![]() Last, it questions the pertinence of ‘orientalism’ as a label for the representation of eunuchs in Ctesias’ account, and even highlights its shortcomings. It assesses the foundations of current prevailing positions, and shows that a hypothesis has become a – questionable – dogma on two sorts of historical referents for Ctesias’ eunouchoi. It examines possible touchstones and shows how difficult it is to cross-check Ctesias’ account of eunuchs with Near Eastern evidence. It then describes the distinctive features of Ctesias’ eunuchs within Greek literature on Persia and presents the main interpretative trends on them. ![]() It first takes into account the fact that we know Ctesias’ eunuchs only through fragments, that is, through the filter of later authors who refer to him while possibly having a personal relationship to eunuchs in their own society. The present paper brings to light the difficulties of the assessment of them as historical figures. The prominence of eunuchs in Ctesias’ account on Persia has given rise in the last decades to a paradoxical combination of scepticism about their historicity and realistic interpretation questioning whether they were in fact castrated. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |