James J. O'Donnell's Augustine: Confessions (Commentary: Curiosity in 10.35.54)

Benozzo Gozzoli (1421-1497), "Take up and read"

Fresco Series, Life of Augustine, Bishop of Hippo

San Gimignano (1465)

(Image from James J. O'Donnell UPenn Website)

In my curious wanderings about the internet, following the lust of my own eyes for seeable knowledge, albeit 'seeable' only with the mind's 'I', my abstract eye was caught by something foreseeable though unforeseen by me, an up-to-date online annotated edition of Augustine's Confessions, with a commentary that even draws upon Hans Blumenberg.

As the site itself says, "This document is an on-line reprint of Augustine: Confessions, a text and commentary by James J. O'Donnell (Oxford: 1992; ISBN 0-19-814 378-8)."

"Nice find," I thought, then found that I had found it before without realizing its significance. I had drawn from it in my blog entry of December 6 for its online reproduction of the Latin text to Book 10, Chapter 35, Paragraph 54 in Augustine's Confessions:

huc accedit alia forma temptationis multiplicius periculosa. praeter enim concupiscentiam carnis, quae inest in delectatione omnium sensuum et voluptatum, cui servientes depereunt qui longe se faciunt a te, inest animae per eosdem sensus corporis quaedam non se oblectandi in carne, sed experiendi per carnem vana et curiosa cupiditas nomine cognitionis et scientiae palliata. quae quoniam in appetitu noscendi est, oculi autem sunt ad noscendum in sensibus principes, concupiscentia oculorum eloquio divino appellata est. ad oculos enim proprie videre pertinet, utimur autem hoc verbo etiam in ceteris sensibus, cum eos ad cognoscendum intendimus. neque enim dicimus, 'audi quid rutilet,' aut, 'olefac quam niteat,' aut, 'gusta quam splendeat,' aut, 'palpa quam fulgeat': videri enim dicuntur haec omnia. dicimus autem non solum, 'vide quid luceat,' quod soli oculi sentire possunt, sed etiam, 'vide quid sonet,' 'vide quid oleat,' 'vide quid sapiat,' 'vide quam durum sit.' ideoque generalis experientia sensuum concupiscentia (sicut dictum est) oculorum vocatur, quia videndi officium, in quo primatum oculi tenent, etiam ceteri sensus sibi de similitudine usurpant, cum aliquid cognitionis explorant.

Readers will recall that I then posted the translation provided by the Catholic Encyclopedia website:

10.35.54. In addition to this there is another form of temptation, more complex in its peril. For besides that concupiscence of the flesh which lies in the gratification of all senses and pleasures, wherein its slaves who "are far from You perish," there pertains to the soul, through the same senses of the body, a certain vain and curious longing, cloaked under the name of knowledge and learning, not of having pleasure in the flesh, but of making experiments through the flesh. This longing, since it originates in an appetite for knowledge, and the sight being the chief amongst the senses in the acquisition of knowledge, is called in divine language, "the lust of the eyes." (1 John 2:16) For seeing belongs properly to the eyes; yet we apply this word to the other senses also, when we exercise them in the search after knowledge. For we do not say, Listen how it glows, smell how it glistens, taste how it shines, or feel how it flashes, since all these are said to be seen. And yet we say not only, See how it shines, which the eyes alone can perceive; but also, See how it sounds, see how it smells, see how it tastes, see how hard it is. And thus the general experience of the senses, as was said before, is termed "the lust of the eyes," because the function of seeing, wherein the eyes hold the pre-eminence, the other senses by way of similitude take possession of, whensoever they seek out any knowledge.

But we've seen all this before, so why do I again call attention to it here now? Because of the linked commentary with scholarly observations, references, links, and abundant abbreviations (penultimately demystified below) that James J. O'Donnell conveniently provides:

Curiositas (for the concept in A. before conf., see on 3.2.2): the noun (see TLL 4.1489-92; cf. Labhardt, Mus. Helv. 17[1960], 209) occurs only once in Cicero (Att. 2.12.2) and becomes common with Apuleius and Tertullian; the adj. is in Cicero and Varro in senses congruent to its use here several times but then does not occur regularly for another century. (The adj. has a less flattering, earlier sense that appears in Terence, e.g.: 'inquisitive, curious, meddlesome, interfering' [OLD]; and at util. cred. 9.22, A. implies that the word is ordinarily unflattering: 'sed scis etiam curiosum non nos solere appellare sine convicio, studiosum vero etiam cum laude'.) curiosus/curiositas in conf.: 1.10.16, 1.14.23, 2.6.13, 3.3.5, 5.3.3, 5.3.4 (see on 5.3.4 for Ps. 8.8-9 and en. Ps.), 6.8.13, 6.12.22, 7.6.8, 7.6.9, 10.3.3, 10.35.55 (2x), 10.35.57, 10.37.60, 10.42.67; only twice in later books are the three temptations are evoked: 13.20.28, 'genus humanum profunde curiosum', 13.21.30, 'venenum curiositatis' (in both cases in 1 Jn. 2.16 triads).

For an archaic, evasive view: G-M: 'In ages of decadence, such as that in which A. lived, morbid curiosity takes the place of honest, healthy curiosity: jaded nerves and blasé characters crave for unwholesome stimulants.' 26 The dissonance between A.'s mistrust and modern reverence and the difficulty in specifying sources for his attitude have helped give rise to a substantial bibliography. Special note should be taken of the work of H. Blumenberg, whose articles on A. (REAug 7[1961], 35-70 and Studia Patristica 6[1962], 294-302), contribute to his ambitious Die Legitimität der Neuzeit (first ed., Frankfurt, 1966; Eng. trans. from revised edition, The Legitimacy of the Modern Age [Cambridge, Mass., 1983], where see 309-23 on A.). See also H. J. Mette, in Fetschrift Snell (München, 1956), 227-235, on Hermetic connections and the ps.-Apuleian Asclepius, a work A. knew later in his career at least; A. Labhardt, Mus. Helv. 17(1960), 206-24 (from Cicero to Augustine: excellent); R. Joly, Ant. Class. 30(1961), 5-32; and S. Lancel, RHR 160(1961), 25-45 (Apuleius).

Texts from the mature A.: qu. ev. 1.47, 'cupiditati quae in curiositate est, opponitur timor mortis: . . . in illa cognoscendarum est aviditas'; agon. 4.4, 6.6, 12.13; b. coniug. 12.14; Gn. litt. 11.31.41 (on Gn. 3.7, 'aperti sunt oculi eorum' : 'audax curiositas mota est, avida experiri latentia'); trin. 10.5.7, 12.11.16 ('cum enim neglecta caritate sapientiae, quae semper eodem modo manet, concupiscitur scientia ex mutabilium temporaliumque experimento, inflat, non aedificat: ita praegravatus animus quasi pondere suo a beatitudine expellitur'); civ. 3.9, 4.34, 5.21, 5.26, 7.34, 9.16, 10.27, 16.8 ('historici de sua curiositate gloriantes'); en. Ps. 80.19, 101. s. 2.10; c. Iul. 6.7.17 ('contra curiositatem quae minus solet mirari quod potuerit comprehendere, incomprehensibilia esse opera dei').

The strength of A.'s distaste for this element of his own character may be measured by his reaction when, around 410, he encounters a correspondent not unlike his own younger self (Dioscorus: almost certainly not the brother of Zenobius, the dedicatee of ord., though PLRE II [s.v. Dioscorus 2] and some others would identify them). A. rebukes him roundly for his curiositas: ep. 118.1.1, 'ego te autem vellem abripere de medio deliciosarum inquisitionum tuarum et constipare inter curas meas, ut vel disceres non esse inaniter curiosus, vel curiositatem tuam cibandam atque nutriendam imponere non auderes eis quorum inter curas vel maxima cura est reprimere ac refrenare curiosos. . . . vanae atque fallaces cupiditates tuae . . . nescio qua umbra honestatis et liberalium studiorum nomine velatae atque palliatae . . . .'

A.'s own intrinsic 'curiosity' (the sort that leaves him agape at the sight of hound and hare: 10.35.57) is on display at civ. 21.4, 'magnetem lapidem novimus mirabilem ferri esse raptorem; quod cum primum vidi, vehementer inhorrui,' followed by a circumstantial description. The 'miracula' described there and in the following chapters do give a hint of the grounds of A.'s aversion to 'curiositas' : attending to the wonders of nature led, more often than not, to ascribing those wonders to divine powers of various sorts. A.'s own notorious early aversion to miracle-stories in general (see on 9.7.16) probably arises from the same desire to avoid competing, to avoid crediting non-Christian deities with special powers. By the time of civ. 22, he had obviously chosen to compete with the non-Christian gods on their own ground; this decision may be variously judged, but it is at least a sign of increasing confidence in his own position.

O'Donnell's labor in this field (and laboriously put online by Anne Mahoney) will certainly prove labor-saving for me as I delve further into Augustine's critique of curiosity.

To identify the abbreviations located in the passage above, see O'Donnell's "Prolegomena." You'll need to scroll down about a third of the webpage, to 'Abbreviations and Methods of Reference'.

That's all for today because I'm still grading final essays.