History of Scholarship

The manuscript of the Syriac Julian Romance was part of the Nitrian manuscripts which came into the possession of the British Museum in the 1830s. The Julian Romance received broader attention in 1874 in an important publication by the German orientalist Theodor Nöldeke. Six years later, J. G. E. Hoffmann published the complete Syriac work under the title Syrische Erzählungen; it is the only (non-critical) edition available of the Romance. In 1928 Hermann Gollancz published an English rendering. In 2016 a much better and reliable English translation of the Romance was published by Michael Sokoloff; besides a translation, it also includes the Syriac text of Hoffmann’s edition from 1880. This chapter offers a discussion of the scholarship of the Romance and deals with issues such as the place and date of origin of the text, the original language, the possible authorship, function, and genre of the text, as well as its place within Syriac literature. The Romance as we have it is generally accepted as having been composed in Edessa. The northern Mesopotamian city has a special place and a prominent role in the Julian Romance, in particular in the Jovian Narrative. One of the purposes of the text seems to have been to emphasize Edessa as the city of Christ par excellence, for which reason it deserves a special place in the world of Christendom, as well as to present Edessa as the model of Christian government for the whole empire.

Reflections on the Past and Present of Research on Partisan Identity

Scholarship on partisanship has been transformed by political scientists’ embrace of social and cognitive psychology in the past few decades. This interdisciplinary union has drastically changed the way political scientists examine the origins and effects of partisanship. In this essay, I provide a brief history of scholarship on partisanship, its transformation into a partisan identity as well as its role in the study of polarization. I then demonstrate how this identity framework has propelled research on negative partisan identity in the U.S. two-party system and European multi-party systems. I conclude with a few avenues for future research that could enrich our understanding of partisanship. Scholarship on partisanship has been transformed by political scientists’ embrace of social and cognitive psychology in the past few decades. Since then, the concept of partisan identity has become widely known beyond the narrow subfield of political psychology. Indeed, the sheer volume of research on the origins, measurement, and effect of partisan identity on political behavior is indicative of its centrality in the general discipline of political science. In this essay, I provide a brief (and therefore necessarily incomplete) history of scholarship on partisanship as well as its transformation into a partisan identity. I then review contemporary research on positive and negative partisan identity in the U.S. and beyond, focusing on their differential effects on political attitudes and behavior. Last, I sketch out a few thoughts on the complexities and caveats of current scholarship, including a plea for more research on the interaction of partisanship with other identities, the necessity of studying partisanship in more externally valid contexts, as well as the promise of common identities in bridging partisan divisions.

How German Theologians Read and Edited Luther for the Public: Karl Gottlieb Bretschneider’s Luther for Our Time

Dieser Beitrag untersucht die Entstehung und die Wirkung von Luther an unsere Zeit (1817), Karl Gottlieb Bretschneiders vielgelesenes Buch der Auszüge, als Fallstudie darüber, wie moderne wissenschaftliche Theologen und Herausgeber Luther gelesen, kommentiert und anderen Lesern vorgestellt haben: in diesem Beispiel als Rationalist. Das Buch war umstritten. Der Beitrag befasst sich auch mit zwei konkurrierenden Auswahlen von Luthers Schriften, die von den konservativeren Protestanten Friedrich Perthes und Hans Lorenz Andreas Vent sowie den ultramontanen Katholiken Nikolaus Weis und Andreas Räß als Antwort verfasst wurden. Es deutet darauf hin, dass eine stärkere Berücksichtigung solcher Zusammenstellungen und der Arbeitsmethoden der Compiler selbst – als Teil der kritischen Geschichte der Wissenschaft – sowohl unser Verständnis des tatsächlichen Einsatzes der Reformer und ihrer breiten Rezeption durch verschiedene Leser bereichern als auch neues Licht werfen wird über die Polemik des frühen neunzehnten Jahrhunderts. This article examines the creation and impact of Luther for Our Time (1817), Karl Gottlieb Bretschneider’s much-read book of excerpts, as a case study of how modern scientific theologians and editors read, annotated, and introduced Luther to other readers: in this instance as a rationalist. The book was controversial. The article also looks at two competing selections of Luther’s texts prepared in response by the more conservative Protestants Friedrich Perthes and Hans Lorenz Andreas Vent and the ultramontane Catholics Nikolaus Weis and Andreas Räß. It suggests that greater consideration of such compilations and the working methods of the compilers themselves – part of the critical history of scholarship – will both enrich our understanding of the actual use of reformers and their broad reception by various readers, as well as shed new light on the polemics of the early nineteenth century.

Herod and his Historians

In this introductory chapter, we lay out the scope and aims of our book. Who was Herod, and who wrote about him? In particular, who was Nicolaus of Damascus? And why would we want to try to recover his account of the king? We note that Herod’s modern biographers regularly make assumptions about Nicolaus that are based on a questionable premise, and opt for a new approach. We set our treatment within the history of scholarship and justify our methodological approach to Josephus’ text in the hope of recovering Nicolaus’ own views on the Eastern monarch and much more besides.

Horace and the Slip to Solitude

This chapter argues that Horace made the solitary sphere into a way of life. Against models of Horace’s persona and work that emphasize the contrast between public bard and coterie poet, it shows how the slip to solitude represented a pervasive gesture across his corpus. Proceeding chronologically, close reading of satires, Odes, and the relationship between the tale of the ostensibly mad man at Argos in the Epistle to Florus and the conclusion of the Ars poetica shows how the poet construed the solitary sphere in different ways in various genres, and how its representations formed an interconnected, self-encircling corpus. Throughout, review of the history of scholarship, including Richard Heinze’s theory of Horatian lyric, shows how Horatian poems have been re-socialized, how self-address works in a variety of Horatian genres, and how recovering Horace’s solitary sphere suggests a poet who had more in common with a Romantic than with a neoclassical spirit.

The Lulav: Early Modern Polemical Ethnographies and the Art of Fencing

In recent years, scholars have devoted a great deal of attention to the history of scholarship in general and, more specifically, to the emergence of critical historical and anthropological literature from and within ecclesiastical scholarship. However, few studies have discussed the Jewish figures who took part in this process. This paper analyzes the role played by historiographical and ethnographical writing in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Italian Jewish–Christian polemics. Tracing various Christian polemical ethnographical depictions of the Jewish rite of shaking the lulav (sacramental palm leaves used by Jews during the festival of Sukkot), it discusses the variety of ways in which Jewish scholars responded to these depictions or circumvented them. These responses reflect the Jewish scholars’ familiarity with prevailing contemporary scholarship and the key role of translation and cultural transfers in their own attempts to create parallel works. Furthermore, this paper presents new Jewish polemical manuscript material within the relevant contexts, examines Jewish attempts to compose polemical and apologetic ethnographies, and argues that Jewish engagement with critical scholarship began earlier than scholars of this period usually suggest

500 years of Old Chinese phonology

This article introduces research on Old Chinese phonology before the Qing dynasty by reviewing the important relevant literature of recent intellectual historians. The article has six parts. The first section is an introduction. The second through fourth parts review the views and arguments over how to understand the works of several important linguists, treating respectively the Southern Song (§ 2, containing Wú Yù 吳棫, Zhū Xī 朱熹 etc.), the Yuan (§ 3, containing Dài Tóng 戴侗, Liú Yùrǔ 劉玉汝, Xióng Pénglái 熊朋來 etc.), and the Ming (§ 4, containing Yáng Shèn 楊慎, Jiāo Hóng 焦竑, Chén Dì 陳第 etc.). Section 5 discusses several methodological issues that concern researchers today, including the historical emergence of three methodologies and methodological issues in researching the history of scholarship. Finally, I point out those topics in need of further investigation.

The Genealogy of a Collection: Working with Manuscript Library Catalogues

In 1773 Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, at that time librarian of the ducal library in Wolfenbüttel, criticised his predecessors of only being interested in the history of the library’s augmentation, of the library’s „genealogy“. According to the famous writer, former librarians were so fixated on the catalogues that they forgot the real purpose of telling a collection’s history: showing how it contributed to scholarship. Of course, Lessing has a point, the history of a collection and its holding institution should not be told simply by enumerating objects, but he might have underestimated the potential of catalogues and book lists as sources for the history of scholarship, indeed the history of knowledge. Library catalogues should not only be seen as valuable sources for the reconstruction of an as-is state of the library at a specific moment of the collection’s life but that a much broader perspective can be taken. Using the example of the Wolfenbüttel manuscript catalogues dating from the mid-17th to the 18th century, the catalogues can be read as behavioural guidelines, as an instrument for representation, as a witness for scholarly practices or as legal papers. Just as for literary documents, they invite to read between the lines, to analyse their specific style as well as to discover the different communicative strategies and hidden messages. Using Lessing’s image, the catalogues help with the composition of an enhanced genealogy, positioning every item into a network of objects, texts, practices, and ideas.

Alcmaeon's Empirical Side: Unpublished Notes from the Vlastos-­Nachlass

In Folder n. 7, Container 49 of the Vlastos-Nachlass (Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas at Austin), an as-yet unpublished series of notes by Gregory Vlastos on Alcmaeon and his empirical method are preserved across two fascicles. After briefly contextualizing Vlastos' remarks within the history of scholarship on Alcmaeon, this paper provides the first annotated reconstruction of the manuscript's extant portion.