Earth papacy

The read of a French book Les popes de Avignon 1305-1378, has given to me a motive for this essay; today it isn’t because we have got down on earth planet and inasmuch we have left the suggestions and tyhe impression regard the holyness of Vatican, that has said actual pope Leon 14th, not be mixt to the Church; but during the Middle Age this difference aren’t, and the Church was a strong power, that worked also for particular interest, or political interest; died pope Bonifacio 8th (1294-1303) in Perusia, a Italian city was the conclave that voted pope Clemente V (1305-1314); but the political context was very difficult, because the conflicts between the Church and the French were very strong, and the tries of French of external his influence on the papacy was very strong and the disastrous, because a pope as Bonifacium 8th was very upholder of predominance of Church on the laic power, whereby every tries of Philipp 4th, king of France was useless, until the slap of Anagni, a city in Italy, when Sciarra Colonna humiliated through this gest the pope; after it the new conclave in fact chosen a French pope, Clements 5th that after his election didn’t transferred to Rome but he wanted stay in French, where the papal seat was transferred and for 72 years the papacy was alone French pope hasn’t cure for this, the merchants instead gone to Avignon because the business was very rich, and Rome was a very desert and disaster, an example: for to change home was sufficient go out from his home and entered in other; anyway in papal history the 18th July  in year 1304 the conclave is opened in Perusia, and the meeting was radically divided between the Italian cardinals and French, the first were more numerous and they wanted the attempt of humiliation of Anagni; this book didn’t explained why this will, it was certainly an important humiliation, but the revenge was very useless, apparently, but we can interpreter this strategy: the interpretation is very easy. The papacy has understood that the power of French could influencer on Rome and the Church, and the power of Church would be transferred to French, and it is is occurred; the Italian cardinals have understood it and the excuses fro the Anagni slap was alone a formal condition for to try that the papacy was in Rome again; but we can also understand that the election of a French pope, was already decided, because the worries of the Italian cardinals, and the will of excuses for the slap are the clear manifestation, and above all that the papacy has had major number a Italian cardinals, but they known that it was useless, because then the French was powerful too, and it says also the power of Church was ending, and the policy by now was dominant; in fact a cardinal Napoleone Orsini leaded the French faction and he wanted also the rehabilitation of two foes of pope Caetani, this is two cardinal from the family Colonna, dismiss from their cardinalities, and very near to Philipp 4th of French. The pope is going to be French because the French was very strong; hence the Church have to approached its to a strong foe, that could give harm to it, Clemens 5th was the evident example; in fact after the election didn’t occurred other French popes. The tell evidences finally also the political strategy: “The tiara( this is the papal election) was ensured to archbishop of Bordeaux for six promises: reconcile to the Church the king of French without restriction…”, it is was the fundamental motive, because the French never would accepted to govern of a excommunicated, hence the riots and revolts would be ordinary questions and a reign have left very much, because above all other states would get profit for the attack, a nation with disorder is very weak, inasmuch easy interest so other states. But above all other questions were important: “…condemn the memory of Bonifacium pop, rehabilitation of Colonna cardinals and to voted cardinals that were very near to French.”; it is the strategy of cardinals friends of French, that had understood that the time of predominance of Italy was ended, now the laic states had the power. And that the French was a powerful nation is attested for the choose of a French cardinal, in a conclave that was for the 90% Italian; it is a political choose, certainly and we have seen until now; but I want dress that although the conclave was Italian absolutely, a laic state, as the French had a powerful very relevant in the European policy; other Italian cardinal could be chosen, but a French because the power was in that nation. But the author has also made a error that is normal in year 1912, when this book was printed, he in fact hinted to the condemn of Templar knights, that occurred never, as Barbara Frale, Italian historical woman has attested, because she has published the parchment of absolution; but this book, The Templars, was published in 2004; politically the condemn would not be been anyway, because the pope, then, was French hence he could took the very great richness of the Templar knight, the French pope and therefore the French. But the nationalism emerges from a modest episodes; after the death of pope Clemens 5th the conclave has stopped for two years: “The saint seat was without pope for two years…”; we can think that it was alone a rethink of cardinal, and it is humanly comprehensible , or better psychologically more comprehensible, because the dread was past, and by now the cardinals have recognize that the French wasn’t a danger, why? Simple because Philipp 4th was died in same year of pope Clement 5th, thence the France didn’t scare because the king Philip was died, inasmuch, we can hypothesize that the Italian cardinals wanted the seat of Church gone back to Rome, because the discordance evidently about the new pope were very radical, also because it was the last possibility, for the Italian cardinals, for to elect a Italian pope, because they known perfectly that a French pope is going to elect alone the French cardinals for the assure to the France the power of Church, because they are going to elect other French pope. Avignon, which during the Roman peace was of small importance compared with Arles and Vienne and other commercial centers of Provence, emerges during the barbaric wars into some prominence by reason of its military strength ;      

 Alessandro Lusana              

 Daily dialectic

A student of Karl Marx(1818-1883), Lucio Colletti(1924-2001), for his exam necessary to university job as professor, said that by now the dialectic could set in oblivion because it was an old concept that Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel(1770-1831) and Marx has used for their theories but it was ended, finished and past; naturally it was the alone opinion of Colletti because the dialectic, at last in acceptation of Hegel and Marx, is always life and always it is going to live, because the dialectic is for the mankind and for the animals and in the universe, among the galaxies, but rightly the first question is, what is the dialectic? Usually the dialectic is alone the verbal dialog for to explain something, and in philosophy it is same, with acceptations very different, for Plato, that was pupil of Socrates the dialectic is the method for to inquiry through the dialog, it is the Socratic method, for Aristotle is the rational process that begins form the probable preambles and after much other Hegel is the union of opposite concept, that in Hegel are the thesis, antithesis and synthesis, the union of opposite concept, that is a concept retook for Johann Gottlieb Fichte(1762-1814), that has created this union between the I and not I; the dialectic anyway is always dynamic, also if it is alone verbal, and in fact this gender of dialectic is other form of evolution and change; but I want consider above all the concept of dialectic of Hegel and Marx, that are the major user of this concept, that is basilar for the life, why? Simple because the fight through or not the weapons is the evolution of mankind, some example: the American “revolution” was a evolution, very modest but it brought an evolution this is the independence, that was already present, but after the “revolution” was also political, officially, the French Revolution was a dialectic change very radical that brought the transformation, at last formally, of a political model this is the absolutely monarchy that after became the Republic, and also when through Louis 18^th become again a monarchy the king wanted the constitution and respected it always, hence the dialectic was learned something; Marx has took Hegel and his concept of dialectic, but he has though that the dialectic was the fight among the social classes, that certainly he has took also from the French Revolution, that was the fight between the social classes, this is the middle age and aristocracy. But the dialectic is also our always and without “revolutions” or Revolutions, how? Simple if we argue to somebody it is an evolution, contrasting, fighting but an evolution, and if after this quarrel we not speak to somebody a change, inasmuch an evolution there was, because the rapport that before was now isn’t, therefore a change and an evolution of our knowledge there is, because we have known other person and we have increased our knowledge, this is that person is an enemy, and the character is so and he not like to me, whereby this character isn’t for me very disagreeable; but this knowledge is stemmed from the dialectic that we have used for the contrast; thereby the dialectic has brought a change and a evolution, that is otherwise dialectic, because this new knowledge contrasts to the former, thereupon the dialectic contract is again, if we want, a Hegelian dialectic, why? Simple because the former ignorance contrast the following knowledge, and these two contrasting conditions bring to the  synthesis, this is the union of the ignorance and knowledge that make the new condition that is the synthesis, the new knowledge and former ignorance and these are two moments of the synthesis, that are came to the synthesis for the dialectic; the question could be: “But the union of between these concepts has annihilated the nature or something is again? Certainly something there is, because we through the dialectic we have known a persons, but not certainly everyman, thence the ignorance these is again.

Alessandro Lusana  

 

 

           

 Artistic sins parochialism: Giotto and Dante

The name of Giotto from Bondone (1267–1337) certainly said very low to common reader because the Italian painter has seen from half word but study, above all in Italy, very short, anyway he has been a Italian painter very famous in art history, and in the second part of Divine Comedy the verses of Dante Alighieri(1265-1321), author of this sublime poem, describes his met to Oderisi from Gubbio, a painter of miniatures, very know during his time, Dante that in circle of haughty recognized Oderisi and he asked: “Are you a great artist? Are you Oderisi from Gubbio?” and he: “Yes, yes”, and Oderisi he regrets it and he condemn the sin the pride. Nothing that can excite us, but the interest regard Dante at last is in the parochialism of sin of haughtiness, Dante condemn Oderisi because haughty for his capacity in the miniature, but he forgotten Giotto, that known for otherwise sin, the question is: “in what occasion?”, a courtier of pope Benedict 11^th, that come to Tuscany for to search an artist necessary to Vatican so Giorgio Vasari (1511-1574): “After that he has had drawings from them(from the artists of Sinise) he come to Florence, and he come to store of Giotto while he was working, the courtier explained the think of pope, and how he wanted use the his capacity, and he asked also a drawing for to send it to his Sanctity. Giotto very polite he was, took a sheet and on it he drawn a circle perfect, and when he made it, he smiling said: “There is it to you the drawing”, and the courtier: “I must have other thing that this drawing?”, and Giotto: “Much more, but unfortunately it is so, send it gather other and you are going to ascertain if it is known”; it is a praise of herself, this is of Giotto to herself, that is more than justified, because Giotto merits it and other eulogy, certainly, but I want stress that Dante has condemned the highly of Oderisi, that he not known because the last documents that remembers Oderisi is dated 11^th March 1271, Dante had then 6 years, and Oderisi was born in Gubbio distant from Florence because in other region, instead Dante didn’t condemn the highly of Giotto, that given a drawn circle to a courtier of pope, the man powerful in Europe, hence if Oderisi was condemned to Purgatory for his sin, Giotto should condemned to Hell, but Giotto had a justification for this lacked condemn, what is? Simple Giotto was Tuscan as Dante, and he written the Purgatory when Giotto was again life, and in other canto Dante, making a confront between Giotto and Cimabue(1240-1302) written: “Cimabue has believed to have the in the painting the success but now Giotto has fame…”; it is a declaration of cowardice of Dante, because Giotto was very much famous in his art, and Cimabue was died, therefore Giotto by now was the champion of the painting, and much famous for to be condemn; inasmuch Oderisi from Gubbio could also condemn but Giotto not. It is certainly the subjection to the fame of a painter, typical for the Middle Age, but also the parochialism that Dante has had.

Alessandro Lusana  

 

  

 The fate in a novella: Edgard Allan Poe

Edgar Allan Poe (18097-1849) was a major American writer that in the novella of pendulum and the well has synthetized the human destiny, both his and of the human gender, generally as a pendulum that changes the position very speedy but it keep always his nature, and repeats always the same position, because it turns on the same positions always, and on the begin of this novella he has anticipated this following change: “(The jugds)shown to me as the slender and white angels, ready for to save me, but after a nausea overcame the my wit, and every fibers of my body vibrated  as I have touched the wire of galvanic cell, and the angelic form became to specters without mean…”; it is the anticipation of the following mutation of the prison in the cell, this is the destiny that changes always. Other summary and symbolic reference to the destiny is the dark of the cell, the prisoner wide the arms but he not touches something, and it is other indication necessary for to reader to consider the symbolic nature of the novella; because the dark is the unknown of future, and the continues analysis of interior dynamic of the prisoner is the reference, the first to the realism of Poe, that I have descripted(Realism of Poe), but the second is to the symbolic nature of the man, that in face to future is the uncertain, hence his wit and his psychology is stirred. And the hands of prisoner that touched a wall is, symbolically taught, some sureness that we can reached during our life: “The my hands met finally an obstacle. Its was a wall build through the stones, smooth, humid and cold…”; it is the sureness that we have read, and the awareness of the prisoner, that every event in the life is alone momentary, because the description is pitiless: “I followed(the wall), running with the prudent distrust”; and the yarn that the prisoner uses for to find again the point where he has started is the initial sureness that we after leave for to search something around, and something that we haven’t found before, but the wicked surprise is the well that the prisoner finds in his cell: “Here, the my chin and my lips not lay on the floor. In the same time I felt my front humid for a cold vapor…I longed a my harm and I was in fair that I have failed on the edge of a well…”; it is the wicked surprise  that usually we have found during the enjoying of something. The sleep that after that the prisoner has drunk, may for an drug is the psychological calm that we have after the reached a sureness. And other meaningful step is the following: “How much time it lasted I don’t know, but as soon as opened the eyes, I could ascertain that the object around were visible…”;it is the sureness that we have reached when we have known the context, the new context, and finally we can finally see the every elements both important and not important, as the dimensions of the cell where is the prisoner: “…I could see the extension of the prison, About the dimensions of it I understood that I was erred very much”; it is the automatically correction that we bring to a opinion of something that we have taught to be other. Edgar Allan Poe, therefore has described the life of man and his uncertain and his sureness, but everything for a short novella.

Alessandro Lusana

 The political man on loan to the Church; Boniface 8th

After the pontificate of Celestine 5^th a “pope”, and I have set le word pope between comma because he was everything except a pope, an ascetic man, and he was alone ascetic that lived in a cavern, when the conclave of Perugia, after 27 months, didn’t choose a pope, hence Celestine 5^th was a solution for to stall, and take a decision for the next candidate, Pacuvius March(b.Ch.220-130) said that:”Ubi bonum patria est”, this is: “Where is the good there is the homeland”; we can also think that after this conclave and paraphrasing Pacuvius: “Ubi the good there is the power”; and in fact ascertained the weakness of Celestine 5^th the after pope was Boniface 8^th, a political man that was also a pope; his nature merely political there is in the intuition, that he had for to read the interest of Philipp 4^th, king of France, for the richness of the Church, that in France was the tithe necessary to keep the churches and orders; and the Bull Clericis laicos in year 1296, was a political document that reveals the political head of Boniface, because through this Bull the pope forbidden to the lay power of imposition the tax without authorization of the pope, and as well as to Boniface also Dante Alighieri(1265-1321), a most famous Italian poetry, synthetized this will of Philipp 4^th through the words: “To bright to temple the avid sails”, regard the robber that Philip 4^th made of the treasure of Templar, but Dante has simply anticipated and followed both the larceny of Philipp 4^th toward the Templars, and followed thw Bull of Boniface 8^th, in text of prohibition is written: “On the prelates of the churches and on ecclesiastical persons, monastic and secular, they impose heavy burdens, tax them and declare levies upon them. They exact and extort from them the half, the tenth or twentieth or some other portion or quota of their revenues or of their goods; and they attempt in many ways to subject them to slavery and reduce them to their goods; and they attempt in many ways to subject them to slavery and reduce them to their sway. And with grief do we mention it, some prelates of the churches and ecclesiastical persons, fearing where they ought not to fear, seeking a transitory peace, dreading more to offend the temporal than the eternal majesty, without obtaining the authority or permission the Apostolic chair, do acquiesce, not so much rashly as improvidently, in the abuses of such persons. We, therefore, wishing to put a stop to such iniquitous acts, by the counsel of our brothers, of the apostolic authority, have decreed: that whatever prelates, or ecclesiastical persons, monastic or secular, of whatever grade, condition or standing, shall pay, or promise, or agree to pay as levies or talliages to laymen the tenth, twentieth or hundredth part of their own and their churches' revenues or goods - or any other quantity, portion or quota of those same revenues or goods, of their estimated or of their real value-under the name of an aid, loan, subvention, subsidy or gift, or under any other name, manner or clever pretense, without the authority of that same chair.”; this is the political man that has thought and understood that Philipp 4^th, needed very much of this money, and the refuse of transfer to Rome after the short pontificate of Benedict 11^th(1203-1204), from Clemens 5^th was wanted from Philipp 4^th before the money of the Church, finally, was of France. This essay wanted alone to affirm that the head of Boniface 8^th was merely political before religious.

Alessandro Lusana  

 

  

 The revenge of female sex: Boccaccio

Giovanni Boccaccio(1313-1375) certainly isn’t a frequent read out the specialist of Italian Medieval literature, he was a writer, poetry and commentator of Divine Comedy, but he has been also the author of De mulieribus claris, this is a biographical and literary biographies of women, and it is certainly very less important, but the time of this book, this is 1361-1362, when the sensibility toward the female gender was very short; we must also consider that Boccaccio has took alone example very famous of mythological tales, hence he wanted tells about the clear women, and imaginary, but other may have been lived, we must doubt about it because he has took from ancient Latin author as Pliny the Old, so called always, and I consider this life very important because is life of a painter woman; the painter during the Middle Age were considered very low, and if these were women more than short, but during Middle Age the women painters there aren’t; anyway Boccaccio has evidently took the wit of love, Medieval love that Dante Alighieri(1265-1321) has felt to Beatrice and he has exalted the female sex trough exponent that has had different rolls in the history, and the painting is a roll, above all because female painter: “Tamiri then she was a noble painter woman, although the ancient time has took away much importance, about hers name is also important, she was daughter of Micone painter…Micone minor, because in Athens two were Micone and painter both…she despised the female works, she was of so much intelligence, she followed the art of hers father. While the reign of Archelao, in Macedonia, she became much famous, and the Ephesians that worshipped Diane she has painted image of goddess, and for much time it lasted that it given very important example…”; but Boccaccio seems unlimited because beyond the painter female she has written the biography of a prostitute, Lena a Greek woman: “Lena although she wasn’t honest I want tell with reverence as the honest women, because as I have said I want not tell about the honest women, but about the famous, for every way they ere famous…”; it is a sign very important of the change of the wit, at least in Medieval morality; because the history, although summary, of a prostitute was a very revolution for the then; but we can understand that Boccaccio was attracted from the fame of this prostitute rather than the work, in fact he followed: “We not always refuse the memory of dishonest, actually since they are were of worth of a memory for the virtue, they must be celebrated with praise…”; it is the justification of this tale, because the morality was again strong, but the to tell is very important for us, because it given a other image of Middle Age, also because Boccaccio in his Decameron has given very much sexual meeting, enclosed the religious, inasmuch the wall of morality and respectability has been destroyed.

Alessandro Lusana        

 

 

    

 

 An egocentric revolutionary: Jean Paul Marat

This essay considers the character of a egocentric that has made also the revolutionary, Jean Paul Marat(1743-1793), French political man and dogged revolutionary in France, was a principal enemy of monarchy, but form his autobiography, that is already a character sign very evident of egocentrism, anyway he says: “For the fortune very low common, I have the vantage of to have an education signed from the father’s home, and of escape from the habit of childhood that worry and degrade the man, and avoid every waste of youngness, and I have had the fortune of arrived to the adult age without left my soul to the passion…The unique passion that has eat my soul was the love for the glory, but it is a fire that is again under the ash…”; it is the confession, very sincere of a egocentric, that the modern psychology, would identify as an egocentric that has found his satisfaction to be the fried of people , as he called his journal, and the people was a motive of satisfaction because it followed the words of Marat, also because he was a doctor and the respect and worship for the doctor then was very radical, hence the homage that the Paris people has bestowed to him certainly has very like to him, it is the motive valid for satisfaction of egocentrism, that he has, honestly, confessed in the lines above. But also his journal L’ami du people, this is the Friend of people, highlights a egocentric character, we must also consider that he was the unique journalist of this journal, hence is normal that he stressed his personality, but for me he this egocentrism has been dominant, anyway some step: “I fighting the enemies of the State, I will attack the cunning, the hypocrites and the treacherous…” these words seem the declaration of a chief of State that must fight against the cruel and very much enemies, but certainly Marat hasn’t one and other, anyway the auto celebration continues: “I know that I must preview from the wicked that I have solicited against me; but the intimidation hasn’t effects on my wit, I will sacrifice for the country and will shed one’s blood”; it is the sing of an hero, but he died in a bath, may he was very convict of his texts, but certainly he was leaded from his egocentrism. Other step of the auto biography is very laughable: “I have already the moral sense developed in age old of 8 years: in this age I can’t bear the see of wrecked treatments against other…”; to it lacks alone a miracle, the ascension or resurrection of Lazarus, we must consider that he has been the chief of Jacobins, therefore he has described him through the wit of his political rule. But the tell of his biography is very useless because regard the episodes very marginal and irrelevant, anyway it shows the character of Marat, that is a weak egocentric, without aspiration except to satisfy his egocentrism.

Alessandro Lusana