DOCSLIB.ORG

Lucian‟ S Paradoxa: Fiction, Aesthetics, and Identity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

i Lucian‟s Paradoxa: Fiction, Aesthetics, and Identity A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Classics of the College of Arts and Sciences by Valentina Popescu BA University of Iasi June 2009 Committee Chair: Kathryn J. Gutzwiller, Professor of Classics Abstract This dissertation represents a novel approach to the Lucianic corpus and studies paradox, with rhetorical, philosophical, and aesthetic implications, as Lucian‟s distinctive discursive mode of constructing cultural identity and literary innovation. While criticizing paradoxography - the literature of wonders - as true discourse, Lucian creates a novel, avowed false, discourse, as a form of contemplation and regeneration of the Greek literary tradition. Paradoxography is Lucian‟s favorite self-referential discourse in prolaliai, rhetorical introductions, where he strives to earn doxa through paradoxa - paradigms of exoticism applied to both author and work. Lucian elevates paradox from exotic to aesthetic, from hybrid novelty to astonishing beauty, expecting his audience to sublimate the experience of ekplexis from bewilderment to aesthetic pleasure. Lucian‟s construction of cultural identity, as an issue of tension between Greek and barbarian and between birthright and paideutic conquest, is predicated on paradoxology, a first- personal discourse based on rhetorical and philosophical paradox. While the biography of the author insinuates itself into the biography of the speaker, Lucian creates tension between macro- text and micro-text. Thus, the text becomes also its opposite and its reading represents almost an aporetic experience. iii iv To my family for their love, sacrifices, and prayers and to the memory of Ion Popescu, Doina Tatiana Mănoiu, and Nicolae Catrina v Table of Contents Introduction 1 1. Paradox 1 2. Sophistry and Paradox 10 3. Lucian‟s Claim to Paradox 14 4. The Paradox of Lucian‟s Reception 21 Chapter 1. Paradoxography and False Discourse 28 1.1. Paradoxography. An Overview 28 1.2. True Stories 50 1.3. Lovers of Lies 87 Chapter 2. Self Presentation and the Aesthetics of Paradox in Lucian’s Prolaliai 123 2.1. Prolaliai 123 2.2. Timid Beginnings: Harmonides and Herodotus or Aëtion 131 2.3. Mastering Paradoxography: The Scythian or the Proxenos 142 2.4. An African Paradoxon: The Dipsades 161 2.5. Enchantment and Disenchantment or the Paradox of Self-Presentation: Amber or Swans 169 2.6. Hippocentaurs and Elephants: Zeuxis or Antiochus 178 2.7. The Spell of an Old Charmer: Heracles 186 2.8. The Old Charmer Revisited: Dionysus 195 Chapter 3. Paradoxology and the Discourse of Identity. An Invitation to Hermeneutics 205 3.1. The Rhetorician 208 3.2. The Ignorant Book Collector 227 vi 3.3. The Dream 239 Post Scriptum 252 Bibliography 255 vii Introduction 1. Paradox A study on Lucian‟s treatment of paradox (τὸ παράδοξον) entails the analysis of two distinct discursive modes: „paradoxography‟, the speech on paradoxa as marvels (θαύματα), and what this study will term „paradoxology‟, the speech in paradoxa as rhetorico-philosophical instruments. Lucian uses paradoxographical discourse to criticize the literature on marvels and its claim to truth, while displaying his own form of paradoxography as avowed false discourse. At the same time, paradoxography becomes Lucian‟s favorite self-referential discourse, using paradoxa as enargetic paradigms of cultural exoticism and aesthetic excellence. Paradoxology, on the other hand, built on rhetorical and philosophical paradoxa, is a constantly startling and deceiving discursive mode of constructing and deconstructing ideas and identities, creating a dense text, particularly resistant to interpretation. What exactly is paradox for Lucian? What does paradox mean in ancient terms? In The Rhetorician the teacher of rhetoric promises a young interlocutor or addressee to show him a short path to becoming a rhetor in no time. The subtle ironical undertones of this piece cannot, however, wipe out entirely the shock a startled reader experiences throughout at least its first few passages, until finally grasping the meaning hidden in this paradox.1 As often Lucian vividly illustrates statements and situations with anecdotes, many of Hellenistic inspiration, in The Rhetorician he uses as exemplum a Sidonian merchant who promised to show Alexander a much 1 Pernot 1993, 533 finds features of a paradoxical encomium in Luc. Rhet.praec. 1 shorter route from Persia to Egypt, through the mountains. After confirming the existence of such path (καὶ εἶχεν οὕτω), the teacher of rhetoric continues: “Except that Alexander did not believe it (οὐκ ἐπίστευσεν), but thought that the merchant was a charlatan (γόητα). Thus, the paradoxical character (τὸ παράδοξον) of a promise seems incredible to many (ἄπιστον δοκεῖ τοῖς πολλοῖς). However, this should not be the case with you. For you will know, through your own experience (πειρώμενος), that nothing will prevent you from being considered a rhetor (ῥήτορα δοκεῖν) in one single – and not even entire – day, by flying over the mountain from Persia to Egypt” (5-6). A few general aspects of the term „paradox‟ are revealed in this passage. First, paradox is always circumscribed by the general opinion (δοκεῖ τοῖς πολλοῖς). It is coupled with lack of credence (οὐκ ἐπίστευσεν, ἄπιστον) and with magic tricks and deceit (γόητα). Yet it does not necessarily mean that something paradoxical, however unbelievable, cannot exist (καὶ εἶχεν οὕτω) or be experienced (πειρώμενος) – although this argument is subject to interpretation, given the paradoxical context of the advice. Paradox is, therefore, fundamentally a matter of opposition to the opinion and the expectation of the many, and thus creates shock and disbelief. In the Suda, παράδοξον is defined, as well as in other lexica, as unexpected (ἀπροσδόκητον) and marvelous (θαυμαστόν),2 while the phrase παρὰ δόξαν means contrary to expectation (παρὰ προσδοκίαν, παρ ̓ ἐλπίδα),3 a sense that is obviously transferred to the substantive adjective as its primary meaning (παρὰ προσδοκίαν – ἀπροσδόκητον). On the other hand, different grammatical forms of παράδοξον are used in the Suda either in definitions of other terms, or – within these definitions – in association with others, as partial or absolute synonyms. „Paradox‟, „paradoxical‟, „paradoxically‟ are therefore associated with terms meaning 2 Hesych. Lex. π 493 (cf. π 514); Phot. Lex. π 383.10, 386.18; Ps.-Zonaras Lex. π 1513.25; Lex. Seg. Bekker 289.2. 3 Hesych. Lex. π 492. 2 new and strange (ξένον, ἄτοπον, νεοχμός, νέος, καιν῵ς, ἀτοπιας πλέων),4 magical (μάγγανον, γοητεία, μαγγανεία),5 contrary to the general opinion and therefore unexpected (ἀδοξότατα, παράλογον, ἀνέλπιστον, ἄλογον),6 monstrous (τερατώδη),7 marvelous (θαυμάσιον, δαιμονίως, ὑπερφυ῵ς, θαυμαστά, θαῦμα), frightening (φοβερός), rare (σπανίων), different (κατὰ ἄλλον τρόπον),8 unholy and unlawful (ἀνόσιον, παράνομον),9 and thus morally bad (κακόν, μοχθηρόν).10 Paradoxology too is linked with reports of marvels or falsehood (τερατεία, τερατολογίαι, ψευδολογία)11 and, by conjecture, with disbelief: τερατολογεῖν means “to tell things that are incredible and beyond human nature” (τὸ ἀπίθανα διηγεῖσθαι, καὶ λέγειν πράγματα ἔξω τ῵ν ἀνθρωπίνων).12 The effect of paradox is recorded as ekplexis, astonishment (ἐκπλαγεῖς, ἐκπλήξεως πλέοι).13 Contrary to the general opinion, paradox does not, however, equal impossibility. The entry for ἀδοξότατα in the Suda is, in fact, an approximate quotation from Alexander of Aphrodisias‟ commentary on Aristotle‟s Topica: ἀδοξότατα are “paradoxical (παράδοξα), impossible things (ἀδύνατα) in Aristotle; paradoxical things are opposed to things approved by the general opinion (τὰ τοῖς ἐνδόξοις ἐναντία), yet they are not quite entirely impossible (οὐ 4 Phryn. Praep. soph. 272; Tim. Soph. Lex. Plat. α 979b.4-5; Hesych. Lex. α 8133; Phot. Lex. α 3104; Etym. Gud. 415.1-3; Etym. magn. 503.23-25, 610.41-42; Lex. Seg. Bachmann 160.17-18. 5 Hesych. Lex. τ 509; Phot. Lex. μ 240; Etym. magn. 359.36; Ps.-Zonaras Lex. π 1510; Lex. Seg. Bachmann 294.3. 6 Ael. Dion. π 16; Phryn. Praep. soph. 79; Hesych. Lex. α 1169, π 494 (cf. π 514); Phot. Lex. α 379, π 386.17-20; Ps.-Zonaras Lex. ε 855.8; Lex. Seg. Bachmann 31.15, 229.15, 392.12. 7 Phot. Lex. τ 578.5; Lex. Seg. Bachmann 384.21. 8 Ps.-Zonaras Lex. ε 652, ε 785.11-12. 9 Ps.-Zonaras Lex. θ 1036.7-8. 10 Phryn. Praep. soph. 272; Lex. Seg. Bachmann 160.17-18. 11 Tim. Soph. Lex. Plat. τ 1004a.10-11; Hesych. Lex. π 452 (cf. π 449-450); Ps.-Zonaras Lex. τ 1719.4-5; Lex. Seg. Bachmann 384. 23-24. 12 Phot. Lex. τ 578.1-3; Etym. magn. 752.24-26; Ps.-Zonaras Lex. δ 474.4. 13 It is documented with an approximate quotation from Polybius, 1.76.7: ἐκπλαγεῖς δὲ γενόμενοι οἱ Λίβυες διὰ τὸ παράδοξον. 3 πάντως ἤδη καὶ ἀδύνατα, (α 505; cf. Alex in Top. 159a 18-24).”14 The comment refers to Aristotle‟s definition of a paradoxical thesis as: a paradoxical assumption (ὑπόληψις παράδοξος) of a distinguished philosopher – such as that contradiction is impossible, as Antisthenes said, or that everything is in motion, according to Heraclitus, or that being is one, as Melissus says – for it would be silly to pay attention to a nobody who happens to say things that are opposite to the general opinions (ἐναντία ταῖς δόξαις); or, it could be an opinion for which we have a reasoned argument that contradicts the general opinion (λόγον ἔχομεν ἐναντίον ταῖς δόξαις) – such as the sophists‟ tenet that not everything that is has come to be or is eternal […]; even if one does not agree with such theses, he might accept them because of their reasoned argument (εἰ καί τινι μὴ δοκεῖ, δόξειεν ἂν διὰ τὸ λόγον ἔχειν).15 Paradox, as opposition to ἔνδοξος and δόξα, the general opinion, becomes an established mode of expression for philosophy, and in dialectics it leads to aporia.16 Among the pre- Socratics, especially Heraclitus formulates philosophical theses as paradoxa.
Recommended publications
  • The Dark Age Church Period of Barbarian Invasions

    The Dark Age Church Period of Barbarian Invasions

    Scholars Crossing History of Global Missions Center for Global Ministries 2009 The Dark Age Church Period of Barbarian Invasions Don Fanning Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgm_hist Recommended Citation Fanning, Don, "The Dark Age Church Period of Barbarian Invasions" (2009). History of Global Missions. 3. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgm_hist/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Global Ministries at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in History of Global Missions by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Middle Ages 500-1000 1 3 The Dark Age Church Period of Barbarian Invasions AD 500—1000 Introduction With the endorsement of the Emperor and obligatory church membership for all Roman citizens across the empire, Roman Christianity continued to change the nature of the Church, in stead of visa versa. The humble beginnings were soon forgotten in the luxurious halls and civil power of the highest courts and assemblies of the known world. Who needs spiritual power when you can have civil power? The transition from being the persecuted to the persecutor, from the powerless to the powerful with Imperial and divine authority brought with it the inevitable seeds of corruption. Some say that Christianity won the known world in the first five centuries, but a closer look may reveal that the world had won Christianity as well, and that, in much less time. The year 476 usually marks the end of the Christian Roman Empire in the West.
  • Rosaria Munson April 4Th, 1992 Half a Man's Worth": Popular Ideology

    Rosaria Munson April 4Th, 1992 Half a Man's Worth": Popular Ideology

    ������������������������������ Half a Man's Worth": Popular Ideology about Slavery in Democratic Athens We see slavery as incompatible with democracy; the Athenians did not. What was their justification? Since slaves were not part of the polis, there is little coverage in our sources, but we can at least see what Athenians of the 5th and 4th centuries said about the institution of slavery and slaves. Homer's comment (via Odysseus' faithful slave Eumaeus) that "Zeus takes away half of a man's ����� (worth or excellence) once the day of slavery comes upon him" is the first explicit statement of the moral inferiority of a slave, though it is striking that the speaker is himself a slave who embodies ������ (nobleness, bravery). There was a universal acceptance of slavery as existing from the very beginning, but chattel slavery in Athens was relatively recent. As the rights of aristocrats spread in Athens to the middle and even lower classes, slaves increasingly filled the menial tasks, including public services, such as police, bookkeeping, cleaning the city. There were three or four private slaves per household, as domestics, farm laborers, or industrial laborers (used by the owner himself or rented out). A few rich men owned numerous slaves. Most rich men would have owned about fifty, but even the most modest household would have at least one. An Athenian without a slave (or the money to buy a slave - about the same price as a mule) argues in one text that he ought to get public assistance. Manumission was infrequent and slaves were treated much differently than free: a slave witness can give evidence only under torture since a slave cannot be trusted to tell the truth - especially against his master - except through torture.
  • The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues

    The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues

    The Roles of Solon in Plato’s Dialogues Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Samuel Ortencio Flores, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Bruce Heiden, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Richard Fletcher Greg Anderson Copyrighy by Samuel Ortencio Flores 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a study of Plato’s use and adaptation of an earlier model and tradition of wisdom based on the thought and legacy of the sixth-century archon, legislator, and poet Solon. Solon is cited and/or quoted thirty-four times in Plato’s dialogues, and alluded to many more times. My study shows that these references and allusions have deeper meaning when contextualized within the reception of Solon in the classical period. For Plato, Solon is a rhetorically powerful figure in advancing the relatively new practice of philosophy in Athens. While Solon himself did not adequately establish justice in the city, his legacy provided a model upon which Platonic philosophy could improve. Chapter One surveys the passing references to Solon in the dialogues as an introduction to my chapters on the dialogues in which Solon is a very prominent figure, Timaeus- Critias, Republic, and Laws. Chapter Two examines Critias’ use of his ancestor Solon to establish his own philosophic credentials. Chapter Three suggests that Socrates re- appropriates the aims and themes of Solon’s political poetry for Socratic philosophy. Chapter Four suggests that Solon provides a legislative model which Plato reconstructs in the Laws for the philosopher to supplant the role of legislator in Greek thought.
  • On the Date of the Trial of Anaxagoras

    On the Date of the Trial of Anaxagoras

    The Classical Quarterly http://journals.cambridge.org/CAQ Additional services for The Classical Quarterly: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here On the Date of the Trial of Anaxagoras A. E. Taylor The Classical Quarterly / Volume 11 / Issue 02 / April 1917, pp 81 - 87 DOI: 10.1017/S0009838800013094, Published online: 11 February 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009838800013094 How to cite this article: A. E. Taylor (1917). On the Date of the Trial of Anaxagoras. The Classical Quarterly, 11, pp 81-87 doi:10.1017/S0009838800013094 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAQ, IP address: 128.122.253.212 on 28 Apr 2015 ON THE DATE OF THE TRIAL OF ANAXAGORAS. IT is a point of some interest to the historian of the social and intellectual development of Athens to determine, if possible, the exact dates between which the philosopher Anaxagoras made that city his home. As everyone knows, the tradition of the third and later centuries was not uniform. The dates from which the Alexandrian chronologists had to arrive at their results may be conveniently summed up under three headings, (a) date of Anaxagoras' arrival at Athens, (6) date of his prosecution and escape to Lampsacus, (c) length of his residence at Athens, (a) The received account (Diogenes Laertius ii. 7),1 was that Anaxagoras was twenty years old at the date of the invasion of Xerxes and lived to be seventy-two. This was apparently why Apollodorus (ib.) placed his birth in Olympiad 70 and his death in Ol.
  • Marathon 2,500 Years Edited by Christopher Carey & Michael Edwards

    Marathon 2,500 Years Edited by Christopher Carey & Michael Edwards

    MARATHON 2,500 YEARS EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SUPPLEMENT 124 DIRECTOR & GENERAL EDITOR: JOHN NORTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLICATIONS: RICHARD SIMPSON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARATHON CONFERENCE 2010 EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 2013 The cover image shows Persian warriors at Ishtar Gate, from before the fourth century BC. Pergamon Museum/Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin. Photo Mohammed Shamma (2003). Used under CC‐BY terms. All rights reserved. This PDF edition published in 2019 First published in print in 2013 This book is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0) license. More information regarding CC licenses is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Available to download free at http://www.humanities-digital-library.org ISBN: 978-1-905670-81-9 (2019 PDF edition) DOI: 10.14296/1019.9781905670819 ISBN: 978-1-905670-52-9 (2013 paperback edition) ©2013 Institute of Classical Studies, University of London The right of contributors to be identified as the authors of the work published here has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Designed and typeset at the Institute of Classical Studies TABLE OF CONTENTS Introductory note 1 P. J. Rhodes The battle of Marathon and modern scholarship 3 Christopher Pelling Herodotus’ Marathon 23 Peter Krentz Marathon and the development of the exclusive hoplite phalanx 35 Andrej Petrovic The battle of Marathon in pre-Herodotean sources: on Marathon verse-inscriptions (IG I3 503/504; Seg Lvi 430) 45 V.
  • Fall 2018 Volume 45 Issue 1

    Fall 2018 Volume 45 Issue 1

    Fall 2018 Volume 45 Issue 1 3 Matthew S. Brogdon “Who Would Be Free, Themselves Must Strike the Blow”: Revolt and Rhetoric in Douglass’s Heroic Slave and Melville’s Benito Cereno 25 Ariel Helfer Socrates’s Political Legacy: Xenophon’s Socratic Characters in Hellenica I and II 49 Lorraine Smith Pangle The Radicalness of Strauss’s On Tyranny 67 David Polansky & With Steel or Poison: Daniel Schillinger Machiavelli on Conspiracy Book Reviews: 87 Ingrid Ashida Persian Letters by Montesquieu 93 Kevin J. Burns Legacies of Losing in American Politics by Jeffrey Tulis and Nicole Mellow 97 Peter Busch Montesquieu and the Despotic Ideas of Europe by Vickie B. Sullivan 103 Rodrigo Chacón The Internationalists: How a Radical Plan to Outlaw War Remade the World by Oona A. Hathaway and Scott J. Shapiro 109 Bernard J. Dobski Shakespeare’s Thought: Unobserved Details and Unsuspected Depths in Thirteen Plays by David Lowenthal 119 Elizabeth C’ de Baca Eastman The Woman Question in Plato’s “Republic” by Mary Townsend 125 Michael P. Foley The Fragility of Consciousness: Faith, Reason, and the Human Good by Frederick Lawrence 129 Raymond Hain The New Testament: A Translation by David Bentley Hart 135 Thomas R. Pope Walker Percy and the Politics of the Wayfarer by Brian A. Smith Doubting Progress: Two Reviews 141 Lewis Hoss A Road to Nowhere: The Idea of Progress and Its Critics 147 Eno Trimçev by Matthew W. Slaboch ©2018 Interpretation, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of the contents may be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publisher.
  • Chthonic Aspects of Macdonald's Phantastes: from the Rising of The

    Chthonic Aspects of Macdonald's Phantastes: from the Rising of The

    Chthonic Aspects of MacDonald’s Phantastes: From the Rising of the Goddess to the Anodos of Anodos Fernando Soto The Herios was a woman’s festival. Plutarch of course could not be present at the secret ceremonies of the Thyaiades, but his friend Thyia, their president, would tell him all a man might know . From the rites known to him he promptly conjectured that it was a “Bringing up of Semele.” Semele, it is acknowledged, is but a Thraco-Phrygian form of Gaia, The “Bringing up of Semele” is but the Anodos of Gala or of Kore the Earth Maiden. It is the Return of the vegetation or Year-Spirit in the spring. (Jane Harrison, Themis 416) 1. Introduction and General Backgrounds hantastes is one of the most mysterious books George MacDonald wrote andP one of the least understood books in the English tradition. Since its publication in 1858, reviewers, readers and researchers have experienced great difficulties understanding the meaning of this complex work.The perceived impediments have been so great that some scholars remain unsure whether Phantastes contains a coherent plot or structure (Reis 87, 89, 93-94; Robb 85, 97; etc.). Other critics appear adamant that it contains neither (Wolff 50; Manlove, Modern 55, 71, 77, 79; England 65, 93, 122). Even those scholars who sense a structure or perceive a plot differ not only regarding the types of structure(s) and/or plot(s) they acknowledge (Docherty 17-22; McGillis “Community” 51-63; Gunther “First Two” 32-42), but in deciding into what, if any, genres or traditions Phantastes belongs (Prickett, “Bildungsroman” 109-23; Docherty 19, 23, 30, McGillis, “Femininity” 31-45; etc.).
  • Loeb Lucian Vol5.Pdf

    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.
  • The Waterway of Hellespont and Bosporus: the Origin of the Names and Early Greek Haplology

    The Waterway of Hellespont and Bosporus: the Origin of the Names and Early Greek Haplology

    The Waterway of Hellespont and Bosporus: the Origin of the Names and Early Greek Haplology Dedicated to Henry and Renee Kahane* DEMETRIUS J. GEORGACAS ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. A few abbreviations are listed: AJA = American Journal of Archaeology. AJP = American Journal of Philology (The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Md.). BB = Bezzenbergers Beitriige zur Kunde der indogermanischen Sprachen. BNF = Beitriige zur Namenforschung (Heidelberg). OGL = Oorpus Glossariorum Latinorum, ed. G. Goetz. 7 vols. Lipsiae, 1888-1903. Chantraine, Dict. etym. = P. Chantraine, Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue grecque. Histoire des mots. 2 vols: A-K. Paris, 1968, 1970. Eberts RLV = M. Ebert (ed.), Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte. 16 vols. Berlin, 1924-32. EBr = Encyclopaedia Britannica. 30 vols. Chicago, 1970. EEBE = 'E:rccr'YJel~ t:ET:ateeta~ Bv~avnvwv E:rcovowv (Athens). EEC/JE = 'E:rcuJT'YJfhOVtUn ' E:rccrrJel~ C/JtAOaocptufj~ EXOAfj~ EIsl = The Encyclopaedia of Islam (Leiden and London) 1 (1960)-. Frisk, GEJV = H. Frisk, Griechisches etymologisches Worterbuch. 2 vols. Heidelberg, 1954 to 1970. GEL = Liddell-Scott-Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford, 1925-40. A Supplement, 1968. GaM = Geographi Graeci Minores, ed. C. Miiller. GLM = Geographi Latini Minores, ed. A. Riese. GR = Geographical Review (New York). GZ = Geographische Zeitschrift (Berlin). IF = Indogermanische Forschungen (Berlin). 10 = Inscriptiones Graecae (Berlin). LB = Linguistique Balkanique (Sofia). * A summary of this paper was read at the meeting of the Linguistic Circle of Manitoba and North Dakota on 24 October 1970. My thanks go to Prof. Edmund Berry of the Univ. of Manitoba for reading a draft of the present study and for stylistic and other suggestions, and to the Editor of Names, Dr.
  • The Greek Alexander Romance Free Ebook

    The Greek Alexander Romance Free Ebook

    FREETHE GREEK ALEXANDER ROMANCE EBOOK Richard Stoneman | 208 pages | 05 Nov 1991 | Penguin Books Ltd | 9780140445602 | English | London, United Kingdom Alexander Romance - Wikipedia Alexander romanceany of a body of legends about the career of Alexander the Greattold and retold with varying emphasis and purpose by succeeding ages and civilizations. The chief source of all Alexander romance literature was a folk epic written in Greek by a Hellenized Egyptian in Alexandria during the 2nd century ad. Surviving translations and copies make its reconstruction possible. It portrayed Alexander as a national messianic herothe natural son of an Egyptian wizard-king by the wife of Philip II of Macedon. In later romances, however, marvels and exotic anecdotes predominated and gradually eclipsed the historical personality. This work inspired the Alexanderlied by the German poet Lamprecht der Pfaffe. An The Greek Alexander Romance poet, Thomas of Kent, wrote the Roman de toute chevalerie toward the end of the 12th century, and about this was remodeled to become the Middle English romance of King Alisaunder. Italian Alexander romances began to appear during the 14th century, closely followed by versions in Swedish, Danish, Scots, and dating from a little earlier in the Slavic languages. The Arabs, expanding Syrian versions of the legend, passed them on to the many peoples with whom they came in contact. Alexander romance literature declined in the late 12th century, and, with the revival of classical scholarship during the Renaissance, historical accounts displaced the Alexander romances. Alexander romance Article Additional Info. Print Cite. Facebook Twitter. Give Feedback The Greek Alexander Romance Websites. Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article requires login.
  • 1 the Rhetorical Use of Torture in Attic Forensic Oratory VASILEIOS

    1 the Rhetorical Use of Torture in Attic Forensic Oratory VASILEIOS

    The Rhetorical Use of Torture in Attic Forensic Oratory VASILEIOS ADAMIDIS Mailing Address: Flat 2, 43 Burns street, NG7 4DS Nottingham United Kingdom Email address: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)7930520275 1 The Rhetorical Use of Torture in Attic Forensic Oratory ABSTRACT: Come 'regola', la tortura di schiavi innocenti che è stata concordata dai querelantia fini probatori (βάσανος probatori) fu ritenuto dagli oratori lo strumento più efficace per giungere alla verità. Questo paper, con riferimento alla psicologia dell'antica Grecia, spiega perché la menzionata regola fu di cruciale importanza per la retorica. Gli oratori, sulla base della presunta attendibilità dell'istituzione dei βάσανος, furono in grado di sviluppare argomenti basati sulle sfide (πρόκλησις), che possono essere comprese al meglio alla luce della concezione greca, piuttosto che moderna, di razionalità ed azione umana. Di conseguenza, a dispetto dell'incertezza che circonda l'attualità della tortura a fini probatori nell'età degli oratori, l'importanza retorica dei πρόκλησις εἰς βάσανον è innegabile e va esaminata attentamente. KEYWORDS: Basanos (βάσανος), Greek psychology, human motivation, practical reasoning. *** The institution of torture is highly controversial; its morality is extremely dubious and its expediency is, at minimum, questionable. A particular form of torture that seems completely indefensible from a modern perspective is the torture (βάσανος) of innocent slaves for evidentiary purposes in Athenian law. This has been characterised as ‘wanton and purposeless barbarity’1, yet has been explained as a way classical Athenian citizens reinforced their dominant political status and ‘confirm[ed] their own social hierarchy and cohesion’2. The barbarity and putative irrationality of evidentiary βάσανος3, in addition to the lack of evidence proving the actuality of this practice, make its existence, at least in the period of the Attic orators, doubtful4.
  • Introduction

    Introduction

    Introduction KONSTANTIN DOULAMIS University College Cork This collection of articles originated in the colloquium ‘The Ancient Novel and its Reception of Earlier Literature’, which was held at University Col- lege Cork in August 2007, with funding from UCC’s Faculty of Arts and the Classics Department. As the conference theme indicates, the purpose of that two-day event was to explore the reception of antecedent literature in Greek and Roman narratives, to consider ways in which earlier texts are assimilated in prose fiction, and to reflect on the implications that this assimilation may have for our understanding of the works discussed. The colloquium, which comprised papers on a variety of texts, from the ‘canonical’ Greek romances and the Roman novels to Alexander’s Letter about India and the Alexander Romance, gave birth to stimulating discussions, both in and out of confe- rence sessions, in a relaxed yet productive ambience of fruitful academic exchange, constructive criticism and collegiality, and yielded some interest- ing conclusions. The following are some of the main questions that were raised and de- bated during the colloquium: Is the ancient novel distinctive in its reception of earlier literary production? To what extent can we talk of a ‘sociology of reception’? Can intertextuality in the Greek and Roman narratives be used in order to define a specific type of reader or social model? What role does the author of a text play in all this? Should emphasis be placed on authorial in- tent or on textual relations? The revised version of the nine conference pa- pers collected here explore these and other similar broad questions, focusing on various types of literary echoes in ancient narratives.