DOCSLIB.ORG

Euripides and Gender: the Difference the Fragments Make

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Euripides and Gender: the Difference the Fragments Make Euripides and Gender: The Difference the Fragments Make Melissa Karen Anne Funke A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2013 Reading Committee: Ruby Blondell, Chair Deborah Kamen Olga Levaniouk Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Classics © Copyright 2013 Melissa Karen Anne Funke University of Washington Abstract Euripides and Gender: The Difference the Fragments Make Melissa Karen Anne Funke Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Ruby Blondell Department of Classics Research on gender in Greek tragedy has traditionally focused on the extant plays, with only sporadic recourse to discussion of the many fragmentary plays for which we have evidence. This project aims to perform an extensive study of the sixty-two fragmentary plays of Euripides in order to provide a picture of his presentation of gender that is as full as possible. Beginning with an overview of the history of the collection and transmission of the fragments and an introduction to the study of gender in tragedy and Euripides’ extant plays, this project takes up the contexts in which the fragments are found and the supplementary information on plot and character (known as testimonia) as a guide in its analysis of the fragments themselves. These contexts include the fifth- century CE anthology of Stobaeus, who preserved over one third of Euripides’ fragments, and other late antique sources such as Clement’s Miscellanies, Plutarch’s Moralia, and Athenaeus’ Deipnosophistae. The sections on testimonia investigate sources ranging from the mythographers Hyginus and Apollodorus to Apulian pottery to a group of papyrus hypotheses known as the “Tales from Euripides”, with a special focus on plot-type, especially the rape-and-recognition and Potiphar’s wife storylines. The final section turns to fragments and comic parodies of Euripides in Aristophanes, which are instructive as a contemporary source of information on the playwright. This section focuses on the fragmentary play Andromeda, but also includes information on a variety of the other fragmentary plays from lines and scholia from various Aristophanic plays. Finally, I consider the difference that the fragments make to our understanding of larger patterns of gender in Euripides. I consider how the fragments provide an expanded diversity of specific types of Euripidean characters, a more developed image of characters that appear in the extant plays, more examples of specific plot-types, more explorations of masculinity, and further plots taken from famous mythological cycles, concluding that the fragmentary plays expand the possibilities of how gender was portrayed and portrayable in Euripides’ plays. Dedication To my father, who taught me to approach everything I do with enthusiasm and an open mind and that there is nothing better than doing what you love with great people. Contents Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………...ii Introduction……………………………………………………………………...………1 Chapter 1: Approaches to Euripides’ Fragments, Approaches to Gender………………5 Chapter 2: Euripidean Quotations in Stobaeus: Context and Content…………………29 Chapter 3: The Contexts of Non-Stobaean Euripidean Fragments…………………….71 Chapter 4: Testimonia on the Fragmentary Plays of Euripides………………………...96 Chapter 5: Plot and Characterization in the “Tales of Euripides”…………………….140 Chapter 6: Fragments and Testimonia in Aristophanes……………………………….171 Conclusion: What Difference Do the Fragments Make?.............................................. 195 Appendix 1: Gender in the Papyrus Fragments……………………………………….202 Appendix 2: Gender in the Satyr Plays……………………………………………….210 Appendix 3: Dates for Euripides’ Fragmentary Plays………………………………...215 Figure………………………………………………………………………………….218 Works Cited…………………………………………………………………………...219 Acknowledgements I would like to express my gratitude first and foremost to Ruby Blondell, who shared her exceptional clarity of thought from the very beginning of this project and helped give shape to a project that was at times unwieldy due to its great variety of material. As an advisor, she struck a balance between my independence and her guidance that I hope to share with my own students in the future. Deb Kamen and Olga Levaniouk brought great insight to their readings of my work and all three women have been superb teachers both in and out of the classroom. On this note, I thank all of the faculty and staff in the Classics department for their unwavering commitment to creating an environment that fosters both high quality scholarship and unparalleled collegiality. I must also thank the Greenfield family, whose generosity has allowed me many opportunities during my time at UW, from travel to time on fellowship to prepare for my exams and to work on this project. I owe a great debt of thanks to the faculty in the Department of Classical, Near Eastern, and Religious Studies at the University of British Columbia, especially Toph Marshall, Susanna Braund, and Lyn Rae, who encouraged me to pursue a PhD and sent me to University of Washington well-prepared for the challenges of doctoral studies. Many of these individuals have now become valued colleagues who continue to give professional support and the encouragement required to finish this project. As well, a group of new colleagues at UBC, Antone Minard, Florence Yoon, and Gwynaeth McIntyre, have proven to be essential elements in improving and expanding my work. Our collaborations are challenging and inspiring, not to mention extremely enjoyable. During my time at UW, I have been blessed to be surrounded by a group of fellow graduate students who have become dear friends and valuable colleagues. Our time together from the seminar room to the soccer pitch has been the highlight of my graduate career and all of you have been essential elements in any successes I may have had here. You have edited, co- presented, shared teaching ideas, been travel-mates, discussed matters both ancient and personal for hours on end, provided beds to Canadian interlopers, acted as couriers, scored golden goals, and accepted myriad nicknames over the last five years. It has been a privilege to share this experience with you all. Finally I must thank those who have supported me from the beginning, my family. My mother, for never failing to ask how much work I had done on my dissertation that day, my sisters and their children, for providing much-needed perspective and laughter, but especially John, who has spent seven years married to a graduate student, never once questioning this path, and who tirelessly gave rides to the bus to Seattle at five AM or drove the I-5 countless times through rain, snow, and bridge collapses in order to make all of this happen. You are my rock and this accomplishment is as much yours as mine. To my “internal deadline”, thank you for providing the final impetus to complete this dissertation. Introduction xeiri\ dei= qanei=n. “He must die by (your) hand.” o9mologw= de/ se/ a0dikei=n. “I admit I wronged you.”1 Read in isolation, these fragmentary Euripidean quotes seem like standard tragic fare, not especially revelatory of the content and characters of their individual plays (Alexander and Auge, respectively). Nor do they give much in the way of clues to who is speaking them (Hecuba and Heracles). They are in fact fragments of fragments, excerpted from a papyrus fragment in the case of the first (fr. 62d, v. 25) and from an anthologist’s quotation in the second (fr. 272a, v. 1). Yet despite their brevity these short quotations provide essential evidence of Euripides’ approach to characterization and plot, revealing a Hecuba who is prepared to have a man killed to protect the reputation of her son and a Heracles who not only returns to acknowledge a son he fathered with a drunken rape, but apologizes to his victim. How does one arrive at such striking claims with what appears to be sparse material? Looking beyond the fragments themselves to the contexts in which they have survived helps us piece together the fragmentary picture by using all of the supporting evidence available to us. In the case of Hecuba in Alexander another papyrus preserves a dramatic hypothesis for the play,2 revealing Hecuba’s role in the conspiracy against her as yet unrecognized son, Paris, while 1 Unless otherwise noted, all translations of Euripides’ fragments are from Collard and Cropp 2008a and b. All other translations are my own. 2 Fragment 62d of Alexander comes from P. Strasbourg 2342.3, a third-century B.C.E. Egyptian papyrus, while the hypothesis is from P. Oxy. 3650, part of a collection of similar Euripidean hypotheses dating anywhere from second century B.C.E. to the second century C.E. See Chapter 5 for a more thorough discussion of the date of this hypothesis and its relationship to our understanding of Alexander. 2 Heracles’ apology in Auge is only fully understood once considered alongside Aelian’s remarks on a different fragment of the same play.3 This project aims to investigate Euripides’ fragments dealing with issues of gender, such as those mentioned above, by drawing on the contexts in which the fragments have survived, which range from the works of Plato to papyri unearthed in Egypt, in effect “recontextualizing” them. Catherine Osborne established the use of context as a means of illuminating the content of fragments in her 1987 monograph Rethinking Early Greek Philosophy: Hippolytus of Rome and the Presocratics. In her book, she disputes the assumption that a text created by the assembly of fragments is sufficient for study on its own. Certainly we ought not to dismiss the work of textual critics like Richard Kannicht (the editor of the most recent Euripidean volumes of the Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta), in which the fragments are provided by themselves with only the textual citation. As an editor of the fragments, it is not his task to address context beyond citing the source of a fragment. But in the methodology employed by Osborne, if we use only their work on the fragments alone, thereby ignoring the interpretations offered by the ancient sources, we are passing over fertile ground for investigating the fragments.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Conflict of Obligations in Euripides' Alcestis
    GOLDFARB, BARRY E., The Conflict of Obligations in Euripides' "Alcestis" , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 33:2 (1992:Summer) p.109 The Conflict of Obligations in Euripides' Alcestis Barry E. Goldfarb 0UT ALCESTIS A. M. Dale has remarked that "Perhaps no f{other play of Euripides except the Bacchae has provoked so much controversy among scholars in search of its 'real meaning'."l I hope to contribute to this controversy by an examination of the philosophical issues underlying the drama. A radical tension between the values of philia and xenia con­ stitutes, as we shall see, a major issue within the play, with ramifications beyond the Alcestis and, in fact, beyond Greek tragedy in general: for this conflict between two seemingly autonomous value-systems conveys a stronger sense of life's limitations than its possibilities. I The scene that provides perhaps the most critical test for an analysis of Alcestis is the concluding one, the 'happy ending'. One way of reading the play sees this resolution as ironic. According to Wesley Smith, for example, "The spectators at first are led to expect that the restoration of Alcestis is to depend on a show of virtue by Admetus. And by a fine stroke Euripides arranges that the restoration itself is the test. At the crucial moment Admetus fails the test.'2 On this interpretation 1 Euripides, Alcestis (Oxford 1954: hereafter 'Dale') xviii. All citations are from this editon. 2 W. D. Smith, "The Ironic Structure in Alcestis," Phoenix 14 (1960) 127-45 (=]. R. Wisdom, ed., Twentieth Century Interpretations of Euripides' Alcestis: A Collection of Critical Essays [Englewood Cliffs 1968]) 37-56 at 56.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hellenic Saga Gaia (Earth)
    The Hellenic Saga Gaia (Earth) Uranus (Heaven) Oceanus = Tethys Iapetus (Titan) = Clymene Themis Atlas Menoetius Prometheus Epimetheus = Pandora Prometheus • “Prometheus made humans out of earth and water, and he also gave them fire…” (Apollodorus Library 1.7.1) • … “and scatter-brained Epimetheus from the first was a mischief to men who eat bread; for it was he who first took of Zeus the woman, the maiden whom he had formed” (Hesiod Theogony ca. 509) Prometheus and Zeus • Zeus concealed the secret of life • Trick of the meat and fat • Zeus concealed fire • Prometheus stole it and gave it to man • Freidrich H. Fuger, 1751 - 1818 • Zeus ordered the creation of Pandora • Zeus chained Prometheus to a mountain • The accounts here are many and confused Maxfield Parish Prometheus 1919 Prometheus Chained Dirck van Baburen 1594 - 1624 Prometheus Nicolas-Sébastien Adam 1705 - 1778 Frankenstein: The Modern Prometheus • Novel by Mary Shelly • First published in 1818. • The first true Science Fiction novel • Victor Frankenstein is Prometheus • As with the story of Prometheus, the novel asks about cause and effect, and about responsibility. • Is man accountable for his creations? • Is God? • Are there moral, ethical constraints on man’s creative urges? Mary Shelly • “I saw the pale student of unhallowed arts kneeling beside the thing he had put together. I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then, on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life, and stir with an uneasy, half vital motion. Frightful must it be; for supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavour to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world” (Introduction to the 1831 edition) Did I request thee, from my clay To mould me man? Did I solicit thee From darkness to promote me? John Milton, Paradise Lost 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Athenians and Eleusinians in the West Pediment of the Parthenon
    ATHENIANS AND ELEUSINIANS IN THE WEST PEDIMENT OF THE PARTHENON (PLATE 95) T HE IDENTIFICATION of the figuresin the west pedimentof the Parthenonhas long been problematic.I The evidencereadily enables us to reconstructthe composition of the pedimentand to identify its central figures.The subsidiaryfigures, however, are rath- er more difficult to interpret. I propose that those on the left side of the pediment may be identifiedas membersof the Athenian royal family, associatedwith the goddessAthena, and those on the right as membersof the Eleusinian royal family, associatedwith the god Posei- don. This alignment reflects the strife of the two gods on a heroic level, by referringto the legendary war between Athens and Eleusis. The recognition of the disjunctionbetween Athenians and Eleusinians and of parallelism and contrastbetween individualsand groups of figures on the pedimentpermits the identificationof each figure. The referenceto Eleusis in the pediment,moreover, indicates the importanceof that city and its majorcult, the Eleu- sinian Mysteries, to the Athenians. The referencereflects the developmentand exploitation of Athenian control of the Mysteries during the Archaic and Classical periods. This new proposalfor the identificationof the subsidiaryfigures of the west pedimentthus has critical I This article has its origins in a paper I wrote in a graduateseminar directedby ProfessorJohn Pollini at The Johns Hopkins University in 1979. I returned to this paper to revise and expand its ideas during 1986/1987, when I held the Jacob Hirsch Fellowship at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. In the summer of 1988, I was given a grant by the Committeeon Research of Tulane University to conduct furtherresearch for the article.
    [Show full text]
  • CLAS 4000 Seminar in Classics on Seneca's Thyestes and LATN 4002 Roman Drama
    CLAS 4000 Seminar in Classics on Seneca’s Thyestes and LATN 4002 Roman Drama http://myweb.ecu.edu/stevensj/CLAS4000/2016syllabus.pdf Prof. John A. Stevens Spring 2016 Office: Ragsdale 133 [email protected] Office Hours: TTh 11-1:30 and by appt. (252) 328-6056 Objectives. Upon completion of this course, you will be able to: • Situate Senecan tragedy in the contexts of Roman literature, history and political philosophy • Analyze the elements of Roman Stoicism present in Seneca’s Thyestes • Characterize contemporary literary approaches to the play • Evaluate the play’s literary and philosophical elements as an integral whole Writing Intensive (WI) CLAS 4000 is a writing intensive course in the Writing Across the Curriculum Program at East Carolina University. With committee approval, this course contributes to the twelve-hour WI requirement for students at ECU. Additional information is available at: http://www.ecu.edu/writing/wac/. WI Course goals: • Use writing to investigate complex, relevant topics and address significant questions through engagement with and effective use of credible sources; • Produce writing that reflects an awareness of context, purpose, and audience, particularly within the written genres (including genres that integrate writing with visuals, audio or other multi-modal components) of their major disciplines and/or career fields; • Understand that writing as a process made more effective through drafts and revision; • Produce writing that is proofread and edited to avoid grammatical and mechanical errors; • Ability to assess and explain the major choices made in the writing process. • Students are responsible for uploading the following to iWebfolio (via Courses/Student Portfolio in OneStop): 1) A final draft of a major writing project from the WI course, 2) A description of the assignment for which the project was written, and 3) A writing self-analysis document (a component of our QEP).
    [Show full text]
  • Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides Translated by Nicholas Rudall Directed by Charles Newell
    STUDY GUIDE Photo of Mark L. Montgomery, Stephanie Andrea Barron, and Sandra Marquez by joe mazza/brave lux, inc Sponsored by Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides Translated by Nicholas Rudall Directed by Charles Newell SETTING The action takes place in east-central Greece at the port of Aulis, on the Euripus Strait. The time is approximately 1200 BCE. CHARACTERS Agamemnon father of Iphigenia, husband of Clytemnestra and King of Mycenae Menelaus brother of Agamemnon Clytemnestra mother of Iphigenia, wife of Agamemnon Iphigenia daughter of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra Achilles son of Peleus Chorus women of Chalcis who came to Aulis to see the Greek army Old Man servant of Agamemnon, was given as part of Clytemnestra’s dowry Messenger ABOUT THE PLAY Iphigenia in Aulis is the last existing work of the playwright Euripides. Written between 408 and 406 BCE, the year of Euripides’ death, the play was first produced the following year in a trilogy with The Bacchaeand Alcmaeon in Corinth by his son, Euripides the Younger, and won the first place at the Athenian City Dionysia festival. Agamemnon Costume rendering by Jacqueline Firkins. 2 SYNOPSIS At the start of the play, Agamemnon reveals to the Old Man that his army and warships are stranded in Aulis due to a lack of sailing winds. The winds have died because Agamemnon is being punished by the goddess Artemis, whom he offended. The only way to remedy this situation is for Agamemnon to sacrifice his daughter, Iphigenia, to the goddess Artemis. Agamemnon then admits that he has sent for Iphigenia to be brought to Aulis but he has changed his mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Sons and Fathers in the Catalogue of Argonauts in Apollonius Argonautica 1.23-233
    Sons and fathers in the catalogue of Argonauts in Apollonius Argonautica 1.23-233 ANNETTE HARDER University of Groningen [email protected] 1. Generations of heroes The Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius brings emphatically to the attention of its readers the distinction between the generation of the Argonauts and the heroes of the Trojan War in the next genera- tion. Apollonius initially highlights this emphasis in the episode of the Argonauts’ departure, when the baby Achilles is watching them, at AR 1.557-5581 σὺν καί οἱ (sc. Chiron) παράκοιτις ἐπωλένιον φορέουσα | Πηλείδην Ἀχιλῆα, φίλωι δειδίσκετο πατρί (“and with him his wife, hold- ing Peleus’ son Achilles in her arms, showed him to his dear father”)2; he does so again in 4.866-879, which describes Thetis and Achilles as a baby. Accordingly, several scholars have focused on the ways in which 1 — On this marker of the generations see also Klooster 2014, 527. 2 — All translations of Apollonius are by Race 2008. EuGeStA - n°9 - 2019 2 ANNETTE HARDER Apollonius has avoided anachronisms by carefully distinguishing between the Argonauts and the heroes of the Trojan War3. More specifically Jacqueline Klooster (2014, 521-530), in discussing the treatment of time in the Argonautica, distinguishes four periods of time to which Apollonius refers: first, the time before the Argo sailed, from the beginning of the cosmos (featured in the song of Orpheus in AR 1.496-511); second, the time of its sailing (i.e. the time of the epic’s setting); third, the past after the Argo sailed and fourth the present inhab- ited by the narrator (both hinted at by numerous allusions and aitia).
    [Show full text]
  • (Eponymous) Heroes
    is is a version of an electronic document, part of the series, Dēmos: Clas- sical Athenian Democracy, a publicationpublication ofof e Stoa: a consortium for electronic publication in the humanities [www.stoa.org]. e electronic version of this article off ers contextual information intended to make the study of Athenian democracy more accessible to a wide audience. Please visit the site at http:// www.stoa.org/projects/demos/home. Athenian Political Art from the fi h and fourth centuries: Images of Tribal (Eponymous) Heroes S e Cleisthenic reforms of /, which fi rmly established democracy at Ath- ens, imposed a new division of Attica into ten tribes, each of which consti- tuted a new political and military unit, but included citizens from each of the three geographical regions of Attica – the city, the coast, and the inland. En- rollment in a tribe (according to heredity) was a manda- tory prerequisite for citizenship. As usual in ancient Athenian aff airs, politics and reli- gion came hand in hand and, a er due consultation with Apollo’s oracle at Delphi, each new tribe was assigned to a particular hero a er whom the tribe was named; the ten Amy C. Smith, “Athenian Political Art from the Fi h and Fourth Centuries : Images of Tribal (Eponymous) Heroes,” in C. Blackwell, ed., Dēmos: Classical Athenian Democracy (A.(A. MahoneyMahoney andand R.R. Scaife,Scaife, edd.,edd., e Stoa: a consortium for electronic publication in the humanities [www.stoa.org], . © , A.C. Smith. tribal heroes are thus known as the eponymous (or name giving) heroes. T : Aristotle indicates that each hero already received worship by the time of the Cleisthenic reforms, although little evi- dence as to the nature of the worship of each hero is now known (Aristot.
    [Show full text]
  • Loeb Lucian Vol5.Pdf
    THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY FOUNDED BY JAMES LOEB, LL.D. EDITED BY fT. E. PAGE, C.H., LITT.D. litt.d. tE. CAPPS, PH.D., LL.D. tW. H. D. ROUSE, f.e.hist.soc. L. A. POST, L.H.D. E. H. WARMINGTON, m.a., LUCIAN V •^ LUCIAN WITH AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION BY A. M. HARMON OK YALE UNIVERSITY IN EIGHT VOLUMES V LONDON WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS MOMLXII f /. ! n ^1 First printed 1936 Reprinted 1955, 1962 Printed in Great Britain CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF LTTCIAN'S WORKS vii PREFATOEY NOTE xi THE PASSING OF PEBEORiNUS (Peregrinus) .... 1 THE RUNAWAYS {FugiUvt) 53 TOXARis, OR FRIENDSHIP (ToxaHs vd amiciHa) . 101 THE DANCE {Saltalio) 209 • LEXiPHANES (Lexiphanes) 291 THE EUNUCH (Eunuchiis) 329 ASTROLOGY {Astrologio) 347 THE MISTAKEN CRITIC {Pseudologista) 371 THE PARLIAMENT OF THE GODS {Deorutti concilhim) . 417 THE TYRANNICIDE (Tyrannicidj,) 443 DISOWNED (Abdicatvs) 475 INDEX 527 —A LIST OF LUCIAN'S WORKS SHOWING THEIR DIVISION INTO VOLUMES IN THIS EDITION Volume I Phalaris I and II—Hippias or the Bath—Dionysus Heracles—Amber or The Swans—The Fly—Nigrinus Demonax—The Hall—My Native Land—Octogenarians— True Story I and II—Slander—The Consonants at Law—The Carousal or The Lapiths. Volume II The Downward Journey or The Tyrant—Zeus Catechized —Zeus Rants—The Dream or The Cock—Prometheus—* Icaromenippus or The Sky-man—Timon or The Misanthrope —Charon or The Inspector—Philosophies for Sale. Volume HI The Dead Come to Life or The Fisherman—The Double Indictment or Trials by Jury—On Sacrifices—The Ignorant Book Collector—The Dream or Lucian's Career—The Parasite —The Lover of Lies—The Judgement of the Goddesses—On Salaried Posts in Great Houses.
    [Show full text]
  • Myths and Legends: Odysseus and His Odyssey, the Short Version by Caroline H
    Myths and Legends: Odysseus and his odyssey, the short version By Caroline H. Harding and Samuel B. Harding, adapted by Newsela staff on 01.10.17 Word Count 1,415 Level 1030L Escaping from the island of the Cyclopes — one-eyed, ill-tempered giants — the hero Odysseus calls back to the shore, taunting the Cyclops Polyphemus, who heaves a boulder at the ship. Painting by Arnold Böcklin in 1896. SECOND: A drawing of a cyclops, courtesy of CSA Images/B&W Engrave Ink Collection and Getty Images. Greek mythology began thousands of years ago because there was a need to explain natural events, disasters, and events in history. Myths were created about gods and goddesses who had supernatural powers, human feelings and looked human. These ideas were passed down in beliefs and stories. The following stories are about Odysseus, the son of the king of the Greek island of Ithaca and a hero, who was described to be as wise as Zeus, king of the gods. For 10 years, the Greek army battled the Trojans in the walled city of Troy, but could not get over, under or through the walls that protected it. Finally, Odysseus came up with the idea of a large hollow, wooden horse, that would be filled with Greek soldiers. The people of Troy woke one morning and found that no army surrounded the city, so they thought the enemy had returned to their ships and were finally sailing back to Greece. A great horse had been left This article is available at 5 reading levels at https://newsela.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Module D (June 2015 Session) Page 1 of 12
    SECTION A – CASE QUESTIONS Answer 1 DIPN Issued by the IRD, DIPN clarifies the IRD’s viewpoints on particular tax provisions and/or the practice of the IRD in certain given situations. It also outlines the IRD’s respective procedures in administrating relevant provisions of the IRO. Notwithstanding that DIPN has no binding force in law (BOR D54/06, para. 25), the IRD would follow, in general, what has been laid down in the DIPNs, both interpretation of tax provisions and assessing practices. BOR Decisions The BOR is an independent statutory body to determine tax appeals. Decisions made by the BOR are final with regard to the facts of a particular case. In addition, BOR’s decisions are not binding on other BOR cases. With reference to the BOR’s decisions, taxpayers can identify how the relevant provisions in the IRO are interpreted and applied in the circumstances. Local Court Cases for tax In the appeals to the Hong Kong Courts, the judges are required to decide the cases by expressing their opinion in respect of questions of law. If taxpayers or the IRD cannot agree on the interpretation of a provision in the IRO, both parties can use the appeal procedures laid down in the IRO to seek a ruling on a question of law from the Courts. In addition, the decisions of a higher court (e.g. Court of Final Appeal) bind all lower courts and the BOR, i.e. the doctrine of judicial precedent. Answer 2 Under s.4 of the IRO, officers of the IRD shall preserve secrecy with regard to all matters relating to the affairs of any person coming to his knowledge, except in the performance of his duties under the IRO.
    [Show full text]
  • The 'Trial by Water' in Greek Myth and Literature
    Leeds International Classical Studies 7.1 (2008) ISSN 1477-3643 (http://www.leeds.ac.uk/classics/lics/) © Fiona McHardy The ‘trial by water’ in Greek myth and literature FIONA MCHARDY (ROEHAMPTON UNIVERSITY) ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the theme of casting ‘unchaste’ women into the sea as a punishment in Greek myth and literature. Particular focus will be given to the stories of Danaë, Augë, Aerope and Phronime, who are all depicted suffering this punishment at the hands of their fathers. While Seaford (1990) has emphasized the theme of imprisonment which occurs in some of the stories involving the ‘floating chest’, I turn my attention instead to the theme of the sea. The coincidence in these stories of the threat of drowning for apparent promiscuity or sexual impurity with the escape of those girls who are innocent can be explained by the phenomenon of the ‘trial by water’ as evidenced in Babylonian and other early law codes (cf. Glotz 1904). Further evidence for this theory can be found in ancient novels where the trial of the heroine for sexual purity is often a key theme. The significance of chastity in the myths and in Athenian society is central to understanding the story patterns. The interrelationship of mythic and social ideals is drawn out in the paper. This paper examines the punishment of ‘unchaste’ women in Greek myth and literature, in particular their representation in Euripides’ fragmentary Augë, Cretan Women and Danaë. My focus is on punishments involving the sea, where it is possible to discern two interrelated strands in the tales.1 The first strand involves an angry parent condemning an errant daughter to be cast into the sea with the intention of drowning her.
    [Show full text]
  • A HISTORY of the PELASGIAN THEORY. FEW Peoples Of
    A HISTORY OF THE PELASGIAN THEORY. FEW peoples of the ancient world have given rise to so much controversy as the Pelasgians; and of few, after some centuries of discussion, is so little clearly established. Like the Phoenicians, the Celts, and of recent years the Teutons, they have been a peg upon which to hang all sorts of speculation ; and whenever an inconvenient circumstance has deranged the symmetry of a theory, it has been safe to ' call it Pelasgian and pass on.' One main reason for this ill-repute, into which the Pelasgian name has fallen, has been the very uncritical fashion in which the ancient statements about the Pelasgians have commonly been mishandled. It has been the custom to treat passages from Homer, from Herodotus, from Ephorus, and from Pausanias, as if they were so many interchangeable bricks to build up the speculative edifice; as if it needed no proof that genealogies found sum- marized in Pausanias or Apollodorus ' were taken by them from poems of the same class with the Theogony, or from ancient treatises, or from prevalent opinions ;' as if, further, ' if we find them mentioning the Pelasgian nation, they do at all events belong to an age when that name and people had nothing of the mystery which they bore to the eyes of the later Greeks, for instance of Strabo;' and as though (in the same passage) a statement of Stephanus of Byzantium about Pelasgians in Italy ' were evidence to the same effect, perfectly unexceptionable and as strictly historical as the case will admit of 1 No one doubts, of course, either that popular tradition may transmit, or that late writers may transcribe, statements which come from very early, and even from contemporary sources.
    [Show full text]