A Reflection Of Reality

• Iovan 2011. The City of the Sun and the Foundations for Social Performance
• Alexandrin 2002. Social economics: a perspective of diversity and community
• Treves 1940. The Title of Campanella's "City of the Sun"

---

Iovan, Marțian 2011. The City of the Sun and the Foundations for Social Performance. Society and Politics 5(2): 66-74. [Open Access]

In his own personal manner, Campanella evaluated "the role of science, the role of sensations and experience in the process of knowledge, by placing nature and man in the centre of philosophic preoccupations." With such a philosophic strategy elements of scholastic and modern philosophy are combined in a sui generis form. (Iovan 2011: 66)

The same paragraph mentions his other works. One of them stands out especially: "Philosophia sensibus demonstrata, De sensu rerum et magia libri quator ("Four books on the sense of things and magic"), published in 1620" (ibid, 66). Sounds like empiricism, indeed.

Companella established a hierarchy of relations among science, philosophy and theology, surpassing the speculations specific to medieval scholastic. For him, sciences involve a reflection of reality. In fact, for Campanella, knowledge is authentic only if it is based on experience. Although subservient to theology (ancilla theologiae), the philosophical knowledge rises above experience, to a more general plane. (Iovan 2011: 66)

There are of course many attempts to establish a new hierarchy of science, philosophy, and theology (at the end of the 19th century, especially, there were countless attempts to place these three into some sensible relation). The emphasis on reality/experience once again affirms nascent empiricism.

Tommaso Campanella developed the Pantheistic outlook, following the line of thought imposed by Cusanus and Bruno. Thus, in his opinion, the great theological and philosophical truth is the existence of God - the infinite synthesis of power, wisdom and love. God lives and works inside, and not outside, of nature and things. Nature, through God, is an autonomous subject, expressing a consummate, peerless splendor. Nature is the object of contemplation and revelation. By knowing nature, man will know God. Consequently, the human life must be led in compliance with nature, oriented by a "religion of nature." (Iovan 2011: 67)

A sensible definition of Pantheism, I think. These must be Nicholas of Cusa and Giordano Bruno.

My approach tries to argue that The City of the Sun is a work meant to design a political and social framework able to compel human beings to adopt a type of conduct which makes them live together in social harmony and morality. I will show that what places Campanella's work among other utopias of modernity is its attempt to reconstruct political and social circumstances in the new society by reconciling the private and communal interests. (Iovan 2011: 67)

"They assert that the whole earth will in time come to live in accordance with their customs, and consequently they always find out whether there be a nation whose manner of living is better and more approved than the rest." (Campanella 1901: 168)

The poetical idea of a philosophical republic, Civitas Solis, was published in the German city of Frankfurt, in 1623 as a consequence of the fact that the work in manuscript had been enthusiastically received by the entellectual circles. The novel ideas and the visionary, daring spirit that the text incorporated were reasons for this enthusiasm. The manuscript was taken over from the author, imprisonedd at that time in Naples, by the Lutheran Tobias Adami, who had visited Companella on his way back from a pilgrimage to Palestine. Following the publication of a series of works, the author became well-known and liked in certain intellectual milieus, not only for his ideas, the model of society he proposed or the values for which he found application in politics, justice, education, nature protection etc., but also for the elegant, precise and charming style of Civitas Solis. The work contains the literary - philosophical portrait of an ideal government and society. Following the conventions of utopian literature as established by Thomas More a century before, and perhaps also fearing the Inquisition and the Spanish authority, Campanella preferred to place his utopian society not in his native country, but in an imaginary world, on an island located somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. (Iovan 2011: 68)

Both content (visionary ideas) and expression (elegant style) were on point. As to the placement of the island, I thought it was Ceylon, off the coast of India. Is it in the Indian Ocean or the Pacific Ocean then?

Consequently, the construction of a just, ideal society, of a democratic republic, presupposes the necessary removal of private property and its replacement with common property over wealth, since the community "all the rich and poor together [...] They are rich because they want nothing, poor because they possess nothing." What Campanella was trying to do, was actually to imagine a possibility to reconstruct the society so as to reconcile private and communal interests, by abolishing the private property (considered to be the source for all the troubles in the world) and by emphasizing the idea of common property. (Iovan 2011: 69)

This was by no means a novel idea. Not only does he mention Pythagoras several times but this aspect is very clearly inspired by the Pythagorean κοινά τά φιλων. It is also not surprising, seeing as Campanella originally came from Stignano, more-or-less exactly 100 kilometers from Crotone. For more information, see Edwin Minar's "Pythagorean Communism" (1944). Even his discussion of poverty and wealth reflect Pythagorean ethics - very clearly Campanella had read Iamblichus.

Solarian life is led exclusively in the community, according to philosophical and moral precepts. Even the common possession of women is regarded as normal. Self-love and egotism are unknown to them. Love for one's self is replaced by the love for one's community, by arduous patriotic sentiments. The rationale of their social organization is: "all things are common with them." (Iovan 2011: 70)

This aspect didn't come to the fore in the translation I read, but that may be due to the translators. "All things are common with them" is κοινά τά φιλων.

The only love expressed by Solarians is for the social body to which they belong, a wrong and unrealistic premise of the entire construct with harmful implications for the internal harmony. People develop a sort of mathematical or mechanical relationship, voluntarily regulated. By stripping the individual of his fundamental characteristics, Campanella goes beyond the values promoted by Renaissance humanism which is not surprising since his intention was to design a social construct able to compel human beings to live together in perfect harmony. (Iovan 2011: 70)

The significant difference between Solarian and Pythagorean communities is that the former "apes" the philosophies of various nations (Brahmins, Christians, Pythagoreans) - Campanella even writes at the end that they have an imperfect understanding of the philosophies and histories of other nations -, while the latter was based on a strict system of theology, philosophy, and mysticism, so that the "social bond" so to say was based on exclusiveness and dedication, on becoming an "esoteric".

Love is primarily in charge of perpetuating the species, mating men and women so that healthy and vigorous offspring result, and, in general, of all that pertains to securing life. (Iovan 2011: 70)

It happened. Campanell's contraction of "prosperity" (Pythagorean "wealth") and "generation" (Chaldean "father") comes at the expense of the former. In other words, the fact that the prince of Love also deals with economic concerns falls by the wayside. There's also a shift of emphasis with such an "eugenic" scheme - progeny no longer in control of Gods but controlled by a human ruler.

A society which promotes personal merits, knowledge and the ability to work is an idea which places Campanella among the seventeenth century political philosophers. "Nobility" is granted, in the new social organization, on the basis of spiritual criteria, aptitudes, competence, and merit. (Iovan 2011: 71)

Again I don't see a break with Pythagoreanism in this. "Nobility" is on par with "felicity" and "intelligence". In other words, to become "noble" in the Pythagorean sense is not due to breeding or family wealth but by having enough wealth to survive but not to be corrupted, and behaving in a virtuous manner. It is discipline and deliberate choice which makes a Pythagorean "noble". But, again, I didn't even notice the discussion of nobility in the translation I read.

Solarians know everything that has been discovered and done by other nations. They know and cherish the culture of all the other nations, they learn all languages, diversify their interdependences and connections with the peoples, aspiring to "a civilization of the universal." (Iovan 2011: 71)

Naah, this is the first instance when he mentions the language issue. In the second, we are told: "Not too much care is given to the cultivation of languages, as they have a goodly number of interpreters who are grammarians in the State" (Campanella 1901: 150-151). In other words, it is the State apparatchik's who know the languages of the world, who are state-employed interpreters and translators. The common people are probably monolingual, as this quote indicates.

Those who infringe upon these rules (through lies, slander, sloth, wrath, or other vices) are deprived of the common meal, the right to frequent women or other honors, as the judge sees fit. (Iovan 2011: 72)

This one got my noggin joggin' at the time of reading it as well. If everything is common and food is taken in refractories, as the monks do, doesn't this deprivation of "the common meal" mean, what with the lack of private property, that this is effectively a condemnation to starvation?

The gravest unlawful acts are directed against the Republic, the supreme magistrates, or God. In such cases, the judgment is held at once, and those found guilty are always sentenced to death. There are neither executioners, nor lictors in the city. For this reason, the convicts are stoned to death by the people. Solarians pity death convicts, and talk to them until they accept or even desire the capital sentence. (Iovan 2011: 72)

The opposite of "talk therapy". Isn't this psychological terrorism? I mean, there are actual cultures out there where social "shunning" results in the wrongdoer depriving himself of water and food, wasting away in a few days. See Valentine Daniel's "The Semeiosis of Suicide in Sri Lanka" (1989).

Fiwe witnesses are required in order to prove the infringement - which is possible, since Solarians are always in a group. (Iovan 2011: 72)

This is yet another veiled Pythagoreanism: "But when it was evening they again betook themselves to walking; yet not singly as in the morning walk, but in parties of two or three, calling to mind as they walked, the disciplines they had learnt, and exercising themselves in beautiful studies" (Iamblichus 1818: 53). Campanella has merely neglected the solitary morning routine, which is a pity in itself, and made the inhabitants "enjoy" constant company.

Alexandrin, Glen 2002. Social economics: a perspective of diversity and community. International Journal of Social Economics 29(4): 271-281. DOI: 10.1108/03068290210419843

A total of 100 small pages long, and written in Italian, it tells of a sailor who came back home to Genoa recounting a story of Taprobana, an old name for Colombo in Ceylon. At the time, Ceylon was ruled by Buddhist kings, who followed by discourses given by the Buddha. (Alexandrin 2002: 271)

Their worship of Jesus and constant mutual confession of sins must be wholly Campanella's wishful thinking.

The economic historian, J.A. Schumpeter (1955: 206) does not clearly define utopias or emphasize their importance as a tool of thought as a guide for action. He does, however, mention Bacon, More and Campanella in one breath. But, as in other evaluations of his predecessors, he "dismisses [Companella] at once as irrelevant to our purpose" (Schumpeter 1955: 207), though he writes: "to Campanella's Civitas solis Platonic rays playing around rather commonplace matter do lend glamour not its own" (Schumpeter 1955: 207). (Alexandrin 2002: 271)

That was my impression as well. What little I know of Plato's Republic shows Campanella's unoriginality as to the "triumvirate" structure of the society.

The leaders of the City are naturally possessed of their desirable characteristics and assume their position equally naturally. The process, however, does involve "choosing" and Campanella mentions "election" (1981: 41; 43). The word "democracy", however, is not prat of the vocabulary of the text. (Alexandrin 2002: 272)

This, too, makes some sense in Pythagorean light. The Pythagoreans were, after all, driven out of Crotona by democratic forces, convinced of their depravity by a neighbouring tyrant (democracies are susceptible to tyrants, it seems, universally). The "Prince Prelate" in this sense is analogous to Pythagoras himself (the "Metaphysic"), and the three princes with their three further adjutants reflect the system of the pythagorean commune. I.e. if you wished to join the Solarian society you'd have to give up all your possessions to the office of Love.

Furthermore, Campanella writes about issues that are often excluded from our economic writing: peace among nations; non-aggression, public property; and the role of the divine. In my view at present, his chief message to us is in the direction of his thought. Campanella posited that a society can be based on spiritual values, wisdom and love, that individuals are equal and can be ennobled, if not enlightened. (Alexandrin 2002: 274)

"Wherefore the State often makes war upon these because, being neighbours, they are usurpers and live impiously, since they have not an object of worship and do not observe the religion of other nations or of the Brahmins." (Campanella 1901: 161) - not very non-aggressive if they wage war against their neighbours based on differences in spiritual values or the lack thereof.

These facts and changes were reflected in the social utopias of the late Middle Ages in works of Thomas More, Thomas Müntzer, Campanella and Uinestely. (Alexandrin 2002: 275)

The Wikipedia page for Thomas Müntzer says nothing about social utopias, and "Uinestely" gives only one search result on Google, to this very paper.

These changes and the breakdown in agricultural industry brought about by the capitalist manner of production, led to the growth of great numbers of expropriated, landless peasants. The peasants thus found themselves between the hammer of capitalism and the anvil of feudalism. They became homeless beggars and vagabonds, forced to go to the cities and into the factories. (Alexandrin 2002: 276)

Awesome phrase.

The guild system in the cities had also changed. Now the apprentices, the first manufacturing factory employees, had no hope to become masters and independent enterpreneurs. (Alexandrin 2002: 276)

A good point. You can't exactly take up the position of a janitor in a factory and work yourself up to become the CEO of the whole conglomerate, as you could in the guild system by beginning with sweeping the floor.

Ideas similar to More's are also found, perhaps in a more developed way, in the writings and sermons of Thomas Müntzer (1490-1525). Müntzer's framework was based on the teachings of Johhan of Flora, which were religious utopias that predicted the end o the world and then a 1,000-year kingdom of peace, justice and plenty. (Alexandrin 2002: 277)

This must be Joachim of Fiore. These "peace, justice and plenty" conformable to the triad: (1) plenty; (2) peace; and (3) justice.

One of the bright stars in the pleiades of the utopians in Thomas Campanella (1568-1639). The ideas of the writers we reviewed are found in Campanella; though they were recognized almost universally. As with other writers, his diagnosis is realistic; as in other writers, his proposals are utopian. He is no more nor no less original, correct or incorrect. But his work, with its own particular charms, merits further study. (Alexandrin 2002: 277)

These words could equally describe Charles Fourier, whose diagnosis of history Engels commended, and whose proposals Marx condemned.

He studied the traditional sciences, but soon turned to the study of their foundations and of philosophy. Here came to follow the philosophical teachings of Telesio, who emphasized the importance of the empirical and of direct observations. This was the beginning of "natural philosophy". One of its aims was to discredit Aristotelian philosophy. Telesio's grand principle was to follow and study real things and not abstractions, and to do that one needed to rely on experience. In breaking this new ground, Telesio was recognized by Bacon as a pinoeer in the method. (Alexandrin 2002: 277)

Bernardino Telesio once again cropping up. Wikipedia even has a section, "Reliance on sensory data".

In 1629, Campanella had an occasion to refute his critics. It was said that he defended his thesis with the zeal of his youth. He relied on the authority of the scriptures, the accepted discoveries in the natural sciences, and the writings of the Aristotelian philosophers to come to the conclusion that a new philosophy was needed. This polemic was a total triumph, and Urbain VIII granted him complete liberty and keys to the city. This news circled Europe at the speed of light. Gabriel Naude, the librarian of Louis XIII, thanked the pope publicly in the name of science for taking Campanella under his protection. (Alexandrin 2002: 278)

This was, after all, the time when writing a single magnificent poem could earn you a manor from someone high up who likes it enough.

Campanella places the source of all knowledge on our ability to feel. his favorite axiom is: Scrire est sentire (to know is to feel). This enables us to know only corporal objects by means of our external senses. These abilities to sense we share with all other beings. But man alone is privileged to have internal sensations. This is our sentiments, our sense of inspiration, and it enables us to [|] know divine things. The psychology of Campanella is thus both sense-based and mystical. (Alexandrin 2002: 278-279)

This only complicates the already complex subject of sentiments further. No biggie. I'm not hurt. I's just cutting onions over here.

One may ask how can effort exist in the absence of private property. Campanella's answer is [|] that the love of ownership is to be substituted by "esprit de corps," by desire to contribute to the well-being of the whole, and he believed that this sublimation is possible. Did not the Romans die for the love of their country? Even in our world we see examples of fraternal cooperation: like the teams of our Navy Seals. Cannot Campanella's answer become the rule? (Alexandrin 2002: 279-280)

Did not know that esprit de corps had this grander meaning. "Fraternal cooperation" take to be its synonym.

Treves, Paolo 1940. The Title of Campanella's "City of the Sun". Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 3(3/4): 248-251. [JSTOR]

According to common belief the Citta del Sole ranks far above all the other works of the Dominican friar Tommaso Campanella (1568-1639) but it by no means deserves the fame it has always enjoyed. (Treves 1940: 248)

This 'bout to be a hot take, I can feel it.

The reason of the favour it has met with is probably due to the fact that it has generally been regarded as a political utopia, totally detached from the other works of its author. Yet Campanella's famous booklet is not a sort of poetical fancy, conceived by the [|] philosopher as an escape from his meditation on the 'raison d'Etat,' but the last stage of his political system. (Treves 1940: 248-249)

Aight, he wrote numerous works, and only this one has been translated into English (and Estonian, and many other languages).

The common opinion is best stated by Dr. De Mattei, according to whom Campanella may have come toh is title through Giovanni Botero's "Relationi universali" or "Delle cause della grandezza delle citta." In these works the Piedmontese Jesuit deals also with the geography of the New World and hints at the existence of a City of the Sun. Moreover Campanella is well known to have been interested in the fact that some tribes of South America with whom Catholic missionaries had come into contact were reputed to worship the Sun. The term "City of the Sun" would, ex hypothesi, have a merely geographical meaning. (Treves 1940: 249)

This much Campanella himself makes clear on the last pages of the booklet, explicitly addressing their worship (or respect?) of the sun.

In the last years of the century Campanella was organizing his famous conspiracy in Calabria the aim of which was to set up a sort of Republic in accordance with the ideas he put forth later in his "City of the Sun." In 1599 the failure of the conspiracy caused Campanella to be arrested and brought to gaol in Naples where he remained for twenty-seven years. (Treves 1940: 249)

This I did not know. I guess it's better to at least make an attempt for it, rather than just sit around your home every noon in hopes that a capitalist on a white horse will come to finance your dreams, like Charles Fourier did.

Moreover it is known that Campanella disliked the Piedmontese writer for the mere fact of his being a Jesuit. (Treves 1940: 249)

No wonder the denizens of his imaginary city attack their neighbours based on religion.

Another suggestion has been implicitly advanced by those critics who surmise that Campanella derived the scheme of his City from Jambulus' "Islands of the Sun." Diodorus (ii, 55-60) gives a detailed survey of [|] Jambulus' book (whether he knew it directly or not is immaterial), especially emphasizing the communist régime of the Heliopolitai. (Treves 1940: 249-250)

Hot dang there are so many utopias I've never heard of. Iambulus's work did not survive. Diodorus Siculus regorded a fragment.