Theorie du langage et exegese biblique chez Paracelse (1493-1541).

Jean-Michel Rietsch. Theorie du langage et exegese biblique chez Paracelse (1493-1541).

Deutsche Literatur von den Anfangen bis 1700, 39. Berlin and Bern: Peter Lang, 2002. 358 pp. bibl. $51.95. ISBN: 3-906768-86-4.

In his study of Theophraste von Hohenheim, a.k.a. Paracelsus, based on his 2000 doctoral dissertation, Jean-Michel Rietsch attempts to build his argument on a premise that has gained more and more importance in recent scholarship: Renaissance literature should be judged according to Renaissance criteria to avoid imposing modern or postmodern theories that early modern writing cannot possibly satisfy. In Paracelsus's case, the problem lies in the tendency to strictly distinguish between scientific and theological writings, a distinction of genres that the author identifies as "purement artificielle" (1) from the outset, as it does not correspond to the form of literary syncretism that enriched Renaissance literature. The author tries therefore to show how Paracelsus's scientific and theological backgrounds informed each other, a process that illustrates the essential relationship between the exterior and the interior, "cle de voute de l'edifice scientifique et theologique de Hohenheim" (346). It is fundamental in understanding the complementarity between Nature and Scripture that is at the basis of Hohenheim's biblical exegesis and his linguistic theories. It is mainly this interplay that sets him apart from most of his contemporaries. Nature and Scripture are both God's creations, two texts that emanate from Him. Therefore, Paracelsus sees only one path to follow in order to arrive at what Rietsch dubs "lisibilite-visibilite:" to penetrate from purely exterior perceptions--our superficial human reality--into the realm of the interior, i.e. to approach Truth, we have to go back to the source of Creation, this "langage, parole divine" (61) reflected in the "two books": "La theorie paracelsienne du langage ... se fonde la, a l'origine du monde, en Dieu lui-meme et se trouve a la source des deux Livres (Nature-Ecriture)" (57). The main difficulty seems to lie in the fact that, in the post-Babelian world, our exterior form of expression, language, is no longer able to grasp the essence of things; hence the necessity to arrive at a truly interior comprehension, which then could be voiced in an authentic language, the vernacular, as opposed to outdated classical idioms.

The study is divided into four parts, the first ("Les Fondements de l'activite exegetique de Paracelse") and second one ("Approche de la theorie paracelsienne du langage") laying the complex theoretical groundwork for the discussion of Psalm LXXVII (78), the centerpiece showcasing Hohenheim's fundamental concepts (133). The Psalm is discussed in depth in parts 3 and 4 ("Le Psaume LXXVII (78) condense des notions fondamentales paracelsiennes" and "Actualisation du Psaume LXXVII"). It is this close reading of Paracelsian thought that constitutes the main strength of the study.

The attempt to portray Hohenheim as a unique original thinker leads to a few problematic generalizations and oversights, however. As Rietsch is discussing the status of the linguistic sign, one cannot help but think of another humanist who integrated theological and scientific concerns into his writing: fellow doctor Francois Rabelais's project seems very similar throughout Gargantua and Pantagruel, culminating in the episode of the "thawed words" (Quart Livre 55-56), a Paracelsian notion par excellence. Whereas the comparison with Erasmus is insightful, especially with regard to the status of the vernacular languages, the opposition between Paracelsus and humanism seems based on a debatable definition of the humanist movement as represented solely by the Dutch scholar (105). By the same token, the equation of humanists with academics appears somewhat farfetched, too, as it was precisely the humanist movement that opposed "official" academic teachings and dogmata, still firmly entrenched in the Scholastic tradition at the time. As in Rabelais's case, a more careful contextualization of Paracelsian thought might have led to a more nuanced description of his position in and impact on Renaissance humanism (see for example Michael Giordano's recent article on "Beroalde de Verville's Parody of Paracelsus in Le Moyen de parvenir" [RQ 56 (Spring 2003): 88-137].

Despite such weaker points, Rietsch succeeds in making his main point, that is, to show, through careful textual analysis, the blending of Paracelsus's scientific and theological thinking in a rather original search for the "Lumiere de l'esprit" (350). As a result, Hohenheim's complex model will become more accessible to Renaissance scholars.

BERND RENNER

Brooklyn College, City University of New York