‘How tough it is for outlaws’ (quam male est extra legem uiuentibus, Sat. 125.4), laments Encolpius, the petty-criminal narrator of Petronius’ Satyrica, as he frets about whether he and his buddies will be found out as they engage in a scheme to fleece the legacy hunters of Croton. But Encolpius and his crew are outlaws in more senses than one. Having forgotten, or simply disregarded, marital-reproductive household arrangements, they engage in novel forms of relationality that their cultural lexicon can barely cover as they quest after sex, feasts, money, or simply subsistence. Much Petronian scholarship, promoting a reading that looks down on the characters, views these forms of relationality as parodic and ‘purely comic’, ludicrously failed attempts by low, satirized characters to appropriate sublime Roman social institutions like fraternal pietas. In this article, taking as my primary example the reformulation of brotherhood and the use of the kin term frater by Encolpius, Ascyltos, and Giton, I read these forms of sociality as queer: that is to say, potentially challenging to normativity rather than simply inadequate to meet its demands. Petronian brotherhood, read in this light, appears richly shaded and contested, not merely a one-dimensional misappropriation composed for the benefit of a ‘superior’ elite audience. What exactly it means to be a ‘brother’ in this postlapsarian world is always an active question in the scenes involving the trio. I offer in this article a more detailed close reading of Petronian brotherhood than has been possible in other, briefer scholarly accounts, focusing in particular on the competing conceptualizations of ‘brotherhood’ by different characters, from Encolpius’ exclusive use of the term as something like ‘boyfriend’ to Ascyltos’ more capacious use of the word.
{"title":"QUEER SOCIALITY AND PETRONIAN FRATERNITY","authors":"Jay T. Oliver","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.13","url":null,"abstract":"‘How tough it is for outlaws’ (quam male est extra legem uiuentibus, Sat. 125.4), laments Encolpius, the petty-criminal narrator of Petronius’ Satyrica, as he frets about whether he and his buddies will be found out as they engage in a scheme to fleece the legacy hunters of Croton. But Encolpius and his crew are outlaws in more senses than one. Having forgotten, or simply disregarded, marital-reproductive household arrangements, they engage in novel forms of relationality that their cultural lexicon can barely cover as they quest after sex, feasts, money, or simply subsistence. Much Petronian scholarship, promoting a reading that looks down on the characters, views these forms of relationality as parodic and ‘purely comic’, ludicrously failed attempts by low, satirized characters to appropriate sublime Roman social institutions like fraternal pietas. In this article, taking as my primary example the reformulation of brotherhood and the use of the kin term frater by Encolpius, Ascyltos, and Giton, I read these forms of sociality as queer: that is to say, potentially challenging to normativity rather than simply inadequate to meet its demands. Petronian brotherhood, read in this light, appears richly shaded and contested, not merely a one-dimensional misappropriation composed for the benefit of a ‘superior’ elite audience. What exactly it means to be a ‘brother’ in this postlapsarian world is always an active question in the scenes involving the trio. I offer in this article a more detailed close reading of Petronian brotherhood than has been possible in other, briefer scholarly accounts, focusing in particular on the competing conceptualizations of ‘brotherhood’ by different characters, from Encolpius’ exclusive use of the term as something like ‘boyfriend’ to Ascyltos’ more capacious use of the word.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"32 1","pages":"224 - 240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87030994","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Finagling an inheritance is one time-tested way of resolving a money shortage: just flatter your way into the good graces of the aged and rich. In Satires 2.5 Horace parodies the Roman version of this vice, known as captatio or ‘legacy-hunting’; with baroque imagination, he presents Odysseus, the mythological hero, consulting the prophet Tiresias in the Underworld and learning how to increase his fortune by amassing inheritances. Odysseus asks: tu protinus, unde | diuitias aerisque ruam, dic, augur, aceruos (‘tell me forthwith, prophet, where I can dig up riches and heaps of money’, 21f.). Tiresias responds: captes astutus ubique | testamenta senum (‘cleverly snatch on all sides the testaments of old men’, 23f.). Social critique naturally looms large in this poem about venal dishonesty. In major studies, Niall Rudd and Klaus Sallmann have examined the poem's criticism of contemporary Roman society, and later scholars have taken a similar line, often reading the poem as a send-up of flattery. All true, but there is more to say. Even as it treats of wills, money, and flattery, the satire also shows a quiet concern with aesthetic issues, especially the state of contemporary poetry.
{"title":"LIES, DECEITS, MANIPULATIONS, AND OTHER FORMS OF AESTHETIC EXPRESSION IN HORACE, SATIRES 2.5","authors":"A. Horne","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.12","url":null,"abstract":"Finagling an inheritance is one time-tested way of resolving a money shortage: just flatter your way into the good graces of the aged and rich. In Satires 2.5 Horace parodies the Roman version of this vice, known as captatio or ‘legacy-hunting’; with baroque imagination, he presents Odysseus, the mythological hero, consulting the prophet Tiresias in the Underworld and learning how to increase his fortune by amassing inheritances. Odysseus asks: tu protinus, unde | diuitias aerisque ruam, dic, augur, aceruos (‘tell me forthwith, prophet, where I can dig up riches and heaps of money’, 21f.). Tiresias responds: captes astutus ubique | testamenta senum (‘cleverly snatch on all sides the testaments of old men’, 23f.). Social critique naturally looms large in this poem about venal dishonesty. In major studies, Niall Rudd and Klaus Sallmann have examined the poem's criticism of contemporary Roman society, and later scholars have taken a similar line, often reading the poem as a send-up of flattery. All true, but there is more to say. Even as it treats of wills, money, and flattery, the satire also shows a quiet concern with aesthetic issues, especially the state of contemporary poetry.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"108 1","pages":"203 - 223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89417999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"RMU volume 51 issue 2 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.16","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"64 1","pages":"f1 - f5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85025943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Writing on Poenulus and Plautus’ genre, Henderson has proposed that the extant Plautine plays are ‘emphatically heterogeneous’, such that ‘no one play typifies the oeuvre.’ His argument counters a charge often leveled against Roman Comedy, that the plays are all the same, or at least that they all amount to the same thing. Henderson was right that they are not and do not, but the fact remains that Plautus’ plays have a certain predictability. Their formulaic nature is what promises, in the face of manifold obstacles, a happy ending. It is what indicates that the fragments of Vidularia once added up to a recognition play—and what defines ‘recognition plays’ as a group. It is what prompts claims that Captiui is ‘unusual’, filled with ‘oddities’ and ‘mistakes’.
{"title":"METAGENRE AND THE COMPETENT AUDIENCE OF PLAUTUS’ CAPTIVI","authors":"Rachel Mazzara","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.10","url":null,"abstract":"Writing on Poenulus and Plautus’ genre, Henderson has proposed that the extant Plautine plays are ‘emphatically heterogeneous’, such that ‘no one play typifies the oeuvre.’ His argument counters a charge often leveled against Roman Comedy, that the plays are all the same, or at least that they all amount to the same thing. Henderson was right that they are not and do not, but the fact remains that Plautus’ plays have a certain predictability. Their formulaic nature is what promises, in the face of manifold obstacles, a happy ending. It is what indicates that the fragments of Vidularia once added up to a recognition play—and what defines ‘recognition plays’ as a group. It is what prompts claims that Captiui is ‘unusual’, filled with ‘oddities’ and ‘mistakes’.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"41 1","pages":"160 - 181"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79732277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In The Death of Camilla (1964), Black American painter Bob Thompson fascinates, disturbs, and provokes enduring questions about race in the United States. In this painting (Figure 1), multicolored nudes clash in battle around two figures frozen in a moment of anguish: a light-skinned female warrioress dying in the arms of a dark-hued male opponent. The power of this painting lies not only in its raw emotion, symbolism, and color, but also in Thompson's daring signification upon the story of Camilla from Vergil's Aeneid and on a seventeenth-century drawing by Nicolas Poussin. While a relatively ‘underknown’ artist, during his life Robert Louis Thompson (1937–1966) received extensive recognition for his compelling reconfigurations of the European old masters and their Classical (Greco-Roman) subjects. Thompson, according to his early biographer, Judith Wilson, may also be ‘the first American artist to put the nation's interracial sex life/sex fantasies on public view.’ In many of his works of reception, Thompson combines these two artistic preoccupations into compelling pieces that foreground tragic contradictions around interraciality in the United States. In his The Death of Camilla painting, I argue, Thompson expands upon the symbolic trajectory of Vergil's story and ‘colors’ Poussin in such a way as to re-present Camilla as collateral damage of the sort of nation building that necessitates interracial conflict.
在《卡米拉之死》(The Death of Camilla, 1964)中，美国黑人画家鲍勃·汤普森(Bob Thompson)引人入胜，令人不安，并引发了有关美国种族的持久问题。在这幅画中(图1)，五颜六色的裸体在战斗中围绕着两个在痛苦的时刻被冻结的人物:一个浅肤色的女战士死在一个深肤色的男性对手的怀里。这幅画的力量不仅在于其原始的情感、象征主义和色彩，还在于汤普森对维吉尔的《埃涅伊德》中的卡米拉故事和17世纪尼古拉斯·普桑的一幅画的大胆意义。虽然罗伯特·路易斯·汤普森(1937-1966)是一个相对“不为人知”的艺术家，但在他的一生中，他因对欧洲古典大师及其古典(希腊罗马)主题的引人注目的重新配置而获得了广泛的认可。据他早期的传记作者朱迪思·威尔逊(Judith Wilson)说，汤普森可能也是“第一位将美国跨种族性生活/性幻想呈现在公众视野中的美国艺术家”。在他的许多关于接待的作品中，汤普森将这两种艺术关注结合在一起，形成了引人注目的作品，突出了美国种族间的悲剧性矛盾。我认为，在他的《卡米拉之死》这幅画中，汤普森扩展了维吉尔的故事和“色彩”普桑的象征轨迹，以这样一种方式再现了卡米拉作为一种国家建设的附带损害，这种国家建设需要种族间的冲突。
{"title":"CONFLICT, TRAGEDY, AND INTERRACIALITY: BOB THOMPSON PAINTS VERGIL'S CAMILLA","authors":"Allannah Karas","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.15","url":null,"abstract":"In The Death of Camilla (1964), Black American painter Bob Thompson fascinates, disturbs, and provokes enduring questions about race in the United States. In this painting (Figure 1), multicolored nudes clash in battle around two figures frozen in a moment of anguish: a light-skinned female warrioress dying in the arms of a dark-hued male opponent. The power of this painting lies not only in its raw emotion, symbolism, and color, but also in Thompson's daring signification upon the story of Camilla from Vergil's Aeneid and on a seventeenth-century drawing by Nicolas Poussin. While a relatively ‘underknown’ artist, during his life Robert Louis Thompson (1937–1966) received extensive recognition for his compelling reconfigurations of the European old masters and their Classical (Greco-Roman) subjects. Thompson, according to his early biographer, Judith Wilson, may also be ‘the first American artist to put the nation's interracial sex life/sex fantasies on public view.’ In many of his works of reception, Thompson combines these two artistic preoccupations into compelling pieces that foreground tragic contradictions around interraciality in the United States. In his The Death of Camilla painting, I argue, Thompson expands upon the symbolic trajectory of Vergil's story and ‘colors’ Poussin in such a way as to re-present Camilla as collateral damage of the sort of nation building that necessitates interracial conflict.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"9 1","pages":"268 - 288"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74563401","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Among Latin rhetorical treatises and imperial writers on technical subjects, the Institutio Oratoria stands out for the sheer number of quotations of poetry that Quintilian incorporates into his discussion. Whereas Cicero's De Inuentione has 13 quotations of poetry and the Rhetorica ad Herennium 16, the index locorum in Russell's Loeb edition of the Institutio records 320 quotations from Greek and Latin poets. Despite the distinctive scale of Quintilian's engagement with poetry, scholars have not taken much interest in it, perhaps under the influence of the persistent belief that in the imperial period ‘the introduction of poetry into orations as an ornament of style’ was ‘often a useless affectation’ or that such quotations constitute mere ‘window dressing’. Early twentieth-century treatments such as that of Cole, who evaluated Quintilian's citations of poets for their ‘textual accuracy’, and Odgers, who used the relative infrequency of Quintilian's quotation of Greek literature to establish the limits of Quintilian's knowledge of Greek, set a tone of dismissiveness in relation to any question of how and why Quintilian quotes poetry as he does: Cole and Odgers attribute any ‘discrepancies’ between Quintilian's quotations and those found in the manuscripts of the poets he quoted to a (presumed) tendency to quote from memory that made him ‘rather liable to errors’. Later critics have extrapolated from their findings to attribute to Quintilian the ‘grave deficiency’ of ‘know[ing] little directly of the major Greek writers’ and to diagnose ‘intellectual stagnation’ in his engagement with Latin literature. These negative judgements are, of course, in line with the traditional assessment of Quintilian as ‘neither a great writer nor a great thinker’, one who is ‘more often belittled than understood’.
{"title":"RHETORICAL DISPLAY AND PRODUCTIVE DISSONANCE IN QUINTILIAN'S QUOTATIONS OF POETRY","authors":"Curtis Dozier","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.14","url":null,"abstract":"Among Latin rhetorical treatises and imperial writers on technical subjects, the Institutio Oratoria stands out for the sheer number of quotations of poetry that Quintilian incorporates into his discussion. Whereas Cicero's De Inuentione has 13 quotations of poetry and the Rhetorica ad Herennium 16, the index locorum in Russell's Loeb edition of the Institutio records 320 quotations from Greek and Latin poets. Despite the distinctive scale of Quintilian's engagement with poetry, scholars have not taken much interest in it, perhaps under the influence of the persistent belief that in the imperial period ‘the introduction of poetry into orations as an ornament of style’ was ‘often a useless affectation’ or that such quotations constitute mere ‘window dressing’. Early twentieth-century treatments such as that of Cole, who evaluated Quintilian's citations of poets for their ‘textual accuracy’, and Odgers, who used the relative infrequency of Quintilian's quotation of Greek literature to establish the limits of Quintilian's knowledge of Greek, set a tone of dismissiveness in relation to any question of how and why Quintilian quotes poetry as he does: Cole and Odgers attribute any ‘discrepancies’ between Quintilian's quotations and those found in the manuscripts of the poets he quoted to a (presumed) tendency to quote from memory that made him ‘rather liable to errors’. Later critics have extrapolated from their findings to attribute to Quintilian the ‘grave deficiency’ of ‘know[ing] little directly of the major Greek writers’ and to diagnose ‘intellectual stagnation’ in his engagement with Latin literature. These negative judgements are, of course, in line with the traditional assessment of Quintilian as ‘neither a great writer nor a great thinker’, one who is ‘more often belittled than understood’.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"43 1","pages":"241 - 267"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88058104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"RMU volume 51 issue 2 Cover and Back matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.17","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"10 1","pages":"b1 - b2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84189436","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The mutability of Philokleon's generational identity in Aristophanes’ Wasps is well established. Critics routinely write of his ‘rejuvenation’ in the second half of the play, and it is in the scene with the αὐλητρίϲ (‘aulos-girl’), Dardanis, that the old man most explicitly plays the part of an irresponsible youth waiting for his son (in the role of father) to die. However, inversions and perversions of generational identity pervade the whole play. Even before Philokleon has undergone his liberating transformation at the symposion, the educational roles of father and son are reversed as Bdelykleon schools him in the proper way to behave in polite society. More subtly and extensively, Bowie has shown how the three agones in which Philokleon unsuccessfully engages during the first half of the play correspond to the three stages of an Athenian male citizen's life: ephebeia, maturity in the hoplite phalanx, and old age in the jury. However, critics have not observed that Philokleon goes through another, parallel journey from youth through maturity to old age in the three ‘iambic scenes’ where he is confronted by the victims of his outrageous behaviour on his way home from the symposion. This article will show how Aristophanes constructs this third lifecycle (counting Bowie's agones and his literal maturation before the play's action begins) before considering its implications for the wider characterization of Philokleon and in particular the final scene.
{"title":"THE THIRD LIFECYCLE OF PHILOKLEON IN ARISTOPHANES’ WASPS","authors":"Robert Cowan","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.9","url":null,"abstract":"The mutability of Philokleon's generational identity in Aristophanes’ Wasps is well established. Critics routinely write of his ‘rejuvenation’ in the second half of the play, and it is in the scene with the αὐλητρίϲ (‘aulos-girl’), Dardanis, that the old man most explicitly plays the part of an irresponsible youth waiting for his son (in the role of father) to die. However, inversions and perversions of generational identity pervade the whole play. Even before Philokleon has undergone his liberating transformation at the symposion, the educational roles of father and son are reversed as Bdelykleon schools him in the proper way to behave in polite society. More subtly and extensively, Bowie has shown how the three agones in which Philokleon unsuccessfully engages during the first half of the play correspond to the three stages of an Athenian male citizen's life: ephebeia, maturity in the hoplite phalanx, and old age in the jury. However, critics have not observed that Philokleon goes through another, parallel journey from youth through maturity to old age in the three ‘iambic scenes’ where he is confronted by the victims of his outrageous behaviour on his way home from the symposion. This article will show how Aristophanes constructs this third lifecycle (counting Bowie's agones and his literal maturation before the play's action begins) before considering its implications for the wider characterization of Philokleon and in particular the final scene.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"8 1","pages":"131 - 159"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77632534","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Roman attitude toward the Ethiopian as expressed in scattered passages is far less kindly than the Greek. The usage in Terence and the Auctor ad Herennium which imply a vogue for Ethiopians is probably in imitation of Greek usage. How early the Roman attitude crystalized into racial feeling it is hard to say, and as those who express it are chiefly satirists one must be careful in drawing conclusions. Nevertheless in the absence of an expressed good will and in the face of references which have a superior or contemptuous tone it is evident that the Romans had no special affection for Ethiopians at Rome, however romantically they may have spoken of the races of distant India. The earliest passage in which they are spoken of slightingly seems to be in Cicero—cum hoc homine an cum stipite Aethiope, Cicero, De Sen., 6. The word does not occur in all the manuscripts and the Oxford and Teubner texts omit it entirely. In notes it is translated ‘blockhead’ and the statement made that in antiquity the Ethiopians were synonymous with stupidity, a conclusion obviously drawn from the passage and the modern attitude toward them. Even if the word was actually used by Cicero, this passage alone is basis for such a theory. Mrs. Beardsley (op. cit., pp.119–120), in my judgement, is wrong in her conclusion that the Roman attitude toward the Negro crystallized into racial feeling. In support of her view that the Romans referred to the Ethiopians at Rome in a superior and contemptuous tone, Mrs. Beardsley includes the following passages: (1) Cicero, Red. in Sen., 6.14 (cited incorrectly as De Sen., 6); (2) Martial, VI, 39, 6; (3) Juvenal, II, 23. Cicero, Red in Sen., 6.14…cum hoc homine an stipite Aethiope…, as Mrs. Beardsley admits, does not appear in all the manuscripts and is omitted in the best established texts. A consideration of the context leads me to believe that the editors (Oxford, Teubner, Loeb) are right in rejecting Aethiope or stipite Aethiope and in reading stipite. Nevertheless, the appearance of the variant indicates that the author of the reading used Aethiope in a derogatory sense. (It is possible that the pejorative meaning of aethiops was a medieval development.) In these two excerpts, Grace Hadley Beardsley and Frank M. Snowden, Jr., discuss the appearance of the word Aethiops (‘Aethiopian’) in Cicero's Post reditum in senatu 14. Beardsley, whose intellectual project was motivated, as Maghan Keita and, more recently, Najee Olya have discussed, by racial animus and who sought to find evidence of Greco-Roman anti-Blackness that was both consistent with, and therefore a legitimizing exemplum for, contemporary anti-Blackness in 20th-century America, took Cicero's words as ‘the earliest passage in which [Aethiopians] are spoken of slightingly’ at Rome—doing so cautiously, given the fact that most editors had deleted it from the text. Frank M. Snowden, Jr.—whose own work W.E.B. Du Bois explicitly contrasted with Beardsley—responded to Beardsley'
罗马人对埃塞俄比亚人的态度远不如希腊人友善。Terence和Auctor and Herennium中的用法暗示了埃塞俄比亚人的时尚，这可能是在模仿希腊的用法。很难说罗马人的态度在多早的时候凝结成种族主义的感情，因为表达这种感情的人主要是讽刺作家，所以在作出结论时必须谨慎。然而，由于缺乏善意的表达，并且面对带有优越感或轻蔑语气的参考资料，很明显，罗马人对罗马的埃塞俄比亚人没有特别的感情，无论他们多么浪漫地谈论遥远的印度种族。最早提到他们的段落似乎是在《西塞罗-特别的人》中，西塞罗，德森，第6页。这个词并没有出现在所有的手稿中，牛津和Teubner的文本完全省略了它。在注释中，它被翻译为“笨蛋”，并且声明在古代埃塞俄比亚人是愚蠢的同义词，这显然是从这篇文章和现代人对他们的态度中得出的结论。即使这个词真的是西塞罗用过的，这段话本身就是这样一个理论的基础。比尔兹利夫人(同上，第119 - 120页)认为罗马人对黑人的态度凝结成种族主义感情，依我看，她的结论是错误的。为了支持她的观点，即罗马人以一种优越和轻蔑的语气提到罗马的埃塞俄比亚人，比尔兹利夫人包括以下段落:(1)西塞罗，红色。在Sen.， 6.14(被错误地引用为De Sen.， 6);(2)军事学报，1999,6;(3)朱维纳利斯，二，23。西塞罗，《红色在森》，6.14，正如比尔兹利夫人所承认的那样，并没有出现在所有的手稿中，在最好的文本中也被省略了。对上下文的考虑使我相信编辑(牛津，Teubner, Loeb)拒绝Aethiope或stistite Aethiope和阅读stistite是正确的。然而，变体的出现表明阅读的作者在贬义上使用Aethiope。(aethiops的贬义可能是中世纪发展而来的。)在这两段摘录中，格蕾丝·哈德利·比尔兹利和小弗兰克·m·斯诺登讨论了西塞罗在《参议院》第14篇《Post reitum》中出现的Aethiops(“Aethiops”)一词。正如Maghan Keita和Najee Olya最近所讨论的那样，Beardsley的思想项目受到种族仇恨的激励，他试图找到希腊罗马反黑人的证据，这与20世纪美国当代反黑人的证据是一致的，因此是一个合法的例子，他把西塞罗的话作为“最早的段落，其中[埃塞俄比亚人]在罗马被轻蔑地谈论”，小心翼翼地这样做，鉴于大多数编辑都把它从文本中删除了。小弗兰克·m·斯诺登(Frank M. Snowden)——他自己的作品W.E.B.杜波伊斯(W.E.B. Du Bois)与比尔兹利形成鲜明对比——以怀疑的态度回应了比尔兹利的断言，即参议院的Post reitum包含了反黑人的证据，最终怀疑该术语在文本中的合法存在，并将其解释为敌对的文士干预的人工产物。事实上，比尔兹利和斯诺登都讨论了一个事实，那就是埃塞古并非出现在所有西塞罗手稿中。虽然确实没有权威的文本版本在senatu 14的Post reitum中印刷Aethiope，但文本设备清楚地表明，该术语在手稿传统中出现的次数比不出现的次数更多:stipe P1: etiope P2 stipe uel ethiope G uel Aethiope stipe E1 esope H
{"title":"ERASING THE AETHIOPIAN IN CICERO'S POST REDITUM IN SENATU","authors":"Hannah Čulík-Baird","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.11","url":null,"abstract":"The Roman attitude toward the Ethiopian as expressed in scattered passages is far less kindly than the Greek. The usage in Terence and the Auctor ad Herennium which imply a vogue for Ethiopians is probably in imitation of Greek usage. How early the Roman attitude crystalized into racial feeling it is hard to say, and as those who express it are chiefly satirists one must be careful in drawing conclusions. Nevertheless in the absence of an expressed good will and in the face of references which have a superior or contemptuous tone it is evident that the Romans had no special affection for Ethiopians at Rome, however romantically they may have spoken of the races of distant India. The earliest passage in which they are spoken of slightingly seems to be in Cicero—cum hoc homine an cum stipite Aethiope, Cicero, De Sen., 6. The word does not occur in all the manuscripts and the Oxford and Teubner texts omit it entirely. In notes it is translated ‘blockhead’ and the statement made that in antiquity the Ethiopians were synonymous with stupidity, a conclusion obviously drawn from the passage and the modern attitude toward them. Even if the word was actually used by Cicero, this passage alone is basis for such a theory. Mrs. Beardsley (op. cit., pp.119–120), in my judgement, is wrong in her conclusion that the Roman attitude toward the Negro crystallized into racial feeling. In support of her view that the Romans referred to the Ethiopians at Rome in a superior and contemptuous tone, Mrs. Beardsley includes the following passages: (1) Cicero, Red. in Sen., 6.14 (cited incorrectly as De Sen., 6); (2) Martial, VI, 39, 6; (3) Juvenal, II, 23. Cicero, Red in Sen., 6.14…cum hoc homine an stipite Aethiope…, as Mrs. Beardsley admits, does not appear in all the manuscripts and is omitted in the best established texts. A consideration of the context leads me to believe that the editors (Oxford, Teubner, Loeb) are right in rejecting Aethiope or stipite Aethiope and in reading stipite. Nevertheless, the appearance of the variant indicates that the author of the reading used Aethiope in a derogatory sense. (It is possible that the pejorative meaning of aethiops was a medieval development.) In these two excerpts, Grace Hadley Beardsley and Frank M. Snowden, Jr., discuss the appearance of the word Aethiops (‘Aethiopian’) in Cicero's Post reditum in senatu 14. Beardsley, whose intellectual project was motivated, as Maghan Keita and, more recently, Najee Olya have discussed, by racial animus and who sought to find evidence of Greco-Roman anti-Blackness that was both consistent with, and therefore a legitimizing exemplum for, contemporary anti-Blackness in 20th-century America, took Cicero's words as ‘the earliest passage in which [Aethiopians] are spoken of slightingly’ at Rome—doing so cautiously, given the fact that most editors had deleted it from the text. Frank M. Snowden, Jr.—whose own work W.E.B. Du Bois explicitly contrasted with Beardsley—responded to Beardsley'","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"32 1","pages":"182 - 202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80777531","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In October of 2016, less than two weeks before the election of Donald J. Trump to the White House, Saturday Night Live (SNL) aired a stunning installment of ‘Black Jeopardy!’, a recurring sketch hosted by Kenan Thompson as Darnell Hayes. In this episode, Keeley (Sasheer Zamata) and Shanice (Leslie Jones), two Black women, were joined by Tom Hanks as Doug, a white man and MAGA-hat wearing Trump supporter. Though Darnell is initially skeptical that Doug is prepared to play ‘Black Jeopardy!’ the four bond over their shared appreciation for ‘big girls’, lottery tickets, and Tyler Perry movies, and their aversion to dogs, corporations, and the government. At one point, Darnell approaches Doug for a handshake; at first taken aback (and literally stepping back), Doug then gratefully clasps the other man's hand. The sketch ends when a new category is announced, ‘Lives That Matter’, and the fragile bonds between Doug, Darnell, and the other contestants begin to fray. Doug announces that he ‘has a lot to say’ about the category. ‘Well, it was good while it lasted’, Darnell replies.
2016年10月，在唐纳德·j·特朗普(Donald J. Trump)当选白宫前不到两周，《周六夜现场》(Saturday Night Live)播出了一期令人惊叹的《黑色危险》(Black Jeopardy!)，凯南·汤普森(Kenan Thompson)饰演达内尔·海斯(Darnell Hayes)。在这一集中，两位黑人女性基利(萨希尔·扎马塔饰)和莎妮斯(莱斯利·琼斯饰)与汤姆·汉克斯一起饰演戴着maga帽的白人道格，他是特朗普的支持者。虽然达内尔最初怀疑道格准备玩“黑色危险!”这四个人都喜欢“大女孩”、彩票和泰勒·佩里(Tyler Perry)的电影，都讨厌狗、公司和政府。有一次，达内尔走近道格，想和他握手;一开始，道格吓了一跳(实际上是退后了一步)，然后感激地握住了对方的手。当一个新的类别“重要的生命”宣布时，小品结束了，道格、达内尔和其他参赛者之间脆弱的纽带开始破裂。道格宣布，他对这个奖项“有很多话要说”。“嗯，它存在的时候很好，”达内尔回答。
{"title":"CATEGORIES IN JEOPARDY: ARGINUSAE IN ARISTOPHANES’ FROGS","authors":"Clara Bosak-Schroeder","doi":"10.1017/rmu.2022.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rmu.2022.1","url":null,"abstract":"In October of 2016, less than two weeks before the election of Donald J. Trump to the White House, Saturday Night Live (SNL) aired a stunning installment of ‘Black Jeopardy!’, a recurring sketch hosted by Kenan Thompson as Darnell Hayes. In this episode, Keeley (Sasheer Zamata) and Shanice (Leslie Jones), two Black women, were joined by Tom Hanks as Doug, a white man and MAGA-hat wearing Trump supporter. Though Darnell is initially skeptical that Doug is prepared to play ‘Black Jeopardy!’ the four bond over their shared appreciation for ‘big girls’, lottery tickets, and Tyler Perry movies, and their aversion to dogs, corporations, and the government. At one point, Darnell approaches Doug for a handshake; at first taken aback (and literally stepping back), Doug then gratefully clasps the other man's hand. The sketch ends when a new category is announced, ‘Lives That Matter’, and the fragile bonds between Doug, Darnell, and the other contestants begin to fray. Doug announces that he ‘has a lot to say’ about the category. ‘Well, it was good while it lasted’, Darnell replies.","PeriodicalId":43863,"journal":{"name":"RAMUS-CRITICAL STUDIES IN GREEK AND ROMAN LITERATURE","volume":"269 1","pages":"1 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77538434","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","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：