Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff was one of the most prominent German philologists of his time and his work is still well regarded. This book, originally published in 1893, is a detailed analysis of the The Constitution of the Athenians, then usually regarded as a work of Aristotle. Wilamowitz accepts Aristotle's authorship of the famous treatise on the history of the constitution that restored democracy after the oligarchy of the Thirty. Volume 2 reconstructs Athenian constitutional history on the basis (...) of the work. A number of essays addressing topics on Athenian constitutional history and drawing on such figures as Solon, Peisistratus, Lysias and Isocrates are also included. (shrink)

Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff was one of the most prominent German philologists of his time and his work is still well regarded. This book, originally published in 1893, is a detailed analysis of the The Constitution of the Athenians, then usually regarded as a work of Aristotle. Wilamowitz accepts Aristotle's authorship of the famous treatise on the history of the constitution that restored democracy after the oligarchy of the Thirty. In Volume 1, he investigates the historical sources employed (...) by Aristotle, hypothesising that he was using at least two now lost works in addition to Herodotus and Thucydides, and that these were likely to be semi-official, contemporary chronicles of events in the city. (shrink)

Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff was one of the most prominent German philologists of his time and his work is still well regarded. This book, originally published in 1893, is a detailed analysis of the The Constitution of the Athenians, then usually regarded as a work of Aristotle. Wilamowitz accepts Aristotle's authorship of the famous treatise on the history of the constitution that restored democracy after the oligarchy of the Thirty. In Volume 1, he investigates the historical sources employed (...) by Aristotle, hypothesising that he was using at least two now lost works in addition to Herodotus and Thucydides, and that these were likely to be semi-official, contemporary chronicles of events in the city. (shrink)

Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff was one of the most prominent German philologists of his time and his work is still well regarded. This book, originally published in 1893, is a detailed analysis of the The Constitution of the Athenians, then usually regarded as a work of Aristotle. Wilamowitz accepts Aristotle's authorship of the famous treatise on the history of the constitution that restored democracy after the oligarchy of the Thirty. Volume 1 investigates the historical sources employed by Aristotle, (...) hypothesising that he was using two now lost works in addition to Herodotus and Thucydides, and that these were likely to be chronicles of events in the city. Volume 2 reconstructs Athenian constitutional history on the basis of the work. A number of essays addressing topics on Athenian constitutional history and drawing on such figures as Solon, Peisistratus, Lysias and Isocrates are also included. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Anzeige für das Litterarische Centralblatt, von E. Rohde.--Anzeige in der Norddeutschen Allgemeinen Zeitung vom 26. Mai 1872, von E. Rohde.--Zukunftsphilologie! Von U. von Wilamowitz-Möllendorff.--An Friedrich Nietzsche, von R. Wagner.--Afterphilologie, von E. Rohde.--Zukunftsphilologie! Von U. von Wilamowitz-Möllendorff.

No project lay nearer to the heart of Eduard Fraenkel during his last years than that of promoting a reprint of the famous book Die dramatische Technik des Sophokles, by Tycho von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, which was first published as volume xxii of Philologische Untersuchungen in 1917. Tycho Wilamowitz, the son of Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff and the grandson of Theodor Mommsen, was killed fighting against the Russians near Ivangorod on the night of 14/15 October 1914. After his (...) death the manuscript was prepared for publication by his friend Ernst Kapp, who has explained in the foreword of the book the nature of his services. (shrink)

Aristotelis Πολιτία 'Αθνναίων Ediderunt G. Kaibel et U. De Wilamowitz-Moellendorff. Berolini apud Weidmannos. Mk. 1.80.De Republica Atheniensium. Aristotelis qui fertur liber 'Αθνναίων Πολιτία. Post Kenyonem ediderunt H. Van Heeweeden et J. Van Leeuwen J. F. Lugduni Batavorum apud A. W. Sythoff. 6 Mk.Aristote, la République Athénienne, traduite en Français pour la première fois par Théodore Reinach. Fr. 1.50.

In weitem Bogen behandeln die Griechischen Studien wichtige Momente der griechischen Geschichte von ihren Anfängen bis ins 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit gilt zunächst - in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Basler Alttestamentler Klaus Seybold - dem Vergleich mit der parallelen Entwicklung in Israel / Juda, um das Charakteristische der griechischen Geschichte zu profilieren. Einen weiteren Schwerpunkt bildet das 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. mit Studien zur Beurteilung der athenischen Demokratie und zur Bewertung des Tyrannen Dionysios von Syrakus als Wegbereiter der hellenistischen (...) Monarchie. Die letzten drei wissenschaftsgeschichtlichen Beiträge gelten vor allem Jacob Burckhardt und Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff. (shrink)

Au début du XXe siècle, l’Allemagne voit émerger un lieu de savoir nouveau, étrange, alternatif sinon hostile à l’Université, le « George-Kreis », association créatrice et intellectuelle rassemblée autour du poète Stefan George (1868‑1933). Dès la fin des années 1900, Platon apparaît comme le modèle politique et éducatif du Cercle et, partant, du vaste « mouvement spirituel » dont George est considéré comme le guide. Entre 1910 et 1933, les « georgéens » consacrent à Platon une demi-douzaine de livres, de (...) nombreux articles, comptes-rendus et traductions (dont certains font encore aujourd’hui l’objet de rééditions). L’article commence par retracer l’évolution de la « platonolâtrie » georgéenne (en s’appuyant, entre autres, sur des matériaux d’archive), puis en décèle les principes herméneutiques. Ceux-ci, forgés surtout contre les lectures de P. Natorp et U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, revendiquaient une interprétation volontairement anachronique sans craindre une « fusion des horizons » auto‑justificative : c’est parce qu’ils fréquentaient S. George, l’héritier le plus fidèle et intempestif de l’esprit platonicien, que les georgéens se croyaient plus aptes que les philologues académiques à rendre cet esprit dans leurs travaux. En conclusion, l’article analyse l’impact du Cercle sur les acteurs contemporains et postérieurs des études platoniciennes universitaires. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 239 die Herausgeber nicht mit, von wem. Jedem Dialog geht eine Gliederung voran; jeder Band ist mit einer recht brauchbaren Bibliographie versehen. Es ist erstaunlich zu erfahren, dass der erste Band, erstmalig in 1957 erschienen, in 1963 eine Auflage von 78000 erreicht hat; bleiben auch die Auflageziffern der fibrigen B~inde dahinter zurfick, so sind sie doch genfigend eindrucksvoll. Man wfinscht, der Verlag m6chte doch, durch diesen Erfolg (...) ermutigt, das nach Obgesagtem noch Fehlende--und dazu noch Platons Gedichte--in einem Erg~inzungsband bringen, wie immer man fiber die Echtheit der Stficke denkt. Der stilistische Unterschied zwischen den ~bersetzungen von Schleiermacher (erstmalig: 1804-1810) und von H. und F. H. Mfiller ist ausserordentlich. Dies ist nicht etwa auf die gr6ssere Sprachmeisterschaff Schleiermachers zurfickfiihren. Vielmehr liegt seiner Obersetzungsmethode eine h6chst interessante Theorie zugrunde (die F. A. Wolff, der Schleiermachers ~bersetzung verhShnt und Wilamowitz, der sie als ungeniessbar bezeichnet hatte, offenbar unbekannt war). Dieser Theorie zufolge ist es die Aufgabe des ~2bersetzers, den Leser besffindig daran zu erinnern, dass er nur eine l~bersetzung vor sich hat. Einem ~bersetzer, der sich brfistet, dass sich sein Text so liest, wie ihn der Autor geschrieben h~itte, wenn er in der Sprache des ~bersetzers und seines Publikums gedacht h~itte, sollte erwidert werden "Daffir bin ich dir so dankbar, wie ich es w~ire, wenn du mir das Bild eines Mannes zeigtest und sagtest--So wiirde er ausgesehen haben, wenn ihn mit seiner Mutter ein anderer Vater gezeugt h~tte." In anderen Worten: da sich Inhalt und Ausdruck nicht abtrennen lassen, sollte der f2bersetzer, start das Original seiner Sprache anzueignen, vielmehr--wir gebrauchen hier den bekannten Brechtschen Begriff--im Leser einen Verfremdungseffekt erzeugen. Wie man sieht, ist Schleiermachers ~3bersetzungstheorie jeder "rationalistischen " strikte entgegengesetzt; ja, man k6nnte sagen, dass sie das ganze Wesen des Romantisch-Irrationalen eben auf ein Einzelproblem, das des l~bersetzens angewendet, aufs beste ausdrfickt. Und Schleiermachers f2bersetzungspraxis entspricht genau seiner Theorie. Dies ist ihre Eigentfimlichkeit. Und ich denke, dass diese Theorie mehr Au{merksamkeit verdient, als ihr in den nie endenden Diskussionen darfiber, welchen Prinzipien der Obersetzer folgen sollte, geschenkt wird. PHILIP MERLAN Scripps College, Claremont, Calif. Platon der Erzieher. Von Julius Stenzel. Mit einer Einffihrung von Konrad Gaiser. (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1961. Pp. xxx + 337. DM 26.) Platon der Erzieher was first published in 1927. The present edition, with 240 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY the exception of the preface by Gaiser, is an exact reproduction of the earlier one. As a reviewer of the reissue, I feel myself obligated to formulate what seems to me relevant today. I remember that, when I read the first edition about the time of its appearance, I was full of admiration and felt myself indebted to the book for many years. Today it seems to me more dated than most writings on Plato of that period, including various publications of Stenzel. Criticizing Platon der Erzieher, I criticize what I once read differently. Julius Stenzel had earlier established his reputation as a Platonic scholar with his Studien zur Entwicklung der platonischen Dialektik von Sokrates zu Aristoteles (1917). This book as well as most of Stenzel's later investigations have exercised a considerable influence on international Platonic scholarship. In Germany it prefaced a new approach to ancient and especially to Platonic philosophy. In spite of the spadework done by German scholars in the nineteenth century and still by men like Apelt, Constantin Ritter and Theodor Gomperz, Plato's image in German thought about the end of the First World War was mainly determined by three sources: the neo-Kantian interpretation and Natorp's monograph in particular ; the highly original but very personal and philosophically naive "biography" of Wilamowitz-Moellendorff; and the vision of the Plato gestalt by the George circle. Stenzel dedicated the Studien to Wilamowitz and, while paying his respect to Natorp, stated that in contrast to the philosophical Plato interpretation of the Marburg school, he had chosen a philological and historical approach. As for the George circle, he did not acknowledge its significance, though I believe that at least in his later works he was indirectly influenced by it. In the years following World War I, it became important that Stenzel and... (shrink)

This article presents an edition with introduction and commentary of two unpublished letters that Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff wrote to the art historian and cultural scholar Aby Warburg in the 1920 s. The edition completes a correspondence that includes a letter from Warburg that has already been published several times. The two letters cast light on the hitherto barely known relation of Wilamowitz to Warburg himself and to his Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek in Hamburg. They centre on the Warburg Library’s (...) special research interest, namely the influence of the ancient world on later cultural periods, especially the Renaissance. (shrink)

Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff wrote surprisingly often to British colleagues. Usually it was a matter of a letter or two. The prolonged exchange with Gilbert Murray is the exception. More typical is the brief but important one with Sir James George Frazer. Extant evidence attests that he corresponded with some forty Englishmen and Scots. I omit Anglo-Irish: J.B. Bury, J.P. Mahaffy, L.C. Purser and the papyrologist, J.G. Smily. The evidence is incomplete because most letters after the letter N were (...) stolen and burned in the Berlin winter 1945-6. A first catalogue of his British correspondents is assembled. Because of the remoteness of much published biographical material, I include references to the important published sources and occasionally publish a document which otherwise would be forgotten. For the first time Wilamowitz's influence on the English scholars of his time is precisely documented. (shrink)

Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff wrote surprisingly often to British colleagues. Usually it was a matter of a letter or two. The prolonged exchange with Gilbert Murray is the exception. More typical is the brief but important one with Sir James George Frazer. Extant evidence attests that he corresponded with some forty Englishmen and Scots. I omit Anglo-Irish: J.B. Bury, J.P. Mahaffy, L.C. Purser and the papyrologist, J.G. Smyly. The evidence is incomplete because most letters after the letter N were (...) stolen and burned in the Berlin winter 1945–6. A first catalogue of his British correspondents is assembled. Because of the remoteness of much published biographical material, I include references to the important published sources and occasionally publish a document which otherwise would be forgotten. For the first time Wilamowitz's influence on the English scholars of his time is precisely documented. (shrink)