Immagini della pagina

XVIII. On Kirchmann, von Hartmann, pp. 253-265. For various recent German aestheticians, Hugo Spitzer, Kritische Studien z. Asthet. der Gegenwart, Leipzig, 1897. On Nietzsche, Ettore G. Zoccoli, Fred. Nietzsche, Modena, 1898, pp. 268-344 : Jul. Zeitler, Nietzsches Asthetik, Leipzig, 1900. On Flaubert, A. Fusco, La teoria dell'arte in G. F., Naples, 1907: cf. Critica, vi. (1908), pp. 125-134. For books on AEsthetic published during the last decade of the nineteenth century see Luc. Arréat, Dix années de philosophie, 1891–1900, Paris, 1901, pp. 74-116. A few remarks on contemporary AEsthetic are made by K. Groos in Die Philosophie im Beginn. des XX* Jahrh., ed. by W. Windelband, Heidelberg, 1904–1905. For latest books on AEsthetic see Critica, ed. B. Croce (Naples), from 1903 onward, which publishes reviews of them. There is also a review, started in 1906, published at Stuttgart (ed. F. Enke), Zeitschrift für Asthetik und allgemeine Kunstwissenschaft, edited by Max Dessoir.

XIX. The history of particular problems is usually omitted, or, at best, erroneously treated in histories of AEsthetic : for example, see the difficulty experienced by Ed. Müller, Gesch., cit., ii. pref. pp. vi-vii, in connecting his treatment of the history of Rhetoric with that of Poetics. Some writers attach Rhetoric to the individual arts or to artistic technique; others treat the doctrines of the modification of beauty and of natural beauty (in the metaphysical sense) as special problems; others, again, discuss the kinds or classifications in art in an incidental manner, without seeking to incorporate them in the principal aesthetic problem.

§ 1. On the history of Rhetoric in the ancient sense see Rich. Volkmann, Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer in systematischer Ubersicht dargestellt, 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1885, of capital importance: A. Ed. Chaignet, La Rhétorique et son histoire, Paris, 1888; rich in material, but ill-arranged and with the preconception that Rhetoric is still a defensible body of science. For special treatment see Ch. Benoist, Essai historique sur les premiers manuels d'invention oratoire, jusqu'à Aristote, Paris, 1846: Georg Thiele, Hermagoras, ein Beitrag z. Geschichte d. Rhetorik, Strasburg, 1893. There is no history of rhetoric in modern times. For criticism of Vives and other Spaniards see Menendez y Pelayo, op. cit. iii. pp. 211-3oo (2nd ed.). For Patrizzi see B. Croce, F. Patrizzi e la critica della rettorica antica, in the vol. of Studź in honour of A. Graf, Bergamo, 1903 (Probl. d. est. pp. 297-308).

For Rhetoric as theory of literary form in antiquity see Volkmann, op. cit. pp. 393-566: Chaignet, op. cit. pp. 413-539 : also Egger, passim, and Saintsbury, bks. i. ii. For purposes of comparison see Paul Reynaud, La Rhétorique sanskrite exposée dans son développement historique et ses rapports avec la rhétorique classique, Paris, 1884. For the Middle Ages, Comparetti, Virgilio nel medio evo, vol. i., and Saintsbury, bk. iii. There is need for a work on modern Rhetoric in this sense also. For the form it assumed ultimately according to the theory of Gröber see B. Croce, Di alcuni principi di sintassi e stilistica psicologiche del Gröber, in Atti dell’ Accad. Pontan. vol. xxix. 1899 : K. Vossler, Literaturblatt für germ. u. roman. Philologie, 1900, N.I. : B. Croce, Le categorie rettoriche e il prof. Gröber, in Flegrea, April 190o : K. Vossler, Positivismo e idealismo mella scienza del linguaggio, Ital. trans. Bari, 1908, pp. 48-61 (cf. Probl. d. est. pp. I43-I 71). Very incomplete observations on the history of the concept of metaphor are made by A. Biese, Philosophie d. Metaphorischen, Hamburg-Leipzig, 1893, pp. 1-16 ; but this book has the merit of calling attention to the importance of the views and influence of Vico. § 2. For the history of the literary kinds in antiquity see the works above quoted by Müller, Egger, Saintsbury, and the vast literature on Aristotle's Poetics. For comparison with Sanskrit poetics, Sylvain Levi, Le Théâtre indien, Paris, 1890, esp. pp. II152. For mediaeval poetry see esp. Gio. Mari, I trattati medievali di ritmica latina, Milan, 1899 ; and his recent edition of Poetica magistri Iohannis anglici, Igoi. For the history of the kinds under the Renaissance see principally Spingarn, op. cit. i. Chs. 3-4; ii. Ch. 2; iii. Ch. 3. Also Menendez y Pelayo, Borinski, Saintsbury, passim. Special works: on Pietro Aretino, De Sanctis, Storia della letteratura italiana, ii. pp. 122-144 : A. Graf, Attraverso il cinquecento, Turin, 1888, pp. 87-167 : K. Vossler, P. A.'s kiinstlerisches Bekenntniss, Heidelberg, 1901. On Guarini, V. Rossi, G. B. Guarini e il Pastor Fido, Turin, 1886, pp. 238-25o. On Scaliger, Lintilhac, Un Coup d'État, cit. For the three unities, L. Morandi, Baretti contro Voltaire, 2nd ed., Città di Castello, 1884: Breitinger, Les Unités d'Aristote avant le Cid de Corneille, 2nd ed., Geneva-Basle, 1895 : J. Ebner, Beitrag z. einer Geschichte d. dramatischen Einheiten in Italien, Munich, 1898. On the Spanish polemic concerning comedy see A. Morel Tatio on the defenders of comedy and of the Arte nuevo, in the Bulletin Hispanique of Bordeaux, vols. iii. and iv.: on the dramatic theories see Arnaud, Les Théories dramatiques au XVII* siècle, étude sur la vie et les aeuvres de l'abbé D'Aubignac, Paris, 1888 : Paul Dupont, Un Poète philosophe au commencement du XVIII" siècle, Houdar de la Motte, Paris, 1898 : Alfredo Galletti, Le teorie drammatiche e la tragedia in Italia nel secolo XVIII, part i. 17oo–1750, Cremona, 1901. On the history of French Poetics, F. Brunetière, L’Évolution des genres dans l'histoire de la littérature, Paris, 1890, vol. i. introd. : “L'évolution de la critique depuis la Renaissance jusqu'à nos jours.” On that of English Poetics, Paul Hamelius, Die Kritik in d. engl. Literatur des XVII” u. XVIII* Jahrh., Leipzig, 1897: also the well-filled chapter in Gayley-Scott, op.cit. pp. 382–422, the

sketch of a book on the subject. For the romantic period see Alfred Michiels, Histoire des idées littéraires en France au XIX." siècle, et de leurs origines dans les siècles antérieures, 4th ed., Paris, 1863. For Italy see G. A. Borgese, op. cit. § 3. For the early history of the distinction and classification of the arts see the literature quoted above in relation to Lessing, and his Laokoon, with notes by Blümmer. For subsequent history, H. Lotze, Geschichte, cit., bk. iii. : Max Schasler, Das System der Rünste auf einem neuen, im Wesen der Kunst begründeten Gliederungsprincip, 2nd ed., Leipzig-Berlin, 1881, introd. : Ed. v. Hartmann, Deutsche Asth. s. Kant, bk. ii. part ii. especially pp. 524-58o: V. Basch, Essai sur l'esth. de Kant, pp. 483-496. § 4. For the doctrine of styles in antiquity see Volkmann, op. cit. pp. 532-566. The history of grammar and parts of speech is treated fully so far as Graeco-Roman antiquity is concerned in Laur. Lersch, Die Sprachphilosophie der Alten, Bonn, 1838-1841 : better still by Steinthal, Geschichte, cit. vol. ii. For Apollonius Dyscolus see Egger, Apollon Dyscole, Paris, 1854. For the history of grammar in the Middle Ages see Ch. Thurot, Extraits de divers manuscrits latins pour servir à l'histoire des doctrines grammaticales au moyen àge, Paris, 1869. For modern times, C. Trabalza, Storia della grammatica italiana, Milan, 1908. For the history of Criticism several books mentioned under § 2 may be consulted : in addition to these, B. Croce, Per la storia della critica e storiografia letteraria, containing Italian examples (Probl. d. est. pp. 419-448): for the theories of recent French criticism see Ém. Hennequin, La Critique scientifique, Paris, 1888, and Ernest Tissot, Les }o de la critique française, Paris, 1890. On the concept of “romanticism " see G. Muoni, Note per una poetica storica del romanticismo, Milan, 1906: cf. B. Croce, Le definizioni del romanticismo, in Critica, iv. pp. 241-245 (reprinted in Probl. di estetica, pp. 285-294).


Abelard, 178
Absolute, 162
Absolutism in asthetic, 122
Accarisio, A., 358
Action, 47
Addison, J., 195, 203, 218
Adherent beauty, IoI
A done, 34, 441
Advocatus diaboli, 56
Aeneid, 463
Aeschylus, 411
Aesop, 6
AEsthetic physics,
AEsthetic progress, 138
Ahriman, 78
Ainslie, D., 484
Alberti, L. B., 179, 450
Alceo, 37
Alcibiades, 17o
Alemanni, V., 482
Alembert, d', 241
Alexander, 29
Algarotti, 359
Alison, A., 261
Allegorical meaning, 177
Allegory, 34
Allen, Grant, 390
Alphabets, Ioo
Alumno, F., 358
Ambiguity, 71
Ambrosi, L., 479
Aminta, 37
Anacharsis, 223
Anacreon, 51
Anagogic meaning, 177
André, 205, 206, 268
Angelis, de, 222 n., 223 m.
Animals, thought in, 23
Anstruther-Thomson, C., 391 m.
Antisthenes, 463
Apollinesque art, 412
Apollonius Dyscolus, 464
Apollonius of Tyana, 171
Apparent feelings, 80-81
Appearance, 17

IoS, and see

Applied knowledge, 55
A priori synthesis, 41
Arabic art, 138
Archaeology, 126
Archimedes, 20
Architecture, Ior
theory of, I 13
Aretino, P., 442
Ariosto, L., 136, 191, 196, 363, 473
Aristarchus, 464
Aristophanes, 160,411,421, 436
Aristotelians, 180
Aristotle, 41, 43, 92,
169, 170, 173, 176,
184, 186, 187, 193,
220, 223, 227, 229, 236, 238,
257, 267, 315, 343, 421, 423,
427, 429, 430, 436, 437, 438,
Aristoxenus, 450
Armida, Io2
Arnaud, 488
Arnauld, A., 2Io, 229
Arnold, D. E., 218
Arréat, L., 487
Ars Poetica, 228, 257
Art and intuition, I2
and science, 25
for art's sake, 52
Arteaga, S., 241, 269
Artificial beauty, 98
Arts, the various:
classifications of, I 14, 449 seqq.
limits of, II4, 449 seqq.
no separate aesthetics of, II4
theories of, II3
Ascetic view of art, 85
Asiatic style, 463
Association, asthetic, 7, Io;
linguistic, 144
Ast, F., 3oo, 345, 346
Astrology of aesthetic, IIo
Atoms, 30
Attic style, 463
Attractive, the, 87
Aubignac, d', 257, 439

161, 165, 168,
178, 182,

217, 218,

« IndietroContinua »