மறுமலர்ச்சி
கட்டற்ற கலைக்களஞ்சியமான விக்கிபீடியாவில் இருந்து.
மறுமலர்ச்சி (ரெனைசான்ஸ் - Renaissance) என்பது, நவீன ஐரோப்பிய வரலாற்றின் தொடக்கத்தில், அறிவியற் புரட்சியையும், கலைசார் மாற்றங்களையும் கொண்டுவந்த ஒரு பெரும் பண்பாட்டு இயக்கமாகும். இது மத்தியகாலத்தின் முடிவுக்கும், நவீன காலத்தின் தொடக்கத்துக்கும் இடையிலான மாறுநிலைக் காலத்தைக் குறித்து நிற்கின்றது. மறுமலர்ச்சிக் காலம் பொதுவாக, இத்தாலியில் 14 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டிலும், வட ஐரோப்பாவில் 16 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டிலும் தொடங்கியதாகக் கருதப்படுகின்றது.
==வரலாற்று வரைவியல்== (Historiography) ரெனைசான்ஸ் (Renaissance) என்ற சொல் பிரெஞ்சு மொழியிலிருந்து பெறப்பட்டது. இதனை பிரெஞ்சு வரலாற்றாளரான ஜூல்ஸ் மிச்செலெட் (Jules Michelet) என்பவர் முதலின் பயன்படுத்தினார். இது 19 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டில் சுவிஸ் வரலாற்றாளரான ஜக்கோப் புர்க்கார்ட் (Jacob Burckhardt) என்பவரால் விரிவாக்கம் பெற்றது. இதன் நேரடிப் பொருள் மறுபிறப்பு என்பதாகும். மறுபிறப்பு என்பது இரண்டு வகையில் விளக்கம் பெறுகின்றது. ஒன்று பழைய classical நூல்களினதும், படிப்பினைகளினதும், மீள் கண்டுபிடிப்பும், கலை அறிவியல் முதலிய துறைகளில் அவற்றின் பயன்பாடும் என்ற பொருளைத் தருகிறது. மற்றது இத்தகைய அறிவுசார் நடவடிக்கைகளின் விளைவுகள், ஐரோப்பியப் பண்பாடு தொடர்பில் ஒரு பொதுவான புத்தூக்கத்தை ஏற்படுத்தியது எனப் பொருள் படுகின்றது. எனவே மறுமலர்ச்சி என்பதை இரண்டு வித்தியாசமான ஆனால் பொருள் பொதிந்த வழிகளில் பேசமுடியும்: பண்டைய நூல்களின் மீள் கண்டுபிடிப்பினூடாக செந்நெறிக்காலப் (classic) படிப்பினைகளினதும், அறிவினதும் மறுபிறவி என்பதும், ஐரோப்பியப் பண்பாட்டின் பொதுவான மறுபிறவி என்பதுமாகும்.
பொருளடக்கம் |
[தொகு] பல் மறுமலர்ச்சிகள்
20 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டின் இறுதிக் காலாண்டில், பல அறிஞர்கள், மறுமலர்ச்சி என்பது, பல அவ்வகையான இயக்கங்களில் ஒரு வகை மட்டுமே என்ற நோக்கைக் கொண்டிருந்தனர். இது பெருமளவுக்கு, "12 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டின் மறுமலர்ச்சி" என்பது தொடர்பாக ஏற்றுக்கொள்ளக்கூடிய கருத்துக்களை முன்வைத்த சார்ள்ஸ் ஹெச் ஹஸ்கின்ஸ் (Charles H. Haskins) என்பவரின் ஆய்வுகளாலும், "கரோலிங்கியன் மறுமலர்ச்சி" (Carolingian renaissance) தொடர்பான வாதங்களை முன்வைத்த வரலாற்றாளர்களினாலும் ஏற்பட்டது. இவ்விரு கருத்துக்களுமே தற்போதைய அறிஞர் சமூகத்தினால் பரவலாக ஏற்கப்பட்டிருப்பதன் காரணமாக, மறுமலர்ச்சி எனப்படுவதை குறிப்பான சொற்களின் மூலம், உதாரணமாக இத்தாலிய மறுமலர்ச்சி, ஆங்கில மறுமலர்ச்சி முதலியன மூலம், குறிப்பிடுவது தற்கால வரலாற்றாளரிடையே ஒரு போக்காக இருந்து வருகிறது. This terminology is particularly useful because it eliminates the need for fitting "The Renaissance" into a chronology that previously held that it was preceded by the Middle Ages and followed by the Reformation, which many believe to not be accurate. The entire period is now often replaced by the term "Early Modern". (See periodisation, Lumpers and splitters)
Other periods of cultural rebirth have also been termed a "renaissance"; such as the Harlem Renaissance or the San Francisco Renaissance. The other renaissances are not considered further in this article, which will concentrate on the Renaissance as the transition from the Middle Ages to the Modern Age.
[தொகு] விமர்சன நோக்கு
Since the term was first created in the 19th century, historians have various interpretations on the Renaissance.
The predominant view is that the Renaissance of the 15th century in Italy, spreading through the rest of Europe, represented a reconnection of the west with classical antiquity, the absorption of knowledge—particularly mathematics—from Arabic, the return of experimentalism, the focus on the importance of living well in the present (e.g. humanism), an explosion of the dissemination of knowledge brought on by printing and the creation of new techniques in art, poetry and architecture which led to a radical change in the style and substance of the arts and letters. This period, in this view, represents Europe emerging from a long period as a backwater, and the rise of commerce and exploration. The Italian Renaissance is often labelled as the beginning of the "modern" epoch.
Marxist historians view the Renaissance as a pseudo-revolution with the changes in art, literature, and philosophy affecting only a tiny minority of the very wealthy and powerful while life for the great mass of the European population was unchanged from the Middle Ages. They thus deny that it is an event of much import.
Today most historians view the Renaissance as largely an intellectual and ideological change, rather than a substantive one. Perhaps the most important determinant of the Renaissance is that those involved in it believed they were living in a new era that was a clean break from the Middle Ages.
Johan Huizinga (1872–1945) acknowledged the existence of the Renaissance but questioned whether it was a positive change. He argued that the Renaissance was a period of decline from the high Middle Ages, which destroyed much that was important. The Latin language, for instance, had evolved greatly from the classical period and was still used in the church and by others as a living language. However, the Renaissance obsession with classical purity saw Latin revert to its classical form and its natural evolution halted. Robert S. Lopez has contended that it was a period of deep economic recession. Meanwhile George Sarton and Lynn Thorndike have both criticised how the Renaissance affected science, arguing that progress was slowed.
[தொகு] மறுமலர்ச்சிக் காலத்தின் தொடக்கம்
The Renaissance has no set starting point or place. It happened gradually at different places at different times and there are no defined dates or places for when the Middle Ages ended. The starting place of the Renaissance is almost universally ascribed to Northern Italy, especially the city of Florence. One early Renaissance figure is the poet Dante (1265–1321), the first writer to embody the spirit of the Renaissance.
Petrarch (1304–1374) is another early Renaissance figure. As part of the humanist movement he concluded that the height of human accomplishment had been reached in the Roman Empire and the ages since have been a period of social rot which he labeled the Dark Ages. Petrarch saw history as social, art and literary advancement, and not as a series of set religious events. Re-birth meant the rediscovery of ancient Roman and Greek Latin heritage through ancient manuscripts and the humanist method of learning. These new ideas from the past (called the "new learning" at the time) triggered the coming advancements in art, science and other areas.
Another possible starting point is the fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453. It was a turning point in warfare as cannon and gunpowder became a central element. In addition eastern scholars fled west to Rome bringing renewed energy and interest in the Greek and Roman heritage, and it represented the end of the old religious order in Europe.
[தொகு] இத்தாலியப் புத்துயிப்பு
Main article: Italian Renaissance
The Italian Renaissance was intertwined with the intellectual movement known as Renaissance humanism and with the fiercely independent and combative urban societies of the city-states of northern Italy in the 13th to 16th centuries. Italy was the birthplace of the Renaissance for several reasons.
The first two or three decades of the 15th century saw the emergence of a rare cultural efflorescence, particularly in Florence. This 'Florentine enlightenment' (Holmes) was a major achievement. It was a classical, classicising culture which sought to live up to the republican ideals of Athens and Rome. Sculptors used Roman models and classical themes. This society had a new relationship with the classical past. It felt it owned it and revived it. Florentines felt akin to 1st century BC republican Rome. Rucellai wrote that he belonged to a great age; Leonardo Bruni's Panegyric to the City of Florence expresses similar sentiments. There was a genuine appreciation of the plastic arts—pagan idols and statuary—with nudity, expressions of human dignity, etc.
A similar parallel movement was also occurring in the arts in the early 15th century in Florence—an avant-garde, classicising movement. Many of the same people were involved; there was a close community of people involved in both movements. Valla said that, as they revived Latin, so was Latin architecture revived, for example Rucellai's Palazzo built by Leone Battista Alberti. Of Brunelleschi, he felt that he was the greatest architect since Roman times.
Sculpture was also revived, in many cases before the other arts. There was a very obvious naturalism about contemporary sculpture, and highly true to life figures were being sculpted. Often biblically-themed sculpture and paintings included recognizable Florentines.
This intense classicism was applied to literature and the arts. In most city-republics there was a small clique with a camaraderie and rivalry produced by a very small elite. Alberti felt that he had played a major part, as had Brunelleschi, Masaccio, etc. Even he admitted he had no explanation of why it happened.
There are several possible explanations for its occurrence in Florence:
1. The Medici did it—the portrait and solo sculpture emerged, especially under Lorenzo. This is the conventional response:
Unfortunately, this fails to fit chronologically. 1410 and 1420 can be said to be the start of the Renaissance, but the Medici came to power later. They were certainly great patrons but much later. If anything, the Medici jumped on an already existing bandwagon. 2. The great man argument. Donatello, Brunelleschi and Michelangelo were just geniuses. This is a circular argument with little explanatory power. Surely it would be better, more human and accessible to understand the circumstances which helped these geniuses to come to fruition. 3. A similar argument is the rise of individualism theory attributable to Burckhardt. This argues for a change from collective neutrality towards the lonely genius. Goldthwaite says it was part of the emergence of the family and the submersion of the clan system. However, the Kents (F.W. and Dale) have argued that this was and remained a society of neighborhood, kin and family. Florentines were very constrained and tied into the system; it was still a very traditional society 4. Frederick Antal has argued that the triumph of Masaccio et al. was the triumph of the middle class over the older, more old-fashioned feudal classes, so that the middle class wanted painters to do more bourgeois paintings. This does not make sense. Palla Strozzi commissioned old fashioned paintings whereas Cosimo de' Medici went for new styles in art. 5. Hans Baron's argument is based on the new Florentine view of human nature, a greater value placed on human life and on the power of man, thus leading to civic humanism, which he says was born very quickly in the early 15th century. In 1401 and 1402, he says Visconti was narrowly defeated by republican Florence, which reasserted the importance of republican values. Florence experienced a dramatic crisis of independence which led to civic values and humanism. Against this we can say that Baron is comparing unlike things. In a technical sense, Baron has to prove that all civic humanist work came after 1402, whereas many such works date from the 1380s. This was an ideological battle between a princely state and a republican city-state, even though they varied little in their general philosophy. Any such monocausal argument is very likely to be wrong. Kent says there is plenty of evidence of preconditions for the Renaissance in Florence. In 1300, Florence had a civic culture, with people like Latini who had a sense of classical values, though different from the values of the 15th century. Villani also had a sense of the city as daughter and creature of Rome. Petrarch in the mid-14th century hated civic life but bridged the gap between the 14th and 15th centuries as he began to collect antiquities. The 1380s saw several classicising groups, including monks and citizens. There was a gradual build-up rather than a big bang. Apart from the elites there was already an audience for the Renaissance. Florence was a very literate audience, already self-conscious and aware of its city and place in the political landscape. The crucial people in the 14th and 15th century were
- Chrysolaras: increased interest in the grammar of ancient architecture (1395)
- Niccoli: a major influence on the perception of the classics.
Their teachings reached the upper classes between 1410 and 1420 and this is when the new consciousness emerged. Brucker noticed this new consciousness in council debates around 1410; there are increased classical references. Florence experienced not just one but many crises; Milan, Lucca, the Ciompi. The sense of crisis was over by 1415 and there was a new confidence, a triumphant experience of being a republic. Between 1413-1423 there was an economic boom. The upper class had the financial means to support scholarship. Gombrich says there was a sense of ratifying yourself to the ancient world, leading to a snobbishness and an elite view of education, and a tendency for the rich wanting to proclaim their ascendancy over the poor and over other cities. The early Renaissance was an act of collaboration. Artisans and artists were enmeshed in the networks of their city. Committees were usually responsible for buildings. There were collaborations between patricians and artisans without which the Renaissance could not have occurred. Thus it makes sense to adopt a civic theory of the Renaissance rather than a great man theory.
[தொகு] வடக்கு மறுமலர்ச்சி
- Main article: Northern Renaissance
The Renaissance spread north out of Italy being adapted and modified as it moved. It first arrived in France, imported by King Francis I after his invasion of Italy. Francis imported Italian art and artists, including Leonardo Da Vinci and at great expense he built ornate palaces. Writers such as Rabelais also borrowed from the spirit of the Italian Renaissance.
From France the spirit of the age spread to the Low Countries and Germany, and finally to England and Scandinavia by the late 16th century. In these areas the Renaissance became closely linked to the turmoil of the Protestant Reformation and the art and writing of the German Renaissance frequently reflected this dispute.
While Renaissance ideas were moving north from Italy, there was a simultaneous spread southward of innovation, particularly in music. The music of the 15th century Burgundian School defined the beginning of the Renaissance in that art; and the polyphony of the Netherlanders, as it moved with the musicians themselves into Italy, formed the core of what was the first true international style in music since the standardization of Gregorian Chant in the 9th century. The culmination of the Netherlandish school was in the music of the Italian composer, Palestrina. At the end of the 16th century Italy again became a center of musical innovation, with the development of the polychoral style of the Venetian School, which spread northward into Germany around 1600.
In England, the Elizabethan era marked the beginning of the English Renaissance. It saw writers such as William Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe, John Milton, and Edmund Spenser, as well as great artists, architects (such as Inigo Jones) and composers such as Thomas Tallis, John Taverner, and William Byrd.
In these northern nations the Renaissance would be built upon and supplanted by the thinkers of The Enlightenment in the seventeenth century.
[தொகு] பின்வருவனவற்றையும் காண்க
- List of Renaissance figures
- Humanism
- மறுமலர்ச்சிக் கட்டிடக்கலை
- Protestant Reformation
- அறிவியல் புரட்சி
[தொகு] உசாத்துணைகள்
- Burckhardt, Jacob (1878), The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, trans S.G.C Middlemore (republished in 1990 under ISBN 014044534X)
- Ergang, Robert (1967), The Renaissance(ISBN 0442023197)
- Ferguson, Wallace K. (1962), Europe in Transition, 1300-1500 (ISBN 0049400088)
- Haskins, Charles Homer (1972), The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century (ISBN 0674760751)
- Huizinga, Johan (1924), The Waning of the Middle Ages (republished in 1990 under ISBN 0140137025)
- Jensen, De Lamar (1992), Renaissance Europe (ISBN 0395889472)
- Lopez, Robert S. (1952), Hard Times and Investment in Culture
- Thorndike, Lynn (1943) Renaissance or Prenaissance?
[தொகு] Further reading
- A NEW LIGHT ON THE RENAISSANCE, by Harold Bayley, 1909
வார்ப்புரு:History of Europe
