{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04218928164196123, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006081337894336754, 'mean_word_length': 4.648068669527897, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Birth of the European Identity

This book is the second in a series, whose successful debut was made a few years ago, of publications of the papers given to symposia organized by the Department of Classics in Nottingham. Although these meetings have been devoted to literary sources, their subject matter is of great interest to those specializing in other fields of classical studies. A particularly useful feature is the publication of responses to papers alongside the papers themselves. The present volume discusses Greek images of Europe and Asia in the Classical period as they appear in contemporary Greek literature. Two of the five papers are in Spanish. The keynote article is that by J. E. Ziolkowski (pp. 1-35) on 'National and Other Contrasts in the Athenian Funeral Orations' where six surviving Orations are analysed. Throughout, Z. studies the use of words 'Asia', 'Europe', 'Hellas-Hellenes' and 'Barbarof, as well as the names of individuals. He tests the theory that 'EuropeAsia' is just another way of expressing 'Greek-Barbarian'. As usual, 'Europe' meant mainland Greece whilst 'Asia-Barbarian' meant the Persians. The response by J. Roy (pp. 36-43) is more than that; it stands as a useful contribution in its own right, showing how the Greeks identified Europe with themselves to underline their superiority to other peoples, whom they called ' Barbarians' and whose territory they described as 'Asia'. In the fifth century, with the growth in the power of Athens, this claim to superiority became very strong. E. Hall's contribution (pp. 44-80) discusses how the Greeks used swimming as a means of defining who was 'Asian' and who was 'European'. In the introduction she draws comparisons with the cult of physical fitness and sporting prowess in more recent racial and imperial ideologies. The Greek sense of ethnic identity and superiority is here quite simple. Greeks are 'Europeans' because they can swim; 'Barbarians' drown. This image, I believe, cannot be trusted. There is much evidence for the development of river-craft and swimming in the ancient Near East. It seems strange that Thracians, according to the Greeks, could not swim when they, and other Black Sea peoples, lived on the shore, rivers a plenty flowing through the hinterland, and had a reputation for sea piracy. The Greeks may, indeed, have been proud of their expertise in the water but so too were many of those they described as 'Barbarians' or 'Asians' (p. 56). The second part of this contribution is devoted to Timotheus' Persians, about which the respondent, M. Hose (pp. 81-9), presents a different view from that of H.