Concepts and Functions of Philhellenism: Aspects of a Transcultural Movement

Abstract

Philhellenism is a thing. You know it when you see it. Whether programmatically announced, visible in action or, less transparently, present in underpinning assumptions, philhellenism is readily recognisable in different places, periods and persons – and yet it also differs, in telling and significant ways, from context to context, culture to culture, individual to individual. It is so ubiquitous in (and often foundational for) the works, contexts and reception histories of ancient literature that it is near-impossible to avoid it – and yet precisely thereby it easily eludes critical analysis and interrogation. What exactly is it? How does it work? Why does it arise? What does it enable? What does it suppress? Whom does it work for? Whom does it work against? How self-identical – across space and time – is it? How do its various incarnations relate to one another? These questions are of considerable importance for scholars of classical literature as philhellenism is undoubtedly a central ‘pathway of reception’– both in antiquity and for antiquity –, the likes of which are examined in the series in which this volume appears. The title of the volume – with its focus on concepts, functions and transculturality – raises high hopes for advancing our understanding of this formative force in literary and cultural history. The collection of essays joins a slew of edited volumes on the same topic – notably M. Espagne and G. Pécout (edd.), Philhellénismes et transfert culturels (2005); E. Konstantinou (ed.), Ausdrucksformen des europäischen und internationalen Philhellenismus (2007); K. Zacharia (ed.), Hellenisms: Culture, Identity, and Ethnicity from Antiquity to Modernity (2008); G. Heß et al. (edd.), Graecomania. Der europäische Philhellenismus (2009) –, but promises to innovate with a ‘fundamentally new approach . . . The central thesis of this book is that European philhellenism derives its driving force from antiquity. In Rome a “classical philhellenism” emerges which . . . has been drawn on since the Enlightenment. . . . The emphasis on this transcultural aspect and on the literal movement may be what sets this edited volume apart’ (p. 1). While this claim to originality will no doubt ruffle some feathers, the volume’s tripartite structure certainly seems geared towards substantiating it. The first part, ‘Ancient Philhellenism’, takes soundings in (mostly Latin) literature of the Roman era. Pointing to the dynamics of emulation and rivalry at the heart of Roman philhellenism, the editors note in their summary of this first section that ‘[t]he articles here bring this spectrum (well-researched by classical philology) into focus’ (p. 1). Well-researched indeed: S. Tzounakas’s conspectus of moments of philhellenism across Horace’s works, D. Keramida’s reading of Martial’s Hercules epigrams (9.64, 65, 101) as a dual strategy to play to a philhellenic emperor and to establish one’s own literary and cultural footing, and Alekou’s review of Roman satire’s mocking of philhellenic fads and belittling of Graeculi all cover well-trodden ground. Undergraduate students may find these introductions useful, but researchers in the field are unlikely to come away with fresh insights here. A. Wessels’s discussion of the making of Livius Andronicus into a turning point figure in Roman constructions of Latin literary history THE CLASSICAL REVIEW 322