La fides e la promessa: forme di reciprocit\ue0 tra d\ue8i e uomini nella riscrittura di Ovidio

Nelle rielaborazioni ovidiane dei racconti mitici greci, emergono diversi casi in cui la relazione tra esseri umani e divinit\ue0 \ue8 riscritta alla luce della nozione romana di fides. Ma se la quasi totalit\ue0 di questi miti, in cui il dio promette all\u2019interagente mortale un pegno, un dono o un privilegio, \ue8 giustificata dalla presenza di vincoli di tipo amoroso, parentale o devozionale, un caso a parte rappresenta il racconto di Numa Pompilio e Giove (Fast. 3. 285-392) \u2013 un racconto Romano \u2013 in cui l\u2019agente umano merita i pignora certa del dio e instaura con lui un rapporto di reciprocit\ue0. Il contributo si propone di esaminare questa rappresentazione della fides pollicita attraverso un confronto ragionato con altri racconti ovidiani di fides e promesse, parzialmente assimilabili: in particolare, la storia di Bacco e Mida e il mito delle figlie di Anio, entrambi ricodificati nell\u2019ambito della categoria culturale della fides.In the Ovidian reworking of Greek myths, several cases emerge, in which the relationships between human beings and gods are rewritten in the light of the Roman notion of fides. If almost all of these myths, in which the god promises to the human actor a pledge, a gift or a privilege, are justified by a love connection, a parental or a devotional bond, a special case is represented by the story of Numa Pompilius and Jupiter (Fast. 3. 285-392) \u2013 that is, a Roman myth \u2013 in which the human agent deserves the pignora certa from the god and he establishes a reciprocal relationship with him. The paper aims to investigate this representation of fides pollicita through the comparison with other Ovidian tales of fides and promises, partially similar: specifically, the story of Bacchus and Midas (Met. 11. 85-135) and the myth of the Anius\u2019 daughters (Met. 13. 640-674), both recoded under the cultural category of fides

Beneficio e vendetta. Due dinamiche relazionali nel "De beneficiis" e nelle tragedie di Seneca

Nelle sue tragedie Seneca elabora una rappresentazione dei sistemi relazionali di iniuria e vendetta, operando una riconsiderazione delle categorie morfologiche di male facere e bene facere e del loro valore culturale e letterario. Il confronto tra iniuria – il più importante strumento di nocere nelle fabulae di Seneca – e beneficium mira a chiarire i termini strutturali della ridefinizione senecana intorno a offesa e beneficio, al fine di individuare una rete di temi che possano fornire un’interpretazione culturale di queste due forme diverse di relazione, segnate da una polarità ideologica che il confronto fra le tragedie e il trattato de beneficiis lascia emergere. Il mescolamento di elementi appartenenti a dinamiche opposte compromette gli esiti del meccanismo del beneficio, mentre favorisce il successo della vendetta. Il tentativo di indagare i mezzi di questa operazione in "Medea", "Thyestes" e "Phaedra" è funzionale al recupero del significato antropologico di tali pratiche oppositive, unite dal modulo dell’inversione.In his tragedies Seneca works out a representation of the relational systems of iniuria and revenge, operating a reconsideration of the morphological categories of male facere and bene facere and their cultural and literary value. The comparison between iniuria – the most important instrument of nocere in the Seneca’s fabulae – and beneficium aims at clarifying the structural terms of Seneca’s redefinition about offense and benefits, in order to identify a network of themes that may furnish a cultural interpretation of this two different forms of relationship, marked by an ideological polarity that the comparison about tragedies and the treatise de beneficiis allows to emerge. The mixing of elements belonging to opposite dynamics compromises outcomes of the mechanism of benefit, whereas it support the success of revenge. The attempt to investigate the devices of these operations in "Medea", "Thyestes" and "Phaedra" is functional to recover the anthropological meaning of these antithetical practices, linked by the module of reversal

Gift Objects in Virgil’s Aeneid

Secondo l’antropologia degli oggetti, i doni sono oggetti speciali con una propria storia e memoria. Essi sono in grado di promuovere, creare e mantenere legami sociali tra le persone proprio in ragione del loro ruolo di portatori culturali e personali di significato (Gregory 1982b; Kopytoff 1986; von Reden 1995: spec. 60 s.). In qualche misura, questo è anche vero nell’antica Roma, dove quella del dono era una pratica di reciprocità diffusa, che consentiva di tessere una complessa rete di relazioni. Tale complessità si riflette nel poema più rappresentativo della cultura romana: l’Eneide di Virgilio. Il mio contributo mira a indagare la rappresentazione degli oggetti del dono nell’Eneide, con particolare riguardo agli espedienti narrativi e alle categorie culturali e mitiche coinvolte. Pertanto, l’obiettivo principale di questo studio è di evidenziare il ruolo attivo che gli oggetti del dono giocano nel poema: quali sono le loro funzioni relazionali e a quale scopo servono? Tali oggetti mostrano di avere un qualche tipo di agency? Hanno una connotazione di genere? In che misura l’identità e le intenzioni del donatore – o l’identità e le esigenze del destinatario – possono influenzare natura, esiti e loro rappresentazioni? Intendo prestare particolare attenzione ai rapporti tra ospiti nel contesto epico e alle rappresentazioni degli oggetti scambiati nel poema: i doni tessili (textilibus donis) che Andromaca offre ad Ascanio, un ricordo (monumentum) delle sue mani (Aen. 3.483-91) e che Servio considera adeguati a una donatrice; il cratere d’oro che Cisseo donò ad Anchise (Aen. 5.535-38) come ricordo (monumentum) e pegno del reciproco affetto (pignus amoris); e gli “oggetti di famiglia” che Enea offre ai suoi ospiti, da Didone al re Latino, da Eleno a Evandro.According to the anthropology of things, gifts are special objects with their own history and memory. They are able to promote, create and maintain social ties between people because of their role of cultural and personal meaning bearers (Gregory 1982b; Kopytoff 1986; von Reden 1995: esp. 60 f.). To some extent, this was also true in ancient Rome, where gift-giving was a widespread practice of reciprocity that allowed to weave a complex net of relationships. Such complexity is reflected in the most representative poem of Roman culture: Virgil’s Aeneid. My paper aims to investigate the representation of the gift-objects in the Aeneid, having regard to the narrative devices and the cultural and mythical categories involved. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to highlight the active role that gift objects play in the poem: what are their relational functions and what purpose do they serve? Do such objects show to have any sort of agency? Are they gendered connoted? To what extent may the identity and the intentions of the donor – or the identity and the needs of the receiver – influence their nature, outcomes, and representations? I intend to pay special attention to the relationships between hosts and guests in the epic context and to the depictions of the objects exchanged in the poem: the textile gifts (textilibus donis) that Andromache gives to Ascanius, a souvenir (monumentum) of her hands (Aen. 3.483-91), which Servius considers adequate to a female donor; the golden crater that Cisseus gives to Anchises (Aen. 5.535-38) as a reminder (monumentum) and a pledge of their mutual affection (pignus amoris); and the “family objects” that Aeneas offers to his hosts, from Dido to King Latinus, from Helenus to Evander

La fides e la fraus: i doni del tiranno nel Thyestes di Seneca

Nel Thyestes, Seneca riscrive la pratica del dono (536, 984) come strumento della vendetta del tiranno, che ne sfrutta il potere di attrazione. Combinando la categoria della fides con il meccanismo della fraus, Atreo intende mettere in scena un inganno in grado di soddisfare le \u201cinique aspettative\u201d (spes improba, 295) di Tieste, che spera di ottenere il regno (regna nunc sperat mea, 289), e fornirgli una garanzia tangibile di pace (fides pacis, 294). Una tale dinamica prende la forma di un \u201cdono simulato\u201d, una pratica di reciprocit\ue0 in cui Atreo svolge il ruolo del donatore (dans) e Tieste \ue8 indotto ad assumere quello del destinatario (accipiens). Il tiranno lo rappresenta come un modo per colmare il divario venutosi a creare tra lui e suo fratello e ricambiarne le iniuriae. Il contributo mira a esplorare il modo in cui Seneca rappresenta il dono del tiranno come un modulo tragico del sistema di vendetta e come inversione delle teorie su dono e beneficio fornite nel De beneficiis.In Thyestes, Seneca rewrites the practice of the gift (536, 984) as a tool of tyrant\u2019s revenge, which takes advantage of its captivating power. By combining the category of fides with the mechanism of fraus, Atreus intends to perform a deceit that can meet the \u2018unfair expectation\u2019 (spes improba, 295) of Thyestes, who hopes to obtain the kingdom (regna nunc sperat mea, 289), and provide him with a tangible guarantee of peace (fides pacis, 294). Such a dynamic takes the form of a \u201csimulated gift\u201d, a practice of reciprocity in which Atreus plays the role of the giver (dans) and Thyestes is led to assume the role of the receiver (accipiens). The tyrant represents it as a way to close the gap between him and his brother and reciprocate his iniuriae. The paper aims to explore how Seneca shapes the tyrant\u2019s gift as a tragic pattern of revenge-system and a reversal of the theories on gift and benefit provided in De beneficiis

State Martyr

Politician Aldo Moro was abducted and killed in 1978 by the terrorist organization Red Brigades. The media then stylized Moro as a «state martyr». The volume deals with the highly topical question concerning the performativity of this concept in the tension between democratic state and terrorism and reconstructs a crucial phase of post-war time policy in Italy on the basis of media sources on the Moro case. What performs a term from Christian antiquity within modern socio-political discourses? What changes has the term "martyr" undergone in European religious and cultural history? On the basis of these questions, the study opens up an interdisciplinary theoretical horizon to understand the role of religious motives in socio-political con-texts. It brings a central new dimension to the secularization debate, which sees secularization as a new configuration of politics and religion

Thoughts on Pain. Friedrich Nietzsche and Human Suffering

In Nietzsche the autobiographical theme of disease has at its core the philosophical problem of pain. While he reflects daily on the actual condition of the ill person, Nietzsche oscillates the man like a pendulum. He defines him as 'the most melancholic and most happy animal who suffers so profoundly that he must invent laughter', as 'the ill animal' but also 'the most courageous and most used to pain'. Nietzsche seems to be entertained no end by playing around with these definitions, almost as if he is making fun of Aristotle./n It is in fact these two later quotations from the Genealogy that go on to construct the tracks on which his reflections on badness and suffering will move, marking out the area in which the decisive 'match' of the health of humanity is discussed. The first displays a Nietzsche who is always tranchant and blazing in its ability to conjure up the humanity of humans in few words. The highlight of the determinate article is original ('the ill animal') and shows that man is a unique animal who can define himself as being ill. The second suggests the image of a human being who tolerates pain with courage, arriving, just thanks to this journey of pain, to embark on a voyage leading to internal transformation./n Nietzsche's lifelong illness was what prompted him to develop the philosophical problem of pain and its relationship with thought. Taking advantage of his condition as a constant sufferer, Nietzsche strived to understand which directions human thought is able to take whenever it is 'subjected to the pressure of evil'. The first is a hypocritical direction, represented by man's attempts to remove pain from his life. Nietzsche denounces all justifications made for the purpose of providing at all costs a meaning for suffering, and which converge with the modern welfare society that dares to fashion mankind 'without evil'. The other direction, however, is that of those who are not afraid to listen to suffering. Reflecting on his own personal situation, Nietzsche outlines the traits of human beings who reach out towards the mystery of existence and, shaken by the experience of pain, come to abandon their certainties and adopt a more critical view of themselves./n 'Every man is a medical history', recites a posthumous fragment. Certainly, Nietzsche himself is the first to notice 'his own story is the story of an illness and also of a healing' – and this is not only true for him but for everyone who experiences suffering up close. This experience of pain – so intimate that it seems difficult to express in words – does not cause one to be locked up inside of oneself but rather serves to introduce a discussion on one's subjectivity and as an occasion for a moral adventure into the profundities of one's existence.En la filosofía de Friedrich Nietzsche es inseparable el tema autobiográfico de la enfermedad del problema filosófico del dolor. A la vez que reflexiona sobre la condición de la persona enferma, Nietzsche hace que el hombre oscile como un péndulo: lo define como el animal enfermo, como el más melancólico de los animales, pero también como el más bravo y más habituado al dolor, y como el animal más feliz, que sufre tan profundamente que debe inventar la risa. De modo paralelo a estos escritos antropológicos, Nietzsche denuncia enfáticamente los intentos desesperados, públicos y privados, que hace el hombe para remover el dolor de su propia existencia o para vivir como si nunca hubiese existido. Las hipócritas justificaciones, religiosas o seculares, de aquellos que encuentran un sentido absurdo en el sufrimiento, se encuentran con el comfort de la sociedad moderna (ciencia, política, religion), donde desesperadamente se toman riesgos para modelar una sociedad sin mal. Al cosiderar como crucial su experiencia personal con el dolor, Nietzsche desea experimentar hasta el punto en que resista el pensamiento y en la dirección que éste tome cada vez que se encuentra bajo la presión del mal. Sus investigaciones muestran cómo es imposible eliminar lo negativo de la existencia, pues constituye un necesario ingrediente sin el que las lágrimas significarían demasiada alegría y nunca se llegaría a la risa

Cerâmicas em faiança existentes nos casarões do centro histórico de Pelotas, RS

Série Pós-Graduação, v. 8O livro oferece ao leitor informações sobre a cerâmica portuguesa dentro de um contexto do antigo a serviço do novo. Em seu relato a autora ressalta a importância do legado histórico da produção cerâmica na cultura brasileira tendo as cerâmicas artísticas portuguesas como instrumento de memória de nossa colonização. Para tal entendimento, a mesma caminhou pelas origens e tecnologia de produção das cerâmicas portuguesas, pesquisou a sua inserção no Brasil e, em especial, na cidade de Pelotas, RS, uma das vinte e seis cidades do patrimônio histórico nacional detentora de edificações tombadas que possuem um acervo de decoração cerâmica de fachada de grande beleza e qualidade, em sua maioria, na forma de ornatos e esculturas identificadas como cerâmica em faiança originária de Portugal