Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Theopompus, and the Historical Marvel

The Rhetoric of Myth and the Myth of Rhetoric

Bibliographic Data

ID20041024
AuthorsDaniele Miano (0000-0003-4408-5192, corresponding author)
Year2023
Pages34-63
Publication date2023-01-09
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeCHAPTER
VenueMyth and History in the Historiography of Early Rome (SOURCE_BOOK)
PublisherBrill (PUBLISHER • NL)
DOI10.1163/9789004534506_004
OpenAlexW4352990978
ISBN9789004534506
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited11

a rationalist when it comes to myth, but a flexible rationalist, ready to make exceptions. 4 This view was formulated in a particularly clear and concise way by Anouk Delcourt:On le voit : Denys ne rejette pas systématiquement les éléments fabuleuxne reconnaît-il pas quelque utilité philosophique aux mythes?-, mais se donne le droit de le faire s'ils viennent contredire sa logique rationaliste.Il démontre ici encore la profonde originalité avec laquelle il exploite le bagage que lui livrent ses sources. 5 For Wiseman, the matter of whether or not historians wanted to include mythical stories was mostly a question depending on their own theological beliefs, and Dionysius would be prone to accepting all mythical narratives and include them in his historiographical work. 6 In a recent article, this argument was further expanded by Driediger-Murphy, who believes that Dionysius' use of myth was not only influenced by his views on gods, but that his methods for distinguishing history from myth had a strong theological consistency. 7 In her words:From a historiographic perspective, then, Dionysius seems to have thought that some Roman myths were true and some false, and that he himself was able to tell the difference.The criteria by which he made this judgement are complex (and not always obvious to the modern reader), but they can be shown to have internal consistency when they are regarded as theological criteria, derived from Dionysius' own ideas about what the gods were like and what they were and were not able to do.Dionysius seems to have had principles and ideas on what the gods were and how they operated in history, but he really does not seem to apply these principles consistently.Dionysius, as Driediger-Murphy points out, is clearly sceptical about the divine parentage of Romulus, slightly less so about that of Servius Tullius, and explicitly writes that he does not think that gods have intercourse with women.However, in other parts of his work he accepts without hesitation the genealogy of Dardanus from Zeus and a daughter of King Atlas, in order to prove that the Trojans were Greeks, and, indirectly, so were the Romans (Ant.Rom.1.61).The general principles, therefore, are subordinated to the political message, and not vice versa

Aesthetics · Art · Literature · Mythology · Rhetoric · Theology · Classical Antiquity Studies · Historical and Literary Studies · Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies · Philosophy