Tobias Reinhardt
University of Oxford
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Tobias Reinhardt.
Journal of Roman Studies | 2004
Tobias Reinhardt
Readers have always acknowledged the comparatively clear macrostructure of De rerum natura 3. It begins with a prooemium in which is described the terrifying impact which the fear of death has on human lives, as well as the fact that Epicurus has provided a cure against this fear, namely his physical doctrines (1–93). Particular attention is paid to fears of an afterlife in which we have to suffer pain and grief in the underworld; cf., for instance, the programmatic lines 3.37–40 (translation by Ferguson Smith, which will be used throughout):This prooemium is followed by a long passage (94–829) in which Lucretius explains the basics of Epicurean psychology and tries to show that the soul is (like the body) material and hence mortal; this last point is driven home with particular force in II. 417–829 where Lucretius lists twenty-five proofs for the mortality of the soul.
Millennium: Journal of International Studies | 2010
Tobias Reinhardt
Seneca’s Agamemnon is not in any close way based on Aeschylus’,1 although the story is of course in broad outline the same. In the first act the ghost of Thyestes appears and foresees the death of Agamemnon; there follows an ode about royal power being vulnerable to fortune. In the second act, during an exchange with her nurse, Clytemestra initially wavers between the role of a chaste wife and that of an avenging adulteress, then makes a powerful case for the latter. On Aegisthus’ appearance, she adopts the former position, and only at the very end of the scene decides on colluding with Aegisthus. After that, in the second ode, the women of Argos give thanks for the safe return of Agamemnon. In the third act the herald Eurybates appears and gives an account of the Greek fleet’s departure from Troy and of the subsequent storm which all but destroyed it. In this article I examine how exactly Clytemestra’s change of mind at the end of her exchange with Aegisthus is executed. The Clytemestra character is one of the most powerful creations in the dramatic poetry of Seneca, in that the poet has taken great care to identify the conflicting emotions which determine her actions and to depict them in their struggle.2 When she appears in the second act in dialogue with the nurse, she describes herself as torn between two conflicting impulses (108–24): the desire to assume, i.e. return to, the role of a loyal wife, and a wish to pursue violence and engage in conspiracy without compromise. In the first case, the motivating force is pudor (113); in the second, resentment and anger (128 dolor, 142 ira ... dolor, cf. 261 iram), caused in part by the sacrifice of Iphigeneia (158–9), fear (of punishment for her affair with Aegisthus), jealousy of Cassandra, and passion for Aegisthus (132). After an initial statement about her uncertainty in the face of these opposing sets of forces, Clytemestra firmly argues for the latter, while the nurse makes the case for pudor, in the way satellites or confidants in tragedy often do: with conviction and verve but at times manifestly without insight and therefore persuasiveness.
Classical Review | 2001
Tobias Reinhardt
Archive | 2005
Tobias Reinhardt; Michael Lapidge; J. N. Adams
Archive | 2008
Seneca; John Davie; Tobias Reinhardt
Archive | 2009
Seneca, Lucius Annaeus, ca. B.C. A.D.; John Davie; Tobias Reinhardt
Archive | 2006
Quintilian; Tobias Reinhardt; Michael Winterbottom
Archive | 2006
Quintilian; Tobias Reinhardt; Michael Winterbottom
Archive | 2006
Tobias Reinhardt
Classical Quarterly | 2002
Tobias Reinhardt