The thesis focuses on the theory of tragedy in Germany around 1800, and has two primary aims: to demonstrate the importance of idealist thought for contemporary approaches to tragedy and the tragic; and to revise the intellectual historiography of the classic phase in German letters. It traces reflection on Greek tragedy from the Querelle des anciens et des modernes in France around 1700 through the aesthetic systems formulated in Germany around 1800. Two intellectual developments are emphasized: the historicist consciousness that develops throughout the eighteenth century and places Greek tragedy more radically in its cultural context than ever before; and the idealist philosophy of art, which seeks to restore a measure of universality to the ancient genre, seeing it as the manifestation of a timeless quality of ‘the tragic.’ These two impulses, historicizing and universalizing, it is argued, are fundamental to modern understanding of Greek tragedy. The genealogical method seeks to establish a greater continuity with earlier eighteenth-century thought than is generally recognized, and to refute the teleologies that dominate accounts of idealist thought. A reconstruction of the central texts of Schiller, Schelling, Hegel, and Hölderlin reveals that the theory of tragedy around 1800 is in large part a reflection on history, an effort to understand how ancient literature can be meaningful in modernity. Greek tragedy becomes the ground for an engagement with the pastness of antiquity and its possible presence. Idealist theories, far from dissolving particularity in abstraction, seek a mediation between philological historicism and philosophical universalism in considering Greek tragedy. A genealogy of the tragic suggests that such mediation remains a vital task for scholars of the Classics.

This thesis explores the anxieties and opportunities that attend fame and posterity in the second sophistic and how they play out in both literary and monumental expressions of cultural production. I consider how elite provincials in the Roman empire, who are competitive, bi- or even tri-cultural, status-driven, often politically active, and engaged in cultural production, attempt to construct a future presence for themselves either through the composition of literature that is aimed (at least in part) at the future or through efforts to write themselves into the landscape of their native or adopted cities. I argue that the cultural and temporal perspective of these men drives their multifarious, playful, and self-reflexive approach to the production of literature or monuments. For those men engaged in the ‘second sophistic’, in the narrower, Philostratean definition, there is an ever present tether on their creative efforts, in that for contemporary success they must immerse themselves in the culture of classical Athens; and the prominent practice of epideictic oratory, with its promotion of improvisation and lack of repetition, discourages the kind of literary effort that aims at eternity. At the same time, their attempts to build themselves into the hearts of cities is less restricted, in that those who possess or have access to sufficient wealth can grant elaborate benefactions which essentially stand as monuments to their financer. Nevertheless, their belated position with respect to the Greek literary canon and the heights of political and cultural prestige invested in classical Greece infuses the cultural efforts of the second sophistic with a sense of pathos that acknowledges the impossibility of creating and controlling one’s future reputation regardless of how much effort is applied. At the same time, this impossible position, rather than limiting them, endows these men with a varied, self-ironizing, intertextual, intermedial, and unique approach to cultural production that actively engages with the inescapable and laudable past in order to carve a lasting impression on the literary and physical landscape of the Roman empire.

This thesis aims to contribute to the study of the role of the civic past in the public discourse of fourth-century Athens. It does so by close examination of the surviving public speeches of Demosthenes and Aeschines, arguing that presentation of the city’s history in front of mass audiences held singular persuasive potential for public speakers, allowing them to furnish with a more meaningful ethical context both the discussion of issues addressed in the Assembly and the arguments advanced in public trials. Deploying the past convincingly in such settings redounded to speakers’ personal credibility and authority, and Demosthenes and Aeschines – who offer rare examples of paired opposing speeches from the same trials – are selected as ‘case-study’ orators in order to illustrate: i) the importance of the invoking of Athenian historical models, both distant and recent, to Demosthenes’ self-fashioning as a politician; and ii) the extent to which orators made the very question of how to cite the past in public a stake in their wider struggle for political pre-eminence, seeking to be recognized as the ‘true’ and authoritative mediator of this material. These interests are reflected in the organization of the thesis. After an Introduction which discusses key preliminaries, Chapter One argues for Demosthenes’ early recognition of the potential of historical illustration for wider self-presentation, honed over the course of his Assembly career (Chapter Two) to become essential to his self-casting as Athens’s leading statesman. Chapter Three compares Demosthenic and Aeschinean approaches to citing the past in court, in two prosecutions from the mid-340s, and Chapters Four and Five – focusing on the high-profile Embassy and Crown trials – move to argue the importance of each politician’s contestation of the other’s versions of history to their battle over the reputations arising from their careers to date. The Conclusion summarizes, and reflects on some methodological aspects with a view to further work.

This thesis is a new edition of the Preface and Books 1-8 of Pseudo-Arcadius’ Epitome of Herodian’s Περὶ καθολικῆς προσῳδίας. It includes an introduction, critical apparatus, apparatus of parallel passages and notes on the text, and is intended as a contribution to modern Herodianic studies. Most of our knowledge of Greek accentuation is due to Herodian’s lost Περὶ καθολικῆς προσῳδίας. The main sources for this work, an epitome misattributed to Arcadius and another by John Philoponus, do not have modern critical editions. Lentz’s only collected edition of Herodian’s works (1867-70) is difficult to work with, because Lentz attempts to reconstruct Herodian’s work rather than to lay out the surviving evidence. The new critical edition of Pseudo-Arcadius’ Epitome is a response to the need for new and separate editions of the sources for the Περὶ καθολικῆς προσῳδίας. A new edition of this text is important because the previous two editions (Barker 1820, Schmidt 1860) have many weaknesses; neither editor examined all the surviving manuscripts, and they did not read the manuscripts themselves but used copies made by other people. My new examination of all the surviving manuscripts, excepting some very late and uncontroversially derivative manuscripts, comes to a new conclusion about their interrelations. The two manuscripts which I am the first to employ turn out to be the only non-derivative manuscripts, and therefore by far the most important. They enable us to improve the text significantly. My introduction includes a substantial new evaluation of the interpolated or doubtful sections in the epitome, whose study is impeded by confusion as to their date and relationships to other works. It also discusses the authorship of this epitome, and its grammatical terminology and concepts. Another innovation is the apparatus of parallel passages. The collection of other texts that have derived material from Herodian shows the extent of Herodian’s influence on later grammatical texts. The parallel passages, as witnesses to Herodian’s text in some form, often enable us to correct the text of Pseudo-Arcadius’ Epitome. A further contribution of my thesis consists of the commentary, which discusses corrupt passages, features of the text that have never been explained before, and places where specific details of the epitomator’s methods can be identified. The commentary also provides argumentation supporting decisions taken in editing the text, and other helpful information for the understanding of the text.

In this thesis, I argue that Sophoclean characters take shape through a number of different kinds of interaction. On the most basic level, interaction occurs between characters; interactions between characters, however, provide a framework for interactions between those characters and a variety of more abstract concepts. These interactions, by allowing characters to situate themselves with respect to concepts such as, for example, the social roles which shape the society of the play, provide a more complex picture of the personalities depicted onstage; a fuller view of Antigone’s personality, for example, emerges both from her own interactions with the concept of sisterhood and from the differences between her interactions with that concept and Ismene’s. At the same time, these interactions involve the audience in both the construction and the interpretation of Sophoclean characters; as they watch figures interact with each other onstage, the audience, in turn, interact with their own prior knowledge of the concepts which drive the characters of a play. In my five chapters, I discuss five different areas of interaction. In my first chapter, I look at interactions between characters and myth, arguing that Sophoclean characters emerge out of a tension between novelty and familiarity. In my second chapter, I discuss the interactions between characters and their social roles, looking at the problem of appropriate role performance as it applies to Sophoclean characters. My third chapter deals with characters and their memories; I argue that Sophoclean characters shape and are shaped by their memories of past events depending on shifting present circumstances. In my fourth chapter, I discuss the interactions between characters and the passage of time and suggest that Sophoclean figures are characterized by the ways in which they move through time and respond to its passage. In my final chapter, I look at the use of general statements by Sophoclean characters, arguing that the ability of characters to generalize successfully provides a useful measure of their ability to function in the world of the play.

Esta dissertação dedica-se ao estudo da persuasão nos discursos proferidos por Odisseu no canto XIV da Odisseia, levando em consideração a interação de três elementos:o orador, o auditório e a argumentação. É seu objetivo refletir sobre qual tese Odisseu busca compartilhar com seu público, Eumeu, e as estratégias de que se vale para atingir esse fim. / This dissertation is a study about the persuasion in Odysseus´ speeches in Odyssey XIV, observing three elements: the orator, the audience and the argumentation. My target is make a reflection about what idea Odysseus wants to share with his audience, Eumaios, and the strategies to do it.

Por meio da análise das ações de dois heróis de peças do teatro Ático antigo, o presente trabalho elabora uma comparação entre a construção de dois tipos de comportamento marginal, e entre as diferentes consequências advindas dessas condutas que se colocam à margem da sociedade dramática. Nesse sentido, a partir da caracterização da marginalidade do herói personagem-título, da tragédia de Eurípides, Hipólito, demonstrarei de que modo a escolha do rapaz pela virgindade está intrinsecamente ligada às consequências desgraçadas que se abatem sobre a casa de seu pai, Teseu. De fato, considero que porque Hipólito escolhe deliberadamente, ou seja, sem coerção física ou mental, viver à margem dos costumes de sua comunidade dramática, ele é completamente responsável por desencadear a vingança de Afrodite que arruinará a vida de sua família. Do mesmo modo, através da delimitação da atitude marginal do herói Diceópolis, da comédia de Aristófanes, Acarnenses, elaborarei de que modo da escolha que o personagem faz pela paz privada, transgressora em relação à decisão da maioria dos cidadãos pela continuidade da guerra, decorrem as consequências etílicas, sexuais e gastronômicas com as quais ele arca. Assim, o objetivo desse trabalho diz respeito a entrelaçar de que modo Hipólito é desgraçado por causa de suas ações marginais e o porquê Diceópolis é feliz graças à marginalidade de suas ações. E, em última instância, pretendo explicitar por quais vias tanto o personagem da tragédia quanto o personagem da comédia são responsáveis pelos frutos que colhem de seus modos de vida à margem. / Through an analysis of the actions of two heroes present in plays from the Ancient Attic drama, this work draws a comparison between the construction of two types of marginal behavior, as well as between the different consequences resulting from these behaviors. In this sense, following the characterization of the marginality of Hippolytus, the homonymous hero of Euripides tragedy, I shall demonstrate how the young mans choice for virginity is intrinsically related to the disgraceful consequences that befall Theseuss house. In fact, I consider that because Hippolytus deliberately chooses (i.e. without physical or mental coercion) to live outside his dramatic community refusing its customs, he is completely responsible for Aphrodites revenge, which ruins his family. In the same way, by delimiting the marginal attitude of Dikaiopolis, from Aristophanes comedy, Acharnians, I shall elucidate the manner in which the characters choice for private peace, transgressive of the majoritys decisions for the continuity of the war, is followed by ethylic, sexual and gastronomic consequences he is faced with. Hence, the aim of this thesis is the intertwining of the way Hippolytus is disgraceful because of his marginal actions and the reason why Dikaiopolis is happy thanks to this very marginality. And, lastly, I intend to cast light upon the ways by which both the tragedy and comedys characters are responsible for whatever they reap from their marginal ways of life.

Esta pesquisa é basicamente desenvolvida em duas partes: (i) um capítulo introdutório, discutindo os principais problemas que envolvem a obra, além de algumas informações que julgamos relevantes acerca de alguns personagens que figuram no livro II; e (ii) a tradução do livro II das Helênicas. Em ambas as duas partes inserimos notas de rodapé de natureza histórica, linguística e/ou literária que contribuem para o esclarecimento de aspectos relevantes do texto. Na primeira parte desta pesquisa, fazemos um breve resumo das Helênicas, com ênfase no livro II. Com base na leitura da bibliografia crítica, comentamos brevemente algumas das principais questões em torno da obra: (i) a questão da composição; (ii) a suposição de que a primeira parte das Helênicas seja uma continuidade da História da Guerra do Peloponeso de Tucídides; (iii) nexos com seus predecessores: Heródoto e Tucídides; (iv) o caráter didático de cunho moral das Helênicas e, finalmente, (v) a repercussão e receptividade das Helênicas na Antiguidade e nos estudos mais recentes. Para a tradução e o estudo do texto grego, utilizamos a edição de E. C. Marchant (Oxford Classical Texts, 2008) / This research is basically divided in two parts: (i) an introductory chapter, discussing the main issues concerning the work, and providing additionally some biographical details about the main characters of Book II; and (ii) the translation into Portuguese of Book II of Xenophon\'s Hellenica. The study is enriched by footnotes with historical, linguistic and/or literary informations in order to clarify relevant aspects of the text. In the introductory chapter, we present a brief summary of Xenophon\'s Hellenica emphasizing the content of Book II. Based on the recent literature on Xenophon, we comment briefly some important issues concerning the work as a whole, such as (i) the problem of its composition and arrangement; (ii) the assumption that the first part of the Hellenica consists in a continuation of Thucydides\' History of the Peloponnesian War; (iii) Xenophon\'s relationship with his predecessors: Herodotus and Thucydides; (iv) the ethical and didactical purpose of the Hellenica, and finally (v) the reception of the Hellenica in Antiquity and in the modern and contemporary literature on Xenophon. For the translation and the study of the Greek text we have used EC Marchant\'s edition (Oxford Classical Texts, 2008)

Esta pesquisa é basicamente desenvolvida em duas partes: (i) um capítulo introdutório, discutindo os principais problemas que envolvem a obra, além de algumas informações que julgamos relevantes acerca de alguns personagens que figuram no livro II; e (ii) a tradução do livro II das Helênicas. Em ambas as duas partes inserimos notas de rodapé de natureza histórica, linguística e/ou literária que contribuem para o esclarecimento de aspectos relevantes do texto. Na primeira parte desta pesquisa, fazemos um breve resumo das Helênicas, com ênfase no livro II. Com base na leitura da bibliografia crítica, comentamos brevemente algumas das principais questões em torno da obra: (i) a questão da composição; (ii) a suposição de que a primeira parte das Helênicas seja uma continuidade da História da Guerra do Peloponeso de Tucídides; (iii) nexos com seus predecessores: Heródoto e Tucídides; (iv) o caráter didático de cunho moral das Helênicas e, finalmente, (v) a repercussão e receptividade das Helênicas na Antiguidade e nos estudos mais recentes. Para a tradução e o estudo do texto grego, utilizamos a edição de E. C. Marchant (Oxford Classical Texts, 2008) / This research is basically divided in two parts: (i) an introductory chapter, discussing the main issues concerning the work, and providing additionally some biographical details about the main characters of Book II; and (ii) the translation into Portuguese of Book II of Xenophon\'s Hellenica. The study is enriched by footnotes with historical, linguistic and/or literary informations in order to clarify relevant aspects of the text. In the introductory chapter, we present a brief summary of Xenophon\'s Hellenica emphasizing the content of Book II. Based on the recent literature on Xenophon, we comment briefly some important issues concerning the work as a whole, such as (i) the problem of its composition and arrangement; (ii) the assumption that the first part of the Hellenica consists in a continuation of Thucydides\' History of the Peloponnesian War; (iii) Xenophon\'s relationship with his predecessors: Herodotus and Thucydides; (iv) the ethical and didactical purpose of the Hellenica, and finally (v) the reception of the Hellenica in Antiquity and in the modern and contemporary literature on Xenophon. For the translation and the study of the Greek text we have used EC Marchant\'s edition (Oxford Classical Texts, 2008)

Mythological figures play a number of roles in literature: they may, of course, appear in person as developed characters, but they may also contribute more indirectly, as part of the substratum from which rhetorical argument or literary characterisation are constructed, or as a background against which other literary strategies (for example, the rewriting of epic or the appropriation of Greek culture by the Romans) can be marked out. This thesis sets out to examine the way in which the figure of Penelope emerges from unknown origins, acquires portrayal in almost canonical form in Homer's Odyssey, and then takes part in the subsequent interplay of Homeric and other literary allusions throughout later Classical literature (with chapters focusing particularly on fifth-century Greek tragedy, Hellenistic poetry, and Augustan poetry). In particular, it focuses on the manner in which, despite the potential complexities of the character and the possible variants in her story, she became quintessentially a stereotypical figure. In addition to considering example where Penelope is evoked by name, a case is also made for the thesis that allusion, or intertextual reference, could also evoke Penelope for an ancient audience. A central point of discussion is what perception of Penelope would be called to mind by intertextual reference. The importance of approaching relationships between ancient texts in intertextual terms rather terms of strict "allusion" is thus demonstrated. The formation of the simplified picture is considered in the light of folk-tale motifs, rhetorical simplification of myth, and favoured story patterns. The appendices include a summary of the myth of Penelope with all attested variants, and a comprehensive list of explicit references to her in classical literature.