Theater and Theatricality in Seneca’s World

Littlewood, Cedric

doi:10.1017/cco9781139542746.015

Cited by 40 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 169 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, the baroque age's theatrical worldview-the metaphor of the world-theater is a commonplace of the time-is another aspect of the affinity between Seneca and the baroque: Seneca, too, frequently refers to the world as 'spectaculum,' in which the Stoic plays an exemplary role, and his tragedies self-consciously exhibit themselves as theater (cf. Littlewood 2015). Less than two centuries later, however, precisely this theatricality was the main criticism of Gottsched (Critische Dichtkunst, 1731) and Lessing (Laokoon, 1766) in trying to establish a new, 'bourgeois' form of tragedy.…”

Section: Joachim Harstmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brill's Companion to the Reception of Senecan Tragedy

Robinson¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Joachim Harstmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brill's Companion to the Reception of Senecan Tragedy

Robinson¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the year 64 during the Principate of Nero, in the night between July 18 and 19, a fire broke out in Rome that within nine days destroyed or badly damaged a substantial part of the City, leaving many dead or homeless. Rumors circulated that the fire had been set by Nero, who, it was claimed, sought to divert blame from himself by holding responsible a new sect of aggressively proselytizing Jews, known as Christians. Most recent scholarship has rejected the popular view of Nero as an arsonist "who fiddled while Rome burned." 1 Largely ignored, however, has been the question of whether the Christians, generally regarded as innocent scapegoats of Nero, might in fact have played some role in the fire. This chapter considers the problematic nature of Christianity and Roman attitudes toward Christians in the first century CE and suggests based on this evidence that Christian involvement is not out of the question. NERO AND THE FIREOf the few surviving ancient accounts of the Great Fire of 64, the most detailed is that of Tacitus (Ann. 15.38-44), who wrote in the early second century. Most sources contemporary with Nero say nothing * Too late to be incorporated and discussed in extenso in my essay is a new article by B.D. Shaw, "The Myth of the Neronian Persecution," JRS 105 (2015) 73-100. I do not agree with Shaw's major premise that it is most unlikely that Christians were specifically targeted as arsonists, but that they instead suffered punishmentor rather "persecution"for their faith. Tacitus notes that Christians were punished for arson, but carefully and skillfully leads us to deduce that the real culprit was indeed Nero. In my opinion, the reason that other elite post-Neronian authors omit reference to early "Christianized Jews" in connection with the conflagration is that they were intent upon laying the blame for it at the feet of the tyrannical Nero, rather than the new heretical Jewish sect.

show abstract

Untitled

2017

The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theater and Theatricality in Seneca’s World

Cited by 40 publications

References 169 publications

Brill's Companion to the Reception of Senecan Tragedy

Brill's Companion to the Reception of Senecan Tragedy

The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero

Untitled

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About