Polis and Cosmos in the Earliest Drama: the Tragedies of Aeschylus.

最早的戏剧中的城邦和宇宙：埃斯库罗斯的悲剧。

• 批准号: AH/G004773/1
• 负责人: Richard Seaford
• 金额: $ 4.38万
• 依托单位: UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2009
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2009 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FG004773%2F1
• 关键词: Polis; Cosmos; Earliest; Drama; Tragedies

The six surviving tragedies of Aeschylus are the earliest European drama that we possess. For centuries most scholarship on them was devoted to restoring (from corrupt manuscripts) what Aeschylus wrote. In the last fifty years the returns from this activity have diminished. There has instead been a mass of scholarship on various aspects such as performance and metaphor, on various problems and specific passages, and in the production of detailed commentaries. What I propose to produce is something different: a new synthesis that uses this wide range of scholarship in order to understand and appreciate Aeschylus in relation to the development of the polis. I begin by describing the conceptions of space, time, and the cosmos in some pre-Aeschylean texts. Such conceptions are not given by observation merely, but are socially constructed, and so differ from one kind of society to another. In archaic Greece they were, I argue, influenced by socially integrative institutions such as the polis, ritual, and money. And so for instance. the conception of space (immediate, geographic, or cosmic) in Homeric epic is concrete and unsystematic, with few defined areas: this reflects the pre-state nature of Homeric society, which pre-dates the systematisation that will accompany the development and monetisation of the polis. This monetisation was a factor in the systematic and relatively abstract cosmos of 'presocratic philosophy'. And it played a role in the emergence of tragedy out of ritual in the Athenian polis of the late sixth century BC. This understanding of the social construction of space, time and cosmos is in the second (longer) part of the book applied to a detailed interpretation of Aeschylus. TI start by investigating the conceptions of time and space implicit in text and performance. Ritual is used to control time and space (immediate, geographic, and cosmic), but in the introverted, autonomous, and self-destructive royal houshold it is generally inadequate or perverted. For instance, it fails to perform its normal role of imposing telos (limit, completion) on events. The result is a world that resembles (within the limits of myth) the cosmos of the presocratic Herakleitos. For instance, the seemingly endless cycle of revenge at Argos is expressed, as is the endless Herakleitean cycle of elemental transformations, in the unity of opposites. Aeschylus associates the cycle with the disruptive (unlimited) nature of money and of monetised exchange, which in turn - I argued in the first part - had influenced the cosmic cycle of Herakleitos. However, the Oresteian trilogy moves from the (Herakleitean) cyclical unity of opposites to the (Pythagorean) mediation of opposites by a third term - for instance in the founding in a cave of a polis cult that mediates the opposition between the upper and the lower worlds. The interplay of ritual, space, time, and cosmology in the context of the confrontation of household and polis is no less important to the other tragedies. But Persians reverses the norm: the royal household is - exceptionally - barbarian, and maintains its unity and autonomy (at the expense of the community) by the successful control of space (immediate, geographic, and cosmic) through ritual. The foregoing gives a sample of the ways in which I combine considerations drawn from performance, ritual, history, politics, economics, and (in the broad sense) cosmology so as to produce a new understanding of the significance and the power of Aeschylus.

埃斯库罗斯现存的六部悲剧是我们所拥有的最早的欧洲戏剧。几个世纪以来，大多数关于它们的学术研究都致力于（从腐败的手稿中）恢复埃斯库罗斯所写的东西。在过去的50年里，这种活动的回报已经减少了。相反，在表演和隐喻等各个方面，在各种问题和具体段落以及详细评论的制作方面，有大量的学术研究。我所提出的是一种不同的东西：一种新的综合，利用这种广泛的学术研究，来理解和欣赏埃斯库罗斯与城邦发展的关系。我开始描述一些前埃斯库罗斯文本中的空间、时间和宇宙的概念。这些概念不仅是通过观察得到的，而且是社会构造的，因此在不同的社会中各不相同。我认为，在古希腊，他们受到城邦、仪式和货币等社会一体化制度的影响。比如说。荷马史诗中的空间概念（直接的、地理的或宇宙的）是具体的和非系统的，几乎没有定义的区域：这反映了荷马社会的前国家性质，它先于伴随城邦发展和货币化的系统化。这种货币化是系统的、相对抽象的“前苏格拉底哲学”体系中的一个因素。在公元前世纪晚期的雅典城邦中，它在仪式之外的悲剧的出现中发挥了作用。这种对空间、时间和宇宙的社会结构的理解是在本书的第二部分（较长）中应用于对埃斯库罗斯的详细解释。TI首先考察了文本和表演中隐含的时间和空间概念。控制被用来控制时间和空间（直接的、地理的和宇宙的），但在内向的、自主的和自我毁灭的皇家家庭中，它通常是不充分的或变态的。例如，它无法执行其对事件施加telos（限制，完成）的正常角色。其结果是一个类似于（在神话的范围内）前苏格拉底时代的赫拉克利特的宇宙的世界。例如，在阿尔戈斯的复仇似乎是无休止的循环，就像在对立统一中的元素变化的无休止的赫拉克莱循环一样。埃斯库罗斯将周期与货币和货币化交换的破坏性（无限性）联系在一起，我在第一部分中指出，这反过来影响了赫拉克利特的宇宙周期。然而，俄瑞斯忒的三部曲从（赫拉克利特的）对立的循环统一转向了（毕达哥拉斯的）对立的中介，这是通过第三个术语实现的--例如，在一个洞穴中建立了一个城邦邪教，它调解了上层世界和下层世界之间的对立。在家庭与城邦的冲突中，仪式、空间、时间和宇宙观的相互作用对其他悲剧也同样重要。但波斯人颠覆了这种规范：皇家是野蛮人，通过仪式成功地控制了空间（直接的、地理的和宇宙的），从而维持了其统一性和自主性（以牺牲共同体为代价）。以上所述，我将从表演、仪式、历史、政治、经济和（广义上的）宇宙学中得出的各种考虑因素联合收割机在一起，以便对埃斯库罗斯的意义和力量产生一种新的理解。