古代史学中的古迹缺席

IF 0.2 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS
L. Spielberg
{"title":"古代史学中的古迹缺席","authors":"L. Spielberg","doi":"10.1515/tc-2019-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article demonstrates that ancient historians did not simply draw upon inscriptions and statues as sources, but also subverted the original messages of these artefacts by placing their own spin on events. These readings ‘against the grain’ take place both where the historical monument exists and has been seen by the historian, as in Thucydides’ digression on the Peisistratids’ inscriptions and decrees, and where the monument is either inaccessible or nonexistent (e. g. Livy’s discussion of the 493 BC Latin treaty and Tacitus’ analysis of the senate-decrees issued for Germanicus’ funeral). By reinterpreting monuments, historians enable sources to transcend their semiotic function and elevate them into commemorative objects. However, this process of reframing and negotiation does not only occur to individual monuments; as this chapter demonstrates, Classical historiography also includes more general commentary on the usefulness of material sources as transmitters of the past.","PeriodicalId":41704,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Classics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/tc-2019-0004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Monumental Absences in Ancient Historiography\",\"authors\":\"L. Spielberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/tc-2019-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article demonstrates that ancient historians did not simply draw upon inscriptions and statues as sources, but also subverted the original messages of these artefacts by placing their own spin on events. These readings ‘against the grain’ take place both where the historical monument exists and has been seen by the historian, as in Thucydides’ digression on the Peisistratids’ inscriptions and decrees, and where the monument is either inaccessible or nonexistent (e. g. Livy’s discussion of the 493 BC Latin treaty and Tacitus’ analysis of the senate-decrees issued for Germanicus’ funeral). By reinterpreting monuments, historians enable sources to transcend their semiotic function and elevate them into commemorative objects. However, this process of reframing and negotiation does not only occur to individual monuments; as this chapter demonstrates, Classical historiography also includes more general commentary on the usefulness of material sources as transmitters of the past.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41704,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Classics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/tc-2019-0004\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Classics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/tc-2019-0004\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"CLASSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Classics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/tc-2019-0004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文论证了古代历史学家并非简单地将碑文和造像作为史料来源,而是通过对事件进行自己的解读来颠覆这些文物的原始信息。这些“不合惯例”的解读既发生在历史纪念碑存在的地方,也发生在历史学家已经看到的地方,如修昔底德关于庇西特拉德的铭文和法令的题外话,也发生在纪念碑不可接近或不存在的地方。李维对公元前493年拉丁条约的讨论以及塔西佗对为日耳曼尼克斯葬礼而颁布的元老院法令的分析)。通过对纪念碑的重新诠释,历史学家使史料超越了其符号学功能,并将其提升为纪念对象。然而,这种重构和协商的过程不仅发生在个别的纪念碑上;正如本章所展示的,古典史学还包括更多关于材料来源作为过去传递者的有用性的一般性评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Monumental Absences in Ancient Historiography
Abstract This article demonstrates that ancient historians did not simply draw upon inscriptions and statues as sources, but also subverted the original messages of these artefacts by placing their own spin on events. These readings ‘against the grain’ take place both where the historical monument exists and has been seen by the historian, as in Thucydides’ digression on the Peisistratids’ inscriptions and decrees, and where the monument is either inaccessible or nonexistent (e. g. Livy’s discussion of the 493 BC Latin treaty and Tacitus’ analysis of the senate-decrees issued for Germanicus’ funeral). By reinterpreting monuments, historians enable sources to transcend their semiotic function and elevate them into commemorative objects. However, this process of reframing and negotiation does not only occur to individual monuments; as this chapter demonstrates, Classical historiography also includes more general commentary on the usefulness of material sources as transmitters of the past.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Trends in Classics
Trends in Classics CLASSICS-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信