After the American continent was discovered, Spanish intellectuals exerted their ingenuity in an attempt to explain the existence of those hitherto unknown territories, and engaged in controversies about the moral and legal right to exploit them. The use of classical sources as authorities was common in those debates. In this article, we focus on the mention by Ps.-Aristotle and Diodorus of an island in the Atlantic Ocean, discovered and exploited by Carthaginians until the colonization process came to a dramatic end. We study the use of this story in connection with America, exploring its role in the controversy about rights of discovery and its implications for the debate about the ethnicity of indigenous peoples and the justification of their conquest. This led to the establishment of a comparison between the ancient colonization of Spain by the Carthaginians and the colonization of America by the Spaniards, where the latter was presented as an improvement or positive reverse of the former. Finally, we present the hypothesis that this Carthaginian colonization, as it was imagined in the early sixteenth century, was inspired by contemporary events taking place in America, and that this had an impact on the understanding of ancient Spanish history for centuries.
{"title":"Carthaginians Beyond the Ocean: Comparison, Justification, and Inversion in the Hypothesis of the Carthaginian Discovery of America","authors":"Pamina Fernández Camacho","doi":"10.1093/crj/clab016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/crj/clab016","url":null,"abstract":"After the American continent was discovered, Spanish intellectuals exerted their ingenuity in an attempt to explain the existence of those hitherto unknown territories, and engaged in controversies about the moral and legal right to exploit them. The use of classical sources as authorities was common in those debates. In this article, we focus on the mention by Ps.-Aristotle and Diodorus of an island in the Atlantic Ocean, discovered and exploited by Carthaginians until the colonization process came to a dramatic end. We study the use of this story in connection with America, exploring its role in the controversy about rights of discovery and its implications for the debate about the ethnicity of indigenous peoples and the justification of their conquest. This led to the establishment of a comparison between the ancient colonization of Spain by the Carthaginians and the colonization of America by the Spaniards, where the latter was presented as an improvement or positive reverse of the former. Finally, we present the hypothesis that this Carthaginian colonization, as it was imagined in the early sixteenth century, was inspired by contemporary events taking place in America, and that this had an impact on the understanding of ancient Spanish history for centuries.","PeriodicalId":42730,"journal":{"name":"Classical Receptions Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138530349","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Greek Revolution of 1821 – 1829 mobilized the ideas of classical reception and Philhellenism developed over the previous century to appeal for international support for the war. These complicated ideas influenced the ways both Greeks and non-Greeks thought about the nation, its political character, language, literature, history, culture and landscape. How the revolution and post-revolutionary Greece have been interpreted has shifted over the past 40 years, reflecting changes in both critical theory and also in the geopolitical circumstances in the Eastern Mediterranean and globally. The bicentenary celebrations of 2021 have highlighted the complex, competing claims for the authority to give the dominant account of the founding of modern Greece. Reviewing the scholarship on both Western and Greek Hellenism over the past four decades, our article considers the relationship between classical reception, revolution and the act of commemoration and reveals the hybridity of Hellas in 1821 and 2021
{"title":"Hellenism, philhellenism and classical reception: commemorating the 1821 revolution","authors":"Jennifer J. Wallace, V. Lambropoulos","doi":"10.1093/CRJ/CLAB011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/CRJ/CLAB011","url":null,"abstract":"The Greek Revolution of 1821 – 1829 mobilized the ideas of classical reception and Philhellenism developed over the previous century to appeal for international support for the war. These complicated ideas influenced the ways both Greeks and non-Greeks thought about the nation, its political character, language, literature, history, culture and landscape. How the revolution and post-revolutionary Greece have been interpreted has shifted over the past 40 years, reflecting changes in both critical theory and also in the geopolitical circumstances in the Eastern Mediterranean and globally. The bicentenary celebrations of 2021 have highlighted the complex, competing claims for the authority to give the dominant account of the founding of modern Greece. Reviewing the scholarship on both Western and Greek Hellenism over the past four decades, our article considers the relationship between classical reception, revolution and the act of commemoration and reveals the hybridity of Hellas in 1821 and 2021","PeriodicalId":42730,"journal":{"name":"Classical Receptions Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45377181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Lost Women of Troy by Hanoch Levin, Israel’s foremost playwright of the twentieth century, is an adaptation of Euripides’ Trojan Women and Hecuba. Staged in Tel Aviv in 1984 during the First Lebanon War, Lost Women focuses on the bereavement and humiliation of Hecuba. Levin reconfigures this character to reflect mothers on both sides of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Through a subversion of the aesthetics of tragedy, Levin’s play is an indictment of the notion of heroism prevalent in Israeli society. It presents a bitter criticism of his public’s acceptance of the ideology of war and their participation in a narrative that glorifies those who die in combat as heroes. Levin’s critique, I argue, is formulated as a textual sparagmos, a violent tearing apart of Euripides’ tragedies and the conventions in which they operate. Levin’s metatheatrical violence against the tragic genre parallels the inherent violence of the discourse of heroism which his adaptation seeks to expose and denounce.
{"title":"An Israeli–Palestinian Hecuba: Hanoch Levin’s Anti-Tragedy","authors":"Abigail Akavia","doi":"10.1093/crj/clab012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/crj/clab012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The Lost Women of Troy by Hanoch Levin, Israel’s foremost playwright of the twentieth century, is an adaptation of Euripides’ Trojan Women and Hecuba. Staged in Tel Aviv in 1984 during the First Lebanon War, Lost Women focuses on the bereavement and humiliation of Hecuba. Levin reconfigures this character to reflect mothers on both sides of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Through a subversion of the aesthetics of tragedy, Levin’s play is an indictment of the notion of heroism prevalent in Israeli society. It presents a bitter criticism of his public’s acceptance of the ideology of war and their participation in a narrative that glorifies those who die in combat as heroes. Levin’s critique, I argue, is formulated as a textual sparagmos, a violent tearing apart of Euripides’ tragedies and the conventions in which they operate. Levin’s metatheatrical violence against the tragic genre parallels the inherent violence of the discourse of heroism which his adaptation seeks to expose and denounce.","PeriodicalId":42730,"journal":{"name":"Classical Receptions Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48000500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Looking back to the early modern period from the current immigration crisis, this article reads Shakespeare’s tragedy Coriolanus as a tragedy of displacement and asylum seeking. It argues that just like theatrical productions today, Shakespeare might have harked back to ancient Greek tragedy as a cultural resource for coming to terms with the challenges of immigration. It traces the possible migrations between the ritual of asylum seeking that was reflected in a number of Greek tragedies including Aeschylus’s Hiketides, the earliest surviving play about refugees from the fifth century BC, and Shakespeare’s Coriolanus. In this respect, this article is part of the current critical re-evaluation of the relations between Shakespeare’s work and ancient Greek tragedy. It places Coriolanus into the intertextual and intermedial hiketeia rhizome, in which one transmission line from Greek tragedy via Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Plutarch, Amyot, and North to Shakespeare can be corroborated by evidence, while other lines are more uncertain. Asking whether hiketeia, the ancient verbal and gestural repertoire of a stranger pleading for protection and integration into the polis, is only present as ‘rotten custom’ in Shakespeare’s tragedy, as a trace of cultural history without any considerable force in the new context, the article explores the paradoxical negotiation of displacement in Coriolanus, where both the exiled and the exiler become suppliants. It proposes that Shakespeare’s transformative reactivation of hiketeia as a theatrically, affectively, and politically potent form created an opportunity to negotiate the immigration crisis in Jacobean England.
{"title":"Shakespeare’s suppliants: the ‘rotten custom’ of ancient asylum seeking in Coriolanus","authors":"C. Wald","doi":"10.1093/crj/clab010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/crj/clab010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Looking back to the early modern period from the current immigration crisis, this article reads Shakespeare’s tragedy Coriolanus as a tragedy of displacement and asylum seeking. It argues that just like theatrical productions today, Shakespeare might have harked back to ancient Greek tragedy as a cultural resource for coming to terms with the challenges of immigration. It traces the possible migrations between the ritual of asylum seeking that was reflected in a number of Greek tragedies including Aeschylus’s Hiketides, the earliest surviving play about refugees from the fifth century BC, and Shakespeare’s Coriolanus. In this respect, this article is part of the current critical re-evaluation of the relations between Shakespeare’s work and ancient Greek tragedy. It places Coriolanus into the intertextual and intermedial hiketeia rhizome, in which one transmission line from Greek tragedy via Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Plutarch, Amyot, and North to Shakespeare can be corroborated by evidence, while other lines are more uncertain. Asking whether hiketeia, the ancient verbal and gestural repertoire of a stranger pleading for protection and integration into the polis, is only present as ‘rotten custom’ in Shakespeare’s tragedy, as a trace of cultural history without any considerable force in the new context, the article explores the paradoxical negotiation of displacement in Coriolanus, where both the exiled and the exiler become suppliants. It proposes that Shakespeare’s transformative reactivation of hiketeia as a theatrically, affectively, and politically potent form created an opportunity to negotiate the immigration crisis in Jacobean England.","PeriodicalId":42730,"journal":{"name":"Classical Receptions Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47566235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：