The Odeon of Herodes Atticus is a historic stone theater located on the southwest slope of the Acropolis in Athens. Photo: IC PHOTO

---

Throughout history, dialogue and exchange between civilizations has never ceased, with comparative studies serving as an indispensable conduit for these encounters. By exploring the literature, art, and history of diverse cultures, we deepen our appreciation of their distinctiveness while uncovering shared themes and mutual influences. In today’s globalized world, a key academic challenge is to advance cross-cultural research while preserving and respecting cultural identities. 

To explore this further, CSST spoke with Christos Tsagalis, a professor of ancient Greek literature at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki in Greece. Tsagalis discusses the value of the humanities, the significance of comparative studies in classical and epic traditions, and the academic positioning of ancient Chinese civilization within this broader context. He rejects the notion that the humanities must adopt an “apologetic” stance to justify their relevance in the modern world, arguing instead that literature, art, and music are fundamental to all civilizations, and cross-cultural dialogue and exchange is essential for humanity’ s progress. 

Emerging trends in classical studies 

CSST: Given the growing interest in global perspectives, should the field of classical studies expand to include other ancient civilizations, like China? How would this change affect the scope and methodology of classical studies? 

Tsagalis: The scientific field of classical studies has been defined as the discipline that is dedicated to the study of the literature, history, and civilization of ancient Greece and Rome. The reason for the designation of this cultural framework is the crucial role ancient Greece and Rome have played in the formation of European civilization and, by extension, in the formation and shaping of America. It would be misleading to call the great civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia “classical,” since they have not played a decisive role in the formation of the West. They are great civilizations, which we study, explore, and inquire into, but they are not part of Western culture. 

We should bear in mind that the same term may have different meanings in different cultural and historical contexts. For example, what is conceived of as “classical” in China may be different from what is labeled “classical” in the West. Chinese civilization stretches back in time and has an impact that deservedly bestows on it the designation ‘classical.’ However, this is a different function of the term “classical,” and in any case does not make it part of Western culture. 

What should be done with ancient Chinese civilization is to take the place that other ancient civilizations have taken within Western academia. To be more practical, it should be part of the growing discipline of comparative studies that promotes the interactive study and interpretation of different literature, cultures, and historical periods. In fact, this approach would allow Chinese culture to be seen not only per se but also in comparison to the history, literature, and culture of ancient Greece and Rome. I strongly believe that this is the best way to go forward. 

CSST: Given the current challenges faced by the humanities, do you believe the study of classical civilizations still has “vitality” in the modern world? 

Tsagalis: First, let me state that I am against a certain “apologetic” stance taken by the entire field of the humanities regarding their relevance to the modern world. A grave mistake committed is the effort of each culture to impose itself on others or over-accentuate its relevance. I argue that there is no need to do this. Instead, we should encourage comparative approaches, which respect the identity of any given culture but also embrace dialogue and intercultural interaction.  

One emerging research interest in classical studies is, in my view, the study of larger issues that override literature, history, and archaeology, and encompass cultural developments and phenomena that have great relevance to the modern world. This potential change of focus will significantly boost classical studies and help counterbalance arguments against its relevance in the world of the 21st century. 

CSST: Athens is home to 20 prestigious foreign institutions dedicated to classical studies. With the recent establishment of the Chinese School of Classical Studies at Athens, what potential do you see for new perspectives and collaborations in this well-established academic landscape? 

Tsagalis: The establishment of the Chinese School of Classical Studies at Athens is a refreshing and welcome change in the cultural environment of Athens and Greece. The main reason is that this is not just another School of Classical Studies. In fact, it will introduce ancient Chinese civilization into the dynamic intellectual dialogue of the field. Moreover—and this is a strong wish of mine—it will actively engage with the Greek intellectual and cultural environment. 

To be specific, one idea would be to organize seminars promoting the joint-presentation by Chinese and Greek scholars of fields of research in which a comparative perspective (Chinese-Greek) would broaden the type of questions asked and answers given. Joint seminars could also take place for students, and to this extent the digital resources available could solve the problem of distance, offering an opportunity for students in China and in all Greek universities to participate. One great field of interest in which both China and Greece have much to gain is the study of epics. I would be more than happy to contribute towards this goal. 

Value of epics through comparative lens 

CSST: While the Homeric epics are central to the Western canon, many cultures have their own epic traditions. How do you think a comparative approach to epics from different traditions can enrich our understanding of their role in human societies? 

Tsagalis: The comparative perspective has the advantage that it makes available to researchers a pool of material that may function, on balance, as an analogy with what might have happened in the case of a given culture that is deprived of enough material for formulating reliable answers. For example, a crucial issue that bedevils Homeric studies is the role and impact of writing in the composition, fixation, and dissemination of the Iliad and the Odyssey. The study of other ancient epic traditions, from Mesopotamia to India to China, may provide more reliable data regarding this thorny issue. The Greek evidence is simply not enough. 

Apart from this “internal” usefulness of the comparative method, another important gain resulting from its applications concerns the enrichment of our understanding of the impact culture has on the shaping of society. This is because societies also share several common beliefs that stem from human nature and do not depend on time, geography and the available material means. 

Oral tradition, textual transmission in Homer

CSST: The Homeric epics have been continuously reinterpreted across different historical periods. How do you think modern scholarship has reshaped our understanding of Homeric poetry, particularly in relation to its oral tradition and textual transmission? 

Tsagalis: It is virtually impossible to give even a summary of the various theories concerning the interpretation of Homeric epics concerning the crucial issues of authorship and textual transmission. Here, I will briefly repeat that one of the most rewarding approaches to the issues of oral tradition and textual transmission is the attempt of certain scholars to combine the insights of oral-formulaic theory and Neoanalysis. 

As early as 1984, German classical philologist Wolfgang Kullmann argued in his thesis “Oral Poetry Theory and Neoanalysis in Homeric Research” that the two theories share certain common tenets and that a bridging of their original distance is possible, provided that neither of them sticks to its initial rigid model. A step forward was made by Jonathan S. Burgess, a classics professor at the University of Toronto, and myself. Burgess and I have claimed that intertextual references between oral epic traditions are possible, that a level of fixity can be achieved by means other than writing, and that the Iliad and the Odyssey feed on pre-Homeric oral cyclic epics as master-manifestations of cyclic myth, namely of mythological traditions pertaining to the Theban and Trojan War sagas. 

As for textual transmission, the theory of dictation is the most economic scenario for the beginning of the textual transmission of the two Homeric epics. The mechanics of this process have been thoroughly discussed in recent scholarship, and it is fair to say that they involve not only a poet and a scribe but also another person, the collector, who would have made the whole process take place, would have coordinated it, and also would have exercised his impact on the oral text. 

CSST: Could you elaborate on the concept of the “oral palimpsest” and its significance in understanding the intertextual relationships within Homeric epics? 

Tsagalis: The “oral palimpsest,” which is the first part of the title of a book of mine published in 2008—The Oral Palimpsest: Exploring Intertextuality in the Homeric Epics, is based on a deliberately employed oxymoron. Notwithstanding the fact that the word ‘palimpsest’ belongs to the realm of manuscript and not oral tradition, I regard it as an apt metaphor for describing Homeric epics. During a long process of shaping, the Homeric tradition has absorbed, altered, disguised, and reappropriated mythical, dictional, and thematic material of various sorts and from different sources. In that sense it is like an oral palimpsest, “to be ‘erased’ and re-‘written’ in accordance with traditional structure and within the limits of the multiform idiom.” Mythical fragmentation and dictional ellipsis constitute two useful gateways leading to multiple other traditions that need to be retrieved to comprehend, evaluate, and appreciate the level of sophistication epic song-traditions display. 

The notion of intertextuality for orally composed poems requires a clarification of the term “text.” Fixity, identity, and autonomy are three crucial parameters regarding the semantics of “text.” Utterances with a clearly delineated framework, coherence, and cohesion can function, as the study of various oral cultures around the world has shown, as “oral texts,” which acquire fixity, are recognized by audiences as distinct unities of meaning, and enjoy a level of autonomy in that they are transferable either within a poem or between poems. Moreover, if we can spot multiple examples of long-range associations within a poem (i.e. intratextual associations), as well as thematical and even phraseological links between fully-fledged poems like the Iliad and the Odyssey, then there is nothing to exclude the possibility of intertextual associations between various oral epic poems or traditions. 

Edited by LIU YUWEI