"Orientalism" Of Origin: Greek Classical Historians Work In The "other" Image Research

Basing on the reference to the texts and works of art from Homeric age,combining with the Greek politics, economy and culture in Classical age, thedissertation is a research of the constructions of “the Others” in all three classicalhistorians, Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophonen’s works.The introduction is composed by three parts. Part one explains the theory in thisdissertation. The ways of definition and analysis of “the Others” in this dissertationare learned from the research of Orientalism made by Edward W. Said and theanalytical paradigm provided by Gayatri C. Spivak, who introduced new perspectiveof Feminism to Post Colonial Criticism. Part two defines three main kinds of “theOthers” in Classical Greek world, Female, Barbarians and Slaves, in line accordancewith the characteristics of Polis. Part three summarizes and evaluates domestic andoversea researching, meanwhile explain the structure of this dissertation.Chapter one traces Greek ideals of female, barbarians and slaves from Homericage to Archaic period. For female, Greeks thought they should be restricted in“private sphere”. Barbarians were considered as different and inferior to Hellenes forthe existence of Panhellenism and Hellenic personal identification. For slaves andslavery, the contents about which in Homer’s Epic provided some conflicting opinions.On one hand, Greeks discriminated slaves and being slaved was regarded asextremely miserable experience. On the other hand, they beautified slavery andslave owners. Slaves were thought to emerge their ability and character in dedicatingthemselves to their owners.Chapter two analyses the constructions of female images in classical historians’works and discusses their cause. The women who introduced into “public sphere”were always displayed as “the Others”. The constructions of their images werechaotic and negative. In contrast, the women who kept themselves in “privatesphere” were given many kinds of wonderful qualities. These constructionsmaintained gender system and responded gender idealism with female roles indramas during Classical age. Chapter three analyses the constructions of barbarians in their works. Traditionsfrom Homeric period and great historical events in classical period led to thephenomenon that barbarians were considered as “the Others” by most Hellenes andtheir “otherness” mainly reflected in two aspects: on one hand, barbarians succumbto despotic rulers, which was the opposite to Hellenes’ democracy. On the otherhand, barbarians’ system of behavior and their culture customs were the reverses ofHellenes’. In this background, Herodotus and Xenophon adopted Aeschylus’ ideas ofPersians. In History and Cyropaedia, Persians were constructed as “the Others” whosuccumb to tyrannies and were unaware of freedom, which was consistent withconditions in Persians. Meanwhile, like another authors and craftsmen, Herodotusconstructed other barbarians as “the Others” through the method that theircharacterizations, which were always savagery and ignorant, were portrayed as thereverses of Hellenes’, of which Egyptians, Scythians and Amazons in History weretypical symbols. In classical period, the phenomenon that constructing barbarians asneutral images also existed and was reflects in the three historians’ works, butcompared with the construction as “the Others”, the existence of neutral imageswere not beneath discussion.Chapter four analyses the constructions of slaves in their works. Slaves wereconsidered as the same as barbarians by classical historians, which led to theirconstructions of them were the harbinger of the idea “nature slave” that would beexplained detailed in Aristotle’s Politics. In this background, slaves as “the Others”were distinguished from free men/citizens in body, mind and behaviour. Slaves’bodies could not be absolved from violence, meanwhile were ugly and abnormal,which mirrored their incomplete in intelligence or mind, so that slaves’ behaviourswere always foolish or metamorphic. Sometimes classical historians considered thatslaves also had some logos to a certain degree. Dependent on the logos, slaveowners were able to aware slaves through some methods that their profits wereconsistent with their owners to whom they should devote themselves. Obviously,slaves’ acknowledged “logos” were what made them as slaves forever, not whatmade a man as a real free citizen. Besides, distinguish between slaves and free men/citizens was realized as unconditional, so that classical historians omitted slaves’deeds in military operations for intimate relationship between joining in the armyand citizenship, meanwhile avoided their achieved revolt to slavery.The epilogue summarizes principle and specialty in the constructions of “theOthers” in classical historians’ works. Said has traced Orientalism to Persians. Afteranalyzing the constructions in their works with the reference to the texts and worksof art from Homeric age, it could be acknowledged that the present of “the Others”in Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon’s works composed beginnings ofOrientalism with which in another ancient Greek texts and works of art.