{"title":"色诺芬的大事记和希腊史学。比较方法","authors":"Mélina Tamiolaki","doi":"10.1515/jah-2021-0023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper proposes a comparison between Xenophon’s Memorabilia and Greek historiography, with the aim of further illuminating Xenophon’s literary techniques. I pursue this comparison in two parts: in the first part, I deal with the verbs ἤκουσα (“I heard”), ὁρῶ (“I see”), and οἶδα (“I know”) and the expression δοκεῖ μοι (“it seems to me”), examining their uses in Xenophon and his most important historiographical predecessors respectively (Herodotus and Thucydides); in the second part, I turn to the section about Critias and Alcibiades (Mem. 1.2.12–48) and suggest some possible connections with Greek historiography. Throughout my analysis, I highlight both similarities and divergences between Xenophon’s techniques and certain historiographical methods and principles. I suggest that reading the Memorabilia in the light of Greek historiography enables a better evaluation of Xenophon’s literary techniques and that the manifold ways in which Xenophon evokes or differentiates himself from historiographical practices form part of an original apology.","PeriodicalId":41459,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Xenophon’s Memorabilia and Greek historiography. A comparative approach\",\"authors\":\"Mélina Tamiolaki\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jah-2021-0023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper proposes a comparison between Xenophon’s Memorabilia and Greek historiography, with the aim of further illuminating Xenophon’s literary techniques. I pursue this comparison in two parts: in the first part, I deal with the verbs ἤκουσα (“I heard”), ὁρῶ (“I see”), and οἶδα (“I know”) and the expression δοκεῖ μοι (“it seems to me”), examining their uses in Xenophon and his most important historiographical predecessors respectively (Herodotus and Thucydides); in the second part, I turn to the section about Critias and Alcibiades (Mem. 1.2.12–48) and suggest some possible connections with Greek historiography. Throughout my analysis, I highlight both similarities and divergences between Xenophon’s techniques and certain historiographical methods and principles. I suggest that reading the Memorabilia in the light of Greek historiography enables a better evaluation of Xenophon’s literary techniques and that the manifold ways in which Xenophon evokes or differentiates himself from historiographical practices form part of an original apology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jah-2021-0023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHAEOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jah-2021-0023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要本文将色诺芬的《大事记》与希腊史学进行比较,以期进一步阐明色诺芬的文学技巧。我将分两部分进行比较:第一部分,我将讨论动词 κο ο σα(“我听到”)、ο ρ ο(“我看到”)和ο ο δα(“我知道”)以及δοκε ο μοι(“在我看来”),分别考察它们在色诺芬和他最重要的史学先驱(希罗多德和修昔底德)中的用法;在第二部分,我转向关于克里提亚和亚西比德的部分(Mem. 1.2.12-48),并提出与希腊史学的一些可能联系。在我的整个分析中,我强调色诺芬的技术与某些史学方法和原则之间的相似之处和分歧。我认为,从希腊史学的角度来阅读《大事记》,可以更好地评价色诺芬的文学技巧,色诺芬唤起或区别于史学实践的多种方式,构成了原始道歉的一部分。
Xenophon’s Memorabilia and Greek historiography. A comparative approach
Abstract This paper proposes a comparison between Xenophon’s Memorabilia and Greek historiography, with the aim of further illuminating Xenophon’s literary techniques. I pursue this comparison in two parts: in the first part, I deal with the verbs ἤκουσα (“I heard”), ὁρῶ (“I see”), and οἶδα (“I know”) and the expression δοκεῖ μοι (“it seems to me”), examining their uses in Xenophon and his most important historiographical predecessors respectively (Herodotus and Thucydides); in the second part, I turn to the section about Critias and Alcibiades (Mem. 1.2.12–48) and suggest some possible connections with Greek historiography. Throughout my analysis, I highlight both similarities and divergences between Xenophon’s techniques and certain historiographical methods and principles. I suggest that reading the Memorabilia in the light of Greek historiography enables a better evaluation of Xenophon’s literary techniques and that the manifold ways in which Xenophon evokes or differentiates himself from historiographical practices form part of an original apology.