Pausanias_Travel_Writing_in_Ancient Greece [Maria_Pretzler]

Pausanias: Travel Writing in Ancient Greece
readers might imagine. It is not enough to list all the interesting places,
but in order to produce more than a catalogue an author also needs to
explain how different locations relate to each other. Topography is an
obvious organising principle for a travel text, but it is not the only way in
which a landscape can be evoked and recreated in words: to some travellers
the meaning of particular places may appear more important than
their physical location.
Pausanias’ description of the Isthmos offers neither a geographical
overview nor a visual impression, although this area offers a particularly
good opportunity for both. One passage is not sufficient to draw conclusions
about a literary work as extensive and complex as the Periegesis, but
this example illustrates that Pausanias’ text does not always conform to
our expectations of what is appropriate or necessary for the description of
a particular place. Modern readers are used to visualising landscapes with
maps and images, and most travel books will include such illustrations.
The communication from travel writer to reader is heavily influenced by
such habits of visual representation. Today’s travel writers are likely to
think of topographical relations between places with a map in mind, and
descriptions of the scenery will be influenced by the experience of taking
and viewing photographs of landscapes. Since the Periegesis shares important
features with a familiar genre of contemporary travel writing,
modern readers are likely to approach the text with similar expectations.
Editions and studies of Pausanias regularly challenge the norms of classics
publications because it is difficult to present this text to a modern
audience without offering at least maps, and, if at all possible, images as
well. We need to recognise, however, that Pausanias’ ancient readers did
not share our familiarity with maps or our easy access to pictures of
regions we have not visited ourselves. In fact, our way of visualising
landscapes based on maps or images may often make it difficult to notice
what Pausanias does not say, and one needs to pay attention to realise that
the Periegesis rarely offers the complete representation of the landscape
which we would expect from a modern travel text. 10
Anyone who knows Greece will be struck by Pausanias’ apparent indifference
to even the most impressive scenery. The landscape is usually just
mentioned in passing, for example when directions for a route are given,
or when topographical features are connected to local stories or cults. Such
references generally acknowledge the presence of a mountain, spring or
forest, but any information that would suggest what a place actually looks
like is exceptional. In Pausanias’ text features of the landscape, natural or
man-made, become ‘visible’ only when he considers them worth mentioning.
Mere natural beauty was not sufficient to qualify for that category,
because the focus of the Periegesis is firmly on places that are historically
or culturally significant, with a particular interest in sacred sites. 11 The
description therefore includes apparently inconspicuous items such as
60