Skip to main content
Open Book Publishers

The Embassy, the Ambush, and the Ogre: Greco-Roman Influence in Sanskrit Theater

Metadata
TitleThe Embassy, the Ambush, and the Ogre
SubtitleGreco-Roman Influence in Sanskrit Theater
ContributorRoberto Morales-Harley(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0417
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/OBP.0417
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
CopyrightRoberto Morales-Harley
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Publication placeCambridge, UK
Published on2024-08-29
ISBN978-1-80511-361-4 (Paperback)
978-1-80511-362-1 (Hardback)
978-1-80511-363-8 (PDF)
978-1-80511-365-2 (HTML)
978-1-80511-364-5 (EPUB)
Short abstractThis volume presents a sophisticated and intricate examination of the parallels between Sanskrit and Greco-Roman literature. By means of a philological and literary analysis, Morales-Harley hypothesizes that Greco-Roman literature was known, understood, and recreated in India. Moreover, it is argued that the techniques for adapting epic into theater could have been Greco-Roman influences in India, and that some of the elements adapted within the literary motifs (specifically the motifs of the embassy, the ambush, and the ogre) could have been Greco-Roman borrowings by Sanskrit authors.
Long abstractThis volume presents a sophisticated and intricate examination of the parallels between Sanskrit and Greco-Roman literature. By means of a philological and literary analysis, Morales-Harley hypothesizes that Greco-Roman literature was known, understood, and recreated in India. Moreover, it is argued that the techniques for adapting epic into theater could have been Greco-Roman influences in India, and that some of the elements adapted within the literary motifs (specifically the motifs of the embassy, the ambush, and the ogre) could have been Greco-Roman borrowings by Sanskrit authors. This book draws on a wide variety of sources, including Iliad, Phoenix, Rhesus and Cyclops (Greco-Roman) as well as Mahābhārata, The Embassy, The Five Nights and The Middle One (Sanskrit). The result is a well-supported argument which presents us with the possibility of cultural exchange between the Greco-Roman world and India – a possibility which, though hypothetical, is worth acknowledging. Due to its comparative nature, this volume will appeal to both Indologists and Classicists, including Mahābhārata scholars, Sanskrit theater scholars, and those interested in comparative work with Sanskrit literature. It brings an original perspective to the field, and provides inspiration for new lines of research.
Print length288 pages (xii+276)
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Dimensions156 x 16 x 234 mm | 6.14" x 0.63" x 9.21" (Paperback)
156 x 18 x 234 mm | 6.14" x 0.71" x 9.21" (Hardback)
Weight411g | 14.50oz (Paperback)
585g | 20.64oz (Hardback)
Media4 tables
OCLC Number1453602802
LCCN2021388896
THEMA
  • ATD
  • DBSG
  • 2BBA
BISAC
  • PER011000
  • PER011020
LCC
  • PK2907.G74
Keywords
  • Sanskrit
  • Greco-Roman
  • Epic poetry
  • Theatre
  • philological analysis
  • cultural exchange
Locations
PaperbackLanding pageFull text URLPublisher Website
Landing pageEBSCO HOST
HardbackLanding pageFull text URLPublisher Website
PDFLanding pageFull text URLPublisher Website
Landing pageFull text URLOAPEN
Landing pageDOAB
Landing pageFull text URL
Landing pageFull text URL
Landing pageFull text URLINTERNET ARCHIVE
HTMLLanding pageFull text URLPublisher Website
EPUBLanding pageFull text URLPublisher Website
Contributors

Roberto Morales-Harley

(author)
Associate Professor of Sanskrit and Head of the Department of Classical Philology at Universidad de Costa Rica
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4752-8588

Roberto Morales-Harley Holds a doctorate in Humanities from the University of Malaga, master’s degrees in Languages of the Ancient World from the University of Murcia and in Classical Literature from the University of Costa Rica, licenciate and bachelors degrees in Classical Philology from the University of Costa Rica. Studied Sanskrit at the Universities of Costa Rica, Murcia, and the Australian National University. Is currently Associate Professor of Sanskrit and Head of the Department of Classical Philology at the University of Costa Rica.

References
  1. Aelian. (1997). Historical miscellany (N. G. Wilson, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  2. Acharya, P. K. (1927). Indian architecture according to Mānasāra-Śilpaśāstra. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. Aeschylus. (1922). In two volumes, vol. 1 (H. W. Smyth, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  4. Aeschylus. (1926). In two volumes, vol. 2 (H. W. Smyth, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  5. Aristotle; Longinus; Demetrius. (1995). Poetics (S. Halliwell, Trans.); On the sublime (W. H. Fyfe, Trans.); On style (D. C. Innes, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  6. Bhasa-Projekt Universität Würzburg. (2007). Multimediale Datenbank zum Sanskrit-Schauspiel: Texte, Manuskripte und Afführung klassischer indischer Dramen. http://www.bhasa.indologie.uni-wuerzburg.de/
  7. Catullus; Tibullus; Pervigilium Veneris. (1962). Poems (F. W. Cornish, Trans.); Elegies (J. P. Postgate, Trans.); Pervigilium Veneris (J. W. Mackail, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  8. Dio Chrysostom. (1946). In five volumes, vol. 4 (H. L. Crosby, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  9. Euripides. (1994). Volume I: Cyclops, Alcestis, Medea (D. Kovacs, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  10. Euripides. (2003). Volume VI: Bacchae, Iphigenia at Aulis, Rhesus (D. Kovacs, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  11. Euripides. (2008). Fragments: Oedipus-Chrysippus, other fragments (C. Collard & M. Cropp, Eds. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  12. Gelius. (1927). Attic nights: Volume I, books 1-5 (J. C. Rolfe, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  13. Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages. (2020). Nāṭyaśāstra 1-16, 18-30, 33, 35-37. http://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/corpustei/transformations/html/sa_bharata-nATyazAstra-1-1618-303335-37.htm
  14. Homer. (1995a). Odyssey: Volume I, books 1-12 (2nd ed.) (A. T. Murray, Trans., & G. E. Dimock, Rev.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  15. Homer. (1995b). Odyssey: Volume II, books 13-24 (2nd ed.) (A. T. Murray, Trans., & G. E. Dimock, Rev.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  16. Homer. (1999a). Iliad: Volume I, books 1-12 (2nd ed.) (A. T. Murray, Trans., & W. F. Wyatt, Rev.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  17. Homer. (1999b). Iliad: Volume II, books 13-24 (2nd ed.) (A. T. Murray, Trans., & W. F. Wyatt, Rev.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  18. Horace. (1942). Satires, epistles, and ars poetica (H. R. Fairclough, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  19. Martial. (1920). Epigrams, vol. 2 (W. C. A. Ker, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  20. Philostratus. (1912). Live of Apollonius of Tyana: In two volumes, vol. 1 (F. C. Conybeare, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  21. Plautus. (1916). In five volumes, vol. 1 (P. Nixon, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  22. Plautus. (1917). In five volumes, vol. 2 (P. Nixon, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  23. Plautus. (1924). In five volumes, vol. 3 (P. Nixon, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  24. Plautus. (1930). In five volumes, vol. 4 (P. Nixon, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  25. Plautus. (1952). In five volumes, vol. 5 (P. Nixon, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  26. Plutarch. (1932). Lives: In ten volumes, vol. 3 (B. Perrin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  27. Plutarch. (1962). Moralia: In fifteen volumes, vol. 4 (F. C. Babbit, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  28. Plutarch. (1967). Lives: In ten volumes, vol. 7 (B. Perrin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  29. Sophocles. (1912). In two volumes, vol. 1 (F. Storr, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  30. Sophocles. (1913). In two volumes, vol. 2 (F. Storr, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  31. Sphujidhvaja. (1978). The Yavanajātaka (D. Pingree, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  32. Sukthankar, V. S., Belvalkar, S. K., Vaidya, P. L. et al. (Eds.). (1933/1971). The Mahābhārata for the first time critically edited. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
  33. Terence. (1918). In two volumes, vol. 1 (J. Sargeaunt, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  34. The Greek Anthology. (1916). In five volumes, vol. 1. (W. R. Paton, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  35. Virgil. (1918). In two volumes, vol. 2 (H. R. Fairclough, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  36. Adams, D. Q., & Mallory, J. P. (1997). Cow. In J. P. Mallory & D. Q. Adams (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture (pp. 134-139). London: Fitzroy Dearborn.
  37. Adaptation (n.d.). In Oxford English Dictionary (online). https://www-oed-com.virtual.anu.edu.au/view/Entry/2115?redirectedFrom=adaptation#eid
  38. Adluri, V., & Bagchee, J. (2014). The nay science: A history of German Indology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  39. Adluri, V., & Bagchee, J. (2018). Philology and criticism: A guide to Mahābhārata textual criticism. London: Anthem Press.
  40. Alexander, J. (2016). A systematic theory of tradition. Journal of the Philosophy of History, 10, 1-28.
  41. Allen, J. (1946). A tabula iliaca from Gandhara. The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 66, 21-23.
  42. Allen, N. J. (2020). Arjuna-Odysseus: Shared heritage in Indian and Greek epic. New York: Routledge.
  43. Aperghis, G. G. (2020). The Greeks in the east in the Hellenistic period. In F. de Angelis (Ed.), A companion to Greeks across the ancient world (pp. 459-479). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118341339.ch21
  44. Arnott, P. (1972). Parody and ambiguity in Euripides’ Cyclops. In R. Hanslik, A. Lesky, & H. Schwabl (Eds.), Antidosis: Festschrift für Walther Krauss zum 70. Geburtstag (pp. 21-30). Vienna: Böhlau.
  45. Arora, U. P. (1981). Motifs in Indian mythology: Their Greek and other parallels. New Delhi: Munishram Manoharlal.
  46. Arora, U. P. (1996). Greeks on India: Skylax to Aristoteles. Bareilly: Indian Society for Greek and Roman Studies.
  47. Arora, U. P. (2011). India and the Hellenistic world. In K. Savvopoulos (Ed.), Second Hellenistic studies workshop (pp. 45-65). Alexandria: Alexandria Center for Hellenistic Studies.
  48. Arora, U. P. (2018). Greek sources on India: Alexander to Megasthenes. New Delhi: Aryan Books International.
  49. Baldick, C. (2001). The concise Oxford dictionary of literary terms (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  50. Bansat-Boudon, L. (1992). Poétique du théàtre indien: Lectures du Nāṭyaśāstra. Paris: École française d’Extrême-Orient.
  51. Barchiesi, A. (1984). La traccia del modello: Effeti omerici nella narrazione virgiliana. Pisa: Giardini.
  52. Baums, S. (2017). Greek or Indian? The Questions of Menander and onomastic patterns in early Gandhāra. In H. P. Ray (Ed.), Buddhism and Gandhara: An archaeology of museum collections (pp. 33-46). New Delhi: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351252768
  53. Bernard, P. (1976). Campagne de fouilles 1975 à Aï Khanoum (Afghanistan). Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions & Belles-Lettres, 120(2), 287-322.
  54. Berres, T. (1993). Vergil und Homer: Ein Beitrag zur Entmythologisierung des Verhältnisses. Gymnasium, 100, 342-369.
  55. Bierl, A. (2012). Orality, fluid textualization and interweaving themes: Some remarks on the Doloneia, magical horses from night to light and death to life. In F. Montanari, A. Rengakos, & C. Tsagalis (Eds.), Homeric contexts: Neoanalysis and the interpretation of oral poetry (pp. 133-174). Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110272017.133
  56. Bierl, A. (2015). New trends in Homeric scholarship (NTHS). In A. Bierl & J. Latacz (Eds.), Homer´s Iliad, the Bassel commentary: Prolegomena (pp. 177-203). Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501501746-013
  57. Boardman, J. (2015) The Greeks in Asia. London: Thames & Hudson.
  58. Bopearachchi, O. (1991). Monnaies gréco-bactriennes et indo-grecques: Catalogue raisonné. Paris: Bibliothéque Nationale.
  59. Bopearachchi, O. (2005). Contribution of Greeks to the art and culture of Bactria and India: New archaeological evidence. The Indian Historical Review, 32(1), 103-125.
  60. Boyer, P. (1990). Tradition as truth and communication: A cognitive description of traditional discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  61. Bremond, C. (1980). Comment concevoir un index des motifs. Le Bulletin du Groupe de Recherches en Sémio-linguistique, 16, 15-29.
  62. Brodbeck, S. P. (2006). Ekalavya and “Mahābhārata” 1.121-28. International Journal of Hindu Studies, 10(1), 1.34.
  63. Brodbeck, S. (2020). The end of the Pāṇḍavas’ year in disguise. The Journal of Hindu Studies, 13(3), 320-346. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhs/hiaa019
  64. Bronkhorst, J. (2016). How the brahmins won: From Alexander to the Guptas. Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004315518
  65. Brown, P. G. M. (2015). Contaminatio. In S. Goldberg & T. Whitmarsh (Eds.), Oxford classical dictionary (online). https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.1799
  66. Brückner, H. (1999/2000). Manuscripts and performance traditions of the so-called ‘Trivandrum plays’ ascribed to Bhasa: A report on work in progress. Bulletin d’Études Indiennes, 17/18, 501-550.
  67. Burgess, J. S. (2001). The tradition of the trojan war in Homer and the epic cycle. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  68. Burgess, J. S. (2017). The tale of Meleager in the Iliad. Oral Tradition, 31(1), 51-76.
  69. Burkert, W. (1992). The Orientalizing revolution: Near eastern influence on Greek culture in the early archaic age (M. E. Pinder, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  70. Burkert, W. (2004a). Babylon, Memphis, Persepolis: Eastern contexts of Greek culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  71. Burkert, W. (2004b). Die Griechen und der Orient. Munich: C. H. Beck.
  72. Busch, G. (1937). Untersuchungen zum Wesen der τύχη in den Tragödien des Euripides. Heidelberg: Winter.
  73. Cairns, F. (1989). Virgil’s Augustan epic. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  74. Casali, S. (2004). Nisus and Euryalus: Exploiting the contradictions in Virgil’s “Doloneia”. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 102, 319-354.
  75. Casson, L. (2001). Libraries in the ancient world. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  76. Cobb, M. A. (2018). Rome and the Indian Ocean trade from Augustus to the early third century CE. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004376571
  77. Coloru, O. (2009). Da Alessandro a Menandro: Il regno greco di Bactriana. Pisa: Fabrizio Serra.
  78. Conte, G. B., & Most, G. W. (2015). Imitatio. In S. Goldberg & T. Whitmarsh (Eds.), Oxford classical dictionary (online). https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.3266
  79. Corrigan, T. (2017). Defining adaptation. In T. Leitch (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of adaptation studies (pp. 23-55). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199331000.013.1
  80. Cuvardic García, D., & Cerdas Fallas, M. (2020). La “enunciación de objeto” en Catulo, Horacio y Marcial. Káñina, 46, 191-205.
  81. Danek, G. (1988). Studien zur Dolonie. Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
  82. Dange, S. A. (1994a). The order of the ‘Duryodhana’-plays of Bhāsa. In S. A. Dange & S. S. Dange (Eds.), Critiques on Sanskrit dramas (2nd ed., pp. 33-51). New Delhi: Aryan Books International.
  83. Dange, S. A. (1994b). Three dramas and one motif. In S. A. Dange & S. S. Dange (Eds.), Critiques on Sanskrit dramas (2nd ed., pp. 77-87). New Delhi: Aryan Books International.
  84. Dange, S. S. (1994a). Ghoṣavatī, Saṅgamanīya and the Aṅgulīyaka. In S. A. Dange & S. S. Dange (Eds.), Critiques on Sanskrit dramas (2nd ed., pp. 88-94). New Delhi: Aryan Books International.
  85. Dange, S. S. (1994b). The citra-phalaka, a strategical device. In S. A. Dange & S. S. Dange (Eds.), Critiques on Sanskrit dramas (2nd ed., pp. 132-139). New Delhi: Aryan Books International.
  86. Dekel, E. (2005). Vergil’s Homer: The Aeneid and its Odyssean lens. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley.
  87. Derow, P. S. (2016). Philhellenism. In S. Goldberg & T. Whitmarsh (Eds.), Oxford classical dictionary (online). https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.4970
  88. Derrett, J. D. M. (1992). Homer in India: The birth of the Buddha. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 2(1), 47-57.
  89. Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human society. New York: W. W. Norton.
  90. Dillon, M. (1975). Celts and Aryans: Survivals of Indo-European speech and society. Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study.
  91. Dowden, K. (2010). Trojan night. In M. Christopoulos, E. D. Karakantza, & O. Levaniouk (Eds.), Light and darkness in ancient Greek myth and religion (pp. 110-120). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
  92. Duckworth, G. E. (1961). Turnus and Duryodhana. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 92, 81-127.
  93. Duckworth, G. E. (1967). The significance of Nisus and Euryalus for Aeneid IX-XII. American Journal of Philology, 88(2), 128-150.
  94. Dué, C. (2012). Maneuvers in the dark of night: Iliad 10 in the twenty-first century. In F. Montanari, A. Rengakos, & C. Tsagalis (Eds.), Homeric contexts: Neoanalysis and the interpretation of oral poetry (pp. 175-184). Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110272017.175
  95. Dué, C., & Ebbott, M. (2010). Iliad 10 and the poetics of ambush: A multitext edition with essays and commentary. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  96. Edmunds, L. (1997). Myth in Homer. In I. Morris & B. Powell (Eds.), A new companion to Homer (pp. 415-441). Leiden: Brill.
  97. Eliot, T. S. (1919). Tradition and the individual talent, I. The Egoist, 6(4), 54-55.
  98. Elliott, K. (2020). Theorizing adaptation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  99. Erskine, A. (2016). Scipionic circle. In S. Goldberg & T. Whitmarsh (Eds.), Oxford classical dictionary (online). https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.5744
  100. Esposito, A. A. (1999/2000). The two versions of Dūtavakya and their sources. Bulletin d’Études Indiennes, 17/18, 551-562.
  101. Esposito, A. A. (2010). Dūtavākya, die Worte des Boten: Ein Einakter aus den ‘Trivandrum Dramen’, kritische Edition, mit Anmerkungen und kommentierter Übersetzung. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  102. Falk, H. (2002). Frühe Zeitrechnung in Indien. In H. Falk (Ed.), Vom Herrscher zur Dynastie: Zum Wesen kontinuierlicher Zeitrechnung in Antike und Gegenwart (pp. 77-105). Bremen: Hempen.
  103. Fantuzzi, M. (2020). The Rhesus attributed to Euripides. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  104. Farrell, J. (1997). The Virgilian intertext. In C. Martindale (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Virgil (pp. 222-238). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  105. Feller, D. (2004). The Sanskrit epics’ representation of Vedic Myths. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
  106. Fenik, B. (1960). The influence of Euripides on Vergil’s Aeneid. Doctoral dissertation, Princeton University.
  107. Fenik, B. (1964). “Iliad X” and the “Rhesus”: The myth. Brussels: Berchem.
  108. Finkelberg, M. (Ed.). (2011). The Homer Encyclopedia. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
  109. Fitzgerald, J. L. (2018). Mahābhārata. In K. A. Jacobsen, H. Basu, A. Malinar & V. Narayanan (Eds.), Brill’s encyclopedia of Hinduism Online. Leiden:Brill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212-5019_BEH_COM_2020040
  110. Fontaine, M. (2014). The reception of Greek comedy in Rome. In M. Revermann (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Greek comedy (pp. 404-423). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCO9781139015356.027
  111. Fowler, D. (2000). Epic in the middle of the wood: Mise en abyme in the Nisus and Euryalus episode. In A. Sharrock & H. Morales (Eds.), Intertextuality: Greek and Roman textual relations (pp. 89-113). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  112. Free, K. B. (1981). Greek drama and the Kutiyattam. Theatre Journal, 33(1), 80-89.
  113. Freschi, E., & Maas, P. A. (Eds.). (2017). Adaptative reuse: Aspects of creativity in south Asian cultural history. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  114. Fries, A. (2014). Pseudo-Euripides, ‘Rhesus’: Edited with introduction and commentary. Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110342253
  115. Gail, A. J. (1980/1981). Āyudhapuruṣa: Die anthropomorphen Waffen Viṣṇus in Literatur und Kunst. Indologica Taurinensia, 8/9, 181-185.