奥赫里德神学院在巴西利科伊语中的表演、仪式和权力

IF 0.2 3区历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES

BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.1515/bz-2022-0043

João Vicente de Medeiros Publio Dias

{"title":"奥赫里德神学院在巴西利科伊语中的表演、仪式和权力","authors":"João Vicente de Medeiros Publio Dias","doi":"10.1515/bz-2022-0043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, we analyse two basilikoi logoi by Theophylact of Ohrid addressed to the emperors Constantine Doukas (1081-1091?) and Alexios I Komnenos (1081-1118) and contest recent scholarship which traces criticism to Alexios I by the use of subversion of traditional rhetorical topoi. We do not question the presence of such subversions, but rather their function in the text. For that, they are studied in their performative contexts: ceremonial events, performative practices and the political circumstances in which their composition possibly took place and when they were performed. By doing so, it is noticeable that criticism to the emperor in such situations is hardly conceivable and the inadequacies of the praises present in the texts can be interpreted as a response to already existing criticism to current imperial policy. Moreover, by comparing both orations as autonomous works, it is possible to perceive a clear shift both in the power balances in the recently established Komnenian consortium and in the relationship between Theophylact and major political player of his time","PeriodicalId":44281,"journal":{"name":"BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT","volume":"115 1","pages":"803 - 828"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance, ceremonial and power in the basilikoi logoi by Theophylact of Ohrid\",\"authors\":\"João Vicente de Medeiros Publio Dias\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/bz-2022-0043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this article, we analyse two basilikoi logoi by Theophylact of Ohrid addressed to the emperors Constantine Doukas (1081-1091?) and Alexios I Komnenos (1081-1118) and contest recent scholarship which traces criticism to Alexios I by the use of subversion of traditional rhetorical topoi. We do not question the presence of such subversions, but rather their function in the text. For that, they are studied in their performative contexts: ceremonial events, performative practices and the political circumstances in which their composition possibly took place and when they were performed. By doing so, it is noticeable that criticism to the emperor in such situations is hardly conceivable and the inadequacies of the praises present in the texts can be interpreted as a response to already existing criticism to current imperial policy. Moreover, by comparing both orations as autonomous works, it is possible to perceive a clear shift both in the power balances in the recently established Komnenian consortium and in the relationship between Theophylact and major political player of his time\",\"PeriodicalId\":44281,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT\",\"volume\":\"115 1\",\"pages\":\"803 - 828\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/bz-2022-0043\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bz-2022-0043","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要在这篇文章中，我们分析了奥赫里德神学院对康斯坦丁·杜卡斯（1081-1091？）和阿列克谢一世（1081-1118）两位皇帝的两个basilikoi logoi，并对最近通过颠覆传统修辞拓扑来追溯对阿列克谢一世的批评的学术提出了质疑。我们并不质疑这些子版本的存在，而是质疑它们在文本中的作用。为此，他们在表演背景下进行研究：仪式事件、表演实践以及他们的创作可能发生的政治环境和表演时间。通过这样做，值得注意的是，在这种情况下对皇帝的批评是难以想象的，文本中赞扬的不足之处可以被解释为对现有的对当前帝国政策的批评的回应。此外，通过将这两篇演讲作为自主作品进行比较，我们可以察觉到最近成立的Komnenian联盟的权力平衡以及神学与他那个时代的主要政治人物之间的关系发生了明显的转变

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Performance, ceremonial and power in the basilikoi logoi by Theophylact of Ohrid

Abstract In this article, we analyse two basilikoi logoi by Theophylact of Ohrid addressed to the emperors Constantine Doukas (1081-1091?) and Alexios I Komnenos (1081-1118) and contest recent scholarship which traces criticism to Alexios I by the use of subversion of traditional rhetorical topoi. We do not question the presence of such subversions, but rather their function in the text. For that, they are studied in their performative contexts: ceremonial events, performative practices and the political circumstances in which their composition possibly took place and when they were performed. By doing so, it is noticeable that criticism to the emperor in such situations is hardly conceivable and the inadequacies of the praises present in the texts can be interpreted as a response to already existing criticism to current imperial policy. Moreover, by comparing both orations as autonomous works, it is possible to perceive a clear shift both in the power balances in the recently established Komnenian consortium and in the relationship between Theophylact and major political player of his time

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES-

CiteScore

0.40

自引率

33.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Steeped in tradition, this organ of international Byzantine studies covers literature, history and art history, including the related and peripheral disciplines, equally in all sections (essays, reviews, bibliographies) and thus contributes significantly to the support and development of Byzantine Studies.