Ce DEA est cohabilité par les Universités de Brest, Caen, Rouen, Nantes, Rennes 2.
OBJECTIF
Initiation ŕ la recherche de haut niveau et application dans les domaine des langues, des littératures et des cultures du monde méditerranéen antique.
CONDITIONS D'ADMISSION
- Maîtrise (ou son équivalent), un bon niveau en langues, philosophie ou histoire ancienne.
Sélection sur dossier
DUREE DES ETUDES : 1 an
DEBOUCHES
- L'enseignement intéresse un public ŕ la fois en formation initiale (préparation ŕ une carričre de chercheur et d'enseignant ou de chercheur en Universités) et
en formation continue (enseignants du second degré et des classes préparatoires recherchant une actualisation de leurs connaissances des méthodes
d'enquętes scientifiques).
- Il est possible également d'envisager une orientation vers des secteurs privés ou publics dans les domaines culturels tels que le patrimoine.
RENSEIGNEMENTS COMPLEMENTAIRES
S'adresser ŕ Françoise Maurel - Faculté des Lettres et des Sciences Sociales - 20 rue Duquesne
BP 814 - 29285 BREST Cedex - Tél : 02 98 01 72 87 - e-mail : EDSLL.Lettres@univ-brest.fr
PROGRAMME
LES ENSEIGNEMENTS
Tronc commun : 36H de cours généraux
- Introduction aux recherches archéologiques 18H
- Initiation aux recherches informatiques sur les textes, inscriptions et bibliographies grecs 18H
Modules spécialisés :
- Théâtre grec 33H :
- étude, traduction, édition des fragments et sources textuelles 15H
- métrique, musique et danse 6H
- la pantomine gréco-romaine 6H
- realia, réception, mise en scčne et adaptations du théâtre grec 6H
- Civilisation, archéologie et philosophie de l'antiquité 33H
- langue et civilisation romaines 15H
- archéologie et civilisation gallo-romaines 6H
- le roman grec 6H
- philosophie grecque et épistémologie 6H
Les étudiants peuvent aussi participer ŕ plusieurs séminaires, dont certains dans les universités participant au réseau, notamment le Séminaire
de Théâtre Antique : ce séminaire international annuel de 3 jours fait partie des travaux du Centre d'Etudes et de Représentations du Théâtre
Antique (CERTA).
LE MEMOIRE (70% de l'ensemble)
Chaque étudiant doit rédiger sous la Direction d'un enseignant responsable un mémoire de recherche sur un sujet convenu d'avance et réguličrement
inscrit auprčs du secrétariat de l'Ecole Doctorale. Ce mémoire doit ętre soutenu devant un jury composé d'au moins 2 membres au plus tard un an
aprčs la date d'inscription. En cas de nécessité, notamment pour les salariés, ce mémoire peut, aprčs accord des enseignants, ętre rédigé en 2 ans.
... et psychologie dans les derniers dialogues de Platon 1 Evanghelos M OUTSOPOULOS ... d'informations,
nous renvoyons ŕ notre ouvrage E. Moutsopoulos, La musique ...
www.u-bourgogne.fr/PHILO/CENTRE-BACHELARD/ Z-moutsopoulos.PDF
5. Synaulía. Cultura musicale in Grecia e contatti mediterranei,
a cura di A.C. Cassio, D. Musti, L.E. Rossi, 2000, pp. 321.
[p. 5] A. C. Cassio, D. Musti, L. E. Rossi, Premessa
[pp. 7-55] D. Musti, Musica greca tra aristocrazia e democrazia
[pp. 57-96] L. E. Rossi, Musica e psicologia nel mondo antico e nel mondo moderno: la teoria antica dell'ethos musicale e la moderna teoria degli affetti
[pp. 97-110] A. C. Cassio, Esametri orfici, dialetto attico e musica dell'Asia Minore
[pp. 111-155]M. Napolitano, Note all'iporcherna di Pratina (PMG 708 = TrGF I 4F3)
[pp. 157-216] A. Pagliara, Musica e politica nella speculazione platonica: considerazioni intorno
all'ethos del modo frigio (Resp. 111 10, 399 a-c)
[pp. 217-316] G. Mosconi, La democrazia ateniese e la 'nuova' musica: l'Odeion di Pericle
Ian Rutherford, Pindar's Paeans. A Reading of the Fragments with a Survey of the Genre. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Pp. xvi, 546. ISBN 0-19-814381-8. Ł75.00.
Reviewed by Lutz Käppel, University of Kiel (luka@email.uni-kiel.de)
Word count: 4722 words
There are few fields in classical studies that have flourished as much in the last two decades as the study of Greek choral lyric poetry. The reason why scholars 'discovered' this central literary genre of the archaic and classical ages relatively late and why there was a real boom of publications after this 'discovery' follows the old Pindaric wisdom that everything has its kairós. For whereas Pindar's epinician odes have constantly attracted the attention of scholars during the centuries, all the rest of the material -- mostly lost until the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century -- did not even receive the treatment it deserved when the papyri that emerged from the sands of Egypt opened up a completely new world of literary production: partheneia from Sparta, dithyrambs, paeans and multifarious hymns from all over the Greek world, composed by excellent poets like Alcman, Simonides, Pindar, Bacchylides and many others. It is true that when the papyri were published, the first enthusiasm about the new material stimulated careful studies of the texts and their philological reconstruction. But as soon as the basic philological work was done, scholars lost interest in the poems, and research fell into a kind of hibernation. Literary studies of the poems or even systematic analyses of the different genres are extremely rare before the 1970s.1 Indeed in his unique systematic evaluation of the material of Greek lyric poetry from 1955 A. E. Harvey had to give up his project of drafting the whole system of lyric (sub-)genres (like the paean, the dirge, the dithyramb etc.) with the well-known sentence: "The result of this discussion is, I am aware, depressingly negative".2 It seems as if the time was just not ripe for the proper appreciation of the new material.
This inactivity changed instantly when Claude Calame's book on Alcman's partheneia inaugurated a new chapter of research in Greek lyric poetry in 1977.3 What had happened? New methods of cultural anthropology, a new awareness of the pragmatics of literary texts in ancient Greece, and last but not least the willingness to abandon the purely aesthetic approaches which had dominated Greek literary studies in the second third of the 20th century opened up new horizons. It was not until the middle of the seventies that asking (the right) questions on literary genres that were so deeply rooted in religious and social life like Greek lyric poetry provided sufficient answers. A fruitful discussion of these texts demands a multiple and complex methodology indeed: The single poem as well as the whole genre has to be considered as an act of oral communication in a very elaborated system of literary, linguistic, and social interactions. After Calame had cut the Gordion knot it was merely a natural development that scholars took up the neglected material and a real boom of studies of the lyric genres ensued -- on dithyrambs,4 dirges,5 hymns6 and, most of all, paeans. The last genre proved to be by far the most rewarding and so it is somehow natural that R[utherford]'s book is already the third work on paeans in the last 10 years7 and also so to speak the summa of intensive work on the subject insofar as it also sums up R.'s own work, which has been well documented in more than 20 articles in the last 15 years.8
This 'comprehensiveness' in many senses of the word is at the same time one of the great merits and one of the (very) minor problems of the book. The great merit of comprehensiveness will be illustrated in the following pages. Let us postpone it for a moment. The little problem, however, is obviously due to the long time it took to finish the book. R. himself rightly says in his introduction that the book was "virtually complete" (p. viii) when my book on the paeans (see note 7) became available to him. That was in 1992, nine years before the publication of R.'s book. In the meantime R. had of course continued working on different chapters (especially on sections on the paean in general, on the arrangement of Pindar's book of paeans and on Pind. pae. VI). So some of the inconsistencies which I will address later might be due to this long process of writing and re-writing. R. should, however, perhaps rather be thanked than blamed for his patience in withholding the book in the light of his recent findings, which he was thus able to incorporate into the final version.
What, then, is the end result we finally hold in our hands? An erudite book with a vast amount of material, some very important new suggestions on old issues and an altogether state-of-the-art presentation of Pindar's paeans as representatives of their genre. The central part of the book covering more than 250 pages is a new edition of the fragments of Pindar's paeans and the scholia one by one, each followed by a detailed critical apparatus, an English translation and an interpretative essay addressing textual problems, difficulties of interpretation in general, place and date of performance, literary structure and relation to other poems (part II: pp. 183-442). This part is preceded by a long, bipartite introduction covering a survey of the genre in general (pp. 3-136) and an introduction to Pindar's paeans in particular (pp. 137-182). At the end a metrical appendix (pp. 443-458), a list of paeans of poets other than Pindar (pp. 459-466) and the usual concordances (pp. 467-471), bibliography (pp. 472-512) and indices (pp. 513-546) offer valuable help in handling the material incorporated in the book.
R.'s approach to the genre takes into account all the results which modern scholarship has achieved during the last two decades: In a first step (section 1) he situates Greek (choral) lyric in the context of a "song-dance culture", in which the performances function as "symbolic social action(s)", "reinforcing society's values", "reflecting the important role that the sacred played in all aspects of Greek social life" (p. 3). As a consequence of the ubiquitous performances in the fifth century there must have been a vast amount of songs, and the poems/songs were distinguishable as belonging to different 'groups', which we nowadays are used to calling 'genres'. R. speaks about a "fixed canon of genres" (p. 4) already for the fifth century. In order to clarify what he means by 'genre' in this context, R. makes the following points: (1) "songs ... (of) the same genre ... (have) a shared function or shared performance scenario; formal features are much less important." (2) 'Genre' in the fifth century is "a descriptive category ... Genres are not yet ideal norms." (3) "Genres can be described both synchronically ... and diachronically", the first category distinguishing different genres of the same period from each other, the second operating with genre-models and their 'imitation' by following generations. In R.'s view this catalogue of features, however, applies only to the classical period. He considers the Hellenistic approach to genre not to be descriptive (see 2) but "normative" and not functional (see 1), but "formal": "The difference between classical and Hellenistic conceptions of genre can be explained by the hypothesis that in the fifth century BC performance is still closely tied to social and religious contexts, whereas by the Hellenistic period this linkage has been lost ..." (p. 5).
This approach is extremely promising indeed, not primarily because I have come to roughly the same conclusions in my book, but because it gives R. the freedom to appreciate each poem/song of the classical period without the obligation of pressing it into a formal scheme into which it will never perfectly fit. That means, he can avoid Harvey's failure in classifying the lyric genres according to supposed formal features, and he has quite a good and flexible tool to describe the poems in question as 'members' of one genre. So consequently R. lays the ground for his survey by listing basic functions: (1) "prayer to avert ... evil", (2) "victory paian" (3) "intermediate" (e.g. symposium paean, cult paean, armies before battle).
On the whole R. observes a strong tendency of "overlapping of function" (p. 8), especially in cult paeans. Yet, if one makes a list of different functions that are supposed to produce a genre, one is still in need of defining its "coherence". R. sees the problem, too, and he defines the "underlying common elements of performance and function" as (1) "political solidarity among male performers" and (2) a "common ethos of controlled celebration" (p. 9). This is an interesting new attempt to describe the generic nucleus of the paean in general terms, and it should be considered carefully in the future. I personally, however, am not completely convinced, because "political solidarity" and "common ethos" are so general that they apply to many other lyric genres as well, e.g. the dithyramb. I think it is not enough to define the paean by "controlled" celebration (in order to distinguish the paean from the dithyramb?). Perhaps R.'s new description has one advantage: It avoids naming any 'purposes' -- as I did by putting the appeal or thanksgiving for health, prosperity, or well-being in general into the functional center of the paean. In this way he can perhaps handle the paeans which he calls 'celebratory' paeans (see p. 84) in a slightly more efficient way. In fact, there are many other possible issues in a given special paean other than 'appeal' or 'thanksgiving'. Celebration may be in many cases one of them. In R.'s model the element I called the 'hymnic' approach to the god (praising and describing him)9 gets a more prominent position in the structural system of the genre than in my concept. Perhaps R. is right, though the performance of paeans in contexts of 'jubilation' is not really an argument against my model of reciprocity between 'song' and 'well-being coming from the god' (as R. strongly maintains on pp. 84 f.). To me it seems not incompatible with my theory if the god (as benefactor) is not only thanked, but also celebrated.
But theory is not the main focus of the book. Its aim is to provide the reader with all the material on the paean that exists. So R. takes us back to the ancient accounts of the origin of the genre, the relation between song and god (Paian), the etymology (ancient and modern) and the Cretan connection (Section 2: pp. 10-17). All this is very learned and convincing. There is only one point I have serious doubts about: R. argues that the battle paean must be something very old, because the god 'Paiawon' is mentioned together with Enyalios (= Ares) on the Linear-B tablet from Knossos KN V 52. R. infers from this coincidence "that Paiawon was a military deity at Knossos, and the use of the paian in battle was very ancient" (p. 15). I cannot agree with this interpretation. First of all Athena and Poseidon are mentioned as well, and it would be methodically improper to infer that they were military deities too, just because Enyalios is on the tablet as well.
Interesting is the chapter on "typology of paeanic text and performance" (Section 3). R. works through the whole spectrum of 'paeanic utterances' from the single cry (ié) to the highly artistic song and checks the features off that are involved. It is striking that the 'appeal to paian' is always present (see table 1 on p. 23), with an expansion of features from one step to the next: 'supporting text' is added in 'paeanic speech', 'artistic form' is an additional feature of a 'paian-poem' and eventually an 'artistic paian-song' has all these features plus 'elaborate structure', 'song' and '(usually) dance'.
The next two paragraphs trace the different functions of paeans within their respective performance contexts. The most important occasions are certainly the Apolline festivals in Delphi, Delos, Sparta and other sanctuaries (Section 5: pp: 23-36). Other functions include apotropaic prayers, healing in the cult of Asclepius, military contexts before and after battle, symposium, special ritual occasions, when 'euphemia' is requested, celebrations and weddings, commemoration of dead heroes, and praising of potentates like Lysander and Hellenistic rulers (Section 6: pp. 36-58). R. gives a kaleidoscope of the ancient evidence for all the occasions. This includes a long discussion of the ancient views on the origin and aetiology of the paean (Crete, Pythoctonia in Delphi) and a great number of presentations of attested and/or transmitted texts of the genre.
The paragraph called "Performance" (Section 6: pp. 58-68) presents a mixture of formal and functional issues. According to R. the performers were mostly males. That this means that the paean is closely connected with 'initiation', as R. thinks (p. 62), is a very doubtful generalization drawn from the paeans at the Hyacinthia in Sparta. I cannot see any initiation context e. g. in Pindar's paeans or in the many 'medical' paeans. As 'modes of performance' R. notes processions, circular motions round an altar, antiphonal structures with an éxarchos and a choir joining in with the refrain (pp. 63-68).
From here R. reaches his chapter on formal features of the genre (Section 7: pp. 68-83): invocation of 'Paian', refrain, other generic 'signatures', structures and themes, metre, music; and from there he goes on to an overall definition of "the significance of the paian in its generic and social context" (Section 8: pp. 83-90), with a kind of 'appendix' on problematic cases of generic distinctions (Section 9: pp. 90-108). R.'s new solution for the description of a sort of "essence" of the paean is -- as I said earlier -- a 'social' one: "Key ideas ... include collective male strength, social cohesion, the assertion of the strength of the community ... the world of the living as opposed to the world of the dead, and finally celebration" (p. 86). For R. the paean is "defined by its correlation with support of the polis, political and social order, life and healing, and finally the male" (p. 89). Of course all of these are important features of many of the poems which belong to the genre of paeans, and I would by no means criticize that we do not find each of them in all poems. R. rightly concedes that the 'members' of a genre are only "interrelated by family resemblances".10 What is unconvincing in R.'s concept, however, is that he totally refrains from building up a systematic concept integrating formal and functional features into one system in the true sense of the word. The chapter on formal features (Section 7) stands for itself, being completely isolated from the rest both from R.'s typology (Section 3) and from the 'significance' (Section 8) of the paean. On p. 23 we are told that the 'appeal to paian' occurs in every paean (cf. pp. 68 f.), on pp. 69 ff. the paean-cry is called a 'distinctive formal feature', on p. 86 R. lists the 'key ideas' mentioned above. How are these different features (belonging to different categories) related to each other? In my view the different dimensions of a literary text (form, performance, function) generally belong together very closely. They very often mirror each other and form patterns of structural representations of each other. For R. form, performance and function seem to have nothing to do with each other. He does not even attempt to draw any line from one category or dimension to another. How is R.'s 'social significance' of the paean mirrored in the formal shape of the genre (or, at least, which features correspond to each other)? One may well ask why the 'appeal to paian' (p. 23) is so prominent in R.'s typology while a corresponding function plays no role in the intrinsic significance of the paean (pp. 86 ff.), and why vice versa 'social cohesion' etc. have no formal expression whatsoever (as a feature or at least structure).
In my view the deficit of R.'s concept is also the reason why he gets into trouble so deeply in the next chapter on 'distinctiveness' (Section 9: pp. 90-108). R. lists the well-known problematic cases, where ancient sources are in doubt whether a poem is a paean or belongs to some other genre (skolion, dithyramb, prosodion, hyporchema). In the majority of cases R. convincingly explains the confusion by a deficit of knowledge of the (later) sources about the original performance scenarios. For the hyporchema and the prosodion, however, he comes to the opposite conclusion, that in these cases the confusion is due to the lack of distinctiveness of these genres already in the classical period itself: "the line of demarcation ... may have been ... blurred" (p. 107). In the light of this statement R.'s assertion at the end, however, that "the paian was a reasonably distinctive category in the fifth century BC" (p. 108), emerges somewhat surprisingly.
What, then, is the problem here? In my view R.'s results point at two crucial shortcomings in his own concept. I begin with the second: For R. it is beyond all doubt that the genres which the Hellenistic eidographers called 'hyporchema' and 'prosodion' actually existed as genres beside the paean, the dithyramb etc. from the beginning.11 It is striking that the words are not attested before the end of the fifth or the fourth century BC respectively.12 This is strong support for the hypothesis that in the generic system of the archaic and the main part of the classical period these genres did not exist as opposed to the paean at all.13 R. takes these genres as existent, but he cannot quote a single instance from the classical period in which a poem is called a hyporchema or a prosodion. His whole discussion of 'lines of demarcation' is a backward projection from the perspective of a later generic system, which develops genres with formal features like 'form of presentation' etc. That the use of a changed system with different categories for the description of an older system must lead to inconsistencies in classification is inevitable, and this has nothing to do with a lack of distinctness of the classical genres themselves. The first and main reason for R.'s spongy picture of the overall generic system, however, is his loose description of the generic features of the paean itself. A closer look at the reciprocal relationship between form, performance and function would have produced a more district picture of the paean, and this would have increased the possibility of distinguishing it from other genres.
The next two chapters present a discussion of the significance of the paean in tragedy (Section 10: pp. 108-115) and an extremely interesting essay on "Paeanic ambiguity" (Section 11: pp. 115-126).14 In the latter R. demonstrates convincingly how often the light and happy paean is used in highly ambiguous contexts reflecting or foreshadowing the dark and unhappy side of life.
The last introductory chapter gives a short outline of the post-classical development of the genre (Section 12: pp. 126-136). R. describes it as a "decline" (p. 126), stressing the loss of the classical performance contexts and the overall extension of possible addressees. A short discussion of the paean to Dionysos by Philodamos on pp. 131-135 closes the general introduction.
The greatest achievement of the book, however, is the edition of Pindar's paeans. Here R. confronts the reader with radical changes both in the general presentation of the poems and their interpretation in particular. The first radical change is that he altered the sequence of poems we are used to reading as paeans in Snell-Maehler's edition.
The editores principes of the most important papyrus (POxy 841), Grenfell and Hunt, distinguished four different sections of the papyrus, which they put into the order we now read e. g. in Bowra's and Snell-Maehler's editions (first group: Pind. pae. I-VII, second group: VIIa-b, third group: VIId-VIIIa, fourth group: IX-X). The stichometric symbols in the margin of the first group, however, show that these poems represented lines 870-1350 of the ancient edition. Grenfell and Hunt (followed by all later editors) took this as a piece of evidence that Pindar's book of paeans was written on two rolls of papyri, the second one starting around line 800. R. has a better solution: He reverses GH's sequence, starting with their fourth section, going on with the third, then the second and the first at the end (see table 3 on p. 143). This is completely reasonable, also on papyrological grounds of handwriting. The consequence is that we now have the following sequence of poems: IX, X, VIId, VIII, VIIa-c, I-VII. This may be a bit inconvenient, but R., though introducing new numbers (A1, 2, B1 etc.), always gives the old numbering as well.15
R.'s chapters on the history of the text and the organization of the ancient edition (Sections 14-17: pp. 144-165) are learned and very informative. Especially interesting is his suggestion for the organization of the Hellenistic edition: It may very well be true that the poems with a clear reference to Apollo came earlier, and the poems which have been transmitted and which only have a very general reference to Apollo were put in the second part of book (p. 160).
Finally R. gives an overall view of Pindar's paeans, going through performance scenarios, formal features, generic specialties, religious issues and Pindar's relation to Delphi (Sections 18-21: pp. 166-182). This is all very well documented and convincingly argued. The only doubt I have is about R.'s explanation of the long passages of self-description in the poems. I don't think that they are included with regard to later "secondary performances and display or circulation in written form" (p. 177). Why doesn't R. interpret them as generic just in the sense he outlined earlier? Isn't an ample self-definition a perfect (formal) poetic means to produce collective coherence for the present moment by assuring oneself as a singer and dancer? To a later reader these passages may seem odd for the performers in their musical trance they were certainly not.
The edition and commentary of Pindar's paeans follows the sequence of poems which R. has fixed in his reconstruction of POxy 841. Certainly a lot of additional papyri come in for the edition of the single poems. R. has reexamined all the original papyri. Of course, the result is not an overall revision of the text we are used to reading in our traditional editions. There are very few substantial new readings. The great improvement of R.'s new edition is rather the scrupulous listing of all the marginal notes, critical signs, stichometric symbols etc., that were neglected by the editores principes and later editors. And this work was really worth the while. I have already mentioned the establishment of the new sequence of poems by the consequent consideration of the stichometric signs. Another improvement is the full reproduction of asterisks, paragraphoi, marginal titles, chi(ázetai), etc. in the text, so that the modern reader is much closer to the original papyrus and is better able to understand the ancient presentation of the text. It is impossible to go through the texts in detail. I was unable to find any serious objections to R.'s editions. The commentaries are all extremely learned and exhaustive. The interpretations are generally plausible, although R. too seldom refers them to the generic outline of the paean he has given in his introduction. The material that is included will be valuable for future readers even beyond the purposes of the explanation of the Pindaric text.
Of the many excellent discussions of paeans I can only present a small selection. R.'s presentation of Pae. VIII is in my view one of the highlights of the book (p. 210-232). He collects all the material of the myth of the four early temples in Delphi and gives a sensitive and convincing interpretation of the special treatment of the story in this paean. The chapter will be the standard reference on the subject in the future.
The second highlight is doubtlessly R.'s treatment of Pae. VI (pp. 298-338). R.'s innovations already begin with his new papyrological findings: In the margin at the beginning of the third stanza he identified a second (sub-) title. Whereas the whole poem carries the title "For the Delphians to Pytho" the last triad obviously had the marginal title "For the Aeginetans in honour of Aiakos a prosodion". A scholion on l. 124 adds: "It circulates in book I of the Prosodia." These new readings, which R. had published already,16 offer a new key to many of the old problems of interpretation. The first of these problems is the relation between Nemean 7 and Pae. 6. Is Pindar apologizing in Nem. 7 for an unfavourable presentation of the death of Neoptolemos in Delphi as a punishment for the attempt to steal meat from the sacrifice and for the murder of Priam at the altar of Zeus in Troy in Pae. 6? R. does not rule out this apology hypothesis but rather concentrates on Pae. 6. There he thinks Neoptolemos is in the center of the narrative because he has an important ritual role as an overseer at the sacrifice that takes place at the Theoxenia, the Delphic festival at which Pae. 6 was performed. So what we have is an aetiological narrative for the role of Neoptolemos (and his Aeginetan descendants) at the Theoxenia. On the other hand the narrative also gives a moral 'exemplum': Neoptolemos is punished for impieties, i. e. Apollo takes care of his place at Delphi and removes all forms of injustice. Then there is an abrupt break between the second and the third triad, and a strong praise of Aegina starts. This triad also stood (separately) in the first book of prosodia and was written (as such) "for the Aeginetans." Who performed the song, Delphians or Aeginetans? R. tentatively favours the Aeginetans, being members of the 'Theoria' from Aegina visiting Delphi, where their 'ancestor' Neoptolemos played an important role. But at this point the two titles, especially the newly discovered marginal title of the third triad (plus scholion) come into consideration. R. points out three possibilities for an explanation: (1) the song was "a coherent three-triadic composition, but ... the third triad was detached by later critics and came to circulate independently (p. 336)"; or (2) it "was a supplement" or a "semi-independent supplement" produced for Aeginetan consumption, a kind of apologetic appendix in the sense of Nem. 7 (p. 337); or (3) the full poem was split "between two groups, Delphian hosts and Aeginetan visitors ... After the performance, the Aeginetan theoroi perhaps returned to Aegina and took only 'their' part of the song (i. e. the third triad)" with them (p. 337). The last possibility would indeed very well explain the (original) formal unity of the poem (metre), the harsh break before the third triad, the two titles (for the Delphians -- for the Aeginetans) and the strange manner of transmission: the whole poem was transmitted in the book of paeans (perhaps from Delphic sources?) and the 'Aeginetan' bit came into circulation from Aeginetan sources and entered the line of transmission as a prosodion (possibly its use in Aegina itself). R. does not openly favor any of the possibilities, but it is clear that he sympathizes with the second and the third. I would prefer the third, because it would better explain the inner tension within the (whole) poem. The second possibility seems not so likely because there is nothing apologetic about the third triad.
R. has produced the standard edition and commentary on Pindar's paeans. It combines traditional methods like papyrology, textual criticism, philology, history of religion etc. with modern approaches like genre theory and linguistic pragmatics. R. even compares considerable Near Eastern and Egyptian material (pp. 10f., 214, 217, 226f., 257 etc.) and thereby brings in a comparative element. On every page R. displays learnedness and a stunning command of the material. His new findings and interpretations will have to be considered by every student of paeans in the future. That different parts of the book are not always related to each other as much as they could have been is surely due to the long process of re-writing certain chapters in order to include new findings and ideas. So R.'s book has become the compendium on the paean. That it still leaves room for discussion on one or the other issue is, however, not its smallest merit.17
1. The most prominent exception that should be quoted is: S. L. Radt, Pindars zweiter und sechster Paian, Amsterdam 1958.
2. A. E. Harvey, "The Classification of Greek Lyric Poetry". CQ. 5 (1955) 157-175, quotation at 175.
3. C. Calame, Les Choeurs de jeunes filles en Grčce archaique, 2 vols., Rome 1977.
4. See especially D. F. Sutton, Dithyrambographi Graeci, Hildesheim 1989; M. J. H. van der Weiden, The Dithyrambs of Pindar, Amsterdam 1991; B. Zimmermann, Dithyrambos, Geschichte einer Gattung, Göttingen 1992; G. Ieranó, Il Ditirambo di Dioniso, Pisa-Rome 1997.
5. M. Cannatŕ Fera, Pindarus. Threnorum Fragmenta, Rome 1990.
6. W. D. Furley, J. M. Bremer, Greek Hymns, 2 vols., Tübingen 2001.
7. The first two were: L. Käppel, Paian. Studien zur Geschichte einer Gattung, Berlin-New York 1992; St. Schröder, Geschichte und Theorie der Gattung Paian, Stuttgart Leipzig 1999.
8. The two protagonists of scholarship on paeans in general and on Pindaric paeans in particular have been G. B. D'Alessio and R. himself. R. lists 12 articles on the subject for the former, 26 for himself. The whole material is now incorporated in R.'s book.
9. Paian, p. 83 f.
10. See my discussion of the concept of 'Familienähnlichkeit' and its application on the paean in Paian, pp. 10-13 and 84 f. R. should have at least quoted the authors of the concept, Wittgenstein and Jauss.
11. R. p. 107 ... "limited generic indeterminacy and possibility of describing the same song in alternative ways ... goes back to the fifth century BC."
12. Prosodion: Aristoph. Birds 853; hyporchema: Plat. Ion 543c 4.
13. See L. Käppel, Bakchylides und das System der chorlyrischen Gattungen im 5. Jh. v. Chr., in: Bakchylides. 100 Jahre nach seiner Wiederentdeckung, ed. A. Bagordo and B. Zimmermann, Zetemata 106, München 2000, 11-27; cf. Käppel, Paian, p. 82.
14. An earlier version is I. Rutherford, Paeanic Ambiguity: A study of Representation of the paian in Greek Literature, QUCC 73 (NS 44) (1993) 77-92.
15. This chapter goes back to R.'s 'Et hominum et deorum ... laudes (?): The Organization of Pindar's Paean-book', ZPE 107 (1995) 44-45.
16. I. Rutherford, For the Aeginetans for Aiakos a Prosodion: An Unnoticed Title to Pindar, Paean 6, 123 and its Significance for the Poem, ZPE 118 (1997) 1-21.
17. I owe thanks to G. Wulff-Doebber for producing the computer-script of this review and to D. Hodgson-Moeckel for correcting my English.
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2002/2002-10-38.html
Sprechstunde in der Vorlesungszeit: Mi 10-11 u.n.Vereinb.,
Email: luka@email.uni-kiel.de
Professor (C4) Klassische Philologie, insbesondere Gräzistik
Direktor des Instituts für Klassische Altertumskunde
Mitglied der Zentraldirektion des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts
Senior fellow des Bonner Zentrums für europäische Integrationsforschung, Abteilung für europäische Wertesysteme, Sprachen und Kulturen (Planung und Koordination des Projektes Ad Fontes)
Ich wurde am 7.8.1960 in Dorsten / Westfalen geboren, wo ich auch im Frühjahr 1979 das Abitur ablegte. Vom WS 1980/81 an studierte ich zunächst in Tübingen Klassische Philologie und Germanistik, dann in Oxford 'Classics' und kehrte zum Staatsexamen wieder nach Tübingen zurück. Dort war ich ab 1986 als wissenschaftlicher Angestellter und - nach der Promotion 1990 - als wissenschaftlicher Assistent am Philologischen Seminar tätig. Während eines Forschungsaufenthaltes am Center for Hellenic Studies in Washington, D.C. (USA) im Studienjahr 1992/93 und eines Habilitationsstipendiums der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft 1993-1995 war ich beurlaubt; nach Wiedereintritt in den aktiven Assistentendienst habilitierte ich mich dann 1997 in Tübingen. Das sich an die Assistentenzeit anschließende Heisenbergstipendium konnte ich nur noch kurz in Anspruch nehmen, denn schon zum WS 1999/2000 erreichte mich der Ruf auf die Professur für Klassische Philologie, insbes. Gräzistik an der Universität Kiel.
Im Wesentlichen sind es zwei wissenschaftliche Schwerpunkte, die im Laufe der Zeit mein wissenschaftliches Profil immer mehr bestimmten. Der eine ist durch meine Dissertation und meine Habilitationsschrift ausführlich dokumentiert: die frühe und klassische griechische Poesie im Schlaglicht moderner literaturwissenschaftlicher Methodologie. Der andere ist bislang eher 'im Verborgenen' gepflegt worden: die griechische Mathematik und Naturwissenschaft im Kontext der antiken Philosophie. Beide Schwerpunkte möchte ich in Forschung und Lehre in Kiel weiterpflegen. Besonders letzterer wird im Rahmen eines Projektes zur Erforschung der Rolle der Mathematik in der Akademie Platons breiten Raum einnehmen.
Darüber hinaus habe ich - neben manch anderen wissenschaftlichen Vorhaben - die Fachgebietsherausgeberschaft für das Fachgebiet "Mythologie" im Lexikon-Projekt "Der Neue Pauly" übernommen, so daß auch der neben der Literaturwissenschaft und der Philosophie- und Geistesgeschichte dritte große Bereich der Gräzistik, die Kulturwissenschaft im engeren Sinne, repräsentiert sein wird.
Fernando García Romero
Coordinador del programa de doctorado Dto. de Filología Griega y Lingüística Indoeuropea.
PROGRAMA DE DOCTORADO DEL DEPARTAMENTO DE FILOLOGÍA GRIEGA Y LINGÜÍSTICA INDOEUROPEA (curso 2001-2002)
Los Sres. alumnos deberán cursar al menos tres asignaturas de la línea de investigación que elijan para realizar sus estudios de Tercer Ciclo, de entre las tres que propone el Departamento (Lingüística griega e indoeuropea, Técnicas filológicas y edición de textos, Literatura griega en sus textos). Los once créditos restantes se podrán obtener cursando cualquier otro curso o seminario del programa de doctorado (o con los créditos de libre disposición que se permiten).
Minoisch-mykenische Musik
Dabo-Peramic, M.M., Greek Prehistoric Music (1979).
Dragona-Latsondi, A., Mykenaikos kitharodos apo te Nauplia, AEph 1977, 86-98.
Neumann, G., Zum kretischen Hieroglyphenzeichen H 29, Kadmos 29, 1982, 5-8.
Platon, N., Minoiki Lyra, Charisterion eis A.K. Orlandon G (1966) 208 ff.
Sakellarakis, J.A./Sapouna-Sakellarakis E., Archanes (1991) 121 Abb. 99.
Schachermeyr, F: Griechische Frühgeschichte (1984) 147 ff. 211 ff.
Schiering, W., Akustisches in der minoischen Kunst, Kotinos (Festschr. E. Simon 1992) 1 ff.
Griechisch-römische Musik
Abel, U., Darstellung musischer Darbietungen auf attischen Vasenbildern. (Magisterarbeit München 1969).
Aign, B., Die Geschichte der Musikinstrumente im ägäischen Raum bis 700 v. Chr. (1963)
Albrecht, M. von (Hrsg.), Quellen und Studien zur Musikgeschichte. Von der Antike bis in die Gegenwart, Bd. 1, Musik in Antike und Gegenwart (1987).
Anderson, W,D., Ethos and Education in Greek Music (1966).
Archaeologia 14, Februar 1983 (das ganze Heft über Musik, bes. S. Michaelides 38-40).
Barnett, R. D., A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories in the British Museum (1957).
Becker, H., Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der antiken und mittelalterlichen Rohrblattinstrumente (1966).
Behn, F., Musikleben im frühen Altertum und im frühen Mittelalter (1954).
Beschi, L., La prospettiva mitica della musica Greca, in L. Kahil/P. Linant de Bellefonds (Hrsg.), Religion, Mythologie, Iconographie. Kongr. Rom 1989 (1991) 35-50.
Bélis, A., Un nouveau document musical, BCH 108, 1984, 99-109.
Bélis, A., L’ aulos phrygien, RA 1986, 21-40.
Bélis, A., Les musiciens dans l'Antiquité (1999).
Bielefeld, E., Ein boiotischer Tanzchor des 6. Jh. v.Chr., in Festschr. Zucker (1954) 27-35 (über die Berufstracht).
Birchler Emery, P. u.a., La musique et la danse dans l’Antiquité (Ausst. Genf 1996).
Boardman, J. The Lyre Player Group of Seals. An Encore, AA 1990, 1-17.,
Boriello, M., in: Pompeji. Natur, Wissenschaft und Technik (Ausst. Deutsches Museum München 2000) 120-125.
Brand, H., Griechische Musikanten im Kult (2000).
Brinkmann, A., Altgriechische Mädchenreigen, BJb 30, 1925, 118 ff.
Brommer, F., Antike Tänze, AA 1989, 483 ff.
Castaldo, D., Il pantheon musicale. Iconografia nella ceramica attica tra VI e IV secolo (2000).
Cook, A I.M., Geometric Graveside Scene, BCH 70, 1946, 97-101.
Courbin, P., Les Lyres d'Argos, in: Études argiennes (= BCH Suppl. VI) (1980) 93 ff.
Crowther, N.B., Heralds and Trumpeters at Greek Athletic Festivals, Nikephoros 7, 1994, 135-155.
Dies., A., L'Organologie des instruments de l'Antiquité. Chronique Bibliographique, RA 1989, 127 ff.
Dies., Auloi grecs du Louvre, BCH 108, 1984, 111-122.
Curtis, J., The Double Flutes, JHS 1914, 89-105.
Delavaud-Roux, M.-H., E’enigme des danseurs barbus au parasol et les vases "des Lenéennes", RA 1995, 227-263.
Gabriel. I., Ein mittelalterliches Plektron aus Starigard/Oldenburg. Plektron und Plektrongebrauch in der antiken Welt, in: Mousikos Aner. Festschr. M. Wegner (1992).
Deubner, L., Attische Feste (1932).
Dikaios, P., BSA 37, 1936/1937 (1940) 56-72.
Dumoulin, D., Die Chelys, Archiv für Musikwissenschaften XLIX, 1992, 85-109. 225-257.
Forstenpointner, G./Fabrizii-Reuer, S./Trinkl, E., "... und unter der Hand erklang es gewaltig ...". Bestattung eines Lyraspielers in Ephesos aus dem 5. Jh. v. Chr., in: Archaeologia Austriaca 84-85, 2000-2001,159-179.
Gropengiesser, H., Sänger und Sirenen, AA 1977, 582-610.
Haas, G., Die Syrinx in der griechischen Bildkunst (1985).
Hagel, S., Modulation in altgriechischer Musik (2000).
Hahland, W., Neue Denkmäler des attischen Toten- und Heroenkultes, Festschr. Zucker (1954) 177-194.
Herbig, R., Griechische Harfen, AM 54, 1929, 164-193.
Hickmann, E., Die Musik des Altertums (1989).
Hickmann, H., Altägyptische Musik, in: Hdb. der Orientalistik, 1. Abt. Erg. Bd. 4 (1970) 135-170.
Higgins, R.A., Lute Player in Greek Art, JHS 85, 1965, 62 ff.
Hofstetter, E., Sirenen im archaischen und klassischen Griechenland (1990).
Huchzermeyer, H., Aulos und Kithara in der griechischen Welt bis zum Ausgang der klassischen Zeit (1932).
JbKuGewHamb 9/10, 1990/91, 33 (zum Xylophon).
Johnson, A.J., Musical Evenings in the Early Empire, JHS 120, 2000, 57-85.
Jurgeit, F., Ein etruskisches Plektron in Karlsruhe, in: Miscellanea Archeologica Dohrn dedicata (1982) 53-62.
Kauffmann-Samaras, A., A propos d'une amphore geométrique du Musée de Louvre, RA 1972, 29 ff. (geometr. Waffentanz).
Kourou, N., Musical Procession Scenes in Early Greek Art, Praktika 1985 (A) 415-422.
Kunisch, N., Bilder griechischer Musikanten in den Kunstsammlungen der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Jahrbuch 1984 der Ruhr Universität Bochum 3-30.
Kyrieleis, H., Der Tänzer vom Kap Phoneas, IM 46, 1996, 111-121.
La specchio della musica (Ausst. Ferrara 1988)
Landels, J.G., The Brauron Aulos, BSA 58, 1963, 116 ff.
Landels, J.G., Music in Ancient Greece and Rome (1999).
Lehnstaedt, K., Prozessionsdarstellungen auf attischen Vasen (1970).
Lenz, D., Vogeldarstellungen in der ägäischen und zyprischen Vasenmalerei des 12.-9. Jhs. v. Chr. (1995).
Maas, M./ McIntosh Snyder, J., Stringed Instruments of Ancient Greece (1989).
Marconi, M., Divinitŕ greche fra suoni danze, QuadTic 22, 1993, 9-19.
Nelson, N., 'Xylophon' on Gnathia Vases, BABesch 61, 1986, 30 ff.
Neubecker, A.J., Altgriechische Musik (1977).
Nordquist, G.C., Instrumental Music in Representations of Greek Cult, in: The Iconography of Greek Cult in the Archaic and Classical Periods, Kongress Delphi 1990 (1992) 143-168.
Nordquist, G.C., Some Notes on Musicians in Greek Cult, in: R. Hägg (Hrsg.), Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Epigraphical Evidence. Preceedings of the Second International Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult, organized by the Swedish Intitute at Athens, 22-24 November 1991 (1994) 81-93.
Otto, B., Marsyas im Thiasos, JbBadWürtt 12, 1975, 33, Abb. 14.
Padgett, J. M., A Geometric Bard, in: J. B. Carter/S. P. Morris Hrsgg.), The Ages of Homer (Festschr. Vermeule 1995) 389-405.
Paquette, D., L'instrument de musique dans la Grčce antique (1984).
Pöhlmann, E., Zwei Elgin-Leiern im British Museum, Quellen und Studien zur Musikgeschichte, Bd. 1. Musik in Antike und Neuzeit, 1987, 319-327.
Porada, E., A Lyre Player from Tarsos and Liis, in: Festschr. Goldmann (1956) 185 ff.
Poursat, J.C., Les représenations de danse armée dans la ceramique attique, BCH 92, 1968, 550 ff.
Prudhommeau, G., La danse grecque antique (1965).
RE 21 (1951) 187 f. s.v. "Plectrum" (K. Schneider) (zur Spielweise der Saiteninstrumente).
Roberts, H., Reconstructing the Greek Tortoise-Shell Lyre, in: World Archeology 12, 1981, 303 ff.
Schauenburg, K., Herakles musikos, JdI 94, 1977, 49-76.
Journée d'Étude : L'Iconographie musicale : questions, thčmes et projets pour l'étude de la musique ancienne
Direction : Nicoletta GUIDOBALDI
Du 28/05/99 au 28/05/99
PROGRAMME :
Daniela CASTALDO
L'iconographie musicale dans l'antiquité classique
Cristina SANTARELLI
Quelques thčmes d'iconographie musicale dans trois manuscrits de la Bibliothčque nationale de Turin
Maria Grazia CARLONE
Images de luthistes ŕ la Renaissance
Florence GETREAU
Quelques avancées sur le patrimoine musical en France
Nico STAITI
Les représentations de la musique et la tradition orale
Table ronde
Documentation et recherche : bilan et perspectives
PARTICIPANTS :
Maria Grazia CARLONE (Catalogo Italiano d'Iconografia Musicale)
Daniela CASTALDO (Université de Bologne)
Christophe DUPRAZ (ENS, Paris - CESR, Tours)
Elena FERRARI BARASSI (Catologo Italiano d'Iconografia Musicale - Université de Pavie)
Florence GETREAU (Institut de Recherche sur le patrimoine musical en France - Paris
Nicoletta GUIDOBALDI (CESR - Tours)
Tilman SEEBASS (Université d'Innsbruck)
Cristina SANTARELLI (DAMS, Turin - Istituto per i Beni Musicali in Piemonte)
Nico STAITI (Université de Bologne)
IMMAGINI MUSICALI NELLA CERAMICA GRECA
Museo Civico Archeologico di Bologna, 1994
"Il Resto del Carlino"
19.1.94
Musica su ceramica
"Immagini musicali nella ceramica greca", presso il Museo civico archeologico di Bologna, č una esposizione che si basa su recenti studi iconografici applicati all'analisi e alla schedatura di un consistente nucleo di ceramiche di proprietŕ del Museo bolognese, ricerca condotta da Daniela Castaldo, per il Dipartimento di Musica e Spettacolo dell'Universitŕ di Bologna. Si tratta dunque di un'occasione non priva di fascino, per rivedere con maggior attenzione una cinquantina di vasi attici in gran parte provenienti dalle necropoli felsinee, della ricchissima collezione del museo (che ne annovera complessivamente quasi un migliaio), scelti tra quelli dipinti con scene musicali, e alcuni pezzi provenienti da altre collezioni. Il taglio iconografico č di particolare interesse se si pensa che, a tutt'oggi, la musica resta uno dei capitoli piů misteriosi della cultura greca, quasi completamente perduta, sia per quanto riguarda gli strumenti sia per la scrittura della musica. Tali lacune sono in parte colmate dal vasto repertorio di immagini connesse in qualche modo alla pratica musicale che scorre sui fianchi dei vasi, come ad esempio crateri, anfore, coppe, che venivano usati durante simposi e banchetti. Si scopre cosě che molte figure nere e figure rosse dipinte sulle ceramiche, databili tra la fine del VI e la fine del IV secolo a.C., hanno portato con sč, unici testimoni, l'immagine di strumenti a corde quali la lyra, la kithara o il barbytos, o l'aulos che č a fiato, o ancora krotala o tympanon, a percussione, e ciň costituisce una descrizione tutto sommato piuttosto fedele di oggetti che la letteratura greca ci ha reso noti dal canto suo, fin dai poemi omerici. All'argomento si intrecciano quindi ambiti diversi, come una rilettura tematica dei miti, dove la musica č spesso presente, con le sue due anime, quella Apollinea, armoniosa ed equilibrata, e quella Dionisiaca, orgiastica e folle; ma anche la storia del costume e della societŕ greca, per individuare i contesti e le modalitŕ di esecuzione e fruizione della musica. L'immaginario greco ma anche la vita vera illustrata dalle decorazioni attiche dice molto dunque, di questa perduta musica donata dagli dei dell'Olimpo e coltivata dagli uomini, di come accompagnasse banchetti e danze, con momenti lirici e momenti di scatenamento inebriante dei sensi, della sua presenza come ritmo e come accompagnamento delle parole. Ma acuisce il silenzio da cui questi mitici strumenti greci sono tuttora circondati.
http://www.geocities.com/dabell_2000/musika.htm
Heinz Steinmüller
MUSICA ANTIQUA
Pegasus-Taschenbuch, 2000
ISBN 3-930873-16-8
125 Seiten, (DM 12,00/ EUR 6,20)
Von den antiken Hochkulturen bis zum neurömischen Choral und der frühen Mehrstimmigkeit des 9. Jahrhunderts
http://www.pegasusdruck.de/content/c_verlag.htm
Esametri orfici, dialetto attico e musica dell’Asia Minore, in Synaulía. Cultura musicale in Grecia e contatti mediterranei, a cura di A. C. Cassio, D. Musti, L. E. Rossi, "Ann. Ist. Orient. Napoli" Sez. filologico - letteraria, Quaderni, 5., 97-110.
Quelle: Helmut Brand, "Griechische Musikanten im Kult - Von der Frühzeit bis zum Beginn der Spätklassik". Erscheint im Sommer 1999 im Roell Vhttp://www.harpa.com/music-archaeology/bibliographie-1.htmerlag/Dettelbach
2000
256 S./p.
Hc
13,5 x 21 cm
engl.
EUR 34,00
ISBN 3-86135-643-0
There is plenty of evidence that both in ancient Greece and in medieval Europe orally performed epics were sung rather than spoken, often to the accompaniment of a musical instrument. Although scholars studying epics such as the Iliad, the Odyssey or the Chanson de Roland have commented on this fact, little progress has been made in incorporating the musical and more generally the performative aspect of oral epic into their interpretations. This is partly explained by the scarcity of musical documents that have come down to us. There is, however, a wealth of comparative material from living traditions and the implications of their study for traditional medieval epics (and possibly also the Homeric poems) form the subject of this book.
This book is the first representative survey of the music and performance of oral epic poetry world-wide. It contains a general introduction on the music and performance of oral epics by Karl Reichl (University of Bonn).
Contents:
Preface
Karl Reichl: Introduction: The Music and Performance of Oral Epics
Gregory Nagy: Epic as Music: Rhapsodic Models of Homer in Plato's Timaeus and Critias
Stephen Erdely: Music of South Slavic Epics
Wolf Dietrich: The Singing of Albanian Heroic Poetry
Margaret H. Beissinger: Creativity in Performance: Words and Music in Balkan and Old French Epic
Dzhamilya Kurbanova: The Singing Traditions of Turkmen epic Poetry
Karl Reichl: The Performance of the Karakalpak Zhyrau
Emine Gürsoy-Naskali: Dudak degmez: A Form of Poetry Competition among the Asiks of Anatolia
Hiromi Lorraine Sakata: The Musical Curtain: Music as a Structural Marker in Epic Performance
Carole Pegg: The Power of Performance: West Mongolian Heroic Epics
Nicole Revel: Singing Epics among the Palawan Highlanders (Philippines): Musical and Vocal Styles
Christiane Seydou: Word and Msuic: The Epic Genre of the Fulbe of Massina (Mali)
Joseph Harris: The Performance of Old Norse Eddic Poetry: A Retrospective
John Stevens: Reflections on the Music of Medieval Narrative Poetry
Orario di ricevimento: mercoledě e venerdě h. 10-12
Corsi: STORIA DELLA MUSICA GRECA per Laurea Triennale (5 cfu, Cdl: LClFi)
Per il programma del corso vai all'elenco dei programmi d'esame
Per sapere data di inizio, orario e luogo di lezione vai all'elenco lezioni e orari di ricevimento docenti
Per iscriverti all'esame vai all'elenco degli appelli
CURRICULUM
PUBBLICAZIONI
(aggiornate al Luglio 2001)
Nata a Castelnovo Sotto (RE) l'8.6.1950, si č laureata in Lettere (indirizzo classico) il 19.11.1973 presso l'Universitŕ di Bologna, discutendo con il Prof. B. Marzullo la tesi di Letteratura Greca Problemi di interlocuzione nella Lisistrata di Aristofane e conseguendo il punteggio di 110/110 e lode.
In qualitŕ di assegnista ministeriale (presso la prima Cattedra di Letteratura Greca dal 15.3.1975 al 19.10.1981) e in qualitŕ di ricercatore confermato (presso l'Istituto di Filologia Classica e Medievale dal 20.10.1981 e presso il Dipartimento di Filologia Classica e Medievale dal 1.4.1983 a tutt'oggi), ha svolto attivitŕ scientifica e didattica afferente al Corso di Laurea in Lettere indirizzo classico.
A partire dall'a.a. 1993/1994 ha tenuto per affidamento, fino all'a.a. 1998/1999, i corsi di Storia della Musica Greca e Romana, Teoria Musicale Classica e Letteratura Greca presso la Scuola di Paleografia e Filologia musicale dell'Universitŕ degli Studi di Pavia. Nell'ŕmbito di questi insegnamenti ha svolto la relativa attivitŕ didattica, compresa l'assegnazione di diverse tesi di laurea.
Nell'a.a. 1999/2000 ha tenuto lezioni di Didattica del Greco per la Scuola di Specializzazione per l'Insegnamento Secondario.
Nell'ŕmbito della ricerca i suoi maggiori interessi si appuntano sulla produzione teatrale del V sec. a.C. e sulla storia della musica greca e romana.
1982
7. Etym. Gen. my 131-220, "MCr" XV/XVII (1980/1982) 255-262.
1984
8. Rec. Plutarco. Dialoghi Delfici, a c. di D. Del Corno, Milano 1983, "RFIC" CXII (1984) 284s.
1985
9. Aristoph. Eq. 402sq.: un'eco di Morsimo?, "Vichiana" N.S. XIV (1985) 125-130.
10. Rec. A. Pertusi, Testi inediti e poco noti sulla caduta di Costantinopoli, a c. di A. Carile, Bologna 1983, "RFIC" CXIII (1985) 121s.
1986
11. Ar. Eq. 32, "Orpheus" N.S. VII (1986) 104-111.
1987
12. Ps. Apollodoro III 2 W., "Vichiana" N.S. XVI (1987) 280-284.
13. Rec. Elio Aristide. Discorsi Sacri, a c. di S. Nicosia, Milano 1984, "Orpheus" N.S. VIII (1987) 216.
1988
14. Sceptrum, in Enciclopedia Virgiliana IV (1988) 698s.
1989
15. Rec. Theodorus Gaza. Ciceronis liber de senectute, ed. I. Salanitro, Lipsiae 1987, "GFF" XII (1989) 119s.
1990
16. Thalamus, in Enciclopedia Virgiliana V (1990) 158-160.
17. Tyrannus, ibid. 341s.
18. Vox, ibid. 633-635.
19. Zona, ibid. 660.
20. Rec. Giovanni Pascoli. Giugurta, a c. di A. Traina, Venezia 1990, "Eikasmós" I (1990) 261.
21. Rec. S. Auffret, Mélanippe la philosophe. Trilogie, avec la collaboration de G. Javary, Paris 1987, "GFF" XIII (1990) 133.
1992
22. Septem discrimina vocum. Orfeo e la musica delle sfere, Bologna 1992 (Rec. "RFIC" CXXI [1993] 255 [Lo Cicero]; "Orpheus" N.S. XIV [1993] 391s. [Corsaro]).
1993
23. Note al Bellerofonte euripideo, "Sileno" XIX (1993) 513-523.
24. Nota ad Eur. Bacch. 3, "QUCC" N.S. XLV (1993) 83-85.
2000
25. Annotazioni in margine all'aulós, "RCCM" XLII (2000) 163-173.
2001
26. I nomoi di Clona, "RCCM" XLIII (2001) 105-108.
27. Rec. A. Di Giglio, Strumenti delle Muse. Lineamenti di organologia greca, Bari 2000, "RCCM" XLIII (2001) 142-144.26.
28. A proposito di Eur. Hel 183 ályron élegon, "RCCM" XLIII (2001) 185-194.
29. Diocle e gli ossibafi, "Annali dell'Universitŕ di Ferrara - Sezione di Lettere" N. S. 2 (2001).
Luigi Enrico Rossi
Musica e psicologia nel mondo antico e nel mondo moderno:
la teoria antica dell’ethos musicale e la moderna teoria degli affetti
Il forte impatto psicologico della musica č ancor oggi un fatto su cui non vi sono dissensi, ma
esso era forse ancor piů forte, a giudicare dalle testimonianze, nella Grecia antica. I mezzi
della musica antica, benché assai piů semplici di quella moderna, vanno commisurati ad «una
situazione di molto minor sollecitazione ambientale» [57]; del resto, se pure potessimo
ricostruire l’esecuzione di un brano di musica antica, non sarebbe possibile ricostruire in noi
stessi l’ascoltatore di allora: «siamo provvidenzialmente costretti a sentir parlare gli antichi
stessi nelle loro testimonianze e nella loro riflessione teorica sugli effetti della musica».
Tuttavia, se la sensibilitŕ agli effetti psicologici (ovvero psicagogici) della musica, dalla teoria
etica della musica della Grecia classica alla dottrina degli affetti elaborata in Europa nel XVII-XVIII
sec., č una costante, «se comune era la consapevolezza della grande forza psicagogica
della musica, diversa č stata la direzione in cui questa forza č stata vista operare» [60-61].
L’atteggiamento dei Greci si sintetizza in una formulazione che Platone (resp. 4,424c)
attribuisce a Damone: «In nessun ambiente avvengono innovazioni musicali senza leggi
politiche istituzionali, come dice Damone e come credo anch’io», ove non puň essere la musica
a mutare la politica (il che presupporrebbe una certa libertŕ musicale, negata nel dirigismo
politico di Platone) ma č sempre la politica a mutare eventualmente la musica. Č l’effetto
potente della musica sull’animo che ne rendeva importante, nella concezione degli antichi, il
controllo da parte delle autoritŕ politiche (gli aneddoti al riguardo, specie per la conservatrice
Sparta, sono numerosi), in ognuno dei componenti musicali (tonalitŕ, melodia, ritmo, tempo
/agogé, strumenti; per la danza le figure). «I fattori musicali vennero ad avere un determinato
ęthos e fu cosě che la musica divenne uno dei fattori piů importanti che concorrevano a
formare e a disciplinare il costume individuale e quello collettivo di una comunitŕ» [64-65]. La
dottrina dell’ęthos musicale (Ethoslehre) non va perň considerata come un blocco statico e
monolitico: se Pitagora postulava una corrispondenza fra i rapporti numerici della musica e i
rapporti numerici dell’anima, la corrente damoniana «procedeva con metodo genuinamente
empirico e sperimentale» [66]: ad essa vanno ricondotti Platone e Aristotele, diversi solo nella
diversa accettazione di armonie sulla cui caratterizzazione etica v’č comunque accordo, ed
ancora l’aristotelico Aristosseno (la differente impostazione era forse oggetto del perduto Sulla
differenza della musica pitagorica e di quella aristossenica, di Didimo il musico, forse I sec.
d.C.). A negare ogni effetto psicagogico-educativo della musica era invece quella che č stata
definita la corrente formalistica, rappresentata da Democrito, Epicuro (cfr. Filodemo di Gadara)
e dal papiro Hibeh 13 (opera di un sofista?). Le polemiche musicali che hanno luogo dal V sec.
a.C. in poi si appuntano perň non solo attorno all’ęthos musicale ma anche al giusto equilibrio
fra parola e musica, ove la seconda non soverchi la prima: la distinzione fra i due problemi č
chiara nel fr. 708 P. di Pratina di Fliunte, ove si critica la preminenza della parola, e ancora
nella sphragís dei Persiani di Timoteo, metricamente piů semplice e lineare di tutto il resto, in
quanto rappresenta «una presa di posizione metaletteraria implicita sul rapporto
parola/musica, perché la parola non vada annegata nella musica» [73]. In ogni caso, nella
riflessione antica, «il centro dell’interesse č sempre ed esclusivamente la reazione [psicologica]
dell’ascoltatore», tanto che la «concentrazione assoluta sulla funzione conativa, quella che
mira a ottenere determinati effetti sul destinatario», spiega anche la scarsa complessitŕ della
musica antica: esigenze di espressivitŕ musicale a livello autoriale avrebbero ben potuto
promuovere uno sviluppo, anche al livello tecnologico degli strumenti [76]. Similmente, anche
nella letteratura antica, almeno fino all’ellenismo, quella che prevale č la funzione conativa, e
la critica letteraria antica si occupa di letteratura «in quanto produttrice di un effetto sul
pubblico, non come l’espressione di un autore» (D.A. Russell, Literary Criticism, in Oxford
Class. Dictionary, 611ss.): incentrata sul destinatario č ad es. la teoria aristotelica della catarsi
[77-81]. Sarŕ solo dal Rinascimento in poi che si scoprirŕ la funzione psicologica attiva
(espressiva) della musica: importante sarŕ l’opera della Camerata fiorentina e il ‘cantare con
affetto’ di Giulio Caccini, ma anche il perfezionarsi degli strumenti, a corda e a fiato, che
rispose ad una maggiore esigenza di espressivitŕ da parte degli autori (si veda soprattutto il
comune progresso della letteratura per violino e dello strumento stesso); non a caso, i testi di
tecnica esecutiva del XVIII secolo si pongono proprio il fine di guidare ad un’ermeneutica delleintenzioni dell’autore. Piů tardi il Romanticismo condurrŕ a superare la schematica normativitŕ
della Affektenlehre, quasi un «prontuario espressivo» [89], in nome di una visione piů
storicizzata dell’espressione artistica ma in cui comunque č l’attenzione alla soggettivitŕ
dell’autore, non agli effetti sull’uditorio, che rappresenta la base di ogni approccio al fatto
musicale (semmai, la funzione conativa della musica č oggi oggetto di studio da parte della
psicologia della percezione e di applicazione nella pubblicitŕ commerciale [90]). [Gianfranco
Mosconi] [= POIESIS 1-00-0707]
http://www.dismec.unibo.it/musichegreci/de%20musicis/schederelazioni2000/Rossi2000.pdf
La Accademia Fiorentina di Papirologia e di Studi sul Mondo Antico č lieta di ospitare nel proprio spazio web il calendario dei seminari organizzati presso l’Universitŕ di Roma ‘La Sapienza’ dal socio Luigi Enrico Rossi. Il seminario di Luigi Enrico Rossi č da anni un’importante occasione di incontro e di discussione culturale, e un imprenscindibile punto di riferimento per quanti si occupano di studi classici.
_________________________________
Letteratura greca II (Prof. L.E.Rossi)
Letteratura Greca - Luigi Enrico Rossi
Moduli attivati per questo insegnamento
Titolo Docente A. A.
a) "Istituzioni di letteratura greca (oralitŕ/scrittura, generi letterari, destinatari: la comunicazione letteraria)". Luigi Enrico Rossi 2002-2003
b) Lettura (in greco) di Esiodo, Le opere e i giorni: un 'epica singolare in una prospettiva esegetica nuova Luigi Enrico Rossi 2002-2003
c) Introduzione alla teoria e alla prassi della metrica greca Luigi Enrico Rossi 2002-2003
Il simposio come istituzione politica (differenziato per grecisti e non grecisti) Luigi Enrico Rossi 2001-2002
Istituzioni di letteratura greca (oralitŕ/scrittura, generi letterari). I°anno di lettere. Luigi Enrico Rossi 2001-2002
Lettura in greco di Aristofane, "Vespe" Luigi Enrico Rossi 2001-2002
