Articles by Angelica Vedelago
Pelopidarum secunda is an understudied anonymous English adaptation of Seneca's 'Agamemnon' and S... more Pelopidarum secunda is an understudied anonymous English adaptation of Seneca's 'Agamemnon' and Sophocles' 'Electra'. The play is preserved only in manuscript and was probably performed at Winchester College around 1590. Through a combination of Marvin Carlson's notions of ‘ghosting’ and of the ‘site of memory’ with a neo-historicist approach, the article offers a close analysis of this neglected school play from an intertextual, performative, and extratextual perspective. The analysis shows that the play is haunted by memories of its classical sources and of other performance contexts, including the church, and contains potential allusions to contemporary royal figures. In so doing, I argue that Pelopidarum secunda showcases the role of classical models in the history of Elizabethan revenge tragedy. By conjuring up memorable sources—Sophocles and Seneca—and events—past performances and executions—the unknown playwright(s) had the ambition to make Pelopidarum secunda equally memorable. Although this attempt has evidently failed given the obscurity into which the play has fallen so far, Pelopidarum secunda deserves a place in the archival memory of classical reception as well as further scholarly attention within early modern English drama studies.
Among the corpus of Neo-Latin drama, translations from Greek tragedy are an interesting area of i... more Among the corpus of Neo-Latin drama, translations from Greek tragedy are an interesting area of inquiry for the study of Neo-Latin metre, as translators are poised between Greek and Latin metrical patterns. Following Continental models such as Erasmus, two sixteenth-century playwrights from the British Isles, George Buchanan and Thomas Watson, undertook the translation of Greek tragedies and were confronted with their metrical complexity, particularly in the choruses. However, thanks to the prosodic education which they received at local grammar schools and at university and which they later perfected on the Continent, Buchanan and Watson were able not only to understand but also to try and reproduce the metre of the Greek original in their Neo-Latin versions, which in different ways deserve the definition of "metrical translations".
International Journal of the Classical Tradition, 2018
This paper analyses James Thomson's 1738 adaptation of Aeschylus' Agamemnon. Critics have mainly ... more This paper analyses James Thomson's 1738 adaptation of Aeschylus' Agamemnon. Critics have mainly been interested in Thomson's projection of the contemporary political scenario onto the ancient myth of Agamemnon, focussing on the reworking of the plot and characterization. This paper explores Thomson's interaction with his ancient source in more philological terms, considering the author's access to the Aeschylean text by means of Thomas Stanley's 1663 Latin translation of all extant Aeschylean tragedies. In the process of adapting Aeschylus' Agamemnon, Thomson draws not only upon the Greek playwright - mainly via Stanley's Latin translation and at times engaging directly with the original text - but is equally indebted to Seneca's version of the play, sometimes via its translation by John Studley, and Pierre Brumoy's digests of Aeschylean and Senecan plays. In some passages of the play, the coalescence of all these sources leads to a multi-layered language: this creative interplay demands new ways to describe operations that defy the usual overarching categories of adaptation or translation processes.
The Fine Art of Lying in Early Modern English Drama, 2019
Book chapter by Angelica Vedelago
Conference Presentations by Angelica Vedelago
Paper presented at the conference "Renaissance Academic Drama and the Popular Stage", 11-12 June ... more Paper presented at the conference "Renaissance Academic Drama and the Popular Stage", 11-12 June 2020
Except for isolated instances, in the sixteenth century Greek tragedy was mostly translated into ... more Except for isolated instances, in the sixteenth century Greek tragedy was mostly translated into Latin. A translator’s choice of Latin, on the one hand, guaranteed him a wider readership but, on the other, exposed him to comparison with translators who had previously attempted the same task. However, this does not seem to have detracted translators from producing versions of works that had already been translated into Latin before such as Greek tragedians. Nor does the choice of the vernacular made translators immune to the influence of existing Latin translations. Translation theories of the time reflect this phenomenon, sometimes explicitly encouraging competition with previous translators. This is the case of Laurence Humphrey’s Interpretatio linguarum (1559), a work that has been recently recognized as a treatise that valuably recapitulates contemporary trends in translation theory in Europe. Capturing the main ideas on translation circulating at the time, Humphrey’s treatise challenges analyses that are nationally confined and rather showcases the interconnectedness of a pan-European respublica litteraria. Also, this treatises sheds light on the relationship between translation and imitation, envisaging the latter as an essential feature of the former.
In light of Humphrey’s and other contemporary theorists’ observations on imitation within translation, I intend to examine how some Latin and vernacular sixteenth-century translations of Sophocles and Euripides were informed by the translator’s desire to imitate previous translators, sometimes in a competitive dimension. By looking at translators’ remarks in the paratexts as well as at their practice, the paper will thereby try to define the role of intermediary texts both in intra-lingual (from Latin into Latin) and inter-lingual (from Latin into vernacular) translations of Greek tragedy.
Theses by Angelica Vedelago
MSt dissertation (University of Oxford)
MA thesis (University of Padua)
This dissertation is a philological analysis of Friedrich Hölderlin's translation of Sophocles's ... more This dissertation is a philological analysis of Friedrich Hölderlin's translation of Sophocles's tragedy Antigone. The first chapter takes into account Hölderlin's overall production as a translator, with a particular focus on his translation of Sophocles' Antigone. The following chapter discusses Hölderlin's role as a philosopher and a literary theorist by means of a close reading of his theoretical aesthetical treatises.After these theoretical chapters, the attention is shifted to the comparative analysis of the texts, which is the result of multiple approaches meant to seize and organize coherently all the nuances and features of Hölderlin's translation. As a result, both the source-text and the target-text have been read according to three different criteria: the word order, the enhancement of meaning, and finally the most important aspect in Hölderlin's Antigone, i.e, the presence of leitmotivs that do not appear in the original.
Co-editing by Angelica Vedelago
Degrees of Dissimulation and Dissemblers' Perspective in John Webster's White Devil and Duchess of Malfi, 2019
Book Reviews by Angelica Vedelago
The Classical Review, 2022
Conference by Angelica Vedelago
by Annalisa Oboe, Angelica Vedelago, Francesco Roncen, Susanna Zellini, Pietro Bertocchini, Giulia Nalesso, Teresa Cancro, giacomo micheletti, Sara Giovine, Manuel Galzerano, Piers Kelly, and Giovanna Todaro « More than any other single invention, writing has transformed human consciousness». To those li... more « More than any other single invention, writing has transformed human consciousness». To those living in a society thoroughly familiar with writing like ours, this statement by W.J. Ong could sound strange. Several ground-breaking studies of the twentieth century – such as Preface to Plato by E. Havelock (1963) and Orality and Literacy by Ong (1982) – have pointed out that the transition from an oral to a chirographic society (which later came to be superseded by the printed word and, finally, by its electronic equivalent) represents the most relevant developments of human thought. But is this the only possible interpretation?
This conference aims to tackle this theme from multiple perspectives, including the various declinations of the humanities, ranging from literature to linguistics, from pedagogy to philosophy. Such a wide and interdisciplinary approach will shed further light on the dynamics of orality and writing, hopefully leading to a more comprehensive view of their interactions, so that their contribution to the development of human thought and culture may be equally recognized.
Programme:https://oralitaescrittura.wordpress.com/2017/11/29/programma/
«La scrittura ha trasformato la mente umana più di qualsiasi altra invenzione». Questa affermazione di W. J. Ong può suonare strana a chi vive in una società che ha ormai familiarizzato con la scrittura. Alcuni studi fondamentali del XX secolo – fra cui, per l’ambito classico, Cultura orale e civiltà della scrittura di E. Havelock (1963) seguito poi da Oralità e scrittura di Ong (1982) – hanno evidenziato che è stato proprio il passaggio da una società orale a una chirografica, e di qui alla stampa e infine all’elaborazione elettronica della parola, a determinare gli sviluppi più significativi del pensiero, delle società e della storia dell’uomo. Ma è davvero questa l’unica prospettiva possibile? Il convegno si propone di affrontare il tema da una prospettiva ampia e interdisciplinare, declinandolo nei vari ambiti degli studi letterari e umanistici e cercando di accogliere le dinamiche dell’oralità e della scrittura in una visione complessiva, dove entrambe risultino ugualmente importanti nello sviluppo della coscienza e della cultura umana. Programma: https://oralitaescrittura.wordpress.com/2017/11/29/programma/
Calls for Papers by Angelica Vedelago
La scrittura ha trasformato la mente umana più di qualsiasi altra invenzione». Questa affermazion... more La scrittura ha trasformato la mente umana più di qualsiasi altra invenzione». Questa affermazione di W. J. Ong può suonare strana a chi vive in una società che ha ormai familiarizzato con la scrittura. Alcuni studi fondamentali del XX secolo -fra cui, per l'ambito classico, Cultura orale e civiltà della scrittura di E. Havelock (1963) seguito poi da Oralità e scrittura di Ong (1982) -hanno evidenziato che è stato proprio il passaggio da una società orale a una chirografica, e di qui alla stampa e infine all'elaborazione elettronica della parola, a determinare gli sviluppi più significativi del pensiero, delle società e della storia dell'uomo. Ma è davvero questa l'unica prospettiva possibile? Contributi più recenti (O. Oruka, 1991; B. De Sousa Santos, 2014) hanno proposto una nuova visione dell'accesso alla conoscenza, sostituendo la tradizionale idea di un'unica epistemologia universalmente valida, e generalmente ancorata al supporto scritto, con una concezione plurale degli approcci epistemologici ('sage philosophy', 'orature', 'corporeality of knowledge').
Uploads
Articles by Angelica Vedelago
Book chapter by Angelica Vedelago
Chapter in the volume "Roman Women in Shakespeare and His Contemporaries" edited by Domenico Lovascio
Conference Presentations by Angelica Vedelago
In light of Humphrey’s and other contemporary theorists’ observations on imitation within translation, I intend to examine how some Latin and vernacular sixteenth-century translations of Sophocles and Euripides were informed by the translator’s desire to imitate previous translators, sometimes in a competitive dimension. By looking at translators’ remarks in the paratexts as well as at their practice, the paper will thereby try to define the role of intermediary texts both in intra-lingual (from Latin into Latin) and inter-lingual (from Latin into vernacular) translations of Greek tragedy.
Theses by Angelica Vedelago
Co-editing by Angelica Vedelago
Book Reviews by Angelica Vedelago
Conference by Angelica Vedelago
This conference aims to tackle this theme from multiple perspectives, including the various declinations of the humanities, ranging from literature to linguistics, from pedagogy to philosophy. Such a wide and interdisciplinary approach will shed further light on the dynamics of orality and writing, hopefully leading to a more comprehensive view of their interactions, so that their contribution to the development of human thought and culture may be equally recognized.
Programme:https://oralitaescrittura.wordpress.com/2017/11/29/programma/
«La scrittura ha trasformato la mente umana più di qualsiasi altra invenzione». Questa affermazione di W. J. Ong può suonare strana a chi vive in una società che ha ormai familiarizzato con la scrittura. Alcuni studi fondamentali del XX secolo – fra cui, per l’ambito classico, Cultura orale e civiltà della scrittura di E. Havelock (1963) seguito poi da Oralità e scrittura di Ong (1982) – hanno evidenziato che è stato proprio il passaggio da una società orale a una chirografica, e di qui alla stampa e infine all’elaborazione elettronica della parola, a determinare gli sviluppi più significativi del pensiero, delle società e della storia dell’uomo. Ma è davvero questa l’unica prospettiva possibile? Il convegno si propone di affrontare il tema da una prospettiva ampia e interdisciplinare, declinandolo nei vari ambiti degli studi letterari e umanistici e cercando di accogliere le dinamiche dell’oralità e della scrittura in una visione complessiva, dove entrambe risultino ugualmente importanti nello sviluppo della coscienza e della cultura umana. Programma: https://oralitaescrittura.wordpress.com/2017/11/29/programma/
Calls for Papers by Angelica Vedelago
Chapter in the volume "Roman Women in Shakespeare and His Contemporaries" edited by Domenico Lovascio
In light of Humphrey’s and other contemporary theorists’ observations on imitation within translation, I intend to examine how some Latin and vernacular sixteenth-century translations of Sophocles and Euripides were informed by the translator’s desire to imitate previous translators, sometimes in a competitive dimension. By looking at translators’ remarks in the paratexts as well as at their practice, the paper will thereby try to define the role of intermediary texts both in intra-lingual (from Latin into Latin) and inter-lingual (from Latin into vernacular) translations of Greek tragedy.
This conference aims to tackle this theme from multiple perspectives, including the various declinations of the humanities, ranging from literature to linguistics, from pedagogy to philosophy. Such a wide and interdisciplinary approach will shed further light on the dynamics of orality and writing, hopefully leading to a more comprehensive view of their interactions, so that their contribution to the development of human thought and culture may be equally recognized.
Programme:https://oralitaescrittura.wordpress.com/2017/11/29/programma/
«La scrittura ha trasformato la mente umana più di qualsiasi altra invenzione». Questa affermazione di W. J. Ong può suonare strana a chi vive in una società che ha ormai familiarizzato con la scrittura. Alcuni studi fondamentali del XX secolo – fra cui, per l’ambito classico, Cultura orale e civiltà della scrittura di E. Havelock (1963) seguito poi da Oralità e scrittura di Ong (1982) – hanno evidenziato che è stato proprio il passaggio da una società orale a una chirografica, e di qui alla stampa e infine all’elaborazione elettronica della parola, a determinare gli sviluppi più significativi del pensiero, delle società e della storia dell’uomo. Ma è davvero questa l’unica prospettiva possibile? Il convegno si propone di affrontare il tema da una prospettiva ampia e interdisciplinare, declinandolo nei vari ambiti degli studi letterari e umanistici e cercando di accogliere le dinamiche dell’oralità e della scrittura in una visione complessiva, dove entrambe risultino ugualmente importanti nello sviluppo della coscienza e della cultura umana. Programma: https://oralitaescrittura.wordpress.com/2017/11/29/programma/