Значение слова "ANDREAS CAPELLANUS" найдено в 2 источниках

ANDREAS CAPELLANUS

найдено в "Encyclopedia of medieval literature"

(fl. 1180–1190)
   Andreas Capellanus is known to us only through his famous Latin treatise De amore, or De arte honeste amandi (Art of Courtly Love), from ca. 1185–90. Both in content and structure based on Ovid’s Ars amatoria and Remedia amoris, this treatise constantly raises expectations about its own sources and its overall intentions, and then disappoints them as well. Although we know nothing concrete about Andreas,we can be certain from the many allusions in his text and its learned character that he was a cleric and a teacher. Although Andreas repeatedly refers to the Countess MARIE DE CHAMPAGNE, and has included in his text fictional judgments promulgated by her about difficult conflicts in love, we can be certain that this represents only part of his literary strategy and that Andreas actually served at the Parisian court of King Philippe Auguste educating the young prince(s). In his prologue he addresses his student Walter (Gualterus) who had asked him to explain to him the secrets of love, and promises to outline for him everything he knows himself about this arcane and complex subject matter: “For I know, having learned from experience, that it does not do the man who owes obedience to Venus’s service any good to give careful thought to anything except how he may always be doing something that will entangle him more firmly in his chains” (Andreas 1941, 27). This highly ambiguous statement sets a tone for the entire work that has intrigued and puzzled scholars for centuries. Does Andreas advocate COURTLY LOVE or does he reject it? He confirms himself: “although it does not seem expedient to devote oneself to things of this kind or fitting for any prudent man to engage in this kind of hunting . . . , I can by no means refuse your request” (27). This treatise, which proved to be one of the most influential critical discussions of (courtly) love throughout the entire Middle Ages, consists, apart from the author’s preface, of three books.The first book begins with several definitions of what love is, between what persons love may exist, what the effects of love are, etc. Next Andreas offers a number of dialogues, each between a man and a woman, mostly of different social classes. In all of these dialogues the man woos the lady, but she regularly rejects him, and only once can the man convince her by means of a frightening allegorical tale that love is a noble undertaking if she can find the man to be worthy of the erotic reward (83). These dialogues offer Andreas many opportunities to examine the essential values of courtly love, to experiment with various literary genres, and to explore the basics of courtly love discourse itself. Finally we also learn about what love means for male clerics and nuns, prostitution, and about love among and with peasants who can easily be raped, an act that the narrator does not describe as a crime (150).
   Closely following Ovid’s model,Andreas subsequently, in his second book, discusses how to retain love. It also confirms the extraordinarily high position assigned to courtly ladies who are treated with greatest respect because of their rhetorical sophistication and impressive knowledge of the rules of love, which are repeated throughout the first two books as absolutely binding for all members of the courtly world. At the end we even hear that many copies of these basic rules were created and disseminated at all courts (186). Moreover, Andreas adamantly confirms that true love is possible only outside of marriage, which is eventually illustrated through a beautiful Arthurian tale of a young Breton knight who has to win a hawk from King Arthur on behalf of his lady.
   The third book, however, argues the very opposite, as the narrator now emphasizes that God has forbidden love outside of marriage, and then he moves into a most amazing, perhaps even hilarious misogynistic diatribe in which he ridicules and severely condemns all women for their natural vices. The narrator concludes his treatise with serious warnings to Walter to stay away from any form of love, but his conclusions remain surprisingly ambiguous and opaque: “you will see clearly that no man ought to mis-spend his days in the pleasures of love.”And: “pass by all the vanities of the world, so that when the Bridegroom cometh to celebrate the greater nuptials . . . you may be prepared to go forth to meet Him” (211). Older scholarship tended to ignore the third book entirely and glorified The Art of Courtly Love as the fundamental statement relevant for all of courtly literature. Modern scholars have considered the third book, with its apocalyptic warnings of Christ’s second coming that shift gears so radically, and have suggested that Andreas indeed rejected courtly love altogether and used the first two books only as an ironic backdrop for his actual topic. Only most recent scholars have realized the considerable degree of irony and satire throughout the entire treatise and observed Andreas’s playful use of traditional literary and scholastic genres, resorting to selfmockery and ridicule of theological literature and also of the pervasive misogyny deeply influencing all of medieval society.
   In fact De amore proves to be a masterpiece of rhetorical dialectics and illustrates the artistic nature of courtly love literature both in Latin and in the various vernaculars. Undoubtedly, however, the debate about the true meaning of this text will continue, but this phenomenon itself might well have been the author’s ultimate purpose. We know that the treatise remained well known throughout the Middle Age because it is documented in Albertanus of Brescia’s De dilectione Dei et proximi (1238); because it is included in a list of books to be condemned, published by Bishop Etienne of Paris (1277); because it was translated into various vernaculars; and because of the large number of manuscripts and earlymodern prints of the text.
   Bibliography
   ■ Allen, Peter L. The Art of Love: Amatory Fiction from Ovid to the Romance of the Rose. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992.
   ■ Andreae Capellani Regii Francorum. De Amore, Libri Tres. Edited by E. Trojel, 1892;Munich: Fink, 1972.
   ■ Andreas Capellanus. The Art of Courtly Love. Translated with Introduction and Notes by John Jay Parry.New York: Columbia University Press, 1941.
   ■ Brown, Catherine. Contrary Things: Exegesis, Dialectic, and the Poetics of Didacticism. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1998.
   ■ Classen, Albrecht.Verzweiflung und Hoffnung. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2003.
   Albrecht Classen


найдено в "Universal-Lexicon"

Andreas Capellanus,
 
Kaplan in der Kanzlei des Königs Philipp II. August von Frankreich. Für das gebildete Hofpublikum, besonders für den jungen Freund Gualterius (Gautier le Jeune), schrieb er vor dessen Heirat 1186 den Ehetraktat »De amore«. In drei Büchern führt er darin theologische, medizinische, soziale, moralische und juristische Aspekte bei Gewinnung und Erhalt der Liebe vor, ironisiert ihre höfische Verherrlichung und warnt vor ihr durch scharfe Kritik an den Frauen.Das Werk, obwohl 1277 in Paris auf den Index gesetzt, wurde mehrfach übersetzt und beeinflusste die volkssprachliche Minneliteratur. Es wurde (und wird zum Teil bis heute) als »höfische Liebeslehre« missverstanden.
 
Ausgaben: Andreae Capellaní regii Francorum De amore libri tres, herausgegeben von E. Trojel (1892, 21964); Des königlichen fränkischen Kaplans Andreas 3 Bücher über die Liebe, herausgegeben von H. M. Elster (1924); André la Chapela, in: Traité de l'amour courtois, herausgegeben von C. Buridant (1974; französisch); Andreas on love, herausgegeben von P. G. Walsh (1983, lateinisch-englisches).
 
Literatur:
 
Lex. des MA., Bd. 1 (1979);
 A. Karnein: La réception du »De Amore« d'André le Chapelain au XIIIe siècle, in: Romania, Jg. 102 (1981); B. Schmolke-Hasselmann: Accipiter et chirotheca. Die Artusepisode des A. C. - eine Liebesallegorie?, in: Germanisch-Roman. Monatsschrift, Jg. 63 (1982); R. Schnell: A. C. Zur Rezeption des röm. u. kanon. Rechts in »De Amore« (1982).


T: 41