>I guess the first place I would look would be Macrobius' Commentary on the
>Somnium Scipionis. Among everything else he discusses in it, he categorizes
>and describes the various types of dreams.
>
>Philip Rusche
>Dept. of English
>UNLV
>
>
>
>>To ALL:
>> Even a cursory reading of the Penitentials reveals that the lists
>>of sins contain references to thoughts as well as to deeds. The prescribed
>>lists of penance ("tariffs") vary acoording to those distinctions. Thoughts
>>are sometimes treated as deeds, in which case they are penalized like them
>>for predefined periods; sometimes they are treated as conditions,
>>indicators of an inchohate self, in which case they are penalized for as
>>long a the condition endures.
>>It is the realm of dreams that puzzles me, since they seem to play such a
>>prominent part in those subversive nocutrnal pollutions ( wide-scale
>>reading of pollution).
>>Can anyone direct me to any Medieval defenses of dreams as
>>deeds/actions/events,
>>rather than some metamorphosis of potentiality ?
>>
>>Josef Gulka
>>
>>Josef Gulka
>>[log in to unmask]
>>215- 732-8420
>>
Philip:
Thank you for the respons. I should clarify my quest: I am looking
for any Medieval Latin defenses of dreams as phenomena equivocal to
deeds/acts/ real events; thereby, as an event/act which constituted an
outright transgression, and hence calling for something to counteract its
damaging effect: in this case the penitential tariff__punishment in this
life. Dream interpretation is not the issue, nor categorization according
to some valenced or interpretice schema. The question of the "reity" of a
dream is my concern. To briefly contextualize: this particular quest takes
place within a broader study of Docetic theologies in the Middle Ages, in
which the "phantasma" and its "reity" is a critical issue.
Josef Gulka
Josef Gulka
[log in to unmask]
215- 732-8420
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|