This chapter surveys cuneiform texts that reflect various degrees of linguistic awareness, providing the reader with a general perspective on Babylonian semiotics and linguistics. The chapter begins with a discussion of the scholarly settings in which cuneiform developed and goes on to explore how this writing system, together with practices of divination and magic, influenced the linguistic consciousness of scribes. It examines a variety of texts, including the basic elementary school exercise SA A, which Assyro-Babylonian scholars often interpreted as an esoteric text describing the very first human words. It also investigates the conceptions of language in epic narratives such Adapa and the South Wind and Gilgamesh.

This book traced the broad as well as the narrow paths that led from Mesopotamian theories of language to their Greek adaptations. It argued that some stories, like the succession myths, displayed not only a shared interest in the nature of language but were also a vehicle for transcultural transmission. Within this context, the idea of a universal god whose multiple names describe cosmic history was utilized by elite specialists for purposes of understanding the world. Rather than viewing transculturation in terms of influence or, contrarily, in asserting independence, this study showed how the Greeks made selective use of Mesopotamian cultural goods to achieve prestige through innovation.

This chapter explores coincidences and divergences between Hesiod’s conception of language and those found in Akkadian literature. First, it provides a synopsis of Hesiod’s ideas about language and the interrelation of these ideas with the poet’s broader poetics. Then it discusses how Hesiodic conceptions of language are deeply intertwined with the interpretation of divine names. The chapter also investigates how Hesiod’s particular ways of interpreting theonyms is used to endorse hermeneutic practices anchored in an oral tradition. It explores the differences between the Theogony and its cuneiform counterparts, especially by comparing how wordplay and etymology are deployed in the analysis of divine names.

This chapter examines the Derveni papyrus and compares its hermeneutics to exegetic techniques found in cuneiform texts. The analysis shows that the anonymous author of the papyrus operates with semantic and theological models that align with ideas expressed in Akkadian texts, particularly those ideas relating to theonyms and the evolution of the cosmos. As in some Assyrian and Babylonian texts, the author makes use of hermeneutic techniques that heavily rely on morphological analysis aiming to prove that divine names have a unified referent. This referent is a polyonymous cosmic god, Nous (Mind), which has the same characteristics of the Babylonian gods Ninurta and Marduk when represented as universalizing divinities of multiple names.

Extraordinary individuals in ancient Greece claimed to know the real meaning of names. They understood "real meaning" to be the theological and cosmological truths hidden in language. Although the truths were plural and there was no consensus about what true names ultimately reveal, the theoretical assumptions of those individuals were essentially similar: they believed that language in general, but more specifically the names of the gods, contained crucial information about the cosmos. Classicists tend to think that those views were already present in archaic hexametric poetry and further developed centuries later by philosophers, sophists, and religious innovators of the sixth and fifth centuries BCE. But did Greek philosophies of language and the semantics of divine names effectively develop in isolation? The present book explores points of contact between Greek and Mesopotamian systems of thinking about language and reality and argues for the importance of bringing into a dialogue cuneiform and Greek texts concerned with the cosmic function of language.

This chapter explores the reception of Thucydides in later Greek and Roman historiography. It identifies three key themes in this reception. First, the tendency to avoid naming Thucydides, making him an ‘absent presence’ in later historical writing. Second, the adaptation and redeployment of Thucydidean themes in subsequent work. Third, the importance allotted to Thucydides’ Athenian context. These themes are discussed with reference to a number of ancient historical writers, including Xenophon, Appian and Sallust.

After briefly surveying what is known of Thucydides’ life and work, this introductory chapter outlines some of the key themes in Thucydidean scholarship, which will also be important in this volume: the nature of the History (including its language, style and organization), its reception by both historians and theorists and the key methodological questions and strategies that have been applied to the text.

Thucydides is only rarely a tangible presence in the narrative of the Peloponnesian War. This chapter shows how the ‘narrator-less’ style of Thucydides’ narration of the war is central to his construction of authority and to the authority of the text. It examines the ways in which Thucydides’ authorial presence is manifested in the work, in both explicit and less explicit ways. And it offers a detailed analysis of the ‘Archaeology’ and its surrounding practice, arguing that this section of the work is the most explicit and sustained instance of Thucydidean self-fashioning.

This chapter explores Thucydides’ important contribution to the shaping of history as a genre of writing. The discussion focuses in particular on the ways in which Thucydides engaged with other, non-historiographic modes of commemorating the past in the 5th century BCE, a process here labelled ‘meta-history’. The chapter analyses three examples of meta-history in the work: the Periclean Funeral Oration, the Mytilenean Debate and the tyrannicide digression. It shows how these episodes help us understand Thucydides’ claims for the usefulness of his work.

This chapter analyses Thucydides use of sources and his approach to evidence. It surveys his (possible) use of documentary sources and eye-witness testimony, before going on to discuss specific types of evidence cited in the text: inscriptions, letters, poetry and prose writing. The second part of the chapter explores the ways in which Thucydides’ approach to history (and to the writing of history) might have influenced his use of sources, drawing particular attention to the influence that Thucydides’ views of religion might have had on his presentation of events.