Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (479)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Book article / Book chapter (479) (remove)
Keywords
- Psychologie (26)
- Animal Studies (23)
- Cultural Animal Studies (23)
- Cultural Studies (23)
- Ecocriticism (23)
- Environmental Humanities (23)
- Human-Animal Studies (23)
- Literary Studies (23)
- cultural studies (13)
- Kulturwissenschaften (12)
Institute
- Institut für deutsche Philologie (104)
- Institut für Psychologie (bis Sept. 2007) (82)
- Neuphilologisches Institut - Moderne Fremdsprachen (70)
- Institut für Altertumswissenschaften (33)
- Neuphilologisches Institut - Moderne Fremdsprachen (bis 2007) (32)
- Institut für Internationales Recht, Europarecht und Europäisches Privatrecht (21)
- Institut für Psychologie (21)
- Institut für Biblische Theologie (18)
- Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften (18)
- Institut für Pharmakologie und Toxikologie (14)
Schriftenreihe
- Cultural Animal Studies, Band 3 (23)
- Aesthetische Eigenzeiten, 17 (1)
- Akten des ... Symposiums des Mediävistenverbandes; 13,2 (1)
- Aventiuren; 13 (1)
- Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies (1)
- Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (1)
- GenderCodes - Transkriptionen zwischen Wissen und Geschlecht; 17 (1)
- Image ; 185 (1)
- International Archives of the History of Ideas / Archives internationales d’histoire des idées 242 (1)
- Jahrbuch der Oswald-von-Wolkenstein-Gesellschaft; 17 (1)
Sonstige beteiligte Institutionen
No abstract available.
No abstract available.
No abstract available
No abstract available
No abstract available
No abstract available
No abstract available
No abstract available
No abstract available.
No abstract available.
No abstract available.
No abstract available.
Albert Memmi
(1987)
No abstract available
No abstract available
No abstract available.
Mokutu et le coq divinatoire
(1984)
No abstract available
No abstract available.
No abstract available
No abstract available.
No abstract available
Arthur Adamov
(1986)
No abstract available
No abstract available.
Wissensvermittlung in Frage und Antwort: Der enzyklopädische Lehrdialog "Le Livre de Sidrac".
(1993)
No abstract available
No abstract available.
No abstract available.
No abstract available.
No abstract available
No abstract available
Kateb Yacine: Nedjma.
(1992)
No abstract available
No abstract available.
Hierarchical structures among male individuals in a population are frequently reflected in differences in aggressive and reproductive behaviour and access to the females. In general social dominance requires large investments which in turn may have to be compensated for by high reproductive success. However, this hypothesis has so far only been sufficiently tested in small mating groups due to the difficulties of determining paternity by classical methods using non-molecular markers. DNA fingerprinting overcomes these problems offering the possibility to determine genetic relationships and mating patterns within larger groups. Using this approach we have recently shown (Schartl et al., 1993) that in the poeciliid fish Limia perugiae in small mating groups the dominant male has 100% mating success, while in larger groups its contribution to the offspring unexpectedly drops to zero. The reproductive failure under such social conditions is explained by the inability of the ex-male to protect all the females simultaneously against mating attempts of his numerous subordinate competitors.
In 3 Maccabees, kingship as a form of rule is addressed on two levels: On the political level the question about a good king is addressed against the background of Hellenistic understandings of kingship, using the example of Ptolemy IV Philopator. This king is portrayed at the beginning of 3 Maccabees as a successful, positive, Hellenistic ruler, but one whose good rule goes off the rails. This analysis of the ideal of Hellenistic rule (cf. 3 Macc. 3:12-29; 6:24-28; 7:1-9) is then taken to a theological level: the God of Israel is portrayed as the true good king, the Soter who saves his people in their time of greatest trial (6:29, 32; 7:16). By these means the many divine epithets that are a striking feature of 3 Maccabees are incorporated into the narrative (cf. 2:2-3). Thereby 3 Maccabees not only thematises the conflict with a Hellenistic king who exploits his power in diverse ways but also focuses in a concentrated way the notion of a good (Hellenistic) king into the notion of God as king and ruler.
Although the Letter of Aristeas mentions the translation of the Jewish nomos into Greek, it is striking that worship is not a fundamental theme of this writing. Nevertheless, six passages present acts of worship, which recount worship from different perspectives: Aristeas prays to God and explains his “Greek” idea of worship (Let. Aris. 17), whereas in Let. Aris. 132-140 the high priest explains the Jewish concept of worship. Sacrifices and prayers at the temple in Jerusalem for the Ptolemaic royal house are told in Let. Aris. 45, while at the Ptolemaic court in Alexandria one of the Jewish scholars prays at the beginning of the symposium (Let. Aris. 184-186). Then the daily prayer of the Jewish scholars are recounted in Let. Aris. 305-306 and finally the Ptolemaic king performs a proskynesis before the law at the end of the letter and thereby accepts the translation (Let. Aris. 317).
No abstract available
" ... der Schuld, Vergehen und Sünde vergibt" (Ex 34,7): Sünde und Schuld in der Hebräischen Bibel
(2012)
No abstract available.
"...using different names, as Zeus and Dis" (Arist 16). Concepts of "God" in the letter of Aristeas
(2016)
The “Letter of Aristeas” recounts the translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek. Probably originating in the 2nd century BCE1, the book tells a legend of how the translation of the Torah into Greek came into being. This shows that translating a holy, canonical text or the first time needed explication. Notably, the translation of the godly nomos (Arist 3) comparatively takes up little space (Arist 301–307). And it has to be noted, that “God” is seldom a topic in the Book of Aristeas. The word (ὁ) θεός “God” is found in only three contexts: in the dialogue between king Ptolemaios and Aristeas (Arist 15–21), in the dialogue of the high priest Eleazar and Aristeas (Arist 121–171; above all 128; 130–141; 155–166; 168) and in the question-and-answer-speech during the symposium at the Ptolemaic royal court between the king and the Jewish scholars (Arist 184–294).
In analysing the different statements regarding God, the frame of the narrative is of decisive importance: In the Book of Aristeas, “Aristeas” (Ἀριστέας), who writes in Greek, presents himself as the author, but he is also part of the story. Accordingly, Aristeas is the narrator, who tells the story from his own point of view, and at the same time, he is a character in the ‘world’ of the text. This Aristeas presents himself as a Greek and a Non-Jew (Arist 16; 121–171), who already wrote a book (Arist 6) and plans further publications (Arist 322). In the double-role as narrator of the text and protagonist in the text, Aristeas has to be differentiated from the (real) writer/author of the Book of Aristeas, who possibly was Jewish. That means that the (real, probably Jewish) author of the Book of Aristeas presents (or invents) “Aristeas” and gives him the role of the narrator of his text.3 The author portrays Aristeas as a Greek, non-Jewish character, who is a servant of the royal court. This differentiation between narrator and writer/author is of crucial importance for the question of the different conceptions of God in the Book of Aristeas.
Starting with a terminological and phenomenological perspective on the question “What is an emotion?”, particularly as developed by Aaron Ben Zeʾev , the kiling scene in the book of Judith (Jdt 12:10–13:9 is analysed. This crucial scene in the book’s plot reports the intense emotions of Holofernes but nothing is said about any emotions on the part of of Judith. The only emotional glimpse occurs in Judith’s short prayers in the killing scene. The highly emotional Holofernes and the unemotional Judith together reveal that Holofernes is already made “headless” by his own emotions, whereas the unemotional Judith, unencumbered by emotions, is able to behead the “headless” Holofernes.