A Companion to Greek Literature

Martin Hose, David Schenker, Martin Hose, David Schenker

• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9781119088615, 9781444339420
• eBook ISBN: 9781118886069
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Literatur
• Subtopic: Antike & klassische Literaturkritik

A Companion to Greek Literature presents a comprehensive introduction to the wide range of texts and literary forms produced in the Greek language over the course of a millennium beginning from the 6th century BCE up to the early years of the Byzantine Empire.

• Features contributions from a wide range of established experts and emerging scholars of Greek literature
• Offers comprehensive coverage of the many genres and literary forms produced by the ancient Greeks—including epic and lyric poetry, oratory, historiography, biography, philosophy, the novel, and technical literature
• Includes readings that address the production and transmission of ancient Greek texts, historic reception, individual authors, and much more
• Explores the subject of ancient Greek literature in innovative ways

PART I
Production and Transmission

CHAPTER 1
Mechanics and Means of Production in Antiquity

Lucio Del Corso

1. Overview

Plato’s Theaetetus, a philosophical dialogue written during the first half of the fourth century BCE, opens with a scene (142a–143c) which is arguably the oldest example of meta-literature: two characters, Euclides and Terpsion, remember the intense exchanges of ideas which Theaetetus, one of their friends now dying from a battle wound, used to have with Socrates. Before sadness for their friend’s fate overtakes them, Euclides tells Terpsion that he has composed a text, comprising a full account of the dialogues of Theaetetus and Socrates, and explains the working method he followed: first he wrote some notes (hypomnemata) based on Socrates’ reconstruction of his conversations with Theaetetus; later he further developed that text “in tranquility,” asking Socrates more than once for explanations of specific topics, and then making the necessary corrections. In this way, Euclides says in conclusion, “I composed almost all the dialogue.” The final destination of this process is a biblion, a “papyrus roll,” which Euclides asks a slave to read aloud, while he and his friend lie on comfortable armchairs. The compositional journey here described is clearly articulated: the literary text is not the consequence of a single or unitary creative action, but rather the result of different phases, each distinguished by a significant interaction between orality and writing. And this interaction between spoken and written word extends long beyond the gestation of the literary works, into their final phases. Plato’s dialogues are dotted with reading scenes, always used as a starting point for philosophical reflections, and with references to writing and books,¹ designated variously as syngramma, biblos, biblion.

It may seem contradictory to find such a sensibility in Plato: in other passages of his dialogues, the philosopher seems to propose a substantial devaluation of the role of writing as a tool for the preservation and transmission of knowledge; and in a dialogue almost completely devoted to the topic of poetic composition, the Ion, the final source of poetic inspiration is divine, and the rhapsode only an instrument for receiving it. But, in fact, Plato’s references to the nature of literary creation enlighten rather than contradict each other, and portray the image of a literary civilization where the processes of composition, publication and reception were already articulated in a complex series of events.

Moving on many centuries, we come to the grey zone of the seventh century, where late antiquity and the Byzantine age overlap. At the end of his Hodegos, Anastasius of Sinai,² an erudite monk able to defend orthodoxy with a Greek prose worthy of the ancient philosophers, takes leave of the readers begging their pardon “for the many mistakes and repetitions” in his work. Indeed “these dogmas of Christ needed to be sketched out (proschideusthai) and corrected (diorthousai) and arranged in sections (stichizesthai) and then, finally, transcribed in a beautiful script (kalligrapheisthai),” but because of a long illness the author could not follow all those steps: “therefore, we composed the treatise in this way, with the fascicule (tetras) in front of the sheet of notes (schedos). And if, as is possible, we said something which is not appropriate to the correct way of speaking or thinking, we ask you to forgive us: only God is truly firm” (24.120–140 = 320 Uthemann). In Anastasius’ apologies – the expression of a civilization substantially different from the age of the poleis – the spoken word still plays a role, at least for the completion of the text; and Byzantine culture kept that oral dimension until its twilight (Cavallo 2007). Again striking is the lucid description of a compositional process articulated in very distinct phases (draft version, revised version, final version, editorially arranged and transcribed in calligraphic script), during which the author employed different forms of writing: thus, for Anastasius the schedos of the draft is an object different from the tetras of the final version, as the hypomnemata used by Euclides for the preliminary version of Socrates and Theaetetus’ dialogues are different from the biblion of the corrected and revised final text. But what exactly was this process of writing, correction and revision? Plato and Anastasius do not give us further details, imagining their public already knew this articulation of the work and the writing materials it was grounded on. But no modern attempt to reconstruct mechanics and means of production of literary texts in the Greek world can leave aside an inquiry in this direction, even if it will be difficult to give univocal answers.

Mechanics similar to those described by Plato or Anastasius can be deduced from many sources, scattered through much of Greek literary history, from the late classical to the beginning of the Byzantine age. But putting the diverse elements into a coherent picture is not an easy task. Greek writers were not much interested in describing the dynamics underlying the compositional process, nor about the tools involved in it. On this point, Latin writers have been much more generous: the epistles of Cicero and Pliny the Younger, Gellius’ Attic Nights, Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria (and the list could be much longer) are inexhaustible sources of information about the making of literary texts in ancient Rome (Pecere 2011). For the Greek world, we have nothing comparable. In Greek texts the materiality of the writing processes too often appears to be under a veil; even when an author speaks about his relationship with books and writing, usually he assumes an allusive tone, presuming the knowledge of things or facts we can no longer understand. Because of this behavior, many sources seem ambiguous to modern readers, and have been interpreted sometimes in opposite ways. One way to minimize such difficulties is to check texts against other forms of evidence. Many ancient works of art (from classic Attic vases to imperial sarcophagi) depict scenes with individuals reading or writing on different materials, in open spaces or at home: those objects therefore become precious evidence of Greek intellectual life. Again, significant information can be deduced by the examination of the characteristics of papyri and other writing materials used by the Greeks. But even a combination of such different materials will give us only a partial frame, with few established elements. Iconographic sources could be idealized representations, and above all they are rarely detailed enough; and papyri, for environmental reasons, come only from areas far from the main cultural centers, and are attested only from the beginning of the fourth century BCE, after the end of one of the most productive periods of Greek literature.

Even bearing such limitations in mind, a rapid survey of the extant evidence will allow us to reach a clearer comprehension of literary phenomena. With this in mind, let us return to Plato and Anastasius. As we have seen, the two writers both mention a plurality of different writing items: biblion, schedos, tetras, used for revised texts, or more generic hypomnemata. Our survey on mechanics and means of production will start from here: the individuation of writing materials and of their functions.

2. Writing Materials

When Plato wrote the Theaetetus, writing was already employed in the Greek world for many public and private purposes, requiring different implements and materials. Texts int...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Table of Contents
• List of Illustrations
• Notes on Contributors
• Abbreviations
• Introduction: A Companion to Greek Literature
• PART I: Production and Transmission
• PART II: Greek Literature as a Dynamic System
• PART III: Genres
• PART IV: The Players
• PART V: The Places
• PART VI: Literature and Knowledge
• PART VII: Literature and Aesthetics
• PART VIII: The Reception of Greek Literature
• Index
• End User License Agreement