Pausanias_Travel_Writing_in_Ancient Greece [Maria_Pretzler]

Pausanias: Travel Writing in Ancient Greece
Corinth, which was sacked by the Romans in 146 BC and re-founded as a
Roman colony only about a century later. In this passage Pausanias has
reached the end of his description of Corinth, and there are earlier hints
at scepticism towards local traditions current in the Roman city of his own
time. 8 He has already discussed the violent interruption in its history, and
there is no need to be explicit about problematic traditions of the Roman
colony: readers are expected to take a hint. 9 Such low-key comments often
juxtapose local stories with alternative versions from other places, the
literary tradition, or Pausanias’ own findings. 10 The use of third-person
narrative allows the author to stay in the background without giving up
the opportunity to express his opinion. 11
This means that even when
Pausanias sounds like a detached reporter it is necessary to investigate
whether a particular passage was shaped by his opinion, or the attempt to
suggest a particular viewpoint.
From time to time Pausanias steps onto the scene to speak in his own
voice. 12 Statements in the first person make up a small proportion of the
whole text, but they establish the author’s presence, allowing him to define
his persona and his roles within the work. Pausanias often speaks as a
writer, commenting on the composition and structure of his work. The
cross-references belong to this category, as well as comments pointing out
the beginning or end of a logos, or occasional remarks explaining why he
has, or has not, decided to discuss a certain issue in detail. 13 Pausanias
seems quite willing to talk about the intentions and principles which guide
the composition of the Periegesis, and he likes to demonstrate that his text
follows a well-established plan. 14
First-person statements are also used to state opinions: Pausanias is
not always satisfied with just slipping a subtle comment into his description,
and sometimes he engages in a more extensive argument. Explicit
statements of opinion make it easier to understand how the author’s views
and knowledge are displayed elsewhere in the text, even where he ostensibly
keeps a low profile. Pausanias engages in discussions that
demonstrate his expertise in various fields of learning. The complexity of
such arguments, even where small details are concerned, is best demonstrated
by an example. In the following passage Pausanias deals with a
problem that is very common in the Periegesis: he assesses contradictory
stories, using his knowledge of Greek literature and local tradition. 15
They [the Tegeans] also say that Kydon, Archedios and Gortys, the surviving
sons of Tegeates, voluntarily settled in Crete, and that the cities of Kydonia,
Gortyna and Katreus were named after them. The Cretans do not agree with
the account of the Tegeans: according to them Kydon was a son of Hermes
and Akakallis, the daughter of Minos, while Katreus was a son of Minos and
Gortys a son of Rhadamanthys. As far as Rhadamanthys himself is concerned,
Homer says in Proteus’ speech to Menelaos [Hom. Od. 4.564] that
Menelaos would go to the Elysian plain, but that Rhadamanthys had already
gone before him. Kinaithon in his poem represents Rhadamanthys as a son
18