Advertisement

International Journal of the Classical Tradition

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 247–277 | Cite as

Review articles

  • Stephen Scully
  • Arlene W. Saxonhouse
  • Eberhard Heck
  • Hartmut Leppin
Article

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Periodization inevitably distorts our understanding of the past as well as enabling it. Recent archaeological finds, dating to 1000 bce, at Lefkandi on Euboia reveal that areas in Greece were far less isolated in the Dark Ages than previously believed, leading some scholars to dispell the notion of a Greek Dark Age altogether; cf. Sarah Morris, “Introduction,” in Greece between East and West: 10th-8th Centuries BC (Gunter Kopcke and Isabelle Tokumaru edd.) (Mainz, 1992), xvii–xviii. A worthy rebuttal may be found by Ian Morris, “Periodization and the Heroes: Inventing a Dark Age,” in Inventing Ancient Culture (Mark Golden and Peter Toohey edd.) (London, 1997), 96–131. For a noteworthy discussion of the large number of settlements between 1100–700, including Lefkandi, that were only occupied for a few generations, see James Whitley, “Social Diversity in Dark Ages Greece,” The Annual of the British School at Athens 86 (1991), 34–65. For an overview of Greek history from 1200 to the eighth century, see Robin Osborne, Greece in the Making, 1200–479 bc, (London, New York, 1996), the chapter “The Problem of Beginnings,” pp. 19–51.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cf. Sarah Morris, Daidalos and the Origins of Greek Art (Princeton, 1992) and J. Hurwit, The Art and Culture of Early Greece (Ithaca, N.Y., 1985); Walter Burkert, The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age (tr. by M. E. Pinder and Walter Burkert) (Cambridge, Mass., 1992).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A number of Greeks, especially sophists and Hippocratic writers, questioned the Greek tendency to divide humans between Greeks and “barbarians”, see Heinrich von Staden, “Affinities and Elisions: Hellen and Hellenocentrism,” Isis 83 (1992), 580–81 and H.C. Baldry, The Unity of Mankind in Greek Thought (Cambridge, 1965).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Herodotus 2.50.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cf. the fourth-century Athenian orator Isocrates, who in his Burisis 21 and 28–30 also praises the Egyptians for their practical wisdom, law, and piety. For even greater admiration for Egyptian culture, see Hecataeus of Abdera, whose Aegyptica was written at the end of the fourth century. See Felix Jacoby, Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, IIIA (Leiden, 1940), esp. 264 F 1–6 and F 25. Also see Plato, Timaeus 20d–26e; on Diodorus of Sicily who, circa 40 BCE, wrote a history of the world, tracing the origin of many things, including the gods, writing, and mathematics to Egypt (cf. 1.9.2ff), see Thomas Cole, Democritus and the Sources of Greek Anthropology (Atlanta, 1990), 15–7 and 176–92.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cf. Jonathan Barnes, “The Hellenistic Platos,” Apeiron 24 (1991), 118, citing Heinrich Dörrie, Der Platonismus in der Antike vol. II (Stuttgart, 1990), 429 n. 13; Luc Brisson, “L'Egypte de Platon,” Les Etudes philosophiques (1987), 153–67, esp. 162–66; Bernard Mathieu, “Le voyage de Platon en Egypte,” Annales du Service des Antiquités d'Egypte 71 (1987), 153–67. Also see Geoffrey Kirk, “Popper on Science and the Presocratics,” Mind 69 (1960), 326–27, where he considers briefly Egyptian and Near Eastern influences.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cf. Proclus, In Platonis Timaeum commentarii (E. Diehl ed.), vol. I, ser. Bibliotheca Teubneriana (Leipzig, 1903), 76.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    While “Pythagorean” triangles were known in the Near East a millennium before the Greek philosopher, mathematician, and religious leader was born in Samos about 580 BCE, the Greeks connected him, and the origins of mathematics, with Egypt. For the Greek sense of indebtedness to the Egyptians, see Plato, Phaedrus 274c5–275b2 (but see Phaedrus' skepticism, 275b3–4); Aristotle, Metaphysics 1.1.981b23–25; Diodorus 1.9.6. See further Robert Palter, “Black Athena, Afrocentrism, and the History of Science,” in Black Athena Revisited (Mary Lefkowitz and Guy Rogers edd.) (Chapel Hill, 1996), 232–33 (first published in History of Science 31 [1993], 227–87), and Martin Bernal, “Response to Robert Palter,” History of Science 32 (1994), 445–64, with Palter's comments following, 464–68.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cf. Odyssey 4.219–34: Drugs, good and bad, grow in Egyptian soil and all Egyptians as descendants of Paion (“Healer”) are skilled physicians, the passage adds. Cf. Herodotus, 2.77 and 84. On the distinctiveness of Greek medicine, see G.F.R. Lloyd, Magic, Reason and Experience: Studies in the Origins and Development of Greek Science (Cambridge, 1979), 37–49 and 226–34; on healing practices in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Greece, see Guido Majno, The Healing Hand: Man and Wound in the Ancient World (Cambridge, Mass., 1975), 29–206.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cf. Aeschylus, Prometheus 460; Herodotus, 5.57–59; Plato, Phaedrus 274c5–275b2; scholia ad Hom. Il. 7.185 (=Hartmut Erbse [ed.], Scholia Graeca in Homeri Iliadem vol. II [Berlin, 1971], p. 261); Diodorus, 1.9.2; Pliny, Natural History 7.192–93. On the invention of the alphabet and on early Greek alphabets see L.H. Jeffrey, The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece, rev. and suppl. by A.W. Johnston (Oxford, 1990). For a minimalist view of the influence of other languages on Greek, see E.D. Francis, “The Impact of non-Indo-European languages on Greek and Mycenaean,” in Reconstructing Languages and Cultures (Edgar C. Polomé and Werner Winter edd.), Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 58 (Berlin & New York, 1992), 469–506. In response to the view that a single person invented the Greek alphabet in order to record the Homeric songs, as argued by Barry Powell, Homer and the Origin of the Greek Alphabet (Cambridge, 1991), see Deborah Steiner, “Greek Letters,” Arion 3rd ser. 5 (1997), 233–41.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cf. O. Neugebauer, The Exact Sciences in Antiquity 2nd ed. (Providence, 1957) and his A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy 3 vols. (New York, 1975); B.L. van der Waerden, Science Awakening (tr. by Arnold Dresden) (New York, 1961). For a study of tradition and innovation in the sciences in the Near East, Egypt, and Greece, see G.F.R. Lloyd, The Revolutions of Wisdom: Studies in the Claims and Practice of Ancient Greek Science (Berkeley, 1987), 50–108. Also see note 8, above. A recent view, not widely embraced, argues that the roots of the Greek novel, and those of its strange Latin cousin in works like the Satryicon and The Golden Ass, be traced not to Egypt, as is commonly done, but to Sumerian literature; cf. Graham Anderson, Ancient Fiction: The Novel in the Graeco-Roman World (Kent, 1984); against Anderson see now Consuelo Ruiz-Montero, “The Rise of the Greek Novel,” in The Novel in the Ancient World (Gareth Schmeling ed.), Mnemosyne Supplement 159 (Leiden, New York, & Köln, 1996), 75–6.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cf. A. Dessenne, Le Sphinx: étude iconographique (Paris, 1957). As a guardian of passageways, she can also lead to the Underworld. Now see in Ian Morris (ed.), Classical Greece: Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies, ser. New Directions in Archaeology (Cambridge, 1994), ch. 2 by Ian Morris, “Archaeologies of Greece,” pp. 8–47, and Herbert Hoffmann, “The riddle of the Sphinz: a case study in Athenian immortality symbolism,” pp. 71–80.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    The Mycenaean Sphinxes facing each other atop a doorway are found in the Pylos Museum; for other heraldic Mycenaean Sphinxes, see Jean-Claude Poursat, Les ivoires mycéniens (Paris, 1977), 59–61; cf. Reynold Higgins, Minoan and Mycenaean Art (London, 1981), 102, 116, 130; cf. Timothy Gantz, Early Greek myth: A Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources (Baltimore, 1993), 23–4 and 494–98 (in regard to Oedipus); Ingrid Krauskopf, s.v. “Oidipous,” in Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae VII (Zurich, 1994), Vol. I, p. 3–8; Vol. II, plates 10–80, also in regard to the Theban hero.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vol. I: The fabrication of ancient Greece (New Brunswick, N.J., 1987) has now been translated into five languages; vol. II: The archaeological and documentary evidence (1991); vol. III: Solving the riddle of the Sphinx (well under way). Bernal is also preparing for a popular audience Moses and Muses.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cf. Norma Thompson in IJCT 3.4 (Spring 1997), 529–533, a review of Mary Lefkowitz, Not Out of Africa: How Afrocentrism Became an Excuse to Teach Myth as History (New York, 1996). In response to the criticisms in these two recent volumes, a number of books are in preparation, including Black Athena Writes Back (Martin Bernal and David Chioni Moore, edd.; Duke University Press Durham, NC, scheduled release Spring 1999); Just Out of Africa (Molefi Asante and Maulana Karenga edd.); Heresy in the University (Jacques Berlinerblau, ed., Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ, scheduled for 1998).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    For a fine overview of Afrocentrism including a discussion of Egypt as an ancient black civilization in that ideology, see Gerald Early, “Unterstanding Afrocentrism,” Civilization (July–August 1995), 31–9. For the declining popularity of Arthur Haley's Roots and its edenic image of a precolonial Sub-Saharan, West Africa, see Jim Sleeper, “Way Out of Africa” in his Liberal Racism (New York, 1997), 96–117; see also Keith Richburg, Out of America: A Black Man Confronts Africa (New York, 1997). For the diversity of African cultures and a rethinking of the question of Pan-Africanism, see Anthony Appiah, In My Father's House: Africa in the Philosophy of Culture (New York, 1992).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    On science and culture, see von Staden (note 3. above), “, 578–95; also G.E.R. Lloyd, “Methods and Problems in the History of Science,” Isis 83 (1992), 564–77. On religion, see Burkert (note 2, above), The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age (tr. by M. E. Pinder and Walter Burkert) (Cambridge, Mass., 1992), 65–73, and passim; Christopher Faraone and Dirk Obbink (edd.), Magika Hiera. Ancient Greek Magic and Religion (New York, 1991); and my Homer and the Sacred City (Ithaca, 1990), 28–31 and 141–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cf. Penglase (pp. 185–96). For the need to exercise caution regarding Penglase's use of Mesopotamian myth, see W.G. Lambert's review of Penglase in the Journal of the American Oriental Society 116 (1996), 768–71. Equally, if not more, significant are the parallels between the Akkadian Enuma Elish and the Theogony, treated briefly by Penglase (pp. 189–95). For a fine new translation of the Akkadian creation myth, see Benjamin Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature 2nd ed. (Bethesda, Maryland, 1996), 350–401.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cf. Hartmut Erbse (ed.), Scholia Graeca in Homeri Iliadem vol. I (Berlin, 1969), Scholia A, p. 137. Also see my “The Nature of the Gods in Early Greek Poetic Thought” Philosophies of Nature: the Human Dimension (Robert S. Cohen and Alfred I. Tauber, eds.) (Dordrecht, 1997), forthcoming.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cf. Scully, ibid. (note 16, above); “Understanding Afrocentrism,” Civilization (July–August 1995), 31–9 Helene Foley, The Homeric Hymm to Demeter (Princeton, 1994), 61 and 118–37; Jenny S. Clay, The Politics of Olympus (Princeton, 1989), 217–19 and 257–60.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cf. Robert Garland, Introducing New Gods: the Politics of Athenian Religion (Ithaca, 1992), 111–115 and 150.Google Scholar
  22. 1.
    Work on this essay was done partly during my tenure as a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford with funding provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Their generosity is gratefully acknowledged. The contents of the volume are as follows: Section I: “Democracy and Regimes of Power”: Sheldon S. Wolin, “Norm and Form: The Constitutionalizing of Democracy,” pp. 29–58; Ellen Meiksins Wood, “Democracy: An Idea of Ambiguous Ancestry,” pp. 59–80; Jennifer Roberts, “The Creation of a Legacy: A Manufactured Crisis in Eighteenth-Century Thought,” pp. 81–102; Kurt A. Raaflaub, “Democracy, Power, and Imperialism in Fifth-Century Athens,” pp. 103–146.—Section II: “Critical Discourse in Athenian Democracy”: Josiah Ober, “How to Criticize Democracy in Late Fifth- and Fourth-Century Athens,” pp. 149–171; S. Sara Monoson, “Frank Speech, Democracy, and Philosophy: Plato's Debt to a Democratic Strategy of Civic Discourse,” pp. 172–197; J. Peter Euben, “Democracy and Political Theory: A Reading of Plato's Gorgias,” pp. 198–226.—Section III: “Athenian Ideals and Contemporary Issues”: Christopher Rocco, “The Tragedy of Critical Theory,” pp. 229–251; Barry S. Strauss, “The Melting Pot, the Mosaic, and the Agora,” pp. 252–264; Warren J. Lane and Ann M. Lane, “Athenian Political Thought and the Feminist Politics of Poiesis and Praxis,” pp.265–288; Charles W. Hedrick, Jr., “The Zero Degree of Society: Aristotle and the Athenian Citizen,” pp. 289–318; John R. Wallach, “Two Democracies and Virtue,” pp. 319–340.Google Scholar
  23. 2.
    Amidst the burgeoning literature see, e.g., Josiah Ober. The Athenian Revolution: Essays on Ancient Greek Democracy and Political Theory (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996); M.H. Hansen, The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes: Structure, Principles and Ideology, translated by J.A. Crook (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1991); Josiah Ober, Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989); Barry Strauss, Athens after the Peloponnesian War: Class, Faction and Policy, 403–386 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986); Jochen Bleicken, Die athenische Demokratie (Paderborn, München, Wien, Zürich: Ferdiand Schöningh, 1985).Google Scholar
  24. 3.
    Athens on Trial: The Antidemocratic Tradition in Western Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  25. 4.
    William Mitford, The History of Greece, 8 vols., revised by William King (London: T. Cadell, Strand, and Edinburgh: W. Blackwood and Sons, 1838), 4:10, 4:20.Google Scholar
  26. 5.
    Quoted in Arnaldo Momigliano, George Grote and the Study of Greek History (London: H.K. Lewis, 1952), p. 7. This 1952 pamphlet is reprinted in Arnaldo Momigliano, Studies in Historiography (London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1966; New York and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1966), pp. 56–74. The quote is on p. 60. Momigliano discusses in this essay as well Grote as the successor to Mitford and the explicit attempt by the Philosophical Radicals to make Mitford's pro-monarchical reading of Greek history “their chief target” (pp. 59–60).Google Scholar
  27. 6.
    “The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with That of the Moderns,” in Political Writings, translated and edited by Biancamaria Fontana, ser. Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 316 [“De la liberté des anciens comparée, à celle des modernes” (1819) in: Constant, Collection complète des ouvrages publiées sur le gouvernment représentatif et la constitution actuelle, ou Cours de politique constitutionnelle 4 (Paris and Rouen: 1820)].Google Scholar
  28. 7.
    Ibid., “, p. 310.Google Scholar
  29. 8.
    The Ancient City: A Study on the Religion, Laws, and Institutions of Greece and Rome. Reprint with a new foreword by Arnaldo Momigliano and S.C. Humphreys (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980), p. 3. [La cité antique; étude sur le culte, le droit, les institutions de la Grèce et de Rome (Paris: Hachette et cie, 1893), p. 2.] On Fustel de Coulanges and his role in the development of political-historical study of ancient Greece see by Arnaldo Momigliano, in addition to the English translation of Fustel, also his article “The Ancient City of Fustel de Coulanges,” originally in Italian in Rivista Storica Italiana 87 (1970) pp. 81–98, recently in English translation by J. Landry in Momigliano, Essays in Ancient and Modern Historiography (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1977) pp. 325–343.Google Scholar
  30. 9.
    “Aristippus in and out of Athens,” American Political Science Review (March 1979), 73:113.Google Scholar
  31. 10.
    Lawrence W. Levine's recently published response to Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987), The Opening of the American Mind: Canons, Culture, and History (Boston: Beacon Press, 1996), avoids judgment on the classical texts from Athens; rather, he writes about the flexibility of canons over time in the American university.Google Scholar
  32. 11.
    Bernard Knox, The Oldest Dead White European Males and Other Reflections on the Classics (New York and London: W.W. Norton & Co., 1993 on which see the review by Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones in this journal (IJCT), 1,2 (Fall 1994), pp. 117–120) likewise both acknowledges the flaws of the Greeks but reminds the readers of all we would lose were we to banish them because they did things of which we today do not approve.Google Scholar
  33. 12.
    Vlastos' classic article of 1953, “Isonomia” [American Journal of Philology 74 (1953) pp. 337–66], raises some questions about these claims; he argued that isonomia was such a significant concept because it introduced political equality independent of economic equality. Wood may herself be romanticizing in her vision of Athens as a realm of economic egalitarianism. Gregory Vlastos's 1953 article is now most easily accessible in his Studies in Greek Philosophy, vol. 1. The Presocratics, ed. by Daniel W. Graham (Princenton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995), pp. 90–111. For a discussion of the concept of isonomia after Vlastos see: Jürgen Mau and Ernst Günther Schmidt, eds., Isonomia. Studien zur Gleichheitsvorstellung im griechischen Denken (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1964).Google Scholar
  34. 13.
    Constitutionalism and Democracy: Studies in Rationality and Social Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). This volume includes, among others, such essays as “Democracy and the rule of law: some historical experiences of contradictions in the striving for good government” by Francis Sejersted, “Consequences of constitutional choice: reflections on Tocqueville” by Jon Elster, and “Precommitment and the paradox of democracy” by Stephen Holmes.Google Scholar
  35. 14.
    Ibid., Constitutionalism and Democracy: Studies in Rationality and Social Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). p. 2Google Scholar
  36. 15.
    Charles Hedrick's essay towards the end of the volume focuses on the exclusionary aspects of Athenian citizenship and thus is somewhat similar in raising questions about the consequences of looking to Athens for a positive model for “reconstruction”.Google Scholar
  37. 16.
    Josiah Ober's article has been reprinted as ch., 10 (pp. 140–160) in his Athenian Revolution (above n. 1). Work on this essay was done partly during my tenure as a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford with funding provided by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Their generosity is gratefully acknowledged. The contents of the volume are as follows: Section I: “Democracy and Regimes of Power”: Sheldon S. Wolin, “Norm and Form: The Constitutionalizing of Democracy,” pp. 29–58; Ellen Meiksins Wood, “Democracy: An Idea of Ambiguous Ancestry”, pp. 59–80; Jennifer Roberts, “The Creation of a Legacy: A Manufactured Cristis in Eighteenth-Century Thought,” pp. 81–102; Kurt A. Raaflaub, “Democracy, Power, and Imperialism in Fifth-Century Athens,” pp. 103–146.—Section II: “Critical Discourse in Athenian Democracy”: Josiah Ober, “How to Criticize Democracy in Late Fifth- and Fourth-Century Athens,” pp. 149–171; S. Sara Monoson, “Frank Speech, Democracy, and Philosophy: Plato's Debt to a Democratic Strategy of Civic Discourse,” pp. 172–197; J. Peter Euben, “Democracy and Political Theory: A Reading of Plato's Gorgias,” pp. 198–226.—Section III: “Athenian Ideals and Contemporary Issues”: Christopher Rocco, “The Tragedy of Critical Theory,” pp. 229–251; Barry S. Strauss, “The Melting Pot, the Mosaic, and the Agora,” pp. 252–264; Warren J. Lane and Ann M. Lane, “Athenian Political Thought and the Feminist Politics of Poiesis and Praxis,” pp. 265–288; Charles W. Hedrick, Jr., “The Zero Degree of Society: Aristotle and the Athenian Citizen,” pp. 289–318; John R. Wallach, “Two Democracies and Virtue,” pp. 319–340.Google Scholar
  38. 17.
    Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, Vol. 1. The Spell of Plato (London: G. Routledge, 1947).Google Scholar
  39. 18.
    Dialektik der Aufklärungs is available in the original German in Max Horkheimer, Gesammelte Schriften, eds. Alfred Schmidt and Gunzelin Schmid Noerr, Vol. 5, ‘Dialektik der Aufklärung’ und Schriften 1940–1950 (Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer Verlag, 1987), pp. 11–290.Google Scholar
  40. 19.
    His point concerning Athens' incorporation of foreigners and former slaves in the late sixth century rests on a single sentence from Aristotle (Politics 1275b34–37).Google Scholar
  41. 20.
    This leaves aside whether those myths in antiquity supported aristocratic control and ideologies of ethnic purity. See for example Euripides' Ion, which does not appear in Strauss' discussion and Nicole Loraux, The Invention of Athens: The Funeral Oration in the Classical City, translated by Alan Sheridan (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986). L'invention d'Athènes: Histoire de l'oraison funèbre dans la ‘cité classique’ (Paris: Editions de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Mouton Editeur, 1981).Google Scholar
  42. 1.
    Die Forschung skizziert B. Dehandschutter, “The Martyrium Polycarpi. A century of research”, in: ANRW II 27, 1, hg. von W. Haase, Berlin/New York 1993, 495–522, hier 508–514: ‘The theology of martyrdoms in MPol’; zu den frühen lateinischen Texten jetzt A. Wlosok, “Märtyrerakten und Passionen”, in: Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur der Antike 4, hg. von R. Herzog u. P.L. Schmidt, München 1997, § 472, bes. 472.1 mit Lit. 1 und 2.—Für bibliographisch-bibliothekarische Hilfe danke ich stud. phil. et rer.nat. Gesine Bechtloff.Google Scholar
  43. 2.
    H. von Campenhausen, Die Idee des Martyriums in der Alten Kirche, Göttingen 1936 (2. Aufl. 1964), 1–55, bes. 2–5.Google Scholar
  44. 3.
    Th. Baumeister, Die Anfänges der Theologie des Martyriums, Münster 1980, 1–3 (gegen von Campenhausen), 6–65.Google Scholar
  45. 4.
    S. oben Anm. 1. B. Dehandschutter, “The Martyrium Polycarpi. A century of research”, in: ANRW II 27,1, hg. von W. Haase, Berlin/New York 1993, 495–522.Google Scholar
  46. 5.
    Zu den Rechtsgrundlagen und zur religionspolitischen Bewertung des Christentums durch die Römer nennt B. nur G.E.M. de Ste. Croix, “Why were the early Christians persecuted?”, Past and Present 26, Oxford 1963, 6–38; andere und neuere Beiträge dazu findet man über Wlosok (oben Anm. 1) § 472.1. Lit. 2, und Rez., “Zu Hadrians Christenrescript an Minicius Fundanus (Euseb. hist. eccl. 4,9,1–3)”, in: Prinzipat und Kultur im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert, hg. von B. Kühnert, V. Riedel u. R. Gordesiani, Bonn 1995, 103–117; s. auch unten zu Anm. 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 6.
    G.W. Clarke, The Letters of St. Cyprian 1, New York 1984, 323–324.Google Scholar
  48. 7.
    Zur ‘Fabrik-Aktion’ am 27. Februar 1943 K. Kwiet, “Nach dem Pogrom. Stufen der Ausgrenzung”, in: Die Juden in Deutschland 1933–1945, hg. von W. Benz, München 1988, 545–659, hier 593–595.Google Scholar
  49. 8.
    Dazu jetzt K.-H. Schwarte, “Die Christengesetze Valerians”, in: Religion und Gesellschaft in der römischen Kaiserzeit, Kolloquium zu Ehren von F. Vittinghoff, Köln/Wien 1989, 104–163, m.E. zu stark einen Vernichtungswillen gegen die Christen annehmend; anders J. Molthagen, Der römische Staat und die Christen im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert, Hypomnemata 28, Göttinggen 1970 (2. Aufl. 1975), 85–100.Google Scholar
  50. 9.
    Z.B. H. Musurillo, The acts of the pagan martyrs, Oxford 1954, 143–146: ‘Pagan martyrs and Christianity’.Google Scholar
  51. 10.
    Meinem Tübinger Kollegen Heinz Halm danke ich für freundliche Bestätigung und Ergänzung der Ausführungen B.s.Google Scholar
  52. 11.
    Von Campenhausen (oben Anm. 2), Die Idee des Martyriums in der Alten Kirche, Göttingen 1936 (2. Aufl. 1964), 1.Google Scholar
  53. 12.
    Das folgende am besten dokumentiert in der Biographie von E. Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Theologe—Christ—Zeitgenosse, 6. Aufl. München 1986, 760–1045 passim (760 Kapitelüberschrift ‘Die Wendung des Christen zum Zeitgenossen’).Google Scholar
  54. 13.
    Vgl. Bethge 744, 760 f.Google Scholar
  55. 14.
    Bethge 1042.Google Scholar
  56. 15.
    M. Gräfin Dönhoff, “Um der Ehre willen”. Erinnerungen an die Freunde vom 20. Juli, Berlin 1994, Taschenbuchausg. o.O. 1996.Google Scholar
  57. 1.
    Storia della storiografia italiana nel secolo decimonono, Bari 1921.Google Scholar
  58. 2.
    Momiglianos Stärke war die kleine Form. Zahlreiche wichtige Einzelstudien finden sich in den berühmten, bisher neun Contributi gesammelt, die in rom seit 1955 erschienen sind.Google Scholar
  59. 3.
    Lo studio dell'antichità classica nell'Ottocento (Letteratura italiana. Storia e testi 72), Rom/Neapel 1962; L'idea di Roma e la cultura italiana del secolo XIX, Mailand/Neapel 1962 (der Ertrag dieser beiden Arbeiten ist zusammengefaßt in: “Antichità classica e ottocento italiano”, Il Veltro 3 [1963]. 383–408); Ottocento italiano fra il nuovo e l'antico, 3 Bde., Modena 1992.Google Scholar
  60. 4.
    Vgl. aber M. Gigante, La cultura classica a Napoli nell'Ottocento, 2 Bde., Neapel 1987.Google Scholar
  61. 5.
    Braccesi verweist auf seine weitergehenden Ausführungen in seinem Werk L'antichità aggredita. Memoria del passato e poesia del nazionalismo, Rom 1990.Google Scholar
  62. 6.
    S. dazu L. Trichaud, Education et développement en Italie, Paris 1970, 79ff; G. Ricuperati, “La scuola nell'Italia unita,” in: Storia d'Italia V,2, Turin 1973, 1695–1726, 1700.Google Scholar
  63. 7.
    Zum Verhältnis zwischen den Wissenschaftskulturen Deutschlands und Italiens s. K. Christ/ A. Momigliano (Hg.), L'antichità nell'Ottocento in Italia e in Germania/Die Antike im 19. Jahrhundert in Italien und Deutschland (Annali dell'Istituto storico italo-germanico in Trento/ Jahrbuch des italienisch-deutschen historischen Instituts in Trient, Contributi/Beiträge 2), Bologna/Berlin 1988; K. Christ/E. Gabba (Hg.), Römische Geschichte und Zeitgeschichte in der deutschen und italienischen Altertumswissenschaft während des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, 2 Bde. (Biblioteca di Athenaeum 12/16), Como 1989/1991; L. Polverini (Hg.), Aspetti della storiografia di Giulio Beloch. Incontri perugini di storia della storiografia antica e sul mondo antico I, Acquasparta, Palazzo Cesi, 19–21 maggio 1986, Neapel 1990.Google Scholar
  64. 8.
    Der schlägt sich auch in der Gründung international anerkannter altertumswissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften nieder wie der Rivista di filologia e istruzione classica (1872) und des Archivio di glottologia (1873), s. dazu S. Timpanaro, “Il primo cinquantennio della Rivista di filologia e istruzione classica”, Rivista di filologia e istruzione classica (=RFIC) 100 (1972), 387–441, 387ff. Bezeichnenderweise wurde bei der Gründung der RFIC (in einem Verlag, dessen Besitzer E. Loescher deutscher Herkunft und mit den Teubners verwandt war) ausdrücklich der Wille proklamiert, von Deutschland zu lernen.Google Scholar
  65. 9.
    Besonders die in der Stadt Rom, im unmittelbaren Zugriff des Papstes tätigen Antiquare sahen sich heftigen Angriffen ausgesetzt, s. etwa die Polemik des Dichters G. Leopardi und des Literaten und Politikers M. D'Azeglio bei Salmieri, 275f.Google Scholar
  66. 10.
    Vgl. etwa U. Muhlack, Geschichtswissenschaft im Humanismus und in der Aufklärung. Die Vorgeschichte des Historismus, München 1991; C. Kunst, Römische Tradition und englische Politik. Studien zur Geschichte der Britannienrezeption zwischen William Camden und John Speed (Spudasmata 55), Hildesheim 1994.Google Scholar
  67. 11.
    „Edward Gibbon fuori e dentro la cultura italian”, Atti della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa Ser. 3, 6 (1976), 77–95=A. Momigliano, Sesto contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico 1 (Storia e letteratura. Raccolta di studi e testi 149), Rom 1980, 231–248, 239ff.Google Scholar
  68. 12.
    Zu Beginn des 20. Jh.s versuchte E. Romagnoli vor allem durch Übersetzungen ein breiteres Publikum für die klassische Welt zu interessieren, s. P. Treves, „Ettore Romagnoli fra positivismo ed estetismo”, in: Ders., Tradizione classica e rinnovamento della storiografia, Mailand/Neapel 1992, 237–298.Google Scholar
  69. 13.
    S. aus der überreichen Forschung etwa H. U. Wehler, „Deutsches Bildungsbürgertum in vergleichender Perspektive-Elemente eines Sonderwegs?”, in: J. Kocka (Hg.), Bildungsbürgertum im 19. Jahrhundert 4, Stuttgart 1989, 215–237. Am ehesten bildet die sogenannte „borghesia umanistica”, die in den ersten Jahren des geeinten Italiens dominierte, ein Gegenstück zum Bildungsbürgertum; s. zu ihr M. Meriggi, „Italienisches und deutsches Bürgertum im Vergleich”, in: J. Kocka (Hg.), Bürgertum im 19. Jahrhundert I, Göttingen 1995, 147–165, bes. 163f; eventuelle Unterschiede in der Form der universitären Bildung berücksichtigt Meriggi nicht.Google Scholar
  70. 14.
    Vgl. Timpanaro, 1972, 400ff.Google Scholar
  71. 15.
    S. dazu R. Pertici, „Piero Treves storico di tradizione”, Rivista storica italiana (=RSI) 106 (1994), 651–734, 720ff. Mit dem Terminus, „storiografia neoguelfa” bezeichnet Treves Autoren mit antiklassizistischer, liberal-katholischer Ausrichtung, die kulturell häufig nach Frankreich hin orientiert waren.Google Scholar
  72. 16.
    Vgl. A. La Penna, „L'influenza della filologia classica tedesca sulla filologia classica italiana dall'unificazione d'Italia alla prima guerra mondiale”, in: M. Bollack/H. Wismann (Hg.), Philologie und Hermeneutik im 19. Jahrhundert II, Göttingen 1983, 232–272, 234ff.Google Scholar
  73. 17.
    Zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts, vor allem während des 1. Weltkriegs, kam es dann zu einer nationalistischen Überreaktion gegen die Deutschen; s. L. Canfora, „Vitelli e le correnti nazionalistiche prima del 1918”, in: M. Bollack/H. Wismann (Hg.), Philologie und Hermeneutik im 19. Jahrhundert II, Göttingen 1983, 308–322.Google Scholar
  74. 18.
    M. Cristofani, La scoperta degli Etruschi. Archeologia e Antiquaria nel 700 (Contributi alla storia degli studi etruschi e italici 2), Rom 1983, bes. 173ff zu „antiromanismo e filoitalicismo”.Google Scholar
  75. 19.
    Zu Vicos späterer Entwicklung in dieser Frage vgl. A. Momigliano, „La nuova storia romana di G. B. Vico”, RSI 77 (1965), 773–790 = Ders., a.a.O. Tradizione classica e rinnovamento della storiografia, Mailand/Neapel 1992, 237–298. (Anm. 11) Sesto contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico 1 (Storia e letteratura. Raccolta di studi e testi 149), Rom 1980, 191–210, insbes. 194f.Google Scholar
  76. 20.
    Zu ihm Santamaria, 81ffGoogle Scholar
  77. 21.
    Agostiniani, 58ff.Google Scholar
  78. 22.
    Parisi, 248.Google Scholar
  79. 23.
    Salmieri, 287.Google Scholar
  80. 24.
    S. etwa A. Momigliano (wie Anm. 19), „La nuova storia romana di G. B. Vico”, RSI 77 (1965), 193.Google Scholar
  81. 25.
    S. Timpanaro, La filologia di Giacomo Leopardi, Rom/Bari 19772 (141f zum Unterschied zwischen philologischen Arbeiten Leopardis und den Versuchen Foscolos); A. Momigliano, „Classical scholarship for a classical country. The case of Italy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries”, in: Ders., Ottavo contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico (Storia e letteratura. Raccolta di studi e testi 169), Rom 1987, 73–89, 77.Google Scholar
  82. 26.
    Vgl. E. Nolte, „Italien von der Begründung des Nationalstaats bis zum Ende des 1. Weltkriegs (1870–1918)”, in: T. Schieder (Hg.), Handbuch der europäischen Geschichte 6, Stuttgart 1968, 401–432f, 431f.Google Scholar
  83. 27.
    Gabba, 409; 443.Google Scholar
  84. 28.
    Die Orientierung an Rom implizierte nicht die Aufgabe des romantischen Originalitätsgedankens. Dies zeigt sich eindrucksvoll in den zahlreichen Apologien für Cicero, der gegen die brillante Polemik Mommsens als eigenständiger Denker reklamiert wird; s. Gabba, 419f.Google Scholar
  85. 29.
    Das bedeutete allerdings, wie der Beitrag Gabbas zeigt, nicht, daß das schon lange bestehende, von mediävistischen Problemen beflügelte Interesse an den Munizipien und ihrer Freiheit gesunken wäre.Google Scholar
  86. 30.
    Dazu L. Schumacher, „Augusteische Propaganda und faschistische Rezeption”, Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 40 (1988), 307–330; R. Vesser, „Fascist Doctrine and the Cult of the Romanità”, Journal of Contemporary History 7 (1992), 5–21; E. Gentile, Il culto del littorio. La sacralizzazione della politica nell'Italia fascista, Rom/Bari 1993, 146ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen Scully
    • 1
  • Arlene W. Saxonhouse
    • 2
  • Eberhard Heck
    • 3
  • Hartmut Leppin
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Classical StudiesBoston UniversityBostonUK
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of MichiganAnn Arbor
  3. 3.Universität TübingenTübingenDeutschland
  4. 4.Friedrich-Meinecke-InstitutFreie Universität BerlinBerlinDeutschland

Personalised recommendations