PROCLUS ON HESIOD'S WORKS AND DAYS AND ‘DIDACTIC’ POETRY

IF 0.2 3区 历史学 Q1 Arts and Humanities
R. M. van den Berg
{"title":"PROCLUS ON HESIOD'S WORKS AND DAYS AND ‘DIDACTIC’ POETRY","authors":"R. M. van den Berg","doi":"10.1017/S0009838813000773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In their introduction to the recent excellent volume Plato & Hesiod, the editors G.R. Boys-Stones and J.H. Haubold observe that when we think about the problematic relationship between Plato and the poets, we tend to narrow this down to that between Plato and Homer. Hesiod is practically ignored. Unjustly so, the editors argue. Hesiod provides a good opportunity to start thinking more broadly about Plato's interaction with poets and poetry, not in the least because the ‘second poet’ of Greece represents a different type of poetry from Homer's heroic epics, that of didactic poetry. What goes for Plato and Hesiod goes for Proclus and Hesiod. Proclus (a.d. 410/12–85), the productive head of the Neoplatonic school in Athens, took a great interest in poetry to which he was far more positively disposed than Plato had ever been. He wrote, for example, two lengthy treatises in reaction to Socrates' devastating criticism of poetry in the Republic as part of his commentary on that work in which he tries to keep the poets within the Platonic pale. This intriguing aspect of Proclus' thought has, as one might expect, not failed to attract scholarly attention. In Proclus' case too, however, discussions tend to concentrate on his attitude towards Homer (one need only think here of Robert Lamberton's stimulating book Homer the Theologian). To some extent this is only to be expected, since much of the discussion in the Commentary on the Republic centres on passages from Homer. Proclus did not, however, disregard Hesiod: we still possess his scholia on the Works and Days, now available in a recent edition by Patrizia Marzillo.","PeriodicalId":47185,"journal":{"name":"CLASSICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0009838813000773","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLASSICAL QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838813000773","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In their introduction to the recent excellent volume Plato & Hesiod, the editors G.R. Boys-Stones and J.H. Haubold observe that when we think about the problematic relationship between Plato and the poets, we tend to narrow this down to that between Plato and Homer. Hesiod is practically ignored. Unjustly so, the editors argue. Hesiod provides a good opportunity to start thinking more broadly about Plato's interaction with poets and poetry, not in the least because the ‘second poet’ of Greece represents a different type of poetry from Homer's heroic epics, that of didactic poetry. What goes for Plato and Hesiod goes for Proclus and Hesiod. Proclus (a.d. 410/12–85), the productive head of the Neoplatonic school in Athens, took a great interest in poetry to which he was far more positively disposed than Plato had ever been. He wrote, for example, two lengthy treatises in reaction to Socrates' devastating criticism of poetry in the Republic as part of his commentary on that work in which he tries to keep the poets within the Platonic pale. This intriguing aspect of Proclus' thought has, as one might expect, not failed to attract scholarly attention. In Proclus' case too, however, discussions tend to concentrate on his attitude towards Homer (one need only think here of Robert Lamberton's stimulating book Homer the Theologian). To some extent this is only to be expected, since much of the discussion in the Commentary on the Republic centres on passages from Homer. Proclus did not, however, disregard Hesiod: we still possess his scholia on the Works and Days, now available in a recent edition by Patrizia Marzillo.
接着是赫西奥德的作品和日子,以及“说教”诗歌
在最近出版的优秀著作《柏拉图与赫西奥德》的导言中,编辑G.R. Boys-Stones和J.H. Haubold指出,当我们思考柏拉图与诗人之间有问题的关系时,我们倾向于将其缩小到柏拉图与荷马之间的关系。赫西奥德实际上被忽略了。编辑们认为这是不公平的。赫西奥德提供了一个很好的机会,让我们开始更广泛地思考柏拉图与诗人和诗歌的互动,至少是因为希腊的“第二诗人”代表了一种不同于荷马英雄史诗的诗歌类型,即说教诗歌。对柏拉图和赫西奥德有利的,对普罗克劳斯和赫西奥德有利。普罗克劳斯(公元410/12-85年)是雅典新柏拉图学派的多产领袖,他对诗歌有着极大的兴趣,他比柏拉图更积极地对待诗歌。例如,他写了两篇冗长的论文来回应苏格拉底在《理想国》中对诗歌的猛烈批评,作为他对那部作品的评论的一部分,他试图让诗人保持在柏拉图主义的范围内。普罗克罗斯思想中这个有趣的方面,正如人们所预料的那样,引起了学者们的注意。然而,在普罗克罗斯的案例中,讨论也倾向于集中在他对荷马的态度上(这里只需要想想罗伯特·兰伯顿令人振奋的著作《神学家荷马》)。在某种程度上,这是意料之中的,因为《理想国注释》中的大部分讨论都集中在荷马的段落上。然而,普罗克劳斯并没有忽视赫西奥德:我们仍然拥有他的著作《工作与日子》,现在在帕特里齐亚·马尔齐罗的最新版本中可以找到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Classical Quarterly has a reputation for publishing the highest quality classical scholarship for nearly 100 years. It publishes research papers and short notes in the fields of language, literature, history and philosophy. Two substantial issues (around 300 pages each) of The Classical Quarterly appear each year, in May and December. Given the quality and depth of the articles published in The Classical Quarterly, any serious classical library needs to have a copy on its shelves. Published for the The Classical Association
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信