DOCSLIB.ORG

Michel Foucault FEARLESS SPEECH

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Michel Foucault FEARLESS SPEECH Michel Foucault FEARLESS SPEECH Edited by Josepb Pearson SEMIOTEXT(E) CONTENTS EDITOR'S PREFACE 7 1. The Word ParThesia 9 THE MEANING OF THE WORD 11 Frankness 12 Truth 13 Danger 15 Criticism 17 Duty 19 THE EVOLUT'ON OF THE WORD 20 Rhetoric 20 Politics 22 Philosophy 23 2. Parrhesia in Euripides 25 Special thanks to Johanna Balusikova fur design and to Sylvere THE PHOENICIAN WOMEN 26 Lotringer and Ben Meyers. for editing: and copy~editing HIPPOLYTII$ 30 © Gerard Aime and DanielJe Bancilhon for the Foucault photos on the THEBACCHAE 31 front cover and inside back cover, respectively. ELECTIIA 33 ION 36 This work received support from the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Cultural Services of the French Embassy in the United States. Hermes' Prologue 36 Apollo's Silence 40 ScmioteXt(e) lon's Role 44 2571 W. 5,' SlIeet 52 L"" Angeles, Ca, 90057 USA Creusa's Role e-mail: [email protected] ORESTES 57 PRO.LEMATlZ'NG PARRHESIA 71 2001 © Semiotext(e) All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America 3. Parrhesia in the Crisis of Democratic Institutions 75 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 4. pam.esia in the Care of the Self 89 SocRATIC PARRHESIA 91 THE PRACTICE OF PARRHESIA 107 In Human Relationships 107 Community life 108 Public life 115 Personal relationships 133 In Techniques of Examination 142 Preliminary remarks 142 Solitary self-<!!xaminatlon 145 "My intention was not to deal with the problem of truth, but Self-diagnosis 150 with the problem of the truth-teller, or of truth-telling as an Self-testing 160 activity: ... who is able to tell the truth, about what, with what consequences, and with what relations to power.... Concluding Remarks 167 [W]ith the question of the importance of telling the truth, knowing who is able to tell the truth, and knowing why we Bibliography 175 should tell the truth, we have the roots of what we could call the ;critical' tradition in the West." Michel Foucault 7 EDITOR'S PREFACE The following text was compiled from tape-recordings made of six lectures delivered, in English, by Michel Foucault at the University of California at Berkeley in the Fall Term of 1983. The lectures were given as part of Foucault's seminar, entitled "Discourse and Truth," devoted to the study of the Greek notion of parrhesia or "frankness in speaking the truth." Since Foucault did not write, correct, or edit any part of the text which follows, it lacks his imprimatur and does not reflect his own lecture notes. What is given here constitutes only the notes of one of his auditors. Althongh the present text is primarily a verbatim transcription of the lectures, repetitive sentences and phrases have been eliminated, responses to questions have been incorporated, whenever possible, into the lectures themselves, more accessible translations of certain Greek texts have been substituted, and numerous sentences have been revised, all in the hopcof producing a more read­ able set·of notes. The division of the lectures into sections, the section headings, all footnotes, and a bibliogmphy giving ref­ erences to footnoted material, also have been added. The editor gmtefolly acknowledges his indebtedness to John Carvalho for providing information which enabled him to audit Foucault's course. He also expresses his g.... titude to Dougal Blyth for advice on various matters pertaining to the classical Greek texts Foucault discusses. In addition, he thanks Jacquelyn Taylor for her help in IOCliting some of Foucault's references. Joseph Pearson Department of Philosophy. Nonhwestem UniversitY 1. The Word Parrhesia l FEARLESS SPEECH 11 THE MEANING OF THE WORD' The word parrhesia [1tappl)aia] appears for the first time in Greek literature in Euripides [c.484-407 B.C.], and occurs throughout the ancient Greek world oOetters from the end of the Fifth Century B.C. But it can also still be found in the pattistic texts written at the end of the Fourth and during the Fifth Century A.D.-dozens of times, for instance, in lean Chrysostome [A.D. 345-407]. There are three forms of the word: the nominal form par­ rhesia; the verb form parrhesiazomai [ 1tappllcrtci~oJ.llll] (or bet­ ter' parrhesiazesthai [1tapP1l<Jtci~et;em]); and there is also the word parrhesiastes [1tapPllcrtamrl<;], which is not very frequent and cannot be found in the Classical texts. Rather, you find it only in the Greco-Roman period-in Plutarch and Lucian, for example. In a dialogue of Lucian, "The Dead Come to Life, or The Fisherman, », one of the characters also has the name Parrhcsiades [nappl)crta&r]<;l. Parrhesia is ordinarily translated into English by "free speech" (in French by franc-parler, and in German by Freimuthigkeit). Parrhesiazomai or parrhesiazesthai is to use par­ rhesia, and the parrhesiastes is the one who uses parrhesia, i.e., the one who speaks the truth. In the first part of today's seminar, I would like to give 1. First Leeture: 10 October 1983. 2. Cf. H. Liddell & R. Scott, "TIapp1\aiu" in A GreeJ<.-English Lexicon, 1344; Pierre Miquel, "TIapp1lola" In Dictionnaire de Spirilualitc) Vol. 12. cot 260--261; and Hejnrich Schlier, "TIapPTtcriu. na:pPTlcru:i~O!1«t" in 'I1ux;lcgicai Dictitmaty of the New Testament, Vol. 5, 871-886. 3. Lucian) "The Dead Come to Life, or The Fisherman,» Trans, A, M. Harmon in The WOrks ofLucian. Vol. 3, 1-81. 13 12 Mlchel fovcat.;/t FeARLESS $PI!HiCH a general apen;u about the meaning of the word parrhesia, and we could say that there is also the subject of the enuncian­ the evolution of this meaning through Greek and Roman culture. dum- which refers to the held belief or opinion of the speak­ er. Inparrheria the speaker emphasizes the fact that he is both Frankness the subject of the enunciation and the subject of the enun­ To begin with, what is the geoeral meaning of the word par­ ciandum-that he himself is the subject of the opinion to rheria! Etymologically, parrhesiazesthai means "to say every­ which he refers. The specific "speech activity" of the parrhesi­ thing"-from pan [nav] (everything) and rhema [pilj.ta] (that astic enunciation thus takes the form: "I am the one who which is said). The one who uses parrhesia, the parrhesiastes, is thinks this and that." I use the phrase "speech activity" rather .someone who says everything he4 has in mind: he does not than John Searle's "speech act" (or Austin's "performarive hide anything, but opens his hean and mind completely to urterance") in order to distinguish the parrhesiastic utterance other people through his discourse. In parrhesia, the speaker is and its commitments from the usual sorts of commitment supposed to give a complete and exact account of what he has which obtain between someone and what he or she says. For, in mind so that the audience is able to comprehend exactly as we shall see, the commitment involved inparrhesia is linked what the speaker thinks. The word pameria, then, refers to • to a certain social situation, to a difference of statuS between type of relationship between the speaker and what he says. For the speaker and his audience, to the fact that the parritesiastcs inparrheria, the speaker makes it manifestly clear and obvious says something which is dangerous to himself and thus that what he says is his own opinion. And he does this by involves a risk, and so on. avoiding any kind"f rhetoricalform which would veil what he thinks. Instead, the parrhesiastes uses the most direct words Truth and forms of expression he can find. Whereas rhetoric pro­ There are twO types of pamesia which we must distinguish. vides the speaker with technical devices to help him prevail First, there is a pejorative seose of the word not very far from upon the minds of his audience (regardless of the rhetorician's "chattering/' and which consists in saying any~ or everything own opinion concerning what he says), in parrhesia, the par­ one has in mind without qualification. This pejorative sense rheriastes acts on other people's minds by showing them as occurS in Plato,5 for example, as a characterization of the bad directly as possible what he actually believes. democratic constitution where everyone has the right to Ifwe distinguish betwcen the speaking subject (the subject address his fellow citizens and to tell them anything-even of enunciation) and the grammarical subject of the enounced, the most stupid Or dangerous things for the city. This pejora­ tive meaning is also found more frequeody in Christian liter­ ature where such o(bad" parrhesia is opposed to silence as a 4. Responding to a student's question~ Foucault indicated that the oppressed role of women in Greek society generally deprived them of the use of parrhesia (along with aliens, slaves, and children). Hence the pre~ dominant use of the masCUline pronoun throughout, 5. Plato, Republic 577b. cr. also Phaedtu, 240e & Laws 649b, 671b. 15 14 Michel Foucault FEARLESS SPEECH discipline or as the requisite condition fur the contemplation tic attitude. For before Descartes obtains indubitably clear and of God.' As a verbal activity which reflects every movement of distinct evidence, he is not certain that what he believes is, in the heart and miod, P""Msia in this negative sense is obvious­ fact, true. In the Greek conception of pmrhesia, however, there lyan obstacle to the contemplation of God. does not seem to be a problem about the acquisition of the Most of the time, however, pmrhesUz does not have tbis truth since such truth-having is guaranteed by the possession pejorative meaning in the classical texts, but rather a positive of certain moral qualities: when someone has certain moral one.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Does It Mean to Make-Up the Mind (Οὕτω Διανοεῖσθε)? Justin Murphy
    parrhesia 29 · 2018 · 163-189 what does it mean to make-up the mind (οὕτω διανοεῖσθε)? justin murphy Under what conditions can thought and speech participate meaningfully in sys- temic political transformations? In my view, two bodies of late twentieth-century thought stand out as the most advanced efforts to answer this question. Gilles De- leuze and Michel Foucault, in their own registers and of course with very differ- ent accents, both suggest substantial but complicated roles thinking and speaking might have to play in any viable future project of emancipatory politics. Given the idealistic associations and connotations of such terms as thinking and speaking, it is no surprise that both figures have been charged with similar crimes: individual- ism, aestheticism, or escapism, all of which are typically implied to render their bodies of work unhelpful for projects of organized, collective political change.1 In the present historical moment of the so-called age of information, we are now in a better position than ever to understand the ways in which mere thought and speech are unable to generate politically significant emancipatory dynamics. In modern global capitalism, it has never seemed more clear that what is called free- dom of speech and the public exchange of ideas is perfectly consistent with the perpetuity and even intensification of oppressive institutional dynamics. Yet, I wish to suggest that in this rightful disillusionment with mere thought and speech lies an opportunity for improving our understanding of the unique conditions under which certain types of thought and speech might be keys to unlocking new forms of emancipatory politics today, in the context of what Deleuze called “con- trol societies.”2 If it is true that Foucault and Deleuze are two of the most advanced thinkers of this question—and yet even they remain uncleared of charges relating to political triviality—then it would seem that the surest way to advance the question would be to begin at the edges of where they left off.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Inquiry As Virtuous Truth-Telling: Implications of Phronesis and Parrhesia ______
    ______________________________________________________________________________ Critical Inquiry as Virtuous Truth-Telling: Implications of Phronesis and Parrhesia ______________________________________________________________________________ Austin Pickup, Aurora University Abstract This article examines critical inquiry and truth-telling from the perspective of two comple- mentary theoretical frameworks. First, Aristotelian phronesis, or practical wisdom, offers a framework for truth that is oriented toward ethical deliberation while recognizing the contingency of practical application. Second, Foucauldian parrhesia calls for an engaged sense of truth-telling that requires risk from the inquirer while grounding truth in the com- plexity of human discourse. Taken together, phronesis and parrhesia orient inquirers to- ward intentional truth-telling practices that resist simplistic renderings of criticality and overly technical understandings of research. This article argues that truly critical inquiry must spring from the perspectives of phronesis and parrhesia, providing research projects that aim at virtuous truth-telling over technical veracity with the hope of contributing to ethical discourse and social praxis. Keywords: phronesis, praxis, parrhesia, critical inquiry, truth-telling Introduction The theme of this special issue considers the nature of critical inquiry, specifically methodological work that remains committed to explicit goals of social justice and the good. One of the central concerns of this issue is that critical studies have lost much of their meaning due to a proliferation of the term critical in educational scholarship. As noted in the introduction to this issue, much contemporary work in education research that claims to be critical may be so in name only, offering but methodological techniques to engage in critical work; techniques that are incapable of inter- vening in both the epistemological and ontological formations of normative practices in education.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Parrhesia 2.0: Moving Beyond Deceptive Communications Strategies in the Digital World François Allard-Huver, Nicholas Gilewicz
    Digital Parrhesia 2.0: Moving beyond deceptive communications strategies in the digital world François Allard-Huver, Nicholas Gilewicz To cite this version: François Allard-Huver, Nicholas Gilewicz. Digital Parrhesia 2.0: Moving beyond deceptive communi- cations strategies in the digital world. Handbook of Research on Digital Media and Creative Tech- nologies, pp.404-416, 2015, 978-1-4666-8205-4. 10.4018/978-1-4666-8205-4.ch017. hal-02092103 HAL Id: hal-02092103 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02092103 Submitted on 7 Apr 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Digital Parrhesia 2.0: Moving beyond Deceptive Communications Strategies in the Digital World François Allard-Huver Sorbonne University, France Nicholas Gilewicz University of Pennsylvania, USA ABSTRACT Deceptive communications strategies are further problematized in digital space. Because digitally mediated communication easily accommodates pseudonymous and anonymous speech, digital ethos depends upon finding the proper balance between the ability to create pseudonymous and anonymous online presences and the public need for transparency in public speech. Analyzing such content requires analyzing media forms and the honesty of speakers themselves. This chapter applies Michel Foucault’s articulation of parrhesia—the ability to speak freely and the concomitant public duties it requires of speakers—to digital communication.
    [Show full text]
  • The Satrap of Western Anatolia and the Greeks
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2017 The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Eyal Meyer University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons Recommended Citation Meyer, Eyal, "The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks" (2017). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2473. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Abstract This dissertation explores the extent to which Persian policies in the western satrapies originated from the provincial capitals in the Anatolian periphery rather than from the royal centers in the Persian heartland in the fifth ec ntury BC. I begin by establishing that the Persian administrative apparatus was a product of a grand reform initiated by Darius I, which was aimed at producing a more uniform and centralized administrative infrastructure. In the following chapter I show that the provincial administration was embedded with chancellors, scribes, secretaries and military personnel of royal status and that the satrapies were periodically inspected by the Persian King or his loyal agents, which allowed to central authorities to monitory the provinces. In chapter three I delineate the extent of satrapal authority, responsibility and resources, and conclude that the satraps were supplied with considerable resources which enabled to fulfill the duties of their office. After the power dynamic between the Great Persian King and his provincial governors and the nature of the office of satrap has been analyzed, I begin a diachronic scrutiny of Greco-Persian interactions in the fifth century BC.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Liquid Modernity, Material Feminisms, Care of the Self, and Parrhesia
    Journal of critical Thought and Praxis Iowa state university digital press & School of education ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Volume 6 Issue 1 Everyday Practices of Social Justice Article 2 Working Towards Everyday Social Justice Action: Exploring Liquid Modernity, Material Feminism, Care of the Self, and Parrhesia Lauren P. Hoffman Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/jctp/vol6/iss1/ This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Repository @ Iowa State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Iowa State University Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis 2017, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1-17 Working Towards Everyday Social Justice Action: Exploring Liquid Modernity, Material Feminisms, Care of the Self, and Parrhesia Lauren P. Hoffman* Lewis University The purpose of this paper is to explore the difficulty many critically prepared educators and leaders experience when wanting to translate their social justice knowledge into everyday social justice practices. Even though these individuals are critically conscious and want to critically act, many become overwhelmed with the enormity of the neoliberal crisis, tend to fear actually acting against or speaking up in the face of injustice, and may become cynical in terms of even believing in the possibility of any type of educational and social transformation. To address this reticence, the postmodern and posthuman concepts of liquid modernity (Bauman, 2006, 2007) material feminisms (Barad, 2007,2008), care of the self and parrhesia (Foucault, 2001, 2005, 2011) were presented to educational leadership doctoral students as ideas to explicitly challenge their issues of fear and cynicism.
    [Show full text]
  • MYTHOLOGY – ALL LEVELS Ohio Junior Classical League – 2012 1
    MYTHOLOGY – ALL LEVELS Ohio Junior Classical League – 2012 1. This son of Zeus was the builder of the palaces on Mt. Olympus and the maker of Achilles’ armor. a. Apollo b. Dionysus c. Hephaestus d. Hermes 2. She was the first wife of Heracles; unfortunately, she was killed by Heracles in a fit of madness. a. Aethra b. Evadne c. Megara d. Penelope 3. He grew up as a fisherman and won fame for himself by slaying Medusa. a. Amphitryon b. Electryon c. Heracles d. Perseus 4. This girl was transformed into a sunflower after she was rejected by the Sun god. a. Arachne b. Clytie c. Leucothoe d. Myrrha 5. According to Hesiod, he was NOT a son of Cronus and Rhea. a. Brontes b. Hades c. Poseidon d. Zeus 6. He chose to die young but with great glory as opposed to dying in old age with no glory. a. Achilles b. Heracles c. Jason d. Perseus 7. This queen of the gods is often depicted as a jealous wife. a. Demeter b. Hera c. Hestia d. Thetis 8. This ruler of the Underworld had the least extra-marital affairs among the three brothers. a. Aeacus b. Hades c. Minos d. Rhadamanthys 9. He imprisoned his daughter because a prophesy said that her son would become his killer. a. Acrisius b. Heracles c. Perseus d. Theseus 10. He fled burning Troy on the shoulder of his son. a. Anchises b. Dardanus c. Laomedon d. Priam 11. He poked his eyes out after learning that he had married his own mother.
    [Show full text]
  • Cephalus, His Story: Ovid's Metamorphoses 7.661-865
    Cephalus, His Story: Ovid’s Metamorphoses 7.661-865* Hiroyuki Takahashi 1. Mystery about his Javelin Towards the end of Book 7 of the Metamorphoses, Cephalus, an elderly Athenian hero, who is visiting Aeacus, the king of Aegina, to ask for a help for his country in preparation for the war against Minos, tells a story about how he unwittingly killed his beloved wife, Procris, with his javelin. The adverse fate the otherwise happily married couple suffered twice is the main subject of the tripartite story. The first misfortune was caused by Aurora, who, enamored with Cephalus hunting in the mountain, abducted him, and eventually let him go home, but not without planting in him a suspicion that his wife might also have had an affair in his absence. Cephalus disguised himself to put her fidelity to a test, never ceasing to seduce her until he barely finds her wavering a little. Humiliated, she ran away from home, but, she was so forgiving and loving that she not only accepted his apology but also gave him the fatal javelin and a hunting dog, both of which would never miss their prey, as tokens of their reunion, which seemed to be even happier than before the mishap (part one: 690-758). After a digression about the dog chasing a monster fox in the middle (part two: 759-93), Cephalus goes on to narrate his second misfortune. Again going to the mountain for hunting, he called on aura/Aura to come to him and relieve the fierce heat. Somebody overheard him and mistook it for a call to his mistress, then reported it to Procris.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case of Parrhesia: Courage in Discourse and Its Effects
    Original Article A CASE OF PARRHESIA: COURAGE IN DISCOURSE AND ITS EFFECTS Thiago Barbosa SOARES* ▪ ABSTRACT: This article aims to analyze the meanings of parrhesia and its effects in a statement by a Brazilian federal representative, that breaks with hegemonic discourse. More precisely, we describe and interpret how the production and emergence of parrhesia functions to configure meanings in a statement constituted and developed within the vote regarding the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff’s mandate in 2016, delivered by Jean Wyllys. In this way, considering the postulate of Discourse Analysis, developed by Pêcheux, in which subject and meaning are constructed simultaneously in the historical movement, we hold that parrhesia, as Foucault observes it in his final works, produces, simultaneously, certain meanings and subjects circulating in the social space. Given this conceptual framework, we employ the theoretical and methodological tools of Discourse Analysis to investigate how truth-telling is constructed and what its effects are on the treadmill of resistance against discursive hegemony. ▪ KEYWORDS: discourse analysis; parrhesia; Jean Wyllys. Introduction A ‘discourse’ is not an infrastructure; nor is it another word for ‘ideology’. In fact, it is, rather, the opposite, despite what is often claimed either in writing or by word of mouth. (VEYNE, 2008, p.28) Paul Veyne is right in saying what discourse is not, in order to dispel certain existing interpretations about discourse. Likewise, eschewing generic readings of discourse is desirable and even necessary in the scope of our object of investigation, since the exercise of parrhesia - which “implies speech equality, the right to speak”, that is, isegory -, as understood by Michel Foucault, it is more than truth-telling, it is an ethical act whose implication is the conjuration of the effects of the discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • Parrhesia 31 · 2019 Parrhesia 31 · 2019 · 1-16
    parrhesia 31 · 2019 parrhesia 31 · 2019 · 1-16 gaston bachelard and contemporary philosophy massimiliano simons, jonas rutgeerts, anneleen masschelein and paul cortois1 There are philosophers whose name sounds familiar, but who very few people know in more than a vague sense. And there are philosophers whose footprints are all over the recent history of philosophy, but who themselves have retreated somewhat in the background. Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) is a bit of both. With- out doubt, he was one of the most prominent French philosophers in the first half of the 20th century, who wrote over twenty books, covering domains as diverse as philosophy of science, poetry, art and metaphysics. His ideas profoundly influ- enced a wide array of authors including Georges Canguilhem, Gilbert Simondon, Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Bruno Latour and Pierre Bourdieu. Up until the 1980s, Bachelard’s work was widely read by philosophers, scientists, literary theo- rists, artists, and even wider audiences and in his public appearances he incar- nated one of the most iconic and fascinating icons of a philosopher. And yet, surprisingly, in recent years the interest in Bachelard’s theoretical oeuvre seems to have somewhat waned. Apart from some recent attempts to revive his thinking, the philosopher’s oeuvre is rarely discussed outside specialist circles, often only available for those able to read French.2 In contemporary Anglo-Saxon philosophy the legacy of Bachelard seems to consist mainly in his widely known book Poetics of Space. While some of Bachelard’s contemporaries, like Georges Canguilhem or Gilbert Simondon (see Parrhesia, issue 7), who were profoundly influenced by Bachelard, have been rediscovered, the same has not happened for Bachelard’s philosophical oeuvre.
    [Show full text]
  • Kierkegaard on Socrates' Daimonion
    Kierkegaard on Socrates’ daimonion Citation for published version (APA): Sneller, R. (2020). Kierkegaard on Socrates’ daimonion. International Journal of Philosophy and Theology, 81(1), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2019.1649602 DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2019.1649602 Document status and date: Published: 01/01/2020 Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers) Please check the document version of this publication: • A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean Culture
    ANTONIJE SHKOKLJEV SLAVE NIKOLOVSKI - KATIN PREHISTORY CENTRAL BALKANS CRADLE OF AEGEAN CULTURE Prehistory - Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean culture By Antonije Shkokljev Slave Nikolovski – Katin Translated from Macedonian to English and edited By Risto Stefov Prehistory - Central Balkans Cradle of Aegean culture Published by: Risto Stefov Publications [email protected] Toronto, Canada All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without written consent from the author, except for the inclusion of brief and documented quotations in a review. Copyright 2013 by Antonije Shkokljev, Slave Nikolovski – Katin & Risto Stefov e-book edition 2 Index Index........................................................................................................3 COMMON HISTORY AND FUTURE ..................................................5 I - GEOGRAPHICAL CONFIGURATION OF THE BALKANS.........8 II - ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERIES .........................................10 III - EPISTEMOLOGY OF THE PANNONIAN ONOMASTICS.......11 IV - DEVELOPMENT OF PALEOGRAPHY IN THE BALKANS....33 V – THRACE ........................................................................................37 VI – PREHISTORIC MACEDONIA....................................................41 VII - THESSALY - PREHISTORIC AEOLIA.....................................62 VIII – EPIRUS – PELASGIAN TESPROTIA......................................69
    [Show full text]
  • The Example of Procris in the Ars Amatoria
    UC Berkeley Cabinet of the Muses: Rosenmeyer Festschrift Title The Example of Procris in the Ars Amatoria Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5xx8c1wj Author Anderson, William S. Publication Date 1990-04-01 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California THE EXAMPLE OF PROCRIS IN THE ARS AMATORIA William S. Anderson University of California, Berkeley Ever since Richard Heinze developed his masterful study of Ovid’s narrative styles by pitting similar stories recounted in elegiac meter against those of the Metamorphoses, starting from the near-contemporaneously composed myths of Persephone of Fasti 4 and of Met. 5, a methodology of contextualization has been legitimated for exploring these materials.1 As perhaps the richest pair of such narratives, elegiac and hexameter, the story of how Cephalus loved, married, and then accidentally killed Procris in a hunting accident has generated numerous studies since Heinze’s time.2 The earliest adherents of Heinze used the account in Ars Amatoria 3.687ff. to demonstrate the greater weight and epic character of the account in Met. 7.672ff. (or of 7.796ff., to limit ourselves to the death of Procris in the Met. as the strictly parallel passage).3 In more recent years, as the “epic” character of the Met. has been called into question, the procedures of contextualization have altered somewhat. On the one hand, many studies have continued to emphasize the greater power and pathos of Procris’ death in the Met. and so called attention to features of Ars 3 that appear to be earlier and less artistic details consciously changed and improved by Ovid in the later Met.
    [Show full text]