Following up on yesterdayโs post, there were further topics that Matthew Ferguson explored about ancient biographies of a popular sort and questions of historical accuracy. One of the major points that he highlights is that historical accuracy of details is not a reliable guide to genre. That point may seem counterintuitive, but modern examples will help the point become clear. If you read Little Women, or watch the TV show Little House on the Prairie, there are lots of details that reflect accurate history โ the impact of war on families in New England, or place names in Minnesota, to just mention a couple of examples. None of that means that specific details are factual, and that includes major characters. I deliberately included the Laura Ingalls Wilder example precisely because that TV show is based on childrenโs stories which are in turn based on the authorโs actual experiences. As you can hopefully see, the question of what is โfactualโ and what is โfictitiousโ is complex and blurry, often cutting across not only specific works but whole genres as well as individual characters who appear in them.
In his โpart 1โ post on this topic, Matthew also explains that ancient Greek readers and authors had different genres than we do, more of them, and those they had did not consistently overlap with our own ideas of fiction and nonfiction. If the fact that the Greek term for one of those genres wasย plasma doesnโt persuade you to read the post, probably nothing will.
In his โpart 2โ post, Matthew explores how the Alexander Romance provides parallels to the work that source and redaction critics engage in with respect to the New Testament Gospels (and others).
Iโm also grateful that Matthew, in these and other posts of his, cites and interacts with things that Iโve written that are germane to this subject!
ย










