History of Classical Scholarship 2021-04-21T23:48:37+00:00 Open Journal Systems <p><em>History of Classical Scholarship</em> (<em>HCS</em>) is an academic journal that sets out to be the first periodical exclusively devoted to the history of the studies on the Greek and Roman world, in a broad and interdisciplinary sense.</p> Lily Ross Taylor Beyond Bryn Mawr College 2021-02-02T19:26:34+00:00 Judith Hallett <p><em>Written to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of her death in 1969, my essay on the Roman historian Lily Ross Taylor focuses on her influence as scholar, teacher and educational leader beyond Bryn Mawr College, where she received her doctorate in Latin in 1912, and taught from 1927 through 1952.&nbsp; Among her achievements as public intellectual and academic celebrity, often as the first woman classicist so recognized, are her 1947 Sather lectures at the University of California at Berkeley, 1964–1965 Jerome lectures at the University of Michigan and the American Academy in Rome, and write-ups in such popular US venues as </em>Life<em> and </em>Time<em> magazines. They also include the piazza and garden named in her honor in 2009 by the Italian town of Ciciliano in Lazio, whose territory she had identified as the ancient municipality of Trebula Suffenas. Drawing on reminiscences from those who knew her as well as archival materials and an unpublished manuscript by Taylor herself on “Intolerance and Racial Differences”, I seek to locate Taylor, her accomplishments, and her global legacy today in a variety of different, less glamorous “elsewheres.”</em></p> 2021-01-30T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Digital Roundtable: Feeling and Classical Philology 2021-03-03T17:46:59+00:00 Lorraine Daston Sotera Fornaro Stefan Rebenich <p>Constanze Güthenke’s latest book, <em>Feeling and Classical Philology: Knowing Antiquity in German Scholarship, 1770–1920</em> (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­versity Press, 2020), makes a major and distinctive contribution to the study of German classical scholar­ship. We have decided to mark its publication by inviting three distinguished scholars in the field to respond to its key findings and interpretative insights. This digital roundtable is intended as an early contribution to the debate on a study that will warrant much further attention over the years to come.</p> <p>LC<br>FS</p> 2021-02-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Necrophilia 2021-03-03T17:47:27+00:00 Lorraine Daston <p><em>Constanze Güthenke’s </em>Feeling and Classical Philology<em> (Cambridge, 2020) prompts wider reflections on the balance between empathy and distance, and between personality and context in classical scholarship. This paper explores some implications of that line of enquiry.</em></p> 2021-02-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Studio e scienza 2021-03-03T17:45:47+00:00 Sotera Fornaro <p><em>Questo lavoro si misura con alcune proposte del recente libro di Constanze Güthenke </em>Feeling and Classical Philology<em> (Cambridge, 2020) e ne discute, in particolare, il contributo alla storiografia delle emozioni: un campo di indagine che acquisisce particolare rilevanza nell’esplorazione dello sviluppo storico degli studi classici.</em></p> <p><em>This paper engages with some key arguments of Constanze Güthenke’s recent book </em>Feeling and Classical Philology<em> (Cambridge, 2020) and discusses in particular its contribution to the history of emotions: a field of investigation that proves especially relevant to the exploration of the historical development of classical scholarship.</em></p> 2021-02-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Rigour and Creativity 2021-03-03T17:46:25+00:00 Stefan Rebenich <p><em>This paper explores some of the phases of intellectual history discussed in Constanze Güthenke’s book </em>Feeling and Classical Philology<em> (Cambridge, 2020): the links between early nineteenth century liberalism and the scoping of ancient history as a field of scholarly investigation; the formative moment in which the classical world began to lose its paradigmatic role; the connections between this new approach and the establishment of a developing bourgeois culture; the crisis of historicism; and the interdisciplinary paradigm that Wilamowitz sought to assert.</em></p> 2021-02-26T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) „Ein römischer Gegenspieler des Polybios“ — Friedrich Münzers letzter Aufsatz 2021-02-27T21:03:32+00:00 Manfredi Zanin <p><em>Das Manuskript eines unveröffentlichten Aufsatzes von Friedrich Münzer (1868</em><em>–</em><em>1942) ist j</em><em>ü</em><em>ngst von T. Corey Brennan im Nachlass von Ernst Badian (1925</em><em>–</em><em>2011) entdeckt worden. Der Aufsatz, in welchem M</em><em>ü</em><em>nzer sich mit A.&nbsp;Postumius Albinus, dem Konsul von 151 v.</em><em> </em><em>Chr. und Annalisten, und dessen Verh</em><em>ä</em><em>ltnis zu Polybios befasste, wurde im Winter 1938</em><em>–</em><em>1939 auf Einladung von Ronald Syme (1903–1989) abgefasst und ihm zur Veröffentlichung im </em>Journal of Roman Studies<em> geschickt. Mit vorliegendem Beitrag wird dieser letzte bekannte Aufsatz Münzers endlich herausgegeben; er ist mit einer Einleitung über die Geschichte des Manuskripts und die Editionskriterien sowie mit einem Nachtrag zu den von Münzer berührten oder behandelten Hauptthemen versehen.</em></p> <p><em>The manuscript of a hitherto unpublished paper by Friedrich Münzer (1868–1942) has recently been discovered by T. Corey Brennan in the Nachlass of Ernst Badian (1925–2011). Written in Winter 1938–1939 on the invitation of Ronald Syme (1903–1989), and sent to him for publication in the </em>Journal of Roman Studies<em>, the article focuses on A. Postumius Albinus, the consul of 151&nbsp;bce and annalist, and his relationship with Polybius. The text of Münzer’s paper, which is his last known scholarly work, is here preceded by an intro­ductory note on the history of the manuscript and the editorial criteria, and includes an addendum on some of the key historical issues discussed by Münzer.</em></p> 2021-02-27T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) In usum editorum. Giorgio Pasquali e l’Edizione Nazionale dei Classici Greci e Latini 2021-03-12T22:27:35+00:00 Sergio Brillante Luisa Fizzarotti <p><em>La collana di edizioni critiche di testi greci e latini chiamata </em>Scriptores Graeci et Latini <em>fu fondata negli anni Trenta sotto l’egida della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Fra i membri del comitato scientifico preposto alla direzione dell’im­presa un ruolo chiave fu svolto inizialmente da Giorgio Pasquali. Quest’ultimo non solo progettò di contribuire alla collana con la sua edizione delle </em>Epistole<em> platoniche, ma criticò anche i lavori di altri colleghi coinvolti nell’iniziativa, fra cui soprattutto la pubblicazione delle opere di Virgilio curata da Remigio Sabbadini. Inoltre, Pasquali scrisse anche delle regole editoriali rivolte ai futuri editori (</em>Norme per i collaboratori<em>) al fine di garantire l’uniformità della col­lezione. Dal momento che se ne conservano poche copie, il testo è quasi del tutto sconosciuto, ma esso è nondimeno degno di considerazione. Si tratta infatti del più accurato lavoro che Pasquali abbia mai dedicato alla tecnica dell’edizione critica, accanto alla voce </em>Edizione <em>scritta per l’</em>Enciclopedia Italiana<em>. Basandosi anche su materiale archivistico inedito, si ricostruisce l’attività svolta da Pasquali all’interno del Comitato per l’Edizione Nazionale dei Classici Greci e Latini e si fornisce inoltre una nuova ristampa delle sue </em>Norme per i collaboratori<em>.</em></p> <p><em>The </em>Scriptores Graeci et Latini<em> is a collection of critical editions of Greek and Roman texts established in the 1930s under the supervision of the </em>Reale Accademia dei Lincei<em>. Among the members of the scientific committee, a prominent role was initially played by Giorgio Pasquali. Not only did he plan to publish his edition of Plato’s </em>Epistles<em>, but he also criticized the work of his colleagues, in particular that on the poems of Vergil by Remigio Sabbadini. With the homogeneity of the collection on his mind, Pasquali even wrote the </em>Conventions<em> to be respected by future participants in the project (</em>Norme per i collaboratori<em>). This text is almost unknown, since very few copies are still extant today, but it is worthy of consideration nonetheless. It represents the most accurate work by Pasquali concerning the editorial technique of ancient texts, on the same level as the better known entry </em>Edizione<em> that he wrote for the </em>Enciclopedia Italiana<em>. Relying on previously unpublished archival documents, this paper reconstructs all of these aspects of Pasquali’s activity, and the </em>Norme per i collaboratori<em> are newly edited.</em></p> 2021-03-11T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Geschichtsschreibung und epigraphische Quellen bei Santo Mazzarino 2021-03-12T22:27:34+00:00 Werner Eck <p><em>Santo Mazzarino war eine beherrschende Gestalt der italienischen Altertums­kunde in der 2. Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Jeder assoziiert mit ihm Forschung und geschichtliche Darstellung speziell der Spätantike. Im Rahmen einer umfassenden Erörterung der Bedeutung des italienischen Historiker sollte auch untersucht werden, wie weit er sich mit dem weiten Geld der epigra­phischen Forschung befasst und ihre Quellen in seine Darstellungen einbezogen hat. Dabei zeigte sich, dass Mazzarino, auch auf der Basis seiner Mitarbeit am Dizionario epigrafico, sich weit stärker mit dieser Quellengattung befasst hat, als dies allgemein bekannt ist.</em></p> <p><em>Santo Mazzarino was a dominant figure in Italian classical studies in the second half of the 20th century. His name is usually associated with ground-breaking research and major historical accounts, especially of Late Antiquity. This paper discusses the extent to which Mazzarino dealt with the broad field of epigraphic research and included its evidence in his work. Its key finding is that Mazzarino, not least through his collaboration with the </em>Dizionario epigrafico<em>, engaged with this category of sources far more strongly than is generally known.</em></p> 2021-03-11T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) L’Istituto di Studi Romani fra Mostra Augustea e Storia di Roma 2021-04-05T23:20:23+00:00 Leandro Polverini <p><em>Il 1938 è l’anno culminante della prima fase di esistenza dell’Istituto di Studi Romani (dalla fondazione, nel 1925, alla fine della seconda guerra mondiale). Le celebrazioni del bimillenario della nascita di Augusto, promosse dall’Istituto, in particolare la grandiosa </em>Mostra augustea della romanità<em>, furono infatti accompagnate dall’inizio della pubblicazione della </em>Storia di Roma<em>, che avrebbe caratterizzato un cinquantennio della seconda fase di esistenza dell’Istituto. La rassegna delle vicende delle due iniziative, sulla scorta della vasta docu­mentazione esemplarmente conservata nell’Archivio dell’Istituto, vuol servire ad una loro valutazione storiografica, specifica e comparativa, in funzione di un giudizio storico sull’Istituto di Studi Romani, nella duplice prospettiva della sua prima fase di esistenza: culturale e scientifica, da una parte, politica e ideologica, dall’altra.</em></p> <p><em>The peak in the first phase in the history of the Istituto di Studi Romani (from 1925, its foundation year, to the end of the Second World War) was 1938. The celebrations of the Augustan bimillenary promoted by the Institute, notably the lavish </em>Mostra augustea della romanità<em>, coincided with the early instalments of the </em>Storia di Roma<em>, which would then go on to mark the second phase of the history of the Institute. The overview of both initiatives, through a survey of the vast and admirably well-organised Archive of the Institute, can serve their proper historiographical assessment, with a view to an historical evaluation of the Institute’s impact and significance from a twofold standpoint: through a cultural and scholarly perspective, on the one hand, and through a political and ideological one, on the other.</em></p> 2021-04-05T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) Autobiografia di Ettore Pais 2021-04-21T23:48:37+00:00 Gianluca Schingo <p><em>Il documento qui presentato, tratto dalle carte di Ettore Pais (1856–1939) recentemente tornate alla luce, è uno scritto autobiografico concepito per una pubblicazione che non vide mai la luce. Elaborato tra il 1925 e il 1927, il testo ripercorre la carriera e le pubblicazioni dello storico fino a quel momento, trat­teggiando i momenti fondanti del suo percorso culturale. Ettore Pais, attra­verso un lungo excursus sulla cultura storica e archeologica in Italia, esplicita le influenze ricevute e i concetti su cui si era venuto formando il suo metodo d’indagine storica, sottolineando i punti fondamentali della sua visione della storia italiana, antica e moderna, evidenziandone la continuità.</em></p> <p><em>This is the edition of a document drawn from some recently discovered papers of Ettore Pais (1856–1939): it is an autobiographical text that was originally intended for publication and never saw the light of day. It was written between 1925 and 1927, and surveys the historian’s career and published work, charting the main stages of his intellectual trajectory. Pais provides a lengthy overview of the historical and archaeological culture in Italy, discusses the key influences on his work and the concepts that shaped his historical methodology, and states the key tenets of his vision of Italian history, both ancient and modern, in which strong emphasis is placed on continuity.</em></p> 2021-04-21T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c)