Strata of Greek Religion in Aeschylus
Professor H. J. Rose's thoughtful and suggestive article, “Mythology and Theology in Aeschylus,” has probably led many students of Aeschylus to reread his tragedies with an eye on the specific problems to which Rose directs our attention and also to rethink such impressions and views concerning...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
1947
|
| In: |
Harvard theological review
Year: 1947, Volume: 40, Issue: 4, Pages: 211-226 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Professor H. J. Rose's thoughtful and suggestive article, “Mythology and Theology in Aeschylus,” has probably led many students of Aeschylus to reread his tragedies with an eye on the specific problems to which Rose directs our attention and also to rethink such impressions and views concerning Aeschylus' religious outlook as they may previously have formed. Professor Rose skillfully illustrates the difference between mythology and theology by contrasting the praise of Zeus in the first great chorus of Agamemnon with the references to Cassandra's experience which we find in a later part of the same play. It is probably true that there are in Aeschylus' work masses of traditional mythology that have not been reforged by his own creative imagination, not become organically assimilated to his own religion, but these are few and far between. On the whole, mythology provides the material which his vigorous and intense thought hammers into shape — into a new mythos which shows the gods acting as Aeschylus' own religious — or theological — convictions demand that they should act. In the larger part of his paper Professor Rose unless I have missed some points, is less anxious to separate the areas of mythology and theology by a clearly drawn boundary line, and to me at least this restraint seems very wise; for if one thinks too rigidly in the terms of these two concepts one runs a risk of cutting through the live tissue and of tearing asunder what has become intimately blended in the poet's own religion. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1475-4517 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Harvard theological review
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0017816000026419 |