DOCSLIB.ORG

Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer (1790–1861)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer (1790–1861) Druckerei C. H . Beck Medien mit Zukunft .................Märtl/Schreiner,.................... Phil.-hist. Abh. 139/2013 2. Revision, 24.09.2013 1 BAYERISCHE AKADEMIE DER WISSENSCHAFTEN PHILOSOPHISCH-HISTORISCHE KLASSE ABHANDLUNGEN · NEUE FOLGE, HEFT 139 2. Revision Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer (1790–1861) Der Gelehrte und seine Aktualität im 21. Jahrhundert Konferenz der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Kommission für interdisziplinäre Südosteuropaforschung der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen (München, 6. Juni 2011) Herausgegeben von Claudia Märtl und Peter Schreiner Vorgelegt von Claudia Märtl in der Sitzung vom 13. Juli 2012 MÜNCHEN 2013 VERLAG DER BAYERISCHEN AKADEMIE DER WISSENSCHAFTEN IN KOMMISSION BEIM VERLAG C. H. BECK MÜNCHEN Druckerei C. H . Beck Medien mit Zukunft .................Märtl/Schreiner,.................... Phil.-hist. Abh. 139/2013 2. Revision, 24.09.2013 2 ISSN 005 710 X ISBN 978 3 7696 0127 5 © Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, München 2013 Druck und Bindung: Druckerei C. H. Beck, Nördlingen Gedruckt auf säurefreiem, alterungsbeständigem Papier (hergestellt aus chlorfrei gebleichtem Zellstoff) Printed in Germany Druckerei C.H . Beck Medien mit Zukunft Märtl/Schreiner, Phil.-hist. Abh. 139/2013 ..................................... 2. Revision, 24.09.2013 . 1. ................................. ................................. Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer (1790–1861) Portrait in der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 2. Revision . ................................. ................................ Druckerei C. H . Beck Medien mit Zukunft .................Märtl/Schreiner,.................... Phil.-hist. Abh. 139/2013 2. Revision, 24.09.2013 3 2. Revision INHALT CLAUDIA MÄRTL, München, und PETER SCHREINER, München: Vorwort ................................................................................................................. 5 Tabellarischer Lebenslauf ............................................................................................ 11 CLAUDIA MÄRTL, München: Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer in der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften ................................................................................................. 15 REINHARD LAUER, Göttingen: Fallmerayer als Schriftsteller ....................................... 23 PETER SCHREINER, München: An den Anfängen einer geschichtlichen Darstellung des Byzantinischen Reiches. Mit unedierten Scripten Fallmerayers aus der Nachlass- Sammlung der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek im Anhang ......................................... 33 OLIVER J. SCHMITT, Wien: Ist Fallmerayer der Begründer der historischen Südost- europaforschung? ................................................................................................... 93 KLAUS KREISER, Berlin: Fallmerayer, Orientalist oder Experte avant la lettre? ............ 105 CHRISTIAN VOSS, Berlin: Slavische Sprache(n) und slavische Ethnizität in Griechen- land. Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer aus der Sicht der heutigen Minderheiten ................. 121 IOANNIS ZELEPOS, München: Rezeption durch Reaktion. Zur Bedeutung Fallmeray- ers für den griechischen Nationaldiskurs im 19. Jahrhundert .................................... 133 WALTER POHL, Wien: Ethnische Identitäten in Südosteuropa als Forschungsproblem 143 PETER SCHREINER, München: Der wissenschaftliche Nachlass Jakob Philipp Fall- merayers in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek. Inventar ............................................. 155 ANHANG Verzeichnis der Abbildungen ...................................................................................... 163 Register der Personen ................................................................................................ 165 Verzeichnis der Autoren dieses Bandes ........................................................................ 171 Druckerei C. H . Beck Medien mit Zukunft .................Märtl/Schreiner,.................... Phil.-hist. Abh. 139/2013 2. Revision, 24.09.2013 Vorwor t 5 2. Revision Vorwor t Vor wor t VORWORT Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer ist kein vergessener Gelehrter. Dazu hat er selbst bewusst und un- bewusst beigetragen. Viele seiner Äußerungen, besonders zur Bevölkerungsgeschichte auf dem Balkan, werden immer wieder kritisch aufgegriffen und diskutiert. Seine stilistisch glänzenden und inhaltlich nicht überholten Reiseberichte, die Fragmente aus dem Orient, wurden, wenn- gleich oft bis ins Unverständliche gekürzt, bis in die jüngste Zeit immer wieder aufgelegt. Seine lebenslange Verbundenheit mit der Südtiroler Heimat, die ihm immer sehr nahe stand, hat eine Erinnerung an ihn behalten, wie sie Gelehrten nur selten zuteil wurde. Eine moderne Biblio- graphie zählt allein zwischen 1900 und 2011 insgesamt 142 Titel, die explizit seinem Leben und Werk gewidmet sind, darunter Werke bedeutender Namen der deutschen Geisteswelt wie Franz Babinger und Theodor Heuss.1 Das Tiroler Landesmuseum in Innsbruck beherbergt das von Eugen Thurnher ins Leben gerufene Fallmerayer Archiv. Der zweihundertste Geburtstag (1990) war Anlass für ein Colloquium, dessen Beiträge in einem Band zugänglich sind.2 Eine Ausstellung auf Schloss Tirol im Jahr 2009 machte erstmals einer größeren Öffentlichkeit auch zahlreiche Originaldokumente bekannt und fasste sie in einem gedruckten Katalog zusam- men,3 begleitet von einem ausführlichen Textband, in dem neues oder schwer erreichbares Material zur Biographie Fallmerayers zugänglich gemacht wird.4 Im Rahmen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften widmete Franz Babinger, der Geistesverwandte, dem von Fallmerayers Angriff gegen die Person von Johann Nepomuk Ringseis ausgelösten Akademie- zwist eine monographische Studie.5 An derselben Stelle beleuchtete ein Jahrzehnt früher der österreichische Literaturwissenschaftler Herbert Seidler in einer fundamentalen Abhandlung, die auch ein ausführliches Quellenverzeichnis mit einschließt, Fallmerayers gesamtes Schaffen unter dem Aspekt der deutschen Geistesgeschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts.6 Es lag nahe, auch die 150. Wiederkehr seines Todestages (26. April 1861) zum Anlass eines Gedenk-Colloquiums zu nehmen, das gemeinsam von der Bayerischen Akademie der Wis- senschaften, vertreten durch Claudia Märtl, und der Kommission für Interdisziplinäre Südost- europa-Forschung an der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, vertreten durch Rein- hard Lauer und Peter Schreiner, am 6. Juni 2011 im Sitzungssaal der Philosophisch- Historischen Klasse der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften stattfand. Die Thematik _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 [Michael Grünbart], Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer. Bibliographie zur Sekundärliteratur 1900–2011 (Instrumenta Fallmerayeriana 3), Wien 2011. 2 Eugen Thurnher (Hrsg.), Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer. Wissenschaftler, Politiker und Schriftsteller (Schlern-Schrif- ten 292), Innsbruck 1993. 3 Ellen Hastaba/Siegfried de Rachewiltz (Hrsg.), „Für Freiheit, Wahrheit und Recht“. Joseph Ennemoser und Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer. Tirol von 1809 bis 1848/49 (Schlern-Schriften 349), Innsbruck 2009. 4 Ellen Hastaba, Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer (1790–1861). Annäherungen an seine Biographie (Schriftenreihe histo- rischer Quellen zur Kulturgeschichte Tirols 4), Innsbruck 2009. 5 Franz Babinger, Der Akademiezwist um Jakob Philipp Fallmerayer (1851). Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Bayeri- schen Akademie der Wissenschaften unter Maximilian II. (Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philoso- phisch-historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte 59, 5), München 1959. 6 Herbert Seidler, Jakob Philipp Fallmerayers geistige Entwicklung. Ein Beitrag zur deutschen Geistesgeschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts (Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Abhandlun- gen N. F. 26), München 1947. Druckerei C. H . Beck Medien mit Zukunft .................Märtl/Schreiner,.................... Phil.-hist. Abh. 139/2013 2. Revision, 24.09.2013 6 Vorwor t der acht Vorträge war ganz auf den Gelehrten Fallmerayer ausgerichtet, seine innovatorischen und methodischen Ansätze, inwieweit sie historische und philologische Disziplinen beein- flussten und heute noch von Bedeutung sind. Aber auch Irrtümer und Schwachstellen sollten nicht verschwiegen werden. CLAUDIA MÄRTL skizziert einleitend knapp und eindringlich seine wissenschaftliche Be- deutung als Mitglied der Bayerischen Akademie, ohne den Menschen Fallmerayer aus dem Blickwinkel zu verlieren. Es ist heute fast vergessen, dass ein Gelehrter auch ein Schriftsteller sein kann. Die Prägnanz seines Stiles, in der auch Verletzbarkeit liegen konnte, ist schon frü- her verschiedentlich hervorgehoben worden, aber erstmals hier zeigt REINHARD LAUER an dreiundzwanzig ausgewählten Stellen Fallmerayer als Meister der deutschen Sprache, eine Meisterschaft, die dazu beiträgt, dass – als literarische Werke – auch jene Schriften noch lesenswert sind, die an aktueller wissenschaftlicher Bedeutung eingebüßt haben. PETER SCHREINER versucht nachzuweisen, dass Fallmerayer, auch in der methodischen Suche nach Quellen und Literatur, am Beginn einer historisch ausgerichteten Byzanzforschung steht, und sich Methoden der Grundlagenforschung bediente, die erst in unseren Jahrzehnten auf der Basis neu geschaffener Quellenrepertorien in Numismatik, Sigillographie und Diplomatik erweitert und verfeinert werden konnten. OLIVER J. SCHMITT setzt sich zunächst mit den Definitionen des Südosteuropa-Begriffes auseinander, um auf dieser Grundlage Fallmerayer als einen jener Historiker bezeichnen
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Byzantine Missionaries, Foreign Rulers, and Christian Narratives (Ca
    Conversion and Empire: Byzantine Missionaries, Foreign Rulers, and Christian Narratives (ca. 300-900) by Alexander Borislavov Angelov A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) in The University of Michigan 2011 Doctoral Committee: Professor John V.A. Fine, Jr., Chair Professor Emeritus H. Don Cameron Professor Paul Christopher Johnson Professor Raymond H. Van Dam Associate Professor Diane Owen Hughes © Alexander Borislavov Angelov 2011 To my mother Irina with all my love and gratitude ii Acknowledgements To put in words deepest feelings of gratitude to so many people and for so many things is to reflect on various encounters and influences. In a sense, it is to sketch out a singular narrative but of many personal “conversions.” So now, being here, I am looking back, and it all seems so clear and obvious. But, it is the historian in me that realizes best the numerous situations, emotions, and dilemmas that brought me where I am. I feel so profoundly thankful for a journey that even I, obsessed with planning, could not have fully anticipated. In a final analysis, as my dissertation grew so did I, but neither could have become better without the presence of the people or the institutions that I feel so fortunate to be able to acknowledge here. At the University of Michigan, I first thank my mentor John Fine for his tremendous academic support over the years, for his friendship always present when most needed, and for best illustrating to me how true knowledge does in fact produce better humanity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Classification of Byzantine Literature in the Library of Congress Classification
    Knowl. Org. 28(2001)No.2 85 A. Sitas: The Classification of Byzantine Literature... The Classification of Byzantine Literature in the Library of Congress Classification Anestis Sitas Anestis Sitas holds a Diploma in Library Science from the School of Library Science at TEI, Thessa- loniki, Greece, and a Bachelor of Arts in Education from Aristotle University in Thessaloniki. He is currently studying for his doctorate. He has worked as a librarian at the Public library of Thessalo- niki and as documentalist in the Documentation Center of the European Parliament in Brussels, Belgium. Since 1990 he has been a cataloguer at the library of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies at Aristotle University in Thessaloniki, Greece. Since 1992 he has been teaching Library of Con- gress Classification at the School of Library Science of TEI in Thessaloniki. Sitas, A. (2001). The Classification of Byzantine Literature in the Library of Congress Classifi- cation. Knowledge Organization, 28(2).85-94. 12 refs. ABSTRACT: Topics concerning the Classification of Byzantine literature and, generally, of Byzantine texts are discussed, ana- lyzed and made clear. The time boundaries of this period are described as well as the kinds of published material. Schedule PA (Supplement) of the Library of Congress Classification is discussed and evaluated as far as the handling of Byzantine literature is concerned. Schedule PA is also mentioned, as well as other relevant categories. Based on the results regarding the manner of han- dling Classical literature texts, it is concluded that a) Early Christian literature and the Fathers of the Church must be excluded from Class PA and b) in order to achieve a uniform, continuous, consistent and reliable classification of Byzantine texts, they must be treated according to the method proposed for Classical literature by the Library of Congress in Schedule PA.
    [Show full text]
  • Contesting Conceptual Boundaries Byzantine Literature and Its History
    PANAGIOTIS A. AGAPITOS Contesting Conceptual Boundaries Byzantine Literature and Its History Abstract The paper presents the problems of writing a history of Byzantine literature in the context of postmodern anxieties about canonization, authority and narrative his- tories of literature. An essential difficulty for such a project is the fact that Byzan- tine literature has been viewed as a continuation of or appendix to Ancient Greek literature, while, on the other, it has been divided into “learned” and “vernacular”, the latter category having been defined as Modern Greek since the middle of the nineteenth century. The paper offers two sets of criteria for establishing new con- cepts of periodization and taxonomy. A series of examples are indicatively ad- duced in order to explain the scientific and ideological impasse in which Byzan- tine Studies have found themselves at the end of the previous century, while de- lineating a proposal for a different approach to content and structure of a wider synthesis. Writing a ‘new’ history of Byzantine literature is an experiment in pro- posing a radical paradigm shift by means of which this particular literary produc- tion in Medieval Greek can be studied within the broader context of Medieval Eu- ropean literatures as an integrated entity rather than as a separate and peripher- al phase in the histories of Ancient or Modern Greek literature.1 1. The present paper developed out of Exasperated by the growing production of literary histories in Ger- a lecture given at the workshop many during the first half of the nineteenth century, Arthur Scho- “Cosmopolitan languages and their literatures”, organized in February penhauer solemnly declared in 1851: 2014 at the University of Ghent.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Chronicle of John of Nikiu: Historical Writing in Post-Roman
    The Chronicle of John of Nikiu: Historical Writing in Post-Roman Egypt Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Felege-Selam Solomon Yirga Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2020 Dissertation Committee David Bernhard Brakke, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Kristina Marie Sessa 1 Copyrighted by Felege-Selam Solomon Yirga 2020 2 Abstract While there has been a great deal of work on the late seventh-century Chronicle of John, the anti-Chalcedonian Bishop of Nikiu, since its 1883 publication and French translation by Hermann Zotenberg, there have been few modern studies devoted exclusively to the author and his work. What is more, these modern studies primarily engage with the text as a source of data for the reign of Emperor Herakleios, and the Arab conquest of Egypt, meaning that modern historians often read past the author to a layer of sources beneath them. This positivist utilitarian view of the Chornicle often involves reducing John’s worldview to that of a monophysite historian and a Coptic proto-nationalist, and as such interprets the relevant data through this framework. Modern scholarship has further transposed this world view onto the author’s world, creating the impression that the Chronicle presents a narrative which reflects the development of a Coptic identity characterized primarily by hostility towards the Chalcedonian church, and the Roman state which had previously supported it. Anything in the text which challenges this view is dismissed as the product of John of Nikiu’s method of compiling sources and inverting pro-Chalcedonian and pro-Roman sentiments where they appear.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This PDF File
    On the Transmission of Paeanius Jonathan Groß S AN UNIMPOSING TEXTBOOK of Roman history, Eutro- pius’ Breviarium ab urbe condita has enjoyed success from A its first appearance to present times.1 It was written at the request of emperor Valens (r. 364–378) by his magister memoriae Eutropius,2 completed during the emperor’s campaign against the Goths at the Danube (367–369),3 and published circa 369/70 after Valens had accepted the title Gothicus maxi- mus. Spanning ten short books (six for the Regal and Republi- can period, four for the Emperors), the Breviarium relates the history of Rome from its foundation in 753 BCE to the death of the then current emperor’s predecessor Jovian (r. 363–364), focussing on military affairs and the expansion of the Empire, with biographical details of the protagonists. It was widely used by Pagan and Christian authors alike, and in the eighth century Paul the Deacon created an extended version called Historia Romana. This version has surpassed the original with 1 On the immediate success of the Latin Breviarium see J. Hellegouarc’h, Eutrope. Abrégé d’histoire romaine (Paris 1999; 22002) LV–LVIII; D. Rohrbacher, The Historians of Late Antiquity (London 2002) 49–56. 2 According to G. Bonamente, Giuliano l’Apostata e il ‘Breviario’ di Eutropio (Rome 1996) 22, Eutropius held this office from 369 to 370. Since his title magister memoriae is attested in only a single manuscript (cf. Bonamente 32, 40 tav. I), it has been contested by R. W. Burgess, “Eutropius ‘v. c. magister memoriae’?” CP 96 (2001) 76–81 (repr.
    [Show full text]
  • Ihor Ševčenko BYZANTINE STUDIES: the LAST HUNDRED YEARS and the NEXT HUNDRED MONTHS*
    Византийский временник, т. 58 Ihor Ševčenko BYZANTINE STUDIES: THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS AND THE NEXT HUNDRED MONTHS* My task this morning is to speak of Byzantine studies in the past and of the outlook for them in the future. A speech opening a congress, like the key-note address at a Republican or Democratic convention back in the United States, is supposed to exude optimism. Mine, too, will be optimistic in the end, but I shall open on a pessimistic note. In the widest scheme of things, the outlook for our discipline is not splendid, owing to the marginalization of conventional elite culture in the advanced Western countries. To the extent to which Byzantine studies are a part of that conventional elite culture, they, too, are being marginalized, and our efforts to spread the Byzantine message among the wider public may be an unconscious defensive reaction to this process. In the narrower scheme of things, however, and barring some cataclysm, a marginalized elite culture still has a good chance of maintaining a comfortable niche for itself. Consequently, we Byzantinists, too, can feel good. Within the limits imposed by changes within the elite culture - and they have been rapid in the last forty years or so - the fate of our discipline still lies in our own hands. Establishing anniversaries is often a matter of definition. If we define Byzantine studies as an independent scholarly discipline with a clearly delineated field of inquiry and well- thought-out subdivisions within that field; if we define it as object of study provided with agreed upon, if somewhat flexible, chronological limits, a discipline endowed with a regular scholarly outlet for its concerns, and a discipline possessed of at least one institutional center in which to pursue its goals, then our congress in Copenhagen is a perfect place to mark the first centenary of Byzantine studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonnus and Theodore Hyrtakenos David Hernández De La Fuente
    Nonnus and Theodore Hyrtakenos David Hernández de la Fuente ew evidence for the Byzantine reception of Nonnus of Panopolis (fifth century) can be found in the work Nof Theodore Hyrtakenos (fourteenth century), a teacher and rhetor who wrote panegyrics, an ekphrasis on a garden, and several funeral speeches honouring members of the imperial family.1 Karl Krumbacher in 1897 included Nonnus among the sources for Hyrtakenos’ mythological allusions, but provided neither examples nor references.2 Many years later, Francis Vian, in the introduction to his excellent edition of Nonnus, has cited Krumbacher’s opinion rather skeptically: “mais cet auteur n’indique pas les raisons sur lesquelles il se fonde.”3 In what follows, however, I will adduce a number of passages from Hyr- takenos that clearly reveal Nonnian influence. While less value has been put on his work in a more modern age, we shall see that Nonnus was read and admired in Byzantine times and that his work was echoed in scholarly literature of the period. In his Lament on the Death of Michael Palaeologus the Younger4 (Michael IX, who died in 1320), Hyrtakenos alludes to num- erous mythological figures of mourning, beginning with the grief of the Achaeans in the Iliad. In so doing, Hyrtakenos invokes many ancient authors—among them Pindar and Simonides (p. 1 For more details about this “obscure writer of the Palaeologan period” see A. Karpozilos, “The Correspondence of Theodoros Hyrtakenos,” JÖBG 40 (1990) 275ff. 2 K. Krumbacher, Geschichte der byzantinischen Literatur 2 (Munich 1897) 483. 3 F. Vian, Nonnos de Panopolis, les Dionysiaques I (Paris 1976) LX n.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Diglossia and Register Variation in Medieval Greek* Notis Toufexis University of Cambridge
    Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies Vol. 32 No. 2 (2008) 203–217 Diglossia and register variation in Medieval Greek* Notis Toufexis University of Cambridge This article recognizes diglossia as a key phenomenon for the interpretation of the exis- tence of different registers in the late Byzantine period (twelfth-fifteenth centuries). The main characteristics of Byzantine diglossia are outlined and associated with language pro- duction during this period. Learned and vernacular registers are approached as extreme poles of a linguistic continuum and linguistic variation as a defining characteristic of a diglossic speech community. Ever since Karl Krumbacher’s Geschichte der byzantinischen Litteratur and most defin- itely since H. G. Beck’s Geschichte der byzantinischen Volksliteratur1 the literary produc- tion of the Byzantine period2 is divided into two relatively distinctive branches: ‘normal’ literature, composed in some variety of purist Greek, is contrasted with the so-called Volksliteratur,3 consisting of a more or less established canon of texts written, in the words of Robert Browning, ‘in what appears to be a mixture of developing spoken Greek * This article, originally presented at the 21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies (London 2006), represents the outcome of research conducted for the research projects ‘A Grammar of Medieval Greek’ at the University of Cambridge (2004–present) and ‘Formen der Schriftlichkeit in der griechischen Diglossie des Mittelalters und der Neuzeit’ (SFB538) at the University of Hamburg (1999–2004). I am grateful to Martin Hinterberger, Brian Joseph, Peter Mackridge, Marc Lauxtermann and Io Manolessou for their suggestions and to David Holton and Marjolijne Janssen for their suggestions and corrections in matters of style.
    [Show full text]
  • John Tzetzes and the Blemish Examiners: a Byzantine Teacher on Schedography, Everyday Language and Writerly Disposition
    John Tzetzes and the blemish examiners: a Byzantine teacher on schedography, everyday language and writerly disposition Defining the relation between learned and vernacular literature still remains an important issue concerning the overall study of Byzantine literature. Since the mid- dle of the nineteenth century these two linguistic and literary areas were more or less viewed as being separate entities catering to the needs and expressing the ide- ologies of different strata of Byzantine society, high (written and Byzantine) in the case of learned literature and low (oral and Neohellenic) in the case of vernacular literature.1 This division had a great impact on the study of late Byzantine and early Modern Greek literature, especially in the way in which the socio-cultural environ- ment of these two literatures was perceived and how the master narratives for their respective histories were gradually created up to the middle of the twentieth centu- ry.2 Though much work has been done in editing and interpreting learned and ver- nacular texts, and even though voices have been raised against the division of these two domains,3 the overall impression from publications of the last twenty years is that most Byzantinists prefer to deal with learned texts, leaving the vernacular ma- terial to Neohellenists, while the latter on the whole avoid to study in depth materi- al before the fifteenth century.4 The research for the present paper was conducted in June-July 2012 at the Institut für Byzanti- nistik (Universität München) and in September 2016 at the Institut für Altertumskunde (Uni- versität Köln) with fellowships from the Alexander-von-Humboldt Stiftung (Bonn).
    [Show full text]
  • From Justinian to the End of the Eastern Roman Empire (527-1453) (2Nd Ed
    The History of Byzantine Literature: from Justinian to the end of the Eastern Roman Empire (527-1453) (2nd ed. Munich: Beck, 1897) By Karl Krumbacher Introductory sections translated by David Jenkins and David Bachrach Copyright: University of Notre Dame 2001 Translators’ Preface Introduction 1. Concept and General History of Byzantine Literature 2. Characteristics 3. International cultural relations First Section: Prose Literature 1. Theology 2. Historians and Chroniclers 3. Geography 4. Philosophy 5. Rhetoric, Sophistry and Epistolography 6. Classical Studies 7. Scientific Specialties a. Law b. Medicine c. Mathematics and Astronomy (including Astrology and Fortune Telling) d. Zoology, Botany, Mineralogy and Alchemy e. Military Science Second Section: Poetic Literature 1. General Characteristics and Introduction 2. Church Poetry 3. Popular Poetry Third Section: Vernacular Greek Literature — Introduction 1. Discussion of terms 2. Historical Overview 3. Language and Meter 1 Translators’ Preface Karl Krumbacher was born on Sept. 23, 1856 in Kempten, Bavaria and died on Dec. 12, 1909 in Munich. He was educated in the classics at the universities of Leipzig and Munich and in 1897 became Professor of medieval and modern Greek at the University of Munich. Arguably the greatest Byzantinist of his generation, his contributions to the field were profound. He both founded the discipline’s leading international journal, the Byzantinische Zeitschrift, and authored its standard reference work, Die Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur (1892; 2nd ed., 1897). Die Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur, The History of Byzantine Literature, is a wealth of general and detailed information. General introductory chapters on particular genres are followed by shorter chapters on individual authors, and detailed bibliographies enrich its more than 1100 pages.
    [Show full text]
  • Procopius in French Language Research, 1885–2005
    Histos Supplement ( ) .– PROCOPIUS IN FRENCH LANGUAGE RESEARCH, – Janick Auberger Introduction The detailed survey by Brian Croke in this volume (above, Ch. ) covers, among other things, philological studies during the period & –'& in Paris and Lyons which obviates the need to cover the same ground here. Brian Croke reminds us of how long scholars waited for the first complete opera omnia of Procopius ('' /''.), two volumes published in Paris, with a Greek text and a Latin translation. This ample enterprise coincided with the efforts of scholars at the court of Louis XIV and the Jesuits of Clermont College to produce a whole series of works delving into Byzantine civilisation. Scattered studies had appeared before then, including a version of the Secret History (Anecdota ) in Lyons edited in ' . by Niccolo Alemanni (&77–' ') with a Latin translation. Meanwhile another group of humanists, including Jean Bodin and Guillaume Paradin (& – ), began looking at Procopius as a significant and useful historian. Paradin’s translation of The Gothic Wars appeared in Lyons (&:7). Notable as well was the translation by Martin Fumée, lord of Genillé (& – ), which appeared with a royal privilege in &7: (Guerre contre les Vandales et les Goths ), and the work of Pierre Pithou (&. – '). Nor should we overlook François de la Mothe le Vayer (&77–': ), who scrutinised Procopius and Agathias in his Jugements sur les anciens et principaux historiens grecs et latins dont il nous reste quelques ouvrages (Paris, ''). More essential, . Janick Auberger however, were the studies by the Jesuits of Clermont College, the future lycée Louis-le-Grand . They ambitiously proposed a new Greek text, a new translation, and a new commentary.
    [Show full text]
  • Reframing Empire: Byzantium and the Transformation of European Identity, C
    Reframing Empire: Byzantium and the Transformation of European Identity, C. 1400–1520 The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Aschenbrenner, Nathanael. 2019. Reframing Empire: Byzantium and the Transformation of European Identity, C. 1400–1520. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:42029579 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Reframing Empire: Byzantium and the Transformation of European Identity, c. 1400–1520 A dissertation presented by Nathanael Aschenbrenner to The Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of History Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts May 2019 ! © 2019 Nathanael Aschenbrenner All rights reserved. Dissertation Advisor: Professor Dimiter Angelov Nathanael Aschenbrenner Reframing Empire: Byzantium and the Transformation of European Identity, c. 1400–1520 Abstract This dissertation investigates the social and political functions of ideas of empire in sustaining, subverting, and reshaping communities in late medieval and early modern Europe. Examining fifteenth-century imperial thought in and about the Byzantine empire drawn from rarely examined Greek and Latin texts, this dissertation shows how empire became a critical category in negotiations over political legitimacy and identity amidst the rapid reconfigurations of the Mediterranean world c. 1400–1520. In the dying Byzantine empire, oratorical celebrations of imperial authority bound elites together, but also magnified deep social and political divisions over church politics, imperial territory, and succession, hastening the empire’s demise.
    [Show full text]