Theoretical challenge
Sources are often evaluated based on either their content or their form. Literary texts rely on the interplay of both. How can one methodically and precisely analyse the interplay between content and form?
Methodological response
Hylistics offers a response to the challenge by differentiating between pure, unformed content (‘raw material’ in the form of hyleme sequences) and formed content (representation of hylemes in texts, images, films, etc.).
With regard to texts, this field is hylistic narratology.
5.1 Hylistic narratology: methodological steps
Hylistic narratology is the evaluation of the interplay of content and form of a written source.
Comparison of narrative material vs. concrete source leads to the specification of differences between pure content (narrative material, i.e. hyleme sequence) and formed content (source).
Reference: A. Zgoll, Cuperly, Cöster-Gilbert 2023.
5.1.1 Genre and three-dimensional text profile
Theoretical challenge
Classifying a source by only one distinctive element, such as ‚genre‘, is necessarily too superficial. It has led to aporias (such as the distinction between literary vs. religious texts) which are highly problematic since they are based on the inconsistent categories of form vs. function.
Methodological response
The problematic under-determination of a source by only one label can be overcome by classifying the source through a threefold text profile which analyses
- content
- form
- function
Example
The sumerian text Innana’s Descent to the Netherworld has
- mythical contents
- elaborated (= literary) form
- religious functions
Reference: See A. Zgoll 2022, 302 f; 2025, 333–335.
5.1.2 Textual variety (length, syntax, focus) vs. hylemes
Comparative analysis of textual representation of specific hylemes, built on hyleme analysis:
In the source, the content (i.e. hylemes) may be
- shortened, e.g. briefly hinted at or referred to by means of a summarising statement (analogously to a hyperhyleme in the narrative material)
- omitted
- enlarged
- repeated
- abstracted, e.g. summarized
- formally super-/subordinated
- e.g. through position (superordination: beginning, end of a text; subordination: as by epithets or syntactical subordination)
- through the perspective of an important figure
- etc.
See A. Zgoll, Cuperly, Cöster-Gilbert 2023.
5.1.3 Order of the text vs. order of the narrative
Comparative analysis of the textual order vs. the chronological order of narrative material, built on hyleme analysis:
In the source, the order of the narrative material (i.e. chronological hyleme sequence) may be
- chronologically plain (as in the narrative material)
- changed in a simple or complex way, e.g. employing foreshadowing (prolepsis) or flashbacks (analepsis)
5.1.4 Combination of narratives in a text
It is important to establish how different narrative materials are combined within a source:
- placed in a sequence without any apparent changes
- built together by a narrative hinge, that is, the addition of new hylemes on the level of the narrative material, resulting in threshold lines on the level of the text
If one fails to recognise such special junctions, one may face considerable difficulties when searching for the meaning of a source.
5.2 Case Studies
See Publications.
References:
Zgoll, A., 2022, „Sacred Texts and the First Myth about the Creation of Writing“, in: Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 22/2, 258–314. (Open Access: https://doi.org/10.1163/15692124-12341333)
Zgoll, A., 2025, Rituale. Schlüssel zur Welt hinter der Keilschrift, Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Orient 6, Göttingen.
Zgoll, A. / Cuperly, B. / Cöster-Gilbert, A. 2023, In Search of Dumuzi: An Introduction to Hylistic Narratology, in: S. Helle / G. Konstantopoulos (ed.), The Shape of Stories. Narrative Structures in Cuneiform Literature, CM (Cuneiform Monographs) 54, Leiden / Boston, 285–350. (Open Access: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004539761_013)