DOCSLIB.ORG

Thalheim's Isaeus Itaei Orationes Cum Deperditarum Fragmentis Post Carolum Scheibe Iterum Edidit Th

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thalheim's Isaeus Itaei Orationes Cum Deperditarum Fragmentis Post Carolum Scheibe Iterum Edidit Th The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR Additional services for The Classical Review: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Thalheim's Isaeus Itaei orationes cum deperditarum fragmentis post Carolum Scheibe iterum edidit Th. Thalheim. Leipzig: Teubner. Mk. 2. 40. W. Wyse The Classical Review / Volume 18 / Issue 02 / March 1904, pp 115 - 120 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X0020944X, Published online: 27 October 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X0020944X How to cite this article: W. Wyse (1904). The Classical Review, 18, pp 115-120 doi:10.1017/S0009840X0020944X Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 130.132.123.28 on 13 Jul 2015 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 115 O.P.5 with the variant diuitum (-is O), and word ' emendare' which is used invariably is given as a variant in P.2'7: militum is the in the subscriptiones, is to be construed in reading of Rat.2 and a variant in P.10. 313 its most literal sense; and that view is, I furens: with Or. Boul. W. M. Rh. D.1 P.5 think, fully borne out by this MS. The (uel fremens) P,7: it is also given as a changes of the original text amount to variant in P.10 Lo.2 Z. 314 et: I noted this nothing more than insertions of omitted also from 0. Or. H. Trin. P.8 328 lines or words, and corrections of slips of retudit; so too O. and Or. (uel retundit). the pen. Perhaps in the case of spelling 348 semustulati. 359 amictum. 439 man- a little more has been done; but after all suescit with 0. Or. M. 472 pactum : cor- spelling is not a matter of vital importance, rected. 565 supplet. 567 iocantur: with and Sam Weller's jokes are none the worse many MSS. 579 martyras. because he spelled his name ' with a we.' Per. iii. Hymnus in honorem passionis Mavortius makes no display of that hyper- eulaliae beatissimae martyris. 21 flere : with sensitive critical faculty, which has nowa-. most MSS. 40 ruit. 96 furiis. 102 es. 105 days been so over-cultivated and practised on forte : corrected. the text of the classical authors, that, if Per. iv. Hymnus in honorem sanctorum some candid man from among them could decem, etc. 134 negarit. 145 aera: cor- but read his own works in a modern edition, rected to sacra. 151 iuliam. 153 pangat. he would probably admit with shame and 167 uitiosa. humility that there were many neat phrases Per. v. 59 et: so too O. Or. Duss. K. 79 and graceful touches of which he was per- aucipes. fectly innocent. Indeed, so far was Mavor- If we look for new and startling variants tius from practising this kind of criticism that among these readings we shall be disap- he allowed many metrical impossibilities pointed, for they add little or nothing of any and obviously false repetitions to escape his value to those already known, and most of notice; and not a single one of the impor- the new variants are demonstrably wrong. tant variants—and there are variants fully There remains to be considered what as important as those of the Mavortian re- light the MS. throws upon the vexed ques- cension of Horace—can be attributed t6 tion of Mavortius' editorship. v To dispose his pen. So that it can hardly be doubted first of a minor point: here as in the Hora- that the variants of that group of Horatian tian MSS., the name does not occur at the MSS., must, like the variants of the other end of the complete book, but at the end of MSS., where we have no subscriptio to one section—oddly enough in both cases it conjure with, be laid on the head of is a lyric section— ; yet the metrical notes in the universal scapegoat, the copyist. Mavortius' hand, and the corrections of mis- Mavortius was no Bentley ; and, though it spellings and slips, if they too are to be may be no compliment to him to say so, for attributed to him, are continued throughout us, at any rate, it is a comforting assurance. the whole MS. So there would seem no For, even if Bentley's assertion that Horace support for the essentially improbable view is preserved only in Mavortius' recension that Mavortius' work, whatever it was, ex- were true, which recent research tends to tended only over a part of the poems of prove it is not, still we may rest assured Horace. The more important point is, that that would not be so great a calamity what was his work ? Was Mavortius a as it would be if Milton were preserved textual critic in the modern sense of the only in Bentley's recension. word, or merely a kind of proof-corrector t Years ago it has been ably argued that the E. O. WINSTEDT. REVIEWS. THALHEIM'S ISAEVS. Itaei orationes cum deperditarum fragmentis in 1872 by Hug has been to prove that post Carohim Scheibe iterum edidit TH. BLMPZ are all derived from A, the codex THALHEIM. Leipzig: Teubner. Mk. 2. 40. Crippsianus in the British Museum, so that our authorities for Isaeus are now reduced THB upshot of the critical studies in the to two, viz. A and the codex Ambrosianus text of the minor Attic orators inaugurated (Q), which contains only the first two i 2 116 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. speeches. But the disappearance of BLMPZ first two speeches of Isaeus A may be com- did not end controversy. The place of dis- pared with Q. In Antiphon, Dinarchus, puted stemmata has been amply filled by and part of Lycurgus A may be compared discussions about the state of the archetype, with the Oxoniensis (N). The comparison and the number and significance of the shows (1) that AQN come from the same different hands in A. Bekker, who was in source, (2) that A1 agrees regularly with London in 1820, made no attempt to sub- Q and N, nearly all the exceptions, which divide the numerous corrections found in the are relatively rare, being explicable by the codex Crippsianus. In general he was con- hypothesis that the writers of Q and N, like tent with the terms lpr. A,' and ' correctus the writer of A, sometimes made mistakes. A,' but occasionally gave something more Buermann's canon was that, wherever definite such as 'a reeentiore trumu,' 'a internal grounds are not decisive, Apr. must recenti manu,' 'rec. A.' Dobson, whose be preferred to A1. The true principle, Oratores Attiei began to appear in 1828, was which Thalheim follows, is to prefer A1 to uot more precise than Bekker. Sigg, who Apr., unless there are,strong reasons for the •opens the new era, and whose collation was contrary course. But what reason has he used by Hug, discovered the hands of three for printing oirg in iv. 27. 5, v. 35. 11, vi. •correctors. Jernstedt, Blass, Thalheim, and 41.7, ix. 28.3, when in each place A1 took •other scholars find only two correctors, (1) the trouble to change omj to cnroi 1 In his the scribe himself (A1), who introduced edition of Dinarchus (i. 43. 10) he reads many changes, some while writing, others, oirot with N, although Sin} is in A. Again, it would seem, on revising his work, (2) a in vii. 33. 5 is not ei vrj Ata (Apr.) distinctly later critic (A2), whose alterations can be superior to rj vi] Aio (A1) 1 The corrections easily distinguished by the yellowish colour of A2 stand on a different footing. As of the ink. This view appears to me right, long ~ago as 1886 Thalheim maintained but, not being a trained observer of palaeo- (Be Dinwrchi codidbus commentatio p. 2) graphical minutiae, I recognise that my that these alterations are from the pen of opinion on such points is of little value. an ancient scholar, who emended the text The corrections commonly lumped together proprio Marie. The attempts to prove that under the designation A1 have been subjected A2 must have used a MS. are a complete to an elaborate analysis by H. Schenkl, who failure. Emendations of the thirteenth or attributes very few to the copyist, the fourteenth century have not more title to majority to a second hand (the first cor- respect than emendations of the nineteenth rector), others to a third hand, some even century. Neither have they necessarily to a fourth ; he also considers that the scribe less, if the emender is a Greek handling his was not the rubricator. Buermann, who native language and familiar from child- edited Isaeus in 1883, so far agreed with hood with the ways of MSS. To make a Schenkl as to think it probable that the dead set against A? is unreasonable, and MS., when completed, was revised by a second smacks of self-conceit. Vixere fortes ante person, but he did not allow this qualified Agamemnona. There are places where he assent to complicate the critical problem, is at least as happy as his modern censors. since he supposed that the reviser had before There are also places in which the advan- him, if not the same original as the scribe, tage rests with professors of our own age. at any rate a MS. which was its twin-brother I am surprised that Thalheim does not {exemplar archetypi simiUimum), and more- notice the proposal of Blass (Antiph.2 praef. over rejected as impracticable any systematic p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Goneis in Athenian Law (And Perception)
    GONEIS IN ATHENIAN LAW (AND PERCEPTION) David Whitehead Queen’s University Belfast [email protected] Abstract: This paper aims to establish what the laws of classical Athens meant when they used the term goneis. A longstanding and widespread orthodoxy holds that, despite the simple and largely unproblematic “dictionary” definition of the noun goneus/goneis as parent/parents, Athenian law extended it beyond an individual’s father and mother, so as to include – if they were still alive – protection and respect for his or her grandparents, and even great-grandparents. While this is not a notion of self-evident absurdity, I challenge it on two associated counts, one broad and one narrow. On a general, contextual level, genre-by genre survey and analysis of the evidence for what goneus means (and implies) in everyday life and usage shows, in respect of the word itself, an irresistible thrust in favour of the literal ‘parent’ sense. Why then think otherwise? Because of confusion, in modern minds, engendered by Plato and by Isaeus. In Plato’s case, his legislation for Magnesia contemplates (I argue) legal protection for grandparents but does not, by that mere fact, extend the denotation of goneis to them. And crucially for a proper understanding of the law(s) of Athens itself, two much-cited passages in the lawcourt speeches of Isaeus, 1.39 and 8.32, turn out to be the sole foundation for the modern misunderstanding about the legal scope of goneis. They should be recognised for what they are: passages where law is secondary and rhetorical persuasion paramount.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones a Dissertation Submitted in Partial
    The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2015 Reading Committee: Alain Gowing, Chair Catherine Connors Alexander Hollmann Deborah Kamen Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Classics ©Copyright 2015 Brandon F. Jones University of Washington Abstract The Sophistic Roman: Education and Status in Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny Brandon F. Jones Chair of Supervisory Commitee: Professor Alain Gowing Department of Classics This study is about the construction of identity and self-promotion of status by means of elite education during the first and second centuries CE, a cultural and historical period termed by many as the Second Sophistic. Though the Second Sophistic has traditionally been treated as a Greek cultural movement, individual Romans also viewed engagement with a past, Greek or otherwise, as a way of displaying education and authority, and, thereby, of promoting status. Readings of the work of Quintilian, Tacitus and Pliny, first- and second-century Latin prose authors, reveal a remarkable engagement with the methodologies and motivations employed by their Greek contemporaries—Dio of Prusa, Plutarch, Lucian and Philostratus, most particularly. The first two chapters of this study illustrate and explain the centrality of Greek in the Roman educational system. The final three chapters focus on Roman displays of that acquired Greek paideia in language, literature and oratory, respectively. As these chapters demonstrate, the social practices of paideia and their deployment were a multi-cultural phenomenon. Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................... 2 Introduction ....................................................................................... 4 Chapter One.
    [Show full text]
  • Women and Property in Ancient Athens: a Discussion of the Private Orations and Menander Cheryl Cox University of Memphis
    Women and Property in Ancient Athens: A Discussion of the Private Orations and Menander Cheryl Cox University of Memphis There has been a great deal of discussion in the past two decades or so among social historians and anthropologists of the proposition that women in European societies, both in the past and in the present, have informal power at the private level of the household. Women’s interests were reflected and expressed in succession practices and in the management of the household economy. Central to the status of women was the dowry because of its place in the conjugal household and the negotiations over its use and transmission. A large dowry ensured the woman’s important role in the decisions of the marital household and thus helped to stabilize the marriage. Because the dowry, as the property of the woman’s natal kin, would ideally be transmitted to the man’s children, the man could become involved in the property interests of his wife’s family of origin.1 In a material sense, in classical Athens the wife’s dowry allowed for the cohesion of two households (oikoi): the oikos of her marriage and that of her natal family. The dowry in legal terms belonged to the woman’s natal family, as it had to be returned to her family of origin either on divorce or on the death of her husband and her remarriage. Much of the information we have for dowries pertains to elite families. Because the woman’s dowry could be inherited by the children, it was worth fighting for, especially if she had not received her full share (Dem.
    [Show full text]
  • Persuasive Ethopoeia in Dionysius's Lysias Author(S): Kristine S
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by KU ScholarWorks Persuasive Ethopoeia in Dionysius's Lysias Author(s): Kristine S. Bruss Source: Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Winter 2013), pp. 34- 57 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the International Society for the History of Rhetoric Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rh.2013.31.1.34 . Accessed: 04/03/2014 17:03 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press and International Society for the History of Rhetoric are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 129.237.46.100 on Tue, 4 Mar 2014 17:03:51 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Kristine S. Bruss Persuasive Ethopoeia in Dionysius’s Lysias Abstract: Dionysius of Halicarnassus’s account of ethopoeia at Lysias 8 is often cited as evidence of Lysias’s mastery of character portrayal, but the passage itself has received little in-depth analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Speech Against Leocrates. Edited by A. Petrie
    LYCURGUS The Speech against Leocrates Pitt Press Series LYCURGUS THE SPEECH AGAINST LEOCRATES CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS C. F. CLAY, MANAGER LONDON : FETTER LANE, E. C. 4 NEW YORK t THE MACMILLAN CO. BOMBAY ) CALCUTTA [ MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD. MADRAS ) TORONTO : THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD. TOKYO ! MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED LYCURGUS THE SPEECH AGAINST LEOCRATES EDITED BY A. PETRIE, M.A. PROFESSOR OF CLASSICS, NATAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE s. (UNIVERSITY OF AFRICA) ; FORMERLY LECTURER IN GREEK IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN ; SOMETIME SCHOLAR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE CAMBRIDGE AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 1922 U PRINTED IN ENGLAND PREFACE Leocrates of Lycurgus has remained, in THEEngland, in comparative obscurity, not having 1 attracted an editor since John Taylor edited it at Cambridge, along with the Midias of Demosthenes, in 1743. Yet the speech is by no means without its merits. It forms, in many ways, an excellent introduction to Attic oratory for younger students. It is easier than Demosthenes, and there is no complex political situation to expound: the issue is simple and direct. And it has a greater variety of interest than either Demosthenes or Lysias. Its very fault of diffuseness, from the purely forensic standpoint, becomes, from an educative point of view, its great virtue. Lycurgus' excursions into ancient history, legend, and the poets, provide, in Livy's phrase, so many deverticula amoena where the student finds refreshment with instruction. The text of the present edition will be found to adhere, in the main, to that of Blass, whose critical commentary I have supplemented with those of Scheibe, Rehdantz and Thalheim.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ancient Tradition on the Identity of Antiphon , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 31:1 (1990:Spring) P.27
    GAGARIN, MICHAEL, The Ancient Tradition on the Identity of Antiphon , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 31:1 (1990:Spring) p.27 The Ancient Tradition on the Identity of Antiphon Michael Gagarin 0NG MANY Antiphons known from antiquity, two fifth­ .Ncentury figures are sometimes thought to be the same person: Antiphon of Rhamnus, an orator and a leader of the oligarchic coup in 411, and 'Antiphon the Sophist', one of Socrates' interlocutors in Xenophon (M em. 1.6) to whom are often attributed the works On Truth, On Concord, and Politicus. 1 The separatist case has usually been based on the papyrus fragments of On Truth, but the most recent separatist argument, by Gerard Pendrick,2 deals almost entirely with the ancient tradition. He concedes that "the majority of ancient opinion is unitarian" (59), but he accords this fact little weight and presents instead a selective discussion of ancient authors who, in his view, support a separatist position. The purpose of this paper is to offer a more comprehensive assessment of the ancient tradition and to show that ancient opinion was more strongly unitarian than Pendrick implies. 3 As far as we can tell, the only separatist views expressed in antiquity were based on stylistic criteria alone, the inadequacy of which is evident, and a unitarian position is taken for granted 1 The partial listing in REI (1894) 2526-30 (ef Suppl. 1 [1903J 93f on the orator and Suppl. 4 [1924J 33-43 on the papyrus fragments from On Truth) gives 18 Antiphons, some of whom may be the same person.
    [Show full text]
  • The Agenda of Libanius' Hypotheses to Demosthenes
    The Agenda of Libanius’ Hypotheses to Demosthenes Craig A. Gibson F SCHOLARLY INTEREST AND ACTIVITY are an accurate indication, Demosthenes was alive and well in late antiquity. By the time of Libanius (A.D. 314–ca 393),1 readers of this 700-year- Iold classic were well served with secondary treatments of all kinds: rhetorical commentaries and handbooks, biographies of the orator, philological and historical commentaries, special literary studies, lexica to individual speeches (both alphabetical and non-alphabetical), and alphabetical lexica to the Attic orators as a whole. But outside the classrooms of the grammar- ians and rhetoricians, students of Demosthenes had no basic guide to the more than sixty items in this unwieldy corpus. It was to satisfy some such market as this that Libanius com- posed one of his earliest known works: a set of introductions, or “hypotheses” (Ípoy°seiw), to Demosthenes’ speeches.2 1 On Libanius’ life and writings see J. H. W. G. Liebeschuetz, Antioch: City and Imperial Administration (Oxford 1972) 1–39. Bibliography for the years 1954–81 may be found in G. Fatouros and T. Krischer, edd., Libanios (Darmstadt 1983) 275–280. 2 Text: R. Foerster, ed., Libanii Opera VIII (Leipzig 1915) 575–681. References to the hypotheses here will append the modern number of the Demosthenes ora- tion, e.g. Hyp. 25.4 [59]. Libanius was not the only ancient scholar to compose hypotheses to Demosthenes. According to the Suda, Posidonius of Olbiopolis in the second century (S 2109, discussed under 2108) and the rhetor Numenius in the first (N 518) also wrote them.
    [Show full text]
  • Loeb Classical Library
    LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY 2017–2018 Founded by JAMES LOEB 1911 Edited by JEFFREY HENDERSON NEW TITLES FRAGMENTARY GALEN REPUBLICAN LATIN Hygiene Ennius EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY IAN JOHNSTON • SANDER M. GOLDBERG Galen of Pergamum (129–?199/216), physician GESINE MANUWALD to the court of the emperor Marcus Aurelius, Quintus Ennius (239–169 BC), widely was a philosopher, scientist, medical historian, regarded as the father of Roman literature, theoretician, and practitioner who wrote on an was instrumental in creating a new Roman astonishing range of subjects and whose literary identity and inspired major impact on later eras rivaled that of Aristotle. developments in Roman religion, His treatise Hygiene, also known social organization, and popular as “On the Preservation of Health” culture. This two-volume edition (De sanitate tuenda), was written of Ennius, which inaugurates during one of Galen’s most prolific the Loeb series Fragmentary periods (170–180) and ranks among Republican Latin, replaces that his most important and influential of Warmington in Remains of Old works, providing a comprehensive Latin, Volume I and offers fresh account of the practice of texts, translations, and annotation preventive medicine that still that are fully current with modern has relevance today. scholarship. L535 Vol. I: Books 1–4 2018 515 pp. L294 Vol. I: Ennius, Testimonia. L536 Vol. II: Books 5–6. Thrasybulus. Epic Fragments 2018 475 pp. On Exercise with a Small Ball L537 Vol. II: Ennius, Dramatic 2018 401 pp. Fragments. Minor Works 2018 450 pp. APULEIUS LIVY Apologia. Florida. De Deo Socratis History of Rome EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY CHRISTOPHER P.
    [Show full text]
  • Way Back When
    Way back when The Ancient Greeks invented the field of rhetoric, in which speakers called orators play upon both reason and emotion to persuade their audiences. The Greeks used oratory to inform political and judicial decisions, and also to develop and share new philosophies. Great thinkers presented their ideas in front of audiences, and orators often competed against one another in public contests for cash prizes, fame, and political influence! Greek orators were so well known for their abilities that even after Greece were conquered by Rome, wealthy Romans would send their kids to Greece to learn public speaking. The most famous Greek orators were the Ten Attic Orators, who lived in an around Athens during the 5th and 4th centuries B.C.E. (a time often known as the “Golden Age” of Athens). They were: Antiphon; Andocides; Lysias; Isocrates; Isaeus; Aeschines; Lycurgus; Demosthenes; Hypereides; and Dinarchus. Of these, the four most important were probably the following: Antiphon helped install an oligarchy, or government of the few, in Athens in 411 B.C.E., and was executed for treason when traditional Athenian democracy returned. Isocrates (pictured), who belonged to a school of orators called the Sophists, became rich by teaching rhetoric to wealthy students Lycurgus held a number of public offices in Athens and oversaw both public finances and public morals. Demosthenes overcame a speech disorder to become the most famous orator of all time. He often spoke on behalf of keeping Athens free from the clutches of a conquering king called Philip of Macedon. These fiery speeches were called Philippics.
    [Show full text]
  • Selections from the Attic Orators Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, Edited with Notes by R
    The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR Additional services for The Classical Review: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Selections from the Attic Orators Selections from the Attic Orators, Antiphon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, edited with notes by R. C. Jebb, Litt. D., Camb., [late] Professor of Greek in the University of Glasgow. Second Edition. London: Macmillan. 1888. J. E. Sandys The Classical Review / Volume 3 / Issue 09 / November 1889, pp 406 - 408 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00195940, Published online: 27 October 2009 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00195940 How to cite this article: J. E. Sandys (1889). The Classical Review, 3, pp 406-408 doi:10.1017/S0009840X00195940 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 128.122.253.228 on 29 Apr 2015 406 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. his conclusions, and it will repay any reader torical style, alien to that of Xenophon, (2) its to study them for himself. The fifth chapter affected and poetical diction, (3) its false discusses the Memorabilia. Here Dr. Hart- statements, (4) direct borrowing from the mann is a thorough-going follower of Schenkl HeUenica of passages which the writer has and Krohn, who used the knife with such either tried to make more definite and astonishing freedom. True he controverts particular, «r has spoilt by failing to under- in nine cases the excisions .or objections stand, or has deliberately changed in order of Schenkl, but he makes up for that to do greater honour to Agesilaus, (5) state- by many more of his own.
    [Show full text]
  • Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the 'Founders' of Rome
    Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the ‘Founders’ of Rome: Depicting Characters in the Roman Antiquities by Beatrice Poletti A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classical Languages Department of History and Classics University of Alberta © Beatrice Poletti, 2018 ABSTRACT In my thesis, I analyze Dionysius’s presentation of some of the most celebrated characters of Rome’s early past: Aeneas, Romulus, Numa Pompilius, L. Junius Brutus, and M. Furius Camillus. The thesis is composed of Five Chapters, an introduction, and a conclusion. In Chapter 1, I describe the background to Dionysius’s arrival in Rome, focusing on the literary milieu of the capital. In Chapter 2, I discuss Dionysius’s work and the ideas underlying the conception of the Roman Antiquities. In Chapter 3, I examine Dionysius’s account of the Aeneas legend. I deal with the legends of Romulus and Numa, respectively, at Chapters 4.1.1 and 4.2, and 4.1.2 and 4.3. My analysis of the stories of L. Junius Brutus and M. Furius Camillus occupies Chapters 5.1 and 5.2. I have chosen these characters for my study because of their significance in the Romans’ conception of their early past and their association with key events and institutions of Roman history, as well as the political meaning which their figures eventually acquired. By Dionysius’s time, all these characters (with the exception of L. Brutus) had come to embody the qualities and political virtues of the princeps. Aeneas was the progenitor of the Roman race as well as Augustus’s personal ancestor through his adoption into the gens Julia.
    [Show full text]
  • Loeb Classical Library Philo
    Loeb classical library philo Continue Want more? Advanced embedding details, examples and help! This article needs additional quotes to verify. Please help improve this article by adding quotes to reliable sources. Non-sources of materials can be challenged and removed. Find sources: Classical Library - News newspaper book scientist JSTOR (January 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Volume 170N Greek Collection in the classical library Loeb, revised edition of Volume 6 Latin Collection in the classical library of Loeb, second edition of the 1988 Classical Library (LCL; Named after James Lebe; /loʊb/, German: løːp) is a series of books originally published by Heinemann in London, United Kingdom, today by Harvard University Press, USA, which presents important works of ancient Greek and Latin literature in a way that makes the text accessible to the widest possible audience, presenting the original Greek or Latin text on each left page, and a rather literal translation on the main page. The editor-in-chief is Jeffrey Henderson, a William Goodwin Aurelio professor of Greek language and literature at Boston University. The history of the Classic Library of Loeb was conceived and originally funded by Jewish-German-American banker and philanthropist James Loeb (1867-1933). The first volumes were edited by Thomas Ethelbert Page, W. H. D. Rouse and Edward Capps and published by William Hinemann (London) in 1912, already in their distinctive (green for Greek text) and red (for Latin) hardcover bindings. Since then, dozens of new titles have been added, and the earliest translations have been revised several times. In recent years this has included the removal of bowdlerization from previous editions, which often reversed the sex of subjects of romantic interest to hide homosexual references or (in the case of early editions of Daphnis Longus and Chloe) translated sexually explicit excerpts from ancient Greek into Latin rather than English.
    [Show full text]