Who was Watching Whom? A Reassessment of the Conflict between Germanicus and Piso

Despite Tacitus’ insinuations to the contrary, Cn. Calpurnius Piso (cos. 7 b.c.e.) was no friend and loyal supporter of Emperor Tiberius. The emperor offered Piso the command of Syria in an effort to win over the political support of this prestigious-but-recalcitrant senator. As a safeguard should Piso attempt something treacherous in this powerful command, Tiberius gave Piso the province at a time when Germanicus Caesar—the emperor’s loyal adopted son and heir—would be in the East resolving a number of economic problems in the eastern provinces. Thus Piso was not sent to watch the prince, but to be watched by him

The Contest of Homer and Hesiod and the ambitions of Hadrian

This is a publisher's version of an article published in The Journal of Hellenic Studies in 2010. The offprint is posted here in accordance with existing publisher policy.This article examines the compilation known as the Contest of Homer and Hesiod. More usually mined for the material it preserves from the sophist Alcidamas, here I advance a reading that seeks to make sense of the compi- lation as a whole and situates the work ideologically in its Imperial context. An anecdote early in the compilation depicts the emperor Hadrian enquiring about Homer’s birthplace and parents from the Delphic Oracle; he is told that Telemachus was Homer’s father and Ithaca his homeland. When the text says that we must believe this self-evidently absurd response on account of the status of the emperor, its author is satirizing Hadrian’s ambitions to participate in the Greek intellectual world and the pressures on scholars to accept Hadrian’s authority in their field. Moreover, the compiler has linked this anecdote to the long account of the poetic contest between Homer and Hesiod in order to draw an unflattering parallel between Hadrian and King Panedes, who, as writers such as Lucian and Dio Chrysostom suggested, exposed his ineptitude in choosing Hesiod over Homer as the victor of the contest

The Emperor Has No Clothes: Confronting the DC Circuit’s Usurpation of SEC Rulemaking Authority

In The Emperor Has No Clothes: Confronting the D.C. Circuit’s Usurpation of SEC Rulemaking Authority, Professor James D. Cox of Duke University School of Law & Benjamin J.C. Baucom, recent law clerk to Justice Don R. Willett of the Supreme Court of Texas, argue “that the level of review invoked by the D.C. Circuit in Business Roundtable and its earlier decisions is dramatically inconsistent with the standard enacted by Congress.” They conclude “that the D.C. Circuit has assumed for itself a role opposed to the one Congress prescribed for courts reviewing SEC rules.

The beginnings of a monastic reformer : the younger years of Poppo of Stavelot (Lotharingia, 978-1020)

This paper investigates the underlying mechanisms and different contexts which played a decisive role in the advancement of the pre-abbatial monastic careers of adult converts living in the eleventh century. Whereas most studies on these individuals have focused primarily on their abbatial careers, this article will consider the years preceding their attaining an influential monastic leadership position. Based upon the case of Poppo of Stavelot, traditionally regarded as one of the principal proponents of monastic reform in early-eleventh-century Lotharingia, this paper argues that the key factor leading up to a person’s nomination as abbot was not so much his religious reputation, extraordinary character, or even the result of his accumulated experience. Rather, the evolution of an individual’s pre-abbatial career depended to a large extent on how his social identity was perceived by others, as well as on the confrontation between his social capital and the concrete and short-term political context of the time

Wallenstein’s Power Problem and Its Consequences

This paper wants to be both: an introduction to game-theoretical thinking as well as a game-theoretical discussion of Schiller’s Wallenstein. Note that the intention of this article is to convince theatergoers and people who work in the theatrical arts that it is worthwhile to study some game theory. Others will hopefully profit from the unusual Wallenstein interpretation. It is not this article’s purpose to teach game theorists, but rather to inspire applications. The drama is depicted as a game and consequently submitted to a formal analysis that is based on the economic concept of rationality. Weber’s definition of power is operationalized and applied to Wallenstein’s decision situation.Power, bargaining, mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium, theater, Wallenstein

Restoration of the St. Clement’s Ohrid Archbishopric- Patriarchate as the Macedonian Orthodox Church and Ohrid Archbishopric

This is a brief narration of the creation of St. Clement\u27s Ohrid Archbishopric-Patriarchate as the Macedonian Orthodox Church-Ohrid Archbishopric from ancient times to recent times. The author first returns to the founding of the first three Macedonian and, generally, European Christian churches in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea by the Apostle Paul and his associates around the middle of the first century, AD. Then, he proceeds to the creation of the autocephalous Archbishopric Justiniana Prima (534-545) by the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I in Skopje or in its surroundings. The work of the Holy Apostle Paul and Emperor Justinian I was continued by the Slavic brothers, Sts. Cyril and Methodius of Thessalonica and their closest disciples and associates, Sts. Clement and Naum of Ohrid. As a result of their church-educational and social work, when numerous churches and monasteries were built in Macedonia and autochthonous monasticism was founded, Emperor Samuil (967-1014) created the so-called Prespa Metropolitanate or Archbishopric. Its autonomy was confirmed by Pope Gregory V. The emperor elevated the Archbishopric to the level of a patriarchate. When Samuil transferred the capital from Prespa to Ohrid, it was known as the Ohrid Patriarchate. After the collapse of Samuil\u27s state (1018), the Byzantine emperor Basil I lowered the Church to a level of archbishopric. The Ohrid Archbishopric persisted for about eight centuries until 1767, when the Turks abolished it in a non-canonical manner, and transferred its dioceses to the jurisdiction of the Greek Patriarchate of Constantinople. Then began the numerous attempts of the Macedonian people to restore its former St. Clement’s Ohrid Archbishopric as the Macedonian Orthodox Church. This happened in 1958, while the restoration of its autocephaly took place in 1967