Ernst Kantorowicz’s Synthronos: New Perspectives on Medieval Charisma

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)

Let me begin with the positive aspects. You make an important observation about Kantorowicz's notion of charisma in the essay, which has the potential to contribute significantly to the ongoing debate on charisma and the connection between St. Paul and Weber, as the author has emphasized multiple times. However, some areas can be improved to enhance the clarity and effectiveness of the paper.

Firstly, the author acknowledges the lack of a linear structure throughout the article, resembling a labyrinth. To address this issue, it would be beneficial for the author to simplify and streamline some of the unnecessary branches opened within the text. Providing a clear and concise roadmap at the beginning would greatly assist readers in navigating through the essay. By doing so, the article can present a more straightforward and engaging journey for the readers.

Another point that requires improvement is the exploration of the concept of representation, which is one of the article's key proposals. While the Aristotelian transformative visual rhetoric is mentioned, it is deemed insufficient in explaining the thesis. It would be valuable to delve deeper into this pivotal idea, offering a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of representation and its relationship to charisma.

Additionally, the explanation regarding why Kantorowicz did not use the concept of charisma should be addressed within the body of the text rather than at the end of the article. By doing this, the author has the opportunity to explore further important ideas related to Weber's concept of charisma and its implications. This would provide a stronger foundation for the argument and enhance the overall coherence of the paper.

Finally, reconsidering the structure and certain points of the article would allow the author to highlight the contributions of the conclusions more effectively. Rather than merely summarizing the ideas, the conclusions should emphasize and showcase the unique insights and advancements presented throughout the essay.

Addressing these issues can strengthen the article, offering a clearer and more engaging exploration of the Kantorowicz charisma notion and its implications in the wider context of charisma theory.

Author Response

Please, find attached my reply. With thanks.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

I have read the manuscript with great interest, which proposes a new perspective on the concept of charisma in the context of medieval political theology, with a particular focus on Ernst H. Kantorowicz's unpublished manuscript "Synthronos". The author's effort to bring new insights into the concept of charisma through different disciplinary lenses including theology, sociology, literature, and visual rhetoric is commendable. 

In conclusion, this manuscript has the potential to make a significant contribution to the field of medieval political theology by offering a fresh interpretation of Ernst H. Kantorowicz's "Synthronos". I recommend this manuscript for publication. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer;

Many thanks for appreciating my work. During months it has been object of a lot of study, care and strong criticism.

I look forward to meeting you in the future and keeping thinking together on this or further issues of research.

 

Yours sincerelly,

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

Quite a long article, with numerous illustrations. The first part carefully situates the Synthronos study within Kantorowicz's body of work; the language is technical, but the explanations are clear and precise. Some of the exressions are particularly striking and welcome. For example, when Kantorowicz succeeds in "overcoming the gravitational force of anachronism". 

The article's progression is clear. The notion and representation of synthronos, considered from its ancient origins, enables us to think about charisma, for which they offer a figurative approach.

The author then analyzes the multiplicity of meanings assumed by the question of representation in E. K's work, playing on its three fundamental dimensions:

1) Perspective

2) Corpus

3) Persona

The article then discusses the different meanings of the word charisma in the Western tradition. The article's central thesis is that, between Saint Paul's vision of charism as a free gift from God and Max Weber's, which sees it (against Sohm) as the expression of a power of domination, the path taken by Kantorowicz insists on the representation, the visibility of charism, which the synthronos had already made it possible to account for.

This is a very thorough and interesting study, of great historiographical and scientific interest. The author has perfectly mastered a rich, multilingual bibliography, highlighting a little-known but essential work in E. Kantorowicz's prosetiform oeuvre. 

We can only recommend its publication.

The language used is sometimes technical, but it is also very precise, and the author takes care to carefully explain his/her method and his/her purpose, regularly summarizing the main findings of his/her study. In this way, the reader is not lost in a hermeneutical architecture that remains subtle and complex.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer;

Many thanks for appreciating my work. During months it has been object of a lot of study, care and criticism.

I look forward to meeting you in the future and keeping thinking together in this or further issues of research.

 

Yours sincerelly,

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In sections 1.1 and 1.2, which the author uses to present some historical precedents in the Ancient World, there is no development or, at least, a minimal mention of the figure of the "Puer Ascanius", son of Aeneas. In this infant figure, who has become a mythical figure in Virgil's poems, the two natures (or the two "bodies") of the future monarch come together: the human child and the divine or the child "touched by the grace of the gods", whose flames (a very antique manifestation of "charisma" in numerous Eastern protocivilisations) are made ostensible to his followers and harassers.

In this respect, it is worth citing the work of the archaeologist and historian Michel Manson, a specialist in the history of childhood: 

1) Michel Manson, Ascanius puer et l'idéologie impériale (texto inédito). Mémoire de l’École française de Rome, 1979, 195 p., XIV. 

2) Michel Manson, Pour une histoire de l'enfant dans l'Antiquité, Histoire de l'éducation, nº30 (1986), pp. 3-12. URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/hedu_0221-6280_1986_num_30_1_1406

3) Michel Manson, "Quelques remarques sur le "puer Ascanius" du codex Vaticanus 3225, pictura 16". In: L’enfant au Moyen Âge: Littérature et civilisation [on line]. Aix-en-Provence: Presses universitaires de Provence, 1980. URL: <http://books.openedition.org/pup/2696>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pup.2696.

Likewise, to extend the subject to the field of images and, specifically, medieval, Renaissance and Baroque paintings, the author can consult the book chapter: 

Oriol Vaz-Romero Trueba, "Puer senex o el niño en la pintura de El Greco y de sus contemporáneos españoles, entre neoplatonismo y naturalismo". In:  M. E. Almarcha Núñez-Herrador, P. Martínez-Burgos García, M. E. Sainz Magaña (eds.), El Greco en su IV Centenario: patrimonio hispánico y diálogo intercultural. Toledo, CEHA-Universidad de Castilla La Mancha, col. "Estudios" 151, 2016, pp. 907-930. URL: https://ruidera.uclm.es/xmlui/handle/10578/10511?show=full. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Many thanks for your suggestions and orientations.

The whole text has been also corrected by a mother tongue scholar.

If you can help me with more suggestions, please, do not hesitate to keep going.

All the best,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

   I will state right off that I do not think this article should be accepted for publication.  I have several reasons.

   First, the author makes incessant errors in the use of the English language. For example:

   “on the sum”à on the summit

   “when human mind”à when the human mind

   “EKa drops down into”à reaches

   “Testament has been”à Testament was

   “leads us to a one more”à leads us to another

    “timely”à chronological

    “tri-partition”à tripartite

 

Second, the author’s presentation is sloppy and sometimes misinformed:

     “Ramses III”à Ramses II

     “Thutmose III”à Ramses II

     “image referred to”: not so

     “Nemrut”/ “Nemrud”

     “his idea of charisma”: but K. never uses this word

     “Cicero devoted a whole treatise to the crown”: such a treatise is not identified and I wonder if there was one

      “Plowden 1816”: but cf. ill. which shows date of 1761, and original date remains mysterious

       Fig. 2 presumably is meant to display throne sharing, but it does not.

      “the goddess Commagene” ?

      “Fox, R. Lane”à R. Lane Fox

      K.’s biography of F. II did not appear in the poetry series Blaetter fuer die Kunst

      “Frederick II Barbarossa” is a howler—make that Frederick II; Barbarossa was Frederick I--and at any rate K. did not write his doctoral dissertation on either!

 

Third, the author plagiarizes: “the series was to include”/”the series was to have included”; “K. was able to correct the proofs”/” K. was able to correct the proofs”

(I present the author’s words in quotation marks, but he doesn’t use them himself even when he is copying verbatim.)

 

Fourth, the author sometimes barely communicates. E.g. I don’t understand the point of the epigraph; who’s Sohm?; why would anyone want to know whether “Pagination is top right. . .?

 

Fifth, the author is too much of a name dropper for the sake of dropping names. E.g. Talcott Parsons, Max Weber.

 

Sixth, the author is frightfully pretentious: “musealized”; “to enclose the notion of medieval charisma in a monolithic and fixed proposal”

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Many thanks for your suggestions and orientations.

After working further, I corrected many things whilst others were less clear to me.

You will see an improvement. The whole text has been also corrected by a mother tongue scholar.

If you can help me with more suggestions, please, do not hesitate to keep going.

All the best,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I attached my comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Many thanks for your help, you will find attached my answer to your suggestions in red color text.

The whole text has been also corrected by a mother tongue scholar.

I you have further suggestions I will be happy to keep going.

All the best.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf