Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Ctesias of Cnidus, a Reappraisal

Ctesias of Cnidus, a Reappraisal <jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>The works of Ctesias of Cnidus have frequently been regarded as second rate at best. His reliability as a historian has been seriously questioned in particular, not only by Felix Jacoby and many historians after him, but also by authors in antiquity. Doubts were especially raised about Ctesias' Indica, but also the trustworthiness of his Persica was—and still is—considered dubious. This verdict appears to be unfair, for two reasons. The first is that hardly anything that can be attributed directly to Ctesias has survived: the overwhelming majority of material ascribed to Ctesias has been transmitted by other authors, who used their source not necessarily with proper care. The second is to be found in Demetrius' On Style: here a new perspective on Ctesias is offered. It shows that we should no longer regard Ctesias primarily as a historian, but as a forerunner of a new literary genre (culminating in the classical novel) mixing historical fact with fictitious elements. It is only because of the lack of a proper word in antiquity to describe this genre that the term 'history' was applied to his work as well. It would confuse many generations of historians and deny Ctesias his proper place in Greek literary history.</jats:p> </jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Mnemosyne Brill

Ctesias of Cnidus, a Reappraisal

Mnemosyne , Volume 60 (1): 25 – Jan 1, 2007

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/ctesias-of-cnidus-a-reappraisal-Ob73NLoybt

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2007 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0026-7074
eISSN
1568-525X
DOI
10.1163/156852507X165838
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>The works of Ctesias of Cnidus have frequently been regarded as second rate at best. His reliability as a historian has been seriously questioned in particular, not only by Felix Jacoby and many historians after him, but also by authors in antiquity. Doubts were especially raised about Ctesias' Indica, but also the trustworthiness of his Persica was—and still is—considered dubious. This verdict appears to be unfair, for two reasons. The first is that hardly anything that can be attributed directly to Ctesias has survived: the overwhelming majority of material ascribed to Ctesias has been transmitted by other authors, who used their source not necessarily with proper care. The second is to be found in Demetrius' On Style: here a new perspective on Ctesias is offered. It shows that we should no longer regard Ctesias primarily as a historian, but as a forerunner of a new literary genre (culminating in the classical novel) mixing historical fact with fictitious elements. It is only because of the lack of a proper word in antiquity to describe this genre that the term 'history' was applied to his work as well. It would confuse many generations of historians and deny Ctesias his proper place in Greek literary history.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Journal

MnemosyneBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2007

Keywords: ANALYSIS; CLASSICAL PERIOD; HISTORIOGRAPHY; PERSICA; GREEK

There are no references for this article.