{"title":"Authorship Analysis and the Authenticity of Euripides’ Electra 518–44: Preserving Character Consistency","authors":"Nikos Manousakis, E. Stamatatos","doi":"10.1086/730675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this interdisciplinary study, a cutting-edge authorship attribution algorithm, highly accurate in testing the authenticity of very short texts, is used to examine the authorship of a passage in Euripides’ Electra, notoriously suspected of inauthenticity. There has been a long debate about the authorial nature of the anagnorisis discussion between Electra and Agamemnon’s old tutor in this Euripidean play. Is it a parody of Aeschylus? Is it, as it has been argued, dramaturgically inconsistent and even tasteless? Was it actually composed by Euripides? And if it is authentic, what was Euripides’ artistic aim in creating the scene? These and other relevant questions make Electra 518–44 possibly the most philologically intriguing passage in the play. On our part, we show that the passage is Euripidean, employing computer-based authorship analysis, also indicating that the textual difficulties/plot incongruities adduced to support the opposite are rather overemphasized pseudo-problems, and we conclude that it has much to do with Electra’s characterization in the play.","PeriodicalId":46255,"journal":{"name":"CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/730675","RegionNum":2,"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
In this interdisciplinary study, a cutting-edge authorship attribution algorithm, highly accurate in testing the authenticity of very short texts, is used to examine the authorship of a passage in Euripides’ Electra, notoriously suspected of inauthenticity. There has been a long debate about the authorial nature of the anagnorisis discussion between Electra and Agamemnon’s old tutor in this Euripidean play. Is it a parody of Aeschylus? Is it, as it has been argued, dramaturgically inconsistent and even tasteless? Was it actually composed by Euripides? And if it is authentic, what was Euripides’ artistic aim in creating the scene? These and other relevant questions make Electra 518–44 possibly the most philologically intriguing passage in the play. On our part, we show that the passage is Euripidean, employing computer-based authorship analysis, also indicating that the textual difficulties/plot incongruities adduced to support the opposite are rather overemphasized pseudo-problems, and we conclude that it has much to do with Electra’s characterization in the play.
期刊介绍:
Classical Philology has been an internationally respected journal for the study of the life, languages, and thought of the Ancient Greek and Roman world since 1906. CP covers a broad range of topics from a variety of interpretative points of view. CP welcomes both longer articles and short notes or discussions that make a significant contribution to the study of Greek and Roman antiquity. Any field of classical studies may be treated, separately or in relation to other disciplines, ancient or modern. In particular, we invite studies that illuminate aspects of the languages, literatures, history, art, philosophy, social life, and religion of ancient Greece and Rome. Innovative approaches and originality are encouraged as a necessary part of good scholarship.