Boucquey Thierry (General Editor). Encyclopedia Of World Writers. 3 volumes

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

wiser than Socrates. “No” was the answer. Pon-

dering this, Socrates realized how little he really

knew and concluded that he must have been pro-

claimed wisest only because he appreciated how

ignorant he was. His mission, then, would be to

procure the assistance of other wise men in his

quest for that which is invariably and eternally

true, particularly regarding the virtues of individ-

uals and societies.

From this is derived the image that most peo-

ple today have of Socrates (probably an accurate

one): a barefoot, robed, bearded individual wan-

dering and pondering throughout the city of

Athens. He has also been described as being subject

to fits of abstraction, and Aristophanes has de-

picted him as strutting like a duck and habitually

rolling his eyes, until he arrives at some suitably

public arena. Here, he buttonholes an ostensibly

wise man—a teacher or a politician, for example—

and grills him before an audience in a painstaking

truth-seeking exercise that ultimately shows the

supposed authority to be uninformed at best, fool-

ish at worst, and always a less-than-rigorous

thinker.

This process was the so-called Socratic method,

exemplified by the philosopher PLATO,Socrates’

most illustrious pupil, in many of his dialogues.

Critic David Denby describes the Socratic method

like this:

Socrates the great teacher seems to flatter his

students and friends, praising them extrava-

gantly. Oh, yes, they’re so wise, so clever, and

his own powers are so feeble, so terribly feeble!

But he’d just like to ask them some small ques-

tion: What do they mean by such-and-such a

word, such-and-such an idea? And then wham!

he catches them in some contradiction or con-

fusion, and they’re knocked sprawling.

According to Plato, Socrates himself referred to

the process as “midwifery,” believing the answers

already existed in the minds of his students and

needed merely to be “birthed” by a skilled special-

ist. It can be assumed that Socrates’ principal goal

was elucidation and not humiliation, but that did

not detract from the entertainment value of his

methods.

Socrates’ marriage to Xanthippe is another de-

tail of the great philosopher’s life with which most

modern readers are familiar. History paints her as

a scold, a nag, and a shrew. Another viewpoint de-

picts her as a devoted and long-suffering woman

whose husband did not provide adequately for his

family. (Socrates and Xanthippe had at least one

son, possibly two or more.) As the scholar I. F.

Stone suggests, “Xanthippe had a lifetime of try-

ing to make ends meet and feed the children while

[Socrates] went around enjoying himself in philo-

sophical discourse. Socrates’ constant boast that

unlike the Sophists he never took a fee from his

pupils was a luxury for which his poor wife paid

the bill.”

After Sparta’s victory in the Peloponnesian

War, Athens was ruled briefly by a brutal right-

wing oligarchy known as the Thirty Tyrants.

When democracy was restored, Socrates was

brought to trial on two charges:“not worshipping

the gods whom the State worships, but introduc-

ing new and unfamiliar religious practices” and

“corrupting the young.” Some critics have sug-

gested that Socrates was really indicted because

he had been the teacher of two of the rebels and

because he remained in Athens during the ter-

rorist dictatorship without protesting the activi-

ties of the regime. In any event, he was found

guilty and sentenced to death. Plato’s Phaedo

claims to recount the last day of Socrates’ life,

which ended when he drank hemlock, a poison.

(In fact, Plato was absent from that occasion due

to travel or illness.)

Critical Analysis

What is known of Socrates’ teachings and beliefs

has been construed from his biographers and de-

fenders, namely XENOPHON, ARISTOTLE, Aristo-

phanes, and especially Plato.

Xenophon, a historian, former pupil, and disci-

ple, defended Socrates against his indictment by

portraying him as a popular teacher of morality

Socrates 281

and ethics, while Aristotle praised Socrates’ use of

“inductive arguments”and “universal definitions.”

Xenophon’s works about Socrates include his

Memorabilia and Symposium. In Clouds, Aristo-

phanes depicts a deceitful farmer who enrolls his

son in a school of philosophy known as the

Thinkery, hoping he will become crafty enough

to figure out how to erase his debts. Socrates is de-

picted as “traversing the air and contemplating the

sun.” Plato, in his Dialogues, attributed some be-

liefs to Socrates that were not his, like the theory

of Forms that is so characteristic of Platonism.

Socrates was, first and foremost, concerned

with ethics and human excellence, and he looked

for generalities or universal definitions through

specifics. He classified values as either intrinsic or

instrumental, i.e., serving as a means or agent to

another end. Knowledge, integrity, and valor have

intrinsic value since they are esteemed for them-

selves, whereas physical beauty, wealth, and power

have only instrumental value as they are appreci-

ated only because of what further use they can be,

and may be ill-used as well. Only that which has

intrinsic value can give an individual excellence

and make him happy. Socrates believed that virtue

was synonymous with wisdom and that happiness

lies in virtue. Therefore, wickedness could only be

a consequence of ignorance, for why would some-

one knowingly choose to be unhappy? In Plato’s

Apology, the character of Socrates describes him-

self like this:

“And so I go about the world obedient to the

god, and search and make inquiry into the wis-

dom of anyone, whether citizen or stranger,

who appears to be wise, and if he is not wise,

then in vindication of the oracle I show him

that he is not wise; and my own action quite

absorbs me, and I have not time to give either

to any matter of public interest or to any con-

cern of my own.”

In the Prelude to The Trial of Socrates (which

begins,“No other trial, except that of Jesus, has left

so vivid an impression on the imagination of West-

ern man as that of Socrates”), I. F. Stone discusses

the mutual debt of Plato and Socrates:

It is to Plato’s literary genius that Socrates owes

his preeminent position as a secular saint of

Western civilization. And it is Socrates who

keeps Plato on the best-seller lists. Plato is the

only philosopher who turned metaphysics into

drama. Without the enigmatic and engaging

Socrates as the principal character of his di-

alogs, Plato would not be the one philosopher

who continues to charm a wide audience in

every generation.

Yet it is Socrates who has influenced the whole

of Western thought. His teachings on ethics and

the way he lived his life—according to his be-

liefs—have been followed by philosophers ever

since. Socrates’ impact on modern thought con-

tinues to the present day in the way we define

such concepts as ethics, morals, ignorance, and

wisdom.

Works about Socrates

Bowen, Richard and Iassen Ghiuselev. Socrates: Greek

Philosopher. Broomall, Pa.: Mason Crest Publish-

ers, 2002.

Brann, Eva. The Music of the Republic: Essays on

Socrates’ Conversations and Plato’s Writings.

Philadelphia: Paul Dry Books, 2004.

Kreeft, Peter. Philosophy 101 by Socrates: An Introduc-

tion to Philosophy. Ft. Collins, Colo.: Ignatius

Press, 2002.

Plato. Apology. Edited by James J. Helm. Wauconda,

Ill.: Bolchazy-Carducci, 1997.

Plato. Phaedo. Translated by G. M. A. Grube. Indi-

anapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1976.

Stone, I. F. The Trial of Socrates. New York: Double-

day, 1989.

Xenophon. Conversations of Socrates. Translated by

Hugh Trednnick. New York: Penguin Classics,

1990.

282 Socrates

Song of Igor, The (1185–1196) epic poem

Composed between 1185 and 1196 in southern

Russia, The Song of Igor is a heroic

EPIC recounting

the defeat of Prince Igor’s forces from the city of

Novgorod-Seversk by a Polish army. Apparently

composed by a well-educated nobleman whose

name is no longer known, it is said to be the most

artistically complete work of old Russian epic liter-

ature.

Like most traditional epics, The Song of Igor was

intended to be performed and accompanied by

music, and was only later set down in writing. The

book is divided into five sections. In the introduc-

tion, the author addresses his audience as brothers

and explains that, unlike other epics, he has striven

not only to create beautiful music but also to re-

count historical events. He then begins his narra-

tion of Igor’s adventures. Despite the bad omen of

a solar eclipse, Igor, his brother Vsevolod, and their

sons prepare themselves for battle against a no-

madic Polish force, a battle they will ultimately lose.

To contrast this defeat, which is caused by Igor

and his brother’s egoistical quest for personal glory,

the second chapter recounts the victorious battle

of the righteous Grand Duke Svyatoslav in the old

Russian capital of Kiev. This is followed by a com-

plaint spoken by Igor’s young wife for her absent

husband, who has been imprisoned by the Polish

enemy. The poem closes with a retelling of Igor’s

daring escape from prison and return to his wife.

Though the heroic epic enjoyed a golden age in

the old Russian capital of Kiev in the 12th century,

The Song of Igor stands apart for its poetic sophis-

tication and dramatic force. Characters’ moral and

political predicaments are vividly described, and

the action itself is presented with much energy and

pathos. These elements allow favorable compari-

son of the work to other medieval European epics,

from the Old English

BEOWULF, to the Middle High

German

NIBELUNGENLIED to the Old French SONG OF

ROLAND

The manuscript of The Song of Igor, together

with other old Russian texts, was discovered in a

monastery library in the late 18th century by

Count Mussin-Puschkin, the Procurator-General

of the Holy Synod in St. Petersburg. Copies of the

manuscript were published in 1800, and it found a

large audience due to the newfound interest in

Russia and Europe, in medieval nationalistic epics,

and in the high literary quality of the work. The

original manuscript was later lost in a fire, but

thanks to the 1800 republication, the work has

been preserved in its entirety.

An English Version of The Song of Igor

The Song of Igor’s Campaign, An Epic of the Twelfth

Century. Translated by Vladimir Nabokov. New

York: Ardis, 1989.

A Work about The Song of Igor

Mann, Robert. Lances Sing: A Study of the Igor Tale.

Columbus, Ohio: Slavica, 1990.

Song of Roland (Chanson de Roland)

(ca. 1030–1070) epic poem

The best-known French EPIC poem of the MIDDLE

AGES, the Song of Roland, is an exciting story of war

and treachery, heroic knights and Christian faith—

all set in a medieval world in which loyalties and

chivalry collide. One scholar, Bernard Cerquilini,

has said, “The reason we are medievalists is to

study the Song of Roland.”

The poem is based on an actual event. In 778,

Charlemagne, the king of the Franks, who had

been campaigning in Spain, was returning to

France through the Pyrenees Mountains when his

rearguard was ambushed by Basques at a pass

called Roncevaux and killed to the last man. The

dead included Roland, Lord of the Breton

Marches. The story of this attack was recorded ear-

lier by the Frankish noble Einhard (Life of Charle-

magne, ca. 829–836). Almost 200 years later, the

story of this battle became the focus of an Anglo-

Norman French poem called the Chanson de

Roland (Song of Roland). The poem is now housed

in a manuscript in the Bodleian Library in Oxford,

England, and its last line reads: “Ci faut la geste ke

Song of Roland 283

Turoldus declinet,” which means, “Here ends the

tale that Turoldus used for his poem.”

The true source or sources for the poem, how-

ever, are not known. The Song of Roland makes

mention several times of an ancienne geste or geste

Francor, a tale of heroic deeds written by the baron

Saint-Gilles, who was supposedly present at the

battle of Roncevaux. But this source, which may

have been in Latin and was certainly much later

than the battle, has not survived.

The poem may have originally been the work of

a jongleur or minstrel, who sang it to entertain

noble audiences. Many later manuscripts of the

Song of Roland are based on the Bodleian manu-

script, though they all differ in many ways from the

original.

The date of the French poem indicates that it

was influenced by the Christians’ struggle against

the Muslims in the first CRUSADE (1095–99). The

author turned the original story (where Charle-

magne actually fought in alliance with a Muslim

prince in Spain) into a fight between the forces of

Islam and Christendom.

Critical Analysis

The Song of Roland consists of some 4,000, 10-

syllable lines, divided into laisses, or strophes of

varying numbers of lines. The poetic technique is

that of assonance, or similar vowel sounds at the

ends of lines, and occasional rhymes. There is

some repetition and sometimes different versions

of the same lines within the poem, perhaps be-

cause it was copied incorrectly or because more

than one source manuscript was used.

The story begins by telling us that Charlemagne

has been fighting the Saracens in Spain for seven

years. The Saracen king of Saragossa, Marsile, ad-

mits that his army cannot defeat the Christians.

After he decides to pretend to convert to Chris-

tianity and become Charles’vassal to get the Chris-

tians to leave the country, he sends messengers to

Charlemagne’s camp.

Roland, the emperor’s nephew and a favorite

and most valiant knight, opposes the plan, warn-

ing that the Saracens have been treacherous in the

past, killing the envoys Basan and Basile. Ganelon,

Roland’s stepfather, thinks they should accept the

offer. When another knight, Naimon, argues per-

suasively that it is best to show mercy to an enemy

who cannot win, the army finally agrees.

Charles decides to send a messenger to Marsile

with the news, but when Roland volunteers,

Charles refuses to let him go. Roland then suggests

that Ganelon should go, and everyone agrees, but

Ganelon is angered because he perceives Roland’s

suggestion as an insult to his honor, perhaps for

not having volunteering himself. Roland does not

take Ganelon’s anger seriously and laughs, unwit-

tingly inciting Ganelon’s desire for revenge. As a

result, when Ganelon meets with Marsile, they plot

together to destroy Charlemagne’s rearguard.

Ganelon returns to the Christian army with

hostages that Marsile sends as a false pledge of

good faith. As the army is about to cross the Pyre-

nees, Ganelon convinces Charlemagne that Roland

should be left in command of the rearguard.

Roland, though he does not know the whole of

Ganelon’s treachery, realizes his suggestion is mali-

cious. He denounces Ganelon but accepts the task,

swearing that Charlemagne will cross safely over

the mountains.

When the main part of the army is over the

pass, the Saracens attack the rearguard as Ganelon

had planned. Oliver, Roland’s friend, sees them

coming and asks Roland to blow his horn to sum-

mon Charles and the rest of the army back to help

them fight the Saracens. Roland refuses because

he feels it is his duty to fight the battle for his lord;

anything less, he believes, would be shameful.

Roland and Oliver quarrel over this, but Roland

will not be moved.

The battle is bloody. Beside Roland and Oliver

is Archbishop Turpin, a priest, who does not hesi-

tate to kill Saracens with his own hands. Roland

soon realizes, despite some initial success, that the

rearguard has no chance of winning the battle.

When he finally blows his horn to alert Charle-

magne to the ambush, the veins in his temple

284 Song of Roland

burst. Oliver too has been mortally wounded, and

as they both lay dying, they make up their quarrel.

Only when he is the last man alive does Roland

lie down under a tree and take his final breath:

He proffered his right glove to God;

Saint Gabriel took it from his hand.

Roland laid his head down over his arm;

With his hands joined, he went to his end.

(ll. 2389–92)

The Archangel Gabriel and St. Michael are sent

from God to bring Roland’s soul to heaven.

When he hears the horn, Charlemagne realizes

Ganelon’s treachery and has him put in chains. He

finds the bodies of Roland and the other heroes,

then pursues the Saracens and defeats them. In the

meantime, the emir Baligant has roused an enor-

mous force of Saracens from the eastern king-

doms, and they arrive in Spain to help Marsile.

Charlemagne defeats and kills the emir in single

combat.

On their return to Aix-la-Chapelle, Ganelon is

put on trial. He defends himself by saying he had

the right to avenge his honor, which Roland had

impugned. His ally, Pinabel, concurs with this view

and says that anyone who wants to convict

Ganelon must fight him. The court is ready to ac-

quit Ganelon when Thierry, one of the smallest

and slenderest of the knights, agrees to fight Pin-

abel. Because God is with Thierry, he defeats Pin-

abel, and Ganelon is executed. Only then does the

Archangel Gabriel return to call Charlemagne back

to war.

Some critics, including Pierre Le Gentil, see the

Song of Roland as a tragedy, believing that Roland’s

pride and anger against Ganelon lead to an unnec-

essary loss of life at Roncevaux. The poem contains

details that skillfully foreshadow the tragedy, as

when Ganelon drops the glove that Charlemagne

holds out to him as he accepts his mission. Other

critics, however, including Robert Cook, believe

that Roland is not proud but acts in perfect accord

with the rules of

CHIVALRY: “He is at Roncevaux to

represent Charles, and his first duty is not to him-

self....Roland has already committed himself to

fight if attacked, and if he calls for help instead he

will be breaking his word.”

The characters in Song of Roland are portrayed

as larger than life. Roland is the fiercest knight,

Oliver the wisest. Charlemagne is portrayed as a

venerable old man with a white beard, though in

reality he was only 36 at the time of the Saracen

battle. He is a religious leader as well as a warrior

for whom God works miracles, making the sun

stand still while he fights the Saracens.

The author seems to have known very little

about the actual beliefs of Muslims. He represents

them as “pagans,” worshipping not only

MUHAM-

MAD but also Apollo as idols. Nevertheless, the poet

celebrates the bravery of individual Muslims. Of

Baligant he says,“Oh God, if he were a Christian, /

what a noble baron!” (l. 3164). For Christians, on

the other hand, fighting with a pure heart against

God’s enemies means martyrdom and an assur-

ance of reaching heaven. The poem’s ultimate mes-

sage appears to be that individual destinies and

quarrels have no place when the ultimate fate of

Christendom is at stake. The times called for hero-

ism from every man.

The Song of Roland had an immense influence

on the development of medieval epics. Later poets

from many lands developed the legend of Roland

and Charlemagne’s other warriors into a whole se-

ries of epics, including Matteo Maria Boiardo’s Or-

lando Innamorato (1487) and Lodovico Ariosto’s

Orlando Furioso (1516).

An English Version of the Song of Roland

The Song of Roland. Translated by Glyn Burgess. New

York: Penguin Books, 1990.

Works about the Song of Roland

Cook, Robert Francis. The Sense of the Song of Roland.

Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1987.

Le Gentil, Pierre. The Chanson de Roland. Translated

by Frances F. Beer. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard

University Press, 1969.

Song of Roland 285

Sophocles (ca. 496 B.C.–ca. 405 B.C.)

playwright

Sophocles, son of the wealthy Sophilus of Colonus,

was born near Athens. He was good-looking and a

talented dancer and musician who led public victory

hymns as a teenager. His lyre instructor was Lam-

prus, who was a widely celebrated master of tradi-

tional Greek music. Sophocles’ true love, however,

was the theater, and after a few appearances as an

actor in his own youthful productions, he devoted

himself entirely to the writing of Greek tragedies.

Sophocles was widely admired and his work

was a popular success. His first of 24 competitive

dramatic victories came in 468

B.C., when he

bested the venerable

AESCHYLUS in a theatrical con-

test. He penned nearly 125 dramas—of which a

mere seven survive—and supplanted Aeschylus as

the poet of Athens.

Sophocles was also active in public life, serving

as treasurer of the Athenian Empire (443–442

B.C.)

and as general (441–440

B.C.). During the unsuc-

cessful revolt of Samos around 412 B.C., he was ap-

pointed to a board of commissioners in the

aftermath of the doomed Sicilian expedition. He

was also a lay priest in the cult of Asclepius, a deity

of healing, and was associated with other well-

known men of letters, including the historian

HERODOTUS; Archelaus, a natural scientist and

teacher of SOCRATES; and the many-talented and

prolific Ion of Chios.

Upon the death of his fellow tragedian

EURIPIDES

in 406 B.C., Sophocles expressed his respect and

grief by clothing actors in mourning dress during a

rehearsal for a drama competition. He himself died

not long after, and his play Oedipus at Colonus was

produced posthumously by his grandson. Yale pro-

fessor Eric A. Havelock writes that Sophocles “was

remembered and celebrated as an example of the

fortunate life, genial, accomplished, and serene.”

Sophoclean tragedy is tense, startling, and dis-

quieting. The cast of characters tends to be com-

paratively small, and the individuals’ personal

natures are boiled down to the essentials, so the

significance of each action is intensified. Action in

Sophocles’ plays is always indicative of character.

Causality is a prominent theme, with separate fac-

tors often combining to produce to an inevitable

result. Sophocles’ tragic vision is that life exists

only at the price of suffering.

Ajax was produced around 442

B.C. and is

thought to be Sophocles’ earliest extant play. Its title

character is a Trojan warrior whose bitterness over

losing the armor of the legendary Achilles to a rival

drives him mad, and he slaughters a flock of sheep,

believing they are his Greek foes.When Ajax regains

his reason, shame drives him to take his own life.

His compatriots are persuaded to give him an hon-

orable burial in a typically Sophoclean scene that

sees an outcast reconciled with God and society.

The Women of Trachis (ca. 420s B.C.) is one of

the few Greek tragedies that features Heracles

(Hercules in Latin). Although a stunningly popu-

lar mythological figure, Heracles was rarely a the-

atrical subject. The play takes place during the last

of Heracles’ famed 12 labors. His wife is duped

into giving him a poisoned garment that so scalds

his skin he chooses to be burned alive on a pyre.

In Electra (ca. 415 B.C.), the playwright tells of

the familial curse on the House of Atreus that

Aeschylus so thoroughly dramatized. The title char-

acter in Philoctetes (ca. 409 B.C.) is a Greek hero

who has angered the gods by accidentally stum-

bling onto one of their sacred sites. He suffers di-

vine retribution but is mysteriously rescued from

his punishment. Critics, including

ARISTOTLE,have

censured the play’s use of the artificial device of

DEUS EX MACHINA to bring the play to a conclusion.

Oedipus the King (ca. 427 B.C.) dramatizes the

deeply tragic yet fascinating story of the King of

Thebes and how he unwittingly brought pestilence

to his realm and ruin to his family and himself. In

Oedipus at Colonus, the erstwhile sovereign—aged,

exiled, blinded, and broken—is sent by the gods to

his death, but not before finding redemption. Pro-

duced at roughly the same time as Ajax, Antigone

follows one of the daughters of the late king, whose

only crime is wishing to see her slain brothers

buried properly, and who pays for it with her life.

286 Sophocles

These three productions are collectively known as

the “Theban Plays.”

Critical Analysis

As Oedipus the King opens, a group of suppliants

stands before the royal palace beseeching their

ruler to save Thebes from a deadly blight that has

ravaged the city: plants are not bearing fruit, live-

stock are sick, and women are barren.

A priest reminds Oedipus that he rescued the

city once before, directly upon his arrival in

Thebes, when he freed the people from the tyranny

of the cruel Sphinx by solving the beast’s riddle.

(The riddle asks what walks on four legs in the

morning, two in midday, and three at night, and

the answer is “Man”: as a crawling infant, as an

adult, and as an elderly person with a cane.)

Oedipus’s brother-in-law, who has just paid

tribute at the temple of Apollo, reports that, ac-

cording to the god, the land has been defiled by the

presence of the slayer of King Laius, who was killed

by robbers while in an embassy. Shortly thereafter,

Oedipus muses how, having restored order in

Thebes, he had won the hand of Laius’s widowed

queen, Jocasta.

The murderer must be located and either ex-

iled or executed, according to the report; only then

will Thebes be purified and fruitfulness restored.

Oedipus promises that anyone who comes forth

with knowledge of the homicide will not be

harmed, but all Thebans are forbidden to shelter

the guilty man. As for the killer himself, Oedipus

proclaims:

Upon the murderer I invoke this curse—

whether he is one man and all unknown,

or one of many—may he wear out his life

in misery to miserable doom! If with my

knowledge he lives at my hearth

I pray that I myself may feel my curse.

(ll. 246–251)

Little by little, the awful saga unfolds. Jocasta re-

veals that, years ago, an oracle had warned Laius

that he would die at the hands of their son; so

when a son was born, they left him abandoned on

a hillside. Oedipus, with growing dread, recalls

that, although he was reared by the king and queen

of Corinth and considered them his parents, he

was once accused by a drunken dinner guest of

being illegitimate. Furthermore, an invocation of

Apollo foretold his doom: to murder his father and

lie with his mother. With horror, monstrous real-

ization dawns: Oedipus was the abandoned son.

He had encountered Laius that fateful day and

murdered him in a fit of pique, then married his

wife—Oedipus’s mother. A tortured Jocasta hangs

herself, while Oedipus puts out his own eyes with

her brooches and banishes himself:

I do not know with what eyes I could look

upon my father when I die and go

under the earth, nor yet my wretched

mother—

those two to whom I have done things

deserving

worse punishment than hanging....

And my city,

its towers and sacred places of the Gods,

of these I robbed my miserable self

when I commanded all to drive him out,

the criminal since proved by God impure

and of the race of Laius.

(ll. 1372–1383)

Sophoclean audiences would have been familiar

with the tale of Oedipus, so the tragedian’s task was

to make the narrative interesting in a new way. He

did this by introducing irony into every possible

situation to create intense dramatic tension. Oedi-

pus, the famed solver of riddles, is stumped by the

circumstances of his own birth, marriage, and

kingship. He is symbolically blinded by pride and

arrogance when he is literally a seeing man, and

after he “sees” the truth, he blinds himself physi-

cally. He accuses a blind prophet, a “seer” who

grasps that Oedipus killed his father and married

his mother, of lying in an effort to seize the throne.

Sophocles 287

However, like Sophocles’ other protagonists, Oedi-

pus is shown ultimately to be a man of some

honor, as he refuses to take his own life, but rather

accepts the fate that he himself meted out and the

gods ordained.

“A full study of the influence of Sophocles on

modern literature has yet to be written,” according

to Harvard professor Ruth Scodel.“The task would

be immense, touching on the histories of scholar-

ship, reading and education....While works which

use explicitly Sophoclean themes are not hard to

find, often those where Sophocles has been used

less obviously have used him more profoundly....

At once satisfying, disturbing, and frightening, the

Sophoclean world seems inexhaustible.”

English Versions of Works by Sophocles

The Oedipus Plays of Sophocles: Oedipus the King,

Oedipus at Kolonos, and Antigone. Translated by

Robert Bagg. Introduction by Mary Bagg. Boston:

University of Massachusetts Press, 2004.

Sophocles I. Translated by David Grene. Chicago: Uni-

versity of Chicago Press, 1991.

Theban Plays. Translated by Peter Meineck and Paul

Woodruff. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press,

2004.

Works about Sophocles

Beer, Josh. Sophocles and the Tragedy of Athenian

Democracy. Oxford, U.K.: Greenwood Publishing,

2004.

Budelmann, Felix. Language of Sophocles: Communal-

ity, Communication and Involvement. Cambridge,

U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Scodel, Ruth. Sophocles. Boston: Twayne Publishers,

1984.

Strabo (ca. 63 B.C.–ca. A.D. 24) geographer,

historian

With the rise of the Roman Empire, the political in-

fluence of the Greeks diminished. However, Greece

remained a center of intellectual and literary activ-

ity throughout the era of the Roman Empire. One

of the important Greek writers of this time period

was Strabo, the first great geographer in history.

As with so many other figures in ancient times,

little is known of Strabo’s life. He was born in the

Greek city of Amasia, in today’s northern Turkey.

He received an excellent education and was deeply

influenced by Stoical philosophy. While he traveled

extensively throughout the ancient world, it is be-

lieved that he probably lived in Rome. Despite the

fact that Strabo was a Greek, he was of the opin-

ion that the Roman Empire was a positive influ-

ence on the world. The order and stability it

provided allowed people like him to pursue intel-

lectual and literary activities, without being inter-

rupted by war or politics. This attitude is clearly

expressed in his writings.

Strabo was the author of 47 books known as the

Historical Sketches (compiled in 20

B.C.), a history

of Rome of which only fragments remain. His

greatest work, most of which is extant, is The Ge-

ography, or Geographical Sketches. This work, writ-

ten in 17 volumes, was a general survey and

summary of the geographic world familiar to the

Greeks and Romans: Europe, India, Syria, and

Asia, among other countries. Strabo describes the

various mountains, rivers, and regions that had

been explored up to that time. He also discusses

important cities, the cultural tradition of various

tribes and nations, and the art and architecture of

many of the places he visited. The Geography is in-

valuable not only for its historical information, but

also for what it reveals about the extent of geo-

graphic knowledge possessed by the ancient

Greeks and Romans.

English Versions of Works by Strabo

The Geography of Strabo. Translated by Horace

Leonard Jones. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-

versity Press, 1967.

Isaeus. Loeb Classical Library. Translated by Edward

Seymour Forster. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard

University Press, 1992.

288 Strabo

Works about Strabo

Dueck, Daniela. Strabo of Amasia: A Greek Man of

Letters in Augustan Rome. London: Routledge,

2000.

Syme, Ronald. Anatolica: Studies in Strabo. Edited by

Anthony R. Birley. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 1995.

Strassburg, Gottfried von

See GOTTFRIED VON STRASSBURG

Sturluson, Snorri

See SNORRI STURLUSON.

Sundiata, an Epic of Old Mali (13th

century) epic poem

Sundiata, an Epic of Old Mali relates the story of

Sundiata (also called Son-Jara), the 13th-century

hero-king of Mali, a kingdom in West Africa. The

Sundiata is a conceptual prose rendition of the

original

EPIC

poem (see

EPIC OF SON

JARA

), written

in the Mande language. D. T. Niane, the compiler,

adopted this approach to make the story of Sundi-

ata more accessible to non-Mande speakers.

Niane’s translation retains the general chronology

of events as well as the main themes and ideas con-

tained in the original.

The book begins with the prophecy of the fu-

ture king’s birth and the meeting and marriage be-

tween Sogolon Kunde (the Buffalo-woman) and

the then-king of Mali. Their union produces the

future king, Sundiata, who must go through a se-

ries of tests and trials, including exile, before he

returns triumphantly as the hero after defeating

the evil king Soumaroa Kante.

The epic addresses several important themes,

including destiny, bravery, and friendship. The im-

portance of prophecy is emphasized in Sundiata’s

transformation from a cripple into a powerful and

remarkable king. The irreversibility of destiny is

clearly shown in the eventual reclaiming of the

Mali kingship by Sundiata, despite the many at-

tempts made by his enemies, among them the

wicked Sassouma, to foil his destiny.

Bravery constitutes another important theme of

the book. The young and crippled Sundiata shows

great courage and fortitude in his determination to

overcome his handicap and protect his family from

harm. He goes to battle with Soumaroa Kante, the

sorcerer king, even when he has not discovered the

secrets of the latter’s prowess.

Another major theme is friendship, represented

in the loving and sacrificial relationship between

Sundiata and his half brother Manding Bory. Be-

cause of their close friendship, both characters are

able to survive their trials and tribulations and re-

main undaunted as they resist their enemies. Sun-

diata willingly goes into exile to ensure that

Manding Bory remains unharmed.

This tale, originally told by griots, or the West

African keepers of oral traditions, gives invaluable

information about not only the rich oral traditions

of West African society, but also about its history

and heroic past.