Euphrosyne

This paper discusses several texts concerning the effect of Greek drama on the audience. Starting wtih the ones that insist on the dangers of the behaviour of the heroes being accepted as a paradigm, such as the agon or Aristophanes’ Frogs and the condemnation of drama in Plato’s dialogues (mostly in the Republic and the Laws), it proceeds to examinate the meaning of katharsis and hamartia in Aristotle’s Poetics and the various interpretations these concepts have been subjected to.

Pour une partie considérable des commentateurs d’Aristophane la comédie Les Grenouilles présente une composition peu cohérente en résultat de la bipartition de sa structure. Les gre- nouilles ont une place dans l’imaginaire grec, ce dont témoigne le vocabulaire et de nombreux objets à leur image. Leur présence se trouve signalée dans le mythe, le fabulaire et le culte. Si l’on envisage le choeur des grenouilles, qui donne le titre à la pièce, comme une représen- tation grotesque de la nouvelle mousiké, on peut conclure que la première partie du drame doit être associée à la seconde, dont la tragédie est l’objet. De là l’unité de cette comédie où se vérifie l’antagonisme Comédie / Tragédie ressenti par Aristophane en tant que τρυγῳδός en face du τραγῳδός. Au dépens de celui-ci le comédiographe se réclame le droit de conseiller les Athéniens pendant la situation très grave et décisive de 405.

The revival of Greek tragedy at the end of the twentieth century raises a number of important aesthetic, philosophical and existential questions. Once we accept that Greek tragedy expresses a number of basic categories of Western thinking and behaving, we also have to acknowledge that the tragic feeling characterizes us more than we would like to agree upon. The history of this existential and philosophical way of thinking will be explored in a twofold way, which will be called “the myth of unity” and “the myth of plurality”.

Dans les vers qu’il consacre à l’astronomie, Lucrèce mentionne une hypothèse - nommément attribuée à Démocrite - pour expliquer le cours relatif du Soleil et de la Lune (cf. De rerum natura V, 614-649). Or l’origine démocritéenne de cette théorie n’est directement confirmée par aucune autre source. Il s’agit par conséquent d’expliciter cette référence complexe en fonction de l’astronomie épicurienne et de montrer qu’elle n’entre pas en contradiction avec la cosmologie démocritéenne. Mais, au-delà des questions purement astronomiques, cette étude permet de préciser quelle fut l’attitude de Lucrèce à l’égard du grand Démocrite, que les Anciens reprochaient souvent à Épicure d’avoir plagié.

Nos versos que dedica à astronomia, Lucrécio menciona uma hipótese - designadamente atribuída a Demócrito - com a finalidade de explicar o curso relativo do Sol e da Lua (cf. De rerum natura, V, 614-649). Ora, a origem democritiana de tal teoria não está diretamente confirmada por nenhuma fonte outra. Trata-se portanto aqui de explicitar esta complexa referência em função da astronomia epicurista e de mostrar que ela não entra em contradição com a cosmologia do filósofo atomista. Entretanto, para além das questões meramente astronómicas, o presente estudo torna possível indicar com exatidão qual foi a atitude de Lucrécio em relação ao grande Demócrito, o qual, segundo as frequentes críticas dos Antigos, Epicuro teria plagiado.

Considerando que todas as abordagens possíveis de interpretação se reduzem a três perspectivas hermenêuticas fundamentais, uma centrada na intenção do autor, outra no texto como realidade autónoma e outra no leitor; considerando também que estas diversas perspectivas de leitura se têm em geral assumido como abordagens unilaterais, defendemos aqui uma hermenêutica retórica que assenta num horizonte integrado de interpretação e faz simultaneamente justiça à intenção do autor, ao sentido do texto e ao seu significado para o leitor. À semelhança de uma constelação de métodos, ele reúne as três abordagens básicas de interpretação - diacrónica, sincrónica e existencial - não só situando o texto no seu mundo e na problemática existencial do autor que o gerou, mas também fazendo aflorar a verdade intrínseca do texto em função dessa realidade e aplicando o seu sentido à realidade contemporânea do leitor.

Taking into consideration that all possible approaches of interpretation are reduced to three basic hermeneutical perspectives, either centred on the author’s intention, or on the text itself or on the reader; taking also into consideration that these diverse perspectives of readership have been assumed as unilateral approaches, we defend in this paper a rhetorical hermeneutics which is based on an integrative horizon of interpretation e does simultaneously justice to authorial intention, text’s meaning and reader’s signification. Like in a methodological constellation, it reunites the three basic approaches of interpretation - diachronic, synchronic and existential - situating the text in its world and its implied contextual problematic, as well as revealing the intrinsic truth of the text and applying the resulting meaning to the contemporary reality of the reader.

In the Ars amatoria, modelled on didactic and elegiac sources, Ovid organizes his speech with a strong attention for structure, reflecting the didactic finalities; the poetical tissue reveals a methodological formulation, that proceeds without swerves, but according to a lucid preceptive explanation.

The 15^th century fortune of Statius’ Silvae has been studied mostly for the textual transmission of this work rather than for its fortune in the humanistic culture and poetry. The present work focusses on the materials on Silvae, which the Humanist Aulus Janus Parrhasius (1470-1521) scattered in many manuscripts during his life, and establishes a relationship among Parrhasius’ comments and those previously written by Domitius Calderini (1475) and Politianus (ca 1481). In fact, they constitute the main sources of Parrhasius’ interpretation of Statius’ Silvae.

Dans cet article je cherche à étudier l’omniprésence et le rôle des dieux dans l’Onirocriticon d’Artémidore, dont le catalogue est dressé au livre II, 34-40. Après quelques remarques sur le phénomène onirique dans l’Antiquité et sa permanence dans les domaines de la culture et des sciences médicales, il faut s’interroger sur l’efficacité de sa méthode ‘scientifique’ dans ce qui concerne l’interprétation des rêves qui portent sur l’avenir. En donnant un sens nouveau, intelligible aux songes allégoriques et ‘envoyés par les dieux’ pour déchiffrer et décrypter l’univers onirique de ses contemporains, on peut bien se rassurer que ces anciens dieux du panthéon grec et les nouvelles divinités de la mythologie oriental ont, pour la plupart, la ‘clef des songes’ du traité d’Artémidore de Daldis.

Les cinquante dernières années ont été très fécondes pour les historiens de la Rome archaïque: les découvertes des archélogues ont, sur bien des points (ligues, cultes heroïques et oraculaires, techniques augurales, fortifications romuléennes, exploitation des marais salants…) enrichi et approfondi notre connaissance du passé. Mais cela n’a en aucune façon affaibli ni infirmé la tradition annalistique.

The last fifty years have been very fertile for the historins of archaic Rome: the discoveries of the archaeologists, in many areas (leagues, heroic and oracular cults, augural techniques, Romulean fortifications, Salinar… have enriched our knowledge of the past, without invalidating the annalistical tradition.

Some of the most important historians who wrote in the 6th and 7th centuries refer to the Frankish incursion into Visigothic territory which led to the defeat and death of Amalaric, the young king of the Visigoths. However, we are mostly faced with biased and lacunary texts, illustrating different versions of the event, which, motivated by their different rhetorical purposes, seldom show coinciding accounts. In this paper we tried to handle with these textual divergences in order to establish the events and motivations which would have characterized this episode of the struggle between Franks and Visigoths for the control of the rich south of mediterranean Europe.

Neste artigo oferecemos notas de cariz exegético e textual aos vv. 1-8 do Filoctetes de Sófocles, corroborando paleograficamente a conjectura de H. Lloyd-Jones e N. Wilson ao v. 8 com base em erros análogos de copistas na tradição bizantina de Sófocles e Eurípides.

A violência sobre crianças é uma realidade (especialmente na guerra - Tucídides) que transparece na mitologia. Os temas mitológicos, se servirem os intentos do poeta, poderão ser usados na literatura (Aristóteles), nomeadamente na tragédia de Eurípides. O autor, no entanto, tem responsabilidade na educação do cidadão, devendo evitar exemplos que incitem à perpetuação do ódio (Platão).

Violence upon children is a reality (specially during war times - Thucydides) and can be found in mythology. Mythological themes can be used in literature, if they are useful to the intents of the poet (Aristoteles), namely in Euripides’ tragedy. However, the author has responsibilities towards the education of the citizens and he should avoid exempla that will increase and continue hate and violence (Plato).

As Levine Gera points, we find in the Cyropedia several tales in which a robe is involved; the dress of the characters is always mentioned in the relevant passages of the work and the Median stole becomes for Cyrus a pattern of his career from the very beginning to the attainment of highest power and of the kingdom. The analysis focuses this motif symbol of the kingship and examines step by step its impress on the narrative framework.

Physiognomonics appears in Babylonia, about four thousand years ago. But the first treatises of physiognomonics belong to the Greco-roman literature: Physiognomonics of the pseudo-Aristotle and the Treatise of Physiognomonics of a latin Anonymous from the IVth century. One finds nevertheless traces of physiognomonics in the poems of Homer. The ancients have attributed the origin of that science to Pythagoras or to Hippocrates. Physiognominics, fouded on three methods, did not disappear at the end of Antiquity: in 1781, Lavater wrote an important book Essai sur la physiognomonie.

O objectivo deste estudo é demonstrar a grande erudição de Flávio Josefo, através das citações dos autores gregos, que faz ao longo de toda a sua obra. Apresentando exemplos dessas referências, algumas delas já detectadas por Drüner em finais do séc. XIX e Thackeray nos anos 30 do séc. XX, demonstra-se que Josefo não só conhecia bem Tucídides e Sófocles, como os Poemas Homéricos, Hesíodo, Eurípides, Heródoto e Platão, além de outros. Mais, usou-os com ambivalência: tanto servem para a caracterização de várias personagens e situações da História de Israel, como para argumentar contra a religiosidade helénica. Este método e o seu uso particular no Contra Ápion levam-nos a crer que o conhecimento da literatura grega era do próprio Josefo e não dos assistentes a que terá recorrido por razões linguísticas.

This essay’s aim is to demonstrate Josephus’ erudition, as the Greek Authors’ quotations through his work prove. Introducing exemples of those quotations, some of them detected in late XIXth century by Drüner and in the 30’s by Thackeray, the author concludes that Josephus knew not only Thucydides and Sophocles, but also the Homeric Poems, Hesiod, Euripides, Herodotus and Plato, among others. More, he used them with ambivalence: they allow him to depict Israel’s History characters and situations and at the same time to criticize the Greek Religion. This method and its specific use in the Contra Apionem make us believe that the Greek Literature’s knowledge belonged to Josephus himself and not to the Assistants, to whom he recured for the Greek’s sake.

No Dion, tratado do início do século V a.D., Sinésio de Cirene propõe-se explicitar uma concepção de cultura erudita por oposição à que dela teriam os cristãos de Alexandria e alguns filósofos neoplatónicos do seu tempo, levantando, assim, uma polémica, que se dirige provavelmente contra os teurgistas atenienses, e tendo possivelmente como referentes Plutarco de Atenas e Siriano ou alguns dos seus seguidores em Alexandria. No entanto, o debate visado leva ainda à defesa da retórica e da poesia, primeiro como propedêuticas da filosofia, e depois, em tom palinódico, num paignion que não revela, como prazer e entrega necessária, posterior à revelação filosófica. A apologia do prazer, não apenas sensível mas também inteligível, surge então como jogo retórico, não alheio nem ao divertimento nem ao argumento filosófico. Ao relevar ainda as figuras de Sócrates e Aspásia, pelo Phaedrus e pelo Menexenus, faz delas o seu exemplum e metonímia da filosofia e da retórica, dissimulando nelas também a defesa da sua mestra, Hipátia, pela união da sedução e do prazer à sua erudição e conhecimento filosófico.

Synesius’ Dion, treatise written in the beginning of the fifth century A.D., states a learned conception of culture opposed to the one shared by Alexandrian christians and some Neoplatonist philosophers alike. In doing so Synesius sets off a polemic aiming most probably at Athenian theurgists and, specifically, at Plutarch of Athens and Syrianos or at some of their followers in Alexandria. Yet such a dispute leads to the defence of rhetoric and poetry, first as introductory subjects to philosophy and afterwards, hinting at a palinodic paignion, as due pleasure and commitment next to philosophical inquiry. Hence, not only does Synesius give rise to an apology of pleasure as sensitive delight but also as intelligible pleasure bringing forth out of rhetorical zest both amusement and reasoning. Eventually, the introduction of characters like Socrates and Aspasia, through Plato’s Phaedrus and Menexenus, implies an exemplum and a pun for philosophy and rhetoric as well, concealing the actual defence of Synesius’ teacher, Hypatia, who symbolises the alliance of charm and pleasure, of learning and philosophical acumen.

Dans le discours XXXIII, § 6-7, Grégoire de Nazianze présente en parallèle un blâme de Nazianze et un éloge de Constantinople, en utilisant des «lieux» (topoi) et des arguments caractéristiques de la rhétorique. Les similitudes sont particulièrement frappantes avec les préceptes de Ménandros le Rhéteur. Lu superficiellement, le texte de Grégoire de Nazianze peut ressembler à une énumération décousue. Mais si on le réfère à Ménandros, et plus largement à l’ensemble de la théorie et de la pratique épidictiques, on découvre que ce texte est travaillé par la rhétorique de l’ «éloge de cité» (enkômion poleôs), qui en constitue l’architecture secrète et qui rend compte des thèmes et des mots mêmes utilisés par Grégoire. Ce fait conduit à des conclusions sur la nature et le rôle de la rhétorique au IVe siècle après J.-C.: la rhétorique comme outillage mental; l’intégration des problèmes philosophiques au sein des traités et des discours rhétoriques; la rhétorique comme culture partagée entre paganisme et christianisme.

In sections 6-7 of his 33rd oration Gregory of Nazianzus presents two parallel subjects, the blame of Nazianzus and the praise of Constantinople, by means of «commonplaces» (topoi) and arguments that are characteristically rhetorical. The resemblance to Menander Rhetor’s precepts is especially striking. If one reads Gregory’s text superficially, it may look like a rambling enumeration. But when compared to Menander Rhetor, and more widely to epideictic theory and practice in general, his text is clearly constructed according to the rhetorical model of the «praise of a city» (enkômion poleôs), which serves as a secret architecture and accounts for the very themes and words used by Gregory. This fact leads to conclusions concerning the nature and role of rhetoric in 4th century A. D.: rhetoric offers conceptual tools; rhetoric incorporates philosophical problematics into its own system; rhetoric is a commonly shared cultural trait for Pagans and Christians.