Vividness through variety: narrative discontinuties in Herodotus and Thucydides
At the Classics department of Uni-Heidelberg an Emmy-Noether research group is inquiring into the communicative functions of Ancient Greek particles in well-known literary works including the Histories of Herodotus and the Histories of Thucydides (5th cent. BCE). In spite of all the thorough studies delving into the historiographical mentality, the compositional design and the stylistic components underlying each of the masterpieces, a good deal of research might still be added, which concerns the linguistic features characterizing the remarkably varied narration of historical events in both authors. Among the linguistic features that tend to be underestimated, particles stand out. Yet, the amount of occurrences of these short and semantically elusive words is impressively high. The basic assumption bringing about the organization of such a workshop is that particles are a particularly apt device for signalling discourse strategies in many different ways. However, in order to make sense of what particles effect in Herodotus and Thucydides, it is essential to frame their possible functions within a broadly conceived context of communication, which is informed by historiographical constraints, narratological requirements, literary expectations and pragmatic needs. Only the consideration of all these aspects, at the global level of ‘style’ as well as at the local level of single utterances, can yield productive analyses and comprehensive evaluations.
This is why the invited speakers represent a scholarly heterogeneous group whose expertise ranges from a more historical to a more linguistic (and literary) slant.
The focus of the workshop is going to be the narrative manners of conveying vividness by way of identifying different strategies both within each work and across the two of them. As far as Herodotus is concerned, vividness results from evidence of what has been called his ‘dramatization of history’ and his mimetic presentation of facts. The multifariousness offered by his language (poikilia) has been noticed and praised since the time of Dionysus of Halicarnassus (1st cent. BCE).
The Thucydidean poikilia can be said to rest on the various stylistic choices expressing the historian’s accounts as vividly as possible—at the costs of syntactical coherence and smoothness, sometimes. Thucydides’ way of communicating vividly also has to do with the relevance of perceptions and the hints at a ‘theatrical’ staging of narrative. The umbrella-term ‘narrative discontinuities’ refers to marks of transitions/boundaries/changes articulating the flow of discourse in the historiographical prose under examination. Special attention will be devoted to the role played by several linguistic elements (such as tenses, particles, word order, demonstratives, and combinations of them) with respect to: the balance between persuasive and descriptive macro-speech acts; the dialectical juxtaposition of reported vs authorial accounts; the possible distinction between foreground and background information; the narrative rhythm; the manipulations of the chronological order of events; the distribution of direct and reported speeches; the higher or lower degree of involvement of the narrator; the borderline between serious and mocking/ironical intentions. Such discontinuities along with the linguistic features possibly marking them are intended to pertain to each individual historiographical work. A further stepin the discussion will be the comparison between the features found in Herodotus those found in Thucydides. Common vs distinctive patterns may be stressed, either in accordance with already given interpretations, or in contrast with traditional views. Here is where notoriously controversial passages may turn out to be revealing. Variations and peculiarities across the two Histories may deal with the influence of other genres (such as epic, drama, sophistic, medical science), the preoccupation with a product inducing more or less terpsis (“enjoyment”), and the relationship--hinted at--with contemporary or future receivers.
The foreseen workshop activities include the presentation of close readings provided by each speaker in connection with each research focus; reactions and discussions concerning the selected passages; the joint analysis of a set of chapters from both works, chosen ad hoc; the exchange of ideas and perspectives related to the topics mentioned above.
Contact :
Dr. Anna Bonifazi
Seminar für Klassische Philologie
Marstallhof 2-4
69117 Heidelberg
Tel: +49 (0) 6221 54 2563
E-Mail: anna.bonifazi@skph.uni-heidelberg.de
