GREEK AND THE OTHER: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS ON PSEUDO CALLISTHENES' ALEXANDER ...

135 Pages·2016·2.95 MB·English

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
`

GREEK AND THE OTHER: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS ON PSEUDO
CALLISTHENES’ ALEXANDER ROMANCE AND ANNA COMNENA’S
ALEXIAD

A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement to Obtain the Magister
Humaniora (M. Hum.) in English Language Studies

by
Kristiawan Indriyanto
Student Number: 146332017

THE GRADUATE PROGRAM OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2016
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
`

GREEK AND THE OTHER: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS ON PSEUDO
CALLISTHENES’ ALEXANDER ROMANCE AND ANNA COMNENA’S
ALEXIAD

A THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Magister
Humaniora (M.Hum) in English Language Studies

by
Kristiawan Indriyanto
Student Number: 146332017

THE GRADUATE PROGRAM OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2016
i
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
A TMSIS
GREEKAND THE OTHf,R: NARRATIVIE ANALYSIS oN PSETIDO
CALLISTHENES' ALEXANDER ROMANCE AI\TD ANNA COMNENA'S
ALEXIAD
by
Kristiawan Indriyanto
Student Number: 146332017
Approved by
ffi
Paulus Sarwotoo Ph.D.
Thesis Advisor Yogyakarta, September 5,
2016
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
A TEE,SIS
GREEKAI{D THE OTHER: NARRATTVE ANALY$S ON PSETIIX}
CALI.TSTHENES' ALET(AIYDER ROMANCE AND A}INA COMNENA'S
ALEXAD
Prwsted
by.
Kristiawea Indriyanto
Student Number: 116132017
Ilefended bcfore the Thalr fommlttm
'#= "'"ff""'-'q*ru
m,*ffi"'ig'
Chairperson
,ft'
Secrekry %ffi
ff,
Ph.d
#
Member i-ffiurura*i, $€ ,ffiER-PJb
iara Anilalas, SJ.ZI(N;
#*rqH[ate'
;
Yogyakarta, August 19, 2A16
The Grduate Program Ilirector
iii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
`

MOTTO

GOTT MIT UNS
GOD WITH US

Fur Gott Ums Vaterland Ums Prinzessin
iv
it
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
;
$TATEMENT OT W$RI( ORIGINALITY
This is to certiS that all ideas, phraBss, senteflces, ualess otherwise stated, are
the ideas, and sentences of the thesis writer. The writer undcrstands the full
if
consequences including degree eenoellation he took sornebody elseis ideas,
phrases, or sentsrces without proper references
ogyakarta, Srytember 5, 2016
,W.
Kristiawan In&iyanto
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJAAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH
ANTAK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
I/ang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama : Kristiawan Indriyanto
NIM
z 146332017
Derni pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
GREEK AND TIIE OTHER: NARRATIVE ANALYSIS ON PSEUDO
CALLISTHENES' ALEXANDER ROMANCE AND ANNA COMNENA'S
LEXIAD
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan
dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data,
mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di intemet atau media lain
untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu maninta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan
royalty kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan.ini yang saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal: 5 September 2016
Yang menyatakan
@
Kristiawan Indriyanto
VI
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
`

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I thank Jesus Christ for His blessing and guidance for the
accomplishment of my thesis. I give my gratitude toward my thesis advisor, Paulus
Sarwoto, Ph.D for his insight, help, and correction during the writing of this thesis. I
also thank my lecturers in English Language Studies especially Patrisius Mutiara
Andalas, SJ., S.S., S.T.D. Dra. Novita Dewi, M.S., M.A. (Hons), Ph.D and the late
Prof. Dr. Bakdi Soemanto, S.U. Through their classes and discussions, I learn a lot.
Furthermore, I thank my examiner, Arti Wulandari, Ph.D.
I would also thank both my parents, Prof. Dr. Teguh Prasetyo, S.H., M,Si. and
Sri Indarti, S.H., for their kindness and support during my study. Many thanks are
also attributed toward my friends in English Language Studies, especially from the B
Class of 2014 and Literature Batch. I would like to thank my friends in Literature
Batch, mas Adit, Pras, Ruly, Anggi, mas Tama, mbak Anis, mbak Rini, mbak Dian,
mbak Melania, mbak Teti. During our class we all learn a lot. I also give my gratitude
to my other friends who worked together to finish our thesis, Martha, Sari, Dangin,
mbak Vita, mas Bayu and mas Ajay from IRB. I am also thankful toward the senior
members of 2014 Batch, Pak Marwan, Pak Kosmas, and Pak Firmus for their
wisdom. I also thank my friends in DOTA 2 Dictator Team, Pandu, Uya, Bryan,
Richard, Li, We, Theo, Bli Putu, Anto. Lastly, I also thank the academic staff of ELS,
Mbak Marni and Mas Mul for their helping hands.
vii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
`

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE ............................................................................................................... i
APPROVAL PAGE .................................................................................................... ii
DEFENCE APPROVAL PAGE ............................................................................... iii
MOTTO ...................................................................................................................... iv
STATEMENT OF WORK ORIGINALITY ............................................................ v
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH
UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS .................................................................... vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................... vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................... viii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ xi
ABSTRAK ................................................................................................................... xii
CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 1
A. Background of the Study .................................................................................... 1
1. Justification of the Study ................................................................................ 1
2. Historical Background .................................................................................... 7
3. Objects of Study ........................................................................................... 10
B. Problem Formulation ....................................................................................... 16
C. Benefit of the Study ......................................................................................... 16
D. Thesis Outline .................................................................................................. 17
CHAPTER II : LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................. 18
A. Review of Related Studies ............................................................................... 18
B. Review of Related Theories ............................................................................. 27
1. Narratology ................................................................................................... 28
a. Classical and Postclassical Narratology ................................................... 28
b. Ideology in Narrative Devices .................................................................. 30
b.1 Ideology and Ideology in Narration .................................................. 30
b.2 Ideology in Focalization .................................................................... 32
b.3 Ideology in Narrative Form ............................................................... 35
viii
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
`

c. Narratology in Non-Fictional Text ........................................................... 37
2. Postcolonial Theories ................................................................................... 39
a. Colonialism, Colonial Complicity, and Imperialism ................................ 40
b. The Other and the Greek’s Barbarian Other ............................................. 44
b.1 Said’s Analysis on European Concept of the Other .......................... 44
b.2 The Greek’s Concept of the Barbarian .............................................. 46
CHAPTER III : IDEOLOGICAL SIMILARITIES BETWEEN ALEXANDER
ROMANCE AND ALEXIAD .................................................................................... 50
A. Comparison between Alexander and Alexius through the Narrators’
Focalization ............................................................................................................. 51
1. Glorification of Alexander and Alexius as Noble Greek (Agathos) ............ 51
2. Alexander and Alexius’ Hellenic Virtues..................................................... 54
a. Intelligence (xunesis) ................................................................................ 55
b. Bravery (andreia) ..................................................................................... 59
c. Self-restrain (sophrosune)......................................................................... 62
B. Comparison between Barbarian Kings through the Narrators’ Focalization ... 66
1. Depiction of Darius as Stereotypical Barbarian King .................................. 67
2. Depiction of Apelchasem as Stereotypical Barbarian King. ........................ 75
CHAPTER IV : IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ALEXANDER
ROMANCE AND ALEXIAD .................................................................................... 79
A. The Presence and Absence of Prolepsis .......................................................... 79
1. The Presence of Prolepsis and the Myth of Colonial Complicity in
Alexander Romance ............................................................................................. 80
a. Prolepsis in Sarepeum Prophecy .............................................................. 81
b. Prolepsis in Ammonian Prophecy ............................................................ 86
2. The Absence of Prolepsis in Alexiad ........................................................... 90
B. Different Barbarians by Different Narrators’ Focalization .............................. 95
1. Alexander Romance’s Depiction of Mythical Barbarians ............................ 96
2. Alexiad’s Depiction of Semi-Barbarians .................................................... 101
a. Depiction of the Varangians ................................................................... 102
b. Depiction of Italus .................................................................................. 105
ix