DOCSLIB.ORG

British Scholarship on Greek Colonisation in Context 1780-1990

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
British Scholarship on Greek Colonisation in Context 1780-1990 British Scholarship on Greek Colonisation in Context 1780-1990 Summary This thesis examines British scholarly perceptions of Greek colonisation from the eighteenth century to the present. Beginning with a study of the ancient sources for Greek colonisation and the key themes which preoccupied ancient authors, the thesis proceeds to argue that, modifying recent interpretations of work from this age of empire, British scholarship did not, as a whole, simplistically distort ancient evidence so as to create a version of Greek colonisation which mirrored, in a self-congratulatory way, contemporary British experiences. We should therefore position this scholarship within its appropriate historical context (with special attention to politics, empire, colonisation, and perceptions of antiquity). In addition to enabling us to trace the impact of the great events of the modern era upon classical scholarship, in doing so we can also gain insight into the complexities, hopes, and anxieties which characterised British thinking about such themes as empire, colonisation, political freedom, and the place of Western civilisation in historical perspective. British Scholarship on Greek Colonisation in Context 1780-1990 Structure Section I: Introduction, Current Debate, and the Ancient View Chapter 1: Introduction 2 Chapter 2: Current scholarship on Greek colonisation and its earlier historiography 4 Chapter 3: Ancient sources and ancient perceptions of Greek settlement overseas 29 Section II: The British View 1780-1990 Chapter 4: The Rise of Britain 1780-1870 80 Chapter 5: High Empire 1870-1914 121 Chapter 6: World War to Cold War 1914-1990 166 Section III: Conclusions Chapter 7: Conclusions 231 Bibliography 238 1 Section I: Introduction, Current Debate, and the Ancient View Chapter 1: Introduction This thesis originates from resurgence in the study of what has traditionally been known as Greek colonisation, and an increasing awareness of a relationship between antiquity and modern European imperialism, colonialism, and colonisation. The revival of interest in Greek colonisation has been a direct result of recent tendency to question the underpinning assumptions of the subject, in particular assumptions derived from what was the formative period of not only classical scholarship, but also modern European imperialism. From the late eighteenth century, but especially from the nineteenth century, classical scholarship emerged as a discipline of both significant prestige and explanatory power. In the eighteenth century antiquity was used to debate the pressing constitutional issues of the day, issues which often crossed the boundaries of domestic, international, and imperial or colonial politics. Come the nineteenth century, Greek history emerged as the most prescient way of framing arguments in favour of the reformist politics of the day, thus supplanting Rome as the dominant point of comparison for Britain in the domestic, if not imperial, sphere. The first studies of Greek colonisation were made in the later eighteenth century when Britain‟s empire, based on naval power, commerce, and colonies of European settlers required a different model to that offered by Rome, and a different field of past experiences to interrogate for useful lessons. From then on, chapters on Greek colonisation became standard practice in all the great histories of Greece, a practice which continued from the eighteenth century, throughout the nineteenth, and up to the present day. Those studies of Greek colonisation written during the late eighteenth century were inevitably influenced by the defining colonial and constitutional concerns of the day, such as the American and French Revolutions – indeed it was their very purpose to relate to and comment upon such events. Accounts of Greek colonisation written during the early to mid nineteenth century, when the American colonies had been lost, coincided with the gradual expansion of Britain‟s white settler colonies in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and displacement of indigenous peoples. Into the late nineteenth century, the example of Greek colonisation was actively invoked in debates about a „Greater Britain‟, or an „Imperial Federation‟: conceptions 2 designed to overcome Britain‟s perceived geopolitical weakness in the face of vast territorial empires. At all times after the loss of the American colonies, discussions of Greek colonisation took place within a context of two very different conceptions of what the British Empire was: the white settler colonies on the one hand – free, increasingly self-governing, and representing the extension of Anglo-Saxon freedoms abroad – and the empire of rule on the other – centred on India, despotic, militaristic, yet the basis of Britain‟s power in the world. Irrespective of the period in question, studies of Greek colonisation were conducted at a time when British colonisation played an important if changing role in British visions regarding empire and their place in the world, not even diminishing significantly in the period after the Second World War when European solutions offered themselves. The key question is the extent to which conceptions of Greek colonisation were influenced by this British colonial context – and if so, how? The dominant perspective among recent scholarship is that it most certainly was influenced by contemporary British experiences, and this is one of the key reasons why the subject has come under renewed scrutiny; the term colonisation itself has been brought into question, and earlier scholarship interrogated for contemporary „colonial‟ or „imperial‟ attitudes which distorted antiquity and created mentalities which still pervade and distort our perspectives of ancient Greece to this day. This study aims to examine more closely what British scholars wrote about Greek colonisation from the late eighteenth to late twentieth centuries, taking into account the particular political, imperial, and colonial context at work at the time of writing. It is only by a fuller contextual discussion such as this that we can truly judge the extent of „colonial‟ or „imperial‟ influences on the study of this aspect of Greek antiquity. The contextual discussion is intended to be a study in itself, tracing the way antiquity was a major means of expressing responses to contemporary political, imperial, and colonial debate. Thus while the primary aim of this thesis is to consider the extent contemporary ideas influenced the study of Greek colonisation, it is also the intention to be able to place that understanding within the wider context of British perceptions of antiquity and address the importance of the latter in shaping the British historical imagination – in other words the role of antiquity in forming British visions of the past, present, and future of Western civilisation. 3 Chapter 2: Current scholarship on Greek colonisation and its earlier historiography If the ancient sources for Greek colonisation are generally considered problematic, the interpretation of this evidence by British scholars in the modern age has been the subject of equal if not harsher scrutiny. The literary evidence is usually later and often anachronistic in its reading of events, in many cases giving events of the eighth century a very contemporary fifth century flavour.1 It is perhaps inevitable that much of the modern scholarship has come to be scrutinised in much the same way. This criticism has not come exclusively from British scholars, as debate about Greek colonisation, and thus its historiography, is international. However international the debate may be, much of it has been conducted in the English language and by scholars connected to British universities, or those of the English speaking world. As a result, a great deal of this discussion has been conducted within the intellectual sphere of Anglo-Saxon approaches to the imperial past, and has thus been influenced by post-colonial thought relating to the former imperial possessions of above all the British Empire. It is perhaps natural that an increased interest in the historiography of colonisation followed in the wake of important reinterpretations of both the scholarship and the ancient evidence. Such reinterpretations began to be published in earnest in the 1990s, and what follows is a thematic breakdown of some of the main issues raised. What scholars currently think about colonisation and what they think of earlier work is a subject necessarily intertwined. Much in the way of new approaches and new ideas about the nature of Greek colonisation stem from a renewed interest in the subject. This is itself a direct result of a more critical attitude towards traditional scholarship late to feel the impact of approaches long since felt in the field of modern history. First will be a discussion of two very important elements essential in understanding recent debate about Greek colonisation: terminology and methodology. Then there will follow a review of some of the key themes to emerge from modern debate about Greek colonisation and its historiography: colonisation as an act of state, colonial dependence, and colonists and natives. Current views on Greek colonisation are invariably linked to criticisms of earlier ones. These thematic subheadings are intended to reflect the manner in which current scholarship, in forming new interpretations of Greek colonisation, arguably do so in 1 J-P. Wilson, „Ideologies‟ of Greek colonization, in G. Bradley and J.-P. Wilson (eds.), Greek & Roman Colonization: Origins, Ideologies, and Interactions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Colony and Empire, Colonialism and Imperialism: a Meaningful Distinction?
    Comparative Studies in Society and History 2021;63(2):280–309. 0010-4175/21 © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History doi:10.1017/S0010417521000050 Colony and Empire, Colonialism and Imperialism: A Meaningful Distinction? KRISHAN KUMAR University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA It is a mistaken notion that planting of colonies and extending of Empire are necessarily one and the same thing. ———Major John Cartwright, Ten Letters to the Public Advertiser, 20 March–14 April 1774 (in Koebner 1961: 200). There are two ways to conquer a country; the first is to subordinate the inhabitants and govern them directly or indirectly.… The second is to replace the former inhabitants with the conquering race. ———Alexis de Tocqueville (2001[1841]: 61). One can instinctively think of neo-colonialism but there is no such thing as neo-settler colonialism. ———Lorenzo Veracini (2010: 100). WHAT’ S IN A NAME? It is rare in popular usage to distinguish between imperialism and colonialism. They are treated for most intents and purposes as synonyms. The same is true of many scholarly accounts, which move freely between imperialism and colonialism without apparently feeling any discomfort or need to explain themselves. So, for instance, Dane Kennedy defines colonialism as “the imposition by foreign power of direct rule over another people” (2016: 1), which for most people would do very well as a definition of empire, or imperialism. Moreover, he comments that “decolonization did not necessarily Acknowledgments: This paper is a much-revised version of a presentation given many years ago at a seminar on empires organized by Patricia Crone, at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton.
    [Show full text]
  • The Olynthiacs and the Phillippics of Demosthenes
    The Olynthiacs and the Phillippics of Demosthenes Charles Rann Kennedy The Olynthiacs and the Phillippics of Demosthenes Table of Contents The Olynthiacs and the Phillippics of Demosthenes..............................................................................................1 Charles Rann Kennedy...................................................................................................................................1 THE FIRST OLYNTHIAC............................................................................................................................1 THE SECOND OLYNTHIAC.......................................................................................................................6 THE THIRD OLYNTHIAC........................................................................................................................10 THE FIRST PHILIPPIC..............................................................................................................................14 THE SECOND PHILIPPIC.........................................................................................................................21 THE THIRD PHILIPPIC.............................................................................................................................25 THE FOURTH PHILIPPIC.........................................................................................................................34 i The Olynthiacs and the Phillippics of Demosthenes Charles Rann Kennedy This page copyright © 2002 Blackmask Online.
    [Show full text]
  • SDN Changes 2014
    OFFICE OF FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL CHANGES TO THE Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List SINCE JANUARY 1, 2014 This publication of Treasury's Office of Foreign AL TOKHI, Qari Saifullah (a.k.a. SAHAB, Qari; IN TUNISIA; a.k.a. ANSAR AL-SHARIA IN Assets Control ("OFAC") is designed as a a.k.a. SAIFULLAH, Qari), Quetta, Pakistan; DOB TUNISIA; a.k.a. ANSAR AL-SHARI'AH; a.k.a. reference tool providing actual notice of actions by 1964; alt. DOB 1963 to 1965; POB Daraz ANSAR AL-SHARI'AH IN TUNISIA; a.k.a. OFAC with respect to Specially Designated Jaldak, Qalat District, Zabul Province, "SUPPORTERS OF ISLAMIC LAW"), Tunisia Nationals and other entities whose property is Afghanistan; citizen Afghanistan (individual) [FTO] [SDGT]. blocked, to assist the public in complying with the [SDGT]. AL-RAYA ESTABLISHMENT FOR MEDIA various sanctions programs administered by SAHAB, Qari (a.k.a. AL TOKHI, Qari Saifullah; PRODUCTION (a.k.a. ANSAR AL-SHARIA; OFAC. The latest changes may appear here prior a.k.a. SAIFULLAH, Qari), Quetta, Pakistan; DOB a.k.a. ANSAR AL-SHARI'A BRIGADE; a.k.a. to their publication in the Federal Register, and it 1964; alt. DOB 1963 to 1965; POB Daraz ANSAR AL-SHARI'A IN BENGHAZI; a.k.a. is intended that users rely on changes indicated in Jaldak, Qalat District, Zabul Province, ANSAR AL-SHARIA IN LIBYA; a.k.a. ANSAR this document that post-date the most recent Afghanistan; citizen Afghanistan (individual) AL-SHARIAH; a.k.a. ANSAR AL-SHARIAH Federal Register publication with respect to a [SDGT].
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Planning in the Greek Colonies in Sicily and Magna Graecia
    Urban Planning in the Greek Colonies in Sicily and Magna Graecia (8th – 6th centuries BCE) An honors thesis for the Department of Classics Olivia E. Hayden Tufts University, 2013 Abstract: Although ancient Greeks were traversing the western Mediterranean as early as the Mycenaean Period, the end of the “Dark Age” saw a surge of Greek colonial activity throughout the Mediterranean. Contemporary cities of the Greek homeland were in the process of growing from small, irregularly planned settlements into organized urban spaces. By contrast, the colonies founded overseas in the 8th and 6th centuries BCE lacked any pre-existing structures or spatial organization, allowing the inhabitants to closely approximate their conceptual ideals. For this reason the Greek colonies in Sicily and Magna Graecia, known for their extensive use of gridded urban planning, exemplified the overarching trajectory of urban planning in this period. Over the course of the 8th to 6th centuries BCE the Greek cities in Sicily and Magna Graecia developed many common features, including the zoning of domestic, religious, and political space and the implementation of a gridded street plan in the domestic sector. Each city, however, had its own peculiarities and experimental design elements. I will argue that the interplay between standardization and idiosyncrasy in each city developed as a result of vying for recognition within this tight-knit network of affluent Sicilian and South Italian cities. This competition both stimulated the widespread adoption of popular ideas and encouraged the continuous initiation of new trends. ii Table of Contents: Abstract. …………………….………………………………………………………………….... ii Table of Contents …………………………………….………………………………….…….... iii 1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………..……….. 1 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae for WM Murray
    William M. Murray Page 1 Curriculum Vitae WILLIAM M. MURRAY Mary and Gus Stathis Endowed Assoc. Prof. of Greek History Executive Director, Interdisciplinary Center for Hellenic Studies University of South Florida 4202 E Fowler Ave., SOC 107, Tampa, FL 33620-8100 [email protected] __________ EDUCATION 1970-74: B.A. (with highest distinction, ΦBK) in History, The Pennsylvania State University. 1973: Summer Session II, American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Greece. 1978-80: Regular Member and Vanderpool Fellow, American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Greece. 1974-82: Ph.D. in Ancient History, University of Pennsylvania (Doctoral Dissertation: The Coastal Sites of Western Akarnania: A Topographical-Historical Survey; Readers: A.J. Graham, N.G.L. Hammond, J.D. Muhly). __________ TEACHING/RESEARCH APPOINTMENTS Lecturer, University of Pennsylvania: 1977, 1981-82. Assistant Professor, University of South Florida: 1982-86. Gertrude Smith Professor (Director of Summer Session), American School of Classical Studies at Athens: 1986. Associate Professor, University of South Florida: 1987-present. Whitehead Visiting Professor, American School of Classical Studies at Athens: 1995-96. Maurice Hatter Distinguished Visiting Professor, University of Haifa: 1997 (summer). Mary and Gus Stathis Endowed Associate Professor of Greek History: 2000 to present. __________ AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION Greek History and Archaeology, the History and Archaeology of Northwestern Greece, Ancient Greek and Roman Naval History, Ancient Seafaring, Nautical Archaeology. __________ PUBLICATIONS: Monographs and Major Research Tools 1. Octavian's Campsite Memorial for the Actian War, Vol. 79, part 4 of Transactions of the American Philosophical Society (Philadelphia, 1989). 2. "Epirus-Acarnania," in R.J.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza­ Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coinage of Akragas C
    ACTA UNIVERSITATIS UPSALIENSIS Studia Numismatica Upsaliensia 6:1 STUDIA NUMISMATICA UPSALIENSIA 6:1 The Coinage of Akragas c. 510–406 BC Text and Plates ULLA WESTERMARK I STUDIA NUMISMATICA UPSALIENSIA Editors: Harald Nilsson, Hendrik Mäkeler and Ragnar Hedlund 1. Uppsala University Coin Cabinet. Anglo-Saxon and later British Coins. By Elsa Lindberger. 2006. 2. Münzkabinett der Universität Uppsala. Deutsche Münzen der Wikingerzeit sowie des hohen und späten Mittelalters. By Peter Berghaus and Hendrik Mäkeler. 2006. 3. Uppsala universitets myntkabinett. Svenska vikingatida och medeltida mynt präglade på fastlandet. By Jonas Rundberg and Kjell Holmberg. 2008. 4. Opus mixtum. Uppsatser kring Uppsala universitets myntkabinett. 2009. 5. ”…achieved nothing worthy of memory”. Coinage and authority in the Roman empire c. AD 260–295. By Ragnar Hedlund. 2008. 6:1–2. The Coinage of Akragas c. 510–406 BC. By Ulla Westermark. 2018 7. Musik på medaljer, mynt och jetonger i Nils Uno Fornanders samling. By Eva Wiséhn. 2015. 8. Erik Wallers samling av medicinhistoriska medaljer. By Harald Nilsson. 2013. © Ulla Westermark, 2018 Database right Uppsala University ISSN 1652-7232 ISBN 978-91-513-0269-0 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-345876 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-345876) Typeset in Times New Roman by Elin Klingstedt and Magnus Wijk, Uppsala Printed in Sweden on acid-free paper by DanagårdLiTHO AB, Ödeshög 2018 Distributor: Uppsala University Library, Box 510, SE-751 20 Uppsala www.uu.se, [email protected] The publication of this volume has been assisted by generous grants from Uppsala University, Uppsala Sven Svenssons stiftelse för numismatik, Stockholm Gunnar Ekströms stiftelse för numismatisk forskning, Stockholm Faith and Fred Sandstrom, Haverford, PA, USA CONTENTS FOREWORDS .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Iliad Teacher Sample
    CONTENTS Teaching Guidelines ...................................................4 Appendix Book 1: The Anger of Achilles ...................................6 Genealogies ...............................................................57 Book 2: Before Battle ................................................8 Alternate Names in Homer’s Iliad ..............................58 Book 3: Dueling .........................................................10 The Friends and Foes of Homer’s Iliad ......................59 Book 4: From Truce to War ........................................12 Weaponry and Armor in Homer..................................61 Book 5: Diomed’s Day ...............................................14 Ship Terminology in Homer .......................................63 Book 6: Tides of War .................................................16 Character References in the Iliad ...............................65 Book 7: A Duel, a Truce, a Wall .................................18 Iliad Tests & Keys .....................................................67 Book 8: Zeus Takes Charge ........................................20 Book 9: Agamemnon’s Day ........................................22 Book 10: Spies ...........................................................24 Book 11: The Wounded ..............................................26 Book 12: Breach ........................................................28 Book 13: Tug of War ..................................................30 Book 14: Return to the Fray .......................................32
    [Show full text]
  • Separating Fact from Fiction in the Aiolian Migration
    hesperia yy (2008) SEPARATING FACT Pages399-430 FROM FICTION IN THE AIOLIAN MIGRATION ABSTRACT Iron Age settlementsin the northeastAegean are usuallyattributed to Aioliancolonists who journeyed across the Aegean from mainland Greece. This articlereviews the literary accounts of the migration and presentsthe relevantarchaeological evidence, with a focuson newmaterial from Troy. No onearea played a dominantrole in colonizing Aiolis, nor is sucha widespread colonizationsupported by the archaeologicalrecord. But the aggressive promotionof migrationaccounts after the PersianWars provedmutually beneficialto bothsides of theAegean and justified the composition of the Delian League. Scholarlyassessments of habitation in thenortheast Aegean during the EarlyIron Age are remarkably consistent: most settlements are attributed toAiolian colonists who had journeyed across the Aegean from Thessaly, Boiotia,Akhaia, or a combinationof all three.1There is no uniformityin theancient sources that deal with the migration, although Orestes and his descendantsare named as theleaders in mostaccounts, and are credited withfounding colonies over a broadgeographic area, including Lesbos, Tenedos,the western and southerncoasts of theTroad, and theregion betweenthe bays of Adramyttion and Smyrna(Fig. 1). In otherwords, mainlandGreece has repeatedly been viewed as theagent responsible for 1. TroyIV, pp. 147-148,248-249; appendixgradually developed into a Mountjoy,Holt Parker,Gabe Pizzorno, Berard1959; Cook 1962,pp. 25-29; magisterialstudy that is includedhere Allison Sterrett,John Wallrodt, Mal- 1973,pp. 360-363;Vanschoonwinkel as a companionarticle (Parker 2008). colm Wiener, and the anonymous 1991,pp. 405-421; Tenger 1999, It is our hope that readersinterested in reviewersfor Hesperia. Most of trie pp. 121-126;Boardman 1999, pp. 23- the Aiolian migrationwill read both articlewas writtenin the Burnham 33; Fisher2000, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Attic Inscriptions Online Website
    Attic Inscriptions: Education Teachers’ Notes on OCR A-LEVEL ANCIENT HISTORY Attic Inscriptions for the Greece Period Study These notes offer introductory commentaries on ancient Athenian inscriptions relevant to the Greece Period Study, ‘Relations between Greek states and between Greek and non-Greek states, 492–404 BC’. They are aimed at teachers in the hope that they provide guidance on the relevance of ancient Athenian inscriptions to the specification and also some insight into the application and analysis of inscriptions as sources for ancient Greek history. We focus on eight selected inscriptions. Three are prescribed sources for the specification, while five are non-prescribed. The non-prescribed sources allow teachers to widen their students’ knowledge; moreover, it should be remembered that candidates can be credited equally for using prescribed and non-prescribed sources in their answers, and we feel that these five sources offer a great deal for teachers and students to work with. The notes were written by Peter Liddel and James Renshaw, drawing upon the translations and commentaries of S.D. Lambert and others on the Attic Inscriptions Online website. We welcome comments on this material or ideas for their expansion: [email protected] Prescribed Sources: 1. Athenian Tribute List (454/3) 2. Athenian relations with Chalkis (446/5 (or 424/3?) 3. Decrees about reassessment of Tribute (Thoudippos’ decrees) (425/4) Non-Prescribed sources: 4. Memorial of Athenian war dead (460-59) 5. Regulations for Erythrai (454-450) 6. Foundation of colony at Brea (c. 440-432) 7. Financial decrees (Kallias’ decrees) (434/3?) 8.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014.Axx Barbantani, Mother of Snakes and Kings
    Histos () – MOTHER OF SNAKES AND KINGS: APOLLONIUS RHODIUS’ FOUNDATION OF ALEXANDRIA* Abstract: Of all the lost Foundation Poems attributed to Apollonius Rhodius, active at the court of Ptolemy II, the Ktisis of Alexandria must have been the most important for his contemporaries, and surely is the most intriguing for modern scholars of the Hellenistic world. Unfortunately, only a brief mention of this epyllion survives, in a scholion to Nicander’s Theriaka , relating to the birth of poisonous snakes from the severed head of Medusa, carried by Perseus over Libya . Deadly and benign serpents belong to a multi- cultural symbolic imagery intertwined with the Greek, Macedonian, Egyptian and Jewish origins of the city. This paper explores the possible connections of the only episode preserved from Apollonius’ Ktisis with the most ancient known traditions on the foundation of Alexandria —possibly even created at the time of Alexander or of the first Lagid dynasts, Ptolemy I and II. And I wished he would come back, my snake. For he seemed to me again like a king, Like a king in exile, uncrowned in the underworld, Now due to be crowned again. D. H. Lawrence , Snake (Taormina, ) Introduction pollonius of Rhodes is credited with a certain number of Foundation poems in hexameters, namely on Alexandria, Naucratis, Caunus, ACnidus, Rhodes and, possibly, Lesbos. The epic poem Argonautica is Apollonius’ only work which has survived through direct tradition, and the only one mentioned in the biographical sources, while his Κτίσεις are only known through short quotations and summaries by different ancient authors * The research on Apollonius’ Κτίσεις began in , when I was asked to edit the fragments for FGrHist IV, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Benjamin Jowett (1817-1893)
    Centre for Idealism and the New Liberalism Working Paper Series: Number 4 Bibliography of Benjamin Jowett (1817-1893) (2018 version) Compiled by Professor Colin Tyler Centre for Idealism and the New Liberalism University of Hull Every Working Paper is peer reviewed prior to acceptance. Authors & compilers retain copyright in their own Working Papers. For further information on the Centre for Idealism and the New Liberalism, and its activities, visit our website: http://www.hull.ac.uk/pas/ Or, contact the Centre Directors Colin Tyler: [email protected] James Connelly [email protected] Centre for Idealism and the New Liberalism School of Law and Politics University of Hull, Cottingham Road Hull, HU6 7RX, United Kingdom Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 I. Writings 4 II. Reviews and obituaries 6 III. Other discussions 13 IV. Newspaper reports regarding Benjamin Jowett 18 V. Jowett papers 19 2 Acknowledgments for the 2017 version Once again, I am pleased to thank scholars who sent in references, and hope they will not mind my not mentioning them individually. All future references will be received with thanks. Professor Colin Tyler University of Hull December 2017 Acknowledgments for original, 2004 version The work on this bibliography was supported by a Resource Enhancement Award (B/RE/AN3141/APN17357) from the Arts and Humanities Research Board. ‘The Arts and Humanities Research Board (AHRB) funds postgraduate and advanced research within the UK’s higher education institutions and provides funding for museums, galleries and collections that are based in, or attached to, HEIs within England. The AHRB supports research within a huge subject domain - from ‘traditional’ humanities subjects, such as history, modern languages and English literature, to music and the creative and performing arts.’ I have also profited enormously from having access to the Brynmor Jones Library at the University of Hull, a resource which benefits from an excellent stock of written and electronic sources, as well as extremely helpful and friendly librarians.
    [Show full text]