2004
Volume 55, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0165-8204
  • E-ISSN: 2667-1573

Abstract

Abstract

In his serio-comic (. 11), Dio of Prusa, one of the leading Greek orators of his time (1st century CE), argues that the Trojans, not the Greeks, have won the Trojan war. Homer has lied to us and these lies have been leading us to an unjust depiction of history for centuries. Dio shows how exactly this is possible: based on what Homer himself tells us (or does not tell us) Dio deconstructs the and through his revision attempts to convince his audience of Homer’s early case of ‘fake news’. Although the modern reader may initially consider this piece to be a mere joke, Dio’s text actually fits several traditions, including Homeric criticism, rationalizations of mythography, display of rhetorical command, literary play with (pseudo-)authoritative sources, and the urge of Roman Greeks to connect their Greek identity to the Homeric past. Moreover, Dio makes us consider the nature of the itself: what does Homer tell us? What does he leave out? And why?

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/LAM2022.1.004.OVER
2022-02-01
2022-06-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anderson, G.1993. The Second Sophistic. A cultural phenomenon in the Roman Empire, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bolonyai, G.2001. ‘The uses of progymnasmata. The case of “refutations” and Dio’s Trojan Oration’, Acta antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae41, 25-34.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bowersock, G.W.1969. Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brescia, G., M.Lentano, G.Scafoglio en V.Zanusso. 2018. Revival and Revision of the Trojan Myth. Studies on Dictys Cretensis and Dares Phrygius, Hildesheim.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cohoon, J.W.1932. Dio Chrysostom, volume 1. Discourses 1-11, Londen.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Destrée, P. en F.-G.Herrmann (eds). 2011. Plato and the Poets, Leiden/Boston.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Diehl, E.1949. Anthologia Lyrica Graeca. Vol. 1. (3e editie), Leipzig.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Drules, P.A.1998. ‘Dion de Pruse lecteur d’Homère’,Gaia3, 59-79.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Gorp, H. van, D.Delabastita, R.Ghesquiere en J.Flamand. 2007. Lexicon van Literaire Termen (8e herziene druk), Deurne/Groningen.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Feeney, D.C.1991. The Gods in Epic. Poets and critics of the classical tradition, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hawes, G.2014. Rationalizing Myth in Antiquity, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Hunter, R.2009. ‘The Trojan Oration of Dio Chrysostom and Ancient Homeric Criticism’, in J.Grethlein en A.Rengakos (eds), Narratology and Interpretation. The content of narrative form in ancient literature, Berlijn/New York, 43-62.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jackson, C.R.2017. ‘Dio Chrysostom’, in D.S.Richter en W.A.Johnson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the Second Sophistic, Oxford, 217-232.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Jones, C.P.1978. The Roman World of Dio Chrysostom,Cambridge, MA.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jonge, C.C. de.2011. ‘De Alexandrijnse bibliotheek en de geschiedenis van de klassieke filologie’, Lampas44.4, 331-348.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jouan, F.1966. Dion Chrysostome, Discours Troyen (XI) qu’ Ilion n’a pas été prise (2 delen), Parijs.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kim, L.2010. Homer Between History and Fiction in Imperial Greek Literature, Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Klooster, J.J.H.2011. Poetry as Window and Mirror. Positioning the poet in Hellenistic poetry, Leiden.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kindstrand, J.F.1973. Homer in der Zweiten Sophistik. Studien zu der Homerlektüre und dem Homerbild bei Dion von Prusa, Maximos von Tyros und Ailios Aristeides, Uppsala.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Koning, H.2016. Mythen moet je niet geloven! Mytheverklaringen uit de Oudheid (vertaling van Palaephatus, Περὶ ἀπίστων), Budel.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Minon, S., D.Auger, Chr.Bréchet, M.Casevitz, E.Oudot en R.Webb. 2012. Dion de Pruse. Ilion n’a pas été prise. Discours «Troyen» 11, Parijs.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Pease, A.S.1926. ‘Things without honor’,Classical Philology21.1, 27-42.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Richter, D.S. en W.A.Johnson (eds). 2017. The Oxford Handbook of the Second Sophistic, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. De Roy van Zuydewijn, H.J.19972. Homerus, Odyssee. De terugkeer van Odysseus (vertaling), Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Russell, D.A.1992. Dio Chrysostom, Orations VII, XII, XXXVI, Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Russell, D.A. en D.Konstan. 2005. Heraclitus. Homeric problems, Atlanta, GA.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Saïd, S.2000. ‘Dio’s Use of Mythology’, in S.Swain (ed.), 161-186.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Schironi, F.2018. The Best of the Grammarians. Aristarchus of Samothrace on theIliad, Ann Arbor.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Seeck, G.A.1990. ‘Dion Chrysostomos als Homerkritiker (Or. 11)’, Rheinische Museum133, 97-107.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Swain, S.1996. Hellenism and Empire. Language, classicism, and power in the Greek world, AD 50-250, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Swain, S. (ed.). 2000. Dio Chrysostom. Politics, letters, and philosophy, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Trapp, M.2010. ‘Troy and the True Story of the Trojan War’, www.academia.edu/3066086/Troy_and_the_True_Story_of_the_Trojan_War (geraadpleegd op 11januari2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Turner, F.M.2011. ‘The Homeric Question’, in I.Morris en B.Powell (eds), A New Companion to Homer, Leiden/New York/Keulen, 123-145.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Vagnone, V.2003. Dione di Prusa, Troiano or. XI, Rome.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Veyne, P.1988. Did the Greeks Believe in Their Myths? An essay on the constitutive imagination (Engelse vertaling P. Wissing van het Franse origineel uit 1983), Chicago/Londen.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Whitmarsh, T.2001. Greek Literature and the Roman Empire. The politics of imitation, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Whitmarsh, T.2005. The Second Sophistic (Greece & Rome New Surveys in the Classics No. 35), Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/LAM2022.1.004.OVER
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error