Reviewed by:

• Augustine and the Humanists: Reading the ‘City of God’ from Petrarch to Poliziano ed. by Guy Claessens and Fabio Della Schiava
• Patrick Ball

Augustine called De civitate Dei his ‘magnum opus’; it is a leading source of theological thinking about the history, destiny, and politics of Christianity. It also yields abundant information about its period, the tipping point between pagan antiquity and the Christian Middle Ages: facts about Rome’s pre-Christian religion, extensive citation of lost classical sources, and miscellaneous detail (such as that it was customary to scatter powdered charcoal under boundary markers, so nobody could get away with shifting the stones afterwards). As the Middle Ages’ Godcentred mentality gave way to Renaissance humanism, there was the potential for new uses of City of God to emerge—for it to evolve from a theological authority into a repository of antiquarian knowledge. To date, though, there has been little interest in exploring humanists’ engagement with it. This volume attempts to address that oversight. An introductory chapter by Eric Saak precedes fifteen contributions, each detailing one scholar’s engagement with the work (or, in the case of Antonio Manfredi’s chapter, two scholars: Tommaso Parentucelli and Giovanni Tortelli). Elisa Brilli concludes the volume with an interesting study of manuscript illuminations of De civitate Dei and what these imply about changing understandings of Augustine’s ‘City’ over the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

The contributors address the topic from varied angles. A uniform approach is not authorised or necessarily possible given the available evidence. One common, basal mode of investigation assesses Augustine’s influence by estimating the number of his works the humanist in question possessed or had read and the frequency of references to him in that individual’s writings. More is not always feasible. The most rewarding chapters succeed in providing further context. For instance, Fabio Forner describes how Enea Silvio Piccolomini, the future Pius II, deployed Augustine’s other writings, during the standoff between the papacy and [End Page 221] the Council of Cardinals, in defence of the cardinals before switching sides to the papal camp. Then, once the Turks captured Constantinople, he began citing and modelling his own writings on City of God, itself inspired by the Visigoths’ sack of Rome. Sometimes there is enough evidence to allow focus on something specific in a scholar’s use of the work. Thus, Sam Urlings gives a rundown of City of God’s place in the Florentine Republic’s political thought, before turning to Coluccio Salutati’s account of the rape of Lucretia, the Roman Republic’s foundation myth—an account that implicitly critiques Augustine’s presentation of the rape. A few chapters treat Augustine’s general influence, not City of God’s, perhaps as there was little to say about the latter. It may be no coincidence that those contributions that engage most directly with the topic include the ones written by the editors (Fabio Della Schiava on Biondo Flavio, and Guy Claessens and Jeroen De Keyser on Francesco Filelfo). Della Schiava and Claessens’s awareness of these men’s especially close engagement with Augustine may have inspired the project.

Explicit connections between chapters can be observed, including commonalities in humanists’ responses to Augustine’s work. Several contributors describe the defensive use of City of God, from Petrarch onward, to counter condemnations of the reading of pagan philosophy or poetry. Here was an unimpeachable authority who had made extensive use of both to support his arguments. For Valerio Sanzotta, Marsilio Ficino invoked Augustine in the service of Platonism as a ‘protective shield for a philosophical program that was [...] profoundly un-Augustinian in its essence’ (p. 377). There seems to be agreement that the humanists under consideration engaged with Augustine in complex ways. Petrarch used him to oppose scholastic objections to pagan authors, but his response ultimately involved ‘disappropriation’ (Saak, p. 39). Later humanists essentially followed suit. Clementina Marsico’s observation that Lorenzo...

审阅者：

• 奥古斯丁与人文主义者：阅读从彼特拉克到波利齐亚诺的“上帝之城” ed。作者：Guy Claessens 和 Fabio Della Schiava
• 帕特里克·鲍尔

奥古斯丁称De civitate Dei为他的“巨著”；它是关于基督教历史、命运和政治的神学思考的主要来源。它还提供了有关其时期的大量信息，即异教古代和基督教中世纪之间的转折点：有关罗马前基督教宗教的事实，对失落古典资料的广泛引用，以及各种细节（例如撒粉木炭的习惯）在界碑下，这样之后就没有人能够逃脱移动石头的责任）。随着中世纪的以上帝为中心的心态让位于文艺复兴时期的人文主义，上帝之城有可能出现新的用途——因为它是从神学权威变成了古物知识的宝库。然而，迄今为止，人们对探索人文主义者对此的参与兴趣不大。本书试图解决这一疏忽。埃里克·萨克 (Eric Saak) 的介绍性章节在十五篇文章之前，每篇都详细介绍了一位学者对这项工作的参与（或者，在安东尼奥·曼弗雷迪的章节中，介绍了两位学者：托马索·帕伦图切利 (Tommaso Parentucelli) 和乔瓦尼·托尔泰利 (Giovanni Tortelli)）。 Elisa Brilli 在本书的结尾对De civitate Dei 的手稿插图进行了有趣的研究，以及这些内容对 14 世纪和 20 世纪奥古斯丁《城市》理解的改变意味着什么。十五世纪。

贡献者从不同角度讨论该主题。鉴于现有的证据，统一的方法未被授权或不一定可能。一种常见的、基本的调查模式通过估计有关人文主义者拥有或阅读过的奥古斯丁作品的数量以及该人的著作中提及他的频率来评估奥古斯丁的影响力。更多并不总是可行的。最有价值的章节成功地提供了进一步的背景。例如，法比奥·福纳 (Fabio Forner) 描述了未来的庇护二世 (Pius II) 在教皇与[End Page 221]之间的对峙期间，Enea Silvio Piccolomini 如何运用奥古斯丁的其他著作。[End Page 221] 枢机主教会议，在转投教皇阵营之前为枢机主教辩护。然后，土耳其人占领君士坦丁堡后，他开始引用并模仿自己的著作上帝之城，其灵感来自于西哥特人对罗马的洗劫。有时，有足够的证据可以让我们关注学者对作品的使用中的特定内容。因此，萨姆·乌林斯 (Sam Urlings) 概述了上帝之城在佛罗伦萨共和国政治思想中的地位，然后转向科卢西奥·萨鲁塔蒂 (Coluccio Salutati) 对卢克丽霞被强奸的描述，罗马共和国的基础神话——含蓄地批评了奥古斯丁对强奸的描述。有几章讨论了奥古斯丁的总体影响，而不是上帝之城的影响，也许是因为后者几乎没有什么可说的。与该主题最直接相关的贡献包括由编辑撰写的文章（Biondo Flavio 的 Fabio Della Schiava 以及 Francesco Filelfo 的 Guy Claessens 和 Jeroen De Keyser）可能并非巧合。德拉·斯基亚瓦和克莱森斯意识到这些人与奥古斯丁的密切接触可能激发了这个项目的灵感。

可以观察到各章节之间的明确联系，包括人文主义者对奥古斯丁作品的反应的共性。一些贡献者描述了从彼特拉克开始，对《上帝之城》的防御性使用，以反击对异教哲学或诗歌阅读的谴责。这是一位无可指摘的权威，他广泛利用两者来支持他的论点。对于瓦莱里奥·桑佐塔（Valerio Sanzotta）来说，马西里奥·菲奇诺（Marsilio Ficino）援引奥古斯丁来为柏拉图主义服务，将其视为“本质上完全非奥古斯丁主义的哲学纲领的保护盾”（第 377 页）。人们似乎一致认为，所考虑的人文主义者以复杂的方式与奥古斯丁打交道。彼特拉克利用他来反对对异教作家的学术反对，但他的回应最终涉及“挪用”（Saak，第 39 页）。后来的人文主义者基本上也效仿了。克莱门蒂娜·马西科 (Clementina Marsico) 的观察表明，洛伦佐 (Lorenzo)...