Ancient first-person epitaph as one of the sources of the posthumous narrative

The article considers ancient and early Byzantine epitaphs (from the 6th century BCE to the 6th century CE) in the aspect of the historical poetics of posthumous narration. The question is raised of how the first-person epitaph relates to the so-called "narrative from beyond the grave" of modern literature. The narrative content of such epitaphs is compared, on the one hand, with the most plausible source of the posthumous narrative, i.e., the "dialogues of the dead" by Lucian of Samosata, and, on the other hand, with the motifs of contemporary texts based on the narration from beyond the grave. It is revealed that in terms of form, the ancient first-person epitaph is even closer to the posthumous narrative than the Lucianic tradition, where narration is inscribed in the conventionally dramatic form of a dialogue, whereas in epitaphs it is directly conducted by the "dead person". Noteworthy is the convergence that the two genres experience in the Hellenistic era, which is manifested in the question-and-answer form of epitaphs (as well as in some characters, which the both genres happen to share). An increase in the size of epitaphs is noted as the genre evolves, as well as the process of "narrativization" of funerary poetry (the further, the more events it contains). Most of its motifs appear both in Lucian and in modern posthumous narratives (for example, the motifs of the irony of fate and death, vanitas vanitatem and the earthly hierarchy beyond the grave, murder and punishment for murder or revenge, the dead person discussing one's grave), but some are typical only of epitaphs (the motif of posthumous glory). Conversely, some motifs constant in Lucian and in modern posthumous narratives are not reflected in epitaphs; this is especially true of the extremely detailed elaboration of the "laws" and "structure" of the afterlife. Moreover, it is not narrativity that dominates the epitaphs, but performativity, i.e., direct action with words, originating in the magical, incantatory roots of lyric poetry. The auto-epitaphs under study contain a variety of performatives: oaths and curses, orders and requests, complaints, blessings, greetings, permissions, promises, wills and teachings, to which the narrative is subordinated. It is precisely this hierarchy of the narrative and the performative that is the main and fundamental difference between ancient ego-epitaphs and the Lucianic tradition of a journey to the afterlife, included in the "dialogue of the dead" (where performatives take place, but in an inverse proportion and hierarchy in relation to the narrative element), and modern posthumous narratives, where performatives are practically absent - at least, performatives addressed to an extra-textual, extradiegetic addressee. Therefore, the ancient first-person epitaph should be recognized as a "side" line of the tradition leading to the contemporary posthumous narrative: it is related to it, but is not its main source, although from the point of view of formal structure it resembles it even more than the direct source - the entire Lucianic line. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References