Chapter SixThe compiler compiled: Didymus in Imperial scholarly and miscellanistic literature

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 0 CLASSICS BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES Pub Date : 2021-06-21 DOI:10.1093/bics/qbaa018
Scott DiGiulio
{"title":"Chapter SixThe compiler compiled: Didymus in Imperial scholarly and miscellanistic literature","authors":"Scott DiGiulio","doi":"10.1093/bics/qbaa018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Few ancient scholars were as prolific as Didymus of Alexandria, who was hailed by some in antiquity as the greatest of the grammarians. Yet, despite his polymathic output and seemingly positive ancient reputation, Didymus was much maligned for his carelessness and the compilatory nature of his work, attitudes which have continued in modern scholarship. This chapter aims to reassess the earliest period of Didymus’ reception by looking closely at the scholarly and miscellaneous texts of the Roman Empire that cite and discuss the Alexandrian. By examining four particular points of reception—Roman educationalists, Harpocration, Athenaeus, and Macrobius—this chapter illustrates that while Roman authors were particularly interested in using a caricature of Didymus as a straw man for their own arguments, Greek figures more readily engaged with Didymus and his work per se. These two traditions evolve in parallel and use Didymus to represent both the positive and negative facets of polymathy; each freely cites, and transforms, him to suit their literary purposes. As a result, Didymus’ reception throughout antiquity is considerably more complex than has been previously acknowledged: he is a figure of both authority and consternation, even among the authors most similar to himself.","PeriodicalId":43661,"journal":{"name":"BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bics/qbaa018","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Few ancient scholars were as prolific as Didymus of Alexandria, who was hailed by some in antiquity as the greatest of the grammarians. Yet, despite his polymathic output and seemingly positive ancient reputation, Didymus was much maligned for his carelessness and the compilatory nature of his work, attitudes which have continued in modern scholarship. This chapter aims to reassess the earliest period of Didymus’ reception by looking closely at the scholarly and miscellaneous texts of the Roman Empire that cite and discuss the Alexandrian. By examining four particular points of reception—Roman educationalists, Harpocration, Athenaeus, and Macrobius—this chapter illustrates that while Roman authors were particularly interested in using a caricature of Didymus as a straw man for their own arguments, Greek figures more readily engaged with Didymus and his work per se. These two traditions evolve in parallel and use Didymus to represent both the positive and negative facets of polymathy; each freely cites, and transforms, him to suit their literary purposes. As a result, Didymus’ reception throughout antiquity is considerably more complex than has been previously acknowledged: he is a figure of both authority and consternation, even among the authors most similar to himself.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
第六章编者汇编:帝国学术和杂记文献中的低土莫斯
很少有古代学者像亚历山大的狄狄莫斯那样多产,他被古代一些人誉为最伟大的语法学家。然而,尽管他的博学的成果和似乎积极的古代声誉,低土莫斯被很多人诽谤他的粗心大意和他的工作的汇编性质,这种态度在现代学术界继续存在。本章的目的是通过仔细观察罗马帝国引用和讨论亚历山大的学术和杂项文本,重新评估低土马最早的接受时期。通过考察四个特定的接受点——罗马教育家、哈波克拉申、雅典娜乌斯和马克宏比乌斯——本章说明,虽然罗马作家特别感兴趣的是使用低土莫斯的漫画作为他们自己论点的稻草人,但希腊人物更容易与低土莫斯和他的作品本身接触。这两种传统并行发展,并使用Didymus来代表博学多才的积极和消极方面;每个人都自由地引用和改造他,以适应他们的文学目的。因此,在整个古代,对低土莫斯的接受比之前所承认的要复杂得多:他是一个既权威又令人震惊的人物,甚至在与他最相似的作者中也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A tale of two Octavias: historical empathy and intimate partner ‘violence’ The abuse of aged parents in the ancient Roman world ‘Start with the cage’: coercive control and the Roman husband The farmer wants a wife: ecofeminism, domestic violence, and coercive control in Roman agricultural writing The princeps investigates: two cases of domestic violence in Tacitus’ Annals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1