Vaios Vaiopoulos

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the Studies Group. Communications concerning the papers contained in this book should be addressed to the Mediterranean Studies Group,

State religion in Rome does not constitute the fruit or the refuge of any metaphysical or deep thinking; at least it had never been confined in that only aspect. Roman religion, plain and practical like Roman people, averse to ecstatic cult and mysticism, emphasizing on the right keeping of a ritual procedure performed at the right place and time, practically constituted one aspect of the state, the ius divinum, which preserved the pax deorum by means of appropriate ceremonial. In the whole structure tradition, auctoritas maiorum, inherited ancestral cult and belief, in one word past, played a principal role. On the other hand the interest in past, history (and the development of historiography) can by no means be considered as an early indication of what we nowadays call "science", nor even a manifestation of the early rationalism attested in Greek 5 th B.C. century which prepared the way for Herodotus, Thucydides and "Hippocrates". Roman historiography is from its birth interweaved with politics, and so it remained throughout its course in the history of philology: an ancilla to the political activities of ambitious generals who craved to pay a tribute to their activity in favour to Rome so that they could be established as political personas who justifiably enjoy high honors and offices, or as good-willing Roman patriots whose main concern had been the accomplishment of the mission of Roman global sovereignty. A (frequently moralizing Roman) historian or politician is characterized of a love for the past along with a tendency of rhetorical description of this past drawing his inspiration from examples

ABSTRACT After a short introduction to Ovid's Heroides, this article focuses on certain cross-references between Heroides 6 and 12. These two (fictitious) letters, the first, written by Hypsipyle, the queen of Lemnos, and the second written by the Colchian princess, Medea, are addressed to the same man, Jason. Before abandoning Medea in order to marry Creusa, Jason had already abandoned Hypsipyle for Medea, or so Hypsipyle claims. This article shows the intertextual complementarity of the two letters through the presentation of an imaginary communication between the two heroines, as Medea seems to “answer” some points in Hypsipyle's epistle.

The infamous and formidable mythological figure of Medea has deservedly held an enduring appeal throughout the ages. This has perhaps never been more true than in the Silver Age of Latin literature, when the taste for rhetorical excess and the macabre made the heroine, and especially her notorious acts of witchcraft and the slaughter of her own children in revenge for her husband’s infidelity, a particularly suitable and attractive topic for literary treatment. By examining the portrayal of this remarkable figure in the works of Ovid, Seneca and Valerius Flaccus, Virgo to Virago: Medea in the Silver Age offers a comprehensive study of the representation of the heroine, not only in this specific period, but in the entire Roman era, since these three authors provide the only substantial accounts of this figure to have survived in Classical Latin. Through close analysis of the texts, Virgo to Virago explores the characterisation of Medea, whose mythical life was inevitably overshadowed...

abstract:The experience of hosting a Congress for the MSA changes a scholar's view of American scholarship, of the Mediterranean, and of Mediterranean studies. The "big size" model of MSA Congresses has brought a special meaning to the study of the Mediterranean, offering opportunities for scholars to view the region simultaneously in a tightly localized context and in the region's expansive context.

Through the study of Messalla in the first book of the Corpus Tibullianum Vaios Vaiopoulos transports us to Augustus’ time. This study attempts a review of Messalla’s presence in the first book of the Corpus Tibullianum, with special emphasis given, naturally, to elegy 1.7, written in honour of the general’s birthday. It is noted that though from the first elegy it is acknowledged that the poet and the general belong to two completely different worlds, the latter’s world is not overall rejected. In 1.3 we effectively have a switch from the obsequium to Delia to an obsequium to Messalla, while the presence of the general as patron in the first part is balanced by Amor’s patronage in the second. Similarly, the contrast of the presence of a representative of Romanitas in the bucolic dream of 1.5 is rectified thanks to Messalla’s divine epiphany. In 1.7 the reception of laus Messallae relies on the reading abilities of the general/reader and the reader in general, as they are essential for the comprehension of minor elements, such as the part played by the references to rivers, the identity of the father, the identification of Osiris, Bacchus and Messalla. It is maintained, finally, that the presence of the general can also be determined in the rest of the poems, thanks, for example, to the theme of viniculture. (taken from the Introduction of this collective volume, edited by Spyridon Tzounakas)