Of late my energies have focused on the historian Herodotus. I recently published a textual commentary on book five of his Histories (U of O Press, 2018). The commentary offers readers, among other things, narratological parsing that enables them to see the dialectic Herodotus creates with the various audiences of his text. Currently I am working on two articles on Herodotus, the first on historical construction and identity and the second on margins.
Acta Classica : Proceedings of the Classical Association of South Africa, 2002
Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a ri... more Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a rival or in the inappropriateness of his being a parasite and a rival. This paper argues against these interpretations because in the poem hunger does not stigmatize Aurelius as poor or a parasite but rather as a promiscuous sodomite. For this reason Cat. 2 1 should be understood in the context of the traditional Roman view of masculinity : appropriate domination is an affirmation of healthy masculinity; inappropriate submission is unhealthy emasculation. The paper also suggests that Cat. 21 is an elaboration of a standard insult, 'esureis et me felas', threatening a dissatisfying and sexually humiliating 'feeding' of Aurelius' empty belly and a sexually dissatisfying and humiliating fulfillment of Aurelius' carnal desires. In making these insults, Catullus can be said to have put Aurelius, excessively indulging his masculine lust, in his submissive place.
A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is n... more A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is not the one who makes the ‘only right’ conjecture. A text can foresee a Model Reader entitled to try infinite conjectures. The empirical reader is only an actor who makes conjectures about the kind of Model Reader postulated by the text. Since the intention of the text is basically to produce a Model Reader able to make conjectures about it, the initiative of the Model Reader consists in figuring out a Model Author that is not the empirical one and that, at the end, coincides with the intention of the text. (Eco)
Ovidians today agree that humour is central to understanding theMetamorphoses; but much disagreem... more Ovidians today agree that humour is central to understanding theMetamorphoses; but much disagreement exists about what passages are funny; what type of humour is used; and what response it is intended to elicit. Since his own time Ovid's humour has provoked criticism: Quintilian and the two Senecas criticise him for introducing to theMetamorphosesan inappropriate tone. The Romantics found Ovid's humour in bad taste. For much of the 19th and 20th centuries it was taken to be light and on the surface. More recently scholars identify his humour as either deep and humane or hateful and misogynistic. This division is caused, in my opinion, by Ovid's black humour, which by its very nature is easily misunderstood or missed, especially by those inclined to see the tragic in things, disinclined to see comedy mixed into a scene of death or rape, inclined to think the tragic, serious and universal more worthy, profound and significant than the comic, base and particular.
A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is n... more A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is not the one who makes the 'only right' conjecture. A text can foresee a Model Reader entitled to try infinite conjectures. The empirical reader is only an actor who makes conjectures about the kind of Model Reader postulated by the text. Since the intention of the text is basically to produce a Model Reader able to make conjectures about it, the initiative of the Model Reader consists in figuring out a Model Author that is not the empirical one and that, at the end, coincides with the intention of the text. (Eco)
Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a ri... more Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a rival or in the inappropriateness of his being a parasite and a rival. This paper argues against these interpretations because in the poem hunger does not stigmatize Aurelius as poor or a parasite but rather as a promiscuous sodomite. For this reason Cat. 2 1 should be understood in the context of the traditional Roman view of masculinity : appropriate domination is an affirmation of healthy masculinity; inappropriate submission is unhealthy emasculation. The paper also suggests that Cat. 21 is an elaboration of a standard insult, 'esureis et me felas', threatening a dissatisfying and sexually humiliating 'feeding' of Aurelius' empty belly and a sexually dissatisfying and humiliating fulfillment of Aurelius' carnal desires. In making these insults, Catullus can be said to have put Aurelius, excessively indulging his masculine lust, in his submissive place.
Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a ri... more Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a rival or in the inappropriateness of his being a parasite and a rival. This paper argues against these interpretations because in the poem hunger does not stigmatize Aurelius as poor or a parasite but rather as a promiscuous sodomite. For this reason Cat. 2 1 should be understood in the context of the traditional Roman view of masculinity : appropriate domination is an affirmation of healthy masculinity; inappropriate submission is unhealthy emasculation. The paper also suggests that Cat. 21 is an elaboration of a standard insult, 'esureis et me felas', threatening a dissatisfying and sexually humiliating 'feeding' of Aurelius' empty belly and a sexually dissatisfying and humiliating fulfillment of Aurelius' carnal desires. In making these insults, Catullus can be said to have put Aurelius, excessively indulging his masculine lust, in his submissive place.
Acta Classica : Proceedings of the Classical Association of South Africa, 2002
Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a ri... more Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a rival or in the inappropriateness of his being a parasite and a rival. This paper argues against these interpretations because in the poem hunger does not stigmatize Aurelius as poor or a parasite but rather as a promiscuous sodomite. For this reason Cat. 2 1 should be understood in the context of the traditional Roman view of masculinity : appropriate domination is an affirmation of healthy masculinity; inappropriate submission is unhealthy emasculation. The paper also suggests that Cat. 21 is an elaboration of a standard insult, 'esureis et me felas', threatening a dissatisfying and sexually humiliating 'feeding' of Aurelius' empty belly and a sexually dissatisfying and humiliating fulfillment of Aurelius' carnal desires. In making these insults, Catullus can be said to have put Aurelius, excessively indulging his masculine lust, in his submissive place.
A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is n... more A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is not the one who makes the ‘only right’ conjecture. A text can foresee a Model Reader entitled to try infinite conjectures. The empirical reader is only an actor who makes conjectures about the kind of Model Reader postulated by the text. Since the intention of the text is basically to produce a Model Reader able to make conjectures about it, the initiative of the Model Reader consists in figuring out a Model Author that is not the empirical one and that, at the end, coincides with the intention of the text. (Eco)
Ovidians today agree that humour is central to understanding theMetamorphoses; but much disagreem... more Ovidians today agree that humour is central to understanding theMetamorphoses; but much disagreement exists about what passages are funny; what type of humour is used; and what response it is intended to elicit. Since his own time Ovid's humour has provoked criticism: Quintilian and the two Senecas criticise him for introducing to theMetamorphosesan inappropriate tone. The Romantics found Ovid's humour in bad taste. For much of the 19th and 20th centuries it was taken to be light and on the surface. More recently scholars identify his humour as either deep and humane or hateful and misogynistic. This division is caused, in my opinion, by Ovid's black humour, which by its very nature is easily misunderstood or missed, especially by those inclined to see the tragic in things, disinclined to see comedy mixed into a scene of death or rape, inclined to think the tragic, serious and universal more worthy, profound and significant than the comic, base and particular.
A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is n... more A text is a device conceived in order to produce its Model Reader. I repeat that this reader is not the one who makes the 'only right' conjecture. A text can foresee a Model Reader entitled to try infinite conjectures. The empirical reader is only an actor who makes conjectures about the kind of Model Reader postulated by the text. Since the intention of the text is basically to produce a Model Reader able to make conjectures about it, the initiative of the Model Reader consists in figuring out a Model Author that is not the empirical one and that, at the end, coincides with the intention of the text. (Eco)
Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a ri... more Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a rival or in the inappropriateness of his being a parasite and a rival. This paper argues against these interpretations because in the poem hunger does not stigmatize Aurelius as poor or a parasite but rather as a promiscuous sodomite. For this reason Cat. 2 1 should be understood in the context of the traditional Roman view of masculinity : appropriate domination is an affirmation of healthy masculinity; inappropriate submission is unhealthy emasculation. The paper also suggests that Cat. 21 is an elaboration of a standard insult, 'esureis et me felas', threatening a dissatisfying and sexually humiliating 'feeding' of Aurelius' empty belly and a sexually dissatisfying and humiliating fulfillment of Aurelius' carnal desires. In making these insults, Catullus can be said to have put Aurelius, excessively indulging his masculine lust, in his submissive place.
Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a ri... more Scholars see the insult of Cat. 2 1 in the inappropriateness of Aurelius' being poor and a rival or in the inappropriateness of his being a parasite and a rival. This paper argues against these interpretations because in the poem hunger does not stigmatize Aurelius as poor or a parasite but rather as a promiscuous sodomite. For this reason Cat. 2 1 should be understood in the context of the traditional Roman view of masculinity : appropriate domination is an affirmation of healthy masculinity; inappropriate submission is unhealthy emasculation. The paper also suggests that Cat. 21 is an elaboration of a standard insult, 'esureis et me felas', threatening a dissatisfying and sexually humiliating 'feeding' of Aurelius' empty belly and a sexually dissatisfying and humiliating fulfillment of Aurelius' carnal desires. In making these insults, Catullus can be said to have put Aurelius, excessively indulging his masculine lust, in his submissive place.
Appropriate for any ancient Greek course above the elementary level, the text uses a reading app... more Appropriate for any ancient Greek course above the elementary level, the text uses a reading approach for learning the language. Though a weakness is its lack of historiographical detail, its strength is that it offers comprehensive parsing notes and running vocabulary. It also offers comprehensive notes on narratological shifts in point of view so that students can observe the dialectic Herodotus creates with his audience. Finally it has been painstakingly edited so that students are guided by commas to understand how the logical flow of each sentence develops into a complete thought. One reviewer writes,
"I think the commentary itself strikes a nice balance. It is detailed, certainly compared to the other running-vocab options out there, but it doesn’t do all the work for the student; this has the added benefit of leaving the door open for the instructor to ask for or offer explanations, draw out discussions on topics or forms, etc. I think the comments on the finer grammatical details and more idiomatic phrases will be especially helpful (relative clauses; words that must be supplied; constructio ad sensum; substantival participles; word order)."
This text assists students to develop quickly into strong readers of ancient Greek.
Uploads
Papers by Philip S Peek
"I think the commentary itself strikes a nice balance. It is detailed, certainly compared to the other running-vocab options out there, but it doesn’t do all the work for the student; this has the added benefit of leaving the door open for the instructor to ask for or offer explanations, draw out discussions on topics or forms, etc. I think the comments on the finer grammatical details and more idiomatic phrases will be especially helpful (relative clauses; words that must be supplied; constructio ad sensum; substantival participles; word order)."
This text assists students to develop quickly into strong readers of ancient Greek.
https://oupress.com/books/15027399/herodotus-histories-book-v