Representations

Considering the question of how the experience of genocide was represented in ancient times requires us to keep three propositions in mind: first, that the term "genocide" is a modern one and that in ancient contexts the notion it implies can be understood both in a broader and narrower meaning than is usual in modern times; secondly, that representations are found exclusively in works of literature and art; and thirdly, that these literary and artistic expressions are produced more by the perpetrators than the victims. Any analysis of representations has to consider the artistic context, whether textual or visual, and the genre. Given the huge and manifold nature of the topic, this chapter will adopt an exemplary approach to consider its two sides: representation and misrepresentation. It will focus on four aspects through case studies: first, this chapter will discuss the general representation of genocide as related to extinguishing a group-the essence of many conceptualizations of genocide-which is not so much defined through ethnic, racial, or religious parameters but gender; therefore, any kind of genocidal action is performed as massacre of "only" a certain part of the population, usually the male part in a context of war and especially before, during, and after the sacking of cities. The second part will deal with the model case for representing the sacking of a city and killing part of its population: Troy. A standard topic in Greek literature and art from the beginning (with Homer's Iliad), this case provides a complex matrix for any consideration about fate, guilt, and ethos in human action and is widely reflected in Greek society and culture. Since Homer does not deal with the sacking of Troy, later literary and artistic representations are the main sources, especially the dramatists. Of special relevance is a comparison with Roman reflections on Troy's fate, for it shows a rather different notion of the destruction of Troy. Third, the chapter will discuss some cases from Greek historical periods, where ancient historians have disputed the actual extent of massacres that moderns might term genocidal. The discussion will show that these cases are disputed not so much in regard to historical factuality, but rather the language of representations; what is acceptable in tragedy is not appropriate for historical narratives. The last part of the chapter will focus on some Roman cases, up to the various late antique representations of the impact of Justinian's wars against Germanic peoples.