Corte, poder e utopia: O Relox de Príncipes (1529) de Fr. Antonio de Guevara e a sua fortuna na Europa do século XVI

Em Valladolid era publicado, em 1529, o Libro llamado Relox de Príncipes, da autoria de fr. Antonio de Guevara, iniciando-se “[...] la más fantástica carrera y reputación literaria del siglo XVI, tanto dentro como fuera de España [...]” (Márquez Villanueva e Redondo 173). A história do Relox de Príncipes encontra-se intimamente ligada à edição, cerca de um ano antes, em Sevilha, nos prelos de Jacobo Cromberger, sem nome de autor, do Libro Áureo de Marco Aurelio, também da autoria de Guevara. Com efeito, a parte mais importante desta obra impressa em 1528 viria a integrar a publicação “oficial” de 1529, facto que originaria uma persistente confusão entre ambas, até porque aquela que pode considerar-se a versão primitiva, o Libro Áureo, apesar do aparente repúdio do autor, continuaria a ser objecto de sucessivas edições autónomas. Isso mesmo dizia expressamente Antonio de Guevara no prólogo do Relox de Príncipes, sustentando que a impressão do Marco Aurelio fora feita sem seu consentimento. Após referir que, a pedido do imperador, que se encontrava doente na altura, lhe oferecera o manuscrito, incompleto, do Libro Áureo, Guevara afirmava a sua mágoa por, sem poder controlar esse processo, o manuscrito ter sido copiado e recopiado na corte pelas mais diversas mãos, e progressivamente adulterado, publicando-se uma versão na qual ele próprio não se reconhecia.

Humor and the framing of the public sphere and public opinion in Portugal (1797-1834)

In his Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment (1784), Kant puts forward his belief that the vocation to think freely, which humankind is endowed with, is bound to make sure that “the public use of reason” will at last act “even on the fundamental principles of government and the state [will] find it agreeable to treat man – who is now more than a machine – in accord with his dignity”. The critical reference to La Mettrie (1747), by opposing the machine to human dignity, will echo, in the dawn of the 20th century, in Bergson’s attempt to explain humor. Besides being exclusive to humans, humor is also a social phenomenon. Freud (1905) assures that pleasure originated by humor is collective, it results from a “social process”: jokes need an audience, a “third party”, in order to work and have fun. Assuming humor as a social and cultural phenomenon, this paper intends to sustain that it played a role in the framing of the public sphere and of public opinion in Portugal during the transition from Absolute Monarchy to Liberalism. The search for the conditions which made possible the critical exercise of sociability is at the root of the creation of the public sphere in the sense developed by Habermas (1962), whose perspective, however, has been questioned by those who point 2 out the alleged idealism of the concept – as opposed, for example, to Bakhtin (1970), whose work stresses diversity and pluralism. This notwithstanding, the concept of public sphere is crucial to the building of public opinion, which is, in turn, indissoluble from the principle of publicity, as demonstrated by Bobbio (1985). This paper discusses the historical evolution of the concept of public opinion from Ancient Greece doxa, through Machiavelli’s “humors” (1532), the origin of the expression in Montaigne (1580) and the contributions of Hobbes (1651), Locke (1690), Swift (1729), Rousseau (1762) or Hume (1777), up to the reflection of Lippman (1922) and Bourdieu’s critique (1984). It maintains that humor, as it appears in Portuguese printed periodicals from 1797 (when Almocreve de Petas was published for the first time) to the end of the civil war (1834) – especially in those edited by José Daniel Rodrigues da Costa but also in O Piolho Viajante, by António Manuel Policarpo da Silva, or in the ones written by José Agostinho de Macedo, as well as in a political “elite minded” periodical such as Correio Braziliense –, contributed to the framing of the public sphere and of public opinion in Portugal.

Entrevista com Antonio Bonet Correa

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), Fundação Millennium bcp, Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda