Stasis. Ein antikes Konzept
Date
2019-09-06
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Doktoritöö uurib üht kreekakeelset mõistet konflikti kohta, stasis’t. Sõnal stasis on kreeka keeles palju esmapilgul vastandlikke tähendusi. Ühelt poolt viitab see konfliktile, vastasseisule; antiikautorid tähistavad sellega sageli poliitilist konflikti, aga ka poliitilisest konfliktist osa võtvat parteid. Teiselt poolt tähendab stasis aga ka paigalseisu, hoiakut ja positsiooni. Oleme harjunud konflikti ette kujutama millegi aktiivsena ning vastandama seda paigalseisule. Kreeka mõiste stasis ühendab endas mõlemat: tegu on vaenuliku vastasseisuga, mille ajal võivad aset leida ka aktiivsed kokkupõrked. Lisaks sellele andis stasis nimetuse nn stasis’eteooriale, mis on retoorikateooria osa, tähendades seal kõnekonflikti või ka väidet. Uurimus keskendub stasis’e mõiste ajaloole arhailisel ja klassikalisel ajajärgul sihiga välja selgitada, kuidas hakkas sõna stasis tähistama kõnekonflikti ning kuidas sellest sai hellenistliku ja keisririigiaegse retoorilise stasis’eteooria terminus technicus. Selleks analüüsitakse arhailise ja klassikalise aja kreeka autorite tekstikorpust ning käsitletakse ka mõningaid hellenistlikke ning keisririigiaegseid autoreid (stoikud, Epiktetos, Hermagoras, Hermogenes; hilisemad kommentaarid). Suurimat tähelepanu pööratakse konnotatsioonidele ja kontekstile. Analüüsi tulemusena võib näha, et arhailisel ajajärgul tähistas stasis poliitilist konflikti, mis ohustas valitsevat aristokraatlikku status quo’d. Klassikalisel ajajärgul, kui Ateenas kehtestati demokraatlik riigikord, stasis n-ö kodustati, pandi alluma protseduurireeglitele kohtus ja rahvakoosolekuil. Selle protsessi tulemusel hakkas stasis viitama ka järjest enam kõnekonfliktile (kui taltsutatud poliitilisele vastasseisule, mis ei pruugi viia riigikorra muutuseni). Keisririigi ajal nihkus antiikaegne kultuuriparadigma normatiivsuse poole: riigikorraks sai monarhia, levis monoteism jne. Selle muutuse tulemusel vähenes ka stasis’e mõiste puhul kahepoolse tüli tähendus ning stasis hakkas teatud kontekstides tähistama ühepoolset väidet või seisukohta. Nii sai hakata nt retoorilise stasis’eteooria stasis’eid võrdlema Aristotelese kategooriatega, millel konflikti tähendus puudub. Ühesõnaga, arhailisel ajal oli stasis metsik konflikt, mis klassikalisel ajal kodustati. Rooma Keisririigi perioodil lisandus stasis’ele aga n-ö ühepoolne tähendus.
The Greek term stasis has usually been treated isolated in such fields as political history, ancient natural sciences and rhetoric. In the first instance it denotes a political conflict, a sedition or a seditious party, in the second a rest as opposed to movement or a position and in the last one a rhetorical conflict or stance. From these seemingly different meanings of the word difficulties arise because we usually understand conflict as an action, rest as its opposite and position not necessarily as an opposition. Further, the origins of rhetorical use of this term have been obscure. This study suggests that stasis is a single concept with an astonishingly coherent and diachronically rather stabile semantic field where initially opposition played a central role. The concept of stasis comprises the meanings of struggle, stillness and position: it is a hostile standing-apart, during which also active fights may break out any moment. Stasis is defined through opposition, it is what separates the enemies, opposing forces and movements etc., it could be quiescence (hence rest), space (hence postion) or struggle (hence fighting). Tension and potentiality of a change are characteristic to stasis, as well as undecidedness. Politically, stasis endangers the established status quo. Classical democracy appears as an attempt to 'tame' stasis: it took place in assemblies and courts, governed by procedural rules. So, stasis came to signify a special verbal conflict (though it also retaines the meaning of nonverbal conflict). In Roman times, a paradigmatic cultural change in the direction of normativity took place as well in Greece: democracy was replaced by monarchy, polytheism finally by monotheism etc. The concept of stasis also changed. Its meaning of conflict decreased and the word took up new meanings as a single argument or one-sided opinion. Namely for this reason were commentators from the late antiquity able to compare the rhetorical staseis with Aristotelian categories, which do not refer to conflict at all. If stasis was in Archaic times a 'wild' conflict, it became 'tamed' in Classical times. In Roman times, an increase of 'one-sidedness' of stasis can be observed. The original semantic field of stasis has been preserved but new nuances have evolved which explain the rhetorical use of the term.
The Greek term stasis has usually been treated isolated in such fields as political history, ancient natural sciences and rhetoric. In the first instance it denotes a political conflict, a sedition or a seditious party, in the second a rest as opposed to movement or a position and in the last one a rhetorical conflict or stance. From these seemingly different meanings of the word difficulties arise because we usually understand conflict as an action, rest as its opposite and position not necessarily as an opposition. Further, the origins of rhetorical use of this term have been obscure. This study suggests that stasis is a single concept with an astonishingly coherent and diachronically rather stabile semantic field where initially opposition played a central role. The concept of stasis comprises the meanings of struggle, stillness and position: it is a hostile standing-apart, during which also active fights may break out any moment. Stasis is defined through opposition, it is what separates the enemies, opposing forces and movements etc., it could be quiescence (hence rest), space (hence postion) or struggle (hence fighting). Tension and potentiality of a change are characteristic to stasis, as well as undecidedness. Politically, stasis endangers the established status quo. Classical democracy appears as an attempt to 'tame' stasis: it took place in assemblies and courts, governed by procedural rules. So, stasis came to signify a special verbal conflict (though it also retaines the meaning of nonverbal conflict). In Roman times, a paradigmatic cultural change in the direction of normativity took place as well in Greece: democracy was replaced by monarchy, polytheism finally by monotheism etc. The concept of stasis also changed. Its meaning of conflict decreased and the word took up new meanings as a single argument or one-sided opinion. Namely for this reason were commentators from the late antiquity able to compare the rhetorical staseis with Aristotelian categories, which do not refer to conflict at all. If stasis was in Archaic times a 'wild' conflict, it became 'tamed' in Classical times. In Roman times, an increase of 'one-sidedness' of stasis can be observed. The original semantic field of stasis has been preserved but new nuances have evolved which explain the rhetorical use of the term.
Description
Keywords
klassikaline filoloogia, retoorika, vana-kreeka, kultuur, antiikaeg