254 / 298
Horst Steinke
254
kind:] the belief in historical narratives (
fides historiarum
), however cer-
tain, give us [3
rd
kind:] knowledge of God, nor, consequently, of the
love of God. […] and so [2
nd
kind:] belief in historical narratives (
fides
historiarum
) is by no means essential to [3
rd
kind:] the attainment of our
supreme good. However, […], I do not deny that [2
nd
kind:] their study
can be very profitable in the matter of social relations. […], as far as
[3
rd
kind:] reason allows
535
.
This text portion is relevant to our inquiry by its reference to
“history”
536
; it provides a bridge to Vico’s treatment of “history”,
and thus can serve as the needed common ground on which to
develop comparisons. The main point, if we may reduce the
statement, is that developments in human history and culture,
and the “lessons” derived thereof
–
generalizing from Spinoza’s
treatment of biblical history – must, firstly, be considered of lim-
ited value, and, secondly, wholly contingent on expressing «rea-
son» in the form of «the knowledge of God[-Nature]». Such «rea-
son» alone can form the basis of community and political life
hitherto unrealized
537
.
When the same question is raised with respect to Vico’s over-
all objective or inquiry, the answer, in one respect is comparable:
it involves a reconstruction of (ancient) history
538
. A closer look,
nevertheless, is in order; it needs to identify more specifically in
what Vico’s “reconstruction” of history consists. It is, of course,
at one level a reconstruction of the very origins of civilization,
and the complex forces that were operative at that beginning, in-
cluding what may be called the prevailing «attitudes of mind»
539
,
alongside corresponding social and “political” conditions and in-
stitutions. However, as has already been commented on in con-
nection with Book II of
Scienza nuova
, entitled “Poetic Wisdom”,
far from portraying the knowledge of the “founding fathers” of
civilization as “primitive”, and inferior to subsequently achieved
intellectual states, he sees in them the originators of human
knowledge, creating the conditions of possibility of science; the
«imagination» and the resultant «imaginative universals» he as-