Journal•ISSN: 1073-0508
International Journal of The Classical Tradition
Springer Nature
About: International Journal of The Classical Tradition is an academic journal published by Springer Nature. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Cultural heritage & Cultural anthropology. It has an ISSN identifier of 1073-0508. Over the lifetime, 476 publications have been published receiving 1875 citations. The journal is also known as: IJCT.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: The scholarly revival accelerated by the 1965 celebrations commemorating Seneca's death in A.D. 65 was accompanied in Germany by a remarkable surge of literary interest in the Roman philosopher as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The scholarly revival accelerated by the 1965 celebrations commemorating Seneca's death in A.D. 65 was accompanied in Germany by a remarkable surge of literary interest in the Roman philosopher. This article, beginning with a mid-century example, surveys the stages of that interest and analyzes the reasons accounting respectively for each. A postwar generation of Christian humanists in West Germany focused on Seneca as a proto-Christian while a younger generation of Marxist writers in the East saw in him primarily the model for a life of freedom and dignity under tyranny. The most recent generation in a unified Germany shares with Seneca the radical ethical ecriticism of his society. Gunter Grass's novelortlich betaubt (1969), the most immediate response to the 1965 celebrations and anticipating the stage of ethica criticism, constitutes a shrewd analysis of the responses to Seneca in three generations of West Germans.
42 citations
TL;DR: In this article, it is argued that a series of texts preserved in various Greek manuscripts are epitomes of an astrological compendium assembled by Rhetorius at Alexandria in about 620 AD.
Abstract: It is argued in this article that a series of texts preserved in various Greek manuscripts are epitomes of an astrological compendium assembled by Rhetorius at Alexandria in about 620 AD It is also demonstrated that this compendium was utilized and frequently refashioned by Theophilus of Edessa between 765 and 775 and was made available by Theophilus to his colleague at thecAbbāsid court at Baghdād, Māshā' allāh Māshā' allāh's works in turn strongly influenced the early development of Arabic astrology, and many of them were translated into Latin and Greek, thereby spreading Rhetorius' influence A manuscript of Rhetorius' compendium was apparently brought to Byzantium by Theophilus' student, Stephanus, in about 790; from this archetype are descended the several Byzantine epitōmes and reworkings of portions of this text; some of these—pseudo-Porphyry, Ep(itome) III, Ep IIIb, and Ep IV—passed through the hands of Demophilus in about 1000, while two of the remainder—Ep IIb andBer—were the only ones to preserve the name of Rhetorius as their author
42 citations
TL;DR: In this paper it is argued that allegory became part of philosophy in Middle and Neoplatonism as well, both “pagan” and Christian, and the author studies how a harsh debate arose between the "pagan" and the "Christian" sides about which texts, myths, and traditions to consider susceptible of allegoresis (i.e., rich in philosophical truths expressed symbolically).
Abstract: This article is composed of three parts and an epilogue. In the first part, its point is that in Stoicism allegory was part and parcel of philosophy, and the author endeavors to clarify the reason why the Stoics integrated it in their philosophical system. The author tends to rule out that it was only for an “apologetic” reason, in order to defend the Stoic doctrines, and a different explanation is offered. In the second section it is argued that allegory became part of philosophy in Middle and Neoplatonism as well, both “pagan” and Christian, and the author studies how a harsh debate arose between the “pagan” and the Christian sides about which texts, myths, and traditions to consider susceptible of allegoresis (i.e., rich in philosophical truths expressed symbolically). Similarities and differences are also pointed out between Origen’s and “pagan” allegoresis, Stoic and Platonic. The third part concentrates on Origen’s theorization of biblical allegoresis – significantly included in his philosophical masterpiece, again qua part and parcel of philosophy –, on the three exegetical levels he defines, literal, moral, and spiritual, on their antecedents, and on the special status of the scriptural narratives on the arkhē and the telos in his own theorization and exegetical practice. In relation to these exceptions (narratives that have only an allegorical meaning), the author argues that Origen was inspired by the special epistemological status of Plato’s myths, which he moreover praises. Providing some telling examples, the author demonstrates how Origen even enters in conversation with Plato’s myths on the arkhē and the telos and, if necessary, corrects them, and directly compares them with the biblical stories on the arkhē and the telos.
36 citations
TL;DR: Psellos, a prolific and versatile Byzantine scholar of the 11th century, dealt with questions of literary aesthetics in a number of his works, often drawing a comparison between ancient and Christian writers as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Michael Psellos, a prolific and versatile Byzantine scholar of the 11th century, deals with questions of literary aesthetics in a number of his works, often drawing a comparison between ancient and Christian writers. In his treatise on John Chrysostom's style his aim is to show that Chrysostom is not at all inferior to most of the ancient orators and that it is unjust to accuse him of not following the laws of rhetoric. While on the whole Psellos's judgment is essentially based on the criteria established by ancient theorists, especially Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Hermogenes, some light can be thrown on his specific personal approach by the analysis of this hitherto rather neglected treatise.
34 citations
TL;DR: The authors examines the early history of the humanist response to the Homeric poems and to the ancient inheritance that came with them as evidenced in critical judgements and in translations, and concludes that the humanism response, though often marked by apparent enthusiasm and good intentions, was actually tentative and half-hearted at best and sometimes downright hostile.
Abstract: The attacks upon Homer by Vida and Scaliger in the sixteenth century are well known. Less generally appreciated is the extent to which these attacks simply filled a vacuum and grew naturally out of the perplexity and difficulty experienced by humanist readers and translators from Petrarch onwards. This article examines the early history of the humanist response to the Homeric poems and to the ancient inheritance that came with them as evidenced in critical judgements and in translations. In a general survey it concludes that the humanist response, though often marked by apparent enthusiasm and good intentions, was actually tentative and half-hearted at best, and sometimes downright hostile. Even where ignorance of Greek or difficulty with the language was not a problem, Homer tended to be judged, whether consciously or unconsciously, by the overriding standard of Virgil. A taste for and appreciation of the distinctively Homeric were not a part of the rich legacy bequeathed to modern Europe by the early humanists. This article is being published in two parts, with the second half appearing inIJCT 4.2 (Fall 1997). (Part One: 1. Preliminary expectations and difficulty: Petrarch; 2. Homer’s reception among early humanist educators; 3. Humanist translation: i. Tentative beginnings: Loschi, Bruni, Decembrio, ii. Homer in prose: Valla and Griffolini.—Part Two: 3 Humanist translation [continued]: iii. The unfulfilled desire for verse, iv. Politian and a betterversio; 4. Sixteenth-century criticism: Vida and Scaliger; Appendix: Examples from humanist translators).
31 citations