Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
CtesiasandtheImportanceofHisWritingsRevisited
17
Unfortunately,Photius’methodsinhisepitomesarenotentirelyclear,59andthisfact
hindersatrueappreciationofsuchlostworksasthatofCtesias.60Yet,comparedwith
Plutarch’saccount,hissectionspertainingtotheperiodofArtaxerxesIIseemextremely
succinct.61Thisconclusionbecomesapparentwhenonebearsinmindthenotoriously
lengthynatureofCtesias’descriptions(cf.below).Therearesignsthatoriginalspeeches
andwholeconversationswereremovedbyPhotius,orreducedbyhimtoindirectspeech
(cf.F16.67andPlut.Art.15.1-7).62Somedetailsaremissing.Forinstance,inPhotius’
summaryoftheaccountofthebattleofCunaxa,Tissaphernes,thePersianSatrapdoes
notappear,yethisroleseemstohaveimportanceinthenarrative,judgedbyotherpas-
sages(cf.F24,27.68)andfromtherewardsheisknowntohavereceived(Diod.Sic.
14.26.4);itismoreprobablethatPhotiusshortenedtheoriginalversion.63Outofcare-
lessness,apparently,thepatriarchrefersonlytoananonymouspersonwhopickedupthe
blood-soakedsaddleclothofCyrustheYoungerafterhewashit(F16.67:¢PToξέPξng
δ™POVδωKST™iTVέγKOVTiT{VΚύPoUπqXoV),andnottothefactthatitwasanattendant
ofMithridates(Plut.Art.11.6),whoislatertoplayasignificantroleinthenextscenes,
ascanbeinferredfromPlutarch(Art.11.5,14.5,15-16)andfromPhotius’subsequent
reading(¢PToξέPξngπOPέδωKSVOrTnσOμέVniΜiTPOδdTnVΠOPUσdTiδi,Tπ.TPOπέζng
μSγOXOUXήσOVTOBπoKTSqVOiΚ‡PoV...).64AsummarywritteninhasteisalsoPhotius’
briefnotethattheCarian,theotherpersonwhofatallyinjuredCyrustheYounger,istor-
turedbyParysatis,allegedlyofherownaccord(F16.67),astatementwhichisseennot
tobeaccuratebycomparisontoPlutarch(Art.14.10).65Photiusisnotquicktocorrect
himself,afterhehadamistake;atonepointhebelievesthatthekinghimselfseveredthe
headofCyrustheYounger(F16.64:KO.OrKiσμ{gTo‡σώμOTogΚύPoU‰π{TBδSXφo‡
¢PToξέPξoU·TήVTSγ@PKSφOX[VKO.T[VXSqPO,μSfl’egT{V¢PToξέPξnVVβOXXSV,
OˆT{gBπέTSμS,KO.TflPidμβSUσSV),butafterwardswroteasifitwasanotherperson
(F16.67:łΒOγOπdToUTo‡BπoTSμόVTogπPoσTdξSiβOσiXέωgT[VKSφOX[VBπ{To‡
σώμOTogΚύPoU;correspondingtoPlut.Art.17).Anotherinferencefromthiscompari-
sontoPlutarchisthatPhotius’summaryappearserroneousandevenself-contradictory
59
Ondifferentconjectureswithregardtohismethodssee:Wilson1968;1983:95[onwritingfrom
memory];Lemerle1986:39-40,223-224;Hägg1973:213-218[ondiversemethods].RegardingPhotius’
reliability,seeGoossens1950(esp.519onhisreadingofCtesias).OnthemannerinwhichPhotiusadapted
hisoriginal,seeHägg1973:97-116.
60
OnPhotius’summaryofCtesias,seeBigwood1976:2-5;Stronk2010:34-35,141-146,whodoes
notexcludethepossibilitythatPhotiususedanalteredcopyofthework,perhapsevenanepitomeofthe
Persica,andonemadebyPamphilaofEpidaurus(1stcenturyCE).Yet,themistakesPhotiusmakes(below)
seemtoreflectareadingoftheoriginal.
61
SeeBigwood(1989:308)ontheIndica.Incomparisonwithanotherwork,itappearsthatPhotius’
versionatacertainpointislessthanafifthoftheoriginalaccount.
62
SeeGera1993:207-208.Photiuswasinterestedonlyinthecontentofthedescriptionsandlessin
theirstructureorform;cf.Bigwood1989:311.
63
SeeBigwood1983:355n.64.Plutarchalsoseemstominimizethissatrap’srole.SeeWylie1992:128.
64
TheconclusionofBinder(2008:233-234)thatadifferentsourceisusedbyPlutarchisnotneeded.
65
ItseemsinconceivablethatParysatishadtheauthoritytoexecutetheCarianherself;indeedimmedi-
atelyafterwards(F16.67),PhotiushimselfremarksthatParysatisrequestedMithridatesoftheking.There
isnoreasontoinferconclusionsbasedonthiscarelesssummary.Cf.Brosius1996:114n.76.Cf.Bigwood
1976:4n.13,whoclaimsthat“PhotiushasperhapsbeenledastraybythefateoftheCarianeunuch[sic!],
whichhedescribedintheprecedingsentence.”
