DOCSLIB.ORG

Some Aspects of Intertextuality Between Plutarch's Life of Pericles and Thucydides

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Some Aspects of Intertextuality Between Plutarch's Life of Pericles and Thucydides Some Aspects of Intertextuality between Plutarch’s Life of Pericles and Thucydides ana ferreira Univ. Porto, CECH, FLUP ORCID: 0000-0003-1764-8842 [email protected] Plutarch lived about five centuries after Pericles. Such a great lapse in time meant his knowledge of the distinguished Athenian statesman was based on data collected mostly from literary (written1) sources and information that, through oral tradition, had survived in the memory of the various ensuing generations. As would be expected, Plutarch generally opted for authors who were chronologically closer to the statesman. They either participated directly in the events or experienced personally the successes and difficulties of Athens, especially after the statesman’s death, having closely witnessed the decisions made during Pericles’ government. Thus, it comes as no surprise that the History of the Peloponnesian War is Plutarch’s main2 source for his Life of Pericles: as Thucydides was an important historian of the fifth century BC, consulting his work was obviously indispensable to address the major characters or events of this period so as to ensure credibility. Furthermore, the historical and the biographical account go hand in hand, since it is the people with their lives who make history, but, at the same time, it is the various events that influence personalities and their actions. In this specific case, although they are dedicated to different accounts, historian and biographer do, however, have a common goal: to contribute in some way to the development of future generations. Thucydides intends to examine the causes of the greatest war ever waged among the Greeks and how it unfolded. He aims to clarify the motives behind such a conflict and to facilitate an understanding of the similarities between this war and others that may take 1 We can divide these sources into three groups: historiographical (Thucydides, Duris of Samos, Ephorus, Ion of Chios, Stesimbrotos, Critolaus, Aeschines, Heraclides Ponticus or Idomeneu of Lampsacus); comic playwrights (e.g., Cratinus, Eupolis, Aristophanes, Plato Comicus), as well as works dedicated to oratory or philosophical matters (by Plato, Aristotle, or Theophrastus). 2 Thucydides is only quoted specifically in Per. 9. 1, 15. 3, 16. 1, 28. 2, 28. 8, 33. 1. However, as we shall see, the influence of this author appears throughout the biography, and a close study shows that there are several passages in which Plutarch’s text is an almost literal transcript of the historian’s one (cf. Per. 18 and 34). 99 O Mundo Clássico e a Universalidade dos seus Valores place in the future, since human deeds have much in common and history is, in a sense, cyclical; Plutarch (Per. 2), to some extent, intends to assist in the education of better men through the presentation of his paradigms, since human beings tend to imitate those they admire, and to criticize and avoid the less positive traits of individuals. Thus, as a historian, Thucydides pays special attention to the facts he seeks to understand and explain; Plutarch, as a biographer, pays special attention to the major actors involved, examining the elements that define their personality, as well as interpreting and justifying their options. Indeed, the biographer believes that how individuals act tends to reveal their qualities and faults. It should not be forgotten, however, that Plutarch generally takes on an attitude of great impartiality with regard to the sources he uses. He does not blindly accept all the information he collects. He often disagrees with what is said and evaluates the ability for thoroughness and objectivity of the several authors he resorts to. For example, when there is a lack of consensus on a certain matter, the biographer presents several points of view and, at times, indicates the one he finds to be most credible. Hence, it is necessary to observe the use the author of Parallel Lives made of the History of the Peloponnesian War. The fact that Thucydides is a historian and Plutarch a biographer is one of the main causes behind the rather particular use the latter makes of this historical source. Thucydides is concerned with analyzing, within a defined historical context, Pericles’ power over the people and the strategy he advocates for victory. Plutarch, in turn, as a biographer, omits or summarizes various historical facts (notably military details), because it is not his intention to theorize on these matters. However, he focuses on the accounts of moments in Pericles’ life that best illustrate the traits he has chosen to highlight, such as πρᾳότης ‘self-control’, δικαιοσύνη ‘sense of justice’ or caution in war, and which the statesman will also have in common with his peer, Fabius Maximus. For this reason, he provides more personal information on Pericles than Thucydides3. 3 The only characteristics that Thucydides particularly appreciates in Pericles are his ora- tory skill and the ability to sway the masses: for example, he is able to encourage people when they lack confidence in their abilities or, on the contrary, to control their impulses which, with his clairvoyance, he feels will be harmful to the good of the polis. We almost get the impression that the people are like pawns in the hands of Pericles: except for his last years in power (already during the Peloponnesian War), the statesman easily turns them around. Recalling the episode in which Plutarch describes the city’s embellishment works: when the people, instigated by Pericles’ political opponents, complain about the expenses related to the works, he proposes to finance them and states that in this case, only his name will prevail in the future as the mentor of the remodeling work. Thus, the entire demos gave him carte blanche for expenses. To some extent, this shows that, recognizing the magnificence of the works, the people did not want to run the risk of not being associated to those works in future generations. Pericles, as we can 100 Some Aspects of Intertextuality between Plutarch’s Life of Pericles and Thucydides Bearing this goal in mind, we can easily understand that Plutarch refers to Thucydides’ text mostly with the intention of proving, by describing Pericles’ actions, the personality traits he wishes to highlight. He wants to show his readers the man behind the acts – with all his virtues, weaknesses and concerns. Consequently, Plutarch immediately takes advantage of the few personal references the historian makes (cf. Thuc. 2. 65). It is Pericles’ speeches, quoted by the historian, in which the statesman presents his positions and analyzes the possibilities of victory, that best characterize his politics. Before going further, it is important to make some considerations about these speeches. Thucydides quotes three directly and one indirectly: the first, in Thuc. 1. 140 – 1. 144 (in which Pericles defends a warlike option and presents his strategy); the second, in Thuc. 2. 13 (indirectly, on what he would do if during the invasion Archidamus spared his lands, going on to talk of the financial means available to the Athenians for war); the third, the famous Funeral Oration4 (a speech that Pericles gave at the time of the funeral ceremonies in honor of the fighters who fell on the battlefield and in which he praises their ancestors, Athenian democracy and war heroes), in Thuc. 2. 35 – 2. 46; finally, the fourth, in Thuc. 2. 60 – 2. 64 (last speech following the wrath of the Athenians because of their plight aggravated by the plague). However, in Per. 8, Plutarch says that the statesman, although he was an excellent speaker, left nothing in writing except for decrees, and only a few expressions he used were still remembered. These expressions are quoted by Plutarch based on Plato, Theopompus and comedy writers, but to whom Thucydides does not make any reference. This, together with some incongruities in the speeches presented by the historian, leads scholars to admit that they cannot be representative of Pericles’ oratory skill. Despite their quality in terms of persuasion and efficacy, they are most probably by Thucydides himself5. Nonetheless, although he refutes the authenticity of the speeches, Plutarch takes advantage of much of the information they contain. But, unlike Thucydides, who intertwines speech (especially in moments when important decisions are to be made) and narrative in his work, the biographer does not employ this type of conjugation (although there is direct speech in some parts). This is, in some measure, more a matter of personal taste or derived from precepts of the genre rather than due to the authors having written their works in very different periods. If Thucydides, in the fifth century BC, was deeply influenced by the see, was all too aware of the weaknesses (in this case, pride) of his “flock,” so he knew how to convince them. Thucydides also praises the perspicacity of Pericles, which he considers an indispensable quality for the planning and decision-making related to these large enterprises. 4 Plutarch does not refer to this Oration, but to another, also delivered by Pericles on the occasion of the War against Samos. 5 For more information on this, vide Stadter 2012: 109-123. 101 O Mundo Clássico e a Universalidade dos seus Valores Sophistic movement (which would later on lead to the development of rhetoric), Plutarch, in the first century AD, is also influenced by Hellenistic oratory and even by the Second Sophistic. It is, therefore, perhaps Thucydides’ taste that leads him to use speeches, seen as powerful means of analysis of the intricacies of a subject or of the personality of those who proclaim them. The historian mainly explores the first function, that is, the constraints that are invoked in speeches as a justification for a certain political option, rather than the aspects that unveil traits of the speaker’s character (very characteristic of dramatic authors, also profoundly marked by the Sophistic model, such as Euripides, for example).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Theopompus's Philippica
    chapter five Theopompus’s Philippica heopompus of Chios (FGrHist 115) was widely renowned in antiq- T uity for the severity with which he condemned the moral faults of the characters peopling his Philippica. Few indeed escaped the scathing vigor of his pen. Despite his family’s exile from Chios, Theopompus seems to have had the necessary funds to carry out thorough research (TT 20 and 28,FF25, 26 and 181) and did not have to work for a living, but was able to devote himself wholly to his writing.1 Because he was in no need of either patronage or an income, he had the freedom to write whatever he pleased without risk of losing his livelihood by causing offense. It is per- haps for this reason that he was known in antiquity as “a lover of the truth” (φιλαληθης )(T28). We must now determine whether or not this epithet was justified in Theopompus’s use of the past in the Philippica. In addition to his numerous epideictic speeches, Theopompus wrote three known historical works: an epitome of Herodotus, a Hellenica, and a Philippica.2 It is likely the epitome of Herodotus was Theopompus’s earliest 1. A recent discussion of the (very vague and contradictory) evidence for Theopompus’s life can be found in Michael Attyah Flower, Theopompus of Chios: History and Rhetoric in the Fourth Century BC (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), 11–25. 2. Suda, s.v. Θε π µπ ς ι ς ρ ητωρ (ϭ T 1). 143 144 lessons from the past historical work,3 but all that remains of it is an entry in the Suda stating it contained two books (T 1) and four attributed fragments from ancient lexica giving it as the authority for the use of specific words (FF 1–4), although the possibility exists that some other, unattributed fragments may belong to it also.
    [Show full text]
  • Download The
    THE CONCEPT OF SACRED WAR IN ANCIENT GREECE By FRANCES ANNE SKOCZYLAS B.A., McGill University, 1985 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Classics) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1987 ® Frances Anne Skoczylas, 1987 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of CLASSICS The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date AUtt-UST 5r 1Q87 ii ABSTRACT This thesis will trace the origin and development of the term "Sacred War" in the corpus of extant Greek literature. This term has been commonly applied by modern scholars to four wars which took place in ancient Greece between- the sixth and fourth centuries B. C. The modern use of "the attribute "Sacred War" to refer to these four wars in particular raises two questions. First, did the ancient historians give all four of these wars the title "Sacred War?" And second, what justified the use of this title only for certain conflicts? In order to resolve the first of these questions, it is necessary to examine in what terms the ancient historians referred to these wars.
    [Show full text]
  • Marathon 2,500 Years Edited by Christopher Carey & Michael Edwards
    MARATHON 2,500 YEARS EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SUPPLEMENT 124 DIRECTOR & GENERAL EDITOR: JOHN NORTH DIRECTOR OF PUBLICATIONS: RICHARD SIMPSON MARATHON – 2,500 YEARS PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARATHON CONFERENCE 2010 EDITED BY CHRISTOPHER CAREY & MICHAEL EDWARDS INSTITUTE OF CLASSICAL STUDIES SCHOOL OF ADVANCED STUDY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 2013 The cover image shows Persian warriors at Ishtar Gate, from before the fourth century BC. Pergamon Museum/Vorderasiatisches Museum, Berlin. Photo Mohammed Shamma (2003). Used under CC‐BY terms. All rights reserved. This PDF edition published in 2019 First published in print in 2013 This book is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0) license. More information regarding CC licenses is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Available to download free at http://www.humanities-digital-library.org ISBN: 978-1-905670-81-9 (2019 PDF edition) DOI: 10.14296/1019.9781905670819 ISBN: 978-1-905670-52-9 (2013 paperback edition) ©2013 Institute of Classical Studies, University of London The right of contributors to be identified as the authors of the work published here has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Designed and typeset at the Institute of Classical Studies TABLE OF CONTENTS Introductory note 1 P. J. Rhodes The battle of Marathon and modern scholarship 3 Christopher Pelling Herodotus’ Marathon 23 Peter Krentz Marathon and the development of the exclusive hoplite phalanx 35 Andrej Petrovic The battle of Marathon in pre-Herodotean sources: on Marathon verse-inscriptions (IG I3 503/504; Seg Lvi 430) 45 V.
    [Show full text]
  • Euripides” Johanna Hanink
    The Life of the Author in the Letters of “Euripides” Johanna Hanink N 1694, Joshua Barnes, the eccentric British scholar (and poet) of Greek who the next year would become Regius Professor at the University of Cambridge, published his I 1 long-awaited Euripidis quae extant omnia. This was an enormous edition of Euripides’ works which contained every scrap of Euripidean material—dramatic, fragmentary, and biographical —that Barnes had managed to unearth.2 In the course of pre- paring the volume, Barnes had got wind that Richard Bentley believed that the epistles attributed by many ancient manu- scripts to Euripides were spurious; he therefore wrote to Bentley asking him to elucidate the grounds of his doubt. On 22 February 1693, Bentley returned a letter to Barnes in which he firmly declared that, with regard to the ancient epistles, “tis not Euripides himself that here discourseth, but a puny sophist that acts him.” Bentley did, however, recognize that convincing others of this would be a difficult task: “as for arguments to prove [the letters] spurious, perhaps there are none that will convince any person that doth not discover it by himself.”3 1 On the printing of the book and its early distribution see D. McKitterick, A History of Cambridge University Press I Printing and the Book Trade in Cambridge, 1534–1698 (Cambridge 1992) 380–392; on Joshua Barnes see K. L. Haugen, ODNB 3 (2004) 998–1001. 2 C. Collard, Tragedy, Euripides and Euripideans (Bristol 2007) 199–204, re- hearses a number of criticisms of Barnes’ methods, especially concerning his presentation of Euripidean fragments (for which he often gave no source, and which occasionally consisted of lines from the extant plays).
    [Show full text]
  • MONEY and the EARLY GREEK MIND: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy
    This page intentionally left blank MONEY AND THE EARLY GREEK MIND How were the Greeks of the sixth century bc able to invent philosophy and tragedy? In this book Richard Seaford argues that a large part of the answer can be found in another momentous development, the invention and rapid spread of coinage, which produced the first ever thoroughly monetised society. By transforming social relations, monetisation contributed to the ideas of the universe as an impersonal system (presocratic philosophy) and of the individual alienated from his own kin and from the gods (in tragedy). Seaford argues that an important precondition for this monetisation was the Greek practice of animal sacrifice, as represented in Homeric epic, which describes a premonetary world on the point of producing money. This book combines social history, economic anthropology, numismatics and the close reading of literary, inscriptional, and philosophical texts. Questioning the origins and shaping force of Greek philosophy, this is a major book with wide appeal. richard seaford is Professor of Greek Literature at the University of Exeter. He is the author of commentaries on Euripides’ Cyclops (1984) and Bacchae (1996) and of Reciprocity and Ritual: Homer and Tragedy in the Developing City-State (1994). MONEY AND THE EARLY GREEK MIND Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy RICHARD SEAFORD cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521832281 © Richard Seaford 2004 This publication is in copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Heraclitus on Pythagoras
    Leonid Zhmud Heraclitus on Pythagoras By the time of Heraclitus, criticism of one’s predecessors and contemporaries had long been an established literary tradition. It had been successfully prac­ ticed since Hesiod by many poets and prose writers.1 No one, however, practiced criticism in the form of persistent and methodical attacks on both previous and current intellectual traditions as effectively as Heraclitus. Indeed, his biting criti­ cism was a part of his philosophical method and, on an even deeper level, of his self­appraisal and self­understanding, since he alone pretended to know the correct way to understand the underlying reality, unattainable even for the wisest men of Greece. Of all the celebrities figuring in Heraclitus’ fragments only Bias, one of the Seven Sages, is mentioned approvingly (DK 22 B 39), while another Sage, Thales, is the only one mentioned neutrally, as an astronomer (DK 22 B 38). All the others named by Heraclitus, which is to say the three most famous poets, Homer, Hesiod and Archilochus, the philosophical poet Xenophanes, Pythago­ ras, widely known for his manifold wisdom, and finally, the historian and geog­ rapher Hecataeus – are given their share of opprobrium.2 Despite all the intensity of Heraclitus’ attacks on these famous individuals, one cannot say that there was much personal in them. He was not engaged in ordi­ nary polemics with his contemporaries, as for example Xenophanes, Simonides or Pindar were.3 Xenophanes and Hecataeus, who were alive when his book was written, appear only once in his fragments, and even then only in the company of two more famous people, Hesiod and Pythagoras (DK 22 B 40).
    [Show full text]
  • INQUIRY INYO the PURCHASING POWER OP the DRACHMA in ANCIENT Grebci
    INQUIRY INYO THE PURCHASING POWER OP THE DRACHMA IN ANCIENT GREBCi . THE PURPOSE OP DETERMINING, IP POSSIBLE, THE MATERIAL CONDITIONS HCH PREVAILED IN ATHENS DURING HER EXISTENCE AS AN INDEPENDENT STA' ProQuest Number: 13850489 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 13850489 Published by ProQuest LLC(2019). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 ?RJSFACE» I have derived my information from the following sources: Aeschines - Against Timarchus; Against Ctesiphon. Andocides - Concerning the Mysteries. Pseudo—Andocides - Against Alcihiades. Aristophanes - Acharnians; Knights; Clouds; Wasps; Peace; Birds; Lysistrata; Thesmophoriazusae; Frogs; Ecclesiazusae; P lutus. Aristotle - Constitution of Athens; Rhetoric; Politics. Pseudo-Aristotle - Oeconomica. Athenaeus - The Deipnosophists. ■ Demosthenes - Speeches, XIV;XVIII;XXI;XXII;XXVII;XXVIII;XXIX;XXX;XXXI XXXIV; XXXV; XXXVI; XXXVII; XL; XLI; XLII; XLV; L; LIII; LIX. Diogenes Laertius - Lives of the Philosophers. Harpocration - Lexicon to the Ten Orators. ' Herodas - Mimes. Herodotus - History. Hesychius - Lexicon. Isaeus - Speeches, II;III;IV;V;VI;VII;VI1I;X;XI. Isocrates - Concerning the Team of Horses; Antidosis. Lucian - Dialogues of Courtesans. Lycurgus - Against Leocrates. Lysias - Speeches, III;XIV;XVT;XVII;XIX;XXIV;XXVI;XXXII.
    [Show full text]
  • International Law in Antiquity David J
    Cambridge University Press 0521791979 - International Law in Antiquity David J. Bederman Index More information Index Achaeans— see also treaties see also Greek city-States agricultural/mercantile interests, 159 leagues and federations, 168 Amyntas/Chalcidians (Chalcis), 161 Peloponnesian War, 161, 163 Athens/Argives, 70, 175, 182 relations— Athens/Chalcidians (Chalcis), 164 Athens, 163 Athens/Egesta, 164 Sparta, 163, 182 Athens/Thebes, 163–64, 181 Trojan War, 228, 245, 256, 257–58 Babylon, 141 Adcock, Frank, 35, 96, 160, 168, 212–13 defensive, 36, 161–63, 172, 176, 177, 180, adjudication, norms, 268–69, 271 214–15 Adkins, A. W. H., 216 Egypt/Hittites, 148–49 Adrastus, 258 Elea/Heraea, 70, 162, 174–75, 182 Aegina, 94, 228 epimachia, see epimachia Aeschines, 69, 131, 254 Greek city-States, 35, 37, 156, 159–65 Aetolians— leagues, see leagues and federations see also Greek city-States military, 36, 161–65 federations, 168 offensive, 36, 159, 161–64, 214–15 relations— Peloponnesian War, 35, 37, 156 Macedon, 36, 198 philia, 125, 159–61, 184, 190 Rome, 118, 190–91, 198, 199, 205 Rome/Carthage, 42, 72–73, 134, 160 Sparta, 181 sanctity, 7 Agamemnon, 57, 250 Sparta/Argives (Argos), 163, 182 Ago, Roberto, 38, 42 Sybaris/Serdaioi, 159, 179 Ahhiyawa, relations, Hittites, 90, 91 symmachia, see symmachia Akkadian Empire— ambassadors— conquest, 22, 23 see also envoys covenants, 65 authority, 102 Elam, 140 credentials, 99–102, 104, 105, 116 oaths, 62 diplomacy, see diplomacy statecraft, 3, 47 embassies, see diplomatic missions Akkadian language, 24, 25, 140, 143, 147 immunities, see diplomatic immunities Alexander of Pherae, 112 Israelite kingdoms, 96, 108 Alexander the Great, 21, 31, 41, 93, 153, 167, liberty restrained, 112 250 Mesopotamia, 100 aliens, see foreigners Near East, 96 alliances— punishment, 91 303 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521791979 - International Law in Antiquity David J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Delimitation of Fragments in Jacoby's Fgrhist: Some Examples
    The Delimitation of Fragments in Jacoby’s FGrHist: Some Examples from Duris of Samos Christopher A. Baron ELIX JACOBY’S Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker provides an indispensable tool for the study of Greek historical writing in all periods and for nearly every F 1 historian. The authority and convenience of Jacoby’s col- lection remain unparalleled, as evidenced by the fact that his seventeen volumes of texts, commentary, and notes are now available in two online versions, including the ongoing Brill’s New Jacoby project (BNJ).2 While his volumes make it easier to 1 On Jacoby’s work see most recently Carmine Ampolo (ed.), Aspetti dell’opera di Felix Jacoby (Pisa 2006); John Marincola (ed.), A Companion to Greek and Roman Historiography I (Malden 2007) 5–7; and the relevant essays in Glenn Most (ed.), Collecting Fragments/Fragmente sammeln (Göttingen 1997). That Jacoby accomplished what he did before the existence of the TLG and searchable databases is incredible, and humbling; that it took several dec- ades and an international team of scholars to re-commence the project after his death in 1959 shows the enormity of his achievement. His original project continues under the auspices of Guido Schepens and Jan Bollansée: see Schepens’ “Prolegomena” in FGrHist IV A 1 (1998) vii–xxi. At the same time, an Italian project is underway to publish a new collection of Greek historical fragments, led by Eugenio Lanzilotta (http://frammstorgr. uniroma2.it); five volumes have been published to date. 2 In 2006 Brill converted Jacoby’s original work (with apparatus criticus and German commentary and notes) to an online format: Brill Online Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker.
    [Show full text]
  • Frances Anne Skoczylas Pownall
    FRANCES POWNALL (March 2017) Department of History and Classics e-mail: [email protected] 2-28 H.M. Tory Building telephone: (780) 492-2630 University of Alberta (780) 492-9125 (fax) Edmonton, AB T6G 2H4 EDUCATION 1987–93 PhD in Classics, University of Toronto Major Field: The Greek Historiographical Tradition Before Alexander the Great Minor Field: Roman History Thesis: UnThucydidean Approaches: The Moral Use of the Past in Fourth-Century Prose Supervisor: Professor M. B. Wallace 1990 Vergilian Society, Summer Study Program Villa Vergiliana, Cuma, Italy 1989 American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Summer Archaeological Program 1985–87 MA in Classics, University of British Columbia Thesis: The Concept of Sacred War in Ancient Greece Supervisor: Professor Phillip Harding 1985 French Summer School, McGill University 1981–85 BA (Honours) in Classics, McGill University Thesis: The Cult of Artemis Tauropolos at Halae Araphenides and its Relationship with Artemis Brauronia Supervisor: Professor Albert Schachter SCHOLARLY AND RESEARCH INTERESTS • Greek historiography (Archaic through Hellenistic) • Greek history (especially Classical and Hellenistic) • Philip and Alexander of Macedon • Greek prose (history and oratory) ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS 2008– University of Alberta (Professor) 1999–2008 University of Alberta (Associate Professor) 1993–99 University of Alberta (Assistant Professor) 1992–93 Memorial University of Newfoundland (Lecturer) 1991–92 Mount Allison University (Crake Doctoral Fellow/Instructor) NB: I took maternity
    [Show full text]
  • CHRISTOPHER A. BARON University of Notre Dame 249 O’Shaughnessy Hall, Notre Dame, in 46556 +1-574-631-2802 [email protected]
    April 2021 CHRISTOPHER A. BARON University of Notre Dame 249 O’Shaughnessy Hall, Notre Dame, IN 46556 +1-574-631-2802 [email protected] ACADEMIC POSITIONS EDUCATION 2014–present: Associate Professor of Classics, Ph.D., Ancient History, University of University of Notre Dame Pennsylvania, May 2006 Concurrent in History, 2015–present - Fellow, Nanovic Institute for European M.A., Social Sciences (Roman History), - Studies University of Chicago, March 2000 2007–2014: Assistant Professor of Classics, B.A., History, summa cum laude, Illinois University of Notre Dame Wesleyan University, May 1995 2006–2007: Visiting Assistant Professor of LANGUAGES: Classics, University of Notre Dame Expert: Ancient Greek, Latin, French Intermediate: Italian, German 2003 –2006: Summer Instructor, Classical Basic: Spanish, Biblical Hebrew Studies, University of Pennsylvania MONOGRAPHS Timaeus of Tauromenium and Hellenistic Historiography. Cambridge University Press, 2013. Reviews: L.M. Yarrow, BMCR 2013.12.23; R. Vattuone, Sehepunkte 13 (2013) no. 9; J. Stronk, Classical Review 64.1 (2014), 81-83; P. Nývlt, Eirene 50 (2014), 355–57; M. Mari, Mediterraneo Antico 19 (2016), 403-12. In Progress: Greek Historians under the Roman Empire (30 BCE–340 CE). My goal in this book is twofold. First, I intend to analyze the Greek historians writing under the Roman Empire (from Dionysius of Halicarnassus to Eusebius) through the lens of their common condition – Greek intellectuals, living under a world empire, engaging in a traditional elite activity which had arisen under different political/social circumstances. This will allow me to judge their similarities, producing a richer picture of Greek historical writing, but also highlight their differences (choice of subject, historical method and outlook, style and narrative voice) and the development of the genre over time.
    [Show full text]
  • Greece Study Guide
    Greece Study Guide IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF PAUL 1 Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Alexandria Troas 4 Amphipolis and Apollonia 7 Amphipolis 8 Apollonia 12 Athens 14 Corinth 17 Delphi 37 Heraklion Crete 40 Kos 41 Malta 45 Mars Hill 49 Neapolis 54 Nicopolis 58 Patmos 61 Philippi 64 Rhodes 66 Samos 72 Samothrace / Samothraki 79 Thessaloniki 81 Veria - Berea 94 IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF PAUL 2 Introduction “ In the first century, Christianity was a community of believers. Then Christianity moved to Greece and became a philosophy. Then it moved to Rome and became an institution. Then it moved to Europe and became a culture. And then it move to America and became a business.” - Priscilla Shirer Shaul / Paul went to Greece within the framework of his second and third journeys. It was during a night gourd 49 A.D., when Shaul / Paul, while at Troas of Asia Minor, had a vision in which he saw a man of Macedonia who called him to carry on with his work in the this man’s homeland: Come over into M acedonia, and help us. It is worth noting that this divine intervention, which Shaul/ Paul with his fellow laborers Silas, Titus and Timothy took as an invitation from the Lord to make the message of His Gospel know to that area, was not the first. Their arrival at Troas and, as a consequence, their turn westwards and more specifically to Greece had become manifest on two further occasions during this second journey of Shaul / Paul. IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF PAUL 3 On the first occasion, when the left Iconium, they were prevented by the Holy Spirit from turning eastwards, to Asia, and as a result they finally headed for the regions of Phrygia and central Galatia.
    [Show full text]