锚定家谱

IF 0.4 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS MNEMOSYNE Pub Date : 2024-01-27 DOI:10.1163/1568525x-bja10189
Joseph Zehner
{"title":"锚定家谱","authors":"Joseph Zehner","doi":"10.1163/1568525x-bja10189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The writings of both Hecataeus and Pherecydes focus on genealogies, but scholars have characterized their styles differently: Hecataeus is anti-traditional and idiosyncratic, while Pherecydes is an impartial recorder of myths. This contribution argues for a neglected side of each author: Hecataeus follows Homeric genealogical traditions, while Pherecydes constructed novel genealogies of his own. Both authors, then, used tradition to accommodate, or ‘anchor,’ their innovations in genealogical writing, a strategy which Herodotus, in turn, improves upon in his own use of genealogies.","PeriodicalId":46134,"journal":{"name":"MNEMOSYNE","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anchoring Genealogy\",\"authors\":\"Joseph Zehner\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/1568525x-bja10189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The writings of both Hecataeus and Pherecydes focus on genealogies, but scholars have characterized their styles differently: Hecataeus is anti-traditional and idiosyncratic, while Pherecydes is an impartial recorder of myths. This contribution argues for a neglected side of each author: Hecataeus follows Homeric genealogical traditions, while Pherecydes constructed novel genealogies of his own. Both authors, then, used tradition to accommodate, or ‘anchor,’ their innovations in genealogical writing, a strategy which Herodotus, in turn, improves upon in his own use of genealogies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46134,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MNEMOSYNE\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-27\",\"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-bja10189\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"CLASSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MNEMOSYNE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1568525x-bja10189","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

摘要

赫卡泰厄斯和菲雷西德斯的著作都侧重于家谱,但学者们对他们的风格有不同的描述:赫卡塔乌斯反传统、特立独行,而菲雷西德斯则是神话的公正记录者。本文论证了两位作者被忽视的一面:赫卡塔厄斯遵循荷马史诗的家谱传统,而菲雷西德斯则构建了自己的新家谱。因此,两位作者都利用传统来适应或 "锚定 "他们在家谱写作中的创新,而希罗多德在使用自己的家谱时又改进了这一策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Anchoring Genealogy
The writings of both Hecataeus and Pherecydes focus on genealogies, but scholars have characterized their styles differently: Hecataeus is anti-traditional and idiosyncratic, while Pherecydes is an impartial recorder of myths. This contribution argues for a neglected side of each author: Hecataeus follows Homeric genealogical traditions, while Pherecydes constructed novel genealogies of his own. Both authors, then, used tradition to accommodate, or ‘anchor,’ their innovations in genealogical writing, a strategy which Herodotus, in turn, improves upon in his own use of genealogies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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