Intertext and allusion in Herodotus' Histories : authority, proof, polemic
This study considers anew the central question of Herodotusâ relationship with literary and textual sources. It examines how Herodotus comes to define his own work in a context where many artists (both narrative and visual) are seeking to accumulate, delineate, and ultimately dictate cultural memory. Rather than applying traditional Quellenforschung, my analysis centres on examining significant intertextual and allusive relationships in his work. In each chapter, I address the nature of Herodotusâ engagement with certain textual rivals/genres, namely early prose writers, inscriptions, poets (expecially Homer, Simonides, Aeschylus, Sophocles), and oracles. From this emerges a highly nuanced engagement with myriad texts in the Histories (principally: as authoritative voices; as persuasive evidence; and as voices for disputation). Such engagement furnishes considerable authority for the writer of the Histories, to the extent that he provides a superior view of the past, compared to the more limited, partisan perspectives offered by his textual rivals. My study reinforces the salient point that Herodotus is no historian in any modern sense of the word; his interaction with other literary traditions does not
Haywood, Jan Liam Thomas
PA Classical philology
Intertext and allusion in Herodotus' Histories : authority, proof, polemic. This study considers anew the central question of Herodotusâ relationship with literary and textual sources. It examines how Herodotus comes to define his own work in a context where many artists (both narrative and visual) are seeking to accumulate, delineate, and ultimately dictate cultural memory. Rather than applying traditional Quellenforschung, my analysis centres on examining significant intertextual and allusive relationships in his work. In each chapter, I address the nature of Herodotusâ engagement with certain textual rivals/genres, namely early prose writers, inscriptions, poets (expecially Homer, Simonides, Aeschylus, Sophocles), and oracles. From this emerges a highly nuanced engagement with myriad texts in the Histories (principally: as authoritative voices; as persuasive evidence; and as voices for disputation). Such engagement furnishes considerable authority for the writer of the Histories, to the extent that he provides a superior view of the past, compared to the more limited, partisan perspectives offered by his textual rivals. My study reinforces the salient point that Herodotus is no historian in any modern sense of the word; his interaction with other literary traditions does not
allusion herodotus histories authority proof polemic study_considers anew central_question herodotus relationship literary textual_source examines herodotus come define work context many artist narrative visual seek accumulate delineate ultimately dictate cultural_memory rather apply traditional analysis centre examine significant intertextual relationship work address nature herodotus engagement certain textual genres namely early prose writer inscription poet homer aeschylus sophocles oracle emerges highly nuanced engagement myriad text histories principally authoritative voice persuasive evidence voice engagement considerable authority writer histories extent provide superior view past compare limited partisan perspective offer textual rival study reinforces salient point herodotus historian modern sense word interaction literary_tradition