Search

This article investigates the use of philology and classical scholarship in the racial categorisation of modern Greeks by French scholars in Greece in the second half of the nineteenth century, in particular the members of the French School in Athens, founded in 1846. It argues that modern Greeks are 'racialised' by these scholars of antiquity in relation to their perceived proximity with their classical heritage. It thus demonstrates how classical scholarship and philology are used as tools to justify racial inferiority and theories of degeneration through systematic scientific attempts to categorise and create scientific hierarchies grounded in linguistic difference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Estudios Humanisticos. Filologia is the property of Universidad de Leon, Area de Publicaciones and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The conjecture zomoteganon in Apic. 4, 27 is ascribed by editors to Cesare Giarratano and Friedrich Vollmer, who printed it for the first time in their edition of 1922. Two letters of Giarratano to Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff suggest, however, that zomoteganon might be Wilamowitz's own emendation. The correspondence between Giarratano and Vollmer is included in an appendix, since it represents the background to their Teubner edition of Apicius. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the Radical Enlightenment has been primarily associated with the philosophical criticism of Spinoza and his disciples. But the Radical Enlightenment's attack on Christianity did not solely hinge on the philosophical grounding of its proponents, let alone the philosophy of the seventeenth-century Dutch savant. Focusing on the German Enlightenment radical Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694-1768), and his criticism of the ancient Jewish priesthood, this essay shows that an equally potent criticism of Christian doctrine targeted its Old Testament foundations, in which Christian theologians had located the prefiguration of the New Covenant. However, not many radical thinkers were equipped to execute such a profound attack, as it required not only an understanding of the subtleties of Christian theology, but also substantial philological training and an intimate knowledge of historical and linguistic scholarship on ancient Israel. This essay explores how Reimarus's criticisms bridged the Radical Enlightenment and older traditions of Christian humanism and Hebraism within the trope of priestcraft. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores a central facet of humanist scholarship and pedagogy—namely, the writing and teaching of universal history—in the decades around 1700. In does so by examining one of the most prominent humanists of the European Republic of Letters: the Leiden classical scholar Jacob Perizonius (1651–1715). Through analysis of Perizonius's unpublished lectures on universal history, it explores how 'classicists' (long before they commonly identified as such) could command geographies and temporalities far distant from Greco-Roman antiquity. Late humanist classical scholars like Perizonius used the ancient genre of universal history or historia universalis to combine everything from the fall of Rome to the emergence of Renaissance Europe into a single continuous narrative. In so doing, Perizonius helped forge a via media between antiquity and modernity at a moment when self-identified "ancients" and "moderns" frequently engaged in conflict. Perizonius's synthesis proved immensely influential to Enlightenment historiography and beyond. As argued here, universal history enabled Perizonius to craft an origin narrative of how nostra Europa or 'our Europe' purportedly became modern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The King James Bible has now entered its fifth century. Prepared by some 50 committed scholars of Hebrew and Greek, its text depended heavily on the work of the martyred scholar William Tyndale. Like the Septuagint, its Greek precedent, begun in the 3rd century B.C.E., the KJV was a team effort, and it was in fact, as the Septuagint was in legend, undertaken at royal command. Like Shakespeare's works, the King James Version both reflected and helped create the modern English language. But its phrases were not always called majestic. Indeed they were frowned upon by many an 18th century writer. But its robust language, hewing closely to the concrete diction of the Hebrew and koine Greek originals, kept to a vocabulary less than a third the size of Shakespeare's, allowing it to fulfill Tyndale's dream, that one day the Bible's message would be open to the humblest speaker of English. Idealized, even idolized in some quarters, this redoubtable text continues to strike fire today, where its many rivals often only sputter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite a proclaimed internationalism and open-mindedness, prejudices concerning e.g. religion and national background were common in the early modern Republic of Letters. In fact, stereotypes were often used in debates to undermine the position of one's opponent. In this article, I will look at a polemic between Jean Le Clerc (1657-1736) and Pieter Burman (1668-1741) about the position of classical scholarship and education at the turn of the eighteenth century. I will employ Bourdieu's theory of practice to demonstrate how the stereotypes these two scholars use served both to blacken each other and to define themselves and the subject of the debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Graeco-Latina Brunensia is the property of Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper treats the articles as represented in A.E. Housman: Classical Scholar. Since Housman wrote on a wide variety of ancient authors, the numerous areas of expertise in which he engaged are noted and examined by a cadre of scholars who are marked by eminence. Each of these papers is summarily critiqued in the following review-essay. Moreover notation of two distinct pathways toward original studies of Housman's rigorous scholarship are then supplied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plato suggested ways to regulate and integrate slaves within the legal system of his Utopian Cretan polis Magnesia as described in his work, Laws. This text alone invalidates most criticism of Popper's presentation of Plato's political views. His 50-year-old reading of Plato fits the text better than any other. To preserve the noble tradition of classical scholarship, classical scholars should acknowledge explicitly that he was correct, and that by now they have surreptitiously incorporated the substance of his views. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Carl W. Blegen Library of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens contains one of the most comprehensive collections of books on classical philology and the archaeology of Greece and the eastern Mediterranean. Early in its history, an amateur librarian, Theodore Woolsey Heermance, created an independent, highly detailed classification system, which encompassed classical studies in all its facets. His system is still used in the Blegen Library today. However, the discipline of classics has changed considerably, especially in the last couple of decades, and while the breadth of Heermance's system (and, indeed, Heermance's foresight) is such that monographs in all areas of classical studies can be accommodated, the system as a whole also serves a unique document of classical scholarship a century ago. Moreover, because the letter designations have not changed since 1903, it is possible to track trends in scholarship and publication within fairly narrow subject headings. This article addresses not only Heermance's impressive classification system, but also the means by which this static classification system can be used to draw conclusions about the state of classical scholarship and the humanities in general in the twentieth century. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]