E F Beall
Biographic Data
| ID | 1447453 |
|---|---|
| NAME | E F Beall |
| GIVEN NAMES | E F |
| FAMILY NAME | Beall |
| SIGNATURE | BEALL E F |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 5 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 5 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 5 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1986 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2009 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Once More on Hesiod’s Supposed Tartarus Principle
This note supports recent skepticism of the dominant construal of the neuter plural form τάρταρα at Hesiod, Theogony 119, whereby the term is in the nominative case, really stands for the masculine singular entity Τάρταρος that epic elsewhere cites as an underworld place-name, and is personified as a fourth original principle along with the Chaos, Gaea, and Eros of vv. 116–122, in favor of an interpretation whereby the term is an accusative refer…
Theism and Mysticism in Hesiod's Works and Days
Notes on Hesiod's Works and Days, 383-828
American Journal of Philology - Volume 122, Number 2 (Whole Number 486), Summer 2001
Hesiod's Prometheus and Development in Myth
Hesiod's was not some given entity, a concept with properties viewed as fixed throughout the times of the two poems which mention it.* Prometheus was a process, as it were, already operating in the Greek archaic period, not just in the hands of later writers such as Plato. The development between the Theogony and the Works and Days bespeaks a certain consciousness of the values underlying the mode of expression we call myth. I One might also say …
Syntactical ambiguity at Taittirīya Upanisad 2.1
Hesiod's Prometheus and Development in Myth
Hesiod's was not some given entity, a concept with properties viewed as fixed throughout the times of the two poems which mention it.* Prometheus was a process, as it were, already operating in the Greek archaic period, not just in the hands of later writers such as Plato. The development between the Theogony and the Works and Days bespeaks a certain consciousness of the values underlying the mode of expression we call myth. I One might also say …
Syntactical ambiguity at Taittirīya Upanisad 2.1
Syntactical ambiguity at Taittirīya Upanisad 2.1
Hesiod's Prometheus and Development in Myth
Hesiod's was not some given entity, a concept with properties viewed as fixed throughout the times of the two poems which mention it.* Prometheus was a process, as it were, already operating in the Greek archaic period, not just in the hands of later writers such as Plato. The development between the Theogony and the Works and Days bespeaks a certain consciousness of the values underlying the mode of expression we call myth. I One might also say …
Notes on Hesiod's Works and Days, 383-828
American Journal of Philology - Volume 122, Number 2 (Whole Number 486), Summer 2001
Theism and Mysticism in Hesiod's Works and Days
Once More on Hesiod’s Supposed Tartarus Principle
This note supports recent skepticism of the dominant construal of the neuter plural form τάρταρα at Hesiod, Theogony 119, whereby the term is in the nominative case, really stands for the masculine singular entity Τάρταρος that epic elsewhere cites as an underworld place-name, and is personified as a fourth original principle along with the Chaos, Gaea, and Eros of vv. 116–122, in favor of an interpretation whereby the term is an accusative refer…
Philosophy (5 works) · Art (4 works) · Classical Antiquity Studies (4 works) · Hesiod (4 works) · Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies (4 works) · Literature (4 works) · History (3 works) · Philosophy (3 works) · Poetry (3 works) · Biblical Studies and Interpretation (2 works)