D.Litt. et Phil. / Can a framework based on literary theory be successfully applied to the analysis of a narrative classical text? This is the central problem addressed in this study. The research question is posed within the following context: In contrast to previous approaches the modern tendency in literary research is to acknowledge the active role which the reader has to play in the production of meaning. This trend is clearly reflected by the course which scholarship on the historical works of Tacitus has followed during the past century. The history of the reception of Tacitus' works proves that the literary influences of the times were often crucial for the reception of his works. A logical conclusion would be that the popularity of modern literary constructs, and in particular, the application of narratology to narrative texts, will have a marked influence on the modern day reception of Tacitus' works. The historical writings of Tacitus are not regarded as an historical document, but as a text With literary merit. The strong influence of rhetoric on Roman historiography invalidates the enforcement of criteria used for modern historiography. The research question is discussed on the basis of a narratological analysis of Tacitus' Historiae 1.1-49. In these chapters the short reign of the emperor Galba is treated. Six narratological aspects of the text are discussed, namely selection, order, time, characterisation, space, and focalisation. The following conclusions are reached: The greatest benefit or advantage of a narratological framework lies in the systematisation of the analysis. A reading strategy is supplied and the reader is guided to recognise and describe certain basic characteristics which are inherent in all narratives. The narratological analysis demands a much higher degree of creativity on the part of the reader than a conventional philological analysis. The description of the text leads to certain questions, which in turn lead to a scientifically based interpretation. The conclusions which are reached are the result of the analysis and not the substantiation of a preconceived supposition. Although intertextual references may be lost on the reader of the translated text, and although he will probably not be aware of the semantic implications of grammatical constructions, a knowledge of Latin is not a prerequisite for a narratological reading Of the text. There are comparatively few readers of Latin and Greek texts today, and the fact that the reception of a specific text is not restricted by language or even medium should be seen as an added advantage. The analysis of different narratological aspects of the text pointed to the same underlying themes: The importance of military power in these times, the powerless position in which the emperor found himself, the obsequiousness of senate and people, and the deeply seated hatred of the principate which underlies the narration. The identification of these themes are not new but the methodology certainly is.

Note: