Was für ein Buch hat Asconius eigentlich geschrieben? Zur Frage nach den Zielen und Methoden des antiken Kommentars zu Ciceros Reden // Hyperboreus. 2020. Vol. 26/1. P. 137–156 (Zusammenfassungen auf Englisch und Russisch) (original) (raw)
Related papers
Asconius. Kommentar zu Ciceros Rede "Für Scaurus" / Historischer Kommentar (Manuskript)
Einleitung 1 Der politische Hintergrund des Prozesses gegen Scaurus Die auf uns nur teilweise gekommene Verteidigungsrede pro Scauro wurde von Cicero im J. 54 im Prozess gegen M. Aemilius Scaurus gehalten, der wegen Erpressung, die er als Statthalter Sardiniens begangen hatte, vor dem Repetundengericht angeklagt worden war. Der Mandant Ciceros wurde in den frühen 90er Jahren geboren. 1 Sein gleichnamiger Vater (geb. 163/162) gehörte zu den einflussreichsten Politikern seiner Generation. 2 Im J. 115 bekleidete er das Konsulat und gelangte im J. 109 zur Zensur. Zudem war er während mehr als zwei Jahrzehnten 3 princeps senatus. 4 Der Name seiner ersten Gemahlin ist nicht bezeugt. Schon in sehr fortgeschrittenem Alter vermählte er sich mit Caecilia Metella, der Tochter des L. Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus (Konsul 119, Zensor 115), die, abgesehen von politischen Beziehungen mit der mächtigen Familie der Meteller, ihm eine reiche Mitgift mitbringen sollte. Von dieser Gattin, die viel jünger als ihr Gemahl war, hatte er einen Sohn Marcuseben den, den Cicero verteidigte,-und eine Tochter Aemilia. Als sein Vater starb, war der jüngere Scaurus noch nicht erwachsen.
Andreas Schwab. Ciceros Proömien als Beginn der Philosophiegeschichtsschreibung in Rom? Beobachtungen zu den Vorreden der ,Gespräche in Tusculum‘. Philologia Classica 2018, 13(1), 69–81, 2018
This paper focuses on Cicero’s prefaces to his philosophical Tusculan disputations and in particular on their function. I will argue that in these paratexts, Cicero not only comes to grips with the concept and value of philosophy, but also inaugurates the genre of the history of philosophy in Rome. To support this thesis, I will illuminate at first the four aspects and concepts of ‘philosophy’ which Cicero develops: (2.1) philosophy as studium sapientiae, (2.2) philosophy in the Latin language, (2.3) ‘perfect philosophy’: the method and models of Cicero, and (2.4) philosophy as ‘medicine for the soul’. In a second step, two narratives that Cicero provides will illustrate (3) the scope of philosophy and its history in the prefaces. Both narratives also present intercultural encounters: the first (3.1) between the early Greek philosopher Pythagoras and the Etruscan king Numa, the second (3.2) between the so-called ‘Athenian legation’ and the senate in Rome. Against this background, I will finally focus on the climax of Cicero’s fifth preface, in which he outlines, in a spectacular overview, a history of philosophy. This sketched history of philosophy covers (4.1) an early time of wisdom and some even earlier representatives from a mythical time, (4.2) then the ‘old philosophy’ opening up with Pythagoras, and finally (4.3) the ‘Socratic’ philosophy. Cicero’s own dialogues belong to the latter category, being its consummate realisation. Through his own Latin endeavour to write a history of philosophy in Rome, Cicero in fact works out his own biased history of philosophy, which finds its fulfilment in Cicero himself.
J.Linderski, Ciceros Rede pro Caelio und die Ambitus- und Vereinsgesetzgebung der ausgehenden Republik, Hermes 89, 1961, 106-119 = RQ 1995, 204-217 + addenda 647-649 + addenda altera RQ II, 2007, 619-620. Cic. Pro Caelio 16; Crimen ambitus, crimina sodalium et sequestrium, lex Licinia de sodaliciis.
2018
The picture we can form of the Roman emperors of the 1st century A.D. can only be traced with the utmost caution. We know that popular perception of this period sees a Caligula or a Nero as true beasts in human form; this is all the more true when this view is further clouded by modern distortions of film and historical fiction. But also the power of the images created by the despotic principes of that era, which historians like Tacitus left to posterity, should not be underestimated, despite centuries of critical investigation and partial revision. The suspicion that the authors consciously orientate themselves towards fictional literature, both drama and novel, is confirmed in a number of cases, e.g. in Tacitus' account of the reign of Nero (Ann. XIII-XVI), on which the paper will concentrate. For Tacitus (and with him apparently for the majority of ancient historians), this procedure seems to be typical: a representation that does not produce inner drama with the means of linguistic art alone, but often feeds directly from the sources of dramatic poetry and the novel. Thus Eduard Schwartz could describe Tacitus as "not the last great ancient historian, but the last great ancient poet". It remains a worthwhile task to continue to pursue this obviously close relationship to fictional literature. To critically examine the representational strategies of ancient historians means to sharpen the awareness of when admirable linguistic art distorts historical truth, when "history" becomes "stories", then and now.
How the wise Accursius was taken for a fool: the story of a misunderstood jest. Against the backdrop of the alleged ‚legal transfer‘ from the Greeks to the Romans during the process of drafting the XII Tables, at which Pomponius hints in D. 1,2,2,4, Accursius reports (Gl. constitui) the well-known dialogue in gestures between a wise Greek and a Roman fool. In this story he also seems to make a paradoxical reference to the dogma of Trinity. This passage has been subjected during the centuries to three different approaches: 1) it is a fabula, which Accursius believes to be historia, revealing his total ignorance of ancient history; 2) it is historia not only in Accursius’ opinion, but also for some later scholars, who follow his authority on the matter; 3) Accursius knows it is a fabula, a iocus, a nuga, and he wittingly tells it as such. An accurate analysis of the gloss shows that the third interpretation is the soundest: Accursius was acquainted with the ancient tradition about the embassy to Athens and considered it to be no more than a fabula. He tells this ‚dialogue of mutes‘ with the purpose of stressing the pre-eminence of Roman law over Greek law.
SAK, 2016
Copies of the Book of the Dead from the Saitic Period are rare, especially in the case of spell 146, which is not attested until the Third Intermediate Period. One example is Papyrus Wien Aeg. 12022a+b, which comprise sections of the end of spell 146. The two papyrus fragments are part of a long roll stored in the Egyptian Museum Cairo, containing the beginning and the end of spell 146 as well as further chapters of the Book of the Dead. The papyrus scroll is just one segment of the large Book of the Dead manuscript belonging to the Montupriest Ankhefenkhonsu, son of Basenmut, dating to the end of the 25th or beginning of the 26th Dynasty. This study includes an edition of Papyrus Wien Aeg. 12022a+b considered alongside contemporaneous manuscripts on the one hand, and a discussion of the owner of the papyrus rolls on the other.