نبذة مختصرة : Following the recent appearance (2007) of the author's (literary) translation into Afrikaans of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus' Meditations (Meditasies van Marcus Aurelius Antoninus 2007]), this article reviews some philological dimensions of the work, especially for readers approaching that translation from various disciplinary angles and who may be unversed in Greek. The provenance and transmission of the text is traced, from its speculated possible origins as Marcus' personal diaries, first entered on wax-tablets during the Roman campaigns in Germania and kept in private circulation after the emperor's death, through the scant references to it, first by Themistios (200 years later), and then by bishop Arethas and the Suidas-lexicon in the 10th century AD. While the work was apparently read widely in the Byzantine Empire, the editio princeps was only published in the Renaissance by Andreas Gesner in Switzerland in 1559. The textual tradition of the work runs back onto two variant manuscripts, the Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1950 (in the Apostolic Library of the Vatican) and the Toxites-manuscript, now lost through fire, on which the Gesner-edition was based. The work presented its first interpreters with many problems because of the stylistic dissonances displayed by the introductory first book with the remaining eleven books of the work, the very Jew geographic references encountered in it and the apparent incoherence of the thoughts presented in the work. Few commentators understood what Marcus actually was saying, although it was superficially clear that the work contained a number of personal notes which were clearly meditative in nature. Various good editions of the work appeared in the twentieth century (Haynes, Trannoy and especially Farquharson), but it was only with the publication of Pierre Hadot's interpretation (La Citadelle interieure) in the eighties that a single, coherent principle of translation was suggested which explained the background and workings of Marcus' meditations. He identified and typified the Meditations as Stoic spiritual exercises derived from Epictetus, designed to transform the practitioner's inner discourse in a structured way. The Meditations in fact suggests three essential or disciplinary rules, embodied in three disciplinary activities, viz. that of rational decision-taking, of human desire and of impulse; the rules pertain to the three domains of individual capacity for decision-taking, Universal Nature and human nature. The exercises were calculated to influence the demeanour of the practitioner, always striving to renew him in the face of great personal challenges, especially that of death. The Meditations clearly formed an askesis - a self-discipline by the virtuous and good person. It posed universally valid values and norms to regulate practical conduct. Through the daily, and routinely, repeated dogmata (values, norms) one's inner intentions to do the good are affirmed and entrenched. By turning inwards, the practitioner regularly renews himself spiritually and is able to face life's challenges. Robert Newman has pointed out (ANRW) that the meditatio was characteristic of the Stoa, and that it became the most important ethical tool to heal the individual human spirit in the early Empire. The meditation was highly structured and practised on a routine basis by the use of standard phrases and images in a standard method. Thus Marcus' meditations summon the practitioner to exercise by way of the imperatives introducing so many of his aphoristic sententiae. The call is ever to impress the right norms on one's hegemonikon, the inner guiding rational spirit, to integrate with it in the ablility to guide one's conduct. Meditation was considered essential for the preservation of ethical integrity and for ignoring the non-essential, the externalia. Marcus' meditations have been characterised as 'free meditations' rather than repetititive and rigid 'question-and-answer'-sessions.… [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
نبذة مختصرة : Na aanleiding van die onlangse verskyning (2007) van die skrywer se (literêre) vertaling van Marcus Aurelius Antoninus se Meditasies in Afrikaans, lewer hierdie artikel 'n oorsig van 'n aantal filologiese aspekte van die werk, veral ten behoewe van lesers van die vertaling. Aandag word gegee aan die vasstelbare herkoms van die teks, die oorlewering daarvan, die literêre aard en genre van die werk, asook die "innerlike werking" daarvan in 'n poging om die leser by te staan in sy eie verstaan en interpretasie van die Meditasies. In ooreenstemming met die interpretasie van Pierre Hadot, word die Meditasies hier geïdentifiseer en getipeer as Stoïsynse geestelike oefeninge wat ontwerp is om die innerlike diskoers van die beoefenaars daarvan op 'n gestruktureerde wyse te transformeer. Marcus se meditasies word hierin eerder gekarakteriseer as "vrye meditasies" as herhalende en onbuigsame "vraag-en-antwoord"-sessies (Robert Newman). Voorop in Marcus se gedagtes staan altyddeur sy eie waargenome naderende dood. Die voorrang wat Marcus aan sy eie pyn en lyding verleen, betuig 'n nuwe, tweede eeus-geskape kulturele uitdrukkingsvorm vir die subjektiwiteit van die menslike persona, asook Marcus se volledige bekering tot die Stoïsisme (Judith Perkins). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Processing Request
No Comments.