Late antiquity and the antiquarian

Arnaldo Momigliano, the most influential modern student of antiquarianism, advanced the view that there was a late antique antiquarianism, but also lamented the absence of study of the history of antiquarianism in this period. Part of the challenge, however, has been to define the object of such a study. Rather than "finding" antiquarianism in late antiquity as Momigliano did, this article argues that a history that offers explicit analogies between late antique evidence and the avowed antiquarianism of early modern Europe allows a more self-conscious and critical history of late antique engagement with the past. The article offers three examples of this form of analysis, comparing practices of statue collecting in Renaissance Rome and the late RomanWest, learned treatises on the Roman army by Vegetius and Justus Lipsius, and feelings of attachment to a local past as a modern antiquarian stereotype and in a pair of letters to and from Augustine of Hippo

Bread as Food and Medicament in Oribasius’ Writings

Treatises left by Oribasius (first and foremost his Collectiones medicae and Eclogae medicamentorum) preserve a vast body of information on the varieties of bread eaten in late antiquity, characterise them from the point of view of dietetics, list medical conditions in which a given variety is especially beneficial, and name medical preparations which include the product. The present study elaborates on Oribasius’ dietetic knowledge and his input into the development of dietetic discourse (namely his influence on Byzantine dietetic doctrine), determines Oribasius’ main information sources on bread, characterises bread as food, lists varieties which were thought to be used by physicians and explains reasons for the preferences, and finally exemplifies cures and medical preparations which include bread

Society, Politics, and Ideology of Classical Athens

В книге – на основании анализа разнообразных источников и использования последних достижений историографии – рассматриваются дискуссионные проблемы истории Афин V–IV вв. до н.э., а также сопутствующие темы. Взаимоотношение политических лидеров и толп (неорганизованных массовых сборищ) рассматривается в первых двух разделах. Совершенно разных (даже противоположных по политическим взглядам) лидеров классических Афин объединяла общая вписанность в «политические рамки», невозможность использовать «энергию масс» в своих целях. На основе анализа слов, обозначающих толпу, и сообщений источников о возможных действиях неорганизованных массовых сборищ автор делает вывод о том, что толпа в классических Афинах не играла почти никакой роли в политической жизни, однако использовалась как средство идеологического устрашения. Для характеристики идеологии демократических Афин используется неожиданный источник: собственные имена, которые анализируются с использованием как просопографических методов, так и методов описательной статистики. Особый интерес представляет анализ «закрытых» ономастических комплексов, который позволяет провести корреляцию между «демократическими» именами и социальным статусом афинских граждан. В исследовании использованы оригинальные подходы, которые позволяют по-новому взглянуть как на афинское общество V–IV вв. до н.э., так и на другие проблемы истории античного мира. In the book debatable problems of Athenian history in 5th-4th centuries B.C. and concomitant issues are examined on the basis of various sources analysis and usage of recent advances in historiography. Interrelations between political leaders and crowds (unorganized mass gatherings) are considered in the two first parts. In terms of analysis of words designating crowds and sources information on probable actions of unorganized mass gatherings, the author concludes that the crowd in classical Athens almost did not influence politics but was used as a tool of ideological frightening. For description of democratic Athens ideology, proper names are analyzed with use of both prosopographical and descriptive statistics methods. In the paper original approaches are utilized; they make it possible to look in a new way at both Athenian society in 5th-4th centuries B.C. and other issues in ancient world history

Greek and Roman Logic

In ancient philosophy, there is no discipline called “logic” in the contemporary sense of “the study of formally valid arguments.” Rather, once a subfield of philosophy comes to be called “logic,” namely in Hellenistic philosophy, the field includes (among other things) epistemology, normative epistemology, philosophy of language, the theory of truth, and what we call logic today. This entry aims to examine ancient theorizing that makes contact with the contemporary conception. Thus, we will here emphasize the theories of the “syllogism” in the Aristotelian and Stoic traditions. However, because the context in which these theories were developed and discussed were deeply epistemological in nature, we will also include references to the areas of epistemological theorizing that bear directly on theories of the syllogism, particularly concerning “demonstration.” Similarly, we will include literature that discusses the principles governing logic and the components that make up arguments, which are topics that might now fall under the headings of philosophy of logic or non-classical logic. This includes discussions of problems and paradoxes that connect to contemporary logic and which historically spurred developments of logical method. For example, there is great interest among ancient philosophers in the question of whether all statements have truth-values. Relevant themes here include future contingents, paradoxes of vagueness, and semantic paradoxes like the liar. We also include discussion of the paradoxes of the infinite for similar reasons, since solutions have introduced sophisticated tools of logical analysis and there are a range of related, modern philosophical concerns about the application of some logical principles in infinite domains. Our criterion excludes, however, many of the themes that Hellenistic philosophers consider part of logic, in particular, it excludes epistemology and metaphysical questions about truth. Ancient philosophers do not write treatises “On Logic,” where the topic would be what today counts as logic. Instead, arguments and theories that count as “logic” by our criterion are found in a wide range of texts. For the most part, our entry follows chronology, tracing ancient logic from its beginnings to Late Antiquity. However, some themes are discussed in several eras of ancient logic; ancient logicians engage closely with each other’s views. Accordingly, relevant publications address several authors and periods in conjunction. These contributions are listed in three thematic sections at the end of our entry

Greek love, orientalism and race : intersections in Classical reception

Classics has been characterised as both a radical and a conservative discipline. Classical reception studies has enjoyed exploring this paradox: antiquity has provided an erotic example for modern homosexual counter-culture as well as a model for running exploitative empires. This article brings these aspects of reception studies together, to examine how the Victorian homosexual reception of the ancient Greeks was framed and worked out in a particular imperial context at the end of the nineteenth century

Introduction

This introduction presents an overview of the key concepts discussed in the subsequent chapters of this book. The book explores, inter alia, the strategy employed by Augustine in using Plato as a pseudo-prophet against later Platonists and explores Eusebius’ reception of Porphyry’s daemonology. It examines Plotinus’ claim that matter is absolute badness and focuses on Maximus the Confessor’s doctrine of creation and asks whether one may detect any influence on Maximus from Philoponus. The book addresses Christian receptions of Platonic metaphysics and also examines the philosophy of number in Augustine’s early works. It argues that the aspect of Augustine’s philosophy must be read in context with the intellectual problems that occupied him at the beginning of his career as a writer. It draws on a number of sources to investigate the development of the doctrine and the various intellectual issues it confronted, including Plato’s Timaeus, Philo of Alexandria, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Plotinus and, finally, Athanasius