02-27-2013, 12:51 AM
The thesis:
provides several useful summaries of the views regarding the dating of The Aethiopica. For example:
"G.W. Bowersock22 (1994), having discussed some of the previous
contributions to the discussion of the date of Heliodoros, describes T.
Szepessy's interpretation of Ephraem as 'simply wrong'. Szepessy objected
that the tumuli in Ephraem's account of the siege of Nisibis could not be
compared with the earthworks which surrounded Syene. Bowersock asserts
that Szepessy was misled by the Latin translation of Ephraem which he used,
stating of the word there translated tumuli, "The Syriac plural ta/ala matches
precisely the use of Xdl.tcta to describe the earthworks in Heliodorus (9.3),
and Itatc is similarIty the word used in two places by Julian in his account of
the siege of Nisibis." Bowersock then points out that the embassies to
Hydaspes in Heliodoros X appear to be echoed in the Histonia Augusta:
Aurelian 33 includes Blemmyes, Exomitae (Aksumites) and giraffes; Aurelian
44 includes Blemmyes, Exomitae and Seres (Chinese). He argues that because
the Chinese would not historically have visited Ethiopia Heliodoros and the HA
are interdependent. He also suggests that the presence of cataphracts in both
the Aithiopika and the I-IA24 reflects a general interest in this type of armour
among late fourth century writers; and concludes that the HA imitated
Heliodoros."
with also a useful summary of the Lightfoot article quoted above:
"C. S. Lightfoot Hi.sioria 37 (1988) 105-125, in a fine and detailed study of the
historical siege of Nisibis, concludes that Julian's accounts contain a mixture of
factual information (in particular, that the city walls were breached by a torrent
of water released against them), and of fiction (in particular the idea that a dyke
erected around the city produced a lake upon which ships could sail21).
Lightfoot assumes that Julian imitated the fictional components of his account
from 1-leliodoros, and provides perhaps the strongest argument on the side of
those who believe that Julian imitated Heliodoros. Of course, even with
Lightfoot's view of the evidence, it remains possible that the fictional elements
in Julian's account were invented by himself and imitated by Heliodoros, or
derived from a source (not necessarily an historical account of the third siege of
Nisibis) which he shared with Heliodoros. The links between Heliodoros' siege
of Syene and what Lightfoot regards as the/actual elements in the sources for
the siege of Nisibis are slight: the diversion of a river, and the collapse of part
of the city walls under the weight of water. However, against those who
would use Lightfoot's arguments to support a third century date for
Heliodoros, the argument that contemporary public interest in the siege of
Nisibis is required to explain why Heliodoros included the siege of Syene in the
Aithiopika, an incident not essential to the plot, retains its validity."
'HELIODOROS AITHIOPIKA I:
A COMMENTARY WITH PROLEGOMENA
Submitted for the degree of Ph. D.
in the University of London
by
John William Birchall
of
University College London
(Department of Greek and Latin)
1996
A COMMENTARY WITH PROLEGOMENA
Submitted for the degree of Ph. D.
in the University of London
by
John William Birchall
of
University College London
(Department of Greek and Latin)
1996
provides several useful summaries of the views regarding the dating of The Aethiopica. For example:
"G.W. Bowersock22 (1994), having discussed some of the previous
contributions to the discussion of the date of Heliodoros, describes T.
Szepessy's interpretation of Ephraem as 'simply wrong'. Szepessy objected
that the tumuli in Ephraem's account of the siege of Nisibis could not be
compared with the earthworks which surrounded Syene. Bowersock asserts
that Szepessy was misled by the Latin translation of Ephraem which he used,
stating of the word there translated tumuli, "The Syriac plural ta/ala matches
precisely the use of Xdl.tcta to describe the earthworks in Heliodorus (9.3),
and Itatc is similarIty the word used in two places by Julian in his account of
the siege of Nisibis." Bowersock then points out that the embassies to
Hydaspes in Heliodoros X appear to be echoed in the Histonia Augusta:
Aurelian 33 includes Blemmyes, Exomitae (Aksumites) and giraffes; Aurelian
44 includes Blemmyes, Exomitae and Seres (Chinese). He argues that because
the Chinese would not historically have visited Ethiopia Heliodoros and the HA
are interdependent. He also suggests that the presence of cataphracts in both
the Aithiopika and the I-IA24 reflects a general interest in this type of armour
among late fourth century writers; and concludes that the HA imitated
Heliodoros."
with also a useful summary of the Lightfoot article quoted above:
"C. S. Lightfoot Hi.sioria 37 (1988) 105-125, in a fine and detailed study of the
historical siege of Nisibis, concludes that Julian's accounts contain a mixture of
factual information (in particular, that the city walls were breached by a torrent
of water released against them), and of fiction (in particular the idea that a dyke
erected around the city produced a lake upon which ships could sail21).
Lightfoot assumes that Julian imitated the fictional components of his account
from 1-leliodoros, and provides perhaps the strongest argument on the side of
those who believe that Julian imitated Heliodoros. Of course, even with
Lightfoot's view of the evidence, it remains possible that the fictional elements
in Julian's account were invented by himself and imitated by Heliodoros, or
derived from a source (not necessarily an historical account of the third siege of
Nisibis) which he shared with Heliodoros. The links between Heliodoros' siege
of Syene and what Lightfoot regards as the/actual elements in the sources for
the siege of Nisibis are slight: the diversion of a river, and the collapse of part
of the city walls under the weight of water. However, against those who
would use Lightfoot's arguments to support a third century date for
Heliodoros, the argument that contemporary public interest in the siege of
Nisibis is required to explain why Heliodoros included the siege of Syene in the
Aithiopika, an incident not essential to the plot, retains its validity."
Francis Hagan
The Barcarii
The Barcarii
