Band 17, Heft 2 - Special Issue: Networking through Proems: Proemial Strategies for Intellectual Networking in Antiquity Issue Editors: Kasra Abdavi-Azar/Marco Pelucchi/Elsa Giovanna Simonetti/Pietro Zaccaria

The papers gathered in this Special Issue explore the networking function of ancient proems across a wide range of literary traditions throughout antiquity, spanning from philosophical, scientific, and hagiographical works to historiographical and poetic ones. The focus is on how ancient authors used proems to situate themselves and their works within larger networks that included literary predecessors and models, but also friends, rivals, dedicatees, and readers, as well as commissioners, patrons, rulers, and even gods and cosmic principles.

This paper surveys the extant proems of Greek historiography from Hecataeus to Dionysius of Halicarnassus. It considers the proems through the lens of intellectual networking, arguing that each author through his proem inscribes himself into two distinct intellectual networks: a diachronic network of the authors he wants to be considered his predecessors, both historiographical and otherwise, and a synchronic network of his readers or audience, with whom he attempts to create a bond, and in whose eyes he wants to claim authority. A fundamental principle of the diachronic intellectual network is agonistic intertextuality, that is polemics against predecessors which at the same time acknowledges their importance for one’s own work. A number of tropes are found to be typical of the extant proems, and it is argued that their function is likewise to signal the specific intellectual network to which the author wants to be seen as belonging.

This article analyses the preface to Valerius Maximus’ Facta et Dicta Memorabilia , dedicated to the Emperor Tiberius. It examines the literary and rhetorical motifs typical of Latin historiographical prose and explores the intertextual networking within the preface. The study highlights the relationships between Valerius Maximus’ text and other authors (Horace) and literary works, focusing on both explicit and implicit references. Additionally, it addresses the patronage relationship with Tiberius, placing the preface within the social, literary, and political context of the Principate. This analysis provides insights into the historiographical and rhetorical practices of the time, emphasising the critical role of prefaces in shaping reader expectations and engagement.

This article discusses the possibility that Dionysius of Halicarnassus’ Roman Antiquities were Flavius Josephus’ direct model for his Jewish Antiquities , a theory that has faced both support and criticism. Following König and Wiater’s framework of literary dialogue, this study identifies various layers of interaction, from biographical and paratextual elements to lexical and conceptual similarities. Josephus’ Jewish War is also considered: while in this case his main models were historians like Thucydides and Polybius, his use of Dionysius can also be identified through a close reading of Josephus’ proem. Both authors shared a similar standpoint towards Rome and its empire, not least because of their personal experiences. Despite their different perspectives, both used antiquarianism as a political instrument for their respective historiographical agendas. Josephus’ numerous references to Dionysius indicate him as a significant, though unacknowledged, model.

This paper aims to provide a reflective understanding of what proems are, and what they can achieve, by advancing beyond the literary and agonistic elements of proems, often understood to reflect the social or cultural aspects of literary form. Instead, it seeks to expand the possibilities for understanding proems as distinct avenues for new ways of talking about the content of reality. It does so chiefly through analysis of two major cosmogonic works from Ancient Greece: Hesiod’s Theogony , and the treatise On Nature by the Pythagorean philosopher Philolaus of Croton. This paper argues that both Hesiod and Philolaus designate the proems of their works as places to outline the primordium of reality, and that their cosmogonic accounts have much more in common than scholars have typically recognized. These ‘biomorphic’ accounts of the birth of the ordered universe stand especially in contrast to accounts based on other cosmogonic modes, such as the ‘stochazomorphic’ and ‘technomorphic’ modes (the latter of which is deployed in the proem to Ovid’s Metamorphoses , which stands in contrast especially to Hesiod’s account of the generation of reality).

In the proem to his Platonic Theology , Proclus appropriates the language of mystery rites to cast Plato as a divinely inspired hierophant to whom absolute epistemic authority should be accorded. He thus elevates Plato’s philosophical teachings to the status of revealed truth and legitimises his own exegetical endeavour as a divine concern. Proclus further extends such authority to a carefully curated network of like-minded Platonist exegetes, among whom he subtly positions himself and his teacher Syrianus. Through a detailed analysis of the proem, this study explores how Proclus construes the history of Platonic succession by embedding it within a broader account of both the history of theological truth and divine revelation.

This paper showcases the importance of networking between exegeses for the theme of ἀπραξία in Philo of Alexandria. De providentia 1.6–7 and De aeternitate mundi 13–19, on the proemial chapter of Genesis , are examined to better understand the case of De opificio mundi 7–12. In Opif. 7–12, Philo adopts Stoic apologetic strategies, positing a pre-cosmos without disorder. He preserves God’s otherness from the cosmos while incorporating active divine agency within creation. In De opificio mundi 7–12, Philo’s reworking of Stoic concepts does not indicate a critical attitude towards the Stoa. This paper also considers the problem of Philo’s opponents in light of the development of the theme of ἀπραξία between the end of the Hellenistic era and the early Imperial age. It seeks to identify his opponents, arguing that it is unlikely that Philo meant Aristotle, whom he perhaps perceived more favourably than commonly assumed. The hypothesis is put forward that his opponents instead may be suspected to be a group of Pseudo-Pythagoreans or pythagorising Platonists.

This article explores various possible roles played by personal names in prefaces to Ancient Greek and Latin literature and their contribution to creating or manipulating literary, social, or intellectual networks. After briefly discussing the well-known figure of the dedicatee, it turns to two groups of people which can be mentioned in the preface, contemporary and historical figures respectively. The case studies explored (Apollonius of Perga, Xenophon, Strabo, Columella, Statius, and Martial) demonstrate the breadth of functions that inclusion of names in the prefatory material could have and their importance for the reception of the work by the potential reader.

In the proem of Longus’ Daphnis and Chloe , an anonymous hunter gazes in wonder at the images painted on a γραφή: the ἱστορία ἔρωτος depicted on the painting stimulates the writing of the four books of the novel. In the phrase ἰδόντα με καὶ θαυμάσαντα, which describes the marveling vision of the anonymous observer, scholars recognize a textual allusion to the profile of Gyges that Plato illustrates in the Republic (2.359c7–360b3). This paper aims to investigate the possible allusion and examine, with a narratological approach, the profile of some amazed observers in the plot of Daphnis and Chloe .

Hagiographical proems emerge as crucial sources for contextualising authors and their intended audiences. In Byzantine hagiographical works produced from the late eighth to early eleventh centuries, proems are highly rhetorical and standardised in their language. This standardisation makes it difficult for scholars to situate hagiographers within their social and intellectual networks. I argue that when facing this challenge we can benefit from the study of biblical intertextuality, and select the proem of the Life of Patriarch Nikephoros by Ignatius the Deacon as a case study.