The East Face of Helicon pdf epub mobi txt 电子书 下载 2025

In this book M.L.W. covers the Hesiodic and Homeric poems, lyric, down to Pindar and Bacchylides, and Aeschylus; but he's not concerned with oriental contributions to science and philosophy or other aspects of Greek culture. He holds a view that the influence of Egypt on Greek poetry and myth was vanishingly small in comparison with that of western Asia, i.e.Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Syrian, and biblical sources. (The comparative study of Greek and Near Eastern literature has not been much cultivated at Oxford in recent times, apart from M.L.W.'s occasional efforts. From the late eighteenth century Classical studies became more isolationist.) Since the second half of the nineteenth century when it became possible to read Akkadian cuneiform and then Sumerian and Hittite texts, and with the excavation of Ugarit since 1929, orientalists have found new points of contact with the Classical world. The discovery in the thirties and forties of the Hurro-Hittite Kumarbi mythology, with its undeniable anticipations of Hesiod's Theogony, finally forced Hellenists to accept the reality of Near Eastern influence on early Greek literature. <<Even from Oxford it is possible to discern the beginnings of a new and welcome trend for classicsts and ancient historians to study at least one oriental language. It would perhaps be too absolute to say that this is where the future of our studies lies; but nothing will contribute more to their progress than the bringing of new evidence to bear, and this is a particularly promising direction in which to look for it. It must become a firm part of our agenda for the twenty-first century. But there is much consciousness-raising still to be done. There are still too many classicists who thoughtlessly use 'the ancient world' or 'das Altertum' as a synonym for 'Graeco-Roman antiquity', as if other ancient civilizations did not exist.>> [There is a need for more orientalists, especially in the Assyriological field. Cuneiform studies have made enormous advances in the present century, but the ratio of manpower to material is such that they remain in a very developed state by comparison with our Graeco-Roman scholarship. All-round commentaries on literary texts, such as we are used to for classical authors, scarcely exist. Nor do word indexes and concordances.]--from Preface

In this book M.L.W. covers the Hesiodic and Homeric poems, lyric, down to Pindar and Bacchylides, and Aeschylus; but he's not concerned with oriental contributions to science and philosophy or other aspects of Greek culture. He holds a view that the influence of Egypt on Greek poetry and myth was vanishingly small in comparison with that of western Asia, i.e.Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Syrian, and biblical sources. (The comparative study of Greek and Near Eastern literature has not been much cultivated at Oxford in recent times, apart from M.L.W.'s occasional efforts. From the late eighteenth century Classical studies became more isolationist.) Since the second half of the nineteenth century when it became possible to read Akkadian cuneiform and then Sumerian and Hittite texts, and with the excavation of Ugarit since 1929, orientalists have found new points of contact with the Classical world. The discovery in the thirties and forties of the Hurro-Hittite Kumarbi mythology, with its undeniable anticipations of Hesiod's Theogony, finally forced Hellenists to accept the reality of Near Eastern influence on early Greek literature. <<Even from Oxford it is possible to discern the beginnings of a new and welcome trend for classicsts and ancient historians to study at least one oriental language. It would perhaps be too absolute to say that this is where the future of our studies lies; but nothing will contribute more to their progress than the bringing of new evidence to bear, and this is a particularly promising direction in which to look for it. It must become a firm part of our agenda for the twenty-first century. But there is much consciousness-raising still to be done. There are still too many classicists who thoughtlessly use 'the ancient world' or 'das Altertum' as a synonym for 'Graeco-Roman antiquity', as if other ancient civilizations did not exist.>> [There is a need for more orientalists, especially in the Assyriological field. Cuneiform studies have made enormous advances in the present century, but the ratio of manpower to material is such that they remain in a very developed state by comparison with our Graeco-Roman scholarship. All-round commentaries on literary texts, such as we are used to for classical authors, scarcely exist. Nor do word indexes and concordances.]--from Preface

In this book M.L.W. covers the Hesiodic and Homeric poems, lyric, down to Pindar and Bacchylides, and Aeschylus; but he's not concerned with oriental contributions to science and philosophy or other aspects of Greek culture. He holds a view that the influence of Egypt on Greek poetry and myth was vanishingly small in comparison with that of western Asia, i.e.Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Syrian, and biblical sources. (The comparative study of Greek and Near Eastern literature has not been much cultivated at Oxford in recent times, apart from M.L.W.'s occasional efforts. From the late eighteenth century Classical studies became more isolationist.) Since the second half of the nineteenth century when it became possible to read Akkadian cuneiform and then Sumerian and Hittite texts, and with the excavation of Ugarit since 1929, orientalists have found new points of contact with the Classical world. The discovery in the thirties and forties of the Hurro-Hittite Kumarbi mythology, with its undeniable anticipations of Hesiod's Theogony, finally forced Hellenists to accept the reality of Near Eastern influence on early Greek literature. <<Even from Oxford it is possible to discern the beginnings of a new and welcome trend for classicsts and ancient historians to study at least one oriental language. It would perhaps be too absolute to say that this is where the future of our studies lies; but nothing will contribute more to their progress than the bringing of new evidence to bear, and this is a particularly promising direction in which to look for it. It must become a firm part of our agenda for the twenty-first century. But there is much consciousness-raising still to be done. There are still too many classicists who thoughtlessly use 'the ancient world' or 'das Altertum' as a synonym for 'Graeco-Roman antiquity', as if other ancient civilizations did not exist.>> [There is a need for more orientalists, especially in the Assyriological field. Cuneiform studies have made enormous advances in the present century, but the ratio of manpower to material is such that they remain in a very developed state by comparison with our Graeco-Roman scholarship. All-round commentaries on literary texts, such as we are used to for classical authors, scarcely exist. Nor do word indexes and concordances.]--from Preface

In this book M.L.W. covers the Hesiodic and Homeric poems, lyric, down to Pindar and Bacchylides, and Aeschylus; but he's not concerned with oriental contributions to science and philosophy or other aspects of Greek culture. He holds a view that the influence of Egypt on Greek poetry and myth was vanishingly small in comparison with that of western Asia, i.e.Mesopotamian, Anatolian, Syrian, and biblical sources. (The comparative study of Greek and Near Eastern literature has not been much cultivated at Oxford in recent times, apart from M.L.W.'s occasional efforts. From the late eighteenth century Classical studies became more isolationist.) Since the second half of the nineteenth century when it became possible to read Akkadian cuneiform and then Sumerian and Hittite texts, and with the excavation of Ugarit since 1929, orientalists have found new points of contact with the Classical world. The discovery in the thirties and forties of the Hurro-Hittite Kumarbi mythology, with its undeniable anticipations of Hesiod's Theogony, finally forced Hellenists to accept the reality of Near Eastern influence on early Greek literature. <<Even from Oxford it is possible to discern the beginnings of a new and welcome trend for classicsts and ancient historians to study at least one oriental language. It would perhaps be too absolute to say that this is where the future of our studies lies; but nothing will contribute more to their progress than the bringing of new evidence to bear, and this is a particularly promising direction in which to look for it. It must become a firm part of our agenda for the twenty-first century. But there is much consciousness-raising still to be done. There are still too many classicists who thoughtlessly use 'the ancient world' or 'das Altertum' as a synonym for 'Graeco-Roman antiquity', as if other ancient civilizations did not exist.>> [There is a need for more orientalists, especially in the Assyriological field. Cuneiform studies have made enormous advances in the present century, but the ratio of manpower to material is such that they remain in a very developed state by comparison with our Graeco-Roman scholarship. All-round commentaries on literary texts, such as we are used to for classical authors, scarcely exist. Nor do word indexes and concordances.]--from Preface

与ὀπώρα交换书单补记。关于所论议题，这本书在传世文献这一层次上（当然还会有此书尚未论及的出土文物等层次）的cross-reference和documentation或已是十分详备了。