This chapter extends on the previous one by investigating the validity of preexisting theories of intersubjectivity within psychology. Operationalizations of children’s intersubjectivity are applied to narrative vignettes used to exemplify alternative theories. This analysis demonstrates how each theorization illuminates some dimensions of interaction while excluding others. The vignettes are contrasted to show how the measurement of interactions determines the form of intersubjectivity observed. The conclusion argued for in this chapter is that although all theories depict some component of intersubjective behavior, a theory in line with the principles elaborated in the previous chapter is necessary.

Chapter 3 considers the underlying narrative structures of Corippus’ epic and how the poet positions the campaigns of John Troglita in their wider context. The Iohannis surveys the events of circa 530–46 in a series of analeptic ‘flashbacks’. As a succinct verse history of North Africa between the late 520s and 546, these surveys differ wildly from contemporary imperial propaganda. This chapter argues that these accounts must be considered as meaningful responses to the recent past within Byzantine Africa and as functional parts of the Iohannis. It is argued that Corippus’ presentation of these counter-narratives created a space for the interrogation of a complex past which would otherwise have been unavailable to him.

The second part of the chapter looks at the prolepses in the Iohannis, where Corippus’ narrative moves from the narrated time of John’s campaigns to their anticipated resolution and the composition of the epic itself. This teleology is not only explored through many direct references to the coming Roman triumph, but also to the counterfactual ‘futures’ anticipated by the Moors. Corippus’ resolution of these accounts through authorial interjections help to underscore the inevitability of imperial victory while emphasizing the sense of crisis within the historical narrative.

The chapter investigates the factors motivating the choice of mood in Early Latin indirect questions. Under what conditions would the speaker use the indicative rather than the subjunctive? subjunctive? Some factors have already been identified, such as exclamatory-style phrases, the degree of detachment of the indirect question, the head verb’s meaning and its mood. The present study submits that variation in mood can be motivated by (literary) register and the social identity of speaker and addressee. The question is addressed first by building a complete corpus of indirect questions in Early Latin drama, with each form tagged with the relevant markers (metrical context, status of speaker and addressee, etc.); from this corpus of data, instances in which indicative is most definitely retained as a rule are excluded, and instances are examined in which either mood was in principle allowable, with a view to identifying patterns. Attention is paid to style, metre, character type, and genre. This methodology enables a sociolinguistic approach to the question and considerations about the developments in usage over time.

Confronts the synchronic model of time which underpins Quintus’ whole interval poetics and approach to Homer. Analyses the key narrative features of time in the poem: pacing, counterfactuals, anachronies and motifs of closure. Proposes that Quintus draws on the two different narrative forms offered by the Iliad and Odyssey and radically recombines them into one. Given the political dimensions attached to these forms, the chapter ultimately suggests the ideological implications of this technique. By merging teleological and open narratives, Quintus creates a positive reading of the ‘inevitability’ and ‘continuity’ associated with the advance of empire, celebrating for imperial Greece the open-ended potential of the closed Homeric text.