DOCSLIB.ORG

Information to Users

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Information to Users INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely afreet reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Z eeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 ARISTOTLE’S POETICS : ITS THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS AND ITS RECEPTION IN HELLENISTIC LITERARY THEORY DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Poulheria Kyriakou, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1995 Dissertation Committee: A.J. Silverman J.W. Allison Adviser D.E. Hahm Department of Classics UMI Number: 9534013 UMI Microform 9534013 Copyright 1995, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Copyright by Poulheria Kyriakou ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my thanks to Prof. Allan Silverman for his help and advice throughout the preparation of this dissertation. Thanks also go to the other members fo my advisory committee, Profs. June Allison and David Hahm. I would also like to thank my parents and my husband. VITA May 14, 1967 ..............Born -Volos, Greece 1989 .............................B.A, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece 1989 - 1990 ................ Visiting Fellow, University of Cologne, Germany 1990 - 1992...................Teaching Associate, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1992 ..............................M.A Classics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1992 -1994................... Teaching Associate, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1994-1995..................... Presidential Fellow, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Classics TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...........................................................ii VITA............................................................................................. iii INTRODUCTION................................... 1 CHAPTER PAGE I. POET AND POETRY IN THE POETICS ....... 5 II. ARISTOTLE’S CONCEPT OF ART AND THE POETICS ...............................39 III. NECESSITY AND PROBABILITY IN THE POETICS ..............................................70 IV. ARISTOTLE AND THE TRAGEDIANS....... 89 V. ARISTOTLE’S POETICS AND HELLENISTIC LITERARY THEORY........ 106 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................. 181 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this thesis is to study the philosophical underpinnings of the notion of mythos in Aristotle’s Poetics. Despite the emphasis Aristotle lays on mythos, this task has never been seriously undertaken so far. By turning to Aristotle’s metaphysics and his theory of science I will argue that his literary inquiries in the Poetics, sui generis though they might seem, are firmly inscribed in the broader context of his philosophy and that the concept ofmythos is the link of the Poetics to this context. Mythos enables Aristotle to characterize poetics as an autonomous art in his own technical sense of the term. Thus my purposes are fairly limited: the thesis does not offer a new interpretation of thePoetics as a whole but rather focuses on a single but essential aspect of the treatise. The starting point of my inquiry is the realization that the Poetics occupies an almost unique place among Aristotle’s surviving works: lacking the strong philosophical appeal of theAnalytics, Physics or Metaphysics, it has been overlooked by historians of philosophy, whereas literary scholars, naturally interested in the work because of its subject, examine the Poetics in isolation from the rest of Aristotle’s philosophy. The implicit assumption here, that the Poetics needs to be viewed within the broader context of Aristotle’s philosophy, is potentially open to objections, not least because modern literary criticism is irrelevant to philosophical concerns. Such an attitude can be thought to be supported by the fact that the Poetics by no means resembles either the tenth book of Plato’s Republic or the end of the Phaedrus -in his discussion of poetry nowhere does Aristotle explicitly fall back on notions central to his philosophy. It is exactly the association with Plato, however, that warns against the assumption that the Poetics lies outside Aristotle’s strictly philosophical interests. Indeed, there is evidence that Aristotle addressed, and most probably rejected, Plato’s views on poetry in his lost dialogueOn Poets ; Plato’s influence, moreover, is felt throughout the Poetics, although he is nowhere mentioned explicitly, and certain passages in the treatise attack Platonic views, most probably harkening back to On Poets. But Aristotle could not have adequately undercut Plato’s views unless he rejected the philosophical assumptions that informed Plato’s hostile attitude to poetry. One is thus justified in looking for the specific philosophical foundations of the Poetics that could have enabled Aristotle to do exactly that. The question which is naturally raised here is how "philosophy" and "philosophical" are to be properly construed in the context of thePoetics. Butcher1 saw in the Poetics a clearly demarcated "theory of poetry and fine art" but one can comfortably side with Bywater who dismissed "aesthetics" as a modern notion irrelevant to the Poetics2. Indeed, no Greek parallel to "fine art" can be found and !Butcher (1907) ch. 8. 2Bywater (1909) ch. 7. there is abundant evidence that Aristotle does not distinguish between "art" and "craft". For him rexvrj is a blanket term that covers not only arts like music and crafts like housebuilding but also sciences like medicine and geometry. Now it turns out that a clear grasp of Aristotle’s concept of art is indispensible to the appreciation of certain aspects of the Poetics , not least because it speaks against the thesis of Halliwell (1986) ch. 2 and 3, the most recent and widely acclaimed attempt to put the Poetics in the larger context of Aristotle’s philosophy. My critique of Halliwell occupies the first chapter. Halliwell correctly dismisses any claim of "aestheticism" as irrelevant to the Poetics. Instead he proposes that Aristotle viewed poetry in terms of what he calls "natural cultural teleology". As is suggested by the term teleology, Halliwell’s argument bears directly on Aristotle’s account of the evolution of tragedy and poetry in general. For Halliwell Aristotle presents poetry as a natural cultural movement that transcends individual artists: on his interpretation, they become mere vessels of this impersonal natural cultural potential as it unfolds gradually and operates teleologically through the artists in order to achieve its own actualization. Moreover, by construing poetry in such objective, i.e. impersonal, terms, Aristotle resolves the traditional Greek dichotomy between poetic craft and inspiration: he does away with the latter and emphasizes the rational, teachable character of poetic craft. According to Halliwell in this scheme the personal talents of the poets play at most a subordinate role and do not affect significantly the progress of poetry which, as said above, transcends individual poets. As I argue in my critique, Halliwell’s account is flawed because he loses sight of Aristotle’s concept of art. The most important problem lies in Halliwell’s teleological characterization of poetry. Teleology is an intrinsic part of Aristotle’s concept of art but it does not bear out Halliwell’s interpretation of poetry. Throughout the Aristotelian corpus art as a potentiality is repeatedly said dependto ontologically on the individual artist and, as Aristotle makes clear, it is the individual artist who operates teleologically through this potentiality, not the other way around as Halliwell has it. It is, moreover, wrong to claim that Aristotle paints a largely impersonal history of poetry: in thePoetics Aristotle is aware of the contributions of individual artists (it is especially his references to Homer that bear this out). On the other hand it is impossible to argue, as Halliwell does, that Aristotle’s belief in the recurrence of cultures and civilizations reflects a belief in an objective natural potential of art, in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Cambridge Companion to Greek Mythology (2007)
    P1: JzG 9780521845205pre CUFX147/Woodard 978 0521845205 Printer: cupusbw July 28, 2007 1:25 The Cambridge Companion to GREEK MYTHOLOGY S The Cambridge Companion to Greek Mythology presents a comprehensive and integrated treatment of ancient Greek mythic tradition. Divided into three sections, the work consists of sixteen original articles authored by an ensemble of some of the world’s most distinguished scholars of classical mythology. Part I provides readers with an examination of the forms and uses of myth in Greek oral and written literature from the epic poetry of the eighth century BC to the mythographic catalogs of the early centuries AD. Part II looks at the relationship between myth, religion, art, and politics among the Greeks and at the Roman appropriation of Greek mythic tradition. The reception of Greek myth from the Middle Ages to modernity, in literature, feminist scholarship, and cinema, rounds out the work in Part III. The Cambridge Companion to Greek Mythology is a unique resource that will be of interest and value not only to undergraduate and graduate students and professional scholars, but also to anyone interested in the myths of the ancient Greeks and their impact on western tradition. Roger D. Woodard is the Andrew V.V.Raymond Professor of the Clas- sics and Professor of Linguistics at the University of Buffalo (The State University of New York).He has taught in the United States and Europe and is the author of a number of books on myth and ancient civiliza- tion, most recently Indo-European Sacred Space: Vedic and Roman Cult. Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Niobid Painter, Argonaut Krater
    • Cleanthes of Corinth- first outlines • Cimon of Cleonae – katagrafa (engraving) Foreshortening Effects of Gravity Veins, wrinkles Cleanthes of Corinth may have done things like this! Cimon of Cleonae might have done something like This. Polygnotus of Thasos Ca. 440 B.C. in Athens Diaphanous drapery for women Several levels used- large and majestic Beginnings of expression and teeth shown Large and majestic plus foreshortening used 4 color- white, red, black, yellow Figures at top not smaller- no perspective Niobid Painter, Argonaut Krater Agatharkos of Samos • Scaenographia for Aeschylos • Perspective and single point perspective • 430 B.C. • Centrum constitutum centro loco-Vitruvius Single Vanishing Point Roman Theatrical Image, Pompeii Heroon at Gjolbaschi-Trysa in Lycia New Kind of Perspective? Zeuxis of Heraclea • From South Italy but works at Ephesus • The Ionic School- what was it? • Use actual models • Tempera on wood panels • Exaggerated heads and limbs • Rich, haughty, elegant monogrammed robe • Dies laughing at own amusing painting! Parrhasios of Ephesus • The great rival of Zeuxis • Psychische- nuance, emotion • Dainty and rounded • Later becomes Athenian citizen • 4th century B.C. • Claims descent from Apollo!! • Painter as superstar! The Sikyon School • Precision, linearity, clarity, sobriety • Eupompos of Sikyon • Pamphilos of Macedonia • Pausias- Master of Encaustic • Cera Punica- white wax mixed with oil • Heat and burn onto surface Encaustic • Encaustic is a beeswax based paint that is kept molten on a heated palette. It is applied to a surface and reheated to fuse the paint into a uniform enamel-like finish. The ancient Greeks developed encaustic over 2,000 years ago. The word encaustic derives from the Greek word enkaustikos, meaning “to heat” or “to burn”.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hermeneutical Profile of the Hypomnemata
    CHAPTER 9 A Hermeneutical Profile of the Hypomnemata This chapter offers a hermeneutical profile of the hypomnemata. This profile is based on the exegetical resources as they were defined in the previous chapter. As we shall see, the notion of Homer as a conscious, individual author and teacher governs interpretations of the Iliad in the hypomnemata. The resourc- es the hypomnema exegetes apply to derive meaning from their base text tie in with this overarching perspective. 1 Perspectivisation The hypomnema commentators approached the Homeric epics as the works of a single, conscious author and teacher by the name of Homer. For these exegetes, “Homer” referred not just to a collection of literary compositions,1 but to a single, conscious author, who had a name, a biography, and a style.2 Homer not merely composed, but also wrote down the Iliad and the Odyssey.3 1 The extent of Homer’s literary production was discussed in antiquity. Aristotle, for instance, famously attributed the Margites to Homer. Others attributed the Homeric Hymns, or even poetry in general, to Homer. See Rudolf Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship: From the Beginnings to the Hellenistic Age (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968), 73–74; Alexander Beecroft, Authorship and Cultural Identity in Early Greece and China: Patterns of Literary Circulation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 61–105. 2 See Dirk M. Schenkeveld, “Aristarchus and ΟΜΗΡΟΣ ΦΙΛΟΤΕΧΝΟΣ: Some Fundamental Ideas of Aristarchus on Homer as a Poet,” Mnemosyne 23 (1970): 162–78; Gregory Nagy, “Early Greek Views of Poets and Poetry,” in The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, ed. George A.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48147-2 — Scale, Space and Canon in Ancient Literary Culture Reviel Netz Index More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48147-2 — Scale, Space and Canon in Ancient Literary Culture Reviel Netz Index More Information Index Aaker, Jennifer, 110, 111 competition, 173 Abdera, 242, 310, 314, 315, 317 longevity, 179 Abel, N. H., 185 Oresteia, 197, 200, 201 Academos, 189, 323, 324, 325, 337 papyri, 15 Academy, 322, 325, 326, 329, 337, 343, 385, 391, Persians, 183 399, 404, 427, 434, 448, 476, 477–8, 512 portraits, 64 Achilles Tatius, 53, 116, 137, 551 Ptolemaic era, 39 papyri, 16, 23 Aeschylus (astronomer), 249 Acta Alexandrinorum, 87, 604 Aesop, 52, 68, 100, 116, 165 adespota, 55, 79, 81–5, 86, 88, 91, 99, 125, 192, 194, in education, 42 196, 206, 411, 413, 542, 574 papyri, 16, 23 Adkin, Neil, 782 Aethiopia, 354 Adrastus, 483 Aetia, 277 Adrastus (mathematician), 249 Africa, 266 Adrianople, 798 Agatharchides, 471 Aedesius (martyr), 734, 736 Agathocles (historian), 243 Aegae, 479, 520 Agathocles (peripatetic), 483 Aegean, 338–43 Agathon, 280 Aegina, 265 Agias (historian), 373 Aelianus (Platonist), 484 agrimensores, 675 Aelius Aristides, 133, 657, 709 Ai Khanoum, 411 papyri, 16 Akhmatova, Anna, 186 Aelius Herodian (grammarian), 713 Albertus Magnus, 407 Aelius Promotus, 583 Albinus, 484 Aenesidemus, 478–9, 519, 520 Alcaeus, 49, 59, 61–2, 70, 116, 150, 162, 214, 246, Aeolia, 479 see also Aeolian Aeolian, 246 papyri, 15, 23 Aeschines, 39, 59, 60, 64, 93, 94, 123, 161, 166, 174, portraits, 65, 67 184, 211, 213, 216, 230, 232, 331 Alcidamas, 549 commentaries, 75 papyri, 16 Ctesiphon, 21 Alcinous, 484 False Legation, 22 Alcmaeon, 310
    [Show full text]
  • The Greek and the Roman Novel. Parallel Readings
    Parallel Cults? Religion and Narrative in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses and Some Greek Novels STEPHEN HARRISON University of Oxford1 1 Introduction In this paper I want to compare the narrative function of the gods, their sanc- tuaries and oracles in the plot of Apuleius’ Metamorphoses with that of simi- lar elements in the plots of Greek novels, and to argue that Apuleius proba- bly knew most of the extant Greek novels and plays with their established literary uses of divine elements. This has additional relevance for the overall interpretation of the Metamorphoses, since it can be used to suggest that the religious element in Apuleius is more likely to have a literary, entertaining function rather than a serious, proselytising role.2 A recent investigation3 gives the following dates for the earlier Greek novels (all CE): Achilles Tatius before 164 Chariton 41–62 Xenophon 65–98 ————— 1 My thanks to the audience at Rethymnon for useful discussion, and to Michael Paschalis and Stavros Frangoulidis for organising a splendid conference. The text and translation of Apuleius are cited from Hanson 1989, the translations of Greek novels from those col- lected in Reardon 1989 (Reardon’s Chariton, Anderson’s Xenophon, Winkler’s Achilles, Gill’s Longus, and Sullivan’s Onos). 2 Here I add to the case made in Harrison 2000, 238–52 and 2000–1. 3 Bowie 2002. The Greek and the Roman Novel: Parallel Readings, 204–218 PARALLEL CULTS? 205 Of the other Greek extant novels, there is no doubt that either the Onos or the lost Greek Metamorphoses from which it derived
    [Show full text]
  • L'indovino Poliido. Eschilo, Le Cretesi. Sofocle, Manteis. Euripide, Poliido (Pleiadi 17; Roma 2014)
    Finglass, P. J. (2016). Review of L. Carrara (ed., comm.), L'indovino Poliido. Eschilo, Le Cretesi. Sofocle, Manteis. Euripide, Poliido (Pleiadi 17; Roma 2014). Rivista di Filologia e Istruzione Classica, 144(2), 469–470. Peer reviewed version Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available via Loescher editore . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ Laura Carrara, L’indovino Poliido. Eschilo, Le Cretesi. Sofocle, Manteis. Euripide, Poliido (Pleiadi 17; Rome 2014). Among all the figures of Greek myth, Polyidus is not exactly a household name. In Apollodorus’ account (Bibl. 3.17-20), he was a seer who came to the aid of Minos, after Minos’ son Glaucus had fallen into a vat of honey while chasing a mouse; Minos was then told by the Curetes that his son would be brought back to life by the person who came up with the best comparison for a three-coloured cow that Minos had in his herds. Polyidus compared it to a blackberry, and was then told by Minos that he had to revivify his son. After being shut up with the corpse, he killed a snake that was making its way towards the dead boy, only to see a second snake bring its fellow back to life by spreading a herb over its body; Polyidus applied the same herb to Glaucus and achieved the same result.
    [Show full text]
  • EEL Round 3 (Pdf)
    EEL Certamen Round 3 Moderator should say: “I will now read one test question for no points. This question does not necessarily reect the diculty of the round that follows.” TU 0: This tossup will be an extremely unique format. These types of tossups can be called "blank" tossups, where any signicant piece of info is replaced with the word "blank" and purely relies on one being able to recognize the entry being read to them without any proper nouns, identiers, and the like. For example if you were to hear: [blank], determined on a dangerous course in order to benet [blank], [blanked] [blank] from [blank] and [blanked] it secretly down to [blank]. [blank], enraged at the [blank's] [blank], ordered [blank] to nail [blank] to a cli in the [blank] [blank]. You might realize that this blank tossup is talking about Prometheus. Using this recently acquired knowledge, answer the following blank tossup by determining whose Tripp entry is being obliquely rendered. [blank] was said by [blank] to be the eldest of the [blanks] of [blank] and [blank]. Most later writers accepted the view of [blank] that he was the youngest, born after his [blank] had swallowed his [blanks], [blank] and [blank], and his [blanks], [blank], [blank], and [blank]. ZEUS B1: Now, answer the following blank bonus by determining whose Conte entry is being obliquely rendered. We do not know [blank's] dates of [blank] and [blank]. He came to [blank] at the end of the war between [blank] and [blank], probably from [blank] and, according to some, in the entourage of [blank blank].
    [Show full text]
  • Illinoisclassica31978williscolor.Pdf
    11 Two Literary Papyri in an Archive from Panopolis WILLIAM H. WILLIS To the XIV International Congress of Papyrologists at Oxford in 1974 Professor G. M. Browne^ and I in uncoordinated papers announced the separate acquisition by the University of Cologne and Duke University of papyri constituting an archive of documents deriving from an important family in Panopolis spanning the last decade of the third century and the first half of the fourth. Certain documents in fact were shared between the two collections. It was at once clear that the Cologne group and the Duke group derived from the same find, made apparently in Achmim in the 1960's, though they traveled by separate routes through different dealers to their present homes. To Cologne had fallen some 30 papyri, mostly larger in size, while Duke's share comprised some 500 fragments, including a dozen texts of significant size, but mostly very small bits requiring reassembly, which by joins have now been reduced to about 150. Through the statesmanship of Professor Ludwig Koenen it was arranged that the two collections would exchange lesser fragments in order that all parts of each divided document might be reunited in either of the two collections. This procedure is still in progress. But when Professors Koenen, Browne, John Oates and I spread the two groups side by side at the Duke Library during a memorable week in November 1975, it became clear that substantial parts of most of our documents are still missing, and are likely to have found their way elsewhere. We wish therefore to acquaint our papyrological colleagues everywhere with the existence and character of the archive and to enlist their aid in recognizing and reporting any other parts of it which may emerge.
    [Show full text]
  • Iliad</Italic>
    300 Jim Marks Jim Marks Context as Hypertext: Divine Rescue Scenes in the Iliad A number of factors determine the fates of individual characters during battlefield scenes in the Iliad. In terms of sheer body count, most of those that perish in battle seem to have been created simply in order for others to kill them.1 Typical of this group is the Trojan Cleoboulus, who receives neither dying words nor patronymic nor homeland, and appears only long enough to fall to Oileian Ajax (16.330–334). As for the more developed characters, life or death in battle is, to begin with, a function of the plot: major heroes by definition survive through most or all of the narrative, and lesser ones at least until they have performed their subsidiary roles. Hec- tor, for instance, must remain alive until the dramatic climax of the plot in Book 22, while the Trojan ally Pandarus is killed soon after he performs the necessary function of restarting the war following the duel between Menelaus and Paris in Book 3 (4.85–222, 5.243–296). The fates of at least some of these more developed characters are also influenced by the fact that they were already or were becoming established in other contexts at the time when the Iliad was taking shape. Odysseus, to take an obvious example, cannot die in the Iliad because he was a widely recognized figure best known for a successful return from Troy, as is at- tested in the Homeric Odyssey and non-Homeric poetry, artistic represen- tations, cult activity on his native Ithaca, and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • Aetion, Artist of the Age of Alexander
    Искусство и художественная культура Древнего мира 103 УДК: 7.032 ББК: 85.103(0)32 А43 DOI: 10.18688/aa177-1-11 Antonio Corso Aetion, Artist of the Age of Alexander Aetion was a renowned painter of pictures who is known thanks to several passages of an- cient writers, especially of Cicero, Pliny and Lucian: these three authorities were quite learned in the realm of visual arts [7, pp. 257–263]. The chronologically first surviving testimony about this artist is Cicero,Paradoxa Stoicorum 33–38. In this passage the writer from Arpinum is criticizing the Romans who madly loved works of art by the greatest Greek masters, because they were not free but slaves of their pas- sions: “You stand gaping spell-bound before a picture of Aetion or a statue of Polyclitus. I pass over the question where you got it from and how you come to have it, but when I see you gazing and marveling and uttering cries of admiration, I judge you to be the slave of any foolishness. ‘Then are not those kinds of things delightful?’ Granted that they are, for we also have trained eyes; but I beg of you, do let the charm that those things are deemed to possess make them serve not as fetters for men but as amusements for children” (transl. Loeb with amendments). We argue from this passage that in late republican Rome pictures of Aetion were objects of deeply felt admiration. They were collected by private owners but were also disliked by the most traditionalist quarter of the Roman society.
    [Show full text]
  • The Education of Artists in Ancient Greece
    Hyperboreus 18:1 (2012) Antonio Corso THE EDUCATION OF ARTISTS IN ANCIENT GREECE Introductory Remarks The aim of this article is to collect the written evidence which may help us to understand what type of education and training ancient Greek artists enjoyed throughout the different ages and in the most important artistic centres. As I shall point out several documents may be also enlightening about the relations between masters and pupils and may indicate the infl uence of philosophical ideas on this phenomenon. I believe that this topic has been little studied and that several relevant sources have not yet been fully used in order to enhance our knowledge of this issue.1 These considerations hopefully justify the present study of this topic. Masters and pupils in the workshops of artists of archaic Greece In archaic Greece the rivalry among craftsmen who work with the same materials and the same techniques was very harsh. 1 I delivered lectures on the education of ancient Greek artists in the University of Pavia in March, 2007 as well as at Saint-Petersburg, in the Bibliotheca Classica, in September, 2007. I thank Prof. Harari, who invited me to deliver my lecture in Pavia, as well as Profs. Kazansky, Gavrilov, Verlinsky, who encouraged me to talk about the results of my research in Saint-Petersburg. About workshops in ancient Greece, see S. Nolte, Steinbruch – Werkstatt – Skulptur (Göttingen 2006) 9–303 who cites the most important previous bibliography. About workshops of painters see A. Anguissola, “La bottega dell’artista”, in: C. Gallazzi and S. Settis (eds.), Le tre vite del Papiro di Artemidoro (Milan 2006) 124–131 with relevant previous bibliography.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT Hopkins's Homer: a Scholarly Edition of Gerard Manley
    ABSTRACT Hopkins’s Homer: A Scholarly Edition of Gerard Manley Hopkins’s Dublin Notes on the Iliad Melinda Creech, Ph.D. Mentor: Joshua King, Ph.D. In a letter to his mother (13 January 1886), Gerard Manley Hopkins mentioned that he was “taking notes for one [a book] on Homer’s art.”(CW II 757). These notes on the Iliad, made while Hopkins was living in Dublin, on sixty-five pages of folded sheets of paper, are housed at Campion Hall, Oxford. In the Campion Hall manuscript, Hopkins makes this final statement: “After this I am going to make my notes mainly on my interleaved book. Feb. 12 ’86.” Those additional fifteen pages, interleaved into his copy of Homeri Ilias (1883), are housed at the Foley Library, Gonzaga University, Spokane, Washington. Taken together, the two sets of notes, consisting of 514 items and pertaining to fifty- seven pages in his edition of the Iliad, were written between November 1884 and ca. February 1886. A transcription of Hopkins’s notes, those housed at Campion Hall, and those housed at Gonzaga University, and a commentary on those notes comprises the bulk of the dissertation. These Dublin Notes on the Iliad, written by Hopkins during one of the darkest times of his life, when he was estranged from his country, his family, and his beloved Wales, provide a unique insight into the way he regarded the art of Homer’s poetry—the way Homer ordered the words, phrases, and lines that contributed to that poetry; the way that “stock” epithets were not stock at all, but expressed nuanced characteristics of the things and people they modified; the value Homer placed on the inscape of words, fitting each word into its place in the lines of dactylic hexameter—and the way Hopkins reflected his study of Homer in his own poetry, particularly the poetry he wrote and revised while living in Ireland.
    [Show full text]