Search

'Who wrote the scurrilous iambic poems of the first stanza?', asks David West at the start of his commentary on the ode. 'The culprit', he declares, 'must be Horace.' This answer accords with that to be found in other commentaries: 'my scurrilous verses' (Page), 'my scandalous lines' (Gow), 'my scurrilous iambics' (Wickham), 'my abusive iambics' (Shorey), 'miei ingiuriosi giambi' (Colamarino and Bo), 'my libellous iambics' (Nisbet and Hubbard), 'my libellous iambic verses' (Quinn), 'miei giambi ingiuriosi' (Fedeli). What, then, are these iambic verses? Some earlier scholars suggested that Horace is referring to various of his epodes, such as those addressed to Canidia (5, 17); but our knowledge of Canidia (cf. also Serm. 1.8) indicates that she would scarcely make plausible the accent on beauty in the first line of the ode. Most commentators, at least since the latter half of the nineteenth century, have believed that Horace is referring to some iambics which he had targeted at the ode's addressee but of which we now have no further knowledge: Kiessling and Heinze, for example, refer to 'the satirical poems which Horace ... has levelled at her', while in the most recent commentary in 2012 Mayer says that Horace 'assures an unnamed young woman that it rests with her to put an end to his vituperative attacks'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

John 1.1–5 constitutes the original Prologue to the Fourth Gospel. This passage can still be read as functioning in this way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Yasna 19 contains an Avestan exegesis of the Gāthic stanza Ahuna Vairiia, the most revered text in Zoroastrianism. The stanza is traditionally understood to be the essential statement of the religion of Mazdā. Thus, in Y 19 we have a unique opportunity to ask about the significance that the Gāthās of Zarathuštra held for the later Avestan tradition. In what intellectual horizon did Zoroastrian priests place their founding text? Although Y 19 exegesis of the Ahuna Vairiia contains semantic obscurities, it is possible to establish the meaning of the commentary through syntactic and conceptual analysis of two key terms and the phrases where they occur. The article critically examines the earlier interpretations of the text. Having found these inadequate, it proposes a new reading and understanding of the Avestan exegesis. In particular, the article argues that the Avestan exegete understood the Gāthic stanza within an eschatological horizon. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A literary criticism of Hymns 2 and 4 of ancient Egyptian priest Isidorus is presented. It examines the stanzaic architecture of the elegiac hymns. It also presents perspectives on why Isidorus created the poems in a meter and an archaic style. It concludes that the hymns seem to have been composed as a series of five-couplet elegiac stanzas.

One may conclude from the lull in publications on the Gāthic Ahuna Vairiia that a satisfactory understanding of the stanza is at hand. This is, however, not the case. The last substantial treatment of the stanza is from Humbach (1991 II) in his 1991 two-volume edition of the Old Avestan texts. Somewhat less extensive is the discussion we find in Kellens’ and Pirart's monumental three-volume edition and study of the Old Avestan texts (1991). In 1975, Insler published a detailed article on the Ahuna Vairiia. The late 1950s saw the appearance of four studies of the stanza by distinguished Avesta scholars: Benveniste, Humbach, Duchesne-Guillemin and Hinz. As for the number of translations there are, it virtually equals the number of scholars in the field. The source of the difficulties is the syntax of the stanza. The disagreements are due for the most part to the scholar's analysis of syntactic units. Thus the variety of translations may be reduced to a few basic types. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article offers information on the transpositions of the final stanzas in the theatrical production "Oedipus Tyrannus" as argued by German theatrical director Friedrich Haase in 1858. It highlights the alleged merits to reverse the final two stanzas of the play. It mentions that the scholars has hardly adopted the proposed transpositions of Haase, which have been restored in the books of author R. D. Dawe.

This article presents information related to "Horace Odes 1.22," and "Epistles 1.10." "Odes 1.22," begins with two famous stanzas on the man who is 'pure in heart.' The moral paragon, upright, courageous and self-sufficient, is clearly based on the ideal Stoic sage and particularly on a recent historical instantiation of that figure of whom its contemporaries use 'interger' and 'integritas' in its moral sense. The epistle addressed to Fuscus contains a number of similar allusions to central Stoic doctrines. Two prominent strands in the poem suggest that Roman Poet Horace, on a general level, is deploying Fuscus' own Stoic doctrine to persuade him to a fundamentally non-Stoic otium. First, Horace twice describes his modest country existence as being as pleasant as that of a king.

The article discusses some textual and metric issues in the ionic stanzas Supplices 42-70 by Euripides. The four ionic stanzas discussed in this article presents a challenging crux, at 45 (-6) in the first strophe, and more can be said about the ode's metrical structure. The metre of a first stanza-pair discussed by the author is properly interpreted as a system of ionic diameters, with word-end at verse-end except where synartesis or word overlap in one or both stanzas creates a run of four metra. The system of twenty-four metra has a structure at once bipartite, tripartite and quadripartite.

Examines the theatrical logic of the recognition scene in the play "Choephoroi." Representation of the recognition scene of Orestes and Electra; Impediment of the choreography and break up the symmetrical patterning of strophe and antistrophe by a special structure set up in the orchestra; Ease of playing the recognition scene because of the physical distance between tomb and hiding place.

Interprets the poem "Medea." Characters and structure of the poem; Contents and context of each line; Examination of the attitude of the chorus toward Medea; Phrases and stanzas of the poem; Indications of classical literature.

The article focuses on classical Greek playwright Sophocles' drama "Oedipus Tyrannus." It is observed that there are differences among scholars about the meaning of the first strophe of the play. It is suggested that it would be more prudent to look within the play for the meaning and interpretation of the first strophe. It is noted that the chorus was referring to the main character Oedipus in the stanza. It is commented that the ode shows a shift from the general to a particular tragic element in Greek tragedies.