Homero was great, therefore thus determined it its nature, poetical; however, if it cannot infer that it was cultured, a time that its nature probably was not delicate. For Vico, it would be impossible to exist somebody poet and Metaphysical in equally sublime way, because metaphysics abstracts the mind of the directions, and the poetical college the mind immerges all into them; metaphysics raises it the universal ones, the poetical college must be gone deep inside of the particularitities. You put Homero in the times of the Roman In one and Psammtico of Egypt, Vico assumed that it must have run much time so that the writing was arrived. Until this happened, the rapsodos had followed conserving memory poems; of where if it understands how much these epic ones must have been one accumulated confused one of episodes, still more when if it sees the infinite difference that if can observe enters the one styles and of another homrico poem. The varieties of dialects were as much, as many inconveniences in fbulas that they must have been several the idiotismos of the peoples of Greece.

The philosopher of Naples supported the hypothesis of that Homero was all this historical process of verbal transmission of the War of Troy until the times of In one and Psammtico. With Homero, he would have occurred the same that with the War of Troy: perhaps never he has been real. Of the War of Troy, thus with of Homero, nothing he remained beyond its poems. Vico considered that Homero he was a poet as ideal, not an existing particular man. Homero would be an idea or heroic character of Greek man, who folloied the transmission of its poems. It would be at the same time a poet-symbol and two poet-individuals. In other Vico words it suggested that Homero is composed for a previous mob of posterior lesser popular poets and for two great poets, which, reelaborando poeticalally the passing historical substance, it would have transmitted, exactly with the consumings caused for the verbal transmission, more or less under the form of as they are the two poems.

The napolitano philosopher refuted the existence of Homero formal, in the measure where the notion of individual authorship if tied with a type of knowledge that of sapincia riposta. For it the Iliad and the Odyssey were workmanships of the people. The people would have elaborated in such a way how much the poet. One was the voice; the other the echo. With its theory regarding Homero, Vico intended to purge it of three maken a mistake ideas: of that it was collator of the civility Greek, of that it was the source of the philosophy Greek. The first one would be maken a mistake therefore, according to Vico, much before since the times Deucalio and Pirra, the men already started, with marriages, to establish the civility Greek. Second hand it did not proceed because, as already it was said had two phases of the heroic poetry before Homero: in the first one those had blossomed that Vico called theological poets, that is, those who had been they themselves true and severe heroes and that they had sung fbulas, second it was of the heroic poets who had modified fbulas they had corrupted and them. The philosophers had not found its philosophies in fbulas homricas, but, in contrast, they had introduced them there. Words keys: The Iliad, Odyssey, Homero, fbulas, old and modern philosophy, heroes, Greeks, Greece, Vico, civility, poetry.

| May 11th, 2016 | Posted in News |

Comments are closed.