Emblemata: The emblem books of Andrea Alciato

A study of the life and works of the legal scholar and humanist, Andrea Alciato (1492-1550), the originator of the emblem book. The nature of the emblem is elucidated and placed in its historical, intellectual and artistic contexts, with special attention paid to the many and varied published manifestations of Alciato???s emblems from 1531 to 1621.published or submitted for publicationnot peer reviewe

on Egyptianising scarabs

UIDB/04666/2020 UIDP/04666/2020This work aims to present an update on the iconographic analysis of the 18 so far known Egyptian and Egyptianising scarabs from the Portuguese Late Bronze and Early Iron context. Such scarabs are part of the Egyptian objects of religious content that both Phoenicians and Greeks consumed and spread across the Mediterranean basin during their colonial waves. To some extent, these Egyptian religious objects also started to be produced by Phoenicians and Greeks in many factories in their colonies. All that Egyptian and Egyptianising material of religious content is called aegyptiaca. During the seventh and sixth centuries bc, Phoenician colonists expanded their settlements towards the Algarve and the estuaries of navigable rivers along the Atlantic shoreline. Most of those new settlers were Phoenicians of second and third generation who had departed from the area of Cadiz and Malaga. They established themselves in new sites, but also in indigenous communities. The transformations undergone in those native societies can be most easily noticed through archaeological data. Phoenician objects acquired a distinctive status and became widely consumed, but also mimicked by Phoenician, Greek and other local artisans. Scarabs are funerary amulets, but also had a protective and magic valour. They could also have been used for social distinction as seals or emblems by their owners. The main question asked when aegyptiaca is found so far in the west concerns the identity of its owner: Phoenician or Native? So, this paper has two main objectives. Firstly, to update the scarce information so far published on these scarabs, by presenting an iconographic study on the representation of demons. Secondly, to posit new questions concerning the role played by aegyptiaca in the Atlantic limits of the Phoenician presence, on religion and cultural identity.authorsversionpublishe

Paul Auster's written groundwork

From stones to wall

Book Review

The Hieroglyph of Tradition: Freud, Benjamin, Gadamer, Novalis, Kant (Angelika Rauch) (Reviewed by Irving Massey, SUNY at Buffalo) Stranger from Paradise: A Biography of William Blake (G. E. Bentley) (Reviewed by Kathryn Freeman, University of Miami) Disarming the Nation: Women’s Writing and the American Civil War (Elizabeth Young) (Reviewed by Joseph Helminski, University of Toledo) Women’s Holocaust Writing: Memory and Imagination (S. Lillian Kremer) (Reviewed by Meri-Jane Rochelson, Florida International University) Fables of Modernity: Literature and Culture in the English Eighteenth Century (Laura Brown) (Reviewed by Jodi L. Wyett, Xavier University) Led by Language: The Poetry and Poetics of Susan Howe (Rachel Tzvia Back) (Reviewed by Megan Simpson, Pennsylvania State University) Edward Abbey: A Life (James M. Cahalan) (Reviewed by James N. Wise, University of Missouri—Rolla) William Hazlitt and Leigh Hunt: The Continuing Dialogue (Payson G. Gates;Ed. and anno, Eleanor M. Gates) (Reviewed by Robert K. Lapp, Mount Allison University

The Venus Shell-Over-Star Hieroglyph And Maya Warfare: An Examination Of The Interpretation Of A Mayan Symbol

For decades, Maya scholars have associated the Mayan ―Shell-Star‖ (also referred to as ―Star-War‖) hieroglyph with Maya warfare. Put forward by scholars such as Floyd Lounsbury and David Kelley, and later advanced by Linda Schele, David Freidel, Ian Graham, Peter Matthews, Anthony Aveni and others, there are now dozens of published articles and chapters relating the hieroglyph to Venus and warfare. Venus is one of the most notable celestial objects outside of the Sun and Moon and was highly visible to the inhabitants of the Maya world. The Dresden Codex (an astronomical almanac) contains important information about the planet Venus, and the calendar section was deciphered by the librarian and mathematician, Ernst Förstemann in the late 1800s. In his decipherment, he deduced that the numbers contained in the tables must be connected to the orbital period of the planet. There is no other planet with the same orbital period 3 as Venus. Förstemann suggested that the decoded astronomy tables were used by the Maya to determine when to wage war. This interpretation, along with others, like Floyd Lounsbury`s study of Venus and the Long Count date at Bonampak were the seeds that have led to methodological errors that first began to take root in Maya research. The idea of the Venus association with warfare took hold and continues to propagate. Many scholars continue to assert that the ―shell-star‖ glyph is related to warfare events. Others, like Gerardo Aldana, and Stanley Guenter, have recently come forward to reexamine and question the hieroglyph and its relationship, if any, to Maya warfare. I suggest, further, that methodological errors may have occurred along the way. I propose that these errors include data lost in translation, and inaccurate translations. In addition, the statistical analysis of Venus cycles has weak points. If this identification of the errors is correct, we need to re-evaluate the weakened foundation on which we are building our assertions about the role of Venus in Maya warfare. In this work, I examine the initial and subsequent interpretations of the Mayan ―shell-star‖ hieroglyph, a symbol that has begun to generate an increasing amount of discussion among Mayan scholars over the last several years. In addition, I discuss new arguments (like that of Gerardo Aldana) regarding the role of Venus in Maya warfare. Finally, I would like to provide some suggestions for future research regarding this subject