Skenderbe person

There is debate, and there will be again about the motives that led Skenderbeun to keep on burning, for 25 years, the fight against the greatest power of the time, the Ottoman Empire: religious fever, patriotism (or the desire to protect what he called himself “ ”: his homeland, his property, his people), ambition (or the passion to prevail military); or a combination of them. These debates are usually ruled by the imdias ' interest at the time of the debate; without what ideologists and fanatics need historical arguments.

From here on, we may also need to get to know a person more closely; because that is how we can ask seriously what motivated him. To help us do so, we are limited by a few chronic history of the time (Barlett, Dimitris Frang, John Muzaca) and the correspondence between Chancellors. And since Skenderbeu hasn't left anything written down yet his ownThen we'll have to ask, sooner or later, these sources don't work like colored glass, or they'll make us see and understand Skenderbe with the eyes of the writers.

And here it is immediately seen that the pen, which has written that world for Skenderbe, has often moved it on a Catholic priest's card because it was Barlet and Frangu, but it was also a good part of the secretaries and Chancellors of the great ones who wrote for Pal Angel's own Pelini; such were the secretaries of the governors with whom Skenderbe, such as the popes.

We might ask, then, if these Catholic priests, who had a specific vision of man and history shaped by their outlook, may have described and analyzed the man Skenderbe and Tʹéi have put this in their mouth a sort of characteristic discurity for their vision; presenting it as they understood it, and sometimes even as they wanted it to be, or as they judged it would be. It had to be (Shown before the world). That question can be answered by comparing the chronics and their testimony, including the letters written on behalf of Skenderbe, with similar documents left by non-priests such as John Muzaca or Venice ambassadors.

But only Sometimes. In the 15th century, and especially in the Catholic environment where Skenderbeu has left written traces of history, written political and historical disks have always given ours to the clergy; by moving their characters to a scan that responded to the Catholic context of time, enriched by rhetoric and models of classism: Thus, Skenderbehu hero and the character of Barlete owe much to Plutarch and Titus Liv, but his moral profile is also the example of one of Christ's Atlet. The speeches he holds, letters written to friends and enemies and all those other discours that give us today the illusion that we can understand something about his “Moitive”, actually obey the models and rhetorical stereotypes of the relevant disk.

This need to factor into the profile, vision and interests of the authors of these texts, or of Filters By which the world has seen Skenderbeun since then, is not that you reject or deny What we know or assume about his motives would only help us understand better. Because even the fact that this time the historical non-discreet was surrounded by Catholic clergymen, was given voice and text His will is neither a coincidence nor a consequence of any conspiracy; but it is due to the historical circumstances of the time and an array of well - thought - out interests.

As historians (Schmitts) have noted, of all those who cooperated with Skenderbea é here include family people, other feudal and non-Albanian leaders, past allies such as Alfonso and Venice the Catholic Church and its clergy were the only ones who remained loyal to Skenderbes to the end and steadfastly; and Skenderbe believed them all, even to more delicate diplomatic duties. This may have been because he was a devout believer, but he could also have come because he had found a strategic exchange of interests between his motives and those of the Holy See; and he deemed the Catholic Church to be the spiritual and ethical steward of his combat company.

And here we can speculate, creating a space or a shift (décalage) between Skenderbeu, who is pictured by the religious disk and the clergy who wrote about it, and the Albanian military commander and warrior Skenderbe (Balkans); which will be the same as the difference between Skenderbeu as the rhetorical (grematic) figure of the historyist time rrruator and Skenderuu “real “” (gebrical, for our conditions). The first is heavily due to the Catholic clergy agency, which formulated and maintained that discurs; the second agency is more complex; and because of documentary circumstances, such as force us to approach only indirectly.