#prosopography

[mybuddyjimmy]

Prosopography

Prosopography [prah-sə-PAH-ɡrə-fee] Part of speech: noun Origin: Latin, late 16th century 1. A description of a person’s social and family connections, career, etc., or a collection of such descriptions. Examples of prosopography in a sentence  “The sociologist used the prosopographies of different groups to study larger trends.”  “My grandmother traced our family’s genealogy, and I used her…

[catilinas]

guys will say ohhh the family tree is so confusing idk who anyone is. and then show you a family tree that is not even that confusing. like it is just one family tree. it doesn't even have three possible iterations that are incompatible with one another. it doesnt even have onions

[ephemeral-winter]

apparently there was a whole parallel conference happening this weekend because my org put out a position of scholarly neutrality last fall and reaffirmed a commitment to all scholars regardless of national origin and the collective that opposed that statement decided to boycott? I’m sympathetic to the collective’s aims even if I think their demands are misguided but like. I’m very online and didn’t find out about it until I was in the airport to go home. how were the senior scholars with power in the org who couldn’t figure out getting PowerPoint into present slideshow view at the last session supposed to know or do anything about it

[martinjost]

Reise durch mein Bücherregal 📚

v.l.n.r.: Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR (Hrsg.), «Prosopographia Imperii Romani» (UB -+)

#01164 · Dank diesem Werk wissen wir endlich, wie die „DDR“ auf Latein hieß, denn seine Herausgeberin ist die Academia Scientarum Rei Publicae Democraticae Germanicae.

Die Prosopographie ist eine historische Hilfswissenschaft, die einzelne Personen identifiziert und alle Spuren, die es über diese Individuen in den alten Quellen gibt, zusammenträgt. Sie befasst sich also nicht gerade mit Staatsmännern und Feldherren, über die die Zeitgenossen Bücher geschrieben haben, sondern über Nebenfiguren der Geschichte, die eventuell nur in einem Steuerbescheid auftauchen und dann wieder auf einem Grabstein. Oder in einer einzigen schriftlichen Quelle als Nebenfigur. Bei der Prosopographie handelt es sich also um die mühseligste Fleißarbeit, bei der ganz langsam biografische Daten zu Nachschlagewerken zusammengetragen werden. Das sieht man schon daran, über wie viele Jahrzehnte sich die Erscheinungsdaten der einzelnen Bände dieses Werks erstrecken.

Die bloße Existenz dieses Spezialfachs hat mich als Student der Alten Geschichte endlos fasziniert und als ich antiquarisch auf zwei günstige Bände einer Prosopographie des Römischen Reichs vom 1. bis zum 3. Jahrhundert gestoßen bin, habe ich sie in meine Büchersammlung aufgenommen. Die Nutzer*innen dieses Werks gehören einer kleinen Nische an, die ohnehin fließend Latein liest, so dass die beiden Bände 1983 bzw. 1987 in Latein verfasst sind – einschließlich Vorwort. Die Ränder der Bögen sind nicht sauber beschnitten, man muss die Seiten mit einem Brieföffner trennen, bevor sie sich aufblättern lassen. Trotz der mittelmäßigen Verarbeitung betrug der Neupreis (ausweislich der Reihen-Übersicht auf der Buchrückseite) um die 100,– D-Mark. Typische Abnehmerinnen waren wohl wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken, die die Bücher ohnehin als erstes zum Buchbinder geschickt hätten.

Wenn ihr zufällig Marcus Nummius Albinus heißt und auf der Suche nach einem Vorfahren seid, fragt mich ruhig – ich kann ihn in meinem Adressbuch nachschlagen (Pars V Fasciculus 3, No. 230).

[sextuspompey]

needing visual aid for one (1) trial is kind of wild

[sheikahwarriork]

nobody will understand this but: FUCK YOU CUSAS 30 by van soldt

[ceruleanvulpine]

the big theorypost. spoilers for both volumes of misericorde

maybe this goes without saying, maybe not: i think tatiana is A Catherine. firstly, because of the law of conservation of mystery women*. but also she describes herself as a dilettante, and is clearly a matched set with he/him eustace (2stace). they're actually labeled as eustace2 and her2 in the script. eustace and catherine, of course, were unexpectedly close and worked together in the library. which is relevant because...

tatiana and 2stace are on some reality warping storyteller shit. this is pretty clear from their conversation, i think. the most obvious example of it in action is that tatiana describes the IRA-assassination-plot thriller to alex, who then finds herself inside it. alex's narration talks about going along with jim because it "feels right", which is plausibly not mind control, except tatiana also becomes an old friend and/or boss of everyone else she meets.

are tatiana and 2stace the *same people* as catherine and eustace, or versions of them? at first i thought alex was A Flora and jim was A [The Farmer] but that doesn't seem as one-to-one. in 1983 they're both immediately off-putting, whereas in 1483 eustace is capable of acting normal-ish, but maybe it was just 500 years of existing outside the narrative??

evidence for 1483 eustace and catherine having reality-altering powers and/or being aware of the narrative: the shelves. eustace's references to things she can't explain. catherine having visions of music/poetry/social movements/things they Need To Do. the presence or absence of goats. catherine's chronicles are mentioned but not there; meanwhile eustace chronicles darcy's visions, which include Books and Fire Goat, and won't let anyone see them.

There Are Two Swords. 2stace and tatiana are philosophically opposed. eustace (1483) talks about preferring not to interfere with people, 2stace (1983) is a stickler for accuracy, mad about liberties taken with katherine's (in nunleft) and jim's (in prosopography) stories. meanwhile tatiana loves spoilers, mocks 2stace for not being able to enjoy his own fantasies, and "loathe[s] the tyranny of continuity."

so i guess my reach-iest theory is that eustace and catherine, in 1483, are both to some extent able to alter the story / the reality they are in, and approach it differently. eustace is not interfering, whereas catherine is flitting around trying to bring out the hidden potential of the nuns and (checks notes) trying to kill someone and change the course of history? i don't know enough about the war of the roses for this.

what catherine was doing "got her killed," but eustace also refers to james as a "solution to a problem i let get out of hand". eustace could have been involved (metafictionally??) without actually doing the deed.

in fact one of the swords killed catherine and the other is wielded by the demon.

so.. maybe... catherine is killed, but still present, possibly involved in the ghost sightings that *aren't* eustace (and it would be thematically appropriate for her demon to be a magic terror while eustace's is created by dressing up in armor) and the magic circles. either she or eustace is the devil james saw (who spoke with a woman's voice). eustace is trying to keep the story on track and struggling with hedwig, but hedwig isn't her real enemy. (has hedwig stepped into a role somehow by picking up catherine's job? or is she just totally mundane and lost. poor thing.)

but also this sounds crazy so WHO KNOWS.

P.S. it's so goddamn funny that tatiana asks alex about 15th century metallurgy. girl are you trying to catch your stickler friend in an inaccuracy? cinemasins ding?

*umineko has never followed the law of conservation of mystery women, ever, except in the ways that it does

[catoswound]

so joseph geiger finds eight anecdotes of possible servilii caepiones men in the first century bce in rome and absolutely murders his audience with this terrible diagram after thirteen pages of prosopography. and brutus is here somewhere

[jeannereames]

Prosopography R Us! Fun with Hephaistion's allies and enemies at the court of Alexander.

[the-mediaeval-monk]

This website is so good if you need Old English names. PASE my beloved.

[caesarsaladinn]

the oxford dictionary of byzantium seems to be at odds with some of these prosopographies, which are further at odds with the book of ceremonies. youch

[lionofchaeronea]

Current nonfiction reading is Hadrian: The Restless Emperor by Anthony Birley. It's a compelling biography of a complex and elusive figure, one of the most interesting (I think) of all the emperors. The literary sources for Hadrian's life and reign are nowhere near as good as we would like them to be--with Cassius Dio existing only in epitome for that period, we're thrown back on the always problematic Historia Augusta--but Birley is virtuosic at making sense of what evidence we do have, whether textual, epigraphic, or numismatic. He argues for Hadrian's love of Greek culture as a defining feature of his personality, while also pointing out that there were precedents for such attitudes in the reigns of Nero and Domitian--both of whom, like Hadrian himself, had poor relations with the Senate. Even if one sometimes gets bogged down in detail--be prepared for a crash course in prosopography as you try to follow the careers of Hadrian's many friends and foes--it's still well worth reading.

(I have only one real complaint. This volume, like its fellows in Routledge's series of imperial biographies, uses endnotes. I hate endnotes. Why, oh why, can't we use footnotes instead?)

[catilinas]

so there’s this mercantile marine act 1850

[poniatowskaja]

At the king’s request, Clement V issued on January 7, 1307 a dispensation addressed to Jeanne and the young Philip to remove the bars of kinship and common decency. Curiously, of the latter impediment Clement remarked, “whatever such grounds there may be, such as, for example, as some are said falsely to assert, the existence of a betrothal between Louis and Jeanne.” The pope, perhaps impressed by the urgency of the king’s suit, was clearly disregarding—or overlooking—his bull of August 18, 1305 for Louis and Marguerite. In an accompanying letter sent to the king on the same day, January 7, 1307, Clement rehearsed the contents of the bull and stated that the king himself had declared false the belief some people had spread abroad that Louis and Jeanne had been betrothed. This is exceedingly curious. Pope Boniface’s prohibition in 1297 against the marriage of Jeanne to the king’s eldest son may, however, have convinced King Philip of the nullity of Louis’s contract with Jeanne, even though Boniface’s pronouncement on natural decency implied that their union, despite his disapproval, was valid. Far more puzzling, in light of Boniface’s decree on natural decency and King Philip’s earlier admissions, is Clement V’s willingness to accept the king’s declaration at face value. Clearly Clement had been pressed repeatedly to grant the dispensation. Philip himself had asked for it when he had visited the pope, and his envoys had frequently repeated his request. Clement said that he had become convinced by their arguments that the marriage would “exalt your name and honor and advance the peaceful and tranquil state of your kingdom and all Christianity.” But he was concerned by the steps he had taken. After treating other questions, he returned to the subject of dispensations, to caution Philip the Fair to cultivate discretion in arranging his children’s marriages. Clement reminded the king of the general dispensation for consanguinity that he had issued for the king’s children when Philip was with him in Lyon; he asked the king to return to him either that privilege or the dispensation granted to Philip and Jeanne. The pope asserted that it was not “fitting” (conveniens) for the king to have two such privileges from one pope under different dates and forms. He declared it his duty to lead the king to “restrain his appetite for dispensations” and to seek them only when they would bring great and evident benefit to the kingdom and advance the cause of peace and Christendom. He waxed eloquent in declaring to Philip that otherwise he risked offending “the king of kings” — Rex regum. Clement admitted his fear that God’s wrath would fall on the person who granted such requests— evidently Clement himself—as well as on the person—Philip the Fair—who used them. This was not the only time Clement upbraided Philip and expressed his indignation at the acts the king pressed him to perform—yet despite his protests, on this occasion as on others, he yielded.

Elizabeth A. R. Brown, 'Philip the Fair and His Family: His Sons, Their Marriages, and Their Wives', Medieval Prosopography, Vol. 32 (2017), 162-164

[garland-on-thy-brow]

Prosopographying a play by Jean Racine. Because of lesbianism.

[catominor]

need to write l. furius camillus prosopography...