Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T21:00:07.944Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MANNERS AND METHOD IN CLASSICAL CRITICISM OF THE EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2013

Matthew Fox
Matthew Fox*
Affiliation:
University of Glasgow, UK
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores a neglected period in the history of classical scholarship: the first decades of the eighteenth century. It focuses on the tension between an evolving idea of method, and the tradition of personal polemic which had been an important part of the culture of scholarship since the Renaissance. There are two case studies: the conflict between Jean Le Clerc and Pieter Burman, and the controversy that followed Richard Bentley's edition of Horace's Odes. Both demonstrate the need to revise current paradigms for writing the history of scholarship, and invite us to reconsider the role of methodology in producing of scholarly authority.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Cambridge Classical Journal , Volume 59 , December 2013 , pp. 98 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2013. Published by Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works cited

Adelung, J. C. (1784–) Fortsetzung und Ergänzungen zu Christian Gottlieb Jöchers allgemeinen Gelehrten-Lexicon, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Amort, E. (1723) Nova philosophiae planetarum et artis criticae systemata, Nuremberg.Google Scholar
Anon. (1710a) Burmanniana sive calumniarum Petri Burmanni in collegas et populares specimen, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Anon. (1710b) Infamia emendationum in Menandri reliquias nuper editarum trajecti ad Rhenum auctore Phileleuthero Lipsiensi, Leiden.Google Scholar
Anon. (1711) Philargyrii Cantabrigiensis emendationes in Menandri et Philemonis reliquias, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Anon. (1712) Horatius reformatus: sive emendationes omnes quibus editio Bentleiana a vulgaribus distinguitur summa fide in unum collectae, London.Google Scholar
Anon. (1724) review of Amort (1723) in Acta Eruditorum anno MCCXXIV, Leipzig, 306–10.Google Scholar
Anon. (1734) Chrestomathia Petronio-Burmanniana, Florence.Google Scholar
Anon. (1761) ‘Le Clerc, John’, in A New and General Biographical Dictionary, vol. 3, London, 323–39.Google Scholar
Ast, F. (1808a) Grundriss der Philologie, Landshut.Google Scholar
Ast, F. (1808b) Grundlinien der Grammatik, Hermeneutik und Kritik, Landshut.Google Scholar
[Barnes, J.] Philargyrius Cantab. Aristarchus ampullans in curis Horatianis; sive querimonia epistolaris de impestiva ista corrigendi libidine, tum de ea opportune cohibenda, ne indies pessime inquinati prodeant optimi auctores, London.Google Scholar
Bejczy, I. P. (2011) The cardinal virtues in the Middle Ages, Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentley, J. H. (1978) ‘Erasmus, Jean Le Clerc, and the principle of the harder reading’, Renaissance Quarterly 31, 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Bentley, R.] Phileleutheros Lipsiensis (1710) Emendationes in Menandri et Philemonis reliquias, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Bots, H. and Waquet, F. (eds.) (1994) Commercium litterarium, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Bots, H. and Waquet, F. (1997) La République des lettres, Brussels and Paris.Google Scholar
Brink, C. O. (1986) English classical scholarship, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Burman, C. (1750) Traiectum eruditum, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Burman, P. (1697) Marquardi Gudii et doctorum virorum ad eum epistolae. Quibus accedunt ex Bibliotheca Gudiana clarissimorum et doctissimorum virorum, qui superiore et nostro saeculo floruerunt; et Claudii Sarravii epistolae … curante Petro Burmanno, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Burman, P. (1703) Dialogus I inter Spidaeum et Gorallum, n.d., n.pl.Google Scholar
Burman, P. (1709) Titi Petronii Arbitri Satyricon quae supersunt, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Burman, P. (1710) Le Gazettier menteur, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Burman, P. (1723–) Thesaurus antiquitatum et historiarum Italiae, 9 vols, Leiden.Google Scholar
Burman, P. (1732) Petri Cunaei et doctorum virorum ad eumdem epistolae, Leiden.Google Scholar
De La Roche, M. (1711) Review of [De Pauw] (1711) in Memoirs of literature, Monday, 2 April 1711; reprinted 1712, vol. 1, p. 223, London.Google Scholar
De La Roche, M. (1722) Review of [De Pauw] (1711) in Memoirs of literature, vol. 2, pp. 436–9, London.Google Scholar
[De Pauw, C.] (1711) Philargyrii Cantabrigensis emendationes in Menandri et Philemonis reliquias, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
De Smet, I. A. R. (1996) Menippean satire and the Republic of Letters: 1581–1655, Geneva.Google Scholar
Fabretti, R. (1686) Ad Jacobum Gronovium apologema in eisuque titiliuitia sive somnia de Tito Livio animadversiones, Naples.Google Scholar
Fox, M. A. (2007) Cicero's philosophy of history, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, M. A. (2013) ‘Cicero during the Enlightenment’, in Steel, C. (ed.) The Cambridge companion to Cicero, Cambridge, 318–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritze, L. A. (1720) De eruditione noxia dissertatio philosophica et historica, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Gadamer, H.-G. (2004) Truth and method, 2nd rev. edn, London.Google Scholar
Golden, S. A. (1972) Jean Le Clerc, New York.Google Scholar
Goldgar, A. (1995) Impolite learning: conduct and community in the Republic of Letters, New Haven, CT, and London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graevius, J. G. (1707) Praefationes & epistolae CXX in usum latinae eloquentiae studiosorum collectae et editae a Jo. Alberto Fabricio, Hamburg.Google Scholar
Grafton, A. (1991) Defenders of the text, Cambridge, MA, and London.Google Scholar
Gronovius, J. (1684) Responsio ad Cavillationes R. Fabretti, Leiden.Google Scholar
Gurd, S. A. (2006) ‘Richard Bentley's radical philology’, Classical and Modern Literature 26, 1–21.Google Scholar
Güthenke, C. (2010) ‘The potter's daughter's sons: German classical scholarship and the language of love circa 1800’, Representations 109, 122–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J. (1781) Philological inquiries in three parts, London.Google Scholar
Haugen, K. L. (2011) Richard Bentley: poetry and Enlightenment, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heumann, C. A. (1712) Parerga critica sive hedbomadum criticarum hebdomas et glossematum decas, Jena.Google Scholar
Heumann, C. A. (1718) Conspectus reipublicæ literariæ, sive via ad historiam literariam juventuti studiosæ aperta, Hanover.Google Scholar
Heumann, C. A. (1747) Commentario de arte critica, Nuremberg and Altdorf.Google Scholar
Hinz, V. (2001) Nunc Phalaris doctum protulit ecce caput: antike Phalarislegende und Nachleben der Phalarisbriefe, Munich.Google Scholar
Jöcher, C. G. (1750–51) Allgemeines Gelehrten-Lexicon, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. (1717) Aristarchus anti-Bentleianus: quadraginta sex Bentleii errores super Q. Horatii Flacii odarum libro primo spissos nonnullos et erubescendo: item per notas universas in Latinitate lapsus foedissimos nonagintae ostendans, Nottingham.Google Scholar
Jortin, J. (1731a) Miscellaneous observations upon authors ancient and modern, London.Google Scholar
Jortin, J. (1731b) Remarks upon the miscellaneous observations upon authors antient [sic] and modern: in several letters to a Friend, London.Google Scholar
Jortin, J. (1790) Tracts, philological, critical, and miscellaneous, vol. 2, London.Google Scholar
Kapp, J. E. (1722) Clarissimorum virorum orationes selectae, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Kelley, D. R. (2002) ‘Intellectual history and cultural history: the inside and the outside’, History of the Human Sciences 15, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenney, E. J. (1974) The classical text, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Klotz, C. A. (1764) Stratonis aliorumque veterum poetarum graecorum Epigrammata, Altenburg.Google Scholar
Konstan, D. and Muecke, F. (1992–93) ‘Richard Bentley as a reader of Horace’, Classical Journal 88.2, 179–86.Google Scholar
Lane Patey, D. (1997) ‘The institution of criticism in the eighteenth century’, in H. B. Nisbet and C. Rawson (1997) 3–31.Google Scholar
Le Clerc, J. (1697) J. Clerici Ars critica, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Le Clerc, J. (1700) J. Clerici epistolae criticae et ecclesiaticae in quibus ostenditur usus artis criticae, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Le Clerc, J. (1709) Menandri et Philemonis reliquiae, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Le Clerc, J. (1710a) review of Burman (1709), Bibliothèque Choisie 19 (1709) 350–427.Google Scholar
Le Clerc, J. (1710b) ‘Raisons pourquoi on ne répond pas au libelle de Mr Pierre Burmann, Professeur à Utrecht’, Bibliothèque Choisie 20 (1710) 450–56.Google Scholar
Le Clerc, J. (1712) Joannis Clerici Ars critica, 4th edn, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Levine, J. M. (1991) The Battle of the books: history and literature in the Augustan age, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Levine, J. M. (1994) ‘Strife in the Republic of Letters’, in Bots and Waquet (1994) 301–19.Google Scholar
Lillienthal, M. (1713) De Machiavellismo literario, sive de perversis quorundam in Republica Literario inclarescendi artibus dissertatio historico-moralis, Regensberg/Leipzig.Google Scholar
Loh-Kliesch, A (2012) ‘Mencke, Johann Burckhardt’, in Leipzig Lexicon: Lexikon/Enzyklopädie zur Geschichte und Gegenwart der Stadt Leipzig http://www.leipzig-lexikon.de/biogramm/Mencke_Johann_Burckhardt.htm (last consulted May 2013).Google Scholar
Maber, R. G. (2005) Publishing in the Republic of Letters, Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDayter, M. (2003) ‘The Haunting of St. James's Library: Librarians, Literature, and “The Battle of the Books”’, Huntington Library Quarterly 66, 1–26.Google Scholar
Mehtonen, P. M. (2010) ‘Transitional texts and emerging linguistic self-awareness’, in Bod, R., Maat, J. and Weststeijn, T. (eds.) The making of the humanities: Volume I: early modern Europe, Amsterdam, 249–60.Google Scholar
Mencke, J. B. (1715a) Compendiöses gelehrten-Lexicon, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Mencke, J. B. (1715b) De Charlataneria eruditorum declamationes duae, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. (1950) ‘Ancient history and the antiquarian’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 13, 285–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Most, G. (1997) ‘Classical scholarship and literary criticism’, in H. B. Nisbet and C. Rawson, 742–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbet, H. B. and Rawson, C. (eds.) (1997) The Cambridge history of literary criticism, vol. 4, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbet, R. G. M. (1986) ‘A rival Teubner Horace’, Classical Review 36, 227–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ormiston, G. L. and Schrift, A. D. (eds.) (1990) The hermeneutic tradition: from Ast to Ricoeur, Albany.Google Scholar
Pansters, K. (2012) Franciscan values, Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitassi, M. C. (1987) Entre croire et savoir. Le problème de la méthode critique chez Jean Le Clerc, Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renehan, R. (1988) ‘Shackleton Bailey and the editing of Latin poetry’, Classical Philology 83, 311–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richter, M. N. and Haltermann, C. D. (1696) Historia literaria delineata et illustrata, Rostock.Google Scholar
Romanus, C. F. (1698) Dissertatio academica de Republica litteraria, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Schoppe, K. (1762) De arte critica, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Timpanaro, S. (2005) The genesis of Lachmann's method, ed. and trans. Most, Glenn W., Chicago.Google Scholar
Toland, J. (1726) A collection of several pieces of Mr John Toland, London.Google Scholar
van der Hoeven, A. (1843) De Joanne Clerico et Philippo a Limborch, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
van Lieshout, H. M. M. (1994) ‘Dictionnaires et diffusion du savoir’, in Bots and Waquet (1994) 131–50.Google Scholar
van Miert, D. (2010a) Humanism in an age of science: the Amsterdam Athenaeum in the Golden Age: 1632–1704, Leiden.Google Scholar
van Miert, D. K. W. (2010b) ‘Scaliger scatologus. Rhetorical roots of obscene and abusive language in the letters of Joseph Scaliger’, EMF: Studies in Early Modern France 14, 17–31.Google Scholar
van Rooden, P. (1994) ‘Sects, heterodoxies, and the diffusion of knowledge in the Republic of Letters’, in Bots and Waquet (1994) 51–64.Google Scholar
Walpurger, J. G. (1715) Meditationes de genuina historia literaria, Wittemberg.Google Scholar
Walsh, M. (1991) ‘Bentley our contemporary: or, editor, ancient and modern’, in Small, I. and Walsh, M. (eds.) The theory and practice of text-editing, Cambridge, 157–85.Google Scholar
Walsh, M. (1997) Shakespeare, Milton, and eighteenth-century literary editing: the beginnings of interpretative scholarship, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Walsh, M. (ed.) (2010) Jonathan Swift: a Tale of a Tub and other works, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Waquet, F. (ed.) (2000) Mapping the world of learning: the Polyhistor of Daniel Georg Morhof, Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Witschi-Bernz, A. (1972a) ‘Bibliography of works in the philosophy of history: 1500–1800’, History and Theory 12, 3–50.Google Scholar
Witschi-Bernz, A. (1972b) ‘Main trends in historical-method literature: sixteenth to eighteenth centuries’, History and Theory 12, 51–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar