Propertius 4.5, Ovid Amores 1.6 and Roman Comedy

IF 0.5 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS
J. Yardley
{"title":"Propertius 4.5, Ovid Amores 1.6 and Roman Comedy","authors":"J. Yardley","doi":"10.1017/S0068673500004983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"‘The absence of Roman comedy … from the influences which the [Augustan] poets like to name proves only that they were not creditable, not in fashion, not that they had made no contribution.’ So Jasper Griffin in his recent book on the Roman poets. Griffin observes that scholars have been deterred from postulating Roman comic influence on the Augustan poets merely by the ‘magisterial pronouncements of the great scholars’, and he amasses considerable circumstantial evidence to support his theory that the Augustan poets, and especially the elegists, were indeed indebted to Roman comedy. He observes, for example, that Cicero provides evidence for the continuing popularity of Roman drama; that (a very important point) Horace complains of the popularity of the Roman comedians whom ‘powerful Rome learns by heart’ (Epist. 2.1.60-1); that the same poet, despite his denigration of Roman comedy, obviously knew and referred to it; that Roman comedy seems to be the source, or a source, for the ‘naughtiness’ of elegy and the rejection of traditional Roman values (with the comic amatores distressed by contemporary mores and the elegists flouting them); that if the elegists do not acknowledge their debt to the Roman comic poets, then no more does Horace in the Odes acknowledge his manifest indebtedness to Hellenistic poetry, claiming instead to be following Sappho and Alcaeus.","PeriodicalId":53950,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Classical Journal","volume":"33 1","pages":"179-189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"1987-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0068673500004983","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Classical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0068673500004983","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: 8

Abstract

‘The absence of Roman comedy … from the influences which the [Augustan] poets like to name proves only that they were not creditable, not in fashion, not that they had made no contribution.’ So Jasper Griffin in his recent book on the Roman poets. Griffin observes that scholars have been deterred from postulating Roman comic influence on the Augustan poets merely by the ‘magisterial pronouncements of the great scholars’, and he amasses considerable circumstantial evidence to support his theory that the Augustan poets, and especially the elegists, were indeed indebted to Roman comedy. He observes, for example, that Cicero provides evidence for the continuing popularity of Roman drama; that (a very important point) Horace complains of the popularity of the Roman comedians whom ‘powerful Rome learns by heart’ (Epist. 2.1.60-1); that the same poet, despite his denigration of Roman comedy, obviously knew and referred to it; that Roman comedy seems to be the source, or a source, for the ‘naughtiness’ of elegy and the rejection of traditional Roman values (with the comic amatores distressed by contemporary mores and the elegists flouting them); that if the elegists do not acknowledge their debt to the Roman comic poets, then no more does Horace in the Odes acknowledge his manifest indebtedness to Hellenistic poetry, claiming instead to be following Sappho and Alcaeus.
Propertius 4.5, Ovid Amores 1.6和罗马喜剧
“罗马喜剧的缺席……从[奥古斯都]诗人喜欢命名的影响中只能证明他们不可信,不流行,并不是说他们没有贡献。”贾斯珀·格里芬在他最近一本关于罗马诗人的书中写道。格里芬观察到,学者们已经阻止了假设罗马喜剧对奥古斯都诗人的影响,仅仅因为“伟大学者的权威声明”,他收集了大量的间接证据来支持他的理论,即奥古斯都诗人,尤其是挽歌家,确实受到了罗马喜剧的影响。例如,他观察到,西塞罗为罗马戏剧的持续流行提供了证据;(这是非常重要的一点)贺拉斯抱怨罗马喜剧演员的受欢迎程度“强大的罗马熟记于心”(《传道书》2.1.60-1);同一个诗人,尽管他贬低罗马喜剧,显然知道并提到它;罗马喜剧似乎是挽歌的"顽皮"和对罗马传统价值观的抛弃的根源(喜剧爱好者被当代的习俗所困扰,而挽歌家则蔑视它们);如果挽歌家不承认他们对罗马喜剧诗人的亏欠,那么贺拉斯在《颂歌》中也不承认他对希腊化诗歌的明显亏欠,而是声称自己是在追随萨福和阿尔凯乌斯。
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
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
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