Schmitt C.B. (ed.) The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
Printing and censorship
37
century standards.
Coluccio
Salutati may have had 800 manuscripts;
Niccoló
Niccoli
of Florence (1364-1437) certainly did. But the average
library was very small. A fifteenth-century scholar or professional, such as a
physician,
had only a handful of books, and the merchant, shopkeeper or
elementary school teacher would be lucky to own a book of hours, a
devotional
work and/or a book of tables for money exchange, before large
quantities of
printed
books became available at reasonable cost.
Printing changed this dramatically. Famous collectors now owned truly
magnificent
libraries: Ferdinandus Columbus of
Seville
(d.
1539),
the
natural
son of the explorer, had 15,000 titles. Gian Vincenzo Pinelli
(1535—
1601),
a Neapolitan noble who lived in Padua, had about
6,400
printed
books
and close to 900 manuscripts (338 in Greek).
10
Collections
of
several
hundred
to a thousand or more were not uncommon in the sixteenth
century. The university
arts
professor or lawyer of average income for his
profession
could own good working collections of up to 100. Even the
vernacular poet could own the works of a half-dozen or so major authors,
and some of the minor ones, in his language. Many more shopkeepers and
merchants now owned perhaps a dozen vernacular books: chivalric
romances, devotional treatises, saints'
lives,
a chronicle or history, a
commercial
arithmetic and the Bible in some form. Printing made possible
riches in books for men of all levels of society beyond the dreams of their
ancestors in the manuscript era.
The
wide range of subject-matter was as
important
as the number of
books
in major libraries. Pinelli owned all the major Greek and Roman
authors
(the
important
titles in numerous editions), most medieval authors,
contemporary works
of
scholarship in many fields, a large number
of
works
of
Italian, French and German literature, many volumes of
current
history
and politics, a few titles in Hebrew, Syriac and Arabic and an Ethiopian
psalter. For a short period of history — roughly the boundaries of the
sixteenth century
—
the dedicated collector could shelve all
of
learning in his
home. The moment passed; although private libraries grew precipitously in
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, learning multipliecLand frag-
mented beyond the powers
of
a single man to collect its fruits in hislibrary.
The
contribution of the printing press
Printing quickened the pace of intellectual discovery, communication,
discourse, and learning. The Renaissance did not depend on the press for its
10.
M. T. Grendler 1980.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
38
The
conditions of enquiry
birth or survival. The intellectual,
civic,
economic and political circum-
stances
that
nurtured
the 'revival
of
learning' in Italy long preceded the date
at which printing began to make an impact (not before c.
1470).
Petrarch,
Leonardo Bruni and other key figures
lived
and died before the advent of
printing. Major discoveries of classical texts were made before printing.
Above
all, the studia
humanitatis
and the scholars and schools who
perpetuated them were
well
established in Italy before printing. In like
manner, the intellectual stirrings
that
produced the Renaissance in Northern
Europe were under way by the time
that
printing came
of
age.
Printing did
facilitate
the diffusion
of
ideas from Italy to the North, and their circulation
there,
thus
compressing into a generation or two developments
that
had
taken
three
to four generations in Italy.
Printing enhanced or altered the conditions
of
enquiry in great and small
ways,
most
of
which
contemporaries
judged
to be beneficial. Some changes
are self-evident, others are more subtle. A significant but sometimes
overlooked
contribution
of
early
printing was to make quickly and widely
available
the corpus of medieval philosophy. Incunabular publishers
printed the works of Albertus Magnus, Duns Scotus, William of Ockham
and others in great number. For example, over 200 printings
of
the works of
Thomas Aquinas appeared before 1501. Thereafter, the printing of
medieval
philosophical texts slowed considerably with the exception of
those
that
retained their position in the curriculum. Peter of Spain's
Summule logicales (1246) was printed over 150 times before 1600 because it
continued to serve as a university text for
logic.
The massive printing of
medieval
philosophy during the first
fifty
years of printing ensured its
survival
and continuity; philosophers then accepted, modified or rejected
the medieval traditions.
While
printing perpetuated the old, it also ensured quick and wide
diffusion
of the new. Lorenzo
Valla
died in
1457,
just at the appearance of
the printing press. It spread his new
views
in De voluptate, De libero arbitrio
and other works, in Italy and beyond long before 1500. The Elegantiae
linguae Latinae libri sex, his linguistic and cultural manifesto
that
so
influenced
the humanistic perception of language and history, had
numerous incunabular editions, and was printed again and again through
the sixteenth century, either in its original form or in abridged versions.
Printing also helped
give
birth to new philosophical doctrines by making
available
ancient sources. The emergence of a sceptical tradition was
primarily the consequence of the recovery and printing of ancient
collections
of sceptical ideas, above all the publication in 1562 and 1569 of
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship
39
Latin
editions
of
the works
of
Sextus
Empiricus. While his works remained
in manuscript, they were barely known; in
print
they had considerable
influence.
The
astonishing multiplicity of books produced by the printing press
greatly
facilitated the mastery of basic skills
that
were the prerequisites for
learning. Incunabular presses
printed
more Latin grammars
than
any other
kind of book; sixteenth-century presses probably
followed
suit, although
the low survival
rate
of copies, even of whole printings of these books,
makes the statement tentative. School-children and adult learners could
own
printed
copies of Latin grammars, glossaries and elementary reading
texts.
The same was
true
for other kinds
of
textbooks:
the classics studied in
school,
the books used in the university curriculum, arithmetics, technical
manuals, vernacular self-help books and letter-writing manuals. Even
writing
could be taught more easily through
printed
texts. It is
likely
that
printing helped broaden intellectual participation, because anyone with
facility
in Latin and a rudimentary knowledge of the pagan and Christian
classics
couldjoin in the major scholarly, political and religious discussions of
the age. This
state
of affairs lasted so long as the unity of knowledge
persisted.
After
the sixteenth century, the centrifugal forces unleashed by
the destruction
of
Christian unity, the growth
of
the vernaculars (which the
press also encouraged) and the addition
of
new
subjects
of
study fragmented
the republic of letters.
For the scholar, the sheer quantity of available books broadened and
deepened his scholarship. If the meaning of a passage in Aristotle baffled
him, he could examine his own copies
of
other works
of
Aristotle,
plus the
commentaries, and the texts of other classical and medieval
authors
for
clarification.
He could also refer to the original Greek,
if
he read it. In similar
fashion,
scholarship became more cumulative and wide-ranging, because
the Renaissance scholar could use a greater variety of
authors
and texts to
make his point
than
could his medieval predecessor. Printing facilitated the
eclecticism
so typical of Renaissance philosophy; philosophers gloried in
being
able to use the numerous philosophical works now
printed.
And
printing largely freed readers from geographical constraints: the London
scholar could own books
printed
in
Basle.
Indeed, a sign
of
the geographical
freedom conferred by the press is
that
few university towns became large
publishing centres, while commercial and population centres did.
In science, the
printed
book offered the great technical advantage of the
means of duplicating the graphic
arts
(woodcuts and engravings) for
scientific
illustration. A manuscript drawing was unique; it required an
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
40
The
conditions of enquiry
artist of equal skill to copy it, and his copy would not necessarily be
identical.
Now printing could reproduce thousands of identical illustra-
tions. The anatomical drawings in medical works, geometrical and
trigonometrical diagrams in mathematical works, pictures of plants in
botanical books, illustrations of animals in works of
zoology,
maps in
geographies,
and diagrams of mechanical contrivances in books of
technology
contributed greatly to these
fields.
Even inaccurate illustrations,
such as the fanciful animals to be found in early
zoological
books, were
useful,
because they could be improved or rejected after the real thing had
been seen.
Printing made possible the diffusion of knowledge through translation
and popularisation to a degree unimaginable earlier. The press produced an
immeasurable number of translations, especially in the sixteenth century.
Practically
all ancient Greek works were translated into Latin. There
were
also many translations from those languages into one or another
vernacular, a smaller number from one vernacular to another, and
relatively
few from the vernacular into Latin. Translations
of
ancient works
of
history, literature and moral philosophy into vernacular languages were
especially
numerous. This suggests
that
those who lacked the opportunity
to learn Latin and Greek had a great desire to acquire the wisdom of the
ancients, and they succeeded. Popularisations of learned material achieved
the same results. One example among many is the theory
of
love
articulated
by
Marsilio Ficino from Plato and the later Neoplatonists. Ficino first
synthesised his doctrine of'Platonic
love'
in a learned Latin commentary on
Plato's Symposium', Platonic
love
later had remarkable diffusion among
writers of prose and poetry in many vernacular languages.
Printing certainly broadened and probably intensified controversy in an
already contentious age. Before printing, two men engaged in a public
disputation in an academic setting, or exchanged letters, and only a small
audience heard or read their words initially; it took time for their
views
to
spread. Not so after printing, for the press offered the opportunity to
respond quickly and repeatedly to an ever-widening audience. Anyone
with
access to a press
could
join
in as quickly as the author could write and
the
printer
print.
In extreme cases, this was a matter of
days.
Controversy
carried on by means of inflammatory printed matter began in the early
years
of printing, but Savonarola's tracts printed in Florence in 1494—8
against those who opposed his reforms demonstrated the great polemical
power
of
the press. Subsequent debates attracted European-wide participa-
tion and audiences: the controversy over Reuchlin and the value
of
Hebrew
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship
4i
literature,
1511—18;
Erasmus' numerous battles with his critics from 1516
until his death in
1536;
Luther versus his Catholic and Protestant opponents,
especially
in
1517-21
but continuing until his death in 1546; the political
pamphlet warfare
that
accompanied the French Wars
of
Religion,
1560-98;
the argument over the rights of church and state engaged in by theo-
logians,
political theorists and jurists across Europe during the Venetian
Interdict of 1606-7 and for years after; and the struggle over the heliocentric
thesis
of
Copernicus
and
Galileo
that
lasted over a century. These are just the
better-known disputes. Renaissance men may not have been more
argumentative
than
their predecessors of the age of script, but the press
amplified
their words enormously.
CENSORSHIP
AND
FREEDOM
OF
EXPRESSION
Censorship and freedom of expression coexisted uneasily in the Renais-
sance.
11
On the surface, it appears
that
the machinery
of
censorship and the
prevailing
attitudes of authoritarian governments and paternalistic
churches severely restricted free expression in politics, religion and
philosophy.
Church and state imposed precise limits on expression, and the
penalty for transgression could be severe, up to death. In practice, the
machinery of censorship often broke down, and the fragmentation of
political
and ecclesiastical authority left many loopholes:
if
an author might
not publish in one jurisdiction, he could in the next. Finally, intellectuals
relied on a counter-tradition encouraging openness to novelty. The end
result was so mixed and inconsistent as to defy summary statement: one can
view
the Renaissance as a period of
severely
limited freedom
of
expression
that
was occasionally circumvented, or as an epoch
of
openness punctuated
by
crackdowns.
Neither state nor church in the Renaissance - or at any other time in
history
—
believed in complete freedom
of
expression,
but tried to suppress
the ideas considered dangerous and promote those
judged
to be beneficial.
Before
the Reformation, most authors acknowledged an unspoken political
censorship enforced by the
threat
of
punishment. A subject did not criticise
his ruler or his policies openly unless he could avoid the consequences. For
example,
in 1428 a friend who had participated in the just concluded war
between
Venice
and Milan (1426-7) encouraged Guarino da Verona to
11.
On censorship in the Renaissance, see Hirsch
1955,1973;
Lopez
1972;
Rotondo 1982; for Italy, Firpo
1950-1,
Patrizi [da Cherso] 1970, M. T. and P. F. Grendler 1976; for Venice, P. F. Grendler 1977,
1978;
for Geneva, Santschi 1978; for England, Loades 1974; for Germany, Eisenhardt 1970.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
42
The
conditions of enquiry
write a history of the conflict. The humanist, a Venetian subject, declined.
Guarino referred approvingly to Cicero's famous dictum
that
history is the
'light
of
truth'
(De oratore
11.9.36).
But, he went on,
following
Cicero's
precept was perilous today. The historian would have to lay bare the causes
of
the war, the honesty and valour (or their opposites) of the contestants,
and much else. Telling the
truth
would cost the historian his head!
12
Guarino had reason to be concerned: governments tended to
view
criticism
as sedition. They were even sensitive to attacks on other rulers
coming
from their subjects speaking in a private capacity, because they
feared
that
such private attacks would invite retaliation on the state as a
whole.
Nevertheless, political dissent flourished. Critics wrote a great
number
of
extremely
vitriolic political pamphlets
—
but anonymously. The
anonymous printed pamphlet lacked the name(s) of author, publisher
and/or place of publication, or gave pseudonyms, and was very difficult to
trace. In times of conflict, such as the French Wars of
Religion,
hundreds
and thousands of printed pamphlets appeared, and they sometimes
articulated new and controversial political, religious and philosophical
views,
as
well
as criticism. The division of Europe into many political
jurisdictions and the existence of innumerable exiles greatly facilitated
freedom of expression. The dissenter could almost always find a publisher
just across the border who was
willing
to
print
a polemic for reasons of
money or sympathy.
Political
dissent was one thing, heresy another. Neither prince, prelate
nor scholar believed
that
heresy had the right to be heard. Heresy threatened
the souls
of
believer
and unbeliever alike as
well
as the fabric
of
society
itself.
The
Renaissance drew upon a centuries-old tradition whose roots went
back
to Plato's Laws and Republic, as
well
as Christian antiquity, to justify
censorship of
religious,
moral and philosophical
views:
the
three
were not
easily
separated in the period. But another tradition favouring a more open
attitude
countered it. Humanists successfully argued in favour of reading
ancient literature
that
praised paganism and portrayed
vice
attractively,
even
though such literature might produce harmful effects on readers.
Taking
their inspiration from the Exhortation to Youths as to How They
Shall
Best Profit by the Writings
of
Pagan Authors
of
St
Basil
the Great (c. 330-
79),
scholars argued
that
the pagan classics ultimately encouraged virtuous
behaviour. Readers should focus on the underlying
truths
found in classical
authors and refuse to be disturbed by surface impieties. Most humanists held
12.
Guarino da Verona
1915-19,
1, p. 617.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship
43
that
both pagan and Christian learning led to virtue. They also liked to cite
St
Paul: To all who are
pure
themselves, everything is pure; but to those
who
have been corrupted and lack faith, nothing can be pure' (Titus
1:15).
Hence,
many thinkers celebrated an optimistic
view
of
human potentiality
and left it to the individual reader,
rather
than
church and state, to select the
good
and to reject the
evil.
They did not challenge the right
of
authority to
censor, but quietly ignored the rules of church and state. This optimistic
vision
of
man's power
of
judgement encouraged an openness to discordant
ideas
that
was especially relevant for contemporary philosophy, which was
both eclectic and heavily dependent on ancient texts.
The
beginning
of
press censorship
The
two
attitudes
—
authority's responsibility to protect society against
error,
and a general confidence
that
the mind should be free to explore the
books
of Christian, pagan and infidel in search of
truth
—
coexisted with
remarkably few conflicts until the Reformation. Before Luther, church and
state
occasionally intervened to prohibit the diffusion
of
philosophical
ideas.
In 1487, the papacy condemned a handful
of
Giovanni
Pico's nine
hundred
theses as heretical,
rash
and/or
likely
to
give
scandal to the faithful. Pico
altered the theses, and Alexander VI in 1493 granted him absolution. In
1512,
Emperor Maximilian I condemned the polemical
tracts
of
Johannes
Reuchlin,
who was defending Hebrew studies against attack. The papal
Bull
Apostolici regiminis of 19 December 1513 condemned the opinion
that
the soul is mortal and other propositions of secular Aristotelianism.
Pomponazzi
and others continued to teach
that
the immortality
of
the soul
was
knowable by faith, not by reason. A handful of additional
civil
and
ecclesiastical
decrees issued between 1475 and
1517
condemned a few books
and proclaimed the principle of press censorship, but their
effect
was very
limited.
Almost
immediately after the beginning of the Reformation, Catholic
states sought to prevent the spread of Protestantism through press
censorship. The papal brief Exsurge Domine of 15
June
1520 condemned
Luther's writings and
threatened
him with excommunication unless he
repented; on 3
January
1521 the papacy carried out its
threat.
Emperor
Charles
V in the Edict of Worms of 26 May 1521 included a 'Law of
Printing' (Gesetz der Druckerei) which prohibited the printing, sale,
possession,
reading or copying
of
Luther's books anywhere in imperial and
Habsburg possessions. Other Catholic governments
followed
suit. The
Spanish crown began inspecting bookshops for Lutheran works as early as
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
44
The
conditions of enquiry
1536.
Milan in 1523, then other Italian states in the next thirty years,
promulgated censorship decrees against the increasing number of Protest-
ant books. So did the English crown. In France, the king, the Parlement of
Paris and the faculty of theology of the University
of
Paris, but not always
in concert, condemned as heretical works of Luther, Erasmus and other
authors in the 1520s and
1530s.
Protestant princes and theologians moved just as quickly to suppress the
books
of Catholics and other Protestants with whom they differed. As the
city
of Strasburg joined the Reformation, it confiscated in 1522 the entire
press run of a polemic against Luther issued by a Strasburg publisher.
The
city then established press censorship and forbade printed attacks on
others in 1524. But this decree was not meant to halt Strasburg imprints
that
assaulted the papacy and, later, the Jesuits. In 1523, the
City
Council of
Zurich
under the religious leadership
of
Zwingli
appointed a committee of
laymen
and ministers to exercise prepublication censorship. No book could
be printed without their permission. In
1525,
Luther urged his
civil
lord, the
Elector
of Saxony, to prohibit the writings of Andreas Bodenstein von
Karlstadt, an early follower who had become more radical than Luther in
the break from Catholicism. On the urging of Luther and Melanchthon,
Elector
John
of Saxony in 1528 forbade the purchase and reading of the
books
of 'Sacramentarians' (i.e.,
Zwingli
and his disciples) and Anabap-
tists.
13
When
Leipzig
turned Protestant in 1539, its Lutheran government
ordered prepublication censorship, inspection of the bookshops and the
imprisonment of a publisher, all in
that
year. Such measures tended to
accompany
a change in religion.
The
authorities made sporadic efforts to halt the diffusion
of
the doctrines
of
religious opponents, skirmishes in the religious struggle rather than
systematic censorship. These efforts had slight consequences for intellectuals
and printers unless they were directly involved in the doctrinal struggle.
France was an exception: numerous arrests and some executions
followed
in
the aftermath of Taffaire des placards', the printing of Protestant
broadsheets and their posting in public places in Paris in October 1534.
Later, Etienne Dolet, Latin scholar, poet and printer, was arrested
—
not for
13.
'Anabaptist' is a generic
term
used in the sixteenth century for a wide variety of
Protestant
sects
(Mennonites,
Hutterites
and others) who stood outside the territorial Lutheran and Calvinist
churches. Many did reject infant baptism, but their other views and actions differed greatly. A
group of religious radicals took control of the city of
Münster in Westphalia in 1533, and practised
community of goods, polygamy and
murder,
until overthrown in
June
1535. As a result, all so-
called
Anabaptists were persecuted. One might use the
terms
'Protestant
sectarians' or 'religious
radicals' but because censorship decrees often referred to Anabaptists without clarification, it is
preferred here.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship
45
the first time in his stormy career - on the dual charges of denying the
immortality
of
the soul and distributing Calvinist titles. He was executed as
a relapsed heretic in Paris in 1546.
Press
censorship after 1530
By
mid-century, Catholic and Protestant authorities realised
that
only
coordinated press censorship could prevent the spread of heresy and
that
effective
press censorship had to include
three
components. First, the
censors needed a catalogue identifying offending books, authors, and/or
ideas.
Such a catalogue might list specific authors and titles, or it could ban in
general terms entire classes of books; many did both. Second,
prepublication censorship to halt the new printing
of
heretical books within
one's own state had to be instituted. Church and state usually did this in
collaboration by appointing readers to examine a manuscript before
granting permission to
print.
The readers perused the manuscript to ensure
that
it was neither heretical, seditious, nor offensive to good morals. Third,
governments tried to control book commerce by inspecting books entering
the state (usually at the customs house) and by periodically visiting
bookshops to make sure
that
booksellers obeyed the
laws.
Both Catholic
and Protestant authorities used these same techniques of censorship.
A
harsher, less tolerant
attitude
became evident at mid-century in Rome.
A
sign of the changing times was the burning of the Talmud and other
Hebrew books across Italy in 1553 for their alleged anti-Christian
sentiments. Hebrew printing revived, but the Talmud was not published
again
in Renaissance Italy. The turning-point for the freedom
of
enquiry in
the Catholic world came with the promulgation by Pope Paul IV of an
Index librorum prohibitorum (Index
of
Prohibited
Books) in early
15
59.
14
For the
first time, the supreme spiritual authority of Catholicism defined for
Catholics
which books and authors could not be printed or read. The so-
called
Pauline Index was very restrictive: it prohibited the opera omnia of
about 550 authors as
well
as additional individual titles. It went beyond
heresy to ban anti-clerical and lascivious works: it condemned the opera
omnia
of
Pietro Aretino, Erasmus, Machiavelli and Rabelais. It reached back
in time to ban two dialogues
of
the ancient Greek satirist Lucian
of
Samosata
and selected titles of the medieval philosopher William of Ockham. Most
important for learning, it banned the opera omnia of a long list of
northern
Protestant scholars, the bulk of whose writing dealt with non-religious
14.
On the Index, see Reusch 1883-5, 1886; Hilgers 1904; Index de VInquisition espagnole 1984; Index de
l'Université de Paris 1985.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
46 The conditions of enquiry
topics
even though they had usually written one or more anti-Catholic
titles.
The Pauline Index felt
that
the religious convictions of an
author
contaminated all his writing. Such banned
authors
included the botanist and
polymath Konrad Gesner,
another
botanist Otto Brunfels, the medical
scholar
Janus
Cornarius, the legists Christoph Hegendorff and
Johann
Oldendorp, the geographer and
natural
philosopher Jacob
Ziegler,
the
cosmographer Sebastian Minister and Philipp Melanchthon, known as
much for his titles in grammar, rhetoric and dialectic as for his religious
treatises. It also promulgated sweeping rules designed to control book
distribution. The Index even banned all the publications of about sixty
Northern European publishers including some prominent ones who
published non-religious titles. The Pauline Index was widely criticised
within Catholic circles and met with much opposition.
After
a tenacious
struggle between Italian printers, governments and the papacy, during
which
thousands
of
books
were destroyed but compliance was very grudg-
ing,
Paul IV died on 18 August 1559. Enforcement stopped, and Pius IV
announced in March 1560 his intention to moderate the Pauline Index. It
had lasted less
than
a year. The common practice of twentieth-century
scholars of
viewing
the Index of
1559
as the definitive, enduring statement
of
Catholic censorship is inaccurate. Nevertheless, the Pauline Index
signalled
a decisive
turn
in papal policy which could be modified but not
repudiated.
Pius IV promulgated the Tridentine Index (so-called because it had been
authorised by the Council
of
Trent although prepared by the papacy) in the
spring of
1564.
Unlike its predecessor, it won immediate and widespread,
but not total, acceptance in Catholic lands, because the Council
of
Trent had
sanctioned it. The Tridentine Index repeated ninety-nine per cent of the
condemnations of
authors
and titles of the Pauline Index. It also
promulgated numerous and complex guidelines for prepublication censor-
ship, the enforcement of the Index and the regulation of the printing
industry. But the changes from
1559
were significant; they moderated some
of
the most criticised features of the previous Index. For example, the
Tridentine Index banned only six titles of Erasmus (Colloquia, Moriae
encomium, Lingua,
Institutio
Christiani
matrimonii,
Epistola . . . de interdicto
esu
carnium
and an Italian translation of the Paraphrasis in Evangelium
Matthaei), leaving the enormous bulk of Erasmus' original works and his
numerous editions
of
classical
and patristic
authors
and the New Testament
to be expurgated. The list of proscribed publishers was dropped.
The
Tridentine Index reflected the conflict between total hostility against
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008