GRICE ITALO A-Z B BO

 

 

Luigi Speranza -- Grice e Botero: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale della memoria di cicerone al rostro -- Cicerone sull’equita civile – scuola di Bene Vagienna – filosofia piemontese-- filosofia italiana – Luigi Speranza, pel Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice, The Swimming-Pool Library (Bene Vagienna). Filosofo piemontese. Filosofo italiano. Bene Vagiena, Cuneo, Piemonte. Grice: “You gotta love Botero – my favourite is not so much the one on the reason of state (the critique of the reason of state) – but his memorabilia of ‘vires’ of the ‘imperium romanum’!” Studia a Palermo; fu poi in varie case dell'Italia centrale, fra cui nel Collegio Romano. Pur essendo stimato quale poeta in versi in latino, forse a causa di un carattere difficile e da una tendenza alla polemica, interrompe gli studi a Roma e fu inviato come insegnante in località periferiche (ad Amelia e a Macerata). A Roma fu al servizio di Borromeo, del cui cugino, san Carlo, fu stretto collaboratore a Milano, impegnato nella riforma della diocesi, una volta uscito dalla Compagnia di Gesù. Occorre tenere presente sin dall'inizio che B. s'impegna nella sua nota opera dal titolo emblematico di “Ragion di Stato” dieci agili libri di circa 300 pagine, ove rimedita le tesi esposte nel suo “De Regia Sapientia” in quanto ritiene essenziale combattere il machiavellismo per poter riaffermare la stretta dipendenza di ogni potere politico dalla religione e dalla chiesa (e segretario di Borromeo) ed approfondire gli studi sulla "ragion di stato", principalmente al fine di individuare un pensiero politico-guida alternativo a quello cui si riferivano le tesi dei riformatori (quello cioè di Machiavelli e di Bodin). La contro-riforma, dunque, necessita di un suo punto di riferimento in materia di scientia civilis (teoria politica), come aveva già fatto presente Minucci.  Il fine e, per alcuni aspetti, il metodo di B. può solo apparentemente e prima facie, richiamare quelli di MACHIAVELLI (si veda). B. infatti considera lo stato italiano come un dominio assoluto e stabile sui popoli. La ragion di stato secondo B. altro non è che l'insieme di tutti i metodi ("i mezi") e gli strumenti necessari e opportuni per conservare e gestire questo dominio. Ma in realtà, sia la sostanza del suo pensiero politico, che lo scopo ultimo cui esso è indirizzato, sono decisamente divergenti, tanto che B. arriva a definire rea e falsa la ragion di stato machiavelliana e giunge a sostenere che il principe, rispettoso dei precetti religiosi, non ha bisogno di leggere né Machiavelli né Tacito.  Si comprende, allora, come la differenza principale della filosofia di B. rispetto a quello di Machiavelli consista nell'importanza assegnata alla morale – la ragione prudenziale -- come strumento di governo; l'uso spregiudicato della “ragion di stato” di natura machiavelliana da parte del governante dev'essere cioè temperato dall'applicazione di virtù, quali la moderazione e la giustizia. Ciò, infatti, conferisce allo stesso principe quella reputazione indispensabile per ottenere obbedienza raggionabile dai suoi sudditi. B. peraltro, afferma che solo i sudditi raggionabile siano sudditi ubbidienti. In questo senso . propone una ferma lotta alle eresie, che comportano dissidi fra i sudditi. Lo stato italiano deve essere confessionale e la ragion di stato comprende, al suo interno, la garanzia dell'orto-dossia, la cui curanella divisione boteriana delle funzioni dello stato italiano spetta alla Chiesa. Ulteriore fondamentale differenza con Machiaveli è l'importanza che B. dà all'economia e alla demo-grafia come parametro per la misurazione della potenza dello stato italiano. B., invero, non fu giurista e, conseguentemente, pose l'accento sull'interesse. Pienamente conscio dell'importanza della variabile economica, B. prende ad esempio la Spagna, incapace di promuovere manifatture e attività commerciali, come regno dalle risorse coloniali praticamente infinite, ma destinato ad essere relegato in secondo piano dallo stato italiano più dinamico nel campo dello sviluppo e della crescita dell'agricoltura e delle attività produttive interne. Nell'ambito della polemica anti-europea, che porta, tra l'altro, a un'elaborazione del concetto di “civiltà romana” in opposizione a ciò che è barbaro o selvaggio, B. tratteggia il processo di incivilimento come passaggio dalla pastorizia all'agricoltura, all'attività industriale e commerciale; è un processo che richiede, inoltre, il costituirsi di governi stabili e la promulgazione di leggi certe.  Altre opere: “Della ragion di stato, Venezia, Giovanni Giolito de Ferrari); “Delle cause della grandezza e magnificenza delle città”; “Le relazioni Universali”; “I Capitani, Giovan Domenico Tarino, Torino). Prudenza di Stato, o maniere di governo. Die Idee der Staatsräson, Berlino-Monaco. Il primo scritto italiano di Oceanografia, Società geografica italiana. Le origini della Statistica e dell'Antropo-geografia. Dizionario biografico degli italiani. IMPERIUM ROMANUM. IMPERIUM Romanum, quod imperante Trajano eratama pliſfimum in Scotia, extendebatur enim ab Oceano Hibernico, ultra Tigrim: Oceano Athlantico ad finum Perficum: ab Athlante adſylvam Calidoniam, pertingebatg ad flumen Albim, tranſi batg Danubium: primùm labi cæpit bellis civilibus Galba, Othonis, Vitellii: iis enim temporibus exercitus,quiin magna Britannia propre fidio erat,trajecit in Continentem. Hollandia &vicinæ regiones rebels larunt, paucig, temporis progreffu, Imperii finibus præfidio deftitutis tranfmiferunt Sarmarta Danubium: Alani ſuperaruntfauces Caſpias: Perla acquifiverunt nomen et potentiam: Gothipervagati funtMoe fiam &Macedoniam: Franci ingreſſi ſunt Gallias. Conftantinus Imp. reſtituit Imperium antiquofplendori, ſopivit bella domeſtica,frenavit tyrannos, barbaros, et gentes hoſtiles. Sedduofuerunt, qua Imperium multum debilitarunt: primumfuit tranflatiofedis Imperialis Roma Conftantinopolim, quod factum dipoliavit Romam, es debilitavit. Imperium. Luce enim clarius est,quòd ficut plante ex nativoſoloin re gionesclimate et qualitatediverſastranſplantatæ, parumretinentvir tutis naturalis: ita,res humana, præcipuè autem dominia et ftatus magnis illis mutationibusperdunt fuum vigorem et ftabilitatem.Eam obcauſam Senatus Romanus nunquă plebiconſentirevoluit, ut Roma Vejam commigraret, quæ civitasmultògratior, et magisconimodae rat,quàm Roma, maximè pofiquam à Gallis ruinæ tradita fuerat.Locus in quo Conſtantinopolis fitaest, adcòamænus,commodus et fertilisest, utſit difficilimū, utvirtus ibialtas radices agat:non enim toto orbe ter rarumcivitas eft, quamterra maremajorefavore profequantur.Illa enim nuncſein fertiliffimos campos extendendo, nuncindelitioſas val les ſe demittenda, rurſusgleniter in fructiferos colles affurgendo, nunc ſe flexibusin mare inſinuando, rurſusá ſe retrorfum vertendo,abun dèincolis omne delitiarum genus,non folum frumenta do vina canfert. Diceresibi Bacchum cum Cerere, Pomonam cum Flora,pulchritudi nem cum fæcunditate certare. Postquam mareminimopacie, plurimos gratos ſinus& tranquillos portus fecit,quorum in folo Boſphoro (nec is tamen plus quàm 25.miliaria longus est ) triginta numerantur, beni gno aſpectuquafiblanditur civitati et regioni,ducitý eo magnisclaffi bus hinc annonamSyrie &Ægypti, inde divitias TrapezuntinasCa, phag.Nunquam ibi fructusnecmeffes, nunc Thracia,Afia tunc defunt, Eoquog, tendit tanta optimorum piſcium copia, quigyros agendo &lu dendo, ferè domuscivitatis fubeunt,utquiidnon viderit,incredibile judicet.Pifces enim nuncfugiendofrigus hyemis, tranfeunt ex ponto Eu-, xino, in aſpectu civitatis Conſtantinopolitana, Propontidem verſus: nuncvitanteseſtatisfervorem, redeunt eadem via,qua digrefierant. Duabus itag, anni tempeftatibus, eorum infinita copia fummadelecta tione, cui commodum parest,capitur.Sunt ibi præterea Cidari et Bar biſa fummèamæni et jucundiflavii, quiambo celebrem hunc finum influunt,qui inter Conſtantinopolim et Peram est, dilataturg:dicitur is a ſcriptoribuscornuaureū. Vtfinemfaciam:Noneft locus rerum af fluentia, enervanda virtuti aptior, nec advirtutem voluptatibuscor rumpendam commodior: id apertè demonſtrant fegnities&mollities majorispartis Imp. Græcorum,ipforumg exercituum. Si amænitas ora Tarentine, et delitiæ regionis Sibaritarum potuerunt ignavosfacere, etcorrumperemores iftorum populorum:fidelitia Capuana potuerunt emollire et extinguere ferociam virtutemg Hannibalis,fuorumg,mi. litum: fiPlato diſcipline incapaces Cyreneos æftimavit, propter fuam profperitatem: quid ſtatuendum erit deloco Conftantinopolitano, dulci et oportunofupra omnes, qui in orbe terrarum funt? In ſumma,cùm nulla resmagispernitiofæ fintReipublica, quàm magnanovitates: que resmajoridamno, nedicam exitio potuitcontingere Imperio Romano, quàmadeò ingens acfubita, prater omnium expectationem immuta tio? Nonplusminúsvefecit bonus ille Imperator, quàmfiquis addan. dumanimali meliorem formam, cerebrum adgenua,aut cor è ſuoloco adcubitum transferret. Secundum erratum Conftantinifuitdiviſio Imperiiſuisfiliis facta in trespartes, quodcontigit qua ex magno Imperio tria fecit, cum notabili diminutione authorita. tis da virium. Cùmenim ejus filii inter fearmis decertarent, taliter ſe invicem confumpferunt, ut Imperium quafiexangue corpus remanſe git. Quamvis autem Imperium aliquot vicibusſubuno Principe coa luerit, diviſioni tamen adeò aptum remanfit, ut rarò acciderit, quin in Orientale et Occidentale non fuerit partitum, ufq;dum Odoacer, Heru lorum etTuringorum Rex, magno cum exercitu,Italiam ingreffus, in tam magnas anguſtias conjecit Auguftulum, utpredefperatione feIm perio Occidentali abdicarit, quod acciditanno Hunnijam antea Danubium tranfmiferant: Alaricus, Vandalorum Rex, Romam cepe rat: Vandaliprimùm Andaluſiam, et poftea Africam: Alani Luſita niam: Gothimajorem Hifpaniæpartem: Angli Britanniam: Curguna diones Provinciã occupabant. Iuſtinianus Imp.res aliquantulum in me lius reftituit,nam per fuos Capitaneosexegit VandalosAfrica, et Gothos Italia, annosso. Sed parvotantùm tempore id duravit,nam anno cæperunt Orientale Imperium vexare, arma etherefis Mahumetana, breviſ tempore fuereà Saracenis oppreſſa prater Syriam, Ægyptum do Archipelagum, Africa, Sicilia et Hifpania.occuparunt quog Saraceni Narbonem, Avenionem, Tolofam, Burdegalam, et re giones vicinas. Imperiumitag, Occidentalepaulatimprorfus in dire ptionem abiit: Orientale autem adeò invalidum remanfit, ut vixali quot vicibus, civitatem Conftantinopolitanam contra Saracenorum arma defendere, multò minus Occidenti auxilium potuerit. Annoalla tem Chriſti 800.titulos Occidentalis Imperii adeptus est Carolus Ma grises, Francorum Rex, quam rem recenfet Ado, ViemeArchiepifcopus, verbisfequentibus: In die fan £to nativitatis Domini, anteconfeſio. nem beati Apoſtoli, cùm gloriofus Rex Carolus ab oratione furrexiffet, Leo Pontifex capiti ejus coronam impofuit,ficg,ab univerſopopulo ac clamatum est: Carolo Auguſto, à Deo.coronato Magno, pacifico,Imperatori Romanorum,vita etvictoria. Divifum itafuit Occidentale Imperium ab Orientali, hoc modo, ut Neapolis Sipontum Orientem verfus, cùm Sicilia Græcorum effet, Beneventum Longobardis rema neret, Veneti neutri parti adfcripti,ſtatus Ecclefia libereffet, reliquum Carclo Magno cederet. Blondus vultIrenem Imperatricem primumin eam divifionem confenfiffe, deindeà Nicephoro confirmatameffe. Ha buit itag, diviſio Imperiiinitium à tranſlatione fedisImperialis Roma Conftantinopolim: crevit diſtractione in plures Principespervenit: ad perfectionem affumptione Caroli Magni. Anteeumenim modus re giminis, leges, magiſtratus, et confilia erantcommunia, tendebantg ad bonum commodumg utriuſ, Imperii, tanquam membrorum ejufdem corporis. Etfiunus Imperatorum moriebaturabſque filiis, totum impe rium manebat alteri: fed Carolo Magno in Imperatorem Occidentis electo, nulla amplius fuit habita ratio Imperii Orientis, nec Imperado lor Orientis unquam fucceffit in Imperium Occidentis, nec ejus Im perator in Orientis Imperium. Permanfit autem Imperium Occiden tis in familia Caroli Magnipaulò minus quàm centum annis: defe cit autem ea familia in Arnolpho. Anno Chriſti 100 2. abfcripto omni jure hereditatis, creatio imperatoris in libera electione ſeptem Principum, qui Electores nuncupantur, pofita fuit. Ratio faciendi · Imperium electivum, quod eò uſque familia Caroli Magni haredi. tarium extiterat,fuit,quòd Imp.Otho 111. filios non habuit: utgdi gnitate perſona, qua eligeretur, Imperium firmius redderetur, Impe rium Occidentis tunc valde coarctatum et concifum erat: nihilenim ci quàm Germania etItaliæ parsfupererat: Pontifex fiquidem Roma nus bonam Italiepartem poſſidebat: Veneti in medio utriuſqueImpe riipoſitivivebant in plenalibertate, cum dominio annexo fuo ftatui; Regna Neapolis etSicilia, qua Normanni Gracis eripuerant, Ecclefia Romana feudatariafacta erant, primùm fub Clemente Antipapa, deinde fúb Nicolao 1 1. et ejus fuccefforibus,qui Antipapa faktum, propteremolumentum approbarunt: Lombardia et Thufcia, partim pro IMPERIUM ROMANUM. propter diffidia Imperatorum, Henrici IV. et V.Friderici I. et11. cum Pontificibus Romanis, partim propterpopulorum ferociam, Imperato ribus pluslaborisetimpenfa, quàm commodi attulerant. Rudolpho Imp.itag,non folùm in Italiam proficiſci,cura non fuit (quòdeum in fortunia, adverfagresfuorum anteceſſorum terrerent )fed etpopulis Italia libertatem parvo precio vendidit.Lucenfibus nonconſtitit liber tasplusquàmdecem aureorum milibus: Florentini eam fex aureorum millibus redemerunt. Deficientibusitag, cumreputatione, viribus Im perii,inei Italia, preter nomen,nihilferèremanfit. Vicecomites Medio lanenfes,et fucceſſivè alii domini,aliis locis rapuerunt libi dominia,quæ potuerunt,abſq; ullo imperatoris reſpectu,tantumg petebant inveſtitu ram fuorum ftatuum.Sed Franciſcus, cùmfibi armisſtatum Medio lanenfem paraffet,parvifecitinveſtituram, exiſtimansſepoſſe feipfum conſervare in ejuspoſſeſſione,iiſdem artibus, quibus eum fibi compara. verat. Vltramontes ſubſtraxerunt ſeImperio multi Principes, ita, ut Imperium prafentitemporeferè in Germania conclufumfit. Sedquòd dominia in Germania uniformia non funt,defcribam illa, utfequitur: Aliqua dominia funtquaſi membra Imperii,fed ſeparata:quamvis enim Imperiifint,non idagnoſcunt, nec agnofcere volunt, ficut Reges DanieetSuecia,Dux Pruffie, Helvetii, Rheti: alia agnoſcunt quidem Imperatorem proſupremo Principe, fed dietas Imperiinon invifunt, nec contribuunt, feruntgonera Imperii,ficut Duces Sabaudia, Lotha ringia, etPrincipes Italia: alia in viſuntdiatas,feruntgonera,ficut principes etcivitates Germania:ſed Rex Bohemie à Carolo IV.imp. à contributionibusexemptus est. Alia dominia non folùmpenduntcom munes contributiones imperii, fedquodplus eft folvuntimperatoritri butum particulare:ea funtilla civitates, que Imperiales nunc upantur: aliqui principes Germania non folùm interſuniComitiis Imperiifed, Gelečtioni Imperatoris: hifuntfex Electores, tres Ecclefiaftici, de tres Laici,quibusjungitur,li vota imparia funt, Rex Bohemia, qui non ve wit adconvocationem (quæ diatadicitur) nihilominus calculum in ele Elione stionehabet. Sed loquendo ftriétè: Civitates etPrincipes Imperiipro priè dicuntur,qui dietis interfunt,et tanquam membra uniuscorporis, participant bona etmala, emolumenta etonera. Hi viventesferè mo dò Reipublicæ fimulunita;ad defenſionem communem habent impera torem procapite, quinonregit abſolutè,fed per Comitia, nec tamenin. dicit illa abſqzprecedenti confenfu maximepartisElectorum. Delibe rationum Decreta,qua edicuntur, irritafieri nonpoffunt, niſi peraliam diatam: fed imperator habet plenam authoritatem mandandi execu tioni decreta. Imperatorita quod ad dignitatem et præeminentiam Spectat,eft primusChriſtianorum princeps,tanquam is,in quem ceſſere Jura Reipublicæ etImperii Romani: ejus est protegere Ecclefiam Dei, defendere fidem, procurareg_pacem,etbonum Reipublicæ Chriſtiana. VIREs. Cimo Vmvires Imperiifitæ fintin Germania, neceſſe est, ut duo verba dicamus dehac ampliſima nobiliffimaſ provincia.lacet ferè in. ter Oderam et Moſam: inter Viſtulam et fluviolum Aa, quiapud Grae velingam fluit:et inter Oceanum Germanicum etBalthicum,Alpesg. Ejus figura quadrata est,longitudine ferèetlatitudine aqualis, oso.mi líariumquaquà verſum. Maximè abundatfrugibus, pecudibus, piſcia bus: id experientia compertum fæpè fuit. Carolus enim Viut Turcisre. fifteret, habuit fubfignis ad Viennam go.peditum, et 35. equitum mil lia adIavarinumcontra eoſdem Turcas, nec tamen caritas ibi experta fuit. Bello inter Carolum V. Proteſtantes peraliquot menfes abundè fefuftinuerunt in campis ferèiso. militum millia. Divesquog, est mi narisauri, argenti,omnisý generis metalli,ſuperatý,alias Europæ pro vincias: natura quog, largitaest ei inregionibus longiffimèàmaridig fitis fontes da puteos aqua ſalſa,ex quibus excoquitur ſalperfectum.Nec minusmercatrixest, quàm fertilis. Indigena enim plusquàm ulla alia natio,vacant opificiis, faciunt artificia miratu digna, ešta Germania tam probèà natura dotata, ornatag magnis fluminibus, qua ubig na vigantur, utcommeatus etmercesfaciliter ex uno locoinaliumdeve bantur. Fluviorum omniummaximus est Danubius, ab illo Rhenus, quiGermaniam à Meridiead Septentrionem tranfgreditur, ficut Das nubius ab Occafu ad Ortum: Albis oritur in Bohemia,lambit Miſniam, Saxoniam,Marchiam'antiquam:Odera oritur in Moravia, lavat Si lefiam,duas Marchias, Pomeraniam. Wefara,Neccarus, Mofa, Mofel la,lfara, Oenus, Varta, Mænus. (HicGermaniam in fuperiorem et in. feriorem dividit. Superior est,qua à Mæno ad Alpes uſ feextendit.In ferior,quæ à MænoOceanum verfus excurrit. Germania in pluresPro vinciasdiviſa est,ſed precipua funt(loquor de iis, que viva membra. Imperii ſunt ) Alſatia,Suevia, Bavaria, Auſtria, Bohemia (quamvis hæc multis privilegiis gaudeat, quacamab oneribus eximunt) Mora via,Sileſia, Luſatia,dua Marchia,Saxonia, Miſnia, Thuringia, Fran conia, Hafia,Weſtphalia,Clivia, Megapolis, Pomerania. In dictisGer mania Provinciis,cum iis non computando Belgium et Helvetiam,et ftimatur effecirciter decem hominummyriades. Dividitur populusin quatuor hominum munera autftatus: rufticos nempe,qui nullo in nu mero funt, civitatum incolas,Barones, Prelatos.Vltima tria genera con veniunt, faciuntg ſtatusImperii. 'Inter Prelatos obtinent primum lo cum Archiepiſcopi Electores:inter hos Moguntinus est Cancellarius Germania, fequiturColonienfis, deinde Trevirenfis, Cancellarii, ille Italiæ,hic Gallia.Sequitur ArchiepifcopusSaltzburgenfis, maximus do dignitate etdivitiis. Epifcopus MagdeburgenfisſePrimatem Germa nieinferibit. Bremenfis et Hamburgenfis quog, multasjuriſdictiones habuerunt.Sequuntur deindeplus quàm 40. Epiſcopi,et magnus Magia fter Ordinis Teutonici, etMagiſter EquitumHierofolymitarum. Suns quog feptem Abbates, iig Imperii Principes. Inter Principes feculares öchtinetprimum locum Rex Bohemia, qui est ſupremusDapifer: Dux Seaconia Mareſcallus: Marchio Brandenburgenfis Camerarius: Co Palatinus Architriclinus Imperii.Preter hos Principes funt34. alii Duces, inter quos habent primum locumArchiduces Auſtrie.Inter Du ces imp. viiquog, numerantur RexDania, propter Ducatum Holſatie. Sunt deinde Marchiones,Landgravii,Comites,Barones innumeri.Ci. vitates libere (quarum go.effe folebant,nunc funt circiter6o.que omnes feiplaspropriis legibusregunt)ulterius obligata nonfunt, quàm quòd duasquintas partes, ejus, quodin conventu conſentitur,contribuunt. Earumaliqua Imperiales dicuntur (ficut diximus, quòd cenfum Impe ratoriſolvant, quicenſusin totumadIs-florenorummillia accedit. Ha bent civitates fatisamplosreditus,qui utplurimumonera excedunt. Æ ftimatur Imperium in totum habereplus quàm feptem myriades in re ditibus, quodproreparvi momenti habendū non est.Cùm enim populi gravati non fint,utin Italia, dantprater ordinarium ſuis Principibus maximafubſidia,quando id requirit neceſitas. Imperium obligatúeſt, ſaltem ex.confuetudine,praftareImperatori, quando Romā vadit ut co ronetur,20.peditum,et 4.equitum millia, fpacio oito menfium, diciturg ideò fubfidium Romanum. Reditus civitatum etPrincipum laicorum, valdecrevere, tumufurpatione bonorum Ecclefiafticorum, tum variis impofitionibuspopulo impofitis,quæcùm in Italia ortü habuerint, facia le ſediffuderunt (exemplumenim malum creſcit femper )per Franciam et Germaniam. Neceſitate exigente, contribuit Imperiú maximaspe cuniarum ſummas,colligunturg extraordinariè: utex contributiones facilius colligi poffint,eštGermaniain decem circulos diviſa, in quibus fiunt conventusparticulares, proexecutione Edictorum, quæ in diætis Imperii facta funt, et aliislimilibus incidentibus. Vires Germaniafunt abſq dubiomaxima: copiaenimcommeatuum inexhauftaeft. Reditus ordinarii et extraordinarii per magni, et modus colligendi commeatus facillimusest,propter fluviori opportunitatem. Quod ad populum at tinet, aſtimaturtotum Imperiumin exercitum educerepoſſe,tum equi tum,cùmpeditum ducenta millia,cujus experimentum factumfuit bel lis, quafupràcommemoravimus,docet idquog experientia. Abanno enim. permultum belligeratum eft in Francia, etin Belgio militi bus Germanis, quorum facta funtfiuntg, adhucquotidie conſcriptio nes non minus frequentes, quàm magna,cüm peditum,tum equitum. Vnoeodemtempore Wolfgangus Dux Bipontinus,duxitin Franciam 12. peditum,et Sequitum Germanorum millia,pro Huguenotis, erantý in ea (Francia) adhuc alia quinqueequitum millia, quibus præerat Co mes Mansfeldiuspro Catholicis. Guilelmus Naffavius habebat in Beli gio et finibusFrancia octo equitum, et10.peditum millia dicta natio nis, etDux Albanus tria millia. Taceo de numero Germanorum, qui Flandriam ingreffifuntDuce Caſimiro, etFranciam, eodem Duce an no 157 8.eorumg quorum parsannopreſentieamingreffa eft in auxi lium Regis Francia: pars, ut auxilio effet fæderi Catholicorum Frana cia. Vt extremammanumimponam:Cùmcontinuò belligeretur in di verſis Europæ partibus,natio Germanica adeò numeroſa est, ut abſqzea nulla ferèfiantexpeditiones.Non loquor hic de Flandris,qui aliquot vie cibus exercitum 30. millium virorum collegerunt, iis, reftiteruntpøe tentie Francorum: aut de Helvetiis,quos i20.peditum millia,adfuide fenfionem poffe cogere aftimatur. Eorumaliquando plus quàm 30.mil lia extraditionem miſerunt in defenfionem ftatus Mediolanenfis, ad verſus Franciſcum 1. Francia Regem. Sed ut ad inſtitutum reverta mur: Inter Germania peditesmeliores cenfentur Tyrolenſes, Suevido Weſtphali:inter equites Brunfuicenfes, maximè autem Clivenſes de Franconienſes: inter arma meliustractant Germani enfem,fariſſamga quàm fclopeta.Valent Germaniſatispræliis campeſtribus,tam ad confli gendum cum hoftibus,quàm ad iis refiftendum.Multum enim facit or do,qui ipſis quaſinaturaliseft,inceffusgravis et firmus, armağıquibus #tuntur, defenfioni apta:parum valent ad defenfionem munitionum, et propter corporum gravitatem, &quòdutplurimùm ventricoſi funt, oppugnationibus inepti habentur. Sunt itag, Germanipotiùsconftan tes,quàm audaces, feroces,quàmftrenui. Non enim tentantres, in qui busmagnanimitaselaceat: in victoria occiduntfine exceptione ætatis et fexus,in quofcung, incurzunt:fibellum in longum ducitur, aut obfi dentur,dedunt fe præfegnitie:ſiin caftris degunt,morampatienternon ferunt,necfciuntvincerecunčtando: fiprima molimina non fuccedunt ex fententia,ſtant attoniti, caduntý animis: in fugam femel conjeéti nunquam amplius recolliguntur: in eo præftant Hifpani omnibus na tionibus: in Germanorum militiamagnifumptus faciendifunt,multa quog, moleftia eft, quòd uxores fecum in bella ducant, tantumg abſua munt commeatus,uteum convehere difficile, conſervare quafi impoli bilefit: abfg, commeatu autem nihil boniſperandum est. Equi Germa nicipotiùsfortes quàm animofi funt, et cum ex decem; qui in bellum ducuntur, octo ab aratro fumuntur,parum profunt: videntesg ſangui. nem vilefcunt:contrarium accidit Afturconibus, iisenim crediit audas cia.Concludendo rem: Peditatus Germanicus in fuo genereequitatu po tior eft.Vires maritima Germania terreftribus minores no funt,quam. vis ea non adeò in ufu fint,ficut terreſtres. Civitates enim Hambur gum, Lubeca, Roftochium, et alie, habent heccentum, hæc iso.naves, quibusæquant vires Regum Dania &Suecia. His viribus adeò fortis, potensõest Germania,ut unita nullum hoftem timeat.Viribus,quas di ximus Germania,junguntur (cùm opus est)auxilia Principum Italia, Sabaudia, Lotharingia. Hienim Principes in neceſſitate nunquam de fuere Imperio. Bello enim Zigethano miſit Emanuel, DuxSabaudia, fexcentos equites fclopetarios: Cofmus, Florentia Dux, triapeditum millia,quibus ipfeftipendia dabat: Alphonfus 11. FerrariaDux, ipfe profectus est cumille et quingentis equitibus, adeò probèinſtructis,ut in caftris melior equitatus non eſſet. Eofe quoquecontulit Guilielmus, Mantua Dux,cum inftruétiffima cohorte virorum.HenricusLotha ringus, Guifia Dux, ei expeditioni interfuit cum trecentis nobilitate claris viris. Cumhis militibus &alis,quos adjunxit Papa PiusViha buit Maximilianus 11.fubfignis centum peditum,&3s.equitummil lia: Ordines Imperii ei in Comitiis annois00.Auguſte Vindelicorum habitis, conceffèrunt 40.peditum, &8.equitum milliain 8.menfes, 20.peditum, et 4.equitum millia in tres annosſubſequentes. Meinecke: Der konservativste unter ihnen war Giovanni Botero, ein Jesuitenzögling und Kleriker, der als Sekretär des Kardinals Karl Borromäus in Mailand, dann im Dienste des Herzogs von Savoyen in Rom, als Erzieher savoyischer Prinzen in Madrid und schließlich in gelehrter Muße in Paris die politische Welt Süd- und Westeuropas gründlich kennen lernte und durch seine vielgelesenen Werke, vor allem durch das ‘saggio’ “Della ragion di Stato” politisch Schule machte und zahlreiche Nachtreter seiner Gedanken fand.1) Denn er befriedigte so recht das Bedürfnis des höfischen und sonstwie politisch interessierten Publikums nach einer leicht verdau lichen und geschmackvoll gebotenen Nahrung. An Machia velli gemessen,war er ein mittelmäßiger Kopf. Er hatte nicht wiedieserEcken und Kanten,an denen man sich wund reiben konnte, und empfahl sich den katholisch-bigotten Höfen der Gegenreformation als ein mildes Gegengift gegen Machiavellis Zynismus und Unkirchlichkeit, ohne daß man dabei auf das Nützliche in Machiavellis Rezepten ganz zu verzichten brauchte. Sein Lehrgebäude stellt eine aus dem Renaissancestil erwach sene, reich geschmückte Jesuitenkirche dar, und sein Lehrton ist der eines Würde, Sanftmut und Strenge richtig mischen den Predigers. Er bot aus dem Schatze seines Wissens und seiner politischen Erfahrungen jedem etwas und konnte die Freunde der spanischen Weltmacht und der Kirche ebenso befriedigen, wie die Bewunderer der republikanischen Selb ständigkeit Venedigs. Man lobte an ihm, recht aus dem [Wahre Katakomben von vergessener Literatur der Medio kritäten tun sich hier auf. Vgl. über sie die von außerordentlicher Belesenheitzeugenden, geistvollen, aberetwaskapriziösenund wort reichen Bücher von Ferrari, Histoire de la raison d'état und Corso sugli scrittori politici italiani (auch viele ungedruckte Schriften werden von ihm behandelt) und Cavalli, La scienza politica inItaliainMemor. delR.IstitutoVeneto. Im allgemeinen vgl. Gotheins Darstellung in „ Staat und Gesellschaft der neueren Zeit“ (Hinneberg, Kultur der Gegenwart) und das Kapitel dieses Buches. 6* Kunstgeschmacke der Zeit heraus, die dolce armonia, und katholische Monarchen empfahlen sein Buch ihren Thron folgern.] Gleich zu Beginn seines Werkes unternahm er es, das neue, machiavellistisch anrüchig gewordene Schlagwort der ragione di stato zu entgiften und ihm einen harmlosen Sinn zu geben. Ragione di stato, definierte er, ist die Kenntnis der Mittel, die geeignet sind, einen Staat zu gründen, zu erhalten und zuvermehren.Wenn man aberfrage,welchesdiegrößere Leistung sei, einen Staat zu vergrößern oder zu erhalten, so müsse man antworten, das letztere. Denn man erwirbt durch Gewalt, man erhält durch Weisheit. Gewalt können viele üben, Weisheit nur wenige. Und wenn man frage, welche Reiche die dauerhaftesten seien, die großen, mittleren oder kleineren,soseidieAntwort:diemittleren. Denn diekleinen seien zu sehr bedroht von den Machtgelüsten der großen, und die großen seien der Eifersucht der Nachbarn und der inneren Entartung zu sehr ausgesetzt. „Die Reiche, die die Frugalität auf die Höhe geführt hat,sind durch die Opulenz verfallen.“ Sparta verfiel erst, als es seine Herrschaft er weiterte. Als Beispiel aber für die größere Haltbarkeit der mittleren Staaten rühmte er vor allem Venedig. Leider jedoch wollten die mittleren Staaten sich nicht immer begnügen, sondern strebten nach Größe, und dann kämen sie in Gefahr, wie Venedigs frühere Ausdehnungsversuche zeigten. Die spanische Großmacht warnte er in geschickter Weise, die Freiheit Venedigs nicht anzutasten: „Brich nicht mit m ächtigen Republiken, außer wenn der Vorteil sehr groß und der Sieg sicher ist; denn die Liebe zur Freiheit in ihnen ist so heftig und so tief verwurzelt, daß es fast unmöglich ist, sie auszurotten. Die Unternehmungen und Pläne der Fürsten sterben mit ihnen; die Gedanken und Beratschlagungen der freien Städte sind fast unsterblich.“ Nach dieser Anleihe bei Machiavelli) bekam dann aber auch das Haus Habsburg [1) Calderini, Discorsi sopra la ragion di stato del Signor Botero, Proemio, Neudruck  2) Principe, c.5: “Ma nelle repubbliche è maggior vita, maggior]  odio, più desiderio di vendetta; nè gli lascia nè puo lasciare riposare la memoria dell'antica libertà”] sein Lob, denn die Größe seiner Fürsten sei der Lohn ihrer hervorragenden Frömmigkeit. Brich vor allem auch nicht, lehrte er weiter, mit der Kirche, es würde immer als gottlos erscheinen und doch nichts nützen. Mailand, Florenz, Neapel, Venedig haben bei ihren Kriegen mit den Päpsten ja doch nur viel ausgegeben und nichts profitiert. Die Koinzidenz des kirchlichen und des realpolitischen Interesses, auf der das ganze spanische System beruhte, war also auch ein Kernstück seiner Lehre von der ragione di stato. Geh mit der Kirche, und es geht dir gut, ist ihr Sinn. Er riet den Fürsten, vor jeder Beratung im Staatsrate die Sache erst in einem Gewissensrate mit ausgezeichneten Doktoren der Theologie zu besprechen. Dennoch war er weltklug und erfahren genug, um zu wissen, daß es zwischen Welt klugheit und Frömmigkeit nicht immer ganz stimmte. Mochte er das Wesen der wahren Staatsräson noch so sanft und maßvoll umschreiben und es den Bedürfnissen der Kirche und der Moral anzupassen versuchen, so konnte er sich doch, wenn er den Dingen ins Auge sah, nicht verhehlen, daß der kristallisch harte Kern alles politischen Handelns, ganz wie es Machiavelli schon gelehrt hatte, das selbstische Interesse des Fürsten oder Staates war. „Halte es für eine ausgemachte Sache," schrieb er,„daß in den Erwägungen der Fürsten das Interesse das ist,was jede Rücksicht besiegt. Und deswegen darf man nicht trauen auf Freundschaft, auf Verwandtschaft, auf Bündnis, auf irgendein anderes Band, wofern nicht dieses auch das Interesse dessen, mit dem man verhandelt, zum Fundamente hat.“ In einem Anhange zu seinem Buche gab er schließlich unumwunden zu,daß Staatsräson und Interesse im wesentlichen dasselbe seien: „ Die Fürsten richten sich in Freundschaften und Feindschaften nach dem, was ihnen Vorteil bringt. Wie es Speisen gibt, die von Natur un schmackhaft, durch die Würze, die ihnen der Koch gibt, schmackhaft werden, so neigen sie, von Natur ohne Affektion, zu dieser oder jener Seite, je nachdem das Interesse ihren Geist und ihren Affekt zurichtet, weil schließlich ragione di stato wenig anderes ist als ragione d'interesse. [Aggiunte fatte alla sua ragion di stato. Venedig] Ein tieferes Nachdenken hätte ihn irre machen müssen an der von ihm so salbungsvoll gelehrten Harmonie staat licher Interessen und kirchlicher Pflichten und ihn in allerlei für das Denken seiner Zeit noch nicht reife Probleme der Weltanschauung verstricken können. Er ging dem aus dem Wege, wie es der praktische Staatsmann aller Zeiten getan hat,und begnügte sich,die Fürsten zu ermahnen,keine Staats räson aufzurichten, die dem Gesetze Gottes widerspräche, gleichsam wie einen Altar gegen den anderen Altar. Und am Schlusse seines Buches schwang er sich gar zu einer Ver urteilung der modernen Interessenpolitik überhaupt auf. Heute können, so führte er aus, keine großen gemeinsamen Unternehmungen der Fürsten mehr zustande kommen, weil die Verschiedenheit der Interessen sie zu sehr spaltet. Einst aber, in den heroischen Zeiten der Kreuzzüge, konnte m a n sich ohne anderes Interesse als das der Ehre Gottes zusammentun. Die griechischen Kaiser traten den Kreuzfahrern in den Weg. Was war die Folge? Die Barbaren vertrieben zuerst die Unseren aus Asien und unterwarfen sich dann die Griechen. Ecco il frutto della moderna politica. In einem späteren Werke führte er auch den Verfall Frankreichs auf dieselbe Ursache zurück. Weil sich Frankreich mit Türken und Hugenotten befreundete, erschlaffte der Glaube, denn „wenn man alle Dinge auf eine unvernünftige und tierische ragion di stato zurückführt, löst sich das Band der Seelen und die Vereinigung der Völker im Glauben."1) Boteros Theorie konnte also als gutes Brevier für politisierende katholische Beichtväter dienen. Man predigte die Unterwerfung des eigenen Interesses unter die Ehre Gottes, man predigte ferner, was nicht immer ganz stimmte, die Harmonie des eigenen Interesses mit der Ehre Gottes, und man konstatierte schließlich, wenn es darauf ankam, bald achselzuckend, bald beklagend den Sieg des eigenen Interesses über alle anderen Lebensmächte. Aber diese Brechungen und Widersprüche spiegelten genau die politische Praxis der gegenreformatorischen Höfe. Einer der Päpste selber, Urban VIII., gab ihnen in den folgenden Zeiten das verführe [Le relazioni universali; s. darüber unten] rische Beispiel, das Staatsinteresse über das kirchliche Interesse zu stellen und den katholischen Mächten in ihrem Kampfe gegen Gustav Adolf in den Arm zu fallen.] Nicht nur die kirchliche, sondern auch die humanistische Tradition hinderte Botero, mit konsequentem Wirklichkeits sinne und rein empirisch seine Lehre auszubauen. Er entnahm Probleme und Mittel der Staatskunst noch in großem U mfange aus den antiken Schriftstellern, ohne sich zu fragen, ob sie auf die modernen Verhältnisse anwendbar seien.) Freilich verfuhren auch größere als er, Machiavelli und Bodinus, nicht anders. Diese konventionelle humanistische Methode beruhte nicht nur auf der Verehrung, die mandem Altertume widmete,sondern auch auf der althergebrachten dogmatischen Geschichtsauffassung, die alles geschichtliche Geschehen und die in ihm zutage getretenen Staats- und Lebensformen als gleichartig und deshalb als immer wiederkehrend ansah. So war Botero imstande, als beste und höchste Quelle poli tischer Klugheit nicht die eigene Erfahrung, die doch immer beschränkt sei, auch nicht die Information durch Zeitgenossen, sondern die Historien zu nennen, „denn diese umfassen das ganze Leben der Welt.“ So sahen er und seine Zeitgenossen alte und neue G e schichte als eine einzige Beispielmasse an, aus der man all gemeingültige Maximen der Staatskunst herauszog, wobei man dann sehr relative Erfahrungen naiv verallgemeinerte. Dabei fehlte es keineswegs an Interesse für die individuellen Verschiedenheiten innerhalb der wirklichen Staatenwelt, in der man lebte. Die Verfasser der venetianischen Relationen gaben sich Mühe genug, ihre Herren über sie zuverlässig zu informieren, und Botero suchte dasselbe Bedürfnis zu b e friedigen durch eine groß angelegte Staatenkunde,die er unter dem Titel Le relazioni universali herausgab.) Er ver sprach hier auch über die Ursachen der Größe und des Teich tums der mächtigeren Fürsten zu handeln, aber blieb dabei im rein Statistischen und Zeitgeschichtlichen stecken und [Vgl. namentlich Buch 6 der Ragione di stato über die Mittel zur Abwehr auswärtiger Feinde. Den ungedruckten 5. Teil des Werkes hat Gioda in seiner Biographie B. herausgegeben.] begnügte sich meist mit tatsächlichen Angaben über Re gierungsformen, Finanzen, Heerwesen und Beziehungen zu den angrenzenden Fürsten. Zu einer schärferen Charakteristik der verschiedenen politischen Systeme und Interessen schwang er sich noch nicht auf. Auch der Bedeutendste dieser ganzen Gruppe, die an der Lehre von der ragione di stato arbeitete, Boccalini tat es noch nicht. Aber er ragte aus ihr weit heraus durch das per sönliche Lebensfeuer, das sein politisches Denken durch glühte. Die Probleme, die ihn beschäftigten, und die Antworten, die er gab, waren von denen Boteros und seiner Genossen nicht so sehr verschieden. Aber während sie bei diesen zu einer seichten Konvention verflachten, wurden sie ihm zu einem wahrhaften, leidenschaftlichen Erlebnis und entwickelten erst dadurch ihren vollen geschichtlichen Inhalt. Der Geist der echten Renaissance und Machiavellis lebte in ihm wieder auf, aber fortentwickelt zum unruhig bewegten Barock. Er wirkte auf die Zeitgenossen vor allem als ein überaus witziger Spötter, als ein Meister der Ironie und S a tire, der allen über den Nacken sah und alle Menschlichkeiten erbarmungslos bloßstellte. Aber schon hierin und erst recht in seinen nachgelassenen Schriften, die lange nach seinem Tode erschienen, offenbaren sich dem Nachlebenden die tieferen Hintergründe seines Denkens”. Meinecke. Il più conservatore filosofo e B.. Segretario di Borromeo a Milano, poi al servizio del duca di Savoia a Roma, come educatore dei principi sabaudi e finalmente nel tempo libero a Parigi, conosce a fondo il mondo politico dell'Europa e, attraverso le sue opere molto lette, in particolare il saggio “Della ragion di Stato” fa scuola politica e trova numerosi seguaci. Perché soddisfa davvero le esigenze del pubblico aulico e per altro politicamente interessato alla ricerca di cibi facilmente digeribili e gustosi. Messo a confronto con MACHIAVELLO MACHIAVELLI (si veda), e una testa mediocre. Non ha questi angoli e spigoli contro cui fregarsi, e si raccomanda alle fanatiche corti della Contro-riforma come mite antidoto al cinismo e all'infedeltà di MACHIAVELLI, senza dover rinunciare completamente all'utilità delle sue ricette. Il suo edificio didattico è una chiesa gesuita riccamente decorata che è cresciuta dallo stile rinascimentale. Il suo tono di insegnamento è quella di una dignità, mansuetudine e severità mescolando opportunamente il predicatore. Dal tesoro della sua conoscenza ed esperienza politica offre qualcosa a tutti ed è in grado di soddisfare gli amici della potenza mondiale e della Chiesa, nonché gli ammiratori dell'indipendenza repubblicana di Venezia. Uno lo loda, fin dal [1 Qui si aprono vere catacombe della letteratura dimenticata della critica mediatica. Su di essi, vedi i saggi estremamente ben letti, ingegnosi, ma un po' capricciosi e ricchi di parole di Ferrari, “Storia della ragione di stato” e il suo “Corso sugli scrittori politici italiani” (si occupa anche di molti scritti non stampati) e Cavalli, “La scienza politica in Italia in “Memor. del R.Istituto Veneto. In generale, vedere la presentazione di Gothein in “State and Society of Modern Times” (Hinneberg, Kultur der Gegenwart) e il quinto capitolo di questo libro. 6. I gusti artistici dell'epoca, la dolce armonia ei monarchi raccomandano il suo saggio deducendone il trono]. Proprio all'inizio del suo saggio, intrapreso questo disintossicare il tormentone machiavellico disdicevole della “ragione di stato” e dargli un significato innocuo. “Ragione di stato”, define B., è la conoscenza dei mezzi atti a fondare, mantenere e accrescere lo stato italiano. Ma, se ci si chiede quale sia la più grande conquista per allargare o mantenere lo stato italiano, si deve rispondere, quest'ultimo. Perché si acquisisce con la violenza, si riceve con la saggezza. Molti possono praticare la violenza. Pochi possono praticare la saggezza. E se chiedi quali imperi sono i più duraturi, il grande, il medio o il piccolo, la risposta è: il mezzo. Perché il impero piccolo e troppo minacciato dalla brama di potere dal impero grand. Il impero grande e troppo esposto alla gelosia dei loro vicini e alla degenerazione interna. Gl’imperi che la frugalità ha innalzato sono caduti a causa dell'opulenza." Sparta cadde in rovina solo quando espanse il suo dominio. Tuttavia elogia soprattutto l’impero di Venezia e l’impero di Genova come esempi della maggiore durabilità di uno stato centrale. Sfortunatamente, però, uno stato intermedio non vuole sempre essere soddisfatti, ma lotta per le dimensioni, e allora sarebbero stati in pericolo, come dimostrarono i primi tentativi di espansione di Venezia, ma no di Pisa, Genova, o Amalfi. Avvertì abilmente una superpotenza di non invadere la libertà di Venezia. Non rompere con una repubblica potente se il vantaggio non è grande e la vittoria è certa. L’amore per la libertà in loro è così intenso e così profondamente radicato che è quasi impossibile sradicarlo. L’impresa e il progetto di un principi muoiono col principe. Il pensiero e la deliberazione di una città libera sono quasi immortali. Dopo questo prestito di Machiavelli) anche la Casa d'Asburgo ottenne [Calderini, “Discorsi sopra la ragion di stato di B.) Principe. Ma nella repubblicha è maggior vita, maggior odio, più desiderio di vendetta; nè gli lascia nè può lasciare riposare la memoria dell'antica libertà], perché la grandezza dei suoi principi è la ricompensa della loro eccezionale pietà. Soprattutto, non rompere colla religione, insegna, sarebbe sempre apparsa senza Dio e tuttavia non sarebbe stata di alcuna utilità. Milano, Firenze, Napoli e Venezia spendano solo molto nelle loro guerre colla religione e non ne beneficiano. La co-incidenza di interessi ecclesiastici e reali politici, su cui si basa un sistema, e quindi anche un elemento centrale della sua dottrina della ragione di stato. Vai colla religione e stai bene, è il loro scopo. Consiglia al principe, prima di ogni consultazione nel consiglio di stato, di discutere la questione con la sua coscienza. Eppure e abbastanza mondano ed esperto da sapere che non e sempre giusto tra la saggezza mondana e la pietà. Per quanto gentilmente e misurato puo descrivere l'essenza della vera ragion d'essere e cercare di adattarla alle esigenze della morale, quando guarda le cose negli occhi, non puo nascondersi che la durezza cristallina nucleo di ogni azione politica [Come già aveva insegnato Machiavelli, e l'interesse egoistico del principe o l’interesse colletivo dello stato italiano. Considera cosa scontata che nella deliberazione del principe il suo interesse è ciò che supera ogni considerazione. Ed è per questo che non ci si può fidare dell'amicizia, della parentela, dell'alleanza, di qualsiasi altro legame, se così non è anche questo ha gli interessi di coloro con i quali si negozia come fondamento. Infine mette francamente che “ragione di stato” e “interesse colletivo del stato” sono essenzialmente la stessa cosa. Il principe si orienta nell’amicizia e nell’inimicizie secondo quanto vi sono piatti che sono naturalmente sgradevoli, resi appetibili dal condimento che dà loro la cuoca, per cui tende, naturalmente senza affetto, da una parte o dall'altra, a seconda dell'interesse del suo animo e preparano il suo affetto, perché in fondo la ragione di stato è poco altro che ragione d'interesse. Aggiunte grasso alla sua ragion di stato. Venezia] Una riflessione più profonda avrebbe dovuto sviarlo dall'armonia della ragione dello stato italiano e dell’interesse dello stato italiano e del dovere etico e religioso che insegna in modo così untuoso e coinvolgerlo in tutti i tipi di problemi di visione del mondo che non erano ancora maturi per il pensiero del suo volta. Evita ciò, come ha fatto lo statista pratico di tutti i tempi, e si limita a esortare il principe a non stabilire un senso di stato che contraddirebbe la morale, come un altare contro l'altro. Alla fine del suo saggio si è persino mosso per condannare la politica di interesse in generale. Spiega che il principe non puo più realizzare grandi imprese comune ad altro principe perché la differenza dei interessi li dividono troppo. Ma nei tempi eroici della repubblica romana ci si poteva unire senza altro interesse che quello della gloria di Roma. Gl’imperatori greci ostacolano i crociati. Qual'era il risultato? I barbari goti e longobardi prima cacciarono i nostri dall'Asia e poi si sottomisero ai Greci. Ecco il frutto della politica. In un saggio successivo attribuisce alla stessa causa anche il declino della repubblica dei franchi. Poiché il regno franco (l’antica Gallia) fa amicizia con turchi e ugonotti, la fede si allentò, perché se si attribuisce ogni cosa a una “ragion di stato irragionevole” e animale, si scioglie il vincolo dei animi e l'unione del popolo.] La filosofia di Botero puo quindi essere usata come un buon breviario per la politi servire i confessori cattolici. Predica la sottomissione del proprio interesse alla gloria ed al interesse colletivo, si predica ancora, cosa non sempre del tutto vera, l'armonia del proprio interesse con l'onore patrio, e infine, quando si arriva al punto, si alza le spalle, a volte lamentando la vittoria del proprio interesse su ogni altra forza della vita. Ma queste rotture e contraddizioni riflettevano esattamente la pratica politica dei tribunali contro-riformisti. Uno dei papi stesso, Urbano VIII, la loro questa seduzione in tempi successivi [Le relazioni universali] [Vedi sotto per un esempio di mettere gli interessi dello stato al di sopra degli interessi della chiesa e di cadere nelle braccia delle potenze cattoliche nella loro lotta contro Gustavo Adolfo.] Non solo la tradizione ecclesiastica, ma anche umanistica impedì a B. di ampliare il suo insegnamento con un senso coerente della realtà e puramente empiricamente. Ha preso i problemi e i mezzi di governo su larga scala. Comincio dagli scrittori antichi senza chiedermi se siano applicabili alle condizioni moderne.] Certo, anche quelli più grandi di lui, Machiavelli e Bodino, non si sono comportati diversamente. Questo metodo umanistico convenzionale si basa non solo sulla venerazione che l'uomo dedica all'antichità, ma anche sulla tradizionale concezione dogmatica della storia romana, che vede simili e quindi sempre ricorrenti tutti gli eventi storici e le forme di stato romano e di vita che in essi emergevano. Botero sa quindi nominare la migliore e più alta fonte di saggezza politica, non la propria esperienza, che è sempre limitata, né le informazioni dei contemporanei, ma la storia di Roma, perché questa abbraccia l'intera vita del mondo. Così Botero vedevano la storia della Roma antica come un unico insieme di esempi, da cui si estrae una massima universalmente valida di governo, per cui una esperienze molto relativa viene poi ingenuamente generalizzata. Non mancava l'interesse per le differenze dei soggetti o individui all'interno del mondo reale dello stato italiano in chi visse. Gli autori delle relazioni veneziane fecero di tutto per informare in modo affidabile i loro padroni su di loro, e Botero cerca di soddisfare la stessa esigenza attraverso uno studio su larga scala dello statio romano che pubblica con il titolo di “Le relazioni universali”. Anche qui promise in procinto di agire sulle cause della grandezza e del pool dei principi più potenti, ma rimase bloccato nella storia puramente statistica e contemporanea e [Cfr. in particolare il libro 6 della Ragione di stato sui mezzi di difesa contro i nemici stranieri. Gioda pubblica la quinta parte non stampata dell'opera nella sua biografia di Botero] di solito si accontenta di informazioni reali su forme di governo, finanze, eserciti e rapporti con il principe vicino. Non arriva ancora aa una descrizione più nitida dei vari sistemi e interessi politici. Anche il più importante di tutto questo gruppo che lavoa  alla dottrina della ragione di stato, Boccalini non lo fece ancora. Ma lui sporge lontano da lei attraverso il fuoco personale della vita che brilla attraverso la sua filosofia politica. I problemi che lo preoccupavano e le risposte che dava non erano poi così diverse da quelle di Botero e dei suoi compagni. Ma mentre si sono appiattiti a una convenzione superficiale in questi, sono diventati un'esperienza vera e appassionata e per lui solo in questo modo svilupparono il loro pieno contenuto storico. Lo spirito del vero Rinascimento e di Machiavelli rivive in lui, ma si sviluppò in uno spirito irrequieto e commovente Barocco. Ai suoi contemporanei apparve principalmente come un beffardo estremamente divertente, come un maestro dell'ironia e della satira, che guarda sopra il collo e smascherava senza pietà tutte le discipline umanistiche. Ma già qui si rivela a coloro che vedeno dopo di Botero lo sfondo più profondo della sua filosofia politica. DE IVRE CIVILIS. CICERONE (si veda) IN ARTEM REDACTO EXERCITATIO SCRIPSIT ILLVSTRIS IVii^^^P^LTOlArM ORDINIS TORITATE PRAESIDE D. CHRIST. GOTTL. HAYBOLDO SVPREMÆ CVRIÆ PROVINCIALIS ADSESSORE, IVRIS SAXONICI PROFESSORE PVBL. ORDIN. ACAD. ELECT. MOGVNT. SCIENTIAR VTILIVM SODALI. AD DISPVTANDViM PROPOSVIT ANNES GOTTHELF i^ORNEJVIANNVS   i I.VBENA LIPSIÆ EX GFFIG^IA SAALBAGHIA DE IVRE CIVILI A M. TVLLIO CICERONE IN ARTEM REDACTO  EXERCITATIO SCRIPSIT ILLVSTRIS IVi^^B^LTOI^M ORDIXIS   ;toritate  PRAESIDE D. CHRIST. GOTTL, HAVBOLDO   SVPRKMAE CVRIAE PROVIXCIALIS ADSESSORE, IVRIS SAXOXICI  PROFESSORE PVBL. ORDIN. ACAD. ELECT. MOGVNT. SCIEXTIAR   VTILIVM SODALI  A. D. Vr. INI. OCT. A. C. cI^LoCCLXXXXVXI  AD DISPVTAXD\'M PROi^OSVIT L V H E N A - t. V Sta T V S   ilOANNES GOTTHELF M^RNEMANNVS   L I P'S I A E  EX OFFICiNA SAALDACHIA I R O AMPLISSIMO ATQVE CONSVLTISSIMO   «lOANNI CHRISTOPHORO  HORNEMANNO * rf   ' PARENTI OPTIM O NEC NON  VIRO ILLVSTRI ET AMPLISSIMO B. SERENISSIMO DVCI SAXO VINARIENSI IN SVPREMO SENATV  ECCLESIASTICO A CONSILUS ET ILLVSTRIS QVOD ^VINARIAE   FLORET GYMNASII DIRECTORI PRÆCEPTORI OMNI PIETATIS CVLTV PROSEQTENDO HOCCE QVIDQVID EST LITTERARH MVNERK OBSEQVII £T OBSERVANTIÆ MONIMENTVM AVGTO R -DE IVRE CIVILI. CICERONE (si veda) fi o^^f  IN ARTEM REDACTO ^ "btinuit haec fempet vxtOL do£^os honiaes constans opinio, atque etiam nunc in omnium, qui dehis rebus optime existimare pofTunt, penitus inhaeret animis., quidquid viiquafti iit poUtiorum disciplinarum, nuUis aliis, quam Romanorum libris ac litteris contineri, nec vllam omnino efl*e artem ^que  icientiam, cui non iniignis lux ex veterum fcriptis adfundatur.  Elgo quidem, quo faepius lego praeftantiHimos veterum libros, eo  magis, quam iam dudum perfuafam mihihabui, iententiam confirmatam video, nuliam reperiri difciplinam, «ui maiora fubfidia  fuppeditet veterum fcriptorum le£Ho, quam iuris ciuilis fcientiam '),  quæ tota fere ab antiquitatis Romanæ cognitione proficifcttor, nec  vllum vmquam intei: omnes, quos tulit Latium, excellentiam ingenio- De commodis, (}ua£ ex adfidua auAarum clafficorum ledione InAudium  iuris ciuilis redundant, gcneracimdixerunt Fridl Placnerus in Praef. fuper  vt Uitate leffienis au^trum c/affictrtm im hure ciuili., I. Fr. Groneuii Okfer-  va$t. Lipf. 1755. edic. prseminar et Ge. Frid. Kraufius in OiC de fraefiiiis  «ufin-u^f veterum in explicand* iitrt fraefmim ^mant, Vit^inb.   r- . ''geriiorum /CTiptores M. T. CICERONE brie exftitifle vberldrem, in quo tot  tamque praeclara de iure litteris conngnata reperiantur. Euoluaa  enim, quaefo, diuini illius au£loris fcripta, non orationes folum, -<#  fed illa etiam, quibus artem dicendi tradit vel philofophic^tra^at,  et reperies in fingulis ipfius libris, ne dicam in iinguiis fere capiti-  bus, innumera iuris fcientiae vefligia, non leuiter illa adumbrata, sed manifefta ac penitus expreifa *). ludae mehercule molis volu-  men confcribendum eflet, (i quis omnia, quae ad iurifprudentiam  fpe£lant, ex CICERONE coUigere vellet atque illuftrare Quae quum  ita (int, haud fcio, an operae pretium fa£luri iimus, ii, qunm commode nobis obtulit et de litterulis noilris quaedam, qualiacumque  iint, diilerendi (hidiorum noftrorum ratio, occaiione ita vtamur,  vt Ciceronis iurisprudentiam paullo copioiius explanemus, et, quot quantaque ad ius ciuile in artem redigendum ipfe ftudia contulerit,  quantum in riobis iitum efl;, pertra£lemus. Sed valde pertrmefco,  ne quis hifce conipe£Hs alto fupercilio ac vultu magna minanti mihi  ..-:Si quis flty cui non facis ponderis habere videacur hæc mea oratio, age  lo. Aug. Hachium, cuius merica de hiAuria iuris Romani atque eleganriori  iurisprudentia nufla vmquam delebir dies, eum igirur excircmus, vr» quae  modo diximus, hls audoritatem tribuat. Nam in WJf. iurifpr. Rom. Stockmanni omnibus ius Romanum cum laude percepturis adHduam iibrorum Tullianorum le^ionem vcl idro commendauir,  quod in aliis veteribus au6loribus tot tantxeque veteris iuris reliquiae» vcl  potius copiæ, quantæ in hoc vno, haud reperiantur. lam olim Franc. Balduinus (in Epift. de opt. iur. doe. et difc. rat. ad studiosam iuuentutem confcriptti et praemifla Eius Catecbefi iuris p. m. 46.) tantuiQ   otii fibi optauit, vt lurisprudentiam Ciceronianam colligere, et eam, vci inftituerat, in locos rommunes digerere pofTet; nihii cnim dignius Rotnano   iure, nikil ca tdccfliouc graciu; cflc poiTc.   r^ji ' 'conSsfHmoecHnt : col n6n di£iusTl7!fts? Me qufdetn nofi jfu^i laiil  s magnis viris fumnn cum laudehuic &rgumento nau^tam efTe ope*  W .mck 4), coniilio tamen multum haud dubie diuerfo 4ib e6, quod no^  bispropoiitum e^y ita, vt negotium noftrum paucis certe etfere obiter antehac tmtatum effe^ abfque adrogantia adfirmemus.  Omnes enim, quofcumque infpiciendi perluflrandique copi& .  nobis USoi erat»^in eo maxime elaborarunt> vt oftenderent, G-   Vid. Anr. Scbultlagil Or./4r imrifpntdentia Ciceremis^ calci fubiefta Dj^//.   ^:^ Fr«n«qa. 170». 4. ian^m cditarum» ct recufa in OpufcuKs ad bijitritm imrii   xx. ftrtinentibust a lo. Lud. Vhlio colleAfs (Halae)  fqq. Henr. Mtxi.\ Keftneri Difl*. Cicer» Iurec^nfuttus in Tr. de Officiis. Rinrelii .   Uenrici Brokes DiflT de Cieerne iuris ciuilis tejy »c interpretet fpecistim d». Cicerene ICt9. Vitemb. ijjg. 4. Eiufd. Diff. de Cicerone iuris ciu. trfiesc-   *\ inttrprete t fpeciatim in fuis de Inuentiene Ithris. ibi<L 1739.4. Efafd. DiiC   de Cicerone iuris viu. tffle ae intei^pretep fpeciatim i» primo de erattre iibri   m cap. I  3g. ibid- . Henrici Conftantini Cra< Specimen iurifprmdentiae Ciceronianae f. ^iceronem iujiam pro A. Caecina cauffam dixijje. L. B.   1769. lo. Olivier Diatr. de iurifprudentia Ciceronis; in £i. Ciuiiis doQrinae   anaiffi pbilofopbica (Rom.) P* . lof. Lud. Em. Puttmaimi   Obf. de vtHitate e leStione fcriptorum M. 'Tuilii Ciceronis phraecipueque eratio-   num TuiJianarum in difciplina iurit erimina/is capienda ; in Ei. M^cellan. c 19. Quibus addcndi funt» qaos Ciceronianae eniditionis praeconet magno   numero recenfct largiflimus eiufmodi fcriptorum promus condus lo. Ge.   MeufcUus Vir III., in BibHotb. Hifi.Multa   qaoque er praedara diuerfls in locis dc Tulliana iuris fcientia protulic   Conyers Middleton in praeclaro opere, cui tituius eft: Hijiory of tbe Lifd   ' of M.T. CicerO' London 4. quodque in vernaculam linguam tranftalit Seidelius. (Gedani) At ilfud miratus fum, qui fa^um fit,   quod in eo capite, quo de Ciceronis doflrina ct erudicione - fq. verf. Seidel.) ^bferuauit pluriroa lcvhi digniflima auftor elegan-   tiffifflu^ ne verbulum quidcoi dixcric de cius i)uis fcicncia. oeronem in iure non futfTe hofpitem » vel plura ac praeclara in eo  reperiri, quae ad ius Romanum expiicandum inprimis faciunt; illam vero quaeflionem, quot quantaquede iure ciuili ad difciplina e dignitatem euehendo eius merita exdant, vel iicco pede tran(ilierunt,  vel ieui tantum bracchio pertralanint. Quae quum ita fint, nuUus  profe^o dubito, quin nos non prorfus inanem in hac quaeftione  pertra^anda operam infumturi ilmus. Quod quidem ii cognoue-  rimus, fieri foriitan potefl, vt, quaepingui, quod aiunt, Minerua  adumbrauimus lineamenta iatius aliquando dedgnemus, et quantum ad vniuerfam iurifprudentiam augendam et in aitius promo«  vendam contulerit Gcero, copiodus exponamus. Quod vero ad  hafce (ludiorum meorum pnmitias adtinet, eas omnium, qut Ittteris fauent, quibufue et leuia aut tenuia haud difplicent, oculis lu-  benter fubmitto ac fpefn foueQ certi(Timam, fore, vt aequi exifli-  natores et erga iuuenis mode/lam imbecillitatem indulgentes lcri-  ptiuaculae coaiilium Hnt refpe^uri.  A dgrcdienti autcm mihi hunc locum animus hon eff adnm agree et putida ditigcntia Arpinatis vitam confcribere; quod prorfus  cft ab inftituto meo aRenura. Id tantum adfequi voto, quod femh  per niihi in fummos homines ac fummis ingeniis praeditos intnenti coniidierandum efle vifum eff, vt ex qnibufdam quafi dcHneamentis', quo fiicrit ille a natura fa^s ingenio, oftendam, ct, quod poffini  inueftigem, quibus initiis ac fandamcntis haec tanta rurrfprudenr.  tiae facultas excitata fit, quibus præfidiis adiutus, qua ria ac rtt-  tione indu^us ad id legitimae fcientiae faftigiura penetrauerit. Iti  enim fiet, vt, quo diRgentius haec cdnffderemusr ac perpendamus  fingula, eo ditucidius adpareat, quantum ad artem noftram augeny  dam et ampKficandam contuterit atque adeo conferre potuerit. Inter omnes fere populos maximam curam conftat educanda  i^eris adhibuiffe Romanos. ProDe enim gnari, quantum iiiter-  ^, quantunai^|EEfemomenti habeat tenelios adhuc animos veluti ce»  reos fingere et ad bona omnia^conformare, puerilem praecipue  aetatem cura fua amplexi funt, et id in primis ipedarunt^ vt fincera  atque integra vniufcuiufque natura toto ftatim peiQore a di ipe r et ar-  tes honeftas, et, ad quod maiora haberet adiumenta, in eo mice  eiaboraret. Eodem modo TuHium noftmm inftitutum fuifte, vel  ex eo iam colligi poteft, quod eius pater, qui, quum eftet infirma -  valetudine, in Arpinati villa remotus a proceUis reipublicae aetatem Cf. TACITO Diai. de 6raf, a». Wz tem«ge^t inlttteris, <]^dquid dabatur otii, id f«re4ii hoe -enifM  conrumrerit ^). lam a primis, vt Graeci dicunt, vnguiculis, iis,  quaeL. Graflb placebarit, artibuset ab iis do£loribus, quibus ille  vtebatur^ eruditus 7) elementa iitterarum celeriter percepit, tan--  tumgue adtigit do^rinae, quantum praeftantidmio quifque ingenio  praeditus prima illa puerili inftitutione potuiffet. Ac fi verum eft,  quod fafepius prodltum legimus et ipfi obferuauimus quidquid suscipias imprimere, id facile recipere teneros inuenum animos, noa  eft, quod dubitemus, quin puerulo iam amor quidam iingularis ear  rum litterarum, quibus ftudia forenfia aluntur, infitus fuerih  Confideret enim aliquis eius ingenium a fimilitudine paterni haud  abhorrens, ponat fibi ob oculos aui magiftratum fumma cum laude  gerentis exemplum 8^, expendat educationem Crafli, quem eloquentium iurifperitiifimum vocare Cicero ipfe 9) non dedignatus  cft, arbitratu inftitutam. Quae fi quis fingulatim percenfeat, con-  iefturain noftram haud vano niti argumento, inficias fane ire non  poterit. £x vmbratili ac dAneftiCa difciplina Romam fecontulit,  eo con^lio, vt mirificum et ad omnia fumma tutum ingenium,  quod in vnius vrbis, quae naibentem ^remio et (inu fuo exceperat^  gyrum fe compellinon fuftinebat, maiorem inueni^ret aliquem cam-  pum, in quem excurreret, roaius, in quo Jfpeilaretar, theatrum.  Incidit quidem tunc temporis in funeftum ac perturbatum reipubli-  cae ftatiun, quo vrbs, imperii domicilium, variis fa^lionibus, servire 6) de leg. 8» X. de prst. i, i. Ep. ad Dim, if, 4.  de ttrmt. 3, l.   t) de leg. a, i. }, i6. de wat. fl, 6<. •  9) Brut. 1%. vi» phrictis, iHbortbat, emmli adlitttt«»Tnrce amnitnti «doer-  tfts, felix vere et anreum feculiim, quo omnis Græciæ {apientta  tam feuera lege excolebatur, vt, quod ibi fuerat exercitatio ingenii,  liic in femen conuerteretur publicae vtilitatis '<>).Quam ob reiii dolefcentes prirots annis Graecis iitteris dare et grammatico^  rhetores, phildfophos Graecos audire folebant "). Quum eoim ve-  teres ea, quam Plato iam fbuerat, imbuti efTertt opinione, omneni  ingenuarum artium do^inam Vno quodam focietatis vincuio conti-  n'eri **), nihil profedo prius neque antiquius habuerunt, quam vt  iuuenes, iiue ad rem militarrai, iiue ad iuris fcienttam, iiue id  eloquentiae ftudium fefe adplicarent, id non fblum agereot, fiad  omnem etiam liberalis difciplinae orbem emetirentur. Adeam quo-  <|ue^fententiam (ludiorum fuonun rationem adcommodauit Gcero ;  de quo fi quis dixerit, tanto eum ingenio fuifle, vt, quaecunque  effent in litteramm cognitione pofita, intelligentia comprehende-  rit, fi quis commemorauerit^ tanta eum induftria exfMtifk, vt,  quidquid librosum philofophi Graeci reliquiflent, qui in aliqUo  fiumero haberentur, qmdquid oratores, quidquid hiflorici iitteris coniignaflent, quidquid.cecinilTent poetae, ideuoluerit ac fhidiofe  legerit, ii quis adfemerit, antiquitatis memori^m paene omnem,  maximarum gentiura ac nationum res geftas cognitas eum habuiffe,   ' lo) Cf. Seneca mPrae/. L. i. Controu. nQtiidquid, Inquic, Romana facundia  habet» quod infolenti Graeciae auc opponac aut praeferac, circa Cicerpnem  effloruic: omnia ingenia, quae iucem flndiis nollris adtuleruflt, tuncnaca  Bfut. . dfg off. I, I. Sueton. de el. rbet. i. et ^* riv>i^*   hicy inquam, qui omma haec illi Tindicare non dubitatet, nimias  lorfitan laudum TuUianariun videretur eSe buccinator. Nemo Tero Cicesonem adtigit, qui dubitare, quin ita fit, vUo modo poC-  £t '3). In primis vero in philofophiae (ludio, non eft £aciie di^hi^  quantum excelUierit '4); quani non a limine, vt dicitur,. falutauiti  fad ad intima eiufdera cubilia penetrauit, et vnamquamque eius par-  %em ita adcurate diiigenterque perluilraiut, vt Ulos, qui in vna  phiiofophia quafi tabernaculum vitae {iiae coUocauerant,^ fere superaret.  Legatnr lac. Periaonii Orttib de deeronts eruditione et indii/fria (Frane^a.   l6%i.) p. l^ {qq. ^ ii. -Non fe e porricu Zenonif, atit Lyceo Arlftoteir», lat liortis Epicuri, fcd   cxAcadcmiae fpMJis maxime exiiHie dicit Or. |. Ep.adDiy. 1,9. Nempe .,Acadcinicae philofophiae ezat, de ooinibus zebus in vtranque partem difpu-   tare, quod ad forcnfcm etoquentiam fane valebat quam plurimum, nequc / ad angufte ec tcnurter, ftd cleganccr, copiofe ct ornate. Sed philofophiam   f^/ aon folum tamquam eloquentiae miniftram amptexus *eft, quae arma ipfi   »r«, iuppcditarc poflcCt quibus aduerfarios, hifce fubfidiis deftitucos,. pEoftcrncnt,.' valeret, vcrum etiam ad ituifprudentiac Audium tranilulit, vt haec, philo-   Ibphiae opcra fubjeuata, paullo magis fe commoucrct, ec tamquam carncm, fuccnm, iaaguinem coioremque adciperet. Cuius focietatis illu/Vre arga« lentum ipfe exftare voluit eo loce {de Itg. i, (.), vbi non a psactoris ediiffco»   Bcquc a XII tabulis, fed penitus ex intima philofephia hauriendam iuris   difciplinam putat. Qycm autem morcm dilFcrendi Socraticum in omnibus libris fequutus eft, eumdem quoque jn iuris fcientia adfiibuit. Vbf-   cumque cnim de iuris quaeftionibus vel controvcrfiis fermo eft, ab vna   parte fententias, et quibus nituntur rationes fumma arte difponit, his vero   jka difpofftis, contratias opiniones earumque argumenta ita tn aciem educit»   vt quiuis ex earum coniliftu, quid in vtraque parte minus firmum, quid   verifimiltus (ir, facile intelligere pollit. Ci.de I»u. s, a Orut. Tart. 14.   cc 34. Plura dtbunt, qui de philofophia Doftri ex iolUcuto coounentati  .li-  •^ji-:  rar^. Omnibus lis itaque do^lrims, quibus aetas pilerilts inleiy  imari adhumanitatemlblet, -atque omnium ik)narum artium ormi^ v  mentis iitflrudus in forum, tamquam in ifAcra ac puluerem, Mu*  €txis eft, rt eius auditor efTet et fedator iu^eiorum. IVes Tiimiruni  Hs temp6ribus artes fuere, qwie ad furoma quaeque viam muniebanl^^  ars dicendt, iuris fctentia atque arma ^i). Ek quibus -quas ^potiifi*,  mum amplexus fit nofter, facile ^uhns potf ft comedura adfequi',  qui eius mentem penitus introfpeut. Qunm enim-omnes tFahaiiiur' -  iandis ftudio, quid mirum, H Qcero, qui, quum amore gioriaenimis :-  acri fortafle neque proHus inhonefto ftagraret} nihai invtta ezpe*. tendumputabat, ntd quod||0et cmn laude et cum dignitate coniua*. Chim, eumdem, quem optimi ac nobilHnmi, petere curfum laudts,  atque in iis elaborare yeiiet ac deiudare, quibus maxima expofita erant vel ad gratiam vel ad opes vel ad dignttatem praemift, quaeque in omni libero populo femper fleruerunt fefnperque dominatae  funt "'^). Aiia qnoque ratio tn retpuMicae ilatu ac temporibus,  quaeillum exceperunt, quaerenda «ft. . QuaeqHtdem^ dUig^ter  tnfpidamus, tnuememus, i^mpubiioam Romanam tunctemporis . -ciuiH- "  Xfunt, Gautier de Siberc in Dlatr. cui litulus: Examen de U PblUftftU d«  '^'?'Ciciront inferta AUm. deVAemd. d. hfcr. ettn ^ians  ^; '.^ C Meinc»rfius, VirlU., inOr. degantiffim; ac dodi/fimc fcripta de pbtlefitphis  ^^ Cicerenii eiufque in vniuerfam pbilofopbitm meutis^ quae exibt in Opuftc. . '  pbilofophlcis varii argumenti (Lipf.). Add. Middletoni  /. /. T. 11 II. p. 3)o. fq. ex verf. SeideU  Xxji) BKttf^4s. Cf. quae egrcjie, vt oronia^ hanc in rem «bieruauic Cbr. Gtr>  viuf. Vir Celeb., ia den pbilofopb. Anmerhungen itnd Abbandlungen zu Ciee- •' r#V BUcbern vn den Pflicbteh T. f . p. aa j  fim. 41. ^ro Afor.<t. <Aj;^a, 19. .i;^ *v.-v^*^ >^^f'<jj^ ?&?<,  m -   ciuilibus di^Hdik ac bellis mirum in modum conquafTatam fuiflc et  Ubefa£Utara. Ac primum quidem Gracchanae Druiianaeque atque  Apuleiae feditiones rempublicam conturbauere, quibus ea femina  fparfa funt, vnde bellorum ciuilium, Sullani, Mariani atque Cinatr  oi formidolofa fufeitata eil flamma, quae ciuium fanguine reftiob  guebatur. In tantis tenebris atque parietinis reipublicae omnia bo^  oarum artium fludia iiluerunt. Forum moeilum etvaftatum, muta  i^tque elinguis curia, fides venalis, iudicia diflbluta, perdita, num*  maria. Sed non dilatabo orationem meam ; etenim poffet efTe infinita, a mihi liberet commemorare iiios turbines, illas procellas  ac ciuiles difleniiones, quibus fatis ^^nter deplorandis alicuius  eorum, qui tunc occubuerunt opus eflet ingenio. Ad CICERONE vnde deflexa efl noflra oratio, reuertamur. Qui quidem quiim omnia  haec adfpiceret, quid mirum, fl eius animus, veterum ie^ione  innutritus, ac fortiflimorum virorura, quoruiQ imagines et ad intuendum et ad imitandumi expreflas reliquerunt et Graeci et Romani fcriptores, exemplis incitatus eo adduceretur, vt omnes curas,  omnes cogitationes, omnes vigilias in eo collocandas eflTe putaret,  vt flrenuiflimus iibertatis vindex, ^umanitatis acerrimus propugna-  tor, iufliflimus cauflarum patronus, ii4|^roborum adcufator ai|da-  cifHmus atque fortiflimus infontium defenfor euaderet. Nihil enim  pulcrius, nihil honeflius, nihil dignius cogitari pofle putabat,  4)uam improbos adcufare et miferos calamitofofque defendere ^7).  Quem quidem finem flbi propofltum quo plenius adfequeretur, in   Diuintt. in Caecil. s, so. ai. PbiUpp. i, }. pr» ClMeni.%7, lo prinus vero  lc^u digiuffifflus cft locu^ qui cxftat i^ O^ a, -"^0 ;i     fo^Xeiiiikpvit ^^m^^S>tt»ttm^M^6per9my vt et trtem dicendt «| v  iuris icientinin, iiiH} qur tegttima defenfio rel adcufatto, in foro tfinr|  ilituenda, nuUo modo fuccedere poterat, ar^flSKio vtnculo eoniuii^  gtoret ^^), Quam ob rem, neXhemidis&cra illotis mantbus adttQ#;  geret, Mtm 9 paruis leges decenrairales» a quibus, tamqqam pobU«§  pTiuatiqueiurisfonte, iioifprudenttae ftudium aufpicahdum pufetfbant vetetes, edidieit i9), atquein fcholis rbeUvuin» vt tam ih dttiTl  fendendo, quam ui adcufando ejcerctt:«tur, fumma induftria M^   •  l| I I I I I I III lll# -;. /" ig) DHliiifta eraht iit tempbribtts ihter fe ittrirconfs!r»ram ct pttronoKMi^V  •^fi^' mnoi»-, qmmquam haud decranr» qui Ttnim<)u« <umma otm 1^4c &^ilii^^'  .| rcnt, vcluti }A. Porcius Cato (^Er «r^/. 1, ]7» ct K.lJ.)* P- Crafliis DtueaO^;;  ' . ar««. I, 37. ^rc/. 36.) i Q. Mucius Scaeuola pontifex (BrM. |9. et 40.), h,  T CraiTus (2?r»/. jg. 39. 40.) etSeruius Sulpicius (ffrivr. ^i.ec^a.). Noftmrt  'ft*" Vero Vtnmqoe perfonam pari com fiutdc faftiaoiffe, qdean ad modoa miur*  •$^.,fi|m^i/u4:de oratore diuinum opus ioquicur, ia tf^^^iaih^ ^ngnthr»^^  locorum» vbi iis, qui ^crfeflt oracorct ellj: VBUiK»lPnt Gp^tUmem cll^^-  necCiuriam ipfe prbfefTus cfl, tcftimonlis aDuadc ihtclligitur. Vid. md  ^ HerHm. u li. de hutnt. i, f. Ormt. Pitrt. «t. (it Or. t, $» 6. %. 14. 41.  >^. Or, |. 41. 43. Brut. Hinc accrrtaic perftrinxic cauilanim patrenos« qw  t\ huc^tque iiliic ofagrui cum cacerua in foro voJitareqc, praefidium cUeQC»i'  bus atque opem amicis et ctitnAis prope ciuibus lucem ingenii et confilii  •(^' ftti porrigerent, qui vero ignari plane legum in maiorum inftitutis -faacfit»*^  rJe;ii^8C,'ir quaHeiure Incidcrct"dtt6itacio, ad ICtoram prudenciam anffSi  geren^ a quibus liaflas ameiuatis adciperentf qnas oraeeriis kccrtis et virU'  A' busLtorqttcreiu: Ttpic 17. de Orat. i, {7. Quac ICti ct oratoris offici»  .'^: quamquam Corn, van BfnJcershoelc Oiffi iar. R»n$. 7, 6. Aib Impcratoribua  >«».. coniund» fuiff^ iudicat : tamcn .contrarium, de qno cx Qjuinftil. fnfii.Ormt»'  la* 3. nec non-Ittucacl. 7«4af^ ciniqne Scholiaftk conftaro potcrar, ftlidi»  racionlbns euindt lo.Guil. Hoftmannus in Prmef' Aegitlii Menmgii AniHWit^'  •: ti^s intitciuiUtprmemiffm, Cf. Schultingii Qr. M: p. J4f, > ^n  19) de teg. a, aj. Liu. J, J4. Tactt. .«^. J, aj. ' i •Mf^< Ihoque ftudio verfatus «ft >•). PoftiBaquam rero in foram ^eduBtit  erat, iuxta prifcum Romanorum morem ad Q, Mucium ScMuoIam  augurem, Timm i^s ciuilis intelligentia atque "omni prudentiae  genere confpicumn fe contulit, quem fenem iuvtenis ita' fe^Htus eft,  vt, quoad poftet, abeius latere'nunrquam decederet, «t^ quae itb eo  prudenter diiputata eftent, fedulo menuMiae mandaret omnta ^>)i'  (I.UO mortuo fe ad^. Mucium Seaeuolam pontificem adplicuit,  ^i quum ea aetate iurifperitorum elequenci(SmiK putaretur ^%  Tullium in primis exemplo fuoexcitafte videtur, vt eloquentlam cum  iuris fcientia coniungerei, eamque indotatam atque incomitatam  yerborum dote locupletaret et 4}rnaret *3). Magni ifti viri, in  duorum familia iupifprudentiae laus erat hereditaria, et er^quorum  ludo, tamquam ex equo Troiano, multi prodierunt lurecorifulti,  guam(}uam nemini fe {id docendum dabant, domi tamen in hemicy-  dio fedentes aeque ac tranfuerfo foro obambulaotes admittebant  adolefcentes difc^wii eupidos, vt, quid conMentibus refj)0nde-*  rent, quas aQiones, exceptiones et cautiones in quauis caufta com-  jnendarent, quibufque rationibus in his omnibus vterentur, .audi-  fent, eaque omnia libi in futuros vAis enotarent ^4). Ificredibi-  lis tamen^quaedam ingeniij quod (ibiplurima deberet, magnitudo . 4ion     jU) Brut. 36. et 89. A Amick. u quem ad locum c£ Wetzd. ^p. iif. ' Plu«  ''tarch- ia vks Cu-.c.J. 4]uum.Ciceroneai PhiloiM Academico operam naua/re  . •^ommemoraneC, haec addk:,i(ta i$ r$t« wtp MetuuB» avSfmtt tvmv troMrtme. xKi ntnfmm/tt tnt ^Mhnu $ts tiix$igim$ rm $oimv .m^$MtT$. •j>'i >^ > ^. a4) ^non magnepewf clefiderauitaherit» iflfeefadiendo lalJdrfiBnrWfia-  duftriam '^), fed ipfa iuriiperitbrum et prudentum de iure ciw^  fcripta etcommentarios percenfuit^ in iifque quum in iuuenili tuqi '  in matura aetate fingukrlem -quamdam iueuttdikatem ae deleflafiqi^',  nem fefe.reperi0e teflatum reliquit *^). Sed non in patrio foltiitt -  iure cognofcendo fubftitit, verumre^am^ quum ftudiorum eat  Athena$, tamquam ad mercafeuram bcmiiru M ar^um, fe con£ert«i|[  actotam fereGraeciam peragraret, omne fuum ftudium in Græcarum legum hiftoria, funmifte prudentiae fonte Tberrimo, nonu*  x^atim Lycurgi, Dracoms et Solonis inftitutis percipiendis peAiil^  i^x iif<}ue, quod iuri Romano explicando maxime inferuiret, d«*'  promfit«7). Qqantum autem iam ineunte aeti^e in iurisibienti»  prpfecerit, luculenter teftantur, quos de inuentione fcripfit admodum adolefcens iibros, atque orationes pro Quin^o et Sex. Roficio"  Amerino habitae ^s), in quibus tot tantaque furgentis ac creicentis  in immenfum ingenii documenta deprehendebantur, vt qt|iuit fa- -  cile poffet iudicare, vnum e fummis viris euafunim illum, vel ta-  lem potius f uturum» cuius iimilem vix yUa praeteritorum feculo-  rum aetas tulitTet. Cicero aeai (mffe.avrtitSaxrov ac propria vimice et Stutniri ad taoeum fa-,^\,.yftigi\>m penctraaifle, egregie me docuerac S^ettigfrust cuiiis futnmi vici pi»,,i^aieinoria numciuam exanimo diicedet meo» la Pr«iMjUtu tui Uctm Ck. m .  Catiih. }, 8. ». (Budiflac 1791 J p. 17^^ s-:i,   « Jt Ortt. ii 43« 44- ^' P'»' «» 4- t .'l aj) C£|^^ddIetoa. /. /.. Atcamen iam antc iter in Graecian   .^,^fiircd|pi plurimas Graecotum ieges cogi^itas irabuine Tullium, patetes   libris de inuentione, in quibus nulta» quae »pud Craecos vigeban^ infU-   ^ tuta recenfet, vt i, }}. 2, a). ii. }8.,   •t) ViA. Breuiitriittn vit^e^ m^ionitm ei fcriftQritm Ciceremft pcaeaiflttai B^OB-, tw* «4«. T, L Pv WVI. iq. ;  I^  yxpoluimus {«-o virium noltranim tnodulo, qua via ac ratione  ^-^ iuris peritiam omnino naQus fit CICERONE Quae (i quis rite per-  penderit) quis e(l, qui ambigat, quin Tullius ciuilem prudentiam  non extremis modo labris dcguftarit, verum, qiiemadmodum reli*  quas humaniores difciplinas, ita et hanc ad vnguem caliuerit?  Attamen dici vix potefl, quantopere inter fe eruditi dilTentiant de CICERONE (si veda) iurisprudentia. Fuerunt^'), qui ideo, quod numquam  fe ICtum profeflus fit, nec de iure refponderit, ICtis adnumeran-  dum eflfe praefra€ke negarent ^oy Quomm vero iniquae fubtilitati   iam     aff) Eorura antdigBanus eft Corn. van Byrnkershoek, qui (in Praetermiffis zA L. 2.  $. 4^. D. de O. I. infertis ec ipfms Kynkershoekii Opufcf. T. II. p. 60. f()q.  et Colleflioni Vhiianae p. ag^. fqq.) magna id cgic opera, vc Ciceronem ex  albo ICcorum expungeret. Simite quid iam ante Bynkershoekium in men-  tem venerac Anc. Fabro in Libro de error. pragmat. Dec. 94. err. 9. et  Vberto Folietae de philofopkiae et iuris ciuitis inter fe comparattene Lib. I.  p. i^. Eanidem fenccntiam amplexi fuBt lo. Sam Brunqu?llius in Hijl.iurit  Pcm. c.-iO. ^. 34. et Eu. Otto in Lib. fing. Je vita, fludiis, fcriptis et bonwi'  kitt Seruii Suipicii c. 4. $. g- hic qurdem, vt iarn Craflius Praef. Spec. iuris-  fruHenfiae Cicero». p. II. nvt. 4. fulpicacus e((i herois fui » quem runc lau-  dabat, extoileadi cauila. Cerce idem parum fui memor in Dt({. de perpetua  feminarum tutela c. i. $. 4. (repccica in Differtatt. iur, puH. et priu. p. 199.)  in «aflra eorum, qui cencrarias parccs fequuncur, cranliiiic, vbi^rimas, m-  quic» teneat At. Tullius, difertifjimus inttr lCtos orator, et lufffinter oratores eruditijpmus.**   JO) V't probetur, TuUium non fuiflTe ICtum, pkrumque etiam falent adfcrre,  quod h«^ ihido Pompohius, hid. L.i. de 0. I lurifccnraltomm reccnium  agens, CICERONE filencio praeterieriC) verom tfciam Q. FuHus Olcmis in   Oratio« iam dodHRi fttma^m cfle abiis,^^tti inCiMroatt pa^roeinio fofti-  pieado fitronu cum laude rerfiiti tet, tiettie eft, qoA nelbUf J^.  Suum cuique hac de re iudicmm efto : hic tamen memiiiifl*e <^p4F-  tet eitis, <]uod grauiter dizit Quin^tilianns »)t modiJt$ tt tkttkh  JptSfo imdiao 4U toMtu mrit promuUumdum tjl, nt, quod fMf^ tM-  ^tidUt iMmntnt, quod nom mttUigMt^ figo vero profiteri noii TiltiM^  In eam aninuim meum femper tncUnafle fentcntfam, ftciniutiiii^ aon fuo ttmtum tempore iuris fcientia ioter primos potniffe eeii>-  fivi, ied et iufilprudfiiitiae pomoeria haud parumprottdiife, A^eri» >,; pradoae contn CSecroncai/atne loliginit ^ltOM, ^mc a^d Dioocm GrfT.  jCAi. 46. cxftat» ftttdia Ciceronis expreiTerit, aullaai irero iorif fcientiac,ipca-  ^''Mlioiicm ftcerit. Poiiipottittt «ttteni l L tm fikkcm ICtok nomiiiafle i^illtut,   tnu :Vi Wl «i« jure ec^ponaetuDC, vcl icri|Nts md io* ptriitiwihiii indWM. rnaCi vcl alio qtto<?iinqiM vap^ crtcm ittris ^ofeffi fuat. Ifife cticai aMl>   tot ^ios maximac «uftoriatis iCtot omifit, «i^ mienwriat c«cram -IQte-  ^''rttiik nott «^co adeutaVe dciiacaait; cttlut nej^fli«fltiae «xemi>ta coUcgk   .^- :^ilM^e« inDifl*. ik Pmt^», kijhrku Btietmrim ^fMi^eO^itcbt if)^.). Giiaao   -r ^tpud Caflittm quin nulla planc fidcs ha bfco d< fit« ntaio dtAitabttg qm iot^   Jieet, ex odio, quod crga CICERONE (si veda) Calcnot fiifoepmtj ywictCfai jn aoil-   Yione fttpprimi inagts« <juam connnnari. Cf.^ttte mbtttterant Gml Bttdactts ^tt. D. deh H 7. Gdlf. GfMt  ht^ Tdkvith .fCttrmmVhk 1. c f . Ittioh. Bachooittk md Ami FmM Ctiko,  fTj .frtgmmt. Pcc 94. err. 9. S^ultii^^ii in Or. fiepius Jaudaci, Chrii^   Waechtlerut in Ihterist tecsfime PrMtermiJerttm Bynkersboeiii eid L t. D.  ^ **'^4fe 0. /. fcriptif, ipfiurque Ofnfcc. rsrier. p. 7 »6. fqq. nec non C^Ut&iem   n^^WZnJMr p^ 29^. fqq. inferti^Tffoltesin ti^.deT:teerene iurijeenfmhe $. it.   1' Sf^; 15; CMffittt i»ni^. J)pir^iibrii^. €itt NW h n ioi p. 11. toKfatos /C^ imr.  <H i X^ pb«<«4*/edit; TOCCMM& <||iuMiaci'OM. <4lr iariffrm/i Cie. in €/«////   doarinae amUjfi pHhfefkica p. 97« fqq- « Piittmannus Mi/cell^ I9*pil4l-  3») InfihMt. Orat.X. i.«tte/btntur lucurenttifima ilta «t darifCma, qua6,;qnotic&um<{ue   'Cacerdiuf opera euoluo, noR ime magna animi dele£Utione animad- -terto, ciuilis iuris veftigia, com{»:obant cauflae abeo orataer..^de«   ckraot res in oiHcio geftae. Quis vmquam tot prircanun legum   •4* uui^ pnblico priuatoque nomina, quin et ipla earum verb&.no* ;lus ceBTemauit? quis iilas omnes «xaQius ac preffius ejumiinauit?,^pi» eamm fenfura, rationem, vim dtlucidius adeoque dignitatem   .c!Urius expHcMMt? Quidquid «nim in legibus eflet vel vtile ct   'iiiy^n, vel noxium et iniuftum, nofter peruefligauerat, quaeqise,cz iis probandae improbandaeue efTent, probe perfpexerat. Ac il quis^ qpaerat, an iuris naturaBs praecepta tenoerit, nonne teSes tocupletiffimi praeter praeclarum de hgibuT opus Amt aurei illi   iibri, quos dt ojpcns elaborauit lam (enex? Si quis rog^st, iurifn»   publici tum communis) tum patriae fuae propf ii, reique pul^icae   gerendae prudentia caUuerit, nonne i^ae refpondent iagsfiiiaiyquas ad Atticura fcrip(it, epi{!otae? Se^ quid opus eft hiec pluribus per&qul? Hoc folummodo addam,. pofle iumn^onmi. virorum   epinioncs, quamuis toto, quod aiunt, coelo diuerfae videatitur,   fiicilltfflo artificio, fi quid mihi cemere datum, conciHari. Tota   «nim lis poti^mum verfatur in vocabulo lCiu Hunc Bynkershee^   kius aliique, qui eius partes (equuntur^ cum ip£b. Gcerone eum   cfle voluerunt, qui legum «t ad r^pondendum et ad agendum et ad cauendum peritus £t 3^. Inde non negant, TuUium exeeHuifle .- 'Qgpdlibroruai pratftaiicIAinorum coaiilHun dofte i<ittfflbrtuit Qvi A. Aag.  G&nclMras,. V. IIJ., ia GeoMB. 4k kgt immm tt mmt Cmrmit, LipC nuis ff1(?IlliX)*"m!|g9Aftttlttini, 'BUlilllmi faimClCttnt,'" NiBUlUiTIOl  hoc dldmus, tdque iis lubenter largiri pofTumus, liummodo omnei  in maximaiuris fcientia CICERONE nlmbuenda amice confpireot. Fa*  cileiui(&it ilUv fp»* pcimo a«t»tiflKtemp<>re iuri oper9Jn-4^M%  oft^j^dore ac profiterir ie etiam I(ki perfanafp tueri ppfl<v ii cuiit  rf^ujbiicae pptuiiTet a je^tbticei:^ *i). Qmiil ^q^odQ^Uitus fcaW^  ipfeyUii^quaiHU^iwcfuaclere voluit, vt, ialuis inuoeribus pu(blici%  {Utkn fedaret ad ius refpoadendum ^), Ac x;onfen/i(ret adeoCjl-^  oero, (juidem nuHutneiiet in experiend<i periculam, mii y^ttii-  «flet,. ne iBterpi:«tati;0.ittfis, ctUfnfi miaus molq^ propter, {«bOrj  cei^jV auferret tamen ipft«eiBp<¥:9i «4 di^peodi cogitationem 4ilftt'*  «atil* : Quafn ob rem fUA|tt|,«am-> doaec va(;atioiif«m aetas ipfi^  fioret acUaturaJT), et ni^ praiecAariu^ dujcit neque hone^ios, qupa^:  bonoribus et reipubiica£ «nuncribus perfunctum fenem pofife Iu&  iurd ^cere idem, qued apiild-BAnium dicat iUe Pythius ApoUQ, 4p. efXe eum, vnde iibi., £ non popiiU et reg9s,> at onine»^ ^PMtfS  oonfiiium expetant 3*). ^ ''^^In omaiam ore fttoc verbaHla nociiEma, -«luae pnt Nhar, \% . occnrrant  ^v Si mUbit btmimi vtiementer jocci^4UtfiomMhm moturUis, trida» mt ImrtS"  etnfuttum effi frtfteiw., Ad quem iocum comroematus eft Ge. Ricfatec»»  Or. de fioma</bo Cicertnis in InrecPnfiiJtcs, ioter eiufU. Oratt. (Norim^ -J6) deLeg. t,.  If) de Or*t. I, 4J. |t) Eamdem diaerits virorum doflorura &atentias conciliandi viam iniuit et>'  ^ -itmlo.JLxMC-Sfee^. memd-^^Mbii.^bftrnatitnes nemmuUmt ^iftUgetiems frm lOis .  i Bm, (L. B. 17«. 4») c- 3- ^ «5 -- «7- P- 46« fq^  Veakmus nunc, praemiflTs, quae necenarit praemittenda piftauf«.  ad merita TVittiana de iureciuili in ^rtem redig^do ritedelV^  aeanda. Quae qutdem it diiigenter con(tderare'TeIimiii ae|>erppA'^ dere iingula, ahimum potiflimumadiurifprudentiam,. qiiaUsCidi^  ronis aetate fuerit, adoertamua necefle e(l. Namet hic vhemeA-  ter eomntendanda eft cautio, quam tn art^ critica obferuari fuadet  loi Cterictts 39), dom ^o/^erfff,*^ itiquit, ^.vitutimftrnrumopmaHhiin  (tbMfci, etqtiaertri, quid tfitePit il^mg^ifinfirinty non, qmdfii^  tin diBmffi mHs tfidtnturt vtfajfif^ha^f^' Af^uflis «utem a^odutif  ftnibus id temporis circum(eripta fuit hirifprudentia ^), necdum  tottantafque Aibiit viciditudines, a^pefteafub imperatoribus illi  adciderunt, quibus inane quahtuitt^on^nsac confudonts legum ihi-^  dio adcefHt. Quum veroHurecotiAiltf, fiue erroris obiiciendi csuflai  quoplura et difHciliora fcire vlderentur, fiue^ quod fiminus veri  eft, ignoratione docettdi, faepe, quod pofitum eflet in vna cognitione, id in iofinit» dirpertiti fuerint 4*;, non ef^ y quod miremur,  dtfcipUnam ea aetate euafiflfe hiu^cam et tftafe cohaerentem, indkr  gedaeque moli haud abn^milem. Non defuere quideih ingenio  maximi, arte vero rudes, vel fapirates pottus, qtiam itireconfulti,  qui, in cunis quafi vagieiite iurifprudentia, quum legibus colli-     J9) Art. Critic. P. II. Seft. a. c. 3. $. 7. ' 40) de OrMt. u |3.   ) dt ieg. i, 19. 4it Or. I, 4J. hilM^^^titt liM PkipirW teget regias in ymnn coiitident *), A{m»  pius^^ iegi&' a^ones conih-ipferat 41), Sextus Aelius Tripcrtita edK  d^t 44)y qate inris tncunabata continebant^ P. Madiis Sdwinli^  M.- IiiAitt»-'Frutus et M^iMsrtilhii teguU» iuris inttr foren^^  tationem exe6gitftCltfr col{eger«nt-4f), Qutn im^ i^"Mudm Hm  ekAitpimio» icodfHtuentt 4^), generatim illud in cboem et 6dol&  bros redigendo, et mediam iurifprudentiam, funuiib eius capitibiai  Vftand«^'confef!onis gratia diftindis, foii^us HrmavOTat 4P);  ffudii 'tueufentir ' teftimoni» iw frtgmeiiti», er iibro ijfm eivfi  IGAihtil>ig0(b trattfiat&»^ 1i«£«ni«m 6buw iunt; Seif la ijaiJMi  oMtt)^ fniii^ et matjseiaili congieflenu^, aedi^ciam ante^ Oaamoami.  aftruxit nemo 4S),. a quo nouus quait incipit rmun ordo» dum tns   mmi^  J^) L. i. f^ i.i>. m0.r, tklmwjftHat, Uh p-^ >7t^ «d. Sfftvfg^v.^^ 4iv .^.  41) 1. 1: f 1«. O; A O. /. nia.iM, N. }}» c . - ::>t,   •44) i:.s.-^.|T.i>.w^O.A -•:-=!• r^h.'^r:-::^-.f:^,, ' ^^   45)! Hoc fchfo triumiitros, qiKi^ reccafuic Pomponius in £. «^ |.|4. D. db O./.  - {atclt^gvndo» «flc .^Mi/tf^ M« rflki^t docoic BracAn iUuftric iar£r«v)q||«Mi>   ^/x titm. frHmti «Mnrj^E«wV-<* 4. f. »9. p>3). Qf. Fraac Gnr. fioiMMU> Or.   liir i§rify*%iitii»i« ¥tgmktri^1^m4iu4/ram (rer. Li{rf'. 1^62. 4-> |K f . •  4«> V- •. f. 4t- A dr O. I. Gcil. N. A. Vil, if. tloiu^ftii» frqnU aifeqiu   fotktp pfofc£to fftcilc nobi» perfuafam iMbcrcmuc*? prftcotptoric fammi  > cxcmpl» ia primis •dduftuia fuiiCe Tnllium» vt de iurtt ciuiiit arteperfi-   cien^ cogftarct.^. ^-i-<*' -'••'J'*-i>5?3|- f;i*.l »ci f(M^4 r» trrfc>a4i : :• '^.-^.n^r-^ja^'  47) £u. Octo Lib. fiog: A vttm Sertii Sm/picS c 7* 1- ». ia 7»c/ imtii V. V. P* t59f' • r,i;i'.. :...'ts:.4S> Sunc quidcm, qui Seruium Sulpic!um« (^ccronis acqnaieih, iMi IMtc  CiccroiKa pMctUcinfe flaciianc; vcior Cc. Sclu4>amis dt /mtitimrJf^. Rm.  Ex. 3. $.^ t. cc Brokes Oifll commcm. tlt Cictrtmt ICtt\. %, Ae Jaqnitur i^euifbrmtmjirels redegit, et fft;^/M« piitterciiiHim Qftioiim»   vk,' in cfuo omnU, e priacipits futs dedu£ia» fiomo^eocu cy>}MM||e«   iiBnt. DeplorandLa fane eft rei litterariae ia^uca, quo/i tx ill^ khro,   priMter Yerbula qutedam, quae Geliius 49) «t Charifiu« ^o) ienuV   vmnt, nihil nobi» iit r^liqui. 7 . Qiiem nt(i.itat<malehibMifletiii- iitria temporuifi, pLurinu icirerans cognitu iucuBdiflinia •at/ipf; vlA-:Ikate fertiliffima^ <quae nunc aefeemae no^is teo^bris iepuita pse«   mantur. Quemadmodum vere., qui in iprima pi£hirae cuiufdara; lineamenta incidunt, ^uamuis «x totius operie ooiitemplatioBe   iUi«s imlcritudinem multo faciltus eflent perfpe^ui«,itamen yele>   primis, quibus-adumbrata eft, iiiieis detotius pii^urae pnae^ntia^ Jband 'inftdiriter iudicant, ita fi% nobis^ quibus per lat^nynlmquir. yNiar^^l^-vr,'-r- r-f: ^'tatem l^ 4mt TuUius in Srtit. c^4i. dc arte iuzis» .quac ip Scruio nuxuna.  iuerit» aut verius vnica» tam magnificef vt hoc de fummo ICto iudicium   " ^ix concitiiri ppfle wideatnr cua' aKa noftri profeiioiic (de OTf, i, 44. i^  qua necdum cxftitinc» qui jus artificiofe xligeftum generacim cempafuerir,  iU>let» optatque, vt aut Hbi» quod iara diu cogitaueric, >tale opus perficere   ' liBcatf aec aiios qutfpiamie impedito, /ufcipiat. Quod piofc^ nenopiafS-   . ^Xt fi i^ tum Seruius in co genere «cellui/ree. Vcrum <nimuerQ« (i ccmpofis «aiiioDCS intueamur, ct Smtwm fcre decennio pott libros dt Ormtme a   Cicerone icripcum eflTc recordenur» facilc concordiam i«(er vtrumque lo. ^'r'4sn fic rcftitttciiius» «t» Ciceroocm poft libfos 4e i)r4itore cditesiid ipfpm  ttntalTe» mox autem, quia fe foccc a Seruio, interea idem molito fupcra»  <um intellexifTet, conntium •rurfuc abMcifle, ec Opus in£e^m rciiquinc, dicamus. Vt taceam, in Brute ne fatis quidem clare adfirraari, Sulpiciura  jtlud«' dc quo qxueijmiu, Jcriptit efeoiik^ quandoquidfm ars im Jtomiue  fumma efle poted^ ctiamfi de ea ex iitterarum monimentia non cvnAcc. 'ijd) Vid. fragMenim eit libris Cieereuit fkUofepkicit^ adied» £dic. Bipont.  VW.XH. p. 30r' «0 dttftftaav >«t} .' <(i|od in projaerkto eft «, ^ n^eleoataL ieiHan»  Ificebit., FrimftitU Imeaiiichtft, qut.e piogiui, quo^aHint; Mtnenil  ^tiautM; defignAuit Tuliiiis^ ^tnquMa ea irridete videtur do^tM^  iilkV)Vf»ruii&>iodoiQus A]ifednlus5«), ;ii jquts ad^ciat, qviseH ;9<^r«taMbiqiiidttBi-^perFundatttr:iidiB»a M fomxm qdr   ^MmcoviBMo iuhbictua&iSJ) ine, qui iQ^hs^imae^H(»..vfitat»e  in rebu» cai^&fquiK ciuiura iequabititarti» cenfen*atione cernitijur«  omoe ius ciuite digerenduni ceii^uit in geuera, quae perpauca fimti  tdfifideeiwuqigfnprumqnafirnicnibi^aiquAj^bwi difpeitifada, atq«» -eimiia» qitailK^Bt^^iiBcnua vsel partbifli;fioiniaa» definitieniblifi  ;<{uam quaAquervini.habeaht, . ej^imenda i£e aebitratus' eft S^  Bieuit quidem eft haec deliiieatii>, fed iiirif^dentiae, qttaltstnnc  4emperis c^at, valds adcolnmodata:, nee.nos dubitare patitur Tnl-  4tus, qhii^ et quisy quae b»ui eomplexus eflb, iatius eip|iearet, peC"  ie^ if$\h»m< ciuMis ^fiB^€t, cfaurimr iUaatque vbecior, 4illMA  diiEcili^ ati^eobicura. Quae quidem omnia numquam efferiflet  ipfius iuris (icientia^ nifi ad ea artem omntum artiom maodmam,  il) Cuius cognitlonem qaim Cicen» a iiirrs poatiCcii fhidio preninquc feiiiii-  ' gerc fwar, vt Brat. ^t. dt kg, s, \%^ i % criiiiiiile £t, ad illui, JMm ad hec  • - ffcfioncfn t>peris pe rrinnife. Quod CICERONE confilium idcnrate exprc4it M. Aur. Galttanuc StvJ»»  fru/tm j. |. dum argumentum libri in iis potiflimum iusis pracccyjtio-  nibus, quae, do^inae gratia inucntae,. dcfiaiti^aibps, diuifimiibutr mfdio*  dici» difpofi(iombu% aUif^uc iimilibi» obiciaatiMiibtts ceaftaMSI»  ciSimoaaic. ni fjot&fowm, iiffnlifTrtinfnlrfTiniini pnli. i]ii«inim ri^iifafMii fiiiiim  nemt, dtfibhitxm diwilfimique conglutinaret «t ration»€QritcJKOii-  'ftnng^t. Indo re€ta. partium difpofitio, et iufius ordo, ifto fki-  •piiM. ^naeque coilocentur, inde vis arguroentationts i« rtttiomifn  iptmdar, tnde «titm deftniendi et diuidendi modiit^ qiti in^omnl  -do£lrinainim i^nere explicatU' primui 9(f. > tStA- id* ;md«iWiitione  tiuins operis haec quidem h«(Sennai. lo^tnttnci «mnwdem ejoeni-  pUsaiiquot e reliquis TuUianae eniditionis monfBMitoti» potitisil-  ^luftrare. Quam In rem optima procid dubb difctplina eftle&io  'Ihpkonm, Jid C 'IVebattumr 2Gtinn i cocfmiiim} Iqiptotsum, qivie  (toia in praeceptis difl«rendi «d luris ^uaefHoines tranfferendis rt-  'fiintur. Sic, quale dt partitiomun ac diisffiohum gemtf, tp^i Mttjis  •artem ingrediatur, elegantifltmis ipie exeroplis iarU tiuilif et abuHt'  if0thnis declarauit ^S). Definitionum:quis modus eflfe debeat, hirh  atitim-^t gttrtilis Aibtiliterd^niendadocoit ^). QoiDiiiodo argii-  imeitkis dtale2Hcis in iuiie ttendum £t, tamH>ttfcsm, timi»al^', «iajri-  ^e in Hbris de imteraio$n iiy^ perpartes eundodefhonlMMtit. Qii*e  (mgula, (icut axiomata iuris generaiia, pailiffl aCioemne^tligeni^itfs  multo, quam ab aliis, inculcata, quale e(l iliud : nullam ejfe perfonem^ fu t ie nd viteim eiue, qm s~vita emigraut rit^ fMfj^ut md eedat k ei ie -  de ), aut illud : vniur pecuniae ptures, diffimitibus ok ta^fiti^heredet  ejfe non pojfe 59J, fi vberius perfequi vellem, veroOr,' 'tk te^pus., ^i^ pfius  •W  V. g. de hment. t. f jV'W4.''f-'**'*) delnuent. z, tt. "J ""^iius, qaafll ititteriil, deficeret ^). Alui vero nobis reftat quaeftio,  «tque grauKHmar ac difficiilima, quani dirimere vijc audeo, nui^  ciHoet ipfe rmquam librum de iure ciuiii in artem redigendo ab-  foluerit Gcero. Qtiin ita iit, in dubium vocat Bynkershoekius ^^),  quem irero grauiflimis verbis reprehendit Bachius ^'). Abfit a nif  -procul, vt (an£liflimas violera Bachii manes; attamen non pofTum,  •quin fententiae Bynkershoekii calculum meum adiiciam, ac mihi  perTuafum habeam, hunc librum a CICERONE ad vmbilicum num<>  iquam fuilTe perdu£lum. Idque quum <:onie£lura probabiie ell,  tum quibufdam etiam veftigiis indicatur. Ac primum quiden  Quin^iianus ^), cui maximam puto fidem iiai>eadam efTe, difertis  verbis dicit, eum aliqua de iure ciuili componere corpijfe. Qui  ldem iocus nullo alio modo, ii quid iudicare valeo, inteliigi  potefl, nifi de hoc libro inchoato foium, non perfe£lo ^4). Tui*  lium multa de iure ciuiii in animo h«buifle fcril>ere, quorum in^  itium {a£him iit hoc vno iibro edito, vt Baciiius opinatur, non fatis  confiat, nec vlium omnino, in quo expcefHe id.pro£efrus fit Cicero,  reperi iocum. Deinde vero in Ciceronis iibris, quos roatura aetate Quædam occupauic OUncrhts mi DiMr., quam aliquoties «xcicauimus Praetermiff: ad i. ». §• ^^•J>. Je V. f. in Ofufcc. T. II. p. tf^. etin CoUef}.  Vbl. p. i%j. <Ja) Hift. iur. Rom. p. S47. cd. nouiflT. . ; .6j) /njiitt. Ormt., }) Hadr- quidcm Tumebus «^ (^infiilimni d. l. verba Fabii interpretatur de  libris Ciceronis de legibus «t de repuUicM, qui tamen non ir.agis de lure fue-  runt, quam eiufdem argumenti !'latonis. Cf. Luzac Sjtec. acad. fuura lau-  dacum c. 3. $. 17. not. i8. p. 49*  C ..^ D  conlcrjpfit, ne verbo quiderahuius ofperis mentio fit. Denique «iw  paret, eum voluifle primas illas lineas leuiter adumbratas latiut  explicare, dumraodo paullum otii fuppeditaret imraenfa nego^  tix)rum moles. lam vcro ab illp inde tempore, quo priraum ad  rempublicam adteflerat, cauflHrum defeniionibus, amicitiis et cUeitv-  telis tuendis, inimicitiis pcepulfandi», ampUflimis deaique mun&'  ribus adminiftrandis occupatus fuit ; fenem vero exceperunt tur-  bulentiflima reipublicae tempora, quibus aiiimus nofter facile in*  ducatur ad credendum, haud potuifl*e TuIIiura propter otii inopiam  huic libro vltimam imponere manum ^5)^,y..<. t»   Haec funt, quae in raeam iententiam brenlter adducenda^ pu^  taui, certe non eo coniiUo, vt, quorum.aliter de-hac re fententift  eft, eorum au^oritatem infringere conarer, fed vt, quae conie£luy  ra adfequutus fueram, virorum eruditorum iudicio exactius ponderanda reUnqucrem, quo modo optinw cognoscere possem, flntue  in his aUqua ) quae vero esse confentanea exiftimentur,. nec ne. Qaoi etiam fuboluifle videtur Eu. 0)-toni in laud. Lib. Cng. dt vit» Str'-  w SuJfiieih c 6* $. $^ iii Tbel iur. T. V. p. i^^u ERRATVM.. liOt S- pn> : pnmis 0imij, lege: primct MH$r.  yiRO V t RO LITTERARVM AC VIRTVTVM LAVDE f  FLORENTISSIMO   mANm GOTTHELP HORNEMANNO CHRIST. GOTTL. HAVBOLD '   iJwd "QuinUUiafiut vmjtme tinftut, tum^am mi4tttm proffcij/e, ad  CUero ijatde plaeeai, idi» TEquidem, NOBILISSIME HORNE  MAI^E-t totum eonueniret vel hic TFi^S Ubetlus planijime^jlendit,  t quo famiHaritas cum primipe Romanae eloquentiae, eruditionis atquf  venustatis tam arcte contracta eiucet, vt eam in finguHf octijjimae  difputationis partibus, ne dicim, verhls, exprimtre videaris. Quae  quemadmodum iamfota et ad iujium Jludiis TP^I S pretium fiatuendum,  et ad maiarem indies de ingenii TVJ excellentia diligentiaeque adjiduitate   D 2 fpem Grice: “If I were asked to name the most brutal death an Italian philosopher ever suffered I am between Gentile and Cicero. The former was a typical leftist mafia thing in the middle of Florence; the latter was commanded by Marcantonio and committed by Erennio – il centurione – and Pompilio Lena – il tribuno militare – the action was fast. Lena was careful to keep the head and the right hand --. He brought them to Fulvia’s bedroom when Marcantonio was there. A slave displayed the head and the right hand on a platter – the right hand and the head were later displayed on the Rostro – Fulvia in the bedroom took a pin from her coiffure and stuck it in Cicero’s tongue. Cicero had been captured on his way to Greece – He could have saved his life, but the housekeeper informed Lena what road in the wood he had taken. Cicero would have left earlier, but his brother wanted to buy provisions for Greece (‘you never know what the food is like there’). Cicero’s brother Quintus, along with his son, were killed soon after. The prescriptions followed a rigorous order declared by the ‘ragione di stato’ .. Cicero was first on the list. Mark told Plutarco: “I would not engage in such cruelty – but Cicero was the most vile serpent!” Nome compiuto: Giovanni Botero. Keywords: Staatsräson, Ferrari, civil equita di Vico, civilis aequitas di Cicerone, ragion di stato, Candarini, Macchiavelli, Grice, conversational cooperation, conversational equality, pirotic generality, conceptual, applicational, formal. Generality, universalizability, civilis aequitas, aequitas, =, identity and aequitas, aequi-, justice as fairness, principle of conversational reciprocity. Refs.: Luigi Speranza, “Grice e Botero” – The Swimming-Pool Library.

 

Luigi Speranza – GRICE ITALO!; ossia, Grice e Botta: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale del primo filosofo italiano – fat philosopher, brave, addicted to general reflections about life, greatest living, Continental --  ‘professional engaged in philosophical research’ – Appio – scuola di Cavallermaggiore – filosofia piemontese -- filosofia italiana – Luigi Speranza, pel Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice, The Swimming-Pool Library  (Cavallermaggiore). Filosofo piemontese. Filosofo italiano. Cavallermaggiore, Cuneo, Piemonte. Grice: “The most relevant of his tracts is his ‘storia della filosofia romana,’ – but he also played with Leopardi, and he is especially loved in the Piemonte as a ‘dantista’! --  Grice: ““You’ve gotta love Botta – my favourite is his tract on Alighieri as a philosopher – he applied all he had learned about philosophy at Cuneo to Aligheri – the result is overwhelming!” Studia e insegna a Torino. Il suo palazzo divenne un rinomato salotto culturale. Examina la filosofia italiana, Cavour, Alighieri. Dizionario biografico degli italiani. The rise of what Italians call philosophy ‘in the volgare’ is contemporary with the revival of letters, when the hahit of independent thought, gradually developing, asserted itself in opposition to Scholasticism. The early establishment of the four Republics (Genova, Pisa, Venezia and Amalfi), the growth of industry, commerce and wealth, the increasing communication with the East, the propagation of Arabic Science, the influence of the Schools of Roman Jurisprudence, the gradual formation of the ‘volgare’ out of the Roman language, and above all, the growing passion for the literature of Ancient Rome, all combined to stimulate the human mind to free itself from the servitude of prevailing methods and ideas. The Catharists appeared in Lombardy, and extending throughout the Peninsula under various names, such as the ‘Paterini’, the ‘Templari’, the ‘Albigesi,’ the ‘Publicani’, and others, remained the unconqnered champions of intellectual liberty. A numerous and powerful school of philosophers, embracing the most prominent representatives of the Ghibelline party, laboured so persistently for freedom of thought and expression, that it was denounced by the Roman Popist Church as a School of Epicureans and Atheists. Foremost among these, according to ALIGHIERI (vedasi), himself a Ghibelline, is the Emperor Frederick II, the patron of the Arabian scholars, a poet, a statesman  and a philosopher. His friend, Cardinal Ubaldini; Farinata degli Uberti, a hero in war and peace; LATINI (vedasi), the teacher of ALIGHIERI (vedasi); and CAVALCANTI (vedasi), ‘the physicist, the logician and Epicurean,’ as a contemporary biographer calls him. Meanwhile Brescia strives to extend to the field of politics the philosophical revolution which had so early begun, and which is now sustained by secret societies widely spread throughout the Peninsula, alluded to in the early poem of St. Paul's Descent to the Infernal Regions. To the same object of intellectual emancipation are directed the religious and social movements headed by such Reformers as Parma, San Douuino, Padova, Casale, Valdo, and Dolciuo. But- as a promoter of freedom in philosophy as well as in political science, Aligheri stands preeminent in the history of his country. He is sthe first to construct a philosophical theory of the separation of the ‘lo stato fiorentino’ from the Pope’s Church in his De Monarchia, in which he advocates the independence of the civil power from all ecclesiastical control. Aligheri also opposes the Papal power in immortal strains in the Divina Commedia; and, under the popular symbols of the age, strive to enlarge the idea of Christianity far beyond the limits, to which it wasconfined by the Scholastics. Petrara boldly attacked Scholasticism in every form, denounced the Church of Rome as the impious Babylon which has lost all shame and all truth, with his friend Boccaccio devoted himself to the publication of ancient MSS., and laboured throughout his life to excite among his contemporaries an enthusiasmfor Classical Ancient Roman Literaccure. His works “De Vera Sapientia”; “De Remediis Utriunque Fortunes”; “De Vita, Solitaria”; “De Contempu Mundi”;, blending Platonic ideas with the doctrines of Cicero and Seneca, are the first philosophical protest against the metaphysical subtilties of his age. Thus the fathers of Italian literature are also the fathers of the revolution which give birth to the philosophy in ‘the volgare’.  The study of the original writings of Plato and Aristotle, and the introduction of an independent exegesis of the ancient philosophers, soon produces a still more decided opposition to Scholasticism; a movement aided by the arrival of Greek scholars in Italy before, and after thefall of Constantinople. Prominent among these, were the Platonists Pletho and Bessarion, and the Aristotelians Gaza and Trebizond, who place themselves at the head of the philosophical revival in Italy. While Platonism becomes predominant in Tuscany under the patronage of Medici, the influence of Ficino, and the Platonic Academy founded by the former in Florence, Aristotelianism extends to the Universities of Northern Italy and particularly to those of Padua and Bologna, taking two distinct forms, according to the sources from which the interpretation of Aristotle is derived. The Averroists followed the great commentary of Averroes, and the Hellenists, or the Alexandrians, sought the spirit of the Stagirite in the original, or in his Greek commentators, chiefamongwho m was Alexander of Aphrodisias. The Averroistic School, mainly composed of physicists and naturalists, was the most decided opponent of the Scholastic system in its relation to theology. Indeed, medicine, Arahicphilos ophy,Averroism,astrology, and infidelity, early in the Middle Ages hud become synonymous terms. Abano, who may he considered as the founder of the Avcrroistic School in Italy, was one of the first who asserts, under astrological forms, that religion has only a relative value in accordance with the intellectual development of the people. He was arrested by the order of the Inquisition; but he died before sentence was passed upon him. His body was burnt, and his memory transmitted to posterity as connected with infernal machinations. Ascoli, a professor at Bologna and a friend of Petrarca, is condemned to burn all his books on astrology, and to listen every Sunday to the sermons preached in the church of the Dominicans. Later he was burnt at the stake, and his picture appears in one of the many Infernos painted on the walls of the Italian churches by Orcagna. The eternity of matter and the unity of human intellect are the two great principles of the Averroistic doctrine. Hence the negation of creation, of permanent personality and of the immortality of the soul became its principal characteristics. Although some of the members of this School endeavour to reconcile its doctrines with the dogmas of the Church, others accept the consequences of its philosophy, and boldly assert the eternity of the imiverse and the destruction of personality at death. Fra Urbano di Bologna, Paolo of Venice, Nicola da Foligno, and many others, are among the first. Among the second may be mentioned Nicoletto Verniaa, Cajetano and above all Pomponazzi, with whom began a period in the development of Anti-Scholastic philosophy. Hitherto the followers of Averroism confine their teaching to commentaries upon the great Arabian philosopher; but with Pomponazzi philosophy assumes a more positive and independent character and becomes the living organ of contemporary thought. Indeed. while he adheres to the Averroists in his earnest opposition to Scholasticism, he is a follower of the Alexandrians in certain specific doctrines. Thus on the question of theimmortality of the sonl (‘l’animo’), which so agitated the mind of the age, while the Averroists assert that the intellect after death returns to God and in time losses its ndividuality, Pompouazzi with the Alexandrians reject that compromise, and openly denies all future existence. He holds that theorigin of man (‘l’uomo’) is due to the same causes which produce other things in nature: that miracles a but illusions, and that the rise and the decadence of religion depends on theinfluence of th estars. It is truet hat he insists on the opposition of philosophy and faith, and thought that what is true in the former might be false in the latter, and vice versa; a subterfuge, into which many philosophers of the Middle Ages are forced by the dangers, to which they are exposed. Pomponazzi is the author of many works, one of which, De immortalitate animae, was burnt in public. His most celebrated disciples are Gonzaga, Giovio, Porta, and Grattarolo. His opponents are Achillini, Nifo, Castellani and Contarini, all moderate Averroists, who strive to reconcile Christianity with natural philosophy; an effort, in which they are joined by Zimara, Zabarella, Pendasio and Cremonini. Among the Hellenists, who maintained in part the opinions of Pomponazzi, is Thomeo, a physician at Padua, who, on account of the vivacity of his polemic against Scholasticism, the Hippocratic character of his doctrines, and the beauty of his style, is considered as the founder of Hellenic criticism and naturalism in the Age of the Renaissance. To the same class of philosophers, although neither pure Hellenists nor Averroists, belong PICO (si veda) and CARDANO (si veda), who strive to substitute in place of scholasticism philosophic systems founded partly on christianity, and partly on Platonic ideas, or on doctrines derived from the Cabala and astrology; CESALPINO (si veda), who constructs a pantheistic philosophy on Averroistic ideas, and VANINI (si veda), who for advocating a system of naturalism is burnt at the stake. Other philosophers oppose contemporary philosophy chiefly for the barbarous form, in which it is expressed, such as Valla, Poliziano, Barbaro, Nizolio, and Vives. But a more effectual opposition to Scholasticism is due to the introduction of the experimental method into scientific investigations, which was first inaugurated by Vinci, who, within the compass of a few pages anticipates almost all the discoveries which have been made in science, from Galilei to thecontemporar ygeologists. Nizolio, Aconzio, Erizzo, Mocenigo and Piccolomini continue the work of Vinci in insisting on the application of the experimental method in philosophy. This application is partially at least attempted by Telesio aud by Patrizi who oppose Scholasticism by striving to create a philosophy founded on nature. Bruno boldly undertakes the philosophical reconstruction of mind and nature on the basis of the unity and the universality of substance; while Campanella establishes his philosophy on experience and consciousness. To promote this scientific movement learned associations everywhere arise; the "Acadeinia Secretorum Naturae” is instituted at Naples by Porta; the Telesiana is established by Telesio in the same city; the Lynchean is founded in Rome by Cesi, and the Academia del Cimento in Florence. Meantime the opposition to Scholasticism extends to the field of politics, where Machiavelli establishee the principles of that policy, which is  destined to triumph in the establishment of Italian unity on the ruins of papal sovereignty, a policy which found a powerful impulse in the religious revolution attempted by Savonarola, a still more effectual aid in the invention of the art of printing, and a pledge of its final triumph in the great Reformation. In vain the sacerdotal caste persecute and imprison the philosophers and reformers, and burn them at th e stake; in vain it strives to drown philosophical liberty in blood. The opposition increases and reappears in th ewritingsof Gnicciardini and Sarpi, the bold defender of the Republic of Venice against the encroachments of the Papal See, the philosopher and the naturalist, to whom many discoveries in science are attributed. The political writings of Giannoti, of Paruta, and Bottero, which are devoted to the emancipation of society from the authority of the Church, close the period which opens with the aspirations of Alighieri aud Petrarch, and is now crowned by the martyrdom of Bruno and Vamni. For the exposition of the doctrines of the Italian philosophers of the Renaissance, the reader is referred to Ueberweg's statements. See further: Tiedemann, Geistder Speculative/} Philosophic; John 6. Biihle, Gesch. der neueren Philos.; Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophic; Ritter, GescMchU der Philos.; Supplement) alia Storia delta Filosofia di Tennemann, by Romagnosi and Poli;  Mamiani,  Jiinnovamento delia Filmofm antica Italiana; Spaventa, Carattere e sviluppo della Filosofia ItaliamidalSctxlo16"finoalnostrotempo. On the philosophy of Aligheri, see A. F. Ozanam, Dante et la Philosophie Cathdique. tranal. By Boissard, Lond; N.Tommaseo.La Commediadi Dante, G.Frap- porti, SuMa Fiiosofia di Dante, Foscolo, Diseorsomiltesto del Poema di Dante, Rossetti, Commento analitico delta Diuina Commedia, Barlow, Critical, Historical, and Philosophical Contributions to the Study of the Divina Commedia, B., Dante as Philosopher, Patriot and Poet, New York; Rossetti, A Shadow of Dante, Boston, and the valuable works written on the Italian poet by Schlosser, Kopish, Wegele, Blanc, Goschel, Witte, and Philalethes (the present King John of Saxony). On Petrarch, see Bonifas, De Petrarca Philosopho, and Maggiolo, De la Philosophie morale de Petrarque. On the opposition of Petrarch to Scholasticism cf. Renan's Averroes et VArenvisme. The doctrines of Averroes were introduced into the Peninsula from Sicily, where appeared the first translations of the commentary of the Arabian philosopher. They soon became naturalizedi at Padua, Bologna, and Ferrara, and the absorbing subject of lectures and discussions. The principal lecturers belonging to this School are Abano, the author of “Conciliator differentiarum Philosophorum et Medicorum”;  Gonduno, whose Quastiones et Comments on Aristotle, Averroes, and Abano are extant in the national library of Paris, some of which were published in Venice; Urbano da Bologna who writes a voluminous commentary of the work of Averroes on the book of Aristotle, De Physico Audita. It was published in Venice with a preface of Vernias; Paolo di Venezia, the author of “Summa totius Philosophiae”, who defends the doctrines of Averroes in the presence of eight hundred Augustinians against Fava, the Hellenist; Tiene, Bazilieri, Foligno, Siena, Santa Sofia, Forll, Vio, Vernias and many others have left voluminous MSS. in the libraries of Venice, Padua, and Bologna, as witnesses of their devotion to the ideas of the great Arabian philosopher. Pomponazzi may be classed among the Averroists, as far as he believes in the existence of a radical antithesis between religion and philosophy. Pomponazzi, however, rejects the fundamental principle of Averroism, the unity of the intellect, and in this respect he belongs to the Alexandrian School. He is the author of several works: “De Immortalitate Animae”; De Fato; De Libero Arbitrio; De Pmdes Unatione; De Providentia Dei; and De naturatium effectaum admirandorum causis, scilicet de Incantationibus. Achillini is one of his opponents, and the School o fPadua has left no record more celebrated, than that of the public discussions held by those two philosophers. Achillini's works were published inVenice. The two adversaries having been obliged to leave Padua, established themselves in Bologna, where they continued their disputations till the occurrence of their death. Nifo is another opponent of Pomponazzi. At the request of Leo X. he writes his “De Anima”, which gives occasion to Pomponazzi to publish his “Defensorium contra Niphum”. Nifo was also the author of “Dilucidarium Metaphyscarum Disputationum.. Marta in his Apologia de Animae Immortalitate, Contarini in his De Immortalitate Animae and several others strive to confute the doctrines of Pomponazzi on the mortality of the soul. He is defended by several of his pupils, and particularly by Porta in his “De Aniina, de Spcciebus inteUigibiUbus.” Porta is also the author of De Humana Mente DispuUitU), De Merum Naluralium Prindpiis, De Dolore; A n homo bonus vel malus vokns fiat. The Lattr. m Council condemns both those, who taught that the human soul was not immortal, and those who asserted that the soul is one and identical in all men. It condemns also the philosophers who affirm that those opinions, although contrary to faith, are philosophically true. It enjoins professors of philosophy to refute all heretical doctrines to which they might allude, and prohibits the clergy to study philosophy for a course longer than five years. Indeed, Averroism becomes hostile to the doctrines of the Church, and it is condemned by Tempier, archbishop of Paris, who causes its principles to be embodied in distinct propositions. Among these were the following: Quod iermoi.est/ wologici sunt fundatiin fabulia. QuodnUiilplussciturprop tersciretheologian. Quod Jobulmandfalsasuntinlege Christiana, sic Pombainaliis. Quod lex Christianaimpeditaddiscere. Quod sapicntes in undi sunt philosophitantum. Notwithstanding the condemnation of the Church, those ideas seem to have taken hold of the philosophical mind of the age, and long continue to find favour among teachers and students. There are, however, philosophers who, adhering to the doctrines of Averroes, strive to blend them with the standard of an orthodox creed. Among them Zimara in his “Solutiones contradictionum in dicta Aristotelis et Aeerrois,” Antonio Posi di Monselice, Palamede, Bernandino Tomi-tano di Feltre and several others. Meantime, new translations and new editions of the works of Averroes, more correct and more complete, appear, due to the labors of Bagolini of Verona, Oddo, Mantino, Balmes, Burana and others. Zabarella, follows Averroes in his lectures at the University of Padua, and findsan opponent in Piccolomini. Pendasio strives to blend Averroism with Alexandrianism, and Cremonini, the last repre sentative of Averroism in Italy, gives new forms and new tendencies to the doctrines of his master. His lectures are preserved in the library of St.Marc in Venice, and form twenty-four large volumes. Cf.PUtro Pomponacci, Studi Storicisulla Scuola di Bologna t di Padua by Fiorentino, P. Pomponacci by Podesta; and Pomponacci e la Scienza by Luigi Ferri, published in the Archivio Storico Italiano, Hellenic Aristotelianism, not less than Averroism, was a step toward the emancipation of the human intellect. The same object was greatly promoted by the Schoolof Humanists, represented by Valla, Poliziano and Vives, and by the Platonic revival through the Academy of Florence, and the translations and the works of Ficino; cf. Tiraboschi's Storia delta, Letteratura Italiarut; Heeren's GeschkhU det Studiums der dassischen LUeratur seitdem WiederauJ Uben der Wissensehaften, Renan's op. c.; I. Burckhardt's Die Cultur der Renaissance in It/Uien, Von Alfred von Reumont's Geschicht* der Stadl Home; Zeller's Italit et In Renaissance, and the Edinburgh Review, Tiie Popes and Ute Italian Humanists. The Humanist revival, properly speaking, commenced with the advent to Florence of Chrysoloras; and it is promoted and illustrated by the researches and the writings of many scholars, such as Poggio, Filelfo, Aretino, Valla, Traversari, Vegio, and Tommaso di Sarzana, who afterwards became Pope under the name of Nicholas V. The Council of Constance contains among its members several of the most learned humanists of the age. and for a time the Papal See is at the head of the movement for the revival of the study of classical literature. Prominent among the popes who promoted that revival are Nicholas V., already mentioned, Martin V., Eugene IV., Pius II., known under the name of Enea Silvio Piccolomini, and Leo X. To this revival may also be referred the origin of the Academical bodies and literary associations which formed so characteristic a feature of the literary life of Italy of that time. Of these associations, those which held their meetings in Florence, at the Camaldolese Convent degli Angeli and at the Augustine Convent delloSpirito, are the most celebrated. The controversy between the Platonists and Aristotelians of the Age of the Renaissance is described in De GeorgWs Dmtriba by Leo Allatius in Script. Bizant.; in Boivin's QuereUe rtes Phibsophes du XV. Hidcle (M/'tnoires de literature de l'Academie des Inscriptions), and in Gcnnadius and Pletho, Aristotdismus und Platonismus in der Grieehixclien Kirehe, by Gass. The following are the works of L. Thomeo, the Hellenist: Arist'itelis Stagirita par&i owe vacant naturaUa, Dialogide Divinatione; Be Animorum ImmorUtlitate; De Tribus Animorum Vehiculis; De Nominum Ineentione; De Precibus; De Compescendo Luctii; De JEUitum. Moribus; De Belativorum Natura; De Animorum Essentia. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola writes De Ente et Una: Twelve book* against Judiciary Astrokigy; Ileptaplon, or a treatise on Mosaic Phileisophy; Rtgu!* Oirigentis lwminem in pugna spirituali, and Nine hundred Theses on Dialectics, moral, physical, and mathematical sciences, which he defends in public in Rome. His nephew, Giovanni Francesco Pico, holds the same doctrines, and writes in defence of the book De Ente et Uno. Cf. Das System des John Pico von Mirandola by Dreydorff. Cardano writes many works, which are published in ten volumes in quarto. The principal ones are: “De Subttilitate librixx; De Rermn Varielate. Cardano is celebrated for his Formula for solving equations of the third degree. Cardsano is also the author of an autobiography. His doctrines are refuted by Scaligero in his Exereitalionesexotcrica. And defended  by himself in his Apologia. Cf. Rixner's and Siber's Beitrage zur Geschiehte der Physiologie im weiteren und engeren Sinne [Ltben nnd Meinungenberuhmter Physiherim.). Cesalpino is the author of several works on physiology and medicine, PerifHJtetiearum Quasii'w*m libriqvinque,and “DtemonumInvestigatin Peripatetiea. Valla writes Etegas- tutrumlibrisex.DialeetiroyDixputatioiws, and DeVeraBono. He translates also the Iliad, Herodotus, and Thucydides. Poliziano translates the Manual of Epictectus, the Questions and Problems of Alexander of Aphrodisias, the Aphorism of Hippocrates, and the Sayings and the Deeds of Xenophon. He writes also Parepistomenon,in which he proposed to describe the tree of human knowledge. Barbaro writes on Themistius, and on the Aristotelian doctrine of the soul.  Tives De Causis corruptarum artium, De Initiis, SectisetLaudibus Philosop7tia, id.; De Anima et Vita. Of the numerous treatises of Vinci the greater part still remainin manuscript in the Ambrosian library at Milan. They are written from right to left, and in such manner that it is necessary to employ a glass in order to decipher them. Extracts from his MSS. were published in Paris by Yenturi. Xizolio writes the Antibarbarusiseu de veris principiis et vera rntviM philosophandi contra Pseudo-PhUosi/phos. Aconzio, Metliodus, scilicet recta investigandarum tradendnrumque artium ac scientiarum ratio. Sadoleto, Phadrus, seu de laudibus Philosophia. Erizzo, De W Istrumentu e Via incentrice degli Antichi. Mocenigo, De eo quod est paradoxa. Piccolomini, “L'Istrumento della Filosofia”, Filo- «"Jin luiturale, and Istituzione morale. According to Tiraboschi, Piccolomini is the first philosopher who used ‘the volgare’ in his writings. He is however, preceded by T. Golferani, who long before writes treatise in that language, Della Memoria locale. Piccolomini, a nephew of Piccolomini, writes “De Rerum DefinUionibus;andUnicersa de Moribus Philotophia. Here may also be mentioned Porta, the author of “De Humana Physiognomia” and De oceulti* Uterarum initio, seu De Arte animi sensi occulta aliis significandi”; Brisiani Methodus Scientinram”; “Veneto, De Hdrmoaia ifundi”; Con tarini, De Perfectione rerum, libri sex”; “Mazzoni, De TripUci Hominum Vita”, “De Consensu Aristotelis et Ptatonis” and “In AristoteU*etPlatonis unitersam Philosophiam Praludia”, and Valerii, “Opus aureum in quo omnia explicantur, qua Scientiarum omnium parens Lullus tarn in Scientiarum arbore, quam arte gcnerali, tradit. Telesio writes “De Rerum Natura juxta propria principia. Varii de naturalibus rebus libelli, “De hisquainaerefiuntetdeterra motibus. Quod aniirud universum ab unica anima substantia gubernatur, adversus Oalenum. Cf. Hixter's and Siber'sop.c.;alsoli. Telesio by FIORENTINO (vedasi). The method pursued by TELESIO (vedasi) he himself thus describes. “Sensum videlicet et nos et naturam, aliud praterea nihil sequutis umus, qua summes ibiipsa concorsidem semper, et eo demagit modo,a tque iilemsem perojteratur. Of the origin of the world he says as follows. Liemotissimam scilicet obscurissimamque rem et minime naturali ratione afferendam; cujus cognitio omnis a sensu peiulet, et de quanihilomninoasserendum situnqumn, quod volnonipso, telipsiussimile perceperit sensu. Patrizi, a Croatian, writes “Discussiones Peripatetica, Nonade L'niccrsis Pliilosuphia, in qua Aristolelica methodo nun per m/itum, sed per lucem ad prima in causam ascenditur; DeliaPoetica o la Decaistoriale. Cf.Rixner and Siber op. cit. Of the works of Bruno some are written in the learned and some in the vulgar. The latter are edited by Wagner, Leipzic, the former (only in part) by Gefrorer, Stuttgart. The following is the complete catalogue of his writings: “L’Area di N'ie”; “De Sphara”; “Dei Segni dei tempi”; “De Anima”; “Claris magna”; “Dei Predieamenti di Dio”; “De Umbris Ideurnm”; “De Compendiosa Architectura”; “II Candelajo, a Comedy, “Purgatorio dell’Inferno”; “Explicatio tri- ginta S giU/irum, l a Cenadelle Ceneri, five dialogues; “Delta Causa, Princi-fiio et Uno, De, flnfinito Unieerso e Mondi, Spaccio delta bestia trionfante, Cabala dd cacallo Pegaseo con Fagyiunta de/F asino C'iUenico;Degli heroici Furori”; “Figuratio AristoteliciAuditusphys”; “Dtalogiduo de Fabriciimorden  tuSaUrnitanipropediritiaadinttntKmeadpeTftctam Cmmimttx impraiim. J$ri Brum intomnium”; “De Lampade combirtaturia Lulliana”; “De Program a Lampade cenatoria Logieorum, Acrotirmu*. teu ration** articuiorvat phyxiomm advertu* Arisloteiieat, Oratio Valedictoria”; Yitemberga habiUi; De Sfxtrrum ScruiinioetLampade eombinaVoria Luilit.Centum ft Seragikt-i ArtieuU adeem* hvju* tempettati* Mathtmatico» atque PhAutuplto*. Oratio «*»> latoriahabitainobitu PriridpUJuUiBrun*ricen*ium D»ci*.IS"*!*; DtItnagiuum.S§**- rumetIdearum Compomtiane, De Tripliee MinimaetMemura, DeMonadt. Nutnero et Figura. De rerum Imagmibut”; Libredew tette arti liberali”; “Liber triginta Statuarum, Tempiam Mnemonidi”; “BeMuttipUciJfundi Vita, (unpublishedandlost); DeSatmie gettibu*(id.); De Prindpii* Yeriiid.); De Attrobigia {.id); De Magia pAgnca;Itt Phytica; Libretto di eongiurazioni; Surmna terminorum metayJtysicorum, pubL W H; Artiftcium perorandi. pubL. Cf. Bruno oder uber da* uaturliche. and gi-ttlxit Prineipder Dinge,by Schelling. Also the introduction of T. Mami.iiito the translation of Schelling's dialogue by the Marchioness Florenzi Waddington; Bax ter's and Siber's op. cit Bruckerii Hutoria PhMonophia. L 6. Buhle, Commentat» deOrtuetProgre**u Pantheimniindea Xenophane Cohfoiaoprimaeju* authtrreunptt ad Spinozam; Nioeron, M'moiret pour »ercir a Chiatoire de* hmmnt* iiitutre*; C. Stepo. Jordan, Di*qui*itio de Bruno Nolano; Guil. F. Christiani. De Studii* Jordan Brunimathematicis; Kindervater,Beitrdgetur LebentgetchichU de*Jord. Bruno. D. Lessman. Giordano Bruno in Cisalpinische Blatter.; Fullebom. Beitr Aye tur G e*chiehte der PhUmoph., F. L Clemens, Bruno und Nicheiae* t'/n Cusa; John A. Scartazzini, Ein BluUeuge de* Wittens, Ch. Bartholmes, Bruno, George Henry Lewes, History of Philosophy, laBS: Sigwart. Spinoza's neuentdeckter fractal von Gott, A. Debs, Jordani Bruni Vila et Scripta, Lange, Geochiehtc de* Materialumus,  Donienico Berti, Vita di Bruno, which contains the proceedings of Bruno's trial before the Inquisition of Venice, recently discovered in the archives of that city., Campanella's principal works are as follows: L'nicersm PhilnsoyJiiaten Metaphyxicarum Rerum juxta propria dogmata, parte* Ire*, Philoaephia teia&u demonttrata et in octo disputation** distincta, advertu* eo* qui propria arbitral*, non autem semata duce natura, philosophati aunt, ; Beak* Philosopher eptiegutit* parte* quatuor, hoc e*t de rerum natura, hominum, moribus, etc. His Ciiitas Soli*, akindof Utopian romance, formspartofthe latter work. Delibruproprii*etrecta ratione studendi Syntagma, De Seiuu rerum et Mugia. De GentSesimo non retinendo; Atheismu» triumphatu*;Apologiapro Galihro; DeMonarchU\Ui*pa*i- cti; Disputationum in quatuor partes PhUosophia BeaU* libri quatuor; several philosophical poems in Latin and Italian. Cf. Baldachini, VitaeFilosofiadi T.Campaneila, Ancona. Introduction to the new edition of Campanella's works, Turin, ;Centofanti, an essay published in the Archirio Storico Italiano; Spaventa and Mamiani, op. cit.; also Sigwart, Tit. Campaneila und Heine poUtischen Idem, in the Preuss. Jahrb., Mile. Louise Colet, QSucrechoutie de CampaneBa, Pierre Leroux, Encyclopedic nouveUe, and G. Ferrari, Corso sugli Scrittvri pdititi Italiani. L. Vanini is the author of Amphitheatrum JEternai Procidentia; De edau- randi* Natura;, Regina Detrque morlalium, arcatti», Dt Vera Sapientia; Phytic- Magicum;DeContemneiida Gloria; Apolngiiipro Motaieaet Oirirtianalege. Cf. Fuhrmann, Leben und Schicksale, Character und Meinungeii de* L. Yaumi, Emue Waisse. L. Vantili, sa vie, sa doctrine, et sa mort; Bxtrait dea mcmoires de P Aoadémie dea Sciences de Toulose. Arpe, Bayle, and Voltaire in several of their works undertake the defence ofV anirò. Cf.alsoLaVieetles SentimentsdeL.VanirtibyDavidDurand,and Rousselot CEuvres P/Ulosophiques de L. Vanini. Of all the editions of Machiavelli's works, that of Florence, is the fullest and the best. A new edition has been recently published in Florence partly by Lemmonier and partly by Barbera. Of his writings, 11 Principe, Discorsi sulle Decite di T. Livio, and Le Storie Fiorentine are the most celebrated. Cf. Gesohichte der Staatswissensc/uiften, by B. von Mohi, Banke's zar Kritik neuerer Gesc/iichts/icreiber; Macaulay's Essay on Machiavelli in his Critical and Historical Essays. Ferrari in his Corso sugli Scrittoripolitici Italiani, and Pasquale St.Mancini, Della Dottrinapolitica del Machiavelli. See also the life of Machiavelli published in the Florentine edition of his  works. The principal work of Guicciardini is “La Storia d'Italia”, extendingfrom1490to Its best edition is that of Pisa in 10 vols. An edition of his unpublished works appeared in Florence,under the editorship of G.Canestrini. This valuable publication contains “Le Considerazioni intorno al Discorso di Nicolò Macliiavélli sopra la prima Deca di T.Livio; I Ricordi politici e civili; I Discorsi politici; Il Trattato ei Discorsi sulla Costtuziome della Republica Fiorentina e sulla riforma del suo governo; Im Storia di Firenze; Scelta dalla corrispondenza ufficiile tenuta dal Guicciardinidurante le diverse sue Legazioni; and il Carteggio, or his correspondence with Princes, Popes, Cardinals, Ambassadors, and Statesmen of his time. Cf.Banke'sop.cit.;Thiers'Ilis- totre du Consulat et de l'Empire — Avertissement; the Preface by Canestrini to the Opere inedite di Guicciardini, and Storia della Letteratura Italiana, by Guidici. For the works of Savonarola, Sarpi, Giannoti, Parata, and Bottero, cf. Ferrari, op.cit. Savonarola is the author of Compendium totius philosopliimtarn naturalisquam moralit, and of Trattato circa il reggimento e il governo della città di Firenze; cf.Storia di Savonarola by Villari. Sarpi writes in the volgare “La Storia del Concilio Tridentino”, a work which has been translated into the learned, also, “Opinione come debba governarsi la Republica Veneziana”, and many other works, of which a full catalogue may be found in the Biografia di Fra Sarpi bhyk. Bianchi-Giovini. The principal writings of Giannoti are “Della Republica di Venezia”; “Della RepubUca Fiorentina”, and Opuscoli; of Parata, Perfezione della vita politica, Discorsi politici. Of G. Bottero, La Ragione di Stato; Republica Veneziana; Cause della grandezza delle Città, and I Principi. The sun of philosophy in Italy  rose with Galilei, a native o fPisa, and the chief of the School, which a century before had begun with Vinci. At an early age, Galileo is a professor at Pisa and Padua, and afterwards holds the office of mathematician and philosopher at the Court of Tuscany. He is the true founder of inductive philosophy. Regarding nature as the great object of science, the autograph book of the Creator, Galilei holds that it cannot be read by authority, nor by any process a priori, but only by means of observation, experiment, measure and calculation. While, to aid his investigations, he invents, the hydrostatic balance, the proportional compass, the thermoseope, the compound microscope and the telescope, he borrows from mathematics the formulas, the analyses, the transformation and development of his discoveries. Applying this method to terrestrial and celestial mechanics, he makes important discoveries in every branch of physical science, and places th eheliocentric system on a scientific basis. Having thus given the death-blow to Scholasticism, he is arrested by the Inquisition, forced publicly to recant, and to remain under its surveillance for the rest of his life. Speaking of the comparative merit of Galilei and Bacon, Brewster says that had Bacon never lived, the student of nature would have found in the writings and the works of Galilei not only the principles of inductive philosophy, but also its practical application to the noblest efforts of invention and discovery. The eminent scientist Biot, while asserting the uselesness of the Baconian method, insists upon the permanent validity of that of Galilei; and Trouessart declares that in science we are all his pupils. Galileo founds a School honoured by the names of Torricelli, Viviani, Castelli, Borelli, Cavalieri, Malpighi, Spallaiizani, Morgani, Galvani, Volta and other eminent scientific men, who, following his method successively, take the lead in the scientific progress of Europe. It is due to this activity in science, that the Italian soul is enabled to resist the oppressive influence of the political and ecclesiastical servitude, under which Italy labored, and it is through the example of Galilei, that physical science never becomes so predominant, as to exclude the stndy of philosophy. Throughout hi sworks he loses no occasion to insist n efficient and final causes, and on the infinite difference which exists between the divine and the human intelligence; and while he deprecates the scepticism, which denies the legitimate power of reason, Galieli rejects pure rationalism, which knows no limit for human knowledge. Galilei asserts that beyond all secondcauses, there must necessarily exist a First Cause, whose omnipotent and allwise creative energy alone can explain the origin of the world; and he professes faith in that Divine Providence which embraces the universe as well as its atoms, like the sun which diffuses light and heat through all our planetary system, while at the same time it matures a grain of wheat as perfectly, as if that were the only object of its action.   The works of Galilei have een published in a complete edition, 10 vols., under the editorship of Alberi. “Le Opere dì Galileo Galilei, prima edizione completa,condutta sugli autentici Manoscritti Palatini,Firenze. This edition contains the life of Galilei,written by hi spupil Viviani. Among his biographers and critics may be mentioned Ghilini in his Teatro di uomini letterati; Rossi in his Pinacotheca Nustnum Virorum, Frisi, Eloggo di Galileo, which is inserted in the Supplement de L’Encyclopedic de Diderot and D’Alembert; Andres in his history of literature and in Saggio delli Filosofia di  Galileo; Brenna, “Vita di Galileo”, inserted in the work of Fabroni, “Vita Italorum doctrina excettentium qui Saculis xvii. et xviii. Jloruerunt; Tozzetti, in his Notizie degli aggrandimenti dette Scienze fisiche in Toscana, in which he publishes the life of Galileo written by Gherardini, his contemporary; C. Nelli, Vita e Commercio letterario di Galileo; Bailly, Histoire de l’Astronomie moderne; G. Tiraboschi, Storia della Letteratura Italiana; Montucla, Histoire des Mathematiques, Libes, Histoire Philosophique de Progrès de la Physique, IL T. Biot, Artide Galileo in Biographie universelle, published by Michaud; Barbier in his Examen critique et complement des Dictionnaires hlistoriques les plus repandus; Brougham, Life of Galileo;  Salii, in his continuation of the  Histoire  Uttiraire d'Italie de Ginguenò; Cuvier, Histoire des Sciences Naturelles; Libri, “Histoire des Sciences Mathematiques en Italie”; Brewster, Lines of Copernicus and Galileo (Edinburgh Review), Life of Newton, and the Martyrs of Science; Boncompagni, Intorno adalcani avanzamenti delibi Fisica in Italia; Wbewell, History of the Inductive Sciences”; Marini, Galileoe VInquisizione, D.Bezzi, in the Atti dell'Academia Pontificia dei nuovi Lincei; A. de Keumont, Galilei und Rom, published in his “Beitrage zur lUiUeniscJten Geschicltte; Chasles, Galileo Galilei, sa Vie, son Proeès et ses Contemporains, Madden, Galileo and the Inquisition; Bertrand, in his Les Fon diteurs de l’Astronomie moderne; Trouessart, in his “Galilee, sa Missionscientìfique, saVie ets onProeès”; Panhappe, “Galilee, sa Vie, ses Découvertes et ses Travaux”; Epinois, Galilee, son Proeès, sa Condam'nation, d'après des document» inédits, in the Revue des Sciences Historiques; Rallaye, Galilee, la Science et l’Eglise, in the Revue du Monde Catholique; Jagemann, “Geschichte des Lebens und der Schriften des Galileo Galilei”; Drinkwater, “Life of Galileo”; Selmi, “Nel Trecentesimo Natalizio di Galileo in Pisa”; Feliciani, “Filosofia Positiva di Galileo”; Wohlwill, Der Inquisition — Process des G. G.”; “Galileo and his Condemnation,Rambler(Lond.), Casc of Galileo, Dublin Rerietp.specially worthy of consultation; The Martyrdom of Galileo, North British Review,  in reply to Biot in the Joural des Savants; Castelnnu, Vie, Trataux. Proeès, etc. de Galil, Paris; Martin, “Galilee et les Droits de la Science; “Galileo's ''System of the World " was translated into English by Thomas Salusbury, fol. Lond. Vico, as the founder of the philosophy of history, stands foremost among the philosophers of modern times. He was born in Naples, and early devotes himself to the study of law, philosophy, philology and history. Living in an age when the philosophy of Descartes had become popular in Italy, Vico attacks the psychological method as the exclusive process of philosophic investigation, maintains the validity of common sense, and upholds the importance of historic and philological studies. Vico’s writings, “De Ratione Studiorum,” “De Antiquissiiiia Italorum Sapientia”, and “Jus Universale”, containing his “De Una et Universi Juris Principio et Fine”; his “De ConstantiaPkUosophiceandDC Constantia-Pht- luloyias, form a sort of introduction to his “Priiicipii di Scienza Nuova”, in which he develops his theoryof the historyof civilization. Of this work, twice re-written, he publishes two editions. In his introductory writings, Vico discusses the question of method, particularly as applied to moral and juridical science, and strives to evolve a metaphysical theory from the analysis of the roots of the language of the Ancient Romans and from the general study of philology, which, according to him, embraces all the facts of historical experience. Knowledge consists essentially in a relation of causality between the knowing principle and the knowable. Since the mind can only know that which it can produce through its own activity; that is to say, the mind can only know those data of experience, which it can convert into truth by aprocess of reason. This conversion, in which, according to Vico, lies the principle of all science, neither the psychological method, nor the geometrical process introduced by Descartes, can effect. It can only be produced by a method in which certainty and truth, authority and reason, philology and philosophy become united and harmonized, so as to embrace the necessary principles of nature as well as the contingent productions of human activity. To establish a fact which may be converted into truth, to find a principle which has its basis in experience and common sense, yet is in harmony with the eternal order of the universe, is the problem of metaphysics. This factorthis principle, according to Vico, is to be found in God alone. the only true “ens” who, being an infinite cause, contains in himself  all facts and allintelligence. Thus Divine Providence, acting inu» mysterious way, but through the spontaneous development of human activity, is the basis of all history, which reveals itself in the evolution of language, mythology, religion, law and government. Whether we accept the mosaic account, which points ont a state of de-gradation as a consequence of the fall, or admit a primitive condition of barbarism, it is certain that, at a remote period, the human race is in a condition far above that of the brutes. Gigantic in stature, their bodies covered with hair, men roam through the forests which covered th eearth, without family, language, laws, or gods. Tetwithin them, though latent, there are the principles of humanity, sympathy, sociability, pudor, honour and liberty, which, call forth by extraordinary events, gradually raise them from animalityto the first condition of human beings. This awakening is caused by terrific phenomena of nature, which, stimulating the mind to consciousness, brought a jxirtion of mankind under the influence of a super-natural power, and induces a number of individuals to take refuge in caverns and to commence the formation of families. From thi spoint the dynamic process of civilization is subject to certain laws, which preside over the development of all history. Prominent among these laws is that which produces the universal belief of all people in the great principles of religion, marriage and burial, which from the first beome the true./ter/tfra humanitatix. This lawm anifests itself in all the progress of civilization, which is divided into three different ages: the divine, the heroic, and the human. The divine age is the first stage of civilization, when the chief of the family is king and priest, ruling over his subordinates as the delegate of heaven. It is the age of the origin of language, rude and concrete, the age of sacred or hieroglyphic characters, of right identified with the will of the gods, and of a jurisprudence identified with theology, the age of idolatry, divination, mythology, auspices and oracles. The heroic age has its birth when that portion of mankind which remains in a savage condition, seeks refuge from the violence of their companions, still more degraded than themselves, in the homes of those families already established, and at the feet of the altars erected on the heights. The newcomers are admitted into the family on condition of becoming servants of their defenders, who now claim to be the off-spring of the gods,and heroes by right of birth and power. Thus the primitive families are the rulers of the community, enjoying rights which are not accorded to slaves -- such as the solemnity of marriage, the possession of land, etc. Gradually the number of slaves increases. They become restless under the domination of their masters, who after long struggle are finally constrained to grant them some of their rights. Hence the origin of agrarian laws, patronages, serfs, patricians, vas sals, and plebeians, and with them the rise of cities, subject to aristocratic government. Meantime language, losing some of its primitive rudeness, becomes imaginative and mythologic; its characters become more fantastic and universal. Law is no longer from the gods, but from the heroes, though still identified with force; and the duel and retaliation take place of sacerdotal justice. In this period the predominance of imagination is so great that general types become represented bv proper names, and accepted as historical characters. Thus the inventive genius of Egyptians finds a personification in Hermes, the heroism of ancient Greece in Hercules, and its poetry in Homer. So Romulus and the other kings of ancient Rome, in whom periods of civilization have been personified, descend to posterity as historical characters. With the gradual development of democracy the human age appears: and with it aristocratic or democratic republics and modern monarchies, established more or less on the equality of the people. Language becomes more and more positive, and prose and poetry more natural and more philosophic. Religion loses a great part of its mythologic alcharacter, and tends to morality and to refinement. Civil and political equality is extended, natural right is considered superior to civil legality,  and private right becomes distinguished from public. In the pefection o fdemocratic governments there is only one exception to equality, and that is wealth. But wealth is the cause of corruption in those who possessit, and of envy and passion in those who desireit. Hence abuse of power, discords, insurrections, and civil wars, from which monarchy often arises as a guarantee of public order. Monarchy failing, the country which is rent by corruption and anarchy will finally fall by conquest, or, in the absence of conquest, it will relapse into a state of barbarism equal to that which preceded the divine age, with the only difference that the first was a barbarism of nature, the second will be a barbarism of reflection. The one is ferocious and beastly, the other is perfidious and base. Only after a longp eriodof decadence will that nation again begin the course of civilization, passing through its different stages, liable again to fall and rise, thus revolving in an indefinite series of “corsi” and “ricorsi”,  which express the static and the dynamic conditions of human society. This theory is evolved by Vico from the history of Rome, making that the typical history of mankind, whose principal features are repeated in the histories of all nations. Thus the same law manifests itself again after the fall of the Roman empire, when in the dark, the middle ages, and modern times, the divine,.the heroic, and the human ages reappear. Civilization therefore in a given people, that is to say, their progress from brutal force to right, from authority to reason, and from selfishness to justice, is not the work of legislators and philosophers, not the result of communication with other communities; but it is the spontaneous growth of their own activity working under the influence of exterior circumstances. The primitive elements of civilization are found only in the structure of their language and mythology, their poetry and traditions. The "Scienza Nuova," according to Vico, may he regarded as a natural theology, for it shows the permanent action of Divine Providence in human history; and as a philosophy, for it establishes the basis of the origin and the development of human society, points out the origin of its fundamental ideas, and distinguishes the real from the mythical in the history of nations. This distinction, so far as it regards the history of Rome, is fully confirmed by the more recent researches of Niebuhr, Schwegler, and Mommsen. The treatise of Vico may also be regarded as the natural history of mankind and a philosophy of law, for it gives the principles of ail historical development and the genesis of the idea of natural right, as deduced from the common wisdom of the people. The complete edition of the works of Vico in 6vols, was published in Milan, under the editorship of Ferrari, the author of “La Mente di Vico”, an important work on the New Science. Giudice publishes “Scritti inediti diVico.” Vico's philosophy gives birth to aconsiderablebranchof literature containing writings of criticism and exegesis. Among his contemporary opponents may be mentioned Romano in his “Difesa Storiai delleLeggi GrecJte venule a Roma, contro topinione moderna del Signirr Vico”, and in his Lettere ml terzoprindpio della Scienza Nvoua, in which he defends the Greek origin of the laws contained in the XII Tables, and opposes the theory on spontaneous formation of language and civilization. He is also the author of ScienzadelDirittoPublico, of the Origine della Societa and other works, in which he holds doctrines antagonistic to those of Vico. Finetti in his “De Principiis Juris Naturae et Gentium ad cerisuillobbeniuin, Pufendorfium, Woljium et alios, and in his Sommario dell’ opposizione dd sistema ferino, e la falsitddditstatoferineattacks thedoctrinesof Vico on the origin of civilization. His defense was undertaken by DUNI (si veda) in his Origine e program delcittadino, e del govemo civile di Roma, and in his La Scienza del Costume oimia Sistema del Diritlo Universale; also by Ganassoni in his Memoria in difesa del Prindpio del VicosiilTe/riginedettexn. Tatole.; and Rogadei in his DeWanticostatoeldpopo L’ItaliaCisliberina. Among Vico's followers and imitators may bementioned Stellini, in his “De Ortu et Progreami morum” and in his “Ethica”; Pagano, the patriot who suffers death for his adhesion to the Partbenopean Republic, in his Suggi politici d d Prindpii, Progresso e Decadenza dtlle Soctetda”; Cuoco, in his “Platone in Italia”; Filaugeri. in his “Scienza della legislazione”, who adopts many of the principles of Vico, and particularly that of the original incommunicability of primitive myths among different people, and spontaneous origin of historical manifestations; and Delfico who, in his  “Ricerclie mil rero carattere della juriurisprudema Romana e de' suoi outtori exaggerates the principies of Vico and falls into a system of historical scepticism. Foscolo in his “Discorso dflC Origine e deS1 Uffizio delta Lettemtura adopted the doctrines of Vico on the origin and the nature of language as well as society and civil government. Janelli, one of the most eminent critics of Vico, in his SuUa Naturti e NeoettitA dfUa ijcienza deUe Cose e delle Storie wnane gives the critical analysis of the historical Synthesis, as expressed in the Scienza Nuova. of the original and spontaneous growth of different civilizations. Jamelli introduces the three ages of the senses, imagination and reason in history, corresponding to the divine, heroic, and human ages of Vico, and characterises the last age by the development of Telo&ifoi and Etiolngia, the former the science of finalities, the latter that of causalities. Romagnosi I nhis OmerrasioM tnti Scitiaii Nuota, and other works, examines the doctrines of Vico from a critical point of view, and while he accepts some of his principles he rejects his fundamental idea of the spontaneity of the growth of civilization, and holds that this is always the result of a derivation from another people. LuigiTontiinhisSagyiv Htpra, la Scienza Nvota, makes a philosophical exposition of the doctrines of Vico, and dwells particularly on the relations existing between Vico, Machiavelli, Gravina. Herder, and other jurists and philosophers. Predari undertakes the edition of Vico's works, but he published only one volume, in which he gives an historical analysis of Vico’s mind in relation to the science of civilization. Cattaneo in his Vico e F Ittiliti in the PoHtecnito, holds that Vico succeeds in fusing together Machiavelli's doctrine of the supremacy of self-interest with that of the supremacy of reason, as denied by Grotius. Tommaso, in Studi critiei maintains that the idea of progress is apparent in the Scienza Nuova, in which, although the course of history is fixed within the limits of a certain orbit determined by the law of the Corsi and Ricorsi, this orbit is not limited, and may become wider and wider in the progress of time. Mamiani, in his “RinnocamentodettaFtiotnjiaantteaIaliaana”, adopts the criterium of the conversion of fact into truth as expressed by Vico, his doctrine on the unity, identity, and continuity of force, the spontaneity of motion as belonging to a principle inherent to every atom independently of the mass, and the idea of the indivisible, indefinite, and immovable, as evolved from phenomenical reality. And so Rosmini and Gioberti have in their various works endeavoured to bring hie authority to the support of their theories, while Centofanti, in his “Formda logic* dellii Fifvsojia (IMa Storia” follows Vico in considering historical reality in its ideal genesis, in ascending from experience to the philosophical idea of history, and in connecting under one principle the cosmic, psychologic, and social orders. Carmignani, in his 8t/ma deW Oriffini e dei Progressi della Filosofia del Diritto”, attributes to Vico the origin of a true philosophy of jurisprudence, and Amari in his “Critica di una Scienza delle legislazioni comparate”, gives a complete analysis of Vico’s doctrines having relation to the philosophical and historical department of comparative legislation. Carlo, in his FUosofiatetondoiPrindpU di Vico and La Mente (ClUttia e Vico; Fornari, in his Delhi Vita di Cntto;  Zocchi, in his Studi sopra T. Jfenwi; Galasso, in his Del Stulema Hegdiano, and Del Metoda Storico del Vico; Spaventa, Florentine, Vera, Bertrai, Conti, Franchi, Mazzarella and others either adopt some of the fundamental principles of Vico, or subject his doctrine to critical examination. Siciliani, in his Sid Rinnotamento della FUo»ofin ponitiva in Italia”, having examined all the principal systems of philosophy, rejects them all, and contends that the reconciliation of modern positivism with ancient idealism can only be effected throuch the doctrines of Vico, from which he strives to develop not only a historical philosophy, but a logical and metaphysical doctrine. Siciliani isa lsotheauthor of “Dante, Galileo e Vico”. Other works of criticism on the philosophy of Vico are Colangelo's “Consideraaoni sulla Scienza Nuova”, Cesare's “Kmimario dcUe dottrine del Vico”; Gallotti's Principii di una Scderna Nuova di Vico”; P. Jola'B Studio snl Vico”; Mancini's “Intorno alia Fihsofia d d Diritto”, Valle's Stiggi nulla Scienza ddla Storia”; Rocco's Elogio Storico di Vico”; Reggio's “Introduzioneai1rincipiidclleUinaneSucieta”; Marini'sG. B.Victo; Giani'sDeW UnicoPrincipioedell'UnicoFine ddV Universo Diritto”; Fagnani's “Delia necessitd e dcW uso ddla Ditinazione UntificatadallaScienzaNuova diVico”; Fontana's/>(FiUisofiuneJlaStoria”; J. Merletta's “G. B. Vico e la sapienza antichissima degli Italiani”; Luca’s “Saggio ontiilogico suVe dottrine deW Aquinute e del Vico”; Cantoni's G. B. Vico”. In Germany the philosophy of Vico finds interpreters in Savigny in his NtebuJir, E. Gans in his preface to UegeVs Philosophy of HiMory; Jacoby in his Cantoni uber Vico”; Wolff in the Museum dcr Alterthumswissenschaft”; OrelliinhisVico and Niebuhr; Weber, the translator of the Scienza Nuova; Giischel in the Zerstreute Blatter; Cauer in the Germanic Museum, and C.EiMiiller. thetranslatorofVico' s minor works. In France, Michelethas interprets Vico’s doctrines in his Principe-i de la Philosophie de CHi*toirc”; Ballanche, in his Prolegomenc* din Palingenesie Sociale, and in his Orphee”; Cousin, in his Introduction a F'ITM'irt'delu Philosophic”; Lerminior." in his Introduction generate a Fllistoire dn Droit; Jouffroy, in his Melanges Philosophiques; Bouchez, in his Introduction, dla Science deVllistoire; the anonymous author of la Science Nouvelle par Vico”; Franck, in the Journal de* Savants”; Ferron, in his Theorie du Progres”; Vacherot, in his Science et Conscience”; Laurent, in his Etudes sur l’histoiredeVHumanite”; Barthlomess, in the Dictionnuire des Sciences PhUosophiques; Boullier in his Histoire dela Philosophic Cartesienne”; Renouvier,in his “Manuel de la Philosophie Moderne” and Comte in his letter to Mill. Cf. Littr6,A. C'ornteetla.PhilosophicPositire. Among the English philosophers, Mill has given attention to the historical principles of Vico in his “System of Logic”. Cf.Vico's "New Science and Ancient Wisdom of Italians," in Foreign Review, Lond., Foreign Quarterly Review. The philosophic revolution which began with Descartes in France, soon extends toItaly and manifests itself in the two forms of psychologism (or idealism), and sensualism -- represented by Descartes and Malebranehe on the one side, and by Locke and Condillac on the other. Among the followers of the Psychologism of Descartes are Cornelio, who in his “Progymnaxmata Physica” tries to blend the doctrines of Telesio with the method of the French philosopher; Fardella, the friend of Amauld and Malebranehe, and the author of Universe PhUosopliijt Systcma”;  Doria, who in his “Difesa ddla Metafisica” opposes the doctrines of Locke; Grimaldi, who in his Discussioni htoriclie, TetHugiche e Filosofiehe” vindicates the Cartesian philosophy against the attacks of the Aristotelians of his age; and Brescia, the authorof “Philosophia Mentis methodice tractate”. Among the opponents of Aristotle may also be mentioned Basso,PluUmtphias    Natural!* adcersw Aristotelem, libri 12. The following philosophers belong to the school of Descartes through the affinities with Malebranche: Gerdil who held to the vision of ideas in the divine mind, and opposed the Sensualism of Locke, the Ontologism of Wolff, and the Pantheism of Spinoza. Among his numerous works the following relate to philosophical subjects: “L immateriality de Cdute dimmlti coidre Locke”; “Defense du sentiment du P. Malebranclie— sur la nature et Corigine da idee*contreteaamendeMr.Locke; “Anti-Emile,or,Reflexion*svrlatlteorieetlapra tique tie l’education contre les principes de Rousseau”; Traite de* combat* singnliert; Discours philosoplugue* nur Vhomme; Dintostrazione maternaltea eontro CeferMtd deBa materia; Del? inflnito Assoluto consulerato iitUa grandezza; Esame e coitfuUtzi-me dti principii deUa FHosofla WiAfiana; Introdtmone alio Studio deUa Religion. Rossi, contemporary of Vico, and author of “La Meitte Sorrana “; Mieeli. who strives to reconcile Christian idealism with the Eleatic doctrines, and whose system may be found in Gioanni's work, “Mieeii. ovcerotldCEnte I'noeRente; Palmieri, who defends Christianity against the materialistic doctrines of Frerct and oother French writers; Carli, who in his “Elemesti di Morale” attempts a philosophical confutation of Rousseau on the inequality of men; FALLETTI (vedasi), who, in his work on Condillac, establishes the principle of knowledge on the idea of being as evolved from THE EGO – cf. H. P. Grice, Personal identity --; Draghetti, who founds his Psychology on moral instinct and reason; Torelli, in his treatise “De Sihtl/t”; Chiavacci in his Saggio sulla grandezza di Dio”; Orazi in his” MeJodo mi tersnle di filosofare”; Pini, author of the “Protologia”, in which he establishes all principles of knowledge and morality on the unity of the Divine Nature; Giovenale, who in his “Soli* intdligentitr, cttinon nieeedit itox. lumen iiideficiensac inextinguibile Muminan* omrtem hominem” seeks in divine illumination the source of all science; Tellino, who in his “These*PhUosojiltiea1deInflnito.1(W1” ascends to the idea of the Infinite as the principle of all knowledge; a principle which was also regarded as transcendental by Pasqualigo in “Disputationes Met'tphgxicae”. By M.TerralavoroinMetaphysial; and by Boschovich in “SullaLeggediCo&- tinuitd”. While these philosophers are characterized by a Platonic tendency, the following professed themselves disciples of Aristotle: Liccto in his “De Ortu Aninur IJtiman^r”; “DeInteMectuAgente”; DeLurerni*aittiqitorninreeonditi*;DeAi,mili*a»ti- qui*; Apologia pro AristoUU. Athei-tini aceunato; De, Pittate Aristotetis”; Polizzo in his “Philosophical Disputationes”; Andrioli, in his “Plttlosophia Erperimentale”; Langhi, in his “Xoriasima Philvsophia”; Jlorandi. in his Curm* Ph&*np/ua”; Maso. in his Theatrum Pldlosophicum”; Scrbelloni. in his Phibtnphii”; Spinola, in his “Korissima Plttlosophia”; Ambrosini, in his Method** ineentiea”; Benedetti, in his Plttlosophia Peripatetica”; Rocco. in his Esercitnzionifi'.otofiche”. As Empiricists more independent of scholastic influence may be mentioned Borelli, the eminent scientist, in his great work, “De Motu Animalium”, in which animal mechanics are established on scientific principles; Magalotti, in his Lettere famigliari against Atheism”; Grandi, author of a Logic in which he opposed Scholasticism, and of “Diacresi”, in which he refutes the doctrines of Ceva, as expressed in his “PlttlosophiaNovo-Antigua”, a workwritten in verse, intended as a confutation of Gassendi, Descartes, and Copernicus; SEVERINO (vedasi), who in his “Pawofta”stives to investigate nature through the study of ancient monuments. Magneno precedes Gassendi in the restoration oft he atomistic philosophy in his “Democritus reviciscens” and in “De Re*tauraU'oite Phitotopki Z>em. Epieurea”; Ciassi anticipates Leibnitz in the doctrine of Monades, in his “Tntorno (die Forte Vice; and Algarotti calls the attention of his contemporaries to the works of Newton in his “Netctonuinismo”. The philosophy of Wolff finds an exponent in the author of “InstUutiones Pliilosophm Wo'.fianae” and the doctrine of Leibnitz is interpreted in the works of Trevisani and Cattanco. Meanwhile, the questions as to the soul of animals, and the union of the soul with the body, are treated by Cadonici in “Dissertazionc epistolare”, Fassoni, in “Libro suW anima delle bestie”, L. Barbini, “Nuoro Sistema intorno all’anima dei bruti”, Sbaragli, “Enteleehia, sen anima sensitiva brutorum demonstrate contra Cartesium”; Pino, “Trattato sojyra l’essenza dtW anima ihlle bestie”, Vitale, “L'unione dell’anima col corpo”, Papi, “Sull’anima delle bestie”, Monti, “Anima brutorum”; Corte, “Sul tempo in cui si injbnde Vanima nelfeto. Empiricism is greatly extended. At first it remains independent, but it soon falls under the influence of the doctrines of Locke and Condillac. Among the early Empiricists of that age may bementioned Martini, “Logica, seu Ars coffutandi”, Fuginelli, “Prina'pia Metaphysial gcomctriai meUiodopertractata”, Visconti, “Theses ex Universa Philosophia”; Sanctis, “Delle passioni e rizi drWintelktto”; Fromond, “NonaIntroductioadPMosophiam”, Spedalieri, Dei Diritti dtW Homo”, Zanotti, philosophical works, Longano, Dell’uomo naturale”; Boccalossi, “Sulla-liiflessione”, Amati, EtMca ex tem pore conciitnata”, Verri, philosophical works, Baldinotti, “Tentaminum Mttap/iyskorum, Libri 3, and “De Recta Humana! Mentis Institutione”, Tettoni, “Priacipii del Diritto naturale”, Capocasale, “Cursxs PhUosophicus”, Bianchi, “Meditozioni”, Muratori, the author of the Annals of Italy, and of DdleForzc deWIntiiulimento, DeliaForzadeUaFantasia,and DaFilosofiaMorale”; Gravina, the author of De Origine Juris Ronnini,  and La Ragione poetica”. The influence of the sensualistic school of France is chiefly introduced into Italy through the translation of Locke's "Essay on tlut Understanding" by Soave (il modo delle parole, la parola e segno dell’idea, e l’idea e segno della cosa), a member of the Order of the Somaschi, and the author of “Instituzioni di Logica, Metafisica e Morale” and of many other philosophical works, all moulded on the philosophy o fLocke. His “Instituzioni” have long been the text-book of philosophical instruction in the Colleges of Northern Italy. The translations of the writings of Bonnet, D’Alembert, Rousseau, Helvetius, Holbach, De Tracy, and, above all, the philosophical works of Condillac give a powerful impulse to the doctrine, and the philosophy of the senses became predominant in the universities and colleges of the Peninsula. The personal influence of Condillac, who resided at theCourt of Parma as tutor to a Bourbon prince, greatly contributes to this result. The philosophical text-books written by Mako and Storcheneau also greatly added to the propagation of Sensualism in the Italian Schools. Among the representatives of this philosophy may be mentioned, besides Soave already named Bini, “Lettere Teologiehe e MeUifisicliche”, Pavesi, “Elementa Logices, Meta- physicei, et Phil. Moralis”, F. Barkovich, SaggiosuUe passioni”, Rezzonico, SuHa FUmofia”; Tomaio, InstituzionidiMetaj Utiea”, Valdr.s- tri, Lezioni di analisi delle Idee”, Lomonaco, Analisi della scnsibilita”, Schedoni, “Delle morali influenze”, Cestari, “Tentatiro secondo delta rigenerazione delle Scienze”, Abba, “Elementa Logices et Metaphysices, Delle Cognizioni umane and Letterea F Uomatomille credenze primitive,;and "Patio,Blemeata PhilosophimMoralis. On the same basis Cicognara seeks to establish Aesthetics in his “Del Bello”, Cesarotti, Philology, in his Sulla Filosofia deUe Scienze”, Costa, Rhetoric, in his D d modo di comporre, le idee, and Borrelli, Psychology, in his “Prineipii della Genealogia del Pensiero”. To counteract these materialistic tendencies, some philosophers endeavour to construct a philosophy ou the basis of revelation, while others seek refuge in a kind of eclecticism. Among the first may bementioned Premoli, “De etistentiaDei”, Riccioli, “De distinction sentium in Deo et in creaturis”, Sicco, “Logica et Metaph.Institutiones”, Semery, Triennium Philosophicum”, Ferrari, PJal<m>- phia Peripatetica adcersus teteres et recensiores prasertim PhUosoplios, and Leti, “Nihil sub Sole Novum” and “De unico rerum naturalium formali principio, ten de Spirita Materiali”. Among the second class are Ceva,alreadymentioned; Corsini, Institution** Phtf.osofJiic* uè Matematico”, Gorini, Antropologia”, Luini, Meditazione Filotvfie”, Ansaldi, Riflessioni sulla Filosofia Morale”, “De traditioneprincipiorvm legis naturalis” and “Vindicim Maupertuisinnm”, Scarella, “Element* Logica; Ontologia, Psycdnght et Teologia naturalis, and above all, Genovesi in his “Elementa Mdaphysices”, “Elementorum Artis Logico-Critiar”, “Instituzioni delle Scienze Metafisicli”, “Logica pei Giovanetti, “Diceosina or moni science”, “MeditazioniFàosoficJie”, “Elementi di Fisica sperimentale” and in his “Lezioni<& Commercio e di EeonAnia Citile”, which work contains his lectures on political economy, delivered from the chair established at Naples by his friend Interi, a wealthy Florentine who resided in that city. To this same School may be referred Galiani, tne author of “Trattato della moneta” and tin Dialogues stir le Commerce de Uè”,  Bianchini, who, in his “Storia Unitersale” strives to separate history from its legendary elements by a philosophic interpretation of ancient monuments, Giannone, who, in his “Storia arile del Regno di Napoli” puts in evidence the usurpations of the Church over the State, and boldly asserted the independence of the latter; and Beccaria, the author of “Dei Delitti e delle Pene”, a work which, more than any other, contributes to a radical reform of penal law in Europe. Cf. StoriadellaLetteraturaItaliana di G.Tiraboschi; Della Storia e detf Indole (fogni Filosofia di  Buonafede, Delia Ristanrazione (Fogni Filosofia nei Secoli 15°, 16°, 17°, by thesanv? writer, Dell’Origine e Progresso d'ogni Letteratura, by Andres; /ecali della Letteratura Italiana, di Corniani continuata da Ticozà e C. tigoni ls>5fi; Storiadella Letteratura Italiana di Lombardi, HistoireUttérair' <fItalie, par Ginguène— eontinuée par Salfi; Storia della Letteratura Italiana, di Maffei, Storia, della Letteratura Italiana, di Giudici. Cf. also Supplementi alla Storia della Filosofia di Tennemann” by Romagnosi and Poli. On Genovesi cf. Genovesi by Racciopi, and on Beccaria, “Beccar» eilDirittoPenale” by Cantù. The predominance of French philosophy makes the ideas of the French encyclopedists and sensualists popular among the more advanced philosophers of Italy. The progress of natural science, of jurisprudence and political economy contributes to foster the habit of mental independence, while the national spirit which had penetrated the literature in ‘the volgare’ from the age of Aligheri, becomes more powerful than ever, especially through the writings of VAlfieri, who, in his Misoyatto, earnestly opposes the prevailing influence of French philosophy, and in his tragedies strives to excite his countrymen to noble and independent deeds by the dramatic representation of ancient Roman patriotism. This spirit is kept alive by the poetry of Foscolo and Leopardi, the satires of Parini and Giusti, the political writings of *.!;./.ini, the historical novels of Guerrazzi and Azeglio, the tragedies of Manzoni and Niccolini, and the historical works of Troya, Colletta, Hotta,SlidCesareBalbo. But no department of mental activity contributes so powerfully to the advance of the national sentiment as philosophy, which, embodying the aspirations of the people, aims to give them a scientific basis and a rational direction. In its development it passes through the same phases as in France, adjusting itself to the wants of the country, yet keeping on the whole an independent character. The Italian contemporary philosophy may be divided as follows: Empiricism, Criticism, Idealism, Ontologism, Absolute Idealism or Hegelianism, Scholasticism, and Positivism. Of the School of Empiricism Gioja is the first representative. He was born in Piacenza, an dearly devoted himself to the cause of liberty and national independence. Witht he advent of Napoleon in Italy he enters public life, and advocates a Republican government. Under the Cisalpine Republic Gioja is appointed historiographer and director of national statistics. With the fall of Napoleon Gioja retires from office; and twice suffers imprisonment for his liberal views. Accepting the doctrines of Locke and Condillac, Gioja strives to apply them to the social and economic sciences in the defence of human rights, and the promotion of wealth, and happiness among the people. In his “ElementidiFtlvsojin”, Gioja defines the nature of external observation, and describes its methods its instruments, its rules, and the other means through which its sphere may be extended. The foundation of all science, according to him, lies in the science of Statistics, which supplies the phenomena of scientitic investigation, classifies them, and brings them under general laws. Thus, Statistic embraces nature and mind, man and society; it originates in philosophy and ends in politics, to which it reveals the economic resources of nations, wealth, poverty, education, ignorance, virtue, andvice. This process he follows in his “FllosojiudtHaStatistioa”, in which he reduces all economic and political phenomena to certain fundamental categories, the bases of social science, and the criteria of productive forces in society. Gioja follows the same method in defining the nature of social merit in his “Del Merita e delle Ricompense”, fixing its constituent elements, he verifies them in the history of nations, and by their presence or absence traces the different degrees of their civilization. A follower of Condillac in psychology, GIOJA (vedasi) is the disciple of Bacon in his method, and of Bentham in his morals. The general good constitutes the source of duty, right, and virtue; even self- sacrifice springs from utility. Imagination and illusion play a great part in human life, indeed it is only through these faculties that man excels other animals. Through them man loves fame, wealth, and power, his greatest motives to action. Virtue itself finds its bestcompensation in illusion, and religion has in the eyes of a true statesman no other value than the influence it exerts on the people. GIOJA (vedasi) writes also “Teoria Civile e Penale del Divorzio”, “Indole, Estenxione e Vantaggi dfllaStatistical”, “Nuovo Prospctto delle Sciense Economise”, “Ideolo gia” and “11Nuovo Gakitco. Gf. ElogioStorico di Gioja by Romagnosi, Discorso su Gioja, by Falco, and Es*at sur PHistoire de la Philosophical Italieau Dix-Neuvieme Sieclt,\^ Louis Ferri. Romagnosi, the eminent jurist, marks a step in advance in the empiric philosophy. Romagnosi was born in Piacenza, supports the government of Napoleon in Lombardy, and holds a professorship of jurisprudence at Parma, Pisa, and Milan. He is tried for treason againstAustria, and acquitted. His psychologic doctrines are contained in his “Che Cosa e la Mcnte Sana”, “La Supremo, Economia deW Umano Sapcre”, Vcdutefondameiitali sulT Arte loyica”, “Dottrine della Ragione. W'hile he admits the general tenets of Condillac, Romagnosi rejects tho notion that our ideas are but transformed sensations. Lier ecognizes in the mind a specific sense, the logical, to which he attributes the formation of universal ideas and ideal syntheses. It is this faculty which perceives differences and totalities, as well as all relations which form the chain of creation. The harmony between the faculties of the mind and the forces of nature is the foundation of all philosophy. It is through the logical sense that that harmony is reached, and the connection and co-ordination of mind and nature are effected. Its sphere, however, is limited to experience, and is therefore essentially phenomenal. The reality of nature, cause, substance and force escapes our mind. Moral obligation arises from the necessary conjunction of our actions with the laws of nature, in reference to our own perfection. The ideal of this perfection, formed from experience and reason, constitutes the rational necessity of moral order. Right is thepower of doing whatever is in accordance with that order; hence right is subordinate to duty. Hence, too, human rights are inalienable and immutable; they are not created by law, but originate in nature, and culminate in reason. Civil society is the child of nature and reason, and not the offspring of an arbitrary contract, as Rousseau believed. Civilization is thecreation of the collective intelligence, in the pursuit of the ends established by nature. It is both internal and external; the first is the result of the circumstances amidst which a nation may find itself, in relation to its own perfection; the second is transmitted from one people to another, and modified by local causes. As a general rule, civilization is always exteriorly transmitted through colonies or conquest, or communicated by Thesmothetes (law-givers), foreign or native. Romagnosi develops these ideas in his “Introduzione alio Studio del Dlritto Publico Univer sale”, “Principii della Scienza del Diritto”; “Delia Natura ed<?FattorideWIncivilimento”, “His Della Genesi del Diritto Penale” in which he limits the right of punishment to the necessity of social defence, has contributed, not less than the work of Becaria on crimes and punishments, to the reform of penal law in Europe since the beginning of the present century. A complete edition of Romagnosi's works is published in Milan under the editorship of Giorgi. Cf. La Mente di Romagnosi by Ferrari, his Biografia by Cantu, and Ferri, op. tit. The philosophic scheme of Criticism proposes to establish the validity of knowledge by the analysis of thought. Its chief Italian representative is Galuppi. Galuppi was born in Calabria, and holds a professorship of philosophy at Naples. A student of Descartes, Locke, Condillac, and Kant, Galuppi directs his attention chiefly to psychology, which in connection with ideology constitutes, according to him, all metaphysical science. Philosophy is the science of thought in its relation to knowledge and to action; hence It is theoretical or practical. The former embrace pure logic -- which occupies itself with thought, that is,with timjorM ofknowledge which is independentofexperience.; Ideologyand Psychology -- the science of thought and of its causes, and, third, Mixed Logic -- which considers empiiic thoughts, the matter of knowledge, and unites the principles of pure reason with the data given by sensations. A fourth branch, Practical philosophy, or Ethics, considers thought in relation to the will,the motivesandrulesofitsactions. To this a fifth branch, Natural Theology is added, which from the conditional evolves the unconditional and from the relative the absolute. Philosophy from another point of view may also be divided nto subjective and objective, as its object is th emind itself, or th erelations which unite it to the externalworld. The fundamental problem of philosophy is found in the question of the reality of knowledge. Rejecting the solution of it given by Locke and Condillac, Galuppi accepts the distinction of Kant between the form and the matter, the pure and the empiric elements in human thought; but he insists that by making the former the product of the mind, the philosopher of Konigsberg renders it a merely subjective function, in a de knowledge entirely subjective, and paved the way for the Scepticism of Hume. Realism in knowledge can only be obtained from the assumption of two principles. First, the immediate consciousness of the Ego; second, the objectivity of sensation. The consciousness of the substantiality of the Ego is inseparable from the modifications of our sensibility; at the same time sensation, either internal or external, is not merely a modification of our existence, but is essentially objective; it affects thesubject and contains the object. Our mindi s thus indirect communication with itself and the external world through a relation which is not arbitrary, as Reid supposes, but essential, necessary, and direct. This relation is expressed in the immediate sentiment of the metaphysical unity of the Ego, which thus becomes the foundation of knowledge. From the primitive consciousness of the Ego, and of the non-Ego, the mind rises to distinct ideas through reflection, aided by analysis and synthesis— the analysis preceding the synthesis— by distinguishing the sensation both from the ego, and the object which produces it. Thus, an idea is essentially an analytic product, although it may be considered a ssynthetic,iur elation to the substantial unity of  the ego in which it is formed. Although all knowledge of reality is developed from the consciousness of experience, there is a previous element in the mind which renders that development possible. This element is subjective, that is, it is given by th emind itself in its own activity, andc onsists in the immediate perception of the identity of our ideas, from which arises metaphysical evidence or logical necessity, which forms the basis of allphilosophicalreasoningandscientificcertainty. Thuseveryjudg ment based on logical necessity proceeds from the principle of iden tity, which in its negative form becomes the principle of contradic tion. It is therefore analytical; indeed no synthetic; judgment d priori is admissible, and those which were held as such by Kant may all be reduced to analytical ones, in which the attribute is contained in the subject, and which therefore are based on identity. General ideas are all the product of comparison and abstraction; none of them are innate, although they are all natural, that is to say, the product of mental activity. Thus from the perception of another body than its own, the mind evolves the ideas of duality, plurality, extension, and solidity; from these the idea of matter; and through further analysis, those of substance, causality,time and space. They are all analytical, subjective and objective; analytic because derived through analysis from identity, subjective because elaborated by theactivity of the mind out of its own consciousness, and objective because contained in the objective perceptions of sensibility. A spiritualist in psychology, Galuppi maintains the unity, the simplicity, the indivisibility and the immortality of the human soul, which he considers as a substantial force, developing into various faculties as it becomes modified by diverse surrounding circumstances, from the consciousness of the Ego and of the non-Ego (or Tu) arising to abstract and universal principles. Remaining, however, withinthe bonds of empiricism, though he places the human mind above nature, yet Romagnosi also holds that it cannot attain to the knowledge of its own essence, or of the essence of matter, nor understand the origin of the universe, and the processes of its development. In Ethics, Galuppi rejects both the doctrine of Helvetius, which founds morality on the instinct of pleasure, and that of Wolff and Romagnosi, who derive its essence from our natural longing for perfection. First among modern philosophers of Italy, Galuppi establishes with Kant the absolute obligation of moral law, and its pre-eminence above self-interest and self-perfection. Happiness is a motive to our actions; it is not the essence of moral obligation, nor the source of virtue. Absolute imperatives, or practical  judgments a priori,such as "Do thy rduty” are at thefoundationof moral law; they originate from the very nature of practical reason, which contains also the principle of the final harmony between virtue and happinesss -- expressed in the moral axiom, virtue merits reward, and vice punishment. From this principle as well as from ou rown consciousness, Galuppi demonstrates the freedom of the will, both as a psychological and moral fact. Natural religion has for it sobject the existence of God, of whom we may obtain the idea by rising from the conditional to the unconditional, from the finite to the infinite, and from the relative to the absolute. This idea is subjective: it is developed from that of identity, that,is, the one isi ncluded in the other. But we reach also the existence of infinite reality through the principle of causality, and in this sense the idea of God is objective. Theism alone can reconcile the infinite goodness of God with the existence of evil; a reconciliation, however, which is imperfect, from the very fact that human reason cannot understand all the relations which exist between all beings. God is incomprehensible, creation is amystery, miracles are a possibility, and revealed religion is an important aid to our education. Cf. L.Ferri,op.cit.,and It.Mariano,LaPhilosophicContemporaine en Ltalie. he following are the works of GALLUPPI (si veda): “Saggio FUosqfico sulla Critlca della Conoseema”, “Letter? Fllosofiche suite Vicende della FUosofia intorno ai Prineipii dtlla, Conoscenza Umana da Cartesio fino a Kant, Elementi di Filosofia”; “Lezioni di Logica e di Metajlsica”; Fili* sojuidellaVolontd”’ “ConsiderazionisuWIdealismotrascen- dentala e sid Itazionalismo assoluto”. The following writers may be referred partly to Empiricism, and partly to Criticism:P.Tamburini, “Introduzionealio Studwddla FUosofiaMorale”; ElementaJitri*Xa- turce”, “Cennisiiila PerfettibiUtddtW Umana Famiglia”, Ceresa.Prineipiit Leggigeneralidi FUosofiae Medieina”, Zantedeschi, Elementi di Psieologia Empirica”, Poli, Saggio FUotofico sopra la Swola dei modernifilosofi naturalisti”, “Saggio cFun Corso di Filosofia; and Primi Elementi di FUosofia”, Ricci. in his C'ottsiuitmo (AntologiadiFirenze). Rivato, Ricobelli.and Devincenzi, who wrote on theFrench Eclecticism in the CommentarideW Alencodi Brescia”, Lusverti, Inxtituzioni Logico-lfetafisiche”, Gigli,AnalisidnUe.Idee”, Bini,LezioniLogieo-itfta- fixieo Morali”, Pezzi, Lezioni di FUosofia della mente e del more; Accordino, Elementi di FUosofia”, ZeUi, Elementi di Metafisim”, Alberi,DdXaciWe”, Gatti, PrineipiidiIdeologic”, Passeri, Ddlanaturaumanasocietoie”, DeW umana perfezione”, Scaramuzza, Esame analiUco ddUi facoliA di*»• tire,  Bonfadini, Sulk Categoric di Kant”, Bruschelli, Prdectiones Logico- Mctaphisicm”, Bellura, La Coseieiua”, Fagnani, Storia naiurale ddla  potenza umana”, Delle intime relazioni in cui progrediscono la Filosofia, la Religione e la. Libertà”, Ocheda, Della Filosofia degli Antichi”, Pizzolato, Introduzione allo Studio detta Filosofia”, DomowBki, a Jesuit, In stitution!s Philosophica”, Testa, La Filosofia del Sentimento”, “La Filosofia dell' Intelligenza”, “Esame e discussione della Critica della Ragione Pura ài Kant, Critica del Nuovo Saggio suW Origine delle Idee di A. Rosmini, Grazia, “Saggio sulla realtà della conoscenza umana”, I.ettieri,  “Dialoghi filosofici suW intuizione”, Introduzione alla Filosofia monde e al Liiilto razionale”, Longo, Pensieri filosofici”, Teoria della conoscenza”, Dimostrazione analitica delle facoltà dell' anima”, Tedeschi, Elementi di Filo sofia”, Mancini, Elementi di Filosofia”, Mantovani, Traduzione della Critica della Ragione Pura di Kant”, Mazzarella, Critica della Scienza”, Della Critica. Empiricism is applied to ^Esthetics by Delfico in his Nuove Ricerche sid Bello, Talia, Princijni di Estetica, Ermes Visconti, Saggi sul Bello,  and Riflessioni idcologicìie intorno al linguaggio grammaticale dei popoli colti”, Venanzio, Callofilia”, Zuccaia, Principi! eMetici, Lichtenthal, Estetica”, Longhi, Callografia” and Pasquali, lnsliluziind di Estetica”. Zuccaia and Lichtenthal, however, separate themselves from the empirical School, and strive to find the essence of beauty in the idea. The same principles of Empiricism are followed by writers who undertake to construct a genealogy of sciences, such as Ferrarese in his “Saggio di una nuova classificazione delle Scienze”. He is also the author of “Delle diverse specie di follia”, “Ricerche intorno all'origine diWistinto”, “Trattato della monomania suicida”, De Pamphilis in his Geografia del'j> Scibile considerato nelXn sua unità di utile e di fine” and Rossetti in his “DelloScibileedelsuoinsegnamento”. Amongthe writers on Pedagogy who follow empirical doctrines may be mentioned Pasetti in his “Saggio suW Educazione fisico-morale”, Raffaele, Opere Pedagogiche”, Boneschi, recetti di Eilucazione”, Fontana, Manuale per l'Educa zione umana”, Parravicini in his various educational works; Aporti, Manuale di Educazione e di Ammaestramento per le Scuole infantile”, Assarotti, Istruzione dei Sordi-Muti”, Bazutti, Sullo stato fisico intellettuale e morale deiSordi-Muti”, Renzi, SiuT indole dei deciti, and Fantonetti, “Della Pazzia”. Among the historians who follow the doctrines of historical criticism may be named Rossi in his ”StudiStorici”, Denina in his “Rivoluzioni d'Italia”, Verri in his “Storia di Milano”, Gregorio in his “ConsiderazionisullaStoriadiSicilia”, Colletta inhis “StoriadelRegnodiNapoli, Botta in his Storia della Guerra dell' Indipendenza Americana” and “Storia d'Italia, continued from that of Guicciardini”, Palmieri in his Saggio Storico e Politico sulla Costituzione del Regno di Sicilia”, Cantù in his Storia Universale” and Storia degli Italiani”. Also by Micali in his L'Italia avanti ilDominio de' Romani”,  Mazzoldi in his Delle Origini Italiche”, Lamperdi in his Filosofia degli Etruschi”, Berchetti in his Filosofia degli antichi pojioli”, “Sacchi in his Stona dilla Filosofia Greca, Roggero in hisori. della Filosofia da Cartesio a Kant”, Raguisco, Storia delle Categorie da Taletead Hegel”, Sclopis, Storia detta Legislazione Itidiana”, Farini, Stati Romani” and Farina, Storia d'Italia”. Next is Idealism. Whatever may be the value of the psychological investigations of Galuppi, and the seeming "realism" by which his  theory is characterized, his doctrine, founded as it was on the subjective activity of the miiid in connection with experience, could not supply an objective foundation for science. It therefore left the problem of knowledge unsolved. To establish the objectivity of human thought on an independent and absolute principle is the task which Rosmini, the founder of modem Idealism in Italy, proposes to himself. Rosmini was born in Rovereto in the ItalianTyrol, and receives hiseducation at Padua. He enters the priesthood, and at a later period founds a religious institute of charity, whose members devote themselves to the education of youth and the ecclesiastical ministry. He is charged by King (Jharlcs Albert with a mission to Rome, the object of which was to induce Pius IX. to join the Italian Confederation, and to allow the citizens of the Roman States to participate in the W r of National Independence. Rosmini’s efforts at first promised success. He is made a member of the Papal Cabinet and is even invited to the honours of the Cardinalate. But the influence of the reactionary party in the Church having become predominant, the Pope withdraws from the liberal path on which he had entered, Rosmini's proposal is rejected, and the ambassador himself  dismissed in disgrace. He returns to his retreat at Stress on the Lago Maggiore, where he again devotes himself to the work of the restoration of philosophy, for which he had so long laboured. Philosophy, according to Rosmini, is the science of the ultimate reasons; the product of highest reflection, it is the basis of all sciences in the universal sphere of the knowable, embracing ideality, reality and morality, the three forms under which Being manifests itself. Hence there are three classes of philosophical sciences. First, the Sciences of intuition, of which ideality is the object, such as Ideology and Logic. Second, he Sciences of perception, the object of which is reality, as given in the sensibility, such as Psychology and Cosmology. Third, the Sciences of reason, whose object is not immediately perceived, but is found through the inferences of reason, such as Ontology and Deontology; the former considering Being in itself and in its three intrinsic rela tions; the latter, Being in its ideal perfection, of which morality is the highestcomplement. Ideology is the first science. It investigates the origin, the nature, and the validity of ideas, and with Logic establishes the principle, the method, and the object of philosophic investigation. His Ideologic and Logical works, containing the fundamental principle of his system, and the germ of all his doctrines, are as follows: “Sagyio sutt' Origine delle Idee”, “Rliinnovamento ddla Filog<yia   in Italia”, a polemical work directed against Mamiani, “Introduzione alla Filosojia”, and “LaLogioa”. Having reduced the problem of knowledge to the intellectual per ception of reality, Rosmini examines and rejects the solutions given by the principal philosophers of ancient and modern times. He however accepts the views of Kant on the essence of that perception, and places it in a synthetic judgment a priori, the subject of which is given by our sensibility, and the attribute by our mind; the one being furnished by experience, the other having a transcendental origin. But against Kant, Rosmini contends that this transcendental element is one and objective, not plural and subjective. It is not evolved by the activity of the mind, but although essentially united to it, it has an absolute, objective and independent existence. This element, the objective form of the mind, to which all Kantian forms may be reduced, is Being in its ideality (“l’esere ideale”), which contains no real or ideal determinations, but is ideal activity itself, deprived of all modes and outlines, the potential intelligibility of all things, native to the mind, the light of reason, the source of all intelligence, the principle of all objectivity, and the foundation of all knowledge. Essentially simple, one and identical for all minds, universal, necessary, immutable and eternal, the idea of being is the condition of every mental act. It cannot originate from reflection, abstraction, or consciousness. It has a divine origin. Indeed, it is the very intelligence of God, permanently communicated to the human mind under the form of pure ideality. All transcendental ideas, logical principles, identity, contradiction, substance, causality, the very idea of the Absolute, are potentially contained within it, and become distinct through the process of reflection. It is only through the synthesis of sensibility and ideality, that man intellectually perceives the existence of realities. To think is to judge, says Rosmini, and to think of reality is to judge that it is actually existent. To this judgment sensibility gives the matter or the subject, mind the form or the attribute, by applying to the former the attribute of existence; while the substantial unity of our nature, at once sentient and intelligent, affords the basis on which that synthesisi saccomplished. Thus reality, which is subjective, that is to say, is essentially connected with sensibility, becomes objectively known through the affirmation of its existence. Thus ideality alone is knowable per se; while reality acting on our sensibility is perceived only through ideality. Through the faculty of universalizing, separating the possibility, or the intelligibility, or the essence (these terms have the same meaning) of the objects so perceived, the fluid forms universal ideas, which are thus but specific determinations of the infinite ideality. Logic establishes the truth of knowledge and the foundation of its certainty. Now truth is aquality of knowledge; that is to say, our knowledge is true when that which we know exists. Truth is, accordingly, the same as existence, and as existence is the form of our intelligence, so our mind, in its very structure, is in the posses sion of truth. No error is possible on this subject; for the idea of existence is affirmed in the very act of denying it. So delusion is possible as to its modes; for that idea has no mode, or determination. So all specific ideas and logical principles are free from error; for they represent mere possibilities, considered in themselves and without relation to other things. The same may be said of the primitive judgment, in which the existence of reality is affirmed. Confining ourselves to the simple affirmation of the actual existence of the object as it is given in sensibility, we cannot err; error beginswhen we undertake to affirm more than we perceive, or when we assert relations between ideas which do not exist. Error, therefore, is always voluntary, although not always a free act; it may occur in the reflex, but never in the direct or primitive knowledge. On these principles, Rosmini rejects the doctrine of Hume and Berkeley as to the validity of our knowledge. Rosmini's psychological, cosmological, and ontological ideas are contained in his Psicoloyia, Antropologia, Teodic&i,  and TiMsofia. Psychology considers the human sol in its essence, development, and destiny. A fundamental sensibility (“sentimento fondamentale”), substantial and primitive, at once corporeal and spiritual, having two terms, one of which is a force acting in space, the other ideality itself, constitutes the essence of the soul. It is active and passive; it is united with internal and external extension, and its body has double relation to it, of subjectivity and of extra-subjectivity. It is one, simple and spiritual, and by this quality it I sessentially distinguished from the souls of mere animals. Having for its aim and end the potential ideality of all things, it will last as long as this intuition: it is therefore immortal, although its term of extension will perish with th edisorganization of the body. Life consists in fundamental sensibility, the result of that double hypo-static relation, in which the  body partakes of the subjective life of the soul, and the soul of the immortality of the infinite ideal. Cosmology considers the totality and the order of the universe, its parts and their relations to the whole. As reality is essentially connected with sensibility, so that the idea of the one involves the idea of the other, Rosinini admits a primitive sensibility in matter, and holds, with Campanella, that chemical atoms are endowed with a principle of life. Hence a hierarchy of all beings exists in nature, from the primitive elements to the highest organisms, a hierarchy founded on the basis of the different degrees of sensibility, with which they are endowed. Hence, also, Rosmini affirms the existenceof a universal soul in nature, much like that admitted by BRUNO (si veda), whose sphere is indefinite space; a soul one in itself, yet multiplied and individualized in the numberless existences of the universe. Spontaneous generation is a natural consequence of the theory of universal life. Ontology includes Theology; but while the former considers the essence of Being, its unity and the trinity of its forms in the abstract, the latter regards it in its substantial existence, as the absolute cause and finality of the universe. The intelligibility of things, as revealed to the human mind, being only potential and ideal, cannot properly be called ‘god’, who is the absolute realization of the infinite essence of being, and therefore contains in the unity of his eternal substance an infinite intelligibility, as well as an infinite reality and morality, a reality which is essentially an infinite sensibility, and a morality which is essentially an infinite love. It is thereforenot through a natural intuition, but through the process of reasoning that the mind acquires a knowledge of an existing God. It is by reflecting on the logical necessity and the immutability which belong to ideality, on the conditions required by the existence of contingent realities, and the nature of moral obligation, that, by the process of integration, our reason is led to believe in the existence of an absolute mind, the source of all intelligibility, reality,and morality. Thus the idea of god is essentially negative, that is to say, affirms his existence, but it excludes the comprehension of his nature. Creation is the result of divine love. The Absolute Being cannot but love being, not only in itself, but in all the possibilitiesof its mani festations. It is by an nfinitely wise abstraction that the divine mind separates from it sown intelligibility the ideal type of the univers; and it is by an infinitely sublime imagination that it makes it blossom, as a grand reality in the space. Yet the universe is distinct from the  Creator, because it is necessarily limited and finite; and as such it cannot be confounded with the Infinite and the Absolute, although it is identi fied with it in its ideal type, which indeed flows from the very bosom of the divine nature. Thus creation in its ideal essence is God; but it is not God in its realization, which his essentially finite. In hisTefxii&sa, Rosmini strives to show that the existence of evil does not stand in contradiction with an all wise and omnipotent Providence. Man is necessarily limited, and evil is a necessary consequence of his limitation. Perfect wisdom in its action must necessarily follow immutable laws, which in their intrinsic development will come in antagonism with partial forces, and produce discords in the universal harmony. Such are thelaws of the maximum good to be obtained through the minimum, of action, the exclusion of all superfluities, the graduation of all things and their mutual dependence; the universal law of development; the existence of extremes and their mutual antagonism; finally, the unity and the celerity of the divine action, which presides over the government of the universe. The problem of the possibility of a better world has no meaning: God may create numberless worlds, but each of them will always be best in relation to its own object. As from a box full of golden coins we can only draw golden coins, so the Creator can only draw from his own mind thatwhichisbest. Deontology considers the archetypes of perfection in all spheres, and the means through which they may be realized. Moral science, including the philosophy of right, is one of its principal branches. This is treated by Rosmini in the following works: “Princij_rii <lrl!<t Seiema Mbrale, Storia Cumparativae CriticadeiSwtemiMorali, Antropologia, Trattato delta Cosdema Morale” FilunojiadelDiritto, OpuscoliMorali”. The essence of morality consists in the relation of the will to the intrinsic order of being, as it reveals itself to our mind; hence the supreme moral principle is expressed in the formula, recognize practically being as you know it, or rdapt your reverence and love to the degree of worth of the being, and act accordingly. The idea of being giving us the standard of this recognition, implies the first moral law, which is tin; identified with the primum notum, the first truth, the very light of reason. Hence moral good is essentially objective, consisting in the relation of the will to ideal necessity. Thus morality is essentially distinct from utility, the former being the cause, the latter the effect; hence Eudemonology, the science of happiness, cannot be confounded with Ethics, of which it is only a corollary. The relative worth of beings arises from the degree of their participation in the Infinite; hence man, whose mind is allied with an infinite ideality, has an infinite worth. It is through this union, not through the moralautonomy of the will, as Kant maintains, that man is a “person” and not a thing; and it is for this reason that actions, to be morally good, must have for their object an intelligent being. Moral categories are therefore founded on the gradations of intelligence and virtue, which is but the realization of intelligence. The duties towards ourselves are derived from the Imperative, which commands the respect and love of humanity, and we are the standard, by which we estimate the faculties and the wants of our neighbours. Rights are found in the faculty of acting according to our will, so far a sprotected by morall aw. Man has an inalienable right to truth, virtue, and happiness, and his right to liberty and property is founded on his very personality. Domestic societyis the basis of all civil organization, and the authority of the State is limited to the regulation of the modality of right, and never can place itself against rights given by nature. Indeed its principal objectis the protection of those rights. Liberal in almost all his doctrines, Rosmini’s ideas on the rights of the Church betray a confusion of Catholicism with Christianity, indeed with humanity. They are therefore extravagant as they are indefensible. It is true that in his Le CinquePlayheildla C/tiesa, Rosmini strives to introduce intotheChurch such reforms, as would have made it less antagonistic to the spiritof Christianity. In that work Rosmini urges th enecessity of abolishing the use of a dead language in the religious services, of raising the standard of clerical education, of emancipating the episcopate from political ambitions and feudal pretensions, and, above all, of intrusting the election of bishops to the people and the clergy, as is required by the very nature of the Church. His essay is placed at once in the “Index Expnrgatorius”. Rosmini applies also his philosophy to politics in his filosojiu detta Politica, and to pedagogic science in his Principle Supremo della Metodologia. Rosmini is also the author of Eponizione Critica della Filosojia di Aristetele, “Gioberti e il Panteismo”, “Opuscoli Filosofi” and of several volumes of correspondence. A complete edition of Rosmlni's works has been published in Milan and inTurin. His posthumous work published in Turin under the editorship of his disciple Paoli. ARJsumiof his system, written by himself, may be found in the Storia universale di O. C'antil, in its documentary part. Rosmini’s philosophy is early introduced into the universities and colleges of Piedmont, through the labours of Sciolla, Corte and Tarditi, the chief professors in the philosophical faculty at Turin. The two first embody the doctrines of Rosmini in their text-books of mental and moral philosophy, while the third, in his “Lettere di un Rosminiano”, undertakes to refute the objections which Gioberti advances against that philosophy. It was this work, which gives Gioberti occasion to publish his voluminous essay on SERBATI (si veda). Meanwhile, Rosmini’s doctrines extend to the schools of Lombardy, owing to the essays of Pestalozza. whose Element! di KUo-nyfiii, contain the best exposition of Rosminianism. Pestalozza is also the author of “Difesa delle Dottrine di Rosmini” and LuMenie di Rosmini, To the same School belong Manzoni, the author of the “Promessi Sposi” who, in his Dialogo »>j2T /»- venzwne, applies the Rosminian principles to the art of composition; Tommaseo, the author of the “Dizionario Estetico”, the “Dizionario dei Sinonimi”, and of several educational works, in his Espoxizione del Sistema Filosofico di Rosmini, A. Rosmini. Studi Filosofici” and “Studi critici”. G. Cavour. the brother of the statesman of that name, in his Fragment* Phitosopluquts; Bonghi, translator of several works of Plato and Aristotle, and author of “Compendio di Logica”, who gives an exposition of philosophical discussions held with Rosmini in his Le Sresiane; Rayneri, in his “Primi Principii di Metodica”, and “Dlla Pedagogia”; Berti, the author of “La Vita di Bruno”, Garelli, in his “Sulla Filosofia Morale” and in “Biografia di Rosmini”, Villa, in his “Kant e Rosmini”; Peyretti, in his “Ekmenti di FUosofui” and “Saggio di  Logiea generate”; B. Monti, in his “Del Fondamento, Progresso, e Sistema delle Conoteeme Umnne”; Imbriani, in his Sul Fautsto di Goethe” and/Mr Organism)poeticio e delta Poetica popolare Itliana”, Minghetti, the statesman and colleague of Cavour, whose work, Dell’Economia Publica, bears the traces of the influence of Rosmini's doctrines; Allievo, in his “Jlegdinnismo, la Scienza e hi Vita”, and P. Paganini, in his “Bella Natura delle Idee secondo Platone”; “Considerazumi sulle profonde armonie della Filosofia Naturale”, tkiggio Cosmologleo sullo fypazin. and Stiggio sopra S.Tommaso e il Rosmini. To this classification may be referred Les Principes de Philosophic, of Caluso. ptranslated into Italian by P.Corte,an published with notes of Rosmini. Corte is the author of  “EkmentidiFilosqfla”, embracing logical, metaphysical, and ethical sciences. He publishes also Anthologia ex M. T. Cicerone and L. A. Seneca in usum Philiw/phi-r Studiosorumconcinnaia,The doctrine of Rosmini on the nature of originalsin, as it was expressed in his Trattato delta C'oscienza”, having been violently attacked by several ecclesiastical writers belonging to the Order of the Jesuits, it is ablydefended by eminent theologians of the Catholic Church, Bertolozzi, Fantozzi, Pagani. and by Gastaldi, a collegiate doctor of divinity at Turin, and Archbishop of that See. On Rosmini's System, see further.— Leydel, in “Zeitschrift f. Philosophic, Annales de Philos. Chretiennr, Bonnetty, ed. Paris, on Rosmini and the decree of the Index. Also same Annaks, Bartholmcss, Hist. critique des Doctrines Religieuses, Paris,  Lockhard, “Life of Rosmini”, Lond, Ferri, op. cit., and Ferrari in the Revue des Deux Monde. Next comes Ontologism. The ontologic school places the "primum philosoophicum" not in simple ideal existence, but in absolute reality, the cause of all things as well as theprinciple of all knowledge. This doctrine, held by St. Augustine and Fidanza, and revived by Malebranche, is developed under a new form by Gioberti. Gioberti was born in Turin, receives his education in that city, and early becomes a priest. Arrested as a sympathiser with the revolutionar schemes of Mazzini, he is condemned to exile.While in France and Belgium he devotes himself to the work of Italian regeneration, and endeavours to attach the clergy to this cause. In his “Primato Morale e Civile degli Italiani” Gioberti urges upon the papacy the necessity of placing itself at the head of the liberal movement, and becoming the champion of Italian nationality and the centre of European civilization. In his Prlegomeni, and “Il Jesuita Moderno”, Gioberti labours o crush the opposition with which his views are received by the reactionary party of the Church and exposes the dangers of its policy. With th eaccession of Pius IX,  and the subsequent establishment of constitutional governments in the Peninsula, Gioberti’s ideas seem to have triumphed. Gioberti returns to Italy and enters at once into public life, accepting a seat in the Parliament and in the Cabinet of Piedmont, where he soon becomes a ruling spirit. After the battle of Novara he is sent to Paris as ambassador, in the hope of obtaining aid for the national cause. Unable to accomplish his mission, Gioberti resigns his office, and remaining in that city a voluntary exile, he again devotes himself to philosophical studies. The philosophy of Gioberti is embodied in the following works: “La Teoria del Supra-naturale”, “Introduzione allo Studio della Filosofia”, “Trattato del Buono”, “Trattato del Bello”, “Errori Filosofici di Rosmini”. Philosophy, according to Gioberti, has long since ceased to exist; the last genuine philosophers are Leibnitz, Malebranche, and Vico. By substituting psychologic for the ontologic method and principles, Descartes renders all genuine philosophic development impossible. Descartes does in regard to philosophy what Luther does in regard to religion, by substituting private judgment for the authority of the Church. Sensualism, subjectivism, scepticism, materialism and atheism are the legitimate fruits of the doctrine of Descartes. To do away with these errors is theobject of  true philosophy. Rosmini's theory cannot attain it; for it is founded on a psychologic process, assumes as a principle of knowledge a pure abstraction, and thus falls into the very errors which it proposes to combat. Through ideality, the mind cannot reach reality, nor from the fact of consciousness can it ascend to universal and necessary ideas. We must therefore invert the process, and look both for method and principles not in the subject, but in the object. The object is the idea in its absolute reality, immanently present to the mind under the form of a synthetic judgment, which comprehends in itself all being and knowledge. This judgment, as it is produced through reflection, finds its expres sion in the ideal formula, “Ens creat existentias,” Being create existences — the supreme principle of Ontology and of Philosophy. Through the intuition of this principle, mind is in possession at once of the real and the ideal; for the first member of the formula (the “Ens”) contains the object, Being, the absolute idea as well as the absolute substance and cause; the second (“Existences”) gives the organic multiplicity of contingent substances and causes and relative ideas; the third, The Creative Act, expresses the relation existing between the absolute and the relative, the unconditional and the conditional, and the production of real and ideal existences from the Absolute. But although this intuition gives the power of intelligence to the mind, it is in itself not yet an act of knowledge; as long as it is not reproduced by the mind, it remains in a latent or germinal condition. It is only by a reflex judgment that we affirm the contents of intuition; coming to the consciousness of its elements, we become acquainted with their mutual bearing and relations. This reproduction therefore is made through ontok>gi«ilreflection, by which the mind, so to say, reflects itself upon the object, and through which alone it is capable of acquiring the knowledge of that ideal organism, which is expressed in the intuition. Thus the ontological method is the only true philosophical process, and stands in opposition to the psychological method, which is founded on psychological reflection, through which the mind turns its attention, not upon the object, but upon itself. But to direct its reflection upon the object of its intuition, the mind needs the stimulus of *language*, through which it may determine and limit the object for its comprehension. Hence the necessity of a first divine revelation, which by language supplies the instrument of our reflection, and constitutes that relation which necessarily exists between the idea itself, and the idea as it manifests  itself to our rmind. Fo ralthough the idea in itself is one and indivisible, in reference to the human mind it has two sides: the one which is intelligible, the other incomprehensible— thus being antithetic towards each other, and giving rise to all the apparent antinomies between Science and Religion. The faculty of super-intelligence, which is inherent in all finite minds, consists in the sense which reveals to the mind its own limitations, as to the comprehension of theidea. It is through revelation that the mind acquires some positive knowledge of the superi-ntelligibility of the idea, although always limited and clouded in mystery. Science, being the reproduction of the ideal formula, must therefore be divided into two branches, corresponding to the intelligibility and the super-intelligibility of the idea;— the one constituting the Rational Sciences, the other the Super-Rational, the last being superior to the former from their more extensive comprehension of the idea through positive revelation. The genesis of sciences from the ideal formula is as follows: " Jfiia" or the subject of the formula, gives Ontology and Theology. The copula (creat) demands a science which shall com prise the double relation between “ens” and existences, in both an ascending and a descending method. The descending process (from Jieuifj to faiatenees) originates the science of time and space, or Mathe matics. The ascending (from Existences to Being) the science of the true, the good, and the beautiful, that is, Logic, Ethics, and AEsthetics. The predicate (Existences) gives rise to the spiritual and material sciences. Oon the one side Psychology and Cosmology, on the other, physical Science in its various branches. The super-natural sciences follow the same division. As to the validity of the knowledge arising from this formula, its first member expresses its own absolute reality and necessity. The intuitive judgment in which this reality and necessity are pronounced, viz.. '"En* *'•*," and ^Ens is necessary" do not originate in the human mind, but are contained in the idea itself, while the mind in its primitive intuition only listens to them — repeating them in its succeeding reflex judgments. So that the validity of those judgments is not affected by the subjectivity of the mind. Thus is it with the funda mental ideas of necessity, possibility, and existence. The first being the relation of the En sto itself; the second the relation of the necessary to the existing; and the third the relation of possibility to necessity. To these ideas correspond three great realities. To thefirst, the Absolute reality, God. To the second, infinite or continuous m agnitude, pure time and pure space. To the third, actual and discrete magnitude, the universe an dits contents. Time and space are ideas, at once pure and empirical, necessary and contingent. As pure and necessary, they may be conceived as a circular expansion growing out of a single centre and extending to the infinite; by this centre, Ens (Being) is symbolized. As contingent and empirical, they may be represented by a circumference which projects from the centre and develops in successive degrees. In this projective development, we have the finite reality, multiple and contingent in itself, but one and necessary, if considered as existing in the central point from which it emerges. For existences have a necessary relation to the Ens, and it is only in that relation that it is possible to know them. The very word existences implies their derivation from the Absolute reality. But the nature of that derivation cannot be reached through reasoning. It manifests itself in the intuition, in which it is revealed in the creative act. By considering the two extreme terms of the formula out of the relation of its copula, they become identified, and philosophy at once falls into Pantheism. Thus the creative act is the only basis of our knowledge of contingent existences. It is by bringing the phenomenal elements of perception into their relations to creative activity that the sensible becomes intelligible, and the individualisation is of the idea are brought in the concrete into our minds. And as our own ideas are formed in witnessing the creative act, it follows that that they may be considered as copies of the divine idea, created and limited, yet stamped with the character of a divine origin. Thus the ideal formula considered in relation to the universe becomes transformed into these other formulas. The one creates the multiple. The multiple returns to the one. These two formulas express the two cycles of creative development, viz., the one, by virtue of which existences descend from Ens; the other, by which they return to I -- a double movement, which is accomplished in the very bosom of the ens itself, at once the efficient and the final cause of the universe. The first cycle, however, is entirely divine, while the second is divine and human, because in it human powers are brought into play. In the Garden of Eden ther&- tiini of the mind to its Creator – H. P. Grice, GENITOR: “Use ‘God’ as exegetical device” -- is perfect; reason predominant over passion, man's reflection I in perfect accord with the organic intuition; but the Fall altered that order, and man put himself more or less into opposition with the formula. Ileuce the errors of ancient theogonies and mythologies, and their pantheistic and dualistic philosophies – Grice: “That Ryle uselessly criticisied!” -- Thus the Bralnuinic and Buddhistic doctrines of the East absorb the universe and man himself in the first member of the formula; while the philosophical systems of the Greeks reduce everything; to the third member, with the exception of Pythagoreanism and Platonism, in which the condition of its organic order is substantially preserved. Christianity restores that order through the miraculous intervention by which God, becoming man, brings the human race back to its primitive condition. In such a dispensation, the tradition which contains the organic structure of the fomula is placed in the keeping of the Church; hence its infallibility, and its right to preside over theology, as well as the whole development of science. The idea as expressed in the formula becomes, in its application to the will, the supreme moral law, the basis of ethics. While its first and second terms give us the idea of moral good, its first cause, law and obligation, the third term supplies the moral agent, and contains the conditions of moral development. It is through his FREE WILL that man can copy the creative act by placing himself in accord with the will of God, as manifested in moral law. Hence, moral law partakes of the character of absolute reality; it is objective, apodeictic, and religious, because it is founded on the very relation of God to the human will. From this relation arises an absolute right in the creator – GENITOR GRICE USE GOD AS EXEGETICAL DEVICE, to which an absolute duty in man corresponds, the source of all the relative duties and rights, which spring from his relation to his fellow-creatures. It is through this accord of the human with the divine will, that man attains happiness, consisting in the voluntary union of his intellectual nature with the divine. The supreme formula of ethics is this: Being creates moral good through the free-will of man. Fom this two others follow, corresponding with the two cycles of creation. The first: that free will produces virtue by the sacrifice of passion to law. Second, that virtue produces happiness by the reconciliation of passion to law. AEsthetic science likewise finds its principles in the ideal formula. Creation, with the ideas of time, space, and force, gives us the idea of the sublime, while Exigences, that is to say. the real in its relation to the idea, contain the elements of the beautiful. Thus, as existences are produced arid contained in the creative act, so the sublime creates and contains the beautiful. Hence the formula, being creates the beautiful through the sublime. The two ideas are co-related. They both consist in the union of the intelligible with an imaginative element, but while, in the sublime, one element predominates over the other, in the beautiful the harmony of the two is preserved. Yet the two ideas are subject to the cycles already noticed in the development of the formula: The Sublime creates the Beautiful,  and the Beautiful returns to th eSublime. In the history of art the sublime precedes the beautiful. The temple and the epic poem are the oldest forms of art. The super-intelligibility of the idea gives rise to th emarvellons, which, expressing itself in language, poetry, painting, and music, becomes an element of AEsthetics. The first arts resting in the organic structure of formula, it follows that only in orthodoxy can the full realization of beauty be found. Heterodoxy, altering more or less that structure, introduces an intrinsic disorder into the lield of AEsthetics, as well as into that of science, morality, and religion. Gioberti at the time of his death was preparing other works, in which his idea sseem to have undergone considerable change. Imperfect and fragmentary as they are left, they were published under the editorship of his friend Massari, and bear the follow ing titles, “La Protologla”; “La Filosofia della Rivelazione”, “La Itifor-ma detta Chiesa. A tendency to rationalism blended with Hegelian transcendentalism appears in those works, although ostensibly founded on the idealformula ofthen'rst philosophy. The idea here becomes the absolute thought, which creates by its very act of thinking. Sensibility is thought undeveloped, as reason is thought developed; and even the incomprehensible is but thought undeveloped, which becomes intelligible through development. Language as the instrument of reflexion plays still a conspicuous part in the woof of the absolute thought, as wrought out in creation, but it has become a natural product: and even of supernatural revelation itissaid, that it may be considered natural, as soon as it is received into th emind. It is through the creative act that absolute thought appears in the development of Nature and Mind, a development which proceeds under the logical form of a sorites, the principle of which is inexhaustible, the progress continuous. The members of this sorites are prop»>-r which rest on categories, or fundamental ideas produced by the absolute thought in its union with the mind, and the tinners which it creates. In the absolute, the categories are one and in<! idea, but become, multiple through the creative act. These are < and trine. The first express the opposite while the last reconcile the oppositions of the former. The absolute thought is the concrete and supreme Category, out of which all others receive existence through its creative activity. An existence which is developed, according to a dialectic movement. The organic structure of the Categories, which embraces the relations between the terms of each dual one, and the relations between their couples, is moulded on the ideal formula. Pantheism does not consist, in a substantial synthesis of God and the universe, but in the confusion of the finite and the infinite, and of the different modes of existence which belong to them. God is infinite,both actually and potentially. The world is potentially infinite, but actually finite. With Cusa and Giordano lining it may properly be said, that the universe is a potential God or a limited or contracted God. Hence,God and the universe are one in the infinite reality of the first, and in the infinite potentiality of the second; for the potentiality of the universe exists in God. As to its finitude, it is given as a term of the creative act; it is a primitive fact which is presupposed by all mental acts, which therefore cannot be reduced to other categories and thus to the unity of the absolute. Finite realities, however, have a double relation to the absolute, which is determined by the metexis and the mimesis. Through metexis they are phenomenal copies of the divine ideas.. Through the mimesis they participate in the divine essence, the condition of their existence. The change in Gioberti's metaphysical ideas manifests itself in his thoughts in relation to the Church. Catholic philosophy rests nolonger on the authority of an ecclesiastical organization, but on the universality and continuity of human thought, in the history of mental evolution. Religion is no longer superior to philosophy; but it is philosophy itself, enveloped in myths and symbols, so as to bring it to the intelligence of the common people. All religions are effects of the creativeact, having different degrees of moral value. Christianity, however, is the complement of all religious forms, and Christ is the Pan-Idea, in which the realization of the moral type fully corresponds its inner excellence. Mysteries:ui lmiracles are facts, whichcannot considered as complete. Their value consists in their relation to the;i!» phenomena which containtin; doctrinesof Palingenesis. No can live which dm-s not follow the laws of ideal development; •i i verse would perish, the moment it should cease to be subchange. The modification introduced in his political doctrine, Gioberti himself published a year before his death, in his “Rinnocamento Civile(VItalia”, where the papacy no longer appears as the natural support of Italian regeneration, but as its greatest obstacle. In Lois work, by far the best of all his voluminous productions, Gioberti gives a new programme to Italian patriots; placing the national cause under the hegemony of the king of Piedmont, he urges his country men to rally around that throne, the only hope of the Peninsula. This programme, carried out to the letter, brings the Italian States under one national government, and finally made Rome the capital of th enation. No statesman,with the exception of Cavour, has ever exerted for a time so great influence on the affairs of Italy as Gioberti. His name is preserved in honuor among his countrymen for the purity of his patriotism, the loftiness of his aspirations, and the liberality of his views, rather than for the solidity and the permanent value of hi sphilosophy. On the political relations o f Gioberti to Cavour, cf. Life, Character, and Policy of Count Cavour, B., New York. As a philosopher, Gioberti does not succeed in forming a large school, although the following writers doubtless derive their inspirations from his works: Fomari, “Dell' Armonia Universale, Lezioni suW arte della parata”, G. Eomano, aJesuit, LaScknzadelTuomointerno«ituoirapporticollaNaturaeconDio; “Elementi di Filosofi"-; Gioanni, Principii della Filosofia Prima, Micrti, o dei- VEiaereUno e Reale”, Miceli o l'Apologia del Sistema” N. Garzilli, Saggioatti rn]ypor(idella Formula idealeeoiproblemi importanti della Filosofia”, Acquisto, “Sistema della Scienza universale”; “Elementi di Filosofia fondamentale”; “Corso di Filosofia morale”; Corso di Diritto naturale”; “Necessità dtW autorità e della legge”; “Saggio sulla- naturae sulla genesi del Diritto di proprietà, Trattato(fIdeologia. In the United States of America. Gioberti finds a devoted interpreter in Brownson, whose able exposition of the doctrine contained in the ideal formula was published in in the Review bearing his name. To the Ontological School, although independent of Gioberti, belong Bertóni, Idee di una Filosofia della Vita, Questione Religiosa,;and La Filosofia Greca prima di Socrate”; Centofanti, “Delia Filosofia detta Storia”; A. Conti, “Storia della Filosofia”; “Evidenza, Amore e Fede, Dio e il male”; PUCCINOTTI (vedasi), Scritti Storici e Filosofici, Storia della Medicina”, BALDACCHINI (vedasi), Trattato sullo Scetticismo; La Filosofia dopo Kant”; CORLEO (vedasi), Filosofia vnirermle”; MANGERI (vedasi), Corso di Filosofia e Sistema Pitico-Ontologico”; LABRANCA (vedasi), Lezioni di Filosofia razionale, Mora and Lavarino, in their Enciclopedia Scientifica, Turbiglio,” L'impero della Logica” and “Analisi Storica delle FUo-vfie di Ix-rte e Leibnizio. On Gioberti, cf. h. Ferri, and R Mariano, op. cit.; Seydel in Zeit- schrift fi Pftilosophie, Smyth, Christian Metaphysicians, Lond. Prominent among the Ontologists is Mamiani. He was born in Pesaro. Mamiani joins the revolutionary movement of the Romagnas, but was arrested and condemned to exile. He takes up his residence in Paris, where he is engaged in literary and philosophical pursuits. He returns to Italy, and gives his support to the liberal reforms inaugurated by Pius IX. When the Pope abandons Rome, Mamiani, as a member of the Constituent Assembly, opposes the proclamation of the Republic, as contrary to the interest of the national cause. With the restoration of the papal power by the aid of France, Mamiani retires to Piedmont, where he is elected member of Parliament and appointed professor of philosophy at Turin. He is a staunch supporter of the policy of Cavour, under whose administration he holds successively the offices of minister of Public Instruction and that of minister to Greece. He is member of the Senate and professor of the philosophy of history atRome. In the early part of his philosophical career, represented by his “Del RintwvameiUsi dtW antica Filusojw italiana”, Mamiaui holds the doctrine of Empiricism founded on psychological investigations, in which he strives to combine experience with reason. Mamiani maintainsthat the principal question of philosophy is that of method; and that this can only be found in experience and nature. It is this method which prevails among the philosophers of the Renaissance, and to which science is indebted for its great achievements, particularly through the teachings and the example of Galilei. This essay calls forth the work of Rosmini, II Itinnovamento, etc., in which he controverts some of Mamiani's statements, and tries to show that the experimental method alone cannot philosophically reconstruct the science of Nature and Mind. Mamiani himself soon becomes convinced of this, and in his works “Discorso sull’Ontologia e sul Mt-todo” and Dialoghi di Sciema 1'riina”, he endeavours to find a philosophical basis in common sense. In these essays appears for the first time his doctrine on immediate perception as the only foundation of the knowledge of reality. The last phase of his doctrine is containedin his “Confessioni di un Metafisico”. It is divided into two parts: Ontology and Cosmology. In the first, Mamiani considers theAbsolute, ideas, natural theology, and the creative act; in the second, the finite, its relation to the Infinite, the co-ordinatiou of nature's means, life, finality, and progress in the universe. Mamiani’s fundamental doctrines are as follows. The knowledge of the real and the ideal is effected through two faculties essentially distinct, although both acting in the subjective unity of the mind: perception and intellection. The first does not consist in a syntheticjudgment a priori, as Rosmini and GIOBERTI (si veda) hold after Kant, but in a direct and immediate relation of the mind to finite realities, as Reid and Galuppi maintains, although Reid and Galuppi overlook its intellectual character. Intellection consists in the relation of the mind to ideas; and, as these have an essential connection with Absolute reality, the mind may be said to possess an intrinsic relation to the "entia realissima"— the most real being. Ideas indeed are intellectual *symbols* of the Absolute reality in its relation of causality; and they are supplied by the intellective faculty, when the mind apprehends their realizations through perception. Tims our intelligence attains to Absolute reality through the intermedium of ideal representations, but it does not penetrate so far as to reach its essence; it remains on its surface. A similar process occurs in perception, through which the mind reaches the object given in sensibility, not in essence, but through the medium of sensation. But while our ideas are mere *representative emblems* -- simbolo ed embolo -- in the divine mind they are real objects in themselves. They are identical with the absolute intelligibility, the possibility, the reason of all things. They are therefore the foundation of all Unite realities, their common attributes and final perfection. They are indeed the efficient and final causes of the world, manifesting themselves under the triple relation of the true, the good, and the beautiful. Hence our ideas, as *representations* and determinations of the divine causality, are essentially objective and immutable representations, and determinations of eternal truth. It follows that the existence of God is founded on the very nature of primitive intuition, which includes the eternal substantiality of truth, and that its demonstration a priori is a simple process of deduction from the principle of identity. It follows also that every ideal relation contains an eternal truth, to which an intelligible reality in God corresponds. It is therefore independent of the human mind. Ideas however are not innate. Threy originate in finite reality, from which they receive their determinations, and have a necessary reference to absolute reality through their *representative* character. It is only through reflection that the minddisc. in itself its relation both to finite reality, contained in internal and external perception, and to infinite reality, contained in the Infinity. Creation is the result of the infinite good, which of necessity tends to communicate itself. The idea of a God infinitely good implies the idea of a creation, founded on the greatest good, as its outward manifestation and ultimate end. This manifestation is brought forth by an infinite power, and an infinite wisdom, under the forms of the laws of causality and finality. From the very nature of the finite, and its opposition to the infinite, arises the immense cosmic diversity. Hence the universe cannot be properly represented as a sphere; it is rather to be regarded as a system of numberless spheres, moving concentrically in various directions, and forming that universal harmonv, which is the highest expression of the infinite good. As the cosmic diversity is equal to its possibility, it follows that there is only one idea of the universe in the divine mind as well as in the universe itself, although in a continuous generation and development. The idea of a better world is impossible; because the idea of the universe, which is in the act of developing, contains already all possibilities. Evil is inherent in the finite; but it diminishes, as the finite more and more approaches the infinite, and in this progressive union of the one with the other lies the ultimate end of creation. In the achievement of this end, the divine causality creates and determines the whole, the divine intelligence pre-arranges the whole, while nature produces the whole under the influence of that causality and intelligence. The finite is an aggregate of monads or forces, which are brought together by their mutual attraction; thus a communication arises between those, which have a diameter of similarity, a participation between the diverse ones, and a co-ordination of all. Hence arises the cosmic system, with its great divisions of nature, life, and mind. Nature reveals itself first in the stellar order, in the ether in connection with light, heat, and electricity, and in the order of chemical compounds, such as water and twater. In the elaboration of the syntheses preparatory to the final ones, the divine art is revealed in that wise co-ordination of means which is produced by the union and separation, the action and reaction of homogeneous, as well as heterogenons forces. But it is only in life (vita) that finality (fine) appears, for life alone contains the possibility of receiving the communication of JJIXK], which is the essence and the object of creation. Life is the development through a suitable organization of the individual, in reference to its participation in the good. At its lowest degree it is nothing but a chemical compound – the amoeba --, enclosed in a cellular envelope and capable of reproducing itself. At its highest point, life is an intellectual and volitional activity which tends to an absolute object, and to this end co-ordinates all the means at its disposal. Between the two extremes there are numberless degrees of vital activity, each developing in accordance with its own end. Vegetation, animality, and humanity or spirituality mark the principal degrees in the scale of life. In these three manifestations, life is a specific force. Bflchner and other Scientists, who give to matter the power of producing life, deny the existence of this specific force, and attribute it to a cause, which in itself has not the elements necessary to its development. So Darwin's theory of the genesis of species involves the negation of the objective reality of the idea or specific essence, containing a substantial fixedness of character and form, and the power of producing itself within the limits of its own nature. It confounds accidental varieties with substantial transformations, and artificial means with natural processes. It is contrary to all historical experience, and the constant fact of the sterility of hybrids. It stands in contradiction with itself in the bearing of the two laws of the struggle for life, and natural selection, which will restrict rather than widen the limits of development, and keep the species within their own boundaries, rather than expand them into new forms and modes of existence. The order of life in relation to the general end of creation begins with plants. In plants, the living force has the specific value of being the organ for life, or rather it is the laboratory in which its elements are prepared. This passes over into animality, which has a real relation of finality, although limited and relative, as are its senses and instincts, through which it enjoys participation in the divine good. Man (Homo sapiens sapiens) alone, whose life is partly the growth of vegetation and animality, is an absolute finality, for he alone has a life, through which he can know and act in accordance with the absolute. The law of indefinite progress is universal and necessary, founded as it is in the very object of creation, in the divine goodness, and the progressive union of the finite with the infinite. This law, which embraces all the universe, is still more apparent in the development of mankind. But in order that it may be verified in history, its application must comprehend humanity as an organic and spiritual unit. It would fail if applied to an isolated nation, or measured by the invariable Roman type, as VICO (vedasi) insists. To see the full bearing of this law, mankind must be regarded in the multitude of its nationalities, in the variety of their character, in the multiplicity of the elements and of the ages of civilization. The law itself must he viewed in its different aspects, and in the agencies which are at work to carry it ont in history; such as the influence of a national aristocracy, the subordination of lower to higher forms of civilization, the mingling of the Italian three tribes, and the expansion of social forces, through which a kind of polarity among the tree tribes is created. All these and other causes, while they preserve the spiritual unity of mankind, maintain its growth and secure its general advancement. Besides the works already mentioned, Mamiani writes also “Meditazi- oniCarte&iane, and “Di  un Nuovo Diritto Europe”, in which he strives to establish international right on a philosophical basis. In his “Iiinaacimento Cattolico”, ROVERE (vedasi) Mamiani contemplates the possibility of a reform in the Catholic Church, that should reconcile it with the spirit of modern times. ROVERE (vedasi) Mamiani is also the author of “Teoria dclla Religions e dello Stato, e dei suoi raj/porti speciali con Roma e colle Nazioni Cattoliche”, “Sei Lettere a Rosmini”, “Saggi di Filosofia Civile” and “Saggi Politici”. Among the philosophers who have treated of ROVERE (vedasi) Mamiani's philosophy, the more prominent are FERRI (vedasi), the author of the “Esmi sar CHUtoire de la Philosophic en Ilalie au 19ine Steele”; Debrit, “Histoire de» Doctrine* Philosophiqves daiu Vltalie Con- temporaine”. These two philosophers, particularly the first, give a complete survey of the principal systems of contemporary philosophy in Italy. See also LAVARINO (vedasi), “La Logica e la Filosofia di Mamiani” and FIORENTINO (vedasi), several essays in the Rivista di Bologna, under the title of Positivismo e Platonismo in Italia; BRENTAZZOLI (vedasi), the author of “Di uri1 ultcriore e deflnitico arplicamento della Filosofia Seokxttka”; TAGLIAFERRI (vedasi), who writes on Mamiani's theory, and BONATTI (vedasi), who discusses the ontological argument of the existence of God as presented by Mamiani in Bonatti iand Mamiani, BONATELLI (vedasi) is also the author of “La Concienza”, and of a sketch of Italian philosophy published in the “Zeituchrift fiir Philorphie und Philosophische Kritik” in Halle. To the Ontologic classification may also be reduced the “Dialoghi Politico-Filosofici” di Buscarini; and “Sopra la Filosofia del Diritto Publico Interno di L.C. di Montagnini; also,1stFUomfiadette Scuote Italiane, a philosophical review supported by Mamiani, Berti, Bonghi, Barzellotti, and other members of an association recently established in Rome for the promotion of philosophical studies; Oerdil, a weekly periodical published in Turin, under the editorship of ALLIEVO (vedasi), chiefly intended to reconcile philosophy with Christianity; and Il Campo della FUosofl Italiani, a philosophical periodical published in Naples, and edited by MILONE (vedasi). Next is absolute idealism. VERA (vedasi) is the recognized head of the Absolute Idealist School in Italy. VERA (vedasi) is born in Amelia, a city of Umbria,  and early goes to Paris, where he completes his education – therefore making him not really an ‘Italian’ philosopher, who Italians define as an Italian philosopher who has NOT been brain-drained, and who earned his maximal degree within and not without Italy. Having spent some years in Switzerland, VERA (vedasi) returns to Paris, and is appointed professor of philosophy in several  colleges connected with the University of France – Grice: “Fancy having a university of England, or a university of Italy!” – VERA (vedasi) returns to Italy, where he is at once made professor of philosophy at the Royal Academy of Milan. VERA (vedasi) transfers to the University of Naples, where he holds the professorship of the history of philosophy and the philosophy of history. VERA (vedasi)’s works are devoted to the interpretation and application of the philosophy of absolute idealism. They include— ProW.me dela Certitude; VHcgiUanisme et la Philosophit. Melanges Philosophiques; Essais de Philosophie; Introduction a la Philasrqkfc, Logique, Philo»,plue de la Nature; Phi losophic de CEsprit; Philosophic de la Heligion; Platonis Aristattiu el Hegelii de medio termino Doctrina; Inquiry into Speculative and Experimental.Se»>v««. Lond; “Lezioni sulla filosofia delta storia”; PrUusiovi alla storia della filosofia (epoca Socratica), ed alla Filosofia delta Storia; II Problema deff Avm-'iito; II Cataitr e la libera Chiesa in Ubero Statot in which the doctrine of the separation of the church from the Italian state held by CAVOUR (vedasi) is opposed on philosophical and political grounds. VERA (vedasi) also translates the History of Religion and of the Christian Church by Bretschneider, London. VERA (vedasi) not only interprets and expounds the philosophy of absolute idealism, but develops it and expresses it in a more intelligible form, thus rendering it accessible to students not familiar with some of the most obscure terminology. In his Introduction dla Philosophica VERA (vedasi) rejects the trinity of being, thought, and motion which Trendelenburg proposes to substitute to the trinity of being, thesis, not-being, anti-thesis, and becoming, synthesis. VERA (vedasi) also confutes eclecticism and the materialistic theories of Bilchner and Moleschott. In his Inquiry into Spcndatice and Experimental Science, VERA (vedasi) refutes the doctrines of Bacon, Locke, and other representatives of empiricism. VERA (vedasi)’s labours have been highly praised by eminent absolute idealists, among whom is Eoeenkranz in "Der Gedanke" and in his Wissenschaft iter hyifchc Idee. See also an article of Saisset in the ItecuedtsDeuxMonde. Among other absolute idealists in Italy may be mentioned SPAVENTA (vedasi), who. in his “Filosofia di Gioberti” aims to show the connection of the doctrines of this philosopher with the ideas of absolute idealism. SPAVENTA (vedasi) is also the author of Introduzione alle Lezioni di Filosofia. Principii di Filosofia, Saggi di Critiea filosofica, politca e religiata, Filosofia di Kant e sua relatione colla filosofia Italiana. D H T intmoraW.ildell’anima umana; ltiiflcssionimlSodalitmo e Comunismo. Here belongs also FIORENTINO (vedasi), the author of Pomponazzi— Telesio, and Stvdj Stnriei sulla Scuola di Bologna ep"Padom. FIORENTINO (vedasi) also writes on Positivism and Platonium in Italy, Rivista di Bologna. MIRIANO (vedasi) writes La Philomphie en Italie; Lasalle e il sua Ernclito, II Il isnrgimcn Italiano secondo i principii della Filosofia della Storia, Il Problema  religioso in Italia. Among those who have devoted themselves to the application of the doctrine of absolute idealism to the special branches of science may be mentioned MEIS (vedasi), naturalist and physiologist; SANCTIS (vedasi), Mareelli, Delzio, Salvetti, GATTI (vedasi), Vitto, Camerim, and Trani, who applied it particularly to literary and historical criticism, and to political, juridical and aathetical sciences. Next is Scholasticism. The philosophical development of  Italian philosophy is distinguished by its national character, and the decided impulse it has given to the reconstruction of Italy, on the basis of independence and liberty. An exception to this general tendency is to be found in the philosophers who, labouring in the interests of the Church, h a vestr iventore- establish Scholasticism, and with its a cerdotal domination over national thought. VENTURA (vedasi) is the principal representative of the scholastic school. VENTURA (vedasi) is born in Palermo, and early becomes a amember of the Order of the Theatins. He is soon elected Superior General of the Order, and holds a high position in the government of the Church. VENTURA (vedasi) is one of the most prominent supporters of  the reforms inaugurated by Pius IX. In his eulogy on O'Connell, in his funeral oration on the victims of the revolution of Vienna, and in his sermons delivered in the Chapel of the Tuileries, in Paris, VENTURA (vedasi) continues to show himself a warm champion of popular rights. In his philosophical works, howover, VENTURA (vedasi) constantly maintains the fundamental idea of scholasticism, placing the authorityof the Church above reason and human conscience, indeed above all sovereignty. Holding that philosophy was but a  deduction from revelation, VENTURA (vedasi) asserts that the ultimate criterion of truth lies in that authority. It is true, VENTURA (vedasi) says, that ideas originate in sensation, and in the subsequent images which are left by them in the mind. But ideas have no value if not incorporated in language, which is itself derived from revelation. Philosophy reaches its culminating point in AQUINO (vedasi), and nothing is left to philosophers but to study, and to expound the doctrines of that philosopher. VENTURA (vedasi) is the author of the following works: De Mctlwdo Philosophandi, De la Vraie et de la Fausse Philosophie; La Tradition et Us Semipelagiens de la Philosophie, La Raison Philosophique et Catholique, La Phil/jxophie Chretienne, Of. Le Pere Ventura et la Philosophie, par Clis.deRemusatin La Revue des Deux Mondes, Fevrier; also, Etudes Morales et Litteraircs par A.de Broglie, See also on VENTURA (vedasi), Drownson's Quarterly Review, and Annates de Philosophie Chretienne, Paris. To the same scholastic school belongs LIBERATORE (vedasi), a Jesuit, the author of Trwtitutlines Phllosophiaoe, Sitjjio aulta Conoscenza Intellettuale, Ethica et Jus Natural,Compendium LogicaletJfe- taphy»ivc. LIBERATORE (vedasi) rejects the vision of God, as well as the doctrine of pure tradition, as the principle of knowledge, and holds that human reason, aided by the senses and the power of abstraction, can originate ideas, and attain truth and certainty in the order of nature. But above nature and man there is the authority of the Church, the only infallible guide in philosophy as well as in theology. To the same scholastic school may be referred SANSEVERINO (vedasi), author of Philosophia Christiana cum antl'juaetnova comparata, CRESCENZIO (vedasi) who wrote Seuole di Filosofia; CAPOZZA (vedasi), author of Sulla Filosofia dei Padri e Dottori della Chiesa e in ixpecialitd d’AQUINO (vedasi) in opposizione alla filosofia. Also AZEGLIO (vedasi), a Jesuit, brother of the statesman of the same name, the author of Etame Crltlco dei Ooverni Jiapprefsentativi delle Sorieta Moderna, and Saggio teorico del diritto naturale fondato sull’esperienza. La Clvilta Cattolica, a monthly Review, literary, political, and phillosophical, published in Rome, is the principal organ of this scholastic sect. Since its origin it has been chiefly edited by philosophers belonging to the Order of the Jesuits, such as LIBERATORE (vedasi), PERRONE (vedasi), AZEGLIO (vedasi), BRESCIANI (vedasi), and CURCI (vedasi). The fundamental idea of this periodical is the insufficiency of human reason in all questions which refer to religion, philosophy, morality, jurisprudence, and politics. European civilization is the result of Catholicism, and it is only in Catholicism that man and society can find a basis for their development. Protestantism, liberty of conscience and thought are only sources of infidelity and revolution, and it is only by subjecting itself to the authority of the Church, that the human mind can re-establish its natural relations with God and man. The revolution which has made Italy one, having been carried out against the interests of the Church, is anti-Catholic and anti-Christian. These doctrines have received the sanction of Pius IX., who in his Syllabus condemns as monstrous errors the following propositions. Moral science and philosophy are independent of the authority of the Church. Philosophy may be treated without regard to revelation. The principles and the method of the Scholastics are not in accordance with the need, and the progress of science. Everyone may embrace that religion, which he in his conscience may think true. Protestantism is a form of Christianity, in which man may please God, equally as well as if he were in the Catholic Church. Common schools ought to be exempted from the authority of the Church. These and other propositions, proclaimed as religious errors, received formal condemnation from the Church in the Council of the Vatican, through the dogmatic definition of papal infallibility, the logical consequence of genuine Catholicism and the highest synthesis of Scholasticism. Positivism, or rationalistic NATURALISM, as implying the negation of all meta-physical science, is represented by FERRARI (vedasi). A Lombard by birth, and a disciple of ROMAGNOSI (vedasi), FERRARI (vedasi) early visits Paris, where he becomes connected with the University of France – Grice: Fancy having a university of England, or a university of Italy! Indeed, I am tempted to call OXFORD THE UNIVERSITY OF ENGLAND and BOLOGNA the UNIVERSITA DELL’ITALIA!”--, as associate doctor, he afterwards holds a professorship at Strasbourg, which he is obliged to resign on account of his radical opinions. FERRARI (vedasi) returns to Italy, enters Parliament, and is appointed professor of philosophy in Turin, Milan, and Florence. Admitting as insoluble the antinomies of reason in the sense of Kant, FERRARI (vedasi) holds that experience is the only foundation of truth. There are two species of contradiction into which the mind may fall: the positive and the critical. The former arise from faults of reasoning, and may disappear through a verification of the intellectual process. The latter are the results of a fatal law of the mind, and cannot be avoided. Kant reduces these contradictions to the ideas having reference to God, the world, and man. But, in fact, they are numberless. They are in us and out of us. They manifest themselves in our ideas and actions, in both the theoretical and the practical order. The universality is the law of mind and nature. Abolute idealism, with an effort of genius, attempts to reduce them to a rational unity. But absolute idealism succeeds only in giving us a philosophy of contradictions. The failure of absolute idealism shows the impossibility of meta-physical science, and the futility of the labours of metaphysicians to find a relation between nature and logic. Between nature and logic there is no relation. Nature is founded on the law of contrast and change, logic on identity. Hence there is an essential opposition between nature and logic, which renders it impossible to represent unity in accordance with mental ideality. Indeed the mind itself is subject to the law of opposition, so that, in reality, an absolute identity even in the logical order is an impossibility. The effort therefore to reduce nature and mind to scientific unity must inevitably result in transforming the critical antimonies into positive ones, and thus in making error a necessity. The mind is neither superior nor equal to nature. It is its child. And it is only in submission to nature that it can co-ordinate its thoughts, determine its knowledge, and find a basis for speculation. Phenomenalism – as Grice describes it in ‘Personal identity’ --, therefore, with all the oppositions which are revealed in the ever-changing movement of nature, is the object as well as the limit of our intelligence. The ideal relations, such as the relations of quality and substance, of effect and cause, of finite and infinite, and all others which relate to the supreme laws of nature and thought, are so many oppositions which predominate in the universe, and in all our analyses; they are the inexplicable conditions of our knowledge, and the insuperable limits of all science. An impenetrable mystery envelopes them, and the mind can neither explain or reconcile them. Hence it follows that no absolute truth exists in the human mind, and that philosophy is only so far true as it does not overstep the limits of a phenomenal experience, the cause of which is an everlasting movement, and its law a perpetual opposition. Led by these ideas, FERRARI (vedasi) attempts a philosophical reconstruction of the political development of nations, founded exclusively on experience and induction. FERRARI (vedasi) establishes therefore a general and uniform type of this development, and divides It into four periods. The first period is an epoch of preparation, in which an idea is manifested, and the genus of future events and laws deposited in the soul of the people. This is followed by the period of explosion, in which those germs, having reached their maturity, burst forth in an explicit idea, and are transformed into political action. A phasis of reaction, next appears, by which a temporary return is made to the ancient regime, and the new form of civilization and the doctrine of revolution is momentarily suppressed. In this phase the body politic finds itself in a kind of oscillation between the old and the new, seeking its equilibrium. Finally, the last period completes the movement through a solution, and it ends with ingrating the new idea in the minds of the people, and in the character of the government. Thus in France, Louis X1Y represents the first period, the revolution the second, the last years of Napoleon and the kingdoms of Louis XVIII., Charles X., and Louis Philippe the third, while the fourth begins in the revolution, is interrupted by the second empire, and recommences with its fall. FERRARI (vedasi) is the author of “La Mente di VICO (vedasi)”, “La Mente di ROMAGNOSI (vedasi)”; “De l’Erreur”; “VICO (vedasi) e l’Italie”, “Idees&urlaPoiii  51o de Platon et d'Aristote”, “Essai stir h Principe et lea Limites de la Philosophie dell’histoire”, Histoire de hi Raison de l’Etat”; “Histoire des Revolutions oVItalie, “Corso di Lezioni swjli Scrittori Politici Italiani, Filosofia della Rivoluzione. BONAVINO (vedasi) is another representative of the school of NATURALISM. He is a priest, but soon renounces this position, and avows himself a rationalist and a naturalist. He is professor of the philosophy of history at Pavia. In “La Filosofia delle Scuole Italiane”, BONAVINO (vedasi) attempts a criticism of the philosophies of SERBATI (vedasi) Rosmini, Gioberti, and ROVERE (vedasi) Mamiani, and rejects them all as exponents of old Scholasticism under new forms. Admitting the negative part of the doctrine of Kant, BONAVINO (vedasi) derives his positive ideas from the French philosophers. Nature and its phenomena are the limits of our knowledge, and time and space its exclusive conditions. There is no other reality, which the mind can reach. There is no substance, no truth in itself. The infinite is only the indefinite, and even this is not real, but ideal. In “Del Sentimento”, BONAVINO (vedasi) rests his psychology on sensation, and makes this the origin of all mental faculties. Applying these ideas to religion in his “La Religione°”, and in his “II Razionalismo del Popolo”, BONAVINO (vedasi) borrows from Feuerbach, from Comte and other positivists, the idea of humanity as the basis and the object of a genuine rationalistic religion. In his Review, La Raaione, BONAVINO (vedasi) discusses the most important questions of philosophy, religion, and politics, showing a decided tendency towards socialism, yet maintaining a proper regard for the rights of property and the institution of the family. BONAVINO (vedasi) is also the author of “Lezioni sulla storia della filosofia” and of the work “Sulla Teorica del Giudizio”. Moleschott, professor at Turin, in his “La Circulation de la Vie” and other numerous works on physiology, TOMMASI (vedasi), professor at Naples, author of NATURALISMO, and other eminent physiologists and scientists, contend that all knowledge is essentially relative and finite, and that therefore all questions relating to the absolute and the Infinite are insoluble. Hence they assert that the province of philosophy must be confined within the limits of natural science. To this school of NATURALISM, although from an entirely different point of view, may be referred VILLARI (vedasi), the author of “La Storia di Savonarola,” who in his “Saggi di Storia, Critica, e Politica” insists on the exclusive application of the historical method to philosophical sciences, a method, the adoption of which is urged by LAMBRUSCHINI (vedasi), the author of “Dell’Educazione e dell'Istruzione”, “La Guida, dell’Educatore” and other valuable works on education; cf. his La Filosofia Positiva esaminata secondo I Principii della Pedagogia, in the Gioventù of Florence, a weekly paper devoted to the progress of education. The following philosophers, under different aspects, illustrate the contemporary history of Positive Philosophy in Italy. BISSOLATI (vedasi), “Introduzione alle Istituzioni Pirroniane”, SECCHI (vedasi), “Unità delle Forze Fisiche”; POZZOLINI (vedasi), “Induzione delle Forze  Fisiche”; BARBERA (vedasi), “La Legge universale di rotazione, and “Newton e la Filosofia naturale”; MARTINOZZOLI (vedasi), “La Teoria detta Filosofia” – cf. Grice THEORY THEORY --; BIANCO (vedasi), “La Rivoluzione nela Filosofia, ossia il Vero ed il Lecito applicati al Materialismo” – Grice: “And Ayer thought he was being original!” -- ; DANDOLO (vedasi), “Storia del Pensiero nei tempi moderni”; ZANGHI (vedasi) “Antropologia: l’uomo e la scimmia” – H. P. Grice, “read chimp. Lit” -- ; ANGIULLI (vedasi), “La Filosofia e la Ricerca Positiva”, SICILIANI (vedasi), “Sul Rinnovamento della Filosofia Positiva in Italia”; BARZELLOTTI (vedasi), “La morale nella Filosofia Positiva”; LANCIANO (vedasi), “Saggio di Scienza Prima, Universo, T'Astroe ASTROE (vedasi), L’Individuo”; PANIZZA (vedasi), “Il Positivismo Filosofico e il Positivismo Scientifico”, “Lettere ad Tclmholtz”. Grice: “Botta uses ‘filosofo italiano’ too freely. When we reflect on ‘filosofo italiano’ I can think of Heidegger, whom was described as ‘the greatest living philosopher’ – or consider a ‘fat poem’ – In what way is a fat philosopher not like a French poem? If Mr. Buddle is ‘our man in nineteenth-century Continental philosophy’ – why is it that Puddle doesn’t sound Continental enough. Bravery is usually the consequence of being addicted to general reflections about life – I can think of Empedocles who threw himself into the Etna to prove that he was a god – when  his sandal sprang up, the implicature was unequivocal!” Nome compiuto: Vincenzo Botta. Keywords: filosofia italiana, dall’A alla Z – indice di nome della storia della filosofia italiana di Botta – Botta, storico dela fiosofia italiana, Botta su Alighieri, Botta su Cavour, empiricismo, positivismo, Vico, criticismo, idealismo, scolasticismo, ontologia, psicologia filosofica. Refs.: Luigi Speranza, pel Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice, “Grice e Botta,” The Swimming-Pool Library, Villa Speranza, Liguria, Italia.