The thesis examines Coleridge's criticism of Wordsworth in the Biographia Literaria in the context of the contemporary review reaction to Wordsworth's poetry and theory of poetic diction, concentrating throughout on Wordsworth's most representative and persistent critic, Francis Jeffrey. The thesis is divided into two sections, according to a distinction laid down in the opening pages of the Biographia. The first examines "the long continued controversy concerning the true nature of poetic diction", the second, "the real poetic character" of William Wordsworth. The first section, on "The Language of Poetry", opens with a discussion of the explicit and implicit aspirations of the Preface to the Lyrical Ballads, relating them to the theory of mind and nature in Wordsworth's poetry, and to Wordsworth's poetic practice. Chapter Two discusses Coleridge's reading of the Preface, its misrepresentation of the Preface's basic assumptions, and the extent to which Coleridge assimilates many of the arguments of the contemporary reviewers, only to move beyond them. The second section, "The Poet, the People, and the Public", concentrates more closely on the criticism of Francis Jeffrey. Chapter Three deals, briefly, with the prejudices of Jeffrey's criticism - with the Edinburgh Review as an historical enterprise - and then, at length, with the principles of his criticism as revealed in his review of Archibald Alison's Essays on the Nature and Principles of Taste and his reviews of other aesthetic, ethical, and philosophical writings. After establishing the critical ambiguity of Jeffrey's associationist aesthetic, Chapter Four moves to a comparison of Jeffrey's and Coleridge's criticism of Wordsworth, treating their similarities and differences on the subject of poetic sensibility and poetic genius. The final chapter, Chapter Five, looks at the social and political implications of Jeffrey's rejection of Wordsworth, interpreting that rejection as prophesying and enforcing the isolation of the poet from the public. Throughout, Coleridge's Biographia Literaria is seen as a coherent response to the contemporary reviewers generally, and, more specifically, to Francis Jeffrey's criticism of William Wordsworth.

This thesis, concerned with critical response and not with influence, examines British opinions of Goethe's: works and life as expressed in review articles, prefaces- to translations, creative works, memoirs and correspondence, and biographical studies. The period is divided into two sections, before and after 1845, and in each section there is. one chapter on a Goethe-critic of outstanding importance (Carlyle and G.H. Lewes, respectively), followed by two chapters on the general critical response. The aim is to discover types of response to Goethe and to show how they are related to each other. Chapter one examines the successive stages, of Carlyle's intellectual relationship to Goethe, and shows the unbalanced and essentially transient nature of his adherence. Chapters two and three deal respectively with reception of individual works by Goethe and with more general opinions, showing a rapid increase in the interest and respect inspired by Goethe in Britain, but also a strong distrust in many quarters, normally centred on the moral deficiencies of Goethe's works and life. Chapter four studies in detail G.H. Lewes's intellectual development up to the 1850s, and connects the various features of his biography of Goethe (1855) with other aspects of his thought. Chapters five and six consider separately negative and positive attitudes to Goethe from 1846 to 1865. Moralistic distrust persists among an older generation of critics, but the general tendency is more towards adverse criticism on artistic grounds and unworried pity for an incomplete moral character, or appreciation of the freshness and healthiness of Goethe's art and an admiration of the breadth of his wisdom which stops short of the messianic claims for Goethe as a potential moral and religious leader made by Carlyle and a few others inspired by Carlyle.

I wish to argue the following points: 1. MT Jeremiah gives a more complex text form in its more intricate poetic structure and, therefore, represents a more ancient or earlier form of verses 10:1-18. 2. LXX Jeremiah demonstrates later interpretative and textual developments in its logical structure of verses 10:1-18, which gives emphasis to verse 11 in its structural placement of verse 9 within that of verse 5, along with the necessary deletions of verses 10:6-8 and 10. 3. Qumran, apocryphal, and pseudepigraphtical material demonstrate the cultural and scribal milieu that readily explains the alterations evident in the Septuagint text form of 10:1-18. These three primary arguments will be expressed in greater detail in chapters 2, 3, and 4. Chapter 2 concerns the Masoretic text form of 10:1-18 and explicates its text form's structure. Chapter 3 discusses the Septuagint text form of 10:1-18 and analyzes its textual developments and translation technique. Chapter 4 surveys Second Temple Period Jewish literature that contains the text of Jer 10:1-18 or references its material. I will study Jeremiah 10:1-18 with the traditional tools of textual criticism along with other biblical criticisms as well. In this thesis, I wish to argue that the texts of 4Q71 (4QJerb) and LXX Jer 10 show evidence of a secondary nature in comparison to the MT tradition as reflected in 4Q70 (4QJera). The abbreviation of the passage and the transposition of 10:9 within 10:5 reflected in 4Q71 and LXX 10 demonstrate an easier and later textual variant in comparison to the more original text form of MT Jer 10. I shall observe that 4Q71 and LXX Jer 10:1-18's alterations to MT's older text form were done for the sake of attempting to smooth out the logical flow of the pericope.

So far only a limited number of biblical books in Church Slavonic has been studied and edited, and the book of Ecclesiastes does not feature among these. Ecclesiastes is not a mainstream book such as the Gospels and the Psalter but rather a peripheral biblical text never used in Eastern Orthodox liturgical services. Its late date and small number of witnesses, which also reflect its marginal status, are additional reasons why this particular book has not attracted much scholarly attention in the past. This thesis is intended to contribute to studies in the history of the Church Slavonic Bible by editing the unpublished text of Ecclesiastes including its catenary versions and discussing its textual tradition. Ecclesiastes surfaces as a complete text relatively late: the earliest extant Cyrillic manuscripts are from the 15th century. Such a late date may be an indication that there was no pressing need for translating the non-liturgical book of Ecclesiastes. Two Church Slavonic translations of Ecclesiastes are extant: one, attested in Cyrillic manuscripts, survives in three distinct types: a continuous version of the text (32 manuscripts of the 15th-17th centuries), a fragmentary commentated version (1 manuscript of the 16th century), a fragmentary commentated insertion (8 manuscripts of the 15th-16th centuries). The other translation is a Croatian Church Slavonic version in Glagolitic breviaries (17 manuscripts of the 13th-16th centuries). The structure of the thesis is determined by the nature of the subject, which deals with textual criticism. The chapters are organised into a series of sections which all have headings. This somewhat 'atomistic' approach is necessitated by the fact that we are faced with fragmentary and incomplete evidence of manuscript sources, and therefore only detailed examination and comparison of various manuscripts and versions of the text will enable us to solve, at least in part, the textual history of the book in question. The limitations of the present study are the scarcity of manuscripts and the lateness of the tradition. These, however, are familiar 'obstacles' recognised by Slavists working on similar subjects. The thesis consists of an introduction, which presents a brief historical outline of the Church Slavonic biblical translations, 4 chapters, conclusion, bibliography and 2 appendices: the first of these contains a variorum edition of the continuous text of Ecclesiastes; the second, the parallel texts from continuous, commentated and interpolated versions. Chapter 1 gives a list of all the extant manuscripts of Ecclesiastes with short descriptions including dating (on palaeographical grounds), and investigates the textual relationships between various groups of manuscripts using the classical method of textual criticism and stemmatics. This leads on to a discussion of the type of edition to be used. At the end of the chapter a stemma codicum is constructed. Analysis of the language is carried out in an attempt to date the translation on linguistic grounds. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the Greek and Slavonic catena and explores some of the key issues arising out of the existence of several versions and early fragments of Ecclesiastes. It deals with problems concerning the date and place of the translation of Ecclesiastes. Detailed analysis sheds some light on the textual peculiarities of the three versions: commentated, interpolated and continuous. The complex interrelationship between these three versions is investigated further and a comparison with the earlier extant fragments of the catena is also carried out. Chapter 3 deals with the quotations from Ecclesiastes in early translated texts and in original Old Russian literature. Quotations found in medieval Slavonic texts, both translated and original, appear to be independent of the translation of continuous Ecclesiastes known from manuscripts of around the 15th century. However, the quotations prove that parts of Ecclesiastes were known in some form of exegetical compilations. Chapter 4 investigates the translation of Ecclesiastes in the Croatian Church Slavonic breviary tradition. It examines claims made by scholars in the past and present with regards to its authorship and to the language of the source from which this text was translated. The conclusion is drawn that the text was translated purely from Latin. This conclusion is based on a number of findings: errors of translation, divergences in wording and grammatical forms between the Croat Glagolitic and Cyrillic Church Slavonic texts, and certain syntactical constructions such as periphrastic expressions for the future, which point unambiguously to a Latin original. In addition the date of the translation is placed roughly between the 12th and the 13th centuries. The conclusions summarize the findings of the study: textual analysis of the continuous text of Ecclesiastes indicates that all the extant Cyrillic manuscripts come from a single translation; this translation was made at some time between the 10th century and the beginning of the 15th century. Commmentated and interpolated versions should be treated as redactions deriving from a fuller catena. This fuller catena may have given rise to the continuous text through the removal of the commentary. Alternatively, the orginal plain text may have been added to the newly translated commentary to produce a commentated version. Bearing in mind that it is hard to decide conclusively between these possibilities, the difficulties of reconstructing archetypes of the plain text and the commentary are shown. The investigation of the text in the Croatian tradition demonstrates that the translation in the breviaries was made from Latin, and thereby eliminates the hypothesis that Methodius was the translator of this version. GB is chosen as a base text for the edition in Appendix 1. The main reason for doing so is pragmatic, for it offers as complete a text as is available to us. Besides, the availability of information on the cultural and historical circumstances surrounding the production of GB, in addition to its importance for the history of the East Slavonic biblical tradition makes it more worthwhile. By publishing the text from manuscript Sinodal'nyj 915 (GB) with a critical apparatus, supplying variants from other manuscripts, the editorial 'control' which the compilers of GB exercised while working with the text translated from Greek is illustrated. They appear to have compared their exemplar with another Slavonic witness to fill a lacuna in the middle of the text, and they shortened the interpolation by removing the commentary. It seems that they deliberately left the biblical verses in the interpolation intact. The textual evidence does not support the supposition that the compilers of GB collated their text of Ecclesiastes with any Greek or Latin sources. The choice of GB for the edition constitutes a significant step towards wider research into and eventual publication of the Gennadian Bible, which has received little attention hitherto, despite its significance as the first complete Church Slavonic Bible. In appendix 2 three versions of Ecclesiastes are presented in a tabular form: the continuous version is taken from the manuscript Sinodal'nyj 915 (GB), the commentated version from the manuscript Undol'skij 13, and the interpolated version from the manuscript Pogodinskij 1 with variant readings from the manuscripts of group 1. In the thesis several new findings are presented. These are: the absence of any link between the versions of Ecclesiastes in the Cyrillic and in the Glagolitic manuscripts, and the implausibility of a Methodian origin for the Croatian Church Slavonic text.

<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal" / mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0 / mso-tstyle-colband-size:0 / mso-style-noshow:yes / mso-style-parent:"" / mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt / mso-para-margin:0in / mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt / mso-pagination:widow-orphan / font-size:10.0pt / font-family:"Times New Roman" / mso-ansi-language:#0400 / mso-fareast-language:#0400 / mso-bidi-language:#0400 / } </style> <![endif]-->This thesis explores the ways in which Cape Town rap group Prophets of da City articulate their resistance to apartheid and, in particular, the ways in which they attempted to intervene in politicians' attempts to pacify the black electorate during the build- up to South Africa's first democratic elections. Initially, I attempt to clear a space from which one could discuss POC's work as postmodern and postcolonial. I then theorise POC's use of sampling as a postmodern strategy whilst, at the same time, pointing out that rap has its origins in the African- American tradition of Signifyin(g). Through my discussion sampling, I suggest that rap, as postmodern cultural practice, challenges concepts of originality as well as uniqueness. I also discuss POC's work as part of subculture and analyse Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing in order to explore the black artist's struggle for space* within the public sphere. Finally, I contend that both Lee and POC's texts are flawed because they marginalise gender politics. I briefly discuss Queen Latifa's rap music to suggest that the discourses of race and gender are inseparable.</p>

<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal" / mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0 / mso-tstyle-colband-size:0 / mso-style-noshow:yes / mso-style-parent:"" / mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt / mso-para-margin:0in / mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt / mso-pagination:widow-orphan / font-size:10.0pt / font-family:"Times New Roman" / mso-ansi-language:#0400 / mso-fareast-language:#0400 / mso-bidi-language:#0400 / } </style> <![endif]-->This thesis explores the ways in which Cape Town rap group Prophets of da City articulate their resistance to apartheid and, in particular, the ways in which they attempted to intervene in politicians' attempts to pacify the black electorate during the build- up to South Africa's first democratic elections. Initially, I attempt to clear a space from which one could discuss POC's work as postmodern and postcolonial. I then theorise POC's use of sampling as a postmodern strategy whilst, at the same time, pointing out that rap has its origins in the African- American tradition of Signifyin(g). Through my discussion sampling, I suggest that rap, as postmodern cultural practice, challenges concepts of originality as well as uniqueness. I also discuss POC's work as part of subculture and analyse Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing in order to explore the black artist's struggle for space* within the public sphere. Finally, I contend that both Lee and POC's texts are flawed because they marginalise gender politics. I briefly discuss Queen Latifa's rap music to suggest that the discourses of race and gender are inseparable.</p>

Magister Artium - MA / This thesis explores the ways in which Cape Town rap group Prophets of da City articulate their resistance to apartheid and, in particular, the ways in which they attempted to intervene in politicians' attempts to pacify the black electorate during the build- up to South Africa's first democratic elections. Initially, I attempt to clear a space from which one could discuss POC's work as postmodern and postcolonial. I then theorise POC's use of sampling as a postmodern strategy whilst, at the same time, pointing out that rap has its origins in the African- American tradition of Signifyin(g). Through my discussion sampling, I suggest that rap, as postmodern cultural practice, challenges concepts of originality as well as uniqueness. I also discuss POC's work as part of subculture and analyse Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing in order to explore the black artist's struggle for space* within the public sphere. Finally, I contend that both Lee and POC's texts are flawed because they marginalise gender politics. I briefly discuss Queen Latifa's rap music to suggest that the discourses of race and gender are inseparable.