Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Prorocze sny, Kserkses i atak Persji na Grecję

100%

Olbrycht M. J.

Przegląd Religioznawczy

|

2023

|

nr 3/289

67-73

EN

In the traditions of Ancient Western Asia, including Assyria and Babylonia (and perhaps Elam as well), dreams were treated as important points of reference for political decisions, and this was given expression in royal documents. Things were no different in the Persian Achaemenid Empire. Persian kings sought explanations from the priests called Magi about their dreams and extraordinary phenomena. Prophetic dreams concerning rulers appear repeatedly in Herodotus’ Histories. This pertains to the dreams of the Median king Astyages (Hdt. 1.107.1; 1.108.1); Cyrus the Great (Hdt. 1.209−210), and Kambyses (Hdt. 3.30; cf. 3.64.1; 3.65.2). Xerxes’ third dream (7.19), the last of a series of three dreams that prompted the Great King to attack Greece, belongs to this group. In the account of Xerxes’ preparations to invade Greece, persuasions to undertake the expedition from many quarters are depicted, but dreams play a key role (Hdt. 7.12−19). The speeches in the Persian council have all assumed that the invasion is a matter of choice for Xerxes. But the final decision to attack Greece comes from the dreams which are interpreted by the Magi. The visions mean that if Xerxes does not make his Greek campaign, he will be changing the nomoi of Persia, and thereby endangering his rule and empire. Abandoning the Greek campaign meant abandoning the nomoi of Persia. Herodotus takes advantage of the existence of the Magi to build his narrative, and places in the king’s dreams the threads and motifs (olive wreath) that put together the particulars of his story. The role of the Magi as interpreters of royal dreams can be considered a tenable element in the historical narrative of Herodotus. The Magi are found in Greek sources as priests, experts in rituals, seers and dream interpreters.

2

Herodotus’ Perspective on the Persian Empire

100%

Harrison T.

|

tom 29

23-37

EN

This paper reviews the different models commonly used in understanding Herodotus’evidence on the Achaemenid Persian empire. It suggests that these approaches-for example, the assessment of Herodotus’accuracy, of the level of his knowledge, or of his sympathy for the Persians-systematically underestimate the complexity of his (and of the Greeks’) perspective on the Persian empire: the conflicted perspective of a participant rather than just a detached observer.

3

The King’s speech. La retorica dei re persiani fra Eschilo, Erodoto e Tucidide

100%

Gazzano F.

|

tom 24

55-73

EN

This paper aims at collecting and investigating, from a rhetorical point of view, the speeches of the Achaemenid kings (from Cyrus to Xerxes) mentioned in Greek sources, with a special focus on Herodotus’ Histories. The many and heterogeneous discourses which this historian attributes to the different Persian kings (dialogues, private conversations, messages, letters and simple speech acts) are analysed and compared, and the research seems to point to some recurrent – and probably well-devised – patterns. The paper also takes into account the poetic speeches of Darius and Xerxes in Aeschylus’ Persians, and the scant evidence (a letter from Xerxes to Pausanias) transmitted by Thucydides.

4

Marsyas of Pella and Phrygia

84%

Müller S.

|

tom 29

39-51

EN

There is a lot of uncertainty about the attribution of fragments to either Marsyas of Pella or Marsyas of Philippi. This paper challenges the traditional attribution of BNJ 135–136 F 4 (mentioning Midas’chariot with the Gordian knot) to Marsyas of Philippi and argues in favor of the identification of Marsyas of Pella as the author. For ideological and propagandistic reasons, it would fit well into Marysas of Pella’s account of the roots of Argead rule in his first book. By referring to Midas, Marsyas would have been able to link his half-brother Antigonus as the contemporary governor of Phrygia not only with the legendary Phrygian king and his legacy, but also with a Macedonian logos attested by Herodotus, creating a connection between Midas and the foundation of Argead rule. According to this logos, there existed old kinship relations between Macedonians and Phrygians who used to dwell at the foot of Mt. Bermium and were called Briges. This tradition was of propagandistic value and could have served to increase the ideological value of Antigonus’satrapy and main base in the rivalry with the other Diadochs.

5

Historiē by Herodotus of Halicarnassus – theoretical issues

67%

Wieżel I.

|

2015

|

tom 63

|

nr 3: Filologia Klasyczna

43-52

PL

Artykuł obecny stanowi garść refleksji natury metodologicznej nad narracją w Dziejach Herodota, której podstawowym substratem jest opis świata widzianego z perspektywy doświadczenia tego, kto opowiada, tj. Herodota oraz narratywizowanego przez niego doświadczenia świadków, z którymi sam przeprowadzał wywiad dotyczący przedstawionych zdarzeń historycznych. W związku z tym traktuje się tutaj Dzieje przede wszystkim jako pewien szczególny rodzaj narracji (narrative), którą stanowi, oparta na indywidualnym doświadczeniu (personal experience) Historyka oraz jego oralnych źródeł, opowieść o konflikcie grecko-barbarzyńskim ujęta w szereg krótszych opowiadań opartych na strukturze epizodycznej. Opowiadania te Historyk scala na zasadzie, którą określa się jako „fabularyzację” (White 1973), czyli opisanie faktów historycznych jako składników specyficznego rodzaju struktur fabularnych. Metodą analizy Dziejów będzie w tym ujęciu narratologia naturalna (Fludernik 1996) dysponująca siatką pojęć dostosowanych do badania tekstów pseudo-oralnych, do których Dzieje niewątpliwie należą.

EN

Besides its historical values which imply a certain “accuracy” in presenting historical events and people, it is also possible to stipulate in Herodotus’ Histories these fragments which belong only to the domain of fiction, a genre literature whose basic substratum consists primarily in the description of the world seen through the eyes of the narrator-witness (histōr). In case of Histories, it is difficult to explicitly define how much of it is history and how much is literature. Nevertheless, it is certain that Histories are a special kind of storytelling, which, as shown by a closer analysis, is based on a personal and vicarious experience of the historian and his oral sources that cover several dozens of years of conflict between the East and the West, intertwined with historical, geographical and ethnological descriptions of Greek and barbaric tribes. In such a context the paper will focus on presenting a twofold nature of Herodotean discourse, revealing, on the one hand, the “rising” of the oral history from the sheer activity of dialoguing with people about the recent past, reconstructed on the basis of its formal and cognitive structure (Fludernik 1996), and, on the other hand, the technique of emplotment (White 1973) used by Herodotus to make the story reportable and tellable within the realm of an epic convention which was vivid and influenced the Archaic and Classical Greek literary texts of his times.

6

Zawsze aktualny problem nawodnienia Egiptu

59%

Szaflarski J.

|

nr 07

7

An Ideology of Loyalty: Reflections on Herodotus Book III

59%

West S.

Folia Orientalia

|

2019

|

tom LVI

8

Walka Wschodu i Zachodu w literaturze greckiej od Herodota do Prokopiusza z Gazy

51%

Polański T.

|

tom 44

329-351

EN

Herodotus presented the conflicts between Europe and Asia on both the mythological and historical level and made them one of the main structural and ideological components of his work. The idea of war against the Achaemenids interpreted as central to the Greek historical destiny returned time and again in the Greek letters, always blended with the symptomatic feeling of superiority and simplified standard view of the Orientals. (Euripides, Xenophon of Athens, Plato, Isocrates). The efforts to unite the Greeks and Macedonians with the Orientals which were undertaken by Alexander the Great, found little understanding among the Greeks (Plutarch). His myth as a conqueror of Asia became an ideological trap of the Hellenic as well as Roman historical thinking (Cassius Dio). Renewed and unsuccessful efforts to follow Aiexander's steps brought interesting literary testimonies shaped by collective experiences of the insuperable climate, the fear of the epidemics, and confrontation with cunning, cruel and elusive adversaries (Plutarch, Procopius of Caesarea). The Greek literary testimonies had their alter ego in the Eastern prophetic writings, which expressed hostility towards the Greeks and Romans and predicted a final victory for the East over the West (Oracula Sibyllina, The Oracle of the Potter, The Oracle of Hystaspes). In the Wars of Procopius of Caesarea a pessimistic, purely militarist view came to the surface. It said that the loyalty of the Orientals could be secured only through the use of military power. In that period we also observe a factor of religious inspiration in the war propaganda on both sides (Procopius of Caesarea, Georgios Pisides).