Talk:Mirrors for princes

Over-inclusive

The list of works is way, way too inclusive. Almost all medieval history writing was written to provide models to emulate, but the "mirror for princes" is something much more specific. Some of the later examples are also very dubious. Notyetlost (talk) 23:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Old comments

Hi!

I stumpled upon this subject while reading about Thomas Aqinas. The text I provided for this article is copy-pasted from this page:

http://www.mtp.hum.ku.dk/details.asp?eln=200654 (Hope they don't mind. At least I have credited them.)

As this was the best google could provide.

I hope someone has a little knowledge about the subject, and are willing to share. Meanwhile the subject at least exists.

Andreas N. Benediktson

Persian / Arab Islamic Origins

I don't have time to add anything to this in the near future, but if anyone is interested they should check out "A History of Islamic Societies", second edition, by Ira M. Lapidus. Pg. 149 - 155

Its quite Islam-centric unfortunately, but has some good information. It starts by describing how the Mirrors-For-Princes (term used in book)literature developed out of a Persian tradition of manuals of statecraft. These were translated into Arabic over the 8th and 9th centuries to counsel the Abbasids. The style further developed and expanded from there, quite probably proliferating into Europe through the Umayyids in Spain and especially the Abbasids (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasids#Learning_under_the_Abbasid_dynasty ). al-ghazali is an important writer to check out.

If someone can check out this book from the library or has it they could at least get something started, otherwise I'll have to wait a bit and see if I have time to research more. Bajeda 16:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)Bajeda

The article definitely needs more information on the background of the genre, so that would be valuable. Isocrates' To Nicocles was also influential (Thomas Elyot's translation was only one of three 16th century English publications). Wareh (talk) 22:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The phrase itself, 'mirrors for princes'

It is pretty clear this phrase originated well after the creation of these books simply by their breadth of origin. This article is somewhat misleading in suggesting that this was a sort of writing movement. If anyone can dig up the origin of this phrase, that would be great.Yeago (talk) 00:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The phrase in some form dates back to the Persian classics and possibly the Pancatantra. I'll take a look to find a source. But yes, this article is sadly Euro-centric and inaccurate. Shouldn't be deleted, but needs filling out.--Lizzard (talk) 07:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The Latin phrase "specula principum" actually means "mirrors of princes", not for them. Nominative plural neuter plus genitive (not dative) plural masculine. --173.230.96.116 (talk) 06:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, the fact is that the phrase mirror for princes is far more widely used that the literal translation. I won't say if it is indeed a wrong translation or is just more ad sensum than ad litteram, but we cannot invent new designations if they lack tradition and are not used in the relevant sources. Anyway, it could be explained in the article. Qoan (tell me!) 10:47, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with the traditional translation because the genitive case in Latin (and in most I.E. languages)is regularly used to express relationships between nouns beyond mere possession, including reference (i.e. "for"). See the Wikipedia article on Genitive case (which also discusses Latin specifically) and the references cited there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genitive_case — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.160.196.213 (talk) 16:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I just wanted to add that mirror-of-princes writing continued in India as a well-known and respected genre in the Mughal period, the eighteenth century and even into the nineteenth century. The genre was generally set up as an older and experienced servant of the previous ruler as author setting down advice to a young successor. One example is the Ajnapatra, which was written in early eighteenth century. It is perhaps worth noting that this mirror-of-princes was produced in the Maratha kingdom, a Hindu kingdom, not a Muslim kingdom, where mirror-of-princes literature was more common. The Anapatra was translated into English in 1929 in the Journal of Indian History (3,1, April, 1929). I would oppose merging the categories of speculuum and mirror-of-princes. They are distinctly different genres in India. S. Gordon ----

Why was "Islamic" removed for Arabic and Persian?

I don't understand. Most of these texts are technically from Islamics. Why the change?

MontChevalier (talk) 18:00, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

List of useful references

• In popular culture
  • https://www.houstoniamag.com/arts-and-culture/2016/01/mirrors-for-princes-worl-art-at-blaffer
  • https://www.houstonchronicle.com/entertainment/theater/article/Men-are-from-Murmansk-Women-are-from-Vilnius-6777804.php

Bookku (talk) 03:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Physics

Why is there a picture of Thomas Aquinas’s commentary on the Physics in this article? It seems totally unrelated. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 00:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

List inclusion criteria

This is about a specific genre of medieval literature in Europe and possibly the Islamic world, right? So why are there so many books on it that aren't medieval? Any objections to removing all the uncited entries that are from other parts of the world or other time periods? - car chasm (talk) 05:53, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Simple: The list of other books from outside the middle ages are either successors of the Mirror for Princes tradition or prototypes of the same genre. The point being that the books do what one needs in order to learn how to be a good prince, king, royal, noble, etc. 98.168.254.39 (talk) 00:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

One more for India and it gets its own area

Someone has been adding articles for India in antiquity. Unfortunately, it's from outside of antiquity. I'm willing to overlook this, but if one more mirror for Princes from India is added, we'll have to remove India from Antiquity and give it its own area. 98.168.254.39 (talk) 00:17, 14 March 2023 (UTC)