{"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.
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.