Pontius Pilate is generally depicted as a very bad procurator. If we examine, however, the contemporary sources (Josephus, Philo of Alexandria and the Gospels), we shall discover that only one of them, the letter of Agrippa in Philo’s
Legatio ad Gaium
gives a really negative image of him. In my paper I try to show that this description of Pilate is an invective, directed not against Pilate, but against Caligula, therefore the image given of the Roman procurator is very far from being trustworthy. Having established this, we can presume that Pilate was a fairly good procurator, a true soldier, who was, however absolutely unable to understand and manage the religious sensibility of the Jews.
első kölni epódosa (196a W) a bevett értelmezés szerint egy bosszú-csábítást
beszél el. A narrátor Neobulé visszautasított kérőjeként alattomosan elcsábítja
annak húgát, e célját pedig egy hamis házassági ígérettel és egy közönséges
ajánlattal éri el. Valójában a szöveg nem tartalmaz kényszerítő okot a
feltételezéshez, hogy a férfi házassággal áltatta volna a lányt. A szerelmi
ajánlat (21-24. s.) pedig finom humorú, kétszólamú szövegnek tekinthető, amit a
lány ártalmatlan, beszélgetésre szóló invitálásként érthetett, s erotikus
metaforaként csupán a vers (férfi-) hallgatósága számára nyerhette el valódi
értelmét. Az említett megfigyelések, továbbá pszichológiai és
recepcióesztétikai megfontolások valószínűvé teszik, hogy a vers egy vágytól -
nem: bosszútól - fűtött férfi és egy ismeretlen szűz - vagyis aligha Neobulé
húga - találkozását örökíti meg.
Satire 4 is one of the most-criticized poems of Juvenal. Because of its structural problems, certain scholars have even casted doubts on its unity considering it as two fragments patched together by a later editor. The key to understand the satire’s structure is the connection between its two main parts and the central figures thereof, Crispinus and Domitian. Apart from the structural problems, this paper also deals with certain features of the mock-epic as well as the targets of the invective.
In this study we analyze the correlation of the corporal “upper part” and “lowest part” as a cognitive basis of the Ukrainian substandard. This paper focuses on three major questions. First, how comparable structure “lowest part like upper part” constructs metaphor models of sexual slang and invective usage. The second goal was to consider the identification of “lowest part” and “upper part”. Our third aim was to define the comparable structure “upper part like lowest part”. Thus the famous theory of M. Bakhtin
on the carnival nature of the corporal “upper part” and “lowest part” has been developed. The models “lowest part like upper part” and “lowest part like lowest part” are relevant for sexual slang. Three models “lowest part like upper part”, “upper part like lowest part”, “lowest part like lowest part” are relevant for invective usage and horse-play. The cognitive, semantic and stylistic potential of the selected subgroups depends upon the direction of the vertical movement along the human body and comparable specificity of its opposed parts.
Iuvenalis 4. szatírája az életmű egyik legtöbbet kritizált darabja. A szerkezeti problémák miatt egyes kutatók a mű eredeti egységességét is kétségbe vonják azt feltételezve, hogy két, egy későbbi kiadó által összefércelt töredékből áll. A struktúra megértésének kulcsa a két fő szerkezeti egység, s ezzel együtt a két központi karakter, Crispinus és Domitianus közötti kapcsolat feltárása. Az alábbi tanulmány a szerkezeti problémák mellett a mű epikus jellegzetességeivel, illetve az invektíva célpontjaival foglalkozik.
Michel Beheim, a prominent 15th-century German author and musical composer — who was at the Siege of Nándorfehérvér (1456) in the entourage of King Ladislaus V (the Posthumous) of Hungary — wrote one of the first song-poems in reaction to the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. Entitled Von den Türken und dem adel sagt dis, these verses, translated here into English for the first time, have previously been neglected in scholarship. Beheim’s perspective is particularly important, documenting as it does an emotional reaction to a defeat that spawned invective-filled rhetoric, crusading propaganda, castigation of the Christian nobility for a failure to come together, and an interpretation of the Turks under Mehmed II as a scourge of God. Beheim here, and in his subsequent body of anti-Turkish works, including his detailed depiction of the Crusade of Varna (1443–1445), contributes to the shaping of a late mediaeval and early modern negative Türkenbild.
In 1903, in the periodical Történelmi Tár [Historical Repository], Henrik Kretschmayr published a Latin satirical poem on John Zápolya by an anonymous author, written according to him in 1527. In spite of the fact that the poem has been known for more than a century, it has evaded the attention of researchers, although it is a noteworthy piece for several reasons. It is a perfect example of anti-Zápolya propaganda, outstanding among such writings in that the author had accomplished a bravoure of style by the parallel application of imitatio and aemulatio, that are characteristic of neo-Latin poetry, when paraphrasing carmen 29, one of Catullus’ most powerful invectives.
Therefore, it is not a simple satirical poem, but a text operating at various levels and capable of addressing several layers of audience. By naming the accusations against Zápolya, also known from contemporaneous pamphlets, it functions as a piece of propaganda, however, by the artful imitation of Catullus, it can also address more educated readers, who may have delighted themselves in the recognition of the allusions.
Although several poets in Habsburg service could be candidates for the authorship, it is clear that the poem was written by the Silesian poet Georg von Logau (Georgius Logus), whose volume published in 1529 includes not only this, but also other poems imitating Catullus, and even follows the ancient author in its composition. This cannot be unrelated to the fact that during his studies in Rome, Logus was the student of Pierio Valeriano, who was the first to discuss Catullus’ poetry in the form of regular university lectures.
popular administration of justice, in the so called occentatio and flagitatio , that is invective. Recently W. Jeffrey Tatum gave a comprehensive survey on Catullan invective. 3 Neither Horváth, nor me, nor Tatum examined the terminology of Catullus
upon this outrage, and heap many an invective upon him? Yet someone may say, “you will avail nothing”.’ 4.2 Potential subjunctive and future in polemical or repudiating questions as a mirative strategy Potential subjunctive may acquire mirative reading