http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
개별검색 DB통합검색이 안되는 DB는 DB아이콘을 클릭하여 이용하실 수 있습니다.
통계정보 및 조사
예술 / 패션
<해외전자자료 이용권한 안내>
- 이용 대상 : RISS의 모든 해외전자자료는 교수, 강사, 대학(원)생, 연구원, 대학직원에 한하여(로그인 필수) 이용 가능
- 구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색 및 등록된 대학IP 대역 내에서 24시간 무료 이용
- 미구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색을 통한 오후 4시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용
※ 단, EBSCO ASC/BSC(오후 5시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용)
This essay examines the history of Mesopotamian astrology and explores the possibility of astrological practices in ancient Israel. It also investigates whether astrology in ancient Israel was influenced by Mesopotamian practices, and why the authors of the Hebrew Bible suppressed astral cults as well as astrology. Celestial divination originated in the third millennium BCE, but its systematic development began in the Old Babylonian period, culminating with the compilation of the astrological omen series titled Enuma Anu Enlil in the first millennium BCE. From the time of the Archaemenid period, earlier nativity omens developed into horoscopy in which the position of planets are calculated at the time of a person's birth. Mesopotamian astrology was not a sort of superstition, but the expression of the Mesopotamians' understanding of the principles of the universe, the divinehuman relationship, and their worldview. Though not a widespread phenomenon, evidence suggests that astrological divination was not entirely unknown in ancient Israel. While Ann Jeffers argues that astrology was native to Palestine, it appears to me that Israelite practices of astrology were heavily influenced by the strong Assyrian military presence in Palestine in the 87th centuries BCE. The astral character of the Israelite pantheon may also have facilitated the proliferation of Mesopotamian astral cults. Only against this backdrop can be understood the Bible's suppression of astrological practices as well as harsh criticism on the worship of the moon, sun, and stars.
Trough the times the Trojan War had been considered as results of the literary and mythological imaginations of the Ancient Greeks. But now the mythology is unvailed and proved as historical reality for everyone due to the complementary cooperation of the Image Texts and the Letter Texts. As Eliade emphasized the fact that all kinds of mythologies associated to the Creation, Origin and Death in the primitive society have justified the behaviors and activities of the Human Being, we have re-acted and repeated the mythologies as ‘living stories'. But the Greek Mythology has been written and re-written literally, so it is not but a literature art. Therefore it can't be near from the reality of the primitive thoughts and ways of cognition of the Ancient Greeks. There is a reason that we have to study on the Greek Mythology not only depending upon the Letter Texts, but also upon the Image Texts that we can discover such as in the murals, sculptures, mosaics, vase paintings and other artistic decorations and works. This is a study in which the analysis of the image texts to complement and assure the origin of the Trojan War. There have been many different interpretations and critics about the Origin of the Trojan War, because the majority of them has depended upon only on the Letter Texts about the Greek Mythology that is a Literary Fiction and combination of the various literal artistic elements. So we must consider the importance of the special meanings and messages of the Image Texts Analysis to find out the historical background and realistic meanings.
This paper is to trace Athenian's kinship diplomacy based on tribal myths. According to Herodotus, Athenians were once called Pelasgians, Cranaans, Cecropidae, Athenians, and Ionians after Ion. Then, after the cities of Ionia had been conquered by Persia in the middle of the 6th century BC, Athenians seemed to abandon the association with the Ionians and to turn to the soil of Attica itself, that is, to the idea of autochthony. Here, autochthony meant ‘hegemony' over other countries. However, the urgent need of close tie with Ionians during the Peloponnesian war, compelled Athenians to restore former relationships with them. In my opinion, this is the background of the birth of the Ion of Euripides. In Euripides' Ion, Ion is described as the son between Apollo and Athenian princess Kreusa. Euripides' Ion is the earliest reference to the tradition which make Apollo the father. Euripides created new myths on Ion for specific political purposes: the genealogizing Apollo as their ancestor god would help to establish friendship with Ionians since the worship of Apollo was fairly common in Ionian cities. The other important mythical innovation of Euripides is that the Dorian race is also Athenian born through Kreusa. In this way, Euripides appealed to the Ionians for their close kinship, and urged even Spartans to cease the Peloponnesian war since the Ionians and the Dorians had common ancestor. In short, The Ion was essentially political propaganda creating new tribal myths, and being Ionian was an Athenians' decision for a kinship diplomacy during the Peloponnesian War.
According to the majority opinion Pharisees were legalists who sought to observe literally the Law. Jesus, the founder of Christianity opposed their formalism and tried to argue Jews into abrogating the Law. I examined this view basing on recent scholarship which viewed the movement of Jesus as an inner reform of Judaism and Pharisees as true leaders who interpreted the Law practically and reduced the burdens of Law in the first century. This paper focused on the debate of Sabbath and the Oral Torah of Pharisees. Scholars who uphold the majority opinion argue that Jesus violated the rules of Sabbath by healing the sick on the Sabbath. There are 8 cases which are related to the matter of Sabbath in the New Testament. In each case Pharisees asked whether it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath. Jesus answered by healing the sick. If the acts of Jesus had been not to be allowed by the Law, Pharisees would have lodged strong protests and laid formal complaints before the Sanhedrin. But Pharisees did not lay any formal complaint against the teaching of Jesus on the Sabbath. This showed the teaching of Jesus was done within the parameters of Judaism. Therefore in the debates on the Sabbath Jesus didn't have any intention to abrogate the Law. Pharisees argued that they have the Oral Torah and interpreted the written Torah with the Oral Torah. Their tries were desirable and necessary because the written Torah was made in old times and was behind the times. Furthermore there were many ambiguities because the written Torah did not regulate the details of daily life. Because Pharisees cleared up these ambiguities, the common people of the Jews respected them. Jesus recognized the virtue of the Oral Torah but protested the abuse of Oral Torah. Some of Pharisees made many additional regulations and violated the original intents of the written Law. Furthermore some who were taught by Pharisees violated the Law on the pretext of Oral Torah. For example as someone did not do anything for his father or his mother, he said he offered it to God. Jesus opposed the abuse of Oral Torah. In sum Jesus did not showed any intention to abrogate the Law in the debates on the Law.
In this study, I focused my arguments on what aspects the laws about the adultery and the divorce have been changed from the classical Roman law to the Christian period of the 4th-6th. First, I examined the Augustan law about the adultery, enacted about B. C. 18 and called often “Julian law for adultery repression.” The Julian law for adultery repression considered that the adultery was woman's sin. It offered to the husband and the married woman's father a right killing (ius occidendi) the adulterer without penalty. According to the Julian law, the husband had to divorce his wife before he accused her of adultery. If the adultery is proven, the adulterer and the adulteress were sentenced to a economic loss. In the period of Constantine, the fundamental notion of the Julian law and the Ius Occidendi were still unchanged. But the woman had to be divorced by his husband only after she was accused and proved guilty. And Constantine sentenced the death penalty to the adulterer and the adulteress, while Justinianus confined the latter in the monastery. As to the divorce, the Roman legal tradition sustained the marriage by marital affection (maritalis affectio) and the divorce by consent of two parties. But Constantine and Justinianus attempted to intervene a Roman custom of free divorce. Constantine promulgated a constitution limiting the unilateral divorce (repudium), but his law was made void twice and was vivified by Theodosius who lightened the conditions of the divorce and the penalty. On the other hand, Justinianus interdicted the bilateral divorce (divortium) but his law had to be recalled soon by Justine II, because it was contrary to the spirit of the Roman law about the marriage and the divorce by free consent.