater number of manuscripts lie in Lisbon, in the

This content downloaded from 46.243.173.26 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 10:14:39 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions