AntichthonPub Date : 2022-12-13DOI: 10.1017/ann.2022.8
Mikhail Vedeshkin
{"title":"The Date of Eunapius’ Vitae Sophistarum and the Establishment of the Martyr Cult in Menouthis","authors":"Mikhail Vedeshkin","doi":"10.1017/ann.2022.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2022.8","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper is a contribution to a discussion on the dating of Eunapius’ Vitae Sophistarum. Arguments are put forward that Eunapius’ remark on the necrolatry of the monks of Canopus reflects the establishment of a cult of Saints Cyrus and John. Since this event took place when the Church of Alexandria was headed by Cyril, we may consider the beginning of his archbishopric (October 18, 412 CE) as a reliable terminus post quem for the publication of this text.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"56 1","pages":"226 - 235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49370099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
AntichthonPub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1017/ann.2022.12
Christopher J. Dowson
{"title":"The Translation of Greek Philosophical Terminology in Marius Victorinus’ Opera Theologica: A Quantitative and Qualitative Study","authors":"Christopher J. Dowson","doi":"10.1017/ann.2022.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2022.12","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article collects and analyses philosophical terms formed in Latin by fourth-century rhetorician and philosopher Marius Victorinus (c. 285–360s C.E.) as a result of his translation from Greek sources. The study examines primarily his theological treatises: the Ad Candidum Arianum (De Generatione Divini Verbi) and the Adversus Arium. It undertakes a quantitative and qualitative examination of these terms by studying two linguistic mechanisms which constitute ‘term-formation’ in Latin: lexical innovation and lexical augmentation. Both functioned as important linguistic and conceptual devices in Victorinus’ translations. The article also examines the theological contexts of certain metaphysical terms to understand further their similarities and differences, not only in Victorinus’ translations, but also in earlier uses of central Latin philosophical terms, e.g., essentia and substantia. The article concludes that Victorinus was more didactic than his philosophical predecessors such as M. Tullius Cicero, Seneca the Younger or Apuleius of Madaura, preferring literal translation (particularly morphological calquing) rather than semantic extensions or metaphorical usages (lexical augmentation). By using neologisms formed using derivational word-formation processes and, on rare occasions, loan-words from Greek, Victorinus adopted an approach of adapting Greek terminology with a high degree of precision in Latin, from a range of sources including Christian, Neo-Platonist, and Gnostic authors. He thereby introduced a new Christological vocabulary in the Latin tradition, making him a significant intellectual figure of the fourth and fifth centuries. Although by no means as dominant as others, such as Augustine or Boethius, Victorinus would nonetheless come to exert influence over later Christian philosophers in the Latin West, particularly during the Scholastic period of the Middle Ages.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"19 1","pages":"203 - 225"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56967471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
AntichthonPub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1017/ann.2022.11
Michał Marciak, M. Sobiech, Tomasz Pirowski
{"title":"Alexander the Great in Mesopotamia in 331 BCE","authors":"Michał Marciak, M. Sobiech, Tomasz Pirowski","doi":"10.1017/ann.2022.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2022.11","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper presents a selected aspect of research conducted within the Gaugamela Project, which seeks to finally identify the location of the Battle of Gaugamela. Its particular aim is to analyse the strategic situation of the army of Alexander the Great in Mesopotamia in the summer of 331 BCE, with a special focus on the itinerary and chronology of the army's march. The paper critically reviews Classical sources (Arrian, Curtius, Diodorus, and Plutarch), but also employs topographic and archaeological data as well as GIS capabilities (least cost paths). In contrast to most previous scholarship, it is suggested that the Macedonian troops crossed the Euphrates much later than suggested by Arrian (Anab. 3.7.1) – around September 2, 331 BCE. Their march led across the Tur Abdin escarpment (via Nisibis) and left Mesopotamia through a ford in the vicinity of modern Cizre or Basorin. What is more, the Macedonian marching rate was definitely not slow (contra W. E. Marsden), but faster than average due to the activity of the Persian scouting troops and logistic necessity. In total, the Macedonians covered around 370 to 394 km within a maximum of 16 days.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"56 1","pages":"77 - 104"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56966932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
AntichthonPub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1017/ann.2021.1
T. Hillard
{"title":"Reading Catullus 113 as the Vilification of Pompey's Ex-Wife Mucia","authors":"T. Hillard","doi":"10.1017/ann.2021.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2021.1","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Written in 55 BCE, carmen 113 seemingly uses the first two consulships of Pompey to measure a decline in moral standards, with one unfortunate woman as the yardstick of sexual profligacy. It closes with a focus on marital infidelity. The epigram should be read as a savage attack upon Mucia, the one-time wife of Pompey. This paper affirms her identity by postulating a punning wordplay on Mucia and C(a)ecilia that made this identification clear to the poet's readership. No textual emendation is required. It is also proposed that the observation regarding adultery, no mere aphorism, queried the legitimacy of one or more of Pompey's children.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"55 1","pages":"74 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56966698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
AntichthonPub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1017/ann.2021.2
P. Watson
{"title":"Catullus’ Lament for Lesbia's Passer in the Context of Pet-Keeping","authors":"P. Watson","doi":"10.1017/ann.2021.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2021.2","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the last three lines of Catullus’ ‘dead sparrow’ poem (. . . o miselle passer! / tua nunc opera meae puellae / flendo turgiduli rubent ocelli, Catull. 3.16–18), the poet turns his attention from the fate of the passer to the effect that its death has on Lesbia. What is remarkable here is the accumulation of diminutives (miselle, puellae, turgiduli, ocelli), a feature which most translators fail to take sufficiently into account. In particular, the employment of two (comparatively rare) diminutive adjectives is especially striking. The effect of such overkill is mock pathos, but why does Catullus end his poem on a parodic note? I would like to suggest that we view this in the light of the Romans’ tendency to criticise excessive emotional display regarding pets and especially to their deaths, the implication being that Lesbia's reaction is overdone. Catullus’ mocking of his girl's unbounded grief for her pet is also to be linked to poem 2 where, it could be argued, the poet displays jealousy of Lesbia's emotional commitment to the passer.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"26 1","pages":"21 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56966870","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
AntichthonPub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1017/ann.2021.7
A. Green
{"title":"Lesbia's Controversial Bird: Testing the Cases for and against Passer as Sparrow","authors":"A. Green","doi":"10.1017/ann.2021.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2021.7","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The identity of the passer in Catullus 2 and 3 has been a subject of controversy for hundreds of years.1 Sir D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson, the great authority on birds in the ancient world, sums it up best with his own musings: ‘Whatever Lesbia's “sparrow” may have been, I am pretty sure in my own mind […] that it was not Passer domesticus, the most intractable and least amiable of cage-birds.’2 Some scholars opt for an obscene interpretation of passer, while others argue that passer must refer to a bird like a bullfinch (Pyrrhula pyrrhula). To test the validity of these arguments, this paper examines four key components of the passer poems, and the passer debates. Firstly, it determines the Roman cultural view of sparrows and whether they regarded the birds as pets, pests, or something else entirely. Secondly, it analyses Roman trends in bird-keeping and looks for other examples of pet passeres in art and literature. Thirdly, it considers actual bird behaviour to reveal whether a sparrow could act the way Catullus describes. Finally, it analyses the different potential meanings of the word passer to determine which birds fell under its descriptive umbrella. In this way we can judge whether the passer was indeed a sparrow while also determining the place of sparrows in Roman thought and pet-keeping culture.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"55 1","pages":"6 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56966957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}