<論説>パウサニアス『ギリシア案内記』における都市景観と歴史叙述 --テゲアに関する記述を中心に--

Abstract

『ギリシア案内記』は、ローマ支配下のギリシア諸都市の状況を伝える同時代史料としても、諸々の神話・歴史伝承を伝える歴史史料としても第一級の価値を持つ作品である。この作品の際立った特徴は、時系列に沿った歴史叙述を空間的な経路に沿った都市景観の描写に織り込んだその独特の構成にあるが、従来の研究では、これら二つの要素は相互に切り離されて論じられることが多かった。そこで本稿では、両要素の連関に注目することによって当作品の全体像を理解するための糸口を提供することを目指す。そのためのケーススタディとして、テゲアという都市に関するパウサニアスの記述を取り上げ、これを考古資料や他の文献史料と詳細に比較することによって、都市景観の描写とそこに挿入された歴史叙述が内容的に密接な連関を持つこと、その背景には、ローマ帝政期における都市ごとの景観と記憶の再編という同時代的な文脈があったことを示す。

Pausanias' Ελλάδος Περιήγησις (Description of Greece) has been a constant reference work for classical historians, both as a contemporary source reflecting the reality of Greek cities in the second century AD and as a historical work preserving now-lost literary/oral traditions. The whole picture of the work, however, has not been adequately explored due to the tendency to divide the work into two parts, namely, the descriptive part describing monuments in each city according, in most cases, to the spatial order, and the historiographical part either preceding or interposing the descriptive part. With the aim of proposing a new understanding of the whole work, this paper explores the connections between the descriptive and historiographical parts in Pausanias' Περιήγησις. As a case study, we will focus on Tegea, an Arkadian city treated in some detail at the end of the Book Eighth. The description of the city includes two remarkable historiographical narratives, the biographical section on Philopoemen and the famous list of the “benefactors of the whole Greece”. In previous studies, the description of the city and the two historical parts are analyzed separately with hardly any connection to each other. In this paper we shall synthesize the studies devoted to the individual sections of the description of Tegea and demonstrate that there is a strong anti-Spartan tendency penetrating both the descriptive and the two historiographical sections: the descriptive part includes numerous remarks concerning monuments, places, and festivals commemorating victories against Spartan invasions (mostly dated to the archaic period); Philopoemen is constantly depicted as a liberator of cities from Sparta and its successive tyrants; the list of benefactors of the whole Greece includes those who overthrew Spartan hegemonies in Greece, such as Conon and Epaminondas, not to mention the “last benefactor” Philopoemen. The comparison with other literary sources, especially Herodotus and Plutarch, which Pausanias uses or alludes with high probability, will show that he selectively chooses those aspects of the preceding sources which describe the inter-Greek struggles against Sparta. The anti-Spartan tradition of the city of Tegea itself, known from literary, inscriptional, and archaeological sources, suggests that Pausanias consciously chooses the city as the place to insert the historiographical narratives tinged with anti-Spartan tendencies. The analysis of Tegea might seem to suggest that Pausanias, moving from one city to another, sympathizes with the memories and local traditions preserved in the landscape of each city. However, the city of Mantinea, another Arkadian city also treated in the Book Eighth, shows that this is not always the case. In contrast to the description of Tegea, where Pausanias focuses on the monuments commemorating Tegean victories against Sparta, the description of the city of Mantinea focuses on two historical themes: the battle of Mantinea (362 B.C.) and the peaceful relationship of the city with the Romans. In the case of Mantinea, too, Pausanias inserts historiographical narratives related to the monuments he depicts. In this case, however, he takes distance from the local traditions and sometimes expresses disagreements. We will conclude from the comparison of the two cities that Pausanias is highly conscious of the nature of the memories each city preserves in its city landscape, and that the historiographical narratives he inserts show his sympathies or antipathizes against the local memories. Taking into consideration the constant reconstructions and recreations of the ‘pasts’ conducted in Greek cities of the early imperial era, the city landscapes, into which Pausanias inserts historiographical narratives, are themselves a kind of “historiography” which expresses a certain vision of the past through the selective preservation and allocation/relocation of monuments. By analyzing the connections between the descriptive and the historiographical parts of Pausanias' work, we can reconstruct the discourse between Pausanias and the memories and historical visions incarnated in the landscapes of the imperial Greek cities.