Abstract This paper outlines the full details of Lucretius’ treatment of parental love. It shows that Lucretius is faithful to Epicurus’ notorious claim that parental love is not natural: in addition to orthodox Epicurean hedonist concerns, Lucretius asserts that children do not ‘belong to’ their parents by nature; as such, even though parental love is now ubiquitous and indeed a cultural norm, there is no basis for the naturalness of parental love. This model of the relationship between parents and children does not, however, apply in the case of certain animals, who do have natural parental love for their offspring. Focussing on two famous scenes, the sacrifice of Iphigenia and the forlorn heifer seeking her sacrificed calf, the paper argues that, by highlighting the fragility of human parental love in comparison to that of the animals, Lucretius brings to his Roman readers’ attention the relative weakness of the familial ties that bond human beings together. At the same time, he emphasises the need to maintain these ties, if social and political concord, with all its benefits, is to continue. It transpires that unlocking the details of Lucretius’ treatment of parental love brings a key lesson of the poem into clearer focus.
{"title":"Lucretius on the Nature of Parental Love","authors":"S. McConnell","doi":"10.1017/ann.2018.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2018.1","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper outlines the full details of Lucretius’ treatment of parental love. It shows that Lucretius is faithful to Epicurus’ notorious claim that parental love is not natural: in addition to orthodox Epicurean hedonist concerns, Lucretius asserts that children do not ‘belong to’ their parents by nature; as such, even though parental love is now ubiquitous and indeed a cultural norm, there is no basis for the naturalness of parental love. This model of the relationship between parents and children does not, however, apply in the case of certain animals, who do have natural parental love for their offspring. Focussing on two famous scenes, the sacrifice of Iphigenia and the forlorn heifer seeking her sacrificed calf, the paper argues that, by highlighting the fragility of human parental love in comparison to that of the animals, Lucretius brings to his Roman readers’ attention the relative weakness of the familial ties that bond human beings together. At the same time, he emphasises the need to maintain these ties, if social and political concord, with all its benefits, is to continue. It transpires that unlocking the details of Lucretius’ treatment of parental love brings a key lesson of the poem into clearer focus.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"72 - 89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ann.2018.1","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56965487","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT This article examines Rome’s diplomatic relations with Carthage and Numidia in the period between the Second and Third Punic Wars. Polybius’ suggestion that Rome consistently decided against Carthage in territorial disputes with Numidia in the aftermath of the Second Punic War (Polyb. 31.21.5-6) has often been taken up in explanations of the origins of the Third Punic War. Many ancient and modern accounts accept the implication of a policy of hostility against Carthage, assuming that Rome permitted and even encouraged Masinissa to infringe upon and seize Carthaginian territory. This paper, however, argues that the results of Roman arbitration between Carthage and Numidia do not show a consistent policy intended to undermine Carthage. Rather, Rome sought to maintain the territorial division which was imposed at the end of the Second Punic War throughout the inter-war period; several of its decisions were actually in favour of Carthage. The Third Punic War should not be seen as a culmination of a half-century of Roman hostility towards Carthage.
{"title":"Rome, Carthage, and Numidia: Diplomatic Favouritism before the Third Punic War","authors":"C. Bailey","doi":"10.1017/ann.2018.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2018.4","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines Rome’s diplomatic relations with Carthage and Numidia in the period between the Second and Third Punic Wars. Polybius’ suggestion that Rome consistently decided against Carthage in territorial disputes with Numidia in the aftermath of the Second Punic War (Polyb. 31.21.5-6) has often been taken up in explanations of the origins of the Third Punic War. Many ancient and modern accounts accept the implication of a policy of hostility against Carthage, assuming that Rome permitted and even encouraged Masinissa to infringe upon and seize Carthaginian territory. This paper, however, argues that the results of Roman arbitration between Carthage and Numidia do not show a consistent policy intended to undermine Carthage. Rather, Rome sought to maintain the territorial division which was imposed at the end of the Second Punic War throughout the inter-war period; several of its decisions were actually in favour of Carthage. The Third Punic War should not be seen as a culmination of a half-century of Roman hostility towards Carthage.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"43 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ann.2018.4","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56965759","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article discusses the evolution and main characteristics of Delphi’s statuary landscape, focussing on the process of prestige spatialisation via erection of honorific portraits within the Delphic territory. My goal is to present trends and tendencies in placing honorific portraits at Delphi from the mid-fifth century b.c. to the late fourth century a.d. The article focusses on issues surrounding the locations for honorific statues and how these featured in attempts to monopolise the sanctuary’s overall lay-out throughout by vying for the most conspicuous places at Delphi. I argue that the placement of honorific statues within the Delphic temenos was not random but was in fact a precisely planned process which was influenced by several (variable) factors. These factors included the availability of space, the visibility of the monuments, and the number of visitors that could be expected. The relationship between Delphi and the League of the Aetolians is particularly stressed in association with the question regarding the nature of the Aetolian self-representation at Delphi. I contrast Delphi with Thermos to assess the degree to which the Aetolians dominated the sanctuary and how they presented themselves to both internal and external audiences.
{"title":"The Power of Space and Memory: The Honorific Statuescape of Delphi","authors":"D. Grzesik","doi":"10.1017/ANN.2018.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ANN.2018.6","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article discusses the evolution and main characteristics of Delphi’s statuary landscape, focussing on the process of prestige spatialisation via erection of honorific portraits within the Delphic territory. My goal is to present trends and tendencies in placing honorific portraits at Delphi from the mid-fifth century b.c. to the late fourth century a.d. The article focusses on issues surrounding the locations for honorific statues and how these featured in attempts to monopolise the sanctuary’s overall lay-out throughout by vying for the most conspicuous places at Delphi. I argue that the placement of honorific statues within the Delphic temenos was not random but was in fact a precisely planned process which was influenced by several (variable) factors. These factors included the availability of space, the visibility of the monuments, and the number of visitors that could be expected. The relationship between Delphi and the League of the Aetolians is particularly stressed in association with the question regarding the nature of the Aetolian self-representation at Delphi. I contrast Delphi with Thermos to assess the degree to which the Aetolians dominated the sanctuary and how they presented themselves to both internal and external audiences.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"23 - 42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ANN.2018.6","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56966315","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Heliodorus’ Aethiopica narrates the adventurous journey of a couple through Egypt to the kingdom of Meroe in Ethiopia where they get married. To increase the plausibility of this story Heliodorus uses his knowledge of Rome’s trade activities in the East and he even introduces some characters involved in trade ventures in those regions (e.g. Nausicles) at crucial moments of its development. On the other hand, Heliodorus’ references to luxurious products of Eastern and African origin, as well as to exotic animals or tribes, are recurring elements (or leitmotifs) that are consciously interspersed throughout the novel. Those references not only serve to unify a carefully planned plot and guide the reader to an intended conclusion, but also to map the idealised Ethiopia and its neighboring subjected regions (inhabited by some fantastic tribes), where the protagonists will eventually live.
{"title":"Merchant’s Road Toward the Utopia in Heliodorus’ Aethiopica","authors":"J. S. Sánchez Hernández","doi":"10.1017/ann.2018.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2018.9","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Heliodorus’ Aethiopica narrates the adventurous journey of a couple through Egypt to the kingdom of Meroe in Ethiopia where they get married. To increase the plausibility of this story Heliodorus uses his knowledge of Rome’s trade activities in the East and he even introduces some characters involved in trade ventures in those regions (e.g. Nausicles) at crucial moments of its development. On the other hand, Heliodorus’ references to luxurious products of Eastern and African origin, as well as to exotic animals or tribes, are recurring elements (or leitmotifs) that are consciously interspersed throughout the novel. Those references not only serve to unify a carefully planned plot and guide the reader to an intended conclusion, but also to map the idealised Ethiopia and its neighboring subjected regions (inhabited by some fantastic tribes), where the protagonists will eventually live.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"143 - 160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ann.2018.9","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56966170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Among the personal hobbies which Horace recommends his young friend Lollius conduct at a discreet distance from his potens amicus is the re-enactment of the battle of Actium, which should only be undertaken in the privacy of his father’s estate. Critics have noted that the potential offence in this seemingly affirmative celebration of the ‘miracle of Actium’ lies in the casting of Lollius’ brother as his opponent, thus acknowledging the civil nature of the battle which was at least downplayed, if not elided, in official discourse. They have overlooked, however, the further subversive element in Horace’s reference to ‘whichever of the two (alterutrum)’ Victory crowns. This presents the counterfactual possibility, both in the Epistle and in the naumachia which serves as a parallel mimesis, that Antony might have won the battle of Actium. This instance of ‘sideshadowing’ demands to be set in a number of contexts, such as the use of counterfactuals in historiographical depictions of battles and the phenomenon whereby some public naumachiae had outcomes contrary to that of the historical battle they were re-enacting. In particular, the very possibility of an Antonian victory renders the Augustan principate contingent, in opposition to the providential, teleological inevitability with which it, and especially its foundational battle, were depicted elsewhere in Augustan poetry. Such an interpretation is supported by Lucan’s allusion to this passage in his Dyrrachium episode, the only other non-Lucretian instance of alterutrum in extant Latin poetry.
{"title":"Sideshadowing Actium: Counterfactual History in Lollius’ Naumachia (Horace, Epistles 1.18)","authors":"R. Cowan","doi":"10.1017/ann.2018.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2018.3","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Among the personal hobbies which Horace recommends his young friend Lollius conduct at a discreet distance from his potens amicus is the re-enactment of the battle of Actium, which should only be undertaken in the privacy of his father’s estate. Critics have noted that the potential offence in this seemingly affirmative celebration of the ‘miracle of Actium’ lies in the casting of Lollius’ brother as his opponent, thus acknowledging the civil nature of the battle which was at least downplayed, if not elided, in official discourse. They have overlooked, however, the further subversive element in Horace’s reference to ‘whichever of the two (alterutrum)’ Victory crowns. This presents the counterfactual possibility, both in the Epistle and in the naumachia which serves as a parallel mimesis, that Antony might have won the battle of Actium. This instance of ‘sideshadowing’ demands to be set in a number of contexts, such as the use of counterfactuals in historiographical depictions of battles and the phenomenon whereby some public naumachiae had outcomes contrary to that of the historical battle they were re-enacting. In particular, the very possibility of an Antonian victory renders the Augustan principate contingent, in opposition to the providential, teleological inevitability with which it, and especially its foundational battle, were depicted elsewhere in Augustan poetry. Such an interpretation is supported by Lucan’s allusion to this passage in his Dyrrachium episode, the only other non-Lucretian instance of alterutrum in extant Latin poetry.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"90 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ann.2018.3","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56965674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In this paper, I offer a cognitive analysis of the invocations of the Muse in earliest Greek epic poetry that is based on recent advances in cognitive science in general and the cognitive science of religion in particular. I argue that the Muse-concept most likely originated in a feeling of dependence on an external source of information to provide the singer with the subject matter of their song. This source of information is conceptualised as an ontological type (or template) ‘person’ by means of the hyperactive agency detection, and the Muse’s full access to strategic information, along with other characteristics, establishes her as a minimally counter-intuitive concept (that is to say a concept that conforms to most of our intuitive expectations and runs counter to a few of them), which, in turn, significantly increases the probability of the acquisition and transmission of the Muse-concept within the culture.
{"title":"Invocations of the Muse in Homer and Hesiod: A Cognitive Approach","authors":"J. Franek","doi":"10.1017/ann.2018.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2018.8","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, I offer a cognitive analysis of the invocations of the Muse in earliest Greek epic poetry that is based on recent advances in cognitive science in general and the cognitive science of religion in particular. I argue that the Muse-concept most likely originated in a feeling of dependence on an external source of information to provide the singer with the subject matter of their song. This source of information is conceptualised as an ontological type (or template) ‘person’ by means of the hyperactive agency detection, and the Muse’s full access to strategic information, along with other characteristics, establishes her as a minimally counter-intuitive concept (that is to say a concept that conforms to most of our intuitive expectations and runs counter to a few of them), which, in turn, significantly increases the probability of the acquisition and transmission of the Muse-concept within the culture.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"1 - 22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ann.2018.8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56965914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The inscription CIL 6.16019 has remained substantially dependent on an 1881 publication that has provided the fullest description of the inscription and a relief on a separate panel reported as found with it. Even though more recent analyses have adopted different lines of interpretation, there has been no new encounter with the actual panels. No photograph has been published and the inscription and relief were thought to be lost. This article announces that the inscription and relief have been located (in July 2016) and have been able to be photographed.
{"title":"CIL 6.16019 Rediscovered","authors":"A. Cadwallader","doi":"10.1017/ANN.2018.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ANN.2018.5","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The inscription CIL 6.16019 has remained substantially dependent on an 1881 publication that has provided the fullest description of the inscription and a relief on a separate panel reported as found with it. Even though more recent analyses have adopted different lines of interpretation, there has been no new encounter with the actual panels. No photograph has been published and the inscription and relief were thought to be lost. This article announces that the inscription and relief have been located (in July 2016) and have been able to be photographed.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"132 - 142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ANN.2018.5","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56965785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Mythological twin brothers played key roles in the establishment and preservation of the city of Rome. This article examines the use of one particular set of brothers, Castor and Pollux, by rival forms of government in the early fourth century ce. In his work on the representations of the Dioscuri on Roman coinage, Gricourt argues that the Dioscuri symbolise the same ideas on Maxentius’ coins as on other such imperial coinage, namely their role in maintaining the eternal order of the universe and their roles as protectors of soldiers. 1 More recently, however, Marlowe and Hekster have successfully argued that Maxentius’ ideology was a counterclaim to that presented by the Tetrarchy. 2 Developing this notion further with respect to Maxentius’ coinage, this article argues that, for the Tetrarchs, Castor and Pollux served as the ideal figures to symbolise the importance of concordia in the collective rule of like-minded individuals. Maxentius, however, used Castor and Pollux in connection with other symbols of the city of Rome (such as Romulus, Remus, and the she-wolf) on his coins to promote his restoration of the city of Rome (in conjunction with titles such as princeps and conservator urbis suae). The examination of this ideological conflict between Maxentius and the Tetrarchy, through their use of Castor and Pollux on their coinage, sheds light on the mutability of myth and its role in the promotion of particular aspects of mythological narratives and figures to support an individual’s own claims to power.
{"title":"Maxentius, the Dioscuri, and the Legitimisation of Imperial Power","authors":"Gwynaeth McIntyre","doi":"10.1017/ann.2018.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2018.2","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Mythological twin brothers played key roles in the establishment and preservation of the city of Rome. This article examines the use of one particular set of brothers, Castor and Pollux, by rival forms of government in the early fourth century ce. In his work on the representations of the Dioscuri on Roman coinage, Gricourt argues that the Dioscuri symbolise the same ideas on Maxentius’ coins as on other such imperial coinage, namely their role in maintaining the eternal order of the universe and their roles as protectors of soldiers. 1 More recently, however, Marlowe and Hekster have successfully argued that Maxentius’ ideology was a counterclaim to that presented by the Tetrarchy. 2 Developing this notion further with respect to Maxentius’ coinage, this article argues that, for the Tetrarchs, Castor and Pollux served as the ideal figures to symbolise the importance of concordia in the collective rule of like-minded individuals. Maxentius, however, used Castor and Pollux in connection with other symbols of the city of Rome (such as Romulus, Remus, and the she-wolf) on his coins to promote his restoration of the city of Rome (in conjunction with titles such as princeps and conservator urbis suae). The examination of this ideological conflict between Maxentius and the Tetrarchy, through their use of Castor and Pollux on their coinage, sheds light on the mutability of myth and its role in the promotion of particular aspects of mythological narratives and figures to support an individual’s own claims to power.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"52 1","pages":"161 - 180"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ann.2018.2","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"56965609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Many modern scholars have argued that the consulship was not created at the foundation of the Republic as Roman tradition maintained, and that the government of the early Republic went through several stages of development before it reached the familiar ‘classical constitution.’ Building on this work, this article considers what the early civilian government of Rome may have looked like. It is argued that the Romans did not create an entirely new government (based on consuls) following the removal of the monarchy, but instead made use of existing sources of power and authority: rich land-owning clans dominated military activity outside the city, while priests, the curiae, and minor officials exercised responsibilities of civilian governance in Rome. The plebeian tribunate was probably the first significant office to be created in the Republic, and the unusual nature of its power (sacrosanctity) and the absence of any other chief magistracy enabled the tribunes to acquire a broad range of prerogatives. A series of reforms eventually led to the development of the familiar ‘classical constitution’, and the consulship and praetorship became the most prestigious and desired magistracies (and—outside the city—the most powerful), but the tribunes long retained the broadest prerogatives for civilian governance inside the city.
{"title":"Plebeian Tribunes and the Government of Early Rome*","authors":"Fred K. Drogula","doi":"10.1017/ann.2017.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ann.2017.8","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many modern scholars have argued that the consulship was not created at the foundation of the Republic as Roman tradition maintained, and that the government of the early Republic went through several stages of development before it reached the familiar ‘classical constitution.’ Building on this work, this article considers what the early civilian government of Rome may have looked like. It is argued that the Romans did not create an entirely new government (based on consuls) following the removal of the monarchy, but instead made use of existing sources of power and authority: rich land-owning clans dominated military activity outside the city, while priests, the curiae, and minor officials exercised responsibilities of civilian governance in Rome. The plebeian tribunate was probably the first significant office to be created in the Republic, and the unusual nature of its power (sacrosanctity) and the absence of any other chief magistracy enabled the tribunes to acquire a broad range of prerogatives. A series of reforms eventually led to the development of the familiar ‘classical constitution’, and the consulship and praetorship became the most prestigious and desired magistracies (and—outside the city—the most powerful), but the tribunes long retained the broadest prerogatives for civilian governance inside the city.","PeriodicalId":41516,"journal":{"name":"Antichthon","volume":"51 1","pages":"101 - 123"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2017-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ann.2017.8","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43934916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：