Pherecydes in Alexandria

IF 0.4 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS MNEMOSYNE Pub Date : 2023-06-02 DOI:10.1163/1568525x-bja10229
Laura Marshall
{"title":"Pherecydes in Alexandria","authors":"Laura Marshall","doi":"10.1163/1568525x-bja10229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPherecydes of Syros’ work is difficult to understand because of its fragmentary nature. A previously unexplored perspective on his work is to analyze how it was understood and used in Ptolemaic Alexandria, particularly by Eratosthenes and Callimachus. Eratosthenes’ distinction between Pherecydes of Syros and Pherecydes of Athens (DL 1.119) has been used as a key piece of evidence that those two authors are, in fact, distinct. However, there has been little discussion of Eratosthenes’ interest in these authors outside of that statement. Callimachus’ interest in Pherecydes has also been ignored by both scholars of Pherecydes and scholars of Alexandrian poetry (except for brief references). Through this examination, I argue that Pherecydes of Syros was an important figure in discussions about the development of prose in Ptolemaic Alexandria.","PeriodicalId":46134,"journal":{"name":"MNEMOSYNE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MNEMOSYNE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1568525x-bja10229","RegionNum":3,"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

Pherecydes of Syros’ work is difficult to understand because of its fragmentary nature. A previously unexplored perspective on his work is to analyze how it was understood and used in Ptolemaic Alexandria, particularly by Eratosthenes and Callimachus. Eratosthenes’ distinction between Pherecydes of Syros and Pherecydes of Athens (DL 1.119) has been used as a key piece of evidence that those two authors are, in fact, distinct. However, there has been little discussion of Eratosthenes’ interest in these authors outside of that statement. Callimachus’ interest in Pherecydes has also been ignored by both scholars of Pherecydes and scholars of Alexandrian poetry (except for brief references). Through this examination, I argue that Pherecydes of Syros was an important figure in discussions about the development of prose in Ptolemaic Alexandria.
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
亚历山大的费雷赛德斯
西罗斯作品的《外循环》由于其支离破碎的性质而难以理解。一个以前未被探索的观点是分析托勒密时期的亚历山大,特别是埃拉托色尼和卡利马科斯是如何理解和使用他的作品的。埃拉托色尼对Syros的Pherecydes和Athens的Pherecydes的区分(DL 1.119)被用作证明这两位作者实际上是不同的关键证据。然而,关于埃拉托色尼对这些作者的兴趣的讨论很少。卡利马库斯对费雷西得斯的兴趣也被费雷西得斯的学者和亚历山大诗歌的学者所忽视(除了简短的参考文献)。通过这次考察,我认为,在托勒密亚历山大时期散文发展的讨论中,希罗斯的费雷赛德斯是一个重要的人物。
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
MNEMOSYNE
MNEMOSYNE CLASSICS-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Since its first appearance as a journal of textual criticism in 1852, Mnemosyne has secured a position as one of the leading journals in its field worldwide. Its reputation is built on the Dutch academic tradition, famous for its rigour and thoroughness. It attracts contributions from all over the world, with the result that Mnemosyne is distinctive for a combination of scholarly approaches from both sides of the Atlantic and the Equator. Its presence in libraries around the globe is a sign of its continued reputation as an invaluable resource for scholarship in Classical studies.
期刊最新文献
Aristotle’s On the Good and the “Categorial Reduction Argument” Tanks for Nothing: an Explanation of Plautus Casina 121-125 Make Art, Not War: An Other (Hi)Story of thymos “Is the Embryo a Living Being?” (Aët. 5.15): Embryology, Plants, and the Origin of Life in Presocratic Thought A Translation Note on Pseudo-Seneca, Her. O. 1907
×
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