Search Results
From its foundation in 1972, Chloe as series related to the journal Daphnis was conceived as a platform for the publication of research into German literature and culture of the early modern period (14th-18th century). Since then it has developed to take on board interdisciplinary and intercultural perspectives. It is considered today an outstanding international scholarly forum for research into the early modern period. From a comparative point of view it examines the relationship between German literatures and cultural history and the culture of other European (and non-European) countries in the period, as well as such phenomena as cultural transfer. It addresses problems pertaining to the early new high German language and to Neo-Latin literature, as well as to new research fields such as intermediality, performance theories or gender studies.
With its double blind peer-review procedures, Chloe is a platform which welcomes previously unpublished contributions in German or English.
Die Reihe Chloe ist seit 1972 als Organ zur Erforschung der deutschen Literatur(en) und Kultur(en) der Frühen Neuzeit (14.-18.Jh) konzipiert worden. Seit ihrer Gründung hat sie sich im Sinne einer breiteren Interdisziplinarität und interkulturellen Perspektive entwickelt und ausdifferenziert. Heute gilt sie als ein international anerkanntes wissenschaftliches Forum für Frühneuzeitforschung. Sie berücksichtigt unter komparatistischem Aspekt die Beziehungen der deutschen Literatur und Kultur zu den europäischen (auch außereuropäischen) Kulturen dieses Zeitraums und Phänomene des Kulturtransfers. Hinzu kommen aktuelle Fragestellungen der frühneuhochdeutschen Sprache, der neulateinischen Literatur wie auch neuere Forschungsfelder der Intermedialität, Performanz, Gender Studies u.a. Im Rahmen der jährlich vorgesehenen vier Hefte sind inhaltlich geschlossene Themenhefte möglich und werden von Gastherausgebern verantwortet. Im Chloe werden noch unveröffentlichte Beiträge in deutscher und englischer Sprache.
Authors are cordially invited to submit proposals to the publisher at BRILL, Masja Horn.
Leonhard Thurneysser zum Thurn (1531–1596), personal physician of Brandenburg’s elector, was an alchemist, astrologist, pharmacist, entrepreneur, and printer of a large number of books, which he himself wrote. In these publications, he repeatedly refers to experiences he gained by traveling the world. His books also included many foreign alphabets and languages (via remarkable typography), thus insinuating an overall language proficiency. This study examines how Thurneysser used travel and languages for self-fashioning.
For Paracelsian texts, as well as for hermetic writing in general, genealogies that trace knowledge all the way back to Hermes Trismegistos or even to Adam are characteristic. However, in the 16th century, Paracelsians were by far not the only ones drafting such genealogies. Many sciences didn’t restrict themselves to the medieval practice of quoting ancient authorities (e.g. Plinius dixit …), but rather employed genealogies of knowledge to achieve legitimacy for their texts. Such genealogies of knowledge preceeded a modern history of science. Also, they aim towards a turning point in the very presence of their authors, a point from which truth is finally revealed again. This presentation will compare different genealogies of knowledge (in botanical, demonological, and alchemical writings) and investigate their social and institutional implications.
The Alsacian author Johann Fischart translated Rabelais’ Gargantua as well as Bodin’s Démonomanie des sorciers. This study aims to clarify the connection between these most opposite texts. How does Rabelaisian laughter in German context connect to early modern witch-hunt ideology? Starting point of this investigation are Fischart’s puns and their lexical, phraseological, intertextual and interdiscoursive dimensions.