Lorenzo Valla summarizes the main ideas. Humanistic principles of Renaissance art

10.08.2019

Undertaken on the basis of traditional historiographical and philological considerations. He was one of the creators of classical “ancient” Latin.

Biography

Lorenzo Valla born in Rome or Piacenza in the city (sometimes reported in the city) in the family of a curial lawyer. He spent his youth at the papal curia Martina V, studied Greek with Bruni , Aurispas And Rinuccio. With Mr. Valla was professor of rhetoric at the University of Pavia, where he was admitted on the recommendation of a humanist Antonio Beccadelli (Panormites). In the city, after an attempt on his life by envious professors, Valla leaves the University of Pavia and travels to other cities in Italy. Since then he lived in Naples at the court Alfonso of Aragon, being his secretary. In Valla received the position of apostolic secretary to the pope Nicholas V and became a canon of the church St. Joanna in the Lateran, retaining both positions until his death on 1 August.

Acts

Valla stood at the center of the humanistic movement of his time. His essay "De linguae latinae elegantia" Considered the first Latin grammar since Antiquity, it is dedicated to clarifying the exact meaning of Latin words and their correct and graceful use. It was a great success among contemporaries and was reprinted more than 30 times in the 15th century after its first publication in the city. Valla also commented and analyzed Latin writers Libya , Salostia, Quintiliana; translated Herodotus, Thucydides, as well as part "Iliad" and some fables Aesop. Wrote a philosophical treatise "De voluptate ac vero bono" ("On true and false good", ), in which he preached extreme hedonism, and also composed historical works.

Characteristic features of scientific and literary activity Walla- polemical and harsh criticism towards Catholic dogmas and humanistic authorities, as well as the ideological struggle against Christian asceticism. In traditional history it is believed that in his work "De falso credita et ementita constantini donatione declamatio", supposedly written in the city, first published in Germany in the city, the falsity of the “Gift of Constantine” was proven.

Against medieval lawyers Valla wrote a harsh invective , and at the same time sharply criticized Cicero and placed Quintilian above him; V "Disputatio adversus Livium, duo Tarquinii Lucius ac Aruns, Prisci Tarquinii filii ne an nepotes fuerint" opposed the opinion Libya. This criticism led to sharp attacks on all sides Vallu: in the city he barely escaped from the Holy Inquisition for his opinion on the apostolic symbol and had to conduct a fierce polemic with Poggio , Fazio and other humanists who reproached him for arrogance and arrogance. Valla reproached in response Poggio the fact that he does not speak the classical languages of the ancients and speaks in “kitchen Latin”, like a despicable cook.

Some historians of science attribute Valle formulation of the following five conditions for successful scientific creativity:

communication with educated people
abundance of books
comfortable, pleasant and private place to work
having time that is not filled with necessary things
release of the soul

In historiography merits Walla boil down mainly to the same criticism, and its "Historiarum Ferdinandi libri III" are of interest due to the controversy that this book caused ( "In Bartholomaeum Facium recriminationum libri IV"). Most essays Walla published in the 16th century or surfaced at a later time.

Reconstruction

Lorenzo Valla became a symbolic figure of the Reformation, many critical anti-church and anti-feudal works of the subsequent centuries of the printing era are attributed to his authority.

One example of this type of substitution is "Refutations of the authenticity of the Gift of Constantine", first published in - 60 years after death Walla. From point of view modern science stated in the text "proof" are a set of polemical demagoguery, and in their content they rely on traditional, Scaligerian chronological ideas about thousand-year antiquity "Gifts", as well as traditional philological reconstructions « ancient Latin» . Therefore, despite numerous statements about the “proof” of forgery "Dara", the text itself attributed Lorenzo Valle, has not been analyzed since its appearance, adding to the dubious foundation of traditional chronology. The Catholic Church finally recognized the fraud "Dara" only in the second half of the 19th century, not so much because of the arguments expressed, but for the sake of a compromise with modern humanities.

From the point of view of NH, the Gift of Constantine is an erroneously dated historical reality of the 15th century, and the text "Rebuttals" is an ideological fake attributed to Valle, as a significant personality, in retrospect by the religious reformers-humanists of the next century.

It is characteristic that church leader Valla, according to traditional historiography, refuted church teaching about the origin of the apostolic symbol and wrote a treatise "De libero arbitrio" against Boethius, where he criticized the Stoic ideas about the relationship between free human will and divine predestination, accepted by Catholic theology. Against monastic asceticism Valla, allegedly spoke in two treatises: "De voluptate ac vero bono" trying to reconcile extreme hedonism with Epicureanism and Christianity, as well "De professione religiosorum", - where the author sharply opposes the monastic institution of the Catholic Church - this book was found in the 19th century and first published in the city, being unknown before that time.

In progress "Dialecticae disputationes" Valla corrects Aristotle's logic according to his own understanding and criticizes the scholastic philosophy that dominated European science until the time of Galileo. Historians also report that Valla, it turns out, was not hostile to Christianity and was interested in church and theological issues: he compiled philological amendments to the accepted translation of the New Testament, wrote "Sermo de mysterio Eucharistiae" and the now lost essay on the origin Holy Spirit.

It is clear that such opinions about the activities of a church functionary could arise only in the era of the Reformation and Enlightenment, and were consolidated only in modern times, When Catholic Church lost its political, economic and ideological strength.

Proceedings

"De voluptate ac vero bono",
"De vero falsoquie buono",
"In Bartoli de insigniis et armis libellum epistola",

Lorenzo Valla

Humanism is a special phenomenon in the spiritual life of the Renaissance. Meaning this term in the Renaissance was fundamentally different than in modern era, where “humanism” is close to “humanity” - “philanthropy”.

In the XIV-XV centuries. the division of sciences into “divine sciences” (studia divina) and “human sciences (humanities)” (studia humana) was accepted, and the latter usually included grammar, rhetoric, literature and poetry, history and ethics. Humanists were called educated people who knew these sciences especially well. From the second half of the 14th century. Special importance is attached to classical (ancient Greek and Roman-Latin) literature. Greek and Latin writers began to be considered the true teachers of humanity, the authority of Virgil (in the Divine Comedy he serves as Dante's guide to Hell and Purgatory) and Cicero was especially high. Symptomatic in this sense is the thesis of one of the humanists, Hermolai the Barbarian (1453-1493): “I recognize only two masters: Christ and literature.”

Petrarch (1304-1374) is considered the first humanist. Analyzing the reasons for the “corruption” and “godlessness” of his time, he indicated their two main reasons and ways to combat them.

The focus of humanists is on man, but not as a “vessel of sin” (which was typical of the Middle Ages), but as God’s most perfect creation, created in the “image of God.” Man, like God, is a creator, and this is his highest purpose. Programmatic in this sense can be considered the treatise of Gianozzo Manetti (1396-1459) “On the Dignity and Superiority of Man,” which opened a long discussion about the “dignity of man.” One of the most important ideas of the humanists was that a person should be assessed not by his nobility or wealth, not by the merits of his ancestors, but only by what he himself has achieved. A high assessment of the personality and the individual inevitably led to individualism.

The most significant humanist philosopher after Petrarch can be called Lorenzo Vallu (1407-1457). VALLA Lorenzo (Lorenzo Valla) (1407-1457) - an outstanding Italian humanist, one of the most brilliant thinkers of the 15th century. Born in Rome in the family of a lawyer. I didn’t go to university, but I got an excellent knowledge of Latin and Greek languages. early years Valla passed near the papal curia, where his uncle was the apostolic secretary, who became Valla's guardian after the death of his father. During this period, famous humanists gathered in the curia - Poggio Bracciolini, A. Beccadelli, A. Loschi and others; the spirit of freethinking reigned here, events of humanistic life and newly discovered manuscripts were discussed.

All this could not but have an impact on young Valla. An important stage in the formation of his views was his work at the University of Pavia, where he was in 1431-1433. taught rhetoric; here, in the Pavian environment, next to such humanists as Maffeo Veggio and Catone Sacco, Valla’s philological method of research and his anti-scholastic and anti-Aristotelian position were formed. The most fruitful period in Valla's work was his stay in 1435-1447. at the court of the Neapolitan king Alfonso of Aragon. Valla later returned to Rome, served under the papal curia, taught at the University of Rome and creative work.

As for a true humanist, philology became for Valla not just a subject of scientific study, but also a powerful research method for philosophical and theological studies. Thanks to philological analysis, which consisted of a critical semantic reconstruction of the text, he was able to advance the understanding of the New Testament and essentially lay the first stone in the scientific study of the Bible. With this and his other critical works, Valla made a significant contribution to the rethinking of the medieval worldview and the creation of the preconditions for modern European knowledge and self-awareness. In his work, he embodied the ideal of a free thinker, for whom the main authority is his own mind, and the stimulus for creativity is inquisitiveness restless mind. Valla's criticism was an expression of his inner dignity and autonomy of spirit. And for this during his lifetime he had to pay every now and then high price.

His main work is “On Pleasure.” Already from the title it is clear that Valla was a philosopher who revived the Epicurean worldview. The second part of the title of this work is “... or About true and false good.” In his philosophical views, Lorenzo Valla was close to Epicureanism. In his treatise “On Pleasure as a True Good,” he proceeds from the pantheistic thesis about the identity of Nature and God. Divine nature cannot be the source of evil, but the desire for pleasure lies in human nature, it is a requirement of nature. This means that no sensual pleasures are immoral. Lorenzo Valla was an individualist: he believed that the interests of other people should be taken into account only insofar as they are related to personal pleasures.

In addition, he has treatises “On the beauties of the Latin language” (against the contemporary barbaric Latin language), “On free will”, “On the monastic vow”, “Comparison of the New Testament”. In polemics with scholasticism and its indisputable authority, Aristotle creates his “Dialectics”, where he criticizes the method of thinking and method of argumentation of the scholastics and tries, by simplifying dialectics, to bring it closer to life. In the dialogue “On Free Will,” he opposes the medieval theological concept regarding the relationship between free will and divine providence. Sharp anti-clerical works - “On the Monastic Vow” (1442), published only in 1869, in which monasticism is criticized, and “Discourses on the forgery of the so-called Deed of Constantine” (1440), in which a philological analysis of the famous document that lay, it was believed that the basis secular power Pope, allowed us to conclude that it was fraudulent.

Also famous is the work “Discourse on the forgery of the so-called Deed of Gift of Constantine.” According to generally accepted Catholic world I think in the 4th century. Emperor Constantine presented Patriarch Sylvester I as a gift in gratitude for his miraculous healing and for his victory in the famous battle, a letter which states the transfer to the pope of all power over the western regions of Europe, primarily over Italy. It was on this document that the popes based the priority of papal power over imperial power. Lorenzo Valla, using philological analysis, proved that this letter could not have been written in the 4th century, but was a much later forgery. Since then, skepticism about the priority of papal power has become more and more strengthened.

Lorenzo Valla was an outstanding linguist, as follows from the title and another work, “On the Beauties of the Latin Language,” in which he acted as a critic of barbaric Latin. He objects to the terms introduced by the supporters of John Duns Scotus (“whatness”, “beingness”, “thisness”, etc.), and calls for a return to the living Latin language, not to disfigure it with innovations. Valla also concludes that realistic philosophizing also cannot be true, since it cannot correspond to normal human language. All those universals that need to be expressed in words so incomprehensible to the human ear are nothing more than an invention of pseudoscientists. Valla had an independent and critical spirit, keenly felt the problems of the time and responded to them. There was constant controversy surrounding his work. The Church, whose institutions (monasticism primarily) and secular power he criticized, even tried to organize an inquisition process against him in Naples, but the king prevented this. Valla was an outstanding philologist of his time; his treatise “On the Beauties of the Latin Language” became the first scientific history of the language; the work was very popular, read in humanistic schools, Valla used the philological method in “Comparison of the New Testament”, where, examining a number of Latin and Greek manuscripts, he notes grammatical errors, translator errors, offers numerous corrections, i.e. approaches the New Testament as a historical document accessible to philological analysis. This work of Valla was highly valued by Erasmus.

Philosophy of Lorenzo Valla sees his ideal in the figure of Epicurus, but she revives not his atomism, but his attitude to life, the interpretation of the concept of “pleasure.” Valla understands pleasure differently than the historical Epicurus, who was not an Epicurean in the modern sense of the word. Valla understands Epicureanism precisely as a preference for pleasure over all other human values, and sometimes even regrets that a person has only five senses, and not 50 or 500, in order to receive pleasure in a much larger volume.

In addition to this kind of exaggeration, Valla also gives more serious arguments, proving that feelings, in addition to giving us the ability to experience pleasure, also serve to understand the world. Thanks to feelings Living being preserves its life, and pleasure is the criterion by which it can avoid danger or strive for what helps it survive. It is no coincidence that food is pleasant and therefore useful for life, but poison is bitter and, like any danger, does not give pleasure. Therefore, Valla makes a fundamental conclusion: it is impossible to live without pleasure (which cannot be said about virtue), therefore pleasure is a true good, a true value, and Catholics (and Christians in general) are disingenuous when they say that pleasure is not a true good. For what does a Christian fear after death? Torment in hell. What does he expect from heaven? Eternal pleasure. Valla believes that his view of pleasure does not contradict Christianity, but is more honest and consistent.

A person exists for pleasure, and Valla calls all statements like “better death for one’s homeland than shame” stupidity, because with the death of a person, his homeland also dies for him. Therefore, it is better to betray your homeland (or anyone), but stay alive. Virtue can only be understood as utility for a person, and the criterion of utility for Valla is pleasure or non-pleasure.

Valla did a lot to rehabilitate the name and teachings of Epicurus. For centuries, Christian ideologists have presented Epicurus as a preacher of carnal pleasures and an apologist for licentiousness. However, in the first third of the 15th century. in Italy it became possible acquaintance with the writings of Diogenes Laertius and Titus Lucretius Cara - sources of authentic Epicureanism, as well as the Christian writer Lactantius, who, while criticizing Epicurus, at the same time expounded in detail his views. This created important preconditions for direct acquaintance with the legacy of Epicurus and its rethinking.

Vallas was not the first to take a step towards returning Epicureanism to the circle of philosophical discussions. Much credit for this belonged to L. Bruni and C. Raimondi. But Valla's contribution was fundamental. Valla did not become a supporter of the teachings of Epicurus either in ethics or in natural philosophy. However, relying on the teachings of Epicurus, Valla took a new approach to Aristotelianism, Stoicism and Christianity and, formulating the criterion of morality, connected it with the good of the individual.

Valla proceeded from the fact that every person by nature strives for self-preservation, and in this sense, that which contributes to self-preservation is considered good. The challenge is to correctly understand what its true goodness is. In his treatise On True and False Good, Valla examines various philosophical positions regarding good, virtue and pleasure. The first book discusses Epicurean teaching and the moral problems of man as an individual - self-determining and responsible to himself, the second - Stoicism, interpreted by Valla in a unique way, and the moral problems of a person’s relationship with other people and the community, the third - Christianity and the problems of man’s relationship to God.

Walla starts from the obvious and natural assumption for him that goodness lies in everything that satisfies human needs. The pleasures that a person receives from the senses easily prove what goodness consists of. Neglecting what our senses tell us is contrary to nature and personal benefit. Valla recognizes the value of pleasure as a fundamental characteristic of the good. At the same time, he shows that differentiation of ways of relating to pleasure is necessary and, in general, abandons the hedonistic interpretation of pleasure. Valla convincingly shows that the matter is not only what is meant by pleasure and what pleasures a person strives for, but also how he perceives pleasures.

Once you accept pleasure as a priority value, the whole world turns out to be reduced to pleasure and suffering. Valla shows how the consciousness of a person, blinded by the passion of pleasure, completely changes, which is revealed, in particular, in a person’s attitude towards traditional virtues. A lover of sensual pleasures does not reject traditional virtues, he only reinterprets them in his own way: prudence for him is to see what is beneficial for himself and avoid the unfavorable, “moderation is to abstain from any one joy in order to enjoy many and large..., justice is to gain favor with people, gratitude and [acquire] benefits,” while modesty is “a means of somehow gaining authority and favor with people”; for all these virtues, pleasure becomes “the mistress among the maids.” The one who strives for pleasure strives for the joy of life and the variety of pleasures, and everything that he does, he does for himself, but not for another. This understanding of self-preservation comes into conflict with a person's relationships with other people, with his obligations as a member of the community.

There is another understanding of good - as something that is achieved through glory. Valla attributes this view to the Stoics, speaking of them as philosophers in general. In the understanding of the Stoics, glory is the respect that descendants bestow on a person, and therefore the desire for glory can be considered a virtue. Valla opposes this understanding of glory, virtue and goodness with an opinion much more in tune with modern understanding: “Every thirst for glory comes from vanity, arrogance, and also ambition”; Ultimately, the desire for it poses a threat to harmony and peace in society, because it creates inequality and disunity between people. The main thing for Valla in criticizing the “ethics of fame” is to show that the good here is separated from earthly man, alive and feeling.

The good of man lies in a life free from suffering and worries, and the source of pleasure is the love of other people. Virtue is the ability of a person to correctly understand his interest and make the proper choice between a greater and a lesser good. And although pleasure lies in love, love relationship in Valla's interpretation they turn into relationships of mutual benefit.

Balla contrasts the understanding of good, reduced to benefit and sensual pleasure, with another understanding of good and pleasure. Valla draws this understanding from the Christian tradition, directly referring to the texts of the Old and New Testaments that speak of pleasure. However Christian tradition Valla reinterprets it in an Epicurean spirit, thereby indirectly indicating that Christianity is usually understood in relation to the Stoic philosophical and ethical tradition. Christian texts Wallas interprets this as saying that those seeking good should strive “not for virtue, but for pleasure for its own sake.” It should be borne in mind that there are two types of pleasures: one on earth, and it is the mother of vices, the other in heaven, and in it is the source of virtue. And “everything that is done without hope for that subsequent [pleasure], for the sake of hope for this present, is sinful... We cannot [enjoy] both, which are opposite to each other, like heaven and earth, soul and body”; and so on in big and small.

However, by shifting his starting point from an Epicurean to a Christian point of view, Vallas paradoxically retains the hedonistic formula of virtue as the handmaiden of pleasure. And from the Christian point of view - in Balla’s interpretation - a person should strive for pleasure, but for the highest pleasure, i.e. heavenly. The basis for achieving bliss is virtue. But this is not the virtue of the Stoics, i.e. (in Balla’s interpretation) not the love of fame, but virtue Christian - love to God. It is she who brings the highest pleasure, she is the path to virtue and the source of high morality (honestum).

Thus, Valla does not accept the ethics of pleasure (Epicurus) and the ethics of glory and benefit (Stoics), although at the same time he recognizes the positive significance of the values of pleasure, benefit and glory. But recognizing the significance of a particular value does not mean accepting the corresponding ethical position in general. The problematic specificity of each of the three books of the treatise creates the impression that in each of them Valla seems to be speaking the language of a separate school, and thus all three philosophical positions end up being equalized. In fact, as an analysis of the text shows, Valla directly identifies with his humanistically modernized version of Christianity, expressed in the third book. This humanism is based on Epicurean psychology, according to which pleasure is a real positive stimulus for human activity. This psychology of pleasure is combined with Christian ethics, the highest commandment of which is love of God.

VALLA LORENZO

(1407 - 1457)

About pleasure

Source: “History of Aesthetics. World monuments

aesthetic thought”: in 5 vols. T.I. - pp. 486-497.

Book one

Chapter X

About the wisdom of nature

So, first of all, I could truthfully and honestly, without offending the ears of people, answer what you said about nature: what nature has created can only be holy and worthy of praise, such as with great meaning, beauty and benefit This sky was created, which unfolds above us, decorated with luminaries day and night. Is it worth mentioning the seas, lands, air, mountains, plains, rivers, lakes, springs, clouds and rain? Is it worth mentioning domestic and wild animals, birds, fish, trees, arable land? You will not find anything created, as already said, without higher meaning, beauty and benefit. Evidence of this can be the structure of our body, which is very clearly shown by Lactantius, a man far from market trade, but who became famous for his almost bazaar speech in a book he called “On Creativity,” however, much more could be cited here, no worse than that , as Lactantius mentions.

Chapter XII

On the wisdom of nature and the perversity of the Stoics

Nature, as I said, did not arouse many vices in people and did not allow them to rage against us, as the ignorant and stupidest Stoics think, running and turning pale, as if from snakes, from the touch and sight of moray eels; We not only do not avoid moray eels, but even with the greatest pleasure we prepare them for food, and if other seasonings are not enough, then there will certainly be plenty of opportunity to joke among the feast about the ignorance and stupidity of the Stoics. You will say: “I do not value these pleasures highly and consider them childish entertainment. I prefer to conquer virtue - a holy and eternal thing - through which bliss is achieved. And nothing is so far removed from the voluptuous life as this bliss, since the life of people who love pleasure approaches the life of animals.” This statement seems to you to be the voice of strong and healthy people, but to me, on the contrary, it seems to be the voice of the sick, who, hearing the whispers of those present, shout: go away, shut up, stop deafening; and if they have a few more clothes on their body: I’m burning, I’m dying, take it off now, why are you delaying? Such things should not be considered a weakness human bodies, but to their illness. The same can be said about food and drink; If something sweet tastes disgusting, is it the fault of the food, the drink, or the sense of taste? Why am I saying this? Because nature has placed pleasures before you and given you a soul inclined towards them. You don’t thank her, and I don’t know why, due to what disease of rabies (that’s what this disease should be called), you chose to lead a lonely and sad life and, to further increase the injustice, you opposed nature, under whose guidance, if you had with a little intelligence, I could live happily, as if with an affectionate mother.

Chapter XIV

How can you take advantage of nature's kindness?

In fact, to show that you, as they say, have completely lost your way, I would say the following: nature has offered mortals numerous benefits, it is our job to be able to use them well. Some are preparing for war, but you don’t renounce peace unless it’s more useful. Others entrust themselves to the sea; from the shore you laugh carelessly at swimming, or rather at those swimming. These people work day and night for the sake of their profits; you calmly rejoice in what you have earned. There is infertility, plague, you retire to another place where there is more joyful life. So this variety of conditions leads to pleasure, be it day or night, in clear or cloudy weather, summer and winter. We strive either for the crowded cities, or for the space and solitude of rural places. It evokes pleasure to move either on horseback, or on foot, or on a ship, or in a chariot. Let's replace the game of dice with a ball, the ball with singing, and the singing with dancing. It is highly unworthy to pour out your stupidity on the best nature universe. And if through no fault of yours some misfortune happens to you, bear it courageously and at the same time hope for better times. Beware that by looking back at the sad, you can deprive yourself of the joy of the cheerful. Thus, the power to follow the good is in our hands.

Chapter XX

About the benefits of the body and above all about health

Now I will talk about the benefits of the body, of which the most important is health, then beauty, then strength, and finally everything else. Let's talk briefly about health. Never has there been a person so far removed from common sense who has been hostile to health. Proof of this is that we all think first of all about maintaining and restoring health, although others think about Plato and some others. However, these people wanted to limit and reduce not health, but the splendor of bodies, similar to the splendor of herbs that develop beyond measure. And Plato himself considers it absurd to neglect health.

Chapter XXI

About the beauty of men

More needs to be said about the second good. In the monuments of literature, in comparison with handsome men, one can find a much larger number of strong men, exalted by glory, such as Hercules, Meleager, Theseus, Hector, Ajax and others, who were called heroes, and those who often emerged from fierce battles with victory, like Glaucus, Doriphon, Milo, Polydamas, Nicostratus. This, however, is not explained by the fact that the writers wanted to declare a preference for strength over beauty. Since they talked about deeds and most often about the military, they rather named those who committed the deeds, that is, strong men. The act is accomplished by strength, not by beauty. Indeed, what will Narcissus, Hermaphroditus and other gentle youths do, dressed in military armor, in the sun, in the dust, in torment? If they become involved in wars, a good part of their beauty will inevitably be lost. There is no need to judge the gifts of the body, since we firmly affirm that they all relate to our happiness. And so that it does not seem that I started this business without knowledge, I will briefly say what led me to this. The beautiful, that is, those worthy of being loved, do not fight, but, what is much more important, in war they fight for the beautiful. To keep silent about other things that are coveted human souls, I will limit myself to one example about a person. All the courageous heroes and demigods fought with tireless ardor and tenacity for one beautiful woman. And you must not assume that the Greeks fought for revenge, vowing to end the war only after the return of Helen, or that the Trojans fought to save their dignity, lest it seem that they returned Helen out of fear. I will use the words of Quintilian here: “The Trojan leaders do not consider it unworthy that the Greeks and Trojans should suffer so many misfortunes for such a long time because of the beauty of Helen.” What was that beauty like? This is not said by Paris, who kidnaps her, not by some young man, not by someone from the crowd, but by the old men and the wisest advisers of Priam. And even the king himself, exhausted by a ten-year war, having lost so many children, to whom this beauty, which became the source of so many tears, should have been hateful and disgusting, listens, despite imminent danger, these conversations and, calling Elena his daughter, gives her a place next to him, forgives her and denies that she was the cause of the misfortunes. Finally, among the greatest authors there is no disagreement that beauty in the body is the main thing, so many do not hesitate to put it even before good health, driven, in my opinion, by the fact that they believe that it equally includes health. Cicero said this: “Grace and beauty cannot be separated from health.” Although it would be more correct to say: “health cannot be separated from grace and beauty.” Many are healthy without beauty, no one is beautiful without health...

So, beauty is the main gift of the body, and Ovid, as you know, calls it a gift of God, that is, nature. Therefore, if this gift of nature is given to people, who will be such an unjust judge as to consider that nature did not honor us with such a gift, but deceived us? I swear I don't understand how this can happen. For if health, strength, and dexterity of the body are not to be rejected, why should beauty be rejected, the desire and love for which, as we know, is deeply rooted in our feelings? Would Homer, the undisputed head of poets, praise the bodily virtues of two great men, one a king, the other the greatest of warriors (I am talking about Agamemnon and Achilles), if he did not understand that these virtues are a great good? Although, in my opinion, he did not so much praise the beauty that he found in them, as he himself invented it in order to praise and teach that it is a great blessing given to all great people and worthy of being placed, as if in rays of light, before the eyes of people , which is why both those gifted with this beauty and others who contemplate it receive pleasure. Our poet Virgil, second after Homer, honored in words the beauty of Loves, Turnus, Pallant, Aeneas, Julius. He expressed his opinion about her in the words of Euryalus: “Courage is more pleasant in a beautiful body.” This verse was somewhere condemned by Seneca, who belonged to the Stoics, as if one really should desire things that stand out as ugliness, and as if Plato did not often exhort his Xenocrates to make sacrifices to the Graces, who corrected his only vice. From this we can easily answer the question why some are notable for bodily deformities of the same kind, like that Xenocrates, of whom I have just spoken, and Thersites, the ugly and stupid man mentioned by Homer. They were born ugly so that the beautiful ones would be more noticeable and stand out. Everything seems more valuable only when compared with the worst, and this is so obvious that it needs no proof. And yet the ugly themselves in some respects cause pleasure, namely, when they admire, contemplating the beautiful, which cannot be said about the beautiful themselves, who notice the ugly more often than the beautiful.

However, does this relate to my intention? Bypassing many things consciously (after all, it is necessary to adhere to moderation), I would only talk about Pythagoras; he was said to be handsome in face, and for this reason, I suspect, gained much sympathy in teaching his doctrine. After all, it is common knowledge that both the author of comedies and tragedies and the plaintiff in court are greatly helped by the beauty of the body.

Chapter XXII

About the beauty of women

Let's go further to immediately talk about another field. As Terence says, nature, the creator of things, has given many women a beautiful and noble face. For what reason, I ask, is it to endow them with adornment or to cause an insult, so that they enjoy this gift or so that they despise it? Of course, to enjoy and be happy. And there is no other reason why nature itself has worked so diligently in fashioning faces. After all, what is more pleasant, what is more attractive and sweeter than a beautiful face? It is so pleasant that anyone who looks into the sky will hardly find anything more pleasant there. At the same time, what is in creation human faces there is a special indescribable art (so that such a variety of beautiful faces often makes me think of a miracle), there is, however, great equality in beauty, from which we can say with Ovid: “Many (beautiful faces - approx. transl.) makes my judgment waver.” The adornment of women is not only the face, but also the hair, which Homer so praises from his Helen, and the chest, and the hips, and, finally, the whole body, so slender, so white and full of juices, so perfect in proportions. Therefore, we often see that in many images of Goddesses and women, not only the head is naked, but in one - the arms, in the other - the chest, in the third - the lower leg, so that some part of the bodily beauty of each is visible. Many women are not hidden by any clothing at all and I swear that this is even better and more pleasant, an example of which is the sculpture on the Celio bridge of Diana bathing in a spring, surrounded by other nymphs and taken by surprise by Actaeon. True, Juvenal says that in painting it is necessary to hide some parts of the body. But why hide the parts that might be the best? Ovid says: “Everything that is hidden appears better.” I would dare to wish (if the ugly and, moreover, distinguished women do not object and do not attack, having gathered in a crowd, outnumbering the beautiful ones) that women would walk around the city naked or semi-naked, at least in warm time years, so that men would not interfere with this, and then we would see more beautiful than ugly, tender than dry. After all, if those women who have beautiful hair Beautiful face, beautiful breasts, we allow these parts of the body to be exposed, why are we unfair to those who are beautiful not with these parts of the body, but with others? Obviously, we are afraid that the law we have made will not turn out to be against ourselves, apparently those who are thin or fat, whose whole body is covered with hair, like Polyphemus, or funny with some other deformity. However, let's return to what we left. For what purpose does such beauty of the body exist, created by the highest mind of nature? Maybe in order to begin to wither and lose all the juice and all the charm, like a bunch of grapes remaining on the vine until winter, while we men, seeing such temptations, would burn with desire? Then it would be better not to create beautiful women, as nature did with the rest of the animals, among which there is no difference in the choice between ugly and beautiful females, although Ovid said otherwise about the bull Pasiphae, which chose more among heifers than among other cows. The same thing happens in people. After all, just as we see women off with a flaming gaze, so do they follow us, if they look beautiful. And no one will deny that men and women are born with a beautiful appearance and a penchant for mutual affection in order to enjoy looking at each other and living together... What more can I say? He who does not praise beauty is blind both in soul and body, and if he has eyes, he must be deprived of them, since he does not feel that he has them.

Chapter XXIII

Other things pertaining to sight and touch

I spoke about vision and touch of only one kind; many more could be listed. Why, if not for our decoration, did nature create gold, silver, precious stones, expensive wool, marble? Whose thought is so hateful to the truth as to doubt it? Even the Gods themselves, whose greatness has nothing completely worthy in human affairs, willingly allow themselves to be decorated with objects of this kind, and therefore we have nothing more sacred than temples. Is it worth mentioning what is created by human hands, such as statues, paintings, magnificent art, theatrical performances? Or is it less necessary to appreciate the hospitality of the fields and vineyards, which, as we know, were highly enjoyed not only by rural residents, but also by noble people and even kings, like Laertes and Cyrus? What can we say about horses and dogs created for our pleasure? And despite the fact that all this is true, some strict philosophers have deprived themselves of their sight. I swear that I praise them, approve them and say that they did a job worthy of themselves. Such monsters should be deprived of sight, if they ever had it, they can be compared only to Oedipus, and placed, as I believe, below Oedipus, since they are unworthy either to see or to be visible. And in general there is nothing so absurd, either in words or in deeds, the authors of which were not philosophers.

Chapter XXIV

About the rumor

Let us now turn our attention to hearing, that is, to the word, in which, almost exclusively, we are superior to animals, although Xenophon thinks the same about glory, which, however, according to Virgil, also applies to animals; he speaks about this glory in “Georgics”: “What is the pain of the vanquished, such is the glory of the winner”... Speaking on behalf of men, I would like to ask: would I run away if I accidentally heard some sweet-voiced song, such as, for example, how they say Cleopatra was there, and interrupted the conversation she was having with me? Oh, if only by chance I could hear Penelope and Briseis! Hearing does not only relate to words. Will I close my ears, as if from the singing of sirens, when I hear that somewhere a girl is singing in a clear and skillful voice (I find it more pleasant to hear the singing of women than ours)? And if anyone thinks that he should do exactly this, he, apparently, always strives to look for unpleasant sounds, such as, for example, the knocking of hammers, the noise of rivers falling from the mountains, the Rhine and the Nile, or, which also corresponds, he strives to deprive himself of hearing . Common sense does not reject the song; Since ancient times, apparently, people have not devoted more labor to any business than to music. Some authors claim that music is the oldest of all favorite activities, thereby proving to be the oldest desire for pleasure. Indeed, music gives nothing other than pleasure. The multitude of musical instruments known even to ignoramuses indicates how widespread this pleasant activity is, which (if we believe what they say) affects even the Gods. That is why poets, who are called diviners of the Gods, always sing, pleasing either the Gods or people, or both. In addition, in ancient times, musicians were revered on a par with soothsayers and sages. Plato believed, both in the books “The Republic”, “Timaeus”, and in others, that music is necessary for a citizen. What else will it add? Our ears enjoy not only the singing of people, but also the singing of birds. I am silent about how pleasant each person’s own singing is, as those who have experienced it know well. After all, since childhood I myself have put a lot of work into this science, either because, as it seemed to me, it contributes to the art of poetry and oratory, or because it was a very pleasant thing.

Chapter XXV

About taste and, above all, about food

Let's go further to finish the conversation about the two remaining senses, and first of all about taste. I don't intend to list different types food, about the nature and skill of preparation of which books have been written not only by chefs, but also by doctors and some philosophers; food prepared either from animal meat, or from the meat of birds, fish, reptiles, or from a mixture of them; it exhibits the same diversity as in women's faces, so you will hesitate what to prefer, although the same thing can happen with other feelings. That’s why Terence says: “The most abundant dishes are served. If someone dares to scold food and shy away from food, then, in my opinion, he praises death more than life and he himself should be starved by fasting (precisely what he approves), and I pray that he will die of hunger altogether " If we read that people were once moderate and thrifty, there is nothing to be surprised about. This custom, wild and almost common with animals, existed since people did not have Wealth, until now, until our prosperity came, which, like an owner, having once entered, never leaves the house. It is unnecessary to talk here about those who do not have the means to live, such as the Garamantes and many southern peoples, feeding on locusts, or about the northern ones, about which Virgil says: “And they drink milk mixed with horse blood.” Or about completely insane soothsayers, like the gymnosophists mentioned by Xenophon, the Egyptian priests and the priests of the Cretan bull. The Spartans and others like them cared about frugality not because of contempt for food, but because of an excessive love of war. But I think that what they did was doubly stupid, since they deprived themselves of what they needed and took death lightly. Therefore, they talk about the abstinence of Pythagoras, but this was denied by Aristotle, and his student the musician Aristoxenus, and subsequently Plutarch, and some others; the same thing can be said about Empedocles and Orpheus. And if, nevertheless, they were abstinent, should one immediately, without thinking at all, imitate them? Why did they do this? To avoid causing expenses to someone? Or to make it seem that they are wiser than others and do not live according to the customs of others? Or did they not like this food? It is easy to abstain from what you do not like, just as, for example, some people refuse wine, which is why they are called abstinent. Therefore, you need to notice not what someone does, but for what reason they do it... In general, let everyone think about food what they want. It always seemed to me that he acts extremely wisely and fairly, who strives to get a crane's neck in order to prolong pleasure, if only the most Long neck will give you the most lasting pleasure. Why am I afraid to say what I think? Oh, if only a person had not five, but fifty or five hundred senses! After all, if those we have are good, why should we not strive for others of the same kind?

Chapter XXVI

About drinking and praising wine

What would I say about the wines? In praising them no speech will be debased. And in fact, can’t we in this place once again repeat the greatest praise that I said shortly before, namely, that by drinking wine we differ from animals. I can also praise laughter here, giving thanks to nature for it, because nature gave both laughter and crying only to people, although Virgil, according to poetic custom, showed the horse Pallante mourning the death of its owner. I admit that crying and laughter are given only to people, the first mainly to relieve suffering, the second to express joy. So, I give the greatest gratitude to nature for everything that I said above. I want to put it all together and give a big, loud speech of praise. We humans are superior to other living beings in only two things: in that we are given speech and given wine; the first comes from us, and the second enters us. And it’s not always even pleasant to talk about, but drinking when you have time is always pleasant, unless the wines are spoiled and the taste sensations are not damaged. It is given to us and by nature in such a way that in childhood a person cannot acquire the ability to speak before he can recognize wine, and an old man cannot forget how to drink before he can speak well; to such an extent the enjoyment of this natural gift of nature grows day by day. That’s why Terence says: old age of the eagle. Since I named this bird, I think someone might object to me: don’t some birds drink wine? To them I answer this way: don’t some birds talk? I believe that since they do it under compulsion and imperfectly, it is not worth saying either that they have the gift of speech, or that she drinks wine. So, wine is a natural property of people, just like the word. What praise will be sufficiently worthy of this good! O wine - creator of fun, teacher of joys, companion of happy times, joy in misfortune! You are the leader of feasts, you are the leader and ruler of weddings, you are the judge of peace, harmony and friendship; you are the father sweetest dream, you are a restorer of strength in tired bodies (as your admirer Homer says), you are a relief in worries and worries, you make us strong from the weak, brave from the timid, eloquent from the dumb. So, long live true and constant pleasures at any age, for any gender! And I would also say, although reluctantly: feasts often tire us, often disgust us, keep us full for a long time, bring an upset stomach, and they do not amuse the elderly at all. When drinking wine, it doesn’t matter how much you take, whenever you take it, and it, as they say, is always without damage and always gives pleasure, both to other ages, and most of all to old people. Why, you ask? Because for a person in old age almost everything loses its charm, as for these holy gifts of Bacchus, they become more and more beautiful every day. And if you believe Tibullus: “It (wine. - approx. transl.) taught some voices to modulate in singing and made inept members harmonious.” Not only the poets paid honor to Bacchus, and for this reason dedicated one peak of Parnassus to Apollo, the other to Bacchus, whence Juvenal says: “And they are called the rulers of Nysa and Cyrrha,” but also the philosophers, whose head is Plato, as in the first and second books “Laws”, as well as in “Feast”, believes that if the soul and body are on fire from wine, then this is some kind of outrageous remedy for the mind and courage. It would take a long time to list how many of the great men became known to posterity through the praise of drinking, given at home and on campaign, in rest and at work, for example Agesilaus, Alexander, the founder of laws and morals himself, Solon, and his equal among the Romans, Cato, who is mentioned in “Lyrical Odes” of Horace: “They say that the courage of old Cato was often ignited by pure wine.” As for me, I have provided for myself the only means in old age, and when late old age approaches, when we are weakened and deprived of much food, love and other pleasures, I will devote myself entirely to serving this cause. For this reason, long ago, as you know, I cut out cellars in the underground rock that adjoins my buildings and took care (which I am most happy about) to fill them with the most excellent wine of various colors, tastes and smells. In this description, in which I have left much untouched (no one could tell about a great matter in a short speech), the wonderful gift of nature is shown. Not to mention that if you look at everything in the world, you will not find anything more reliable with such a variety of color, taste and smell. You can also add that when you drink, pleasure comes from the very color of the wine (which is not found in food), not to mention the smell, which means that you need to use large, wide glasses for drinking; This is what the ancient kings usually did, as is known from the poets; for example, it is known that Mari, according to the custom of King Liber, used a large vessel. Therefore, in merry feasts, especially at the end of them, large glasses are used. And I know for sure what and how many of these glasses there should be. If, as I hope, you approve of my intention, then consider it necessary to follow it. And I, who in all other respects can be considered your student, sacredly promise in this matter to be, if you like, your teacher, faithful and proven.

Chapter XXVII

About the sense of smell

It remains for me to briefly say about the last feeling. I am talking about the sense of smell, which I consider the most subtle of all senses, because if there is a nasty smell somewhere, everything else pleasant that is there immediately loses its charm. The sense of smell perceives many odors, both natural, for example, the smells of flowers, the aromas of wines, incense in honor of the Gods, and those created by the art of mortals, for example, the smells of food and incense. How did many retain in their memory until our time the wonderful custom of coming to public places scented with incense - a thing most worthy of a respectable citizen. And on the contrary, there is nothing more despicable than those people about whom Flaccus says: “Ruphilus smells like marshmallow, Gorgonius like a goat.” Why so many words? You cannot reject any wives, neither ugly, nor obstinate, nor tongue-tied, nor sick, the same ones from whom comes bad smell, Can. And how much more should this be blamed and punished in us men, who often appear in court, in the Senate, in the magistrate, especially if we arouse self-loathing not by a vice of the body, like these women, but by a vice of the soul, like Ruphilus and Gorgonius. In this, as in everything else, the Stoics sin. If someone, due to the poverty of his condition, cannot perfume himself with balm or other incense, let him at least love cleanliness and on holidays perfume himself with musk, which will not cause him any expense... However, whoever does not like my speech, let him tell me why by nature so many smells created? Why are only humans given the ability to recognize them? Why is the pleasure of feeling them innate? After all, animals, although they have the same feelings as people, however, in these feelings they are far from superiority and dignity human feelings. As I said above, they cannot distinguish or choose what is beautiful. They enjoy only their own song, they hardly use the sense of touch at all, their taste is adapted to the variety of food and is disordered, since they do not know how to choose the best, they use their sense of smell only to get food for themselves. Moreover, not all animals naturally have the ability to smell, and none of them, apparently, receives any pleasure from this sense.

Born in Rome in 1407, Valla did not receive a formal university education, but he was mentored in Latin, Greek and rhetoric by the greatest humanist of the first half of the 15th century. Leonardo Bruni (Leonardo Bruni, 1374–1444) and the famous teacher Giovanni Aurispa (d. 1459). At the age of 24, Valla tried to get a seat in the papal curia, but due to his youth his candidacy was rejected. In 1431 Valla accepted the chair of rhetoric at the University of Pavia, where, in addition to teaching, he began systematic research in the field of philology, rhetoric, and philosophy.

Here he creates a treatise On true and false good (De vero falsoque bono), published under the title On pleasure (De voluptate). In 1433, Valla criticized contemporary jurisprudence, which caused fierce attacks on himself, as a result of which he was forced to leave Pavia.

Trying unsuccessfully to find a place in various cities Italy, Valla moved to Naples in 1435, where he became the secretary of King Alfonso of Aragon. The king's court was famous both for the fact that it was visited by the most famous thinkers of that time, and for the fact that freedom of morals reigned there, reaching the point of licentiousness. Valla subsequently noted that his lifestyle at that time was by no means morally blameless. Nevertheless, during these years he created most of the polemical works that brought him fame: On Free Will (De libero arbitrio, 1439), devoted to criticism of medieval views on free will and the role of providence; Dialectics (Dialecticae disputationes, 1439), in which scholastic logic and dialectics based on the teachings of Aristotle were criticized and an attempt was made to cleanse Latin from barbarisms; completes the Elegance (On the beauties of the Latin language, De elegantia linguae latinae, 1442), which laid the foundations scientific history Latin language. During these same years, he wrote a sharp anti-clerical essay - On the monastic vow (De professione religiosorum, 1442, published only in 1869), in which he criticized monasticism, and Discussions on the forgery of the so-called Deed of Gift of Constantine (Declamazioine contro la donazione di Constantino, 1440 ). A philological analysis of this famous document, which was believed to lie at the basis of the temporal power of the Pope, led Valla to the conclusion that it was a forgery. Valla's critical views led to charges of heresy. In 1444, the procedure began for bringing him to trial by the Inquisition, and only the intercession of the Neapolitan king Alfonso of Aragon freed him from responsibility. In his Apologia ad Eugenio IV, written in 1445, Valla develops his views on monasticism and church authority. The final edition of the dialogue On the True and False Good (1447) dates back to this time, in which, through the polemics of a Stoic, an Epicurean and a Christian, Valla gives his idea of the highest good, which is a synthesis of the prepared teachings of Epicureanism and Christianity. Soon Valla creates the History of King Ferdinand of Aragon (Historiae Ferdinandi regis Aragoniae, 1445–1446).

In 1448, after the election of Pope Nicholas V, an admirer of Renaissance culture and patron of humanists, Valla moved to Rome, where he received the post of first copyist, and soon apostolic secretary. On the instructions of the Pope, Valla carries out translations from Greek of a number of classical authors. At the same time, he teaches rhetoric, comments on ancient authors and is working on the essay Critical Textual Commentary on the New Testament (In novum Testamentum ex diversorum in utriusque linguae codicum collatione adnotationes). Valla writes several theological works, creates a private school of rhetoric, and teaches at the University of Rome.

With his critical works, Valla made a significant contribution to the rethinking of the medieval worldview and the creation of the prerequisites for modern European knowledge and self-awareness. In his work, he embodied the ideal of a free thinker, for whom the main authority is his own mind, and the stimulus for creativity is the inquisitiveness of a restless mind. Valla's criticism was an expression of his inner dignity and autonomy of spirit. For this he had to pay a high price. Neither the guards church traditions, nor the figures of the humanistic circle forgave him for his militant intellectual nonconformism. Most likely, Valla was indeed impudent, arrogant, arrogant, and the Italian humanist Bartolomeo Fazio (author of O famous people, mind. 1457) and Poggio Bracciolini (writer and collector of ancient manuscripts, 1380–1459), did not greatly exaggerate when they reproached him for this. However, from the works of Walla himself, especially from the Apology, it clearly follows that it was not his own person, but the truth and only the truth that worried him most of all, and in the search for truth, in the education of youth and the enlightenment of those whom he could reach, Walla saw your duty and life purpose.

Valla is a true representative of the era of Humanism. For him, philology turns out to be not just a subject of scientific study, but also a powerful research method. It was thanks to philological analysis, which consisted of a critical semantic reconstruction of the text, that he was able to advance in the understanding of classical legal texts, and the understanding of the New Testament, and in the analysis of pressing philosophical, socio-philosophical and logical problems.

Valla's great merit was in rehabilitating the name and teachings of Epicurus. He was not the first to take a step towards returning Epicureanism to the circle of philosophical discussions, but his contribution was fundamental. Based on the teachings of Epicurus, Valla formulated the criterion of morality, unambiguously linking it with the good of the individual. Each person follows his own good; The task of the individual is to correctly understand what his true good consists of. The good of man lies in a life free from suffering and worries, and the source of pleasure is the love of other people. Virtue is the ability of a person to correctly understand his interest and make the proper choice between a greater and a lesser good. And although pleasure consists of love, love relationships in Valla’s interpretation turn into relationships of mutual benefit. Thus, relying on the ideas of Epicurus and criticizing the views of the Stoics and Aristotle, and indirectly Christianity, Valla affirms a new ethics - the ethics of personal interest.

On foot, trying to find a place in various cities of Italy, Valla moved to Naples in 1435, where he became the secretary of King Alfonso of Aragon. The king's court was famous both for the fact that it was visited by the most famous thinkers of that time, and for the fact that freedom of morals reigned there, reaching the point of licentiousness. Vpo

Consequently, Valla noted that his lifestyle at that time was by no means morally impeccable. Nevertheless, during these years he created most of the polemical works that brought him fame: On free will (De libero arbitrio, 1439), dedicated to criticism of medieval views on free will and the role of the government

ideas; Dialectics (Dialecticae disputationes, 1439), in which scholastic logic and dialectics based on the teachings of Aristotle were criticized and an attempt was made to cleanse Latin from barbarisms; completes Elegance (On the beauties of the Latin language, De elegantia linguae latinae, 1442), 3

which laid the foundations for the scientific history of the Latin language. During these same years, he wrote a sharp anti-clerical essay - On the monastic vow (De professione religiosorum, 1442, published only in 1869), in which he criticized monasticism, and Discussions on the falsity of the so-called Deed of Gift of Co.

Constantine (Declamazioine contro la donazione di Constantino, 1440). A philological analysis of this famous document, which was believed to lie at the basis of the temporal power of the Pope, led Valla to the conclusion that it was a forgery. Valla's critical views led to charges of heresy. In 1444 the war began

the procedure for bringing him to trial by the Inquisition, and only the intercession of the Neapolitan king Alfonso of Aragon freed him from responsibility. In his Apology addressed to Pope Eugenio IV (Apologia ad Eugenio IV), written in 1445, Valla develops his views on monasticism and ecclesiastical authority. To that

The final edition of the dialogue On the True and False Good (1447) also dates back to this time, in which, through the polemics of a Stoic, an Epicurean and a Christian, Valla gives his idea of the highest good, which is a synthesis of the prepared teachings of Epicureanism and Christianity. Soon Valla creates History

King Ferdinand of Aragon (Historiae Ferdinandi regis Aragoniae, 1445–1446).

Iu Papa Valla carries out translations from Greek of a number of classical authors. At the same time, he teaches rhetoric, comments on ancient authors and is working on the essay Critical Textual Commentary on the New Testament (In novum Testamentum ex diversorum in utriusque linguae codicum collatione ad

notations). Valla writes several theological works, creates a private school of rhetoric, and teaches at the University of Rome.

With his critical works, Valla made a significant contribution to the rethinking of the medieval worldview and the creation of the prerequisites for modern European knowledge and self-awareness.

In his work, he embodied the ideal of a free thinker, for whom the main authority is his own mind, and the stimulus for creativity is the inquisitiveness of a restless mind. Valla's criticism was an expression of his inner dignity and autonomy of spirit. For this he had to pay a high price. N

neither the guardians of church traditions nor the leaders of the humanistic circle forgave him for his militant intellectual nonconformism. Most likely, Valla was indeed impudent, arrogant, arrogant, and the Italian humanist Bartolomeo Fazio (author of On Famous Men, d. 1457) and Poggio Bra

Chciolini (writer and collector of ancient manuscripts, 1380–1459), did not greatly exaggerate when they reproached him for this. However, from the works of Valla himself, especially from the Apology, it clearly follows that it was not his own person, but the truth and only the truth that worried him most of all, and in finding the truth, in

education of youth and enlightenment of those who can be reached, Walla saw his duty and life purpose.

Valla is a true representative of the era of Humanism. For him, philology turns out to be not just a subject of scientific study, but also a powerful research method. Thanks to

philological analysis, which consisted of a critical semantic reconstruction of the text, he managed to advance in the understanding of classical legal texts, and the understanding of the New Testament, and in the analysis of pressing philosophical, socio-philosophical and logical problems.

Valla's great merit is

I was involved in the rehabilitation of the name and teachings of Epicurus. He was not the first to take a step towards returning Epicureanism to the circle of philosophical discussions, but his contribution was fundamental. Based on the teachings of Epicurus, Valla formulated the criterion of morality, unambiguously linking it with the good of the individual. Each person follows

public good; The task of the individual is to correctly understand what his true good consists of. The good of man lies in a life free from suffering and worries, and the source of pleasure is the love of other people. Virtue is a person’s ability to correctly understand his

nd interest and make the proper choice between the greater and the lesser good. And although pleasure consists of love, love relationships in Valla’s interpretation turn into relationships of mutual benefit. Thus, relying on the ideas of Epicurus and criticizing the views of the Stoics and Aristotle, and indirectly Christianity, Valla utve