Si uales, bene est, ego ualeo: algumas concepções do gênero epistolar greco-romano

Roman authors referred to Latin and Greek as utraque lingua (both our languages), and the study of Classics has traditionally entailed an appreciation of the entanglement and complex relations between Latin and Greek language and literature. However, the Roman world was linguistically diverse—multilingual, not bilingual. Especially since the pioneering work of James Adams (Adams 2003, cited under General Overviews), classicists have begun to engage more fully with modern bi- and multilingualism theory and practice and to explore more systematically beyond Latin and Greek, literature, and the elite. This article is designed to introduce some of the key scholarship in this rapidly expanding and important field, presenting not only recent works, but also some of the earlier research that remains influential. It begins with a selection of general overviews, which characterize the new wave and more traditional approaches. It then offers a short selection of general surveys of languages in the Roman world and introductory, influential texts in modern bilingualism studies. The rest of the article is split loosely between epigraphic regional studies, literary bilingualism, and technical linguistic studies. Discussion in the Regional Studies section makes it clear that some areas (e.g., Egypt) have a long tradition of investigation into bi- and multilingualism, whereas others remain relatively under-researched. In the largely literary sections, the focus is on Greek and Other Languages in Latin Literature, Translation Literature, and “Roman Greek”, which concentrates on the Greek of Roman writers and also considers epigraphic sources such as the senatus consulta. In these sections the viewpoint is primarily on bi- and multilingualism in literary and related sources and does not seek to encompass the wider literary scholarship. The final section, Technical Linguistic Studies, contains research related to both lexical and non-lexical contact phenomena.

Part 1 Greek literature: Oliver Taplin, Greek hexameter poetry Leslie Kurke, archaic poetry (down to the New Music) Andrea Nightingale, ideas, science, and Philosophy (down to the beginnings of the Hellenistic Schools) Peter Wilson, Fifth Century drama Leslie Kurke, Herodotus and Thucydides Christopher Carey, rhetoric Jane Lightfoot, Alexander to actium Jane Lightfoot, Greek literature under the Romans. Part 2 Latin Literature: Matthew Leigh, Latin literature before 70 BC Christina Krauss, oratory and history down to Augustus Llewelyn Morgan, poetry of the Late republic Llewelyn Morgan, poetry c.40 BC to c.19 BC Philip Hardie, poetry from c.19 BC to the death of Tiberius Matthew Leigh, Imperial epic Catherine Connors, Imperial poetry and satire down to c.150 AD Christina Kraus, Imperial prose Michael Dewar, Latin literature after c.150.

BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 395 its own sometimes cumbersome and inelegant subtitle. The rationale for this is clear, but it does have the undesirable effect of significantly disrupting the reading process, a paradoxical quality in a work which seeks to deepen our fascination with the immersive potential of stories. University of Bristol Vanda Zajko The Reception of the HOMERIC HYMNS. Edited by Andrew Faulkner, Athanassios Vergados, and Andreas Schwab. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2016. Pp. xiv, 409, 17 figures. As the HOMERIC HYMNS offer stories and epithets about the gods not found elsewhere in ancient literature, and as they were often (but not always) ascribed to Homer, one might have suspected that they enjoyed a wide circulation in the Greco-Roman world. But that was not necessarily the case. The longer hymns are certainly part of performance in the archaic and classical periods but, other than Thucydides’ reference to the hApollo at 3.104.2–6, direct quotations or clear allusions to them are scarce in the classical period. Plato, for example, never mentions them in spite of his frequent reference to hymnic poetry. The Library at Alexandria most likely preserved a collection of the Hymns in some form (although certainly not in the form we have today) but there is no clear reference to them by Hellenistic scholars. In Callimachus and Apollonius one can occasionally detect learned quotations or strong verbal echoes, again mostly to the longer hymns, but here again verbal evidence is far more scant than one might have expected. Philodemus in the first century b.c.e. “may have brought the collection to Rome,” as the editors write (21). But, again, in what form? Even then the relative paucity of strong verbal echoes in Latin literature is noteworthy. A single copy of thirty-one hymns survives into late antiquity, it being the sole ancestor of the later Renaissance manuscripts, but our understanding of the transmission of the Hymns in the Byzantine period is limited. Only from the Renaissance forward can we clearly speak of influence and imitation. All this makes the study of reception, prior to the Renaissance, spotty and problematic. The volume consists of an Introduction by its three editors and seventeen chapters arranged in five parts. Part I on “Narrative and Art” comprises a single chapter, by Jenny Strauss Clay, containing a fine discussion of “representation” of stories in texts and on Greek vases. Focusing primarily on the hHermes, Clay suggests that a Caretan blackfigure hydria (circa 530 b.c.e.) “combines and compresses” (46) numerous scenes from the hymn (the theft and hiding of the cattle, the dais, and Apollo’s attempt to bind his brother, among others) into a compelling narrative of its own. She also proposes that the hymn was performed in the context of the symposium. Part II on “Latin Literature” (five chapters) jumps abruptly to the Roman period, followed by Part III on “Imperial and Late Antique Literature” (five chapters) and Part IV on “Byzantine Literature” (two chapters) before the study of reception gains firmer ground in Part V on “Renaissance and Modern Literature” (four chapters), which in this volume ends in 1826. To the editors’ credit, all of the chapters are unusually well integrated, due to a gathering of all the contributors to discuss pre-circulated papers. Prior to the Renaissance, much in this reception story remains speculative. Hard evidence is often lacking; attested parallels are more often than not thematic or structural rather than verbal or textual. One frequently reads contributors describing influences or reworkings as “plausible,” “possible,” “detected,” or even “weak.” With the paucity of 396 PHOENIX firmer evidence, the editors in the Introduction are overly confident, in my judgment, in asserting the Hymns’ popularity in the Hellenistic period and in making claims about intertextuality in this period. In particular, they are too quick to dismiss S. Douglas Olson’s detailed argument (8, n. 35)1 that many of the repeated phrases detected in this period stem from commonplace archaic hexameter phrasings. In short, the volume would have been stronger with a full chapter devoted to reception in the classical and Hellenistic periods (rather than the brief summary it offers, 4–15). Especially when dealing with...

A New Approach to Greek and Latin Literature - Joshua Whatmough: Poetic, Scientific and other Forms of Discourse. A New Approach to Greek and Latin Literature. (Sather Classical Lectures, vol. xxix.) Pp. xii+285. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press (London: Cambridge University Press), 1956. Cloth, 37s. 6d. net. - Volume 8 Issue 2

It is the argument of the present paper that it is worth reconsidering carefully wat the word ‘barbarian’ says about Greek and Roman attitudes towards other peoples over time. This will be based on literary sources of all kinds, including poetry and tragedy from the eighth century BC until the fourth century AD. The essence of what is seen as barabrism shifts over time as a consequence of changes in self-perception. In Greek literature the word almost always refers to foreigners, hardly ever to Greeks. Determining factors could be language, geographic origin, descent, religion and citizenship. Some of these could be changed. Towards the end of the fifth century there is a clear and strong shift towards negative judgement and moral disapproval. In Latin literature it is easier to distinguish clear-cut patterns. Since there was no argument about what it was to be a Roman it was obvious who was not a Roman, i.e. a barbarian. There was never any doubt that it was possible for a barbarian to become a Roman.

Imperial Greek and Latin Literature - A. Dihle (tr. M. Malzahn): Greek and Latin Literature of the Roman Empire. From Augustus to Justinian. Pp. vii+647. London, New York: Routledge, 1994 (first published in German in 1989). Cased, £45.00. - Volume 45 Issue 2

DESPITE HIS REPUTATION as a classical scholar, Friedrich Schlegel's novel, Lucinde (1799), has been interpreted from the time of its publication as advocating and displaying an anticlassical aesthetic. While some of its detractors focused on the scandal of the novel's autobiographical connections and its flouting of bourgeois sexual morality,1 Friedrich Schiller's reaction, expressed in a letter to Goethe, is typical in basing its condemnation of Lucinde on the novel's failure to adhere to certain aesthetic principles that were frequently associated with classical antiquity during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries:2Nach den Rodomontaden von Griechheit, und nach der Zeit, die Schlegel auf Studium derselben gewendet, hatte ich gehofft, doch ein klein wenig an die und Naivetat der Alten erinnert zu werden; aber diese Schrift ist der Gipfel moderner Unform und Unnatur, man glaubt ein Gemengsel aus Woldemar, aus Sternbald, und aus einem frechen franzosischen Roman zu lesen. (letter of July 19, 1799)[After all of Schlegel's boasting about his study of Greek and after all the time he spent on it, I would have hoped to find some trace of the simplicity and naivety of the ancients; but this writing is the pinnacle of modern formlessness and unnaturalness; it seems to be a mixture of Woldemar, Sternbald, and a provocative French novel.3]Schiller associates a classically influenced aesthetic with Simplicitat und Naivitat (simplicity and naivety), in accord with the view of antiquity expressed in his essay Uber naive und sentimentalische Dichtung (On Naive and Sentimental Poetry).4 His letter also echoes Winckelmann's attribution of edle Einfalt, und eine stille Grose (noble simplicity and quiet grandeur) to Greek art.5 For Schiller, a work such as Lucinde that embraces chaos, fragmentation, and change cannot be classical; rather, he associates the mixing of genres advocated and practiced by Schlegel with a modernity that he considers to be grotesque.Later critics have tended to adhere to Schiller's descriptive categorization of antiquity and modernity, even if they do not accept his aesthetic judgment of Lucinde, and they tend to emphasize the novel's modern aesthetic orientation-for example,its affinity with experimental novels of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, such as Cervantes's Don Quixote and Sterne's Tristram Shandy, which play with temporal structure and defy readers' expectations of coherent plot and character.6 Certainly, Lucinde situates itself in this modern, experimental tradition. I will argue, however, that Schlegel perceives aesthetic innovation and experimentation not as a rupture with the past but as extending back to classical antiquity; indeed, Lucinde derives many of its structuring aesthetic principles from classical sources. Some of these sources, such as Plato7 and the classical idyll,8 have been examined by previous critics. One of Schlegel's most important influences, however, remains unexplored by past and present criticism. Rather than Greek art, philosophy, and literature, Schlegel's aesthetic foundation for Lucinde is to be found in Latin literature, in particular Ovid's Amores and Metamorphoses.In his Gesprach uber die (Dialogue on Poetry, 1800), in the section Epochen der Dichtkunst (Eras of Poetic Art), Schlegel appears to share the assessment of Winckelmann and his followers that Latin literature (Virgil) is inferior to ancient Greek literature (Homer).9 Any literature following that of ancient Greece is a pale imitation of jenem hochsten Olymp der Poesie (Winckelmann 143; that highest Olympus of poetry) according to Schlegel's fictional speaker Andrea (Schlegel KA 2:5). Intriguingly, though, this section offers an assessment of Latin poetry that connects it to Schlegel's own work. In Latin literature, das Erotische und Gelehrte (144; the erotic and the erudite) dominate. This sounds very much like Schlegel's Lucinde, which attempts to combine eroticism with intellect to create a new philosophy of love and a new aesthetic. …

Exile has been the most productive literary topics in twentieth century literature. The increased reflection on exile in the twentieth century has not only influenced research in social sciences and modern languages, but has also left its mark on the classics, where interest in the exiles of antiquity has grown continuously over the past fifty years. This scholarly interest has been largely confined to the three most prominent ancient writers who went into exile, the 'exulum trias' Cicero, Ovid, and Seneca the Younger; moreover, modern concepts of exile literature have been applied to classical literature without the necessary caution. This chapter highlights some of the problems involved in recent approaches to exile in Greek and Latin literature. Then, it briefly explains the aim, concept, and structure of the present volume. Finally, the chapter gives an outline of the development of ancient discourse on exile. Keywords: Cicero; exiles of antiquity; Greek literature; Latin literature; Ovid; Seneca

The author's argument in this chapter is that Alciphron's Letters (especially Book 3, his Letters of Parasites ) engages closely with a long-standing tradition of writing in letter form about symposia and dinner parties. One strand in that tradition is the letter of invitation. The other is the retrospective banquet letter, in other words the kind of letter which offers a report of a dinner party for the benefit of someone who was not present. A great deal of scholarly attention has been given to Alciphron's relationship with New Comedy and a number of other genres, but his relationship with sympotic letter traditions has to his knowledge barely even been mentioned in earlier studies, let alone analysed at length. The category of the sympotic report letter has rarely been discussed at length within modern scholarship, despite the fact that it occurs so frequently within both Greek and Latin literature. Keywords:Alciphron; Greek literature; Latin literature; letters of invitation; letters of report; sympotic letter tradition

This thesis examines martyrdoms and suicides, or ‘voluntary deaths’ in Greek and Latin literature from the second to fourth centuries AD and analyses their similarities and differences to understand how they contributed to shaping contemporary social practices and beliefs. It attempts to bridge the gap between the study of martyrdom and the study of suicide by comparing accounts of martyrdom to stories of suicide in the same period. Taking a literary approach, and employing a narratological reading, this thesis proposes answers to the following questions: What are the rhetorical and thematic conventions of these narratives, and can they be referred to as similar? What do these descriptions reveal about social practices during this time, such as those associated with gender and sexuality? Can ideas about martyrdom be applied to suicide and vice versa? What do these literary similarities or differences reveal about how voluntary death was treated? Questions such as these have continued to be a source of contention for historians in martyrdom and suicide research. This thesis expands upon existing interpretative and theoretical models, such as those used by van Hooff (2002), Hill (2004), and Grig (2004), in order to increase the sophistication of modern understanding of ancient voluntary death and to contextualise stories about voluntary death within their own time and place. The primary goal of this thesis is therefore to explore what a comparative study of martyrdom and suicide accounts can tell us about the societies that produced them. In particular, it focuses on themes of power and chastity in relation to identity and gender and how they were presented in stories of voluntary death. I analyse how these deaths directly or indirectly contributed to shaping the practices and beliefs of men and women around these ideas in the second to fourth centuries AD. There are four texts analysed in relation to these themes: The Passion of Perpetua with Apuleius’ Metamorphoses, and The Acts of Paul and Thekla with Heliodorus’ Ethiopian Story. Connecting the martyrdoms and suicides within these texts to ancient authors and audiences reveals that accounts of voluntary death must not be taken at face value, and that they should be interpreted more critically while acknowledging their literary functions.

Poetry is a kind of discourse distinct from ordinary, everyday speech; it is an institution, a kind of speech that a society has marked as special, with special rules applying to its production and reception. Didactic poetry is a kind of poetry that it aims to instruct (Toohey, 2013: 2). In didactic poetry the reader is invited to consider not just the message and the brilliant language of its exposition, but what lies behind the message, the human values and the vision which the poem embodies. The article analyzes the work of Orientius “Commonitorium” and his role as an innovative writer of Latin didactic poetry as well as his position in the landscape of late antique literature of the 5th century AD. The aim of the article is to show to what extent the defining characteristics of the genre can be found in Orientius’ poem “Commonitorium” and to trace the permutations of these features throughout the text. A full range of issues, which scholarship on Orientius has hitherto neglected, will be studied: the “poetics” of the work, that is the poetic selfawareness expressed in the poem, as well as techniques of composition, rhetorical argumentation, strategies of persuasion and narration, intertextual allusions, relationship with contemporary works and other aspects. Scientific novelty. Whereas Latin poetry flourished under the reign of Augustus (27 BC – 14 AD) and the first century AD, only few poetic works survived which were produced in the later second and third century AD. After a long period of silence, Latin poetry had its comeback in late antiquity when in the 4th century AD various writers started composing poetic genres again. Instead of Rome, other locations became important breeding grounds for the production of literature, especially Gaul, where writers such as Ausonius, Paulinus of Nola, Sulpicius Severus, Sidonius Apollinaris and others were active. Whereas the genres composed by late antique writers were more or less the same as in Classical literature, most of their works differ in content and meaning (Gasparov, 1982: 2; Johnson, 2000: 335–337). Late antique writers were deeply familiar with their Classical literary predecessors, but due to the influence of Christian religion, the character of Latin literature produced in late antiquity also differs significantly from the works which were written by pagan writers in the preceding centuries. This article discusses the work of a poet who has been rarely studied so far. Orientius, whom the majority of scholars now identify with the homonymous bishop of Augusta Ausciorum (modern Auch, France) in Southern Gaul, is an important representative of didactic poetry and his work constitutes an important example in the history of the genre. His didactic poem with the title “Commonitorium”, in elegiacs was probably written around 430 AD. In conclusion, the “Commonitorium” presents itself as a serious poem concerned with issues of paramount importance to humanity. The question of what exactly the “Commonitorium” endeavours to teach is indeed of major importance for understanding the work. It claims to be truly universal work, encompassing everything that exists. Within two books, Orientius reveals to his readers/students the way to reach salvation, both gives us specific, concrete information and tells us how we should live our lives, how we should relate to our fellow human beings and to God.

The boundaries of literary genres in the ancient world were both fixed and fluid. In the hands of a talented writer, this fluidity offered the possibility of subtle, hybrid literary forms. This essay considers the use of poems as letters in the work of Palladas and Gregory of Nazianzos, who both played a major role in the revival of poetry in the fourth century AD. Among the epigrams of Palladas and Gregory, there are some that (to a degree cryptically) share features with the letter as a form of communication. Gregory also wrote seven verse epistles, which stand out for their originality in Greek literature, as verse letters are only previously found in Latin literature. Why did Gregory choose to write poems rather than prose letters on these occasions? How are these poems related to his prose letters to the same people or to those written in similar circumstances?

‘x is more beautiful than y’ sounds a standard thing to say in Greek and Latin literature; but it raises intricate and interesting issues, not least from the standpoint of y. This chapter draws on symbolic logic to compare the relation between assessing superiority or inferiority in beauty and making choices in love in both Greek and Latin literature. The various dynamics, logics, and rhetorics of desire in the light of inferiority and superiority are subjected to close scrutiny, paving the way for a discussion that addresses not only the complex scenarios that unfold here (paying special attention to the various ways in which the amorous hierarchy is set in relation to other hierarchies) but also the intriguing fact that such questions of relative inferiority and superiority in erotic matters seem to pervade Greek literature more extensively and differently than Latin.

BOOK REVIEWS 383 tary patterns (summarized, 465–466). Nevertheless, Rife’s volume is an interdisciplinary triumph and provides a rigorous model for future bioarchaeological research in the Mediterranean. CARRIE L.SULOSKY WEAVER University of Pittsburgh, clweaver@pitt.edu * * * The Plays of Hrotswitha of Gandersheim: Bilingual Edition. Translated by LARISSA BONFANTE [and Alexandra Bonfante-Warren]. Edited by ROBERT CHIPOK. Mundelein, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 2013. Pp. xxix + 411. Softcover, $29.00. ISBN 978-0-86516-783-4. Hrotswitha, a canoness in Gandersheim Abbey in Saxony, died after the turn of the 11th century CE, after having apparently been the first person, and certainly the first woman, to write dramatic literature in Latin since the classical period. Hrotswitha has thus garnered appropriately significant attention from feminist scholars and historians of drama, and it is generally within those two traditions that the present edition of Larissa Bonfante’s translation of Hrotswitha’s plays appears. This first bilingual edition of the plays pairs Bonfante’s 1979 translation (with contributions from Alexandra Bonfante-Warren and Nicole Diamente) with the Latin text edited by Walter Berschin in 2001. The English text is intended for performance, and it thus providesan avowedly non-literal translation while also interpolating stage and acting directions at many points. In order to make such a text accessible to modern students, the translation takes some liberties, for example unpacking the connotations of patrona in the dialogue itself rather than construing it simply as “patroness” and providing a distracting footnote (xvii and 402). The English also becomes more readable by “loosening up the extreme compression of the Latin” (xviii), for example rendering Latin ita as “You are quite right; it may well be so” (28–29). This approach produces a readable and fairly natural text generally faithful to the original. Indeed, the translation seems well suited for students interested in the plays as dramatic pieces with an eye to actual performance. The mise-en-page and copious stage and acting directions 384 BOOK REVIEWS facilitate that end, and the translation would work well in a performance situation . That specificity of audience raises the main problem with this current edition , namely the presence of the original Latin text. It is unclear what value the Latin text provides considering the audience for which it seems most suited and the non-literal nature of the translation. The departures from the original text are not marked, and the translation thus seems less than helpful in guiding students early in their learning of Latin. Moreover, the Latin text printed in the bilingual edition (Berschin’s) is not the text that served as the basis for the original translation (Helene Homeyer’s 1970 edition), creating additional opportunities for confusion. Pragmatically, the lack of modern punctuation in the Latin text and the absence of grammatical notes prevent this edition from providing the same quality guidance found in the best publications from Bolchazy-Carducci. The introductory material new to the bilingual edition is rather derivative and also unfortunately suffers from some mechanical errors. For example, some works cited only in short form in the footnotes do not appear in the bibliography (specifically in n. 8 on xi, which employs MLA citation style rather than the Chicago style of the other notes, and in n. 14 on xiv). The promulgation of the tired stereotype that medieval texts only rarely (if ever) follow the “rules” of Classical Latin (x) is a disappointment. The discussion of sources focuses more on Hrotswitha’s non-dramatic writing than on the plays and in fact provides little more than summary,whether ofthe plays themselvesor of secondaryscholarship (xiv–xvi). While the preface to the bilingual edition never completely hides its debt to various secondary sources, the depth of that debt goes unacknowledged in several places. This bilingual edition provides an English translation that should prove useful to students and classes seeking an accessible text ready to be performed. The utility of including the original Latin text, however, remains unclear, and the quality ofthe new prefatorymaterialleavesmuch to be desired. JONATHAN DAVIS-SECORD University of NewMexico, jwds@unm.edu ...

One of the most talented disciples of the illustrious comparative philologist Richard Porson, Peter Paul Dobree (1782–1825) is commemorated in this two-volume edition of Adversaria, consisting of his prolific notes on Greek and Latin literature, history, and philology. Dobree left an enduring impression upon English classical scholarship, despite his premature death shortly after accepting the Regius professorship of Greek at Cambridge. Edited by his successor at Cambridge, James Scholefield, the Adversaria attest to Dobree's scholarly probity and precision, offering insights into a mind whose major achievements undoubtedly still lay ahead. Volume 2 (1833) includes Dobree's notes on Greek literature - including the works of Sophocles, Aeschylus, Euripides, and Aristophanes - as well as his comments on such major Latin writers as Cicero, Livy, Horace, and Juvenal. Dobree was honoured among 'the first rank of English textual scholars' for his accuracy, rigour, and literary sensitivity - qualities demonstrated in these volumes.