Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
News:
Treasure Gallery
O1864701.jpg
ps248876.jpg
80.jpg
cd1267.jpg
ps346389.jpg
Pages: [1]   Go Down
Print
This topic has not yet been rated!
You have not rated this topic. Select a rating:
Author Topic: Derveni Papyrus, The Oldest Greek Papyrus, Published At Last  (Read 290 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Bart
Platinum Member
*****

Karma: 143
OnlineOnline

Posts: 1737



View Profile
« on: October 22, 2006, 02:09:43 AM »

Invaluable papyrus published at last

By Iota Myrtsioti - Kathimerini

The first official edition of the Derveni text, with an extensive commentary, is launched in Thessaloniki following 26 years of research

The Derveni Papyrus, the oldest Greek papyrus, dates to around 340 BC and was probably written quite some time earlier, perhaps Invaluable papyrus published at last
By Iota Myrtsioti - Kathimerini
The first official edition of the Derveni text, with an extensive commentary, is launched in Thessaloniki following 26 years of research
The Derveni Papyrus, the oldest Greek papyrus, dates to around 340 BC and was probably written quite some time earlier, perhaps in the late fifth, or early fourth century. It is of tremendous importance for the study of both papyrology and archaeology. Scholars who have studied it describe it as ?the most significant new evidence about ancient Greek philosophy and religion since the Renaissance.'
Scholars turned out in force on Thursday night for the launch of the first full edition of the Derveni Papyrus at the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki.

The oldest book in Europe, the Derveni Papyrus is an Orphic, eschatological text that discusses the fate of the soul and the role of the Furies. A mystic, often allegorical text, it was written in the last quarter of the fourth century BC. Scholars who have studied it describe it as ?the most significant new evidence about ancient Greek philosophy and religion since the Renaissance.?

The book was found in 1962 in a grave at Derveni, in Thessaloniki. Some scholars object to the fact that the book has not been made accessible to other researchers. The Institute of Philosophical Research, directed by Apostolos Pierris, decried what it called ?a major scandal in scientific chronicles.? It also accuses the team of scholars, professors Kyriakos Tsantsanoglou, Theokritos Kouremenos and Georgios Prasaoglou of Thessaloniki University, of hiding the papyrus for decades, delaying its scholarly and critical publication and thereby depriving ?the international community of scholars of any access to such a significant text.?

Why was there no scholarly Greek publication for 26 years, despite the fact that, by 1982, the researchers had read 80 percent of the text?

?Because we had to complete it, which included interpreting all of the legible surviving text on 26 scrolls,? Tsantsanoglou told Kathimerini. ?It was a difficult task, since we had to assemble that gigantic puzzle which would lead to its integrated form. The first, unauthorized publication in 1982, in a foreign scholarly journal, set us back, as it formed the basis of numerous studies on the Derveni Papyrus.?

As time passed, the papyrus became common property: ?In Europe and America,? said the professor, ?there were 100 papers and three publications on it. But we went ahead with our research. In 1993 we added another seven columns, which were presented at an international conference.? The Greek researchers followed up with more publications, but there was no official publication.

Besides, the religious and philosophical interpretation was not easy. ?Gaps made the task difficult to understand what was allegorical and what was literal in the approach used by the author of the text,? he added.

The dispute flared up in June, when the Greek Culture Ministry announced that the Patras Institute of Philosophical Research and Oxford University were to collaborate on a new study of the papyrus.

At a press conference in the presence of Deputy Economy and Finance Minister Petros Doukas, Pierris and lecturer Dirk Obbink of Oxford announced that they had begun taking photographs for the philosophical analysis of the text, describing those who had studied it so far as ?not equal to the stature of the find.?

Following approval by the Central Archaeological Council, the new research team undertook to decipher the text by electronic means. More than 200 charred chunks of papyrus went under the microscope again for a new deciphering and reading, this time with the use of micro-phase photography.

Meanwhile, the researchers at Thessaloniki University completed the first full edition of the papyrus. ?The Derveni Papyrus? is in English with a Greek translation and commentary by Tsantsanoglou, Kouremenos - who is professor of papyrology - and Georgios Prasaoglou, who is associate professor of classics.

Other speakers at the presentation were professors Richard Hunter of Cambridge University, Franco Montanari of Genoa University and Gregory Nagy of the Harvard Center of Greek Studies.

http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/news/content.asp?aid=75684
in the late fifth, or early fourth century. It is of tremendous importance for the study of both papyrology and archaeology. Scholars who have studied it describe it as ?the most significant new evidence about ancient Greek philosophy and religion since the Renaissance.'

Scholars turned out in force on Thursday night for the launch of the first full edition of the Derveni Papyrus at the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki.

The oldest book in Europe, the Derveni Papyrus is an Orphic, eschatological text that discusses the fate of the soul and the role of the Furies. A mystic, often allegorical text, it was written in the last quarter of the fourth century BC. Scholars who have studied it describe it as ?the most significant new evidence about ancient Greek philosophy and religion since the Renaissance.?

The book was found in 1962 in a grave at Derveni, in Thessaloniki. Some scholars object to the fact that the book has not been made accessible to other researchers. The Institute of Philosophical Research, directed by Apostolos Pierris, decried what it called ?a major scandal in scientific chronicles.? It also accuses the team of scholars, professors Kyriakos Tsantsanoglou, Theokritos Kouremenos and Georgios Prasaoglou of Thessaloniki University, of hiding the papyrus for decades, delaying its scholarly and critical publication and thereby depriving ?the international community of scholars of any access to such a significant text.?

Why was there no scholarly Greek publication for 26 years, despite the fact that, by 1982, the researchers had read 80 percent of the text?

?Because we had to complete it, which included interpreting all of the legible surviving text on 26 scrolls,? Tsantsanoglou told Kathimerini. ?It was a difficult task, since we had to assemble that gigantic puzzle which would lead to its integrated form. The first, unauthorized publication in 1982, in a foreign scholarly journal, set us back, as it formed the basis of numerous studies on the Derveni Papyrus.?

As time passed, the papyrus became common property: ?In Europe and America,? said the professor, ?there were 100 papers and three publications on it. But we went ahead with our research. In 1993 we added another seven columns, which were presented at an international conference.? The Greek researchers followed up with more publications, but there was no official publication.

Besides, the religious and philosophical interpretation was not easy. ?Gaps made the task difficult to understand what was allegorical and what was literal in the approach used by the author of the text,? he added.

The dispute flared up in June, when the Greek Culture Ministry announced that the Patras Institute of Philosophical Research and Oxford University were to collaborate on a new study of the papyrus.

At a press conference in the presence of Deputy Economy and Finance Minister Petros Doukas, Pierris and lecturer Dirk Obbink of Oxford announced that they had begun taking photographs for the philosophical analysis of the text, describing those who had studied it so far as ?not equal to the stature of the find.?

Following approval by the Central Archaeological Council, the new research team undertook to decipher the text by electronic means. More than 200 charred chunks of papyrus went under the microscope again for a new deciphering and reading, this time with the use of micro-phase photography.

Meanwhile, the researchers at Thessaloniki University completed the first full edition of the papyrus. ?The Derveni Papyrus? is in English with a Greek translation and commentary by Tsantsanoglou, Kouremenos - who is professor of papyrology - and Georgios Prasaoglou, who is associate professor of classics.

Other speakers at the presentation were professors Richard Hunter of Cambridge University, Franco Montanari of Genoa University and Gregory Nagy of the Harvard Center of Greek Studies.

http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/news/content.asp?aid=75684
Logged

Learning is a treasure which accompanies its owner everywhere.
Sovereign
Guest
« Reply #1 on: October 22, 2006, 12:29:47 PM »

Derveni papyrus
The Derveni papyrus is an ancient Greek papyrus scroll which was found in 1962. It is a philosophical treatise that is an allegorical commentary on an Orphic poem, a theogony concerning the birth of the gods, produced in the circle of the philosopher Anaxagoras, in the second half of the fifth century B.C., making it "the most important new piece of evidence about Greek philosophy and religion to come to light since the Renaissance" (Janko 2005). It dates to around 340 B.C., during the reign of Philip II of Macedon, making it Europe's oldest surviving manuscript.[1][2] It was finally published in 2006.

Discovery
The scroll was found at a site in Derveni, Macedonia northern Greece, in a nobleman's grave in a necropolis that was part of a rich cemetery belonging to the ancient city of Lete. It is the oldest surviving book in the Western tradition and one of very few surviving papyri found in Greece. [1] The scroll is carbonized from the pyre of the nobleman's grave.

The papyrus is kept in the Thessaloniki Archaeological Museum.


Content
The text is a commentary on a hexameter poem ascribed to Orpheus. Fragments of the poem are quoted. The poem begins with the words "Close the doors, you uninitiated", a famous admonition to secrecy, recounted by Plato. The theogony described in the poem has Night give birth to Heaven (Uranus), who becomes the first king. Cronus (time) follows and takes the kingship from Uranus, but he is succeeded by Zeus.

Zeus, having heard oracles from his father goes to the sanctuary of Night, who tells him "all the oracles which afterwards he was to put into effect." Upon hearing them, Zeus swallowed the phallus [of the king Uranus] who first had ejaculated the brilliance of heaven.[3]


Recent Reading
The text was not officially published for forty five years after its discovery (though three partial editions were published). According to the publisher A. L. Pierris the late professor Tsantanoglou of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki was not capable of publishing it but also did not wish to allow anyone else to take the glory. A team of experts was assembled in autumn of 2005 led by A.L Pierris of the Institue for Philosophical studies, Dirk Obbink dirctor of the Oxyrhynchus papyrus project at the University of Oxford with the help of modern multispectral imaging techniques by Roger Macfarlane and Gene Ware of Brigham Young University the papyrus was published in the space of 20 months.[1]


Notes
   1. ^ a b Ancient scroll may yield religious secrets. The Associated Press. Retrieved on 2006-06-01.
   2. ^ THE PAPYRUS OF DERVENI. Hellenic Ministry of Culture. Retrieved on 2006-06-01.
   3. ^ Bowersock, G. W. Tangled Roots. From The New Republic Online 8 June 2005. Retrieved 6 June 2006.
Logged
Sovereign
Guest
« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2006, 12:33:31 PM »

The Derveni Papyrus in the Homeric Scholia
The author of the Derveni Papyrus, commenting on a fifth century Orphic Cosmogony, used to be thought an an eccentric and intellectually aberrant mystic. Now that his techniques of allegory and literary interpretation, together with his connections to presocratic philosophy and the sophists have become better understood, it is time to place his composition firmly within the ancient Greek commentary tradition. After noting that the Derveni commentator is already working within the commentary tradition, this paper will assess a connection between the Derveni commentary and the later commentaries to the Homeric poems that points to a close relation between them of mutual dependence or parallel descent in certain details. The form of the Derveni commentary (as demonstrated by A. Lamedica, ?Il Papiro di Derveni come commentario. Problemi formali,? in Proceedings of the XIXth International Congress of Papyrology, Cairo 1989, ed. A. H. S. El-Mosalamy, vol. 1 (Cairo 1992) 325-33) already exhibits the salient formal features (manner of citation of examples, quotation of lemmata, same critical terminology for eliciting meaning from poetic language) of the exegetical commentary as it emerges in the commentaries of Hellenistic scholars more than a century later, as preserved in the papyri and Mediaeval scholia. This is further confirmed by the points at which the commentary tradition of the Homeric scholia themselves seem to show knowledge of the Derveni commentary or at any rate transmit both poetic and exegetical material contained exclusively in the Derveni commentary: for example in P.Derv. col. xii, a discussion about snow-capped Olympus (cf. F. Schironi, ZPE 136 (2001) 15), and P.Derv. col. xxvi on the meaning of the adjective eas). One example (brought to light by A. Bernab? in PEG and recently discussed by G. B. D'Alessio in JHS 124 (2004) 16-37) will illustrate the relationship I have in mind: At P.Derv. col. xix 11 the Derveni commentator quotes from his theogonic poem exactly the same verse, otherwise unattested (hinas d' egkatelex' Achelwiou argurodinou) as that quoted by the commentator to Iliad 21 in P.Oxy. II 221 as a comparison arguing against the genuineness of Il. 21.195 in Achilles' exultation over the death of Asteropaios, which stresses that the river Skamandros has been of no more help to him than his own ancestry (which included the river Axios), noting that 'not powerful Acheloios matches his strength against Zeus, (195) not the enormous strength of Ocean with his deep running waters, Ocean, (196) from whom are all rivers and the entire sea' etc. The citation draws the Derveni theogony and its commentator's allegorical interpretation of Acheloios into the history and understanding of the episode involving Achilles, Asteropaios, and Acheloios in Iliad 21. It shows a knowedge of a text of Iliad 21 at a stage that lacked verse 195 after 194, allowing 196 to run on in a way that gave rise to reflection on the metonymical nature of Acheloos the river (god) and his interpretation of Acheloos as the cosmic element of water. Unlike Achilles, whom the Homeric text makes contrast with or opposed to Zeus in respect to might or power, the Derveni commentator contrasts Acheloos as water with air as Zeus, ultimately assimilating them as one and the same. For the Derveni commentary, meditation on the Homeric verses and narrative here has mixed with Presocratic cosmogony and physics in the field of commentary to produce allegory. For the Homeric commentator, the verse quoted serves as as authoritative narrative parallel for a text of Il. 21 that made 196 run on directly from 194, thus making Acheloios and not Okeanos the father of all rivers and springs. But where did the commentator find the verse about Acheloios? For the Homeric commentator, knowledge of the Derveni commentary, directly or indirectly, is the most economical explanation for his access to the verse (since it is unlikely that he drew on Orphic literature for philological parallels, and we have no knowledge of any other epic poem containing the line or imitating Il. 21.194). Knowledge of the Derveni commentary has been suspected elsewhere in the tradition of ancient scholarship: namely by Philochorus (FGrHist 328 F 185; cf. The Derveni Papyrus in the Homeric Scholia Cronache Ercolanesi 24 (1994) 111-35). The upshot of all this, I argue, is that the Derveni commentary was better known in antiquity than has been realised and now earns a place in literary history at the level of other known commentaries like those of Aristarchus and his followers?while anticipating them by well over a century.
Logged
Solomon
Guest
« Reply #3 on: May 14, 2007, 12:42:57 AM »



Video
Logged
Tags:
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.4 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
History Hunters Worldwide Exodus | TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc