AUC PHILOLOGICA
AUC PHILOLOGICA

AUC Philologica (Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philologica) is an academic journal published by Charles University. It publishes scholarly articles in a large number of disciplines (English, German, Greek and Latin, Oriental, Romance and Slavonic studies, as well as in phonetics and translation studies), both on linguistic and on literary and cultural topics. Apart from articles it publishes reviews of new academic books or special issues of academic journals.

The journal is indexed in CEEOL, DOAJ, EBSCO, and ERIH PLUS.

AUC PHILOLOGICA, Vol 2016 No 2 (2016), 33–42

Photius and μεταγραφειν: Some notes on the linguistic aspect of Photius’ testimony to the nature of Zosimus’ drawing upon the Histories by Eunapius of Sardis

Ivan Prchlík

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/24646830.2016.3
announced: 05. 05. 2016

abstract

Photius’ statement, if understood literally, seems to indicate Zosimus’ New History to have been a virtual transcription of the Histories by Eunapius of Sardis. Some of the modern scholars mistrust his authority, yet one of them, J. A. Ochoa, tried to analyse Photius ’ statement in order to achieve a more nuanced interpretation that would even allow for a non-literal reading. In this paper, Photius’ usage of the verb μεταγράφειν is re-examined, as well as other reviews of his Bibliotheca are pointed to, in which there are compared the authors who are known to have drawn upon one another, yet not exclusively. Both clearly testify that what Photius had in mind was that Zosimus had drawn solely upon Eunapius in the relevant section of the New History. One minor observation corroborates the hypothesis that also the opening chapters of the first book are in fact part of this section. Fótios a μεταγράφειν. několik poznámek k lingvistickému aspektu Fótiova svědectví o povaze Zósimova čerpání z dějepisného díla Eunapia ze Sard Podle Fótia, je-li chápán doslovně, bylo dějepisné dílo Zósimovo téměř opsáno z Eunapiova. Někteří moderní badatelé Fótiovi nevěří, jeden z nich, J. A. Ochoa, se však pokusil Fótiovu formulaci rozebrat a dospět k takové interpretaci, která by dokonce umožňovala chápat ji volněji. V tomto článku je znovu rozebráno Fótiovo užití slovesa μεταγράφειν a dále poukázáno na ty části Bibliothéky, v nichž jsou srovnáváni dva autoři známí tím, že jeden čerpal z druhého, ale nikoli výhradně. Obojí jasně dokazuje, že Fótiovým názorem skutečně bylo, že v příslušné pasáži svého díla čerpal Zósimos výhradně z Eunapia. Jedním postřehem menšího významu lze podpořit i domněnku, že součástí této pasáže byla také první část první knihy.

keywords: Photius; Bibliotheca; Zosimus; Eunapius of Sardis; metagraphein/metagraphe

references (30)

1. Baldini, A., 1984. Ricerche sulla storia di Eunapio di Sardi. Problemi di storiografia tardopagana. Bologna: CLUEB.

2. Bidez, J., Hansen, G. Ch., 1960. Sozomenus, Kirchengeschichte. Ed. Joseph Bidez, Gunter Christian Hansen. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.

3. Bleckmann, B., 1992. Die Reichskrise des III. Jahrhunderts in der spätantiken und byzantinischen Geschichtsschreibung. Untersuchungen zu den nachdionischen Quellen der Chronik des Johannes Zonaras. Munich: tuduv-Verlagsgesellschaft.

4. Blockley, R. C., 1980. '"Was the First Book of Zosimus" New History Based on More Than Two Sources? ' .Byzantion 50, 393–402.

5. Cameron, A., 2004. Greek Mythography in the Roman World. Oxford: University Press.

6. Cameron, A., 2011. The Last Pagans of Rome. Oxford: University Press.

7. Festy, M., 1997. 'Le debut et la fin des Annales de Nicomaque Flavien ' . Historia 46, 465–478.

8. FHG II = Fragmenta historicorum Graecorum. Collegit, disposuit, notis et prolegomenis illustravit, indicibus instruxit Carolus Muller. Volumen secundum. Paris: Didot, 1848.

9. Fitton, J. D., 1976. Eunapius and the Idea of the Decline of the Roman Empire in Zosimus. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy. McMaster University <https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/handle/11375/15911>.

10. Freese, J. H., 1920. The Library of Photius. Volume I. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge / New York: Macmillan.

11. Hartmann, U., 2014. '"… und die Pronoia hat die Menschheit noch nicht verlassen". Die Konstruktion der Geistesgeschichte als pagane Gegenwelt in Eunaps Philosophenviten ' . In: B. Bleckmann, T. Stickler (eds.), Griechische Profanhistoriker des fünften nachchristlichen Jahrhunderts [= Historia. Einzelschriften 228]. Stuttgart: Steiner, 51–84.

12. Henry, R. 1959. Photius, Bibliothèque. Tome I (Codices 1–84). Ed. and trans. Rene Henry. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.

13. Henry, R., 1960. Photius, Bibliothèque. Tome II (Codices 84–185). Ed. and trans. Rene Henry. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.

14. Henry, R., 1962. Photius, Bibliothèque. Tome III (Codices 186–222). Ed. and trans. Rene Henry. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.

15. Liebeschuetz, W., 2003. 'Pagan Historiography and the Decline of the Empire ' . In: G. Marasco (ed.), Greek and Roman Historiography in Late Antiquity. Fourth to Sixth Century A.D. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 177–218.

16. Martinus, R. C., 1866. De fontibus Zosimi. Dissertatio inauguralis. Berlin: Schade. Ochoa, J. A., 1990. La transmisión de la Historia de Eunapio. Madrid: ACHH.

17. Paschoud, F., 1985. 'Eunapiana ' . In: J. Straub (ed.), Bonner Historia-Augusta-Colloquium 1982/83. Bonn: Habelt, 239–303.

18. Paschoud, F., 1992. Rev. 'J. A. Ochoa, La transmision de la Historia de Eunapio ' . Orpheus 13, 168–172.

19. Paschoud, F., 2000. Zosime, Histoire nouvelle. Tome I. Livres I–II. Ed. and trans. Francois Paschoud. New ed. Paris: Belles Lettres.

20. Paschoud, F., 2005. 'Questions d ' historiographie tardive: a propos de deux ouvrages recents ' . Antiquité tardive 13, 363–376.

21. Paschoud, F., 2006. Eunape, Olympiodore, Zosime. Scripta minora. Recueil d ' articles, avec addenda, corrigenda, mise à jour et indices. Bari: Edipuglia.

22. Reitemeier, I. F., 1780. 'De Zosimi fide ' . In: I. C. Volborth (ed.), Bibliotheca philologica II. Leipzig: Weygand, 225–235.

23. Ridley, R. T., 1969–70. 'Eunapius and Zosimus ' . Helikon 9–10, 574–592.

24. Rohrbacher, D., 2002. The Historians of Late Antiquity. London/New York: Routledge.

25. Schamp, J., 1987. 'Gelase ou Rufin: Un fait nouveau. Sur des fragments oublies de Gelase de Cesaree (CPG, N° 3521) ' . Byzantion 57, 360–390.

26. Schroder, H. O., 1940. 'Oreibasios ' . In: G. Wissowa (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Supplementband VII. Stuttgart: Metzler, 797–812.

27. Speck, P., 1991. 'Wie dumm darf Zosimos sein? Vorschlage zu seiner Neubewertung ' . Byzantinoslavica 52, 1–14.

28. Treadgold, W. T., 1980. The Nature of the Bibliotheca of Photius. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies.

29. Williams, F., 2009. The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis. Book I (Sects 1–46). Second edition, revised and expanded. Leiden/Boston: Brill.

30. Winkelmann, F., 2000. 'Zur nacheusebianischen christlichen Historiographie des 4. Jahrhunderts ' .In: C. Scholz, G. Makris (eds.), POLYPLEUROS NOUS. Miscellanea für Peter Schreiner zu seinem 60. Geburtstag [= Byzantinisches Archiv. Band 19]. Munich/Leipzig: Saur, 404–414.


published: 4 x per year
print price: 150 czk
ISSN: 0567-8269
E-ISSN: 2464-6830

Download