Cynthia and Propertius, Haemon and Antigone: Prop. 2. 8, 21–24

Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.21638/spbu20.2022.207
Kristina S. Rossiyanova
{"title":"Cynthia and Propertius, Haemon and Antigone: Prop. 2. 8, 21–24","authors":"Kristina S. Rossiyanova","doi":"10.21638/spbu20.2022.207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The piece deals with the interpretation of Prop. 2. 8. 21–24. These verses seem to be problematic and illogical over the years. In the poem, the speaker, deserted by his beloved Cynthia, imagines himself dead and then describes the heroine’s reaction to this disastrous event. Propertius thinks that she will be happy about his death and defile his grave. Then he suddenly turns to Haemon, who commits suicide in despair of the Antigone’s death, and after that threatens Cynthia to kill her. Firstly, it is incorrect to compare the righteous Antigone with the unfaithful Cynthia. Secondly, the decision to kill the beloved is inept. Some scholarstranspose the verses in order to avoid the incoherence. Others try to interpret the passage, leaving the lines in their initial order, but they usually think that Propertius compares himself with Haemon and Cynthia with Antigone. The author of the article reconsiders gender roles in this comparison and suggests a new interpretation. There are also some examples from the Catullan and Propertian poetry, which show that the gender-inverted comparisons are widely used in ancient literature and especially in Roman love poetry of the 1st century B. C., in which they, probably, are part of a new literary strategy.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2022.207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The piece deals with the interpretation of Prop. 2. 8. 21–24. These verses seem to be problematic and illogical over the years. In the poem, the speaker, deserted by his beloved Cynthia, imagines himself dead and then describes the heroine’s reaction to this disastrous event. Propertius thinks that she will be happy about his death and defile his grave. Then he suddenly turns to Haemon, who commits suicide in despair of the Antigone’s death, and after that threatens Cynthia to kill her. Firstly, it is incorrect to compare the righteous Antigone with the unfaithful Cynthia. Secondly, the decision to kill the beloved is inept. Some scholarstranspose the verses in order to avoid the incoherence. Others try to interpret the passage, leaving the lines in their initial order, but they usually think that Propertius compares himself with Haemon and Cynthia with Antigone. The author of the article reconsiders gender roles in this comparison and suggests a new interpretation. There are also some examples from the Catullan and Propertian poetry, which show that the gender-inverted comparisons are widely used in ancient literature and especially in Roman love poetry of the 1st century B. C., in which they, probably, are part of a new literary strategy.
分享
查看原文
辛西娅和普罗提乌斯,赫蒙和安提戈涅:提案2。8月21
这篇文章涉及对第2号提案的解释。8. 21 - 24日。随着时间的推移,这些经文似乎是有问题的,不合逻辑的。在这首诗中,说话者被他心爱的辛西娅抛弃,想象自己死了,然后描述了女主角对这一灾难性事件的反应。普罗提乌斯以为她会为他的死感到高兴,并玷污他的坟墓。然后他突然转向Haemon, Haemon对安提戈涅的死感到绝望,自杀了,然后威胁辛西娅要杀了她。首先,将正义的安提戈涅与不忠的辛西娅相提并论是不正确的。其次,杀死心爱之人的决定是愚蠢的。有些学者为了避免不连贯而把诗句调换。另一些人则试图解释这段话,把这几行文字按照最初的顺序排列,但他们通常认为普罗提乌斯把自己比作赫蒙,把辛西娅比作安提戈涅。本文作者重新思考了这种比较中的性别角色,并提出了一种新的解释。还有一些来自卡图兰和property诗歌的例子,表明性别颠倒的比较在古代文学中被广泛使用,特别是在公元前1世纪的罗马爱情诗歌中,它们可能是一种新的文学策略的一部分。
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
×
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