No description available.

This thesis is a study of Quintus Smyrnaeus’ Posthomerica, a Greek epic of the third century C.E. written in Greek hexameters in Homeric diction and in a Homeric style and about the post-Iliadic events of the Trojan War. My thesis deals with intertextuality, that is, the relationship between the Posthomerica and the Homeric texts. The Posthomerica has been called a hyper-Homeric text, which has been viewed as a negative trait of the poem. I analyse this Homeric-emulative tendency and discuss the interaction between the cultural and literary influences contemporary to the Posthomerica, and the poem’s overwhelmingly Homeric intertextuality. I assess how Quintus, as a Late Antique reader, reads Homer, and I focus in on the originality and Late Antique interpretative bias of Quintus in his readings and emulation of Homer. Intertextuality points to resemblances and differences, and indicates how a poem that can be called “Homeric” is in fact neo-Homeric in its updating of Homeric ethics, ideologies and poetics. I also discuss throughout the thesis how the Posthomerica is Alexandrian in its indebtedness to Homer. The Posthomerica is a learned text where application of intertextuality by the reader activates and vivifies a poem that has otherwise been dismissed as second-rate. There are four sections in my thesis, all dealing specifically with three separate aspects of poetics. The first section is a study of similes in the Posthomerica. I present a complete statistical analysis of similes in the poem, and compare practice in earlier epics. I then focus on specific examples of similes in the poem, and show how Homeric intertextuality vivifies meaning and characterisation of these similes. Very often the context of the Homeric passage implicated in the Posthomeric simile adds a varying sense and meaning. I also highlight the concern for pattern and structure in the placement of similes in the Posthomerica in a way that derives more from the style of Apollonius Rhodius than Homer. Thus Quintus reads Homer through later Greek epic lenses. My second and third sections are related. I discuss gnomai in the Posthomerica, and present detailed statistics for this understudied area of the poem. I argue that the widespread use of gnomai, particularly in the voice of the primary narrator, provides an ethical thread in the poem, and that the content of these gnomai is non- Homeric, and influenced by Stoicism. Thus within a Homeric-emulative poem we read a recurrent non-Homeric philosophy and ethics carried by gnomai. The third section then focuses on one simile (in Book 14), which, in a very original way, contains a gnome. The simile derives its content from Odyssey 8 and the story of Aphrodite and Ares caught in the act of adultery. I read Quintus updating Homer in this simile and re-presenting the Homeric story with a definite moral, and therefore un-Homeric, emphasis. The fourth section concentrates on ecphrasis and the Shield of Achilles in Posthomerica 5. I show how Quintus presents radically non-Homeric devices within this ecphrasis first narrated in Iliad 18. I argue that this originality within a very Homeric template is reflective of the overall status of the Posthomerica in relation to Homer. I focus in particular on the figure of the Mountain of Arete on the Shield of Achilles, and illustrate how this figure, which is Stoic in its inheritance, behaves as a mise-en-abîme for the key ethical content of the poem found in gnomai. I then discuss the implications of Quintus revising the Homeric Shield of Achilles into a symbol of the Stoic ethics that the Posthomerica, this most “Homeric” of poems, contains. That is the overall focus of this thesis: the interaction of Homeric indebtedness and non-Homeric influences in the Posthomerica.

The most recent, and in many ways the best, text of the Florida of Apuleius is that of P. Vallette in the Budé series (Paris, 1924). I have, however, used the Teubner text by R. Helm (Leipzig, 1910, reprinted with addenda 195 and 1959) as the basis for this Commentary, mainly because of the usefulness of Helm's critical apparatus, which is considerably fuller than Vallette's. I have discussed variant readings where the sense appears to be affected, but I have made no independent study of the MSS. This Commentary makes no claim to be a critical edition. I have been more concerned with interpretation and elucidation than with matters of style, though in an author like Apuleius the two aspects cannot always be separated. A commentary is not, however, the most convenient medium for a stylistic study. I have commented mainly on subject matter, on the language (including points of grammar), and on anything of general or special interest that appeared to throw light on the meaning and intention of the author. In the Introduction I have considered the question of the composition of the Florida. My conclusion is that the passages, as we now have them, are excerpts from an earlier collection made by Apuleius himself, and that the division into four books goes back to this original collection. I have also tried to show that, even in its present mutilated state, the Florida gives a unique insight into Apulelus' manner as a public speaker and his relations with his Carthaginian audience. For convenience, I have inserted the Bibliography at the beginning of the work, so that the reader may more easily refer back to the list of older editions, which are discussed in the first section of the Introduction.

In confining this Commentary to the first 62 sections of the Lucullus my intention has been to make a special study of Antiochus' case against the Academic sceptics. Although this is the only full-length counter-argument against Academic scepticism which we possess (despite the many works written by both aides in a controversy spanning more than two centuries), due attention has not been paid to it. Scholars have tended to use Cicero's work as a source-book for Antiochus' general philosophical views or to confine their attention to the sceptic case. Even if consideration has been given to the dogmatic case as well (as by Stough, Greek Skepticism), there has been a certain bias in favour of the Academic sceptics. This is possibly due to the fact that the scepticism of the Academy has in itself a strong appeal and that it has the final word in Cicero's work. But I do not think that Lucullus' arguments, whatever their shortcomings, are weaker by comparison. The Lucullus is, not only an extremely important philosophical text, it is also one of the most difficult. Reid's Commentary is very valuable but his interest was more literary and general than strictly philosophical. My own Commentary is concerned solely with the philosophical content of the dialogue and takes account of relevant work on Hellenistic philosophy since Reid's edition appeared at the end of the last century, I have tried to place the arguments and philosophical issues in their ancient context, either, by means of plausible inferences where direct evidence is lacking or by reference to classical texts. I am aware that the problem of knowledge is still an issue today and I have made use of some modern works on the subject, in elucidating particular arguments, but, in general, I have limited references to modern philosophy to a minimum in order not to impede understanding of Cicero's text and not to widen excessively the scope of the Commentary. The text used is that of Plasborg (Teubner, Leipzig, 1922).

The original aim of this thesis was to be a consideration of the North African writer's use and interpretation of Scriptural texts in which a change in exegesis could be detected after he became involved in the New Prophecy. From this analysis, I hoped to draw some useful conclusions. However, I soon realised that the task in hand was not such a simple one as at first appeared, for a number of reasons. First of all, investigation into the origins and nature of the movement led me to realise that adherence to any movement which is centred on the activity of the Spirit cannot be easily rationalised and compartmentalised. It must often be preceded by a period of questioning in which old values and beliefs are re-assessed. Tertullian's adherence to the movement must be seen, not as a specific event, but as a gradual progression. No clear-cut division can be drawn at which a definite change in his use and interpretation of Scripture can be detected. His ideas were constantly being formed, modified, and even reversed, as his sympathies towards the next movement grew. Secondly, a separation of key texts in order to note a change in their usage is no, in itself, a valid approach. Only by a consideration of such texts in relation to specific theological and practical issues can a development in Tertullian's thought be legitimately and convincingly traced. Allowance must be made also for the fact that the New Prophecy which Tertullian made his own may have differed in both form and content from that which had existed originally in the East, several decades earlier. A third point to be noticed is that Tertullian's use of Scripture is governed by a variety of exegetical principles and influences. These must be considered also. In this connection, it must be emphasised that Tertullian was a man of his own age and place. His education in rhetoric, law, and philosophy cannot fail to have influenced his outlook. Fourthly, Tertullian's dependence on Scripture must be weighed against the other supports which he uses to confirm his argumentation. His sympathy towards the New Prophecy would certainly offer help, and possibly hindrance, to this task. Finally, in order to make a valid assessment of the development in his thought in relation to Scripture, it is impossible to study his writing in isolation. Only a careful comparison with the writings of his predecessors and contemporaries will provide an assessment of his originality. It is therefore the revised aim of this thesis to take into consideration the above points, and to draw up a detailed analysis of the resulting information. The thesis takes the form of a close examination of Tertullian's use of Scripture in the context of various dogmatic and practical issues, which were to become of increasing importance in his later life. A comparison of these texts will reveal some interesting developments, and will allow an assessment of his originality to be made. The literature on Tertullian's interpretation of Scripture is limited to several works, which, in the main do not pay great attention to the development of his thought in this matter. Where the development is considered, it is frequently fragmentary. I hope that this thesis will go beyond any work hitherto produced.

Procopius of Caesarea wrote a classicizing history of the wars of Justinian, which focuses squarely on warfare in an age when his contemporaries were often directing their attention towards theological matters. Battles make up a significant portion of this history and they are the focus of this thesis, with particular attention paid to their literary construction, as well as the values, norms, and assumptions which underscore them. Chapter one focuses on the life and social background of Procopius, addressing issues such as his literary career and education. Chapter two looks at the wider context, including the three strands of thought concerning the composition of a work of history written in Greek, namely rhetoric, historiographical theory, and Greek military theory. It looks, particularly, at the theorists’ respective discussions of battle; and, the practices adopted by Procopius’ contemporaries when approaching battle, whether writing an ecclesiastical history, chronicle, or classicizing history, or a military treatise. In the next four chapters I focus on the text itself. Chapter three, on the Persian Wars, looks at issues such as narrative order and pace, the exhortation, and morale, discipline, and the use of stratagems. Battles in the Vandal Wars is the subject of chapter four, and here I look at how Procopius engages with his audience through the use of literary devices such as narrator interventions and narrative markers, as well as how he characterizes the warfare itself. In chapter five I explore the influence that Homer has had on Procopius’ descriptions of battle in the Gothic Wars, especially the siege of Rome. The last chapter, six, skips the thematic approach used in the previous three chapters and instead evaluates his battles on a case-by-case basis. While Procopius’ conception of battle betrays many of the hallmarks of his classical predecessors, there are unmistakable signs of the influence of his contemporary context, such as the attribution of outcomes to God. What is more, these battles, which are carefully constructed, and integrated into the wider text, showcase Procopius’ skill and ingenuity as a writer, and historian. As a result, my thesis demonstrates that Procopius needs to be taken seriously as a literary, cultural, and historical source for the sixth century.

The Institutio Oratoria of Quintilian (Marcus Fabius Quintilianus) is a work that follows in a tradition of writing on rhetoric, a tradition that dates back to the fifth century B.C. My thesis establishes Quintilian and his work within this tradition, and encourages the reader both to consider one aspect of the convention of technical instruction in rhetoric, namely criticism, and to reflect on the originality of criticism in Quintilian's work. Accordingly, I have two main aims. Firstly, I intend to give full detail of examples of criticism in the Institutio Oratoria, and this will include identifying, where possible, people who are targeted by Quintilian for criticism. Thus, in detailing examples - which I do by paraphrase and translation - and assigning them to chapters in this thesis, I follow the structure that Quintilian provides for his work in the preface to his first book. Targets of criticism include groups, such as parents, pupils, teachers, philosophers, actors, dancers, and specific individuals. My second aim is to assess the originality of Quintilian's criticism. Thus, I examine the works of predecessors, notably, but not exclusively, other writers on rhetoric, whose works are extant or partly extant. My feelings indicate that there is much criticism that can serve as precedent for criticism in the Institutio Oratoria. However, it is evident that Quintilian has not indulged in mere repetition. He has changed and adapted criticisms in a way that reflects his educational and forensic background. He also implies that many of these still relate to his own time. I have also found that much criticism lacks apparent precedent - apparent, because other works on rhetoric that precede the Institutio Oratoria and have not survived could feasibly have provided precedents for criticisms in Quintilian's work that appear novel - and I suggest that the underlying intention of this is to relate practice more closely to theory, and theory more closely to practice.

This thesis is a synchronic reception study of a single play, the Oedipus at Colonus. Rather than providing a commentary, or extracting one or two themes in isolation for examination, it considers the play through the lens of the eighteenth century. In so doing it offers a variety of disciplinary approaches, looking at the QC through the eyes of an aesthetic philosopher, creative writer, textual critic, artist, politician, historian, art historian, composer, musicologist, teacher or clergyman. After an introduction outlining some basic presuppositions for the thesis, chapter 1 covers aesthetic philosophy, chapter 2 books, chapter 3 staged reworking, chapter 4 paintings and chapter 5 opera. In reflecting on the play from such a broad range of perspectives, a range of insights emerge. The major theme is the way in which aesthetics develops over time and how these developments are reflected in the wide range of material under discussion. This thesis is about the sublime. Reading the DC through eighteenth-century eyes prioritises certain aspects of it which can, in various guises and at various times, be understood as sublime. This places great emphasis on themes such as religion and the role of landscape, while diminishing others, such as that of blindness, which might usually seem obvious ways to think about the play. Each act of reception draws out something slightly different from the Greek model, and by examining a range of material, our overall appreciation of the play and the eighteenth century is significantly enhanced, particularly in respect to the aforementioned themes.

The thesis focuses on Plato’s treatment of poetry in the Ion, Gorgias and Republic X. Although these discussions provide three quite different accounts of poets and their activity and have thus commonly not been associated, a similar objective may be detected in them: they all aim to disqualify poets, presenting them as incompetent in what they do or also (in the Gorgias and Republic X) as morally harmful. My aim is first to show how the three discussions differ from Plato’s other major discussions of poetry in Republic II-III and Laws II and VII: while the former provide (disqualifying) answers to the descriptive questions of whether poets have relevant knowledge and how they morally affect their public, the latter are concerned with the prescriptive questions of what poets should do in their envisaged role as political instruments (Chapter I). In the close study of the three discussions, my aim is to identify, critically examine and compare the ‘disqualifying’ strategies employed in them: I consider, on the one hand, how they substantiate the charges of poets’ incompetence or moral harmfulness and on the other hand, how they counter and account for the widely shared appreciation of Homer and other poets (Chapters II-V). Before discussing Republic X, however, I consider separately the notion of poets’ μίμησις (representation/ imitation), which in Republic X has a prominent role, but at the same time appears difficult to understand in itself as well as seemingly inconsistent with Plato’s other arguments about poets’ μίμησις, in particular in Republic III. Rejecting the widely accepted assumption of ‘narrower’ and ‘wider’ meanings of the term μίμησις respectively in Books III and X of the Republic, I analyse the notion of μίμησις in itself, and, following this I distinguish between three kinds of poets’ μίμησις and define in what elements they differ (Chapter IV). In the final overview of the three discussions, I reconsider how successful are their disqualifying depictions of poets.

This thesis contributes to the understanding of the stagecraft and composition of Athenian tragedy through a re-evaluation of its component elements within the structure. I undertake a re-interpretation of the Aristotelian terms for 'plot', which allows for a more nuanced examination of events occurring within a tragedy. As Aristotle notes, the systasis of pragmata is the structure of events that forms a tragedy. The muthos is the way in which these events are presented and includes the actions and words of the dramatis personae. Pragmata are constituent elements of both the systasis and muthos. This thesis identifies and evaluates the pragma’s effects upon the movement of the systasis, its contribution to the enrichment of the muthos and its influence on audience engagement with a performance through both enacted and non-enacted forms. My approach involves a rigorous examination of the elements common to an enacted pragma, before identifying the variations therein. While a pragma involves all actions which serve the same general function, every instance of a pragma is unique. Each chapter in turn focuses on a particular pragma, before examining the role of that pragma within an entire tragedy. Enactments of each pragma in extant tragedy are tabled in appendices. The pragma of return home is examined within Andromache; recognition in Sophocles' Elektra; supplication in Hekabe; and reporting in Women of Trachis. This analysis demonstrates the dynamic role and versatility of different types of pragma within a tragedy, and the playwright's ingenuity as demonstrated by his deployment of this element. No single approach or methodology can by itself fully interpret an Athenian tragedy, but a focus on a particular pragma illuminates different themes and emphases and ultimately provides us with a better understanding of a tragedy.